Transcript: Sajid Rahman: Founder of My Asia VC, Investor in 1000+ Startups with 40+ Exits

Host: This episode of Startup Project is brought to you by Bear.tax. Bear.tax compiles all your crypto transactions and makes it easy for you to file your taxes. Check out bear.tax, that is bear.tax.

Host: It is Adjit, welcome to the show. Thanks for taking time.

Guest: Uh, thanks, Nagash. Yes, it's a pleasure.

Host: Uh, so I'm super excited to talk to you because, uh, you're sort of an anecdote of a couple of trends that are, you know, that are playing out now in both angel investing and venture, you know, you operate, uh, remotely in a sense that you operate from Jakarta, but you invest in, uh, companies across the world.

And, uh, you're also an operator investor because you also run your own, uh, company in Health Tech space. Um, so, that makes me, you know, excited following your investing for a while as well, uh, to have this conversation.

But before, you know, getting into the Angel Investing and, you know, venture investing side of it, uh, if you can tell me about your career before Angel Investing and, uh, how did you get into Angel Investing itself?

Guest: Yeah, uh, so my background has been with, uh, banking and finance, uh, which took me to all over the world, uh, from, uh, Asia to Africa, almost nine countries later, last was in Indonesia.

And, uh, from banking, uh, uh, then I left banking and moved to healthcare, and worked on setting up, uh, digital healthcare business, essentially providing people access to healthcare who otherwise won't have it.

Uh, so it started as a digital healthcare, then we brought in, uh, health financing component because, uh, you know, many countries in the emerging markets don't have a proper health insurance or strong health financing, uh, infrastructure.

And from there it expanded to offline, uh, proposition like clinics, hospital, medical college, nursing college, et cetera. So essentially trying to create a healthcare system. Uh, that's one of the operational that I'm doing now.

Host: And at what point, uh, did you start investing into startups?

Guest: So it happened, uh, you know, during my, when I was in banking days, um, uh, what a few, few founders, uh, reached out to me. Uh, they were trying to build a comparison site.

They reached out to me in Indonesia, uh, where I was located at that point of time and asked me whether, you know, I can help them, advise them through the regulatory landscape.

So that really is my first sort of like, uh, involvement in a startup company. And then they were trying to raise a small round where I invested along with, you know, other investors but small checks. So that sort of started my investment journey.

That was sort of, you know, in a way it's been accidental investor, so to speak.

And of course, you know, from that time on, the other people on the captible, they really wanted me to, you know, uh, wanted me, I showed me the way to how to invest in other companies, uh, guide me into different, you know, processes, methods, et cetera.

And so that was the rabbit hole I went into and I'm still there.

Host: And you went into the rabbit hole pretty deeply, right? Because I think you're one of the few persons who can say who has seen like 40 plus exits, if I'm right?

Guest: Yeah, yeah, uh, yeah, I mean I, so yeah, once I went into it, it was really, you know, uh, going full, full heads on. So, so I ended up investing almost 1,000 or so companies over the years. Uh, so I've been doing this for the last, uh, you know, it started on like 2014, so roughly seven years or so now. And 1,000 plus companies.

Host: Are you the highest, uh, you know, are you the investor with highest number of angel investments?

Guest: Uh, I don't know. Uh, maybe. I mean if not the highest, I would probably be one of their top ones. Uh, I, I mean I have seen people, uh, who have invested, uh, you know, 4,500 or so. So I don't know, maybe, maybe one of them.

Host: The only one I saw at least in my research, uh, is close to it is probably Naval or someone who has run multiple seed funds, which I haven't come across.

Um, but, uh, I, I think you probably might be at the number one or two position, at least in terms of as a syndicate, you might probably be the highest, uh, if I'm not wrong.

Um, you might know better, but at least that's my interpretation as an outsider. Uh, so when you first started angel investing, you know, one of the, I, uh, and correct me if I'm wrong, you started doing it, uh, through Angelist, right?

Guest: Uh, so the first one, obviously, you know, first the investments were direct investment, my personal checks into the company.

And, uh, at that time, you know, then I slowly got to know about Angelist and, uh, Funders Club and, uh, you know, WeFunder, you know, different platforms are there.

Uh, so yeah, so then I started, uh, mostly through Angelist, but also a few through other platforms.

Uh, but, you know, I would say, uh, my investments in syndicates, uh, or other, you know, that sort of, uh, platform would be 80% Angelist and 20% other.

Host: Having built, you know, and done investments through Malaysia VC, which is your, uh, major way of investing, uh, one of the things I personally see is there's a cold start problem, right?

