Hi everyone, welcome to this morning's session startups in austerity. I'm your moderator Zachary Bogue from DC, VC. And a few housekeeping things that the web wanted me to say please tweet about the session. They also mentioned something about chat rules, but this is being live stream. So I don't know that that was applicable in my briefing document. And please use the hashtag web web 23. So let's set a little bit of context first. We've I've heard it said that this is one of the most consequential consequential annual meetings for a long time. There's rising rates, rising inflation. There's the first state on state conflict since World War two. There's increasing geopolitical tensions. There's food insecurity, water insecurity and increasing impacts of climate change. Against that backdrop, startups need to continue to figure out how to scale their business, raise capital, build products that their customers love and just continue to operate. So I think that the part of the message from startups on austerity and what you've come out to hear is what is the new playbook. And without I'm going to introduce our panel. First off, we have Isabel Kenyon, founder and CEO of Calibrate. And I'll first I'll actually say that all three of the startups are members of the the innovator unicorn community here at the West. Next up is Raj Verma, CEO of Single Store. Next is Luciana Lixandro, the initial or the first partner for Sequoia Capital here in Europe. And then Jack Gen of Air Wallachs. And I would actually like to start off and have each of you in one sentence or less.  Please describe your your businesses. Calibrate is a digital metabolic health business based in the United States. We pair doctors and coaches with consumers to help them improve their metabolic health and lose weight. Yeah, Single Store is just easily the best database in the world. It's the fastest, the cheapest and has some of the best investors, Zach. Hi, Luciana from Sequoia. We're a global venture capital firm started in the valley five decades ago and we invest in early and growth stage companies. Hi, I'm Jack the CEO and co-founder of Air Wallachs. We are a global payments infrastructure company in power modern businesses to go global. We build one of the most powerful payments and banking infrastructure in cross 100 countries to inspire the entrepreneurs to chasing economic opportunities worldwide. Nice work guys. It's great. My first question is for Isabel. So Calibrate has both direct to consumer as well as B2B models inside the same platform. And obviously consumers spending is changing and business spending is changing. And so how are you responding to that? And what are you seeing? And are you seeing differences in the two the two markets? We're paying really close attention to both and actually seeing a shift in in the momentum behind both. So we started the business in direct to consumer to begin with. And on that side of the business we actually see increased consumer demand in the healthcare space. Our product is expensive for consumers. It's $1,500 a year. But we see just consumers continue to be very focused on their health and our cost of acquisitions the lowest ever been it's ever been on the direct to consumer side. And so we're going to continue to accelerate into the direct to consumer business until we see otherwise. On the B2B side we saw a massive shift. So we sell it as an employer benefit in the U.S. And what we saw was that employers went from saying I have all the budget to try all the things and I want the best possible suite of benefits to I want benefits that help me. Save money. And we've had to really fundamentally change the value prop and the messaging and the positioning but more importantly the payment model. So we've changed to put our fees at risk and to really focus on outcomes. Oh great. So I think a topic that's on everyone's mind in Silicon Valley and broadly in the investor and startup community is valuation. And Raj you raised rounds in 2020 2021 and 2022 so you've kind of got good snapshots along the way. So I'd love to hear how you think the funding market broadly as well as valuations are involved. Yeah I think you know the funding market is always there for a quality product. You know that better than anyone else does. And the fact is that you know I remember 13th of March 2020 when the world was coming to an end. I had the one thing that CEOs get by the way is enough advice free at that. And the fact was that covid's come. Everything's going to be doom and gloom. Take 100 million dollars of debt draw down the debt because the world's going to run out of money. This is March August of 2020. The advice was born baby bird growth growth growth. Don't worry there's enough capital in the world that will fuel your growth. Now that was great 2021 that continued then 2022.  Fire people. All right. You have to bring your sales and marketing costs down. By the way these are just fads. I am probably the most optimistic you know person not only on this stage but even in the conference because I'm leaving a lot more optimistic than I came to this Davos conference because I think the message is not about you know. Good times or bad times it's about delivering a quality product and a quality product to your consumers and a quality product to your investors. We raised in 20 we doubled in 21 and we increased by 50 percent in 2022. And if there is I'd hate to advise because that's what I said I get so much of it. But the thing when we look back at it was we had a strategy we had an execution plan and we stuck to the basic basics rather. You know what's how to build a good business spend less than you make. It's as simple as delivering a quality product. All right. And I tell you what you just do that one thing you will always get up rounds for the rest of your life. You know we were at a dinner and I think the president of NASDAQ or CEO she stood up and she said. The demand for quality products will always remain in the market. Right. So I really think that quality is delivered through high rate of innovation and leverage distribution. Does anyone else have any comments on valuation.  