We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP485: Market Updates, Ray Dalio Retiring, Elon Buying Twitter and Elemental Power w/ Josh Wolfe

Starting point is 00:00:00 You're listening to TIP. Hey guys, I'm really excited to share an upcoming event hosted by the Investors Podcast Network. Beginning on Monday, October 17th, we're launching a stock pick competition for all of you to compete in. And the first place winner will receive $1,000 plus a year-long subscription to our TIP finance tool and more. So don't miss your chance to win $1,000. If you're interested, please visit the Investorspodcast.com slash stock-dash competition for more information. The last day to submit your stock analysis will be Sunday, November 17th. And to compete, please make sure you're signed up for our daily newsletter, We Study Markets,

Starting point is 00:00:38 where we'll be announcing the winners. All entries can be submitted to the email, newsletters at the investorspodcast.com. Good luck. On today's show, we welcome back Josh Wolfe. I interviewed Josh back in November 2021. It was episode 399, where I called him the real life Tony Stark. That's because Josh is the co-founder of Lux Capital. which supports scientists and entrepreneurs trying to do the impossible or implausible.

Starting point is 00:01:04 In this episode, we discuss why Josh believes we are at an entropic apex in the current markets, his beliefs around peace through strength and why he backed billionaire Palmer Lucky's new defense startup andrew. Why Stan Drucken Miller invested in Lux early on alongside Bill Conway, the billionaire co-founder of the Carlisle Group? Josh's belief that we should rebrand sustainable energy to elemental power and include nuclear. We also discussed some of Josh's entrepreneurial endeavors such as founding Curion with $1.5 million

Starting point is 00:01:33 and selling it for over $100 million. Bitcoin and Josh's investment in FTX, founded by billionaire Sam Bankman-Fried, otherwise known as SBF. Josh's previous criticisms of Elon Musk and his Twitter deal as well as Ray Dalio, who had retired the day of this recording, his pursuit of digitizing sense and so much more. It's hard to find someone who has a wider knowledge base than Josh. He can zoom way out to the macroeconomy and then zoom way into microscopic details around

Starting point is 00:02:01 chronobiology with ease. So without further ado, I hope you enjoy this wide-ranging discussion with Josh Wolfe. You are listening to The Investors Podcast, where we study the financial markets and read the books that influence self-made billionaires the most. We keep you informed and prepared for the unexpected. Welcome to the Investors podcast. I'm your host, Trey Lockerbie, and today we are in New York City with Josh Wolf. Welcome to the show. Good to see you, Trey. How you doing? Good to see you as well. I'm happy to be here in person. This is really fun.

Starting point is 00:02:45 Post-COVID, we are together. Yeah, thank you for hosting me here. It's a lovely, beautiful office. There's amazing murals on the wall and glass windows that are huge in outlook on the city. It's incredible. You know, the mural is really interesting, actually. It's an homage to all these rebels of signs. Did I see Turing there? You saw Turing, in fact, yes. And we got Henrietta Lacks and Santiago Romani Cahall and Turing and Feynman and Catherine Johnson from Hidden Figures and Rosalind Franklin. All of those folks, either because of gender, ethnicity or sexuality or some other social thing for which they were ostracized, were scientifically correct. But because of the forces that be, in some cases they were the wrong gender, the wrong color, or the wrong sexuality, they were totally eschewed. And so this was an homage to the rebels of science. much like yourself in a lot of ways.

Starting point is 00:03:34 Yeah, we like to bet on the people that, you know, have chips on their shoulders and, and feel like outliers. I love it. In the latest Lux annual report, you were describing the current environment, which we're going to talk a little bit about, as the entropic apex. Can you break down what exactly you mean by that? Well, entropy is disorder and apex is the top of something. We felt that it was the peak of disorder, that it was the peak of chaos that was the

Starting point is 00:04:02 complete inverse of what had been a lot of order, predictability, and stability amongst markets by which everything was going up. Everybody was basically aligned to one side of the ship. Everybody assumed that the world was only going to get better, that we had permanently low rates, that companies were going to continue to be at profit margins, despite record claims of record peak margins. Jobs would be abundant. Everybody would be able to work from home. The world was stable. War was finished. We were, you know, in post-history period, and then very quickly in Q1 of this year, all of that reversed. Quite quickly, yes, exactly. It's kind of like how Buffett has this quote about how it takes a lifetime to build a great reputation

Starting point is 00:04:43 and only about five minutes to ruin it. It seemed like we were building up a lot of this wealth and then someone came along, swiped it all the way, or at least a lot of it away. What are some of the biggest risks people aren't thinking about? Because obviously there's a lot out there that people are talking about. What are you seeing? Well, there's individual risks, there's company risk, there's market risk, there's societal risk. So let's take the number one risk which everybody's concerned of, which is climate change or

Starting point is 00:05:07 global warming. To me, that's actually not a risk because it's one that we know. And I think that the answer there is mostly one of human adaptation, redundancy. You want to be able to anticipate that there's going to be more extreme events that you're going to be prepared for them. Maybe you shouldn't live in coastal Florida if you know that the hurricanes are going to destroy billions of billions of property that continue to get built. Maybe you shouldn't live on fall zones in California if you know that eventually the quote unquote big one is going to come. And there are people that are looking in saying, how do I hedge possibility of average climate temperatures increasing along certain latitudes and buying land in Michigan and Canada and imagining that in two decades

Starting point is 00:05:44 they might be building vineyards there. And so that's the big global macro one. The geopolitical one is one that I think people are now very aware of. And I don't think we yet have an appreciation for the cascade of events. So people know Russia, Ukraine, there's increasing possibility, probability of China, Taiwan at some point. I try to focus on where are there areas that you see the sort of proverbial fingers of instability. You see early signs that there may be chaos, but it hasn't yet materialized. One area in particular is the Sahel and the McReb in Africa. I think that there's high risk of growing violent extremism, the feeling from European, former European colonial powers that this isn't necessarily of great import, the presence of peer or near peer competition from

Starting point is 00:06:27 both China and Russia and the latter in particular funding mercenary groups to extract diamond and uranium and other resources. It's going to be a continent of chaos, and I feel like it's very improbable that terror is not projected into Europe. So that's an area where I would say that people are not looking, and I think it's something that will look back, unfortunately, and probably see economist headlines, covers of the chaos that's happening in the Sahel and the McReb in Africa. States like Mali and Niger and Rwanda elsewhere. And people say, what could we have done or why didn't

Starting point is 00:06:57 we move faster or why didn't we? And so that to me is an area geopolitically that I think is not being appreciated. Going down to individual markets, I think emerging markets are both for currency purposes and over indebtedness at significant risk of default of both the attendant political chaos and populist chaos and risk of starvation, commodity exports, imports. So that's an area where it's very hard to predict where the supply chains will break and where there are dependencies and inputs, but it's one that is of high risk with markets themselves, both fixed income and equities. I think equities, for the most part, people are sort of going through denialing or bargaining depression acceptance. I still think that there's a leg to fall, and there has to be certain

Starting point is 00:07:37 poster children to me of the excess that need to capitulate and repent, if you will. Yeah, and, you know, that might be some of the large thematic mutual fund index complexes. is that might be some of the celebrated poster children of technology that are not cash generating positive profitable businesses. So that's something I'd look for on the equity side. On the fixed income side, you have pension complexes, you have all kinds of strange interconnectedness in markets that are just not as sexy to be covered in the front page of headlines. And so I think there's still less leverage than there was 14 years ago, 0809, but there is still significant leverage in hidden pockets of the economy that can ripple over

Starting point is 00:08:12 and people are under anticipating. You have not really seen headlines about municipalities struggling like you did 15 years ago. I think that's an area that, you know, is potentially problematic for both political and infrastructure purposes. And then people's savings have been killed. You know, people were saving during COVID. They had a wealth effect from rising stock prices and to the extent that they were speculators on both crypto and or equities, you know, that wealth effect was compounded. They pulled in a lot of forward demand on consumer discretionary goods that are now abating. And you're seeing that with liquidations inventory bill declining profitable quarters for some of the large consumer discretionary companies from

