Scott Barclay shares insights on when to play an active role as a venture capital investor. He explains with examples how engagement with an entrepreneur starts and eventually disproves or strengthens his conviction in a business idea.
Scott Barclay shares insights on when to play an active role as a venture capital investor. He explains with examples how engagement with an entrepreneur starts and eventually disproves or strengthens his conviction in a business idea.
Highlights:
More details at https://podcast.sure.ventures
The Sure Shot Entrepreneur
Scott Barclay - Future of healthcare needs more empathy and technology
Scott Barclay: [00:00:00] It would be really great if you could unlock the interaction between a psychiatrist and a patient but that's a really broken interaction and you start to, have an understanding of top down, how poorly we manage mental health, how poorly we manage psychiatry, I’m just using this as an example. You start top down and see all the downstream implications to quality of life, health care spend, impact on communities. But then, you start to go bottoms up on how we touch, how we treat patients, how we understand them. Then you start to recognize the massive lack of treatment, lack of access, lack of treatment variation within different communities.
Gopi Rangan: [00:00:40] You are listening to the Sure Shot Entrepreneur. The podcast for founders with ambitious ideas, venture capital investors and other early believers tell you relatable, insightful, and authentic stories to help you realize your vision.
Hello and welcome to the Sure Shot Entrepreneur! Today's guest is Scott Barclay, a good friend of mine and the partner and data collector at DCVC, a deep-tech-focused Venture Capital firm based in the Silicon Valley.
Scott leads DCVC’s computational care investment thesis backing companies pushing compute and empathy closer to the care journey in healthcare. In this episode, we will discuss Scott’s hypothesis-driven investing. You will learn about how Scott can play a very active role although he is a quiet Alpha. When it is required for the company divisor, he's willing to step it up, roll up his sleeves, and help the company in any way he can. He gives specific examples of that. He also talks about how entrepreneurs can work with him and how his growth mindset helps him engage closely with entrepreneurs to discover things that were previously not possible.
Scott, welcome to the Sure Shot Entrepreneur! I want to start with a question about you, tell us about yourself perhaps start with your childhood where did you grow up?
Scott Barclay: [00:02:15] I'm from a small town called Martinsville, Virginia, and even there, I’m cheating, I’m from a small little part of the country outside of Martinsville. I remember the first week of college, I went to the University of Virgina, and there was a classmate from Southern California, and I was telling him what town I was from and so he goes , “when you leave your town, what town are you in?” and I said, “No, when you leave my town, you then drive for a long time, and an hour later you enter another town.” He was like, “Yeah, but when your in between, what town are you in?” and I'm like, “No, you’re in the country.” I grew up in a simple and working class family.
Gopi Rangan: [00:02:55] You played football right? You were a quarterback.
Scott Barclay: [00:02:58] Oh yes. You read something, you know, that’s an intentional little nugget for somebody to bring it up. Gopi, as I get older, I stopped checking my height because I could never admit that we shrink as we get older but I’m going to keep telling myself that I’m 5’8 and a quarter.
What you should know about me being 5’8 and a quarter, is that I was that height when I was 12. I just didn't get any taller after that. I grew kind of young. I lived a glorious middle school athletic career of true domination, you know, and I get the bleeding of things to prove this. I never was able to dunk, so that always eluded me. I even today still dream of dunking a basketball, but basketball is what I loved. Football was where I had like glory during a very finite period of my life. But you learn a lot from being good and then not being so good. You learn a lot from being advanced and seeing things, other people can't see, and then having them catch up and surpass you physically, you learn a lot about yourself and a lot about ego.
And you know, when in doubt it taught me, I better actually keep reading more books. It is good to be in shape, but it's probably better to keep learning.
Gopi Rangan: [00:04:04] How did you become a venture capital investor specifically in healthcare?
Scott Barclay: [00:04:09] I think the best way I like to answer that is very early in my career. I had to decide, do I think I'm really so smart that I'm one of the world's best investors or do I think I'm someone who embraces a growth mindset and complexity and really like leading teams into those headwinds and challenges.
And I chose lead teams. And that took me down a path of NCR and Boston Consulting Group, really interesting choices, and growth as CVS, building certain businesses there, it took me down into more of an entrepreneurial career. I did not invent, but I helped fix, and then scale and create the ecosystem that your prescription moves electronically.
