April 25, 2024 • 45 mins
This latest episode peels back the curtain on Simon's life—an odyssey marked by a dyslexic childhood and the loss of his mother to cancer. These pivotal moments not only shaped his character but also propelled him toward innovating the tangled world of healthcare. Simon walks us through the inception of HypaIQ and its mission to streamline the way medical professionals capture their critical insights.
Venturing into the startup arena without a background in software development could easily deter the bravest of souls, yet Simon's tale is a testament to perseverance. Simon stresses the importance of a balanced lifestyle for maintaining clarity and purpose amid the high stakes of entrepreneurship. His journey serves as a powerful reminder that complexity can often be best addressed with simple, elegant solutions.
You can connect with Simon via his LinkedIn profile or by visiting the HypaIQ website.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:01):
If we can't learn how to run properly and we can't be
taught at school something asbasic as running, it sort of
raises quite a lot of questionsabout everything, doesn't it?
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Absolutely.
And everything we are taught inschool and everything we are
not taught about school, I oftenthink about most of the biggest
things in life how to buy ahouse, how to fall in love, how
to grieve at a funeral are nevertaught in schools.
It's just something thatescapes our scholastic system.
Simon is the CEO and founder ofHyper IQ.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
If you're a startup founder and you're getting on a
bit, you are going to bevulnerable to heart disease and
heart attacks.
So unless you take it seriouslyto look after yourself, you are
for sure heading for trouble.
And so just get out, live yourlife.
You'll feel better, prouder,more motivated for that process.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
Hey everybody, it's Greg Sheehan.
Welcome to my podcast, whereyou will hear from a range of
guests, including those from thestartup world and those that
have had incredibly interestinglives and some stories to tell.
I would really appreciate it ifyou could hit the follow button
and share this amongst yourfriends, but, as you know, time
is limited, so let's get on withit and hear from our next guest
(01:23):
.
You know time is limited, solet's get on with it and hear
from our next guest.
My guest today is Simon Currie.
Simon is the CEO and founder ofHyper IQ and he will tell us a
little bit about what Hyper IQis all about as we get into it.
It's late in the evening UKtime and early morning New
Zealand time as we do thisrecording, so both of us are
bringing our best game for thispodcast.
(01:45):
I know, just in looking atSimon's background, it's going
to be a really interestingconversation.
Simon, welcome to the show.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Great to be here, Greg.
I've listened to some of yourpodcasts and you display a
remarkable level of emotionalintelligence and general
engagement.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
Oh, that's very kind.
That's very, very kind of you.
That's extremely kind.
I need to tell my aging parentsthat I'm doing okay these days,
despite, maybe, how I gotstarted at school.
Simon, I'd love to start thisepisode talking a bit about your
journey before you got startedwith HyperIQ, and how did you
get started into what ultimatelybecame what you're doing now?
(02:24):
Where did you get started intowhat ultimately became what
you're doing now?
Where did you get started inyour career.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
I'll give you a sort of brief synopsis, including a
bit of my childhood, I supposethe first significant medical
event in my life, because I'm inhealth class there's always a
connection the age of 16 weeksmy mother somehow managed to die
of cancer.
Oh wow.
And it sort of has a link to mycareer, because 55 years later
(02:53):
or so I introduced what dideventually become the leading
cancer system in Europe.
We were the reseller of it, sowe didn't invent it, but that
seems that whole particularchallenge, the medical challenge
of cancer, seems to havecropped up in some strange ways
throughout my life.
But just a little bit about myunremarkable educational life,
(03:17):
which was strangely inconsistent.
I'm dyslexic and at my agedyslexia was, you know, a bit
like a disability.
You know, actually I've learnedit's a superpower, absolutely.
I was incredibly inconsistent.
So I came, always came, bottomof all the classes in the term
work and then had the mostextraordinary exam results and
(03:39):
the most extreme of that wasbeing near the bottom of the
bottom.
Physics set that 200 people inthe year and coming just before
what we call over here O levels,I came top of the entire year
in 200 people in physics andthat sort of tells you a bit
about my sort of intellect.
And I was the only person thatwhen we got to A levels that
(04:03):
left with left with an ArtA-level.
So again, strange combination.
You know there's sort ofopposites there.
So for most of my career it'sbeen in healthcare, not entirely
.
I did import some New Zealandtrimarans at one stage.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
I saw that.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Probably the worst sailor that's ever set up a
Royal Yachting Association classassociation, but it was a
commercial necessity at thatparticular stage.
So my career has always reallybeen in the entrepreneurial end
of life, mostly working withpeople I regard as very
(04:41):
brilliant and talented, and Iwas the sort of suit that stuck
it all together and we hadsomething that was quite a
legend in its time calledBritish Medical Television in
the 1980s and it all endedtragically.
It was way before even the wordstartup was invented, I think.
Anyhow, coming right to todayand Hyper IQ, that emerged
(05:03):
really out of the cancer projectand I'd worked with another
brilliant clinician and set up amicro business that still
exists, actually in the Seattlearea, and that was the hard
coded solution and I was stillvery much a suit at that stage
and anyhow, we parted ways.
I could see it wasn't going tobe a scalable relationship and
(05:26):
I'd long had the thought that ifsomebody and so we had an
automation engine, hard-codedwith his ideas, to write medical
notes and medical documents,and I would think to myself, if
somebody actually worked out howto make that user-driven, then
that would be a game-changer,that would wipe our business off
the face of the earth, thenthat would be a game changer
that would wipe our business offthe base of the earth.
Little did I realize that afterleaving that project I would
(05:48):
have those insights as to how todo it.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
So tell us a little bit about how you got started in
that.
So Hyper IQ has been around nowfor a few years and my
understanding is it's all aboutremoving the time taken by a
medical practitioner or a doctorin the note-taking process.
You're going to do a muchbetter job of explaining what it
does than I do.
It'd be great for you toexplain what that is and what it
does.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
Well, in really simple, plain English, what we
do is allow our users to capturetheir medical thinking and
therefore to automate thecreation of documents, and that
really is all there is to it.
How you achieve that is youhave to come up with all sorts
of innovations, in particular,an interface that allows a human
(06:37):
being with, let's say, organicthinking and gives them the
ability to take a document ortheir ideas and start with an
editor that then lays down thelogic and all the steps in that
intellectual process.
So our back end is highlyinnovative.
(06:57):
It is where the human beingmeets a user interface that
allows them to capture theirintellectual process, and I want
to put that in a reallymeaningful content, and I've
often done this with a deck, butI've never done it on a podcast
(07:19):
, to an audience like this.
But let me try and bring thatto life and actually the way I
do it on a deck.
I have a brilliant titlesequence from a BBC documentary
on the history of writing, andit starts off with talking about
Gutenberg and how he'sexperimenting with lead alloys
(07:40):
in the 1440s that led to thedevelopment of the printing
press and how that you'rethinking.
How the heck does that relateto what we're doing.
Well, how it relates to whatwe're doing.
Is that actually the way welearn and share knowledge today,
with all our electronics andonline journals and meetings
(08:03):
like this?
It's fundamentally the sameprocess, and what I mean by that
is by talking.
It's by conversation.
A textbook is a description, alearning journal, of how you do
a breast initial contact.
One of the most intellectuallycomplex areas of medicine is you
learn that process by the samedescriptive processes.
(08:26):
When you build a piece ofcontent in our application, it
is fundamentally a differentprocess because you are
digitizing how you think andthat's what then drives the
automation and creation oflanguage.
And how does that relate to thepracticalities of medicine?
(08:48):
Let me try and use it with anappalling the appalling from a
medical context piece ofthinking, but I think it will
illustrate the point.
