(Illustration: Some people buy multiple pieces of the same clothing style. I tend to buy multiples of the same toys (or brands), paired with a deep-seated quirk of not wanting to be like everyone else, like this niche notebook Field Notes that I’ve been using for over a decade. I was originally drawn to its woodgrain cover, which has since been discontinued, but thankfully my hoarding habit means I have some stocked up. The advantages of using the same style through deliberate design decisions are many, perhaps including the transformation into excess returns for our clients a decade later (wishful thinking). Photo taken in 2016 at a friend’s home in Boston. Image source: Ernest.)
✳️ The Design Decision of AUM Fees
Charging a percentage of AUM (Assets Under Management). Almost every wealth management firm uses this model, and most clients take it for granted. But a16z Perennial CIO Michel Del Buono said on the Sorcery Podcast that this isn’t just a pricing decision, it’s a design decision that influences everything else. Let’s practice decomposing it:
The surface layer: On the surface, charging a percentage of AUM seems reasonable. Professional managers manage client assets, clients pay proportionally, the more managed the more the manager earns, seemingly aligning both parties’ interests. At 0.4% to 0.6% annually, the percentage sounds quite low. But what you get is a seemingly premium service: a dedicated contact person, integrated tax reporting, trust management, even help finding housekeepers and dog walkers. Email responses are fast, attitudes are great, problems get handled anytime. Most people’s understanding of “wealth management” stops here. And because we don’t always have the chance to know what other possibilities look like, we assume this is the industry standard, that everyone does it this way.
Beneath the surface: Del Buono described a very straightforward logic. “If the compensation for doing something easy and doing something difficult is the same, human nature will choose the easy thing.” The AUM percentage model works like this: whether you help a client buy stocks and bonds or construct a multi-asset allocation basket including venture capital, private equity, real estate, and credit, the fee collected is the same. The result? Portfolios tend toward simplification.
Going deeper. To do complex alternative investments, you need professional investors. Del Buono’s definition: someone whose income at some point in their career depended on investment performance. These people have different compensation structures from traditional financial advisors, they have performance bonuses, growth expectations, and find it difficult to stay in an organization that isn’t centered on investment. So most wealth management firms have zero or single-digit professional investors. Without an internal investment team, they can only outsource to third-party funds, becoming a fund of funds (Fund of Funds), with fees potentially consuming 3 to 4 percentage points per year.
Fee structure determines who’s willing to come, determines organizational capability, determines product quality, determines clients’ long-term returns.
(We encountered the same thing in developing our business and information integration consulting practice when experimenting with mixed pricing. For fixed-fee projects, the team tended to do just enough. After switching partly to outcome-based pricing, the same practitioners were willing to proactively dig one layer deeper, getting closer to the problem behind the client’s problem. It wasn’t that people changed, it was that the structural design decision changed.)
He used a car repair metaphor that made the whole thing concrete: “You bring your car in for repair, and the mechanic says the repair fee is 0.1% of your net worth.” Charging by the hour for car repair is perfectly natural, service-type work should also charge by service content (Fee for Service), not be tied to your asset size. But because AUM-based pricing is more profitable than fee-for-service, the entire industry got pulled along.
What they don’t want us to see: The underlying logic of the AUM fee model is actually an organizational design decision. It determines who we’ll hire, what kind of team we can build, what quality of investments we can provide, and ultimately determines how many percentage points of wealth gap clients will face a decade later. Del Buono built a16z Perennial the opposite way: starting with professional investors to build the team, handling investments in-house whenever possible instead of outsourcing, directly reducing embedded fees. He estimates this can save several percentage points, directly converting into clients’ after-tax excess returns (Tax Alpha).
(This reminds me of the API Mandate internal memo Jeff Bezos issued in 2002: all teams must communicate through APIs, no exceptions. When you get the underlying structural design right, everything above naturally aligns. The fee structure is the API layer of the wealth management industry. If this layer is crooked, no matter how many services you stack on top, adjustments won’t come easy.)
After decomposing and reintegrating the AUM fee, it’s no longer just a number but a system: fee methods shape organizational behavior, organizational behavior determines talent structure, talent structure determines investment quality. This logic doesn’t exist only in wealth management. It applies to any professional service. If you’re evaluating a consultant, a partner, or any fee model, you can start with one question: where does this fee structure direct the organization’s energy? The answer might tell you the truth better than any pitch deck.
Family offices may sound far removed from us, but rumor has it that every “like” or “heart” brings you one step closer to the next tier of asset management. I’d rather believe it and give it a tap. Want to try too? Maybe there’ll be excess returns in ten years?!
✳️ Further Reading
✳️ Knowledge Graph
(More about Knowledge Graph…)
✳️ Transcripts
Introduction to Perennial and Wealth Management
- Is it true this is the multi-family office of Mark and Ben?
- It’s a multi-family office for the principals here and a number of founders, the many in fact backed by the company.
- SpaceX is rumored and reported to have nearly a two trillion dollar IPO incoming.
- How do you prepare early employees and founders for these large liquidity events?
- » It’ll be an interesting test of the markets if they can sort of, I mean that would be the largest IPO ever, for the markets to digest that.
- It’d be really interesting to watch.
- Most of the independent firms have spun out of the banks.
- Banks themselves don’t train people to be professional investors.
- These people are trained to be service providers.
- They’re trained to be responsive, helpful, but actual investment acumen when you’re at a large bank sits in a separate group.
- You’re rewarded as a wealth manager by how much you grow your book of business.
- You’re never trained to be an investment person per se.
- So I’ll see someone with their very first liquidity, they take it and instead of doing something a little bit safe in case there’s a rainy day, they turn around and they’ll put it in a bunch of very early stage startups.
- You just sort of sit there and you’re like, “Listen, if you’re going to do venture, at least try to do it in a systematic way.
- Do not take 80% of what you just got and hand it to your three friends.”
- Almost always this ends in tears.
- » Michel, welcome to sorcery.
- Thank you.
- I think this is one of your first podcasts in a very long time.
- First modern podcast.
- » First modern podcast.
- And so you’re the CIO of a16z Perennial.
- Is it true this is the family office or multi-family office of Mark and Ben?
- It’s the multi-family office for the founders, not necessarily being backed by the company but many in fact backed by the company.
- So what’s the structure of Perennial?
- Okay, so I think the reason why we built Perennial or why we’re building Perennial, it’s about four years in now. It was a reflection on what’s happening in the wealth management industry.
- I think for starters, the principals here, Mark and Ben included, had been served by more traditional wealth management firms and they looked to the LPs of a16z and saw, you know, the big sovereign wealth funds, the big pensions have very high-end professional investment teams come and then they look at the wealth management side, how they were being served personally and, you know, frankly I think most folks would agree they felt sort of underwhelmed with the quality of the investment advice and the investment acumen.
- Not the whole service provision, everything, but specifically on the investment front.
- I mean that was one issue.
- Another issue or another point obviously is to build a community around a16z.
