Back
George Zachary
Partner at CRV, C.R.V.

9-12-19 Firseide Chat with George Zachary, Charles River Ventures

🎥 Sep 14, 2019 📺 ideatoipo ⏱ 92m 👁 61 views
Join us for a fireside chat with George Zachary of Charles River Ventures, one of the most prominent and successful venture ...
Watch on YouTube

About George Zachary

George Zachary, a general partner at CRV, has spoken publicly about how a health scare in 2015—when a large tumor was discovered and initially misdiagnosed as cancerous—shifted his investment focus toward bioengineering and healthcare. He stated that the experience made him feel empathy for patients without his network and resources, and he described his role as backing founders who aim to detect cancer early. Zachary said he started a bio practice at CRV despite lacking a biology background, hiring an expert to help. He has since invested in companies such as PillPack, which Amazon acquired, and a cell-based animal meat company, and he has discussed investing in a firm that uses stem cells and robotics to test drugs for central nervous system diseases. Zachary has also commented on the venture capital industry, noting that the average age of venture investors is around 40, meaning many have no experience of a market downturn, which he described as "scary" for limited partners. He criticized the application of probability in investing, saying that inexperienced investors mistakenly believe one in ten companies will be a hit. On the topic of Twitter, where he was an early investor, Zachary said the company has "almost no ability to control or know the amount of bots" and that it chose not to examine direct messages to detect bots because it would break its terms of service. He has also expressed concern about the potential for bioengineering to be used to create weapons targeting specific ancestries, and he described SoftBank's Vision Fund as a "hugely distorting force" in the market.

Source: AI-verified profile updated from George Zachary's recent appearances. Browse all interviews →

Transcript (135 segments)
R
Rob0:20
Okay ladies and gentlemen, thanks for coming tonight. I heard there's a debate on TV but paying attention to that, you guys are here tonight so thanks for coming. My name is Rob, I organized Idea to IPO. We've been doing events in Silicon Valley for many many years. We always have a busy calendar of events. I'd like to highlight two events that are coming up: September 17th, how to get seed funding for your early-stage startup, that's all the way up in San Francisco; September 19th, deep learning 101, that's in Sunnyvale. Check out the details for those events and all of our events on our website, ideatoipo.com. We launched officially on February 1st, 2010. At that time, we had no members and no events on our calendar. At this stage, we have over 60,000 members among all our Meetup groups in the Bay Area. We've completed over 2,100 events. By any standards, by any measure, we're the most active, most prolific startup event organization in Silicon Valley, bar none. We're actually the most active, most prolific startup event organization in the history of Silicon Valley. Just just I'm not bragging, I'm just stating a fact. Our mission is to promote entrepreneurship, support entrepreneurs, build community, and provide value in the Silicon Valley startup ecosystem. To that end, we provide content that is practical, actionable, relevant stuff you can actually use to succeed as entrepreneurs. We believe in building community because Silicon Valley is an aspirational ecosystem. It attracts people from all over the world who come here to do great things. Who here is not originally from Silicon Valley or the Bay Area? Who here was born and raised in Silicon Valley or the Bay Area? For natives, including our moderator, let's hear it for the natives. So whether you were born and raised here or just arrived last night, it's important for us to provide multiple channels for you to meet people, build relationships, and grow your network. In addition to our content oriented events throughout the week, we also have some fun events on Friday nights. The next one actually is tomorrow, Friday the 13th. We have a TGIF mixer, "Thank God It's Friday" for Friday the 13th celebration, so if you're free on Friday the 13th, tomorrow, come check it out. You're all invited; it's free and I hope to see you there. With regard to value, it's important that we provide value at each and every one of our events, so we make sure that we're affordable because we know many entrepreneurs are struggling financially. And at each and every one of our events, we make sure that we provide a delicious buffet meal. Is that a delicious buffet meal? Well, let's thank Perkins Coie for sponsoring that delicious buffet meal. I know you guys were expecting Costco pizza. That's next week, so enjoy it. Why? Yeah. Most importantly though, at each and every one of our events, we want to make sure that we provide value for your time, which is your most valuable resource. I have to ask, is anyone here getting any younger? I didn't think so. So when you invest your valuable time to come to our events, we want to make sure that you maximize your ROI. We have many, many partners that help us do what we do: law firms, venture capital firms, angel investor groups, incubators, accelerators, colleges, universities, lots of other players in Silicon Valley. Tonight, once again, we're grateful to Perkins Coie for hosting us at this beautiful venue and providing us with an awesome moderator. So once again, let's hear it for the law firm of Perkins Coie. A few of our other partners are here tonight; I would like to have them come up and say a few words. First off, let's hear it for SVA Hub and Searle.
S
Sarah0:42
Welcome everybody. My name is Sarah and I'm running one of the incubators in Sunnyvale which is called SVA Hub. It's one of the new co-working spaces as well. We offer some office solutions to the startups and founders. We do have different memberships like private offices, dedicated desks, flex desks and co-working space, as well as offering office solutions. We also offer some other services such as business development, accelerator corporate innovation, and by the way, next Tuesday we have an event at our space about product market fit. Everybody is also invited to that event. It's svahub.com. Thank you so much.
M
Michelle5:27
Right next up, we have Laptop Radio and Michelle. Hi, I'm Michelle. I am on Wednesdays on at Laptop Radio, which is my show on KCSKU 90.1 FM Stafford. I have a show about tech, so I talk about games, gamification, blockchain, AI, and just did a whole three-episode series on employment and labor law for startups, interviewing someone from Perkins Coie. That was super awesome. And you can find Laptop Radio on Apple Podcasts, Google Podcasts, and Spotify, so check it out. Thank you.
R
Raahat Subedar6:15
Alright, next up we have Coldwell Banker and Raahat. Good evening everyone. My name is Raahat Subedar. I've been practicing real estate here in Silicon Valley for a while and I'm a firm believer that you need good information to make good decisions. If you're contemplating any real estate decisions, please feel free to reach out to me as a resource. Thank you.
A
Anita6:43
Alright, next up we have Happiness Factors and Anita. Thank you all. This is Anita from Happiness Factors, and Happiness Factors was founded on the concept that we want to eradicate death by suicide which is due to emotional unwellness. At Happiness Factors, we provide emotional wellness tools and techniques based on NLP, hypnotherapy, and amer psychology. And we not just make you happy, but we help you sustain it without the use of drugs, marijuana, or alcohol. If you would like to find out more about it, please contact me. And we are also looking for some marketing and some technical folks, so come talk to me if you are interested in making a difference in the emotional wellness across the globe, and at the same time making some stock options out of it. Have a nice day.
R
Rob7:48
Alright. So our local mission in Silicon Valley is to support entrepreneurs here locally in the valley. Our global mission is to democratize entrepreneurship and innovation all around the world. To that end, we maintain a robust YouTube channel: youtube.com/ideatoipo. Tons of videos there, check it out. We've documented and archived many of our events, and this rich valuable content is available on demand anytime, anywhere, totally free of charge, whether you're in Palo Alto, San Francisco, New York, LA, Maui, Moscow, or Timbuktu. Our partner in this endeavor is Tim Jaegers of Jaegers Films, one of the top professional videographers in Silicon Valley. So let's give it up for Tim.