Gopi Rangan: [00:04:49] You're talking about Surescripts.
Scott Barclay: [00:04:51] I’m talking about Surescripts. I became a venture capital investor with a little bit of twinkle in my eye, which was in my mid thirties. I had one of those career altering situations where I said, let me not take one job that looks like any one thing, but I have just enough capital and time and freedom that let me just have time to pursue some hypotheses in healthcare, where I felt like at that point, having really built a lot of stuff at CVS and having helped create the tribe and ecosystem building, building Surescripts and running some other e-prescribing companies.
I felt like I had a first or second row into all the ways in which U S healthcare is dysfunctional and the early seeds of change of what digitization and informatics can mean in the future. It's something I said to myself in 2012 was, Oh, I don't want to be a venture capitalist, particularly the early stage VCs.
That's all about ego and network. And I'm not about any of those things, but let me try to take some hypothesis driven shots on some specific use cases, I believe in. So I looked one part like a product guy, one part like an angel investor. I did a couple of things with the private equity firm, but for me, they were testing a concept that I wanted to go deep, broad around the bundle payments.
I did something with GE healthcare, but for me it was actually a platform where they said I could use a significant amount of my time to work on incubating a couple of ideas. So my point is I had this period that I both could still to this day, not well explain to my mother. But on the other hand, it gave me this type of freedom.
I could be the, what I'm telling you is in that freedom, I did start to touch a ton of VCs, some famous, some, not some really good, some that are no longer in the business, probably for good reasons. And something jumped out at me and it's not just similar from something that the note says, I started to form a view that great early stage investing was not about just networking ego.
It's that we're some of the deepest, most interesting applied thinking. Applied thinking comes into play around the future that you want to create. And. I started to form a hypothesis of almost all of the best companies had a special founder and a special early venture capitalist who believed in them. And I think of that as GP-CEO-fit.
And once I allowed myself to view the world that way, I still have the following percentages, which is I view venture capital about 75% of the time. It's kind of agnostic. Meaning the VC doesn't have nearly as much value as they would like to say, or even they believe themselves. But it's real money and it's real catalytic capital taking really good shots.
I would say 15% of the time that venture capitalists impact on the company to whom they just wrote a check. It's actually destructive. It usually has a root cause somewhere with an ego somewhere within missed expectations. And that can happen on the CEO or the venture capitalist side. I'm just saying 15% of the time you look back and one, or both of them would say, you know, we should not have done that.
And fundamentally that's usually a relationship or a bad judgment about character. But when I had my eyes open during that period of which I was, you know, I don't want to be a VC. I started to see some really special situations, some 10% of the time, when you see that investor actually made the difference.
It was a special founder. They had a chance. They were going through tough times. I've literally been in the room now multiple times where I've seen the investor have the bravery or the boldness or the fortitude to make the hard call, to pick something up and say, here's how we're going to redo it. But we're going to redo the management team or to pick something up and say, everyone else is absconding, but here's how we're going to put more capital in.
And here's how we're going to see this or here's why we're going to pivot. It's that combination of the investor and the founder, where if you get it right, you trust and some type of search for truth on some type of true North mission where I've been really inspired. So now that I'm only a venture capitalist and I'm three plus years into only doing this, I have to say one of my few things I'm after is I'm after making investments on the future where I see the plausible, exponential upside.
Where I can help play that role. Now, what I don't mean is that I would always be a difference maker. I am perfectly happy to return unbelievable returns to our LPs on a solution that makes the world better. Even if I can be perfectly honest that that founding team did everything. I just happened to be lucky and along for the ride and I did no harm. That's perfectly fine. I will make no apologies for that.
I'm always seeking is it's that one's where you have a certain alpha where you have an edge. Where the world doesn't yet understand, or is even against the concept you're after, but you and that founder share that vision and you, and that founder have some complimentary sets of perspectives and capabilities and things you bring to the table.
We are in this early stage of the company it's catalytic, and you can look back and say, I always spoke truthfully. I always did my best was wrong about a lot of things, but we always worked in trust and we created something greater. I've seen that happen. I've seen some really wonderful examples of some people who've come before you and I, Gopi. I hope to be part of a few of those. I have a pretty good inkling that I already am part of a few, but it's still pretty early. So no premature victory.