- a16z is all about its community and so this is another way to help founders in a different dimension of their personal life.
- So if you can take that burden off their hands, you know, ostensibly they can focus even more on the business.
- And so it becomes much more of a lengthier relationship with the founders because obviously you start when you invest with them in their startup, but even post liquidity, instead of having sort of an artificial end point of your relationship with them, you can continue helping them think about life after liquidity event.
- In terms of philanthropy, asset management, legacy, all those kinds of things.
- I want to get more into the Perennial strategy and structure, but I think before that it would be great to just dive even deeper into the state of wealth management today.
Problems in Traditional Wealth Management
- What have been the biggest problems drilling down further into the issues that you’ve seen, how wealth is managed, maybe the different types of wealth over time, but structurally like what are the biggest problems there?
- It’s really interesting.
- So there are basically two approaches you can use to have your wealth managed if you’re a wealthy individual.
- One is you can go to the traditional RIA or wealth management channel.
- And I’ll talk about that in a second.
- The other one is you can go to traditional asset managers.
- Think, you know, the large asset management firms you know of, hedge funds, PE shops, things like that.
- And both those approaches I think have their own sort of problems when you're dealing with an individual that has an institutional amount of wealth or will and are taxable.
- These two, the confluence of these two effects means that the sort of the two standard approaches I just described aren’t really great.
Issues with RIAs and Independent Firms
- So wealth management, traditional wealth management, most of these firms, the independent firms have spun out of the banks and the banks themselves don't train people to be professional investors.
- These people are trained to be service providers.
- They’re trained to be responsive.
- They’re trained to be helpful, but actual investment acumen when you’re at a large bank sits in a separate group.
- And you’re rewarded as a wealth manager by how much you grow your book of business.
- So you’re never trained to be an investment person per se.
- And then when you spin out, therefore, you create your own large independent firm, it’s again not a focus.
- And so if you are, the way I would characterize a lot of that product or that offering, I would call it mostly retail product but with a veneer of very high-end service when it comes to investing side.
- Of course there’s all the ancillary services around, you know, household staffing and finding dog walkers and nannies and things like that.
- But by and large the investment side of the function I think is just not of the quality that someone with an institutional balance sheet should expect or deserves.
- So there’s that side.
- By the way, there are also fee structure misalignments.
- So, and this is a tangent, but I think it’s an important one, which is most of these firms rely on a relationship fee, which is a flat fee that you pay no matter what you do.
- And let me ask you the question.
- If you’re paid the same to do something easy or something difficult, I think human nature is such that you’ll do the easy thing.
- And so you look at a lot of these firms that have the flat fee structure and you look at the portfolios that come to us.
- We see a lot of them coming in and I would characterize those portfolios as very simple, not very sophisticated.
- Very focused on just standard market betas, stocks and bonds and things like that.
- Not a lot of focus on alternatives.
- And the reason being is for you to build an alternative offering, you're going to have to go hire professional investors.
- And professional investors are paid well.
- They have growth ambitions.
- It’s very difficult for them to fit into an organization that’s not focused around investment, too.
- So I think there’s a lot of challenges even if you wanted to grow an asset management or investment function inside an RIA.
- I think it’d be very difficult.
- So the flat fee arrangement, you know, means that people do not invest in building out these alternative teams.
- It’s a lot of work.
- It’s a lot of effort and it’s a lot of expense.
- And if you make the same 40, 50, 60 bips doing that or just buying stocks and bonds, you’re going to buy stocks and bonds.
- So by and large, that industry I think is not teed up for it, you know, a sophisticated portfolio that is deserving of someone that’s got 50, 100, 200 million, let alone a billion dollars.
- So that’s one route.
Limitations of Institutional Asset Managers
- And then the other route is the traditional institutional asset management route.
- And those guys, their biggest clients are nonprofits.
- So they’re pensions, endowments, foundations, sovereign wealth funds.
- All these people don’t pay tax.
- So they are not at all focused on the taxable element and if you're an individual, you're paying, especially in this state, you're paying 50 plus percent tax.
- So the easiest alpha, to use an investment term to get, is a tax alpha.
- And they are not, these institutional asset managers, because most of their clients are not taxable, they’re not even attempting to optimize after-tax return.
- In fact, you could even argue that from a fiduciary perspective, they’re not allowed to optimize after-tax return because the vast majority of their clients care about pre-tax return.
- So they’re structurally not able to serve you.
- So there’s this weird no man’s land where you have, you know, taxable individuals that have and deserve sort of an institutional quality portfolio build and an asset allocation and yet neither of the two standard channels really deliver that.
Generational Wealth and Evolving Management Needs
- And I would add in sort of subscale endowments and foundations also in the mix because they, while they can probably access the institutional, they may be too small and they may be cut out of certain elements.
- So having sort of a different approach could also be useful for them.
- Dave, who connected us, and thank you to Dave for the connection, he wanted to hear what you’ve seen throughout the different generations of wealth.
- I mean, we’ve come a long way.
- It was a lot of industrial, a lot of like big bank, big kind of industry types of wealth built over long periods of time to now what we’re seeing and what is the bread and butter of a16z, very fast wealth, billionaires, billion dollar exits very quickly.
- And part of that is of course these different cycles of innovation in AI and the proliferation around there, but what have you seen throughout your career through these different types and how has management changed alongside that?
- » No, it’s super interesting and I think I can tell when I meet a family what region they’re from because these waves affected different areas.
- So the industrial wave was the Midwest.
- If I meet a Chicago family, and these are gross generalizations, but nonetheless, if I meet a Chicago family, very often they’ve sold their business maybe one or two generations ago and the family business has become managing the family’s assets.
- So, they’re very well versed in all the terminology.
- They understand the asset classes.
- And they ask pretty sophisticated questions around that and they’re very focused on the performance and so on and so forth.
- So, I would put that as like one of those earlier waves you’re talking about.
- And then you come to the West Coast and your point, it’s more recent wealth.
- Person who generated the wealth is the person you’re interacting with.
- And so, that person is going to have a lot of business savvy, intellectual insight into how things work.
- So, they’re going to be very curious about this industry and about how to do things, but they won’t necessarily per se have an interest in having studied it the way a multi-generational family that had an industrial exit two generations ago would have done because it’s not their full-time job.
- It’s not their passion.
- So, they’re often facing the choice of either creating a single family office, which I think is very difficult and I can get into that, or joining a multi-family office.
- And then when they join the multi-family office, they’re facing a number of questions that I think are not obvious to answer, which is, what am I paying for? What am I getting? What do I want?
- And because they’re not necessarily knowledgeable about the industry, they focus on, they fall back on things they understand.
- How quickly does someone answer my email? How helpful are they when I’m in a pinch?
- Which are important things, but not the only thing.
- Assessing the investment performance is very important because just a couple hundred basis points of extra performance over the lifetime of someone could mean hundreds of millions of dollars more that they could then go and create a charity to do something with or something like that.
