How 8VC Builds Billion-Dollar Companies | Palantir, Addepar, Saronic

With $6B+ in AUM, 8VC has taken a different approach to venture capital: instead of just funding startups, they also build them. Founding Partner Drew Oetting joins Sourcery to unpack 8VC’s infamous “Build” Program, where nearly 30% of the fund’s capital goes into companies they co-found. With a track record of creating 28 companies—including Affinity, Saronic, Epirus, and Resilience—alongside massive outcomes like Palantir ($370B), Addepar (Managing $7T+), and OpenGov ($1.8B acquisition), 8VC’s DNA is centered around building (*ehem Joe Lonsdale*). In this episode, we dive into: • How 8VC identifies opportunities worth building in-house • Why structuring incentives and culture is key to balancing venture + company creation • Case studies from OpenGov, Saronic, and Resilience • 8VC’s perspective on biotech, AI, defense, and reindustrialization • The role of public & private collaboration, startups, and capital in rebuilding America Connect with us: 1. Drew Oetting: https://x.com/andrewoetting 2. Molly O’Shea: ⁠https://x.com/MollySOShea⁠ 3. Sourcery: ⁠https://x.com/sourceryvc⁠ Brought to you by: • Brex https://brex.com/sourcery—The modern finance platform, combining the world’s smartest corporate card with integrated expense management, banking, bill pay, and travel. As a Sourcery Listener you get: 75,000 points after spending $3,000 on Brex card(s), white-glove onboarding, $5,000 in AWS credits, $2,500 in OpenAI credits, & access to $180k+ in SaaS discounts. On top of $500 toward Brex travel, $300 in cashback, plus exclusive perks (like billboards..) visit → https://brex.com/sourcery • Turing https://turing.com/sourcery—Turing delivers top-tier talent, data, and tools to help AI labs improve model performance—and enables enterprises to turn those models into powerful, production-ready systems. Visit: https://turing.com/sourcery • Kalshi https://kalshi.com/sourcery—The largest prediction market and the only legal platform in the US where people can trade directly on the outcomes of future events: https://kalshi.com/sourcery • Fourthwall https://fourthwall.com/—The #1 way to sell merch online — Fourthwall is the easiest way to launch a fully branded merch store—used by big brands like MKBHD, Acquired, & even the Smithsonian. 100+ products. No upfront cost. Visit Fourthwall to start today: https://fourthwall.com/ Follow Sourcery for the latest updates! https://www.sourcery.vc/ (00:00) Intro: Drew Oetting, Founding Partner 8VC (03:33) Origins Of 8VC & Lessons From Joe Lonsdale’s Founder DNA (05:48) Early Experiments In Building Companies Inside 8VC (07:03) Formalizing The Build Program (30% Of Capital) (08:33) How 8VC Works With EIRs To Co-Found Startups (10:33) Why Most VC Firms Fail At In-House Company Building (13:03) Portfolio Highlights: OpenGov, Saronic, Epirus, Affinity (17:03) Case Study: Resilience & Biotech Manufacturing (27:03) American Reindustrialization, Policy, & Capital Allocation (39:03) The Future Of AGI & Its Real-World Impacts (45:33) Rapid-Fire Round: Recession Odds, National Debt, Aliens (54:03) Closing Thoughts On Building America’s Future

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

• 0:00Speaker 00

  The Palantir DNA, I think, has laid the groundwork for much of what's going on here at Reindustrialized.

• 0:04Molly O'Shea?

  Anduril now has gotten to a size where they're going to be doing more acquisitions.

• 0:07Speaker 00

  Yep.

• 0:08Molly O'Shea?

  OpenGov also had a nice exit.

• 0:09Speaker 00

  I think the thing that's underappreciated is how much your organization has to be designed intentionally to balance this dichotomy of starting companies and investing in them. But I think if you don't intentionally design the incentives, the culture, and the amount of capacity you have on your investing team, on your finance team, then it's very hard to do both well. Building in the United States is insanely expensive and it takes a really long time. Part of that, I think we can address through regulatory policy and other stuff like that. But part of it is just functionally, like, you know, we're not going to pay people what they pay people to work in China, building facilities. They need to be paid a lot more here.

• 0:47Molly O'Shea?

  So Palantir, Anduril, OpenGov, Eperus, Saronic. Which of these are your favorite?

• 0:52Speaker 00

  Well, I mean.

• 1:03Molly O'Shea?

  Drew Oding, welcome to Sorcery.

• 1:06Speaker 00

  Thank you for having me.

• 1:07Molly O'Shea?

  This is a big day. We're at the Reindustrialized Summit. How are you feeling?

• 1:11Speaker 00

  Feeling great. Feeling patriotic and pumped up about all these companies that are here. I'm working on a bunch of interesting stuff, so I love this conference. Second year being here, it's great.

• 1:20Molly O'Shea?

  What's the biggest thing you've taken away from the day and the programming so far?

• 1:23Speaker 00

  They do a very good job here of, one, having tons of startups, but then, you know, a lot of people from our government. And I think that it's probably the biggest reality of this reindustrialization concept, I think, is that it's going to require the federal government and some state governments and startup companies to interact in a way that is, probably hasn't happened in a long time. And I think startups are kind of a new thing for most startup founders to have to really think about. And it's definitely a new thing for a lot of folks in the government to think about because it starts a sort of a different set of challenges and playbooks that they're running than very large companies that the government's used to dealing with. So it's, I think what's promising is that it seems like on both sides, there's a lot of collaboration starting.

• 2:08Molly O'Shea?

  And you've seen this firsthand. It feels like ABC is at the center of the American mission. You're doing a lot of work, of course, down in Texas. Joe is kind of, he's kind of a beast at podcasting.

• 2:21Speaker 00

  Yeah, he's he's a beast at a lot of things. He's probably the highest energy, highest pain tolerance person that I know. And I think that applies to, you know, obviously building out American Optimist, the podcast, but also the University of Austin, a crazy project, if you think about it, building a new university. It's like starting a super complex startup, but there's no like profit, you know, dream at the end of it. But, you know, working with him has been incredible. I've worked with in my entire career. And he definitely is a rare individual, someone who has big ideas, you know, beyond business, but also is like willing to roll up his sleeves and actualize them himself.

• 2:57Molly O'Shea?