Gopi Rangan: [00:09:58] The way you describe your journey, very personal and very, very thoughtful. I see a parallel here and tell me if I'm reading this right. The middle school giant, that was upset that other people passed him is actually now enjoying playing the role where you support entrepreneurs and let them pass you and take the credit.
And you actually thrive on that. You've turned your whole psychology around enjoying it versus being it.
Scott Barclay: [00:10:30] Yeah, you know, there are leaders, there are followers. And then there are people who are truly able to be both depending on the context on what the situation calls for. So I have no need to be an alpha or be a leader when what I really should do is sit down and just start rolling and help out.
And then there's other times, where whether others are in agreement or not, you should step forward and say, “hey, this situation isn't right,” or, “hey, we may not be in agreement, but this is going to fly into the side of the mountain and I will not let that happen and here's what I'm going to do.” So there's definitely something in the playbook there of knowing when to follow someone greater than yourself, knowing when to be vulnerable and sublimate yourself to that.
And other times when you say by luck and by juxtaposition by history, by intent by fate, I'm here at a moment and the things that we do matter, and we're going to give it our best. And that means we probably need to step up, even if it's a little bit uncomfortable. I like those situations. I'm okay with both.
So I find that's probably an important part of my DNA of being an investor. I'm thinking of two investments, as I say, these sentences to you. And in one case, the CEO probably has no idea that I can be kind of an alpha. Because he's pretty amazing. I honestly learned from him more than he learns from me. I know that I'm very helpful, in some specific ways.
I have a very cold hearted investing view of alpha and I'm pretty sure he's going to help me return that. And we have a very positive symbiotic relationship, but in every context in this company, he's the leader and I am, but a humble investor who was happy to be part of it and contributing. And simultaneously, I think about another company that I think will have equally profound returns and along that journey, that CEO and I will look back and there'll be times where it will be unclear who was carrying who? Because I definitely played a very strong role.
Now, in the first example, I should tell you it's a repeat entrepreneur. And in second example, it's a founder with amazing technical and product capabilities, but there's not been a founder before. So one thing that I'm telling you, Gopi, I'm totally comfortable with both.
One of the things I find it's very important as an, as an investor is not to superimpose yourself into the wrong situations. So in the example of the repeat super founder, I very early navigated to what, what he would be looking for in me, that I also agree that could really help with. And that is a relatively quiet, thoughtful, strategic, you know, helpful, a couple of levers behind the scenes.
Whereas in the second while we keep redefining it over time, you know, I've had interventions, I've had strong leadership at both the board and the company level. I think looking back the CEO and I will say, “yeah, it was because we had trust. We could both be strong with each other and we've both gotten to a better place because of it. I think more importantly, the company and the value creation in the company have gotten to a better place for it.”
So I'm one part, articulating a great caution should not be an alpha when that is not what's called for, but also a willingness when you see it.
Gopi Rangan: [00:13:34] So it reads like the making the company successful by doing what it takes is more important than stepping into an alpha role to satisfy your ego needs. And you don't, you try not to do that, but when you describe the kind of entrepreneurs that you work with, it's a wide variety.
People who need a little bit of your help and sometimes entrepreneurs who take a lot of your help. What do you look for in an entrepreneur when you meet them?
Scott Barclay: [00:14:02] We're probably only coming onto your cap table because we already suspected and have validated. You have something very special that is deep and technical at the technology level, at the compute level, at the data science level. I lead a portfolio called computational care that says yes and It looks at the broken provision of healthcare and says, “Oh, we too are excited about what compute can do in healthcare over the next 20 years, but in almost no situations, can I name is it sufficient.”
So there's things we do in compute, Gopi, over in computational bio where the compute team itself is worth investing in. In computational care we've yet to make an investment over 17, 18 investments where we didn't have a combination of the deeply technical founders in some early compute secrets, plus some empathy. It's either an empathy to the patient or an empathy to the user. And within that empathy, their secrets of how to unlock the use case or the product. And ideally, cause we are not formulaic, but if we were formulaic, it would be deep compute plus empathy, plus we already know some secrets to go to market. Now, seldom, do you have all three so often we're investing very early in a cross disciplinary team.
So in competition care, I'm usually investing pretty early in a cross disciplinary team where there's some technical advantage and some empathy to the use case. And then in the early stages of the company, probably the most important thing you can do, whether you think of it as de-risking, or really calibrating the company, that's something that flywheel is if that is true and right, and you prove it, how do you create some type of go-to-market flywheel, where you could meet some exponential impact and exponential financial return? So the founder I'm looking for someone who already has a concept of how they want to lead a team and they already have a concept of that technical advantage.
