20VC: Why Cursor is Dead | An AI Tsunami is Coming & You Need to Prepare | Systems of Record Become Valueless Databases with Agents | Is This The End of Tech Private Equity with Jerry Murdock, Co-Founder of Insight Partners

Most of the companies I just mentioned, their view, as they've told me, is cursor is obsolete. What we have with the tsunami happened is a wake up call to move to higher ground. Don't get caught on the beach when the damn thing hits the beach, move to higher ground. You really don't know the edge unless you go over it. If I have any wisdom, it's all, it's because I fucked up so much and I've learned from it. Here's the secret. Here's the real secret. I never left the game. I was lucky because I was losing money every year I've been in this business. I failed. Money does not come with instructions. Jerry Murdoch is one of the most influential venture capitalists of the last three decades. He's a co-founder of Insight, which now manages more than $90 billion. He led one of the most eminent rounds for Twitter. He's an OG of the venture space. And today, we sit down to discuss his biggest lessons from 30 years of investing. But before we dive into the show today, if you're looking for a way to transform your customer service, let me introduce you to Finn, baby. Finn is the number one AI agent for customer service, resolving up to 93% of customer queries automatically. There is no other agent that can do that, not 93% of customer queries, okay? So why choose Finn? Finn is the best performing AI agent for CS. Finn doesn't just answer questions. It takes actions. It automates the most complex customer queries, like refunds, transaction disputes, technical troubleshooting, with speed and reliability. Beats every competitor in every head to head Bake Off, completely configurable and code optional setup. My word, I mean, the benefits just go on and on. It's easy and efficient implementation. It works on any help desk with no tedious migration needs. It's trusted by over 6,000 customer service leaders, including top AI companies like Anthropic, Lovable, Synthesia, Clay. So if you're ready to transform your customer service team, learn more about Finn at fin.ai/20VC. While fit the scales you'll support without losing speed, ReFord shows you how to translate that scale into durable product-led growth. Everyone's shipping faster than ever. Cursor, Claude, Codex. AI is making code and writing code faster than ever. But here's the problem. Speed means nothing if nobody uses what you ship. That's where ReFord comes in. ReFord is building the product discovery engine that sits upstream of your coding agents. Not another prototyping tool, research, repo, or AI interviewer, but a product that will ingest your customer data, generate variations of product solutions, validate the solutions before code is written, and hand off winning directions to your team. ReFord kills product debt before it starts, because every unused feature you ship isn't just wasted and ginary time, it's a maintenance burden, complexity tax, and surface area that you cannot shrink. Used by product teams at companies like Toast, Vimeo, Klavio, and many more, ReFord helps team ship more features that actually get used. Try ReFord at reforge.com/build and use the code "20VC" that's 20VC for 1 month free of pro. Just like ReFord's help teams level up how they grow, Navan helps some scale smarter by simplifying travel and spend. This one's for the finance pros who want to drive real business impact with travel and expense, rather than waste time chasing receipts or force people onto outdated tools that only add to month end chaos. Enter Navan, an AI powered travel and expense platform that helps save your company money through real-time visibility, policy control, and high-employee adoption. It's easy to use, you can book a trip in 7 minutes, compared to, and this is mind-boggling, the industry average of a whopping 45 minutes, and smart AI approves in policy bookings and blocks everything else automatically, and you can travel spend in real time. See exactly how you're saving up to 15% on your travel budget. That's why the world's smartest companies like Anthropic, Figma, Stripe, Canva, Use Navan, go to navan.com/20VC to date, see for yourself, and to find out how you could win two business class flights anyway in the continental US, because we all deserve a vacation, right? No purchase necessary. Rules apply. Good luck. You have now arrived at your destination. Jerry, I've known you for years. I've wanted to make this happen literally since we first had that lunch, so thank you so much for joining me today. Hey, happy to be here. Now, I think it's such an interesting time, because bluntly, me and a generation of investors are going, hang on a minute. Is everything that we've been taught for the last five, 10 years completely irrelevant? And now I get to sack on your wisdom for the next hour. When we chatted the other day, you said about tsunamis as an analogy for where we are with the AI wave that we currently face. What did you mean by the tsunamis? Now, how do you. Well, the first thing I think about a tsunami is that it's harmless when it's out at sea. It's only dangerous when it hits the beach. That's number one. Number two, it's messy. You're going to get it maybe an earthquake or two, notified. There's something possibly coming. And it's not just one wave. There's these pre-peak waves and post-peak waves, but there's an event coming that is more than a single product. And in this case, it's autonomous agents. Autonomous agents is, in my opinion, what the tsunami is about, not just AI in general. So autonomous agents is the big wave that comes. And so where are we now? We're in the anticipatory period where we can see it coming. And that's why we're seeing the satica or the satspocalypse. Is that the case? I'm not a doom saer, but I am one to say, look, change is coming fast. And you need to anticipate that. You need to be on top of that. And the idea of, oh, I can just bolt on AI to my company. It's possibly true. You can maybe get an exit, but being AI native and thinking that way is going to make you a better company. And thinking deeply about what is going on in the communities that are driving the tsunami, right? Those open source communities that are popping up in massive amounts, they're the ones that are going to have the big impact. We're going to get to the bolt on AI kind of strategies, but you have an incredible portfolio of companies. You work with many incredible founders. What do you see in the portfolio that we touched on when we chatted before on the cool on Friday that maybe people aren't seeing today when they read the news or think about investing? If I look at real true AI startups like E2B or eventual or Lotus AI, get dynasty, these are all native AI companies that are up and running. Ovens, another great one. What's happening with them is they're all using open claw, nano claw, or one of their own homemade, you know, autonomous agents. And I think that's not obvious yet in the marketplace because it's only about two months old. These guys have been doing it for anywhere from two weeks to six weeks roughly that have brought in autonomous agents to actually write code. That's the thing that I think is