- Duration: 53 min
- Platform: zoom
- Source: Read.ai 01K34M4BNCETD977YZKSGQX7D2 (https://app.read.ai/analytics/meetings/01K34M4BNCETD977YZKSGQX7D2)
Transcript
[Michael Houck]: Hey. What’s going on? Been a while. How are you? UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: I’m good. [Michael Houck]: I’m chilling. UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: Just, uh, it’s been busy. [Michelle Kwok]: Cause like a ton of people were on vacation. So I was just like ripping back and forth and we just opened our New York office. So been busy. Oh, that’s exciting. [Michael Houck]: Hey Tim. [Michael Houck]: Hey Michael. [Tim Draper]: How are you? I’m sorry. I haven’t had lunch, so I’m taking a few bites here. [Tim Draper]: You’re all good, man. [Michael Houck]: Don’t worry. Um, how’d you Been a good one. [Tim Draper]: Yeah. Cool, well, I want to make sure we have time for everything. [Michael Houck]: Looks like the AI note taker is here, so we’re all good. We’re all set. So yeah, anything. Anything on what’s the what’s the overall thing you’re going to interview? [Tim Draper]: Yeah, this is just another other time where we’ll chat. [Michael Houck]: I’ll ask a few questions that came up with and also Michelle contributed to as well. We’ll walk through those and just want you to give sort of your obviously detailed but also sort of off the cuff feelings, responses, and answers. [Michelle Kwok]: Unfiltered thoughts, yeah. Unfiltered thoughts, say anything. The more honest, the better. [Michael Houck]: The more detailed, the better. Yeah, we want the hot takes, Tim. [Tim Draper]: We want the hot takes. [Tim Draper]: OK, great. UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: Okay. [Michael Houck]: What do you have? [Michael Houck]: Let’s just, we’ll jump into it. Um, okay. So Michelle mentioned concept of a Draper wild animal as a founder. Um, what does that mean to you? And how would you sort of describe someone that way? [Tim Draper]: When would you describe someone that way? Well, we were working with, uh, the AI provider Mappa and What MAPPA does is evaluates personalities by listening to people’s voices. And it’s remarkably good at it. So it describes, like if you talk into it for a while, it comes back with a pretty good description of what your personality is. So what we decided to do was, so that’s like an LLM. But what we decided to do is put in our own little co-pilot, which is going to evaluate entrepreneurs’ voices and try to map those to entrepreneurial success. And so that entrepreneurial success will be determined that we will get better predictions of entrepreneurial success based on certain characteristics. We don’t really know what those are. And so we’re asking the AI to map great entrepreneurs to great voices. And maybe they’re not great voices, maybe they’re just great entrepreneurs. And figure out what the Draper wild animal should be. We don’t know what it is yet. We’re in search. [Michelle Kwok]: I think, what do you think it is? And I can add on what the heuristics say on MAPA, but like from all the really great entrepreneurs that you have met, what is something that you always feel like you get from them? Because you’ll meet an entrepreneur and then you’ll be like, Michelle, I don’t think they’re a wild animal. And I’ll be like, yeah, I get it. So you know, something in your head. [Tim Draper]: Yeah. Oh, we have some theories. And those theories are pretty, I mean, pretty consistent. But weirdly, it’s the tonality of the voice and the way they put words together and all that, that the AI is picking out. But what we’re looking for A Draper wild animal is somebody who figures out where all the boundaries are and then builds something where there are no boundaries. So we have a lot of trouble with entrepreneurs who spend, you know, 15 minutes of their half hour explaining how they’re going to get approval from my government. We don’t have great success with people who are extraordinarily good salespeople, but not particularly passionate about what they do. We have not too much success with entrepreneurs who are talking mostly about how they’re going to make money or make us money and not about the mission and the vision. And we look for entrepreneurs. And if they’re just if they build it, they will come entrepreneurs. They’re not they’re not loving their customer enough. They don’t have that attention to the customer, that passion to delight the customer. And all those things, I guess, we are hoping to be able to figure out in a person’s voice. Now, we can put in things like, have they said how much they love the customer or delight the customer? That could be in there. Have they said how they’re going to build something that the customer loves so much that they will start spreading the word. So creating some sort of a network effect or viral effect. Those are some of the things we’re listening for just in the words they say. But in the way they say them, we feel it. But now the AI is going to be able to have that equivalent kind of feel and understanding that we do. And hopefully we can get to the point where the AI does that job for us. [Michelle Kwok]: Yeah, just to add on to that. So a lot of what Tim says is true, like when it comes out in your voice in the way that when we review the transcripts, it says that the entrepreneurs they can adapt fast and they can outlast the rest like they are going they’re so passionate that they’re going to outlast the rest. Some of the things that Mappa talks about is we love founders that have intensity but with intent. We