Pat Kinsel

simple way to build generational wealth is just dump your 401k into any ceo who wields a sword

I’m bionic for real now 🦾

I agree about the eventual and accelerating tokenization of things and am doing my part to contribute, but do you realize that a "real estate debut vault" with "mortgages or property-backed loans" is an actual existing thing? They are called "eVaults." There is a standards body called MISMO that is governed by the Mortgage Bankers Assoc. and American Land Title Assoc. They mandate an XML schema called an eNote. There is a registry called MERS. A mortgage note is signed in the appropriate XML, placed on the registry, assigned to the owner with a MIN (identifer), and securely stored. When transferred all things are updated, maintaining a ledger of debt ownership and assignment. The mortgage industry is highly liquid and completely interoperable because of this system. It is integrated with every mortgage originator, warehouse lender, secondary market investor, the GSEs, and every software system across the entire ecosystem. Every participant is on the registry, has a MIN, etc. MERS was a consortium that was sued by every state and county for decades, finally winning and establishing their legal right to possess and administer this registry... making it enforceable in court when a loan is challenged. Each layer of the stack is audited, makes reps and warranties, etc. It is also all virtually worthless. Plumbing where players monetize what surrounds it. Each part is bundled and typically free from the companies who generate mortgage docs, provide point of sale systems, etc. There is literally ZERO incentive for anyone here to change their systems and any participate who does change will require all of their partners to do the same. Even if you get a few, originators require maximum liquidity. They "best ex" loans, pooling them, and selling to the highest bidder exactly when they want. They cannot be restricted in any way. So you need to upgrade the entire system. MERS is now owned by ICE who owns the NYSE. They also own Encompass, the largest loan origination system with the vast majority of the market on their platform. Do you not think they themselves will upgrade this system, perhaps more slowly than people would like, but likely all at once and coordinated with the industry...? I share all this because it frustrates the shit out of me. So much wasted energy when there are real problems to solve. People should not spend ANY time on the tokenization of real estate assets, they should build value to the underlying process, its steps, and participants. And they should remember that this industry has high $$$ signs, but is terribly low volume and exceptionally difficult to differentiate and win.