Gopi Rangan: [00:15:52] How do you check for those things? You mentioned the founder with the appropriate skill set and the background and the vision to build a business, a founding team that has empathy towards its customers, patients, or the system in general, and with the deep technical knowhow secret sauce that will carry through, like, how do you evaluate those?
Like, is it a one meeting? Is it multiple meetings? Is it over many months or do you have a vision of what might be a good problem to solve? And then you, when you see the entrepreneur, you find there's a good match there.
Scott Barclay: [00:16:30] I'm not only anti-formulaic. I'm pretty skeptical of language around VCs and pattern matching. So I'm going to give you an anti-formula answer, but something close to the normal motion. I think where I'm going to start is I'm going to start with a hypothesis. I'm gonna start with, well, for some reason, bottoms up of something we've seen anecdotally or something we've heard or talked down from like classic BCG quality research, where you start with GDP and problem solve and assumptions about the future and you start looking for big blue ocean type spaces. You come upon a hypothesis. I should just pause and say, healthcare is really complicated. I love, I love being a student of both economics and industries and so many lessons from other things. That's one of the reasons I love being in Silicon Valley, all the things that I've learned, unrelated to my direct areas of influence within how we change the provision of care of 30 years.
I'm always taking in those lessons in those analogs. I'm always looking for the cross disciplinary cross walks, right. But within healthcare, it's kind of hard and kind of complicated. So when I say I'm talking about a hypothesis, I may already be into it part of health care where I'd be using too many acronyms that Robin Williams and good morning Vietnam would be kind of making fun of me.
So I usually start with a hypothesis around, you know, it would be really great if you could unlock the interaction between a psychiatrist and a patient that's a really broken interaction and you start to have an understanding of top down, how poorly we manage mental health, how poorly we manage psychiatry.
I'm just using this as an example, and you start top down to see all the downstream implications to quality of life health care, spend impact on communities, but then you start to go bottoms up on how we touch, how we treat patients, how we understand them. You start to recognize the massive lack of treatment, lack of access, lack of treatment variation within different communities.
So you start to really stew around in the space. You start to come up with some specific hypotheses like, a specific problem one can solve is this interaction between the psychiatrist and the patient. And in particular that even if they have a face to face relationship and they come back to six weeks later, the quality of what happened in between and the quality of reporting that and understanding it in ways that are clinically relevant to the prescriptions that would be written is very, very poor.
As you start to build hypothesis stuff, you know, someone should build something that looks like X and start to look for. So Gopi, I’ll answer your question by saying once you have something you think you're looking for, you kind of start to go down a journey. So from a DCVC perspective, very early in meeting a founder, whether I have found them, whether it's come from a hot referral, a random, what looks like a random LinkedIn referral, like I will take an inbound from anywhere because I think the entrepreneurial journey is so broad ranging, and I don't believe in a certain pattern fitting.
So I'm just looking to meet founders who are working on problems, where I both care about and think I can help. So I'll meet any founder in mental health because it's worth doing, and I've got a number of areas of hypothesis with it. But within that area of hypothesis, I'm telling you two things. First is within the first 30 minutes, I know if this founder is technical enough and if their view of the world and what needs to happen could create a technical mode, that would be a fit. So I almost always tell a founder in the first meeting, if I think there's legs for this conversation. The second thing I will tell you is while I maybe went into it with a hypothesis, I am equally delighted to realize I wasn't thinking about it the right way, but this founder was so I'd love to have statistics.
I don't have them for you today. That for every hypothesis path that go down, that leads to an investment, I was expecting to make, I'm expecting in the long run to make us equal number of investments, where I went down that path of hypothesis, but I was delighted to discover, the founder had an inkling that I didn't consider. And then actually my hypothesis was wrong, but theirs was right. And then once you start to walk in their shoes and walk with them, you start to uncover.
So if your question was one about diligence, it's very early understanding, are they, are the team or what they're working on going to be technical. Then I'm going down a path of deep technical diligence to truly validate that. While simultaneously basically go in an exercise of vision-building with the founder, of the future they want to create and aligning on a shared future. While also just doing really good blocking and tackling diligence of what capital gets you to, what stage to accomplish, what problems, what is your theory of the CEO, like how are you going to build a team?