mind-blowing. Okay, so they have autonomous agents to actually write code. What does that mean for cursor, a 27 to $30 billion company that's raised a lot of money? Yeah, I'll tell you so for most of the companies I just mentioned, their view as they've told me is cursor is obsolete. That's where the product is today. Now my view is yeah, but that team is really smart. They've got a lot of money and a lot of customers. They've got time to embrace autonomous agents, which is what I think they'll do. And they've got shot to pivot and figure out what the next direction is. But you know, in the AI business, you've got to be going where things are going to be. You can't be thinking about yesterday. So I think those guys are going to have to quickly embrace autonomous agents. You mentioned, yeah, utilization of open-claw. What do you think is the impact of open-claw more broadly that we're maybe not considering enough? Great question. Look, first thing you got to do, look at OpenCon, look at the community, the commitment to open source and the number of people developing for it. I mean, you can look at huge companies like OpenAI and you can look at Anthropic, putting massive resources and then you look at open source and you've got sheer numbers of people doing integrations, massive amounts. If that community keeps accelerated and growing, we're going to see agents do incredible things that they don't have today. When I think of an autonomous agent, first of all, we're going to have to come up with what we call a claw stack or some form of stack for the autonomous agent. Back in, you may not remember, back in 2003, 2004, we were post 9/11. The world was miserable. People couldn't afford to build websites with sun servers and Oracle databases, which were expensive, but the LAMPStack came out, which was Linux, Apache, WebServer, MySQL, Database, and PHP, Frontend Development Tool. That led to the explosion in 2004, 2005 of websites and ultimately commerce. Google went public in 2004 and rode that wave brilliantly. I think in the same thing with autonomous agents that you're going to find the open source community coming out with a stack. Right now, you've got a reasoning layer that's dominated by Claude and Codex and Gemini. I think what's going to happen with the autonomous agents is ultimately they're going to have an orchestration layer where they can have multiple different LLMs that they can orchestrate on and triage workflows. They'll triage workflows and say, hey, for this Part of the workflow, let's use They're expensive tokens, but they're going to get the job done better. And then for this other part of the word, let's use an open source model like deep sea, Klamathri, whatever. And they're going to start from a big picture. Maybe this is going to happen as soon as orchestration gets solid enough. They're going to determine where the workloads go for reasoning models, which is going to be super powerful. And my guess is this will lead to the rise of open source models more proficiently. And that's going to lead to the rise of ASIC's chips. Because what's going to happen with ASIC is you're going to put the model on the chip. You know, ASIC's going to be a lot cheaper, a lot more tunable for a specific workload than an expensive chip from Jensen. So I think that we're going to see massive development of autonomous agents influencing open source models and ASIC's chips. When the big picture, that's a revolution. One of my dear friends is Rory O'Driskel from scale. And he was the thing I love about Harry is the statement that's great, Jerry, but what about me? We're going to specialize in as eventually capitalist. I have a shitload of Nvidia. And I'm thinking through as I listen to you, can you just play out for me that migration from Jensen ships to ASIC's chips and just like how that actually plays out in reality? Well, it's the thing that wasn't mentioned as to why he bought Grock. He means that capability so that he can handle ASIC's chips eventually, right? I mean, because Grock, those guys know how to put memory right on the chip. And so that's automatically an ASIC's chip today. And so I think Grock is not just about handling different types of workloads and getting memory on the chip. It's about making sure that CUDA can also support ASIC's chips. They know it's coming. They absolutely know it's coming. And so I think the Grock acquisition is going to help them make sure the CUDA is viable for the ASIC's explosion that's coming. If the ASIC's explosion comes and CUDA does migrate with it, doesn't Nvidia retain their value? Or does it still downgrade because they have a leakage of value with the ASIC's chip expansion? Depends on execution. This is the thing about the game, you know? Who's going to out execute? Who's going to get it more? A lot of people like to criticize meta here and there about being behind the game, but they had the balls to say no to Jensen. Sorry Jensen, we don't need you. So why did he do that? Because he's betting on ASIC's chips. No question about it. You also mentioned the routing and the triaging between different models. It may be thinking a couple of different things. One, is that not just like a commoditization of models where it's a race to the bottom on price and who can deliver the cheapest fastest? Two, align to that. What if then we just see models do what we are seeing, which is eat into the application stack? How do you think about these two elements? The answer to that question is going to be decided by the autonomous agent, not developers. The agent is different than a developer. If you and I are developers, we're going to go and do something based on what our experience tells us, what we think. Okay, let's go build something here and we're going to use an ASIC chip or whatever. The difference is an autonomous agent is probabilistic. So the probabilistic nature of an agent is going to say, I don't know which is better ASIC or use one of Jensen's chips. Why don't I just go out and get 10 Python libraries, run them in 10 different sandboxes, write the work, the work log, and then to see which one performs better. That's what's going to happen. And so look for autonomous agents to have a more of a say in that. But when I think about it again, that's great, but what about me? Jerry, I'm investing in the agent layer today, like many other investors are. And I'm also seeing anthropic release, incredible application layer products very quickly, whether it's legal, whether it's that co-work, how do we determine between safe for us to invest versus in the path of an anthropic product update? That's why you get paid the big bucks, Harry, is that no one's going to tell you what's safe. I don't know what you are. I thought that was the point of this. I'll tell you, about 80% of the investments I've made have returned less than 1.3x. So it's the 20% that made all the money in my life and made all the impact. Money is just a sort of batting score for how much impact you had as an investor. That's the way I see it. And so there is nothing safe right now. You're going to have to watch who's going to execute the best. Do you think the public markets over-rotate when it comes to price responsiveness on these updates? You saw Cloudflat and CrowdStrike hit like 10% on the back