E141: State of Series A's, VC dry powder, IPO window opens + more with Bill Gurley & Brad Gerstner
发布时间 2023-08-11 07:10:33 来源
I'm recording. Yeah, how's my hair Nick? Do I look ridiculous and shoulda where to have it? Oh my God, I went to the teaching salon in for a haircut a few days ago. Then teaching salon $10. You got $10 worth of value. My neck was literally bleeding. The guy cut my neck like six places. It's diagonal of the back. And he was stolen the whole time I walk in. He's like, what do you want? I'm like, I put this thing. He's like shit, okay, sit down. I thought I was like in a barber shop. I came to the camera. Why would you possibly do that? There was nothing available. I told my wife, I'm like, get me any hair appointment. Anything. I just got to get my haircut. It was so long. And then she's like, oh, I got you an appointment at the teaching school. Oh, I'm like, that's high end. All the hair salons stylists go there. It must be awesome. This guy fucking butchered me. Guys worth over $100 million. You got a $10 haircut. Fucking $10. And then he's like, what would you like to tip? I'm like, you're the tip. You should be a fucking barber.
我在录音。嗯，尼克，我的头发怎么样？我看起来荒唐吗？应该去哪里修剪？天哪，几天前我去教学发廊理发。然后教学发廊只要10美元。你得到了10美元的价值。我的脖子真的在流血。那个人割了我脖子六个地方。是后颈斜着的位置。他一直在吐槽我进来的时候。他说，你要什么？我说，给我理这个。他说，该死的，好吧，坐下。我以为我进了一家理发店。我拿着摄像机来干嘛？为什么你会这样做？没有其他选择了。我告诉我妻子，给我找个任何时候都行的发型师预约。我的头发太长了。然后她说，哦，我给你约了个教学学校的预约。哦，我当时觉得那是高级的。那里所有发廊的发型师都去那里。一定很棒吧。结果这个家伙把我给宰了。这个家伙身价超过1亿美元。你只花了10美元理发。该死的10块钱。然后他问，你想给多少小费？我说，你就是小费。你应该做个该死的理发师。
Yeah.
是的。
All right, everybody. Welcome back to the all in podcast episode one for one. Chamath PolyHappatia has gone missing somewhere in the Mediterranean. We've sent some search crews out. We got some beacons. We're trying to find him, but he is not here today. There will be no conspicuous consumption or discussion of truffle season or wine. But instead we went to the BG squared. If you got to come to all in summit 2022, one of the highlights of the event was having two BG's, Brad Gerstner and Bill Gurley on the pod. So we thought for all star summer, we would bring in some all stars here. Welcome back to the pod. Fifth bestie, Brad Gerstner and Bill Gurley. How are you, sir?
好的，大家。欢迎回到《全球一体化》播客的第一个节目。Chamath PolyHappatia在地中海的某处失踪了。我们派出了一些搜救队伍，我们有一些信标，我们正在努力找到他，但他今天不在这里。今天将不会有明显的消费或讨论松露季节或葡萄酒。相反，我们去了BG平方。如果你参加了2022年的全球一体化峰会，其中一个亮点就是在播客上邀请了两位BG，Brad Gerstner和Bill Gurley。所以我们想在全明星夏季，把一些全明星请到这里。欢迎回到播客节目，第五个最好的朋友Brad Gerstner和Bill Gurley，您好吗？
I'm doing great. Thanks for having me on.
我过得很好，谢谢你接待我。
Bill, you don't do a lot of press. You don't do a lot of pods. And I know you're on a lot of boards, but you're not part of benchmarks next fund. So people are wondering, are you retiring? What are you up to? I know you're still got all these boards. You're on. But what's Bill Gurley up to these days?
比尔，你在媒体上不怎么露面。你也不怎么出现在播客上。我知道你参与了很多董事会，但你并未成为Benchmark的下一个基金的一部分。所以人们很好奇，你是要退休了吗？你最近在忙些什么呢？我知道你还在参加很多董事会，但比尔·格利最近在忙些什么呢？
Yeah, I appreciate that. As you mentioned, I'm on nine benchmark boards still. So I'm working with those and doing the classic work that I've been doing my whole career. Second thing is I've started, I've done a handful of angel deals about 1-100, the frequency of J-Cal here, but a few. So dipping my toe in the water. And then third, I've been working hard on a book. I've got a co-writer, we've been doing a ton of research. We've got a proposal ready to go on an agent. We're going to go out to publisher soon.
是的，我很感激你提到了这一点。正如你所说，我现在还是作为九个基准委员会的成员工作。因此，我继续从事我整个职业生涯以来一直在做的经典工作。第二件事是，我已经开始进行了一些天使投资，大约1到100笔交易，虽然频率还不如J-Cal那么高，但也算是有一些了。所以我可以说我已经开始涉足这个领域了。然后第三件事是，我一直在努力地写一本书。我找到了一个合作作者，我们进行了大量的研究。我们已经准备好了一份出版社提案，很快将会找个代理商出版。
Oh, well, you should just do a Harper business. I'll put you in touch with Hollis. That's the winning publisher. That's the best business publisher in the world. And perfect.
哦，好吧，你应该去做一份哈珀生意。我会让你和霍利斯联系。他们是最成功的出版商，全球最好的商业出版社。非常完美。
No, Harper Collins Business, world's great publisher. World's great publisher. And you don't need what the thesis is.
不，哈珀柯林斯商务，世界上伟大的出版商。世界上伟大的出版商。而且你不需要知道这篇论文是关于什么的。
Yeah, it's a further development of a speech I gave at the University of Texas Business School about how to chase and succeed in your dream job.
是的，这是我在德克萨斯大学商学院发表的演讲的进一步发展，演讲主题是如何追逐并成功获得你梦想的职业。
Oh, nice. Oh, so like career advice, letter to a younger girly? Is that what this is? A letter to a younger builder?
哦，不错。哦，所以这个是关于职业建议，写给一个年轻女孩的信吗？这是给年轻的建筑师写的信吗？
I didn't want to do like, "Oh, here's my thoughts on venture capital." That didn't feel right. This is something I'm more passionate about. And something I hope will be impactful to a lot of people. I've already gotten quite a bit of feedback from people that have been moved by the shorter version on the presentation.
我不想像这样做，“噢，这是我对风险投资的想法。”这样做感觉不对。这是我更加热衷的事情。我希望这对很多人有所影响。我已经收到很多人对演示中较短版本的反馈。
What would you when you look on your career, unpack it for a minute? What do you think the things you got right where or the things? You know, you might change in terms of your career and being happy and finding your passion.
当你审视自己的职业时，你会怎么做，稍微阐述一下？你认为你在职业方面做得对的是什么？或者你认为自己在职业和寻找激情方面可以做出哪些改变，从而获得幸福感？
Yeah, I do feel super fortunate that I was able to do my dream job for over two decades. And I love innovation. I love betting and gambling. And I love the combination of being able to think through markets and disruptions and to be able to place bets. And all those things are super exciting. Things I got right. Studying history, which is something I talk a lot about and we'll be talking about in the book. Like, knowing who the patriarchs were of your industry and knowing what they thought, I think, is super powerful in any endeavor. And then networking, just like crazy, which I think is actually easier today. So those are a couple of the themes that we develop. Networking and studying history. Specifically, you and I have had many conversations about biographies. We both share a passion for those top biographies, not of business people, but that had an impact on you. And then I'll go around the horn top biographies that had an impact on you, preferably ones that aren't business, but if it is business, I guess it's okay.
是的，我非常幸运能够从事我梦寐以求的工作超过二十年。我热爱创新，喜欢赌博和博彩。我喜欢能够思考市场和颠覆，并能下注的结合。所有这些都非常令人兴奋。我做对了一些事情。比如，我非常喜欢研究历史，这也是我在书中要谈到的内容之一。了解你行业的开创者以及他们的想法，我认为这在任何事业中都非常有力量。而且，网络合作，现在我觉得这其实更容易实现。这些是我们要发展的几个主题。网络合作和历史研究。具体来说，我和你已经有过多次关于传记的对话。我们都对那些对你产生影响的顶级传记有着热情。如果是有关商业的传记，也可以。
One that actually led to me developing this theme was learning more about Danny Meyer's journey, who is the renowned restaurant owner in New York City and the founder of Shake Shack. But he had a career where he was in sales. He was about to go to law school and his, I think his uncle told him, what are you doing? You know, you want to be a restaurant owner. And he stopped that day, took a job at 10K a month. Our 10K a year. He took like a 90% pay cut and started studying. And that gets into the history part, but he just started studying and obviously the rest of his history, to tell those of you that know about Danny Meyer. Set it setting the table is the book. Yeah. And that is the book Union Square Cafe Grandma Chitavran amongst some of his great restaurants going around the horn here, Friedberg.
导致我开展这个主题的一个事情是了解了丹尼·迈耶(Danny Meyer)的经历，他是纽约市著名餐厅老板和Shake Shack的创始人。但是他曾经从事销售工作，本来打算去上法学院，我想他的叔叔告诉他：“你在做什么呢？你想成为一名餐厅老板。”于是那一天他停下了，接了一个每月1万美元的工作。或者是每年1万美元吧。他接受了一个90%的薪水减少，并开始学习。这就涉及到了历史部分，但他只是开始学习，显然剩下的就是历史，对于了解丹尼·迈耶的那些人来说。《Setting the Table》是一本书。是的。联合广场咖啡厅、祖母Chitavran等一些他伟大的餐厅的书籍正在流传。
You have a favorite biography you read or something that impacted you young in your career. And then do you feel like you figured it out and what did you what would you change about the early part of your career? So the same two questions. That's a three very loaded questions. I don't know how to pick which one you want to answer that one. I will tell you, when I was running my company in 2011, climate, yeah, the climate corporation, I read the Walter Isaacson biography of Steve Jobs. Yeah. And he actually profiled a number of jobs as management techniques. My only operating role prior to that was working at Google.
你在职业生涯初期阅读过一本喜爱的传记或受到某种影响的东西。那么你是否觉得自己已经找到了答案？你对职业生涯早期有什么改变的想法？所以这是三个非常复杂的问题。我不知道该回答哪一个。让我告诉你，2011年我在经营我的公司“气候公司”时，我读到了沃尔特·艾萨克森关于史蒂夫·乔布斯的传记。是的，他实际上对乔布斯的管理技巧进行了分析。那之前，我唯一的运营角色是在谷歌工作。
So that was the only management experience or exposure I had had. And then reading about how Jobs ran his management team, it actually changed my behavior going into the office. I I took a very different approach and I saw the results almost immediately. What was the primary thing that impacted you? Well, first of all, like having the cadence and the and the directness with the team, engaging the team fully in discourse, immediately making decisions, getting everyone to commit, moving forward very quickly. I was the first time CEO. So I never had a good mentor and reading those segments of Jobs's management style in his biography was just a really great tool to add to my emerging toolkit on how to be a manager and how to be a CEO and how to run a company. That was big for me.
那是我唯一的管理经验和接触。然后阅读有关乔布斯如何管理团队的资料，实际上改变了我在办公室的行为。我采取了一种非常不同的方法，几乎立即看到了结果。对你产生最大影响的是什么？嗯，首先，与团队保持节奏和直接性，全面参与团队讨论，立即做出决策，让每个人都承诺，快速前进。我是第一次担任CEO。所以我从来没有一个好的导师，阅读乔布斯传记中他在管理风格方面的那些部分实际上是对我成长中如何成为一个经理和一名CEO以及如何经营一家公司的宝贵工具。这对我来说是非常重要的。
I could rehash everything about early on in my life. I don't think that's the use of. Walter, Isaac Sten's bug on Elon coming out in a couple of weeks, which should be interesting. I sat for an interview with Walter for that one. So I'm interested to see how that turns out. Yeah, I did too. I was asked to. I didn't, you know, we were asked to do it. No, I did it. I did it. I, you know, I don't, I didn't ask to do it. I got asked, you know, if I would give some anecdotes, I think Saks also got asked if he would do some anecdotes. So I think it's going to be pretty good. And Walter was hanging around. He's been putting passages out on Twitter, right? Yeah. I mean, he's such a good writer and just watching him, you know, David and I were at Twitter for a little bit and, you know, just being.
我可以重复我生活初期的一切事情。但我认为这没有用。沃尔特，艾萨克·斯坦对埃隆的突发事件将在几周后发布，应该很有意思。我就为那个接受了沃尔特的采访。所以我很期待看看结果如何。是的，我也是。有人邀请我这样做。不，我做了。我做了，你知道，我没有要求做这件事。我被问到是否愿意提供一些轶事，我认为萨克斯也被问到是否愿意提供一些轶事。所以我认为结果会很不错。而沃尔特一直在身边。他一直在推特上发布一些段落，对吧？是的。他写作功底非常好，只是看他，你知道，大卫和我在推特上待了一会儿，就是这样。
He was hanging out. He was like, you know, in the corner of the room, like, just paying a lot of these meetings. Yeah. So he was there basically during the whole transition. I think that was going to be the ending of the book is, you know, he had to cut it off at some point, but he was there for the first month of the transition. Yeah. The Twitter takeover and for rocket launches and everything in between. So he, I mean, watching his biography technique is, uh, it's pretty intense. I mean, he spends a long time with the subjects and, you know, just taking notes and talking to everybody around him. So he would, you know, peel off Saks or peel me off. Hey, uh, could I ask you a question about this or ask you a question or that? What do you think of this? Well, Jake, I'll speaking of books.
他在闲逛。他就像，在房间的角落，像是在参加一大堆这些会议。是的，所以他基本上在整个过渡期间都在那里。我觉得这会是书的结尾，你知道的，他不得不在某个时候截止，但他在过渡的第一个月一直在那里。是的，包括Twitter的接管和火箭发射等等。所以他的传记技巧，嗯，非常强烈。我的意思是，他花了很长时间和被采访对象在一起，你知道的，只是做笔记和与周围每个人交谈。所以他会向我请教，嘿，我可以问你关于这个的问题吗？或者问你关于那个的问题吗？你对这个有什么看法？嗯，杰克，说到书的话。
I'm in the rare position of needing your advice. Oh, okay. Here we go. I think that's a compliment. Sort of a compliment. Okay. So you would Harper college. I'm going to do a book about how to create, run scale, operate software companies, which will be an extension of the blog I've been writing for a couple of years, which I haven't been active on mainly because I've been using that time for this pod, but I was writing it a pretty good clip until we started doing all in pod. Yeah. I want to get back to putting that together. Yes. And I could go chapter by chapter, you know, here's how you should think about marketing. Here's how you should think about sales. Here's how you should think about finance metrics and so on.
我需要你的建议，这是一个罕见的位置。好的，我们开始吧。我想这是一个赞美。算是一种夸奖吧。好的，所以你在Harper大学上课。我想写一本关于如何创建、经营和扩大规模的软件公司的书，这将是我这几年来写博客的延伸，由于花大部分时间在制作这个播客上，我已经有些时间没有更新了。是的，我想重新开始整理这个博客。我可以逐章地写，你知道，关于如何思考市场营销，如何思考销售，如何思考财务指标等等。
But I'm not sure that's the best way to present the material. So yeah, do I just write the book that I think it should be or do I work with a publisher on what the business book should be and they kind of give me the guidance. So it's a great question. You are in a unique position where, you know, you're successful and you have an audience for the book and success for you is for, you know, great founders to read the book and for it to have impact. As opposed to somebody who's an author who just wants to be published, right? So you have a different reason to do this.
但是我不确定这是呈现材料的最佳方式。所以，是不是我只写我认为应该写的书，还是与出版商合作，让他们给予我指导。这是一个很好的问题。你处于一个独特的位置，你知道，你很成功，也有了读这本书的受众，对你来说成功意味着伟大的创始人读这本书，并且产生影响。而不是一个只想出版的作家，对吧？所以你有不同的理由去做这件事。
I think you should write the book. You should decide who you want the audience to be and what you want to get out of the book and you should forget about publishers and the whole grand scheme of things. Then when you write the treatment, you write the first five chapters or so, then you can bring it to a select group of publishers. You can get an agent. I can introduce it to two or three agents. There's, you know, a top two or three in this field.
我认为你应该写这本书。你应该决定你希望的读者群体以及你期望从这本书中获得什么，而且你应该暂时忘记出版商和整个宏大计划。接着，在你写纲要时，你可以先写前五章左右，然后将其提交给一些精选的出版商。你可以找一个代理人。我可以向两三个代理人介绍它。这个领域里大概有两三个顶级代理人。
And I think what you should do is the business advice is out there, right? And the techniques are out there. But what you have is you have war stories. So the technique I used in my book, Angel, was to, you know, talk about techniques and investing that I had learned from other folks, including Bill Gurley and Michael Moritz or whatever. But then I would give my anecdotes, things I had experienced personally. And what that does is it makes the examples, let people really get some narrative out of the book. And so the lesson combined with the actual practical experience, that's kind of the magic of these business books.
我认为你应该做的是，商业建议是存在的，对吗？而且技术也是存在的。但是你所拥有的是你的亲身经历。所以我在我的书《天使投资》中使用的技术是，谈论我从其他人那里学到的投资技巧，包括比尔·格利和迈克尔·莫里茨等人。但我也会提供我个人的轶事，我亲自经历过的事情。这样做的好处是，让读者能够从书中获得一些故事叙述。所以结合教训和实际经验，这就是这些商业书籍的魔力所在。
I think do you have a favorite biography, your self-sax, either business or non-business? I don't think I read a lot of business biographies. Really? I read one business, how to book back in the PayPal days. You know, I didn't have any real business education. Good to great. Do you remember what it was? It was good to great. Yeah. I mean, that was the seminal book at the time. So I read this book and literally one chapter was on how you should stick to your core idea. And then the next chapter was about how you should be flexible. So I'm like, well, both of these ideas are right situationally. Yes. But so how do you decide? So I came away from the book thinking, this isn't really going to help me because it doesn't give you what you really need, which is what are the specific situations in which you should apply a given principle. Yes. And I kind of came away from like thinking that business self-help books just weren't that they're too theoretical and weren't that helpful. And this is where biographies really become helpful because you actually get to see why that technique was to play Brad.
我认为你是否有一本自传（无论是商业还是非商业）是你最喜欢的？我觉得我没有读过很多商业自传。真的吗？我在PayPal时代读了一本商业类的“成功之道”书。你知道，我没有接受过真正的商业教育。《从优秀到卓越》。你还记得它是关于什么的吗？是关于从优秀到卓越的。是的。当时那本书是有影响力的。所以我读了这本书，然后突然发现其中一章讲的是你应该坚持你的核心思想，而下一章则是关于如何灵活应对。所以我就想，这两种想法在不同情况下都是正确的。是的。但是你如何决定呢？所以，我从这本书中得出了这样的结论，它并没有真正帮助到我，因为它没有告诉你你真正需要的东西，也就是在什么具体情况下应用某个原则。是的。我还开始觉得商业自助书只不过是过于理论化，没有太多实用价值。这就是为什么自传真的很有帮助，因为你能够真正看到为什么那种技巧适用于布拉德的情况。
Do you have any business files that you get related to that about sex? Sex do not write a how to book. Yeah. Right. Write a book about your visceral experiences, right? That just you happen to teach people how to along the way, right? You have a lot of, you know, I just think the story is powerful.