- So, that part I think is lost sometimes in the translation.
Critique of Service-Oriented Wealth Management
- » I want to get to the family offices point, but I do remember when we were first talking, there is a big difference between these other wealth managers that do allure you with all the customer service that kind of takes part and takes you away from the actual performance of the portfolio.
- So, what have you seen there?
Fee Structures and Investment Focus
- Yeah, so this goes back to sort of that flat fee relationship fee kind of arrangement which and that flat fee is an AUM-based fee.
- So, if I'm selling you a bunch of services, why am I charging you an AUM fee?
- And you know, I sort of like to make funny analogies.
- One analogy is let’s say you brought your car to get your car fixed and the mechanic comes out and says, “Well, to repair your car, it’s 10 basis points of your balance sheet.”
- I mean, I think we’d all react like what are you talking about.
- There’s an hourly wage.
- You work three hours, multiply it by three, that’s what you should pay me.
- So, these services in my opinion should be fee for service.
- But because that’s of course less profitable than having an AUM-based fee on someone’s entire balance sheet, you charge that fee.
- You go through the motions of the investment management, but you view that as a cost center.
- And it like you do the services.
- And so, that's why the portfolios often end up being sort of simpler and less sophisticated because you're not incentivized to invest in building out the alternatives teams I mentioned.
- These are people who are hard to find.
- You have to manage them in a different way than you would a more junior resource.
- And constructing these portfolios, the proof points take time.
- You’re building a VC portfolio.
- You’re not going to find out in two years whether it’s done well.
- You’re going to find out in 10 years.
- I don’t know that a lot of these firms have the patience for that.
- So, for me, what was very important, and by the way, if you don't build a professional investment team, then you by default have to invest in other people's investment firms.
- So, it becomes a pure fund to fund approach.
- And so, there’s dual layer of fees, so it’s very expensive to do.
- So, there are fallout implications from not building an investment team in-house.
- It forces you to become a fund of funds if you are going to do alternatives.
- And so, that’s a high fee kind of setup.
Importance of Professional Investors
- So, very important for me from the get-go here to sort of hire people that were professional investors by trade first.
- And professional investors have a very specific definition in my mind.
- It's someone who at some point in their career was paid purely based on the performance of their investments.
- Your investments are up 20% this year. Here’s your money. Thank you very much.
- If you have those kinds of people on your team, you now can underwrite your investments yourself, or you can go hire a third-party manager, but you’re not forced to just go down the third-party route.
- And so, you can save a lot of embedded fees for the things you decide to do yourself.
- And I’m not suggesting you should do everything yourself, cuz it’s too hard.
- There are too many things.
- But there are certainly some things you can do yourself and therefore really reduce the fee load.
- So, you increase the alpha to the client because you’re not passing through these fees.
- Like a standard sort of endowment style approach, 50, 60, 70% alternatives on look-through basis, your fees will be three or four percent a year.
- So, that’s a huge headwind.
- If you can get rid of some of that by having a professional team in-house and not always just hiring third-party managers, that can, you know, maybe you cut that in half.
- It’s a couple hundred basis points of alpha right there.
- So, the structuring is very important in my opinion, how to do this right.
Challenges of Single-Family Offices
- And then on the family offices point, family offices are taking off.
- They’re becoming a new hype wave.
- They’re all over the place, but you’re saying single family offices are very difficult.
- Why is that?
- And why should people avoid doing that as a first step?
- I mean, the allure is cool.
- I have my own family office.
- But you know, what are you trying to accomplish?
- So, if what you're trying to accomplish is have someone help you a little bit with your sort of financial reporting and all that, you can call that a family office.
- I guess the definition of a family office is very broad, so it could include all sorts of things.
- But if you're trying to build a multi-asset class portfolio, global multi-asset class portfolio, you're going to need to hire a bunch of these sort of professional investors I mentioned.
- I don’t know, you need five, six, seven of them.
- Different asset classes.
- You’ve got fixed income obviously, stocks, which are more straightforward, I’d say, but then you’ve got venture capital, private equity, real estate, real assets, credit.
- And all these things are specialties that require people.
- So how are you going to do that and pay these people if your balance sheet isn’t very big?
- And I mean, billions.
- Otherwise the compensation you’re paying to this team is eating up whatever benefit you might be getting.
- The other challenge I found is that family offices have real trouble retaining the talent.
- Because, you know, you hire someone, they’re ambitious, they have a career path.
- The principal of the family is signing up really to be a manager of an asset management company.
- That's really what they're signing up for.
- I don't think many of them actually realize what they're signing up for, and I don't think they want to do that.
- So, they don’t want to manage me, you know, meet me daily or twice a week, let alone a broader team.
- And so, it’s very difficult to attract the high-end professionals, cuz they’re just going to be sort of in a vacuum, often not meeting the principal.
- So, it’s a very difficult thing to execute.
- Some people do execute, of course, but they have very large balance sheets.
- They have a long-term horizon, and they’re committed to building a proper bench on their team.
- So, I think that’s one issue.
- The other issue is a lot of single family offices, you hear that the motivation is they build it to keep the family together.
- And then you witness the statistics at least show that when the patriarch or matriarch passes away, very often the family office falls apart.
- Either the investments are completely turned around and the things are liquidated in a hurry, that results in large losses by the way, where the beneficiaries that sometimes we buy those things.
- Or the kids or the heirs take their money and go their own way.
- So, the very sort of conceptual underpinning of why to create a single family office seems to fall apart a lot, too.
- So, there’s multiple challenges with trying to do a single family office, I think.
- Again, it depends how you, what you want to execute with the single family office.
Sponsor: Brex
- Sorcery is brought to you by Brex, the financial stack trusted by more than 30,000 companies, including one in three venture-backed startups in the US.
- » Nearly 40% of startups fail because they run out of cash.
- » Brex is literally built to help founders avoid that.
- Unlike traditional banks that let your money sit idle, chipping away at it with fees, Brex is designed to help you spend smarter and move faster.
- Their all-in-one solution combines checking, treasury, and FDIC protection into one powerful account.
- You can send and receive money globally at lightning speeds, get 20 times the standard FDIC coverage through their partner banks, and even high yield from day one.
- With same day and even same hour liquidity, access your funds anytime.
- Companies like Scale AI, DoorDash, ServiceTitan, Hims, Anthropic, Flexport, Robinhood, and Plaid trust and use Brex.
- Start today at brex.com/sorcery.
- That’s b r e x.com/sorcery.
Sponsor: Turing
- Turing is training the next generation of AI with tasks that require real expertise and real-world judgment.
- That’s why companies like Nvidia, Anthropic, Salesforce, and Gemini partner with Turing.
- Turing builds realistic reinforcement learning and data systems based on real operational traces.
- The kind of infrastructure Frontier Labs need to train superintelligence.
- Visit turing.com/sourcery.
Perennial’s Approach to Wealth Management
- At what level of wealth should people start thinking about going the wealth management direction?
