E173 - Olympia Yarger, CEO & Founder, Goterra - Open the Pod Bay Doors

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
S1 (00:08):
Hi, everyone. Ian here. Now, about three years ago, my
friend and colleague Phaidon Stout interviewed Olympia Jago. Olympia is
the CEO and founder of gotra, which is a pretty
amazing robotic maggot food waste processing company. Uh, explain it
better in the podcast. She is a remarkable founder. She's

(00:29):
been a member of summit for our late stage founder
group for quite a few years now, and has just
got an incredible story feed and went into it a
little bit three years ago. But we love getting founders
back who have made great progress. Now Olympia is part
ag tech, part deep tech and part climate tech, which
is pretty remarkable. She lives in Canberra, which is a

(00:51):
sort of hotbed of deep tech startups, and she really
does have an amazing story. I know feeding got into
some of that, but I think we cover some different
ground in this one and hopefully it's pretty interesting. So
why don't we jump over and listen to my interview
with Olympia Yoga? Okay, welcome. I'm back with another episode

(01:12):
with one of our favorite founders in the whole world,
Olympia Lager from Gautier. Hello. Yeah, welcome. And now you
are coming to us. Remote. I was actually in Canberra
last week, so I should have brought my studio in
the car and popped in to see you. But I
didn't have time and I forgot. But you are in Canberra,
which is somewhat of a hotbed for fantastic deep tech startups,

(01:34):
including Gattaca. So, and it's your second time on the podcast?
It is.

S2 (01:39):
Look at me.

S1 (01:39):
Go. Do you remember the last one I do, yeah.
Phaidon did the.

S2 (01:42):
Interview. Yes, I was on the side of the road.

S1 (01:47):
Yeah. Because, yeah, one of the things I remember about
you and, uh, from some of our early summit, um, uh,
clan meetings was the, uh, uh, the fact that you
were often behind the wheel of a truck driving. So
you're very hands on founder. I mean, maybe we should
start there like you are definitely, uh, you know, sleeves
rolled up. Uh, get in the thick of it. Um,

(02:08):
in fact, no, let me not ask that question. First.
Let's go back to the basics and then we'll ask
that question. Tell us a little bit about Gutierrez so
that we we know what we're dealing with here.

S2 (02:17):
Gotcha. Is a waste management infrastructure company or waste management
technology company. So we build autonomous robotic systems that make
insects to a job. And their job is to process
food waste. So we have a fee for service waste management, uh, capability.
And then we create, uh, to agricultural commodities on the
back side. Um, and so we make money on the

(02:38):
front end and the back end, but we effectively where we,
we enable a circular economy for that waste stream and
the sort of ripple effects or concentric circles of how
we work kind of impact the customers up and down
the supply chain by participating with us. So it's a
fun time to be in the space. And yeah, doing
doing what?

S1 (02:59):
You also save the planet. I mean, it's maybe worth
talking about. Why?

S2 (03:02):
Yeah.

S1 (03:03):
Yeah. Uh, so like, food waste is bad because if
you leave it, it degrades and produces lots of noxious
bad gases. But if you process it with your maggots
or your robots or whatever you call them, then it
doesn't do that. So is that kind of the punch line? Yeah.

S2 (03:20):
And I think also what we've done is we've decentralize
the capability so we can do centralized or decentralized. But
by decentralizing the capability you've also reduced truck movement. You've
reduced impact to trucks, uh, of trucks on roads. You've, um,
created logistic opportunities to reduce the cost of waste processing.

(03:41):
So like I said, the knock on it's a sort
of a bait. But wait, there's more sort of steak
knife situation where, um, the sort of ripple effects of
being able to have technology that can scale up or
scale down to meet the customer need doesn't just mean
that you can scale that capability infinitely and meet sort of,
or address any customer where they are. But it also

(04:02):
means that the the secondary and third order effects or
the supply chain up and down is also benefit benefiting
and impacted by your good work. And so, um, yeah, we, we,
we do a lot of things across that supply chain
that improve for everyone.

S1 (04:20):
And maybe for those that can't get their head around
what the hell this looks like. I mean, can you
bring it to life? Uh, you know, because it's basically
a container, but like, there's a bit more to it
than that. So tell us about the actual product. It's super.

S2 (04:31):
It's it's it's interesting. We own probably still a few
too many verticals. Um, because we are sort of commercializing fast,
but we it's still stuff that hasn't existed before. And
so um, effectively on the mechanical side, you've got a, uh,
industrialized mechanization that, uh, holds the insects, maintains their environment,

(04:52):
health and well-being, and then it moves them to a
feeding station and feeds them autonomously each day. It also
accepts and receives waste from the customer. Depending on the
way that unit is set or what customers are serving,
that could either be receiving a tipped wheelie bin or receiving, uh,
a load from a skid steer. Um, and then it

(05:14):
processes that waste and moves it into the what is
entirely a refurb to shipping container, um, to be where
the insects are held, um, on the insect side, biologically,
what we've done is we've got a strain that is
highly suited to high heat, low humidity. So our operational
costs are lower. Um, and we also have this capacity for, um,

(05:37):
an insect that has a shorter life cycle. So not
genetically modified for sure, but it has the strain has
been adapted to our use case. So our generational life
cycle is a little shorter than most. Um, and we've
been able to make improve the production output of that insect, um,
for some time. So you've got a fair range of capabilities. Um,

(06:01):
when you do the math, which is to match the
biological with the mechanical and. And make a thing.

S1 (06:08):
So if I had to simplify that, then basically you
have a large shipping container with a bunch of clever
mechanical stuff inside, filled up with a black soldier fly larvae,
and then you get your customer, or you come along
with a wheelie bin or truck full of food waste
and you tip it in one side. The maggots eat

(06:31):
the food, process it, and then what?

S2 (06:34):
And then we pull them out the other side and
we process those into fertilizer and livestock feed. So we've
got got it.

S1 (06:42):
So you've got protein stock and some fertilizer, which is
a pretty good. So you're basically you get um, a
waste product that people don't know what to deal with
and would otherwise just throw away into landfill and they
pay you. Well, this was the original model I remember hearing.
They pay you to take your raw material, and then
you process it and churn out, uh, protein for pet

(07:05):
food or, or cattle feed or whatever it is, plus fertilizer. Yeah.

S2 (07:10):
So we we managed waste. That's difficult to process. So yes,
it's still it's the customer still needs to pay for
that to be managed because it's a difficult waste stream. Yeah.

S1 (07:21):
And it saves the planet because you've got 97% less emissions. Yes. Yeah. No.
That's great. Uh, and so maybe, um, uh, I realized
I haven't gone back to ask you the founder question, but, like,
where are you at? Because there were there were some
good news last year in 2023. So you got some
pretty high name installations underway. So like tell us about progress.