If we take a gp and for somecrazy reason that would probably
be very silly we wanted him todo a breast initial consult, it
would probably take himIntellectually there are
(09:10):
thousands of components to abreast initial consult it would
probably take him.
It takes 15 years to train anoncologist, so I would think it
would take him a couple of yearsto be retrained to do that
40-minute consultation WithHyper-IQ, particularly if he was
a user, he could download thatand, as I say, this would be a
really bad idea.
It'd probably be a good idea tolook over it and understand all
(09:34):
the components, but he couldactually apply that, ask the 40
or 50 questions he needs to dowith the patient, go through all
the examinations and produceall the patient.
Go through all the examinationsand produce all the
documentation, includingcustomised patient advice,
referral letters, all in a blinkof an eye at the end of that
process the following day.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
And does it also aggregate the crowd.
So does it bring collectiveintelligence from other
similarly trained professions orprofessionals.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Yes, in a way that GitHub and Amazon Bookstore does
, in that people can review,rate and download content.
Now we're at the MVP stage.
We're just about, in the nextthree months, to release this
product.
So collective intelligence inthis context would be without
the friction and the stepsinvolved, shall we say, in
(10:29):
scientific publishing, which arequite onerous is that people
can freely publish their contenton the platform.
They can then download it andthey can then review and rate
and share their thoughts on it.
So in this sense, collectiveintelligence is then taking that
(10:49):
piece of content, you can thenadapt it.
We can track those changes,those branches that are made to
it in much the same way thathappens in GitHub.
So does that answer thequestion?
Speaker 2 (11:00):
Yes, I think so.
So people that are contributingcontent what's in it for them?
If they're contributing theirown content for the greater good
, are they doing italtruistically, or is there some
sort of commercial benefit forthem in doing that?
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Great question and I hope both.
The reason why I've sort of putthe conditionality in it is
that for much of the time insort of developing the platform
in a sense altruistic that wordyes altruistically.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
It's a tough one.
It is a tough one.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
There is a self-interest in that, in much
the same way that in computercoding.
The open source movementbenefits and shares the
collective intelligence and thetesting and the sharing of
content.
But in fact I was.
(12:04):
Youtube would be a lesserproduct if there wasn't a
monetization element because itallows people to invest in the
content and I think much of ourcontent can be built in half a
day or three days or a week orso.
But if you take something asintellectually complex as a
(12:24):
breast initial consult, that'sprobably a man year of work and
that probably sounds like a verybig cliff to climb.
But the good news is that thatbreaks down into 20 or 30
components.
So you have things likereviewer systems, physical
examination, family history, andthose components can be shared.
(12:46):
So if the patient is, let's say, overweight, you might have a
set of questions and that modulethat deals with that condition
can then be used by acardiologist.
So collective intelligence hasa lot of different parameters to
it, I would say and it'sinteresting to me.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
So you've spent essentially decades in the, I
guess, the medical intelligence,medical information, medical
knowledge space, and then youstart HyperIQ.
You obviously know a lot aboutit, but are you a software
developer?
Is that something that you weretrained in?
Or did you then start hiring orworking with people that could
cut code for you?
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Great question.
I regret to say I'm not asoftware developer.
When the mobile revolutionarrived, I was using pretty
crummy products from variouspeople well before the iPhone,
but I sort of realized thatthere was going to be a mobile
user interface revolution.
So I listened to every podcaston this earth when that was all
(13:51):
taking place and downloadedevery possible app.
So I sort of rode the knowledgecurve.
The cutting edge of the mobilerevolution is really where I got
a lot of my technical education.
But one of the reasons whyactually most of the reasons why
it's taken a lot of time tobring us to market is we live in
(14:11):
Europe and not Silicon Valley,and raising anything, any money
for new ideas is pretty toughand there's a lot of friction.
But we did have substantialchallenges with the technology
stack and we had to rebuild itfrom scratch about four years
ago and at that stage I was ableto find a very brilliant
(14:35):
software engineer, a chap calledDavid Weston.
He's got almost no socialprofile actually he's a real
nerd and very, very focused.
But he's built enormousplatforms and worked and led big
teams 11 patents to his name,worked seven days a week, 24
hours a day and suddenly therewas very astute at judging
(14:58):
personalities, said to us well,if you two can work together
because you're polo opposites,it would be a very powerful
combination.
And we survived and weresmiling.
Speaker 2 (15:09):
And so as you got started and he started cutting
code et cetera, how were youbuilding the product?
Were you iterating it andtalking to customers early on,
or did you have such a good sortof domain knowledge that you
didn't really need to?
You were able to just keeptelling him what to keep
building you know domainknowledge that you didn't really
need to.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
You were able to just keep telling him what to keep
building.
Embarrassingly, you probablypicked up that I've got a big
LinkedIn first connections.
So the importance of buildingwhich are mostly clinicians,
building a community ofpotential users has been always
of paramount importance.
But when you're doing somethingthat's genuinely radical and
(15:47):
hasn't been done before, it'svery difficult, I think, to say
we've got this crazy idea.
What do you think of it?
That had a lot of confirmation.
I remember presenting toactually they were more like
property developers than medicalentrepreneurs, but I did
present to the healthcaredivision of Ross Childs at some
(16:07):
early stage in this project andthey said it was sort of a
compliment and a sarky commentall combined.
They said this sounds likewalking on water and sort of, if
you can do it, that would bemiraculous.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
I was just going to say do you think it is easier?
You're doing something that isbe miraculous.
I was just going to say do youthink it is easier?
You're doing something that isquite disruptive.
Does it make it challenging todo something disruptive when
you've actually got a tremendousamount of knowledge in the
space?
You know you've almost got thebias of knowledge, which
sometimes can hold disruptionback because you're coming at it
from a position of you knowyears and years and years of
(16:44):
knowledge, as opposed to solvinga problem coming at it from the
outside, if you like.
Does that make it trickier,having all that knowledge, or do
you think it does make it?
Speaker 1 (16:55):
easier.
It's an interesting comment andit's a well-made comment.
Failings of startups andfounders like myself is that,
despite the fact that we're allclaiming to be at the cutting
edge, we're so often veryinstitutionalized by our own
ideas and prejudices.
So anything but open-minded, Ithink, for my sins.
(17:18):
People that know know me wouldsay I probably don't fall into
that description.
I've got a very fluid mind thatcan see lots of possibilities.
There's constantly evolving.
I would say it's probably aslightly presumptuous statement.
I'm happy to for somebody totell me I'm talking rubbish.
So we've had plenty ofchallenges, but I don't think
(17:39):
that was one of them.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Yeah, and interestingly, as you say, if
you like, your superpower isyour mind and your ability to
have these, almost the polymathcapability of somebody who can
see the world quite analyticallybut also can see the world in a
kind of artistic and patternsbasis.
Has that been a tremendous helpto you, as you've done?
(18:04):
Startups, that ability to justthink outside the square.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Absolutely.
I'm constantly thinking.
I'm gobsmacked by howinstitutionalized human beings
are and how we're stuck in ourown little microcosms.
I've got quite a cool statement.
I wish I could remember itfluently, but on my Twitter
account or Facebook I think Igot something like like to solve
(18:31):
big problems with simple ideaswith simple ideas.
And when you look at life andwe've got these huge challenges
like climate change and healthand people being overweight,
well, one of the very simplesolutions to that and congestion
.
I live in North I don't know ifyou know south of London, north
(18:52):
Surrey, not far from Heathrow,and it's one big traffic jam all
the time.
Well, there's a simple solutionto that Build cycleways.
Do what the Dutch do.
We become healthier, we spendmore time outside and you know,
for most of us, cycling isprobably the first basis where
we're going to get to fly.