你有关于性的任何业务文件吗？性不是用来写一本“如何操作”手册的。是啊。没错。是写一本关于你自身真实体验的书，对吧？只是在途中顺便教人如何，对吧？你有很多呢，我只是觉得这个故事很有力量。
Holy shit. What? What? Unbelievable. Is it calling zoom bombing when you just zoom? Wait a second. So I'm going to look at this. Oh, no. Oh, no. Oh, no. I got to get this guy. This guy fell off a boat in the Mediterranean. Thank you to the Starlink team yet again coming to the rescue. What is this? Oh, no, I just started to come and say hi. You have to hang. This is the black mirror version of the Brady bunch right here. What happened? Are you lost and see we tried to get you and find you the yacht was missing. The dinghy is missing. We sent out search crews. Hold on to your camera and go. You look like Tiger Woods in this shot. A guy, a guy that I work with. It's my through the Michael Bridges of the all in podcast and that you haven't missed a podcast since the beginning. So then that's the only reason why I'm coming into the same. Yeah, it's in my head. I just want to do business. That's a lot. I love you guys. Enjoy the pop. I'll talk to you later. I'll watch. Bye. Bye. Look at that. The Iron Man Street continues. Bye. You didn't want to give up. I love you. This is he's drunk. He's drunk. That was a drunk zoomed out. You remember he's nine hours ahead.
天啊。什么？什么？太不可思议了。难道你只是在用Zoom打电话就被称为Zoom轰炸吗？等一下。所以我要看看这个。哦，不。哦，不。哦，不。我得找到这个家伙。这个家伙在地中海的船上掉下来了。再次感谢Starlink团队来救援。这是什么？哦，不，我刚刚开始出来打个招呼。你得等着。这是《不可思议的黑镜》版本的布雷迪家族。发生了什么？你迷路了吗？我们试图找到你，你的游艇不见了，小船不见了。我们派出搜索队。抓住你的相机，出发吧。你看起来在这个镜头中像老虎伍兹。一个和我一起工作的人。这是我在全力播客中通过迈克尔·布里奇斯认识的，你从一开始就没有错过一次播客。所以这是我进来的唯一原因。是的，这在我脑子里。我只是想做生意。这太多了。我爱你们。享受弹跳吧。待会再聊。我会看着的。再见。再见。看那个，《钢铁侠》路线持续中。再见。你不想放弃。我爱你。他喝醉了。他喝醉了。那是一个喝醉了的Zoom会议。记得他比我们早九个小时。
Jay Cal, to answer your question. Yes, please. Teddy Roosevelt, man in the arena, Phil Knight, Alexander Hamilton. Those three for me that like the takeaway, the red thread that connects them is do shit that matters. Do stuff that matters. Your life is short. Get in the arena major in the majors, but do stuff that matters. So they all were inspirations for me, both in terms of how I organize my own life, but also how I think about investing. Fantastic. And I'll give you a couple of ones that you may not have thought of, something like an autobiography, the biography of Akira Kurosawa, the famous film director. Absolutely outstanding. Great recommendation. I'm going to I actually want to read that. That's a great. Incredible. I'll read that. Who wrote it? Akira Kurosawa. It's an autobiography. Oh, it's his autobiography. Autobiography. Oh, wow. Warren standing up. Steve Martin, Bill Gerlin talked about this one. And it really is fantastic. I've actually listened to it twice. And that's one of the great things about these biographies. You listen to him a second time. Here's another one, Saks. This is critical for you on writing. Oh, I'm listening to that. You've listened to it. Who's buying free? Fantastic. Stephen King. Oh, Stephen King, huh? On writing might be top five for me involved. And he really goes into like the story of Harry. He wrote like a small treatment of Harry. He was a math teacher. He threw it in the garbage because he was so frustrated with his wife sees it in the garbage. She reads it. She says, this is incredible. You should keep writing it. He writes it. He sells the book for $10,000. She's getting paid like $9,000 as a teacher. He can't quit his job. And back in the day, they used to sell your hardcover rights and your paperback rights separately. If your hardcover went well, then you would do a paperback and go mass market. He gets a call. They sold the rights to the mass market book, $400,000 to paperback. This agent gets on the phone and says it's $40,000. And he thinks he hears $40,000. He says, well, $40,000. That's incredible. That's four years I might be able to quit. My job as a teacher goes, no, that's $400,000. Says, OK, so $40,000 divided by nine. It's like maybe it's even closer to five years. He says, no, you're getting 400,000. You can't believe it. And that was basically the story of Stephen King. But it'd be great, great to listen to prior to writing a book. He's absolutely it's it's super amazing. Most people don't know this fact, but King wrote the novella that became Shossing. Absolutely. Yes. So that's right. He's got a lot of those you you didn't know it. And then the Malcolm X biography is amazing, too, if you haven't read it. So those are just non traditional ones of people following their passion. One of the things about it is the extreme effort and the decades of perfecting a craft that I found super appealing about these. Nothing happens easily in your honor, J Cal, the rest of the episode. Seven, seven, seven, seven, right.
杰伊·卡尔，回答你的问题。是的，请好。特迪·罗斯福，独身竞技场的人，菲尔·奈特，亚历山大·汉弘都是我所喜欢的人，他们之间连接的共同点是，做有意义的事情。做一些有意义的事情。你的生命是短暂的。参与竞技场，专攻重点，但要做有意义的事情。所以他们都是对我的启示，不仅对我自己的生活组织方式，还对我思考投资的方式。太棒了。我再给你介绍一些你可能没想到的书，比如一本自传，日本著名电影导演黑泽明的传记。非常出色。很棒的推荐。我会去读的。谁写的？黑泽明。这是他的自传。哦，原来如此厉害。该可信度高。斯蒂夫·马丁、比尔·格林也谈到过这本书。真是太棒了。我实际上听了两遍。这就是这些传记的好处之一，你可以再听一次。这是另一本，萨克斯。这对你的写作很重要。哦，我正在听。你已经听过了吗？谁在买账单？非常好。史蒂芬·金。哦，史蒂芬·金，是吗？对我来说，《写作》可能是前五名的书之一。他真的深入讲述了哈里的故事。他曾经是一名数学教师，他写了一篇哈里的简短作品，然后因为对此感到沮丧，扔进了垃圾桶。他太太看到后阅读了起来，说这太棒了，你应该继续写下去。于是他继续写了下去，并以1万美元的价格卖出了这本书。而她作为一名教师的薪水是9000美元。他不能辞去自己的工作。那时候，他们把你的精装版权和平装版权分开出售。如果你的精装版卖得好，那么你就会发行平装版并打入大众市场。他接到一通电话，他们把这本书的平装版权卖了40万美元。这个经纪人打电话过来说是40,000美金，然后他以为听错了，以为是4万美金，说"哇，4万美元，简直太棒了，这样我就可以辞去我的工作了"，然后那个人说"不，是40万美元"。他简直不能相信。这基本上就是史蒂芬·金的故事。但是在写书之前听一下这个实在是太好了。他真的很了不起。很多人不知道这个事实，但金写了那个成为《使徒行者》的中篇小说。是的，没错。他还有很多你不知道的作品。还有一本马尔科姆·X的传记也很棒，如果你还没读过的话。这些都是非传统的人们追随他们的激情的例子。其中有一件事很吸引人，那就是极端的努力和数十年的精益求精，我发现这在这些书中非常吸引人。没有什么事情是容易的，杰伊·卡尔，接下来的剩下的七分之七。
By the way, if you're a startup founder, entrepreneur, CEO, best film to watch. Because. Well, yeah, I mean, there is no rules. There is no giving up. There is you do what it takes and you persist. I think persistence is one of the biggest I've talked about is one of the biggest predictors for success. And there's a character that emerges. Once you're facing challenge, this film does such an incredible job of demonstrating the essence of that character.
顺便说一下，如果你是创业公司的创始人、企业家或者CEO，这是一部非常好的电影可以观看。因为，嗯，是的，我是说，这里没有规则。没有放弃的借口。你必须尽力去做，坚持下去。我认为坚持是成功的最大预测因素之一。并且在面对挑战时，一个角色会显现出来。这部电影非常出色地展示了这种角色的精髓。
Yeah. I think it's also a similar character that's needed in a biography. You'll see that a number of the actors in that film. A occur in other films by. Cara, who that star is, the Tashira Mufune. Yeah. Yeah. Who is in all of he's just about in all of his views. He was he was squirt to De Niro to Scorsese. Yes. Scorsese sort of modeled his relationship with De Niro after Kurosawa and George Lucas, Kurosawa, Francis for Coppola were all disciples of Kurosawa's, you know, incredible. Well, the seventh samurai was remade as a Western. The Venus and seven with I think Steve McQueen and Yule Brenner. Yep. A lot of Kurosawa's movies were remade as Westerns. Yep. It just works pretty well. And they were they were all scored by any Amorekoni. A lot of them by Inu Markoni, which I was listening to in the cold plunge. I started in the cold plunge. Oh my God. I it's I would just like to say just a hearty fuck you. This is such a random show. We have no. Well, we'll get there. But I mean, I just want to start the pockets by saying fuck you. It's really like is there anything else that's going to be talking about on the show? I'm like, I don't think so. Show Rogan and all these assholes who said in order to be like successful, you have to jump in a cold plunge because now I've done it four times out of the last, like I'm doing it every other day. And they're right. I feel like a superhero after I do this.
是的，我认为传记中也需要这样一个类似的角色。你会注意到，在那部电影中有很多演员在其他卡拉的电影中也出现过，他们就是那位明星塔什拉·樱木忠清。是的，是的，他几乎在他的所有作品中都有出现。他（樱木）是德尼罗和斯科西斯的私人弟子。是的，斯科西斯之后以樱木为榜样与德尼罗建立了他们的关系，而乔治·卢卡斯、弗朗西斯·福特·科波拉也都是樱木的门徒，你知道，这太不可思议了。《七武士》被改编成了一部西部片，《七人魔法使》主演了史蒂夫·麦奎因和尤尔·布伦纳。是的，很多樱木的电影都被改编成了西部片。是的，它们都由奥尼·马洛内作曲。其中许多是由奇诺·马洛内作曲的，我在冷水浸泡时一直听着。哦天呐，我只想说一声：去他妈的。这个节目太随机了。我们根本没有...好吧，我们会到那里的。但我的意思是，我只是想在开始时说一声去你妈的。这真是一个没有方向的节目。我想我们还会谈论别的吗？我觉得不会。罗根和这些混蛋说为了成功，你必须跳进冷水浸泡，因为我过去的四次都这样做了，差不多是隔一天一次。他们是对的，我觉得自己像超级英雄一样。
Anybody doing cold plunge here besides me and Shama? No, but I mean, I was in Mexico. Oh, Bill's occasionally. And they had this this cold plunge thing. And I we did it every day that we were there at the hotel. But then we came back. Well, it's you get this in Dorphan, Rundjap. Rush afterwards. It's incredible. And then afterwards now when I go to the gym, I only do like a 10 minute ice cold shower afterwards. Like it's quite a hole to like and it feels amazing. You feel like so relaxed after you got it. I did six. I did five or six minutes at 58 degrees. I've been lowering it two degrees a day. But the first thing I did it at 43 or 44 for like 45 seconds. And my body started shaking. I got hypothermia instantly. Bill, you've done it. You've done this nonsense occasionally. I'm still not convinced there's any medical. Oh, but you got to sit around. You sit around. It's very trendy. It's very true. I have an inference on it too. So I'm doing inference on having started a little bit. I'm not a cycle bike. Right. And motorcycle bikes. I'm going to be biking cold. And we literally my last week has been failure. You just take your take your bike into the cold. And then you ride it into the inside. And then you go play pickle ball. Yeah. OK, and you're wondering why everybody hates us. And lifestyles of the abhorrent. One percent.
除了我和Shama，还有其他人也在这里参加冷水浸泡吗？不，但我的意思是，我当时在墨西哥。哦，比尔偶尔也会参加。然后他们有这个冷水浸泡的东西。而且我们在那家酒店住的每一天都会做。但是之后我们回来了。嗯，你在进入冷水时会感到一种巨大的兴奋感。真是不可思议。之后我去健身房时，我只会冷水淋浴10分钟。感觉挺好的，感觉很舒服。你在体验完冷水之后感觉非常放松。我用58度的水浸泡了六分钟。我每天降低两度温度。但我第一次尝试的时候，用了43或44度的冷水浸泡了45秒钟，我的身体就开始颤抖，我立刻得了低体温症。比尔，你也试过吧。你偶尔也会尝试这种胡闹的事情。我仍然不相信有任何医学依据。哦，但你得坐在旁边，坐一坐。这很时尚，这很正确。我对此也有推理。我正在尝试推理从开始一点点做。我不是骑自行车，对，骑摩托车。我要在寒冷的天气骑车。然后你把自行车骑进屋里。然后你去玩拍球。是的。好吧，你在想为什么大家都讨厌我们。我们这些令人憎恶的人生活方式也只占据了百分之一的人。
All right, listen, speaking of a couple of other rentals that are were cura sola films are worth watching. Actually, he did he did versions of Shakespeare, which I think is really interesting. Absolutely. So Kurosawa took on Shakespeare and then Hollywood kind of adapted Kurosawa. But a couple of really good ones thrown a blood was Kurosawa's adaptation of Macbeth and then Rand was his adaptation of King Lear. Two of my favorites worth checking out. Hidden Fortress also grit. And fortress became the basis for Star Wars. It was a big influence. Yeah, the R2 D2 and C3P characters, C3P. Oh characters who are like sort of telling the story are in the hidden fortress. You can see the direct descendent there. But for me, the genre I love for Kurosawa is his film, the wa era. Straight dog. I allow. I mean, these are exceptional films and high and low. I wanted to remake when I was thinking about being a film director. And it turns out Spielberg owns the rights high and low. Incredible story, but we digress here.
好的，听着，说起一些其他值得观看的库洛索夫电影租赁，实际上，他曾经拍过莎士比亚的改编版本，我觉得非常有趣。确实如此。所以库洛索夫拍了莎士比亚的作品，然后好莱坞对库洛索夫进行了改编。但是有几部非常好的作品，比如《麦克白》和《李尔王》的改编版本都是库洛索夫的经典之作，值得一看。还有《隐藏的堡垒》也很棒。而且这部电影成为《星球大战》的基础，对其有很大影响。是的，在《隐藏的堡垒》里有像R2D2和C3P这样的角色，他们在某种程度上讲述了这个故事。你可以看到直接的传承。但对我来说，我热爱库洛索夫的电影《剑术时代》和《直到天边》。我曾经想重新拍摄《直到天边》当我考虑成为一名电影导演时。结果发现是斯皮尔伯格拥有了《直到天边》的版权，真是一个令人难以置信的故事。但我们偏离了主题。
Let's get to the guy. You just won one last anecdote. Oh, the TV show Breaking Bad. Yes. Inspired by Akira, the Kurosawa film about a guy who finds out he's going to die. And when he finds out he's going to die, suddenly he becomes one of my favorite. Self like with this true like nature comes out. So an incredibly poignant film that obviously acquired the extraordinary TV show Breaking Bad.
让我们去找那个家伙吧。你刚刚听到了一个笑话。哦，那个电视节目《绝命毒师》。是的。它受到了黑泽明的电影《吉良吉影》的启发，讲述一个男人发现自己将要死去。当他发现自己将要死去时，突然间他成为了我最喜欢的人物之一。像他那样真实自我的本质就显现出来了。所以这部非常动人的电影显然影响了《绝命毒师》这一非凡的电视节目。
Yeah. Akira is means to live in Japanese. And this is a story of somebody who has basically lived a modest amid is somebody who lived a mid life. But then at the end decides he wants to do something meaningful with his little pittance of money and to make an impact on the world. And so he decides he's going to take a parking lot that's disgusting and fill with garbage and make it into a kids playground. So people can enjoy their life. It is. And it's also it's to sure a Mafune as an old man. So in a way, this parallels their careers and trying to do something important. There's another one I live in fear. So those two to live and I live in fear about aging and getting all the genre.
是的，Akira在日语中的意思是“生活”。这是一个关于一个基本上过着平凡生活的人的故事，他决定用自己微薄的财富为世界做出有意义的贡献。因此，他决定将一个肮脏的停车场变成一个供孩子们玩耍的游乐场，以便人们能够享受生活。同时，这也象征了Mafune作为一位老人的生活。从某种程度上说，这与他们努力做出重要贡献的职业生涯相似。还有一个是《我害怕死去》，这两部电影都关注老龄化和面对不同形式的恐惧。
If you don't know Akira Kurosawa, you know, just you're going to need to be a little patient because it doesn't have a thousand cuts per minute, like modern films. It's not the Transformers or a Marvel film, but it's well worth it. If you can get your ADHD under control, I would start with the samurai movies. I have the super samurai. Yeah. Seven samurai throwing a blood and ran. Yeah, you go there. And then there's, I mean, if you want to go super intellectual, Roshomon, which is about truth, every people's different. Every film theory, every film theory class starts with Ross and more. Yeah. So there's your USC film school. Divergence. Save 100 grand. OK. We just say we'll see you all at UCLA. Yeah.
如果你不知道黑泽明，就需要有点耐心，因为他的电影并不像现代电影一样每分钟有一千个剪辑。它不是《变形金刚》或漫威电影，但它真的非常值得一看。如果你能控制好自己的注意力不集中，我建议你开始看他的武士电影。我有《七武士》、《血染满国山》等等。如果你想追求超高智商，可以看《罗生门》，它关于真相，人们各有不同。每个电影理论课都以《罗生门》为首篇。所以，你可以把它作为你的电影学校的起点，省下一百万美元。好吗？那我们就说在UCLA见咯。
OK, VC market update. Carda has released a series a funding map covering the first half of 2023, but the data is what's interesting. They covered and Carda basically manages cat tables and stuff like that for folks. Original company was eShares, I think. This is a funding map, which just shows like how much money was raised. Nothing really too consequential in there. But what's really interesting is the data on series A rounds, series A rounds. Series A rounds are typically the rounds when a benchmark or Sequoia, a craft come in and, you know, join the board and put in a. Significant check before that you have angels and seed investors. And after that, you have growth funds, but the series A is considered like a seminal moment in the history of a startup.
