E52: Trump's SPAC, peak venture liquidity, tech as an economic ladder, Dems overplaying their hand

Show Notes: 0:00 Bestie weight loss strategies, poker recap 13:19 Trump SPAC, how he can leverage the capital intelligently, building vs. acquiring, and more 33:43 Peak venture returns, tech landscape 44:56 Tech's global role: are we still in the early days, as opposed to a bubble? Wealth shaming, upward mobility 58:58 Democrats overplaying their hand, Netflix discourse, and more 1:17:41 Pig kidney biological innovation Follow the besties: https://twitter.com/chamath https://linktr.ee/calacanis https://twitter.com/DavidSacks https://twitter.com/friedberg Follow the pod: https://twitter.com/theallinpod https://linktr.ee/allinpodcast Intro Music Credit: https://rb.gy/tppkzl https://twitter.com/yung_spielburg Intro Video Credit: https://twitter.com/TheZachEffect Referenced in the show: https://www.tmtgcorp.com/press-releases/announcement-10-20-2021 https://www.tmtgcorp.com/company-overview https://www.cnbc.com/2021/10/22/trump-social-media-spac-digital-world-acquisition-corp-surges-another-100percent.html https://twitter.com/scienceisstrat1/status/1450723760806379520 https://www.wsj.com/articles/venture-returns-keep-climbing-mystifying-some-industry-veterans-11634554801 https://files.pitchbook.com/website/files/pdf/Q3_2021_PitchBook-NVCA_Venture_Monitor.pdf https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/20/us/amherst-college-legacy-admissions.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/20/us/dorian-abbot-mit.html https://www.okayplayer.com/culture/michael-che-elon-musk-snl.html https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/20/tech-billionaire-aiding-facebook-whistleblower-516358 https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-09-20/china-slams-effeminate-men-in-xi-s-mounting-push-for-conformity https://www.nytimes.com/2021/10/19/health/kidney-transplant-pig-human.html https://pandaily.com/top-livestream-salesman-li-jiaqi-records-1-7-billion-in-sales-in-first-11-11-livestream-viya-follows

Speaker names marked ? are inferred from speaking time and the show’s known hosts — they are not voice-verified.

• 0:00Jason Calacanis?

  Only Sacks can lose 20 pounds and look worse.

• 0:04Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Sacks, you know, with, with all, with all these gains and all your funds, I would really love for you to cash them out and buy a belt.

• 0:10David Friedberg?

  Ask your wife or your house manager to help you find slim fit shirts at the, uh, the local Macy's.

• 0:15Jason Calacanis?

  You'd literally look like you're wearing a parachute.

• 0:17David Sacks?

  I've never, I've never worn slim fit anything.

• 0:19Jason Calacanis?

  Stand up for a second. Stand up.

• 0:21David Sacks?

  I can't. I'm not, I'm not wearing pants.

• 0:26Jason Calacanis?

  Oh my. Could somebody call HR? Are you really not wearing pants?

• 0:29David Sacks?

  I got, no, I got, I got shorts on.

• 0:31Jason Calacanis?

  No, that's not true. Are you really wearing shorts?

• 0:34David Sacks?

  Yeah, I am.

• 0:35Jason Calacanis?

  No, he's not. He's lying.

• 0:37David Sacks?

  No, I'm not.

• 0:38Jason Calacanis?

  Put your leg up. Show us that pasty leg. No fucking way. Oh my God.

• 0:43Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Oh my God. How big are those shorts? That's incredible.

• 0:46Jason Calacanis?

  He's like Dom DeLuise and he lost a hundred pounds. He didn't change his wardrobe. You're rich dude. Change your wardrobe.

• 0:52Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Oh my God. Those are like two toothpicks sticking out of a tent.

• 0:57Jason Calacanis?

  It's like somebody set up a circus tent and didn't tie down the ends.

• 1:02Jason Calacanis?

  He's wearing a parachute at a circus tent.

• 1:05Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Oh my God.

• 1:23Jason Calacanis?

  Hey everybody. Hey everybody. Welcome to another episode of the All In Podcast. With us today again. The podcast with us again today, the dictator, Chamath Polly Hapatia and the queen of Kinoa, David Friedberg in front of some bad art. And from the mausoleum, a schwelt, fighting weight, minus 20 pounds, the Rain Man himself, David Sacks.

• 1:49David Sacks?

  You guys gave me the motivation. I mean, this podcast. You fat shamed me. You needled me for months and I'm like, okay, I'm gonna lose the weight. So I've lost it.

• 2:00Jason Calacanis?

  What was your peak weight in the last 12 months?

• 2:03David Sacks?

  I think I was at in the high 190s and I'm down to about 172 now. So it's about 25 pounds.

• 2:11Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Wow.

• 2:11David Sacks?

  Since, since about April or May.

• 2:13Chamath Palihapitiya?

  That's really great, bro. That's fantastic. I mean, honestly, your family thanks you. I thank you as a friend too. No, but seriously, that's really fucking great. I'm really, I'm really proud of you.

• 2:24David Friedberg?

  Are you exercising too?

• 2:25David Sacks?

  Thank you.

• 2:25David Friedberg?

  Or you just cut your diet?

• 2:26David Sacks?

  It's, it's, uh, I, I, I'm doing the same exercise regimen I was doing before, which is just running occasionally, but, um, but it's, it's all diet.

• 2:34Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's all diet.

• 2:35David Sacks?

  It's, it's frankly severe calorie restriction. And your, your Munich product has been very helpful.

• 2:41Chamath Palihapitiya?

  But is it really severe calorie restriction?

• 2:43David Friedberg?

  Thanks for the plug.

• 2:44David Sacks?

  I think so.

• 2:44Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, we were talking about Munich for the syndicate on the call-in app the other day.

• 2:50Jason Calacanis?

  These fucking plugs are dropping from the sky.

• 2:52David Sacks?

  Well, hold on, I'm allowed to plug, I'm allowed to plug another bestie's product.

• 2:57Chamath Palihapitiya?

  So you could put a call-in plug. You're violating our rules of the road that we wrote down.

• 3:01David Sacks?

  It's not a violation of the rules because I'm not a shareholder in Munich. I don't owe any interest in that.

• 3:06Jason Calacanis?

  But are you negotiating a deal?

• 3:07David Sacks?

  No, but now I might.

• 3:09Jason Calacanis?

  Have you talked about funding Munich?

• 3:10David Sacks?

  No, I haven't, but Freebrooke, can I invest?

• 3:15David Friedberg?

  That's a good one. We should, we should actually throw that one in the syndicate if you guys want. Uh, yeah, Munich's great. I, I did it. I lost some weight on it.

• 3:22Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Saxipoo, what's your, uh, what's your, uh, basal calorie burn? Did you calculate that?

• 3:27David Sacks?

  I'm not, what does that mean?

• 3:28Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Like your steady state calorie burn on a normal day, like if you're not exercising or whatever, like,

• 3:32David Sacks?

  Yeah.

• 3:33Chamath Palihapitiya?

  based on your height, your BMI, your weight, all that stuff?

• 3:35David Sacks?

  Yeah, I did, I did look it up and I think it's around 2,000 calories a day. But, but the thing that's super interesting, yeah, there's a calculator online where you can enter your, your, uh, height, weight and age, and it'll tell you how many calories that you burn every day. So if you want to lose weight, you need to consume fewer calories than that. It's that simple. Everything else that people do around weight loss, that is not that, is basically some sort of game. You just have to consume fewer calories than you're burning. But the thing that's really interesting about that calculator is that the number of calories you can burn every year actually changes as you get older, it goes down. So the reason why people gain weight as they get older is because you're in a habit of consuming a certain number of calories every day. But, you know, as you get older, like every year, you can consume, say, 50 fewer calories a day, something like that. And that basically

• 4:21David Sacks?

  Comes fat if you can if you consume at the same level. So you have to cut your consumption down as you get older or you will gain weight.

• 4:27David Friedberg?

  And in addition to your metabolic fitness, meaning like, you know, having your exercise level stay up to increase your metabolism overall, you can also add muscle mass. A lot of people lose muscle mass over time. Muscle burns more calories per day just to kind of keep functioning. So the more muscle mass you have, the higher your basal.

• 4:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And you lose like half a pound to a pound a year after forty. Is that correct? Directionally, uh, free.

• 4:52David Friedberg?

  I don't know, but that sounds about right. Yeah.

• 4:54Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah, that's what I read.

• 4:55David Sacks?

  That is about right. And I think it's because of this dynamic where people are just consuming the same amount, but they don't realize that they can't burn it. And so it becomes fat.

• 5:06David Sacks?

  You know, so to my case, first of all, you got to get your caloric intake down to 2000 just to get to steady state. And that can be a challenge. But if you really want to lose weight, you need to burn, you need to basically consume a few hundred calories less than that. And if you can consume 500 calories less than that per day, that's considered rapid weight loss. And then you can actually see the results, which is very motivating.

• 5:28Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah.

• 5:28David Sacks?

  So I like the idea of just going for the like significant, the 500 calories.

• 5:32Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Where are you? You're at 1500 calories a day?

• 5:35David Sacks?

  Yeah, I mean, I think so. I mean, I haven't like precisely measured it out, but I've been trying to go for.

• 5:39Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And is that you skip a meal? Is that how you get to the minus 500 calories?

• 5:43David Sacks?

  Yeah, I will either skip breakfast or I'll do a very light breakfast. Um, and then for lunch, I'll do like something entirely plant based, like, like soup, like a vegetable soup of some kind. And then when it comes to dinner, it'll be a more normal dinner, but no carbs, no dessert.

• 5:58Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Two dinners, one bottle of wine.

• 6:00David Sacks?

  Wow. No, no, you have a good system.

• 6:04David Sacks?

  Yeah. The sack system is vegetables first. Yes. Then fish, then poultry, then red meat. So, so it's, it's not, you're not like entirely all one thing or another. You're not like all vegan, which would be hard. You're not, it's not like you're all, uh, there's no red meat or something like that. You can do a little of everything, but you have to have a weighting. And the weighting is based on what foods have are the most calorie dense. So the mistake that I think people make, and I think it's one of these. Trick diets is like with these protein, like the South Beach type diet or the paleo diet, right? Where they're trying to trick their body into ketosis and all they do is eat a lot of red meat, but those steaks have a lot of calories in them.

• 6:43Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah.

• 6:43David Sacks?

  So it only works if you do it perfectly where you totally trick your body and keeping your body in ketosis forever is just not sustainable in my view. It's hard. So I think you're a lot better off just eating less calorie dense food and steak is very calorie dense. So, you know, again, you try and eat plants first than than fish.

• 7:01Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I rarely eat beef, but I get to eat it today and I'm having steak night. Dre's coming over for dinner and in the season, he, whenever I text him and I say, hey, what do you want for dinner? Draymond's always like fish, fish, fish, fish, fish. And I said, bro, I, I get to eat steak so fucking rarely. And today we're having steak. I can't wait.

• 7:22David Sacks?

  And when you say get to, when you get to, it's because you're on some diet, basically?

• 7:25Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, no, I do. I, I just observe that I don't eat meat any more than once a week maximum. And right now I'm probably averaging once every two weeks, maybe even once every three weeks. And to your point, it's much better. I, I do these scans, you know, you can do these kind of body scans to know what your, um, your total water weight, your total muscle weight, your total weight, your total body fat, all of that stuff and your basic metabolic rate. And I just kind of track it like once a quarter, just to see where it is. Um, and I, I agree with you. Like I've really found that, uh, I can't eat red meat anymore. Like it's like, it just really fucks me up. But it's so good. Right. It's so good. Oh my God. It's so good.

• 8:04David Sacks?

  The other, one other trick is that you should never consume calories like in liquid form, right? You should only be drinking water, tea, coffee, things like that, that don't have any calories. People go to Starbucks in the morning and they, they drink like

• 8:18Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Eight hundred calories.

• 8:19David Sacks?

  Yeah, 400 plus calories. Then they have a, you know, cinnamon roll or whatever, or banana nut bread.