S2 (07:45):
So we now in, uh, six sites in four states. Um,
our weather park site is still, um, moving through the
day process. So it's somewhat delayed, but um, we've.

S1 (07:57):
That's in Sydney.

S2 (07:58):
So that's in Sydney. Um, we've got some new sites
coming into Western Australia and uh, Victoria and Queensland this year,
and then also some regional New South Wales sites, um,
and three more Sydney sites coming. So yeah, we despite
the delay and.

S1 (08:17):
The sites different sorry different model for the sites. So
do you own and operate them or do you do
your customers or operate.

S2 (08:23):
Um, some of them are on site of the customers.
Some of them are um, us, um, setting up new
establishments with councils. Um, so all within the same business
model that we use, um, but just different new customers
or new sites for existing customers. Um, I think the
biggest thing is, you know, last year we were three,

(08:44):
you know, three sites in in the beginning of the
last year, we were three sites in two states, and
we moved, uh, as we predicted, through to six sites
in four. And so, yeah, the set goal for this
year is, is just as big and probably as audacious.
And so strap in folks, it's going to get exciting.

S1 (09:03):
No, it it's pretty exciting. Um, and let's go back
to this founder question then, because, I mean, and I
don't want to cover the ground that you and fed
and talked about three years ago, but I suspect a
lot of listeners will not have heard that one. So
I think it's important that we do, uh, but maybe
a bit more about the, the genesis to this, uh,
because I think you were a sheep farm originally and
now you're a maggot farmer. I don't know how you

(09:24):
think about this or talk about it, but you are an,
you know, very hands on founder. So tell us a
bit more about that.

S2 (09:30):
Yeah. I think I didn't realize in the beginning that
that that not all founders are as hands on. Um,
but then also, I think the challenge is that not
all businesses require founders to be as hands on. So,
you know, I know a lot of my peers in
software startups who by now, you know, we all start
at the same time. But just the evolution of their

(09:51):
organization compared to mine is very different. Um, and so,
you know, you they're still they're now sort of basically
raising money, working with investors and doing high level BD.
And I, I think the other thing that's certainly different
or where it needed me to be different, was how
much money we raised. So by and large, when you

(10:13):
think about climate tech companies, um, and certainly with this
stage of traction, um, that we've got, we've not raised
a lot of funds. So when you compare us to
the closest competitor in internationally, I think we've raised 20
million Australian and the closest competitor to us in like
commercialization and traction has raised probably over 70 million, uh, euro.

(10:36):
And so, you know, there's been a need for me
to stay a little bit more operational, um, in these
last sort of five years of Gutierrez evolution. Um, just
because we don't have funds to put that many more
layers between myself and the rubber meeting the road, both
metaphorically and physically and frankly, when you're working with, um,

(10:59):
the sort of dynamic of the business that we have,
which is, you know, we're not all in one room or,
you know, either engineers and scientists. We have literally from
entry level through to super sophisticated scientists and mechanical engineers
and whatever. And so you've got a very diverse workforce
at gotra, which means that you've got, uh, different predictability

(11:23):
around how that workforce rotates or moves, um, what its
life cycle is going to be. So, yeah, truck drivers, uh,
often not long term employees. And so sometimes or if they've,
they've had a delay in another area and we've got
to get a truck on the road and they need
someone with a medium rigid license, there are only a

(11:43):
few of those in the organization, and I happen to
be one of them. So if you're not going to
put in and help when those things need to take place,
then yeah, I don't know if you need to be
being a CEO at all.

S1 (11:56):
And when did you last drive the truck or it's a.

S2 (11:59):
Sign potentially, of how much we've grown in the last
six months for sure. I haven't driven the truck. I
don't think since probably October of last year.

S1 (12:07):
Uh, you don't? Yeah. Well done. Yeah, yeah. That's progress.
That's good. I used to love it when you saw
Olympia behind this massive truck wheel on the zoom.

S2 (12:16):
Yeah, I've got to figure out how to make it
my background. So it feels like people feel like that's
why it should be.

S1 (12:24):
Um, it was interesting. I might just deviate down this this, um,
track for a sake. So the capital efficiency of Aussie
founders in terms of progress per, uh, invested, invested dollar,
like a lot of international VCs say that we are
amongst the best in the world. Yeah. Uh, and I
think what you just said there kind of alludes to that, but,

(12:45):
I mean, what you and what you're doing is hard.
I mean, you got deep tech, you've got hardware, you've
got biology. I mean, there's a whole bunch of tough
stuff in there. Yeah. Uh, I mean, like any. Can
you just maybe unpack that a little more around how
efficient you've been with the capital that you've raised?

S2 (13:01):
I can there's even a spreadsheet now that actually talks
to it. Um, look, I yeah. So in 2018, we
raised $1.2 million. And after two years we had a
prototype TRL six that cost me $650,000 to build. My
CapEx spend was sorry. My operational spend for those two

(13:25):
years was 175,000. Um, so yeah, that's that's how efficient
I was in those two years. So, um, those two
years got us a contract into Lendlease, Barangaroo, tower two
and so on that we raised an $8 million round.
And in those two years, 2020 to 2022, um, the

(13:45):
cost of the mid went down to 560,000 for the
first one. We got it down after that. Um, operational
spend over two years with 3.3 million. So again fairly
fairly light on um on what we, where we spend
our money and what we did. And so by 2023
to 2024, um, yeah. The first the chips are now

(14:08):
110,000 and operational spend is 3.8. So only went up
500,000 on operational spend. But from 2022 to 23, um
was 770% growth.

S1 (14:27):
And you did raise another round last year that was announced.
I think it was August 10th million.

S2 (14:32):
So we did a, uh, safe of ten. Um, and
so that put us to that sort of got us
to the 23, 24 timeline. So yeah. So we've we've
done jumps of insane amounts. So tons processed first two years,
50 tons processed second two years through 3200 tons processed

(14:52):
last year, 10,000. And so that's huge. Yeah. So we're
not where. Yeah. The insane, um, revenue increases based on
how much money we've raised.

S1 (15:04):
But yeah. Yeah. So normally when you do a safe
run like that, it's a precursor to, uh, sort of
priced bigger rounds. So is that the stage you're at?