T
Tim Jaegers8:40
Thank you Rob. Thank you everybody. This is a hot mic so I'll be quick. Tim Jaegers, I've been doing multimedia production all around the Bay Area for the last ten years or so. I specialize in videography, I also do photography, web development, everything from pre-production to actual production and post-production. So any questions regarding content creation, feel free to reach out to me. If I don't have the answers, I can definitely point you to the people that do. And looking forward to a good chat. If this many people are here, these guys must have something interesting to say. Thanks for having us.
R
Rob9:13
Alright ladies and gentlemen, here's the schedule for the rest of the evening. Our special guests and moderator will go into their fireside chat. Audience members, hold your questions until 8:00 PM. At that point, we're going to open it up to audience questions. Please use the microphone. We'll take as many questions as possible. They'll take us to 8:30 PM, at that point we're going to end the formal program. We do have a raffle. I got this book last week at the CMX Summit, "Turn the Impossible into the Inevitable: Story 10x" by Michael Margolis. It's a pretty awesome book. So we'll pass around the bowl again if you haven't had a chance to answer that raffle. So that's at 8:30 PM, you can stick around, network, socialize, and connect. As a courtesy to Perkins Coie, we would like to leave the building by 9 PM. We might have an after-party somewhere, maybe the Rosewood, we'll see. So without further ado, I would like to pass it off to our awesome moderator and our unbelievable special guest. So let's hear it for Jim Brenner and George Zachary.
J
Jim Brenner10:24
Thank you very much. This is hot. Just really quickly, for those who don't know Perkins Coie, we're a national law firm across the country with over a thousand lawyers. We specialize from everything from M&A to labor law to regulatory advice. Here in Silicon Valley, this office particularly focuses on emerging company and venture capital. That's what I specialize in, and patent and privacy. So that's the pitch. Here with me, I got George Zachary from CRV. George, won't you tell us a little bit about yourself, just get the audience familiar with your background and where you're from, and we can get started.
G
George Zachary11:01
Okay, thank you for having me. My name is George Zachary and I'm with a firm called CRV. CRV has been around since 1970 and we are on our 17th fund. So I'm merely one of... actually one of ten people that are running the firm right now. We're kind of in our third group of people that are running the firm. We actually have a constitution, most people don't know that. So CRV, we're focused on basically funding enterprise, consumer, and bio companies. I actually run the bio practice. I used to run parts of the consumer and enterprise business as well. For myself, I've been in venture capital for now almost 25, 26 years and was a company founder three times. Co-founder, I'm the co-founder of Shutterfly, which is a publicly traded company, and two other companies: one which went bust and I had no money and was personally bankrupt, that was the company before Shutterfly; and another company before that where my friend was the co-founder and we sold to another company. We were a public company. So that's a little bit about me from a work perspective. I grew up in New York, my parents were immigrants from Greece, and I never expected to have this job ever. Just so we can gear the conversation right away: how many people here are entrepreneurs, right? How many of you have companies that are like haven't funded, I mean you were looking for funding? Most everybody. Alright. How many of you are not entrepreneurs, are executives just here to see what's going to happen tonight? Just alright. You guys better buckle up.
J
Jim Brenner13:05
Alright. Um, so George, you and I were talking. I know you recently you switched to biotech. Do you want to talk a little bit about that history? Because I guess I know historically you were consumer, you were one of the early investors in Twitter, and you switched to biotech. Do you want to give a little bit of a why and what you see, why you think bioengineering and biotech is important and what sort of drove you to start looking at that?
G
George Zachary13:30
Most of my investing career has been focused on giving the individual more power. So I've always kind of believed in that. I've actually been doing computing since I was 12 years old, in 1977, and I'll skip what I was doing, but it was always focused around giving the individual more power. That's actually how I became... I was actually the original investor in the company that precedes Twitter, and then I was one of the original investors in Twitter. This story was actually about people being about people having individual power, but the vision wasn't really the global vision that it was. So my investments have always been a series of kind of empowering the individual theses. And in about 2015, completely coincidentally, I kind of had a checkup. My doctor said, 'Oh, you have this kind of large tumor and you need to get an MRI.' So that was pretty scary because it was basically the size of my fist, it was right next to my hip, and I couldn't even feel it. Going through that entire process, I kind of saw lots of people who had no idea and would just listen to the doctor or the center they were in and didn't know what to do. So I kind of told myself that if I actually really survive this, I would do something to try to help people. So after getting this large tumor taken out of me and them telling me, 'Oh, it's benign and we can't actually classify what kind of tumor this is,' thank you UCSF for moving us. It took about six months off, and then I started the bio practice, which was very daunting because I don't have a bio education. So I hired someone who is fantastic in bio and we got started, and that was about three years ago now.
J
Jim Brenner15:51
And going back to original thesis, how do you see... what are you looking for in biotech to help empower the individual? Or where do you see the market going that would empower individuals? I know we all kind of understand the healthcare system doesn't give a lot of power to individuals, but where are you focusing?
G
George Zachary16:14
Well, there's no way that I can change the healthcare system. That's kind of where I came out.
J
Jim Brenner16:19
Why do you think that? Because I think everyone's focused on trying to change it, at least I see a lot of clients trying to focus on changing the healthcare system. Why do you think that's not either something for you or the market is able to do?
G
George Zachary16:35
I think it's going to be really difficult and capital inefficient to do it. I just feel like there's way better value that can get created by fundamental innovations in technology, and I think there will be new platforms that come about that radically change people's lives, like hugely, that people are not expecting. So that's why I kind of headed down that route.
J
Jim Brenner17:06
And would you care to give us any previews of where those platforms are coming from, or the edges that you start seeing?
G
George Zachary17:12
Yeah. I mean, we talked about this just briefly when I walked in, right? I'm an investor in a company called System One, and I got involved there because they are helping people with central nervous system diseases like Alzheimer's and epilepsy. And up until now, people didn't test these diseases in mice or studied people's brains who have passed away. So they haven't been able to test drugs in living humans until it's slightly too late. The company basically takes stem cells from people who have these diseases, cultures them, and basically creates neural tissues. So these are like small brain organoids, and the neurons basically start communicating with one another and firing. And all of a sudden, you have this small brain organoid. As I mentioned in the New York Times, there was an article about 'Are these small brain organoids actually thinking?' So that's a question for a different time. But one of the things we do is we basically take these neural tissues, put them in a dish, and using high speed robotics and a whole bunch of data science, we're testing thousands of drugs, actually about a thousand right now, of on-label, off-label drugs and natural products against specific types of diseases to see if any of these types of compounds will work. So this will cut down the amount of time, this will cut down the amount of money that we can use to find solutions to some of these diseases. So it's a combination of computer science, a combination of robotics, using an innovation platform, new innovative platform which is actually people's neural tissue.