• 8:25Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah, they're at 1200 at the start of the day.

• 8:26David Sacks?

  I mean, that's it. You're, I mean, you're going to be gaining weight on just from going to Starbucks in the morning. There's no, now, if you do an Americano with a splash of almond milk or something, that's like five, 10 calories, that's fine. But, um, you, you have to stop drinking calories. And then the one exception is like last night, we did poker, we were drinking wine. So that's fine. You know?

• 8:46Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I didn't because I thought the wine was shit.

• 8:48Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, let's talk about.

• 8:49Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I thought the whole, I thought the whole game was horrible. Let me just tell you all the things that were.

• 8:53Jason Calacanis?

  Here we go. Hold on a second.

• 8:54Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Okay. Number one, I fucking came all the way up to San Francisco.

• 8:57Jason Calacanis?

  Last night, Chamath normally hosts. Sax went over the top and Chamath is tilted.

• 9:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Over the top in air quotes. Number one, nobody arrived on time because nobody respects you enough to show up on time.

• 9:09Jason Calacanis?

  Jake, Jake and I played Heads Up for an hour before anyone else showed up. We, we were there from seven to eight just playing Heads Up. It was fun. It was fun. I took all of Friedberg's money. I own 3% of Munich.

• 9:19Chamath Palihapitiya?

  You, as the host, didn't show up till 9:30 and you spent all of the time on the phone,

• 9:26Jason Calacanis?

  Trading Japanese bonds.

• 9:27Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Outside in the room, trading Japanese bonds or doing whatever you were doing.

• 9:30Jason Calacanis?

  Talking to Peter Thiel.

• 9:30Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Me showed up at 10:30. You know, the game was basically randomly in the muck half the night. Nobody was observing any good decorum. Run it once, run it twice. There was just nothing going on.

• 9:41Jason Calacanis?

  There was no decorum.

• 9:42Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Fish. You had stale fish. Okay. Just sitting there rotting, stinking up the whole fucking room. You know, you had 2013 Colden, which is not even a good year, just FYI. Okay. 2012. Okay. 2015. I mean, so anyways, I thought it was a disaster. I stormed and up and I left.

• 10:00Jason Calacanis?

  He did rage quit and it was quite a moment because we're playing PLO. Finally Sax loses all his money.

• 10:07David Sacks?

  May I respond?

• 10:08Chamath Palihapitiya?

  But I did have three bowls of ice cream, which I regretted this morning.

• 10:13Jason Calacanis?

  All right. Sax, in your defense, why were you, why did you leave your guests for three hours while you talked at your own home?

• 10:22Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Bro.

• 10:23David Sacks?

  It wasn't, it wasn't three hours. You guys were being well attended to. I made sure that you were well attended to and then I had to duck out for.

• 10:29Jason Calacanis?

  Well attended to. What are we, preschool?

• 10:31Chamath Palihapitiya?

  What do that, what are you talking about?

• 10:32David Sacks?

  Excute a couple of, a couple of, excuse a couple of trades. So.

• 10:37Jason Calacanis?

  Oh. What were the calls?

• 10:39David Sacks?

  Well, you know, crypto is like a 24/7 market these days.

• 10:45Jason Calacanis?

  Crypto never sleeps, so David Sacks has to excuse himself.

• 10:48David Sacks?

  Yeah, I got wired 800K Hong Kong gold had to.

• 10:53Jason Calacanis?

  To flip the bar.

• 10:54David Sacks?

  Yeah, so, okay, so first of all, the food was amazing. We had like this incredible.

• 11:00Jason Calacanis?

  You didn't eat it. You had Brussels sprouts. You had the Brussels sprouts. You ate none of it.

• 11:06David Sacks?

  I'm on a diet. I did eat the sushi. There's like this incredible sushi spread. We had so much sushi, most of it didn't get eaten. Then we had pizzas, got the best late night pizzas from two different pizza places got delivered. There was more than one pizza per person in terms of selection.

• 11:20Jason Calacanis?

  It was Tony's Nepal time.

• 11:22David Friedberg?

  You had homemade caramel sauce poured over Timothée's.

• 11:25Jason Calacanis?

  That was good. No, dolce de leche. That was great. Props to the chef who made that.

• 11:29David Friedberg?

  Put dolce de leche on the vanilla.

• 11:30David Sacks?

  Yeah, and the Colga in 2013 Estate 9 is a fantastic bottle of wine that I had another bottle earlier this week.

• 11:36Jason Calacanis?

  We just lost 42% of the audience. They are now on the YouTube comment saying, why are these people, why do we listen to this pod every week?

• 11:45David Sacks?

  And here's the reality, Chamath, is you were very quiet and sort of sullen the whole night from really the time you got there.

• 11:53Jason Calacanis?

  It's kind of true.

• 11:53David Sacks?

  You didn't really participate in the conversation and Sky hypothesized that the reason why you were so withdrawn is because you were upset that the game had moved from your place to my place and you thought somehow I was trying to hijack your game, which is not true. We do a game at my place maybe.

• 12:09Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, no, no. I told Sky, no, no, I told, I told Sky text already. I said, hey, guys, we normally run the game Thursdays at my house. I'm happy to come up, but it's harder for me because Nats almost due.

• 12:19David Sacks?

  Right. So you were upset from the get-go that you weren't hosting.

• 12:21Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, no, I wasn't. I told, I told him that pretty candidly.

• 12:23Jason Calacanis?

  Well, I mean, there's another underlying issue here. Friedberg and Sacks have not come to the last three games at Chamath's house. Is there something going on here? Is it just a commute?

• 12:31Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I think the commute is hard. I mean, in fairness to you guys.

• 12:34Jason Calacanis?

  The commute is hard.

• 12:34David Friedberg?

  I only missed the last game. I went to, I went to.

• 12:36Jason Calacanis?

  Sax hasn't been coming and I know he's in, he's in town. Is there something going on Sax where you can't?

• 12:41David Sacks?

  No.

• 12:41Jason Calacanis?

  Drive anymore? You have, I mean.

• 12:43David Sacks?

  It's either the commute or sometimes I'm out of town, you know, so.

• 12:46Jason Calacanis?

  You were in town the last couple of times. I don't know. I think you're trying to, you and Chamath maybe need to go for a walk.

• 12:50David Sacks?

  Okay, I'll come. I'll come the next, when's the next game?

• 12:52Jason Calacanis?

  Whenever. The next game is, you should come. But I mean, you're, what are you doing? Staying home playing chess with Peter Thiel on your iPad? I mean, come on.

• 12:58Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Both me and Freeburger about to have kids. We cannot.

• 13:01David Sacks?

  Oh, the game's over?

• 13:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, no, no. For another couple of weeks, yeah.

• 13:04David Friedberg?

  We're gonna revert back to that terrible COVID app, iPad app, playing poker where like everyone gets to each other.

• 13:10Jason Calacanis?

  Oh my god. Oh, the Chinese app that was fixed with a bunch of people colluding.

• 13:13David Friedberg?

  Everyone was so angry. Yeah.

• 13:16Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Well, we'll get it back in the next.

• 13:17David Friedberg?

  Let's, let's start our show.

• 13:18Jason Calacanis?

  Let's start, let's start the show. First up in Spaceland, Donald Trump has done a SPAC and it's for his Trump Media and Technology Group. Uh, and he's launching an app called Truth Social, which you can preload, I guess, in the App Store. You're allowed to preorder stuff now. I thought that was kind of an interesting feature. Um, the company will merge with the SPAC called Digital World Acquisition Corporation, ticker symbol currently DWAC. It's led by somebody named Patrick Orlando, uh, who is a Florida-based investment manager. I'm not making that up. Uh, I don't know if Orlando is actually his name. Um, he founded a sugar trading business and built two energy distribution businesses allegedly, uh, or supposedly.

• 13:58Jason Calacanis?

  Um, Freeberg said maybe he's a real estate guy, who knows? The stock peaked at $157 a share, uh, this morning, Friday morning.

• 14:07David Friedberg?

  So the SPAC started at 10 bucks?

• 14:09Jason Calacanis?

  It started at 10, so that's 16x before dropping back down to 100. It's become a bit of a meme stock on Wall Street Bets. Trading was halted. Uh, it puts this at something in the range of a, you know, well over a $10 billion market cap. And, um, there is literally no technology, no team, and a bunch of technologists looked at the source code just by doing view source, I think, on the, on the webpages. And, uh, there's an open source project, I think, called Mastodon or Masterton. I don't know. I think it's Mastodon. Um, that they seem to have just copied the code from. It's, it's like a distributed. version of Twitter and it seems they just cut and pasted the code and didn't even change the license, you know, like the GPL license, we're supposed to give credit to who wrote the code. So no business, no team, no IP, no users, no money, no office, no nothing.

• 14:54Jason Calacanis?

  It's basically, uh,

• 14:56David Friedberg?

  It's an NFT. This is an NFT.

• 14:58Jason Calacanis?

  It's an NFT.

• 14:59David Friedberg?

  And basically,

• 15:00Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's an exchange traded NFT.

• 15:02Jason Calacanis?

  It's an NFT of Donald Trump.

• 15:04David Friedberg?

  The value of this thing, the value of this thing is like closer to, Donald Trump is closer to 20 billion because there's a 1.7 billion dollar value if they hit certain stock prices, according to the press release they put out, but there's not a good SEC filing on it. So at 1.7, that means he got 170 million shares, which are now worth, let's say at 157 dollars a share. Donald Trump has effectively 20 plus billion dollars.

• 15:27Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, so he's finally a billionaire?

• 15:28David Friedberg?

  And he's finally billionaire of equity value in his stake in this thing.

• 15:32Jason Calacanis?

  He's actually a billionaire.

• 15:32David Friedberg?

  And I think this, and this is the absolute like penultimate NFT. It is traded against a caricature that is a one of a kind, completely rare. This is going to, all of his quote unquote media IP is going to be licensed into this SPAC. And so if you want to own a piece of it, this is the way to own it. And people are trading it like an index on the Donald Trump, um, uh, character.

• 15:57Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's a, it's an index on that. I think it's a, it's an index on the right. I think it's an index on an alternative to Fox News.

• 16:05David Friedberg?

  To traditional media.

• 16:06Chamath Palihapitiya?

  The traditional media. It's a huge fuck you to actually the mainstream media. I think this is gonna,

• 16:12David Friedberg?

  To Twitter.

• 16:13Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Oh my God, it's going to tilt the hell out of like the folks that write at the, at the New York Times. My gosh.

• 16:19David Friedberg?

  Did you see Jack Dorsey's tweet, by the way?

• 16:20Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No.

• 16:21David Friedberg?

  I gotta, I'll, I'll, I'll put it in the chat, but he kind of, um, he made a comment on it after there was a screenshot.

• 16:27Jason Calacanis?

  I mean, let's be honest, it's a grift. I mean, this is, this is, this is the ultimate peak grift in the peak bubble of our lifetime. Period.

• 16:35David Friedberg?

  I think it's a vote, like Peter Thiel said yesterday, you know, like Bitcoin is a vote against the establishment, this is a vote against the establishment.

• 16:41Jason Calacanis?

  All right, what are the chances that an actual app launches Saks? Like, and when would that actually happen? When can this crew of dipshits actually write a line of code and actually release a product? You know how hard it is to release product?

• 16:54David Sacks?

  Yeah, that's a good question. I mean, what they're saying is that they're going to launch a new social network, I guess, Twitter style called Truth Social. And the primary interface will consist of a feed of short posts from users you follow. Sounds familiar. However, these posts will be called truths instead of tweets and reshares will be known as retrues.

• 17:15Jason Calacanis?

  Wow.

• 17:17David Sacks?