- Wealth management as opposed to single family office.
- Well, I mean for wealth management, of course there are firms that cater, you know, from small amounts all the way to larger amounts.
- But for a type of wealth management firm that I'm talking about, the type we're building here at Perennial that has a lot of investment expertise, 25, 50 million dollars would kind of be the minimum, really.
- But I would say it’s really more for the centimillionaires and billionaires who have, again, an institutional time multi-generational time horizon.
- So, they’re more like an endowment than they are like an individual.
- How many families are you working with right now?
- Well, we're purposely keeping it small.
- Because another thing is we really want to be customized and focused on the individual needs of the families.
- What you’ll find, again, in the industry is a lot of folks go by playbooks.
- So, they’ll categorize you as a certain type of family in terms of your risk profile or your liquidity or your balance sheet.
- And then there’s a standard program that’s put into place.
- I’d say that’s very common.
- We don’t want to do that.
- We feel like the people we work with are people who have multi-generational wealth anyway.
- So, they should have a custom built asset allocation, custom built investment program.
- A lot of work around their concentrated stocks, often they come with a lot of concentrated stock.
- And so, we built a team around that.
- And so, we only have a couple dozen families that we work with in that sort of overarching quarterback of everything.
Perennial vs. Other Silicon Valley Firms
- Is that the main difference between a16z Perennial and let’s say an Iconic?
- How does it fit within the broader theme of these Silicon Valley oriented firms?
- I think the Silicon Valley oriented firms, for the most part, again, are trying to be a full stack offering of all the services.
- And so, you know, with a certain amount of revenue, there’s only so much you can build in-house.
- So, a lot of these firms do not have professional investors.
- So, I often ask people as a quiz, how many professional investors do you think are in, you know, RIA XYZ?
- And people will answer, I mean percent. People answer me 20%, 50%, 30%.
- But the number often is zero or one or two people.
- And so, that’s the big difference between us and then many of these other firms.
Preparing for Major Liquidity Events
- With so many large wealth creation events coming up, SpaceX is rumored and reported to have nearly a two trillion dollar IPO incoming.
- One, what do you make of that?
- And two, how do you prepare early employees and founders for these large liquidity events?
- Well, look, I think it’ll be an interesting test of the markets if they can sort of digest, I mean, that would be the largest IPO ever.
- And so, for the markets to digest that would be really interesting to watch.
- And I think there’s a lot of other very large startups waiting in the wings who will be watching this super carefully.
- Because if it works for SpaceX, maybe it works for me.
- In terms of preparing, I think, you know, again, if you’re an individual with taxes, structuring your estate, structuring your trusts is very important pre-IPO.
- And then post-IPO, it’s all about how do I diversify gradually?
- And I would not purport or claim to know more about SpaceX than someone that’s worked there 20 years.
- So, I would work with that person and ask them, you know, what do you think the prospects of SpaceX are?
- I would not go in suggest they dump SpaceX 100% immediately and go buy stocks and bonds.
- Sure, part of their strategy should be to diversify, but part of it should be to hold on to that stock long-term and think about how to maybe even monetize the volatility.
- So, we’ve built some options programs and things like that for people here to monetize these stocks that are volatile by nature.
- And so, you can monetize that volatility without necessarily exiting the stock.
- So, there’s lots of interesting strategies you can do with someone that has a concentrated stock position.
Addressing Wealth Management Gaps
- It’s just so interesting, cuz I think I’ve talked to several people in LA pertaining to this IPO.
- I’ve talked to Shawn Maguire of Sequoia, who they’ve invested billions into SpaceX and Elon companies.
- And then I’ve also talked to engineers and I’ve talked to people that have been at SpaceX.
- One of the themes that I’ve seen throughout this is that there are not enough wealth managers.
- And there’s not enough wealth managers with this family office type of expertise, either.
- And so, there’s a little bit of like an incoming drought for a lot of demand.
- And I know SpaceX is not only LA, but it’s also Texas.
- And there are definitely differences there.
- But in terms of that, what do you make up of like where should they go?
- Because a lot of these engineers and other professionals there are not in this world, they’re ill-equipped to assess the options.
- And so, often they end up in places they shouldn’t, in my opinion.
- And so, the challenge for them is to, even if this is not your passion, please invest time enough to understand the space.
- One of the things I always suggest to people is look at the pedigrees, the education, the employment history of the people you're hiring.
- If they've never really been professional investors, then don't look to that firm for professional investment advice.
- Look to that firm for services.
- So, I think just educating yourself enough about the industry is a really important first step to even try to attempt to, you know, as often people say, they get a referral.
- Oh, my buddy uses so-and-so and they’re a nice person. Okay, well, I’ll go with that.
- And you know, I always like to make medical analogies here because it sort of highlights how ridiculous that decision-making process is.
- Let’s say you have a horrible cancer and need a big surgery.
- Are you simply going to ask your neighbor, “Hey, do you know a good brain surgeon?”
- And they’re like, “Oh, yeah, you know, so-and-so down the road is a great brain-” No.
- You’re going to go read the hospital reports and find out which surgeons have done the surgery the most and, you know, do the same thing here.
- I mean, your wealth is the product of your life’s work.
- This is not some, it’s a very important thing.
- So, invest the time, please, to sort of understand what you're buying before buying cuz I'm at the receiving end of that a lot.
- I see people, they go somewhere and then they come to us.
- And they say, “I don’t like this.”
- And you ask, “Well, why did you pick that?”
- And the answer almost always is, “Well, my neighbor or my friend or a colleague.”
- So, if you have any influence on this, tell people do just a little homework.
- How easy is it or how hard is it to switch over to different firms?
- Super hard.
- Really?
- And this is part of the game.
- So, you’re with a firm, you know, all your account numbers, all your wiring instructions, they know all your different trusts, your trustees, your accountants.
- So, when you are doing something, they’ll report back to the accountant.
- They’ll, you need to send money, they’ll do the wiring instructions for you.
- The industry is set up to sort of trap you.
- Even the large custodian firms, I don’t know if it’s hard for people to realize this, but if you’re as an individual in these custodian firms, the brand names, I won’t name any names, but you know who they are.
- You can sort of do a lot of stuff yourself, self-initiate, self-service.
- When you move under the RIA platform, those features are disabled to sort of keep you more locked into that ecosystem.
- So, it’s very hard.
- It’s daunting.
- And this is why there's such a race to be the first firm that someone that recently had liquidity.
- This is where the fight is.
- Like, “I heard you had a liquidity, you’re about to have a liquidity event. Me, me, me, pick me.”
- Because once you’ve picked the person, the odds of them moving again are extremely low.
- And so, that’s where all the competition happens.
Onboarding and Offering Strategies
- When they essentially onboard, I’m just so curious about this.
- Like, what products do you show them?
- And where are their barriers for like, for instance, do you go into art?
- Like, for these typical portfolios, how do you set them up initially?