好的，VC市场更新。Carda发布了一份涵盖2023年上半年的A轮融资报告，但数据才是最有趣的。他们主要管理股东表格等内容。原始公司应该是eShares。这是一份融资报告，只是展示了筹集到的资金数量。里面没有太重要的内容。但真正有趣的是A轮融资数据，A轮融资通常是Benchmark或Sequoia等公司加入董事会并提供一笔重要投资的轮次。在此之前有天使投资者和种子投资者，之后有成长型基金，但A轮被认为是初创公司历史中一个重要的节点。
Media and round is now seven million raised. That's down 26% year over year. And this is all data from the first half of the year. It's the first half of 2023 versus 2022, which was a really crummy year. We're down from the crummy year, 26% on the dollars raised, seven million. And the pre money valuation, 40 million down, 17%. So last year, it was 11 million raised on 48. I don't have the 2021 data here, but it would be even more. So just right off the bat.
现如今，媒体和轮次筹得的资金已经达到七百万美元。与去年同期相比，这一数字减少了26%。而这些数据均来自今年上半年。这是2022年与2023年上半年之间的对比，而那一年可谓非常糟糕。与那个糟糕的年份相比，我们在筹集的金额上下降了26%，即七百万美元。而公司估值方面的前期金额则下降了17%，即从四千万下降至四千万。去年筹集到的资金为4800万美元，我没有这里的2021年数据，但那个数字应该更高。所以，这当即显示出来了。
Reactions, sorry, you bill girly to what we're seeing in this series. A space is a return to normalcy. I mean, the series A's back in the, you know, Uber days and Airbnb days where what, five, 10 million bucks on a 30 million. So this is returned to normalcy. Yeah, I don't think you've gone quite back to that line, right? And so I think there's still a significant amount of competition at that level. And the fact that it's off a little bit is no worthy, but it's not like off 50% right. I think that market remains competitive. I think there's a number of great people out there investing at that level. And like, and of course the A.I. deals, like one thing it might be interesting is if you pulled the A.I. deals out, I bet those numbers would be more akin to what they were two or three years ago because those are being done at 200. Is the reason you went to angel investing or seed investing, let's call it because it's so crowded and competitive at the series A level. And what seed investing is now is what series A investing was for the 20 years of your career.
反应，抱歉，你帐单太“女性化”了，与我们在这个系列中看到的形成鲜明对比。太空是回到正常状态的象征。我的意思是，系列A回到了像优步和爱彼迎那样的阶段，30亿美元投资中的五到十亿美元。所以这是回归正常状态。是的，我觉得你还没有达到这个水平，对吧？所以我认为在这个水平上仍然存在相当程度的竞争。它的回落是值得注意的，但并不是像50%那样严重。我认为这个市场仍然具有竞争力。我认为有很多优秀的人在那个水平上进行投资。当然，人工智能领域的交易可能是个有趣的例外，如果你排除那些人工智能交易，我敢打赌这些数字会更接近两三年前的水平，因为那些交易都是在2亿美元以上进行的。你之所以转向天使投资或种子投资，是因为在系列A阶段市场过于拥挤和竞争激烈。而现在的种子投资正是你职业生涯的20年里的系列A投资的水平。
Nah. I did. OK. I think if I were practicing institutionally, I would state the series A level and take board seats and try and get as much ownership as possible, which is the one than the benchmark strategy. I am. This is more of a hobby thing for me. Got it. And I don't want board seats anymore. But it's super, super crowded at series A still to this day. I said it was competitive. I don't know that it's super crowded. I think a lot of people realize that if you can get two and a half or 3% management fee investing $300 million at a pop, that's an easier lifestyle than actually taking board seats and doing work. And so I think a lot of money and activity got pulled into the late stage market. Nearly every firm started doing that.
不，我就是这样做的。好的，如果我在机构实践的话，我会声明A轮，并且拥有尽可能多的股权，并且拥有董事会席位，这比基准策略更重要。我是的，这对我来说更像是一种爱好。明白了。而且我不再想要董事会席位了。但是现在在A轮仍然非常非常拥挤。我说竞争激烈。我不确定是否非常拥挤。我认为很多人意识到，如果你能够通过一次性投资3亿美元来获得两个半到3%的管理费，那比真正拥有董事会席位和工作更容易。所以我认为很多资金和活动都流向了后期市场。几乎每家公司都开始这样做。
And once the once the center of gravity goes there and a firm, you know, and you're investing 200 million a clip, can you imagine the Monday meetings? Like who's paying attention to the person that's putting five million out of the time? Like it'd be hard. It's like going to playing high stakes cards and then you get invited to it. You're playing 200, 400, 200, 200 and you go to five, 10 games. It's like it's it's if they're the team and who's paying attention to the person playing in the little game. And so I actually think the number of people that practice at that level has actually gone down. Huh, but that doesn't mean, you know, the business since I got in, only got more competitive. And so there's still enough. And the other thing is the founders have learned how to play.
而且一旦重心移往那边，一个有实力的公司投资2亿美元一次，你能想象周一开会时是什么样子吗？那个投入每次只有500万美元的人有谁会关注他呢？这很难。就好像你正在玩高额赌博，然后被邀请去玩200、400、200、200的游戏，而你只能玩5、10的游戏。就好像他们是团队，谁会关注那个在小游戏中玩的人呢？所以我实际上认为，在那个水平上练习的人数实际上是下降了。哼，但这并不意味着，你知道，我加入行业后，竞争变得更加激烈。所以还是有足够的机会。另外一件事是创始人已经学会了如何玩。
However, if there's 10 people doing it, they know, how to play them off of one another. They're very skilled at it. Yeah. That's a that's a weird thing that happened is like the playbook because of podcast, because of blog posts. I mean, just absolutely how to how to run a company and then, you know, how to, you know, negotiate with VCs is it's all been unpacked. Sax, what are you seeing? You're a series A investor. You compete with the Sequoia's, the benchmarks, heads up for these series A's. What are you seeing in the series A and what do you take from this data being down? 26% year over year, which probably actually means probably 50% down from the peak. Uh, what are those?
然而，如果有10个人在进行这项工作，他们知道如何利用彼此之间的关系。他们在这方面非常熟练。是的，发生这种事情很奇怪，像一个剧本一样，因为有播客和博客文章。我是说，完全就是关于如何经营一家公司，以及如何与风险投资者谈判。一切都被分析得一清二楚。Sax，你看到了什么？你是一位A轮投资者。你与Sequoia、Benchmark等公司竞争这些A轮融资。你在A轮市场看到了什么？你对下降26%的数据有何看法？实际上，这可能意味着从峰值下降了50%。这些数据意味着什么？
Well, yeah, the venture capital market peaked in Q four of 2021 in terms of both valuations and the amount of money that was being deployed and it kept going down throughout all of 2022. And I think it bottomed out in Q one of 2023, basically in the last several months. And I think now the pace of deployment has sort of stabilized and it's kind of stabilized at a pre pandemic level. So, you know, maybe a 2019 level. Now, I think that probably mass and big differences by round. So like you're saying series A rounds are more competitive. There's relatively more action there. I think the late stage rounds, Brad can speak to this. The capital there is dried up, I think, conservatively more. And those rounds are much harder to get. And the reason I think is because that when you have more operating history, then it's harder to raise a round based on narrative. Whereas when you're at a very early stage, you can basically just raise money based on a dream and a story.
嗯，是的，从估值和投放金额两个方面来看，2021年第四季度风险投资市场达到了顶峰，并且在整个2022年期间一直下滑。我认为2023年第一季度是谷底，大约是在最近几个月里。我认为现在投放步伐已经稳定下来，基本上稳定在疫情前的水平，也就是可能是2019年的水平。现在，我认为可能存在不同轮次之间的巨大差异。比如你说的A轮比较有竞争力，那里的活动相对较多。我认为后期阶段的轮次，布拉德可以谈谈这个问题。我认为那里的资金比较干涸，相比而言更难获得。我认为原因是当你有更多的运营历史时，更难以基于故事来筹集资金，而在早期阶段，你基本上可以根据一个梦想和一个故事来筹集资金。
The way I frame it to people is when I'm part of this is my fault because I'm training people in our accelerators and pre-excelerators. I tell them you're either selling promise or performance. And once you start having customers and numbers and retention, someone like SACS is going to be like, give me the data and they're going to look at churn and say, yeah, this business is too much churn. It's a leaky bucket, whatever. But when you're selling promise, it's a lot easier than selling performance. I'll tell you guys to see that as a well known CEO public company now, he told me, and I think, girly, I think you guys were investors. He said, as soon as we started having revenue, our valuation felt like it went down as soon as we started making profit, our valuation went down. Because at that point, you're judged on the quality of that stage of the business. Whereas before you could paint a picture with a thousand words about the different paths you might walk and everyone wants to believe the optimistic path will be walked. And so you can boost your valuation, boost investor interest. But once those numbers start to come through, it really changes the investor criteria for how they assess the value of the business.
我向人们解释的方式是，在我参与时这是我的过错，因为我在我们的加速器和前加速器中培训人员。我告诉他们，你要么是卖承诺，要么是卖业绩。一旦你开始有了顾客、数据和留存率，像SACS这样的机构就会说，给我数据，他们会审视流失率，然后说，对，这个企业的流失率太高了。就像一个漏水的桶。但是当你卖承诺时，比卖业绩容易得多。我告诉你们，就连一个现在已经成为众所周知的CEO的上市公司也告诉我，我想你们也是投资者。他说，一旦我们开始有了收入，我们的估值就会感觉下降，一旦我们开始盈利，我们的估值也会下降。因为在那一刻，人们会根据该阶段业务的质量来评估你。而在此之前，你可以用千言万语描述可能走的不同道路，并且每个人都希望相信乐观的道路会被走上。所以你可以提高你的估值，增加投资者的兴趣。但是一旦那些数字开始出现，投资者评估企业价值的标准就会发生真正的变化。
Well, a lot of people will state if they have a product launch, telling them those tell you to raise money before you launch. Yeah, sell the promise of that launch. Yes. Old saying it's better to raise on the sizzle than on the steak. Mm. Yeah. Unless the steak is pretty high grade. Yeah, obviously, if the steak is great, then yes, that's the best time. But just to take that risk off the table. Yeah. But just to recap, I think where we are, I think the venture capital markets have stabilized for funding new companies. I think there's a mania going on with AI, both in terms of the size of these rounds and the valuations. It's like 2021 for a lot of AI companies. We're not participating in that craziness. We are doing some seed checks, I would say. And early stage AI companies were kind of calibrating the size of the check with the stage and amount of risk. And I think that's appropriate. So you are going pre-series AC, putting in that's a 500k one million dollar check. Seed is what makes the most sense, I think, for AI startups, because if you wait for a later round, then they're not being priced based on fundamentals at all. Yeah. Yeah. So what check size is that? 500k million? We just did. We did one of four million dollar check where he led kind of a bigger seed round. Got it. Fantastic. I love that those are called seed rounds today. I mean, it used to be three to five million was your series A, but yeah, sure. Seed round three to five. I still don't understand the term pre-seed.
好吧，很多人会说，如果他们有产品发布活动，那些人会告诉你，在发布之前先筹集资金。是的，卖给他们关于发布的承诺。是的。俗话说，筹集资金比炙肉更好。嗯。是的。除非肉很高级。是的，显然，如果肉很棒，那就是最好的时机。但只是为了减少风险。是的。简而言之，我认为我们现在的情况是，我认为风险投资市场已经稳定了，可以为新公司提供资金。我认为在AI领域有一种狂热现象，不论是在融资规模还是估值方面。对于很多AI公司来说，就像2021年一样。我们并不参与这种疯狂。我们正在进行一些种子投资的审核，我会说，对于早期阶段的AI公司，我们正在根据阶段和风险的大小来确定投资规模，我认为这是合适的。所以你们在进行预系列A轮投资，投入500k至100万美元。我认为种子轮对于AI初创公司来说是最合适的，因为如果你等到后面的轮次，它们根本不是基于基本面来定价。是的。是的。那个投资规模是多少？500k或100万？我们刚刚做了一笔400万美元的投资，他主导了一轮较大规模的种子轮融资。明白了。真棒。我喜欢现在把这些叫做种子轮。以前是三到五百万美元的A轮，但是，是的。种子轮是三到五百万。我还是不明白“前种子轮”这个词是什么意思。
So just to finish the thought, I think where we're at, and Brad can chime in on this, is I think the venture capital market has stabilized for new companies, new fundraising. However, I think there's going to be a one to two year period of distress for all these companies that raised in the peak, 2020, 2021, and are now running out of money, and they don't have enough revenue, they're not growing fast enough, and or their burn is too high, and all those companies are going to be facing down rounds or restructurings, or they're not going to be able to raise. Well, people are also marking their books now. We're starting to see the marking of the books. They're going to get marked down. And we're going to have probably a one to two year period of distress for all those bubble companies while we have a little bit of a resurgence for new companies. I got another topic I'm going to go to here related, but Brad, I just wanted to let you chime in on the late stage there, because you operate in the BC, Sarah. Yeah.
所以，为了完整陈述我的观点，我认为我们所处的情况是风险投资市场已经稳定下来，对于新公司和新融资来说。然而，我认为在接下来的一到两年里，对于那些在2020年和2021年融资达到顶峰，现在资金已经用尽，收入不足，增长速度也不够快，或者烧钱过多的公司而言，将会面临困境。这些公司将会面临下调估值或重组，或者无法筹集到资金。同时，人们也开始开始调整它们的账面价值。它们的估值将会下调。而在这一段时间内，我们也可能会看到新公司的复苏。我还有一个与此相关的话题要讨论，但是Brad，我希望你也能对及后期的情况发表一下看法，因为你在创业板颇有经验。 是的。
I think, and this is related to the topic I suspect we're going to transition to, but listen, there is a lot of activity in venture today. Right. And we're very reflective to the stock market. People were really scared in Q3 and Q4 of 2022, started in 2021, but 2022 was scary to people, because public market valuations for growth companies were down over 50%. So we really saw IPO markets, venture, all start to slow down. Coming out of that, we've seen stock market within 10% of all time highs. We see this wave of AI occurring. What I would tell you is under 500 million, maybe under 600 million, right? Series B and C rounds are as hot as I've ever seen them in data infrastructure and AI and software, et cetera. So there is a lot of competition there. The later stage stuff, which as you know, I call quasi public. So if a company is over a billion dollars, right? Now you're very reflective relative to what's happening in the public markets. We're starting to see activity. I just read whiz raise more money. It's got $200 million ARR raised at 10 billion. So those markets are definitely- 50 times revenue. Yeah, we did not participate. 50 times revenue. You know, so there is definitely activity. I know a deal we got called on yesterday raising two and a half billion at 100 billion. There is a lot of activity. However, SACs is right. You know, remember, we had 1000 unicorns at the end of 2021. And I've said 100% of those are going to do a down round. And we're still in the early stages of that reset to occur. There was some, you know, there's a report out this week that lots of people comment on Twitter where public markets were down 50% and private marks were down, I don't know, five to 10%. Like that will all normalize. It's all going to be down, you know, the same. So that's the only place I don't see activity under performance companies that were valued over a billion dollars. Those are dead on arrival until you get to a market clearing price. And we're not there yet.
我认为，这与我怀疑我们即将转向的主题有关，但请听着，现在风险投资领域非常活跃。是的。我们对股市非常敏感。人们在2022年第三季度和第四季度的时候非常害怕，从2021年开始，但是2022年对人们来说非常可怕，因为增长型公司的股票市值下跌了50%以上。所以我们真的看到了IPO市场、风险投资领域等各个领域开始放缓。从那时开始，我们看到股票市场接近历史最高水平。我们看到了这股人工智能的浪潮正在发生。我要告诉你的是，在5亿甚至6亿美元以下，对于数据基础设施、人工智能和软件等领域，B轮和C轮融资项目是我见过的最热门的。所以竞争非常激烈。较晚期的项目，就像你知道的，我称之为准公开募股。所以，如果一家公司市值超过10亿美元，那现在市值将很大程度上反映出公开市场的情况。我们开始看到了活动。我刚刚看到威仕公司筹集了更多资金。他们实现了2亿美元的年收入，并以100亿美元的估值融资。所以这些市场确实存在着……50倍的营收。是的，我们没有参与其中。50倍的营收。你知道，所以确实存在很多活动。我知道昨天我们接到了一个正在筹集25亿美元，市值为1000亿美元的项目。确实存在很多活动。但是SACs是对的。记住，2021年底我们有1000个独角兽。我曾经说过100%的独角兽都将进行降轮融资。而我们现在仍处于这种重置的早期阶段。这周有一份报告称公开市场下跌了50%，私募市场下跌了5%到10%。就像那样，一切将会趋于正常。所有东西都会下跌，基本上是同样的情况。所以唯一的地方我看不到活动是那些市值超过10亿美元的表现不佳的公司。除非你达到市场竞价的价格，否则它们会很难生存下来。我们还没有达到那个阶段。
Okay. So the other big issue here is a lot of money was raised by VCs. Oh, you know, commonly known as dry powder in the industry, but there are some misconceptions about this dry powder. People are saying, oh my God, all this money is going to come flowing into the ecosystem. Kumbaya, it's going to be the roaring 20s again. However, Bill, you did a little tweet storm.
好的。所以这里的另一个重大问题是，风险投资家筹集了大量资金。哦，你知道的，在行业中通常称为干粉。但关于这个干粉，有一些误解。人们在说，哦天哪，所有这些钱都会源源不断地涌入生态系统中。生活美好，就像二十年代的繁荣一样。然而，比尔，你发了一连串的推文。
What people don't realize is when we refer to dry powder at VC firms, the VCs do not have that $250 billion or whatever it is, quarter trillion dollars sitting in their bank accounts. That money is sitting in another person's bank account, LPs, Harvard's endowment, CalPERS, sovereign wealth funds, etc. It has not been drawn down by the VCs yet. So Bill, why is this an important fact for people to understand? And what are the dynamics that LPs are dealing with?
人们没有意识到的是，当我们提到风险投资公司的“干粉”时，那些风投家并不真的在他们的银行账户里拥有2500亿美元，或者无论是多少，两千五百亿美元。这些钱实际上放在另一个人的银行账户里，也就是有限合伙人（LPs），比如哈佛大学的捐赠基金、加利福尼亚公众员工退休金（CalPERS）、主权财富基金等等。它还没有被风投家提取出来使用。所以，比尔，为什么这对人们来说是一项重要的事实？有限合伙人（LPs）又是如何处理这些动态的呢？
Yeah. And there's a ton of dynamics between the GPs at the venture capitalist and the LPs at those endowments that Brad started to hit on one of those, which is the marks aren't in the right place. And so the thing you just explained, critical, Jason, which is you don't actually have the money. There's no venture firm sitting around with all of the money that they've got committed to their fund in a bank account that's just taking. Why not? Why does that not actually occur?
