Sabitlenmiş Tweet
“Science is the belief in the ignorance of experts”
-Richard Feynman (1966)
feynman.com/science/what-i…
English
Alex Rampell
10.9K posts
Alex Rampell
@arampell
Silicon Valley entrepreneur (cofounder@ TrialPay, Yub, Affirm, Point, TXN), investor (General Partner @a16z), husband, father and sarcast (one who is sarcastic)
Palo Alto, CA Katılım Ekim 2010
1.4K Takip Edilen55.4K Takipçiler
@wquist This is a confusion of cause and effect.
Did these “rent extracting” VCs cause analysts to drop coverage of <$1B companies too? Burden small companies with Sarbox compliance? And overall make it very painful to run a sub $1B company in the public eye? Amazing conspiracy.
English
"Companies have been going public later (and larger) because VCs wanted to extract rents on private market growth when interest rates were low. Not because it was better for founders." 👀
Dan Gray@credistick
NVIDIA went public at a market cap of about $625 million, and became a $4.42 trillion monster in public markets. This example does not support a thesis of much larger exits, rather it’s an argument for going public sooner. Companies have been going public later (and larger) because VCs wanted to extract rents on private market growth when interest rates were low. Not because it was better for founders. Exits will generally be larger now than in previous eras, but much of the current activity is downstream of ZIRP conditions and will not persist for the next generation. Public markets provide more meritocratic access to huge pools of capital, which will look increasingly attractive to the best companies. And that’s a great thing, for the best companies and their investors.
English
LOL Trevor Milton is raising $1B at a $4B valuation for an autonomous jet (consumer and military), says the most wealthy people in the world say “we can trust you now” because of the Trump pardon, and Trump affiliates are helping him.
Good luck!
wsj.com/business/trevo…
English
My question is simple: what would cause you to re-assess your opinion and possibly admit you are wrong and this policy will cause harm? I am wrong all the time, and when I find contradictory evidence, I adjust my views. If nothing will change your view, you are promoting a religion and not a policy proposal.
95% of private companies “valued” at >$1B don’t ever become liquid (this is what I do, to answer your question: venture capital). Multiple people have already LEGALLY left the state (why not admit this or actually attempt to examine the data?)
English
@davidsgamage @joshrauh @JeffLHoopes Why do you think they have left? You can argue about models or look at the actual observed consequences. “But but our model says!” is profoundly dishonest when you can actually observe the outcome…of just the first inning!
English
Our response to the @joshrauh et al. revenues estimates of the California Billionaire Wealth Tax Act (CBTA) has now been posted: papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cf… In short, their estimate relies on many false claims about CA law and the CBTA and is completely implausible and dishonest. 1/
Hoover Institution@HooverInst
If California’s problem is spending, not revenue, would the proposed “Billionaire Tax” solve anything? Hoover Senior Fellow @joshrauh breaks down the math around California’s $93 billion deficit. Read Hoover research on the impacts of the tax proposal: hoover.org/news/californi…
English
English
@arampell @joshrauh @JeffLHoopes We won't have reliable data or info for some time, but historical experience provides strong reason to expect that mobility response will be very small. 3/3
English
Alex Rampell retweetledi
Let this sink in. California wealth tax architect Saez admits it here: he would let 80% of billionaires leave CA, liquidating Silicon Valley and its jobs, for an extra $2 billion per year in revenues. This is in a state that spends $325 billion per year, up by 68% since 2019.
English
@moseskagan @joshrauh No. To his credit he responded to everything, but I was stunned how clueless he is. He has no clue how venture capital functions or what a private valuation means (or that less than 5% of “unicorns” ever get liquid!)
English
Alex Rampell retweetledi
I am actually surprised that the era of real estate agents and 6% commissions didn't end years ago.
What is keeping it alive?
English
Some of the best companies to be created today have NOTHING TO DO WITH AI. Yes, you read that right!
Rather, AI makes their creation and operation possible. I wrote this 2 years ago, but very relevant today.
a16z.com/ai-second-orde…
English
Robinhood Banking just crossed $1B in deposits from 65K funded customers. Huge milestone — and the team is just getting started🔥
Robinhood is a financial technology company, not a bank. Banking services are provided by Coastal Community Bank, Member FDIC.
English
Alex Rampell retweetledi
Two hundred and fifty years after Adam Smith published The Wealth of Nations, its insights remain relevant to people who want to be more free and prosperous. reason.com/2026/03/09/250…
English
Alex Rampell retweetledi
Mike Cannon-Brookes thinks the market is massively underestimating how AI will reshape software.