of an anthropic security. Is that an overreaction? The answer to your question is about the markets and they over-rotate. If you go to Wall Street, you'll see the giant bull that's there in the statue. It's because of a herd mentality. And yeah, I think investors are like, hey, I'm not a technologist. I'm just going to sit back and watch this. Someone panicked. Maybe the others are just sitting on the sidelines. What you're seeing is less about panic selling because it'd be down a hell of a lot more than it is. And what you're seeing is cautious on the sidelines buyers that are saying, hey, I don't see a deal here. I'm not sure I have enough information to jump back into CrowdStrike and bring the stock price up. So is it an over-rotation or is it just a pause where a lot of investors are sitting back saying, hey, let's get more information about who's going to be the winners and who's going to be the losers. Is there a parallel to a prior time where you can remember this? Well, well, in man's uncertainty, I do not know what happens. I'm better to sit out and watch because I don't want to see Monday drop another 40%. Yeah. So March of 2000, almost 26 years ago, tech stocks dropped between 30 and 40% across the board. And then if you missed a quarter, you were down over 50 or 60%. And we lived in that malaise March through the summer. And by the way, we were still able to get a couple IPOs out, but at lower multiples during that time. And we just sat in misery until 9/11, which what I call was the coup d'état to finish us off. And the market got destroyed. And we were thinking, hey, we don't do dot-com investments in insight. We're going to be fine because we knew that in '99 that there was a bubble. And we knew that dot-coms were going to blow up. We said, look, it just can't be sustainable. There's not enough commerce. There's not enough people on dial up. You can't do commerce on dial up. And there's not enough fiber in the ground. So sure enough, there was a burst. However, the tsunami came in, took out the dot-coms, and then took out all software. We all went down. We were in misery for years. Do you think we are in that same path? Do you think there will be a depressed public market atmosphere for years? Or will it be different now? Well, it's always going to be a little bit different. What's happening now is the speed at which things are changing. Like, we have this company E2B and you think, OK, they do sandboxes great. If you talk to most technology people, they don't particularly put much of a emphasis on differences between sandboxes. It's just a thing that keep your agent safe or keep whatever code you have safe. In reality, it's also a productivity tool. And for the agents, if you make in sandboxes for an agent, it's going to have a qualitatively different speed. For example, about 400 milliseconds is about a time period that humans can recognize at delay. So a lot of systems from mobile on that 400 millisecond time frame. And that's what most sandboxes are. Well, E2B has sandboxes that respond in 80 milliseconds. I'm like, wow, you know when we never noticed it, he said the agents notice it. And that's what matters. When an agent spins up literally 100,000 sandboxes in seconds, that's response time is critical. We've spoken a lot about autonomous agents. When you have autonomous agents, do they make your systems of record valueless or do they make them much more valuable because they have existing distribution which they can incorporate those agents into and leverage? Which one? Well, it depends. I'm an investor in CARDA and have been for a long, long time. And that's a system of record of sorts for stocks. And it has a lot of potential. And I believe they're doing the right thing on all fronts. But if tokenization of stocks come and they use CARDA, then CARDA is going to be infinitely more valuable. Right? Because they have the cap table they can help manage the tokenization. However, if tokenization comes and they bypass CARDA, and a new system of records get built, then there's not much to say that that system of records going to be worth much in the future. So it depends on execution of a CARDA management team and their ability to go capture the trends that are coming forward. If you would look at a Salesforce today, which Camp would you put it in? There's a lot of companies that sit on top of it like in Sino. There's dozens and dozens of companies that are built on top of the Salesforce system of record. So the real question is, let's look at their health. Let's see how they do. You know, if those guys start getting knocked off one by one, and enough of them get knocked off that the underlying value of Salesforce becomes less, then you're going to say Salesforce is going to be worthless. But in the history of companies, Salesforce is like a Mount Everest. It's an 8,000 meter peak sitting there. It's not going to melt overnight. That thing is going to be around for a long time. The question is how valuable is it? And the way to look at it, that question, the way to analyze it, is how valuable all those companies that build themselves on top of it. If those guys start going down, well, then you're going to see some issues. Our job is to ascribe where we see value and where we think there will be more value. And the things where we used to ascribe value, revenue, growth rate, margin, have become transient/questionable. So in that time, how do you think about where you ascribe value? It depends on what the timeframe is. If you look at most software companies that are out there, normally when a new technology comes, it sort of expands the market before it contracts. Because people are already in their momentum they're doing what they're doing. I wouldn't expect to see normal software companies, to see software just fall off the radar. That's not going to happen. I think what happens is that people get fearful and prices change. And then the underlying quality of the business changes based on how well the management team adapts to the situation. You can imagine some companies that have system of records that have great context, but actually increase value if they're able to put that context to work with agents, with autonomous agents. And then you have other people that, oh, they don't really adjust fast enough. They don't really understand what the new market's like. And then their system of record or their software declines, because they haven't really moved fast enough. What we have with the tsunami happening is a wake-up call to move to higher ground. And that kind of adapting of your business, some people will do it, some people won't. You said that move fast. You've been doing this a long time. I've shopped and even been doing this 10 years now, which shows on my wrinkled face. Really it does. But no, my question is, we've seen growth rates like we've never seen before. I mean, zero to a hundred million in our avenue, quite frequently, or Sami frequently in some of these cases, is triple, triple, double, double dead? Have we completely had growth expectations blown out of the water? Well, think about this. Right now, all software is eventually purchased by human beings. Software is going to be purchased or used by agents. And what's going to happen is an autonomous agent becomes