- You said it’s kind of like a gradual process, but like what are all the offerings and how do you balance it?
- » It is a gradual process.
- So, you know, I think we’re a very open book and so, we’ll tell people frankly that they don’t need to necessarily put all of their assets with us.
- Which again is not what most people in the industry will say.
- Most people in the industry will say, “Hey, you should put everything with me because otherwise I won’t have an insight on what you’re doing elsewhere and therefore I won’t be able to manage your things optimally.”
- But that’s not true.
- You can have the firms communicate with each other and I do this regularly.
- And so, you know, again, if you went to a traditional firm, they would start with more of the stock and bond mix.
- They might add a little bit of some sort of credit.
- We sort of tend to work with people more in a linear fashion acknowledging that their portfolio is going to change over time.
- So, we’re not focused simply on exiting that position on day one, the concentrated, let’s say it’s SpaceX.
- We’re not just simply going to be like, you got to sell all of SpaceX.
- It’s okay, SpaceX, if you hold onto it for 20 years, here’s what the outcome might look like.
- By the way, we built a lot of tools to help forecast these kinds of things, which is again empowered by the fact we have professional investors who know how to do that.
- I mean, a lot of it, I’m sorry to be repetitive, a lot of it falls back to that.
- And then we will customize based on their needs.
- Like, so yeah, strange, unusual alternative asset classes are definitely part of the mix.
- We have some clients who do a lot in the art space.
- I’m not an art specialist, but I know art specialists that can help you.
- So, we’re very flexible.
- But the point is the whole mix of things has to make sense.
- And so I’m not simply going to be, and this is where giving advice is an important part.
- A lot of again firms will present you alternatives.
- They’ll say you can do this or you could do that. You tell me what you want.
- And they’re doing this for various reasons.
- One, they may not actually have a strong opinion.
- Two, it’s liability.
- If I tell you do this and you do it and then you’re not happy, well, I told you to do that.
- If instead I gave you three options and you pick B, I didn’t pick B, you picked B.
- So, we’re very much into giving advice.
- We’ll tell you, look, if you’re going to put a lot of art, you might want to counterbalance that with this and that to make the whole portfolio work.
- So, we sort of put ourselves out there, but I think a lot of people have desire and hunger for that.
- They really want, they don’t want to sort of have to learn all these things and make the decision.
- They want someone who tells them, “You should do this.”
- Again, let’s use a medical analogy.
- You know, I have cancer, okay, you need to do a surgery.
- Not, “Well, you know, maybe you could do a surgery, maybe you can drink some herbal teas. You tell me.”
- Now, you wouldn’t be satisfied with that with the physician.
- Why is that okay here?
- So, you want again, I think you want a professional telling you, “No, no herbal tea for you. The tumor’s big. Herbal tea is not going to work. You need a surgery.”
- So, that’s one of the things we pride ourselves in.
Managing Market Volatility and Assets
- I'm so curious about your stance on the current markets and the current market volatility.
- So, one, we have AI disrupting public markets, but we also have wars and geopolitics and I don't know, oil.
- And so, how do you manage through all this?
- How do you provide assistance to the families, to your clients?
- And one, are you actively managing their portfolios?
- Two, are you helping them navigate through this?
- Because I’m sure they’re seeing their wealth go up and down in different directions.
- Yeah, I mean, I always tell people, one of my favorite sayings is, "Volatility is not the enemy."
- A lot of people fret volatility. I’m scared.
- But if you have a deep balance sheet and you’ve kept your portfolio at least somewhat liquid, volatility is a huge opportunity.
- It’s like a fat pitch.
- And so, you get assets that go on sale.
- You know, big equities, stock markets, every four, five years, there’s like a 40% drawdown.
- Blue light sale.
- You should have flexibility in your portfolio to take advantage of the blue light sale, and you should have your advisor call you up and go, “Hey, these things are 40% off. It’s time to back up the truck.”
- So, yes, we do very active interaction with clients on that front.
- How much do you like to put in cash and real estate and all of these other kinds?
- Real estate’s actually, for taxable individuals, a really very cool asset class because it’s uncorrelated. So, if you’re, let’s, again, you’re a SpaceX person. You have a lot of stock market risk factor.
- So, if you take real estate, real estate’s pretty uncorrelated to that, so it diversifies you.
- And then a lot of wealth in this country, a lot of wealthy families made their fortunes with real estate.
- Including the president.
- And why is that?
- Because the entire banking system and taxation system was built around real assets.
- When banks and law, all these laws were built in the '20s, '30s, '40s, all there was was real assets.
- People weren’t, there were no internet companies.
- They were buying buildings, factories.
- So, the tax code is very beneficial to real assets, and you can therefore get a solid teens return on a tax-adjusted basis out of real assets and real estate.
- So, from, to me, it's a very, again, if you've got the ability to stomach the illiquidity, because buildings don't trade like stocks, you should be holding a lot of those in your portfolio.
- So, yes, it’s an important part.
- And then cash or very liquid bonds, people don’t like bonds for the return profile.
- They say, “Well, why would I own this thing? It returns 3 or 4%.”
- And my answer to that is, you're not owning it for the 3 or 4%.
- You're owning it because it gives you that flexibility.
- It gives you that option value to liquidate that and go into something else very fast.
- I remember during the global financial crisis, I worked at a hedge fund.
- The only thing we could sell was Treasuries to raise money.
- Nothing else was trading.
- So, having a Treasury kind of liquidity buffer, super important.
- You can go sell those Treasuries even when there’s a horrible war or something, someone will pay you cash for that.
- In fact, they may pay you more than they would have before, because bonds are a safe haven asset.
- You take that cash, you go buy the distressed asset.
- We should talk about taxes.
Taxes and Residency Decisions
- Yes, taxes are probably one of the biggest talks around town, especially in California.
- Some people are like, “Oh, well, you made so much money, like, you get to choose where you live, and if you want to live in California, that’s the purpose of making a lot of money.”
- Some people will say, “Oh, I made a lot of money. I need to go somewhere else so I can save, you know, a couple percentage points.”
- And I don’t know, live somewhere for three, four years, something like that.
- But what is your main stance on taxes and where you live?
- Cuz we can also get into this afterwards, but the billionaire tax bill, that definitely, I mean, I don’t know if this was based on principle or like a little bit of a protest, but I think it was over a trillion dollars left the state of California.
- So, how do you feel about taxes?
- Well, I mean, no one loves paying taxes unless they feel they're getting value for it.
- And I think when you hear people complain about it, it's, "I don't get value."
- You know, my schools aren't great, the roads are in disrepair, whatever.
- You hear these complaints.
- So, I don’t think anyone’s necessarily averse to paying tax if they feel they’re getting value for it.
- And a lot of people who leave feel they’re not getting value for it.
- So, that’s one.
- Two, there's a sense that the revenues are mismanaged, and I'm not going to get into all the waste and fraud that happens, but we all know a lot of that happens.