Starting point is 00:08:47 Peloton to Nike to Under Armour and now to Walmart and Target. And so you can see the champagne has stopped flowing. The glasses are starting to dry up and I think that'll continue to trickle. I think the big risk that I see is continued unemployment rather than underemployment. And it happening with the middle class and sort of white collar crew that the layoffs occur there first. And it ends up with this weird recession where people that are blue collar are effectively on what I call a class warfare treadmill. And so instead of a treadmill class, you've got sort of treadmill class warfare. And they're showing up at work every day because they need to because food and fuel is more expensive. The cost of everything has gone up, including their mortgages and their car payments

Starting point is 00:09:28 because of the Fed's effort to fight inflation. I think it's really hurting the poor or the worst. And they're going to be very highly employed. The middle class is arguably going to be expendable in many domains, lots of BS jobs, consulting, accounting, other areas. areas where people start to lose corporate business and cut back. And I think that that's going to end up trickling down and have a demand effect on the lower class. So it's going to be this weird fight where in the attempt to fight inflation, you're putting poor people or the poorest back to work because they're the hardest hit. You're going to end up hurting the middle and lower upper class. Their demand function is going to decrease. It's going to end up second derivative

Starting point is 00:10:01 hitting the poor even harder. And so what I imagine is I try to sort of speculatively, as I like to say that failure comes from a failure to imagine failure, what would happen? I think you could end up with a extreme left labor movement, something that is almost like a violent Jimmy Hoffa like character, somebody that is not like an AOC who are Bernie rallying against capitalism with rhetoric and social media, but somebody that actually takes to the streets or the factories with violence. And we haven't seen that kind of character in one or two generations or more, in part because we haven't had the economy that would fight for it. But you see some of these clues, like the train union labor dispute. There are early signals of the kind of stuff that could happen

Starting point is 00:10:39 and critical infrastructure, truckers. You know, you saw this obviously in Canada with the strikes. But I can see significant labor strikes in significantly critical parts of infrastructure, the economy, and some of that turning violent and a new labor leader that forms that becomes a political force. I think that's a very valid risk. And yeah, you're talking about these like secondary, even tertiary effects or trickle down that, well, some of these people don't really maybe even understand what exactly is the root cause of what's happening. They just know how it's affecting them on the daily life and that can lead them to make really kind of maybe uninformed decision to some degree. I want to go back to the equities. You highlighted one point that there's 800 biotech companies,

Starting point is 00:11:17 half have less than two years of cash, 150 of them have negative enterprise value. And with the dot-com era and that bust, you could see the cash burn, right, in that burn rate. And it was almost predictable. Are you seeing something similar here with biotech? And is this an area where you expect a lot of special situations to occur? I'll add to that. I think the last count, something like 75% of biotech universe was under 250 million-hour market cap. So unlike the dot-coms where you had people that were actually talking about profitability, you're never really talking about profitability. Biotech, biotech are cash-burning machines. They turn money into speculative science and clinical trials that hopefully turn into life-saving drugs for patients. And the vast

Starting point is 00:11:54 majority of them statistically fail and the ones that do get lucky or have positive clinical trial data and make a small impact. In some cases, those impacts, unfortunately, for humanity or fortunately depending on where you sit, a simple six-month extension in life for cancer can create a multi-billion dollar drug. And that's sort of sad state of affairs on the one hand that, you know, a mere half a year can extend somebody's life and be worth that much. It feels incomparable to what it should be doing. It should be curing disease. And there are, of course, drugs like Hetrude that take people that are in stage three or stage four cancer. And it's the closest thing we have to like a miracle drug and two of the people that we've backed, Roy Baines,

Starting point is 00:12:26 ex-merk and Roger Perlmutter, also X-Merk, who now lead ICON, one of our biotech companies, you know, are testaments to that. But they're also testaments to the fact that most people don't understand what the mechanism of many of these drugs are. So, you take those 800 publicly traded biotech companies, half of them are going to cease to exist. Some of them will go out of business. Some of them will get acquired. I think the most likely trend here is a combination of investors forcing at a board level roll-ups combinations where people have redundant efforts. So you might have a company that has a diversified portfolio that's focused on immunology and oncology and neurodegenerative diseases and another company that has three different programs that are also in

Starting point is 00:13:03 immunology or oncology. And some investor comes along and says, rationally look, you know, you guys are both sort of competing in this area. We're going to form a new co. It's going to take all the oncology assets and it's just going to be focused on cancer. And we're going to take the metabolic disease or the cardio disease or the kidney disease or liver disease and we're going to focus those on an individual company. So I think there'll be a rationalization. Why? Because when capital is abundant, every experiment gets tried. And I like to harken to a biological analogy of the slime mold, which is when resources are abundant, the slime mold spawns out and, you know, it's basically searching for food and trying everything.

Starting point is 00:13:34 And then when resources get scarce, it recongels into the mothership and comes back into this macroorganism. So the same thing happens in the economy when there's a lot of cash. A lot of people can start lots of biotech companies. There's increasing dispersion of talent across all those biotech companies instead of the best people just going to Merck or Pfizer. They go to one of many biotech companies that have launched each of them are then increasing their consumption and spend on both real estate and on scientific tools. But a lot of those are redundant purchases. And then when the proverbial stuff hits the fan and recongeals, all of that stuff gets liquidated. You know, people are giving up their space.

Starting point is 00:14:07 People are going back to the large companies, private equity firms or investors at the board and governance level are forcing mergers and combinations. And the people that have the most money, biotech or pharma companies that are very well capitalized will pick up other companies for cents on the dollar. I can tell you being in the boardroom of both one company like ICON that has near billion dollars of cash, that they are looking. What are the assets that we can acquire? And the targets that they're looking at are companies that do have 10 programs because oftentimes

Starting point is 00:14:34 what a biotech company would call a platform is really an unacknowledged admission. We don't know which of these 10 things are going to work. So we're going to have many shots on goal. But if you're in the board room, as we are in some of those other cases on the receiving side of that, I can tell you, hey, we're running out of cash. You don't have that much money. You don't have that much time. You can't focus on all 10 of these things.

Starting point is 00:14:51 So pick the top two priorities, either based on maturity of the program or the molecule or the size of the market that you're going after. and you have to either mothball, divest, license, sell, or just that right, you know, shut down those other aid programs. And so the people that have cash will be able to be a little bit predatory, but also salvation for the people that don't. At the top of the year, you were pounding the table saying husband that cash, you know, a lot to your port codes specifically. I'm kind of curious to see what you've seen from the top of the year till now with your portcos taking that advice. Are they doing what you just said, meaning they're letting go of some of their more speculative efforts or projects, and focusing on the core products or services they're providing.

Starting point is 00:15:31 What has been learned, I guess, from the top of the year of doing such a thing like husbanding and your cash? Well, go back two years and our basic admonishment was capitalized in the current capital markets and raise as much money as you can. And then the second piece of that was then husband that cash, don't spend it. And what we meant by that was so many people were investing in growth initiatives because growth was what the market was rewarding. The more you can grow your top line, even if it was unprofitable growth because there

Starting point is 00:15:52 wasn't attention to that, the higher the multiple that people would give you. And that's why you saw particularly in some of these growth businesses in SaaS, 50, 100, 200 times multiples that just were outrageous. It harkens back 20 years ago when people were talking about eyeballs and these weird metrics, an affording insane multiples. So multiples have contracted in many sectors. Growth was becoming unprofitable for many companies. And we basically said don't invest in growth. Instead, husband that cash and start to look towards consolidating your sector so that you can emerge from this winter, whether it lasts for two months or two years. And our view was the latter, it would last for two years, that you have assembled the best team, the best talent. the best technology, the best channels to market. And some of that might be organic investment in that, but most likely somebody else has already built that out. Why don't you go and buy it and buy it for cheap? Because these companies are going to be distressed. So I think going into this year, before the market really got hit, about 90% of our companies had cash for two years or more. 10% were in some sort of condition where they'd have to go out to raise money or they weren't doing well. Maybe they shut down. But overarchingly, and overwhelmingly, the number of companies in our portfolio that

Starting point is 00:16:51 listened to us was very high. And I think they feel very good that they have these sort of or chest balance sheets to both withstand the current market and be able to pounce on opportunities that unfortunately were created by people who might be less prudent. A continent of chaos, you said a minute ago, that might be the name of a book someday. You know, you mentioned Ukraine and Russia. Everyone's pretty familiar with that. This week, North Korea was launching ballistic missiles over Japan. I mean, so to your point earlier, it seems like we're moving more into a dangerous world