an employee. You give it credentials, you give it identity, and then it's up to the agent to make the decision. You will review them like an employee and say, "Hey, what did you buy? What did you spend? What did you accomplish?" And you will manage that autonomous agent just like an employee. You need to prepare for that. If whatever you got invested in is that future going to be done and controlled by agents? And am I in the right position for that or not? How does the world change when you're not selling to people, but you're selling to agents? How does that interaction change? The interface? What changes when there's that core change in buyer? Yeah. First of all, it's never happened before. So it's happening now. My guess is the way pricing models will work better. And it's been in process for a few years. One of my companies, Docker has been moving dramatically toward this as they move into AI, which is a consumption base model. So if the agent has the access and has the authorization to use something, say a sandbox, you're just going to pay based on consumption. The sandbox is nothing more than you're buying memory or buying compute. And so you just open it up. It's free. Start using it. And then you ultimately have to pay. And the agent will come and tell you, Hey, we've reached our limit with the sandbox company here. What do we need to do? And that's how it's going to work. Going back to what we said earlier about bolt on AI strategies. There's a lot of public SaaS companies. I didn't want to name any of them. Who are trying to move, not public actually, even kind of late private, who are trying a bolt on, who are trying to pivot. Does that work? How do you think about the bolt on strategy as an effective strategy? Look, I was just at the Olympics and there's a lot of people trying to win a gold medal and not many people do. And so, you know, you can try all you want, but you better be world class at what you're trying to do if you're going to get the medal. I have the CEO of Monday.com on the show tomorrow. Yeah. When you think about the question, I'm not picking on Monday, but I'm saying the question of will and price software and will software just be entirely vibe coded, personalized, customized? How do you think about that? Because that is the kind of eradication of a lot of them all get camps. Well, first of all, autonomous agents and it may take a year or longer for most enterprises to actually enable and be committed to autonomous agents, but they're going to write software faster, cheaper than any human being on the planet. They already are. And so again, it's this thing of like if you're making your software for autonomous agents and they have a reason to use it and it's valuable, great. You're going to do fine. But if you're not making your software for autonomous agents, you're going to be challenged in the future. Maybe it's six months, maybe a year, maybe 18 months, but you're going to be severely challenged if you still think human beings are going to buy your software. And so we have agents buying software and we review that decisions. I didn't have to deal with sick leave. I didn't have to deal with entitled millennials. I sound incredibly old school, but this is true. As you know, are you worried about what happens to labor forces? Given what you said, most importantly, being the speed of change is so fast. You know, I'm glad you brought that up. We're about two and a half years from a next presidential election. I am here to say that that is going to be a major issue on the next presidential election. It could decide the election. It'll be one of the most important things because there's no easy answer. There's no question that anyone that inputs date into a computer that does scheduling that, you know, like an executive assistant or people doing marketing those jobs are ultimately going to be better done by autonomous agents, white collar jobs. People have been saying that for years. I mean, this is nothing new. The question is when was it going to happen? And now with the advent of open claw and nano claw and all the other autonomous agents that are coming, they're the direct threats. First of all, not to the people with the job. First of all, to the next person in line, the next junior developer you want to hire, the next executive assistant, the next marketing person. So the first thing you see is people stopping or slowing down hiring of white collar employees that input data and use a computer. That's the first thing. Second thing, depending on the speed at which these autonomous agents evolve because there's a lot that they need to do. They've proven it's exists that they can write code and they can do anything you want from a scheduling perspective for your life. So they already can replace a human being they will. I think that the job market's very uneven. I think the first companies that are going to go with this are going to be small medium businesses because they're the ones that, wow, one secretary makes a huge difference in their two, three, four person company. You don't need humans doing it. You've got the autonomous agent doing it. So I think we have to look at what's the speed which the autonomous agents grow in three sectors, consumer, small business, and enterprise. My guess is enterprise is last. This whole AI revolution. There have been last. They may catch up in a year or two. We'll see that's going to be what I think chat T P T and Google and and Thropiker absolutely going to be focused on is getting their own version of the autonomous agents adopted by enterprises rapidly. When this happens, we're going to see dramatic change. And I think politically the minimal viable income may become a reality or at least a ballot question in two and a half years. What does that mean? A minimum viable income, you be on it. It means that you know what, you're going to go and get effectively a certain amount of money guaranteed to every month. So that if you're a white collar person, they'll change the unemployment program because no administration is going to want to sit there and say, yeah, I've presided over 10, 15% of the country unemployed. What they'll do is give an option to put them into a program. And we're retrain people to do something different, maybe to have a better quality life. If you tape the optimistic view, you know, those jobs that are going to be going away are not going to be jobs that gets you a vacation in Brazil anytime soon. They're the jobs that are you're suffering at every day, making a living and you're struggling as to whether you can pay your health care or not. And so maybe those people say, I'm going to move out of the city, move out of the suburb, and maybe I'm going to move back to the country and grow food. You know, I'm going to get this grant to do so. There's already innovative businesses in Wyoming, where they're taking veterans and giving them branches to lease because now a technology one or two people can run a massive branch instead of eight people. And so there's new things like that happening everywhere. Does this labor displacement? Does it help or hurt the Trump administration? Depends when it happens. In the next two years, I think we both agree that in customer support we're already seeing bookkeepers legal would