J
Jim Brenner19:09
So the place where this is touching on, which is something that I'm super interested in, is the brain as a platform. And for me, this is going to be the most revolutionizing concept that we're going to see that's well past the phone, which will be your brain as the platform. Do you mind expanding on that a little bit, what you mean by the brain is a platform? You and I, you explained it to me earlier, but for the audience's benefit, what do you mean when you think of that, what does that mean to you?
G
George Zachary19:42
Well, as you know, it's a challenging question. I guess the simplest way to put it, and it might sound absolutely nuts, is that right now there are methods to instrument parts of the brain to get signals out of the brain. And there are some experiments being made in academia and actually in private companies to basically conduct signals between the brain and the outside world, between computing devices. And one of these companies that my friend owns is basically using this system as a method to connect humans and artificial intelligence to deal with unfriendly artificial intelligence in the future. His name is Elon Musk. So probably most of you know... actually he was the first person that I worked on... his first company is the first company that I worked on in the venture business. And you and I have both had the same thesis around brain integration with computing devices. His focus is more on stopping bad AI from hurting humans. Mine is really focused on helping humans actually with integrating parts of their body that have been destroyed or severed, like their spinal cord. But I think we'll see very pretty quickly the brain actually being used for simple things like instant messaging or automatic recognition of people walking down the street.
J
Jim Brenner21:21
So I know a lot of... excuse my wife, I didn't text her today. It was just... why did you think I mean it'll go out? Yeah, I mean, we can already get signals from your visual cortex of what you're seeing. So if we can take the signals of what you're seeing and refine them, there needs to be really good definition and refining of the definition right now. Then it's possible to look up who those people are using the vast database of people's faces that we have right now and to identify people walking down the street towards you. I mean, you could say this is dystopian, but it also provides people a sense of safety.
G
George Zachary22:05
Yeah, and how do you think of scale for these types of brain as a platform? When you think of how this thing is going to scale, what are you thinking? Are you thinking consumer, you're thinking enterprise, or is it just something completely different?
J
Jim Brenner22:23
Well, my interest is basically people's health. But this is going to become, I think over the next 20 or 30 years, effectively the platform. I mean, the phone is a proxy because you hold it to your head and you look at it like here. You look at it here. I bet why should it be something you hold in your hand and look at here? It'd just be completely dumped into your brain. It's going to be a different intake experience. It'll be a lot faster.
G
George Zachary22:54
So what I invest in is the company that's doing this now. Well, if they had breakthrough technology about it, I don't really see that much for brain as a platform for messaging. What we're looking at right now is the previous, the preceding technology that the companies that could end up doing this see these technologies going forward. But you know, I can see edges of it. I can see companies that are touching on this happening, like System One.
J
Jim Brenner23:22
Alright. Well, okay. Now we have in a dish, we've got normal neural tissue that has neurons that have now started to communicate on their own when we've never said like try to get them to communicate on their own. In academia, there's basically a group of professors saying they're measuring brain waves between neurons and questioning whether these brain organoids are actually thinking. Some ethical questions there.
G
George Zachary23:55
Well, yeah, yeah. I mean, the question is a brain organoid really a brain? It's just this... it's a bunch of tissue. So I know the answer that a lot of biologists say... I don't know. I mean, this is a good question. Right. And you know, another area that I'm focused on is I'm closing an investment right now in a cell-based... I can't say what the company does exactly, but it's in a cell-based animal meat company. I can't say exactly what kind of meat, but I don't eat... it's not beef and it's not chicken, so there aren't that many variations. Or it's not pork either. And one of the reasons why it's super important is that the oceans are getting more and more contaminated. It's not in anyone's interest to clean up the ocean. And the way basically it's quite interesting. Another thing here that's really interesting for me is that the derivation of this animal meat product comes from the original egg cell of the fish product and then it just basically is being kept in perpetuity and growing. And it's not really the animal or... I can't say exactly what it is, but it's not really the animal, it's a bunch of cells. So we have two people in our partnership who are vegan. They're like, 'Well, can I actually eat this because it's not really an animal?' Good question.
J
Jim Brenner25:40
Yeah. So there's, while there's Beyond Meat and Impossible Foods that are basically built off of conventional ingredients, there'll be a new wave of cell-based meat products. And these are not genetically modified products, is that... I mean, I think you don't have to answer this question. Is that once again something that they can scale to a level where it's actually going to be something that... I know that's the hope. But do you think they'll be able to scale to a level that actually can reach all everyone's plates, or is it something that is this cool thing but it's going to be tough to a next life sort of? It's like the seeds of the next big thing.
G
George Zachary26:27
Well, you know, that's the investing risk. So I invested because I think they can get through that. And certainly the company has shown a history of success and being able to scale at various points and being super capital efficient. So if they can't get through it, I lose all my money. Or just let's not hope that happens. Well yeah, or they end up selling the technology to someone else. But I think they can. And in the diligence, a bunch of people who are experts in biology and production really think that they can do it. So let's hope they can.
J
Jim Brenner27:05
Yeah, that'd be really interesting to not have to worry about where our meat is coming from anymore.
G
George Zachary27:12
Well, yeah. I mean, the ocean is full of pollution. Every fish that we now eat has some level of toxin in it, I'm reading. Because the amount of microplastics that we eat is something scary. Scarce for most of us, yeah. Far more dangerous is the amount of lead and cadmium because microplastics might not wind up inside of us because it's debatable whether they do. But lead and cadmium basically do wind up in our tissues. And for kids, they're particularly bad for their brains. For us, they're particularly bad for just overall toxicity and CNS diseases. So no one's going to clean up the ocean soon. It's just not going to happen. The microplastics thing is a small part of it, but the heavy metals portion is a much bigger part, especially with fertilizer runoff.
J
Jim Brenner28:09
So it's changing gears for a second. Let's play hypothetical. Say I was an entrepreneur and I had some bioengineering company and I wanted to get your attention. What are you looking for from a series A stage investor to really get your interest?
G
George Zachary28:29
Yeah, well, every day, I open my email and there's a lot of email. There's 20 emails that come that are just random. 'We found you on the Internet.' Well, no. There's like, I'd say 20 to 30 that show up that have nothing to do with what I invest in. There's like condos in Australia. I'm not being ridiculous, I believe it. And so it's just a mass blanketing. So I don't even respond to those any longer. I used to, but I don't because they don't even take the time to figure out what I'm doing. So right. Then the other ones that I really don't like is where the founders use a broker to get to me. I have some broker I don't know. It's like some unknown person saying, 'Oh, I'm raising money for this company,' and I don't even know who you are. So I'll reply to that person, but it's lower down on the stack. So people who I trust, I'll reply to first because if I don't reply to their emails, I'll be in trouble with them. So basically, with friends of mine that are doing cool things, I'll pay attention to them. With founders of our companies who suggest someone, I'll immediately pay attention. Better stuff from respected people in the industry, I'll pay attention to their stuff. I can only really process one or two new companies a day because I like to think about what the company does. So every day I kind of quickly look through and I'm like, 'Which one seems exciting to me? That one.' Okay, I'm not paying attention to the rest. So I'd say by the end of the week, there's like three or four companies that I might be interested in or might find interesting. And by the end of, by Monday, if I remember any of them, I bring it up with someone. If I don't remember any of them, I just go back and send them a message saying, 'Thanks, but I'm not excited about what you're doing.' And I'd say the majority of every Monday, I'm writing those sending those emails saying, 'Thanks, but I'm not really excited.' So for me, a lot of it is, do I feel excited? I've always made my investments based on this intuitive feeling of, do I feel excited? And if I don't, I don't invest. But it has to start that way.