S2 (15:12):
That's where we're at. You don't. Yeah. Right. So it's
time to sort of turn on, um, operational excellence and
sort of take all the processes that we understand and
learned in this last sort of 4 or 5 years
of R&D and, and really turn the tap on because
there are not enough commercial organics processing facilities across Australia

(15:35):
to meet sort of climate goals, but certainly not some
of the landfill bans. And then even more importantly, um,
the landfills are filling up. So if we can even
remotely contribute to that, um, it's it's well, in the
realms of $1 billion business. And so it's the timing
couldn't be much better. So I think yeah, like we

(15:56):
get asked a lot because it's modular. A lot of um, investors,
particularly in Australia, will go we're not really sure how
it gets big. Right. And and it's which is an interesting, um,
assessment and sort of something I think about a lot
because it means I'm not explaining it very well. But, um,
I think when you think about a company that can
literally adapt to a customer need or a demographic need

(16:19):
at will, um, whereas existing waste management technology, even the
new stuff that's getting funded cannot and has to be
in centralized facilities. Um, how big do you want me
to be? Is the real answer. And so yeah, yeah,
time to grow.

S1 (16:35):
And and how how are you managing your time? Because,
I mean, it's tough being a founder and you've got
a business to run, but, uh, raising a round like
this is going to be pretty time consuming. So, you know,
I presume you're like 80% in fundraising and 60% and
operational was the balance.

S2 (16:54):
Yeah. Look, we've we've had to stay pretty lean on executives, um,
and on team. So we're still operating with a fairly
small team compared to how big we are and how
many sites we operate. Um, and our executive team is
incredibly small, so we're pretty flat. Um, which means that,
you know, everybody's pulling still and everyone's putting their attention

(17:17):
where it needs to be. But our team, you know,
I don't know, a team that can do more with
less than our team. And, um, we all just sort
of move through it by helping each other. And, you know,
we one of our biggest values is we're all in
the boat together. So, um, one of the odd things
about when people sort of come to work with us

(17:38):
or do help advisory, they're like, always just try and
talk to me. And I'm like, no, that'll be this
person's job. And then they find themselves talking to sort
of an entry level grad, um, who is helping with
something quite critical, but where that's sort of how we've
got to operate at the moment. So, yeah, look, the
lights are always on and, uh, yeah, I can neither

(17:59):
confirm nor deny if I'm getting any sleep.

S1 (18:02):
Yeah. No, no, I mean, I might just squeeze you
a little bit on, on this one just because I
think a lot of founders who are going through it
wonder how the hell are going to deal with it. So,
I mean, literally, how do you prioritize your time between
fundraising and operational hands on stuff?

S2 (18:20):
There is no way to actually fundamentally prioritize it, because
you can't negotiate what becomes a priority in one or
the other, um, in its evolution. So operationally, you may
have a really great plan in place. And, and then,
I don't know, a flood happens at your headquarter office
and then the team doesn't have XYZ to manage. And yes,

(18:43):
that has happened now three times in the last 12 months. Um,
and you've got to reprioritize your time that you thought
you would have to work on a deck or a
presentation or a speech and, and go to work and
help do something else. And so I think what you've
got to try and figure out and what I think
maybe I'm going to speak to investors on this one

(19:04):
as well, is and particularly existing investors whose founders are
going through, um, their raises now, um, where I found
the best avenues to get myself support or get myself
time is when my investors, you know, the good ones,
are actually recognizing where I need help and either stepping

(19:25):
into that void or. Finding time, or finding another resource,
or finding some support or recognizing, hey, if I've got
this request for this individual that potentially I might have
to do some of this heavy lifting because of what
all they're managing. And I think that's actually a sign
of where we're at right now, particularly for climate tech companies. Right.
Like too many good climate tech companies went to the

(19:47):
wall last year because they didn't have support early and often,
or it wasn't recognized early and often just how momentous
arrays was going to be for a startup in that climate.
And we can have lots of chats about whether or
not they were good companies or not. But I'm sorry
that you can't actually make those determinations as easily early

(20:10):
as with climate tech as you do with software, and
we can find about that in the comment section later. But, um,
I think I think the biggest thing, you know, is
that a founder needs permission. And largely when they're going
through a raise, they're going to need that permission from
their from their existing investors because their team is going
to try to give them permission. Um, but their investors

(20:33):
are going to expect them to deliver a very polished
raise process. And so if you are struggling, you've got
to be able to reach out to your investors and
get help. We're on areas where you've got to turn operationally,
and they can take the baton for some other stuff. So, um,
for me this year, I think I've been working from

(20:53):
home a little bit more often. So that gives me
a little extra time on the front and back end
to get some stuff done. It also means that I just,
I don't get pulled into as many smaller things as
I would if I was in the office just by default. Um,
and that's not then people pulling on my time. It's
just like, I want to have lunch with my team.

(21:14):
I want to say hello to people. Um, it's it's
more distracting to be in an office sometimes when you're
trying to get shit done. Um, and I think just
I made a commitment to myself, um, because last year
was a particularly tough year for me personally, um, to
ride my horse at least five times a week. Um, I'm,

(21:35):
I'm sitting right at seven days a week, much to
his disgust. Um, except when I've been traveling. And so, um,
that's done a shit ton for my my well-being. It's
very difficult to make time to do things that require
any kind of energy when you're working on a raise,
because it's so tiring and you start to not want

(21:58):
to work out or do anything that requires effort because
it's exhausting. And and then you get tired and then,
you know, you can't work on that thing late at
night or whatever. But forcing myself to to do that and, um,
making it not optional has been really helpful to my,
my mental health. So that's been good.

S1 (22:16):
Yeah. I mean, I think this is such an important
comment and thanks for being open about that. But, I mean,
looking after yourself and to a large extent as a founder,
leaning on others. I mean, I know you've been part
of the innovation based summit, which is the late stage
founder community. I mean, has that been helpful in terms
of being able to, to lean on on your peers? Well, Plug's.

S2 (22:36):
Yes, it has. Yeah. Like for me, I've had, you know,
some of my most meaningful experiences have been at those
summit events. It's been difficult for me to get to them,
to be fair, because it's super hard to when you
make those decisions to go to those events, um, you're
making a commitment to go and to then and then,
but then you feel the pressure of also having to

(22:58):
try and do some work. And so taking the time
to just give to yourself feels difficult, feels selfish. But
every time I've done it, it's been the right thing. Um,
and it's it's certainly given me, um. It's. Yeah. Refilled
the bucket made me feel get perspective because I'm with
other founders who are dealing with similar shit. You know,

(23:18):
you're not alone. Um, it's sometimes really easy to believe
that you're the only person going through this stuff, or
you're the only person who has challenges like you do,
and that's just not true. But you live in your
own bubble. And so, um, getting getting peer to peer
interactions is really important for sure.

S1 (23:37):
Uh, and this isn't an invitation to sort of sledge
the competition, but, I mean, there's been there's companies out
there that maybe not done quite as well. I mean,
I noticed that birdie, which is a Blackbird tech company sect,
30 people late last year. And, you know, no one
likes to see that at all. I mean, it's it's
just tough. I mean, but any comments in that one?