You know it's liberating andmiraculously cheap and you know
(19:16):
it's the fastest way aroundLondon.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
And I noticed too, actually picking up on the
cycling and on the on thephysical exercise angle I
noticed in some of your socialprofiles you talk about you love
to run in the rain, swim in thecold and cycle through mud.
Is this something that you doalmost as an antidote to startup
life and something that perhapsjust keeps the mind sharp and
(19:40):
allows you to escape?
What's the driver for that?
Speaker 1 (19:43):
Great question.
Yes, that's at all levels.
And let me just sort of expandon that In part.
When I realized I was going tobe a rather old founder and I
realized the stress and therisks involved around that
mine's 69, my father had hisfirst infarction at 59 and I
(20:05):
could feel, you know, heartdisease.
You know I could feel bloodpressure coming on I suddenly
realized well, it was death orexercise.
That was pretty, that waspretty motivating the guns, my
temple.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
Yes.
Death or exercise, yeah, yeah,yeah yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
But you're quite right.
You know there is something.
I don't know if there's anybiological science that supports
this, but you know,particularly actually on a
bicycle it was probably a bitless than with running, but on a
bicycle I do find it a very.
For safety reasons I wouldn'twear headphones on a bicycle.
I don't wear headphones when Irun, but I do find it very
(20:41):
intellectually, because I alwayshave some.
You know, I'm always listeningto podcasts or doing something
when I'm at home and I'm notworking.
So I think it's part of theintellectual freedom that you
get from that.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
And what advice would you have for older founders?
Because there are a lot ofpeople who would be, let's say,
in their mid-60s, who are notwanting to retire.
So here in New Zealand we havea retirement age of 65, if you
want to take that up with thegovernment, but obviously
there's no compulsion to do that.
But there's a lot of people intheir mid-60s, have got good
health and are planning onliving for another 20 or 30
years and want to be active.
Have you got advice for thosethat are thinking of starting a
(21:18):
business or maybe are in theearly stages about being an
older founder?
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Well, I think, a piece of general advice to
people.
You know, as they, let's say,pass 50 or 60 is, and we're all
in different physical conditions, but believe in yourself.
You know, I remember Isuspected my 40s, thinking I'd
never run a game.
You know I'd cycle and I took alot of exercise even at that
(21:44):
stage.
But, um, it is amazing,liberating, and you feel so
proud of yourself and I thinkI'm pretty sure somebody's gonna
, if they haven't already done,done it.
Come up with some research,because there's definitely a
link between how the brain worksand your level of balance as
you get older.
And you know, as soon as I getaware of those sorts of things,
(22:08):
I start taking doing exercises.
That corrects all that sort ofstuff.
I seem to remember the britishsunday times.
He's got endless articles aboutyou.
You know, we've got this pieceof research and how all your
muscles wither away when you getto start being over 50 and you
end up by looking like this is apaunchy person with skinny arms
(22:29):
and legs.
Well, you know, that's a loadof bollocks.
You're going to have to work onit, but why wouldn't you?
And if you're a startup founderand you're getting on a bit,
you are going to be vulnerableto heart disease and heart
attacks.
So unless you take it seriouslyto look after yourself, you are
(22:49):
for sure heading for trouble.
And so just get out and liveyour life.
You'll feel better, prouder,more motivated for that process.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Absolutely, and I think the statistics actually
support you on that also, inthat the most successful
founders are typically ones thatare actually doing it a little
bit later in life.
They've had a bit moreexperience, they know how to
lead people, they've got a bitof pattern recognition for
solving problems.
Now so, yeah, certainly, ifyou're listening to this and you
are a little bit older, now isyour time.
(23:21):
It's always your time.
So, simon, what's the toughestthing you've ever had to endure
on the startup journey Notnecessarily just in HyperIQ, but
in the journey of being afounder, which you've done
successfully a number of times?
What's been the hardest part ofthe journey so far?
Speaker 1 (23:37):
That's an interesting question.
I've got a brilliant partner.
She took us over to I'll cometo answering your question.
She took us over on astorytelling course to to create
a few years back and we had totell some story.
My particular story was I'mgoing to tell you about part of
my life, a time in my life whereeverything hung by a thread and
(24:01):
then the thread broke and I'dinvested a huge amount of time
and effort into this cancerproject, the second bit of it,
which was after we'd establishedthe American software business
that became very successful.
I then worked on thishard-coded solution and I won't
go into the personalities notleast the chap that I work with
(24:24):
is now dead and I'm not into thesort of politics of popularism
by being cruel to people,absolutely but I'd spent
everything that I had, includingmy shirt, on being the suit and
his partner, as a result of oneemail.
I think you can probably tellfrom my career what I've told
(24:45):
you.
I'm not a quitter, verydefinitely not.
And that email, I looked at itfor a couple of hours.
It came in about six o'clock ona dark and stormy night it's
something like November time andthe rain was rattling on the
panes and all that, and I had asort of integrity moment and I
(25:09):
felt much to my surprise, youknow, if somebody asked me this
question one hour before thisevent occurred and I read this
particular email that I wouldchange my entire direction and
abandon the project that I'dbeen working on all this time.
That was a pretty challengingmoment and Hyper-IQ hadn't been
(25:30):
invented at that stage.
It became invented within threemonths of that and I suddenly
thought I suddenly had theinsights that led to the concept
of micro IQ.
Yeah, that was a prettyuncomfortable time.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
How did you cope with it?
And you know, obviously you'veprobably endured trials prior to
this.
Was there a way that you wereable to cope with it?
Did you eventually step awayafter a couple of hours of
looking at it and go for a walk?
Did you ruminate on it?
Did you handle it well, do youthink, or was it actually?
Speaker 1 (26:08):
In a funny way, nobody's ever asked that
question before, so it's a greatquestion to ask.
Actually, well, I've got nojudgment as to whether I
particularly handled it well ornot, but in a sense and I think
that actually partly answersyour earlier question about
being institutionalized I sortof rearranged the building
(26:29):
blocks in my mind and actually,funnily enough I think I felt a
huge sense of relief and I couldsee I had a clue how to sort of
economically move forward.
There were huge challenges thatI faced at that particular time
, but I didn't sort of have asense that there could be a hope
(26:51):
, a glimmer of light.
As I sort of rearranged thebricks in my mind, I actually
felt a sense of relief.
In a sense, I think the stormclouds of catastrophe and things
being very wrong with thepersonal interactions had been
building up and suddenly therewas a set of facts that forced
(27:16):
me to address that and see theworld in a completely different,
from a different perspective.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
And did that energize you?
After that Then you're likeokay, you know, once you got
past the shock of this or theprocessing of what you had to do
and the rearranging the bricksat whatever point did you then
feel almost a sense of energythat this is now an opportunity
to go and do something differentyeah, I think so.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
And as to how that's on the sort of graph of energy
levels you know, like I have onmy garment watch, you know quite
how that plotted I'm not sure,but I certainly started to work
on an escape route and and therewere several steps in that sort
of revelation of how I could uh, instead of being you know, I
(28:05):
used to call myself a suit, andI used to.
Although people that know methese days particularly I'm
highly creative, I think,because I was working with very
smart people that judgedthemselves as creatively
brilliant I always knew I had tosort of pay down my own
personal creativity because theyfound that very uncomfortable
(28:27):
and a threat.
So when I sort of escaped fromcalling myself a suit and became
a genuine technical founder inquite a profound way, yeah,
that's got to be cool, isn't it?
Speaker 2 (28:41):
Yeah, absolutely so.
You then get started on HyperIQand you get coding and
developing.
Have you needed to raiseoutside capital at all as part
of this process?