J
Jim Brenner31:25
This kind of raises the question of what gets you excited? I don't know you know, okay.
G
George Zachary31:31
Yeah. I mean, for me, people ask me that or they ask me like, 'What can I do to make it exciting?' It's like, I don't know. It's the gut, right?
J
Jim Brenner31:40
Yeah, my best decisions have been ones that I kind of knew right away, but they always haven't been great decisions that I knew right away or acted on quickly.
G
George Zachary31:58
So I would say founders who can state an occasion that is a big vision that is specific and very broad to the world, and controversial. I like a controversial story where people say, 'That's a crazy idea and it's dumb,' and other people say, 'That's a great idea.' Anything like that's kind of... if they say, 'Yeah, that's a pretty good idea,' I'm like, 'That's not a really good idea because too many people have thought about it.' So I like controversial ideas that are big. For me, anything that's where too many people are... if it seems obvious, then it's not really a place I want to invest.
J
Jim Brenner32:47
Spaceship to Mars, controversial, probably not up your alley though.
G
George Zachary32:52
Well, it just takes... it's past the time horizon of our fund. That's the issue. Our fund life is about ten years. So it's not thirty.
J
Jim Brenner33:02
Do you think you can do it in ten? Okay.
G
George Zachary33:08
Yeah. But I am an optimist. Yeah. So to answer your question more succinctly, I'll tell you a story. I was the biggest investor in a company called PillPack that Amazon acquired. And what they did is they packaged pills and prescriptions for 40 and above patients into little plastic packs. And so people know when they should take their Lipitor and their other drugs at what time. And they don't have to go to CVS, they don't have to go to Walgreens. It gets shipped to them at home in pre-arranged packs. They don't have to put things into those little pill dispensers. The pre-packed pill dispenser for them with times on the little plastic pouches per day. And I knew that the average number of prescriptions was above three for everyone above 50 in the U.S. That's like the average. And I knew that from people in my family. So basically I instantly knew it was a good idea. I knew there was a big market. I met the founder, we got along fantastically well from the first five minutes. His family was in the pharmacy business for 30 years. His dad was in it, he worked at the pharmacy, and he just embodied everything about pharmacy as a service to people as opposed to selling Z-Pak. So he knew that pharmacy was about making people's lives better versus just selling a drug. So it was very easy for him to talk about all the future features of what they were going to do. So when Amazon bought the company, a friend of mine who's on the board, we kind of talked back to me, Amazon basically said, 'We love this team because they're focused on people and what they want to do, and so it was easier for us to buy the company.' So it was that first meeting with the founder that I knew in the first hour I wanted to invest. So I wrote the biggest check of my life, which was $30 million at that point, and the biggest check from our firm ever. The biggest check series ever written, yeah. Hold on tight. And we committed in like four days. But the other twist on this that I want to put is that as an investor, I kind of knew this market while other firms struggled and went slower on diligence. They had some associates and principals that were 30-35 years old that were working on this, so it took them longer to wrap their heads around it. And I got feedback from the founders afterwards saying, 'How many people take three prescriptions? People above 50 take like diabetes medications like three of them, and blood pressure medication.' So in the amount of time that it took the associates and the principals and a junior partner maybe to take three weeks to do diligence and potentially irritate the founders with a lot of little questions, I just was easy for me to close the deal. Now, I'm sure there are other companies that I know there are that I've missed the investment on because I didn't understand exactly what the company does. And my point in saying all this stuff is that some investors will understand what you're doing because it's their background and they get it, and other investors will just completely not get it.
J
Jim Brenner37:07
So my client, we discovered the ones who get it, investors who get what they're doing really quickly, tend to be the best relationships they have.
G
George Zachary37:14
Yeah, that's right. I think you hit the nail on the head. Investors that understand things pretty quickly are usually the best ones to go after, not the ones that sound like 22 balloons and three cakes and other stuff and lead the sales process in.
J
Jim Brenner37:33
And when you lead, you're going to take a board seat or do you get involved? How involved with your companies?
G
George Zachary37:40
Board seats for every one of my companies with the exception of one where I'm a board observer.
J
Jim Brenner37:47
What role do you normally see yourself playing on the boards? I know different VCs see themselves in different positions or it depends on the company itself.
G
George Zachary37:59
Well, it matters in the company and who my other board members are and what their skills are. I'm particularly good at recruiting and organizational issues. It's a good way of putting it. And kind of overall business strategy. So usually I play that role. And now that I've actually had a substantial amount of time in the business, I usually get pulled into the role of terminating co-founders or the CEO because I'm the person on the board with the most experience.
J
Jim Brenner38:44
Yeah, those are never fun times. No.
G
George Zachary38:48
Yeah. I mean, I always used to be the youngest person on the board and I always watched the oldest person on the board do this, and now I'm like, 'Oh my god, I'm now the oldest person on the board that everyone is deflecting this to.' So when no one wants to do it.
J
Jim Brenner39:07
So do you see a trend in things that often lead to how CEOs end up in that position where they're about to be let go? Or is it normally...
G
George Zachary39:16
I won't go into specific company name right. But there was a one of my companies that was doing really well on the revenue side, but the employees were unhappy. And I knew it because a bunch of them were sending me emails from fake email addresses that all had different handwriting or different lexical descriptions of what was going on. They were like, 'Our CEO sucks, please, he's screwing up the company in these ways.' And I knew that it was people in the company because the way they were describing things were very specific. And I could just tell that the person had no idea what they were doing running the company. And as the company was getting bigger and bigger and revenue, the magnitude of error was just increasing. And I know I've run a bunch of projects and managed a bunch of things, and I was the original CEO for Shutterfly. I recruited our first real CEO. So it was easy for me to see that this person was not capable of being a CEO. The number one thing... there are some things about being a CEO. Number one thing is it's not about management, it's about being a great leader. Leadership is number one. Having a vision then you can basically articulate into specific products is number two. And you know, number three is basically an enthusiastic creativity about what the business is around the end user. And a lot of times CEOs will start to lack that at a certain point. Usually, most founders kind of make it, but a lot of times the people who don't make it are the CEOs that they bring in because founders bring in CEOs and those CEOs kind of just run out of gas.
J
Jim Brenner41:25
For this one example, was it something that the CEO, if he was more aware, could have helped prevent or done something about? Or was the person just in way over their head?