like people who have a high velocity mind but they’re logical so Tim always says we’re looking for rational founders who are building around ideas, which I think could be a good thing for a post. [Tim Draper]: Actually, that’s Adam. That’s Adam? He’s saying either irrational people doing rational things or rational people doing irrational things. UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: That’s good. [Tim Draper]: But he doesn’t want irrational people doing irrational things. He doesn’t want rational of people doing rational things. Too crazy or too boring, one of the same. Yeah. But the thing we’re, yeah, we want the entrepreneur. So we’re talking about the entrepreneur, but it’s all, it’s the whole package. They’ve got to be going after an industry that really hasn’t been innovated on for a long time. Time. So the industry is either fragmented or run by a monopoly or oligopoly, where the customer is kind of getting bad service at a high cost, but they they’re willing to keep doing it. And then we’re looking for an entrepreneur where people will naturally gravitate toward them, whether it’s for the idea, for what they say, for the just natural leadership ability. But an entrepreneur is not necessarily a leader and not always. It’s not always in the same person, the leadership and the entrepreneur. Sometimes they’re two different people. Leadership needs to make sure that the team is aligned behind The entrepreneur is usually looking for product market fit and trying to weave their way in uncertainty. Someone who’s comfortable in uncertainty is good. Somebody who is confident of what they’re doing is good, and that could be in the voice, and someone who is determined. So we just had a couple of entrepreneurs that talked to us about something kind of, which seemed kind of interesting. It was a vaccine of some sort. And I liked the market they were going after. But they kind of were becoming entrepreneurs to be entrepreneurs. They weren’t really going into it because they had to do it. It kind of has to be inside them. It has to get done. It’s something that no one else is doing, so they have to do it. And they’re the only ones that can make it happen. And they feel they have to believe that. [Michael Houck]: Yeah, I feel like we’ve seen a big trend in the last couple of years in particular where, you know, it’s like becoming a founder, a venture-backed founder is to some people, they see it as like the next credential that they need to get. Like, oh yeah, I went to Stanford or Harvard. I, you know, went to GSB and then I was a product manager in big tech and then I now have to get into YC, right? That’s like the next thing to do. And it’s less about it’s more about, yeah, I gotta mark up the resume. [Tim Draper]: And when the money goes away, I mean, let’s say they work for Facebook or Google, they had a very happy salary. And they come back and they say, now I gotta start a business. If the entrepreneur ever says, I could be making $5,000 a year, times as much at Google, you know they've got one foot in and one foot out. The great entrepreneurs, they don't look back. It's just, here we go. [Michael Houck]: The money is less on their mind. The opportunity costs less thing on their mind. [UNKNOWN_SPEAKER]: Yeah. [Tim Draper]: And it shouldn't be about the money. It's weird. It's part of irony of life. The entrepreneurs that come in and say they're going to make everybody money, don't. People who say that they're going to paint a picture of the world that's never been seen before, make a fortune. And nobody knows quite why that is. It's a little bit of a, it's one of, you know, gods or the gods or whoever, you know, you believe in, it's one of their little jokes. Yeah. [Michael Houck]: One of my favorite ironies of life and of business for sure. I guess taking that idea sort of one step further, this sort of like unconventional, even irrational founder, who are three of sort of the most of this like archetype of irrational founders that you've actually invested in and sort of what convinced you to back them? [Tim Draper]: So the irrationality just means that the state of the art or the middle of the pack doesn't understand what they're doing yet. And so that they brush it off as something irrational. But what it is, is they're seeing something that might actually a part of the future. And they're pushing the future in that direction. I mean, Elon said he was going to Mars. That seemed pretty irrational at the time, but now it seems to be getting closer and closer. And we backed him. Well, we backed Coinbase. I put money into Bitcoin. It seemed very irrational at the time, but it was a futuristic look. So it was very rational from the point of view of five or 10 years from now, but it was irrational from the point of view of today. Now, there's something else that I've kind of noticed, and that is is when a new technology comes up, there are the people that are very moralistic and they say, this is amoral, this is a problem. We can't have this in our society because it changes something and they're not comfortable with it. Examples of that would be like birth control or IVF or Bitcoin. And in each case, they say this is immoral. It's like it's not what we've been doing. It's not what we do. It's that kind of look. But the entrepreneur is seeing beyond that to a place where if everybody uses this, we're going to have a better life and a better world. The Internet was that way. I mean, people said, I'm never putting my credit card on on the internet and suddenly Amazon's this huge thing. And they