Speaker 1 (28:52):
Yeah, and that's been a journey, and I'll be
completely transparent about allthe facts.
It's the only way I can.
Really, I think it's when youget old, you just can't live
with it.
You can't be bothered not to.
Speaker 2 (29:05):
Yeah, it's too complicated.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
I know there are certain well-known people that
seem to be able to live in adifferent facts of the world.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
But I think when you're in business, you have to
deal with reality.
So we did actually quitesuccessfully.
So there's been two generationsof this product one under the
name velociant, which we haveshut down, that as a business,
and and what caused that?
And that did raise 400 000pounds ish, and what led to the
(29:36):
end of that was that I was againwithout mentioning games I was
introduced to a decent set ofpeople as technical partners and
, you know, handled therelationship well.
But they they built atechnology stack with
out-of-date code libraries andwhen it came to look at how we
(29:58):
could commercialize it, werealized that in healthcare it
was riddled with vulnerabilities, and so I raised this money,
got pretty close to getting themiracle off the ground, then
found myself stranded with atechnology stack that was flawed
(30:19):
.
We did try to repair it.
That wasted ever more time andthe funds were running out.
It was another challenging timearriving here and I think what
I'm reading in America you know,sort of most startups, in fact
the people that put the fundingin.
(30:39):
They did a pivot and they hadbig technology challenges and
became a different type ofbusiness.
Well, we didn't do any pivots,but they had a rich investor
behind them, but I was leftholding the baby.
The technology stack was flawedand I couldn't raise any money
to take it forward.
Then, through a couple ofmiracles and you know friends
(31:02):
and family I was able to stringtogether and take an awful lot
of personal risks and met thisCTO.
And it was made clear to me byall the people around me that
you know, made clear to me byall the people around me that
you know I would be insane toput the money into the company
that had got the failedtechnology stack with a bunch of
(31:25):
investors that hadn't followedon.
So the only sane way to moveforward and I was very
transparent In fact I looked atall sorts of ways of trying to
carry some of the interests overfor various tax and legal
reasons and the way people canclaim back money from
investments.
(31:45):
It was clear that the two hadto be from an HMRC.
That's our tax people point ofview, that there had to be a
complete clean break between thebusinesses.
So that's when HyperIQ started.
Okay.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
So were there some tough conversations that you
then had to have with theinvestors in the original
business to say, look, I'm sorrybut I can't bring you forward
into the new company and we areshutting down the old one.
Or were you able to get aroundsome of those tax issues and
bring them into the new one?
Speaker 1 (32:17):
I was always completely open.
Most of my suppliers alwaysexpected to have tough
conversations and people beingvery angry and upset.
Actually, everybody was lovelyand very supportive, and this is
startups and they expectthere's high risk All that and I
(32:40):
think they could see that I'dmade a genuine attempt, more
than a genuine attempt.
I'd worked over quite a periodof time to try and stitch a
solution together and there weresome pretty profound legal HMRC
reasons why whatever I wishedto do, that wasn't in anybody's
interest.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Yeah, yeah.
And so then you get into that.
You've got then the new company, and then did you raise new
investment from a new set ofinvestors?
Speaker 1 (33:06):
We're in a different world now to that earlier
situation.
Raising money I don't know ifyou'd agree with this, but
raising money for because it'seasier to build technology.
Raising money for a startupPeople sort of assume you're
going to build some sort ofminimum viable product.
So we have no external funding.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
So you bootstrap this next iteration, which is
actually very impressive becausewe know many founders out there
know how tough that is, and I'malso interested around the
older tech stack.
One of the things I haveobserved in the past is, if you
get founders who are from anindustry and founders who have
been around an industry for along time, they've often got
(33:47):
contacts and softwaredevelopment contacts that have
also been around the industryfor a long time and can
therefore have slightly oldertech stacks.
Was that your experience?
You had people that were a bitolder themselves building the
code, or actually they wereyounger people but just using
older sort of out-of-date techstacks and I don't think
(34:08):
architecturally.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
With the first generation product let's call it
that that was particularly anissue.
But the way we built this newtech stack, it's all aws and
it's all and actually to get the.
There are yet more tragedies.
Actually that happened alongthe line because we outsourced a
lot of the development to speedit up.
(34:30):
Some very decent people, buttheir team was largely rather
remarkably young team actuallyas well largely destroyed by
COVID.
So we had three developers thatwere young developers working
on a project in a biosecurebuilding in in india die whilst
working on the project and thathas presented an enormous amount
(34:54):
of challenges that should yetfurther delayed the project.
And my very brilliant cto,david weston, has.
Then he was sort ofaccelerating the development and
working through a young teambut to get the product into the
market.
He's taken on a lot of thetechnical development and we've
(35:15):
kept all these differentrelationships alive through all
these difficulties.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Yeah, I'm also now keen to sort of start talking a
little bit about you personally,as opposed to the business, and
the question I've got is aroundyou know the sources of
inspiration that you look for,whether it's in podcasts or in
books that you like to read,whether it's even escaping and
listening to music or exercising.
(35:40):
How do you recharge?
How do you get you?
You get excited about what itis that you do.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
Great question.
I would say I'm constantlylistening.
I've always been big on.
We have a radio station I don'tknow if it's got over to New
Zealand called Radio 4.
It's a BBC radio station.
I would say it's prettyeclectic, you know, and so I've
always been a huge consumer ofdocumentaries.
(36:10):
And podcasts are reallydocumentaries, aren't they Sort
of?
Actually they're better.
You know, it's a shame the BBChas taken such a long time to
really discover them, becausewhat I liked about podcasts in
the early days of mobile isunlike a TV show where something
is presented to you in apackaged manner, particularly in
(36:34):
the early days of mobileinterfaces, and every week
something was happening.
You could hear the opinionsbeing shaped around the table,
and that is so much richer thana pre-packaged you know,
brilliantly produced bbcdocumentary.
Speaker 2 (36:54):
Perhaps I think so, um, so I yeah it's interesting
because I think you know, formillennia humans have engaged
with one another through storiesand we share knowledge, almost
going back to where we startedthe show, talking about
conversation and thetranscribing of conversation.
Actually, the creation ofstories and sharing of stories,
(37:17):
particularly in an audio manner,like an audio-only podcast, has
a profound impact on ourability to listen, to think
about the ideas being created.
Obviously, it has thatadvantage with the audio-only,
of being able to do other thingswhile you're listening, whether
you're exercising or cleaningthe house, you know whatever it
is.
So that's interesting.
Speaker 1 (37:37):
Have you ever come across a show, bbc show called
it's a history show calledYou're Dead?
Speaker 2 (37:41):
to Me.
I have heard about it, but Ihaven't seen it oh you must.
Speaker 1 (37:45):
It's such an interesting format.
It's got three people in it oneis a comedian, one is an expert
and the other is the producer,director, presenter, guy.
You know the person in yourrole and because there's three
people, it wouldn't work.
You still need this sort ofinterview.
This is doing a different job,but because it's got three
(38:09):
people in, it's got a sort ofintellectual unpredictability
about it.
Yes, and there are some veryintelligent, very able comedians
that are also very wellinformed on that particular
subject matter.
So, for example, there's awonderful one.
I think the world's mostsuccessful pirate was a Chinese
(38:30):
lady that had 70,000 otherpirates working for her
somewhere around the 18thcentury.
Speaker 2 (38:39):
That's an interesting the mind starts to boggle.
She clearly was that's almost,you know one of the first female
global entrepreneurs.
I know I actually heard a story, I read a story about madame
clico so verve clico and she wasprobably the first truly global
entrepreneur with the champagnehouse, obviously.