(23:58):
Was that their product or their team or a minute. Yeah. No,
we should be.

S2 (24:02):
No, no it's okay I'm criticizing.

S1 (24:04):
It's not no criticism.

S2 (24:05):
No it's not about criticism. And I don't know enough
about the organization to have that insight as to what
what went wrong. Uh, all I know is how much
they raised and the ambition that Phoebe and the team had,
which was, you know, relentlessly pursued and should be, um,
should be championed, but you can't. You cannot run a

(24:27):
business like this with five verticals and deliver those kinds
of outcomes without being funded. And and you can't do
climate tech without funding. And I think everyone's going to
start to actually recognize that you can't that that is
that you look at how much money they raised, that
it was a standard model that we've all seen in
the Australian ecosystem. And it's like, oh, we give you
a little bit here, 20% give you a little bit

(24:49):
more and we'll just see hedge our bets. And it's
like you're on the back of that. You don't. And
and in a hardware company of that kind, the kind
of companies that we're running, like you can't give them
a little bit because it like I said, for me
it's like 1.2 million and managed to do all of
the R&D required and keep the organization running and hold

(25:11):
a lease, have customers, which we did from day one.
All of the things that we managed to do and
only spend hundred and $75,000 in those two years on opex, like,
I'm not sure how people think, how much like with
I don't know if people understand what that was. That's
not four dudes in a we work. That's a team

(25:31):
of six in a warehouse trying to do stuff. Right.
And we literally didn't buy anything new. We bought all
this stuff and refurbished it, but we were expected to
deliver very commercial outcomes from those trials. And so you
can't fund climate tech companies and then like, like they're
software startups and then they're going to get 10,000 users.

(25:54):
And then you can add water to that in its
growth stage doesn't it's just not how it works. We've
got to absolutely reimagine and re-evaluate what it means to
fund climate tech. High risk comes out. Yeah. So I mean.

S1 (26:08):
So as well as, I mean, as well as you
being like almost uniquely ambitious and, you know, I'd say
talent talented. Uh, your cap table is pretty impressive, too.
I mean, do you want to run through some of
the people on there and who's backed you?

S2 (26:21):
Yeah. So we've got, uh, ramps and Giant Leap, tenacious ventures,
ML investments out of Singapore under story. Um, we've got
flying Fox. So yeah, like a huge amount of really amazing, um,
Australian VCs. And again now with investments in Singapore that

(26:42):
have just been, um, yeah. Like I would not be
here without those funds. They've been just always backed from
the beginning and and backed with everything I have.

S1 (26:52):
Yeah. And I mean all uh, all of them, I
don't know, a couple of them, but, um, all the
Aussie ones you mentioned are awesome. Yeah. I mean, great investors.
You didn't mention grok.

S2 (27:01):
Oh, yeah. And grow. Sorry.

S1 (27:04):
You know, and grok because that's kind of the, uh,
the I guess this not celebrity because that suggests there's
no talent there. But, I mean, Mike Cannon-Brookes is a
startup celebrity as well as being an awesome guy and
an awesome investor. I mean, he has been, you know,
he's leant in with you and and has helped you,
from what I understand. Is that right?

S2 (27:24):
The, uh, yeah. So in the early days, the team, um,
we had quite a bit of support through from them
for sure. Yeah. Yeah. I don't mind, um, personally myself. So.

S1 (27:37):
Yeah, I mean, he's certainly a fan. Is is is
what I could say. All right. Um, let me ask
one more thing. Uh, you were Canberra's Australian of the
year last year. What does that mean?

S2 (27:49):
Not a lot. You get to say it out loud
when people are annoying you and you want to try
and get something done. And then. And then you feel
the intolerable embarrassment of being the person that you.

S1 (28:06):
Um.

S2 (28:07):
Uh, what should we talk about? To get.

S1 (28:10):
Yeah. Got it.

S2 (28:12):
Look, I think yeah, I think we had it, like,
totally reset. So you can. No, no.

S1 (28:17):
Let's go again. I mean, I'm keen to hear about
the team. Yeah. Uh, and you're working style and you
know what phase you're at. So, I mean, if you
go into the next phase and raise a big series, which,
you know, it's going to be tens of millions, I'm sure, um,
it's going to move you into a new phase. Uh,
but I suspect that no is the answer. But, I mean,
how do you think about R&D, which you've kind of

(28:39):
been doing for the last few years versus sales and execution?
I mean, does that balance change once you get to
that series?

S2 (28:46):
No, it'll be technically a series B for us. I
wish I'd known earlier to start calling things C plus
and plus some things, but tech is a third round.
But technically it's a B. Um, you know, for us.

S1 (28:59):
I mean, it's all semantics. I mean, the round, uh,
letters just tend to mean how expensive your lawyers are.

S2 (29:04):
Yeah, it's I, I still.

S1 (29:06):
Have the letter. The more expensive.

S2 (29:08):
I still haven't figured it out, I think. I think the, um.
You know for us, R&D can't stop because we've we've
really only just touched the surface on what we can achieve.
I think what changes is the type of R&D we're pursuing.
So the mechanical side, um, works as described on the box.

(29:28):
But now, you know, your level of autonomy, data collection, intelligence, um,
is the next phase. And then similarly on the insect side,
the kinds of things that they're going to be consuming,
what kinds of insects we use those sorts of things
as the next evolution. Um, so R&D doesn't stop. It's
just probably a more commercially applied rather than the deep
tech stuff, like, will it actually work? Um, and so

(29:51):
it's just sort of the next step up from where
we are, but, you know, to stay relevant for our
customers that the R&D piece won't change or slow down. Um,
but yes, we are moving well and truly into growth
phase and, um, building that out. So, um, for us,
it is going to be a pretty big change for
the organization. We've in the executive team at the moment.

(30:13):
We've got, you know, former Suez, uh, C-suite individuals. We've
got former C-suite heads of from, um, space, uh, organizations. Um,
and then black soldier fly. Um, and so, you know,
having a team that light and getting them filled out
with sort of some more C-suite folks and people who

(30:34):
understand what it means to, you know, strategically grow a
business of this kind, um, is where we're heading, which
will be a lot of fun. And I'm looking forward
to having that capability in the team. It's going to
be really exciting.

S1 (30:45):
And will this next round allow you to go overseas? Uh,
so at this time next year, where are you.

S2 (30:52):
Always overseas, as always on the marker. But there's such
a big market in Australia at the moment. Um, you know,
there's the focus has got to be expansion and taking
market share in Australia. But I think yeah, we continue
to look at Singapore. And I was over there recently
discussing things with a variety of different stakeholders. And um,
and we also have a couple of customers in the

(31:14):
US who are ready when we are. And so, um,
for me right now, though, you know, with the size
of the team and what we've got going on, we're
just keeping our heads down and focusing on delivering where
we're at and what we're doing.