Starting point is 00:17:20 and not a safer world. Talk to us about your investment in Andrel and what has been. like to work with billionaire Palmer Lucky. Well, the main thesis in Anderol, our aerospace and defense investments, our investment in nuclear waste, our investment in perimeter security and detection, many of these things are basically in the parlance of hedge funds or some global macro folks, long vol. But the vol is that bad stuff is going to happen. It's expecting that there will be black swans, that there will be low probability,

Starting point is 00:17:47 very high magnitude negative events. It is naive to believe that war is eradicated, unless you believe that human nature is eradicated. People will be vanglorious, petty, vengeful, revanchist. They will have petty grievances that become substantive. They will seek resources. They will seek power. They will seek legacy. They will seek restoration of pride. They will seek retribution for the destruction of that pride. And so war is unfortunately a constant through all time. And of course, it happens at a molecular level between organisms and bacterian viruses. And of course, it happens amongst us homo sapiens. And whatever follows us, you know, billions of years from now, war will be a constant. So

Starting point is 00:18:24 nobody likes war. Nobody wants war. You want to defend against something you don't like. And so I've always found it virtuous to have defense as both the deterrent and the way that you defend is by having superior technology. Superior technology to detect deceptions, to detect attacks that are nascent signals before and be able to thwart them. Technology that can move faster than in adversaries, technology that can coordinate forces better than in adversaries. And you want that all to be able to deter and prevent strategic surprise. And strategic surprise is what an enemy would like to do to take advantage of somebody, particularly a stronger adversary. So we've always been investing in technologies and companies that have sort of benefited from these low probability high magnitude events, whether it was a nuclear waste

Starting point is 00:19:09 cleanup company for a nuclear disaster, when many people believe that that kind of thing was improbable or impossible, whether that is the reality that we are going to have mass shootings and horrible events. And you want to be able to protect and defend and deter those things as quickly as possible with security and perimeter defense, or whether that's a suite of technologies in the case of Anderl for all domain defense against combatants. And that could be air, space, land, sea, and cyber. So Anderle was founded by Palmer. It's like SpaceX and some other companies, unique in that it was founded by a billionaire. And many of these companies that require billions of dollars to be able to develop their technology and competitive edge, you need that. You know, Palantir that was

Starting point is 00:19:49 co-founded by Peter Thiel. He's a billionaire. You had SpaceX. By Elon was a billionaire. You had Andrew Lowe from Palmer and others who was a billionaire. So there's an interesting thread through that. There's also a respect and an irreverence. The respect is for the institution and the philosophical demand of what is needed, which in this case is the defense sector. And the irreverence is for the way that it's done. Looking at the Beltway bandits, looking at the people who are cost plus contractors, looking at the F-35 joint strike fighter, and how long it takes, how much it's overrun, looking at the number of congressional districts, 300 plus that contracts are awarded in. I mean, the whole thing is an utter mess.

Starting point is 00:20:23 And it's the kind of mess that if you were an adversary, you would take advantage of. If you were China, you would relish the idea that we have an aversion to defense technologies because of the idea of a military industrial complex or an inversion for people in technology to want to work with the Pentagon while you have a military fusion concept, which says that not only we're going to fund cutting edge technology, but there's a mandate that you must work with the defense industry and government. And so I think Palmer saw this and said, you know, you would think that there is in the Paragon of technology and the frontier of great capitalism and Silicon Valley, the equivalent

Starting point is 00:20:56 of like a James Bond queue, where we have the most cutting edge technology. It's just serving up the warfighter, whatever they need to defend against an adversary. And unfortunately, that doesn't exist. It does in the movies, but in reality it doesn't. And there are brilliant people working inside the Pentagon. There are brilliant people working in all domains from in QTel to Army research to Air Force. But there is no entity that is developing the most cutting edge technologies for the warfighter. And Palmer said, I want to go build that. And I'm sure in no small part, you know, he was inspired by as many of our inventors and entrepreneurs are, science fiction. And as I like to categorize it, the decreasing gap between sci-fi and sci-fact. And in this case,

Starting point is 00:21:32 sort of a stark industries. And I think he said, I want to build the stark industries. And I want to build cutting-edge technologies that truly give the U.S. and our allies an advantage and deter the bad actors. It proved prescient. This was at a time where people felt like, you know, we should be investing in climate and clean and green and us and others were saying, no, this is important. And you can argue today amongst the debates about ESG. To me, there is no greater ESG investment than one could have made than two things. One is investing in strong defense. And all you have to do is look at the plume of methane, if it was Russian or other sabotage and the carbon that's being spewed into the environment because of that. If that could have been avoided by deterrence and

Starting point is 00:22:12 defense early on, it would have done more than everything that's been done over the past half decade in climate goals and Greta Thorneberg protesting in the UN. And the second thing, which I'm very passionate about, and I have a feeling we'll talk about is nuclear's rebrand to elemental power. But we'll get there. Palmer is amazing. He's amazing for two reasons. Number one, he's a technical genius. Number two, I utterly disagree with him politically. And so this to me is a great testament of what our country is. And we disagree about a lot politically. But we do agree that the warfighter, the women and men on the front lines, should have every advantage. And you don't want them to be disadvantaged because no how flawed our country is, and our country is very flawed and our history is very scarred.

Starting point is 00:22:51 There's not another country that I can point to in the world that is really trying to give people more freedoms, more possibility, more lateral movement, more optionality. And that's a system worth defending even with all its pimples and imperfections. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. All right. I want you guys to imagine spending three days in Oslo at the height of the summer. You've got long days of daylight, incredible food, floating sun. sanas on the Oslo Fjord, and every conversation you have is with people who are actually shaping the future. That's what the Oslo Freedom Forum is. From June 1st through the 3rd,

Starting point is 00:23:28 2026, the Oslo Freedom Forum is entering its 18th year bringing together activists, technologists, journalists, investors, and builders from all over the world, many of them operating on the front lines of history. This is where you hear firsthand stories from people using Bitcoin to survive, currency collapse, using AI to expose human rights abuses, and building technology under censorship and authoritarian pressures. These aren't abstract ideas. These are tools real people are using right now. You'll be in the room with about 2,000 extraordinary individuals, dissidents, founders, philanthropists, policymakers, the kind of people you don't just listen to but end up having dinner with. Over three days, you'll experience powerful

Starting point is 00:24:11 main stage talks, hands-on workshops on freedom tech and financial sovereignty, immersive art installations and conversations that continue long after the sessions end. And it's all happening in Oslo in June. If this sounds like your kind of room, well, you're in luck because you can attend in person. Standard and patron passes are available at Osloof Freedom Forum.com with patron passes offering deep access, private events, and small group time with the speakers. The Oslo Freedom Forum isn't just the conference, it's a place where ideas meet reality and where the future is being built by people living it. If you run a business, you've probably had the same thought lately.

Starting point is 00:24:50 How do we make AI useful in the real world? Because the upside is huge, but guessing your way into it is a risky move. With NetSuite by Oracle, you can put AI to work today. NetSuite is the number one AI Cloud ERP, trusted by over 43,000 businesses. It pulls your financials, inventory, commerce, HR, and CRM into one unified system. And that connected data is what makes your AI smarter. It can automate routine work, surface actionable insights, and help you cut costs while making fast AI-powered decisions with confidence.

Starting point is 00:25:25 And now with the Netsuite AI connector, you can use the AI of your choice to connect directly to your real business data. This isn't some add-on, it's AI built into the system that runs your business. And whether your company does millions or even hundreds of millions, NetSuite helps you stay ahead. If your revenues are at least in the seven figures, get their free business guide, demystifying AI at netsuite.com slash study. The guide is free to you at net suite.com slash study. NetSuite.com slash study.

Starting point is 00:25:58 When I started my own side business, it suddenly felt like I had to become 10 different people overnight wearing many different hats. Starting something from scratch can feel exciting, but also incredibly overwhelming and lonely. That's why having the right tools matters. For millions of businesses, that tool is Shopify. Shopify is the commerce platform behind millions of businesses around the world and 10% of all e-commerce in the U.S. from brands just getting started to household names. It gives you everything you need in one place, from inventory to payments to analytics.