be the three encoding would be the kind of four really vulnerable areas. I think health care may hit that before the labor market hits it because it's going to happen. We'll find out this fall. What's the impact of health care on the election? And if it's a big impact, then you can assume that labor will be a major impact on the, you know, on administration. When we think about the impact of agents on companies, I had Seb from Cloner on the show and he said that that peak there was 7,000 by 2030. They're going to be less than 2000. His head count, a bug, not a feature now in companies. You know, look, people never really talk about it, but it's all about culture. What's your culture? If you're looking to have a culture of a players and Steve Jobs talked about this at Apple, you want a, how do you just continue to grow with a players? You're going to have a hell of a lot more agents than people. So it depends on what those 2000 people are doing at Cloner, let it left. What's their culture like with those 2000? If they're all able to have a greater quality of life, have more time with the kids, maybe it's an awesome win, you know, but I'm not there. I'm not him. So I can't comment. Do you think we will have billion dollars in single person companies? It's often said. Do you think it's actually a realist? Yeah, absolutely. I mean, it's all about how smart is your agent? How smart are you to deploy the agents and how well can you learn to listen? I think the thing that's shocking is that autonomous agents work that open call worked. And that's why so many developers are so passionate about open claw because it's something that's working on its own without having to be reviewed. It's an employee. You've gone from an assistant to actual employee. Think about that. That's major major difference in life. And I think those kinds of changes are going to be really important to notice. I am Orlando brother and I'm sitting looking at my book and I've got Anna plan and I've got Cooper and I'm not picking on him, but I'm picking on him. Right. How does it impact me? I need to these assets to go out. They're 15 to 20% typical enterprise ask companies. What happens to traditional P tech in this environment? Well, let's go back to 9/11. There was several of these traditional now they're called, you know, something more sophisticated private equity, but they were kind of buy out shops. Teddy Forstman, Kawaii, New Rana, great one, accepted in 2000. He went all in on telcos, virtual telcos, then it was over for him after 9/11 done. No more forceful and little. And so they'll be stories like that. I don't know about Bravo or anybody else, but they'll definitely be P firms that end up like Forstman little. And then there'll be other ones that had the right bets and did the right creativity and they'll be bigger and better and more important than they were before. Life is basically a set of experiences you have and the total sum of the decisions you make. Any of these firms is about the decisions you make. And now we're to point in time when you need to review what your assumptions are and what decisions you're going to make going forward. If you would make a decision about where you would place a fund today, seeing the atmosphere and the landscape that you have, where would you choose your investing shop to be? The problem is you've got an old man here who's going to want to have it up in the mountains and aspen or in the or in the Alps. That's my new thing. I'm not like Elon or Jensen that are going to do this for the rest of their life. I'm just doing this for impact. I can't even imagine going out there and doing it for the same reasons I did it years ago. It's like Bob Dylan got interviewed and they asked him, well, what was it like for you back in 1964? Newport? He says, I don't even know who that guy was. I, you know, and I feel the same way. I don't even know what that guy was like back in 1995. It's moved on. I was always into this business for the creative impact and to play a very small role on a team that was doing something meaningful. So I want to do that. That's going to be important, but it's just a matter of having the right amount of wisdom about how the change is going to impact people and how you're going to do it. I mean, VC firms should have their own autonomous agents. Everybody should. I mean, can you imagine the the medical and analytical work? Certainly the PE firms are all going to have autonomous agents analyzing markets, analyzing where the opportunity is. So if I was starting from scratch, the one thing I could imagine is having incredible data like it vet on a new opportunity for the white space for where these new AI companies are going to go and say, wow, the data says this guy's on the right market. He just needs to execute. And then you evaluate not just the person, but the quality of how they use autonomous agents. That's going to be the design factor for venture capitalists and startups. We're going to be on the same level playing field. How well do we use autonomous agents in our job? Going back to it, I don't remember that. I'm Bob Dylan and that I think actually money makes people better investors. I've spoken some of my most successful friends. And I say has becoming rich made you a better investor. I'm intrigued to hear your answer. Have you become better than more money you've made? Well, if we use money as a proxy for success, it's funny. You know, with some of our mediocre companies, we thought about swapping out the CEO and it's like, well, the problem is it's a mediocre company. And anybody we would put in would have to already be worth, you know, a couple hundred million bucks. So why would they do it? It's so you've forced to sort of limp along with the existing team because you're just not going to recruit someone better. There wouldn't be successful. There's no validation unless they've made a lot of money. So number one, it's a proxy for success and success is the combination of experience and validation of when and how to make decisions. For me, there's two components to every decision. There's the logic and the second is the intuition. And you need the intuition. And so the one thing that the autonomous agents aren't going to have is intuition, not anytime soon. And so we need people. We need good intuition to make good decisions. And without that component, you're not going to succeed. So in my humble opinion, maybe I've got better intuition. And that's the reason I've been more successful. When's your intuition been most wrong? And what did you learn from it? Good question. The first thing is how do you know it's really intuition and not wishful thinking? So that's the first thing I've learned over time that intuition was almost never wrong. But what I was wrong was me thinking it was intuition. There was nothing but wishful thinking. When did you wishful think too much? When I found an entrepreneur that I liked it was smart, but maybe too comfortable. Maybe a person I liked as a human being more and they weren't crazy enough. They weren't really driven enough. They didn't have that chip on their shoulder. They didn't have that obsession. You know, because you know, you want to work with people you like. And so most of the people that I liked were the ones that let me