是的。风险投资家和捐赠基金中的有限合伙人之间存在大量的动态关系，布拉德刚开始触及其中之一，那就是估值没有正确定位。所以正如你刚才解释的那样，扮演关键角色的詹森，实际上你并没有真正的资金。没有一家风投公司坐在一笔钱上，该钱是他们向自己的基金承诺的，放在一个只是接收的银行账户里的。为什么不呢？为什么这实际上并没有发生呢？
Because people would say, oh, you raised a billion from these folks? They gave you the billion, right? Why do you not take it down? One of the brilliant realities of the way that a LP agreement works with a venture fund is they're not on the IRR clock until they actually pull the money down.
因为人们会说，哦，你从这些人那里筹集了十亿美元？他们给了你十亿美元，对吗？你为什么不拿下来呢？风险投资基金的有一个亮点就是，只有在他们真正取出资金后才会启动投资回报率的计时器。
So they. Explain what that means. Yeah. They charge fees based on the total committed amount, but they don't actually draw the money down and get gaged on the performance of their investment until they need it. And so a classic venture firm will do five, six drawdowns over a 10-year period of a fund. And so they don't act. They literally don't have the money.
所以他们。解释了这意味着什么。是的。他们按照承诺金额收取费用，但实际上并不会动用这笔钱，并且直到他们需要才会根据投资业绩进行评估。因此，一个经典的风险投资公司会在10年的基金期限内进行五六次提款。所以他们不行动。他们实际上没有这笔钱。
A couple of other things worth noting. So. And some of that I didn't put in the tweet, but the marks aren't right. And everyone kind of quietly knows that the marks aren't right, but there's actually no incentive to get the marks right.
还有几个值得注意的事情。噢，还有一些我没有在推文中提到的，但是评分是不正确的。大家都心知肚明评分不正确，但实际上没有激励来正确评分。
Here's. Explain what a mark is to folks. So private companies have an evaluation that's assessed either by the GP themselves, in most cases, which is a bit of a conflict of interest, sometimes by your auditor, E&Y, or whoever's auditing your venture fund. But of course, the techniques they have for assessing valuation are extremely crude. Because they're not market based. They're just. They're not public companies.
这是对大家解释什么是"mark"（标记）的内容。所以私营公司有一个由医生自己进行评估的评估，大多数情况下这存在利益冲突，有时是由审计师、E&Y或审计您的风险基金的其他人进行评估。但当然了，他们用于评估估值的技术非常粗糙，因为它们不是基于市场的，他们并非上市公司。
Yeah. So there's actually not a way to know they have extremely complicated cap tables. The other thing is, many LPs are actually bonus on the paper mark. And this is something that a lot of people don't realize. And so they don't have an incentive to dial around to the DPs and say, get your marks right, because it's actually going to reflect poorly on them if they were to roll those up.
是的。实际上，我们无法知道他们拥有非常复杂的股权表。另外，许多有限合伙人实际上是以纸上标记为基准进行奖金计算的。这是很多人没有意识到的事情。因此，他们没有动力去与股权投资者对话并确保标记正确，因为如果他们把这些数据合并起来，反而会对他们产生不好的影响。
Both of them are. Both of the LP and the GP are in a dance there. Hey, we know that Stripe is not worth 100 billion right now. It's worth 50 billion. But if you mark it down, I don't get my bonus. I'm the person who's giving you money for your next fund. And so when we're assessing, hey, how much are we going to give you for your next fund? We're going to look at the performance of previous funds as an indicator. Only thing that I placed back on what you just said.
他们两个都是。LP和GP都在那里跳舞。嘿，我们知道目前Stripe的价值不是1000亿美元，它只值500亿美元。但如果你将其标记下调，我就得不到我的奖金了。我是给你们下一个基金提供资金的人。因此，当我们评估时，我们会看之前基金的表现作为一个指标，来决定我们会给你多少资金用于下一个基金。我只是针对你刚才说的内容提出了一个观点。
I agree with what you just said, except no one has the explicit conversation. No, it's an emergency behavior of the dynamic system. Show me an incentive. I'll show you an outcome kind of situation. But there's no. I've never heard of an LP like brow being GPs to get their marks right, especially on the downside. Never heard of that.
我同意你刚才说的话，除了没有人进行过明确的对话。不，这是动态系统的一种紧急行为。给我看一个激励措施。我会给你展示一种结果的情况。但是，没有这样的情况。我从未听说过像LP这样的人会为了正确标记GPs而接受惩罚，特别是在负面方面。从未听说过这样的事情。
And those marks can be done by an audit, like I said. They could be done by around a financing. And sometimes you have to lose. And then there's a secondary market, weird secondary market. Secondary market can do it. And sometimes LP's have this weird situation where different venture firms are marking companies at radically different prices, which creates some interesting dynamics as well.
而这些标记可以通过审计来完成，就像我说的那样。它们可以通过融资完成。有时你不得不承担损失。然后还有一个奇怪的二级市场。二级市场可以做到这一点。有时有限合伙人（LP）会出现这种奇怪的情况，不同的创投公司对公司的标记价格存在巨大差异，这也带来了一些有趣的动态。
So I did the C-round of Stripe, where I'm Y-common inter. And I say, you know what? 50 billion's fine. We're going to market at 50 billion because we invested at 2 million in Stripe. But then whoever did the Series G or whatever it's up to, who did the $100 billion mark is like, yeah, we'll mark it down to 90. But somebody Calpers or Harvard has the same share class in two different funds at two different prices. So then you could really triangulate on reality, huh?
所以我参与了Stripe的C轮融资，作为一名普通持股人。然后我说，你知道吗？500亿美元是可以接受的。我们会以500亿美元的市值上市，因为我们以200万美元的价格投资了Stripe。但是后来不论是谁参与了G轮或其他轮次，将估值降到了900亿美元。但是所谓的Calpers或者哈佛（大学）以不同的价格在两个不同的基金中拥有相同的股份。所以你真的能够逼近现实情况了，是吧？
Another dynamic that makes the powder less dry that I didn't mention in the tweet storm. Imagine you're on your first or second venture fund. Or imagine you're a fund that used to just have one fund, but they've expanded to four funds. Okay. Now, imagine you don't have a lot of liquidity proof points on those funds. Do you really want to run out of money and go test whether or not you can raise your third fund or your second fund? Or do you kind of want to wait and see if you can develop some track records? So that because you may be facing the imminent death of your firm, if you run out too quickly and go back to market and there is no market. So I have a hundred million dollar fund. It's my third fund. Okay. What pace am I going to do this? I'm going to do it in 24 months or 18 months like maniacs were doing during the peak, where am I going to take a 36 month approach or more traditional three year deployment? If I even if I take a 40 month deployment, hey, I got time to work out all these issues in the previous portfolio.
还有一个因素使得这个问题不那么干燥，这是我在推文风暴中没有提到的。想象一下，你是第一次或第二次创业基金的投资者。或者想象一下，你的基金过去只有一个基金，但现在已经扩展到了四个基金。好的，现在想象一下，你对这些基金没有太多的流动性证据。你真的想跑光钱去测试是否能筹集到第三个或第二个基金吗？或者你是否想等待并观察是否能建立一些业绩记录呢？因为如果你过快地用光了钱，回到市场上却没有市场，你的公司可能面临即将死亡的危机。所以我有一个一亿美元的基金。这个速度我会在多久内完成？我会像疯子一样在24个月或18个月内完成，就像巅峰期那样，还是采取36个月的方式，或者更传统的三年部署？即使我采取了40个月的部署，嗨，我还有时间解决先前组合中的所有问题。
Sax, you've heard this sort of dynamic. What are your thoughts on the dry powder issue? You yourself have a lot of dry powder, I understand. So how do you think about it? We do have a lot of dry powder and we're going really slow. I mean, there's no feeling that we have to rush out and deploy this capital. And one of the things that's interesting about the period we've been in that's been surprising to me is that our metrics actually haven't changed. I mean, the things that we're looking for in a software company haven't really changed. We look for a certain amount of ARR, certain growth rates, certain amount of net dollar attention, certain CAC, a certain capital efficiency. That bar hasn't changed for us, but the number of companies meeting that bar has gone down considerably. Because they have headwinds because customers are in austerity measures or companies are going out of business and saying, hey, let me consolidate my SaaS tools. Enterprise buyers are sharpening their pencils. They are trying to consolidate vendors. There's a lot of headwinds in the buying cycle right now.
Sax，你听过这种动态。你对现金储备问题有何看法？我了解你自己有很多现金储备。那么你是如何考虑这个问题的呢？我们确实有很多现金储备，但我们进展得非常慢。我的意思是，没有一种感觉让我们觉得必须急着使用这笔资金。而对我来说，这个时期令人惊讶的是我们的指标实际上没有改变。我的意思是，我们在寻找软件公司方面的要求实际上并没有改变。我们寻找一定量的年度再增长合同(ARR)、一定的增长率、一定的净利润留存率(net dollar attention)、一定的用户获取成本(CAC)以及一定的资本效率。对我们来说，这个标准并没有改变，但是符合这些标准的公司数量大大减少了。因为它们面临困难，客户正采取紧缩措施，或者公司正在倒闭并且希望整合他们的SaaS工具。企业购买者在议价时变得更加严格。他们试图整合供应商。目前购买周期中存在许多困难。
Yeah. And it's a little bit like, I don't know if you remember in the.com crash 20 something years ago. Oh, I remember it. Yeah. So back in 99, 2000, the conventional wisdom was that the company you wanted to be in was Yahoo, because Yahoo was profitable. And when all these startups went out of business, Yahoo would be the way that you could own a piece of the future of the internet, but you wouldn't have to take all the startup risk. And then it turned out that all of Yahoo's revenues went away because their revenues were coming from banner advertisements bought by startups, which were funded by VC dollars. So when you had the whole.com crash, Yahoo's business dried up. Yep. So then Yahoo lost whatever it was. It went out, it turned out a lot of people weren't wearing swim trunks. Yeah. So Yahoo's business was actually highly correlated with startup funding. And I think there's been an aspect of that with a lot of these companies where you would think that they're pretty insulated from the business cycle, even like, especially the enterprise software companies. There's a lot of software companies that were selling to other startups. That was pretty obvious. They're going to be impacted. But even the ones selling to enterprise companies have been affected in subtle ways. And there just aren't that many startups right now hitting that same bar that they were hitting just a couple of years ago.
是的。有一点像是，我不知道你是否还记得20多年前的互联网泡沫。哦，我记得。是的。那时候是在1999年、2000年左右，人们普遍认为你应该投资雅虎，因为雅虎是盈利的。当这些初创公司倒闭时，雅虎将成为你拥有互联网未来一部分的方式，但你不必承担所有初创公司的风险。然后事实证明，雅虎的所有收入来源都消失了，因为他们的收入来自初创公司购买的横幅广告，而这些横幅广告是由风险投资资金支持的。因此，在整个互联网泡沫崩溃时，雅虎的业务停滞不前。是的。然后雅虎损失了任何一个公司可能失去的东西。原来很多人并没有穿泳裤。是的。所以雅虎的业务实际上与初创公司的资金密切相关。我认为许多这些公司也存在这方面的问题，你本以为它们对商业周期相当有抵抗力，尤其是企业软件公司。有很多软件公司是向其他初创公司销售的，这是显而易见的，它们会受到影响。但即使是向企业公司销售的公司，也以细微的方式受到了影响。目前符合当年水平的初创公司并不多。
Freberg, your thoughts on this LP, GP dynamics and dry pattern? I mean, I think, I mean one aspect on the same front of VCs being somewhat reticent to deploy more capital. It's flowing through to the LP space and Gurley can probably pine on this or sack and probably pine on this too. But and all of you guys obviously could, but it's been apparent in the last year that LPs are wondering what do they have? What are these portfolios ultimately really going to be worth? What's the actual cash distributions?
对于这张唱片，GP的动态和干燥模式，Freberg，你有什么看法？我的意思是，我认为，我是说关于风险投资机构在部署更多资本方面有些犹豫的一个方面。这种情况正在流入有限合伙人空间，Gurley可能会对此发表自己的看法，你们中的所有人显然也可以，但是在过去一年中，有限合伙人们一直在疑惑他们拥有什么？这些投资组合最终真正价值多少？实际现金分配是多少？
And I think there's these new rules right. Early where you got to distribute 5% of your assets each year to the institution that you're meant to represent. Yeah, but I'll explain this. You're an endowment. You're obligated to not just grow your endowment. Both either from the board of the like the Adama of the Board of Trustees of the University, or I think there was a tax provision put in that if you're not distributing 5% then you're exposed to tax on the returns. And so there's a unquestionable potential issue with LPs around their own liquidity. So they've all followed the Dave Swenson model where they've all got 50% or even more in illiquid assets.
我认为有这些新的规定。早期你必须每年将你资产的5%分配给你所代表的机构。是的，但是我会解释一下。你是一个资助基金。你的义务不仅是扩大你的资助基金。无论是来自大学董事会或是像理事会主席亚达马这样的人，或者我认为有一条税收条款规定，如果你未分配5%，那么你就需要交税。因此，私募股权基金可能面临自己流动性的潜在问题。所以他们都遵循了戴夫·斯文森的模式，将50%甚至更多的资产投资于非流动性资产中。
You move into a cyclical decline where the number of IPOs and liquidity events both for VCs and PE remember PEs way bigger than VCs. Private equity? Yeah. And then the drawdowns keep coming. And so you have to meet the drawdowns. You're not getting any liquidity. Your constituent needs 5% liquidity. And now you have cash crunch. Now you have cash crunch as an LP. And I think GPs are aware of this issue. So, you know, do you want to provoke that or not? Right. Maybe you run quick. You run early or you run late. You don't want to be in the middle.
你进入了一个循环下滑的状态，VC和PE的IPO数量和流动性事件都在下降，记住PE要比VC大得多。私募股权？对，这样子。然后持续不断地出现支取。因此你必须满足这些支取。你没有获得任何流动性。你的投资者需要5%的流动性。现在你面临现金短缺。现在作为有限合伙人，你遇到了现金短缺问题。我认为普通合伙人意识到了这个问题。因此，你知道，你想要引发这个问题还是不想引发呢？对，或许你会快速行动。你早点动身或者晚点动身，但你不想处于中途。
So I'll just say like anecdotally, it seems LPs are more reticent. I've heard several folks talk about how they're reducing commitments by 50%, two-thirds or in some cases 100%, particularly after the mad rush for capital over the last couple of years or capital commitments I would say for the last couple of years. And so the downstream effect of that ultimately, as the current funds get deployed, there are fewer new funds and less new capital being committed from these LPs into new funds. You know, fast forward two or three years. And there's going to be less capital available. And so it keeps the bar high. So while this is, you know, and so the bar, I think, is only going to get higher over the next couple of years as that capital cycle moves its way through the system.
就我的经验来说，目前投资有限合伙人（LPs）更加保守。我听到很多人谈论他们如何减少50%、三分之二，甚至有些情况下减少100%的投资承诺，特别是在过去几年对资本的疯狂追逐或者说对资本承诺的追求。因此，这最终的结果是，随着当前基金的投资，会有越来越少的新基金和更少的新资本从这些LPs投入新基金中。往后看两三年，资本可用性会更加有限。因此，资本门槛会持续提高。所以，当资本周期在系统中运转时，我认为资本门槛在未来几年只会变得更高。
It's probably worth explaining what Freeburg was talking about in terms of a commitment. So you may have a let's just say University X has committed 25 million to funds three through five for venture fund Z. And now they're saying in the next fund, we're going to be at 10 instead of 25. When they say they're making that commitment, that capital gets deployed by the venture investor over the next on average, call it five years. So the reduction in a commitment this year means that there's less capital to invest over the next three to five years. And so that gets played out as we fast forward. We're still sitting on funds for the last couple of years as those funds get invested. The new funds are going to be smaller. There's going to be fewer of them, and that's when the market gets much tighter in the next couple of years.
这个情况可能值得解释一下Freeburg在承诺方面在说什么。我们假设X大学已经承诺为风险基金Z的第三至第五个基金提供2500万美元。现在他们表示在下一个基金中，我们将投资1000万美元而不是2500万美元。当他们说他们做出这一承诺时，这笔资金将由风险投资者在接下来的平均五年内投入使用。今年承诺的减少意味着在接下来的三至五年里将有较少的资金可供投资。因此，随着时间的推移，我们仍然持有过去几年的资金，而这些资金正被投资。新的基金规模将更小，并且数量较少，这将使市场在接下来的几年变得更为紧张。
You know, Brad, this seems like the greatest setup ever feels like the setup last year buying equities when everybody was scared. If everybody is tightening their belts, if VC funds are not going to deploy, this feels like the time to be deploying. So maybe you could talk a little bit about this austerity measures coming or just belt tightening or some people may be getting out of the venture business who shouldn't have been in it to begin with. All of this seems like a great setup for more discipline and more discipline founders. If the VCs have to be disciplined, doesn't that trickle down to the portfolio companies?
你知道，布拉德，这似乎是迄今为止最好的机会，感觉就像去年购买股票时每个人都感到恐慌的情况一样。如果每个人都在节约开支，如果风险投资基金不再出资，那么现在就是投资的时机。因此，也许你可以谈一谈关于节约措施的到来，或者有些人可能不应该开始涉足风险投资行业而退出的情况。所有这些似乎为更加严格和有纪律的创始人创造了一个很好的环境。如果风险投资家必须严格要求自己，那么这种纪律不就会传导到投资组合的公司吗？
100% but while this might happen, I'm going to take the other side. I don't think that's what the lived experiences of most VCs in Silicon Valley today on Series A, Series B, Series C is certainly not in the area we're competing. We're seeing four or five, $600 million deals get done on zero revenue, two, three million dollars in revenue. And so let me just throw out perhaps an alternative view as to why this might look a little different than the world of austerity that we saw in 2002, 2003, 2009, 2011.
然而，尽管这种情况可能发生，但我将持有另一种观点。我不认为在如今硅谷的绝大多数风投公司的A轮、B轮和C轮融资中，他们的实际经历是我们所竞争的领域。我们看到有四五笔价值6亿或7亿美元的交易，其中完全没有收入，也有两三百万美元的收入。因此，让我提出一种可能与我们在2002年、2003年、2009年和2011年所见到的节俭世界有所不同的观点。
The first is, right, the stock market is near an all-time high. And we know that the venture markets are reflective to the stock market. We talked about that. The second reason which I think is interesting is most firms on average are a lot bigger. That creates two issues. We have a situation where younger partners and principals who all did deals that were overvalued over the last few years, they want to put some points on the board in a reprice deal because they have to have some winners. So you have this principal agent problem. The people who used to check them were the senior partners, right, the investment committee. But now they have a lot of mouths to feed. So when you put money to work, you pull down more fee. And so these funds now, I mean, if you're tiger or some of these big funds, you have giant cost bases that you've created because of the size of the firm that you created.