(39:00):
So now, and in terms ofpodcasts, I know you, you also
consume a lot of us content, doyou find that also is, you know,
enormously helpful?
Speaker 1 (39:09):
I found that a very rich learning curve.
I was innately suspicious ofthe way we were doing things in
europe and I don't know how youregard us europeans.
You know old world type ofstuff, but they talk about being
institutionalized.
We're sort of pompous andpatronizing and think we know it
(39:30):
all, and I think the Europeanstartup world has always been
somewhat like that and too manygovernment agents with money
that they're wasting.
And I came across this guy thatyou're probably aware of called
jason calacanis.
Yes, and I literally listened Iwas listening to this week in
tech and and he then had theidea, you know, to sort of
(39:54):
slightly borrow their name.
It caused a bit of friction atthe time, as I recall, and start
up this week in startups andwhat I liked about it is that he
went for all these horribleentities that were, oh, just pay
me two thousand dollars andwe'll raise money for you, and
of course, it's a completelydysfunctional way of doing
(40:17):
things.
You know rich peoplepatronizing them, and he, you
know he's been incrediblysuccessful.
Seven unicorns is he up to.
And then we've got, you know,bbc, you know, with a I think
it's a japanese, frenchfranchise and dragons dead.
You have dragons then, yes,yeah, in new zealand, and
(40:40):
they've got a bit better.
Actually, somebody's told themto behave, but they're sort of
showing off.
We're the big rich people andthey've got a bit better.
Actually, somebody's told themto behave, but they're sort of
showing off.
We're the big rich people andthey haven't ever had a unicorn
in their bloody life.
All they've done is bullying,populism, and so it's a bit like
you know, throwing theChristians to the lions, whereas
Jason has, you know, genuinelyfunded hundreds of businesses.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
Yeah, and has the track record to back it up.
And is there a philosophy or amantra that you like to live by
in life or that you use, youknow, regularly?
That's sort of an approach tohow you live life.
Speaker 1 (41:17):
That's a good question.
Integrity, I think matters.
Well, I don't think I know itmatters.
So you know I strongly believein integrity, being decent to
people.
I'm sure I fail at that all thetime, but I do try and I call
myself a social Christian.
In other words, you know,culturally try and do the right
things.
But you know I don't believeall the floaty spiritual stuff
(41:41):
yeah, it's that helps.
Speaker 2 (41:42):
I'm not sure I've ever answered the question, but
that's me being honest well,it's a nice segue into another
question, which is because youare a very intelligent guy and
you see the world in quite anice, unique way, in the way
that your brain works.
Is there something that youbelieve very strongly in in the
world that actually very fewpeople do?
(42:02):
It might be somethingrelatively scientific, it might
be something philosophical orpolitical.
Is there something that youhold quite a strong view on but
actually very few people do?
Speaker 1 (42:12):
I'll give you one, probably several, but I'm going
to name a person in the lastthousand years who's been one of
the most influential people inthe world.
She's a woman and certainlyprobably been the most
influential British person,english person, and therefore
had quite a big influence on therest of the world.
I would say.
(42:32):
Unfortunately, henry VIII cuther head off and Berlin, yes, I
can remember the BBC, I think itwas, or somebody doing a, you
know the 10 Greatest Britons,and Parson with all his sort of
bluster, the one with Brunel.
But if you think about AnneBoleyn, two things that she
(42:54):
achieved One was she madeEngland or the British
Protestant.
That's pretty significant, hugecultural implications.
British Protestant that'spretty significant, huge
cultural implications.
Secondly, she was the mother of, historically, our most
important and influentialmonarch, elizabeth I, and you
(43:15):
think of Shakespeare and thewhole and the building of the
English Navy.
That all started.
How she respected, had to work,you know, because she was a
woman and she wasn't, you know,sort of confrontational in the
way that men would be.
Respected had to work, you know, because she was a woman and
she wasn't, you know, sort ofconfrontational in the way that
men would be.
She had to work with parliamentso you could say you know, it
laid the foundations ofdemocracy.
And we don't even recognize herproperly in history.
(43:38):
We talk about henry the eighthbecause all these murder.
We don't even talk about himbeing a corrupt fat murderer.
But we completely fail to seehow important somebody like
Amber Leonard is.
Speaker 2 (43:52):
Absolutely.
And final question for me isthere a question actually I
haven't asked that you wouldwish that I had One that you
would love to be able to answerif somebody would only ask it,
that's an unexpected one, I'mtempted to say.
Speaker 1 (44:10):
You know, one of the things I've learned from running
is why aren't we taught how torun properly?
Eighty percent of people runheel strikers.
I don't know if you know whatI'm talking about.
Yes, I do.
Yeah, the natural gate, youknow, if you run in your bare
feet, is to run on your forefoot, and that's sort of a metaphor
for life.
If we can't learn how to runproperly and we can't be taught
(44:34):
at school something as basic asrunning, it sort of raises quite
a lot of questions abouteverything, doesn't it?
Speaker 2 (44:41):
Absolutely.
And everything we are taught inschool and everything we are
not taught about school, I oftenthink about most of the biggest
things in life how to buy ahouse, how to fall in love, how
to grieve at a funeral are nevertaught in schools.
They're just something thatescapes our scholastic system.
Look, that's kind of a funnyplace for us to finish today.
(45:02):
Simon, it's been an absolutepleasure chatting to you.
I would love to be able to sitdown, I'm sure, over a wine, and
chat more fully, because Ithink we'd have a really cool
conversation.
Appreciate you staying up latein the UK.
If it was only a way we couldflatten the earth and solve the
problem of time zones, thatwould be wonderful.
But I really do appreciate thetime that you've given today.
(45:23):
I will include ways that peoplecan connect with you in the
show notes to the episode,because I know there will be
some people who would love tokind of hear a little bit more
about HyperIQ and may want toconnect with you personally.
So I'll include those.
But thank you again for yourtime today.
Speaker 1 (45:38):
Greg, it's been a huge privilege.
Thank you for such perceptiveand interesting insights and
questions.
Thanks, Simon.
If we can't learn how to run properly and we can't be
taught at school something asbasic as running, it sort of
raises quite a lot of questionsabout everything, doesn't it?
Speaker 2 (00:13):
Absolutely.
And everything we are taught inschool and everything we are
not taught about school, I oftenthink about most of the biggest
things in life how to buy ahouse, how to fall in love, how
to grieve at a funeral are nevertaught in schools.
It's just something thatescapes our scholastic system.
Simon is the CEO and founder ofHyper IQ.
Speaker 1 (00:34):
If you're a startup founder and you're getting on a
bit, you are going to bevulnerable to heart disease and
heart attacks.
So unless you take it seriouslyto look after yourself, you are
for sure heading for trouble.
And so just get out, live yourlife.
You'll feel better, prouder,more motivated for that process.
Speaker 2 (01:01):
Hey everybody, it's Greg Sheehan.
Welcome to my podcast, whereyou will hear from a range of
guests, including those from thestartup world and those that
have had incredibly interestinglives and some stories to tell.
I would really appreciate it ifyou could hit the follow button
and share this amongst yourfriends, but, as you know, time
is limited, so let's get on withit and hear from our next guest
(01:23):
.
You know time is limited, solet's get on with it and hear
from our next guest.
My guest today is Simon Currie.
Simon is the CEO and founder ofHyper IQ and he will tell us a
little bit about what Hyper IQis all about as we get into it.
It's late in the evening UKtime and early morning New
Zealand time as we do thisrecording, so both of us are
bringing our best game for thispodcast.
(01:45):
I know, just in looking atSimon's background, it's going
to be a really interestingconversation.
Simon, welcome to the show.