  So that's what's coming. And the slide deck that's available on the company's website lists Twitter, Facebook, Netflix, Disney Plus, CNN, iHeart Media, Google Cloud, Amazon Web Services as some of TMTG's current and future competitors. So basically, you know, Trump is proposing an alternative to all the traditional media and social networks that have basically banned him. But I do think that the trading here does represent, there is, I think, a groundswell for, for social media platforms that are not controlled by big tech. And, you know, there's, Trump has 70 million tech voters, sorry, 70 million voters of

• 17:57David Sacks?

  those, probably 30 to 40 million, you would say are, would be fans of his on social media. He's been banned from Twitter and Facebook, and this is his response. He's going to create his own platform. I don't know whether it'll ultimately be successful, but I think what you're seeing here is the demand for alternatives to, you know, censorious platforms that are controlled by big tech.

• 18:17Jason Calacanis?

  So if he has 30 million real fans, Chamath, what number of them would download the app and participate in the first year?

• 18:24David Friedberg?

  He had 90 million, he had 90 million followers on Twitter, J. K.

• 18:28Jason Calacanis?

  That doesn't count.

• 18:29David Friedberg?

  But that's half of the Twitter-registered account.

• 18:31Jason Calacanis?

  We had 70 million people vote for him. So what are the real fans, not just Republicans who don't want Hillary?

• 18:36Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I don't think that's the way to think about this. I would, I would view this as differently than this.

• 18:42Chamath Palihapitiya?

  What's insane is you have this entity here, which is essentially a cash shell. That's now basically, you know, 300 odd million dollars of cash. Plus what looks like 18 or 19 billion dollars of brand value, like of intangible goodwill. And the sum total of that is what the total market cap of this thing is. So if it is 18 billion, then that's what it is. What this allows them to do, and this is where it kind of gets interesting. Is these guys, what it shows me is they could come back and actually raise an enormous amount of money. They could issue, you know, a secondary stock sale, they could do a convert. They could raise billions of dollars because the demand is there. And then with those billions of dollars, they could actually do something really meaningful.

• 19:26Chamath Palihapitiya?

  They could go and acquire an existing app, Jason.

• 19:29Jason Calacanis?

  Call in, call in.

• 19:30Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Engineers and a product that already exists.

• 19:32Jason Calacanis?

  Maybe do an aquihire, yeah.

• 19:33Chamath Palihapitiya?

  They could acquire a traditional broadcast outlet and give Trump, uh, you know, a way to short circuit his launch of a Fox competitor. So I actually think this is a huge vote. I think David's right. It's a vote against censorship. It's a vote for Trump. It's a vote for the right. It's a vote for alternative, uh, voices. And as a result, I think a lot of folks in the mainstream who have Trump derangement syndrome are now going to be, you know, reawoken and in complete full tilt for a while.

• 20:07Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, it's pretty tilty. Uh, TMTG plus will be, uh, you know, it's terrible branding, but the TMTG plus is going to be there.

• 20:16Chamath Palihapitiya?

  You're already tilted.

• 20:17Jason Calacanis?

  I'm super, no, I'm not tilted. I mean, I, it's, it's, I think the whole thing's just a super grift. I don't think they'll ever get a product out the door. And if they do, I think they get to maybe five, 10 million users, which isn't enough.

• 20:26David Friedberg?

  Jake, they've got, they've got a 20 billion dollar market cap. They could do whatever the hell they want.

• 20:30Jason Calacanis?

  It's all people just manipulating the stock like GameStop.

• 20:33David Friedberg?

  Like Chamath said, they could turn that into, into cash.

• 20:35Jason Calacanis?

  We'll see. I mean, they could turn a billion of it. I don't think they can get to 20 billion.

• 20:39Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Trump today, in one day, is worth more than two times the New York Times. Can you imagine what's going on in the New York Times right now?

• 20:47Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah.

• 20:48Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And that's just brand.

• 20:49Jason Calacanis?

  Well, let's see. I mean, not all these SPACs stay at $150 a share, you know?

• 20:53David Sacks?

  So Jacob, I think you're right that people outside the tech industry really underestimate how hard it is to build technology products that are any good, you know, that have a good UI, they're delightful to users, it does require real talent, and if you're not sort of from the industry, you don't even know what kind of talent you need to hire. However, I think Jamath has a really good point that with this kind of market cap, they could acquire their way to a portfolio of assets. Like, for example, okay, Rumble right now has become the alternative to YouTube among, not just conservatives, but anyone who's been deplatformed. There's a lot of leftists now.

• 21:28Chamath Palihapitiya?

  There's Locals.com that you invested in.

• 21:30David Sacks?

  Yes, exactly. I invested in Locals, which is Dave Rubin's thing. So, but just to take Rumble for a second, because it's kind of the YouTube competitor. You know, they've got something like 30 million users plus. It's a very, it's a pretty big and growing audience, but there is Locals, there are other assets. And you could, and I think the last valuation of Rumble, I think it was announced when Peter Thiel actually invested, I think it was around a $500 million valuation. Even if you paid a gigantic premium to that, I mean, if your market cap's 20 billion, you could spend 2 billion on that, you could spend 5 billion on that, you know?

• 22:04Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And by the way, sorry, just to dispel this idea, you don't need good UI if you have the right feature set, and Reddit is the perfect example where they've always been on the side of free speech, and they've always been on the side of allowing people to vocalize and pursue their own passions, even if some of those things were really, you know, for the mainstream, beyond the pale. Their UI is terrible, but they have thrived because that single feature dominates any desire for elegant UI. And so, I think what you're going to find over this next iteration of these apps is how valuable free speech is, and there are enough examples, whether it's Rumble or Reddit or others, that show you that the ability to not be censored dominates.

• 22:47David Friedberg?

  4chan, Discord, they're all very similar.

• 22:49Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's gonna tweet, it's gonna tweak, oh my god, the folks on the left are on super mega tilt.

• 22:55Jason Calacanis?

  They did figure out how to do data analysis and marketing during his, you know, 2016 campaign. And they did get that guy Pascal or whatever, and they figured out Cambridge Analytica. So they did figure out how to get some tech people, right, Sax, to, you know, do all that marketing stuff.

• 23:11Chamath Palihapitiya?

  The other super tilty thing is people will want to fade this trade and, you know, they're gonna be silent. They're gonna know they're gonna be silently wishing for this thing to crater. And I think there's going to be a lot of profit taking on this because I think it's very speculative. But I think we will all be shocked at the actual closing enterprise value when this thing de-spacs, because it will de-sback and we're all gonna kind of scratch our heads thinking, how did we not see this? I mean, I didn't see this. I would have never.

• 23:38David Friedberg?

  And there's gonna be at least a billion dollars of cash available when they do their secondary. At least. I mean, they can do whatever they want.

• 23:44Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah.

• 23:45David Friedberg?

  They're gonna have more, more cash available to them to invest in in your kind of.

• 23:48Chamath Palihapitiya?

  He is firmly back in the game.

• 23:52David Friedberg?

  And by the way, one of the comments Garamucci made this morning, it's a very astute one, which is, I'm rooting for the SPAC because if this actually does de-sback at this valuation, Donald Trump is not running for president again. Because he's now got a $20 billion media business or $20 million of equity value in this new media business that he's gonna keep running. Sax, what do you think?

• 24:11David Sacks?

  Uh, that could be a win-win for the Republican Party.

• 24:16Jason Calacanis?

  So you're buying the stock, you're joining the board? Sax is leading the B?

• 24:21David Sacks?

  Yeah, I mean, I, I, I think Chamathuraya's a good point that sites like Reddit have shown that, you know, like a beautiful UI is not necessarily the feature that users want in every case. I do think you still have to have some tech talent involved in order to produce a good product. Just to give you an example, so this product wasn't supposed to have its soft launch until next month, but somehow some users found a way to access the site and they were setting up accounts within hours of the announcement. So one vandal claimed the @DonaldJTrump handle and posted a picture of a pig with extremely large testicles.

• 24:54Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, really?

• 24:55David Sacks?

  So, yeah.

• 24:58David Sacks?

  Now, I would just submit that you at least need to have enough tech talent to prevent something like that from happening.

• 25:02Jason Calacanis?

  Yes.

• 25:03David Sacks?

  I mean, maybe it wasn't a vandal. I mean, maybe Trump posted that photo himself. I don't, it's not, it's not impossible.

• 25:10Jason Calacanis?

  It's on brand.

• 25:11David Sacks?

  But, yeah, but, but anyway, my, my point is they still have to assemble the tech talent to build this, or I like the idea better of just acquiring the, the collection of assets that they need. And I think you're right. I think it's multifaceted. I think it's a social network, a la Twitter. I think it's probably some sort of video.

• 25:29Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Do not underestimate the number of people in Wall Street who are on the right and who will help these guys make very good decisions, even if they do it sort of, you know, quote unquote clandestinely, meaning they'll never be on the cover of helping them do a big M and A or whatever. But there are, there are a lot of those folks that will help make sure that this DSPACs cleanly, that they have access to capital, that they know how to go and raise and tap the markets. And what's beautiful about the public markets, and you can say this is, you know, an issue, but it's not in this case, is that, you know, you can go and, and basically support this guy in a way that's relatively anonymous, because it's not like you have to disclose

• 26:13Chamath Palihapitiya?

  that you own this stuff if you're, if you're a private investor. So I think that he's back in the game in a big way. And I think this is going to really shake up the media landscape. If they can execute well, they just need to think about this as an M and A vehicle, not as an engineering and product creation.

• 26:28David Sacks?

  Yes, 100% agree, 100% agree with that.

• 26:30David Friedberg?

  Sex, would you sell Colin for a billion dollars in equity value at a hundred dollars a share to these guys today?

• 26:36Jason Calacanis?

  Yes. I can answer on his behalf, yes. Yes, I'm in a 50.

• 26:40David Friedberg?

  Is that what you were doing on the phone last night?

• 26:42Jason Calacanis?

  I'll take the 20x lift.

• 26:43David Sacks?

  No, no.

• 26:44Jason Calacanis?

  I'll take 20x in eight months.

• 26:45David Sacks?

  Jake, how you want to be my agent?

• 26:48Jason Calacanis?

  I think you have a quicker line to Trump.

• 26:51David Sacks?

  No, no, no, no.

• 26:52Jason Calacanis?

  Uh, I think actually this might be like to Peter Till's point, like maybe don't take the product literally, but take the market cap seriously. Uh, because this is a lot of, if, if they can keep even a $5 billion market up, I do agree that does make them dangerous in terms of buying assets. And I do think they can get the first five, all of these right wing services get five to, he gets five to 10 million people to sign up for him. Even his like Signal, he was at like a million, you know, very quickly. He's got like a Signal or Telegram group, I think. And he got to, he could buy, maybe he could buy Ben Shapiro's Daily Caller. That's a big media brand on the right that people listen to.

• 27:29David Sacks?

  Well, yeah.

• 27:29Jason Calacanis?

  The number one podcast.

• 27:30David Sacks?

  And keep, keep Ben Shapiro there to run it because Trump needs operators.

• 27:34Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And the more disruptive thing isn't to buy stuff on the right, it's to buy stuff in the center or even stuff on the left. Again, it's, it's very hard if you're a public company. It's impossible, actually. If, if Trump Media Group now has a currency and tries to acquire assets, um, the directors have a fiduciary responsibility to actually vote in favor of that deal because they're not allowed to look at who the buyer is and say, no, we don't want to do that. So if he puts out a reasonable fair market offer price, you know, of the closing price plus 30, 35%, there is not a single public market director in the world. I don't care how Democrat tick they are or how much of a donor they are, they'll always vote the deal because otherwise they will get personally sued and that's the liability in public markets.

• 28:18Chamath Palihapitiya?

  So I would be very careful about this thing. This thing is going to get really serious really quickly.

• 28:23Jason Calacanis?

  I wonder if there's a tent pole, um, media personality that he could acquire in the same way Spotify got Joe Rogan and Netflix got Dave Chappelle. There's somebody they could offer a hundred million dollars to.

• 28:36Chamath Palihapitiya?

  They shouldn't do that. They should do what Sax just said, which is that, you know, that, that list of like the dumpster fire on Facebook every day, which is like Dan Benigno and Ben Shapiro and blah, blah, blah. He should just go and get all those guys.