S1 (31:36):
Do you think Aussie founders in general are a little
too eager to to go overseas? Because, look, it's tough.
I mean, trying to launch in a new country is
incredibly difficult.

S2 (31:45):
I think we ignore the fact that Australian founders have
a glass ceiling above them. Right? So if you don't
get a if you don't get a raise away with Blackbird,
main sequence or square peg, maybe one of them, I
guess you could throw in there. Then you you have
to go overseas sooner or later. And as soon as
you go to the US investors, the first thing they'll

(32:06):
ask you is when will you be here? So I
don't think they want to, but there is a belief,
you know, outside of, uh, Australia, if you start with
the US investors, which is where most people start, the
first question you were asked is when will you be international? Um,
and they don't consider Australia a big enough market to bother.
So I think that's a barrier. And I think that's

(32:27):
why you see a lot of Australian founders saying it.
It's also, you know, it tends to be a requirement for, uh,
certain stages of Australian funds from their existing investors. We
must be showing that we're going overseas. Right. Because the
belief is that the Australian market is not big enough.
I don't think founders make that decision willingly. To be fair.
I think that's something that's expected of us.

S1 (32:48):
Yeah. Interesting. Um, I'm keen to. I know before we
switch the mics on, I asked you, did you read
the latest Australian startup funding report? You just want me
to say vagina? No, no, but I know you, uh,
you you prayed yourself on, uh, on on on sort
of articulating that now and again. Um, yeah. No, I'm

(33:10):
keen to like two questions about the startup funding report.
So one, which is probably the more important one is
just around gender. And then let's maybe answer that. And
I just want to ask you about deep tech. So
like the stats around um, gender and the diversity of
the outcomes in that report were not great.

S2 (33:27):
Discussed in.

S1 (33:28):
Any. Um, care to comment?

S2 (33:29):
No. I think we should be ashamed, and I can't
fathom that anyone was speaking into that report without talking
to that issue. And I think what's what I'm starting
to see is that founders are largely becoming, uh, done with,
you know, you can't you cannot ignore the investment pattern
that we are seeing and the behaviour that investments are

(33:54):
letting happen. If I wore burkini on a jet and
fluffed around like an idiot, I wouldn't be funded. And
I know that's true because of the feedback that I've
received from investors about my saying vagina on podcasts. So,
you know, if I can't say a word that's actually
common nomenclature and speaks to my gender, then, um, and,

(34:16):
but another individual can behave like an absolute press and
fly about and still be funded. I don't I don't
know what people expect us to think. Um, but it
shouldn't be good. And, and I think what we've got
to actually turn into as a country is that these
statistics are actually well below, so that even worse than
any other country in the world, there's a reason TechCrunch

(34:37):
is doing a bunch of reporting on the Australian environment
at the moment. Um, yeah. There's nothing that we should
be feeling about it except complete embarrassment. And if we
don't see a change, then we know that the status
quo suits certain organisations just fine. So I think we've
got to stop tolerating the vanity metrics or, you know,

(34:58):
incubator metrics as fun metrics or any of the other
things that people are using right now to validate, um,
because it's just seemingly impossible based on how many female
founders I'm mentoring, the Australian ecosystem that you can have
multiple male funded, uh. Organizations funded in a row. Um,

(35:18):
and the premise is either a there weren't enough women
coming through. Just call bullshit on without even trying or
be what I call and with absolutely no disrespect to
that team, the Canada defense. So any time we're ready,
we can stop using Canva as a as a rationale

(35:39):
for the fact that Australia invests in female founders because
and again, without any disrespect to that team, but they
are being used as an example, um, of, of investment and,
and that was stated on a panel I listened to
recently last year where it was like, you know, literally
the quote in statement was last time, of course, we

(36:02):
invest in female founders. Last time I checked, Melanie Perkins
was a female. That's disgusting. And it shouldn't be a
statement both out of respect to her and her work,
but also out of respect to the millions of other
women who are trying to be funded. Like you don't
get a token and say that's enough. So yeah.

S1 (36:20):
Yeah, yeah. Look, it is an amazing outlier, you know?
So let's not, um, suggest that she hasn't done an
incredible job with Canva. But you're right. Like you can't
use that as the token. Hey, we're fine because we've
got male and Canva.

S2 (36:34):
Yeah, but that's what I'm saying. Like, it's absolutely. I
hate having to use it as the example because it
feels denigrated and it shouldn't. But we cannot continue to
use 1 or 2 women. And I get used in
other smaller, much smaller circles. But you can't use me
as an example either or any of the other female

(36:54):
founders who have managed to claw their way through to
a resolution or a funding round as an example, because
the numbers are still too low, based on the comparative
numbers of females who are founding businesses and starting businesses
in in seed stage pre-seed stage at the moment, like
you're just not looking.

S1 (37:13):
Yeah, yeah. I think, you know, this is one of
the things that I think is, is amazing about you.
I mean, like you're a sort of not I was
going to say minority and a minority because you're doing
deep take as well as being a woman phone. Yeah.
And both of them are quite unusual. I mean, and so,
I mean, maybe let's open up the conversation around that

(37:33):
deep tech piece as well. Yeah. I mean, look, it's tough.
I mean, like the the areas that you're playing in
are incredibly difficult. Um, I mean, how much of, uh,
hindrance has it been, you think being a woman in
this space.

S2 (37:45):
I just if any for Asians. I was sort of like,
took a more 90s approach to it where I was like, oh,
you know, I've just got to work harder to, you know,
play the game, whatever. But, like, nobody understands what the
game is anymore because we're still we're still looking for
source metrics in climate and hardware companies. We're still trying

(38:06):
to validate based on founders that worked in the past.
And it's like, well, if a founder was successful in
the past and now you're saying, well, I'll apply that
rationale to the the archetype of the family that works
in the future. It's like for deep tech that doesn't
even translate because the founder for deep tech is imagining
a world that doesn't even exist, but that, like so

(38:29):
you can't use the past to predict the future in
that way. And so you've got just this, like layering
upon layering of unconscious bias that makes it difficult. And
so after a while, and particularly last year, um, I
settled on a few working groups about women in startups
that just got incredibly disillusioned by what the reality of

(38:49):
what I'm looking at, which is no fun. Well, very
few funds want to admit out loud that they have
an unconscious bias that they cannot resolve. Um, they we're
seeing women walked off boards. We're seeing women removed from
their seats. We're seeing women get to a certain stage
of funding and be just physically unable to cross the Rubicon.
And and at that point, at some point, you've got

(39:12):
to recognize that the sheer limited number of women that
are making it are an anomaly. Not not not an attribute.
And we've got to change something. Deep tech does not
behave the same way as software. Again, happy to argue
with you in the comments. It doesn't evolve. It doesn't grow.
It doesn't change. You cannot fund it the same way.