Speaker 1 (01:50):
Great to be here, Greg.
I've listened to some of yourpodcasts and you display a
remarkable level of emotionalintelligence and general
engagement.
Speaker 2 (02:03):
Oh, that's very kind.
That's very, very kind of you.
That's extremely kind.
I need to tell my aging parentsthat I'm doing okay these days,
despite, maybe, how I gotstarted at school.
Simon, I'd love to start thisepisode talking a bit about your
journey before you got startedwith HyperIQ, and how did you
get started into what ultimatelybecame what you're doing now?
(02:24):
Where did you get started intowhat ultimately became what
you're doing now?
Where did you get started inyour career.
Speaker 1 (02:26):
I'll give you a sort of brief synopsis, including a
bit of my childhood, I supposethe first significant medical
event in my life, because I'm inhealth class there's always a
connection the age of 16 weeksmy mother somehow managed to die
of cancer.
Oh wow.
And it sort of has a link to mycareer, because 55 years later
(02:53):
or so I introduced what dideventually become the leading
cancer system in Europe.
We were the reseller of it, sowe didn't invent it, but that
seems that whole particularchallenge, the medical challenge
of cancer, seems to havecropped up in some strange ways
throughout my life.
But just a little bit about myunremarkable educational life,
(03:17):
which was strangely inconsistent.
I'm dyslexic and at my agedyslexia was, you know, a bit
like a disability.
You know, actually I've learnedit's a superpower, absolutely.
I was incredibly inconsistent.
So I came, always came, bottomof all the classes in the term
work and then had the mostextraordinary exam results and
(03:39):
the most extreme of that wasbeing near the bottom of the
bottom.
Physics set that 200 people inthe year and coming just before
what we call over here O levels,I came top of the entire year
in 200 people in physics andthat sort of tells you a bit
about my sort of intellect.
And I was the only person thatwhen we got to A levels that
(04:03):
left with left with an ArtA-level.
So again, strange combination.
You know there's sort ofopposites there.
So for most of my career it'sbeen in healthcare, not entirely
.
I did import some New Zealandtrimarans at one stage.
Speaker 2 (04:17):
I saw that.
Speaker 1 (04:20):
Probably the worst sailor that's ever set up a
Royal Yachting Association classassociation, but it was a
commercial necessity at thatparticular stage.
So my career has always reallybeen in the entrepreneurial end
of life, mostly working withpeople I regard as very
(04:41):
brilliant and talented, and Iwas the sort of suit that stuck
it all together and we hadsomething that was quite a
legend in its time calledBritish Medical Television in
the 1980s and it all endedtragically.
It was way before even the wordstartup was invented, I think.
Anyhow, coming right to todayand Hyper IQ, that emerged
(05:03):
really out of the cancer projectand I'd worked with another
brilliant clinician and set up amicro business that still
exists, actually in the Seattlearea, and that was the hard
coded solution and I was stillvery much a suit at that stage
and anyhow, we parted ways.
I could see it wasn't going tobe a scalable relationship and
(05:26):
I'd long had the thought that ifsomebody and so we had an
automation engine, hard-codedwith his ideas, to write medical
notes and medical documents,and I would think to myself, if
somebody actually worked out howto make that user-driven, then
that would be a game-changer,that would wipe our business off
the face of the earth, thenthat would be a game changer
that would wipe our business offthe base of the earth.
Little did I realize that afterleaving that project I would
(05:48):
have those insights as to how todo it.
Speaker 2 (05:51):
So tell us a little bit about how you got started in
that.
So Hyper IQ has been around nowfor a few years and my
understanding is it's all aboutremoving the time taken by a
medical practitioner or a doctorin the note-taking process.
You're going to do a muchbetter job of explaining what it
does than I do.
It'd be great for you toexplain what that is and what it
does.
Speaker 1 (06:12):
Well, in really simple, plain English, what we
do is allow our users to capturetheir medical thinking and
therefore to automate thecreation of documents, and that
really is all there is to it.
How you achieve that is youhave to come up with all sorts
of innovations, in particular,an interface that allows a human
(06:37):
being with, let's say, organicthinking and gives them the
ability to take a document ortheir ideas and start with an
editor that then lays down thelogic and all the steps in that
intellectual process.
So our back end is highlyinnovative.
(06:57):
It is where the human beingmeets a user interface that
allows them to capture theirintellectual process, and I want
to put that in a reallymeaningful content, and I've
often done this with a deck, butI've never done it on a podcast
(07:19):
, to an audience like this.
But let me try and bring thatto life and actually the way I
do it on a deck.
I have a brilliant titlesequence from a BBC documentary
on the history of writing, andit starts off with talking about
Gutenberg and how he'sexperimenting with lead alloys
(07:40):
in the 1440s that led to thedevelopment of the printing
press and how that you'rethinking.
How the heck does that relateto what we're doing.
Well, how it relates to whatwe're doing.
Is that actually the way welearn and share knowledge today,
with all our electronics andonline journals and meetings
(08:03):
like this?
It's fundamentally the sameprocess, and what I mean by that
is by talking.
It's by conversation.
A textbook is a description, alearning journal, of how you do
a breast initial contact.
One of the most intellectuallycomplex areas of medicine is you
learn that process by the samedescriptive processes.
(08:26):
When you build a piece ofcontent in our application, it
is fundamentally a differentprocess because you are
digitizing how you think andthat's what then drives the
automation and creation oflanguage.
And how does that relate to thepracticalities of medicine?
(08:48):
Let me try and use it with anappalling the appalling from a
medical context piece ofthinking, but I think it will
illustrate the point.
If we take a gp and for somecrazy reason that would probably
be very silly we wanted him todo a breast initial consult, it
would probably take himIntellectually there are
(09:10):
thousands of components to abreast initial consult it would
probably take him.
It takes 15 years to train anoncologist, so I would think it
would take him a couple of yearsto be retrained to do that
40-minute consultation WithHyper-IQ, particularly if he was
a user, he could download thatand, as I say, this would be a
really bad idea.
It'd probably be a good idea tolook over it and understand all
(09:34):
the components, but he couldactually apply that, ask the 40
or 50 questions he needs to dowith the patient, go through all
the examinations and produceall the patient.
Go through all the examinationsand produce all the
documentation, includingcustomised patient advice,
referral letters, all in a blinkof an eye at the end of that
process the following day.
Speaker 2 (09:54):
And does it also aggregate the crowd.
So does it bring collectiveintelligence from other
similarly trained professions orprofessionals.
Speaker 1 (10:05):
Yes, in a way that GitHub and Amazon Bookstore does
, in that people can review,rate and download content.
Now we're at the MVP stage.
We're just about, in the nextthree months, to release this
product.
So collective intelligence inthis context would be without
the friction and the stepsinvolved, shall we say, in
(10:29):
scientific publishing, which arequite onerous is that people
can freely publish their contenton the platform.
They can then download it andthey can then review and rate
and share their thoughts on it.
So in this sense, collectiveintelligence is then taking that
(10:49):
piece of content, you can thenadapt it.
We can track those changes,those branches that are made to
it in much the same way thathappens in GitHub.
So does that answer thequestion?
Speaker 2 (11:00):
Yes, I think so.
So people that are contributingcontent what's in it for them?
If they're contributing theirown content for the greater good
, are they doing italtruistically, or is there some
sort of commercial benefit forthem in doing that?
Speaker 1 (11:15):
Great question and I hope both.
The reason why I've sort of putthe conditionality in it is
that for much of the time insort of developing the platform
in a sense altruistic that wordyes altruistically.
Speaker 2 (11:30):
It's a tough one.
It is a tough one.