said, oh, there are those viruses that get into your computer. And that's what Google turned out to be, you know, the one that had that virus. And then all of a sudden there were this huge thing. So what we're looking for, the things that are a little out there that people would say today might be a more And in five years might say, that's a big deal. That's really important part of our life. I mean, you could argue self-driving car is amoral because people should drive their own car. You could say a car in the first place was amoral because you weren't riding a horse and it was not good for the buggy whip manufacturer. And so And so what we're seeing is we're embracing these changes. And we're saying, let's see how these go with humanity. Let's see how they improve the world. And if they don't, cut them off. But if they do, let's let them ride for a while and see what happens. And I think that's a better way of looking at the world. And you're less, another word Adam uses, you're less paranoid, you're more pro-noid, which means paranoid means everybody's out to get you. If you're pro-noid, you're thinking everybody's out to help you. [Michael Houck]: It's an awkward sounding word, but we can roll with it. [Michelle Kwok]: There's interesting things that we can talk about here with the point with the IVF and birth control. Like birth control, I think was normalized like not crazy long ago, like 1972. Then IVF was normalized, honestly, probably more in the 90s. [Tim Draper]: And they were talking about when it's normalized, but birth control when it started 1964. Yeah, and then it became more normal. Then it becomes more normal. People start going, oh, the pill, the pill, the pill. Yeah, people said this was like the worst thing that you could be doing. [Michelle Kwok]: And, and so I I think that's what we're seeing with some of our companies. Like, for example, Herocyte, they do embryo screening. They just came out of Stealth. And they do embryo screening for 17-plus major diseases and also a predictor for IQ. It's not gene editing. They're just predicting the embryos. And if you really zoom out and look back at it, you're like, as a parent, why wouldn't I want my kid to have the best opportunity? And it's a fun year. Or not have diabetes and not have to live that type of life. But there are people online who are saying the exact same things as the IVF people back in the day saying, yeah, this is not moral. You're fighting God. But you could see a world in 10 years from now where that is normalized to do that type of embryo screening or a stealth startup that is building an artificial womb. Because one in six couples have fertility complications. Others are still dying from giving birth. And then afterwards, I think it's something like 60% of women have fertility complications, even in today's modern world. [Tim Draper]: Women may just opt out of pregnancy. In fact, I've known women who just are afraid they'd ever get pregnant. So they never want to have a kid, but they would like to have a kid. So now you have an option. So there are some really interesting changes that are happening, that using AI to see which is the best embryo, it turns out the data shows that maybe this one's the smartest, but has the most likely allergy to peanuts. And this one is the strongest, but has the most likely chance of getting cancer. And they get to weigh all those different different variables before choosing which one they're going to have. So anyway, that's where I think we are pushing humanity forward against those who resist the changes. And sometimes they resist the changes for their own good. Like somebody who runs a big pharma company is not going to want some of these new health care advances because the world is moving from chemotherapy to bio cures. And that change is getting to be a huge thing. We're seeing it happening. All these startups are going after bio cures. The big pharma is not going like that because they like the therapy because they want people to keep buying their pills. [Michael Houck]: What why do you think that that's happening now? Like, why is this thesis around biotech and I guess bio cures? [Tim Draper]: Why is this happening now as opposed to five, 10 years ago or anything like that? Some in some ways, I think things have to rationalize over a 20 year period. You know, the they cloned the sheep. I remember that going on the cover of Tim. And then the first instinct, I mean, I thought Bill Clinton was generally a pretty good president, but that, what he did there was really bad, which was, he said, cloning's gonna be illegal. We are making cloning illegal. And I'm thinking, that set back science many years, but enough time now, to where we're doing all sorts of stem cell work, cloning, interesting, you know, blending DNA, you know, we now are going to be able to bring back the woolly mammoth and the dire wolf and the saber-toothed tiger and, you know, the dodo bird and whatever else. And that wouldn't have been possible. And possibly, you'll be able to bring animals that haven't been invented yet. Maybe a carrier pigeon that can swim underwater. There are probably some really interesting things that people could create because we're funding Colossal and Colossal is pushing the edge of what could be done. So interesting new things for humanity are usually invented and then socialized. And then they become okay. And then an entrepreneur breaks in and says, I'm doing this. And if they come in too soon, they get destroyed very quickly. And if they they come in too late, some big company takes