  It does seem that building is just in your DNA. Above all that, your team has built ABC up to what it is today. You cover many categories from biotech, manufacturing, defense, enterprise, logistics, and you've actually also built companies internally. So how did you evolve to that state and build so many billion dollar companies?

• 3:22Speaker 00

  It really stems, I think, from the first fund we did together. We did two funds under Formation Eight, which is kind of the predecessor firm for ABC. And, you know, the first conversation I had with Joe ever, was right out of college, was I kind of asked him, hey, you know, you're CEO of a company, CEO of Atapar at the time, was the second company that he co-founded after Palantir. And I'm like, and you're starting a venture fund, like, how do you do that? And he was like, well, you know, DCs are pretty lazy. So like, I'm pretty sure I can just work, like, you know, just a few more hours every day and work seven days a week, and then it won't be a problem. Which, which probably is true, like, BCs are lazier, like, especially once your firm's established. Building a venture fund is hard, though. It

• 4:04Speaker 00

  takes a ton of time. And so, you know, Joe then placed himself as CEO of Atapar and began, we began, you know, building it up. And I think it started by the fact that when we went to raise our first fund, many of the people that were Like took a bet on us. We're betting on really Joe's entrepreneurial track record. And, and maybe less, you know, he had been incredible angel investor, but had not institutionally managed a venture fund before. And so I think that was kind of the, the real ticket to the dance that we had. And we kind of kept coming up with ideas for companies in addition to investing in companies.

• 4:49Speaker 00

  And they sometimes popped up through problems we had, like we, I had to manage Joe's network when I, he has this chief of staff. And so we ended up starting affinity, uh, which is, you know, now the leading CRM for, you know, venture and kind of growth equity investors. We started two more companies off problems we had, Andwin and Standard Metrics, um, you know, we co-founded. And so, and then we also started seeing folks who were at APC that maybe were not really there to be in investors for the rest of their life. And they started becoming obsessed with ideas and then starting companies.

• 5:31Speaker 00

  So we had Nate Baker, who had been working with us for, as an intern and then as, you know, an associate. And he was just obsessed with title insurance and talks about it all the time. Basically, it's like, listen, there's not that many, like, you know, technically brilliant. And, you know, sort of charismatic and people who could, you know, someone who can go recruit a bunch of their friends. Who is 23 or whatever and obsessed with title insurance. So you got, got to build a company. And so there were these early sort of data points that suggested that, um, yeah, there was something beyond just a traditional venture model.

• 6:08Speaker 00

  For supporting entrepreneurship. And so what we called APC build, um, we formalized that, uh, in 2018. And basically did that so that before we did, it's not very ad hoc. So someone would start a company. And, you know, we, if we, if we had common equity in it or something, we would, um, You know, have to go raise from other investors for the seed round because it was a conflict. Or we would give all our common equity we got from founding to the fund. And it's fine for me and Joe, we thought about proliferating the incentive around starting companies. We want to be able to incentivize our team as well in those.

• 6:49Speaker 00

  And so when we formalized the build program, it built the infrastructure really to be able to invest a lot of resources in in build. It's now 30% of what we do, all of our capital employees and 30% of it goes into companies we we co-founded. And I think Joe and I and the rest of the APC crew have probably done over two dozen at this point over the last decade or so.

• 7:14Molly O'Shea?

  Wow. How do you build out the playbook for each of these companies? Like, what are the core components you're looking for across the board?

• 7:23Speaker 00

  I mean, on the build side, I think there's really two major ways that they get started. The predominant way now is that we have a group of three to six EIRs at any time that are, you know, they're full-time employees at APC, but they're working only on sort of the process of either coming to an idea or getting it ready to kind of launch. And some people will come in with like, they might be like, I'm either going to do healthcare or logistics like that broad. And maybe they're incredible product or engineering people and we kind of, you know, haven't spent a bunch of time with investing partners and and then far down the line, potential

• 8:04Speaker 00

  customers and some of like strategic partners we have who can help vet their ideas. And then other times we have an idea and we go recruit specifically against it. As we've, you know, after we kind of structured APC build, it allowed us to have more EIRs, which I think then there's a there's a natural person to then launch it. I think also top founders like they want to have, they want an idea to be theirs, at least to some extent. And so if you over refine the idea, then it can become less interesting to a founder who wants to, you know, take it, you know, put their own, kind of put their fingerprint on it.

• 8:49Speaker 00

  And also frankly, like they probably are going to be.

• 8:54Speaker 00

  Better at vetting the idea because they're actually going to dedicate their life to it. But there's still some times where we have an idea and we're obsessed with it. And so then we go recruit specifically against the idea.

• 9:05Molly O'Shea?

  It seems like over the last year or so, especially when the VC market was really questionable. I feel like we've gotten to the point where we totally forgot about that, but there was a huge panic state. And then, you know, funds started to pull things back together and it looked like, oh, let's all do the roll up strategy. And so that was a trend at some point. And then there was also, you know, building things in-house. Oh, how are we ever going to make venture returns again? Let's build it in-house. What is your perspective from having that actually ingrained in the fund of all these other funds doing this? And it kind of looking a little touristy?

• 9:47Speaker 00

  Well, I think that there's, I think it's, I think the thing that's underappreciated is how much your organization has to be designed intentionally to make, to balance this sort of dichotomy of, of starting companies and investing in them. There's, there's definitely some overlap, but I think if you don't intentionally design the incentives, the culture, and even like the staffing and the, the amount of capacity you have on your investing team, on your finance team, then it's very hard to do both well. But it is possible for sure.

• 10:30Speaker 00

  It's just that it, it almost has to be like an innate thing. And, or it can be by exception. Like I think there always will be, you know, exceptions where a firm is an incredible, you know, kind of talent pool. And that someone either gets bored being a, being a partner or, or that we're associated or something, or they have a really big idea and they do it by exception. I think that's actually probably the second best way to do it. If you're not going to go like all in on integrating the incentives and frankly, also the, the skillsets that you need to do.

• 11:13Speaker 00

  You know, great investing and company building. And so I think that's the that's the underappreciated part of me. I think most of the firms that are trying it, they have good reason to try it. They have great brands, they have tons of capital, they have insight on the market. I think what sometimes they don't have is a culture and an incentive structure, which makes it symbiotic with the investing side as opposed to either a clear afterthought or a or frankly, a competition for resources and a and a potential source of politics. But you know, those are things that you you have to work through. And we're just lucky that we we sort of worked through those, you know,

• 11:58Speaker 00

  you know, a lot maybe earlier. But there's certainly, you know, we also, we're not the first people to do this. I mean, Sutter Hill has done this better than anyone. There's some biotech funds that have, you know, have done it exceptionally well. And so, you know, there's it's it's not totally on sort of a unproven path, but it does require a lot more. It requires you to run your company differently.