• 28:47Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, that's what I just said, round them up. But I wonder if there's like a comedian, you know, like, you know, Bill Maher is obviously hates him, but then is there somebody in the middle who is like a notable comedian on the right sax? I'm not fully vetted on your alt right buddies, but who's, who's in that alt right cohort that?

• 29:03David Sacks?

  Well, I think there's, there's comics who are willing to be politically incorrect and non woke. So I think, what's his name, like Bill Burr or something like that is, isn't he?

• 29:12Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, Bill Burr's net team Netflix, but yeah, I wonder if a Bill Burr, he hates Trump, though, I think.

• 29:17David Sacks?

  Or who is, who is the guy who got canceled for exposing himself?

• 29:20Jason Calacanis?

  Louis C K.

• 29:21David Sacks?

  Yeah, Louis C K.

• 29:22Jason Calacanis?

  Louis C K.

• 29:23David Sacks?

  I mean, I'm not saying he's conservative, right? But, um, you know, he's available.

• 29:28Jason Calacanis?

  Both those guys hate him.

• 29:28David Sacks?

  He's highly available.

• 29:30Jason Calacanis?

  So, I mean, actually, one thing to think about is, you know, Trump got all these people to do like the monthly $25 reoccurring subscription. And we got in a little bit of trouble for that because people didn't know they were signing off for it. But I wonder if he could get a million people or five million people to pay 10 bucks a month for the sax.

• 29:46David Sacks?

  Yeah, absolutely. If there's something there behind the curtain. I mean, if it's nothing but like, I don't know, a newsletter of his like extemporaneous tweets, I don't think so. But if there's real content there from people they care about, why wouldn't they?

• 30:00Jason Calacanis?

  Wait a second, what if he just did every Friday night, a rally on a video service where he just did one of his two or three hour stand up routines? And had different people come up and talk like his pillow guy and all of his other weirdos in his.

• 30:12David Sacks?

  I think this could be like the, I think this could be like the Oprah Winfrey network where she may like anchor the temple show or something. But there's a lot of other creators on the network. I think that's the opportunity he has. The question, the question, quite frankly, though, is whether he's operational enough to actually drive to these outcomes. I think it's very easy for us to imagine what you could do with $20 billion at his media brand. And the question is just, does this get executed that way?

• 30:35Jason Calacanis?

  Now, does?

• 30:36David Friedberg?

  It's not going to be a real estate sugar guy from Florida that's going to manage this thing to an outcome.

• 30:41Jason Calacanis?

  Does Twitter then let him back on the platform if he has this competing platform? Does Facebook, how does that?

• 30:46David Sacks?

  No, I think, I think at that point they have the perfect excuse not to let him back on, which is like, hey, we're not censoring him because he's, there's an alternative. They don't want to let him back on.

• 30:56Jason Calacanis?

  In a way, I guess you have to ask yourself if Twitter had let him come back on and gave him his platform back after like a six month or a year timeout, would he even be doing this?

• 31:04David Sacks?

  No, he says, and he has a press announcement where he says that, I mean, he says here that Trump Media and Technology Group's mission is to create a rival to the liberal media consortium and fight back against the big tech companies in Silicon Valley, which have used their unilateral power to silence opposing voices in America. This is what's given him the opportunity is their censorship.

• 31:25Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Their censorship just created a $20 billion war chest.

• 31:30Jason Calacanis?

  I mean, the most tilting thing of this whole conversation is it's worth twice as much as the New York Times.

• 31:34Chamath Palihapitiya?

  That is so tilting.

• 31:35David Sacks?

  Haven't I been saying on this show for over a year that censorship backfires in ways you can't expect? They never think through the second and third order consequences of their censorship. It's like when Angela Merkel came out and said, hey, like, wait, did Twitter just deplatform ahead of state? Why are we depending on them? I mean, there's all these second and third order consequences they never think through, and now they're coming back to bite them in the ass.

• 31:56Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, I mean, forcing people to get vaccines is now leading to whatever percentage of people just retiring or, you know, are not coming back to work. And that's causing a bit of bedlam in the economy as we talked about.

• 32:08David Sacks?

  All these authoritarian tendencies create a backlash of some kind. And if our ruling elites would just have a lighter hand, there'd be a lot less tension in the country.

• 32:17Jason Calacanis?

  We had an interesting discussion last night during, but I think it was on the other side of the table. So maybe you two didn't hear it, but we were talking about is Biden going to run again in 2024? And what would that look like? And I just said, I can't imagine Biden in a debate three years from now, like, he doesn't seem, I don't want to be derogatory here, but he doesn't seem very crisp the last time, four years later. So what do we think? Chances of Biden running in 2024? Chances of Trump running in 2024 with all this information? And what would that look like?

• 32:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Zero and zero.

• 32:48Jason Calacanis?

  You're zero and zero. Friedberg, do you even care? Nope. Yeah, I didn't think so.

• 32:53David Friedberg?

  Well, look, I mean, I think Trump's going to run this $20 billion media empire and he's going to be happy doing that. I think if it's not Biden, it's going to be a proxy. So it's not going to be too far off in terms of what the

• 33:06Jason Calacanis?

  You're, you're deep in this, Sax, you're hosting, as people were talking about on Twitter, and you tilted all of San Francisco, or 90% of it, you're hosting DeSantis for a fundraiser.

• 33:17David Sacks?

  His first fundraiser for his reelection as governor, he hasn't said anything about his plans in 2024, it's way too early for that. Do I think Biden or Trump could be on the ballot? I think it's 50/50 for both of them.

• 33:27David Friedberg?

  All right.

• 33:27David Sacks?

  But I would like to see, but look, instead of having two 80-year-olds running against each other, I would like to see, say, two 40-something, or just younger leaders, you know, giving America a real choice.

• 33:40Jason Calacanis?

  All right, where do we want to jump off to now? Venture capital?

• 33:43David Friedberg?

  Venture capital, because clearly Sax is, is having extraordinary liquidity events at 11 o'clock at night on a Thursday night, that

• 33:51David Sacks?

  Friedberg, money is not made, it's simply transferred from one perception to another.

• 33:55Jason Calacanis?

  One perception to another. There's a Wall Street speech. Sax was like in his glory last night, doing monologues from Wall Street last night.

• 34:06David Friedberg?

  He was leaving, he was leaving the poker table to go to, into his soundproof chamber that oversees his estate next to the poker room. And from there, he was on his phone screaming, pacing back and forth, doing deals, Gecko-style. He had his 300-pound trader next to him, he was placing orders, and something's going on in the market. I mean, Sax, you know, you tell, but clearly the, the venture liquidity waterfall that's going on right now is playing into a lot of it.

• 34:34David Sacks?

  It is bonkers. Wait, we gotta show that chart.

• 34:37David Friedberg?

  We should highlight this. Highlight the statistics, Jake, because it is truly extraordinary how much liquidity venture firms are having this year.

• 34:43Jason Calacanis?

  All right, well, just to look at the value of US venture-backed companies that went public or were acquired, 290 billion, 280 billion in 19 and 20. And then this year, 2021 so far, we're at 590 billion, it's literally doubled. But if you look back, it was but 110 billion in 2018. So we are now 5, 6X where we were five years ago. And this is, again, the value of US venture, US venture-backed companies that went public or were acquired. So the liquidity is bonkers, and we're seeing that in real estate. Uh, you know, jets being bought, whatever. The VC industry has experienced three years of record-breaking exits. Uh, this is a Twitter user who tweeted it. Uh, 2021 is obviously smashing

• 35:28Jason Calacanis?

  all those levels.

• 35:29David Sacks?

  Yeah, I mean, uh, for, for the last, uh, until the last three years, for the previous 15, 20 years, the exits per year were in this 50 to 100 billion range. Then they've jumped up to 600 billion in the last year. And in the previous two years, it was 300 billion each. So, yeah, I mean, it's just more money has, has been made or distributed out in the venture capital industry the last three years than I think the previous 20 years combined, at least.

• 35:56Jason Calacanis?

  The last three years, yeah.

• 35:57Chamath Palihapitiya?

  That doesn't, that doesn't even factor in what's happening in crypto.

• 36:01David Sacks?

  Right.

• 36:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And crypto is just like.

• 36:03Jason Calacanis?

  I'm sure there's some crypto in here. Coinbase is in here as an example.

• 36:05Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No, like, like, like in my portfolio, as an example, like, you know, like venture returns, which have, which have been excellent across the board. So forget mine, just everybody's. Venture value kind of like slowly ticks up over time, right? Because like, you know, you're doing this work and then that work gets valued and then somebody else comes in and raises a new round and, you know, you, you hopefully can defend your prorata, yada, yada. So it, it, it, it does create a lot of compounding value, but it's, you know, and, and it's relatively fast, but compared to crypto, it's unbelievably slow. Whereas in crypto, you know, quarter over quarter, you have these swings that I've, I've personally never, ever seen. Like I was telling you this story yesterday, we own something, which I'm not going to tell you what it is,

• 36:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  but, um, it's a crypto thing. And, uh, our NAV, I had to mark my book up a billion net asset value on that asset. I had to mark it up because, you know, we have to submit to our auditors and just keep it an accurate sense of what our book value is. A billion dollars in a quarter. I've never seen that in my entire investing career. And here's how, what it does to me and my whole team.

• 37:13Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I have a budget for next year of how much I want to spend. Instantly, that number goes up. And what it really means is I'm probably just going to be getting the same ownership, but I'm just going to be paying more for it. And if I'm going through that, I think everybody's going to go through it. What it's going to do is, is like, all of this, all of these returns are great. All of these increases are great, but I'm not sure that there's going to be that much more progress. There's not necessarily going to be that many more startups, because it's just harder and harder to find good things in the same, for the same number of GPs in a place. And costs are going bananas. Salaries are off the charts. I don't know if you guys saw, but Stripe, for example, there was a tweet about how Stripe's starting to pay, like, starting engineers 280K.

• 37:58Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I don't know if that's true or not, but there was a tweet in Twitter. And I thought to myself, my gosh, like, 20 years ago, a starting engineering salary was 50, 60K in the Bay Area. And so you've seen this incredible price inflation. So it's actually quite good. Again, it's sort of what we talked about yesterday. All of these gains eventually come back around and get recaptured. And so I think that you're starting to see the beginning of this really incredible cycle of wealth transfer, essentially. So the funds may make it, but it's going to come back to the founders.

• 38:27Jason Calacanis?

  Let me ask you a question about the crypto stuff. Is there any worry there that these valuations match reality? Because you might have a very small float on these, a lot of excitement, and they're not actually products being used by customers in the real world.

• 38:41Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Here's the thing, I, because it's an internal permanent pool of capital, I have no legal requirement to actually mark, okay? But the reason we do it is because we want to track NAV, NAV in book value, okay? And, you know, I compensate my team based on how well we compound book value. But you're right, it's a huge problem, because I don't know how to get liquid on these things. And so you see this thing sitting on your balance sheet, and you're like, what do we do with this? How do you move it around? You can't, you cannot. And so I would rather, there's a, there's a great guy, he was an early pioneer of private equity, and... He had this phrase, which he said like, you know, the best way to mark up a deal is

• 39:26Chamath Palihapitiya?

  right at the end. So if you put in, you know, $10 million into a series A, if you could be allowed, the best thing to do would be carry that at a $10 million value right until the minute you get liquid, because then you don't go through the psychological roller coaster ride of having to go through these marks. Because then when these marks come back down, Jason, to your point, there'll be, there'll be a quarter where we give back that billion dollars of debt, maybe, you know?

• 39:51Jason Calacanis?

  I mean, what, what do we all do?

• 39:53Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's a huge mind fuck.

• 39:54Jason Calacanis?

  Let, let me ask a question about valuation, Sax. When you're doing yours, because this came up when I was doing mine and, and marking my funds. If a secondary transaction occurs and somebody buys COM or, you know, Slack or whatever, it's when it's a private company at $10 a share, but the last time you purchased it, or there was a funding two years ago, it was at $2 a share. Where do you put the valuation at what the secondary market is trading it at, or what you last paid for it, or somewhere in between those? And who makes that decision, Sax? What is the best practice on this? Because secondary market transactions, people are actually making a transaction.