I guess the core of my answer is, I like to walk with that founder and basically build a mental archetype of what is the perfect founder and the perfect company to solve this problem and essentially evaluating and saying nothing's going to be perfect. Essentially leading down to a calculus of is this enough of a fit.
Gopi Rangan: [00:21:21] Very deeply thoughtful, I see. Can you pick an example of a startup and maybe walk through how you met the entrepreneur? How was the relationship initially? Did you know the person way before, or is it a new person? Like you mentioned any inbound interest you take and how did that relationship evolve?And when was it when the light bulb went off that, yeah, this is a good investment for you?
Scott Barclay: [00:21:44] I spent about a year pursuing what I call a skeptical hypothesis. Meaning anytime that you're a would have said, Oh, it's worth understanding, but I don't think there's good venture investment to be made in the ICU, working with data. But there's so much data and to my understanding, we're not really using it that I should at least listen. I should talk to experts. I should try to understand every startup that’s working in this space and any of the ones that I met during that period. It was very genuine. I would have told them I'm really interested in highly skeptical, that this is a good space for venture, but here's some of the other things I've done and here's some of the ways we think, and here's some of the ways we can help. Let's just have a conversation. Unsurprisingly, you know, eight, nine months later, it felt like I'd met four or five, pretty interesting early startups.
I thought these are really interesting shots on goal, and I think they should be funded and they should try. But then when I laid out my own risk, adjusted analysis. I just thought they weren't great venture investments. I just far over expected the challenge they would have in repeating their product and multiple environments. I have not yet seen a product that wow’d me and I had not yet seen a team that I thought could repeatedly sell an oligopoly listed customer set. I'd actually slowed down on that hypothesis. I thought, yeah. You know what, actually, I'm glad we learned a lot, but I think I'm going to spend less time there.
Around that time I got a phone call. So this is in the - interesting overlap of, of history of, I was part of, one of the most amazing things in my life called the Jefferson literary and debating society. And it is the most eclectic, unique set of individuals and as very, both amazing and interesting and problematic history. It is an organization founded in 1825.
But always thoroughly remodernizing itself, surrounded with interesting people and often some of the most, both aggressive intellectuals and politicals of their day. Within that setting, there's this super smart guy named Scott Sonnenschein. And I remember the first few times I met him, I thought he was a communist.
I should tell you, now he's gone on to become a relatively profound professor within business. He teaches an MBA program at Rice University. He did his PhD at the University of Michigan, and he's just published. He's the coauthor with Marie Kondo on design thinking at work, you know, the Marie Kondo process, but applied to both professional career in the professional setting.
So Scott calls me and we weave a little bit out of touch, but he knew it, a few things I was working on. And he said he was mentoring a team that was a combination out of both Rice and Texas children's. There was working on a really hard problem in the hospital and he was just looking for some good mentors, the people that we spend some time with them.
And I said, hey, please tell them I don't invest in ICU, but I'm happy to meet with them. So this team is called, MIC, stands for medical informatics corp. The founder is Emma Fauss, deeply technical. I think she's got a couple of PhDs. This is a deeply technical cofounding team where Dr. Craig Rousson himself carries multiple degrees and is both a professor of cardiology and a PhD, and was a professor of chemistry.
So this is a deeply technically rooted science team, but they had started to work on a new data platform in the ICU relative to some of his work in cardiology at both Baylor and Texas children's. And this professor called me and said, we've just got a special team here in Houston. And I I'm just asking for you to help them a little bit because I liked them and I'd like you to help.
So I'm being overly proposed to the story. The last part I'm going to tell you about meeting this team and meeting this founder was I think it is now like a comical story among the company. Which is like the first five times I took the meeting, I said, hey, I'm not going to make an investment here, but there's something here and I'm not quite sure who to get you to next or how to help. So let's dig in a little bit more on these questions and I just promise, I won't waste your time. Always be direct. And like, I want to find a way to help. But somewhere around that, like fourth or fifth meeting, My skepticism was melting away. And the plausible possibilities of exponential upside started to become more of a weight on me.
And I was spending time with a pretty special internist without anybody from the company in the room, just a user who was using kind of their homegrown first version of this. And what I learned was he had been recruited by an equally amazing organization at three times the pay. And he had balked at moving his family and his career because they wouldn't let him bring the system with him.