Starting point is 00:26:32 So you're not juggling a bunch of different platforms. You can build a beautiful online store with hundreds of ready-to-use templates, and Shopify is packed with helpful AI tools that write product descriptions and even enhance your product photography. Plus, if you ever get stuck, they've got award-winning 24-7 customer support. Start your business today with the industry's best business partner, Shopify, and start hearing... Sign up for your $1 per month trial today at Shopify.com slash WSB. Go to Shopify.com slash WSB. That's Shopify.com slash WSB. All right.

Starting point is 00:27:15 Back to the show. You've backed a couple of billionaire founders that we're going to talk about today. But I'm kind of curious, is there any advantage or disadvantage for having a billionaire founder? Because the two we're going to talk about Palmer being one of them, they became billionaires quite young. And sometimes that can distort your, you know, your reality. A little bit, you've got yes men around you and people, you know, kind of getting an echo chamber going around you when you become that kind of credibility so young. So have you witnessed anything like that that are hurdles to come across it or just stronger personalities to try to get your point across to? Palmer doesn't have a lot of yes men because he's opinionated and disagreeable and so smart.

Starting point is 00:27:55 And I think he's very open-minded to people who challenge him. I could disagree with him. We could debate about guns. We could debate about social issues. And it's actually a fun debate because he's well-informed. I think he made FU money and had some FU views at a young age and he decided he wasn't going to suffer fools. He likes to troll the left on some things. And it's sort of an interesting personality quick.

Starting point is 00:28:13 But the one thing that's constant, no matter how much money he's made, is he has the one trait, which I truly believe is the one defining trait of an entrepreneur. He's got a chip on a shoulder. And it doesn't matter if somebody, some no-name journalist is criticizing him or accusing him of something and maybe they misunderstand or misrepresenting his view, it is just fuel for the fire. He, you know, many people would just let it go. And he hates the idea that somebody has got him wrong or misunderstood or is being sloppy or lazy. I think he really hates the laziness the most because he can have nuance views. People can contain multitudes. And so he's got a chip on a shoulder. I don't think there's any amount of money that he will make that that chip on shoulder won't go away. And I like to say that chips on shoulders put chips in pockets. They certainly have for him. I think they will continue. And his chip is on one part geopolitical and national and historic. I think he believes. the CCP as a source of evil. That's not to say that China or Chinese people or its citizens are evil. Nobody believes that. But I think he believes that the CCP is not a force for good and should be at a disadvantage, not an advantage technologically. Yeah, he's, I mean, to that point, he was ostracized more or less for his political reviews, it seems, from Silicon Valley,

Starting point is 00:29:19 which only fueled him, I think. Yeah, no, he'll say he was fired from Facebook because he was anti-Hillary. And he went and built another billion-dollar company. I mean, you know, the three most powerful words that often come when somebody feels slighted is, I'll show them. And that's true of a high school athlete. It's true of somebody that is scorn from a local town. It's true of somebody that has already made money and is doubted by the public or the press or the media or same antagonist. It's just great fuel for the fire and it never goes away. In fact, one of the great disagreements I have with a lot of peers who are into mindfulness and meditation, which is great for the individual. You know, finding stoic sense of calm is wonderful. But if you truly want society to progress,

Starting point is 00:29:58 Forget about the nonsense of I want to save the world. But if you truly want a better society by which you mean more people have more options, there's more technology, there's more health care, there's more democratization of everything. Everything is more available to more people. You want troves of disaffected, bitter, frustrated, angry people with chips on their shoulder because those are the people that go and actually are motivated to say, the system's got to work or this thing sucks and I'm going to make a better version of it. And you can consider that arrogance of the highest order. But it really is that one fuel that is inextinguishable. And the source of human. ingenuity and progress. Now, this is kind of curious. I'm wondering if this ties in at all, but I recently learned that Stan Drucken Miller was an early LP of Lux, which is really fascinating. And Stan's actually been outspoken recently. He's saying that the market's probably going to be sideways or will have another lost decade or so. Do you share that sentiment with Stan? And do you feel like he's the kind of billionaire with a chip on his shoulder in any way? Or is he kind of his own kind of, he seems almost like a lone wolf in a lot of ways doing his, up doing his own thing. I think he has a crumogenely stoic sense. I think he is intellectually competitive

Starting point is 00:31:03 and he not only wants to be right, but wants to be rich. And I think most importantly, with his riches, he has done enormous good for the world in thinking about social equality and poverty reduction and education reform. So I deeply admire him because the world is a puzzle. He's able to look at aberrations and anomalies and identify them relative to history. He has a humility every time with increasing frequency that you hear him speak publicly. He says, you know, oh, I'm old or I'm past my prime or I'm, you know, this or that. I think there's something admirable about his ability to detect anomalies. And part of that is a long arc of history and correlations and understandings of different

Starting point is 00:31:40 asset classes and how they're supposed to perform together. And he's the first to say with humility, I used to look at this and this and X used to work when Y did. And now, you know, I just don't understand it. Now, sometimes that's his way of saying, I think the world's gone crazy. But in some cases, it's spotting an anomaly. And he's also been publicly honest about saying, I don't, I don't often go on TV. And usually when he does, it's almost Buffett-like in that he feels the need to raise attention. He's taken endowments like Bowden and taken them from small amounts of money to large amounts of

Starting point is 00:32:07 money. And I think for those that he have either invested with him or that he advises, I think he does a great moral good in rational capital allocation, compounding cash that can be used for good. So huge admiration. I got to meet him through my co-founder, Peter, had worked at Lehman Brothers. And before their bankruptcy, I had started in Sali, he had started Lehman. And there was a convertible bond analyst that Pete knew, Ravi Suria. Robbie, not a lot of people know his name, but he was responsible for the Amazon report that basically said that Amazon was going to go bankrupt in, I think it was February, March of 2000, that just precipitated the market crisis in the dot com and NASDAQ collapse in that Q1 of 2000, which is an analogy that I happen

Starting point is 00:32:41 to share with Stan that I feel like these next few years will be very volatile, will be roughly range bound will not have any obvious catalyst of where incremental capital will come in to see some huge return. And people will have headfakes. They will see companies that are up 15 or 20 percent and then down 15 or 20 percent. I equated to a ball that's bouncing and eventually the ball is going to bounce smaller and smaller and volatility will eventually abate and people will eventually feel a sense of fatigue in their participation of markets in that they have fallen and fallen and fallen and and not gone up and start to sort of opt out. That's probably the best time to become an investor for the next cycle if one was trying to time it, which is a very difficult thing. But I think that the right

Starting point is 00:33:18 posture for the next few years is to assume that you have declining in rangebound markets that are highly volatile with lots of head fakes. And probably one or two big frauds that get revealed that shake confidence in the system will inevitably be met with some reactive regulatory piece of legislature that you've seen every time. And then the cycle will start again in some totally new area that is quote unquote different this time. And whether that lasts two years or 20, years for the next generation, it'll be a lot of fun. I remember being in Stan's office early in in Lux's days, and there was a book and said written by Stan Druck and Miller, everything I know. And when you open the book up, every page was empty. And it was just this great nod. I think a

Starting point is 00:33:57 friend made it for him, like half as a joke, but he displayed it proudly because it was, it was a nod to his intellectual humility. And he also gave me great advice, which was, I was just starting a family at the time. And he said, there's no such thing as quality time. And I was like, well, what do you mean? And he's like, well, a lot of people work hard and they come home, they carve out specific hours with their kids, and they feel like if they just put in those two hours on a Saturday or something, that that's quality time. And he said, there's no such thing as quality time. It's just quantity of time. It's spending time at breakfast and at lunch and at dinner and going to all the school plays and events and just being present

Starting point is 00:34:28 and talking about your wealth if you have it and being open. And so I admire that too because it was very contrarian advice. Everybody else talked about quality time with your family. And it almost was the acknowledgement that your family has to respect what you're doing and what you're building, but you can make them part of it. And at the same time, you know, being present in every part of their life. It's part of what we do here culturally at Lux. I've never missed a recital or a play from the trivial to the substantive. It's something that I don't want to hear to ever look back and say, oh, you know, I really wish that I was at that other meeting. You know, you'll never feel that. You'll always regret the thing that is most important to your kids at the time.