• 12:23Molly O'Shea?

  When you talk about the 30% you allocate towards build, how much of the allocation is in, you know, the initial incubation of it? Like, what kind of checks are you writing into the companies? And then how much of it is sectioned off for a follow on?

• 12:39Speaker 00

  It's it really varies, actually. And it varies because the what we're trying to do is we try to launch a company with as much unfair advantage as possible. Sometimes capital is an unfair advantage. And sometimes getting the talent or maybe even, you know, being able to win a design partnership or something requires a, you know, more capital at the table from the beginning than, you know, if you just went and raised a seed round. Sometimes it doesn't, though. And so, you know, the initial check size for us is like, it's probably three to four million on the small side and maybe 25 to. 30 or 40, the bigger side.

• 13:19Speaker 00

  And then there have been times where we also found these companies with other firms that put capital work, whether they're strategics or they're other investing firms. And in those cases, sometimes, sometimes those first rounds are larger, but we're still check size for us is still usually in that range.

• 13:38Molly O'Shea?

  I want to talk deeper about the portfolio because you guys just, you have so many fun names, so many fun names. We're at Reindustrialize, so I'll keep it categorically

• 13:48Speaker 00

  Perfect.

• 13:49Molly O'Shea?

  bounded, okay? So Palantir, Anduril, OpenGov, Eperus, Saronic.

• 13:59Molly O'Shea?

  Which of these are your favorite?

• 14:03Speaker 00

  Well, I mean, I think it's hard to have favorites, right? Because it's like, what? It's not like, you know, there's, there's a lot of different things to prioritize, right? Are you talking about in terms of name or are you talking about in terms of?

• 14:17Molly O'Shea?

  It's a trick question. Everyone hates that question, right?

• 14:20Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 14:20Molly O'Shea?

  I want to talk like a little bit more about them in terms of the impact that they have on the industry. Of course, they're like, they're seismic companies. They've made a real difference, especially Palantir. It's public, it's huge. Anduril now has gotten to a size where they're going to be doing more acquisitions. OpenGov also had a nice exit. So all of these, you know, they've, they're substantial companies. So maybe just pick one or two and kind of like break it down a little bit more.

• 14:50Speaker 00

  Well, Palantir really predates, predates me. So I'll put that aside and obviously it's a huge public company now, so I don't, I don't know much about it, but it's a super important company. And it, and the reality is also the Palantir DNA, I think, has laid the groundwork for much of what's going on here at Reindustrialize. I think between Palantir and SpaceX, they really, one is that that is a talent pool that a lot of folks draw on when either they want to sell to the federal government or when they want to build physical infrastructure and scale it. And so I think those companies are, you know, really important. And so Palantir, the DNA from there has led to a lot of our, those companies and our investments, frankly.

• 15:36Speaker 00

  But in terms of, I mean, I think OpenGov is probably the, I think it's probably the, on a relative basis, like I think having like a nearly $2 billion exit for state and local government software is like probably equivalent to like a Palantir type outcome or something. Just the, the, it's so impressive having watched Joe and CEO Zach Bookman build that company because, I mean, I was on the first sales calls, you know, when they won Palo Alto and, um, you know, it was like, it's like, whoa, it was so cool. We got the first customer and then, and then you start like doing the math of like how many customers they need to get and to make it a viable business. And you just think, wow, this is

• 16:19Speaker 00

  going to be really hard. Um, and it was really hard, but they really did it. Um, and I think, so it's, it's, and it's now growing, you know, even faster than ever, um, after the acquisition. So it's, it's impressive because I think it, it highlights that in a place that every VC in the world, oh, Gov, you know, GovTech, maybe you could do federal, but like, are you really going to do state and local? Um, you know, is this sort of very dismissive view of it. Uh, and yeah, it's probably harder than building like the average vertical software company. But, um, but I think it just, it goes to, I think, you know, like I mentioned, Joe's pain tolerance, his vision for things that other people, you

• 17:01Speaker 00

  know, might just not ever want to touch. So I think I just, it, it holds like a special place for me because I think it's just, it's such a testament to, I think that determination, um, and that drive, even if it's not the biggest company. Uh, I think Saronic also just, it's, it's a more recent one. Um, probably it's one of the first companies we did, uh, from Build in Austin, uh, after we, we moved there in late 2019. And the founder is just amazing. Um, you know,

• 17:33Speaker 00

  Do you know the CEO, Navy SEAL? And you always kind of know that they can be great leaders and calm under pressure, have huge ambition, but you see it up close and like see how it's manifested in the company culture and the way they operate. It just like confirms that. And I think it's something that you can intellectualize. Oh yeah, of course Navy SEAL is going to be a great leader, but like you see it and you're like, whoa, this is like really special. And Viv, he actually, the CTO, he was an ABC fellow back in the day and then worked at Sander Metrics and at Androll and then was ready to build this company and came and joined us. So it's cool also because it comes full circle.

• 18:16Speaker 00

  Where you know, I think first met him when he was, I don't know, 19 or 20 or something. And now he's like an incredible CTO. So that one's a cool one. Plus it's in Austin, which is fun to go see him. And they also work six days a week in person, which is pretty cool.

• 18:33Molly O'Shea?

  Saronic is like a rocket ship.

• 18:35Speaker 00

  Yeah. Yeah, it's an incredible company.

• 18:37Molly O'Shea?

  It's crazy the amount of progress that they've made in such a short period of time. Is that a testament to build? Like, were you able to unlock a bunch of doors for them?

• 18:45Molly O'Shea?

  Sorcery is brought to you by Brex, the financial stack trusted by more than 30,000 companies, including one in three venture-backed startups in the US. Nearly 40% of startups fail because they run out of cash. Brex is literally built to help founders avoid that. Unlike traditional banks that let your money sit idle, chipping away at it with fees, Brex's designs help you spend smarter and move faster. Their all-in-one solution combines checking, treasury, and FDIC protection into one powerful account. You can send and receive money globally at lightning speeds, get 20x the standard FDIC coverage through their partner banks, and even high yield from day one.

• 19:26Molly O'Shea?