We we didn't do up round. We did a flat round about two three months ago. So I put it this way. So we did a sort of you know in twenty twenty one October and November at the peak we did a five point five billion dollar round. And a few months ago we did another round of five point five. And the twenty twenty one round took me two weeks to close. And we probably five acts over subscribed so I said no to over half a billion dollars. The last round took me four and a half months. And I talked to over a hundred investors. So it is really I guess a lot of work. That but I think one sort of advice I will give you know people listening to this forum is focus your time on quality investors that actually understand your business. Because founders will kind of go you know anxiety and nervous and try to kind of cast in a net wide. But the people that doesn't understand the industry or the vertical they will never come in this in this sort of time. And apart from obviously building good quality product and save money I think it's important to spend time valuable time with the people that actually believe in your vision. And continue demonstrating you can have a pathway to cash flow positive and continue to build confidence to those strategic investors. That's the sort of investor you want to spend time with in this sort of environment. Thanks. Maybe I'll jump in for a second. It's very interesting to hear both Raj's and Jack's perspective. And I would say maybe Jack's perspective resonates a little bit more with what we're seeing. But I really love I really love the optimism and congratulations for raising a great round to both of you at growth stages. So it's slightly later stage companies. What we're seeing is that the flat round is the new up round companies that are doing well have fundamentally good unit economics are growing are raising a little bit of cushion for difficult macro. Typically at the same valuation that they raised that maybe a year ago or a couple of years ago. And then many companies that are not in a very solid place from a unit economics perspective are waiting a little bit longer and are trying to extend runway for a couple of years at least. So they don't have to have these conversations for a little bit of time. Great. Just to add to that. So when I say flat round means seems like nothing have changed. What had changed is our revenue report. So the multiple went from close to 80 acts of gross profit to like 20 something acts of gross profit. So the valuation hadn't changed. But a lot of the business have changed. We start we began with we went from burning you know $12 million a month to almost cash flow passive. So that have a lot of change. We have to basically push the business really hard to kind of raise money in this sort of environment. Absolutely. That's that's great. It's interesting. You know you almost sort of growing into the valuations is another way that I've heard founders talk about it. Right. So next question for Luciana. You know back in 2008 you know Sequoia published the famous rest in peace. Good times. And then as COVID came down the black swan missive. And so I think in the tech community we all get up every morning and are kind of hesitantly checking our emails looking for episode three of that installment. So how are you how is Sequoia thinking about that that broadly or where wouldn't they expect episode three. I'll start by saying that something that Raj said earlier that resonated I am leaving Davos more optimistic than I came then I was when I came here from a macro perspective. It seems that a lot of people who spend a lot of time thinking about the economy think that we might get lucky and things might not be as bad as was predicted a few months ago. That said I will tell you we are advising our founders to prepare for prolonged periods of difficult macro and difficult fundraising environments. However this means different things for different companies. As I mentioned there are companies that are in a really strong position that are very well capitalized because they did take advantage of the fundraising environment from a couple of years ago. And in those situations you know what a better time to really accelerate and overtake your competitors that might not be in a strong position. We also have companies that are a bit more vulnerable or a bit earlier stage. And of course in those cases the advice is to be a bit more cautious maybe invest in product but not as much and go to market until the market turns. So I don't think that we can have blanket advice for every company because every company is in a different situation. But we are advising them to prepare for a prolonged period of pain to be candid. The other thing I'll say I'll say what we've learned and maybe this is the optimistic early stage investor in me. But what we've learned is that innovation happens through cycles. We were fortunate enough to partner with Google and PayPal who navigated the dotcom bubble and Square and Stripe were started during the great financial crisis. And I will tell you we were meeting really mission driven great founders two years ago and we're meeting really mission driven great founders today. Everyone here around me will know this better than me but I've never heard a founder say I'm going to start a company because it's really easy to raise money. They start companies because they're obsessed with solving a problem and they want to give to dedicate their their lives to that. So we're still in a fortunate position at the early stages to meet these great founders. I feel a lot of people started company in 2021 because they can raise money. I'll say one thing. One thing. If I may add to you to what you said there were many conversations where potential future founders were asking VCs what should I do. What kind of company should I start. I will tell you we are not having those conversations. Very mission driven founders that are just making it happen in any environment. Great. So Jack I was I was researching this this panel. I saw online that you had a big surge because of the pandemic because of the importance of electronic payments and electronic financial infrastructure. So one is that accurate. So I always want to double check that. And two how are you responding to that. So we in our portfolio we see companies that sort of had headwinds and tailwinds from the pandemic. It seems like you guys were you know great beneficiaries of some tailwinds and are those durable. And how are you thinking about that. I think you know Airwall is born born to solve a global money movement and transaction and payments issue. I try to democratize global banking and financial services. And I think there's two really important event that happened in the last seven and a half years we were born. The first one is the globalization of e-commerce and the platform like Shopify Logistics Amazon eBay. So the kind of environment is ready for even smaller businesses to starting a global e-commerce business from day one. So we haven't we didn't anticipate in that and that driving a lot of the growth in the last 70 years. And the second thing happened that we also didn't anticipate is COVID and that made workforce globalize. When you have globalized workforce you have to think about how do you how do you pay them a salary.  