G
George Zachary41:38
They had enough operational history, but they didn't have enough product in their background. And the company was scaling to the point where you needed to have a lot of product background as the product breadth increased in the company, and they didn't. And the person is also not really good at dealing with confrontation, and the company had increased in size to hundreds of people, and you have to be able to deal with confrontation. I mean, you have to deal with issues. So I think there are plenty of ways to not be a good CEO, but the best way to be a great CEO is to be a great leader. It's easy for me to see when someone is being a great leader. And part of being a great leader, by the way, is you can actually conduct a great financing. CEOs have to almost continuously fundraise, and if they can't sell a company, they probably can't sell internally the things that the company has to do. And when I say sell, it's really an authentic selling as opposed to rah-rah. It's telling an honest story. I always tell my clients that. And I've never seen anyone grow through a coach to become an effective leader. I've tried many times with some great coaches and it's never happened.
J
Jim Brenner43:19
I can second that from my own experience. It doesn't. I wish that it had happened, but it had never happened. So that's one vector. And the second half of that vector is ethical issues. We can watch a couple documentaries on that.
G
George Zachary43:33
Oh yeah. There's a famous ethical issue in the building next door.
J
Jim Brenner43:47
So I know you've been doing venture capital work for 25 years. What's different from when you started? Obviously, we don't do as much in capital markets as we used to. But what else do you see differently from the culture and the industry? And where do you see it going?
G
George Zachary44:08
That's like we could go on for two hours on this. So, when I started, it was... okay, I'm just going to blurt out a whole bunch of stuff. When I started, it was really six white guys with ties on, with jackets on. If you didn't have a jacket and a tie on, it was viewed as... well, most all of the new investments you would see came from attorneys or counsel. There were no seed firms, like none. The cost of starting a company was extremely high because you had to buy servers, database, PCs. I mean, it was real expensive. There was no AWS, there was no open source. So the amount to raise a round for a company was extremely difficult. That's Series A. There were way fewer resources for entrepreneurs. Way fewer. Entrepreneurs didn't know how to approach the venture process. People were not sending me executive summaries or trying to approach me over email because people didn't trust email. So instead, I would get a stack in my...
Office by FedEx of business plans, a stack of them, had to take a look, read them quickly, and then basically send them back with a printed letter. It was like a daily process of that, FedEx coming in, FedEx coming out. So that's really different. They were regional investment banks, those are all gone, they've all been subsumed. I think there's way more information for founders. The balance between founders and investors is way better. It used to be much more disdain between investors and founders. Now unfortunately it's gone the other way, and I find it particularly alarming because it leads to cases where we hear about, like the building we had next door issue, where people just say, 'Well, it's just money, so who cares?' And there is more of that that occurs than not. And publicly we don't care about a lot of it because people just shut down the companies or people just fire the person that did that thing. So the market's not well balanced, and a lot of that is just the public markets a little bit out of control. But that's the public market, the public markets are either in boom mode or bust mode, so you get that reflection.
R
Rob47:24
Do you think Silicon Valley still, at least the venture capital, I mean do you have tight ties to the public markets? Because I know it's not like it was 20 years ago and everyone was rushing to public markets. Now there's a definitely different piece to get there. So you're saying how tied is it? How tight, how cyclical is Silicon Valley tied to the public markets?
G
George Zachary47:43
I feel like it's become more disparate. It's not as tied to the hip as it used to be. So the market dips, you don't feel it the same way that we used to. There's kind of a six-month delay. I mean, we don't know because we've been in an incredible bull market for the longest time period ever, right? But before that, there used to be kind of a six-month delay. Even in 2016, there was a six-month delay. So venture people tend to debate whether the market's going down, and it doesn't hit their mind until six months later, either on the upward or the downward. And part of that is related to the fact that venture investors have a three-year primary investing window until they have to raise a new fund, and that's when they have to face questions from their limited partners. The limited partners are the institutions or really wealthy individuals that invest into venture firms, and those are usually the people to get nervous about the public market because they're also investors in the public market. They compare their ratio of public market investments to private market investments, and based on asset allocation theory, if the public market goes down, they want to reduce their amount of private market holdings, which means they want to reduce the amount of money they're putting into venture firms. So venture firms get nervous and then basically pull back on investing. So that whole cycle takes about six months to a year. And right now we're in the opposite zone, where our limited partners want to give us money, but then now they actually want to invest directly in later stage companies, which I've never seen before. So they're using our firms almost as a seed investment into venture to then do later stage investments into our companies. It's like I have never seen this before. It's gonna make you rethink some things.
R
Rob49:42
Well, yeah, it makes us think. Well, our limited partners almost become a version of competition, especially if you have a growth fund, right?
G
George Zachary49:55
So that's a different direction we're going. That's a new thing. Yeah, there never was a $200 billion fund like SoftBank, with a huge beam of $200 billion. I mean, SoftBank invested, as I mentioned to you, $200 million a month or so ago into one of our companies, which is an insane amount of money and really displaces their competitors.
R
Rob50:27
Do you see the possibility for a second mega fund like that in the Valley, or do you think it's a one-off aberration?
G
George Zachary50:34
You don't have to answer that. If you... Oh no, I don't see one as the issue. Do you think there's room for one? Well, SoftBank's total amount of capital to invest in the Vision Fund is larger than all of early stage venture capital combined. So the answer is probably it would be extremely disruptive to the cycle if a second one showed up. Yeah, yeah, I mean it's just the rest of the world and some corporate money that went into solving that couldn't get into venture capital. So that's a hugely distorting force in everything, probably from valuations into...
R
Rob51:19
Well, yeah, you see it because you know SoftBank's investment in WeWork and Uber at prices that people are saying are not sustainable. How much are they driving the unicorn market that we've been seeing?
G
George Zachary51:38
I think more the growth funds that that person devaluation is that high. I think definitely SoftBank is one of the players. SoftBank Vision Fund is different than SoftBank, but it's not completely different. It's used as a tool investment tool by SoftBank. There are some growth funds, then there's the normal investment banks that use opportunities to get their high net worth clients to invest in those companies. And for companies that are starting to accumulate a lot of revenue, people start putting in money at really high prices.
R
Rob52:26
Do you see what do you see differently about those companies once they take those growth funds or the traditional IPO money or the Vision Fund? I mean, do you see change in the operations or change in the culture at the board level of the company, or is it still very traditional, just trying to innovate and make a product that scales very quick, very fast?
G
George Zachary52:50
I didn't understand your question.
R
Rob52:56
How does when you start taking in money from more traditional capital market investors, and they come into the company, does it change how the board would operate if those people weren't involved?
G
George Zachary53:10
If they're on the board, it becomes an issue because then they usually want more specialized terms. And if they're not on the board, those companies usually don't create a big wave in the company. But the company does tend to change because people realize there's way more capital available. I mean, people end up getting sloppier with spending money, and people's salaries in general go way up, forcing everyone's rent up in a perpetual cycle of high rent in Silicon Valley. It's brutal. Yeah, which drives higher salaries. It's a cycle that's self-perpetuating.
R
Rob53:55
Yeah. We have about five minutes left. Just in the future, where do you see this bull market finally ending?
