Keith Rabois
speaker
686 appearances
3 recordings
1 series
first heard Dec 2024
last heard Jul 2025
Keith Rabois’s voice in public audio — every appearance, attributed to the second.
Trend
recordings per month · last 12 monthsNo recordings in the last 12 months.Older appearances are listed below; set an alert to hear about the next one.
Appearances
Right. At some price point, right? What I would do if I were president, I'd say, you tell me the fair market price for TikTok and I'll go find, you know, I'll make sure that there's buyers. Right. Because CCP won't name any price. There is no price. It's the greatest tool they could ever have. That would be like giving up your nukes.
I don't think they should have to sell at a less than fair market price. I think that's legit. I believe in capitalism. But any free market should allow for some price discovery. And if they can't name any price period, that suggests that you're doing something that's nefarious. There's a reason, by the way, Chamath, you probably know this.
Eight to 10, 12 ounces max, medium, you know, solid. I don't really care on the cut. Yeah, pretty much. Wagyu, I'll be a little non-American, go Wagyu, you know, like Australia or Japanese. Yeah, sure.
I'm a mad girl, you know, red meat Republican.
Well, I'd say that you should cut that data by AI and non-AI, and you might see a tell to different cities. My anecdotal experience is there's AI companies where the market's pretty hot, maybe cooling a little bit, but hot, and AI companies with the right team are getting funded frequently, quickly, etc.
And then there's non-AI companies, and I think you'll see a very different sort of chart there. I do think net-net, you're probably at a steady state that looks reasonable across 40 years, etc., But it would be interesting. And you have to make some methodological decisions about what's an AI company, what's not.
But if you could do that, it'd be interesting to see if the lines look similar or not. But it's pretty hot. People starting companies, founders are optimistic. Crypto companies also are back in vogue, obviously, due to the change in administration. I think a lot of people have been hesitant to start new crypto companies. Of course, yeah.
And there's a belief and confidence in the new administration, the SEC, et cetera. So we'll see if the innovation accelerates with all the new capital and all the new founders back in crypto. In enterprise software... It had been pretty cool, non-AI-based enterprise software. But, you know, like as you mentioned with the IPO this week, trading very aggressively.
I think, you know, maybe there's some inspiration there for, you know, more traditional, boring tech companies. Stripe. Stripe. Stripe should go public, but, you know, they don't listen to me, so...
I personally believe and subscribe to the view that companies should go public as early as possible on the Bill Gurley sort of school of thought.
$50 million minimum, but predictability matters definitely, so not just $50 million, but $50 million with line of sight to $100 million and knowing $100 million to $200 million. I wrote a whole chapter in Eli Gill's high growth handbook on why companies should go public as early as possible. So I've been on this crusade forever. I like accountability, transparency, discipline.
I think they're good things. And there's a critique that like, oh, you're not going to be innovative anymore. If you look at some of the companies we've been talking about, what are some of the most innovative companies in the world? They're public companies.
It just takes the right leader to say, I'm going to be innovative and I don't care what the bureaucrats and lawyers, I'm just not going to get distracted with that. And so I like public companies. And so I think you'll see a lot of the companies I am involved in go public at a fairly rapid clip by historical standards. Different founders, though, have different sort of views on this.
It's very reasonable. Stripe, SpaceX, for example, founded 2003. Who knows when it's going to be a public company? So you can have a very successful company like SpaceX or Stripe. But my preference is to go public early. And then you have the capital, resources, equity, or capital to be strategic, per your point about potentially missing window.
And they were able to transact in that particular case and get ahead of the curve, or at least not miss the curve. But sometimes when you're a private company, there are strategic assets that you can't get your hands on. And think about Facebook buying Instagram. We talked about the taste issue. Instagram had taste at the time, like Kevin had taste.
And think about where meta would be had they not been able to acquire Instagram.
Yeah, or WhatsApp.
You know, honestly, yeah. Without sharing like, you know, one-on-one conversation sort of stuff. I think the question, the burden, they inverted the burden, which is why should we go public? A lot of, a lot of people ask the question the opposite way, which is, you know, why wouldn't I go public? I think their first principle thinkers like put, put my point about Trump.
And I think true of Elon, they asked like, why? And they're like, well, what advantages would we get? And I actually think the M&A one is very real. I think they've been able to construct alternatives to most of the advantages, but not every company is going to be able to do that. It took a lot of effort, energy.
And then the question is, would you substitute that energy into something else that might be higher value creation if you weren't creating the alternatives to a public structure?
Showing 641–660 of 686 · page 33 of 35
← Previous
Next →