In this conversation with the Atlassian co-founder and CEO, Mike joins a16z's Alex Rampell and Erik Torenberg to cover:
- The history of software as “turning filing cabinets into databases” from 1960 to 2022
- The three buckets of SaaS, and why investors keep pricing them like they are the same thing
- Why usage and outcome-based pricing is harder than it looks because customers hate bills they cannot control
- The real bottleneck for AI at work: trust, UX, and getting humans to actually adopt new workflows
00:00 Introduction
03:16 Risk level has gone up
06:44 Three types of SaaS companies
11:07 Vibecoding is preposterous
14:23 Businesses are a set of processes
31:25 AI credits as casino chips
35:24 How Atlassian is adapting
43:26 Why customer trust is hard
@mcannonbrookes @arampell @eriktorenberg
English
Alex Rampell retweetledi
Fortune 500 procurement still runs on email, PDFs, and weeks of back-and-forth — even as trillions in spend flow through it.
Today, we’re excited to announce a16z’s investment in @Lio_Technology, which is changing the future of procurement.
Lio is building an agent-first procurement team that automates sourcing, negotiation, vendor onboarding, and purchasing end-to-end across ERPs and systems of record — collapsing weeks of work into minutes.
⚡️85% less manual work across, 🌍100+ global customers managing billions in spend
We’re excited to partner with @keilvlad, Lukas, and Till — three technical maniacs — as they rebuild procurement for the AI era!
@jamdac @zephratic @BKRoberts
Vladimir Keil@askvladi
Announcing Lio's $30M Series A, led by Andreessen Horowitz! Procurement still operates like an administrative back-office function: rigid software, manual workflows and endless headcount. Enterprises spend over $180 billion annually on procurement talent and roughly $10 billion on procurement software, yet the problem persists. More software hasn't solved it. More hiring won't either. Introducing @Lio_Technology (formerly askLio) the world's first multi-agent system for procurement. Our virtual workforce is already deployed at some of the world's largest enterprises, taking over the manual work that buries buyers, shared service centers, and BPOs today. But Lio doesn't just do the same job - it does work that was never humanly possible: renegotiating every contract, sourcing across every category, and preparing as well as analyzing every negotiation, all at once. Lio's AI agents operate on top of existing procurement software and ERPs - no rip-and-replace - autonomously executing workflows end to end. The results speak for themselves: - 95% adoption rate - 85% reduction in manual work - 10% incremental savings - 100% customer retention Lio isn't a dashboard or a copilot. It's the execution layer for enterprise procurement. As one Head of Procurement put it: "Lio is a cheaper, more scalable, and faster-to-onboard alternative to outsourcing." Lio’s agents are already managing billions of dollars in enterprise spend across dozens of Global 2000 and Fortune 500 companies – from manufacturers to reinsurers to huge industrial conglomerates. This raise accelerates our US expansion and the growth of our agent ecosystem as we build the infrastructure powering AI-driven procurement. A huge thank you to our incredible team, customers, and advisors. Proud to have outstanding investors on board: the round was led by @a16z - special thanks to @seema_amble - with participation from SV Angel, @HarryStebbings, @ycombinator, and a group of leading procurement executives and successful founders. Additional thanks to @BKRoberts, @arampell, @jamdac, @zephratic and @t_blom. Whether as an enterprise partner or a new team member — join our mission now!
English
I'm thrilled to lead @PayPal into its next chapter. Together with our global team, customers, and partners, we'll build a secure, inclusive, and AI-driven commerce experiences for builders, innovators, and customers around the world.
English
Advice on Seeking Advice
If you try to get advice from anyone *where they lack full context* you can build support for any position imaginable. Imagine: "the hospital refused to do surgery on this patient to fix this problem? Isn't that outrageous?" without the context of "the patient is 104 years old."
Try asking a startup investor: "should I have a co-founder?" vs "Can I get a good co-founder for less than 10% of the company when the company is a few weeks old?" I bet you could get everyone to give you the opposite advice with more or different context.
It doesn't mean that getting advice is bad! But you either need to give significant context - or better yet focus on picking the right trusted partner, since it’s virtually impossible to give the FULL story to strangers in 30 minutes. I used to always try to get advice from famous people (it was incredible to me, l was just a nobody kid!) but ultimately context and depth matters.
English
Also if you are a fintech growing too fast in the early days, it's often because you have misunderstood/mispriced your risks
JC Bahr-de Stefano@jbahrdestefano
One of the things that is uniquely difficult about starting + building in fintech is that it just takes longer, especially in the early days. You typically don't see rapid growth and adoption like you do in other verticals. It takes longer to build licensed financial products. It takes longer to cross the hurdle of trust needed to touch, move, or store someone's money or influence their financial decisions. But the amazing thing about these businesses is that when they compound, it's pretty nuts. Deep integrations into customer workflows, exposed to growing transaction volumes, high switching costs, regulatory moats. It's always incredible to see what these companies look like at scale. Slower to build, but also harder to displace once you get there!
English