David Weisburd

I think one of the maybe underappreciated aspects as companies get big, this is a Peter Thielism.

When Google was small, they wanted to pretend like they were a huge company.

When they were a huge company, they were worried about being seen as monopoly.

So they built all these different verticals, even though none of them actually contributed to their revenue.

So a lot of times when these companies turn into these trillion dollar behemoths, they want to have competition in certain verticals so that they can substantiate this competition.

case to Department of Justice and that they're not truly a monopoly.

So there is the synergistic aspect there.

So I'm sure you get this question a hundred times a day, Harvey versus Legora.

Why is Legora a better company?

I've observed this in the very top, the top 1% of founders.

They love competition.

If there's no competition, they invent it.

Maybe you could distill why exactly competition is so good for a company.

I never thought about it from the point of the customer.

In a industry like legal, they may not want to adopt.

So if there's one CEO going around from Legora telling people about the future of legal tech, they may kind of put it to the side.

Now there's two.

Now you have to make a decision.

So it kind of forces this decision to make a decision on the company

And then internally, I recently listened to an interview with an early Tesla engineer, and he was begging Elon, let's raise more money.