- But there’s a lot of, and moving is a very draconian move.
- Because your family, your friends and all that.
- So, some people can do that and want to do that.
- And by the way, it’s not easy.
- You have to sort of really move.
- So, leaving your house here, your main house, and moving to Texas or Florida for a year or two with the intent of coming back doesn’t qualify.
- If you do come back after a couple years, the tax authorities here say, “Look, you never sold your house. You never had the intent of leaving the state, so you owe us tax.”
- So, you really have to sever ties.
- Like, you have to buy your principal residence, sell your principal residence here.
- You’ve got to register to vote.
- You’ve got to have all your physicians there, all that stuff to really prove to the state that you’ve left and that you have no intention of coming back.
- So, the move isn’t easy, and it’s a draconian change.
Portfolio Tax Mitigation
- Some people though, if you have a really big balance sheet, it’s worth it.
- But there’s a lot of things you can do with your portfolio to mitigate tax too.
- So, before jumping to, “I’m going to move to Puerto Rico or whatever,” first think about how you structure your investments, your portfolio.
- So, there's all sorts of very clever ways to use the qualified business tax exemptions, the QSBS.
- So, you can create several trusts.
- Each of those trusts gets the now $15 million exemption.
- Before it was 10.
- So, you can do that.
- Married couples now can get both exemptions.
- So, there's a lot of things that if you do on that, remember we were talking about the pre-IPO prep, you can do things to really mitigate tax a lot.
- Then you can use the proceeds and invest them in tax-advantage things like real estate, if it’s managed the right way, that is.
- A lot of real estate unfortunately is managed in a way where the buildings are sold a lot, and that generates tax.
- But if you hold the buildings for a long time, you can use the depreciation credits and never pay tax on the income you're getting.
- So, there’s a lot of things you can do like that before you move.
- And we spend a lot of time obviously thinking about that, pre-liquid event and post-liquid event, there’s also a number of strategies you can use to generate losses, whether the market is up or down.
- There’s some sophisticated strategies that use leverage.
- Using leverage is not always easy because leverage can be dangerous on a portfolio.
- Luckily, we have a couple people in our team that worked at hedge funds and are used to leverage.
- So, there are things like that you can do before you pull the plug, I’m moving somewhere else.
Personal Impact of Relocation
- But I see a lot of people moving though, to your point.
- Really?
- A lot of people moving.
- In fact, there’s been a bit of a boomerang.
- Some people have moved and then come back because they in their minds they thought that saving several percentage points of tax was worth the move.
- And then when they moved, for personal reasons they’re like, “Look, I saved money, but the savings weren’t worth the cost to me personally.”
- And these are, you can’t, it’s very hard to predict how you’re going to feel when you move somewhere else cuz you’ve never lived there.
- So, it’s, I think it’s a very valid point.
Sponsor: VCX by Fundrise
- VCX by Fundrise, the public ticker for private tech, allowing investors of all sizes to invest in venture capital.
- View the portfolio at getvcx.com.
- That’s getvcx.com.
Sponsor: Public
- Some of you may not have heard this yet, but our sponsor Public just launched something called Generated Assets and it brings AI into investing in a way I’ve honestly never seen before.
- Here’s how it works.
- You type in an idea like AI-powered supply chain companies with positive free cash flow or defense tech companies growing revenue over 25% year over year.
- Public’s AI then dispatches a swarm of agents that scan every single US stock, evaluates them, and instantly builds a custom index around your thesis.
- What really stands out is how clearly it explains why each stock is included.
- And before you invest, you can even backtest your idea against the S&P 500, so you’re making decisions with real context, not just guessing.
- And beyond generated assets, Public lets you invest in stocks, bonds, options, crypto, all in one place.
- They’ll even give you an uncapped 1% match when you transfer your investments over from another platform.
- If you want to build a portfolio that actually reflects your thesis, visit public.com/sorcery.
- Paid for by Public Investing.
- Full disclosures in the description.
Sponsor: Deel
- Founders, ship faster on Deel.
- Set up payroll for any country in minutes, hire anyone anywhere, get visas handled fast, and get back to building.
- Visit deel.com/sorcery.
- That’s d e e l.com/s o u r c e r y.
Capital Losses and SPACs
- Chamath recently went viral for a tweet about capital losses because of the destruction his SPACs have incurred on people.
Utilizing Capital Losses
- What is your viewpoint on capital losses and how do you use them to your point of offsets?
- So, we use them a lot.
- Capital losses are the core behind all those sort of liquid strategies I mentioned before, the leverage strategies and whatnot.
- There’s some nuances in the tax code like you can’t use a loss that comes to you personally unless you happen to be a professional in that industry.
- So, you can only use a small part of them.
- So, the way to use a loss is inside a fund vehicle that generates its own gains that can be offset by its own losses.
- Then you don't have to worry about extracting the losses and putting them on your personal balance sheet and not being able to use them.
- So, if you owned a SPAC or something like that and it went to zero, you may not be able to write that off.
- But if it’s sitting in a portfolio, in a fund structure, usually a partnership, you’re going to have other things inside that fund that are going to be offsets naturally so that you can shield the total result of that fund from tax.
- And that’s exactly the right strategy for real assets and real estates where you’re generating these capital losses, you’re generating depreciation losses, and you use those to offset the income inside that fund.
- And then the total you get at the end has been tax mitigated.
Secondary Markets and SPVs Caution
- SPACs were a huge trend.
- Secondaries have taken storm.
- And so, with secondaries, we're seeing not only lots of volume in secondary transactions, which is good, I guess, for growth investors cuz that was really quiet for a while, but we're also seeing these multi-layered SPVs proliferate and cause sometimes scams.
- But in terms of secondaries, what are you seeing and what are you advising your clients on with these?
- So, it’s a fascinating space, to your point.
- It’s a little bit like the comment I made before where if you don’t have professional investors on your team, you have to build a fund of funds to invest.
- It’s the same idea with these secondary vehicles.
- I’d say be very, very careful what you’re doing.
- Attorneys love to use this term “perfect your ownership interest.”
- So, we’re going to use SpaceX again since we’ve been on SpaceX.
- Let’s say you’ve been working at SpaceX years and you create your own Molly Corp and you put your SpaceX stock in that.
- SpaceX doesn't want you, or most companies, I don't know the particulars of SpaceX, don't want you to transfer your stock to an external person.
- So, what you do is you transfer it to your own entity and then you sell shares in that entity to other people.
- And it's not very clear and you often charge fees.
- So, I mean it’s sometimes quite egregious, to your point.
- You’re being paid 2, 3, 5% for the right to buy something.
- But the problem is the stocks are sitting in that entity and you are the manager of the entity, the employee is the manager of the entity.
- And so, they’re the ones who ultimately, even though they’ve written a promise saying when there’s a liquidity event, we’ll sell the shares and hand you the money, I’ve seen personally cases where the stocks in that entity are sold by the individual managing the entity.