Starting point is 00:35:00 I should take that back to my wife because she says quality time is her love language. So I do think there's the quantity with my two kids is it doesn't really matter, you know, what we're doing. It's just being around. Being together. Yeah. Creating moments and creating memory. And I'll tell you, there was a venture guy who lost his wife and I was a young guy. And I think she left one or two children behind with him. And at his memorial service, which I did not attend, I heard about, he had made his comments about creating moments and memories. And that's just the one thing is like his admonishment to people because he'll never get to do that with his wife again. So I think you can always make money. You can lose money. Time is one direction. And so, you know, every time on a

Starting point is 00:35:38 Friday afternoon, you say no to some meeting, you're saying yes to yourself or to your family. And it's just, it truly is binary. And so I try to multitask as much as I can, but truly when it comes to family, it's just be present, be there. I feel like people would have a hard time just wrapping their head around sitting across from Stan Drucken Miller who's saying, hey, I want to give you money. I would be like, I want to give you money, Stan. And I imagine like that's because you guys are doing such interesting cutting-edge things and you're fishing in all these areas that are maybe unexplored. and one of them I'm really particularly interested in, which is chronobiology, because I don't know, you seem like the kind of guy who's interested in longevity, perhaps, or on the cutting edge and seeing all

Starting point is 00:36:16 these things that might help in a lot of different ways. Maybe talk to us about what chronobiology is and maybe what is most exciting about it for you. Maybe on the one hand, I'm not old enough to be obsessed with the longevity thing. Maybe I still harness the illusion of the young that I'm going to live a very long time. And I have some views about that. But, I'm actually not focused on this in the context of longevity and trying to live forever. It's more about understanding the biology of timing, a timing of mechanisms inside of our cells and between ourselves, a truth that your pro-Kingi cells, which are in your brain, are 25 years old and are not renewed.

Starting point is 00:36:50 The cells inside of your cell or your gut are renewed, in some cases, every day or several days. And so if you were to say your gestational age versus your biological age, different parts of you are different ages, there isn't a you, like this table that we're sitting at, you know, is one age. But you and I, even though we might have been born at a certain year, are made up of different parts. And those different parts actually have different ages in the same way that you could look at a river or stream and say that, well, of course, there's a river or stream, but its individual components are constantly changing. It's also why you might have cancer

Starting point is 00:37:18 mutations in some parts of the body because you have more rapid rejuvenation or reproduction of cells. And in other cases, you have very low rates of cancer because you don't have a higher probability of mutations. So I'm very interested in the cell signaling between organelles inside of a cell between cells within an organ, between organs themselves, between our bodies and circadian rhythms, if you take something like cholesterol medicine, they've figured out that you want to take cholesterol medicine in a specific time of day, which tends to be night, because your liver shuts down the production of LDL, and it's an optimal time to take a cholesterol lowering medicine. So that's something that's not either obvious to many people or well-known.

Starting point is 00:37:56 When you look at between humans, you see synchronicity between women who get their period that are clearly hormone signaling amongst each other at the same time. They end up in the same cycle if they're roommates in college and after. And so there's just very interesting hidden biology in the timing mechanisms inside of cells, inside of our bodies, between our bodies. And that means that there's mysteries to unlock and ultimately drugs to produce. And whether those drugs or mechanisms or technologies or for the specific time of day, you should be taking specific drugs and your biology might actually be different than mine. There are people that we know are mourning people and people that are more night owls. Some of that is genetic. Some of that is biological and environmental or

Starting point is 00:38:36 epigenetic, the way that the environment acts on the expression of your genes. But it's an area that is just not well understood. And anytime there's an area that's not well understood, to me, it's a whistle to pay attention because there's an opportunity to discover something profound. I want to talk about another position you were holding here at Lux that recently went public. Actually, last time we spoke, it was right before this company went public and that was Planet. The timing of that seemed maybe in hindsight less than ideal because it was right around the time all these multiples got cut in half and the IPO price dropped around, I don't know, 70% or so. Hurricane Ian seems like a great case study for the value of planet, right?

Starting point is 00:39:13 Where you got these before and after photos after a huge event and I imagine companies like insurance companies needing some of that kind of data. And it was a kind of a reminder of the value that something like that could bring. So I'm kind of curious how you view the price of planet today and just your observation of the going public in general? Well, I won't comment about specific public positions, but I'll say broadly. We had probably a dozen companies that went public either direct listing IPO or took advantage of the SPAC phenomenon. And the virtue of that was that they were able to get, in some cases, hundreds of millions of dollars of cash delivered to their balance sheet. And

Starting point is 00:39:46 for some of those companies, they were still immature, as almost like a public venture financing. And the admonishment to many of those companies was, quite literally, you have no idea of your stock prices is going to go 10x or be cut by a 10th, you know, 10fold and, and, you know, up 90% lower. And in some cases, they did. And I said that the only thing that matters is how you take that cash and how you invest it to build fundamentals so that you ultimately get rewarded or rightly valued or punished, depending on your performance. So I think for companies that have a long timeframe and a lot of cash, the jury's going to be out. I think it'll be up to them to be able to retain people amongst low stock prices. And you'll see some turnover and some low morale for that kind of

Starting point is 00:40:23 stuff. And again, if you take my own personal experience and expectations, you're going to have a few years of pretty range bound markets that are stuck in the mud that, you know, aren't going up, you know, five or ten X. And so, yeah, so I'd say broadly the virtue of this entire period was people's ability to capitalize huge amounts of cash and make sure that they're not only solvent, but just really competitively advantaged relative to peers. The phenomenon of satellite imagery is, you know, undeniable directional hour of progress going from, you know, having one decades old image of the pale blue dot, you know, that inspired Stuart Brand and Steve Jobs and so many other people to thrice daily static images and live video being able to do 30 frames a second and observe

Starting point is 00:41:02 everything from weather patterns to human rights abuses, industrial activity, and really getting quite literal God's eye ground truth of what is going on. Now, who cares about that over time more and more people? So you can expect that the customers are going to be not only other governments for supplemental information, but macro funds and hedge funds that want proxies of industrial activity and company activity and weather and insurance companies, as you note. But it's going to be up to the company to be able to execute and turn all of the possibility into performance through good fundamentals. And all of our companies should ultimately be subject to that test.

Starting point is 00:41:35 They should all be valued based on an investor coming in and not caring about the technology, not caring about the story or the narrative, but looking and seeing if it ultimately translates into good fundamentals that would reward an investor vis-a-vis every other opportunity cost that they have. Elemental power. So you've been outspoken about the need to rebrand. nuclear energy to elemental power, but shifting towards a future heavily relying on it. Energy has been a major headline in 2022. Do you think the events that have unfolded this year have set the stage for a more elemental future? On elemental energy, yes, I think that the events of the world

Starting point is 00:42:11 have at least sparked people in a few ways, some of which are overt and observable and some of which are speculative. You've already seen in Germany, which unfortunately has made decisions. I would speculate. And this sounds conspiratorial and crazy that the only thing that Putin had to do for the past decade was foment the Green Party, foment them to rise up against Merkel and convince that the populace that the important thing to do, quote unquote, in the name of climate, was to shut down nuclear power. The effect of doing that was not to decrease our reliance on low-carbon energy. I mean, nuclear produces zero carbon. It's just the cleanest, largest, most reliable source of base load power for a population. Most of the people that are against

Starting point is 00:42:50 nuclear, as I've rebranded it, elemental I'll get to in a moment. They're really against growth. They're really against progress. They're really against capitalism. They're really against systems of power. And in some cases, democracy. There really is an ideological wrapper around people that are against that. And the elements of the mantra for clean and green, if it's not a degrowth position, are mostly focused on solar and wind and biofuels and things that feel like they're natural. Now, solar, of course, is inorganic semiconductors and they're not necessarily super clean. Wind requires huge amounts of cement and technology and infrastructure. But there's this poetic and romantic illusion about using these elements.

Starting point is 00:43:26 And so that's actually what inspired me to say, wait a second, people love solar. They love the sun. You know, sun makes us happy. It's in children's books and it's on stickers at, you know, Greenpeace protests. People love the wind, you know. There's lots of that. And that seems good and clean and we want to keep our air fresh. People love water and hydro.

Starting point is 00:43:41 You know, that's also good. I mean, it's not great that we, you know, make dams and affect aquaculture. But, you know, people like the sun. They like the wind and they like water. they should like rocks. Rocks are great. Who doesn't like rocks? Well, hey, there's this rock called uranium.