Speaker 1 (11:33):
There is a self-interest in that, in much
the same way that in computercoding.
The open source movementbenefits and shares the
collective intelligence and thetesting and the sharing of
content.
But in fact I was.
(12:04):
Youtube would be a lesserproduct if there wasn't a
monetization element because itallows people to invest in the
content and I think much of ourcontent can be built in half a
day or three days or a week orso.
But if you take something asintellectually complex as a
(12:24):
breast initial consult, that'sprobably a man year of work and
that probably sounds like a verybig cliff to climb.
But the good news is that thatbreaks down into 20 or 30
components.
So you have things likereviewer systems, physical
examination, family history, andthose components can be shared.
(12:46):
So if the patient is, let's say, overweight, you might have a
set of questions and that modulethat deals with that condition
can then be used by acardiologist.
So collective intelligence hasa lot of different parameters to
it, I would say and it'sinteresting to me.
Speaker 2 (13:05):
So you've spent essentially decades in the, I
guess, the medical intelligence,medical information, medical
knowledge space, and then youstart HyperIQ.
You obviously know a lot aboutit, but are you a software
developer?
Is that something that you weretrained in?
Or did you then start hiring orworking with people that could
cut code for you?
Speaker 1 (13:27):
Great question.
I regret to say I'm not asoftware developer.
When the mobile revolutionarrived, I was using pretty
crummy products from variouspeople well before the iPhone,
but I sort of realized thatthere was going to be a mobile
user interface revolution.
So I listened to every podcaston this earth when that was all
(13:51):
taking place and downloadedevery possible app.
So I sort of rode the knowledgecurve.
The cutting edge of the mobilerevolution is really where I got
a lot of my technical education.
But one of the reasons whyactually most of the reasons why
it's taken a lot of time tobring us to market is we live in
(14:11):
Europe and not Silicon Valley,and raising anything, any money
for new ideas is pretty toughand there's a lot of friction.
But we did have substantialchallenges with the technology
stack and we had to rebuild itfrom scratch about four years
ago and at that stage I was ableto find a very brilliant
(14:35):
software engineer, a chap calledDavid Weston.
He's got almost no socialprofile actually he's a real
nerd and very, very focused.
But he's built enormousplatforms and worked and led big
teams 11 patents to his name,worked seven days a week, 24
hours a day and suddenly therewas very astute at judging
(14:58):
personalities, said to us well,if you two can work together
because you're polo opposites,it would be a very powerful
combination.
And we survived and weresmiling.
Speaker 2 (15:09):
And so as you got started and he started cutting
code et cetera, how were youbuilding the product?
Were you iterating it andtalking to customers early on,
or did you have such a good sortof domain knowledge that you
didn't really need to?
You were able to just keeptelling him what to keep
building you know domainknowledge that you didn't really
need to.
Speaker 1 (15:26):
You were able to just keep telling him what to keep
building.
Embarrassingly, you probablypicked up that I've got a big
LinkedIn first connections.
So the importance of buildingwhich are mostly clinicians,
building a community ofpotential users has been always
of paramount importance.
But when you're doing somethingthat's genuinely radical and
(15:47):
hasn't been done before, it'svery difficult, I think, to say
we've got this crazy idea.
What do you think of it?
That had a lot of confirmation.
I remember presenting toactually they were more like
property developers than medicalentrepreneurs, but I did
present to the healthcaredivision of Ross Childs at some
(16:07):
early stage in this project andthey said it was sort of a
compliment and a sarky commentall combined.
They said this sounds likewalking on water and sort of, if
you can do it, that would bemiraculous.
Speaker 2 (16:21):
I was just going to say do you think it is easier?
You're doing something that isbe miraculous.
I was just going to say do youthink it is easier?
You're doing something that isquite disruptive.
Does it make it challenging todo something disruptive when
you've actually got a tremendousamount of knowledge in the
space?
You know you've almost got thebias of knowledge, which
sometimes can hold disruptionback because you're coming at it
from a position of you knowyears and years and years of
(16:44):
knowledge, as opposed to solvinga problem coming at it from the
outside, if you like.
Does that make it trickier,having all that knowledge, or do
you think it does make it?
Speaker 1 (16:55):
easier.
It's an interesting comment andit's a well-made comment.
Failings of startups andfounders like myself is that,
despite the fact that we're allclaiming to be at the cutting
edge, we're so often veryinstitutionalized by our own
ideas and prejudices.
So anything but open-minded, Ithink, for my sins.
(17:18):
People that know know me wouldsay I probably don't fall into
that description.
I've got a very fluid mind thatcan see lots of possibilities.
There's constantly evolving.
I would say it's probably aslightly presumptuous statement.
I'm happy to for somebody totell me I'm talking rubbish.
So we've had plenty ofchallenges, but I don't think
(17:39):
that was one of them.
Speaker 2 (17:40):
Yeah, and interestingly, as you say, if
you like, your superpower isyour mind and your ability to
have these, almost the polymathcapability of somebody who can
see the world quite analyticallybut also can see the world in a
kind of artistic and patternsbasis.
Has that been a tremendous helpto you, as you've done?
(18:04):
Startups, that ability to justthink outside the square.
Speaker 1 (18:09):
Absolutely.
I'm constantly thinking.
I'm gobsmacked by howinstitutionalized human beings
are and how we're stuck in ourown little microcosms.
I've got quite a cool statement.
I wish I could remember itfluently, but on my Twitter
account or Facebook I think Igot something like like to solve
(18:31):
big problems with simple ideaswith simple ideas.
And when you look at life andwe've got these huge challenges
like climate change and healthand people being overweight,
well, one of the very simplesolutions to that and congestion
.
I live in North I don't know ifyou know south of London, north
(18:52):
Surrey, not far from Heathrow,and it's one big traffic jam all
the time.
Well, there's a simple solutionto that Build cycleways.
Do what the Dutch do.
We become healthier, we spendmore time outside and you know,
for most of us, cycling isprobably the first basis where
we're going to get to fly.
You know it's liberating andmiraculously cheap and you know
(19:16):
it's the fastest way aroundLondon.
Speaker 2 (19:19):
And I noticed too, actually picking up on the
cycling and on the on thephysical exercise angle I
noticed in some of your socialprofiles you talk about you love
to run in the rain, swim in thecold and cycle through mud.
Is this something that you doalmost as an antidote to startup
life and something that perhapsjust keeps the mind sharp and
(19:40):
allows you to escape?
What's the driver for that?
Speaker 1 (19:43):
Great question.
Yes, that's at all levels.
And let me just sort of expandon that In part.
When I realized I was going tobe a rather old founder and I
realized the stress and therisks involved around that
mine's 69, my father had hisfirst infarction at 59 and I
(20:05):
could feel, you know, heartdisease.
You know I could feel bloodpressure coming on I suddenly
realized well, it was death orexercise.
That was pretty, that waspretty motivating the guns, my
temple.
Speaker 2 (20:15):
Yes.
Death or exercise, yeah, yeah,yeah yeah.
Speaker 1 (20:20):
But you're quite right.
You know there is something.
I don't know if there's anybiological science that supports
this, but you know,particularly actually on a
bicycle it was probably a bitless than with running, but on a
bicycle I do find it a very.
For safety reasons I wouldn'twear headphones on a bicycle.
I don't wear headphones when Irun, but I do find it very
(20:41):
intellectually, because I alwayshave some.
You know, I'm always listeningto podcasts or doing something
when I'm at home and I'm notworking.
So I think it's part of theintellectual freedom that you
get from that.
Speaker 2 (20:55):
And what advice would you have for older founders?
Because there are a lot ofpeople who would be, let's say,
in their mid-60s, who are notwanting to retire.
