Charlie Songhurst

So there has to be a natural desire to do this.

And then third, I think there's just a sort of sense of being in a sort of gang that's going to succeed.

A sense of we happy few, to quote some Shakespeare, of just

I want to be with this because this is going to be something that changes the world and it's going to be an adventure and fun.

And that cliche, the journey will be the reward, will be true.

And the economic outcome will be a reward.

And when I look back, the impact will have a reward.

And if you get that trip tech, you'll close them.

I think there's a sort of multi-part explanation for that.

One part I think is the absence of existing status hierarchies on the West Coast meant there was less of an opportunity cost in sort of not joining Goldman.

And you can almost do a counter history and say, maybe all this story about DARPA and the Valley and all of that is much less important than people think.

Maybe you just have a new country formed of 70 to 100 million people without an existing status hierarchy.

It would obviously glom onto the new tech, to the new industry.

The industry was obviously going to be tech.

And so it was obvious that a sort of new country, which is really what the West Coast has been since sort of World War II, when you look at just the population numbers, the West Coast would obviously win.

I think that's one part of it.

I think the second part is differences in the nature of trust and zero-sumness, partly because financial markets are, in the traditional sense, zero-sum.

One person's stock alpha is another person's negative alpha.

East Coast investing has had this sort of sense of, I need to beat the other person, I need to get a deal.

And that has led to sort of lower trust between participants.