down and let themselves down. It's the people that you struggle with that are a little sharp edge that are a little aggressive and that you may not like as people that are like, wow, okay, well, but they might be the ones that succeed. And you have to find that core of humanity in them that you can like them and help them. But most of the most successful people are going to be challenged socially. Peter Phantamon's told me the best founders might you feel uncomfortable. And I think that's very true. Have you changed an ambassador, Jerry? Yes. If you don't change, you die. Changing is what allows you to adapt to the world. I mean, the most interesting thing if Nei, but look at future stuff is Feifei Lee's new startup about this visual representation of the world. I mean, what she's clearly articulated is that, you know, language is a very subpar descriptor of the world. It's just limited. So for autonomous agents, we need a new system where we can visually recognize the world to be able to have an objective view of reality for the autonomous agent. That's why we have poets because we can't really describe the world in enough detail with language, but we can give you a feeling about it. I think that what we have to do in the world is to definitely be aware that we have limitations and understanding it with language. I think limitations is interesting, dude. I often reflect on regret. I love being in Europe. I have family. I make a lot of money in Europe, which is great. But I never tried to go to Hollywood as the actor. And I'm just wondering if I'll regret that. What would you say to me as a wise OG? You know, there's a great British actor I had lunch with once in a Kenneth Brano. And he was reflecting on exactly that question. He said he's made to Hollywood movies, he, but he's done a lot in theater, a lot with Shakespeare. And he said, you know, I could have been more like Olivier that went to Hollywood and did Hollywood films late in life. But I didn't. I chose a different path. And for Brano, I think he was very happy. He didn't move to Hollywood. He could have had that career. And he's 65, 66 now looking back. And he's saying, yeah, I could have been that, but you know what? I'm really happy I didn't do that. So maybe you're like Kenneth Brano, you're going to be happy. You didn't do to Hollywood. I didn't, we started in New York. I've never left Aspen. I lived in New York part time. I never moved away from Aspen. Jeff and I found a insight in New York City. And I cover the West Coast because it was a lot quicker for me. But Jeff and I just lived on airplanes for the first 10 years, you know, and that's how we handled it back in the day. That was pretty revolutionary. Remember Silicon Valley was all about people walking down the street. There was VCs that said, I don't invest in anything more than five miles from my office. Did if you can't cycle there, it's not a deal. That was the thing, I think. Yeah, yeah, I mean, it looked, you choose your life, you choose your path, you shouldn't regret it if you're getting what you want and you're growing as a person. The most important thing looking back is, what have you learned about yourself? When I would talk to our younger partners, like you had Jeff Lieberman on your show and some of our other partners, I'd say, hey guys, you know, it doesn't help to get super rich early, like you have, unless internally, you have a sense of self and you're comfortable with the decisions you make. 'Cause that's the key thing, you know, you can become super successful early, but you've got to internalize that success, recognize what the failures are. If I have any wisdom at all, it's because I fucked up so much and I've learned from it. I made money very young and I was also an alcoholic and the combination of failing badly and passing out drunk many times and my mother being disappointed in the drunk's on that you had actually showed me like what life's really about. I'm so grateful almost for failing and being like that. - Absolutely, you've got to go. Hunter Thompson was a writer that lived near the Aspen area who I used to love, Hunter Thompson's works. He said, you really don't know the edge unless you go over it. - And clearly you did. - Oh, dude, I've been over so many fucking times. - So knowing the edge, Harry, that's what it's all about. We've got to all go over the edge and hope to live to tell about it. That's what gives you the sense of knowing that gives you joy in life and gives you a sense of ease and comfort as you move through it. - When did you go over the edge? - Well, I did a different kind of. At 19, I got accepted to the United States International University in Nairobi, Kenya. So 1977 I get on a plane, go to Europe, hitchhike around for a couple of months and then I go spend six months in Africa. I was spent weekends documenting traditional dances with the director of Beaumont. So I was out in the hinterland and Kenya's the size of Texas with 13 major tribes with 76 individual clans and dialects and we wanted to document it all. And going out and living with these people in the weekends was going over the edge. I mean, I ate things I'd never believed I'd eat again. I mean, I had lived in little huts with goats. It was not a pretty sight. You've built a firm that many, and including me, would aspire to, I just wanted to understand some wisdom. Knowing all you know now, what strategy did you do with insight or product did you do with insight? They're with the benefit of hindsight. You maybe wish you hadn't done. What did you learn? - Oh, we hadn't done. In the early days of insight, the big mistake we hired some famous guy to start insight Europe and after six months we shut it down. It was a mistake in a half. We were not mature enough to do that. And Europe was something, we loved Europe. Early on, fun one had an investment called SLP in Paris. Fun two at a company called Metacuatro in Spain. It went public. That was a big win. We did deals in Portugal. We did deals in the Czech Republic in the 90s. So we thought, oh, let's do a fun big mistake. Too much difference. Too much, we needed to stay in New York together. We needed to focus. We needed to learn from each other. Having people in Europe was too challenging. That was a mistake that we made. - So I always say the product that we sell our LPs is the quality of our investment decisions and that reduces with remote decision making. Do you agree or do you think that today remote decisions work just as well? - That's a function of the team. That's a function of who's involved and that a function of experience. Overall, if I were to invest in a company, I would be very suspicious of remote management because human beings today need it. As we move to autonomous agents in human beings, that's a good question. That's a very good question. I don't know how the future is going to play out, but in the past remotely managed situation. Now, for me, because I didn't live in New York as a co-founder, it was really hard on my team for me to fly out, fly out, fly out. And because you have to make decisions remotely, you have to sit with an entrepreneur, you're in San Francisco and you have to commit now. And you've got a whole team in New York. It's really tough being that remote guy. If you're all local