Max's Musings #2: Sequoia's Rating System, the Replicability Crisis in Research, Building Great Culture, and How to Kick Habitual Phone Use for Good.
3 learnings, 2 conversations, 1 challenge
Welcome!
Each week, I share 3 learnings, 2 top conversations, and 1 challenge related to company building, health, productivity, and life.
At the bottom I highlight my ‘top finds’ for the week.
3 LEARNINGS
–
1. Culture follows the power law
Great company culture is 10x more valuable than just good company culture.
So, it’s really important to invest in creating great company culture versus just good culture.
This is hard because going from good to great requires a lot of effort.
But, recognizing the power law of output in return for effort makes the effort easier to justify.
–
2. Platform biotech might not be as promising as it sounds
Platform biotech is when a company uses a single technology or method to develop a range of products for different diseases.
For example, a platform biotech company might target ‘cancer’ generally whereas a vertical biotech might target ‘stage 2 lung cancer’.
Many of the largest biotech companies are platforms, but several savvy investors I know are skeptical of investing in early-stage platform biotech companies, particularly when AI is used.
–
3: Only 40-60% of research papers can be replicated
This calls into question the extent to which we can trust papers.
The problem is that researchers are incentivized to publish something novel and get citations, which results in gaming the system.
This is why I find the best doctors don’t mindlessly follow papers.
The best doctors say “Let’s do x because I’ve seen it work in thousands of patients”.
Anecdote and observation are powerful.
After all, they’re the first step in the scientific method.
Just because there isn't a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial doesn't mean something's not true.
2 CONVERSATIONS
–
1. Venture investing supports macro hedge fund investing
I spoke to a 21-year-old friend starting a VC fund alongside a systematic macro hedge fund.
He’s already raised from Marc Andreessen, Chris Dixon, and Josh Wolfe.
His key belief is that investing in deep tech startups helps you predict macroeconomic outcomes based on technology-related factors.
He believes VCs see the future before anyone else and that allows them to strategically buy/sell in public markets.
–
2: Sequoia’s rating system
A friend who used to work at Sequoia explained how every time a Sequoia partner meets a founder, they give them a rating. This stays in Sequoia’s CRM for life.
Other partners can update it and change it, and they argue over ratings.
This shows the importance of doing good things consistently.
1 CHALLENGE
–
My phone use has started going up in a habitual, compulsive, addictive way.
I'm solving this by keeping my phone in my bedroom for most of the day.
I’m planning to only use it when I intentionally choose to versus when I’m habitually compelled to.
I’m going to extend this to my computer by using distraction-blocking apps.
This helps me focus on the highest priority thing rather than the urgent, dopaminergic thing.
TOP FINDS
I’ve been loving this silver toothpaste and this coconut oil mouthwash for oral health, which I shared as part of my oral health protocol here.
Is your friend's VC independent from the HF? B/c it sounds like a crossover strategy. That strategy hasn't panned out in reality for everyone (although some have executed it well) but the strategy makes sense in theory.
If HFs can identify startups with the potential to disrupt incumbents, these startups can introduce new tech/business models that significantly alter the competitive landscape.
By investing in these startups, HFs can benefit from their growth and success. At the same time, they can short the stocks of incumbent companies that may be adversely affected by the disruption. If the startup(s) succeed, the HF gains from both the rising value of the startup and the declining value of the incumbents.
Been enjoying these musings.