Initially when you're trying to get things off the ground, you're almost like a marketplace for LPs and startups. And if you don't have enough LPs, you can't comfortably say yes to the, uh, startups that you want to invest in.

And if you don't have good startups, you don't have, you know, LPs coming in subscribing to your, uh, syndicate. So how, how did you solve that problem initially when you're getting started?

Guest: Yeah, so it, it's, uh, you know, you rightly pointed out. It's a very interesting, uh, situation. So, you know, so my syndicate is roughly, uh, a little over a year old, right?

So before that I was investing on my own or through other syndicates. Uh, when I started this syndicate, uh, my first deal was a YC company. Uh, it so happened that, uh, you know, I came across this YC company where I personally invested.

And, uh, then the company also wanted to raise more funds and I approached to one other syndicate lead whether he would be interested to, you know, lead the deal.

Uh, you know, he had other deals on his plate, so he said, you know, he doesn't have the bandwidth and then I said, okay, let me try on my own. So that was my first syndicate.

Luckily, this, the syndicate did well, uh, it got distributed to a wider network on Angelist and at that time I didn't have, uh, you know, I don't recall, but I probably had 50, 100 LPs, so it was not a big LP base.

But anyway, so the because the deal got, uh, quite a bit of exposure, uh, other LP started joining and then of course it started creating a virtuous cycle like you're mentioning, because more LPs joining, better deal coming through, better deal coming through, more LP is joining, right?

So, so then the virtual cycle, uh, started.

Host: Got it.

Uh, I mean, to, what do you think, uh, if someone is trying to crack this cold start problem today, uh, because obviously it's a very competitive landscape, uh, in terms of the whole syndicate model and you have, you then have rolling funds, roll-up vehicles, uh, and just, you know, outside platforms.

Um, for someone who's starting today and who's looking at a syndicate, how would you suggest, uh, them to go about it?

Guest: Uh, the, I would suggest, uh, first of course, you know, source a strong deal. Uh, no one would expect a person to have a strong LP base to, you know, to start with. So one option would be to co-syndicate the deal.

So essentially, you know, reach out to other leads who, who, who has a, you know, probably a much larger following or LP base.

So to co-syndicate and, you know, that way, uh, he's, uh, so essentially the way the co-syndicate works is that for example, let's say X brings me a deal, I, I lead the syndicate on under my syndicate, but I, I refer that this deal is brought by, you know, X.

So, you know, X then gets an exposure to my LP base and some of the LPs will start following X's syndicate and that way, you know, if he does a couple of deals, uh, like that with other syndicate leads, he will start gaining, uh, sort of like a, you know, 50, 100, 200, 300, you know, LP base.

And once it reaches a certain, let's say 300, 400 LP base, then he can start launching his own deal. So that's roughly, you know, how I would suggest anyone new, uh, to enter the space.

Host: Yeah, that's how I did my first, uh, uh, investment as well. I code with someone, um, that I knew very well before, uh, and have been following.

Uh, yeah, I think you're on point because I think the people who are otherwise successful are people who have large, you know, either Twitter following.

You know, I think Sahil who does a successful rolling fund, if you have a separate clout altogether individually, being an entrepreneur or an investor outside, I think then you're also a good candidate to start, but otherwise if you're, if you don't have that sort of a clout, I think this is the best way.

Um, so moving on from, um, like most, uh, like early successful leads, right?

Like Jason, uh, Calcanis or Zack who did the, um, you know, Cruise deal for, you know, which was acquired by GM, most often you see them graduating, um, you know, to do funds, right?

Jason moved out of the platform and famously runs the most largest syndicate, um, or at least he says we don't know if it is the most largest. Um, and you know, Zack also does his syndicate, but also runs his own fund.

Uh, are you also looking to graduate beyond what you're doing with Malaysia or do you have plans or, uh, you're, you're okay with playing in this, you know, pre-seed seed stage where you, uh, are doing it primarily through the syndicator's vehicle.

Guest: I mean I noticed that trend before.

So what used to happen is, you know, like you're mentioning Jason and Zach and a few others I've seen, they started, uh, you know, with the syndicate model, but, uh, after some time, you know, they found, uh, you know, either went off Angelist platform and of course, you know, have their own funds because, you know, fund has many advantages compared to syndicate.

Uh, but what I'm seeing nowadays is that a lot of people are actually continuing syndicate as well as, you know, the rolling fund that Angelist launched.