Starting point is 00:43:53 And you don't really have to do all that much to it. But if you tweak it a little bit, just like you tweak the other stuff, you can get it to produce heat. And that's pretty cool. Okay, well, if you get heat coming out of this thing, just like a geothermal, which people also love on the environmental end, that's just literally heat from the earth that is able to boil water and produce steam and turn a turbine with that steam and produce electricity by spinning the magnets. Well, that's really what nuclear power is. So I realized that people are against nuclear because they conflated, unfortunately, going back to the mid-late 70s with nuclear war. Nobody wants nuclear war. And nuclear war is terrible. So now you've got this thing that's associated. You don't have hydro war. You don't have solar war. You don't have wind war. But you have nuclear war. Nuclear is bad. So nuclear is bad. And you had 1979, the China Syndrome movie where you had this environmental disaster and radiation leak from nuclear. You had also 1979, the Three Mile Island, where there actually was a birth. valve. It wasn't actually a radiation leak. Nobody died. There were no injuries. It was actually

Starting point is 00:44:49 proof positive of engineering systems that work. But then you had Chernobyl, which was a certifiable disaster. I would posit that there isn't much Russian technology that is competitive on a global stage that anybody would buy, except for possibly an AK-47 or a McFighter Jet, because those actually have to compete on the global stage. And then you had Fukushima where a company that we founded ended up playing a pivotal role in the cleanup, a company called Curion, named after Madam Curie, who discovered radiation, spelled with a K, that was developing technology, both material science that could grab radioactive elements like cesium and strontium and technetium and uranium and plutonium and then robots that could actually enter a disaster and remove that. And they ended up being the only U.S. company picked for that cleanup back in the Fukushima disaster, which happened because of an earthquake and a tsunami and then a radioactive meltdown. So I was very proud of founding that company and capitalizing it and the work that they did, which was just, you know, quite miraculous. So I've always been interested in nuclear for about a decade and I got interested really because of a book. I wish that there were something more sophisticated, but I read a book called The Bottomless Well

Starting point is 00:45:47 by two brilliant people, Mark Mills and Peter Huber. Peterson's past, but he was a polymath and brilliant legal mind. And Mark is a technology pundit and advisor to many. And they wrote this great book. Bill Gates gave a testimonial blurb for it. And it was called the bottomless well and it was really about the availability of energy that's all around us at a time when people were talking about peak oil and gas and so forth. But the key thing was a paragraph in one of the chapters that caught me.

Starting point is 00:46:10 And the paragraph talked about our directional progress. And I always had this concept that I call the directional hour of progress applying to all kinds of different technology industries from lighting to automotive to semiconductors where you can see where we start and how we progress and we're never going back the other way. And so in this case, I'm listening to or reading this book and I'm following the logic as they talk about going from carbohydrates, growing fields or trees and burning them as we did centuries ago to hydrocarbons cracking the molecules of oil and natural gas and dead dinosaurs to release heat exothermically.

Starting point is 00:46:40 And then the trend towards nuclear, which was uranium. And the undeniable hour of progress was more and more energy density per unit of raw material. And so that to me was a feeling of inevitability. And so I got very interested in nuclear. I got very interested in every part of the fuel cycle from uranium miners who were mostly hucksters and fraudsters in New Mexico and Nevada. We said no to that. Modular reactors, small scale reactors that were too expensive and too much regulatory risk. And I like to ask this two-word question, which is what sucks in any industry? And the thing that sucked was, what do you do with the waste. And we went around and tried to find a company to invest in, and we couldn't and we ended up starting one from scratch. So that was 10 years ago. We ended up selling that years later. After

Starting point is 00:47:16 success, we had about 140 million of revenue and 160 million of revenue, 40 million of EBITDA. We sold for 10 times EBITDA with a mere from us, million and a half invest in that company and returned about 105 million to our LPs. And it was great story. And as Bill Conway, who put us in business from Carlisle said, it's got the benefit of being true. So nuclear, you know, did us well. And it was interesting also because we talked about, you know, being interested in defense and some of these sort of sectors that may benefit from a reality of the world, which is that there are these negative black swans that occur. And so this was a company that benefited a positive black swan, a low probability high magnitude event consequence from the Fukushima event, which for Japan was a negative black swan. And so it's just always interesting to think about how you can do something that not only makes investors a lot of money, but is morally good because we help to remove 99% of the radioactive material from that disaster site and feel really good about that. It's made history. I've been a proponent since then. of nuclear, particularly as it has been noticeably, audibly, visibly absent from any of the proposals put forth by Al Gore, Greta, anybody that is saying, you know, we need to help the climate, we need to cut carbon. Like, how can you not look at the abundance of the 440 plus global plants

Starting point is 00:48:20 and their safety record and their low carbon footprint and say this is part of the answer? And the amount of land that you need for wind or solar, in contrast to one nuclear power plant, the density of the ability for a gigawatt power plant to provide for millions of people, It's just, it's incomparable. And unfortunately, there was the zeitgeist that had captured people, and it wasn't part of the religious doctrine. It wasn't at the podium when people were speaking. And so I realized that the thing that this really needed was a rebrand. And as I thought about wind and solar and hydro, I said, well, this is just a rock. So why don't we call it elemental power? And elemental power can't include all these other things that the environmentalists love. But any true environmentalists should be pro-nuclear, but they just can't bring themselves to say that word. It's sacrilegious. And so let's give them a new word. And the word. where it is elemental power. Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors. No, it's not your imagination. Risk and regulation are ramping up, and customers now expect proof of security just to do business. That's why VANTA is a game changer. VANTA automates your compliance process and brings compliance, risk, and customer trust together on one AI-powered

Starting point is 00:49:26 platform. So whether you're prepping for a SOC 2 or running an enterprise GRC program, VANTA keeps you secure and keeps your deals moving. Instead of chasing spreadsheets and screenshots, VANTA gives you continuous automation across more than 35 security and privacy frameworks. Companies like Ramp and Riter spend 82% less time on audits with Vanta. That's not just faster compliance, it's more time for growth. If I were running a startup or scaling a team today, this is exactly the type of platform I'd won in place. Get started at Vanta.com slash billionaire. That's Vanta.com slash billionaires. Ever wanted to explore the world of online trading but haven't dared try?

Starting point is 00:50:11 The futures market is more active now than ever before and plus 500 futures is the perfect place to start. Plus 500 gives you access to a wide range of instruments, the S&P 500, NASDAQ, Bitcoin, gas, and much more. Explore equity indices, energy, metals, 4X, crypto, and beyond. With a simple and intuitive platform, you can trade from anywhere, right from your phone. Deposit with a minimum of $100 and experience the fast, accessible futures trading you've been waiting for. See a trading opportunity, you'll be able to trade it in just two clicks once your account is open. Not sure if you're ready, not a problem. Plus 500 gives you an unlimited, risk-free demo account with charts and analytic tools for you to practice on.

Starting point is 00:50:59 With over 20 years of experience, Plus 500 is your gateway to the markets. Visit Plus500.com to learn more. Trading in futures involves risk of loss and is not suitable for everyone. Not all applicants will qualify. Plus 500, it's trading with a plus. Billion dollar investors don't typically park their cash in high-yield savings accounts. Instead, they often use one of the premier passive income strategies for institutional investors. Private Credit.

Starting point is 00:51:30 Now, the same passive income strategy is available to investors of all sizes, thanks to the Fundrise Income Fund, which has more than $600 million invested in a 7.97% distribution rate. With traditional savings yields falling, it's no wonder private credit has grown to be a trillion dollar asset class in the last few years. Visit fundrise.com slash WSB to invest in the Fundrise income fund in just minutes. The fund's total return in 2025 was 8%, and the average annual total return since inception is 7.8%. Past performance does not guarantee future results, current distribution rate as of 1231, 2025. Carefully consider the investment material before investing, including objectives, risks, charges,

Starting point is 00:52:17 and expenses. This and other information can be found in the income funds prospectus at fundrise.com slash income. This is a paid advertisement. All right. Back to the show. There's this new modular nuclear technology that's coming up. Is that something that you are positioned in and all? Are you have interest in or is it more about just raising awareness? My rant here on elemental power has no economic interest. We made our money on cleaning up stuff in nuclear waste.

Starting point is 00:52:44 It's a hard industry. It's not easy. And I'd like to encourage a lot of people to go into it eventually. We'll raise the talent base. We'll lower the cost of capital. We'll raise awareness and attention. And maybe we enter at some other point. But as investors, I put it in the too hard category.