and you're all sitting the same office, you got to make a decision tomorrow. It's a lot easier. So I would argue that remote decision making is very difficult. You mentioned momentum and the importance of momentum in some ways. Critics have suggested that momentum was a challenge for the $20 billion fund and the speed with which it was deployed and the high prices. Just with the wisdom and experience you have, Jerry, I'm fascinated. How do you reflect on that fund? One correlation you can look across all VC funds and look at their vintage, whether it's a 99 vintage or a 2004 or 2005 vintage. And the one correlation you can make to success was timing. If you did a fund in 2005, 2006, you were in great shape to take advantage of the mobile thing that started happening in 2008 when Steve Jobs got 10 million subscribers from AT&T. That's when mobile became real. So if you had an 0506 fund, you had a chance to get some of the best most iconic companies. But if you started a fund in 2009, you're going to miss being early in Twitter. You're going to miss being early in Facebook and miss being in Uber. You're going to miss all that. So timing is the most important thing whether you're early stage or late stage. You can't apply it to just an overall general strategy. Depends on the timing of when you did the investment. Do you think now is the best time ever to be starting a new fund? Absolutely, the best time. You're in a sea change. Humans are no longer going to be the decision makers about software. It's going to be autonomous agents. This sea change, this tsunami, is so different than anything that's come in the past that people that embrace this new model can embrace it from scratch right now. Kind of a huge advantage over people that have been successful with older models that don't quite move fast enough. Because they've already reached. They already mail out of money. We're hard to get old dogs to move fast. How do you feel about getting back in the game then, Joey? You're doing this show with me. You're talking about autonomous agents. Like, seems like you're an old dog moving by fast. Here's the secret. I retired from inside. I retired from negotiating term sheets. I retired from board seats. I retired from internal investment committee means I retired from having dinners with LPs and answering LP phone calls. But it didn't retire. I haven't done a single investment on my own that someone didn't bring me that I love and I trust. Every investment that I've done, which is over a hundred, has come from someone close to me and said, "Jerry, I need your help to help me think about this thing." And through that process of trying to help someone else, I end up in it. And that's been fun, because it's an experience that you're not doing on your own. Your experience you're doing with people you care about. Final one before we do a quick follow-up. Do you believe the future of Venture is like the Go Big or Go home? We see Andrew from Race 15. We have Insight Omega platform. We have the mega platforms of GC and light speed. Is it Go Big or Go home now? That's the only way I played the game. (laughs) I mean, I went big on my things. You know, when I invested in Twitter in 2009, there was 30-something people, no revenue. My fun, for like, are you kidding me? It was a watershed moment that my partner has allowed me to make that investment. What did you see? What I saw, and this is really interesting, like our early investments, the idea of Twitter, which I called the status update for the world, was so brilliant, so over the top, it was far better than anybody on the team's ability to execute against it. So I think Twitter could have been infinitely a more interesting company, but VC's got involved and created politics and they fire Jack Dorsey early and they created issues. And the company was pretty messed up from that trauma of firing one of the founders. And at the same time, they were very excited and the community was growing. The community was helping it. And for me, I saw an incredible idea that wasn't easily replicated. And there was enough momentum to it that this was for me and no brainer. And it was the bet that I put my entire reputation on the line. I got Jeff Warren and Devon Perrecht to jump in with me on this. And I pushed really, really hard. We did that investment less than 30 days from the time I met the team and the time we closed. And it turned out to be a watershed investment for the company and got us into lots of things like consumer and things we weren't doing at the time. That was just because the quality of that idea was insanely great. Did you ever have a trough in confidence? I failed. I was always balanced in that I knew I was going to fail. I knew it was going to be miserable, but I knew I was going to win some. And we were fortunate to do what we did. We were very, very fortunate. [BLANK_AUDIO] failure to me, it was always part of my job. And I had to just suck it up. And so there was nothing that came down the pipe that caused me to lose confidence because I'd been taking and dealing with it from day one. Listen, I'm going to do a quick fire round with you. So I say a short statement, you give me your immediate thoughts. What advice would you give to a graduate entering the workforce today, looking for a job for the first time? Well, I would have him go buy a Mac mini, have an open claw and go to the job interview with his open claw. Who is the best saucer when they bring you a deal, you pay most attention to it? Oh, that's easy. The partners that insight, I mean, what we've really built is one of the great sourcing engines of the world. I mean, my trip to Geoffrey, Raman, Devon, these guys all just were focused on sourcing and managing their teams. And they get through the gauntlet of insight, due diligence and get to something that could be funded was a pretty big accomplishment. I think that those guys were the absolute best saucers in the world. Who is the single best picker that you know? Like they see value where others don't. I don't want to build egos up. But Peter Fenton, John Doar early on, those guys were astounding at picking deals. What is the single most memorable first founder meeting you've had? Oh, wow. I had the founders of True Collar and Sweden come to Aspen. I said, I'm not going to invest in them, but they took their last dollars to get a plane ticket to Aspen. And they came to me and it was, this was written about in the information by Amira Frauti, the story about it. But basically, these guys were nice guys and I couldn't let them down. I didn't want to, I told them, I don't want to invest, but I'll help you. And when I ended up helping them and giving them some money and making it a successful company. And it went public a few years ago and it was a great company for a number of years. But that's when I did not want to go into and I didn't want to go to Sweden. But I liked the guys so much. And they came out asked when I said, okay, I got to do it. What's the difference between a used car salesman and a software salesman? The used car salesman knows that he's lying. I love it. You've got open AI, you've got anthropic and you've got GROC, which would you most want to be in as an ambassador? It's kind of what stage you get to shine in. I'm getting you a