  With same-day and even same-hour liquidity, access your funds anytime. Companies like Scale AI, DoorDash, ServiceTighten, Hims, Anthropic, Flexport, Robinhood, and Plaid, trust and use Brex. Start today at brex.com/sorcery. That's B-R-E-X.com/sorcery.

• 19:47Speaker 00

  I think we were helpful on the upfront, but frankly, I think it's a testament mostly to Dino and Viv and the other co-founders. Like they're very mature, super.

• 19:59Speaker 00

  Like, super present and, and sort of patient, but also intense, which is kind of rare in founders. Like, tend to, tend to usually see like founders that are really intense, like, are very extroverted, like, very manic, almost. And then you have also, like, you know, the, the founders, especially on the technical side, that are maybe more, like, really deep thinkers, but much more, sort of, introverted. And they all kind of have like a, this mix between like, the best of both worlds, which I think just, like, means there's a lot less just noise. It's just, it's incredibly impressive to kind of see it.

• 20:34Molly O'Shea?

  For those that don't know what Saronic is, could you share a little bit on?

• 20:38Speaker 00

  Yes, I mean, Saronic is building, basically, the autonomous future of the Navy. So, they're building autonomous surface vessels for naval reconnaissance, logistics, payload, delivery, ranging from, you know, much smaller form factors, all the way up through much larger ones. And, and a big part of that, which has been a big topic here, and we just identified is, is shipbuilding capacity. And so I think, not only, you know, is Saronic's ambition to deliver these autonomous boats, and there's a huge amount of work that goes

• 21:19Speaker 00

  into the software and the communication protocols and material science and stuff, to make a naval vessel autonomous. But, the other thing is, figuring out how to build ships in the United States again, which is an area that we probably have, you know, the, the, fallen behind the most, in terms of our capacity. And that's on the defense side, but also on the commercial side as well. So, in order for, you know, in order for Saronic to succeed, they also have to become, you know, a leader of US shipbuilding, which is, which is really cool. And they've, they've already made their first, you know, they kind of, they bought a, an old shipyard, you know, and they're, they're retrofitting

• 22:03Speaker 00

  that, but then they're, they have much bigger plans, too.

• 22:06Molly O'Shea?

  I know the portfolio also extends itself into like biotech, life sciences, healthcare, that can also, you know, shift into American resiliency and industrialization.

• 22:18Molly O'Shea?

  What are you seeing in that world that's becoming more exciting and maybe unlocking with this new administration and technology?

• 22:27Speaker 00

  Yeah, I mean, I think that the same way that a lot of the, you know, that in order for AI to realize, you know, so its potential for our economy. But yet is blocked by the rate at which we can scale physical infrastructure. You know, genomic medicine and sort of advanced biologics is similar, right? So the manufacturing of pharmaceutical drugs is another place where the United States owns the innovation end of it and thinks a lot about manufacturing before something is, you know, when something is still being proven out.

• 23:09Speaker 00

  But there's not a lot of thought about scalability when it comes to where you develop a drug. Part of that's because if you're successful, it's, you know, like a 99% margin business. So if you can do it, if you're really bad and it's an 89% margin, who cares? Which is different than a lot of other industries. But also there's just, there has been a, there's, there's been a, a big outsourcing push, especially in more sort of standardized, traditional modalities. And I think it became pretty obvious during the pandemic that the production of, you know, pharmaceutical drugs is probably something that we want to have domestically controlled,

• 23:54Speaker 00

  at least to some extent. And so I think, you know, in some ways, it's the hardest place to innovate from a manufacturing perspective because there are such stringent regulations. And the FDA and the, the way that they sort of monitor and evaluate quality of manufacturing is a very static process, sort of evaluation. They don't like lots of, you know, sort of continuously improving systems necessarily. But I think that's changing. And I think the other big thing is just that. In life science, these facilities are incredibly expensive.

• 24:36Speaker 00

  They require huge amounts of labor. It needs to be there, whether there is a commercial project or not. Because you're a GMP manufacturing facility, you can't have mold accumulating. You don't run the machines. They may either get dirty or they stop performing as well. You have, you need to keep the lights on. You need to keep the HVAC going. You got to keep paying the insurance. You got to pay the property tax. So they have very high fixed cost. And I think that has been a barrier for sure. That I think this administration is prioritizing.

• 25:18Speaker 00

  And then the other part that I think they will prioritize as well, which is going to be an interesting one to kind of grapple with, is some of the production of pharmaceutical products is a pretty dirty chemical process. At least in the way it can be done at scale today. So that's why a lot of chemistry-based drug manufacturing processes have been moved to places with lower environmental standards. So if you can dump all your chemicals into the water, some river, when you're done with three agents, it's a lot cheaper than if they need to go into a bomb-proof detention tank

• 26:02Speaker 00

  and then transported to some biohazard thing in a mountain somewhere. And so I think that's going to be a decision we need to make. Either we're comfortable figuring out ways to reduce that burden from frankly, just environmental regulation and deal with frankly, the trade-off of that, which is that there may be some sort of cost to it. Or we have to invest really aggressively in new technologies that right now are not necessarily commercially viable, even if they're technically viable. Because

• 26:48Speaker 00

  Pharma companies are rationally incredibly averse to switching their process because they've already, you know, they make tons of investments or acquisitions across all these different sort of binary bets. You get one that works, you don't want to have to go deal with changing the way you're going to manufacture that because, you know, and, and there's, there's so much money that was invested and so much money at risk. Once you have something that's commercially viable, that the current way that the, both the regulatory and the sort of market dynamics are, it's really tough to get a new technology into an existing set of programs. And I think that's one way that could accelerate these

• 27:33Speaker 00

  things would be if you want these sort of cleaner, more innovative, like enzymatic approaches to making certain drugs, I think you're going to have to ration with that. And I think there's a role for the government on that. There's also probably a role frankly for pharmaceutical industry to, you know, do they really care about making stuff in the US or not?

• 27:51Molly O'Shea?

  So crazy.

• 27:52Speaker 00

  Yeah, it's tough. I mean, the good news is that I think in the pharma world, many of our allies have capabilities. You know, there's, you know, Europe has significant capabilities, Japan, you know, I mean, India has a huge amount of manufacturing and I think India will be hopefully a really important ally for the United States going forward. But, you know, we do want some capabilities here, especially, you know, at least, at least enough that we can, you know, use them in the event of another pandemic, or, or frankly, just because these are pretty good jobs. They pay relatively, they actually

• 28:35Speaker 00

  really high for manufacturing jobs. And there's a ton of downstream economic sort of, you know, activity that happens with these. These are like huge multi, multi hundred million or billion dollar projects. So the construction, the, you know, electrical, the HVAC, the logistics.

