E65

E65: VC markup dynamics, Russia/US tensions over Ukraine, Altos Labs raises $3B, Stripe's valuation

2022-01-29 spoken.md · speaker-labeled ▶ watch ← E64 all episodes E66 →

0
ideas born
13
ideas moved
23
captures · 4 voices
5
dissenting
+62.2
conviction added
-102.8
decay · 101 silent

Every number here is replayed from score_events — the same ledger the pool ranks on. Decay is what the 101 ideas nobody mentioned gave up this week; it applies only when an episode is processed.

Tier crossings

conviction thresholds crossed by this episode — 65 / 45 / 15 · ideas born here show where they landed. why 65 isn't always green

▲ +9.6 🪙 Bitcoin bid as the escape hatch from dollar debasement ember watch 35.8 → 45.4

Who moved the board

each voice's force on conviction this episodesupports and opposes, weighted exactly as the replay applied them · share = % of this episode's movement

Chamath
Chamath
10 captures · 48% of movement
+52.0 / -38.0 → net +14.0
Sacks
Sacks
5 captures · 24% of movement
+20.4 / -24.1 → net -3.7
Friedberg
Friedberg
5 captures · 17% of movement
+31.3 → net +31.3
Jason
Jason
3 captures · 11% of movement
+20.6 → net +20.6

What got argued (13 ideas)

ordered by how hard each idea moved · quotes are verbatim from the transcript, timestamps deep-link into the episode