it away from them. So the timing is really important. [Michael Houck]: The distinction is just basically, are they showing up with this company at the right time versus when something's socialized versus too early and still kind of scary to people? [Tim Draper]: Yeah, if it's too early, they might get like, I mean, my gosh, after nuclear power was created and they had Three Mile Island, people went around with no nukes sign. And half the time, they were talking about, they just didn't want any nuclear bombs. But they wrote no nukes, which meant way. But what that did was it halted all progress in nuclear power for about 30 years, so that all the great nuclear scientists died off. And now we're now we're having research with small nuclear thorium so that it doesn't have waste, some fusion possibilities that could really change nuclear power in a big way. So it's like, it had to be socialized in society for a while. Now it's like, and then there have to be a few entrepreneurs that kind of go, you know, this will still work, or, you know, the emperor has no clothes, or whatever it is that there's, it's like they gotta, some entrepreneur has to see it, we have to fund it, because we're the only ones who do this sort of thing, right? We call it, I mean, whether you call it deep tech, early stage, or you call it funding the rebellion, or whatever you want to call it. It's we're the place for those. And then the businesses start to take off and then other people who call themselves venture capitalists jump on board. [Michelle Kwok]: I like that. We're using frontier tech now. [Michael Houck]: Frontier tech. [Tim Draper]: OK, we have a there's a venture fund called Frontier. They're great, but I'm not sure we want to use frontier tech. Well, it's kind of cool. I like it. We have bio cures. [Michael Houck]: We have sort of nuclear now having been sort of more socialized and coming back around. What else do you see as like groundbreaking sort of innovations that are at that stage of being ready to sort of break out in society and what's going to transform the next decade, basically? [Tim Draper]: Well, World War Two was in the, you know, 1950s. And World War at the Korean War was in wherever that was, 60s, maybe. Vietnam was in the 60s. Yeah. Oh, no, World War Two was 45. It ended in 45. And then the Korean War was like 48 to 50, something like that. And then Vietnam War was in the 60s. Early 60s, there hasn't really been, there've been skirmishes, wars between third world countries, whatever, but there hasn't been like a big one. And when Russia invaded Ukraine, most technologists were laughing. That first day when the Russians were all in their tanks and they were going along that one road, and there were like 500 tanks going along the one road. If you were a technologist, you'd think, I can take them all out so easily. And so technology now is getting really advanced for wartime. Because all of a sudden, you know, we've got companies that are hypersonic missiles, we got companies We've got companies that are Star Wars defense with lasers. We've got companies that are information sources. They know where every satellite is in space. We have some that go out into space and then come back through the atmosphere. A couple that are space station companies. And all of a sudden, the world of defense or the world of warfare has to be upgraded. And it was left alone to stagnate because no one was at war. And now that there's a war, people are saying, oh, we gotta up our game. And now all these, And the military, the defense groups, when they're at peace, they don't really mess with anything. It's all the same McDonnell Douglas and JPL and whatever. And nobody's looking for innovators. And then when there's a war, it's like, whoa, how fast can we make these? How fast can we buy it? OK, so that's another field. And then there's the Bitcoin field. And that is that there's a gravitational pull toward Bitcoin. And it gets Bitcoin as a percentage of all crypto gets to be bigger and bigger and bigger every time there's a cycle. So it was 40% market share, then it was 50. Now it's 62. Probably end up somewhere around 80. And what that means a developer, a crypto developer, a decentralized developer, AI developer around Bitcoin, you're going to move all of your applications to Bitcoin. It's what happened with Microsoft. They all did the same thing. They all moved their applications to Microsoft because that was the platform. And so there were all sorts of experiments on other platforms, but then they all moved to Microsoft. Or Microsoft just copied and made it a part of their operating system. And that's happening with Bitcoin. So that's another field where we think pretty interesting. And then AI is taking all of our jobs, or at least it's taking- That's so funny, Tim, that's what my next question was like, how do you view AI taking over venture capital and like the startup world? If you're afraid that AI is going to take your job and you want to shoo AI away, it is going to take your job. But if you take your job and innovate through AI, you're going to keep your job. [Michelle Kwok]: So then what does venture capital look like in five years with AI taking our jobs? I mean, like AI is already doing a lot of what But now our interns do, so we're cutting our intern class. [Tim Draper]: Don't say that, Michael. We won't say that. We won't say that. No, but AI is taking a lot. We are doing so much with AI now that our interns and our team is accomplishing so much more because of AI. And we've actually grown our team around that