How do you manage your finance. How do you manage your treasury. How do you manage your employee benefit. So et cetera et cetera. So I think we still have that sort of a tailwind of that kind of we will say the globalized workforce will continue to grow and Airwall will continue to benefit from that. But we also kind of see a lot of you know for example like travel we have 20 percent of revenue travel in 2020 and we kind of lost that 100 percent of kind of cross border travel for the whole 2020 and 2021. And we're seeing that kind of come back. So we see a lot of positive signals in travel. We see a lot of positive signals in the cross border kind of tuition. So international students students start traveling again to go overseas to study. But we see a lot of shrink in e-commerce average volatilized per customer is shrinking. And we see that kind of worse in U.S. and Europe than the APAC. So generally because Airwall is operating in both of the APAC and Europe and U.S. And we generally see APAC is you know outperforming Europe and U.S. and you know on the sort of SAS expenditure or SAS sales the sales cycle is getting longer in you know Europe and U.S. And people willing to spending less. You know I think because the SAS business still very very nascent in APAC and that we haven't think much of that impact right now. But if you ask me sort of predicting the future I would probably say I have a very similar view to Louisiana. I think the environment going to be pretty tough for the next one or two years. You know we have a lot of cash in the bank account and we cash through positive almost. But we're still operating you know towards a positive or you know a more kind of EBITDA gross margin rather than just talking about revenue gross price. So our KPI went from revenue in 2021 to gross profit to 2022 to EBITDA in 2023. I like it. Change those KPIs young teams out there that are listening. Next question for Isabel. So you just wrote a recent piece on the forum agenda about managing teams in sort of times of uncertainty. You said that teams are anxious about the economy taking care of their families and about social justice. So what's your perspective on that. And how do you balance sort of the needs of the increased needs of your team as well as sort of the needs of continuing to externally run the business. I'll pick up where Jack left off. I am a first time founder. I'm a third time employee of a startup. And I think both give me really good perspective. But I built this business in 2020 and raised one hundred twenty five million dollars for it 12 months after launching. So it was all up into the right. And we built a team that was very excited about that rocket ship. And then it came crashing down. And so I think for me it's been about really dialing up my empathy and leaning into my real authentic personality because I really don't think you can get teams to continue to be as excited about your mission and to be as bought into what you're doing. Unemployment is still at record lows. And so they still have amazing opportunities to go work pretty much anywhere.  And what's easy for you the CEO is you're sitting in places like Davos having a really complex conversation with lots of nuance around what's going on in the macro environment. But teams are just feeling what they feel every day. They're feeling like groceries have gotten really expensive. They're feeling like they're sick parents need a lot of care and a lot of time for that. And they're feeling like it'd be a lot easier to do that at Google. Then it would be to do that working at a startup. And so for us it's been about figuring out what are the things we control. What are the things we don't control. It's one of our core values. Keep our team in control. And just make sure the team really understands they don't control things outside of their control and keep designing around that. So an important way I metric myself as a venture capitalist is the number of companies that have billboards on Highway 101 which is the highway connecting San Francisco and Silicon Valley. And Raj you have a very provocative billboard up there right now potentially talking about one of your competitors that has sort of grown grown faster but with less less of a pathway toward profitability. So the next question is how you know in times like this how do you manage sort of that the tension between growing quickly and actually being on the pathway to profitability. Yeah I do think that you know I'm going to say something provocative very unlike me. I think the investors got lazy in twenty twenty right. They just got lazy right. They had so much money they needed to deploy it. And there was really not a multi vector sort of a phenomena to investing. Right. What are you growing at. How is your ARR growing. You know. And that was it. That was a single vector. Right. Now the fundraising is multi vector. Right. How much are you growing and how much are you spending to grow that. Right. What is your time. How are you addressing incumbency. And really if you see to it you know someone said this to me and is stuck with me in our business which is infrastructure software. Right. We haven't invented a Google. We haven't invented something that did not exist. Right. Databases have existed for 60 years. In fact IBM sells one that was first written 60 years. And so the great partners. By the way I'm just saying it's existed for 60 years and there's a hundred and twenty billion dollar time. Our view is that you know incumbency innovation. Right. So we are the innovative vendor. There are incumbents. The seminal challenge is does incumbency find innovation before innovation finds distribution. If you come to think of it that's the seminal challenge. Now for some of the startups who are innovative and who have great products. They start spending too much on distribution. They just do. Now if you're