(39:34):
You cannot expect the founder to be the same. And so,
you know, when we think about what it what is
required to engage with deep tech, we can't we can't
use the models of the past. But we are and
and so we end up with a bunch of pivots and,
you know, stuff that doesn't get commercialized. Or we fund
its commercialization by funding its customer. Like, yeah, we're in

(39:59):
a roundabout. We never get to see it. Not not
for nothing. If you if it's climate tech, you've got
seven years to figure it out. So I don't know,
seven years. Well, we have ten years before 2030 which
was considered a tipping point. So this is the decisive
decade currently. If you look at the weather at the moment,
I would suggest potentially have already gone. But yeah.

S1 (40:21):
I think the tipping point is over. I mean, I
think the North Atlantic Ocean currents are shutting down the
West Antarctic ice shelves. About what are we waiting for then?

S2 (40:29):
Ian?

S1 (40:30):
Oh, yeah. I'm with you. Seriously? It's it's. Yeah. I mean, look,
this is the impossible question, but if you were, uh,
if you had a magic wand, what would you do
to to fix these issues?

S2 (40:45):
It's hard to know, right? Because. Yeah. And then it
sounds like a cop out because I've had a lot
of spicy things to say. And now I'm like, I
don't know how to fix it. I think I think
systemic stuff is difficult. So the first thing you have
to do is wake up every morning and understand that
it's true. And so at the point where you feel
like you're at woke Austin, maybe drive another 100km and

(41:05):
park there because that's the amount of sort of mindfully, mindfully,
the mindfulness that you'll have to do to get past
an unconscious bias. So at very first, I think, you know,
all of us have to start to go, okay, how
do I, as a woman, present myself in, in, in
a boardroom that maybe I could amend, change or do

(41:26):
differently to maybe speak the language in a way that
makes sense? How much is that actually just maybe not
doing a great job? How much is it associated with
my gender? Like sort my stuff out? And then I
think of the fun side. It's it's got to be
better than a metric. So are you going where the
women are? Are you actively trying to understand why a
woman will explain her business so incredibly differently to a

(41:50):
man just by default? Uh, are you you understanding how
you digest information? Women are naturally more storytellers. Is that
the problem? I don't know, like, there's a range of
ways you can confront an unconscious bias in a commercial
sense and revamp how you think about it. I think
the biggest challenge for the Australian ecosystem at the moment

(42:10):
is that glass ceiling. So you've got really big funds
that invest really early to really late, and then you've
got some really strong mid, mid, small to mid sized funds. Um,
you end up a bit stuck in that ecosystem because
you've if you go with a lead that's small then

(42:32):
like is not for deep tech, you're going to have
to go out of town um, later because you won't
be able to get the big four to come on. Um,
or you can try and get the big four and
hope that you meet their metrics to carry forward. And
that's not a criticism, but we all know how it works. Right.
And that's that's generally how this ecosystem is playing out. Um,

(42:54):
and so I think that's the bit that I would
try to reimagine or find a way to work around
or be more collaborative or, I don't know, just do
something different because that's where our that's where we're getting
all we're getting all blocked up.

S1 (43:10):
Yeah. And so in the startup funding report they had
this category called deep tech. You know, and that was
kind of down at the bottom end of the hype cycle. Or,
you know, there's very few deals in there. And I
kind of struggled with that because I even thought about
gotra in that context. And you probably wouldn't have been
called a deep tech company. You'd have been either a
climate tech or agtech, you know, so like how many

(43:34):
deep tech company and then the other one that kind
of annoyed me was they lumped in space with defense. Now, um,
garlic's like, we want to invest in space, but we
don't want to invest in defense. So like we do
an investment there and it looks like we're supporting the
defense industry. Yeah, there's I don't know. So just the categorization. Yeah.

S2 (43:52):
The categories are difficult. Like deep tech I think has
now become like something that like. There's a potential of
something that requires a subtle level of R&D to get
across line, but like, that's climate tech in a day, right?
Like anything that's new, that's going to address the new
world is deep tech. Um, but I think it also

(44:14):
depends on how, you know, how your team fronts sometimes
to how they present it. So, you know, for for
you to be considered new tech often feels like you
need to have a scientist or an engineer on your
team as a founding member or coming out of a, uh,
an academia or SRO type thing. Um, you know, all

(44:35):
of those things are difficult. But it's also, again, Ian,
we're looking backwards to look forwards. SpaceX has historically been
considered defense. It's now telecommunications. So or and other things.
But how are we still categorizing space as telecommunications as
as defense. It means we're not actually realizing how fast

(44:57):
our world is evolving and how these technologies are actually
literally changing our future in front of our eyes. And
we're still just using these old modalities to assess how
we move forward. So I think it's super difficult. Um,
and hats off to everyone in the ecosystem that's trying
to solve for it. But I think we're right now,
from my perspective, and certainly from a lot of the

(45:19):
founders that I work with and know, it feels very
much that a lot of the funds are all in
their separate corners, and we don't have a more collaborative
Australian type of an approach to how we lift the
ecosystem collectively and ensure its success, regardless of the fund

(45:39):
that funds it. Um, and I think that way, if
we thought about those things, I think Australia could be
way a really unique opportunity, a really vibrant opportunity and
an opportunity that's different to others, but not in a
way that, you know, doesn't show an economic return in
investment in Australia, but that that actually enhances what we

(46:00):
can do down here and the stuff that we do
really well.

S1 (46:04):
Yeah. No. Here. Here to that. That's, uh, that's great
insight there. Uh, okay. Like two more, uh, topics. Uh,
and then I want to jump to the quickfire round.
So first one, uh, I so like you think about
hype cycle in the investment world and I it's it's
super hot. Uh, you know, personally, I kind of feel
that it's a bit more genuine than some of the

(46:24):
previous ones, like the sort of Web3 or blockchain or
whatever came before that. Um, what's your view? And I.
And are you using it internally? Yeah.

S2 (46:34):
I, I'm just a bit over fads again. Look, I think,
I think ChatGPT is going to do some really interesting stuff.
I think it's going to eat a bunch of different
things that we haven't thought about. Um, personally, I don't
want to imagine a world where I'm. I'm reading content
that was written by a machine to get me to
do something that was written by machine, like I. There's

(46:55):
a bit of old school ness going on in my
world where I get wrapped around the axle on that stuff.
I think there's absolutely good uses for it, but to
me it's it's again, it's just a tool of a thing.
It's not an actual it's not a machine that does anything.
It it doesn't save anyone, solve anyone. Like, sure, it'll

(47:16):
run a bunch of algorithms and maybe we we understand
the thing better. Great. Guess what? You're still going to
need a machine to action all of that data and Intel.
And so I just find the constant obsession with software
just just odd. I just yeah, I don't get it.
I want us to focus on things that actually do

(47:37):
stuff with the data, or create the data or use
the data to actually affect change, rather than another software
algorithm that needs humans to interact with it so that
it can interact with itself. I just don't get it.