URA ⚡ Nuclear is the fastest path to carbon neutral — uranium is being cornered closed 36 CONTESTED ▲ +15.2 21.0 → 36.2
Chamath
Chamath support ×2 sentiment ▶ 22:55
So at somewhere along the way, nobody took a science class in Germany and figured out that nuclear was both safer and cleaner. Instead, burning fossil fuels is the answer.
Jason
Jason support ×1 sentiment ▶ 23:04
And geopolitically wiser to not have a dependency. And after the Fukushima, they went, turned them all off. They accelerated it.
IPO 📈 2021 is the peak of the risk-capital golden era closed 80 CONTESTED ▲ +10.8 76.1 → 86.9
Sacks
Sacks support ×2 explicit_prediction ▶ 5:37
the public markets have massively corrected. And now finally, you know, we talked about this few few months ago, those new price levels have trickled their way down into venture markets. And so finally, you know, venture deals are starting to price at more reasonable prices. ... I think that the prices now are coming down because what I've heard is that the crossover investors like Tiger, like KOTU who are deploying all this money, they've really slowed down now. I think they're all kind of licking their wounds. And so like all of this money that was flooding into the venture space is kind of on pause right now.
Chamath
Chamath support ×3 positioning ▶ 8:06
But my private book was up a billion dollars. And I told the team, I'm like, no, this is not real. So we have to take those marks because, you know, you have other venture firms that are pricing these deals and we get audited K1s. ... And I said, this is not real. We were at best break even and probably lost money. But you can't, you can't not take these marks because like, you know, you have an entire fund complex that lives on these marks.
Friedberg
Friedberg support ×2 sentiment ▶ 9:12
there's a significant disincentive for venture firms to take markdowns, to raise capital into a private business at a price that's lower than the prior round. Because when they do that, the marked value of their portfolio goes down. And then it makes it harder for that venture firm to go out and raise the next fund that they're going to try and raise from their LPs, because it looks like they're not good investors.
Jason
Jason support ×2 sentiment ▶ 12:01
As everything was going up, these new fund managers are like, we're at 100 IRR, we're at 200% IRR, because this crypto investment we did got marked up. And I was just thinking about what Bill Gurley would always say, which I think is a Howard Marks quote, you can't eat IRR.
SPY 🌍 Everything is at all-time highs and the insiders are selling - de-risk closed 46 ▲ +9.8 48.9 → 58.7
Chamath
Chamath support ×3 positioning ▶ 2:20
in early December or November, when I wrote that letter on Twitter and we talked about it, and I sold a bunch of stuff after Jeff and Elon were selling, raised some cash and I was like, okay, now I have enough buffer here. The whole point from here on out is to basically like insulate myself from my own emotional turmoil as stocks go down. And so far so good.
cg:bitcoin 🪙 Bitcoin bid as the escape hatch from dollar debasement closed 48 ▲ +9.6 35.8 → 45.4
Chamath
Chamath support ×2 positioning ▶ 4:58
I've structured it so that I don't hold any Bitcoin personally myself because I don't want to have the pressure and the risk of keys and coins and wallets and this and that. But I still really believe in Bitcoin in the long term.
XLE ⚡ Global conflict era begins — energy and defense outperform closed 73 ▲ +9.2 24.8 → 34.0
Chamath
Chamath support ×2 sentiment ▶ 21:23
it turns out that, you know, the strongest power in Europe, Germany, is in a really difficult situation because they rely on Russian energy. ... And so when all of the saber rattling was happening, Germany basically had to blink because they need Russia's energy.
TLT 🏦 Fed and ECB are in a much tighter posture a year from now closed 45 CONTESTED ▲ +8.7 46.2 → 55.0
Sacks
Sacks support ×2 explicit_prediction ▶ 46:21
Clearly, Powell does not want to be remembered as the Fed chief that let inflation slip the leash, right? I mean, he's gotten religion now around the idea that this inflation is not transitory, which was his position for months.
ARKK 🌍 Fed ending QE drains liquidity-dependent assets in 2022 closed 76 ▲ +4.0 79.0 → 83.0
Chamath
Chamath support ×3 explicit_prediction ▶ 44:16
we have to remember that, you know, the Fed has nine trillion dollars of assets on their balance sheet. And so, you know, if they start to take nine trillion dollars of cash out of the system by selling these assets into the market, right, you're taking the money out, right, because you're getting money back. That's going to have an enormous, huge impact as well.
QQQ 🌍 American exceptionalism soars and the economy booms in 2022 closed 7 CONTESTED ▼ -3.8 49.1 → 45.2
Jason
Jason support ×2 sentiment ▶ 50:02
So let's look in the good news column. Wages way up. Earnings way up. 10 million job openings in the United States. Pretty close to record low unemployment. And the pandemic ending. And people having record savings in their bank accounts and personal balance sheets.
Sacks
Sacks oppose ×2 explicit_prediction ▶ 53:45