shot in open AI at 500 and I'm giving you anthropic at 380. That's a tight tick and both. I take them both, but I think for me it's open AI because like I'd 800 million people you do. And you got 800 million people doing it when you cross a billion then you're there. Like I'm not that big a bit point, Ben. I'm big in a couple of crypto things. But until you get to a billion users, I'm suspicious of any consumer technology. I get you, but do you not think Jamani and Google can still wipe the floor with the distribution of the launch that they have, than this and the speed that they're moving? They can. And they are long term better assets they've got. If I have an autonomous agent business and I've got Gmail, you're going to have a phenomenal asset that open AI doesn't have. But the issue is who's got 800 million people getting to a billion first? I mean, look, you can say there's a billion users on their other properties like YouTube and things. But if you can convert open AI's chatbot to my own Jerry Murdoch autonomous agent from chat T P T, which I think would Peter Steinberger is going to do, you're going to have an insanely great business. What do people not know about having money that they should know? Very easy answer. What does that mean? Well, everything else you buy, you get, you know, you got a river and it comes with instructions. You get an iPhone, it comes with instructions. Money doesn't come with instructions. So you need to learn to respect it. It's energy. Money is the equivalent of energy and you need to respect it. You know, you don't just leave the lights on at home and the air conditioner on your home all day long, where you're gone. You respect energy. You treat it with respect and you use it for good and you use it to make things happen and you don't waste it foolishly being an idiot. You don't want to go to Las Vegas and hand out $100 bills to just random people. Take that energy and do something great. I mean, I don't know. As Larry Page has said, if he had extra money, he'd just give it the Elon to let him build things to change the world. I think that if you've got money, you've got energy, you can give it to entrepreneurs that do amazing things. You had kids quite later in life. Yeah. You wish you'd had them earlier. Well, you know, it's like you've had a fantastic life. You look back and you say, it's already great. Why would I change it? You know, number one, number two, that guy when I was younger, he wasn't ready for kids. He had all he was doing was building a business. He was building inside. Would it be possible to build inside if you'd had kids during? I would have been divorced and a pretty sad character probably. Look, I mean, when Jeff and I went out to raise money and we were getting sand kicked in our face, he was 30. I was 35 or 36. We both had acne. I mean, so probably wanted to give us money. Me, that guy with kids, I can't imagine him, imagine he's the disaster. What was the breakout moment? You said that, you know, sand kicked in face money, and then he raised 20 billion dollar funds now in single moments. What was the breakout? Was it a Twitter? Was it a, you know, it was the fact that we survived 9/11. I mean, if you want to know, inside had incredible funds, you know, funds won these incredible successes, fun one and two, or still some of our best funds ever. And then fun three or 99 fund was like all challenged and it did pretty well. All things considered. But the fact that we survived that collapsed. A lot of VC firms were zombies walking dead, partners splitting up, people going different directions. We hung in there. We hung in there and survived. That's the breakthrough moment. What's the biggest parenting advice you give me now knowing what you know as a papa? I would say your kids are always always watching you. So used that as an opportunity to be your best self, put your heart first, and be your best self every moment of the day that you can with those kids. Final one, what are you most excited for in the next 10 years, Jerry? I like optimism. We sit at this incredible moment in technology in terms of gentlemen and what are you most excited for? There was a movie in the 1950s called The Long Hot Summer and the character Big Daddy was dying of cancer. And at the end of the movie, things were working out with the family and he says, I feel like I'm going to live forever. And I think about autonomous agents and AI and maybe it's going to help me live forever. That's what I think. I actually do think it will increase longevity significantly in the next 20 years. Do you agree? Yeah, I mean, what I've heard is if you can live another five years, you're going to extend another five years. So if you're wherever say the health you're in today, if you make it five five years, you're going to at least get five years in the back end. Jerry, you're a star. Thank you so much for this. That's great and great. Catch it up with again, Harry. But before we leave you today, if you're looking for a way to transform your customer service, let me introduce you to Finn, baby. There is no other agent that can do that, not 93% of customer queries. Okay. So why choose Finn? It takes actions. It automates the most complex customer queries like refunds, transaction disputes, technical troubleshooting with speed and reliability. Beats every competitor in every head to head bake off completely configurable and code optional setup. While fit the scales your support without losing speed, ReForge shows you how to translate that scale into durable product led growth. Curse, claw code, codex. That's where ReForge comes in. ReForge is building the product discovery engine that sits upstream of your coding agents. Not another prototyping tool research repo or AI interviewer, but a product that will ingest your customer data, generate variations of product solutions, validate the solutions before code is written and hand off winning directions to your team. ReForge kills product debt before it starts because every unused feature you ship isn't just wasted and genaering time. It's a maintenance burden, complexity tax, and surface area that you cannot shrink. Used by product teams at companies like Toast, Vimeo, Klavio, and many more. ReForge helps teams ship more features than actually get used. Try ReForge at ReForge.com, Forge/Build, and use the code 20VC, that's 20VC for 1 month free of pro. Just like ReForge helps teams level up how they grow, Navan helps some scales smarter by simplifying travel and spend. Enter the van, an AI powered travel and expense platform that helps save your company money through real-time visibility, policy control and high employee adoption. As easy to use, you can book a trip in 7 minutes, compare to and this is mind-boggling, the industry average of a whopping 45 minutes, and smart AI approves in policy bookings and blocks everything else automatically. And you can travel spend in real time, see exactly how you're saving up to 15% on your travel budget. That's why the world's smartest companies like Anthropic, Figma, Stripe, Canva, use Navan, go to navan.com/20vc to date, see for yourself and to find out how you could win two business class flights anywhere in the continental US. Because we all deserve a vacation, right? Rules apply. Good luck.