S1 (47:51):
Um. All right. So last question. Um, is around again,
back to the founders. Um, and, you know, one of our, uh,
our new investor at deluxe, Cam Cavanaugh, um, sent this, um,
post around on WhatsApp talking about it was iconoclastic founders. Now,
if you're not sure what that means, it was kind

(48:11):
of like quirky founders with a bit of a glint
in their eye. Uh, and we do reference you in this,
and I'll take you back to the, um, this moment.
But we were in Thredbo, uh, about two years ago
at the summit retreat. So we took, I think, about
30 founders away to to Thredbo to, uh, you know,
just hang out with each other and learn from each other. Um,

(48:35):
and one of the nights we we got to know
each other, and we played this game. Two truths in
a lie. Uh, and I got to admit, there was
a few margaritas involved, but, uh, I can't remember that. What?
The three of you, there's two across the table, and
your story was. I was the Kansas coleslaw wrestling champion,
North Carolina. And we were like, uh, North Carolina. Sorry. Um,

(48:58):
and we were like, well, that can't be true. So
we started asking questions about it, and your answers were
just so specific. But the answer is it's true. Um,
which I found amazing. So I'd love to hear a
little bit about that. But it did get us thinking.
And this the post that cam sent around was pretty
much to that point. It's like the best founders have

(49:19):
something quirky or impressive, or just there's a glint in
their eye or some discipline that just shows that they
can burst through walls in order to achieve their outcome.
So maybe tell us about the coleslaw wrestling. Uh, and
then touching the, uh, is is that the trait that
founders should have?

S2 (49:41):
I am fortunate to have had a very difficult life.
So I was poor and living in my car, and
I needed money. And there was $1,000. If you won
the wrestling and coleslaw, um, event. And so I actually
it's a little upside down. I didn't actually win it.
The reason why it was my lie, because I wasn't
the champion. I wrestled and I got, I got beaten

(50:02):
by the chocolate pudding champion of the beat. But it
was a it wasn't actually I wasn't actually beaten. I
held her down twice. Um, but it was actually a
setup because they never let anyone win. And this chick
was six foot four and they'd never seen anyone beat her.
And so she just would kept three other bucks and
they kept the rest. And so there was this big

(50:24):
uproar at Raleigh, uh, Raleigh radio the next day in, uh,
North Carolina with a bunch of good old boys curling
up and being like that goddamn Australian. She the one
that she she beat that girl. And so, um, but, yeah, I,
I wouldn't have wrestled in coleslaw, but I had no
money and I had no food, and I needed to
because I had a border collie and this four year

(50:45):
old living in a key area. So I think, you know.
I have a tenacity or an appearance of tenacity, because
my resilience to really shit times is higher, because the
worst of the worst day of my life is probably
worse than most people's. And I think that's why immigrants

(51:08):
probably tend to be founders, because they've come from, you know,
places where there's less or not as much fortune or privilege. Um,
they've had to struggle and fight for something and, or
their parents have. And so they have that sort of
past to them as a way of life. And so
there's a different way or an approach to what surviving

(51:31):
or making, making it means. Um, and I think, you know,
just fortunately, my misfortune has given me that, uh, that pragmatism. But, um,
you can't make it up, I think is the big one.
And I think that's where sometimes it gets a little
lost in the assessment of a founder. Um, you know,

(51:52):
tenacity isn't necessarily boldness. Um, it isn't necessarily brashness or,
you know, being loud or vivacious. It's sometimes the quiet
ones that'll get you. I'm not a quiet one. Let's
be real. But, um. No, but that, you know, I think. Yeah,
you can't you can't bottle that stuff.

S1 (52:14):
But do you think it is broadly true that? I mean,
I kind of think it is like the the best
founders have something about them that is a little bit different. Yeah,
you have.

S2 (52:24):
To because particularly in climate tech founded like imagine, a
climate tech founder has seen a world that nobody else
can see, a climate tech founders sitting in a black
swan event every day and imagining the solution that solves
for it. The problem with climate tech is that nobody
agrees what that future is. If you ask ten people

(52:45):
what a climate change world looks like, they'll give you
ten different answers based on a variety of different inputs.
But a climate tech founders looks forward and seeing the
future and found and determined a solution for that future.
And so they have to, but in some regard, not
only be a contrarian, which is somewhat easy if you

(53:07):
want to be, but they also have to be resolute
to that belief and a doggedness to knowing that that's true. And,
and and then I know that what's been most difficult
is the ability to believe that you are right in
the face of a thousand no's, a thousand people who

(53:29):
have stopped believing in you and pulled the plug or
backed away or whatever. Um, and then you've got to
somehow go, they're wrong. All of them, nay, singular, still right,
so still tenacity. And somehow that that specialness has got
to be about staying alive and staying true to that belief.

(53:51):
So yeah, they've got to be really fucking different.

S1 (53:54):
Yeah. Love it. Um. Thank you. All right. Um, and
and thank you for being you. I mean, like, I
think what you're doing for the community and for climate
change and for women founders and deep tech founders is incredible. So, uh,
you know, huge fan of what you're doing, Olympia. Um,
if if someone wants to find out more or get
a job or, uh, do anything else, we're working to

(54:16):
find things easiest.

S2 (54:18):
Or you can get me on whatever. Cosmo.

S1 (54:23):
Yeah, or just Google Olympia. There's probably not too many
of you.

S2 (54:26):
Know, I'm actually outranked. The neighbor's chick called Olympia. Now,
on their you go search, which is nice.

S1 (54:34):
You are the only Olympia I know anyone.

S2 (54:36):
That matters in.

S1 (54:38):
Yeah. That's right. Um, now, we should do the quick
fire round. I didn't actually check what you'd said before feeding,
so maybe the questions are slightly different.

S2 (54:47):
Yeah.

S1 (54:48):
Oh, you got some new ones. Right. Great. So let's
let's get some recommendations. So, uh, are you a book reader?
If so, what would you recommend?

S2 (54:54):
Uh, I always recommend women who run with the Wolves. Um,
I can't remember the woman's name it writes about. I
read the damn thing at least once a year. And
for any female, if you want to understand women and
you understand, or you're a woman and want to understand yourself,
knock yourself out.

S1 (55:11):
Women that run with the wolves. I will check that, um, podcast.
Do you listen to podcast?