• 28:56Speaker 00

  These are all downstream of that. And again, like, there's, there's a real argument that, you know, Americans should be doing that.

• 29:05Speaker 03

  In today's high-speed business world, staying ahead means using the smartest tools possible, including the powerful capabilities of artificial intelligence. Meet Turing Intelligence. Turing builds customizable AI systems designed to solve your mission-critical challenges, no matter your industry. From expert guidance to tailored projects, Turing helps top companies realize AI that's more capable, more adaptable, and more effective. With Turing, discover how AI can accelerate your business growth. To learn more, visit turing.com/sorcery, spelt S-O-U-R-C-E-R-Y. That's turing.com/sorcery.

• 29:41Molly O'Shea?

  Are there any particular companies you're watching in this space?

• 29:44Speaker 00

  So we co-founded a company called Resilience, which is a, basically, we started it in summer of 2020. So, kind of right as the pandemic was underway. And it's a US-based CDMO. So we are a manufacturer of third-party, you know, of other people's drugs here in the US. We have over a thousand folks in our big flagship plant in Ohio.

• 30:13Speaker 00

  And, and so that's like, you know, that's, that's been a really big company. And we co-founded with Arch, Bob Nelson at Arch, who brings like, you know, 40-plus years of biotech investing experience.

• 30:26Speaker 00

  And so it was, it was a build company that I think is a good example of when we partner. And he's, he's got more, knows more about biotech and has more connectivity than we ever will. And we kind of brought, I think, the sort of national security and,

• 30:42Speaker 00

  and also just kind of like operational, you know, view of, of these types of businesses. I also think there's some, the problem with, with biotech right now is just that the sentiment is very low.

• 30:55Molly O'Shea?

  Yeah.

• 30:56Speaker 00

  The kind of just, isn't weird, kind of despite like actual outcomes, both clinical outcomes but also M&A. I think that's because, it's very hard to understand, companies go public way too early. And so the stocks go up and if everyone's happy and interest is zero and then they are the first thing people sell when they're like, I have no idea what this actually is. I bought it because it sounded cool. And there's not that many people who can understand it, who also can invest in like a $500 million market cap company. So you see the stock fall and then people just, you know, sentiment sort of turns. And I think that's, I think that's too bad. I mean, I think we're, we're sort of obsessed with this idea right now of

• 31:38Speaker 00

  like leaning to biotech, which is really the idea of like, how do you get as much done with as little money as possible, which seems obvious, like that's like what startups are always trying to do. Biotech's like, by and large, don't necessarily think that way all that much. And there's ways that now that, you know, I think under the new administration, the FDA is encouraging even more to reduce the cost of getting human data, which is really where value is created in life science. And so I think, I think that unfortunately, the sentiment really does drive how much innovation you can do

• 32:20Speaker 00

  on the manufacturing side of things, just because, you know, the manufacturing companies and also just bioprocessing and new tools for developing life science companies, they are, their customer base is biotech. And so, and then their source of capital is VCs. So, you know, sentiment does matter a lot, but I'm incredibly bullish on, I mean, I think there's going to be almost as much of change in like the way that our economy and our lives work from genomic medicines as from AI. But I think it may be a bit

• 33:01Speaker 00

  of a bumpier ride than with AI where, you know, you can get $2 billion of revenue in a couple of years or something.

• 33:07Molly O'Shea?

  Clinical trials.

• 33:08Speaker 00

  Yeah, and you can push stuff and yeah, there's less regulation and things like that. But I'm very bullish over the next 10 years.

• 33:16Molly O'Shea?

  We are in a kind of wonderful period of progress and the new administration is definitely helping with that. What other initiatives are you optimistic about right now?

• 33:27Speaker 00

  I think, I think the biggest, well, what I'd say is like, being a reindustrialist, like, one thing is just, I think that patriotism is no longer like some four-letter word among, like, um, maybe, maybe among like coastal elites. I mean, I don't think it really ever, like, regardless of political affiliation, I think, like, I grew up in Iowa, I think every people would, everyone flies American flights, regardless of what party you voted for. But I think it, I think it became like a weird thing. I mean, it's always one of our core values on our website. So, um, to us, it never felt weird. Um, but I think it's good to have people be patriotic. Like, if I could have people either be irrationally patriotic or irrationally unpatriotic, it's like,

• 34:09Speaker 00

  I want patriotic because we live in this country, and you can't really do much about it. So, I'd rather have, you know, the same way I'd rather have people be irrationally optimistic than pessimistic. Um, so I'd rather fall in that. I think it's just good for the, for the country, right? I think it's just, it, it creates like, sort of a levity, people feel, you know, excited and ambitious, they want to do things. Um, and so that's, that's great to see from, I think, a really important set of people, which is people who are funding things and people who are, you know, deciding whether they're going to work and stuff like that. And it's also good that they get a little bit more on board with probably where the rest of the, rest of the country is. Again, like, kind of regardless of political affiliation. Um, I think the big

• 34:51Speaker 00

  question as it relates to, um, federal policy from, from here on is, is the industrial policy side. So, um, you know, tariffs are effective in some ways, um, they cause issues in other ways. But regardless of that, if we want to scale our manufacturing base really quickly, there's just fundamental

• 35:18Speaker 00

  Limiting factors that can only be removed by the government. And so if we've decided that we want to move at that rate, which I think, really, I think that's another bipartisan issue. I think, you know, you have, you have both sides wanting to do that. You have to actually remove the real barriers. And what I'm most focused on is ones for startups. Because startups are kind of unique, right? Bonus depreciation is awesome. If you're Boeing, it's awesome if you're a real estate developer. And that's great. But it doesn't do anything for a startup. Because they're a C corp, so it doesn't pass through their investors. They have plenty of net operating losses already.

• 36:01Speaker 00

  So the fact that they can write that off doesn't mean anything because they don't have any, they don't have any profits to, to write it off against. And so, you know, I think the traditional tools that the government uses for incentivizing things probably don't, most of them don't work super well for closing the gap that this wave of sort of companies being built right now.