G
George Zachary54:02
I wish I knew. I mean, I've been one of the few people that have basically thought that it would end three years ago.
R
Rob54:14
No, I was there with you too.
G
George Zachary54:23
Yeah, I think we still have a while more to run. The valuations of a bunch of tech companies are not completely insane. They're high, but not completely insane.
R
Rob54:38
Do you think the valuations starting to get out of control will be a sign that we're almost there?
G
George Zachary54:51
I think when we start to see the front of you know websites, news media saying Dow 50,000 and S&P 5,000, and individuals basically margining their accounts and their homes which they now think have too much value, that's when we're heading up ballistically into the unsustainable land. And it's when that $1 stock of oversupply meets the demand, that's when things turn over and start to reverse and fall the other way. That's what happened in the year 2000. It wasn't that dot-com stocks brought down the market, it was that the market basically had oversupply of overall equity and under demand to buy the equity, and the first casualty was the dot-coms. So the whole market rolled over.
R
Rob55:47
So you don't see geopolitical forces causing or pushing us towards a recession? You think it's more gonna be the typical excesses in the marketplace?
G
George Zachary56:02
Well, you mean like trade war? Like a trade war or literal war?
R
Rob56:08
War, war, yeah.
G
George Zachary56:17
Yeah, I mean, but it matters what kind of war. The public market in the US has tended to be stronger with standard wars of the US, right? With a very large global war, yeah, I would probably sink the market.
R
Rob56:31
What about Brexit? Do you think it can have an effect on the US market if Britain can't figure it out?
G
George Zachary56:38
I'm not really concerned about breakup of Britain leaving the EU or the UK alienating. Well, care to expand on that? Well, I think the UK will continue to operate. I think there'll be more legal issues around the UK interacting with the EU, but I don't think economically things will have a ripple effect across other markets. I don't think so. I'd be far more worried if Italy collapsed and then Germany would have to change how they manage the euro. I mean, Germany needs a low euro to basically sell goods to the US, and the majority of Germany's GDP comes from exports, it's over half. So you need a low euro, right? So if Italy goes kaput, then you need Germany to figure out what to do with the euro. That's good stuff. That's tough.
R
Rob57:51
Yeah, yeah. And what about the results of this trade war if it continues on with China? How do you see that affecting the US markets other than increased price of goods?
G
George Zachary58:03
Well, the trade war keeps going on and the market keeps going up. So it's counterintuitive. The thing is, what happens when the trade war gets reversed? When our current government and China say, 'OK, we're reversing things and we're gonna start working together,' that's when the market's gonna go up ballistically high. Right now we see that in the news. Whenever there's signs that it might come off, everyone goes crazy. So I think the market has discounted out any horribleness of the trade war. There's just too much interdependence for it to lead to a massive crater. The massive crater will come from some interconnectedness that is very hard to understand. It's always something we can totally see with 20/20 hindsight. We never see it until it happens.
R
Rob59:01
All right, well thank you so much for joining us this evening.
G
George Zachary59:09
Thank you.
R
Rob59:15
All right, now it's time for audience Q&A. Who's got a question for George? I want to form a line right here. Come on down and let's try and ask as many questions as possible. This is not a pitch event, by the way, so please no pitches or thinly veiled pitches. If you do pitch, it's unauthorized. We have an announcer enemy that's our balancer, so be careful.
A
Audience Member59:36
Professor, go for it. You talked about Twitter and how social media has turned into a tiara with fake news and they sold our elections. Because you started social media, do you think it's your responsibility to fix it?
G
George Zachary1:00:03
It's a very good question. I mean, when the company was created, I will tell you what, there was between Facebook and Twitter, it's probably a very different set of visions. Evan and Jack, there was actually a couple of the co-founders who disappeared from the company and had nothing to do with the company. There were four people that put the product vision together of the company, and the reason why the product has never changed is because the two other co-founders actually left the company not of their own accord, and the product's never changed because it's not just Jack Dorsey who has the idea for the product. So the only real thing that's kind of occurred is retweet and like, that's been the innovation. No one really knows how to fix it. Originally Evan thought it would be like, I remember being in the room, Evan thought it would be the RSS of SMS, and Jack thought it'd be a great way to figure out how to go find people to go have dinner and go meet at a bar. I'm not kidding. Neither Jack nor Evan thought it would become what it is now. I would say the company has almost no ability to control or know the amount of bots that are getting created. And one of the issues has been looking into people's messaging activity and whether they would do that and how much of a privacy invasion that would be. The government actually has the right to look at everyone's direct messages, but the company does not by the Terms of Service. And one of the ways they could actually determine if something was a robot was to look at people's direct messages, and they decided to not do that because it would break the Terms of Service and be something bad that the users wouldn't like. So they have no real idea of how to solve it. In terms of on the Twitter side, they keep trying to put out patches on how to solve it.
A
Audience Member1:02:39
What about authentication?
G
George Zachary1:02:55
Yeah, well, I wasn't the person to put together the product, and so yeah, authentication is a big issue. I mean, if we authenticate everyone, I don't know how everyone feels about that personally in the United States, but you can't authenticate everyone. So there must be another form of ID to carry around and reveal. Hack.
R
Rob1:03:28
Next question.
A
Audience Member1:03:34
Hello. So a question regarding applied research whose business model from the point of view of a venture capital. Basically, let's say you come across some basic research that already has a very wide application field, artificial intelligence in this case, but I suppose that's generic. How would you recommend the leadership of the company approach that? Because you can always find some way to apply that research that may look very promising on the short term, but the truth is that if it has a very wide appeal, it is not clear at all how to move forward and make it available to such a huge market from the point of view of starting with a spoken.
G
George Zachary1:04:19
Thank you. So just so I understand your question clearly, it is if you have kind of an AI research that you've created and there's been development from it, how do you attract an investor to potentially fund it because it's so kind of global in nature?
A
Audience Member1:04:43
Yeah.
G
George Zachary1:04:49
Okay. It's very, you know, so one of the most important things is in the summary and in the slide deck is to talk about what business and what solution you're trying to solve for that market. If it basically says it's a whole bunch of different solutions for a whole bunch of different businesses, or it's a market that is so huge but it's a solution that requires a lot of development dollars, people sometimes in my business call that a 'boiling the ocean' solution because it needs so much energy to accomplish. That would be a mistake. So I think what you need to do is figure out just come up with what the solution is for a very large market and describe the market and how you can get started with a very small atomic product. It doesn't have to be small, but the atomic product that you could start selling within, let's say, a year of being funded, if it's software.
A
Audience Member1:05:51
Thank you very much.
Great. So going to Mars was mentioned, but you're not really in anymore in the biotech besides communication and imaging. Do you see the biotech market looking at new space for opportunities and innovation as well?
G
George Zachary1:06:09
Yeah, I have 12-year-old twins. If they were in college now, and they had a choice between computer science and bio, I would tell them definitely go into bio. Yeah, there's a lot of, I mean, I mentioned System One before, my cell-based non-beef, non-pork, non-chicken animal meat company. Yeah, there's a lot of interesting things occurring on the bio side. There's another one of my companies that is basically an inhalable little nanoparticle set of nanoparticles that are organic and detect up to 500 diseases, and you basically end up peeing out an enzyme that tells you what kind of disease you have.