• 40:28David Sacks?

  Right.

• 40:28Jason Calacanis?

  But is that as good as a venture firm, you know, plopping down and joining the board?

• 40:33David Sacks?

  No, it's not. So first of all, you don't want to be making these decisions ad hoc. You want to have a policy. So we have a written policy and there's a process for amending it if it ever needs to be amended. And what our policy does is it just uses the most, the most recent preferred round to give us the value of the shares. And then there can be adjustments based on market conditions. Like we know that it's usually on the downward, right? Like the company we know has had a huge problem, they're not going to fundraise again. So there's not going to be a new market anytime soon.

• 41:05Jason Calacanis?

  You're saying it's a zombie company?

• 41:06David Sacks?

  Yeah, it's a zombie company. We can, we can mark it down. But basically speaking, we use preferred financing valuations to set marks only. Now, we do sometimes buy secondary shares and there's a methodology for bringing value on them. Usually it's basically what we buy them at. And if we somehow otherwise own common, we'll use the 409A.

• 41:27Jason Calacanis?

  That's what we do too.

• 41:28David Sacks?

  Yeah.

• 41:28Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah, I think a severely, really clean policy.

• 41:31Jason Calacanis?

  You want to be conservative in these because nothing would be worse.

• 41:34Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah, I think you have to be accurate, not conservative.

• 41:36Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah. Well, I mean, you could be, yeah, I guess the question is like, you could see somebody playing some games where, you know, you buy, you know, some shares at the, you own shares in the company, you buy some shares in secondary, and now you've got two marks.

• 41:51Chamath Palihapitiya?

  The embedded risk in venture capital has always been the following, which is that you have money that goes in into the A. And there is an incentive today, especially because so much money is trying to come in, where you want to drive as much growth as possible because then the B is at such a large step up that the IRRs look amazing. And then the C looks greater than the B. So then everybody's quote unquote, making paper money, which allows you to create more incentives to raise more capital. The problem with all of that is that if these valuations ever turn out to not be real, or there's a valuation reset, or there's inflation, or the public markets don't value growth stocks, it takes a long time for it to work its way through the venture ecosystem.

• 42:31Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And all of this liquidity will probably make it even more violent when it does happen because it'll eventually will happen. We'll go through a rerating like the year 2000. Who knows when it is and what the catalyst is. But that's the real downside of not, of all of this is that it'll eventually have a valuation reset that's going to be.

• 42:51Jason Calacanis?

  And to make this super real for people, US venture capital funds have raised a combined 69.1 billion in 2020, edging past the 2018. And a couple of these were because of Andreessen Horowitz doing a pair of mega funds with 4.5 billion in commitments recently. And so it's been just a tremendous amount of funds being made. And then to give you an example, Clubhouse went from 100 million to a billion to 4 billion in under 18 months in valuation, led, I think, each time by Andreessen Horowitz. So what you're saying in an example like this, or in your hypothetical example, and I'll just make it a real world one. If they take those, and by the way, these are 2020 stats. I don't know what the 2021 stats are. So those are old stats. There's probably many more. I think actually I have the updated stats.

• 43:37David Friedberg?

  Funds have raised 96 billion for 2021. That's the most updated.

• 43:41Chamath Palihapitiya?

  In fairness to all of the venture capitalists, I think that they're doing exactly what they should be doing. And in fairness to all the crossover funds, right now is the time to be putting maximum money to work as fast as possible, not necessarily intelligently, not necessarily in a concentrated way. But the real game, if you want to play it at the institutional level, is to just put all the chips on the table and then go back to the store and get some more chips as quickly as possible, put them all on the table, come back and get more so that when it all, you know, is said and done, you have as many dollars working. And the worst case is you will return the average return of the market. And if that happens to be good, you're you look good.

• 44:26Chamath Palihapitiya?

  If it happens to be crappy, you'll be no worse, better, worse off than anybody else. But meanwhile, you will have collected enormous fees. And so that's the point in the cycle we're at. And I think that anybody who's doing it makes a ton of sense. I think it's it's a really logical thing to be doing.

• 44:41David Friedberg?

  The ones that have had big liquidity events are also retiring. I mean, we're seeing across the board, GPs of these ultra successful funds that have returned 5X plus, taking their, yeah, and they got their carried interest and they share their 20, 25% share in that and they walk away. But if you look at the value of all global public equities, it's about, it's about 100 trillion dollars. And so if you're seeing, let's say that we're raising 100 billion dollars a year of venture capital in these funds, and then you're making a 2.5X average market return, which is not normal, right? Let's assume that's the normal cycle we're in right now. That's 250 billion dollars of liquidity realized in a year

• 45:25David Friedberg?

  out of 100 trillion dollars of global public equities. That's only a quarter of a percent of the disruption of public equities. And think about it, technology is set up to disrupt all of these old school businesses that are public and mature and scaled. And that's what the 100 trillion dollars represents. So it's actually, you know, kind of looking at it statistically, it's not that unfounded that we're only seeing. Quarter percent market cap disruption of public equities each year because those public companies aren't disrupting each other generally. Maybe to some extent they are, they're getting disrupted by new companies that are emerging. New startups. And so I don't think that this is like necessarily. The, you know, the peak, it may kind of be the beginning of a continuing disruption cycle that we're going to see kind of persist for the next decade or two.

• 46:09David Friedberg?

  Especially as more of the old school industrial businesses, which make up a bulk of that market cap. Start to get disrupted, not just by software, but also by automation, by E S G angle investing. By life sciences and all these other kind of technologies. That and these interests, these market interests that are going to disrupt those old industries. I think we could even see an acceleration from here. So, um, you know, I don't, I don't think that this is necessarily peak. Frenzied, bubbled, low interest rate fueled outcomes. I think this may be kind of part of a longer term trend that is statistically probably not that big a deal.

• 46:40Jason Calacanis?

  Sax, are you concerned about this peak bubbly market or do you think? You know, like Tramot said, push all your chips in and raise as big a fund as you can and. You know, if the game is going to be played at these high stakes, you want to be at the table.

• 46:55David Sacks?

  Well, I, I, I like what Friedberg said. I think it's a super interesting point that this could just be the beginning. Look, we, we live in an age of accelerating technological progress. So why wouldn't the returns from that accelerating technological progress also be accelerating? You, you know, we, we had this thesis 20 years ago when the internet first started that you had the new economy to replace the old economy. It took a few years longer than people thought, but we are fully there. And the number of new companies being created now is just exploding. There are a lot of this, the, this liquidity that's being generated is being now pumped into the next set of funds, which will go to founders. They'll be able to create more companies. They'll be able to keep more of those companies. Because there'll be less dilution.

• 47:37David Sacks?

  And then a lot of this wealth is trickling, a lot of the V C money is trickling down into the competition for salaries. So. Anybody, really anywhere in the world who can learn how to write code. Can now, you know, make a six figure plus salary because of remote work. So all the salaries all over the world are equilibrating. So, I mean, this is. Incredible pathway to prosperity for, I mean, certainly the United States, but really the whole world.

• 48:03Jason Calacanis?

  For humanity.

• 48:04David Sacks?

  For humanity. It's really positive, assuming it keeps going, assuming it's not just totally liquidity driven. And, you know, I don't know exactly, you know, how all those macro forces will play out. But, um, but I mean, this seems very positive overall. The other, the other thing it'll lead to just quickly is a change in who has political power. Because, you know, ultimately, you know, money is the mother's milk of politics. And, and the people who are making all these returns will eventually fund politicians. And, uh, and, you know, I, yeah, well, I, yeah, I'm one of them.

• 48:37Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah.

• 48:38David Sacks?

  But look, I think there's two kinds of, like I'd say prototypes, politi- uh, politically speaking, for people in the technology world, you've kind of got the, the sort of standard woke progressives who are funding a lot of this crazy stuff, like decarceration in cities, whatever. We talked about that before. But I also think there's another prototype that's less loud and they feel that they're, they kind of keep their views more to themselves, which is, I call them liberalitarians, who are sort of liberal on social values, but libertarian on economic policy. They don't like government regulations, certainly if they're in the crypto world. They don't like government regulations. They could see how they create, you know, friction to progress.

• 49:17David Sacks?

  And they believe in markets and, um, and they, I think they're going to want to fund politicians who support that, those types of things. So, you know, I could be very positive, uh, politically in that respect.

• 49:29Jason Calacanis?

  What's interesting, I just want to build on what you built on what Friedberg said, which is, I think the best point you made was look on a, on a global basis of the opportunity for an individual. Somebody who is, you know, graduating high school, college, they're 18, 19, 20 years old. Because of remote work, anybody can work from anywhere, technology companies have unlimited resources. And they need an un- a never-ending supply of developers or even a SaaS salesperson, a marketer, you know, back office, et cetera, and they can work from anywhere on the globe and make a six-figure salary, you know, whatever, 50, 60, 70, 80 K for one of these entry-level jobs in sales. And all the information on how to get those jobs is available for free from startups that have put open courseware online or very free courses.

• 50:13Jason Calacanis?

  Yet we're looking at this massive technological change and the New York Times' position is that technology is destroying humanity and polarization of wealth is destroying humanity. What we're actually uncovering here is all of this money being invested in these companies is giving an opportunity for people around the world to get high-paying jobs.

• 50:30David Sacks?

  Totally. And actually, can I, can I, can I, let me mention a really interesting item that was just in Politico today, which is about Al Sharpton was lobbying in Congress against changing the carried interest treatments. Remember, you know, all of us in VC make our compensation in the form of carried interest.

• 50:51Jason Calacanis?

  Explain what it is.

• 50:52David Sacks?

  Well, it's basically, you know, if a fund is in profits that, you know, the VC will get, the VC's firm will get, say, 25% of the upside after they pay back all their LPs. That's called the carried interest. Because of the way that these partnerships are set up, that is treated as a capital gains as opposed to ordinary income, assuming it meets the holding periods of the underlying assets. So there's a big debate about whether, you know, VCs and private equity people should be paying ordinary income or long-term cap gains on those returns. Al Sharpton was lobbying against changing it because in this Politico article, he was saying that it would impede the efforts of black entrepreneurs to build lasting wealth

• 51:35David Sacks?

  if you jacked up the tax rates because there's a lot of fund managers and, you know, who, who are black, who are making a lot of money now, and they don't want to be subject to this change in treatment. So that was super interesting. You know, this tech boom is not, it's not exclusive. I mean, the, the tech industry gets this rap as if it's this highly exclusionary place. It's not. I mean, three of the people on this pod right now are immigrants. So, you know, the wealth that's being created is not going to traditional centers, traditional, it's not going to the heirs of, you know, northeastern, you know, families or something who've been sending their kids to Harvard. For generations, it's going to entirely new people who haven't had this kind of wealth before.

• 52:20Chamath Palihapitiya?

  By the way, another positive externality of this wealth, all these massive gains that folks who have invested in venture capital have gotten has caused one really interesting positive change. So Amherst, which is a really exclusive liberal arts college in the Northeast, made so much money, their endowment is so flush with cash, they basically eliminated legacy admit tenses, which means if your parents got in, you were 70% likely to get into Amherst. An equivalent kid whose parents didn't go to Amherst had a less than 6% admit rate, right? So huge disparity, basically said if you were a legacy kid that exists,

• 53:03Chamath Palihapitiya?

  you know, we all know this, it exists at Harvard, it exists at all these Ivy League schools. But Amherst is now so, has made so much money through VC investments as an example. They're like, we've canceled admit tenses. So there's, there are, there are some really positive things that are happening with all this money that's being made.

• 53:19David Friedberg?

  Al Sharpton's rationale aside, anyone's going to get wealthier if they're paying less taxes. So I think, you know, you're broadly, you're, you're going to see a bit of a focus on that point.