• 36:30Speaker 00

  You know, the real gap that exists from a capital perspective on what they need to do for scale. Venture capital can fund hundreds of millions of dollars of stuff.

• 36:40Speaker 00

  If you're, you know, one of the very, very top companies, you can raise billions.

• 36:46Speaker 00

  But there's many projects out there that maybe don't even meet the threshold for return potential from a VC that would be really important for the country.

• 36:56Speaker 00

  And so VCs are ignoring them. There's, there's not much less capital, capital wise for them. And then there's certain projects that even the biggest VC funds can't, can't fund because,

• 37:10Speaker 00

  and don't really make sense to, right? So, you know, shipbuilding in the United States is a great example. Talking about many billions of dollars to even. Kind of make a dent. Or if you talk about nuclear power, you're talking about billions or tens of billions of dollars. You know, and so in places where startups are the real sort of growth factor. I think the way that, you know, what I'm very hopeful for is that this administration marries, some of the other sort of trade based policies they have with economic policies.

• 37:48Speaker 00

  That, you know, that makes sense for startups as it relates to industrial stuff because their startups are 100% in on building in the US. So a large company, they're excited about it now. They're excited about it now because they got to talk to their board about it. Or they got called in front of the president and he made, you know, made fun of them or something. Or they just want to put a press release out. Or they were planning on already spending $5 billion. So who cares? We'll just say we're spending it here. But the second that Ireland changes their tax policy or that there's a new administration that, you know, changes the tariffs. We already have 30 years of track record that they're going to go and they're going to move their manufacturing wherever it is cheapest.

• 38:31Speaker 00

  And as a shareholder of that company, maybe I'm, maybe I'm okay with that. But as this is in our country, I'm not. And so when our industrial policy is designed, it needs to, it needs to take that into account and build for, and be built for the companies that are all in on the United States and have no, no other choice. You know, we're not going to build our, you know, our fill finish facility in any other country at resilience. We are 100%, we're more than 100% all in, in that facility. Right? Saronic's not going to go build ports in, you know, some random tax haven place just because something changed after they've gone all in on building a, you know, a shipbuilding

• 39:15Speaker 00

  in, in the US. So, and I'm very hopeful about that, but I do think it's an important thing for, both for policymakers, but also for startups to, to realize they need to advocate for themselves.

• 39:29Molly O'Shea?

  Technology is moving super fast. The industry is moving super fast, especially like in VC. Like these companies all of a sudden are printing lots of dollars overnight. And AI is a factor of that. We're getting to AGI pretty quickly or super intelligence, whatever you want to call it. A company I recently discovered is a company called Turing that develops and deploys next generation AGI systems for real world problems across industries. I'm curious, from your perspective, how does AGI fit into this piece? And like, what do you think the biggest effects will be?

• 40:06Speaker 00

  Yeah, I think, I mean, I think part of it obviously depends a bit on like, what we mean by AGI. Right? So like, I will assume that what we mean by AGI is not like truly an omnipotent like sort of digital being, because I frankly think that's a religious conversation. Like, I just think there's not really any distinction between the types of, basically between theology and then discussion about something that is truly like a, you know, like a superior intelligence. And, and so I don't really worry about it much. Like, you know, either, either it will delete me or like, you know, I mean,

• 40:49Speaker 00

  me and my fiance's German shepherd has a great life. So I'm happy to be the pet to some, you know, incredible superhuman, as long as I get, I guess, play, I don't know, play golf all day or something, whatever, whatever it would have me do. So I kind of don't worry about that. Instead, I think about AGI more as like, where you could have a system which could go into a variety of different application areas and very quickly effectively process mine them and understand them without lots of human or any human sort of direction. And so I think, you know, what that looks like is, I think it is a pretty big leap forward. I think what you see right now is basically people building tons of vertically specific

• 41:31Speaker 00

  intelligences that I still think have a fair way to go, but are like rapidly progressing. And so I think, once you see a

• 41:44Speaker 00

  An AI product that can rapidly change like what it's capable of doing and without needing to like be directed by the person. I think that's like where, you know, that's what to me what like AGI would be functionally. And I think it's going to have pretty profound impacts on on some places. I think the way it touches the physical world is actually going to be take much longer. Like, I think that a lot of these systems are going to be really good at basically like internet people stuff, because that's what they're trained on. And that's who's training them like, you know, so obsessively now. So like,

• 42:24Speaker 00

  software engineering, like, for sure. I think Excel work and, you know, some legal, a lot of legal things, a lot of accounting, those are probably the things I and then obviously, you know, call centers and other stuff like that. I think it's gonna be a massive productivity gain, at least for the next 20 years. If you're like, you run a construction company, or you have an HVAC business. Because right now, you're paying some person 50 grand to make your website. Like, that's done. That's not happening more. You're paying some BPO to like, you know, handle your call center while you're on the job. That's going away. If you know, you're hiring some property manager to basically

• 43:04Speaker 00

  move around paper, like, that's going away. And, you know, you need five people to manage coordination of your scheduling of your people. Like, I think that's going away. So I think for small business owners who do something in the physical world, it's going to make them like, so much more productive and profitable. And that's the place where I already see it. Like, my YPO forum, I have, you know, people that don't run tech companies, they run huge construction companies, industrial companies, and like, they're using it themselves, like, just making stuff all the time. And it's pretty impressive stuff. So I think I think that that's like, gonna be a huge, you know, huge boom. And maybe robotics will

• 43:44Speaker 00

  get there, and there'll be, you know, a real sort of conflict between, you know, the whatever robot can do electrical work and electricians. But I think that's, I think that's much farther off than, you know, automating low level web design.

• 44:00Speaker 00

  I think it's already done.

• 44:02Molly O'Shea?

  Done. Well, you guys just announced Bedrock Robotics' recent round of $80 million to help automate construction vehicles. That's a pretty good real world.

• 44:15Speaker 00

  It is. I mean, I think the interesting thing about capital equipment, right, is like the amount of labor relative to the capital equipment already is very, very small. And a lot of, I think it's a place also where you're increasing functionality and speed, more so than just like ripping cost out. So I think it will be largely an enabler and allow the left folks working in construction to be, frankly, like, just do less things that they don't want to do and do more of the important stuff. We also have a massive labor shortage in construction. So unlike maybe in, I don't know, legal or VC or whatever,

• 44:56Speaker 00

  like maybe we're over, maybe we need to cut some jobs there. But I think that, listen, like, building in the United States is insanely expensive and it takes a really long time. And part of that, I think we can, we can address through, you know, regulatory policy and other stuff like that. But part of it's just functionally, like, you know, we're not going to pay people what they pay people to work in China, building facilities. So people need to get, rightfully so, they need to be paid a lot more here. So we're going to have to have, we're going to have to invest heavily in, you know, systems and hardware that make people way more efficient. It's the only way to actually do it without just,

• 45:41Speaker 00

  you know, spending 50% of our GDP on construction each year, which probably is where it would have to be if you were, you know, extrapolating on our current cost structure.