A
Audience Member1:07:14
But do you see any of those biotech companies looking for doing their research in space or developing in space or factoring in space? Not necessarily going to Mars, but doing platform meaning like pharma companies?
G
George Zachary1:07:21
Yeah, I haven't seen any pharma companies looking to do that. What I see is pharma companies basically looking to shorten their product development cycles and improve manufacturing. Manufacturing is kind of an issue.
A
Audience Member1:07:40
This is from Western Digital. Can you comment about the sustainability aspect of your non-chicken, non-pork, non-beef solution? Meat is usually 15 times more resource intensive compared to vegetarian or vegan diets. So can you elaborate on that?
G
George Zachary1:07:58
So we don't think that the majority of people will switch to vegan or vegetarian. So we think over the next 20 years, roughly, that the majority of people will switch to some type of product like this or use some kind of product like this. And that the word vegan and vegetarian might start to get redefined as well. So that's why. I mean, we can argue what's actually technically better for you, and some of the research we've done shows that being a vegan actually is much healthier for you than a vegetarian. Your potential longevity is way higher being a vegan than a vegetarian, actually because of animal proteins. But getting people to be a vegan is very difficult, so we don't expect that to change in the next 20 years. And I'm an investor for the 10 to 20 year cycle, not the one year cycle.
A
Audience Member1:09:13
I was more interested in understanding the sustainability impact of it, in the sense how much more resource intensive your solution is compared to real meat.
G
George Zachary1:09:23
Okay, well, I can't tell you exactly how we do it, but I can tell you that we use very little media and energy to produce this type of product. It features... we use basically all normal kind of organic proteins and carbohydrates to feed these cells, and the cells basically live in perpetuity. We don't put anything out into the ocean. We basically develop the cells in a reactor, and we can actually do it at room temperature, at 72 degrees, so we don't need a lot of heat or energy for cooling.
A
Audience Member1:10:25
I'm sorry, I didn't hear you.
G
George Zachary1:10:36
Oh, yeah, I know them well.
A
Audience Member1:10:43
Hi, my name is Georgie. I'm a director of products at Co Software, and probably a really interesting comment on vegetarianism and vegan. I'm trying to convert to be a vegan and it's been hard. So my question is about you made a really interesting comment about brain as a platform and tying it into AI. You also made some comments about ethics and how that influences your investment decisions. So I was trying to understand how that plays in the context of your investment decisions with respect to AI specifically, the role of ethics.
G
George Zachary1:11:16
Well, some of it comes from the founder. So a lot of the time we have no idea what will happen with the end product or end technology that gets created. And so when we sit around with, when I myself and my partners sit around thinking about making an investment, we're like, well, it could get used for this, this, and this, and then we don't actually know whether it would. So what we're counting on is the people or person who are the founders. Do we believe in them? Did they have good intentions? And that's about the most we can do. But almost most of this technology we've seen on the bio side will be equally as dangerous as positive for people. So that's something that we think about, but we don't have any control on. And I would say that biotechnology and next generation bioengineering is a huge risk. For example, people can engineer specific bio weapons to target people that have a certain type of DNA from certain areas of the world. So I mean, if someone can do 23andMe and understand that your background comes from a certain part of the world, you can basically then weaponize a virus or bacteria to target people with that ancestry. So yeah, a difficult question.
A
Audience Member1:13:04
Thanks for your thoughts.
Hey, my name is Deep. Thanks so much. Years ago I used to run an innovation hub at Berkeley and Stanford in clean energy, like 12 years ago. Ever since then, I'm taking care of aging parents. I've spent nine years of my life dealing with cancer, dementia, diabetes, heart disease, osteoporosis, a bunch of different diseases. So I stuck my foot into this. As I read recently, you also were in their process when you decided to switch towards healthcare. Is your goal really to help the end patient who's sitting there in the hospital going, 'Oh my God, I have no idea what to do,' and to help them have a better experience and a better outcome? What's your why behind the switch? I'm really curious to know that.
G
George Zachary1:14:06
Well, that is the why. But I had come to the conclusion that I wouldn't be good at investing in service companies that could change the overall services, nor did I have enough networks and relationships in the whole political sphere and the payer side of that. And I didn't really understand it. But I did have good networks and relationships, and I enjoyed the science and engineering side. So I kind of went in that direction, and I saw the potential effects and magnitude effects to be way greater outside. So that's why I went on the science and technology route instead of the services route. Through being involved in kopacz, you know, I saw the insanity that pullback had to be involved with in terms of the other players. So when PillPack was bought by Amazon, almost all the infrastructure, the intermediate players lost $14 billion of market cap because people figured out, okay, Amazon maybe just going directly to the pharma companies instead of with all these intermediate layers. It's super fragmented. And the entire process, many times I feel like if a senior, especially, is in the hospital, they don't have an advocate, family, something, they're just lost. And I feel like that we also do this. On the other side, my mom's a nurse for 50 years, and still when we go to the doctor, I feel like we're being pushed around. And if you ask any questions, people start asking you, 'Are you a doctor?' Like you can't even stand up and protect your own family members and do what's best for them. We've been kicked out of three doctor offices already for asking too many questions. I understand this personally. So I'm really happy to make you thank you. Watch I do afterwards. Thanks, George.
A
Audience Member1:16:07
Hi, I'm Annessa. I'm an engineer at Uber. I have two questions, and if you want to answer only one, that's cool. First one: do you think we should have any changes in our education system to meet the demands of how much we could do and for the next generation to actually have a happy and healthy life? The second question is: from your experience of running so many startups, what were the common qualities of those that were successful and not successful? Thank you.
G
George Zachary1:16:40
Okay, which one's more important?
A
Audience Member1:16:48
Education.
G
George Zachary1:16:55
So your question specifically around education is what do you think we should change? Because I feel like we're creating the next generation of people who will be like, 'Okay, I want to grow up and vote for something.' Yeah, I would think access globally to really high quality education is super important because right now it's heavily concentrated in a group of universities that have brand, and a lot of people globally can't afford them or geographically can't get to them. So I think that will have the biggest impact worldwide on people, making it accessible to a wider group. So I'll give you an example. I'm an investor in a company called Udacity. I was the original investor, and the founder there is a guy named Sebastian Thrun. He used to be the director of AI at Stanford. He developed the self-driving car at Stanford originally, the original self-driving car person. And Udacity's focus is on education, global education. But originally he put together a test around AI, and he had an idea: will the rest of the world score as well as my grad students? So he put the test out to 160,000 students worldwide. Actually, 160,000 students took the test. And he had a lot of students test so highly that they would easily have tested more highly than any of his grad students. And these were people in not desirable parts of the world. So there's no way they would have ever gotten to Stanford.
A
Audience Member1:18:40
Would that be on the government? How do we go about making it?