• 53:30Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Which is why, Friedberg, California was massively in the bonus in terms of budget surplus and cash because of this issue. And they were spending money like trunk and sailors.

• 53:41David Friedberg?

  Yeah, I mean, I, I just think you're going to hear a lot of positioning for, you know, the case, and, and by the way, I think that, you know, building individual wealth creates, this is obviously a philosophical point, but you know, it creates a greater path to prosperity for more people through the spending that they'll undergo and, and growing the economy than, you know, than not. So I, I don't know. I mean, I feel like the Al Sharpton point is a good one to kind of make, but it's, it's a broader one than that.

• 54:08David Sacks?

  Well, I think that in my view, the broader point about the Sharpton thing is that it shows that we talk about this group of rich people, the wealthy, the millionaires and billionaires, as if it's a static class of people. At least, this is the progressive attack. It's not. I mean, what Sharpton points to is that this group is constantly changing. There's new people getting rich. So when we talk about the rich, if it's new people getting rich, what we're really talking about is success. And if you really want to ban people getting rich, I mean, you're talking about banning success. Our country can't be successful that way. We're not going to be able to outcompete China if we're preventing success. And by the way, we can't fund all these progressive programs if we are, you know, hamstringing success. So, you know, I think this, what we've created here with this highly entrepreneurial

• 54:53David Sacks?

  free enterprise system that's funded by venture capital, this is the golden goose of the American economy. And the most important thing is that we don't break it.

• 55:01Jason Calacanis?

  Sacks, it might just be, we may have underestimated its power, is what we're sort of realizing collectively here today, is that we've always thought that this thing is hitting all-time highs. This might be the beginning, right? Like, it feels like this is getting bigger and, you know, and going at a velocity that is different than even when we came into the industry. You know, the amount of exits, the amount, the scale of these companies, the coinbases, the Robin Hoods, the Ubers, the Slacks. I mean, these are giant companies making huge international impacts.

• 55:30David Sacks?

  I think it's either that, or this whole thing is a liquidity-driven bubble. So it's one of the two.

• 55:35Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's both. It's both.

• 55:37Jason Calacanis?

  Well, I also think the Sharpton thing is a very interesting point that we can go back to maybe episode 25 or 20, when we started this podcast, which was, Trump got massive support from the black and Hispanic community because of this entrepreneurial freedom, upward mobility pitch the Republicans were making. That's the perfect pitch for the Republicans, not this divisive, divisive, you know, shut the border down, but more, hey, we want everybody to support it. And I thought one of the best takes was Michael Che. Did you want to just add on this and I'll give it to you, Chuma? Michael Che was on The Breakfast Club when our friend was hosting SNL, and he said, "I don't know. I think white people just don't like their billionaires for some reason. It's weird, because we love our billionaires.

• 56:21Jason Calacanis?

  If Oprah or Tyler Perry was coming, we'd be excited about it." And I met Michael Che there. Michael Che was really excited. He's a fan of Elon's. And like, it was a really great conversation they had.

• 56:31Chamath Palihapitiya?

  So true. It's so true.

• 56:33Jason Calacanis?

  Like, why are we hating people who are changing the world and helping?

• 56:37David Sacks?

  Right, because it's not we, it's frankly, it's white woke progressives. They're crazy. They're the crazy ones.

• 56:43Chamath Palihapitiya?

  They're bonkers. We have to get purple.

• 56:46David Friedberg?

  I think conservatives and what you call woke progressives are the same. I don't think it's about a political affinity. I think it is about people feeling like they don't have the opportunity that others clearly were able to realize. And it is amplified and magnified by the social media that that basically shines a light on the success that people have had in a way that we've never had in history before. And it creates a great deal of feeling like I'm missing out and I'm being left out. And that's what's driving a lot of the discontent on both the left and

• 57:17Chamath Palihapitiya?

  100%.

• 57:18David Friedberg?

  It's not a political point of view. I think it's a social point of view. And the great progress we've had and the great success we've had as a society over the past couple of decades is now being realized through this media in a way that's kind of driving emotional conditions for people that haven't had the same level of success.

• 57:33Jason Calacanis?

  Maybe if they stop tweeting and complaining and just learn some skills, like if your skill is complaining on Twitter.

• 57:39Chamath Palihapitiya?

  As the only colored person on this pod, what I'll tell you is I it's very rare that I meet a colored person that hates a successful other colored person. Just doesn't exist, guys.

• 57:48Jason Calacanis?

  Tell us more.

• 57:50Chamath Palihapitiya?

  It's just one of these things where, you know, we were, we are all grinding. We all know how hard it is to be on the outside looking in. If any one of us makes it, there's a lot of support.

• 58:00Jason Calacanis?

  I mean, we see that.

• 58:01Chamath Palihapitiya?

  That's just, I'll just tell you, that's what I felt.

• 58:03David Friedberg?

  South African Jews don't feel that way.

• 58:07Jason Calacanis?

  No, I mean, we see that in the incoming emails and tweets to you, Chamath. You are inspiring people in India, Pakistan, Sri Lanka. We see it constantly. They come up to you at events and they're like, hey, if Chamath can figure this out, I can do it.

• 58:18Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I'm about to do this thing in Africa and I'm going there in December. I can't wait. And, you know, we're thinking of just doing a couple of like lectures and talks.

• 58:26Jason Calacanis?

  Let's do it.

• 58:27Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Lectures and talks and these, these places are going to get rammed with people and it's like, it's beautiful to see like, yeah, I just think that minorities like don't hate on other people that are successful. It's just not.

• 58:38David Friedberg?

  You're going to Africa in December?

• 58:40Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah.

• 58:41Jason Calacanis?

  Why don't we do all in Africa? What are we doing? Like?

• 58:43David Friedberg?

  Where are you going?

• 58:44Jason Calacanis?

  Have any extra seats?

• 58:45Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I got some stuff cooking.

• 58:46Jason Calacanis?

  Hey. I'm getting email constantly by people who are starting startups in Africa. I want to go. I've never been. I really want to go.

• 58:52Chamath Palihapitiya?

  You can come with me in early December if you want.

• 58:54Jason Calacanis?

  I'm in. I'm 100%. I have nothing to do. I'm bored.

• 58:57Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Here's the thing that I wanted to talk about before. What is crazy, and this is Jason to build on your Trump comment. We may be facing a situation, I'd love to get your guys' reaction, where Donald Trump, in his first two years of his presidency, may actually have gotten more done than Biden will get done in his first two years. And I just want your guys' reaction and thoughts on how that possibly could be, because we have a Democratic president, we have a Democratic Congress, and we may not get anything done.

• 59:25David Sacks?

  I can speak to that. Here's your alley-oop. That's with the wind-up. I can't believe that the way the progressives have done this reconciliation bill. It's been crazy. Okay, look, from the beginning, they've been saying, Biden, the administration, the Democrats have been saying, "We want to do the biggest package of tax and spend since the Great Society." Okay, but here's the thing. If you want to do LBJ-type things, you've got to have LBJ-type majorities. They've got a 50-50 Senate and a three-seat margin in the House. LBJ, when he passed the Great Society, he had like 69 senators, he had a filibuster supermajority, filibuster-proof supermajority in the Senate, he had something like 150-seat margin in the House. That is the kind of margins you need to pass Great

• 1:00:09David Sacks?

  Society-like programs. So instead of having, I'd say, ambitions that were reasonable, the administration caucuses with the progressives. They come together with this over $4.5 billion of spending, $3.5 billion in the social welfare, 1.2 trillion of infrastructure, and they wanted even more, okay? And then they've been trying to jam this thing, and they never went to the center of the party, to Sinema, to Manchin, and said, "Hey, what are you guys willing to do?" And so somehow, I think they thought they could just jam this thing through, over the objections of these votes that they absolutely need. And I think there's really this mentality on the part of the progressive left, that I think they're so used to jamming people with speech codes, and cancellation, and censorship, and COVID

• 1:00:50David Sacks?

  mandates that are not passed by legislatures but have been imposed by edict. I think they're just used to jamming people, and they think they're going to shame people on Twitter, like these senators, like Manchin, like Sinema, into voting their way. Guess what? It doesn't work that way. Twitter is not the real world. Eric Adams showed that in New York. He won that election.

• 1:01:07Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Shout out to Dave Chappelle.

• 1:01:08David Sacks?

  Exactly. Dave Chappelle has a 95% approval rating, okay? The critics hate him, the progressives hate him. Guess what? You know how many people were actually at that Dave Chappelle protest? Like, three dozen, okay? The progressives don't have the votes. What they should have done, and by the way, their, their conduct through the whole thing has been insane. AOC has basically been saying, if you don't give us everything we want, we're not voting for your one and a half trillion

• 1:01:30Jason Calacanis?

  They overplayed their hands. These guys have like ace jack off and they're shh.

• 1:01:34David Sacks?

  They're putting their head saying, hey, unless you give us three and a half billion, we're not going to vote for one billion. Really? You're going to do that? How does that make sense? We know, call their bluff. We know progressives will vote for every penny they can. What the, what Biden should have done, if we had a more hands-on president who actually wants to get things done, he, and he knows this from his time in the senate, he should have gone to those swing senators as a group and said, hey, what can we get done here? Not to AOC and Pelosi. They can't deliver.

• 1:02:00Jason Calacanis?

  Well, I mean, the promise of Biden, I'll say, you know, as somebody who voted for Biden, I'm a little disappointed, was he was supposed to be moderate and he was supposed to bring people to the center. And it doesn't feel like he's actually, to your point, Trump, you asked us what we think. I have, I'm not regretting because I, Trump had to go. It was too much chaos. There was just too much risk having him in there. So I am glad I voted for Biden. But I am unhappy that he cannot build consensus down the middle and get the far left to just, you know, pump the brakes. I, I, I understand they have passion for certain projects, but just get something done moderately and in a phased approach. Why does this have to be so huge and confusing? Do a smaller thing three times.

• 1:02:39Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Saks is exposing what we may not know, which is that progressives are very loud, but they may not actually represent a plurality of people. So for example, in the Netflix protest, I saw a video and there was about two dozen people, you know, and one person actually had tweeted, hey, I, I never even showed up to the office yet, but now I'm showing up to walk out of the office. But then what happened was there were some other people that showed up and in the middle of the protest, they had a sign that said, you know, jokes are funny. I like jokes. And then everybody started chanting that. Then a, a black woman got up and she started to say, black lives matter. And then everybody got confused and started to chant, black lives matter. And then they were all looking around each other, trying to find direction in this

• 1:03:24Chamath Palihapitiya?

  protest, and it became somewhat directionless. And I think this is what, you know, we're, we're now realizing is that, you know, remember what like as managers in corporations, we've all heard this term, the squeaky wheel gets the grease. But it may actually be the case that the squeaky wheel shouldn't get the grease because it's a head fake and we're going to get lost in misdirection. Another example of this, there's a guy Dorian Abbott, and I wanted to talk about this as well. This is a guy who's an acclaimed climate professor. Okay, let me just give you the whole story. I'm just going to read to you because I think it's interesting, the first couple of paragraphs of this story from the New York Times. "MIT invites geophysicist Dorian Abbott to give a prestigious public lecture this autumn. He seemed a natural choice.

• 1:04:08Chamath Palihapitiya?

  He's a scientific star who studies climate change and whether planets and distant solar systems might harbor atmospheres conducive to life. Then a swell of angry resistance arose. Some faculty members and grad students argued that Dr. Abbott, who's a professor at University of Chicago, had created harm by speaking out against aspects of affirmative action and diversity because in videos and opinion pieces, he wants people and members of groups rather than as individuals. He basically favors a diverse pool of applicants selected on merit." So, but he said his planned lecture at MIT was about climate science and to help people understand climate change and would make no mention of his views on affirmative action.

• 1:04:50Chamath Palihapitiya?