• 45:51Speaker 03

  Love premium merch just as much as we do. That's why sorcery uses Fourth Wall. Everyone from creators like Marcus Brownlee to podcasts like Acquired to Orgs, like the Smithsonian Institute are using Fourth Wall. They let you create and sell premium products without having to stress the details. They handle everything from production, shipping, customer support, taxes, even giveaways. When it's time to level up and make gear that people are actually proud to wear, that's when it's time to use Fourth Wall. And that's why we've trusted Fourth Wall for all of our brand wear at Sorcery since day one. Use my link in the description to get free credits for your first order. And for any VCs, DM me on X and I can get all your portfolio companies set up with a free samples credit deal.

• 46:34Molly O'Shea?

  One of our partners is Brex and they help companies of all sizes, from startups to enterprises, spend smarter, move faster, be super capital efficient. As you think about these companies scaling over time, what are the levers that you pull on for whether you want to go for growth or go for profitability? Like, what are you looking at?

• 46:52Speaker 00

  I think that like, it's hard to like, it, well, I'll use the example because we're here at Reindustrialize. So I think capital allocation is probably something that's been under-talked about in startups for a generation because software largely had pretty obvious capital allocation frameworks. And it became much more obvious. So even if it wasn't obvious in 2012, like that you should think about like, you know, your cactile TV or whatever, like it became very obvious very quickly. And so there was kind of these playbooks. And I think part of the other reason that, you know, it wasn't thought about all that much is because your biggest source of spend was on engineering and then it switched to sales. And during the engineering time, you know, you don't, you know, you're just like building quickly and you know, shipping product and that's sort of the productivity.

• 47:35Speaker 00

  And, and then you get to sales and salespeople are really managed based on how much money they bring in. So it's kind of easy to do.

• 47:42Speaker 00

  And so, you know, it's not the most complicated capital allocation. When you're building physical infrastructure, it's totally different.

• 47:51Speaker 00

  Because the check sizes you have to write without any feedback are huge to build a facility. You can't build like one one thousandth of it and be like, ooh, like it's working like let's do more. I mean, you might be able to modularize some, but you know, there's really long lead times on equipment. There's lead times on labor. So if you're too incremental, then you just built built a facility that's uneconomic.

• 48:17Speaker 00

  Whereas if you know, if you're, if you're a software company or an e-commerce company, you can change your capital allocation to your different sales and marketing channels. You can do that algorithmically at the most atomic unit you want. So you now have a whole set of, of companies where a huge part of being the founder is thinking about capital allocation. Because you may be betting the farm when you make, you know, you build your first facility.

• 48:44Speaker 00

  And so it definitely changes the way that I think about the way startups should manage growth and profitability. Because they get fewer shots on goal in making these big bets with way, I think with less data. And so it's about de-risking that. So how do you do that? Well, like with resilience, one thing we learned, which is going to sound very obvious, but you know, early on, we took a little bit of like, if we build it, they'll come strategy. That's bad idea. It's much better to buy or invest in a facility alongside a customer who has, you know, either already signed or who has given so much demand signal that they need what you are about to build. And has clarified the economics. So you can do the, the analysis.

• 49:30Speaker 00

  Similar with, you know, I think in defense, like you're not going to get perfect demand signal early on, but paying attention to what, you know, the. People who run various parts of the DOD are saying that they want and the processes that have been defined and you know, is their budget allocated, those things become really, really important because if you build something,

• 49:56Speaker 00

  you know, before, before there's any demand signal and then there's no demand, you've sunk hundreds of millions of dollars that you're not going to ever be able to recover. So I think, I think it changes it a lot for startups. I think they're very aware of it. You hear so much more conversations around capital allocation, around cost of capital, around, you know, I think one thing that, that we're very, you know, excited by and, and trying to, trying to do in various ways is to create new financing structures for these companies when they need to go build a shipbuilding port or they need to go build, you know, a bunch of manufacturing space because there's a big gap between using venture capital and

• 50:39Speaker 00

  the private credit markets that are more traditional and sort of profit oriented. And there really needs to be an basically infrastructure financing or project financing for growth stage businesses. It's a little bit more willing to take risk.

• 50:56Speaker 00

  And so I think it's, I think it's a huge part and,

• 51:00Speaker 00

  and frankly, like you just have a lot less margin for error. Now that being said, you also can, you also, once you have it built and successfully, you usually can get tons of operating leverage on it. Cause you, you might be able to do $2 billion of annual revenue in a facility that costs you 200 or 300 million. But the fixed cost of it might be 50 or 75 million a year. So at 0%, you're burning tons of money and at 100%, you're printing cash. It's just like a different philosophy of business than most startups are used to.

• 51:33Molly O'Shea?

  That's a great answer. That was probably one of the best answers I've gotten for that.

• 51:38Speaker 00

  Oh, it's good. It was it was long, so I'm glad it was good.

• 51:41Molly O'Shea?

  Super helpful. Yeah, no, I think that's gonna be great. As we wrap up, we have to do the very fun segment. Okay, you ready for this?

• 51:49Speaker 00

  I'm right.

• 51:50Molly O'Shea?

  These are this is gonna be a rapid fire, hot spicy question answer round. Okay? I might throw in a curve ball. Who knows?

• 52:01Molly O'Shea?

  Okay, so currently, there's an 18% chance on Calci that Trump brings back manufacturing. What's your take on this?

• 52:10Speaker 00

  How are they defining the resolution of that?

• 52:13Molly O'Shea?

  That is a really good point.

• 52:15Speaker 00

  It's important these days.

• 52:16Molly O'Shea?

  You have to read the fine print. Uh, let's see. If the value added by manufacturing to GDP in Q4 2028 is at least 13.1%, then the market resolves to yes.

• 52:30Speaker 00

  What is it today?

• 52:31Molly O'Shea?