So, you know, I, I personally, uh, you know, there are pluses and minuses with, with both the approaches. I personally, I have a small rolling fund now, uh, as well as I'm working on launching another fund which would mostly focus on secondaries.

So we can cover that later. Uh, but yeah, but I think I will continue to use the syndicate model because there are some very interesting advantages with syndicate model compared to a fund.

Uh, so I, I don't see myself completely moving off the syndicate model or off Angelist platform. Uh, I think that will continue, but I will have the funds on the side.

Uh, I mean if you want me to elaborate on the syndicate thing, I think one of the big advantages of getting a syndicate compared to a fund is that fund has to have a very specific thesis, right?

So, let's say you want to invest in, let's say fintech companies in emerging markets, in seed stage. So you can define your thesis of the fund and then you raise LP money accordingly and you invest.

In case of syndicate, you know, the lead is relatively, uh, free, sort of like a relatively free-handed in the sense that I, I, I can bring any deal that I like and which I think is a good investment.

It may be in Health Tech space, it may be in space, it may be in US, it may be in Brazil, you know, so, so the, the, the scope of the syndicate is much larger in terms of sourcing deals or bringing interesting deals.

So I think syndicate would always be, uh, you know, for me personally at least, would be a good way to invest in future.

Host: Got it.

Uh, I'm also curious about how do you think about rolling funds because one of the criticisms for rolling funds I see and keep hearing is, uh, what happens, let's say I subscribe to your rolling fund, um, but I missed that one particular, uh, quarter where, you know, all the two unicorns that you're only actually invested in and we know that, you know, this, um, you know, venture is a game of power law and, you know, it's your ability to find the next Facebook or next, uh, Twitter or, you know, the next, uh, to be Coinbase or Airbnb is basically defining your success.

At least that's the view, uh, or that's the view that is promoted. So, how do you, uh, counter, uh, this argument when as, you know, as someone who actually is running a rolling fund?

Guest: Yeah, true, true. I mean, you know, that, that's the risk, that's the sort of the downside. You know, every, you know, bottle has its pluses and minuses.

So rolling fund completely, compared to traditional funds has many advantages in terms of LP commitment, uh, you know, faster, you know, first, uh, you know, investment of funds, it doesn't have to wait for the closing and all those stuff.

But of course, you know, then you run the risk of, uh, if an LP that is not subscribed to every quarter, let's say for next. So hypothetically, let's say I launched my rolling fund, you know, two quarters back.

Now, if, uh, you know, in the next eight quarters I might, I don't know, in one particular corner, I might hit, uh, you know, one unicorn and some LP probably decided to invest in four quarter and then didn't continue, right? So.

Host: Yeah.

Guest: That happened. I mean if you think of a fund, I mean I think the only thing about fund is that because it's a wider timeframe, I, you know, a fund usually typically invest over three years and then have some money left for prorata.

And compared to that, so once you commit to that fund, you're essentially covered for three years investment of that fund.

Whereas if you commit to a rolling fund, you're essentially, uh, you know, covered for one quarter assuming, you know, you go quarter by quarter, right? So. Uh, so I guess that, that's where the probability kicks in, right?

In a fund that I mean you can say that okay, fund one has one unicorn, fund two had five unicorns, I probably should have invested in fund two.

You can use that logic, but, uh, again, you know, because of the wider timeframe, I guess fund has a high probability to hit that, you know, one or two unicorns, uh, in a portfolio, right? So.

So yeah, I mean it's a question of, uh, you know, as a LP, I think the strategy then should be that if you really believe in the lead, then continue to, you know, because the amount can be very small compared to a fund commitment.

So, you know, the LPs should continue to, you know, invest every quarter of, of that rolling fund. That way the probability goes up.

Host: Yeah, it's essentially for the LP to decide, uh, you know, whether he wants to continue at what timeframe they want to invest in.

I think that it comes down to essentially choosing the right timeframe whether to be involved in a fund or, you know, a rolling fund or a roll-up vehicle.

Um, so, uh, you also mentioned, uh, you're looking into fund, uh, for secondaries, which is interesting because I think you're one of the, uh, few people who also like, uh, go into different stages of investments, right?

Like you start from, uh, pre-seed, seed and you also do secondaries, pre-IPO as well. So how, how do you think in general, uh, which stage you're investing in more, what is your decision process at that point is like?

Uh, when you're looking at a seed opportunity versus, you know, something like a secondary opportunity and why have you even decided to do a secondary fund?

Guest: So, you know, so two things on the, that's probably, you know, one of the advantages of a syndicate. So for example, right now I have, you know, very large LP base, right? Over 2,000 plus, so probably one of the largest out there.