首先，股市目前处于历史高位附近。而且我们知道，风险投资市场对股市具有反映性。我们已经讨论过这个问题了。第二个有趣的原因是，现在的公司平均规模都要大得多。这带来了两个问题。首先，我们面临一个局面，年轻合伙人和主管们在过去几年里都进行了过高定价的交易，他们希望在重新定价的交易中拿下一些胜利，因为他们必须要有些胜利者。所以会存在一些委托代理问题。过去是高级合伙人、投资委员会来监督他们，现在他们要养活很多人。所以当你投资时，你会获得更多的费用。因此，现在这些基金，比如老虎基金或者其他一些大型基金，因为公司规模的增大而造成了巨大的成本基数。
The third is the nature of LPs. And Bill mentioned, Dave Swenson. In 2002, MIT, Yale, Harvard, they would call, you know, who were the early backers of venture firms, they would call these venture guys up and say, listen, we're hurting. There were a lot of markdowns. We need to slow down the pace of deployment, right? And so they were a factor LPs said, slow it down. I'm not hearing that out of LPs today. Okay. And I think one of these changed. I certainly am hearing it out of traditional LPs, some family offices, some endowments, but pensions, sovereign wealth funds, et cetera, who now represent a much bigger percentage of the total capital base of venture. They have money coming out of the ground every day that they need to deploy, like they did in private equity. And so again, I'm not saying this for certain. And certainly there are more discerning sovereign wealth funds than others who are saying, don't speed up the pace of deployment. But I'm wondering if that nature, that change in the nature of the LP base is also contributing to this, you know, as a SACs called AI mania.
第三个是有关有限合伙人（LP）的本质。比尔提到了戴夫·斯文森（Dave Swenson）。在2002年，麻省理工学院、耶鲁大学、哈佛大学，他们会打电话，你知道，问谁是风险投资公司的早期支持者，他们会跟这些风投人员说，听着，我们很困难。那时有很多折价。我们需要减缓投资的速度，对吧？所以他们是一个因素，有限合伙人说，减慢速度。我今天没听到有限合伙人这样说。好吧。我认为其中一个改变了。当然，我确实听到了传统有限合伙人，一些家族办公室，一些捐赠基金会这样说，但是养老金、主权财富基金等机构现在占据了风险投资的总资本规模中更大的比例。他们每天都有资金需要投入使用，就像他们在私募股权市场一样。所以，我并不是说这是确定的。当然，有些主权财富基金比其他人更具分辨能力，他们在说，不要加快投资的速度。但我想知道，LP基础的这种变化是否也对所谓的AI狂热有所贡献，就像萨克斯（SACs）所说的那样。
Yeah. I mean, we see it in Hollywood. Some new actors come in. They want to build a brand. We saw the Russians do it. We saw the Japanese do it. You see China do it. People come in new entrants at the table. They get splashy cashy. They want to place a lot of bets. They want to make a name for some people to brand. So that's an interesting counterpoint. Our entire business, of course, is based on exits. The highest form of exit, I guess, is an IPO. An overpriced acquisition would be the second. And it was a secondary market for shares as a distant third. It looks like the IPO window might be cracking open a bit and some people are being forced. The guns to the head, armed owned by Softbank, Masayoshisan, looking to raise $10 billion, had a $50, $60, $70 billion valuation, could be the largest IPO of the year. Instacart looking at a $12 billion valuation, Reddit kind of went dark. They had a couple of problems with their community, but they were in line, Stripe obviously in line, Clavios got a $5 billion valuation. And then we saw a couple of what I'll say are non-traditional companies going public, something called Shark Ninja. I saw one public, we had a little conversation about this, Brad, personer. They have a market cap of $4.3 billion. They had a pop of 40%. Have a Greek food chain, Uber. They went public and have a market cap of $5 billion. Surfair, a company I'd passed on investing in, but was intrigued by. They do Pilatus shuttles between places on the West Coast here, little short runs. They did a direct listing in July. Marked a cap of $85 million didn't go well.
是的。我的意思是，在好莱坞里我们看到了这种情况。一些新演员进入行业，他们想要建立自己的品牌。我们看到俄罗斯人这么做过，日本人也这么做过。现在中国人也在这么做。有很多新的参与者进入市场，他们投入大量的资金，想要下大注。他们想要为自己赢得名声，提高品牌价值。所以这是一个有趣的对比。当然，我们整个行业都是以退出为基础的。最高形式的退出，我猜是IPO。其次是高价并购，第三是股票二级市场。现在看起来IPO窗口可能稍微打开了一点，一些公司被迫上市。Softbank的马云正在寻求筹集100亿美元，估值可能达到500亿、600亿、700亿美元，这可能是今年最大的IPO。Instacart估值120亿美元，Reddit遇到了一些问题，但它们也准备上市，Stripe也在准备上市，Clavio估值50亿美元。然后我们还看到了一些非传统的公司上市，像叫做Shark Ninja的公司，我看到它们上市了，我们和Brad、Personer有了一次小小的讨论。它们的市值为43亿美元，上市首日上涨40％。还有一家希腊食品连锁店，Uber也上市了，市值为50亿美元。Surfair是一家我曾经考虑投资但被吸引的公司，在这里他们在美国西海岸之间运营小型飞机航线。他们在七月份进行了直接上市，市值为8500万美元，不过效果不太好。
Bill, girly, is the IPO window opening, or are people kind of on the ledge who have no choice, but to jump and hope for the best. One thing we didn't probably spend enough time on in the last topic, which I'll just hit on briefly, is the complexity of those unicorns. So Brad mentioned, I saw a deck that said there were more private unicorns than public tech companies over a billion dollars at one point in time, which is shocking.
比尔，女孩，IPO大门正在打开吗，还是那些没有选择只能跳下去然后希望一切顺利的人们有些苦恼呢。在上一个话题中，我们可能没有花足够的时间来谈论那些独角兽的复杂性，我只会简要提一下。所以布拉德提到，我看到一份汇报指出在某个时间点，私人独角兽的数量超过了市值十亿美元的公共科技公司的数量，这真是令人震惊。
That's all right. Because those companies grew up in the 99-21 time frame, where you could raise money at excessive valuation, their cap charts are very complex and rigid. They have different lick preferences at different places. And they've got board members who all have different marks and are all very worried about whether this thing can get to a certain place or not.
没关系。因为这些公司是在99-21的时期成长起来的，在那个时期你可以以过高的估值融资，所以它们的资本结构图非常复杂而且僵化。它们在不同地方有不同的偏好。而且它们的董事会成员都有不同的看法，并且都非常担心这个项目能否达到某个特定目标。
And so it's very difficult to come in and do another private round in those situations. You might have to put the return in a guaranteed pick dividend to IPO or some complex derivative. And a lot of people, I think Brad would agree with this, a lot of people just say, they opt out and say, no, this is too hard. I'm not going to go in there and negotiate with five different constituencies on how to do this. You can't just do a simple investment because of that. So it's gotten too complex, which then if the buyers of those shares do not want to be involved in that crazy, okay, is Stripe worth or just pick Stripe as an example, 50 billion or 100 billion. And the last investors are at 100 YC in a two million.
因此，在这些情况下，很难再进行另一轮私募股份。你可能不得不将回报以保证选择股息或某些复杂的衍生工具的形式进行投资或IPO。我认为很多人都会同意这一点，很多人会选择退出，并表示，不，这太难了。我不会去与五个不同的利益相关方协商怎么做。因此，由于这个原因，你不能只是进行简单的投资。所以，它已经变得太复杂了。如果这些股份的买家不想参与这种疯狂的游戏，好吧，那么Stripe值得多少钱，或者以Stripe为例，是50亿还是100亿。而最近的投资者在100 YC中则是两百万。
Yeah, sure. Maybe a bad example just because their total Lick press stack may still be a fraction of their market cap for a lot of these unicorns. The Lick press stack can be very close to their market cap for their today's valuation. And that's what creates a real structural problem. You got a billion dollars in investment in the company and liquidation, money that has to come out to pay those investors, but the company's only worth two billion or a billion. And now it's, yeah.
是的，没错。可能只是一个不太好的例子，因为对于很多独角兽公司来说，他们的整个负债压力堆积可能仍然只占总市值的一小部分。对于今天的估值来说，负债压力堆积可能非常接近他们的市值。这就是一个真正的结构性问题所在。你投资了十亿美元到了公司里，并且将要清算，这笔钱必须拿出来支付那些投资者，但是公司只值二十亿或者十亿美元。现在就出问题了，是的。
When you get to that place, sometimes going public is just the easiest way to clean it all up. Because everybody converts to common and we just, the company starts trading and reality is reality. It's kind of like taking the medicine. Yeah. And I think that happened. One good example was Square at one point had done a derivative financing on top that was somewhat problematic. And they just felt like they had to get out. And they did and it cleaned up the cap chart.
当你到达那个阶段时，有时候公开上市只是清理一切的最简单方式。因为大家都转换为公共利益，我们的公司开始交易，现实就是现实。这有点像吃药一样。是的，我认为这种情况发生过。一个很好的例子是Square曾经采取了一种有问题的衍生融资方式。他们觉得必须摆脱这种情况。他们做到了，并且整理了股权结构。
And one thing I've been waiting on, we'll see if it happens, but because of hyper competition and investing in 1990s, 2020, 2021, there was a term removed from most term sheets that gave investors the right to protect their Lick press on IPO. That's gone in most of these cases. So you could convert Lick press under, which for a founder or an early stage angel investor would be a huge win. Whereas if you sold a company in M&A, the Lick press would play. Does that make sense?
有一件事我一直在等待，我们将看看是否会发生，但由于超级竞争和对1990年代、2020年和2021年的投资，大多数交易文件上的一个术语已被删除，该术语给予投资者保护其在首次公开募股上的利益的权利。这在大多数情况下已经消失了。因此，您可以在某些情况下将其转化为私有股份，对于创始人或早期天使投资者来说，这将是一次巨大的胜利。而如果您在并购中出售公司，这个保护利益的权益将会起作用。这样说您明白吗？
Yes. So the last investor comes in, they're getting a multiple of their money back, except in an IPO. And so the IPO happens, you know, yeah. And I suspect most of those late stage investors keep, assume that their investment has a debt-like floor on Lick press. And if this were to start to happen or recaps, which can also be done, self-inflicted recaps, I have seen many times just to get past the structural complexity. Either one of those things could wipe out that Lick press.
是的。所以最后一个投资者进来时，他们会得到他们投入资金的数倍回报，除非是在首次公开募股(IPO)中。所以IPO发生了，你知道，是的。我认为大多数后期投资者会假设他们的投资在Lick press上有类似债务的底线。如果出现这种情况或进行资本再筹集（也可以自我实现资本再筹集），我已经看到过很多次只是为了摆脱结构复杂性。其中任何一种情况都可能抹消那个Lick press。
So net net, girly, more IPOs are going to happen. I think you will say, there's two things that I think that cleaning up complexity is a great reason for the public market. And Brad already said, we've seen a massive recovery in software stocks, like the marks are better than they were two years ago.
总的来说，亲爱的，还会有更多的IPO（首次公开募股）将会发生。我认为你会说，我认为清理复杂性是公开市场的一个很好的原因。布拉德已经说过，我们已经看到了软件股票的大规模复苏，如今的表现比两年前要好了。
So Brad or Saks, just M&A-wise, we've seen Lena Kahn, we've discussed it many times, seems to be saying, all business equals bad, any merger equals bad, she's going to attempt to throw cold water on any merger that's happening. So M&A seems to be being taken off the plate by not just Lena Kahn, but also the EU's seems to be turning the screws. So if we don't have an M&A market, then that means there's only an IP on market.
所以布拉德或萨克斯，就并购而言，我们已经看到了莱娜·卡恩，我们已经讨论过很多次，她似乎在说，所有的业务都是坏的，任何合并都是坏的，她将试图对正在发生的任何合并行动泼冷水。因此，并购似乎被莱娜·卡恩和欧盟同时调控。所以，如果我们没有并购市场，那意味着只有知识产权市场。
Correct. I mean, that's just another one of the reasons that is pressuring these companies. These companies need to raise capital. So just to double click on what Bill said and put some numbers around it, right? Because we read a lot of stats about how many IPOs there were. So I had the team pull some figures, 480 IPOs, US IPOs in 2020, 1,035, so a huge bubble in 21, 181 in 22, and 123. But I think that overstates, right? Because we had a lot of SPACs and crappy IPOs, so it really overstates the quality IPOs.
没错。我的意思是，这只是这些公司面临的另一个压力原因。这些公司需要筹集资本。所以，我们来详细解释一下比尔说的，并给出一些具体的数据，对吧？因为我们读到了很多关于IPO数量的统计数据。所以我让团队整理了一些数字，在2020年有480个美国IPO，在21年有1,035个，这是一个巨大的泡沫，在22年有181个，在23年有123个。但我认为这些数字夸大了实际情况，对吧？因为我们有很多SPAC和糟糕的IPO，所以这实际上夸大了优质IPO的数量。
So we're one of the major buyers in tech IPOs, so I just went to the team and said, how many IPOs were we tracking and did we consider participating in during these years? So that was 46 in 2020, 100 in 2021, three in 2022, and zero year to date in 2023. Okay. Don't want to be in the Greek food.
所以我们是科技IPO的主要买家之一，所以我刚刚去找团队问，我们在这些年里追踪了多少个IPO，并考虑参与了多少个？所以2020年是46个，2021年是100个，2022年是3个，而2023年至今为止是零。好了。不想参与希腊食品的投资。
So what I would say is I just returned from Deer Valley this week, where Morgan Stanley's putting on a conference talking to their big potential IPO buyers. We are now queued up.
所以我要说的是，我这周刚从迪尔谷回来，那里是摩根士丹利为他们潜在的IPO买家举办会议的地方。我们现在排好队了。
As you and I, we had this tweet exchange, Jason, this week, and I said, you know, in that exchange, the world's normalized fear of COVID's past, hyperinflation's past, etc. First-class IPOs are coming and a bunch of down-round IPOs are coming.
就像你和我之间的这次推文交流，Jason，本周我说了，在那次交流中，世界已经开始逐渐习惯了COVID和超级通胀等过去的恐惧。一些一流的首次公开募股即将到来，同时还有一大批下调估值的首次公开募股。
So let me just explain really quickly on that, right? You mentioned Instacart, right? Super high quality company. I think its last private round was 50 or 60 billion in the bubble. And now it's rumored to be going public at somewhere around $10 billion. Okay. So that represents the reset that will have to happen. And as Bill said, if you were a investor in that last round of Instacart and you were buying preferred shares and thought you were protected, that preference is washed, right? So you're going to be down 50, 60, 70% on those preferred shares because you're going to be converted into common in that IPO. It's the right thing for the company to do. It's the right thing for the investors to do. It cleans up the cap table.
所以让我简单解释一下，好吗？你提到了Instacart，对吧？这家公司质量非常高。我记得它最后一轮的私募估值在泡沫时期是500或600亿美元。现在有传言说它即将在公开市场上市，估值大约在100亿美元左右。好的，这代表着必须进行重置。就像Bill所说的，如果你是Instacart最后一轮投资的投资者，并且购买了优先股并以为自己受到了保护，那么这个优先权就被抹去了，对吧？所以你在这些优先股上会损失50、60、70%左右，因为在IPO中你会被转换成普通股。对于公司来说，这是正确的做法，对于投资者来说也是如此。这样清理了股权结构。
So that is an example of the down-round IPOs of high quality companies that you're going to see come public. Then you're going to have folks like Arm, like ByteDance, Databricks would be another one of these. I think that it sneaked, that would be more in that Instacart camp. There will be some discount relative perhaps to their fully diluted last round's valuation. But these make no mistake about our high quality companies that will lubricate and altimeter will compete for those IPOs because these bankers are hell bent on pricing these IPOs at a discount to fair value. They need them to work. They need to bring buyers back into the IPO market because these companies need liquidity.
这是一个高质量公司的下行IPO的例子，你会看到一些像Arm、字节跳动、Databricks这样的公司赴美上市。我认为像这些公司，其市值相对上一轮的全面摊薄估值可能有一些折价。但请务必记住，这些都是高质量公司，预算投资银行将会竞相争取其IPO，因为这些银行都非常努力地将IPO的定价打到低于公允价值的水平。他们需要IPO成功，需要吸引买家回到市场，因为这些公司需要流动性。
So suddenly the banks need to get wins for the people buying these shares as opposed to in the past. They were like, yeah, we're just selling to security at the market rate, whatever that famous monologue from. What was the movie? Was that Jeremy Irons who gives that monologue? We're selling securities to informed buyers. And that's it. It's a pretty dark scene.
所以突然间，银行需要为购买这些股票的人争取利益，而不是过去那样。他们之前只是像说“是的，我们只是按市场价格卖证券”，那是哪个著名独白来着？那是杰里米·艾恩斯说的那段独白吗？我们是向知情的买家出售证券。就是这样。那是一个相当黑暗的场景。
So it won't be a light switch, Jason, but I do think. Yeah, margin call. Margin call, thank you. It was Jeremy Irons. I don't think it'll look like a light switch, but it will be. I think we're going to see five, six, seven IPOs, good size IPOs in Q4. We'll probably see closer to 10 in Q1, and then it will start opening up in the back half of next year, in part because boards of directors will begin to realize, you know what? We have to go public. If it's down round, who cares? It's acceptable. And this is really healthy. We need these companies.
所以，杰森，这不会是一个开关，但我确实认为。对，追缴保证金。追缴保证金，谢谢。是杰里米·艾恩斯（Jeremy Irons）。我不认为它会看起来像一个开关，但确实会出现。我认为我们将在第四季度看到五、六、七个规模不小的首次公开募股。在第一季度，我们可能会看到接近10个。然后，明年下半年将开始放开，部分原因是董事会将开始意识到：你知道吗？我们必须上市。如果是下跌回合，又有什么关系？这是可以接受的。而且，这非常有益。我们需要这些公司。
And by the way, I'm in the Bill Gurley camp. You should not stay private forever. You should get your company. If you have 100 or 200 million in revenue, get your company public, innovate and grow in the public markets with the discipline and cadence of the public markets. And if it's. You should expect the prices lower because the world was out of their mind in 2021 and multiples of reset.