  The first quarter of 2025, manufacturing accounted for 9.7% of total US GDP.

• 52:38Speaker 00

  I think that the Trump administration will bring will make a big dent on that. That will improve, but I don't think it'll hit 13.1%.

• 52:44Molly O'Shea?

  When will the next US recession start?

• 52:47Speaker 00

  We could be in one now, for all I know, like, I would say in two years or three years would be when probably the there's like, as per the whoever comes up with the Fed or whatever, says that we're in a recession. I think we I think we are in a reckoning right now that's like, kind of being held in stasis, but it's gonna there's gonna be some resolution, but I think.

• 53:10Molly O'Shea?

  Right now, the market has 20% on Q3 2025. That is like the highest percentage of all of them.

• 53:17Speaker 00

  Yeah, it's like, I think I think like, they just need to come up with like a new definition for a lot of this stuff. Because like, you know, the last time we had a recession, it was like

• 53:25Molly O'Shea?

  It lasted two days.

• 53:25Speaker 00

  It was two days, and then we just turned the money from Iran, and then like the stock market went up, but like, it still felt like we were in a recession because no one had a job. I mean, it's just, yeah, so.

• 53:33Molly O'Shea?

  Except US debt is at a crazy peak.

• 53:38Speaker 00

  Yes.

• 53:39Molly O'Shea?

  Okay, so today, US debt, I'm looking at a live tracker right now. It's about 36 trillion. 36.65161, it keeps on changing. What do you think the peak US national debt will be this year?

• 53:53Speaker 00

  38 to 40.

• 53:55Molly O'Shea?

  Okay. That's not bad.

• 53:58Speaker 00

  But well, probably by the, I guess, like by the end of, yeah, the next budget.

• 54:01Molly O'Shea?

  I mean, that's bad. Like, that's bad to say.

• 54:02Speaker 00

  We're gonna add.

• 54:03Molly O'Shea?

  You are close. You are close to what the market is saying.

• 54:06Speaker 00

  We're gonna add to the debt.

• 54:07Molly O'Shea?

  Yeah, seems likely.

• 54:08Speaker 00

  I mean, we want to do all this industrial policy stuff. Like, there's gonna be some short-term adding to the debt. Because it's either gonna come through reduction in tax revenue, or it's gonna come through government outlay in this stuff.

• 54:19Molly O'Shea?

  Right. So what, what is your take on this? Because, of course, there's a lot of backlash with Elon and Doge and that sort of thing. Some other people are saying, oh, this is gonna happen, but AI is gonna unlock so much productivity and like, capital gains, profit, that it'll, it'll help wipe it away. Do you think that that will actually help mitigate the amount of debt that we've racked up? Or are we just gonna say, alright, let's move on?

• 54:43Speaker 00

  I believe over the next 20 or 30 years, it will make a huge difference, yes. I just think in the short run, there's investments need to be made to realize that. And I think that, you know, the way that our system deals with that is by adding to the debt. There's other ways to deal with it, but I think that there's, I don't think there's a, I don't think there's the political will to take the type of measures we'd need to take to both make those investments and reduce the debt in the short run.

• 55:10Molly O'Shea?

  Do you think humans are gonna colonize Mars by 2050?

• 55:15Speaker 00

  I would say we'll be on Mars by 2050. I don't think we would, I mean, colonize maybe is like, depends what that means. But I think there will be a human on Mars by 2050. So maybe that's, maybe that's a no. I don't know. But I think they'll be there.

• 55:30Molly O'Shea?

  There's an 11% chance right now. I think there, I don't know if it'll be humans, it might be humanoids.

• 55:37Speaker 00

  Oh, yeah.

• 55:38Molly O'Shea?

  Definitely.

• 55:39Speaker 00

  That's probably even higher, yeah.

• 55:41Molly O'Shea?

  I'm gonna save the best for last. Will the US say that aliens exist this year?

• 55:47Speaker 00

  Yes.

• 55:48Molly O'Shea?

  Yes?

• 55:49Speaker 00

  Yeah. What do they have it at?

• 55:50Molly O'Shea?

  5%.

• 55:51Speaker 00

  5%? Good. It's a contrarian bet.

• 55:54Molly O'Shea?

  You have a lot of upside.

• 55:55Speaker 00

  I got tons of upside. I'm just, I'm not convinced that the US government hasn't already said that, and that it just, it just was buried somewhere, and we just didn't notice.

• 56:04Molly O'Shea?

  You guys, I feel like you have more UAP sightings in Austin and that area.

• 56:08Speaker 00

  Yeah, there's some, yeah. I think there's, and there's just tons of sightings of stuff. So, I don't know. It's also just fun, fun to imagine. Yeah. I have a good friend in Austin and the only, he goes to a lot of political, you know, kind of fundraiser people trying to raise money. And the only question he asks them is, what is your opinion on aliens? And I think it's actually the best question to ask a person running for office. Because one, if they are like, um, I want to get back to talking about like abortion policy, you're like, dude, you're not fun at all. Like, I want to hear about the aliens. But two, it's like, you know, one of the things everyone imagines when they're going, like, if they were a kid and like, if I was president one day, like, first thing I'd figure out is if there's aliens.

• 56:53Speaker 00

  So if they, if they have energy around it, you're like, okay, this person's like a, this person's like a real person and not like some NPC political drone.

• 57:01Molly O'Shea?

  A real one.

• 57:02Speaker 00

  Yeah.

• 57:03Molly O'Shea?

  Look, if we're not going to get the Epstein files this year, at least give us the aliens.

• 57:06Speaker 00

  I know, that's what I think. They need to release something, so.

• 57:08Molly O'Shea?

  Release something.

• 57:09Speaker 00

  So I'll take the bet. I got a lot of upside on that.

• 57:11Molly O'Shea?

  Okay. Well, Drew, this was so much fun.

• 57:14Speaker 00

  Yeah, this was great.

• 57:15Molly O'Shea?

  Thank you for taking the time and being a huge supporter of reindustrialization.

• 57:21Speaker 00

  Yeah, thank you so much for having me on here.

• 57:23Molly O'Shea?

  Hey, it's Molly. If you enjoy our interviews, check out our newsletter, sorcery.vc, where we deliver a once a week top deals and tech headlines email, and also go deeper on our podcast interviews. Subscribe to Sorcery today. And don't forget to subscribe to the podcast on YouTube, Spotify, Apple, or wherever you listen. Link in description to sign up.