going to spend three dollars to bring in a dollar of revenue it's going to catch up with you. It just will. Right. So in our business there are two things. One. We are part of a strategic spend. Right. So when COVID hit. Our turn was point three percent in the good times. Our turn was point three percent. This morning our turn is point three percent. Why. Because we are part of a strategic budget in companies. Not something which is sort of non strategic. Right. And discretionary. What did we do when COVID hit. We cut all discretionary spend. Right. So if you come to think of it one question you should ask yourself as a founder if you are you know listening to this another bit of advice is are you part of something strategic in an organization because that is what provides you stickiness. Right. Now the other thing about the provocative billboards. Sorry. We keep going. We keep going. The other bit is in a competitive market like ours. I mean there are 368 databases in the world. And I remember the first meeting I had when you know we I took over as a CEO about four years ago. And this is what we said. You know you don't go to South Africa to hunt duck. Right. So if you're going to go play in the database market you've got to want to be the top three to five databases in the world. Otherwise go home. Right. And that's why we've been a little provocative on highway one or one social media etc. And it's you know it's good humored. But yeah I do think that increasing the rate of innovation and keeping your eye on that and leverage distribution and top grading of talent are the three things that the CEOs should keep an eye on. And if I can say one last thing you know even during good times one of the advice that I had gotten from a CEO again was you know they did an exercise which was a sky is falling exercise every six months. So they would actually gather the ELT and the rest of the next rung of management and say let's study a company which was doing really really well three four five years ago. Right. And now went out of business. We actually studied map or which was 120 million dollar business which went out in three months. What could be learned from that. Right. So you don't get to you know you don't start drinking too much of your own Kool-Aid. And the other thing that we do on a regular basis is what if we started single store today. What will we do differently. So that you do not become the incumbent. All right. So yeah. Great. Thank you. So I think we've heard. Well I think we'll do Q&A after one more question. So we've heard a good good perspective on sort of the U.S. from Isabelle and Raj as well as what's going on Asia Pacific. And then Luciana I think we're sitting here in Europe and the question everyone's mind is sort of you know are there extra complications investing in Europe right now. And how is that sort of sort of ecosystem sort of evolving. Happy to talk about that. I've been adventure capital and technology in Europe for over a decade. So I'm a big believer in Europe. I actually think it's always been a bit harder to build a company out of Europe. Why. Because it's a very fragmented market. And as soon as you start selling in Germany or France or wherever it is that you start you have to start thinking about that second market. Otherwise you cannot build a giant business. So you have to develop that muscle early on. Sure. We can think of it as a benefit as a blessing in disguise because you start building a playbook so then you can grow faster and faster through international expansion. But I think it's always actually been a little bit more difficult. And yet successful companies start in Europe and define categories globally and still make it happen. So again it goes it goes back to my earlier point in terms of macro. I don't hear founders talking about start your company because of macro or being influenced by macro. I think if they're obsessed with solving a problem and something is keeping them up at night they will probably go and take that risk. They won't think it's easy to raise money. Therefore I'll start or the vast majority at least the mission driven founders. So yes it's always been a little bit harder. But we are also very fortunate to work with great founders who've made it. And I'm sure there will be many more of those. So you're just saying what just so it feels like it's kind of it's always been a little bit a little bit more different. You're not feeling sort of extra extra pressure with. I'll say this. I have the privilege of seeing founders in the U.S. and in Europe because we work as one team at Sequoia between between California and London. And the spirit is very similar and the conversations are very similar between founders who start in the U.S. and founders who start in Europe. We're not seeing extra pessimism or extra optimism in one or the other. Just adding one additional point on why you know studying businesses in Europe is harder. Because I launched in U.K. and France and Banalax a few other countries and in U.S. as well. So one of the fundamental difference I say is building especially a software in a FinTech space is getting commoditized in the United States. You have infrastructure FinTech in every single vertical can play. You have a reconciliation player. You have a bank in the service player. You have a credit card issuer. Now these things exist in Asia Pacific and Europe. So you know you could build a great multi billion dollar business United States. Build a software layer just entirely on top of other providers and services innovators where such seeing just doesn't exist in a very segmented market. You know people think of Europe but Europe is many countries. There's many markets and you need bespoke infrastructure connectivity is part of market fate in everything or market. And that is the similar thing Asia Pacific and that makes the business model very different and make the scale of the business very different. And I would say it's more challenging to scale. But also I think we'll make your business more defensible. So that's the kind of protocols of how I see the business. So can I just just one comment. I agree with you. I think the environment in a mere for us is slower than the states. And I do think status quo is a little more acceptable in Europe than it is in the U.S. So people taking on innovative solutions especially when the media is you know crying doom and gloom is a lot more acceptable in Europe