Starting point is 00:52:57 modular reactors are great, but it's going to take a lot of money a long time and a lot of regulatory headache. So we're not invested in modular reactors. We're not invested in any of the large nuclear power players. We're not invested in uranium players. There's really no exposure today other than advocacy that I think it's the morally right thing to do as a society. Now with my second question was around the incentive structure. So yeah, is it, it's just too costly to set up that there's too many regulations to get across? Are those just the headwinds that we're facing most? Historically, it was too expensive. It was in part too expensive because of the requisite regulatory requirements. That had come down a little

Starting point is 00:53:32 bit when they came up with these combined operating licenses, which were for both building and permitting. And that cut a little bit of time off of it, but it was still like getting a drug to market, you know, 10 years, billions of dollars. And so that's gotten a little bit shorter. The risk is still very high, particularly with reactors that don't have decades of operating history. So these modular reactors or thorium or other alternative efforts, and I hope that they see the light of day. one that came quite close was Bill Gates funded a Terra power, which was actually very close to getting permitted and built in China and then geopolitical reasons. I think that got killed. It's back now and has raised a new financing. We're not investors there, but I'm very admiring of their efforts and

Starting point is 00:54:09 ambitions. And then you've got a lot of people that are doing fusion, which I'm very skeptical about, but I think great things will come from that, just like great things came from the early days of the space program. So yeah, most of it is just too expensive, too much regulation, too much red tape, and frankly, a scarcity of labor and a scarcity of investors that are super. We're excited about it. You get a zeitgeist change. It'll lower the cost of capital. It'll create a rush of people that want to do it.

Starting point is 00:54:29 And it'll be a good thing. Given what I know about you, I could see you being a huge skeptic of crypto, given that there's a large amount of hucksters and fraudsters, as you put it earlier. But at the same time, there's likely an intrigue around the technology and its use cases. How do you view Bitcoin today? And what is your take on the metaverse and development? Well, I'll give you one comment, actually, because it's fresh. with a friend Dave Heller who used to be very senior at Goldman Sachs, and we were talking about

Starting point is 00:54:58 crypto where he has some exposure, we were talking about ESG. And he said, you know, the thing about crypto and some of these other domains is that there are people that were really skewy and slimy and real hucksters. And growing up in Coney Island, you can spot the hucksters, the people with a scheme and an agenda that are trying to con you. He said, the thing with ESG folks is that, sure, there are some con, you know, people in hucksters, but the more dangerous thing is that there's a lot of people that just have really bad ideas and they're earnest. And so you get less of that in crypto. I think there are some camp of people that are just naive to the way that capital markets work or financial regulations work or a lot of people joke that a lot of crypto is

Starting point is 00:55:32 sort of reinventing the financial system, but we're relearning the financial system in real time. And every time that something collapses, people come running to some agency saying, why didn't you protect us? And people are like, yes, that's why we have the CFTC or the SEC or the, you know, various regulatory bodies. The way that we've approached crypto is to just basically have a demarcation between the objective at one end and the intersubjective at the other. Intersubjective is it depends upon what I think you think, he thinks, she thinks, he thinks at infinitum. And that's the domain of something that exists only in our minds.

Starting point is 00:56:05 So you can argue currency. Is that art? Is that? Teams, religions, companies, those are all intersubjective things. They exist only because we choose to believe in them. And so that's really hard because it's hard to tell what you believe and let alone what the mass of society is going to believe in. And unfortunately, and I've been quite public about this as a non-theist, you know, I would have been

Starting point is 00:56:25 short religion and lost a lot of money. But people believe. And so in crypto, there are people that believe in the primacy and value of a scarce set of digital apes or apes. There are people that believe in crypto punks and their value. And while individual partners might have made investments in NFTs and crypto art, we as a fund have not. And we've not done that because it's intersubjective.

Starting point is 00:56:46 It depends upon other people believing that other people believe that other people believe at infinitum. The opposite of that is the objective. It doesn't matter what somebody believes. The thing just works. So examples of that are protocols, custodians, exchanges, where if you look at something like Anchorage as a custodian or FTX as an exchange, they're relatively indifferent about what people believe, but they are setting up the market mechanism or the market making mechanism or the technology to reduce inefficiencies that exist in a market. And you look at that, the way that you would look at a 56K-bodd modem of the early 90s or late 90s versus a fiber optic cable of today. And it's just no question.

Starting point is 00:57:25 It doesn't matter if you believe that one is faster or the other, it legitimately, by physics, carries light at a faster bit rate than the other. And so the ability for somebody to transact over a protocol or to entrust their assets into a secure custodian or to transact on a marketplace or marketmaker like FTX, you know, it doesn't matter what you believe. It just works better. I want to talk about FTX. And also I alluded to another young billionaire, and that is now Sam Bankman-Fried, who I don't know the timing of your investment in FTX. But I'm kind of curious about what the thesis is around it and how you would describe Sam.

Starting point is 00:57:58 Well, one would look at the pattern between Palmer Lucky and SBF. And you would say that the common characteristic is that they both wear cargo shorts and flip-lops or Birkenstocks as it might be. But both have an amazing irreverence and are really intellectually competitive. and I think SBF has, as it was described internally when we were first making the investment, a ruthless focus on eliminating inefficiencies. And so I think he has attentional turts that he's able to turn in the same way that Bezos would look at a company and say, your marketing spend and margin is my opportunity. And I think it's the same thing that he looks and says, you know, whether it's Citadel, for example, in market making inequities, Robin Hood, any of the prior

Starting point is 00:58:37 crypto folks where he's taken lots of market share from. I think he's looking quite ruthlessly in the interest of serving customers and saying, where can I eliminate inefficiencies. So, yeah, we admire that. And you can look at what has been described as some regulatory arbitrage about everything that he's done has been legal, but he's situated himself in different locales. And I just think he's very smart. He's very driven. It's very philanthropic. And yeah, I think he's just getting started. You've been a longtime critic of another billionaire, and that's Elon Musk, with the caveat that he's an overall net positive for society. As of today, the time of this recording, it appears Elon is proposing I love this, quote unquote, proposing to close the Twitter deal at 5420.

Starting point is 00:59:17 Are you concerned about your account? And where do you think Twitter goes once this deal is done? Yeah, I guess there's, you know, there's a low probability account that Elon does not like me and blows up the account and nukes the account. So, yeah, that would suck. But I think if he's truly, I mean, one of two things is right. I'm right in my skepticism of motive for the deal. Or he, you know, and he doesn't really care about free speech and that, you know, is not the main motive. Or he really does care about free speech in which my account will live on and

Starting point is 00:59:42 perpetuity. So, yeah, we'll see. Yeah, I think that what you're seeing in recent days of the release of many of the texts is that it seems, you know, it was on a whim. I should do this. It seems like I've got some support of some interesting people, pull it together. And I think it's an interesting coup to be able to pull off. And I think he's entitled to do that. So I was a bit skeptical and critical of him as related to the Twitter thing in that the timing of enormous liquidation of Tesla stock, $8.5 billion plus did not seem to make a mark on anybody that he was selling. effectively at the top of Tesla. And it felt like the Twitter transaction was potentially a raison d'etra, reasonable and proximate cause to justify the liquidations. And so, yeah,

Starting point is 01:00:22 if the deal doesn't go through, one would assume that particularly now that Tesla's lower than it was then, that he would buy back lots of Tesla shares and show support for it. But we'll see. Just curious, you have mentioned your skepticism around it not being about free speech. If it's not about free speech, what might it be about? I'm kind of curious if you have any ideas. Well, I did think that, you know, the cynical motive or the cynical attribution of motive was liquidation of Tesla stock and having this reasonable cost. And I think it's the kind of thing that somebody might have if they're impulsive and powerful and influential to be able to say, like, yeah, I'm just going to buy Twitter now. If you actually cared about free speech, I think it was quite easy to be able to influence. I think Elon has enormous influence to be able to just take to the public airwaves and say, why is Twitter not doing this? Why is Twitter not, you know, cutting the bots? And I don't think you need to go with a transaction. to potentially demonize the company, its leadership, its people. And so, yeah, it'll be very interesting to see who stays, who leaves, the ability to attract and retain talent.