And, you know, because it's an opt-in method. So let's say I launch a deal which is a pre-seed or seed stage and of that large LP base, uh, you know, 15, 20 people or 30 people will actually like that stage and will invest in.

But then if I launch a secondary deal, which is probably let's say, hypothetically $5 billion company, which may go to, you know, public in next one, two years, then there is another group of people within that large LP base who, who prefer to invest in later stage given the, you know, relative strength of the company, uh, you know, relative, uh, security of an exit and stuff like that, right?

So.

Host: Uhm hum.

Guest: So syndicate that way gives me that, uh, that freedom to, to source different deals.

Uh, in terms of the secondary, the reason I, I actually started it a couple of months back, so it's not very old, but the reason I started it is, you know, I mean I'm seeing a lot of the companies which are in a very sweet spot.

So for example, let's say they are, let's say a $1 billion company, which has very strong traction and there is another company sort of in the same space, uh, which probably went to IPO at, say 20 billion.

Now the first company, which is a billion, you know, there is all probability given the traction they have that they will reach probably five billion or 10 billion as they go into, you know, public.

So, you know, here the, you know, risk is significantly reduced.

The company is in a very strong growth trajectory and we have a chance of doing four, 5x even from this point, which is, you know, from an IR perspective, that's, that's going, you know, quite significant.

So, so yeah, and we are seeing a lot of these, you know, because they, some of the companies are taking longer to go to public or some of the companies, you know, are seeing traction too early.

So we are seeing lot of the early investors in those companies are actually ready to do some secondary to get some liquidity. And that's why, you know, I thought I should do it.

So I did a couple of syndicates, which have done quite well and, uh, then some of the LPs reached out to me and asked, you know, why don't you do a fund, uh, so that they don't have to go deal by deal, but actually pay carry on a total fund level.

So I said, okay, fine. So then, you know, so then, uh, you know, I'm now working on launching the fund and once it's done, it, it will, it will specifically focus on secondary deals.

So the fund has a very clear thesis, which is, you know, invest in secondary deals. Companies which are expected to go to, you know, public or exit in next, you know, two years, two to three years max.

So the fund, uh, you know, unlike unlike a typical eight to 10 years fund, this will be a fund which is, you know, where the lifecycle will be three to five years max.

Host: It's also, I think another thing that we see that is playing into this is, uh, whatever we imagine internet businesses, market sizes will be, they're absolutely, you know, we are actually, you know, limited by our imagination.

They're much more larger. Like for example, recently when IPO, um, Airbnb went IPO, everyone's talking about if, even if you've invested at a billion dollar valuation, you'd have still made a 20x or 25x, uh, returns on that investment.

So, I think you're definitely right, uh, and I have been noticing the same as well in terms of later stage investments. But how do you, um, compare that with, you know, what the mega funds are doing into going into early stages, right?

Now we are seeing Tiger, especially in India is going at seed level, um, you know, you have Softbank also, which is going at, I think series A, series B level.

How do you see this larger funds, you know, moving back into pre-seed seed while, you know, as you rightly pointed out, there is a sweet spot at, you know, getting, uh, later stage deals.

Guest: So I mean, so just we can give another anecdote. So you know, someone offered me to invest at coinbase at $1 billion and I thought, you know, how big can this be, you know?

Guest: I always let miss that one. Uh, yeah, but I think the, the point about Softbank or Tiger, yeah, I mean I, I think their problem is a bit different, right?

So they have a very strong deal flow at late stage given the, you know, size of the fund, everything and they now want to enter very early at the seed stage to start taking stakes on most promising companies, right?

So there it's for them, it's more like a deal flow of, you know, for their, uh, for their later stage investment. So taking a bet on seed stage give them, uh, you know, very good view of the company.

Uh, you know, they can continue to increase the stake at the company grows if they feel like it and then of course, you know, write a much larger check at the late stage.

So for those guys, it's more about getting a, you know, strong deal flow so that, let's say, hypothetically, you know, Softbank doesn't want sequired to come in and just scoop those late stage deals, right? So they want to, uh, get into that.

So for them, uh, you know, the strategy is essentially to ensure that they do.

Uh, and of course, you know, if you do a seed stage investment and that turns out to be a coinbase or Uber, then then the significantly higher than, you know, doing a late stage deal, so.

Guest: Yeah.

Guest: You know, I was, uh, for as as I was research researching for this conversation, I think you're only or probably a second person who said startup investing is not risky.