And his angle was, Oh, I may still do that in my life, but we just gotta get this to the next side of the beta so that it's so obvious to every ICU administrator. That this was the only way you should capture, synthesize, compute, and start to go to clinical decision support in these real time ICU environments.
So once I started to see clinicians betting their own careers on the ability to use this much less, the ability to do certain types of research in this environment where historically we've not captured those physiological datasets. And then brought me back to what these founders were trying to do.
And so the story I'm telling you is it's one part connection, one part journey of hypothesis. And on this one, it's essentially being open that your skeptical hypothesis is actually worth pursuing. We are major shareholders in MIC. This company is greatly impacted by COVID-19. They are greatly accelerating into how to serve in this environment.
It is fraught. It is stormy waters and it is awesome. Like it is a team that is bold and brave, and they are deeply rooted in both the science and the technicalities of how to do this. But those are deeply rooted in the why. Like you just can't walk into an ICU and want to make a difference without having respect, not only for the families, but also for the staff.
What it is to be in an ICU at two in the morning and have so many alarms and so much light. Do you have a dysphoria condition because you lose all sense of time because the environment is so bad. Well, this is a team that says, “oh, but if we used data, we actually wipe out most of those alarms and wipe out most of those inappropriate machines and signals so that we only focus on the ones that matter, and we aren't only escalating signals to the right person at the right time.”
Just there you start to make a more peaceful environment. Using it as an example of someone who was only after the data science angle. But anyway, that's, that's my story of trying to walk alongside him.
Gopi Rangan: [00:28:04] This is fascinating. You, you narrated like it's a movie all the way from Jefferson society and how diverse thinking shaped your perspectives.
And you formed a hypothesis, which was they're becoming more and more skeptical, but the skepticism melted away when Emma and her team at MIC showed you what is possible. And then you became one of their biggest fans. That's a, it's an amazing story. I wish I could ask you about all of your investments and we get stories like this, but unfortunately we're going to run out of time soon.
I want to ask, is there a nonprofit organization that you work with and what are you passionate about?
Scott Barclay: [00:28:44] I really like the ecumenical hunger program. The website is EHPcares.org. It's just the most efficient and well-run heartful organization, I know of. Of getting food resources to the right families at the right time, that's kind of going down pretty low in the hierarchy of needs. And it's unfortunate to say in the United States of America in 2020, that's actually still really important to do.
Gopi Rangan: [00:29:16] I see that having lived in the Silicon Valley for 20 years, this is a place that creates wealth for so many people. Yet there are bowels of the society where people live in very unfortunate situations that exist, and we don't pay attention, but I'm glad that you serve this organization.
Well, this is fascinating. You started your journey with being a simple person with a few priorities and how you grew up in Martinsville in Virginia, in the countryside and how you are a sports athlete. And you're going to be a star, but injury prevented that. And then through that experience, you developed this growth mindset.
You watch people surpass you and that it was a great learning moment for you. Your career through CVS, BCG, startup experience, at GE, and other places, to me, it feels like all of those things prepared you to be where you are today, so you can serve entrepreneurs. And I really love the way you described hypothesis-driven charts. And it's about applied thinking about a future you want to create and the GP-CEO-fit helps that happen. So I like that phrase, I think I'm going to use that. I know we shared a lot of discussions on where we can focus on the future brainstorm on ideas, but I really hope to find opportunities to collaborate more closely.
Scott Barclay: [00:30:37] Well, Gopi, the same is true here. I'm watching you in motion in the marketplace and the way that we share ideas and deals, but it feels like we've shared good talent, trying to get good people into the right situations where they can make a difference as much as we have understanding who needs to raise capital.
And I just think really great people understand the whole supply chain, but then have the bravery and the pacience, and just take joy at whatever we call it today. Pre-seed and seed anywhere from incubation to, finally being able to solidify what this is and buying and growing in the market. We need your leadership in these markets.So I'm so happy to share ideas and people and try to work on good things in the future with you.
Gopi Rangan: [00:31:18] Thank you for listening to the Sure Shot Entrepreneur. I hope you enjoyed listening to real life stories about early believers, supporting ambitious entrepreneurs.
Please subscribe to the podcast and post a review. Your comments will help other entrepreneurs find this podcast. I look forward to catching you at the next episode.