顺便说一下，我赞同比尔·格利（Bill Gurley）的观点。你不应该永远保持私有化。你应该上市。如果你的公司年收入达到1亿或2亿美元，应该上市，在公开市场上以公开市场的纪律和步调进行创新和发展。如果是这样的话，你应该预期到2021年时，世界对价格的期望过高，多样性正在重置，因此价格会降低。
That's actually shared a news story with me just about some of the incredible returns in the golden-hour venture capital, Washington University, Duke University. Some of these endowments just exploded in value. Yeah. I remember when this article came out. It was September 29th, 2021, less than two years ago. Yeah. And we were all feeling really good about our industry. As it turns out, the whole thing was inflated by all the free money that the Fed had airdrop.
有人跟我分享了一篇新闻，大致上讲述了在黄金时间风险投资领域里，华盛顿大学和杜克大学取得了一些令人难以置信的回报。其中一些捐赠基金价值暴涨。是的，我记得这篇文章发表于2021年9月29日，也就是不到两年前。当时我们对我们的行业感到非常乐观。事实证明，整个局面是由联邦垂直投放的大量免费资金推高的。
So the public markets were really frothy. It was basically very bubbly, especially for gross stocks. You had all these new IPOs and SPACs and so forth, and they were superbubbly. And the result was that the returns, both realized returns and on paper for these endowments were massive. So if you think about the LP community, if they're making commitments in 2021, the way they do that is they look at the total value of their endowments and then they allocate a certain percentage by asset class.
因此，公共市场非常繁荣。尤其是对于总体股票来说，市场基本上是泡沫化的。你会看到所有这些新的首次公开发行和特殊目的收购公司等，它们的泡沫非常大。结果就是这些捐赠基金（endowments）的回报，无论是实现回报还是纸面回报都是巨大的。因此，如果你考虑有限合伙人（LP）群体，如果他们在2021年进行承诺，他们的做法是看他们捐赠基金的总价值，然后根据资产类别分配一定的百分比。
So they'll allocate a certain percentage to public markets, certain percentage to real estate, private equity, and then VC. So if the overall value of the endowment is really big, then that percentage that goes to VCs can be really big too. And then what happened is you had this huge correction over the next couple of years.
所以他们会将一定的比例分配给公共市场，一定的比例分配给房地产、私募股权，然后是风险投资。因此，如果基金总额非常大，那么分配给风险投资的比例也可以很大。接下来的几年中发生了巨大的修正。
And so one of the things we heard from the LP community last year is a problem they called the denominator effect. Well, the value of their portfolios had gone down a lot because the public markets were down. Was it something like 50% some cases? Yeah. For gross stocks and like 15, 20% for the entire market. So the value of the portfolio was down. But the venture capital part of that was not down both because of the lag and getting fresh marks.
去年，我们从有限合伙人社区中听到的一个问题是他们所称的“分母效应”问题。由于公开市场的下跌，他们的投资组合价值大幅减少。有些情况下，这种下跌幅度达到了大约50％。对于全部市场来说，这一下跌幅度约为15％至20％。因此，他们的投资组合价值下降了。但风险投资部分的下降并不明显，这既因为延迟标记的影响，也因为获得新鲜标记的困难。
And then also because they had already made commitments to new VC funds at the peak of the market. So all of a sudden the percentage of their portfolio that was VC related roughly doubled. And so that's why all of a sudden the LP commitments have dried up is because they're over allocated to VC.
然后还因为他们在市场高峰期已经承诺了在新的风险资本基金上投资。因此，他们的投资组合中与风险资本有关的比例突然增加了大约一倍。这就是为什么有限合伙人的承诺突然减少的原因，因为他们对风险资本的投资超额配额了。
Now, as the public markets have come back this year, then that problem mitigates to some degree. But I think it's still out there. And I think this is why you're seeing certainly domestic LPs really slow their allocations to venture capitals. They still have the denominator problem. Now, I think that's less of an issue overseas.
现在，随着今年公开市场的回暖，这个问题在一定程度上得到了缓解。但是我认为问题仍然存在。我认为这就是你看到国内有限合伙人在向风险投资降低其分配比例的原因。他们仍然面临分母问题。现在，我认为这在海外不太是问题。
I think, Jake, how you observe that the four seasons of the bar at the Dubai force. Like a rosewood to Braddock. I literally got stopped four times from the elevator to the front door. I am not kidding. Four people stopped me. That's two more than would stop me at the rosewood going to the front door. It was bonkers. It should recognize that as a hyper-attractor for where available money was relative to the US dollars and whether they were available or not.
我认为，杰克，你观察到迪拜酒吧的四季如何强大。就像玫瑰木对布拉多克一样。我从电梯到前门的路上确实被拦住了四次，我不是在开玩笑。有四个人拦住了我。这比我在布拉多克去前门时要多两个。情况太疯狂了。它应该被认为是一个超级吸引人的地方，相对于美元和可用资金的关系，不管它们是否可用。
Yeah. I think we're in for a period here of just continued distress and pain, even though the market is sort of normalized or stabilized now. Again, I just think we've been in a huge software recession for the last year. I think that it's been massed by the fact that the rest of the economy seems to be okay. But this is the worst software recession we've been in. I think since the dot com crash, I mean, the buyers have been laying off employees by the thousands. And since software is bought on a per seat basis, the market has really condensed.
是的，我认为我们将在这段时间里持续遭受困扰和痛苦，尽管市场现在已经趋于正常或稳定。再说一遍，我只是认为我们过去一年一直处于一场巨大的软件衰退中。我认为这被整个经济似乎还好的事实所掩盖了。但这是我们遇到的最严重的软件衰退，我认为自互联网泡沫破裂以来。我的意思是，买家已经裁员成千上万人了。而由于软件是按每个用户使用许可的方式购买的，市场真的趋于收缩。
We had one startup that was selling to Twitter and they got a renewal. I think they're 80% off because Elon's laid off 8% of the employees. And that's before negotiating the last 20%, which you could negotiate 50% off that. I told him they did a great job of getting that 20% because Elon's canceling everything. I was really impressed. They were able to renew at 20% of last year's value.
我们有一个初创公司向Twitter销售产品，并且他们得到了续约。我认为他们获得了八成的优惠，因为埃隆裁员了百分之八的员工。而且这还没有算上最后百分之二十的谈判余地，那部分甚至可以谈到半价。我告诉他们，他们做得非常出色，因为埃隆正在取消一切项目。我真的很印象深刻。他们能够以去年成交额的百分之二十续约。
You know what? We had a bender and this bender went on for far too long. And you know what? If you go out two or three nights in a row until four or five in the morning, that next week is going to be painful and suffering. That's what the industry is going through. It's just going to take a lot of cold plunges and infrared and pickleball and silence to feel good again in this industry.
你知道吗？我们度过了一段时间太长的放纵之旅。你知道吗？如果你连续两三个晚上出去玩到凌晨四五点，那接下来的一周会非常痛苦和煎熬。这就是整个行业正在经历的。为了重新在这个行业感到舒适，我们需要进行许多冷浸泡、红外线疗法、pickleball（类似乒乓球的运动）和保持安静的活动。
One thing I would like in retrospect that I think super interesting about the venture capital cycle. One, I think it's inherently cyclical and it's always going to be that way unless we fundamentally change the structure of the industry because it just invites competition and there's no barriers to entry.
回顾起来，有一件我认为关于风险资本周期非常有趣的事情。首先，我认为这个行业的性质本身是循环性的，除非我们从根本上改变行业的结构，否则它将始终如此，因为它会吸引竞争，并且没有进入的壁垒。
But I went and talked to some LPs that have been in the business for a very long period of time. And a vast majority of the reason venture outperforms other asset classes has to do with these tiny windows when you have a super prodding market. And if you don't, if you aren't around for that part, you know, if you strip those years out of a 40 year assessment, it's actually not that interesting an asset class, which highlights the need for venture funds to get liquidity at the peak. Yes, right when we're at the peak is when people get the most brazen, the most confident and they start talking about how we're going to hold forever. And so you had venture firms with the biggest positions they've ever had in their entire life go over the waterfall and basically evaporate what could have been returned.
但我去找了一些在这个行业里做了很长一段时间的有限合伙人（LP）。绝大多数风险投资胜过其他资产类别的原因与市场的这些短暂时期有关，这是时机非常合适的时候。如果你错过了这一部分，如果在对40年的评估中去掉这几年，风险投资实际上不是那么有吸引力的一种资产类别，这突显了风险投资基金在高峰时获得流动性的必要性。是的，就在市场达到高峰的时候，人们变得最放肆、最自信，并开始谈论我们将永远持有。因此，风险投资公司在其整个历史上持有最大头寸时，却陷入困境，并且基本上消失了可能获得的回报。
Yeah, I mean, diamond, diamond hands can come back and bite you. And you've said famously, you can't what was the line you had to candy and IRR? Well, you can't. I don't think I said it, but it's been said.
是的，我的意思是，坚定的持有者有时可能会再次反噬。你曾经说过著名的话，嗯，你不能什么，是关于糖果和国际回报率的那句话是什么来着？嗯，你不能。我不记得我说过这句话，但有人说过。
Yeah. Since we're on our movie bender here. For those of you who haven't seen margin call, just one of the great scenes, the best scene, the whole scene, by the way, it's like the best scene, I think of modern finance norms. So look at this murder is when we selling this to same people, we've been selling it to the last two years and whoever else will buy it. But john, if you do this, you will kill the market for years. It's over. And you're selling something that you know has no value. We are selling to willing buyers at the current fair market price so that we may survive. Man, you can rationalize a lot on Wall Street, man.
是的。既然我们现在正在进行电影马拉松。对于那些还没看过《华尔街之谜》的人来说，这是其中一场非常精彩的场景，也是最好的一场，整个场景，顺便说一下，它就是这个电影中最好的一场，我认为这代表了现代金融规范。看，这是我们把这个卖给同样的人，我们在过去两年一直在向他们销售，还有其他愿意买的人。但是约翰，如果你这样做，你会毁了市场数年。一切都完了。而且你在卖一样你知道没有价值的东西。我们是按照目前公平市场价向愿意购买的买家销售，这样我们才能生存下去。嗨，人们在华尔街上可以用很多理由来说服自己。
But yeah, but to the point that what Bill saying is that the opposite took place, which is VCs drink the Kool-Aid and didn't sell when we were at the peak of the market. They also got caught up in a competition of trying to appeal to the founder community is saying, hey, we're in it forever. We're going to hold forever. We're your best friend forever.
但是，就像Bill所说的那样，相反的情况发生了，风险投资家们喝了毒药，而在市场达到顶峰时却没有出售。他们也被困在试图迎合创始人社区的竞争中，他们在说，嘿，我们将永远在这里。我们将永远持有。我们是你最好的朋友。
But Bill, there was also this element that drove that strategic rationale, this data set, which is the best performers in tech generated most of the value after they went public. I mean, there's a trillion dollars of market value generated in Nvidia, in Apple, in Google, in Amazon, all over the many years post going public. And if you read Sequoia's notes when they kind of made the transition that they made, they said, we don't want to walk away from the power law that the power law continues to accumulate and accrue even in the public markets. And we want to continue to participate in that because there's another 100x upside coming from here.
但是比尔，还有一个驱动战略合理性的因素，就是这个数据集，即科技行业中表现最佳的公司在上市后产生了大部分的价值。我的意思是，在英伟达、苹果、谷歌、亚马逊等公司上市后的多年里，市场价值达到了一万亿美元。如果你阅读西科亚（Sequoia）在他们进行转变时的笔记，你会发现他们说，我们不想放弃幂律的力量，幂律在公共市场中仍然不断积累和增值。我们想要继续参与其中，因为还有另外一个100倍的增长空间。
In the ones that we select, we want to stay with, not necessarily we're going to stay in all of them. You have to be too strong. There are some that we believe are still 100x upside from here. And just because there's an IPO doesn't mean that we want to exit the position that there's now more capital available to them, more public currency they can use to do transactions to hire, et cetera. And we want to participate in that value creation.
在我们选择的通货中，我们想要待在其中的，并不一定是我们会待在全部通货中。你必须要够强大。我们相信有些通货仍然有百倍的增长空间。而且只是因为有了首次公开发行（IPO），并不意味着我们想要退出持仓。因为现在有更多的资本可用，更多的公共货币可以用于交易、雇佣等。我们希望参与其中的价值创造。
Totally. I think the last double could be the biggest, right, Bill? I think the total number of companies that meet that criteria in the history of the venture industry is like 10 or 15. And you name many of them. And the problem is that the rhetoric becomes common narrative and it becomes part of the ethos of the firm. And people want to apply it to every single company. Everything. That's right. Totally. And that's not true.
完全正确。我认为最后一次翻倍可能会是最大的，对吧，比尔？我认为在创业行业的历史上符合这一标准的公司总数大概只有10到15个。而你提到的很多公司都符合这一标准。问题在于，这种说辞变成了普遍的叙述，并成为公司理念的一部分。人们希望将这种说辞应用到每一家公司，每一件事上。对，完全正确。但这并不是真实的。
I don't want to get too specific here, but you had a company, you had, you do have some, let's say, seasoned vets, yourself included, Bill, who when given the opportunity to get liquidity on an incredible investment, we'll do so, Fred Wilson sold, I think, all of Coinbase when it goes public. He just clears the position when things go public. That's been his philosophy. Kind of the antithesis of what Zugoya and Ruloff are doing with some of their holdings. And then we've seen, we work as an existential crisis. They don't think this might be a viable concern anymore. But famously, Benchmark was able to sell shares at a very high valuation at some point and lock in an incredible return. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. There it is.
我不想过于具体，但你有一家公司，你确实拥有一些经验丰富的老手，包括你自己在内，比尔。当有机会从一项令人难以置信的投资中获得流动性时，我们会这样做，弗雷德·威尔逊在Coinbase上市时卖掉了所有股份。当事情公开时，他会清除仓位。这一直是他的理念。这与Zugoya和Ruloff在某些持股方面所做的是完全相反的。然后，我们看到了WeWork面临生存危机。他们认为这可能不再是一个可行的担忧了。但是众所周知，Benchmark曾经在某个时期以非常高的估值出售股份，并获得了令人难以置信的回报。是的。是的。就是这样。
So, let me ask you questions, Bill, about getting older.
那么，让我问你一些关于年龄变长的问题，比尔。
Well, let me ask the question. Let me ask you guys about me, Goldier, why? Well, sex, like, you're the world's 17th best moderate to go. Sex, you've been investing in SpaceX, right? I mean, there's been a lot of secondary action in SpaceX. Why would you not sell SpaceX at this valuation today? Or maybe Diddy, as you kind of think about this.
好的，让我来问个问题。让我问问你们关于我，Goldier为什么？嗯，性别嘛，你是世界第17位最好的适度交往者。嗯，你一直在投资SpaceX，对吧？我是说，最近SpaceX有很多二级交易活动。为什么你不会在当前估值下出售SpaceX呢？或者Diddy，你想一下这个问题。
Yeah. I think we were going to wait till the company IPOs. I think that would be our default. When it goes public sex, do you then think, what's the upside from here? Or do you think my job is done? I think my job is done. Yeah, I think my job is done. I think what we would do is just distribute the shares and then each LP can make their own decision about whether they want to hold it or not. One of the nice things you want to do with your share. Yeah. One of the nice things about distributions is that nobody has to sell. So, everyone can make their own decision about whether to hold or not.
是的。我认为我们原计划是等到公司进行首次公开募股。我认为那应该是我们的默认选择。当公司公开上市后，你会不会想，这之后还有哪些好处？或者你会觉得我的工作已经完成了？我觉得我的工作已经完成了。是的，我觉得我的工作已经完成了。我认为我们会直接分发股份，然后每个有限合伙人可以根据自己的意愿决定是否持有。股份分发的一个好处是没有人必须卖出股份。因此，每个人都可以根据自己的决定进行持有或者不持有。
Yeah. Once the company is public and the public has all the information through disclosures, the odds that I know something special that a seasoned public market investor doesn't. That's probably pretty low. I mean, the great paradox of what we all do, and Brad, you have both a public and a private portfolio. I started trading public market equities to get better at my private behavior. Bill, you've done that forever. Is public markets, you can't trade on inside information, private companies. That's all you're trading on. Maybe you could speak to a little bit about being, what do they call it when you do both crossover investors? Does that make you a crossover investor? Is that the proper term?
是的。一旦公司上市，并且公众通过披露获得所有信息，那么我知道的特别信息，而经验丰富的公开市场投资者不知道的可能性就非常低了。我的意思是，我们所做的工作有一个伟大的悖论，Brad，你既有公开市场的投资组合，也有私人投资组合。我开始交易公开市场的股票是为了改善我在私人交易中的行为。比尔，你一直都这样做。公开市场是不能利用内幕信息交易，而私人公司则完全是基于此进行交易。也许你可以谈一谈作为跨界投资者的体验，他们是如何称呼这种投资者的？是否叫做跨界投资者是正确的术语？
Well, Bill Gurley is the original crossover investor. He's been trading public stocks since. What have you been doing that first? Yeah, researching him. But the fact of the matter, as Warren Buffett and who would laugh at the idea of a crossover fund, he's been running one of the world's largest public portfolios and private portfolios forever.
嗯，比尔·格利（Bill Gurley）是最早的跨界投资者。他一直在交易公开股票。你们一开始做了什么呢？是的，研究他。事实上，沃伦·巴菲特（Warren Buffett）和他都会对跨界基金的想法哈哈大笑，但他一直管理着世界上最大的公共和私人组合。
He would say, I invest in great companies that are mispriced. There are moments in the market cycle where late-stage venture is mispriced to the downside. There are moments in the cycle where the public markets are mispriced to the downside.
他会说，我投资于估值错误的优秀公司。市场周期中会出现后期风险投资被低估的时刻。在周期的某些时刻，公开市场也会被低估。
What we saw in 2021 is the private markets were crazily overvalued. In 2022, we had this massive correction in the public markets. We believed that they overshot in part. We believed that because we didn't think we were going to have hyperinflation forever, etc.
2021年我们看到私人市场的估值异常高涨。而在2022年，我们对公共市场发生了一次大规模的调整。我们认为它们在某些方面夸大了。我们认为如此是因为我们并没有认为通货膨胀会永远存在等。
You and I invested in Meta and a lot of other things that were on their ass. You've got to buy in the public market when there's blood in the streets. As Buffett says, buy when there are blood in the streets and sell when there's trumpets in the air. There are definitely blood in the streets when you saw things down 60, 70, 80, 90 percent. Is it trumpets now? Does it feel like trumpets do you now or does it feel like trumpets next quarter or the quarter after? If you feel like people are polishing those trumpets right now? Yeah.