  But his opponents argued that he was infuriating, inappropriate, and oppressive, and so they canceled the lecture. Now, here's the question I have. Here, that's another example of all of this stuff. Are we better off with, let's just say there's 100 grad students, 100 brilliant minds at MIT, being pushed to think even more specifically about climate change by an expert who can do that? Or are we better off finding some more middle-of-the-road person who maybe not be as intellectually ambitious around climate change, but has a whole bunch of other views not related to climate change that are more palatable?

• 1:05:32Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And what does that do for all of us, including probably all these people who probably want a solution to climate change, but who have now held back the ability to teach these kids? What do we do? What do we think about that kind of stuff? And this is where, again, the squeaky wheel in this case did get the grease, but are we actually better off in this example? Friedberg?

• 1:05:52David Friedberg?

  Diversity of thought drives successful outcomes?

• 1:06:02Jason Calacanis?

  All right. Thanks for coming in for the All In Podcast. We're telling you shit you already know. I mean, like, what are we talking about? For yourself, people. Listen to a bunch of opinions. And if somebody says something you don't like or challenges you, maybe that's an opportunity for you to learn or grow, or for you to make a blog post, or do your own stand-up special, give your own talk that challenges their debate, like we do here every week.

• 1:06:24David Sacks?

  Right, but

• 1:06:25David Friedberg?

  You guys remember the same thing happened with that, what's that ultra-conservative young guy, Sacks, who went to Berkeley a few years ago and they blocked him from going to campus? No, no, no, the Greek name, Greek name.

• 1:06:36Jason Calacanis?

  Milo Yiannopoulos.

• 1:06:38David Friedberg?

  Milo Yiannopoulos?

• 1:06:39Jason Calacanis?

  He's the right-wing guy, the gay provocateur.

• 1:06:41Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Here, we're talking about an expert in climate change, giving a lecture about climate change to grad students who could then go and solve climate change for the all of the world. I mean, this is MIT and U Chicago, which are probably two of the smartest institutions of people in the world.

• 1:06:56David Sacks?

  Right. He's not saying anything politically offensive. It's just that his unrelated views, they think are anathema, and therefore they're gonna protest and block him. And of course, they always use the language of safetyism, which is, oh, well, if you allow this person on campus, it threatens my safety. Really? This person's a physical threat to you? No. He threatens my self-conception. Really? He said something that, you know, he's gonna talk about something that offends you? No. It's just that, you know, he said things that threatened my view of the world, so my safety is jeopardized. I mean, this is literally the language that's being used now. I mean, Friedberg's reaction to it is, yeah, this is so obvious that we don't even need to discuss it. But it's not so obvious that it's not taking place. It's actually, it's happening.

• 1:07:40Jason Calacanis?

  It's happening. You know what I find the most disappointing about the whole Netflix situation is, I thought Dave Chappelle, you know, even though maybe the special wasn't as funny as other ones, I thought it made you think in such an incredible way. And I was actually read, I looked up the transcript, and I read the transcript so I could think more about it, and try to form an opinion about this turf issue, and trans people, and, you know, people punching up, punching down, and comedy. It made me think. And then the entire discussion about this is just people walking out and No discussion about what he actually said. And that to me is just a little bit of a tell. Like if you are so upset about what he said, well, where is the transcript of what he said?

• 1:08:21Jason Calacanis?

  Break it down sentence by sentence and tell us exactly what he got wrong and why so that we can continue the discussion. The Netflix walkout and how this thing has unfolded. The reason it's so unproductive is because they're not moving the discussion forward. They're not actually listening to what Chappelle said. And spoiler alert, if you haven't seen it yet, I'm going to talk a little bit about the what was in it. He talked about his friendship with a trans person who was a comedian and how he and she had these incredible discussions and learned a lot from each other and how she was dragged on Twitter and a lot of tragic outcomes. And I'll leave it at that. But there's no discussion about his relationship with that woman who had a tragic fate and the substance of what he said.

• 1:09:03Jason Calacanis?

  Did you notice that Chamath, that there's no discussion about the actual words and points that Dave Chappelle made? That shows you that this is a disingenuous or a broken discussion.

• 1:09:14Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah, I just, I just think that the problems that we have as a society are really big. Freebie talked about it. We have inequality problems. We have climate change problems. You know, we have problems of sort of like systemic health issues. These are all fixable. And I think that this other stuff is getting in the way of people getting organized to solve those issues.

• 1:09:37Jason Calacanis?

  Hundred percent.

• 1:09:38Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And I think that that frustrates me. I would have really, I'm not sure I agree with this guy's views on affirmative action. Let me just be clear. I've kind of, I think on the margins affirmative action is actually, it levels the playing field. And so I support it. But I also sort of the fact that if this guy is a brilliant geophysicist, and he's already proven that, I would want my kids to be taught climate science from him.

• 1:10:01Jason Calacanis?

  Sure.

• 1:10:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I don't, I don't think he's out there to try to like peddle his affirmative action views, you know, to a bunch of other physicists. I don't think that's what he's doing.

• 1:10:10Jason Calacanis?

  No.

• 1:10:11Chamath Palihapitiya?

  That's not what he's celebrated for.

• 1:10:12Jason Calacanis?

  That's not his life's work.

• 1:10:13Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And so I don't care. I would want all of those really brilliant kids at MIT to have, to be one step closer. To proposing a solution to climate change. I think that's a pervasive global issue. And we don't have the ability to prioritize these things and and that's what's just so sad.

• 1:10:34David Sacks?

  We're not going to have an honest conversation about climate change because we can't have that expert give us talk. And I don't think we're to Jason's point, I don't think we're having an honest conversation about the Chappelle special. I don't think any of us believe that Chappelle hates LGBTQ people, or I don't think anyone in the audience thinks that. And I think you have to deliberately misinterpret what Chappelle is thinking in or saying in order to believe that his message is hate. I don't think it is. Now, what I think the Chappelle special represents a threat to is perhaps this idea of intersectionality that all of these oppressed groups have to be on the same team. What he seems to be saying is there's a group of what he's kind of making fun of is that there's this group of sort of pampered, rich, white

• 1:11:16David Sacks?

  LGBTQ people who have made enormous progress. I mean, doesn't he say at one point in the special that, you know, I wish I wish my community, you know, black people could have made as much progress in 40 years in terms of acceptance as this group has. And yet this group now wants us to immediately adopt all of their language and sensibilities and and punches down, talks down to us if we don't. I mean, that's kind of the point he's making is he's kind of revealing a little bit of a rift between these between these two groups that are supposed to.

• 1:11:49Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Well, by the way, if you saw the if you saw the clip of the protest, that rift was actually in display because everybody got confused about what they were supposed to support. Because you had one set of chants and then you had jokes are funny chants and then you had BLM chants from completely different cohorts of people. And it just became a chaos.

• 1:12:07Jason Calacanis?

  Well, I mean, everybody's opinion must be put through the lens of how many oppressed groups they're from, you know, obesity, I'm black, I'm gay, I'm trans, I'm short, whatever. I mean, like, how do we have, how do you even navigate a discussion intelligently? If I have to say, okay, you're Sri Lankan, but you're rich Chamath and free burgers, got ass burgers, but he's really smart about something. I mean, it's like, just make your point and let's have an honest discussion about it. And why are we so upset about this special when in China? You know, we've got a million people, Uighurs, being sterilized and tortured. And then, I don't know if you saw this week, Xi Jinping is saying like, he wants to get rid of the sissy people, sissy men, is the term he's using, in China.

• 1:12:50David Sacks?

  Right.

• 1:12:50Jason Calacanis?

  They literally want to make it-

• 1:12:52Chamath Palihapitiya?

  They passed media rules against effeminate men.

• 1:12:54Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, I mean, why are we not protesting that?

• 1:12:58David Sacks?

  Well, we saw this in the Middle East as well. The real threat to LGBTQ people are these authoritarian governments that really want to oppress, you know-

• 1:13:06Jason Calacanis?

  Oppress, they want to murder-

• 1:13:07David Sacks?

  And murder gay people, absolutely.

• 1:13:08Jason Calacanis?

  They want to kill them.

• 1:13:09David Sacks?

  Yeah, I mean, Chappelle is not the threat. I think Chappelle had to be silenced because what he's saying is actually very heretical to the woke progressive left, which is that not all of these groups are on the same page. And they, again, they believe in this idea of intersectionality, that all of these groups have to basically be on the same page. And actually, the more oppressed groups that you're part of, the more elevated you are. And so, this idea that there could be a schism, actually, is something they want to silence.

• 1:13:39Jason Calacanis?

  Yeah, I mean, Chappelle's quote, "I don't disagree with the trans movement, I just agree with the way they're going about it," was his kind of point. And he said-

• 1:13:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Again, let me speak as a colored person who grew up in a minority family. You know, I would love to tell you that my parents were super, super open-minded, but that would be a lie.

• 1:14:00Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And, you know, I love them to death, and I think they tried their best, but, you know, they came with a ton of fucking baggage, and a ton of stereotypes. And, you know, I don't think that my parents would have been the most supportive of other minorities, whether it's color or sexual orientation or whatever. And it was a lot of, like, very complicated conversations to explain to them how to see the world differently. And, you know, that's what happened when you pluck them out of a third world country and drop them into Canada. And, you know, I think that my parents came far, a very long way. I remember, you know, when I first started, you know, dating my ex-wife, it's like, it was a very complicated thing for them to see me dating an Asian woman. Very complicated, they didn't understand. And then it was like, well, did you want me to marry or date a Sri Lankan?

• 1:14:45Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And they were like, yes, but as long as she's not Muslim. And it's like, what the hell are you, like, what are you saying? And so, I'm just trying to tell you that this idea of intersectionality, it does play out in a lot of our lives, because we all come from families, especially our aging parents-

• 1:14:59Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, my God, yeah.

• 1:15:00Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Who are-

• 1:15:01Jason Calacanis?

  My grandparents, there were some-

• 1:15:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I mean, I love my parents, but I'll be honest with you, they're, you know- They try their best, but man.

• 1:15:08Jason Calacanis?

  The thing that's got me particularly saddened or tilted or just, you know, the thing that just sort of hits me is we've made so much progress in so many ways as a society, yet we don't celebrate that. And we seem incredibly focused on marginal issues, to your point, Chamath, that are not global warming, that are not education, that are, that are not, you know, international relations and geopolitics. You know, like there's economic empowerment. There's so many things that we could be focused on that would actually make change than arguing about canceling Chappelle.

• 1:15:45Chamath Palihapitiya?

  And it would unite people.

• 1:15:46Jason Calacanis?

  Kevin Hart on the Oscars, you know?

• 1:15:47Chamath Palihapitiya?

  But it would unite people. That's what I think is so, that's what I think is such a great opportunity. If we all collectively came together and focused on a bigger enemy, right?

• 1:15:56Jason Calacanis?

  Climate change.

• 1:15:57Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Climate change.

• 1:15:58Jason Calacanis?

  Government.

• 1:15:58Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I think you'd find people to be much more accepting of each other because we would have a common shared goal and then we would find commonality in achieving it.

• 1:16:06David Sacks?

  Yeah. So Jake, Bill Maher invented a word to describe what you're, what you're saying, which is progressive phobia, which is it's the reluctance to admit any progress because of the fear that if you do admit progress, then that means that you don't, you will lack a justification for all these, you know, progressive programs that people want. And so they have to make the situations always seem as dire as possible in order to scare people into a certain agenda. But yeah, there, there's a, you know, unwillingness to admit how much progress we've made in so many areas.

• 1:16:35Jason Calacanis?

  The, the time they tried to cancel me was because I said on Twitter, isn't it amazing that every single skill you want to learn right now? And including the high paying jobs is now available for free on MIT course, wherein anybody can learn this stuff for free. And you used to have to pay $50,000 a year and get accepted into these, you know, Ivy League programs. But now all that information is free and all we need to do is expose people to it and give them the motivation, the time to do. And they were like, how could you say that? You know, people are not able to do it. And I was like, and then a bunch of people replied, who were people of color or people who were poor and said, I actually learned to code on the MIT website. I learned artificial intelligence. I learned, I got my degree in, uh, you know, social media, marketing or whatever at this website, Udemy, that website, other treehouse.