It's almost counter-intuitive, uh, to what we hear in general in public. Obviously venture in general is pitched as the most riskiest asset class, right?

Uh, why do you and how do you, you know, what is your framework around, you know, assessing risk, uh, in early stage investing and because often we hear investing in startups is the most riskiest thing you could do. Why do you think the opposite?

Because, uh, I think you said in one of the conversations, you know, startup investing is actually not risky.

Guest: Yeah, I mean I personally think it's not as risky as it is pointed out to be. Uh, you know, compared to that, I mean there are many, many investments which are riskier.

So, you know, so the startup investment typically suffers from illiquidity, right? So you don't, you don't get the liquidity as quickly as you want. Uh, you sort of start with the company.

And of course, you know, we know many companies fail, so there is always that risk of completely losing the capital and stuff.

But what I've seen in a portfolio basis, uh, startup investments are significantly more rewarding compared to, you know, typical investments like on public stocks and others.

Uh, so, you know, so the important thing would be to do, do obviously follow a portfolio approach. So not invest in one or two, but, you know, do a good portfolio approach of 20, 30, 50 companies.

Uh, the fact that, you know, uh, you know, like the point we were discussing before that, you know, we tend to underestimate the market size of internet companies, uh, and this is, this is only going to grow larger.

Uh, what we are seeing today, I mean this, I mean there's all probability that this particular sector will continue to do 10x in every 10 years or, maybe 10x in every five years. So this is going to grow rapidly.

Uh, you know, it's more about the investing in the future than investing in the past.

Uh, and I think, uh, startup investments, specifically technology startups are sort of like investing in the future, which is sort of the, you know, which is sort of where the, the real return comes in.

So, you know, we tend to follow the investments, uh, you know, like real estate investment others, which are, which is sort of like a past-looking investment, but when you're thinking of the future of, of all these satellite companies, space companies, uh, you know, uh, DNA editing companies, you know, or even in the, you know, soft space, B2B enterprise size and everything.

So these are all forward-looking companies where I think the market is so huge that even of a, you know, a portfolio of 50 companies, if one or two strikes out well, then, you know, the return will be significantly higher than investing in a real estate and others.

So that way I think it's a, it's not a risky investment compared to, you know, uh, compared to other options.

Uh, so yeah, so I mean, as long as one can stomach the illiquid nature of the investment, I think this is a very good, uh, you know, way to create wealth.

Host: Also, what do you think about the change in liquidity because I think we are seeing more and more, you know, secondary platforms that are coming and facilitating secondary transactions and even, you know, you investing in secondary, uh, as a as as part of, you know, uh, your fund is almost a liquidity event for someone who's investing in a pre-series, you know, pre-seed or, you know, writing that first angel check, right?

How, how are you seeing that, uh, change? Because at least in my perspective, I think we are seeing a little bit more liquidity than at least five years back.

Guest: Oh yeah, definitely. I mean I think that will continue.

I mean it won't be, so for example, you know, the secondary will essentially happen if the company has reached hypothetically, let's say series C, series D or, you know, half a billion or billion valuation.

So, so someone investing in pre-seed or seed, let's say at 5, 10 billion, 5, 10 million valuation, will probably still have to wait three, four years to reach there or five years.

But yeah, but it's not the typical 10 years that you usually think with startups. Uh, nowadays, you know, there are, you know, a lot of focus on secondaries or giving liquidity to, you know, founders or early, early investors.

In fact, uh, you know, I invested in a couple of companies personally, that was my direct investment and we are already seeing, you know, some of those companies have reached unicorn and then we are already seeing tender offers, uh, as they reached their, you know, the large round, they're already tender offers for early investors to sell a part of their shares.

So that is becoming a common, you know, theme, uh, for, for startups which has done very well, uh, and there is a, you know, to provide liquidity at least to 15, 20% of the stake, uh, for these companies and investors.

So I think those would be coming in more and more and we'll see this practice, uh, more widespread across countries. Uh, yeah, that trend will continue.

Host: I think one of the things you mentioned obviously is, you know, investing across the globe, right? How, how are you looking at investing across the globe?

Because it's always interesting when, you know, at least from my personal experience, uh, to invest in, let's say, you know, African companies where I don't know anything about.

I obviously can look into India and US and, uh, you know, make a decision.

But how is your decision process and also another question around decision-making is you're obviously doing a lot more than, you know, what a typical investor does, let's say an LP in your fund, right? Um, you are making many more decisions.

Uh, what is your decision process in general like?