than it's in. And that's not a bad thing. It's just the reality. And I do think that the labor laws in Europe just make it very difficult for startups to to get in there. However that said two of our largest development centers are in you know in Lisbon and Ukraine and we are getting just unbelievable productivity and innovation from those two centers. So it's sort of a mixed bad but you're right. I think Europe is a lot slower right now than it was a year ago for sure. Everything you said resonates on the negatives and on the positives. There are actually more engineers in Europe than in the U.S. And they're great universities and the work ethic is great. And they're excited to be in the startup world because they don't really have access X years ago. And also I do think in our technology the deep math that is required to build it a kind of deep math talent that you get in Europe is surreal. So we actually have 40 people in Lisbon for a company our size 400 people. That's a lot. And the productivity that we get. And I should give a shout out to Ukraine as well. And I just tell a little story because I just don't want anyone in this room to think that I'm negative on Europe at all. When the war broke out we have about 35 employees in Ukraine. They did not miss a single day of work. Right. When we said what can we do for you. They said please donate to the army instead. Right. So the people of Ukraine actually inspired us in the states rather than the other way around. So you know big big shout out. Great. So I think we need to transition to Q&A. So please please. And we've got a mic. So please introduce yourself. Stand up and introduce yourself and then then ask your question. Sure. Thank you. My name is Benjamin Isaac. I'm part of the global shapers community.  And as the startup ecosystem is facing times of austerity I it appears we're also learning about other excesses in the industry. And what I'm alluding to is a degrading standards of corporate governance in the startup ecosystem and acceleration a self serving acceleration of ever faster up rounds driven by pushed by investors that may seek to accumulate as much capital as quickly as possible. And I'd be curious in both regarding the investors on stage and the founders that have navigated this this bubble cycle. And what structural reforms would you hope for. Would you advocate for it to ensure the next innovation cycle delivers a greater ratio between productive innovation on the one hand and capital invested on the other. I take a shot. It might not be right. The fact really is no amount of governance can can protect you from a brilliant man. You know that that's just true. Right.  Right. So it's hard to protect yourself against that. And I'm not a big one for regulations per se. However I do think that we as a hundred million dollar company which is relatively small do public company audits and have been doing that for two years. So we actually try and put governance and compliance ahead of most other things even as a smaller company. We are. We don't do anything in the shades of gray arena at all. Right. It's either right or it's not. Right. And and I do think that once you draw that line in the sand and it starts at the top. Right. And then everyone else follows because there are some very innovative ideas that your field gives you. And you just have to push back. And yeah. And get rid of people who sometimes give you those ideas which are in the shades of gray. That's to my my two cents worth.  But I think it's a very interesting time because founders often in this cycle haven't been through cycles like this before at all. And good investors have been through cycles like this before. But a lot of investors who were investing in 2021 weren't investing in any other cycle like this before. And so I think and really no venture investor has invented invested through hyperinflation. And so I think you have a lot of people learning a lot of things very quickly. And that creates difficulties in getting to in in squaring between two different parties. And so I think what I what I feel as a founder is that there is investors were investing and were excited. And now investors are confused. And I joke a lot with my investors. It's your job to price companies. And it's my job to figure out how much capital my business needs. And we could all argue all day if it's my job to manage solution or not. But it's really secondary to the first right. And so I think at the end of the day we have to get back to basics. And founders have to figure out how much capital their businesses need and how to make sure their business is performing in a place where they have access to that amount of capital. And investors have to get back to their jobs of being comfortable pricing rounds and not worrying about how that looks or how they'll be perceived or how their peers will view them. Because at the end of the day the market's only going to keep moving if that happens. I think that I think the exact words of that date that debate backstage was whose fault is it. Investors or the founders. I think you can also say that sort of valuation and governance those kind of are both part and parcel of the same negotiation. Right. So and I would like to think that the mature investors and entrepreneurs never you know when it swings the pendulum sings one way you never really want to max out you know valuation and lack of governance from your investors. And when it was twenty twenty one swings back I said mature mature investors.  