Love these new Anthropic videos

A few thoughts about PayPal, nearly 12 years after I left. I woke up this morning to dozens of messages from former PayPal colleagues. It pushed me to finally speak up. I never spoke publicly about the company after I left. Part of that was loyalty to John Donahoe, who gave me an unlikely opportunity, handing the reins of PayPal to a startup guy who, on paper, had no business running a then 15,000-person organization. But part of it was something else: I had left. I chose not to stay and fight for the changes I believed in. Speaking from the sidelines felt like armchair commentary. Easy opinions without the burden of execution. So I stayed quiet. But twelve years of silence is long enough. And today's news makes it clear the pattern I've watched unfold isn't self-correcting. I left PayPal in 2014 because I was deeply frustrated. We had executed a silent turnaround of a company that had lost its soul. We brought back engineering talent, shipped good products quickly, and acquired Braintree and Venmo. The company was on a tear. So much so that Carl Icahn felt compelled to accumulate a position in eBay and push for a PayPal spinoff. At the time, eBay decided to fight Icahn. It was a difficult period for me, caught between what I felt was right for PayPal and my loyalty to the eBay team. This is when Mark Zuckerberg approached me to join Facebook. The combination of his conviction that messaging would become foundational, the appeal of going back to building products at scale, and my growing exhaustion with the internal politics at PayPal and eBay eventually convinced me to leave and join one of the best teams in the world, one I had admired for a long time. In the summer of 2014, I met John in a café in Portola Valley and told him I had decided to leave. During that conversation, he told me that Icahn had effectively won the fight, that PayPal was going to become an independent company, and he tried to convince me to stay on as CEO, but I had already said yes to Mark, and my word is my bond. There was no turning back. After my departure, the board scrambled to find a replacement, and it took a few months for them to land on Dan Schulman. The leadership style shifted from product-led to financially-led. Over time, product conviction gave way to financial optimization. Much of the momentum we had created still persisted and carried the company forward, mainly driven by Bill Ready, who came over in the Braintree acquisition and rose to COO. Under his leadership, Venmo grew exponentially, and total payment volume (TPV) accelerated quickly. But the shift under Schulman became more pronounced after Bill's departure at the end of 2019. With him went the product conviction that had defined the post-spinoff momentum. Then, for a period, COVID-fueled online shopping hid a lot of the company's new weaknesses. During that period, the company made a fundamental miscalculation: it optimized for payment volume instead of margin and differentiation. It leaned into unbranded checkout, where PayPal had the least leverage, instead of branded checkout, where the margin, data, and customer relationship actually lived. Visa masterfully structured a deal that effectively ended PayPal's ability to steer customers toward bank-funded transactions, which had been a core driver of PayPal's economics. Not long after, PayPal lost a significant portion of eBay's volume. Over time, it saw its share of checkout among its most profitable customers steadily erode as Apple Pay and others continued to execute well. The same pattern repeated itself across lending, buy-now-pay-later (BNPL), and new rails. On lending, PayPal missed the opportunity to turn it into a platform weapon. Products like Working Capital were conservative, short-duration, and optimized for loss minimization. Lending never became programmable, never became identity-driven, and never became a reason for merchants or consumers to choose PayPal over something else. The missed opportunity in BNPL was even more striking. Klarna, Affirm, and Afterpay didn't just offer installment payments, they built consumer finance brands, persistent credit identities, and new shopping behaviors. PayPal saw the BNPL turn, entered the market, and had every advantage: distribution, trust, and merchant relationships. But BNPL was treated as a defensive checkout feature rather than an offensive category. There was no attempt to turn it into a core consumer relationship, no super-app behavior, and no meaningful differentiation for merchants. Others built platforms, PayPal added a feature. The failure to lean into building and owning new rails followed the same logic. After the spinoff, PayPal had a once-in-a-generation opportunity to build a global, at scale payment network. Instead, the company focused on building on top of existing networks and third-party rails. More recently, that mindset carried over to PYUSD. Technically, the product was sound. Strategically, it launched without a compelling transactional reason to exist. PYUSD had distribution, but no organic demand. It was not embedded deeply enough into flows to become a true settlement layer, a cross-border merchant rail, or a programmable money primitive. It sat adjacent to the product instead of inside the core of it. Acquisitions during this period followed a similar pattern. Honey was not a strategic acquisition for PayPal. It added activity, but not leverage. It lived outside the transaction, monetized affiliate economics rather than payment economics, and never meaningfully strengthened PayPal's control of the customer or the checkout moment. Xoom solved a real problem in remittances, but it never compounded PayPal's advantage. It scaled volume without changing the underlying rails, identity graph, or settlement model, and as importantly, it didn’t cater to a high-value, high-margin customer archetype. None of these were bad companies. They were just a wrong fit for PayPal and became unnecessary distractions. The board eventually recognized the problem. In 2023, they brought in Alex Chriss, an Intuit veteran with a strong product background, explicitly to restore product conviction. It was the right instinct. But Alex came from software, not payments. He understood SMB product development. He didn't have the muscle memory for transaction economics, network effects, or settlement infrastructure. In hindsight, he also made an error: clearing out much of the leadership team that understood payments deeply. Executives with years of institutional knowledge departed within his first year. This morning, Alex was removed as CEO. Branded checkout grew 1% last quarter. The board tapped another operator, Enrique Lores, the former HP CEO who's been on the PayPal board for five years. I don’t know Enrique. And he might be a great leader, but on paper at least, he’s a hardware executive. For a payments company. The common thread through all of this is incentive design. Once PayPal became independent, short/medium-term predictability beat long-term vision and ambition. Stock performance mattered more than platform risk and network opportunity. Financial optimization replaced product conviction. I'm not claiming I would have made every call differently. Running a public company at scale involves tradeoffs I didn't have to make after I left. But the pattern, choosing predictability over platform risk, again and again, was a choice, not an inevitability. Over time, the company that had every advantage and could’ve become the most consequential and relevant payments company of our time, lost its mojo, its product edge, and its ability to compete in a market that’s being rewired and reinvented in front of our eyes. That's the part that's hardest to watch for a company I care so deeply about.

YC rejected us over one brutal question. "If this idea is so good... why are you still employed?" We said: "If we get in, we’ll quit." They basically said: "So you don’t believe in it enough to quit, but you want us to believe?" That one hurt. We realized we were asking investors to take a risk we weren't willing to take ourselves. So we quit. Built nonstop for 3 months. Shipped a real product. Signed our first customer. Actually went all in. Came back to YC. "What changed?" "We quit. Here’s what we built. Here’s who’s paying us." We got in. Founders love talking conviction. Most won't make the first bet. Your first investor is you.

The Head of Comms when an employee says, "I got invited on a podcast."