你和我在Meta和其他一些处境困难的项目上投资了。当市场出现血腥局面时，你必须在公开市场上买入。正如巴菲特所说，当街头出现流血时买入，当空中响起喇叭声时卖出。当你看到某些东西下跌60、70、80或90%，确实是血腥局面。现在是否已经有喇叭声了？现在你感觉像是有喇叭声了吗？或者是下一个季度或后续季度有喇叭声？如果你感觉到人们正在打磨这些喇叭？是的。
A lot of it obviously depends on your view on what's going to happen in the economy fundamentally. I'm happy to shift to that. But what I would say is this, remember the chart that I've showed many times about software internet valuations. We were 70 percent above normal, and then we were 30 percent below normal. Now we're closer to the trailing tenure average of internet and software valuations. There are always outliers on both sides of this.
很明显，很多事情取决于你对经济基本面发展的观点。我愿意转换到这个话题。但是我想说的是，记住我多次展示过的软件互联网估值图表。我们曾经比正常水平高出70%，然后又低于正常水平30%。现在我们更接近互联网和软件估值的近期平均水平。在这方面总会有一些离群值存在。
But I would say a lot of the positive arbitrage that we saw in 22 has been squeezed out of the public markets, and we're close to fair value. Now if you want to generate alpha, this is going to be about picking individual winners versus individual losers. Like the beta trade on global macro, I think has largely played out the catch up back to fair value. Now I think there's a debate between hard landing, soft landing, are we going to have a re-acceleration inflation or not have a re-acceleration? Where you come down on these major issues, I think dictates whether or not now is a good time.
但我会说，我们在22年看到的许多积极套利机会已经被挤压出了公共市场，我们接近公平价值。现在，如果你想要产生超额收益，这将与选择个别赢家和输家有关。就像全球宏观贝塔交易一样，我认为已经基本上追赶回到公平价值。现在我认为有关硬着陆、软着陆的争论，以及我们是否会重新加速通胀的问题。在这些重大问题上，你的立场将决定现在是否是一个好时机。
Can I correct something you said, Jacob? Yeah, please. All right. You said that public markets inside information isn't allowed, whereas private markets, it's all inside information. I think that could give viewers a misleading impression of what we do as VCs.
我可以纠正你说的一些话吗，雅各布？当然，请说吧。好的，你说公开市场不允许内幕信息，而私人市场则都是内幕信息。我认为这可能给观众对我们作为风投公司的工作产生误导性印象。
The way that around typically comes together, it's not like we get tipped off by some insider at the company in some nefarious way. What happens is that the company chooses to engage with us or a select number of firms in a process and then gives us their metrics and gives us the business plan and gives us the forecast. It's all done in a very above-board way. It's not like we're being tipped.
通常情况下，公司和我们联络的方式并不是通过某个内部人员秘密地透露信息给我们。实际情况是，公司选择与我们或其他一些公司合作，并以一种公正合理的方式向我们提供他们的数据、商业计划和预测。这一切都是在阳光下进行的，不像是我们得到了内幕消息。
However, the part of it that I guess is true is that a private company does not necessarily engage with everyone in the world. Yes, they don't put on a website, a quarterly report and say, here's what our revenue and our costs were and here's our earnings. Although some private companies do start that process. Like before they're in large, they don't. By and large, they're selective about who they want to be on their cap table. And that's the big difference between a public and private.
然而，我猜测中的部分是真实的，那就是私营公司并不一定与全世界的人都有联系。是的，他们不会在网站上或季度报告中公布我们的收入、成本和利润情况。尽管有些私营公司在发展初期可能会这样做，但总的来说，他们会选择性地确定谁能进入他们的股东名单。这就是公开和私营之间的主要区别。
A public company doesn't care who's on its cap table. Apple doesn't know every shareholder and who's got an account set, E-Trade or Charles Schwab. They may care who their biggest shareholders are, but they don't care who the average shareholder is. Whereas a private company really does care. And part of the reason why they care is because these startups are highly risky and they want to have investors who have a track record of behavior where they don't have to worry about being sued every time something doesn't work out, which is most of the time. I think there's good reasons why startups want to control who their investors are.
一家公众公司不会关心自己的股东名册。苹果公司不知道每个股东以及谁拥有一家E-Trade或查尔斯·施瓦布的账户。他们可能会关心他们最大的股东是谁，但并不关心普通股东是谁。而一家私营公司确实很在意。他们在意的部分原因是这些初创企业具有极高的风险，而他们希望拥有一些投资者，他们过去的行为记录显示，无论何时事情不成功，他们都不必担心被起诉，而事情大多数情况下都是不成功的。我认为初创企业想要控制自己的投资者有很好的理由。
By the way, there's also the issue of value add. Other things being equal, founders and startups would rather have investors who can help them as opposed to simply a junk you public. You mentioned both centers. You don't want somebody who's a neophyte, who's going to cause chaos and be upset when revenue goes down or things are swinging up and down. If you're public, buy the share if you want or sell the share if you want. It's a marketplace.
顺便说一下，还有一个增值问题。其他条件相同的情况下，创始人和初创公司更愿意拥有那些能够帮助他们的投资者，而不是简单地成为一个无用的公众伙伴。你提到了两个中心。你不希望有一个新手，当收入减少或者事情时好时坏时，他会引起混乱并感到不安。如果你是上市公司，你可以根据自己的意愿买入或卖出股份。这是一个市场。
Sorry, just pull up this image I just posted. You guys know Gokul Rajarang? Gokul is a great human. We used to work together at Google. Then he worked with Jack at Square. He's a DoorDash today and he was a leader at Facebook after Google.
抱歉，刚刚上传了这张图片，请大家看一下。你们知道Gokul Rajarang吗？Gokul是个很杰出的人。我们曾在Google共事过。后来他和Jack在Square合作。现在他在DoorDash工作，而在离开Google后，曾在Facebook担任过领导职位。
But he did this tweet last month. Any tech venture investor who compares their funds return to the S&P is being naive or disingenuous. The correct index to compare to is the QQQ, the NavDAC composite and its performance has been mind-boggling. As you can see here, over a 20-year investment period, if you basically just buy the top 10 public tech stocks and at the end of each year rebalance to the top 10 at the end of the year, your multiple over that period of time is 24x. Over 10 years. Yeah, and over a 10-year period.
但他上个月发布了这条推文。任何将他们的基金回报与S&P进行比较的科技企业投资者都是天真或不真诚的。正确的指数比较应该是QQQ指数和NavDAC综合指数，其表现令人惊讶。正如您在这里看到的，在20年的投资期内，如果您基本上只购买前10家公共科技股票，并在每年末重新调整为当年年底的前10家股票，那么您在该期间的多个倍数是24倍。在10年期内。是的，在10年的投资期内。
There's quite a bit of hindsight bias here in saying where we look at the top 10. How do you determine? Why not top 100? Are you willing to say that for the next 10 years that you should only buy the top 10? What if over the next 10 years it's more of the field versus the top 10? I think comparing VC as an asset class to the Nasdaq makes a lot of sense. I think that's fair.
在看待前十名时，这里有相当多的事后诸葛亮倾向。你如何确定哪些是前十名？为什么不选择前一百名呢？你愿意说未来十年你只应该购买前十名吗？如果在未来十年，领域而不是前十名更为重要呢？我认为将风险投资作为一种资产类别与纳斯达克指数进行比较是很有道理的。我认为这是公平的。
Yeah, and that's the second column from the right, which is basically, you know, yeah, 5.2x over 10 years. So if you're not beating 5.2x, which is a totally liquid investment, if you just bought the QQQ index. What this really shows is Apple, Google, Facebook, and Amazon have had an massive run-up.
是的，这是从右边数的第二列，基本上，你知道的，就是在10年内涨了5.2倍。所以如果你无法超过5.2倍的回报，这是一个完全可以变现的投资，如果你只是买了纳斯达克100指数。这实际上显示了苹果、谷歌、脸书和亚马逊的股价大幅上涨。
Well, that's not true. That's actually not true, JKAL, because if you look at just the static, it doesn't outperform. It's the rebalance that outperforms, which is whoever's winning in the market, meaning whoever's gaining market value each year, is he then double down your dollars into for next year. And that's changed over a 20-year cycle over a 10-year cycle, and it really starts to play out over time. But I mean, yeah, as you just look at the QQQ, that's the benchmark as an investor, as a private investor, and Gokal's comment in his tweet is that if it can return, call it 7-8x over 10 years, or in this case, 5x over 10 years, you could argue that a venture fund needs to return a significant premium, probably a 25-30% premium due to the illiquidity and the riskiness of the investment cycle there, whereas the QQQQ can just sell anytime you want. So you need to kind of be demonstrating a 30% premium to the 5.2x 10-year, which is about 6.5x, 7x cash on cash.
其实，那不是真的。这实际上并不正确，JKAL，因为如果你只看静态数据，它并不比其他表现更好。真正起作用的是再平衡——也就是市场上获益增加的那个，意味着每年市值增长的人，会将他的资金增加到下一年。这种趋势在20年或者10年的循环中发生变化，并且随着时间的推移，它真正开始显示出效果。但是，当你看到以QQQ为基准的时候，作为一位投资者，Gokal在推特中的评论是，如果在10年内能够获得7-8倍的回报，或者在这种情况下是5倍，你可以认为风险投资基金需要获得更高的回报，可能是25-30%的溢价，由于这种投资周期的流动性和风险性，而QQQQ可以随时卖出。因此，你需要展示一个将6.5倍，或者7倍现金投入变成5.2倍10年回报的30%溢价。
I mean, according to this, the venture asset class is super overfunded, so why is that then? GIRLIE, do you have a point of view? Yeah, I mean, it would be completely speculative, but I do think if you look at the structure of endowments, you've had a few people really leading the way in terms of a playbook with Swenson, you know, Dave Swenson, who passed away recently. But Dave Swenson, he was a yelter. He ran yelzendowman, he's considered. I think the vast majority of people decided they were going to follow that playbook, which had an oversized investment in illiquid assets, PE, venture, real estate, commodities, those kind of things. And I think it led to just a massive. And these things take forever to figure out if they're right or not. If your portfolio is over 50%, illiquid, like who knows what's right and what's wrong? There were years where yel was printing like 27% a year, and then in one reset, no nine, wiped out a ton of that. So it's super hard to know. But I do think that philosophy became broadly adopted.
我的意思是，根据这个，风投资产类别已经超过融资了，那为什么会这样呢？Girlie，你有什么观点吗？是啊，我的意思是，这完全是一种猜测，但我认为如果你看看捐赠基金的结构，你会发现一些人真正引领了一种策略，就像斯文森，你知道，最近去世的戴夫·斯文森。但是，他是一个yel人，他运营着yelzendowman，他被认为是这方面的权威。我认为大多数人决定跟随他的策略，其中包括在不动产、私募股权、风投和大宗商品等领域大量投资。我认为这导致了一个巨大的问题。而且要弄清楚这些投资是否正确需要很长时间。如果你的投资组合超过50%都是非流动资产，谁知道什么是对的，什么是错的呢？有一些年份，yel的年回报率达到了27%，但在一次重置中，他们丧失了大部分回报。所以很难说。但我确实认为这种理念被广泛采用了。
Yeah. Well, look at. Can you pull up this chart real quick? This is a chart from Sautista that is value of venture capital investment in the US from 2006 to 2022. And what you see is there's basically a few different levels. Before 2014, call it, the industry was basically a $50 billion or your industry in terms of deployments. Then you had a run up where for several years, it was around $100 billion. And then in the pre-pandemic years, 2018, 1920, it was around $150 billion a year of deployment. And then it went totally nuts in 2021. It was $350 billion. Started to come down in 2022 to about $250 billion. I think where we are right now is kind of at that 2019 level of about $150 billion a year. The question is, what it should be? I mean, should this be a $150 billion a year industry? Should this be a $100 billion a year industry? Should this be a $50 billion a year industry?
是的。嗯，看一下。你能快速拉出这个图表吗？这是Sautista的一张图表，显示了2006年到2022年美国风险投资的价值。你可以看到，基本上有几个不同的水平。2014年之前，可以称之为这个行业基本上有500亿美元或者你的项目部署相关方面。然后，几年的时间里，它在大约1000亿美元左右。再然后，在疫情前的年份，也就是2018年、2019年和2020年，它达到了大约每年1500亿美元的部署数额。然后在2021年完全疯狂了，达到了3500亿美元。在2022年开始下降，降至约2500亿美元。我认为我们现在所处的位置大致上相当于2019年的水平，即每年约1500亿美元。问题是，它应该是什么水平？我的意思是，这个行业每年应该是1500亿美元吗？每年应该是1000亿美元吗？还是每年应该是500亿美元呢？
Yeah, it sounds like a $100 to $150 would have been the steady state. And Bill, some portion of this is state private longer having an impact where those last couple of rounds were the big, huge, juicy rounds. And if people had gone public in year 789, like Microsoft Google, not Google, but Microsoft, let me Google it. What year was Google when it went out eight? Going out a little bit earlier would have chopped off some percentage of this growing.
是的，听起来$100到$150应该是稳定状态。而且比尔，其中一部分是因为州立私立时间更长造成了影响，最后几轮是非常巨大、诱人的轮次。如果人们在第789年上市，就像微软谷歌一样，不是谷歌，是微软，请让我谷歌一下。谷歌是在第8年上市的，提前一点可能会减少这一增长的一部分。
Yeah. And I do think one of the most interesting things to watch is going to be how these 1000 unicorns private unicorns play out. Because not only do they have the cat structure problem, but they lived and grew up in a day and age where they were told growth at all costs. And it's super hard culturally to go from that type of execution to the principal type execution you guys have been promoting over the past several months. It's just hard. It's not impossible, but it's very, very cool. And public in year six. Yeah. That's 23 million of total venture raised, I think, prior to IPO. Think about what that means. If a lot of those unicorns are fake, what does that say about innovation in the American economy?
是的，而且我认为最有趣的事情之一就是观察这1000家独角兽公司如何发展。因为它们不仅存在猫股结构问题，而且它们在一个被告知任何代价都要追求增长的年代生长和发展起来。文化上从那种执行方式转变为你们在过去几个月中一直倡导的根本型执行方式是非常困难的。这很难，但并非不可能，而且非常非常酷。在第六年上市。是的。在IPO之前，我想总共募集到了2300万美元的风险投资。想想这意味着什么。如果很多那些独角兽都是虚假的，那对美国经济的创新又意味着什么呢？
We had this narrative over the last decade that the pace of innovation had fundamentally increased because of the availability of tools and technology. And so you had a lot more unicorns being created. I mean, I remember back in, I don't know, like a decade ago or 2010 era, let's say, there were maybe was like 20 to 50 unicorns a year, maybe 20 unicorns a year. There were arguably 10 to 20 girly great companies formed a year in Silicon Valley or in the tech industry. In the West. I remember when Andreessen kind of gave this talk about it, maybe a dozen years ago, he said the number was 17. There's like 17 important companies created every year in Silicon Valley. And your goals VC is to be in one of those 17. Then all of a sudden we had, was it like 100, 200, 300 unicorns a year?
在过去的十年里，我们一直认为创新的速度因为工具和技术的可用性而从根本上提高了。因此，更多的独角兽公司应运而生。我是说，我记得大约十年前或是2010年，每年可能只有20到50家独角兽公司，也许只有20家。每年在硅谷或西方科技行业都会有大约10到20家重要公司成立。我还记得在安德烈森（Marc Andreessen）大约十二年前发表讲话时，他说这个数字是17家。每年硅谷都会成立17家重要的公司，而作为风险投资者，你的目标就是成为这17家公司的一员。然后突然间，我们每年出现了100、200、300家独角兽公司。
Yeah. I mean, if you answer the question, tell me them are real. Well, I mean, Brad, we're just talking about that you're giving a 50 X. Multiple 50 times top line. I'm not talking about earnings folks. I'm talking about top line. If you give 50 X to every company, then you only need $20 million in revenue to be a unicorn. And that's unrealistic when compared to the public markets where things are trading at five times top line and 20 times earnings of its high growth. So is it just a different market?
是的。我的意思是，如果你回答问题，告诉我它们是真实的。嗯，我的意思是，布拉德，我们刚刚在谈论你给出的50倍。我不是在谈论收益，而是在谈论销售额。如果你给每家公司50倍估值，那么只需要2000万美元的营业收入就可以成为独角兽公司了。与公开市场相比，这是不切实际的，因为公开市场上的公司以5倍销售额和20倍收益进行交易，而它们具有高增长潜力。所以这只是一个不同的市场吗？
All right. There's a major slowdown in China. Well, we could talk about portnoy and I just do markets. Just real quick. I think I've spent a lot of time on the island of Maui. I think it's really sad. I don't know if you guys were going to Lahaina the whole town. Beautiful town. So sad. Yeah, it's gone. I just wanted to make sure that we mentioned it because it's pretty depressing what happened. I don't know if you guys have seen the wildfires burn down. We all went to that area from vacation. My favorite. Remember that sex? Yeah. Maui's my favorite. Yeah. Yeah. I mean, now he's my favorite place on earth. Then a Lahaina so many times it's super sad what happened. I just want to hopefully send a message out on the water with those old buildings and porches gorgeous. And it's just all gone right now.
好的。中国正在经历严重的经济放缓。嗯，我们可以谈谈Portnoy和我一直在谈市场。简单来说，我觉得我在毛伊岛度过了很多时间。我觉得这真的很悲哀。不知道你们是否去过Lahaina这个小镇。美丽的小镇。太可悲了。是的，已经不复存在了。我只是希望确保我们提及它，因为发生的事情相当令人沮丧。不知道你们有没有看到山火烧毁的情况。我们所有人都去过那个度假区。那是我最喜欢的地方。还记得那段欢愉的时光吗？是的，毛伊是我最喜欢的地方。是的，是的。我的意思是，现在他是我地球上最喜欢的地方了。以前经常去Lahaina，现在发生的事情太悲伤了。我只是希望通过水传递出信息，那些古老的建筑和阳台真是太美了。现在一切都消失了。
So yeah, this global warming thing and these fires and wind man what a hot summer. I mean, we could do it in southern Iran. Check this out. The temperature hit 155 degrees. It is nine degrees warmer than it's ever been off the west coast of the United States right now. There was 90 degree ocean temperature is off of the Florida coast. The sea surface temperature in the north Atlantic is the highest it's ever been by I think seven years ago. Is this a global warming or is it all the hoax? Look, the people want to debate all day long about anthropogenic I'm asking you. I'm trying to find some. I'm telling you with like absolute certainty, the data right now is un fucking believable. How hot and how dangerous the earth is becoming. And we're seeing not just the fire in Maui, the sea surface temperature, which increases the probability of severe tropical storms and hurricanes in the coming season. It's on on on level.