And it's about actually being being rational and finding sort of the right the right balance. And just one other comment was you know when we were raising our round in twenty twenty and we'd have a slide which said this is our fully funded plan. A few of them would look at us you know cross-eyed saying why do you have a fully funded plan. Because that was not asked for by investors. Right. So they just ignored and that's what I was saying about investors getting lazy. They were just hyper focused on one vector which was ARR growth. And I do think that now the fully funded plan when do you get cash to break even normal questions you should be asking are now asked a lot more. I'll jump in. I think you both made very good points. So. So thank you for sharing that. I'd love to maybe not put every investor out there in the same bucket or out there in the same bucket. I think that that's not right. And I'm not saying the X is better than Y. But I do think different people had different attitudes. It was a period of access of course. I we all agree. I'll tell you this personally. I'm joking with my partners. I'm having more fun at work today than I was having at work two years ago. Although of course the markets are where they are. And macro is tough. So there is a lot of there are a lot of things in the world that are maybe even more difficult today. But I think it's very good for the ecosystem for everyone to focus on fundamentals. We have time to spend with founders even more so than before before making that 10 year commitment because this is what we make. It's not just the capital. It's a commitment to be your partner for a decade plus. We have time to be proactive and dream up about new markets and new products. And that's a luxury that we didn't really have two years ago. So thank you for sharing your views. And I'll say from where I sit I go to the office excited every day to do my job. And more so than I want to make one comment on the fully founded plan. I actually have a different view than that because you know there's a balance between capital allocation and growth especially for infrastructure businesses. There's a lot of upfront capital. It's not possible for the investor to give you a hundred million two hundred million dollars to build an infrastructure. Give you a fully founded plan. And when I saw the company seven and a half years ago. I have no idea where the company going to go. You know we have this passion to solving a very large problem globally. And we just follow our passion. I think that still stands true. And the great investors like Louisiana. You know the investors will see that see through the passion of the founder if they solve the real problem. And it's enough time. And they will continue to get funded especially early stage companies. But the fully funded plan just so that I'm clear doesn't mean you have enough money to be cash flow break even. But how much money you would need to ultimately get there. And then do you have to raise again. That was the point. Yeah. I'll be provocative as well. That's OK. I think for later stage companies of course that's doable and advisable because you understand how much you need to spend in order to get revenue back and you have product market And you have a go to market engine in the early stage business. It's more difficult. Completely. It's almost it's almost metaphysical to do that. Absolutely. It's a healthy debate. However. No. But let me just be provocative back. And all good nature. How do you justify a hundred and seventy X multiple of future ARR. In a company that got listed in our space. That is a very very very generous multiple. Right. And by the way by the way there's just one other point. Right. So that again but we are operators. You guys are the smart ones here in the room. The fact is the fact is I remember a day that a company called Snowflake. Right. Was valued at hundred and twenty three billion dollars and IBM was valued at hundred and ten billion dollars. How did that make sense. Now Snowflake is a great company. It's valued at forty five billion which is great. All right. And by the way IBM is now valued at hundred and thirty billion. Great. So. Do you not think that there was something going on in the market which was not right. Was. I think we should ask public investors. Now there's no flakes growing a hundred like a hundred percent year on year IBM is growing less than 10 percent year on year. That's fine. Are there any other questions from the audience. So you have. Isabel Hartung I'm an advisory board member at Rosling. I have a question. I mean we talked right now about the mechanics and inclination of investors. I'm just curious to look at the sector. So where do you see the biggest upside. And if you listen to the politicians I mean they're all dream of green tech and you know whatever coming up inventions coming out of nowhere to solve our CO2 problems. So what do you see. Do you believe in that. And of course we all know scaling is not that easy. So even if somebody has right now innovative ideas I mean when one could we see that. Like you should answer that. You probably have to share about some some spaces that we're really seeing flourish right now. And I think if you ask people in the audience probably nine hours and we'll talk about AI. I think people who actually work in AI are giggling because a lot of these advances have been happening for the past few years. But they've been available to the to the general public more recently. So there is a lot of excitement in our community around what I can create for a productivity perspective. And I think it's moving very very fast. And I think it's our job to figure out what are what are the right business models and what are the right teams to partner with. You know it's not always the first team that tries a business model in a new space that's going to win. Google was not the first search engine for example. So you know I suspect if there is one area where things are still going to move a little bit fast closer to what we were seeing a couple of years ago is this because there is excitement but there is also real real advancement. And I think it's our job to keep a cool head and figure out the right businesses and the right teams. I would say that's probably the one area where we're seeing the most activity. And then we're seeing a lot of interesting developments of course infrastructure always you know we're dipping our toes into robotics that why now's are so strong. And we're seeing companies that have real IP now and that have learned how to scale the hardware part as well not just the software part. So we're seeing really interesting things there. You know anything about moving. Sorry commerce cross border and anything that has to do with that theme. I think it's still really really interesting and still growing fast post post covid as well. I would say these are just a few areas that come to mind but there are a lot. I'll jump in on the CO2 piece. We over the past decade have seen the emergence of some terrific models that use AI to substitute for for CapEx. It's not CapEx free because there's still steel in the ground to remove CO2. But you could actually start seeing these products these these platforms that are enabled really begin to take meaningful bites out of global greenhouse gas emissions. And it's just it's our job to scale