- And they don’t need to seek approval from the people who invested in it.
- So, be really careful when you go into these private entities.
- Any private company has its own set of rules.
- You can't sort of use intuition, well, that's fair or not.
- Whatever's written in the contract is what matters when you go into private.
- And the vast majority of the volume goes through these sort of questionable SPVs.
- Directly going on the cap table is what you should be trying to do, but that's extremely difficult.
- And so, that’s where I would caution people, really be very careful.
- So, we spend a lot of time when we see these things doing legal diligence, which is expensive.
- You know, you’re going to pay an attorney $20,000 to review this thing and make sure it’s bulletproof.
- Do you really want to do that if you’re going to be putting 500,000 into this?
- So, beware.
- Will your clients take these SPVs to you to manage for them or do they just kind of do them on their own?
Managing SPV Investments and Diligence
- We’ve helped a couple clients try to build some, but most of the time we’re actually trying to build one for our clients to get into a particular company.
- It’s been interesting to see.
- I did an interview series at Anduril and one of the questions I asked Marc Andreessen and Brian Schimpf, the CEO, is there is like a dark pool of fake SPVs going around for Anduril.
- And so, with those, are you just going into deep legal matters and paperwork to backtrack and see if that is a viable vehicle?
- Have you seen any issues? We haven’t run into a full-on fraud before, but, you know, the first thing we do is we pay a background check company to see, again, using you as an example, did she actually work at SpaceX? What did you, you know, so, that’s step one.
- A lot of people don't even do that.
- Ask your friends and clients, how many of them have run a background check on the person running the SPV? The answer's going to be no one.
- So, just to get, this is back to my just do some basic homework if you're going to do these kinds of things.
- Or get someone to do it for you.
Dispersion and Manager Selection
- Venture capital has gotten some heat for not having the best returns, not being the best asset class.
- How do you manage that kind of alternative within these portfolios?
- What’s your view on venture capital as an industry?
- No, that’s a great question.
- » No bias, of course.
- Zero bias.
- Look, if you look at the different asset classes and the dispersion of returns, the worst manager to the best manager, venture is the biggest dispersion of all the asset classes, compared to private equity, credit, or hedge funds, or whatever.
- And so, to your point, that means that who you pick is super important.
- If the dispersion was this narrow, it kind of wouldn’t matter.
- You kind of know what you’re going to get out of that asset class. When the dispersion is this wide, and the stock market performs, by the way, somewhere in the middle of that.
- If you pick the bottom half, to your point, well, that’s a problem.
- You should have just avoided the illiquidity, avoid the fees, and bought QQQ or something.
- And so, I think picking the right managers and being exposed to right people there is more critical than in any other asset class.
- There’s a couple of other interesting observations.
Entity Value and Longevity
- I'd say by and large, the industry has not tried to create entity value.
- What do I mean by that?
- They're often focused around one individual, and if that individual leaves, the firm is gone.
- Or the firm will have to reinvent itself.
- So, because the person has their name on it, they’re the only one there, and they’ve not built sort of an institution around it.
- And so, the longevity of that entity is questionable, and therefore, it doesn’t have entity value in and of itself.
- Of course, the funds have value, but the entity itself doesn’t.
- And what's really interesting about a16z, personally for me, one of the things that attracted me here, this firm has entity value.
- There’s a lot of people who own this firm.
- It’s building a comprehensive set of products and services across different sub-asset classes.
- Be it crypto, AI apps, AI infra, whatever.
- And it also has expertise around fundraising, HR, systems, go-to-market.
- And so, the whole thing is highly valuable.
- It doesn’t just revolve around, it’s not 10 or 15 people with one person.
- So, I would say if you’re going to invest for the long term, try invest in firms that are trying to create entity value because that’s a sign of longevity.
- The firm’s not going to disappear when someone decides to hang up the cleats.
Scale and Check Size Importance
- I think the other interesting thing is as the check sizes to participate have gotten bigger, scale has become more important.
- All asset management industries have some scale benefits to them.
- Venture traditionally had less and now has a lot.
- So, if you’re going to back a new AI startup, you can’t show up with a million-dollar check or two-million-dollar check, it’s useless.
- Or let alone, you’re going to build an AI chip where the tape out for one chip is $100 million.
- And how are you going to participate in that?
- So, you need to have large funds.
- So, that’s another thing I think all of a sudden it’s become very clear that you need to have, there’s been this dispersion and you need to have a bigger fund.
- What’s the biggest lesson that you’ve learned from Mark and Ben?
Team Building and Talent Embrace
- The biggest lesson I learned from Mark and Ben.
- Actually have an interesting one.
- So one of the biggest lessons I've learned from Mark and Ben, it's really interesting.
- It's about how to build a team and how to work with people.
- And they said something when I first got here that was interesting.
- They said we don't hire people for lack of flaws.
- We hire people for their skills.
- And it was really interesting to me.
- At first I didn’t know what to make of this, but for a long time I worked in a large management consulting company.
- And my reviews were all about addressing my flaws.
- So it’s like, they would gloss over the things I did well.
- It was not even worth mentioning.
- And it’s just a list of things I had to fix all the time.
- And it’s actually an incredibly demoralizing kind of thing cuz you, the things you did well, no one seems to care to mention.
- And then you’re always being told every year these are the 18 things you got to fix to make it to the next level.
- Here we've completely turned it on its head.
- Like if you are great at something, let's celebrate that.
- And we're all people, so there'll be things we might not like with that, but that's fine.
- We'll learn to live with that and hopefully the balance is good.
- So there’s this real embrace of the talents people have.
- And so as a result, everyone here at the firm, which stunned me, is every function I meet people are really excellent at their function.
- The amount of talent in this firm is mind-blowing.
- And so it makes you really proud to be part of this place.
- So that’s the lesson I learned from Mark and Ben.
- That’s a great answer.
Founder’s Wealth Management Mistakes
- What’s the biggest mistake people make with their wealth?
- So I’ll restrict my answer to the biggest mistake people make with their wealth to founders of startups.
- I think because they grew up in the venture industry and in the private asset industry, they automatically gravitate to that.
- And so I’ll see someone with their very first liquidity, their very first liquidity, they take it and instead of doing something a little bit safe in case there’s a rainy day, they turn around and they go put it in a bunch of like very early stage startups often referred to by their friends.
- And you just sort of sit there and you’re like, listen, if you’re going to do venture, at least try to do it in a systematic way and not take 80% of what you just got and hand it to your three friends.
- And almost always this ends in tears.
- I’m exaggerating, but very rarely do those outcomes happen the same.
- And of course because that individual who made it, their experience was one of success.
- It’s hard for them to sort of visualize the statistics of the industry as a whole.
- So they’re expecting that they do two or three of these things, at least one of them will work and often none of them.
- So that’s the biggest mistake I see is like you finally got some liquidity, your hard work paid off.
- And what do you go and put it back in another sort of highly uncertain, highly illiquid thing.