是的，全球变暖的问题，以及这些火灾和强风，夏天真是太热了。我是说，我们可以去伊朗南部体验一下。你看，温度达到了155度。比美国西海岸有史以来的最高温度还要高9度。佛罗里达海岸有90度的海水温度。北大西洋海表温度创下了七年前的最高记录。这是全球变暖还是都是骗局？听着，人们整天都想争论是人为的还是自然的，但我想问你。我以绝对的把握告诉你，现在的数据实在是令人难以置信。地球越来越炎热、越来越危险。我们不仅看到了毛伊岛上的火灾，海表温度也增加了强烈热带风暴和飓风在未来季节中发生的可能性。这是一个严重的问题。
So you know, I got in Saudi Arabia in Dubai, 130 degree temperature, 95 degree overnight lows. There if you don't have air conditioning, you will die in a lot of these places. So there are parts of the earth where people cannot afford the amenities and the luxuries that we have. So is it a world that we all just say, there is no hoax. There is no hoax. I'm trying to be. The earth is. Right in front of you. Yeah, the earth is warming. The amount of extreme weather is increasing. The significant effect of that is becoming a parent. And you know, it's we could debate for hours about what quote can you do about it. But there's just a series of really awful things happening right now. And it's becoming more frequent and more apparent that this is a pretty serious thing that we're all you have to do.
所以你知道，我去过沙特阿拉伯和迪拜，在那里温度高达130摄氏度，过夜气温达到95度。在那些地方，如果没有空调，你会死的。所以地球上有些地方的人无法享受我们拥有的便利和奢华。所以这是一个我们所有人都可以说的世界，没有骗局。没有骗局。我在试图说的是，地球就在你面前。是的，地球正在变暖。极端天气的数量正在增加。这对人类产生了重大影响。我们可以争论几个小时关于我们能做什么来解决这个问题的问题。但是现在正在发生一连串非常可怕的事情。而且人们越来越明显地意识到这是一件相当严重的事情，我们所有人都需要去做些什么。
Oh, you have to do girly is follow what you're doing down there in Texas, which has is it the highest renewable energy percentage of any state now is Texas, greater than California?
哦，你只需要关注你在德克萨斯州正在做的事情，德克萨斯州现在拥有的可再生能源比例是任何州中最高的，高于加利福尼亚吗？
So one of the biggest accessories I saw. Some politician from Texas saying we got we got to get off all these. There's no there's no silver bullet. If you want to talk about the, you know, the fundamental challenge that we all face in terms of whether atmospheric carbon is driving heating or not, if you if you follow that track, there is no silver bullet. There is a lot of things that have to go right in the coordinated way. And there are market incentives that make it very difficult for any of those things to actually get done all the way through.
所以我看到的一个最大的附件之一是来自德克萨斯的一位政治家说我们必须摆脱这一切。没有什么银弹。如果你想谈谈我们所有人在大气碳是否导致变暖方面面临的根本挑战，如果你按照这个思路，就没有银弹。许多事情都必须以协调的方式正确进行。市场激励措施使得所有这些事情都很难实际完成到底。
But renewable energy and nuclear, you would say, are important to of the most important. Yeah, there's still industrial production. I mean, it's just the list goes on. You know, systems and agriculture. There's a lot of clear spas. What's the clearest path? I mean, if you had to, if you said, hey, put 90% of your effort on these three things, it would be nuclear renewables, painting people's roofs with white paint like this new paint that's reflects stuff. I mean, what would be in your truck?
可再生能源和核能，你可以说，是最重要的之一。是的，还有工业生产。我的意思是，列举还有很多。你知道的，系统和农业。有很多明确的途径。哪条途径最清晰？我的意思是，如果你必须选择，如果你说，嘿，将90%的精力放在这三件事上，那就是核能、可再生能源，还有用这种反射物质的白油漆涂刷人们的屋顶。我的意思是，你的选择会是什么？
That's not going to change much. No, let's see this conversation. I we've got Brad and Bill here. I think let's honestly, I'd love to have this conversation. We should do it. Let's put on the doc. Yeah. Next week, we'll do a big thing here.
这并不会有太大改变。不，让我们看看这次对话。我们有Brad和Bill在这里。我认为真诚地说，我希望能进行这次对话。我们应该做这件事。让我们记录下来吧。是的，下周我们将在这里举行一个重要的活动。
Yeah. So just wrapping up here on sort of macro, we'll give you a little macro, Brad. CPI seems like it's measured and consumers seem like they're running out of money and starting to tighten their belts. Unemployment still all time low, still nine million job openings. Feels like this is the steady state for the next year. Or do you think hard landing, no landing, soft landing?
是的。所以在宏观经济方面，我们简要总结一下，给你一个宏观经济的情况，布拉德。CPI（消费者物价指数）似乎已经稳定，消费者似乎开始手紧，他们的钱好像用不够了。失业率仍然处于历史低位，仍有九百万个就业机会。感觉像是未来一年的稳定状态。你认为会有艰难的着陆、没有着陆或是软着陆吗？
Well, maybe they can bring up the first chart. This morning, we had CPI reported. We had the smallest back-to-back monthly gains in core CPI in over two years, back to 0.2%, annualizing just over over 2% now. So on a year-over-year basis, it was 3.2%. Now, remember, it was only six months ago that people were still hyperventilating about this 9.1% we saw last year that everybody on this pod, I think, was largely an agreement that was COVID stimulated. But the blue line here represents the consensus estimates of folks like Goldman Sachs, which is pretty similar to what the Fed's own estimates are. If you go to the next slide here, Nick, this is what people, the current market is betting will happen to the Fed funds rate. So the market is saying, you've heard Chamaase many times higher for longer. I happen to think we'll have higher rates for longer too. But the market is saying, we're worried about an economic slowdown that's going to force the Fed's hand. So the market is betting that the Fed funds rate will come down either because inflation continues to roll or because the economy continues to slow. And so this third slide, which I think is a really interesting one, which nobody really talks about. But this is the reason I think Druckenmill and other are worried about recession.
也许他们可以提出第一张图表。今天早上，我们发布了消费者价格指数（CPI）报告。核心CPI连续两个月增幅最小，达到0.2%，年化增长率仅略高于2%。因此，按年计算，增幅为3.2%。现在，请记住，仅仅六个月前，人们还对去年看到的9.1%感到恐慌，而我认为这主要是COVID刺激造成的。这里的蓝线代表了像高盛这样的专家的共识预测，这与美联储的预测相当类似。如果你转到下一张幻灯片，尼克，在这里，这是市场当前预测美联储基金利率变动的情况。所以市场在表示，你们听到Chamaase多次提到会持续较高水平。我也认为我们将有较长时间的高利率。但是市场担心经济放缓将迫使美联储采取行动。因此，市场预测美联储基金利率将下降，要么是因为通胀持续增长，要么是因为经济持续放缓。因此，这第三张幻灯片我认为非常有趣，但是很少有人谈论。但这是我认为Druckenmill和其他人担心衰退的原因。
There's a measure by the San Francisco Fed, which is called the effective funds proxy rate. Okay, so this is not the Fed funds rate. This is what they say the total impact of quantitative tightening plus rate hikes are. And we're now back to the highest level on that proxy rate since we've been since May of 2000. It's up over 7%. I think that's the reason people are looking at this is blue line up over 7%. That's the highest effective rate calculated by the San Francisco Fed since all the way back to May of 2000. And this is the concern a lot of people. Breck, could you just explain that? Why is the effective rate 3% higher than the official rate?
有一个由旧金山联邦储备银行制定的度量标准，被称为有效基金代理利率。好的，这不是美联储基金利率。这是他们认为量化紧缩和加息的总体影响。现在我们回到了自2000年5月以来的最高水平。它超过了7%。我认为人们关注的原因是蓝线上涨超过了7%。这是自2000年5月以来由旧金山联邦储备银行计算得出的最高有效利率。这是许多人的担忧。布雷克，你能解释一下吗？为什么有效利率比官方利率高出3%？
Because of quantitative tightening, because there's a lot of other things going on in the economy, the impacts interest rates, the rate at which you can borrow. Part of it is there's just less money in the system. It's like a crunch, basically. Exactly. Just because the rates 4% doesn't mean you can get out. You can't borrow. Nobody can borrow at the 10-year rate. So if you're a company or an individual and you want to go borrow, you have to borrow at a much higher rate. So that is where the rubber meets the road. If you're trying to borrow to buy a house, borrow to buy a car, borrow to expand your business, the blue line represents a much better calibration for the level of tightening in the economy. So there is a very strong debate. And I would say the market's actually betting here that the Fed is overdoing it because of what you see in that blue line and that the economy is going to slow the lag effects of this tightening have not yet been felt. And so this gets back to the question we had before, which is where are we in the cycle, whether or not we're going to continue to have growth.
由于定量收紧政策，以及经济中发生的许多其他事情，影响了利率，即你可以借贷的利率。其中一部分原因是系统中的资金减少了。基本上就像是资金紧缩。确切而言，虽然利率为4%，但这并不意味着你可以借到款。你无法以10年期利率借贷。因此，如果你是一家公司或个人，想要借钱，你必须以更高的利率借款。这就是实质问题所在。如果你想要借款买房，买车，或者扩展你的业务，蓝线代表了经济收紧的程度更好的校准。因此，这是一个非常激烈的辩论。而且我可以说，市场实际上正在打赌，联储正在过度推行收紧政策，因为你可以从蓝线上看到的原因，经济增长将放缓，这种收紧政策的滞后效应尚未被感受到。因此，这又回到了我们之前的问题，我们目前处于经济周期的什么位置，我们是否将继续保持增长。
Now, really interesting, Jason, Bloomberg's headline today was the summer of disinflation. And we said on this pod six months ago, we said it's more likely by the end of 2023, we're going to be talking about disinflation than inflation. And lo and behold, not only are we seeing signs of disinflation, air tickets down 18% year over year, but China just posted actual disinflation. So prices are coming down, people are going to be surprised that there's more products or services available at lower prices, which then could affect the salaries.
现在，非常有趣的是，杰森，彭博社今天的头条新闻是通缩之夏。而我们在六个月前的这个播客中说过，到2023年底，我们更有可能讨论通缩而不是通胀。果然，我们不仅看到了通缩的迹象，航空票价同比下降了18%，而且中国刚刚发布了实际上的通缩数据。因此，产品或服务的价格正在下降，人们会惊讶地发现有更多的产品或服务以更低的价格可供选择，这可能影响到工资水平。
Because, hey, we're not making as much money at this company, we got to cut salaries. I mean, we know that the Fed at the start of COVID was more like the curses of disinflation are almost bigger than the curses of inflation. And China just saw CPI down three tenths of 1% in the month this week, annualized, that's over three and a half percent. That is a major problem for China. So I think you have some yellow flags here, right? Then say, do we have too much tightening if one of the global engines of growth is experiencing this level of disinflation, that's going to impact the global economy, global demand, etc.
嘿，因为嘛，我们这家公司赚的钱不多，我们得削减工资。我的意思是，我们都知道COVID开始时，美联储更像是在应对紧缩的诅咒，而不是通胀的诅咒。而中国本周的消费者物价指数下降了0.3%，按年率计算，这超过了3.5%。这对中国来说是个严重的问题。所以我认为你们要警惕了，对吧？如果全球增长的引擎之一经历了如此程度的紧缩，那将会对全球经济、全球需求等产生影响。
So, I think it's been the pattern of the Fed, right? They seem to react late and then they oversteer. This has been the theme. And so, There's also just to add one other cloud to the silver lining. It's the amount of debt that's out there. Correct. So both private debt and government debt. Yeah, consumer debt is high. This real estate, commercial real estate is high, got debt everywhere. And people are going to have to belt tighten and maybe austerity and stop spending on some Yolo trips.
所以，我认为这一直是美联储的模式，对吧？他们似乎总是反应迟钝，然后过度调整。这一直是主题。还有一件事要补充，就是存在大量的债务。是的，包括私人债务和政府债务。是的，消费者债务很高。房地产，商业地产都很高，到处都是债务。人们可能需要节衣缩食，甚至可能实行紧缩政策，停止对一些无谓的旅行进行奢侈消费。
But if salaries keep going up, let's bring this piece by. This is an anaconda koa. Who is this? Who are you sharing? It's not a kona koa link. Is it a great kona kio? Koa bi easy letter. Oh, Koa bi as you here. Koa bi as she. Yeah. Koa bi as she. Let's got 300,000 followers.
但是如果工资继续上涨，让我们来解释一下这段话。这是一条不明作用的秘密。这是谁？你在分享什么？这不是一个正确的链接。是否有关于伟大的克纳州的消息？是关于简单信件的人。哦，你在这儿，你是哥嘎比（意为可爱）的。你是她，是哥嘎比（意为可爱）的。是的，哥嘎比（意为可爱）她。我们有30万个追随者。
So we have, we have record household debt, 17.1 trillion, record, mortgage debt, 12 trillion, record auto loans, 1.6 trillion, record student loans, 1.6 trillion, which as Dr. Miller points out, have to start being repaid, I think as a stember, because Supreme Court overturned Biden's unconstitutional debt forgiveness. Record 1 trillion in credit card debt. That I think should be pretty worrying because credit card rates are now around 25%. So credit card debt gets the interest on that is obviously floating. And so when rates go up to where they are now, then it gets very punitive.
所以我们有纪录创收家庭债务，达17.1万亿美元，纪录抵押贷款，达12万亿美元，纪录汽车贷款，达1.6万亿美元，纪录学生贷款，达1.6万亿美元。正如米勒博士指出的那样，这些贷款必须开始偿还，我认为这是一个开端，因为最高法院推翻了拜登非法的债务赦免。纪录1万亿美元的信用卡债务。我认为这应该相当令人担忧，因为信用卡利率现在约为25%。因此，信用卡债务的利息显然是浮动的。当利率上升到目前的水平时，就会变得非常惩罚性。
So David, precisely, and this is remember, we're seeing inflation roll over huge. And we have a chips act and an infrastructure. We have massive government spending going on. And we still see inflation rolling over. So I just find it interesting that within six months, we've gone from worrying about hyperinflation to Bloomberg running a headline summer of disinflation. The last piece of it is government debt. So at the rate that the government is racking up deficits, the treasury is going to have to float something like 3 trillion of new T bills by the end of the year. And we're rolling something like 9 trillion of old government debt over the next 18 months at new higher interest rates. So there's a lot of debt.
大卫，确切地说，要记住，我们正在看到巨大的通货膨胀回落。我们有芯片法案和基础设施计划。政府正在进行大规模的支出。尽管如此，我们仍然看到通货膨胀回落。所以我觉得有趣的是，在六个月内，我们从担心恶性通胀转变为彭博社发表了一个标题称为“通缩的夏天”。最后一个问题是政府债务。由于政府处于累积赤字的状态，财政部到年底将不得不发行大约3万亿的新国债。在接下来的18个月内，将有大约9万亿的旧政府债务以更高的利率滚动。因此，有很多债务。
And we'll continue that discussion next week, as well as the global warming one hearts and prayers out to the fine people of Maui who invite us to come to their incredible paradise. We hope you all stay safe and have a great recovery. You're in our thoughts and prayers for Brad Gersoner, the fifth bestie for the architect, David Sacks, and the Sultan of science. I am the world's greatest moderator and officiant if you're getting married.
下周我们将继续讨论这个话题，以及全球变暖。我们对邀请我们来他们令人难以置信的天堂般的Maui岛的美好人民致以最真挚的心意和祝福。我们希望你们大家都能安全，并顺利恢复。我们为Brad Gersoner、建筑师大卫·萨克斯的第五好朋友以及科学大师保佑。如果你要结婚，我是世界上最好的主持人和官方证婚人。
And for Bill Gurley, Bill Gurley, you have some anecdotes about the all in pond. You were talking to me. Bg squared. Close on closing on an anecdote. Close your early and close this out. Obviously huge hat to the success you guys have had. When you first mentioned you were going to do this, I don't think anyone had any idea that you would reach this level. And I know the hard work it takes for you guys to do this weekly. It's amazing.
对于比尔·格利来说，比尔·格利，你有一些关于“all in pond”的轶事。你和我说过。Bg平方。接近封闭一个轶事。尽早结束并收尾。显然对于你们所取得的成功，我十分佩服。当你刚提到你们要做这个的时候，我想没有人会想到你们会达到这个水平。而且我知道你们每周做这件事是需要付出很多努力的。这真是太了不起了。
But I was walking down this, you guys share and it goes to about people mentioning all in. I was walking down the street in Austin a few months ago and a guy came up to me, he goes, are you Bill Gurley? I go, yeah. And he says, you're that guy they sometimes talk about on all in, right? Yes. The guy they sometimes talk about rolling is your, that's your, there's your subtitle of your memoir. The guy they talk about on sometimes. Yeah, sometimes. Tombstone. There's your tombstone.
但是几个月前，在奥斯汀的街上走着的时候，有个人走近我，问我是不是比尔·格利？我说是的。他说，你就是他们在all in节目中有时会提到的那个人，对吗？是的。他们有时会谈论的那个人就是你，那是你的自传副标题。他们有时会谈论的那个人。是的，有时会。墓碑上刻的就是这个。
To your point, Bill, it took 10 years of hard work by J Cal for the rest of us. We just walked in off the street. Exactly. Thanks. I got you all on my shoulders. That's why he thinks he deserves more than 25%. Holding you all on my shoulders. But he don't get more than 25%.
说实话，比尔，对我们其他人来说，这是经过J Cal十年艰苦工作的结果，而我们只是从街上走进来的。没错。谢谢。我背负着你们所有人。这就是为什么他觉得自己应该得到超过25%的原因。我背负着你们所有人。但他不会得到超过25%的份额。
J Cal, where are you running off to? Why do we got to shut this down? Sacks, sacks are early and I may stay and just keep talking. Everyone's down in the world. Great.
J Cal，你跑去哪儿了？为什么我们要关上这个？
Sacks，太早了，我可能要待下来继续聊天。每个人都在沮丧中。太好了。
And we'll see you all next time on the All In Podcast. Bye. Bye.
在“全力播客”的下一期节目中，我们会再次见到你们。再见。再见。
Oh man. My eyes are really red, my eyes are really red. We should all just get a room and just have one thank you, George, because they're all just like this like sexual tension that we just need to release somehow. What? You're the beat. What? You're the beat. You're the beat. Beat.
哎呀。我的眼睛真的很红，我的眼睛真的很红。我们都应该找个房间，只做一次，谢谢乔治，因为他们都像是这种性紧张感，我们需要以某种方式释放出来。什么？你是节奏。什么？你是节奏。你是节奏。节奏。
What? We need to get murrayed. We need to get murrayed. I'm doing all in. I'm doing all in. I'm doing all in.
什么？我们需要参加“穆雷派”（Murrayed）。我们需要参加“穆雷派”。我全力以赴。我全力以赴。我全力以赴。
表达意思：这段对话中的“穆雷派”（Murrayed）可能是某种俚语或内部玩笑，无法准确定义。整体意思可能是说他们要积极参与某个活动或承担某项任务。