Starting point is 01:01:20 It's an incredibly powerful force, I think, for good for communication. People talk about Twitter as a toxic cesspool. But I find it nothing but high value, high signal, access to really interesting people and ability to broadcast ideas openly and be criticized openly. So I think he's got a lot of really smart people, and I think he probably has a lot of smart ideas and I hope he does something really productive and useful with it. Tesla just announced this really interesting development and they've essentially reinvented the supercomputer, as I understand it, this is above my pay grade, but they have this new D1 chip

Starting point is 01:01:53 and this dojo supercomputer. And I was just speaking with Kathy Wood about this. And I guess my imagination is captured by the potential to exponentially compound information using this new tech. So as a student of futuristic tech, do you have an opinion on this new technology and what it might be able to do for other industries. Any new hardware development semiconductors is always interesting. I think the main pitch here is that they would not have to be relying upon

Starting point is 01:02:18 NVIDIA or others. And my bet would still be on NVIDIA here, not as a stock, but just the development that they're working on, particularly in AI. I think the main thing that they've been able to show here is the giant tile that's effectively working in like a single lab at 2 gigahertz, which is not super fast. And the two key things that they'll have to show, which they may show this year, or maybe soon or maybe never, is tile-to-tile interconnect, so showing multiple layers of these chips,

Starting point is 01:02:43 which are relatively large, and then the software, which they themselves acknowledge that they haven't really made much progress on. The software for Nvidia, if you look at the Cuda system, was really the thing that broke open the entire movement globally for artificial intelligence, machine learning. And so all these things are interrelated.

Starting point is 01:02:59 You know, you have brilliant chip designers globally. It's possibly to come up with a big breakthrough. Apple certainly has with their M1 and M2 chips. It's entirely possible. the Tesla ends up developing a cutting-edge chip or is used for valuable purposes inside Tesla and adjacent industries, but my money would still be on some of the core developers, particularly in the cutting edge of GPUs that are used in AI and ML, which would be Nvidia and some of the competitive efforts from large chip designers for that. Similar to Elon, you've been a critic of Ray

Starting point is 01:03:25 Dalio for seemingly turning a blind eye to the humanitarian atrocities we hear about in China. Ray retired today. The fun was up about 30% this year. Any thoughts on his retirement? retirement, his legacy, what he's leaving behind. Ray went out at the top. So, excellent timing. I mean, you got an up year. You're able to take a bow. It'll be very interesting in the suing years to see what happens.

Starting point is 01:03:48 My criticism has not been about his failure to criticize China, which is a moral failure, and specifically the CCP. My criticism has been that I'm not sure that what people believe Bridgewater does, Bridgewater actually does. And I'm not sure that when you actually listen to Ray, most times over the past 10 years, that his views on markets have been cogent or concise or accurate. And, you know, one extreme would be that the emperor has no close. That takes nothing away from the books, which have presumably been ghostwritten by others or the daily observations, which are, of course, written by others,

Starting point is 01:04:21 or any of the research or the quality of the thousands of people who I think are brilliant that may work there. But whether they're involved in any investment decisions or what's really going on there is a more speculative open question or at least an open question that's open to lots of speculation. All right. So before I let you go, there's one more thing I want to talk about because last time you and I got together, we discussed your aspiration to see human scent digitized. How have we been progressing on that front?

Starting point is 01:04:48 And what could a machine that could smell? Maybe it's the Tesla Optimus robot, let's say, you know, be of benefit. Well, various capital of this Tesla Optimus robot. Obviously, if you look at Boston Dynamics robots from five or 10 years ago, they were doing feats that just blow the mind. Yeah, so I don't see that being really irrelevant technology, and it felt like it was a gimmicky, monorail-man-like showcase from the Simpsons. Yeah, digital smell. It's something that one of the Nobel Prize winners that we backed, Richard Axel in a company called Calliope, which is focused on the gut brain access, a biotech company.

Starting point is 01:05:20 Maybe eight or ten years ago said, you know, forget about it, don't try. Like, lots of people have tried. This is never going to work. And I've been looking for over a decade for both the hardware and the software and kissed a lot of frogs. And we finally found someone. We have beginning about six months ago negotiated with a very large tech company where this technology is being spun out of. It'll be announced in about a month. And we catalyzed the transaction and capitalized it with $60 million, some incredible co-investors, two giant tech companies, one giant global foundation, a few billionaire, famous hedge fund folks that are coming as co-investors. And notably when I was negotiating this, I lost my sense of smell. I evaded COVID for two and a half years and I ended up getting it in my two symptoms where one loss of smell.

Starting point is 01:06:01 And two was the anxiety about when my smell would come back, but that was about just under three weeks. So that was really poetic justice, I guess. There's three things that this company will do. One is, to me, the Holy Grail, and it will be the longest, but Shazam for smell, the ability to hold up your phone or some other small device to effectively capture in the same way you do today, image, which is really two-dimensional or three-dimensional with RGB. And you can do time lapse and you can do slow-mo and you can do 4K and you can put all kinds of filters and whatnot in that capture. sound, which is really two-dimensional, frequency, amplitude, wavelength, and you know, you can capture spatial or stereo or mono. The smell is at least 40 dimensions and could be several hundred depending on what the molecules

Starting point is 01:06:40 are. It's complex. It's not, you know, a single sound or a linear set of notes. It could be mixed in popery, so you have to be able to sort signal. But a smell is volatile organic compounds. They are quite literal chemicals that are floating in the air that bind to your olfactory bulb. Ours is more sensitive than some, but less sensitive than others. We know that dogs can detect COVID and cancer and Parkinson's and early signals of epilepsy

Starting point is 01:07:02 before someone has a seizure. And machines will have the sense of smell. Now, is that the use case? Well, you just mentioned sort of for the medical device aspect. So one is Shazam for smell for humans to be able to record smell. So your childhood bedroom, the nostalgia of a grandparents' home, the smell of your loved one's hair, the smell of a wine, a meal, vacation, beach, forest, wooded path, your home, whatever it is.

Starting point is 01:07:25 The second is detecting human health from breath. So that will be, in fact, why one of the large global foundations cares to be able to help diagnose people early. And then the third is industrial and defense applications. So the ability to detect chemicals, and that could be industrial chemicals. It could be fire. It could be electrical fires inside of large server rooms. It could be taggins that are used on people of interest for defense applications. So, yeah, it's an exciting future.

Starting point is 01:07:50 And we relish the idea that we get to invest in people who are inventing the future. Now, can you foresee a world where the computer is recognizing the smell and those compounds, those volatile compounds, and then could recreate them in some physical space? I can definitely foresee the world that it'll take longer, but, you know, the first thing that Kodak did was figure out recording, and then, you know, screen companies later on figured out playback, but recording will be first and we'll be digitizing that with a signal, and then playback will come after. And I see no reason why it doesn't obey the laws of physics to be able to do that. It just needs to reduce our human.

Starting point is 01:08:24 ignorance and come up with the knowledge and ultimately the technologies then embody that knowledge to be able to produce it. So we will have it. I couldn't tell you when, but recording will come first. That continues to be one of the more fascinating ideas I've ever come across. So I just continue to be interested in it. And I would love to have you back as things progress and you announce more around it. So thank you again, Josh, for coming on the show. It's been a real pleasure to be here in your office. Love listening to you and learning from you and your guests and thrilled to be part of it. Thank you. All right, everybody. That's all we had for you. this week. If you're loving the show, don't forget to follow us on your favorite podcast app. And if

Starting point is 01:08:58 you'd be so kind, please leave us a review. It really helps the show. If you want to reach out directly, you can find me on Twitter at Trey Lockerby. And don't forget to check out all of the amazing resources we've built for you at the investors podcast.com. You can also simply Google TIP finance and it should pop right up. And with that, we'll see you again next time. Thank you for listening to TIP. Make sure to subscribe to Millennial Investing by the Investors Podcast Network and learn how to achieve financial independence. To access our show notes, transcripts or courses, go to theinvestorspodcast.com. This show is for entertainment purposes only.

Starting point is 01:09:35 Before making any decision consult a professional, this show is copyrighted by the Investors podcast network. Written permission must be granted before syndication or rebroadcasting.

We Study Billionaires - The Investor’s Podcast Network - TIP485: Market Updates, Ray Dalio Retiring, Elon Buying Twitter and Elemental Power w/ Josh Wolfe

There aren't comments yet for this episode. Click on any sentence in the transcript to leave a comment.