• 1:17:19Jason Calacanis?

  And all these people were saying, yeah, I learned all these skills and I went from making, working at Walmart to making 60K a year, 70K a year. And Then there was this big fight like, are you going to cancel me for saying there's more opportunity now than ever? I I hold that position. There is more opportunity now for you to learn a skill and get a high paying job than in the history of humanity. The system is more fair now than ever.

• 1:17:39Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah, I was gonna say.

• 1:17:40Jason Calacanis?

  Anybody argue with that?

• 1:17:41Chamath Palihapitiya?

  In the in the world of in the world of progress, there are some amazing innovations every day. This week, and I put this in the chat, and Nick, you can post the article. There was a gentleman in at the NYC NY NYU Langone Center of Medicine, who transplanted a pig kidney into a human and had that human kidney, or basically had that pig kidney not get rejected. Now, this was a person that was brain dead, and I guess, you know, the family, you know, God bless them.

• 1:18:14Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, wow.

• 1:18:14Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Donated this person's body to science effectively. They were kept alive, but then they were able to transplant a kidney in, and they were able to see the urine production and creatinine production. And all of a sudden now, there is a chance that we could actually use pigs, genetically engineered pigs, as a basis for us to basically get kidneys, hearts, lungs. That is incredible.

• 1:18:38Jason Calacanis?

  Friedberg?

• 1:18:39Chamath Palihapitiya?

  So so to your point, Sax, that is happening still every day, and we don't talk up enough about it because we're up in arms about Dave Chappelle.

• 1:18:46Jason Calacanis?

  Friedberg, tell us, you know, if that in 10 years, what that looks like? And in the impact it has on society, if we we take that pig transplant and we just 10x it from now, put a couple billion dollars behind it, what does it look like in a decade?

• 1:18:58David Friedberg?

  Well, I think there's other techniques that are being developed that you could actually generate actual human organs using, um, you know, basis of induced, um, these induced pluripotent stem cells. And regardless of the path, I do think like availability of organ transplants, um, uh, is gonna go up like crazy. The big infrastructure and technical challenge we still face is, uh, we've got to build these these, uh, GMP facilities, uh, to make all of these, uh, cell-based therapies, not just kind of organs, but also other cell-based therapies that are becoming kind of the mainstay of the future of medicine, uh, personalized medicine for humans.

• 1:19:42David Friedberg?

  Um, and so there's also this kind of tremendous infrastructure opportunity. We've talked a lot about. We've talked a lot about infrastructure in biomanufacturing broadly and other life sciences opportunities, but there's a tremendous infrastructure opportunity to build out facilities that can produce these, you know, these therapies. And the therapy can be an organ or a cell-based therapy that can target cancer in your body or what have you. And so you can kind of think about, look, we've resolved the science. Now we've also resolved the engineering. The next step is to build it, right? And so this is like, you know, the bill decade, the bill decades globally for where the intersection of software and

• 1:20:22David Friedberg?

  biology has enabled these incredible breakthroughs in human health and manufacturing and food. And now the infrastructure needs are there. I've said this before, I do think this is where we are, have the biggest gap in terms of infrastructure needs and the biggest opportunity to kind of fill those needs. And if we, if I were to kind of be in Congress or be president, I would say this is the number one priority for an infrastructure bill. Because once you get this going, it's going to change lives and it's going to change the economy.

• 1:20:49Jason Calacanis?

  So high-speed rail costing us 50 billion, 100 billion versus this?

• 1:20:54David Friedberg?

  Yeah, yeah, we could build a bunch of GMP facilities or a bunch of biomanufacturing facilities, a lot of stuff that we could build that would, you know, pay back within years and have a huge outcome. Private markets, maybe will meet this demand, but I think you gotta, you gotta kickstart this stuff. The economics are going to be unfeasible for a while. If you want to get a CAR-T therapy, which is a type of therapy that's personalized CAR-T therapies today, your cost is about $450,000. You know, a local university here, I was speaking with one of their, their lead doctors the other day, they've built their own GMP facility at a cost of $50 million and they can now get the therapies down to $40,000 per patient, but they can only serve 250 patients a year.

• 1:21:39David Friedberg?

  Using that kind of 90% cost reduction. So you can kind of see like as you build these systems, and this is built locally by a university, right? It's not built for industrial scale. These guys aren't commercial operators of these facilities. So if you start to build these facilities from a commercial point of view, and you can bootstrap some of these things and this infrastructure cost, very quickly, the cost becomes so low that you see these technologies proliferate. And I think we should see that both, you know, this organ transplant one is a great case study. Cell-based therapies, biomanufacturing, all sorts of opportunity.

• 1:22:12Jason Calacanis?

  You keep saying GMP facility?

• 1:22:14David Friedberg?

  Good manufacturing. Yeah, it's, you know, if you're gonna make cells that are gonna go in your body, there's incredibly stringent requirements on the safety and the cleanliness and the practices that go on in that facility. So these quote-unquote GMP facilities have a very specific criteria of how you build and how you operate them.

• 1:22:32Jason Calacanis?

  They're just highly, they're high-quality facilities is what you're saying?

• 1:22:36David Friedberg?

  Yeah, think about like a clean room to make semiconductors, except in this case, you're making cells that you're putting in your body. So you gotta be really careful.

• 1:22:42Jason Calacanis?

  All right, everybody, it's been 70 minutes, 75 minutes, 80 minutes. Anybody have any last-minute plugs for products that they want to disguise as a compliment to another bestie?

• 1:22:53David Friedberg?

  I still think we should launch Bestie Coin, the all-in coin, and monetize the all-in podcast. We were talking about this at poker last night.

• 1:22:59Jason Calacanis?

  No monetization, no monetization.

• 1:23:01David Sacks?

  NFTs, do we NFT ourselves?

• 1:23:03Jason Calacanis?

  No, Bestie Coin, Bestie Coin would be incredible.

• 1:23:06Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I think I want to tell you about this guy, Li Jiaqi, who's known as the Lipstick King in China. He did a 12-hour livestream on Wednesday on Taobao. 250 million people tuned in. He sold $1.7 billion of product.

• 1:23:22Jason Calacanis?

  So basically, the equivalent of the entire adult population in America watched this.

• 1:23:26Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Isn't that incredible?

• 1:23:27Jason Calacanis?

  That's bonkers.

• 1:23:28David Sacks?

  That is amazing.

• 1:23:29Chamath Palihapitiya?

  That is just incredible.

• 1:23:30Jason Calacanis?

  So that's QVC, and as if in... Two and a half times the people who watch the Super Bowl. It's two and a half Super Bowls.

• 1:23:37Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Lee Jackie, the Lipstick King.

• 1:23:39Jason Calacanis?

  The Lipstick King.

• 1:23:40David Friedberg?

  Guys, we haven't had Monty on the show in a while. Let me bring him up.

• 1:23:43Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, Monty.

• 1:23:44David Friedberg?

  Get him to the mic.

• 1:23:45Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, Monty. Yeah.

• 1:23:46David Friedberg?

  Monty, anything you want to say?

• 1:23:47Jason Calacanis?

  Some Monty fan service. For those of you asking about the All In Summit, we are looking at locations in Miami and we will have news shortly. If you want to sign up for the email. When are we doing this thing? Uh, we're gonna look at March, April, May.

• 1:24:03David Friedberg?

  But we're gonna do a, we're gonna do an LA show in January?

• 1:24:07Jason Calacanis?

  We're gonna do a live All In Podcast at the Upfront Summit, Mark Suster's event in LA. Uh, but that's like a closed event. And then the All In Summit, you can go sign up for email updates, summit allinpodcast.co, summit allinpodcast.co. We're not looking for volunteers. We're not looking for event planners. We have all the spaces in Miami. We could possibly know. Every single person's emailed us. Thanks to the fans for giving us every piece of information. Right now, it's just about dates, dates, dates. We gotta find a two-day date. And then whatever place we use, like Faina, the New World, uh, the Jackie Gleason Theater, there's so many great facilities there that have reached out to us. Once we pick the facility, we'll know what the facility capacity is. Some of them can fit 2,000 people, some can fit 250. When

• 1:24:52Jason Calacanis?

  we figure that out, then we'll figure out ticketing and, and how we get people there.

• 1:24:55Chamath Palihapitiya?

  This time next week, both Friedberg and I may have kids.

• 1:24:58Jason Calacanis?

  Uh, it's muscle. So are we, are we skipping next week?

• 1:25:03Chamath Palihapitiya?

  No.

• 1:25:04Jason Calacanis?

  I'm not, you're not giving birth. I don't know about you, but.

• 1:25:06David Friedberg?

  Okay.

• 1:25:07Jason Calacanis?

  No, we gotta get pictures and yeah, it's gonna be incredible. Well, congratulations, guys. And if this Africa trip is coming, I.

• 1:25:14Chamath Palihapitiya?

  This Africa trip is happening.

• 1:25:16Jason Calacanis?

  I can't wait. Do you, what countries are you thinking about?

• 1:25:19David Friedberg?

  Tag it along.

• 1:25:20Jason Calacanis?

  Of course. Listen, this is part of my life. I have my own, what's the point of having my own schedule and a bunch of great, powerful friends who are traveling the world, doing interesting shit? I'm, I'm the ultimate wingman.

• 1:25:29David Sacks?

  Your motto is private jet will travel.

• 1:25:32Jason Calacanis?

  I'm the wingman, professional wingman as a service.

• 1:25:35Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Kenya, Nigeria, Ghana, and there may be a couple of other places.

• 1:25:38Jason Calacanis?

  Wingman as a service. That's, if you need to, somebody fun with you for a couple of, you know, touchdowns, takeoffs, wingman as a service.

• 1:25:48David Sacks?

  He's leaving with something.

• 1:25:49Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I'll bring Sonny as my body double.

• 1:25:53Jason Calacanis?

  Send him, send Sonny in another Escalade.

• 1:25:56Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Exactly.

• 1:25:57Jason Calacanis?

  The paparazzi follow him and then we go to a little Honda Accord and you go to the actual events.

• 1:26:03Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I can't wait actually, I'm super excited.

• 1:26:05Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, that's gonna be fun.

• 1:26:07Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah.

• 1:26:07Jason Calacanis?

  Ah, man.

• 1:26:08Chamath Palihapitiya?

  I think so.

• 1:26:08Jason Calacanis?

  Get your passport, let's get the deck of cards.

• 1:26:11Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Oh, actually, you know, that'll be great. You can, we can do a couple fireside chats, big fireside chats.

• 1:26:15Jason Calacanis?

  Hundred percent, we'll take it on the road.

• 1:26:17Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Yeah.

• 1:26:17Jason Calacanis?

  For sure. All right, everybody.

• 1:26:19Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Fireboys, I love you. Friedberg, good luck, bro. Good luck to Allison.

• 1:26:23Jason Calacanis?

  Thank you, you too, man. And for the queen of Kenwa, Rain Man David Sacks.

• 1:26:28Chamath Palihapitiya?

  Bye bye.

• 1:26:29Jason Calacanis?

  Bye.

• 1:26:32David Sacks?

  We'll let your winners ride.

• 1:26:35Jason Calacanis?

  Rain Man David Sacks.

• 1:26:39David Sacks?

  And instead, we open source it to the fans and they've just gone crazy with it.

• 1:26:43Jason Calacanis?

  Love you, Westside. Queen of Kenwa.

• 1:26:52Jason Calacanis?

  Besties are gone.

• 1:26:55David Friedberg?

  That's my dog, thinking, I miss your driveway.

• 1:27:00Jason Calacanis?

  Oh, man.

• 1:27:02Chamath Palihapitiya?

  We should all just get a room and just have one big, huge orgy because they're all just pissed. It's like this, like sexual tension that we just need to release somehow.

• 1:27:10Jason Calacanis?

  What, you're the bee?

• 1:27:12David Sacks?

  What, you're a bee?

• 1:27:14Jason Calacanis?

  Bee? We need to get merge. Besties are back.