- For those founders that come to you, they’re post exit, they’re liquid.
Portfolio Management for Founders
- Do some of them want to start on their second or their third company and how do you manage their portfolios to do that?
- Many do want to start a second and third company.
- Especially nowadays, you’re young.
- Are you going to retire when you’re 35 or 40 and not do anything?
- I mean, I don’t think anyone wants to do that.
- So a lot of people want to, and so if that’s the goal, we try to keep the portfolio actually more liquid because their hope is that they can finance more of it themselves.
- The idea is, well, I did my first company and by IPO I owned 15% of it.
- The next time I want to own 30% of it.
- And so I’m going to bootstrap it and use my own capital more.
- So we try to, yes, is a short answer.
- We change how we would suggest the portfolio based on those desires.
- A lot of founders though, I think want to stick with their company very long term.
- They’re not necessarily thinking two years out I’m done.
- They want to stay along, I mean, this is their baby.
- They know it.
- They’ve grown it.
- So it’s not necessarily I’m going to completely detach.
- It’s maybe my level and intensity will decrease.
- Maybe I won’t be CEO anymore.
- Maybe I’ll be chair or something like that, but flat out leaving, I’d say it’s kind of the exception.
- You do see it, but, yeah.
Macroeconomic Discussion Setup
- I want to do a quick fire on some macro.
- Okay.
Private Credit Bubble Analysis
- Is private credit in a bubble?
- There’s several flavors of private credit.
- One is sort of direct lending.
- So the idea is FICO scores and things like that aren’t the best indication of credit quality.
- Maybe we can develop a different way to assess credit quality, and we’ll lend directly to an individual often, okay?
- That stuff has been fairly resilient and in part because it’s tranched out.
- So they sort of take the equity tranche, sometimes called the first loss piece, and they keep that on the balance sheet, the issuer does, and then the other pieces are sold.
- So there’s like a buffer.
- If there’s a few defaults, you’re okay.
- But there’s more to sort of the private credit lending to companies and mainly sponsor-backed companies.
- And when people say sponsor-backed, they mean PE-backed companies.
- And remember the PE companies, how do you, PE meaning private equity, they’re equity investments.
- So how do you maximize the return on equity?
- Well, you use as little equity as you can.
- So you buy a company and you lever it as much as you can so that your equity piece is small, so that if the company improves, the return on equity is magnified.
- And so you’re purposely leveraging these companies quite highly.
- And you’re putting that into a vehicle and people are investing into that leverage.
- So if there’s an economic headwind and those companies start not being able to manage their debt, that’s a problem.
- So at the end of the day, the question of whether or not private credit is in a bubble is really a question of are we facing some sort of long-term slowdown or recession whereby these companies can't service their debt the way they were before?
- And that, right now, there’s no indication of a slowdown in the economy really.
- There’s a few, you know, there was a bit of a surprise on the employment report.
- But by and large, the economy’s growing.
- The long-term trend for growth is not even 2%, and the economy grows above that pretty regularly.
- So right now, and the huge CapEx boom around AI is propelling the economy.
- So I don’t know that there’s an immediate sort of macro event that causes these companies to not be able to support their debt.
- But it’s a leveraged, high-risk strategy.
IPO Window Status
- Is the IPO window open?
- We’re going to find out with SpaceX.
- What about OpenAI?
- Whoever goes first.
- Who’s going first?
- I think SpaceX.
- But it depends if Anthropic and OpenAI are going to have a heated competition even more.
- Because I feel like they’re in a battle right now.
- And so that’s a race.
- But look, I mean, companies are still able to raise large amounts of money in the private markets, as we’ve seen with OpenAI and others.
- So the pressure to go public is not as high as it would be if they weren’t able to.
- And then, as I mentioned before, I think VC funds, growth equity funds have raised large funds.
- So there’s capital available to do these things.
- Yeah, I mean, it’s surprising how large fund raises, 10, 20, 50 billion dollar fund raises happen overnight, oversubscribed.
- So until that stops happening, there’s less urge to IPO unless you get to a size where the private market can’t accommodate you anymore.
- So it’s, in some paradoxical way, if there’s like a slowdown in the economy and less excitement about these companies, that’s when they’re going to be maybe more forced to IPO because the private capital then won’t be available.
- I feel like OpenAI already pushed the limits on how much private capital they can extract with a 110 billion dollar round.
- I can’t imagine how many more.
- But that was it. No one thought before that that it would be easy to raise that sum anyway.
- It was easy to raise it.
Information Diet and Research Strategy
- What is your information and research diet?
- What do you watch out for?
- I'm kind of old school.
- I like to read source materials.
- I know nowadays, you know, people watch podcasts and things like that.
- I like to read Fed data.
- I like to read FRED, the Federal Reserve Economic Database, that you can get free.
- I like to read quarterly reports from companies, transcripts of the analyst calls, and those kinds of things.
- So, that's what I spend a lot of time looking at and reading.
- And then, of course, listening to my clients who are in the know on the private market side.
- You do have a very good advantage there.
- » A great advantage there.
- So, you know, I think of private investing, there’s like this two-by-two matrix which is like, it’s access and it’s diligence.
- And so, we’re in a real sweet spot here.
- Cuz I have access, or we have access, or clients therefore have access to all sorts of things because of the incredible network we have here.
- And then the diligence, it’s a large firm.
- I can always find someone here that’s worked with someone or knows someone that’s worked with or been on a board or in a startup.
- So, the amount of diligence I can do, it’s very quickly I can sort of assert whether or not this is a quality investment.
- So, on that two-by-two matrix, I like to think I’m lucky enough to be up here, which is, I’m not going to complain.
- Very lucky.
Future Outlook and Educational Goals
- As we close out, what are you most looking forward to this year?
- So, there’s been a big effort at the firm to be more outgoing with media.
- And this is part of that.
- So, I’m very excited to be out there speaking a bit more.
- I mean, traditionally, a lot of wealth management firms tried to operate, multi-families under a little bit under the radar.
- But I think for me personally, at least, I find that the way we set things up is so compelling and differentiated that I’m very excited to sort of present it to the world more broadly.
- So, that’s it.
- Also, from what you’ve mentioned, it’s clear that there needs to be more real information on these industries out there because there’s a lot of traps.
- A lot of traps.
- So, my goal is to educate.
- A long time ago, I wanted to be an academic.
- I spent way too many years at Stanford.
- I still enjoy teaching and educating people.
- So, to me, that’s the biggest excitement of this job.
- Well, I’m looking forward to that as well.
Call to Action and Subscriptions
- Thank you so much, Michel.
- Thank you.
- Appreciate it.
- Hey, it’s Molly.
- If you enjoy our interviews, check out our newsletter, Sourceery.vc, where we deliver a once-a-week top deals and tech headlines email.
- And also go deeper on our podcast interviews.
- Subscribe to Sourceery today, and don’t forget to subscribe to the podcast on YouTube, Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen.
- Link in description to sign up.