G
George Zachary1:18:46
Well, part of it was online. For these people to learn online, part of it is price, part of it is ability for people to have online access, part of it is to combine online and in-person access. So it's like new models of education that don't require necessarily a four-year degree. And it also involves being able to learn in chunks over your entire life. This is especially true because people overall, the world population is gonna be living longer, so people have to continue learning.
A
Audience Member1:19:39
I'm very curious. I come from a brain-computer interface background. I did academic research for many, many years. And in the academic community, we are very amused by the amount of money that's being thrown at BCI companies that are making claims that are not justified by science at all, including Facebook, which was a huge joke, and I would even say Neuralink. Some of the things are completely unworkable, they're dangerous. So I'm curious, why do investors and smart people apparently keep throwing money at dumb ideas?
G
George Zachary1:20:20
Well, that is a good question. Because people think that in one area of dumb, that one of them will work. So the history of venture shows that there's been a lot of dumb stuff, but something will work, and people will just grasp on. 'Okay, this is a super interesting area, so all the best in this one area, and something will work. Or I'll invest in this one area, and they'll meet interesting people, and they'll leave, and then I'll have a chance to invest in their company.' And that happens a lot.
A
Audience Member1:20:54
Yeah, I'm not disputing that. I mean, we all believe that brain-computer interfaces will happen. Most of the academics don't believe it'll happen in their lifetime. So it's a question of timing and making claims that can be backed by the state of science at that point in time.
G
George Zachary1:21:18
So the question is, what's your definition of interface? For what type of usage? I mean, there's the neuralink definition of 'I'm gonna interface to basically beat people to beat bad AI,' but then there's also the use of 'Okay, I'll help deal with a severed nerve.' BCI has been very useful in the prosthetic space. People who have a reason to take out, you know, do a brain surgery and implant stuff, that's been done for 30 plus years. But the AI aspect, I mean, I founded a company. We started off with EEG caps as our interface, and it was in the self-driving car space. But very quickly we understood that this is completely unworkable, even though it gets investors excited. So we just took the EEG part out and interfaced using the natural senses that we have. You can have a video camera, improve the AI in that, and then figure out what's happening in the brain by parsing video, body language. I can make up a picture of what you're thinking to a certain degree by just observing your body language. So there are different ways of doing things. So I'm not disagreeing with you, but I would say that venture tends to be on the front end of the skis. That's the best way. But I don't think I've ever heard it said better. So that's also what makes some stuff that sooner or later becomes innovation, but a lot at the front just become fodder for the rest of it. So a lot of the losses in venture capital end up leading to more innovation sooner or later. In a way, it's like those losses are active losses for the rest of innovation to occur, but it can occur for a long time.
R
Rob1:23:32
Alright, next question.
A
Audience Member1:23:38
Hey, George, thank you very much for your time today. Question for you. You said that you're pretty active sometimes unfortunately in letting go CEOs or startup CEOs. I would love to understand from you, when it comes to hiring an executive team, do you have any influence or do your colleagues have any influence in choosing the people that get hired?
G
George Zachary1:23:57
Yeah, I mean, the first thing we have to develop is a spec for the position. So if we're looking for VP of Sales or VP of Marketing or VP of Engineering, VP of Product, Chief Scientific Officer, Chief Science Officer, Head of Operations, we just break down what kind of person we need, what their spec is. So we first start from there. And if we're lucky enough to know someone that could fit, that's usually the best thing, but that frequently never happens. Maybe once, I'd say 1% or 5% of the time. Then we usually have a recruiter that knows the right set of candidates, and then we can basically start a search for the right candidate. We're usually involved based on the level of the person.
A
Audience Member1:25:07
I'm an aspiring marketing executive for a startup in the Valley. What are some of the qualities that you typically look for in top-line executives, and how do you influence the executive team to choose those qualities?
G
George Zachary1:25:19
Yes, so recruiters will usually look for people like, if you want to be a VP of Marketing, recruiters will usually go out and find people who are senior directors of marketing as a potential VP of Marketing. So being at a high-growth company as a senior director of marketing is the best way to get a job as a VP of Marketing. So I would say if you want to work at a startup and have a job as a director or senior director of marketing at a high-growth company like a startup, that would be best, especially if it's in the company's area. It matters when you want to join the startup as well.
A
Audience Member1:26:11
Thank you very much.
I hope I'm the last question. Oh my gosh. I was wondering if you had any experience with female-founded companies, all-female founded companies, and do you see a different pattern of leadership structure with them versus all-male founded companies? And if so, can you describe it? If not, can you list in priority order what your expectations are from a CEO and/or what hands-on skills you look for for a CEO in a company?
G
George Zachary1:26:57
Well, my company Glimpse Bio, which is on the East Coast, was started by a great person. Her name's Sangeeta Bhatia, and she's like a triple professor at MIT and incredibly smart in tissue engineering. And she wanted to start the company, she didn't want to be the CEO because she's super involved in research. So she started the company. I have two board members, and they're female. The original investor started one of the biggest bio generic companies in India. Our Chief Science Officer is female. So I'm like, thanks for letting me in your club. So it's really a female-driven bio company. I would say more so than male. But no one acts differently because it's male or female. The structure in leadership is really the same. There's no difference. I mean, we have a CEO, we have a CSO, so it's the same structure. It doesn't really change based on gender.
A
Audience Member1:28:19
Can you describe your expectations from a CEO and their hands-on skills that you prefer to see? Like what would be number one, number two, number three?
G
George Zachary1:28:31
Yeah, so Carolyn recruited Carolyn Lowe there as the CEO. So Carolyn, Carolyn's fantastic. She's one of the best CEOs I've ever had the pleasure of working with in my 25 years. So Carolyn is just a natural-born leader. She's very clear in her mind about what the company does, creative in terms of how she can turn what the company does into a much bigger story. She's got a lot of poise under pressure, a lot. And you can never really tell that she's anxious about anything, even when cash was dry or low or anything. And she's really good at managing the company's operations along the science side of things, along the engineering side of operations, around working with the FDA because this is a bio company. So she's really multifaceted, not just management and operations, but really basically she's just a natural leader. And it's great because I don't have to worry about anything with this company. And she's just a naturally super high integrity person. It's amazing what she's created in nine months. So I'm so fortunate to have her as the CEO of this company.
R
Rob1:30:08
Thank you. Yeah, all right, let's give it up for George and Jim. Ladies and gentlemen, stay in your seats. It's time for the raffle. This is the book 'Story 10x'. Has everyone who wanted to enter the raffle already done so? One, once, going twice. Here's your chance. Get this row right there. Out of George and we do the honors.
Amy, George is gonna do the honors. Oh, oh, come on, you late in the show. All right, a drumroll please. George is gonna do it.
And the winner is Kabil Lucre. Come on down.
All right, so ladies and gentlemen, the video will be on their YouTube channel, youtube.com/ideatoipo, within 48 hours. Stick around, network, socialize, connect. As a courtesy to Perkins Coie, we'd like to leave the building by 9 p.m. However, if you want to check out the after party, meet me at the Rosalee. It's Thursday night now. Set. Thanks for coming. See you next time.