Well, the negatives are that yes, the unemployment rate is very low, but a lot of people have dropped out of the labor force. So the labor participation rate is still quite low. ... And then the fact that wages are going up is good, but we don't know how much that's inflation. So those would be the negatives.
ARKG 🤖 Synthetic biology's Netscape moment closed 0 CONTESTED ▼ -3.4 40.7 → 37.2
Friedberg
Friedberg support ×2 explicit_prediction 12mo horizon ▶ 57:29
And I think it speaks to what I highlighted as what will be the new frontier in biotech and will completely rewrite the course of humanity is if we can take drugs and for a short period of time, completely reverse the age of ourselves. ... And this technology and this is going to be the year I think this will be the front cover of a lot of magazines this year. As people realize that this is real and that it's getting commercialized.
Chamath
Chamath oppose ×3 explicit_prediction ▶ 58:02
Whenever I see these grandiose prognostications of future progress and then see these companies raise exorbitant amounts of money, I have never found a single example where it's ever worked ever. In fact, every time I see a company raise an exorbitant amount of money in a Series A, I write them off in my head. ... And in fact, I've never seen a three billion dollar venture fund do much more than return 2X of money.
QQQ 🤖 Own the top 30% of global tech and hold it five to ten years closed 6 CONTESTED ▲ +2.7 83.0 → 85.8
Friedberg
Friedberg support ×2 explicit_prediction ▶ 47:39
the idea that markets bucket, quote unquote, growth stocks together, I think kind of obfuscates an important point, which is that some of the businesses in that category are real businesses that are going to succeed over the long run. And some of them are speculative and are likely to fail over the short run.
SPY 🌍 Supply-chain crunch tips the US into 1970s-style stagflation next year closed 73 CONTESTED ▲ +1.3 57.9 → 59.3
Sacks
Sacks support ×3 explicit_prediction ▶ 43:36
And so I think that the risk of recession now is much higher than it was even a month ago. Now, you know, it's going to be hard to know. So basically, I think what we're saying is it's going to be very hard for the Fed to engineer a soft landing here, where we don't trigger a recession in the process of stopping inflation.
Friedberg
Friedberg support ×3 explicit_prediction 6mo horizon ▶ 50:51
So the real risk to the economy, in my opinion, right now, is when and how we're going to work our way through the supply chain issues. And it is so complex and there's a myriad of problems. And it is a global problem that it's really unclear how this is going to play out over the next six months. ... businesses that you didn't realize and didn't expect are going to get hit with supply chain problems are suddenly going to say, guess what, our revenue is off by 20, 30 percent
Chamath
Chamath oppose ×2 explicit_prediction 9mo horizon ▶ 52:32
And the reason I'm less worried is when you actually talk to the companies that are spending enormous amounts of money on CapEx, they've actually guided to the fact that by the end of this year and the beginning of next year, most of these things will be worked out. It's indigestion. I think we're dealing with a six to nine month issue of having turned things off and are now rapidly trying to turn things back on. ... But I do think it will work itself out faster than people expect personally.
ITA 🏛️ Escalating global conflict becomes the political outlet for inflation closed 12 CONTESTED ▼ -1.1 26.1 → 25.0
Friedberg
Friedberg support ×3 explicit_prediction 12mo horizon ▶ 18:05
I did say, you know, at the end of the year, I do think that we're in this kind of economic status right now that if there were an opportunity for conflict, we're probably more likely to want to engage in conflict than not, because it does create something that we all get behind. ... I think the economic seed is planted for us to be in some sort of conflict this year.
Chamath
Chamath oppose ×2 explicit_prediction ▶ 34:41
The thing here, I think what de-escalates all of this is economic sanctions and monetary impact, because if Nord Stream 2 doesn't get turned on, which is in Germany's control, that has a huge economic impact to Russia. ... I do think the way this gets de-escalated is through money. If you severely impinge Russia's ability to grow their economy, that foments a lot of anger at home.
QQQ 📈 Tech drawdown is in the eighth inning - the bottom is close closed 13 CONTESTED ▼ -0.9 35.2 → 34.3
Chamath
Chamath support ×3 explicit_prediction ▶ 40:19
if you go back to the, you know, from 1950 onwards today, every time the government has started to raise rates or the Federal Reserve has started to raise rates, the stock markets have actually rallied. Now, why is that? It's typically that they see through the end of the rate hike cycle, and they start to price the business as if these rate hikes are done and to rebase things. And on average, I think the stock markets go up between 7 and 8 percent.
Sacks
Sacks oppose ×2 explicit_prediction ▶ 46:46
these market levels that we're at right now, we look 60% correction in growth stocks. But this is with that still in a good economy in peacetime conditions. And now we have a risk of recession and war. So, you know, there's still room for, you know, a lot more negative news here is kind of my point.