Guest: So, you know, so two things. One is I, you know, as someone who has been to many of these countries, you know, I spent five years in Africa, uh, you know, many countries in Asia and others.

So I, you know, one of the things, uh, sort of like a one of the vantage point that I have is going across all these countries that I, I'm a firm believer that all these countries are on the same curve but at different points, right?

So where US, uh, was probably 30 years back or or China or India, you know, Africa or Latin countries are probably, uh, you know, 10 years back or or will be there in 10 years time.

So it's sort of like investing in early days of in some of these large companies in India or in China or in US.

So we are sort of seeing those companies because, you know, one of the things that you notice across these geographies is that the idea is not very different, right?

So you see, you have Uber, you have Uber's version of Gojak, Grab in Southeast Asia interestingly. Each of these companies are now 30, 40 billion dollar or you know, they have Amazon, you have Tokopedia, right?

So you have different versions of these companies. So it's not like they, they are trying to do something very unique. It's more about the, you know, business model might have been tweaked a bit.

So for example, you know, uh, Gojek had their motorcycle rather than, you know, rather than car, uh, you know, as the main transport. So, you know, so you may have seen some of the tweaking model or product, but essentially it's not very different.

So I, I so there's highly, uh, business model risk. It's more of the execution risk what this country, for these companies across geographies.

And, uh, you know, I'm seeing actually some fund hype, fund built around the thesis that, you know, they are looking for companies which are essentially implementing the same model of, of their, let's say larger, much larger part in US, but has traction.

So, you know, so we are seeing funds investing in just in those companies from the frontier markets. Because, you know, it's sort of like early days of investing in Amazon.

It's sort of like early days of investing in Uber. you saw, you know that these companies if they succeed, they'll be really big, uh, and we have an opportunity to, we know the playbook because we know how it has happened before.

So, so you can exactly know where this is going. Uh, and I find that very exciting and interesting to invest and that's one of the reason, you know, I do a lot of deals.

So, probably what is sort of in a unique in my syndicate is that compared to others, I do a lot of deals outside US.

Uh, so, you know, so my deals will probably be 60% in US, 40% outside US across all these markets, showing the same, you know, showing the same sort of trajectory in their growth. So I think that is, that is quite interesting.

Host: How long you generally you take, uh, to decide whether or not you're going to invest?

Guest: So on the due pages part, what I do is, you know, so I have a, you know, sort of like a question that I follow myself.

So, so, you know, so usually it depends on the, you know, first of all, you know, there's this introductory call where I talk with the founders and decide, you know, whether to do it or not.

So if it's a no, then, you know, that, that's usually an upfront no, because, you know, so let's say after talking with the founder 15, 20, 30 minutes, I feel like, you know, this is not going to work or or it's not an ideal candidate for the syndicate, then, you know, that's an upfront now.

But then there are two groups of companies where I'm very convinced that, okay, you know, like you, you talk with the founder 30, 40 minutes, you, you, you see the traction, you think, you know, you see the other names on the capture, you're very convinced this is going to be straight.

You know, and then, uh, then of course then I send them the due diligence questionnaires.

Once they fill up the due diligence questionnaires, then I go through, you know, some other, you know, back end, uh, you know, due diligence and then I launch the deal. So those would be very fast track, those I'm very convinced about.

But then there are some in between, right? In the gray where I'm not very, I'm convinced, but I'm not super confident.

So those are the ones which I take a bit of time, and then I, I, I want to follow the company for a while and tell the founder to keep me updated as they progress their funding round and see who else is coming in and what is the traction looking like and then if I'm convinced then I bring those deals.

So, so one is upfront yes and one is upfront no, so to speak. And then there's a big middle which, which I take time to do, uh, deeper, uh, you know, diligence. So that's sort of the three buckets.

Host: Got it. Uh, and in terms of, you know, the other sectors that is obviously very much, uh, you know, blowing up is sort of all the crypto companies that are coming up.

I guess we might not even call them companies because some of them don't even have company registrations behind them. How do you looking at investing in, uh, you know, crypto and what areas are you looking at or specifically?

Guest: So, yeah, so there are, you know, a couple of things in terms of, uh, so I'm doing a few late stage deals on, you know, in terms of exchanges, because I think exchanges are very interesting. Uh, they have a huge cash flow.

Uh, they of course have to go through the regulatory compliance and risk, manage the risk associated with, with the exchanges, in terms of licensing and others.

But, you know, from a cash flow basis, these are very good businesses and, you know, we saw that reflected in coinbase's valuation. Uh

---