S2 (55:16):
Uh, I can't go past authentic. Uh agtech. So what?

S1 (55:21):
Oh that's Sarah. Sarah snorts. Yeah. She's cool. Yeah, yeah, yeah. No,
she is a great investor and a great person. Uh.
News source. What do you use to stay up to date? Zero.

S2 (55:32):
Still.

S1 (55:33):
Is that right? You are the first one. I think
that said that. And why? Why did you choose him?

S2 (55:39):
Al-Jazeera is the only journalistic, uh, medium right now that's
still pursuing, uh, the use of non quantitative language when
describing the news. So they won't use things they don't
they don't use the word like guerrilla or insurgent. They
just say combatants or um, and so they don't try
to lead you to an assumption through connotation.

S1 (56:02):
Interesting. We'll check that out. And productivity tool. How do
you stay efficient?

S2 (56:07):
Oh I hate productivity tools. Um, when we just moved
over to notion and I can't not like it. It's
actually really good. Yeah.

S1 (56:15):
Okay. Cool. Yeah. Uh, who is your favorite CEO?

S3 (56:20):
Tom Loeffler from.

S2 (56:21):
Hobart or Kate? No. Coming from, uh, black eye.

S1 (56:26):
Uh, yeah. Keaton is, uh, he's, uh, one of our
portfolio companies. Great guy.

S2 (56:30):
And absolutely super.

S1 (56:31):
Smart. Yeah, yeah. Love what he's doing. Um. Favorite app?
What do you do for fun in your phone?

S2 (56:40):
I, uh, escape from reality with Instagram, which I am ashamed,
ashamed to admit. Yeah. So gardening and horse riding Instagram
are cool.

S1 (56:53):
And, uh, are you a content producer, too? Like, can
we follow you and you can follow me?

S2 (56:57):
I'm not a I'm a terrible content producer. I'm the
world's greatest boya. Um, but yeah. Yeah.

S1 (57:05):
Um. Yeah. Interesting. I've got to admit, I've never got
into Instagram. I've tried it a few times. Maybe I
just need to be younger or less dorky, or some
old LinkedIn and a bit Twitter. For me.

S2 (57:16):
I think it's I think it's absolutely more about, um,
the just the dopamine scroll thing for me. Um, and yeah,
with a husband in Special Forces, I cannot be on TikTok, so.

S1 (57:31):
Right. Yeah, that's who we are.

S2 (57:33):
Yeah.

S1 (57:33):
I mean, I quite like the YouTube shorts. I mean,
they do a pretty good job, and they seem to know,
you know, what you like, you know, and it's just
weird how they kind of get on this. You know,
I watched one sumo wrestling match on YouTube, and then
for weeks, all I saw was sumo wrestling. Yeah. And,
you know, I quite liked it, but then I kind
of go over it, and I think YouTube realized I

(57:54):
was probably getting over it and then showed me Norwegian
death diving. Yeah. Which like so yeah.

S2 (57:59):
It's like the algorithms are annoying because it's like, I
don't want to be in an echo chamber. So again,
I usually I'll like scroll for about ten minutes and
then I'll try to change my own algorithm to something else,
which is always just a big fun game. So.

S1 (58:13):
Yeah. Exactly. Um, all right. We're almost there. Um, TV show,
what do you watch if you got time?

S2 (58:19):
Oh, God, I'm so predictable. Yellowstone is sort of the fave. Um,
has been the fave for the minute. Um, and and
I really, really like Vikings.

S1 (58:31):
What was that?

S2 (58:31):
Flying kicks Vikings.

S1 (58:33):
Oh Vikings.

S2 (58:35):
Right. Yeah. Unashamedly.

S1 (58:36):
And why did you like Vikings.

S2 (58:37):
I just I know a bit of aggression. It was
well done. It's well developed but mostly the aggression a
bit of violence just kept just shocked and not thinking
about go.

S1 (58:48):
Yeah those they were they were good conquerors the Vikings.

S2 (58:51):
Yeah for sure.

S1 (58:52):
Yeah I think I've got some Viking blood in.

S2 (58:54):
Oh look out. You know you'd have to be because
I came around and got knocked you guys all the time.

S1 (59:02):
And my mom's maiden name is Anderson, so she's kind
of definitely something. Interesting.

S2 (59:07):
Yeah. Cool. Yeah.

S1 (59:09):
All right, last question. Uh, and I don't know what
you answered the last time, but your TEDx topic, if
you got asked to do a Ted talk, what would
you talk about?

S2 (59:17):
Oh, God. Um. I think these days, I, I probably
talk about I always get stuck here because it's just always, like,
such a it feels to, um, so I, I reckon
it'd be something along the lines of like what, what

(59:37):
what building climate tech means and how to how to
think about building climate tech. It has to be something
along those lines these days. Yeah, I.

S1 (59:44):
Was going to say it's got to be in the climate. Oh,
it doesn't have to be. I mean, I would be
surprised if it wasn't in that space. Yeah. Um. All right, look,
we're approaching the era, so I think we are officially
out of time. Uh, I love doing it. Next time,
we should do it face to face. Yeah, that'd be fun.
Audio quality. It'd be better. Um. And it'd be nice
to get down to Canberra. You know, there's some great
deep tech startups in Canberra. Uh, awesome.

S2 (01:00:05):
Good ones. Yeah.

S1 (01:00:06):
Yeah. Including, um, you know, uh, yeah. Uh, from centre. Yeah.
So another, uh, woman led deep tech company, like, again,
it's a, uh, deluxe portfolio. So we saw them, uh,
when I was down there last week, and they're just
doing an amazing job. Yeah. Um, so big fan of hers. Um,
and Canberra, just generally. I mean, I think it's it's

(01:00:28):
a little under some, uh, in the startup arena, but
the Anu and some of those, um, uh, science schools
are churning out some great companies. Yeah, yeah.

S2 (01:00:39):
No, there's some really good stuff out there. It's going
to be a hell of a good year. We just
need to make sure they get funded.

S1 (01:00:46):
Yeah. Agreed.

S2 (01:00:47):
All right.

S1 (01:00:48):
Olympia. Thank you. Take care. I'll see you soon. And thanks,
everyone for tuning in.

All Episodes

E173 - Olympia Yarger, CEO & Founder, Goterra

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Crime Junkie

24/7 News: The Latest

Stuff You Should Know

.css-15opob5{left:0;position:absolute;top:0.8rem;} All Episodes

.css-14f5ked{margin:0;word-break:break-word;display:-webkit-box;-webkit-box-orient:vertical;box-orient:vertical;-webkit-line-clamp:2;overflow:hidden;}E173 - Olympia Yarger, CEO & Founder, Goterra