because we know that there's a need for more AI. And so I think if you're going in that direction, you will create jobs. If you're going in the other direction, you're going to lose your job. Pretty simple. I've got this theory. I was talking to Alex Filippenko, who is the head of the astrophysics department at Berkeley. And he said, he started to describe what AI has done. And then he started talking about the conversations in the faculty lounge. And this is what I picture. I picture 10 people. Two of them are saying, wow, that admissions office is doing a great job because these essays are spectacular. That's the clueless too. Then six of them are saying, get rid of this AI chat GPT thing. We don't want it anywhere near. It's awful for students to ever think about using this because they have to learn ancient Greek the old way. And then two of them are going, huh, this is cool. How do I incorporate it into my curriculum? So you're going to see that trifurcation happen. And I think that that's going to happen in every industry, everywhere. Do you think this is going to happen? I don't know what the end game is. Does AI actually eclipse the need for me to make judgment calls on on entrepreneurs because they start doing a better job? Or is it that my job is to continually upgrade the AI so that it gets better and better so that I can more efficiently and effectively filter and choose the right entrepreneurs to back? I think it's more of the latter. I don't think AI is going to replace decision-making. I think it will replace, it will at the margin and it will in a decentralized world, but then there will, I think there will always be humans that kind of say, let's have a check on that system. [Michelle Kwok]: It'll make human decision-making just more efficient and faster and just like take less time. [Tim Draper]: But think about creative people and anything they can imagine, they can just say to AI and the AI goes and tells a robot to do it and the robot goes and builds it. So, you know, it's like, hey, you know, I'd like, you know, I'd like to put a water slide in Draper University from the sixth floor down to the pool. And all I have to do is think it. And the AI gets all the approvals, puts in the safety rails, does all that, and then builds it. And it's done. So my creativity has more time to think about, like, the zip line, rather than pounding my head against the town to make sure waterslide in. [Michael Houck]: I want to follow up on something you said at the beginning of that answer, which was basically the trifurcation. Taking that one step further, do you feel like that's going to lead to consolidation in a lot of markets, a lot of industries, because basically some people will be hiring a lot more people because those people will be trained on AI and therefore those companies as a whole will have exponentially more leverage than other companies that are letting people go? [Tim Draper]: of how you see it playing out? Pretty much. I think the same thing happened when the internet came. If you didn't have a website, your business was probably fried. [UNKNOWN_SPEAKER]: Yeah. [Tim Draper]: And I think if you don't at least look for ways you can use AI and try a few things, then your business will be fried too. Because somebody is going to use it in your industry and they're going to do a better job. And then the customer's going to be better off and humans are going to be better off and you will be out of business unless you adapt. So, you know, a big part of capitalism is the ability to adapt because you have to serve your customer. You have to make sure that they're delighted with your service or your product. So keep making them better. And if your service or product gets completely eliminated by AI, then you've got to change your ways. You've got to do something else. Like the guys who made saddles and buggy whips when we were all riding around probably ended up becoming car mechanics. Or their sons and daughters did, right? [Michael Houck]: Yeah, right. It's probably generational. [Tim Draper]: Yeah. And actually, that's true here, too. The older generation is going to rest on their laurels, and the younger generation is going to go, no. Are you kidding me? We should be using AI on every patient in the hospital. We should be using AI for you know, every book that's ever written, we should be using AI to search video, you know, whatever it is. Right. Cool. [Michael Houck]: Well, look, I know we're over. I appreciate you going over and giving a thorough answer there. I think it's really good stuff. Anything else we want to hit on, Michelle? [Michelle Kwok]: Let me just quickly check our chat. Oh, I liked this question that you had. What's a founder behavior that looks like a risk, but it's actually a signal? [Tim Draper]: And a behavior that looks like a signal, but is actually a risk? Oh, the sales guy is the one that looks like a signal, but is actually a risk. You know, somebody who's enthusiastic about whatever it is. But the one that looks like a bad signal, and it's a good thing, like thing that looks like a risk, but it's a positive signal, is somebody who gives you the idea that when you give them a barrier, they figure out a way around it. I think the last, oh, did you have something? [Michelle Kwok]: Go for it. I think just the last thing and we're trying to make a, we're doing the digital twin video on you talking about the key mode to biotech. If you could talk more, just go a little bit deeper about what you mean by that and why that is your thesis in bio right now. Also from