them. Absolutely. And I would say data is one space that you should keep an eye on. And it's not self serving really. Maybe it sounds that way. But I do feel that you know the generation 6 to 16. And that is going to enter the consumer market in the next whatever 3 5 10 years. Their idea of customer experience is very different from our idea of customer experience. This entire metaverse thing that we talk about will require data utilization at a level that is unprecedented. So I mean a large bank in the U.S. for it to determine whether Raj Verma who's bought a product is a existing customer or a new customer takes them six days. Versus in the metaverse when my daughter Zoe goes into bank. Right. They will be hello Zoe. You bought this product and you should try this. By the way how can I serve you. So the availability of data to to help and deploy customer service. Is one area in which I'd keep an eye on. All right. So we have time for one incredibly quick question and an incredibly quick answer from one of you. Chairman of the Eastern Group which is one of the largest natural gas company using the constant cash flow. I'm going to invest into the equities by into equities of starter companies. And my question is what is the early sign of failure. The red flag which you can perceive. Just give me one answer for it. The early sign of failure. I'm happy to take this. I will say this. I think what you can really tell in the early days is speed of execution speed of execution of the team. Which you can already observe in the early days when you don't have revenue and you don't have those milestones. I think that is very closely correlated with long term success. So if a team is not moving fast enough that could be one indicator in my opinion. Great. If that's all I can talk about work off balance. And that's a sign of failure. That was one quick customer stickiness. So thank everyone for coming out today. And just to wrap it up we covered a lot of ground today. So in terms of valuation we we heard everything that that flat round is the new up to if you have good product you have up rounds for the rest of your life. We also heard that obviously you know let's change those KPIs around revenue to start looking more at profitability. So this is a flight to quality. So we just are going to be increasingly look at fundamentals. Don't forget your team and this equation and really tune up the empathy. Globally you know sort of the things in a area like Europe that make it more difficult that also becomes defensible. Whereas if you can scale quickly in places like the U.S. there's also going to be 364 other databases. And then finally and then also Asia Pacific there's there's really ability to scale quickly but also some of the same same a little of the same difficulties as Europe because of the fragmentation. And then I think the overarching theme to land the plane was that innovation happens every day in and out of quite crisis and economic crisis. So you just got to continue to keep your eye on the innovation. So thanks. Thank all the panelists.


Hello, I welcome you all once again to my channel Explore Education, I am Dr. Rashmi Singh, Assistant Propitial Department of Education, Mrs. Khanna Galshwari College, University of Allahabad. In the series of discussing issues over curriculum, this time I am going to discuss procedure for developing curriculum and the lecture will be bilingual mode and it must be interesting and useful to all of you. So, let's start. First of all, there are various models of curriculum development, i.e. many models developed and followed by pathikram vikas are being developed, but since we are not studying curriculum in detail, we will discuss only linear model. By the way, there are other models like linear model, cyclic model, your system design model, there are many models, but we will study only two models in linear model and from that we will understand how pathikram vikas are developed. Linear model is only a model, i.e. one after one, one after one, one after one, we will study only one model. The linear models of curriculum development prescribe a rational, i.e. it is a tarqiq, step by step procedure for curriculum development starting with objectives, i.e. the target, or target for the audience, or for the students in the group. So, we need to study this in 2, the rational linear model of Tyler and the progressional model of Taba. So, the first model of Taba, it's a pathway to design, and the second model is a path to the next step. So, this is the path of the请, first one is the path of the given path, linear model and Taba's grass root rational model. So first of all, Ralf Tyler at the University of Chicago developed the first model of curriculum development. This model was presented in his book, Principles of, oh my god, I got the wrong question. Principles of curriculum and instruction published in 1949, Tyler argued that curriculum development should be logical and systematic. That is, Ralf Tyler, who was the University of Chicago, had made the first model of curriculum development. And he presented it in his book, Principles of Curriculum and Instruction, which was published in 1904. I mean, it's not very old. Tyler argued that curriculum development should be logical and systematic. But Tyler argued that curriculum development should be logical and systematic. His model presents a process of curriculum development that follows a sequential pattern starting from objectives to content, learning experiences, and evaluation. And subject matter. So what will we get from the society? Philosophy of education. Society decides which direction is being followed in education. What will we get from the direction? Aims. What is the purpose of our education? According to that, the curriculum will be made. What do we actually want? Then students and students are the main ones. From subject matter, we will get psychology of learning. So from the society, we will get the knowledge of philosophy of education. From subject matter, we will get psychology of learning. And students, that is, for which class, for students, we are going to make a curriculum. So what will we have to do first? Selecting objectives. First, we will have to choose the direction. After that, selecting learning experiences. That is, what experiences we will give to those students. So we will choose the experiences of the right. After that, organizing learning experiences. How will those experiences