Episode digest

written during extraction and stored in data/extractions/ep065.json — the auditable source of truth, including everything market-adjacent that did not earn a capture

Recorded 2022-01-29, three weeks before the invasion of Ukraine and the week after the FOMC telegraphed a March liftoff — a dense, almost entirely macro episode with no new tradeable theses, only heavy re-litigation of the existing board. Segment one is the January markdown reckoning and it lands squarely on risk-capital-golden-era-peaks-2021 with all four voices: Sacks (2:20-7:38) says the public-market correction has now 'trickled their way down into venture markets', that Tiger and 'KOTU' (ASR for Coatue) have stopped deploying and that venture prices are consequently dropping — while framing it as good news for a four-or-five-year-old Craft that is still mostly buying; Chamath discloses hard numbers (8:06): public book roughly break-even for 2021, private book marked UP a billion dollars, net +15%, and 'I said, this is not real. We were at best break even and probably lost money' — plus a three-year-old shadow portfolio held at cost basis, and 'paper markups are the lifeblood of what keeps this industry going'; Friedberg supplies the mechanism (9:12) that VCs are structurally disincentivised from taking markdowns because the mark drives the next fundraise; Jason brings the micro-fund LP receipts ('we're at 100 IRR, we're at 200% IRR') and Gurley's 'you can't eat IRR'. Chamath also discloses de-risking positioning (2:20): he sold into November/December 'after Jeff and Elon were selling', raised cash, and is deliberately insulating himself from panicking at the lows — a direct reinforcement of his own E055 everything-bubble insider-selling call, and the single highest-signal disclosure in the episode. Bitcoin gets a positioning restatement (4:58): invested 2011 at $80, still an investment not a trade, structured so he holds no coins personally, 'But I still really believe in Bitcoin in the long term' (window on bitcoin-reserve-currency-hedge-2021 closes 2022-02-20, so this is its last mention). Ukraine: nobody predicts the invasion outright. Friedberg reaffirms his own conflict-as-economic-outlet thesis with an explicit self-callback to the prediction show — 'the economic seed is planted for us to be in some sort of conflict this year' — while simultaneously calling US troop deployment 'highly unlikely'; Chamath takes the other side of the same idea, arguing via Obama's 2016 Atlantic quotes that the US blinks every time and that 'the way this gets de-escalated is through money', i.e. sanctions and Nord Stream 2, not the war machine; Sacks does 15 minutes of NATO-expansion realism (1956 Hungary, 1968 Prague, 1981 Poland, 2008 Georgia, 2014 Crimea, Baker's 'not one inch eastward') and says the crisis is defusable by simply ruling Ukraine out of NATO — deliberately NOT captured on the conflict idea, because he rejected its inflation mechanism at E055 and is arguing here that war is avoidable, not that it is coming. The energy read-through is Chamath's: Germany had to blink because 50% of its gas is Russian, and it is there because the environmentalists won 20 years ago and decommissioned the reactors — a support on Friedberg's E061 energy/defense prediction and on the nuclear-uranium thesis, with Jason adding that avoiding dependency is 'geopolitically wiser'. Chamath's throwaway that if Russia invades 'the stock markets will just go absolutely to zero... if you could have negative stock prices, this may be a good catalyst' is hyperbole delivered as a bit and was left uncaptured. Fed segment: Chamath re-pounds his E64 bottom call with receipts — since 1950 stocks have rallied an average 7-8% once hikes actually start, and drawdowns precede the cycle — and Sacks takes the direct other side one week later: 60% off in growth 'in a good economy in peacetime conditions', now with recession AND war risk, 'there's still room for a lot more negative news'. Sacks' recession call is his strongest of the run (soft landing very hard, risk higher than a month ago) and he expects Powell to stay hawkish because he won't be remembered as the chief who let inflation slip the leash; Chamath's contribution to the liquidity thesis is the $9T balance sheet — hikes are priced, the runoff is not. Chamath simultaneously undercuts the supply-chain leg of the recession idea (Apple and Tesla, ~$4T of market cap, have guided to resolution by early 2023; 'six to nine month issue'; 'it will work itself out faster than people expect') while keeping the Fed-overcorrection recession alive ('the marginal risk will be that we overcorrect and actually create a recession that doesn't need to be one') — logged as an oppose at strength 2 rather than a reversal for exactly that reason. Friedberg flips to the other side of the same idea, naming supply chain as the top risk to the economy from operating experience across his hardware/lab/beverage portfolio (GM delivered zero EVs last quarter for want of chips) and predicting unexpected companies print revenue misses of 20-30%. Jason runs his us-boom-2022 annual prediction as a good-news list (wages, earnings, 10m openings, record savings) and Sacks rebuts on labour-force participation and wage-inflation ambiguity, the same split as E062. Netflix: one week after Chamath's E064 reversal, Friedberg walks partway back, calling Ackman 'very smart' for underwriting NFLX at current prices and citing TCV's 2011 $200m pipe at ~$10 adjusted going 60x. Science corner is Altos Labs' $3B — Yamanaka-factor cellular reprogramming, mice biomarker-age reversed without tumours, Friedberg calling age reversal the new frontier and 'this is going to be the year' — met by the episode's most table-pounding skepticism from Chamath, who says he has 'never found a single example' of an exorbitantly funded moonshot working, writes off any company raising a giant Series A, and has 'never seen a three billion dollar venture fund do much more than return 2X'; Jason dismisses the whole category as a 'fear of death by billionaire bet'. Both Altos and the Bolt/Stripe fight are private with no listed comparable: the Bolt segment (Breslow's YC/Stripe 'mob bosses' thread) produced only PR-strategy analysis, universal disclosure of miniscule LP exposure to both companies, Chamath reading his own 2015 email declining Breslow's Series A at a $63m post (Nick: a missed 222x), Sacks admitting Craft passed on a mid-stage round on valuation and 'clearly we should have invested', and the shared lesson that a VC should be a price taker — no ticker, so digest-only. Labels: roster counts Jason 87 / Chamath 74 / Friedberg 47 / Sacks 43 all plausible, and content-verified — Jason does the third-person intro and the 'Love you besties' sign-off, Chamath has Nat, the 2011 Bloomberg BTC op-ed, poker and the Breslow email, Sacks is a 'four or five year old firm' (Craft, 2017) plus chess-with-Thiel and Ukraine realism, Friedberg has the beverage replicator and the Yamanaka science corner; every address-then-answer pair checks out (Sacks 15:20->16:11, Friedberg 17:45->18:05 and 29:34->29:37, Chamath 38:48->40:19, Sacks 53:15->53:45 and 1:06:54->1:07:17). Two anomalies, neither affecting a capture: a 9-turn SPEAKER_5 bucket of short interjections that is provably Jason at 15:12 ('I thought I heard masturbation', the answer to Chamath's question to Jason) and at 30:42 ('you're blaming my position on human rights', Sacks' target); and one merged fragment at 9:12 where Jason's 'Go ahead, Friedberg' opens the turn labelled David Friedberg.