the lens that a lot of generalist investors three years ago said that they weren't gonna invest in biotech at all. Now, a lot of them are even like calling us being like, how did you guys start getting into biotech? How do I do it? [Tim Draper]: Yeah, just from kind of that lens and also the why the chemo to bio, what does that mean to you? Okay, so this is a perfect example of an industry that was very great for a long time and then started providing bad services at a high cost. So Big Pharma, you know, came up with some miracle drugs for different things. And they were all treatments because what they were doing is putting particular molecules in your body in order to combat something else in your body. And it put up barriers to cancer or barriers to heart disease or whatever. Okay, that was fine for a while, but now they worked, they grew and grew and grew. They became hugely successful. Then they started lobbying the government and the government started regulating them. And what happens when the government regulates and the companies lobby is the two of them come to a conclusion as to what the world is and should be. And they don't want to change it. They put in all the rules and the drug companies have to fill out all the forms. And that's why it now takes about a billion dollars in 15 years to get a drug from the lab to a human. Well, and those drugs are almost all treatments. So you have to take many of them forever. And nobody really was working and they were all thinking molecule go through FDA and get it into bodies that and and then sell the heck out of it on TV. And, and, and all of a sudden, we weren't living as long. So like, we're spending much more money, and we were not living as long. So clearly, they were providing bad service at a high cost. That was the chemo therapies. So now, All of a sudden, there are these new technologies. There's CRISPR, there's cloning, there's stem cell work, there's reprogramming, cellular reprogramming, cell reprogramming. People are building new body parts through biological processes. And all of a sudden, things are looking a little different in health care. It's not give them a drug, cut them up, whatever. It's now, hey, you can take some of their stem cells and you can make them younger and put them back into their body and they're younger. Or you can take their stem cells and grow a kidney or grow a we just see Achilles tendon, the muscular ligaments cartilage. [Michelle Kwok]: And those things can now grow outside in outside in the lab. [Tim Draper]: And then you get put back into the body and help the body become better than it was. Yeah, so it's not about treating things over a chronic period of time. [Michelle Kwok]: It's like, this is broken, we are immediately fixing it. And it's going to be good as new. And not a chronic treatment, like you're taking pills every single week and paying pharma for that. [Tim Draper]: Yeah. And the thing with the molecules was you, you pay pharma to take the drug that blocks the cancer, the cancer then reacts and something else happens to your body. And then you need a different drug and then you need, you know, the vaccine and then you need the shingles vaccine because the vaccine created more shingles and then you need the cancer vaccine because the cancer was caused by the shingles. It goes through a process that is really good for all the drug companies, not good for the patients, not good for customers. And now there's a new way and it seems to be working better. So when these people get stem cell treatments, they come out and they go, Oh, this kind of worked. And it was one shot. [Tim Draper]: And all of a sudden- And I'm completely cured and I don't have to go through chemo for months. [Tim Draper]: Suddenly it's a whole different way of looking at medicine, a one-shot cure. And so now we're spending a lot of our time helping build those companies. And they sure may have FDA issues, maybe not. There are places within the FDA that have kind of open season. So like if there's no drug for something, ALS, there's no drug for it that works. And so people can do whatever they want. They can experiment, they can, you know, anything they want to do to, you know, get out of ALS or somebody who's paralyzed, you know, let them try a stem cell treatment in their backbone. And those are happening in the US. And then we made an investment in Prospera, which is the country within the country, which says that their FDA will approve any drug that's been approved by any other country in the world. So they're going to be attracting all sorts of medical tourism. So you can see a lot of people flying to Prospera, getting stem cell and then coming back before they've gone through US FDA and the companies can grow without waiting for a billion, $3 billion in 15 years to get into patients. So there, that’s the Awesome. [Michael Houck]: The analogy I draw is like you’re going from, and I can see why the pharma companies would hate this, because you’re going from a subscription for life to like a one time thing. [Tim Draper]: It’s like here, you’ve been paying Netflix $18 a month for 20 years, and now you’ve got a little dish and you can see whatever you want, or you got the internet and you can see whatever you want without anything. Well, guys, I appreciate it. [Michael Houck]: We’ll go get to work, turn off the camera and get to work. Into pieces, and Tim, we’ll get them over to you soon. Great. [Tim Draper]: Thanks. All right, guys. [Michelle Kwok]: Thank you. It’s fun. I like what’s going on. UNKNOWN_SPEAKER: See you next time.