be associated with the right? And finally, we will evaluate it. Okay. So it is easy. Tyler argues that to develop any curriculum, curriculum workers should respond to four basic questions. Tyler says that in order to make any type of curriculum, you should take care of four things. That is, if they get answers to four basic questions, that means that they are made up of the right. Which ones? The first is what educational purposes should the school or the institution be? It can be anything. Seek to attend. That is, what are the objective goals that we want to do with this curriculum? That means that it should be a part of your curriculum. Then, what educational experiences are likely to attain these objectives? Then, what experiences do you want to achieve with those objectives? What educational experiences? Five minutes. What educational experiences are likely to attain these objectives? That is, what educational experiences are likely to attain these objectives? So, make that a part of your curriculum. How can these educational experiences be organized? That is, what educational experiences are likely to achieve with these objectives? And how can we determine whether these purposes are being attained? That is, what will be the last evaluation? How will we determine that these objectives have been proved? So, if we are able to answer these four questions, that means we have made the right curriculum. Aside from these four questions, what will be the other four questions? Tyler also identified three curriculum sources. Society, students and subject matter. Accordingly, curriculum workers need to study these sources carefully in order to develop a curriculum. That is, we will take care of the society, the subject matter, and the students. We are going to make a curriculum for the students of this school. So, this is, sorry, this is Tyler's Rational-Linear Model. After that, we have to study the Grassroot-Rational Model of Taba-Hilda-Taba. The follower of Tyler, the Taba-Hilda-Taba, Tyler's student or follower, is another curriculum scholar, Hilda-Taba. Taba presented her model in her book, Curriculum Development Theory and Practice in 1962. That is, she came in 1964 and she came in 1962. And Taba writes this in her book Curriculum Development Theory and Practice. That is, Particum, Vikas, Siddhan and Abhiyas. So, every model is a modified version of Tyler's model. Taba argued that Curriculum Development should follow a sequential and logical process and she suggested for more information input in all phases of Curriculum Development. Because Tyler was the follower, that is why she is talking about sequential, logical, and rational models. She is only saying that she needs to give more input in every phase. Taba also claimed that all curricular components are fundamental elements. She said that she will follow the steps of Curriculum Development. How? Diagnosis of needs. First of all, we need to know what is the need for Curriculum Development. Why are we not going to accept it? Then what will we do? We will make the formulation of objectives, the purpose of our goals, and the purpose of our goals. Then, we will choose the subject of content. We will choose the subject of content. We will choose the subject of content. Then what we will do is, we will organize the subject of content. When that happens, we will do selection of learning experiences. This was also in Tyler. Organization of learning experiences was also in Tyler. At last, evaluation was also in Tyler. So, only three things are increasing in this. Diagnosis of needs, selection of content, and organization of content. Other objectives, selection of learning experiences, and organization of learning experiences are as it is of Tyler. So, seven steps. Diagnosis of needs, formulation of objectives. Then selection of content, organization of content. Then selection of learning experiences, organization of learning experiences. And lastly, determination of what to evaluate and ways and means of doing it. I mean, what we need to know, what we need to understand, and what we will do for that. Okay, so this is Taba's grass root rational model. So, I have discussed only two models with you. You will find out how the development of Particrum is done. Because curriculum development is not required in detail. It is just a procedure for developing. Curricrum is your wish, you have a lot of models, but remember this for your information. But for basic knowledge, Tyler's model and Taba's model are different. Okay, both are rational. That is, they are logical, they are sequential. And they start with objectives. And they go in one direction. So, I have covered this topic. Two, what is the topic? What was the topic procedure for developing curriculum? So, thank you and don't forget to like and subscribe my channel Explore Education. I have done from my side.


Well, technology is changing humanity in every way. Some of it good, some of it not so good, but I think in general it's basically enabling us to become somewhat superhuman, for example with knowledge or information, but also to focus more on what we are because technology does the job. Probably in 20 years we may not have to work because of technology, but it's also changing our bodies. Then we'll be bioengineering and we have genetics and stuff, so it's going to be interesting. I think what we need more than technology really in the end is an ethic in understanding of what it is that we want to be. As I said on the stage, the difference between going through a virtual system and getting information is like I get 2% of what is actually real, but seeing somebody is 100%. So I think it's going to be telepresence and teleworking and telecommuting will be big, but they will not substitute for a long time for the actual meeting. However, having said that I think a lot of business meetings will be done without traveling and without the beer. Well, obesity really, digital obesity is just eating too much information and connecting too much. It's just like food, same problem. So the problem is that with digital information, the information is free, the devices are cheap, the time is unlimited, so it's very tempting to get fat. It's even worse than food. So what we need to do is we need to figure out how we can have a diet of information that gives us time to digest and not to eat too much. So in many ways offline becomes a new luxury. That's like saying having a diet is the new eating.