So here in New Zealand we havea retirement age of 65, if you
want to take that up with thegovernment, but obviously
there's no compulsion to do that.
But there's a lot of people intheir mid-60s, have got good
health and are planning onliving for another 20 or 30
years and want to be active.
Have you got advice for thosethat are thinking of starting a
(21:18):
business or maybe are in theearly stages about being an
older founder?
Speaker 1 (21:22):
Well, I think, a piece of general advice to
people.
You know, as they, let's say,pass 50 or 60 is, and we're all
in different physical conditions, but believe in yourself.
You know, I remember Isuspected my 40s, thinking I'd
never run a game.
You know I'd cycle and I took alot of exercise even at that
(21:44):
stage.
But, um, it is amazing,liberating, and you feel so
proud of yourself and I thinkI'm pretty sure somebody's gonna
, if they haven't already done,done it.
Come up with some research,because there's definitely a
link between how the brain worksand your level of balance as
you get older.
And you know, as soon as I getaware of those sorts of things,
(22:08):
I start taking doing exercises.
That corrects all that sort ofstuff.
I seem to remember the britishsunday times.
He's got endless articles aboutyou.
You know, we've got this pieceof research and how all your
muscles wither away when you getto start being over 50 and you
end up by looking like this is apaunchy person with skinny arms
(22:29):
and legs.
Well, you know, that's a loadof bollocks.
You're going to have to work onit, but why wouldn't you?
And if you're a startup founderand you're getting on a bit,
you are going to be vulnerableto heart disease and heart
attacks.
So unless you take it seriouslyto look after yourself, you are
(22:49):
for sure heading for trouble.
And so just get out and liveyour life.
You'll feel better, prouder,more motivated for that process.
Speaker 2 (22:59):
Absolutely, and I think the statistics actually
support you on that also, inthat the most successful
founders are typically ones thatare actually doing it a little
bit later in life.
They've had a bit moreexperience, they know how to
lead people, they've got a bitof pattern recognition for
solving problems.
Now so, yeah, certainly, ifyou're listening to this and you
are a little bit older, now isyour time.
(23:21):
It's always your time.
So, simon, what's the toughestthing you've ever had to endure
on the startup journey Notnecessarily just in HyperIQ, but
in the journey of being afounder, which you've done
successfully a number of times?
What's been the hardest part ofthe journey so far?
Speaker 1 (23:37):
That's an interesting question.
I've got a brilliant partner.
She took us over to I'll cometo answering your question.
She took us over on astorytelling course to to create
a few years back and we had totell some story.
My particular story was I'mgoing to tell you about part of
my life, a time in my life whereeverything hung by a thread and
(24:01):
then the thread broke and I'dinvested a huge amount of time
and effort into this cancerproject, the second bit of it,
which was after we'd establishedthe American software business
that became very successful.
I then worked on thishard-coded solution and I won't
go into the personalities notleast the chap that I work with
(24:24):
is now dead and I'm not into thesort of politics of popularism
by being cruel to people,absolutely but I'd spent
everything that I had, includingmy shirt, on being the suit and
his partner, as a result of oneemail.
I think you can probably tellfrom my career what I've told
(24:45):
you.
I'm not a quitter, verydefinitely not.
And that email, I looked at itfor a couple of hours.
It came in about six o'clock ona dark and stormy night it's
something like November time andthe rain was rattling on the
panes and all that, and I had asort of integrity moment and I
(25:09):
felt much to my surprise, youknow, if somebody asked me this
question one hour before thisevent occurred and I read this
particular email that I wouldchange my entire direction and
abandon the project that I'dbeen working on all this time.
That was a pretty challengingmoment and Hyper-IQ hadn't been
(25:30):
invented at that stage.
It became invented within threemonths of that and I suddenly
thought I suddenly had theinsights that led to the concept
of micro IQ.
Yeah, that was a prettyuncomfortable time.
Speaker 2 (25:44):
How did you cope with it?
And you know, obviously you'veprobably endured trials prior to
this.
Was there a way that you wereable to cope with it?
Did you eventually step awayafter a couple of hours of
looking at it and go for a walk?
Did you ruminate on it?
Did you handle it well, do youthink, or was it actually?
Speaker 1 (26:08):
In a funny way, nobody's ever asked that
question before, so it's a greatquestion to ask.
Actually, well, I've got nojudgment as to whether I
particularly handled it well ornot, but in a sense and I think
that actually partly answersyour earlier question about
being institutionalized I sortof rearranged the building
(26:29):
blocks in my mind and actually,funnily enough I think I felt a
huge sense of relief and I couldsee I had a clue how to sort of
economically move forward.
There were huge challenges thatI faced at that particular time
, but I didn't sort of have asense that there could be a hope
(26:51):
, a glimmer of light.
As I sort of rearranged thebricks in my mind, I actually
felt a sense of relief.
In a sense, I think the stormclouds of catastrophe and things
being very wrong with thepersonal interactions had been
building up and suddenly therewas a set of facts that forced
(27:16):
me to address that and see theworld in a completely different,
from a different perspective.
Speaker 2 (27:23):
And did that energize you?
After that Then you're likeokay, you know, once you got
past the shock of this or theprocessing of what you had to do
and the rearranging the bricksat whatever point did you then
feel almost a sense of energythat this is now an opportunity
to go and do something differentyeah, I think so.
Speaker 1 (27:42):
And as to how that's on the sort of graph of energy
levels you know, like I have onmy garment watch, you know quite
how that plotted I'm not sure,but I certainly started to work
on an escape route and and therewere several steps in that sort
of revelation of how I could uh, instead of being you know, I
(28:05):
used to call myself a suit, andI used to.
Although people that know methese days particularly I'm
highly creative, I think,because I was working with very
smart people that judgedthemselves as creatively
brilliant I always knew I had tosort of pay down my own
personal creativity because theyfound that very uncomfortable
(28:27):
and a threat.
So when I sort of escaped fromcalling myself a suit and became
a genuine technical founder inquite a profound way, yeah,
that's got to be cool, isn't it?
Speaker 2 (28:41):
Yeah, absolutely so.
You then get started on HyperIQand you get coding and
developing.
Have you needed to raiseoutside capital at all as part
of this process?
Speaker 1 (28:52):
Yeah, and that's been a journey, and I'll be
completely transparent about allthe facts.
It's the only way I can.
Really, I think it's when youget old, you just can't live
with it.
You can't be bothered not to.
Speaker 2 (29:05):
Yeah, it's too complicated.
Speaker 1 (29:06):
I know there are certain well-known people that
seem to be able to live in adifferent facts of the world.
Speaker 2 (29:13):
That's right.
Speaker 1 (29:13):
But I think when you're in business, you have to
deal with reality.
So we did actually quitesuccessfully.
So there's been two generationsof this product one under the
name velociant, which we haveshut down, that as a business,
and and what caused that?
And that did raise 400 000pounds ish, and what led to the
(29:36):
end of that was that I was againwithout mentioning games I was
introduced to a decent set ofpeople as technical partners and
, you know, handled therelationship well.
But they they built atechnology stack with
out-of-date code libraries andwhen it came to look at how we
(29:58):
could commercialize it, werealized that in healthcare it
was riddled with vulnerabilities, and so I raised this money,
got pretty close to getting themiracle off the ground, then
found myself stranded with atechnology stack that was flawed
(30:19):
.
We did try to repair it.
That wasted ever more time andthe funds were running out.
It was another challenging timearriving here and I think what
I'm reading in America you know,sort of most startups, in fact
the people that put the fundingin.
(30:39):
They did a pivot and they hadbig technology challenges and
became a different type ofbusiness.
Well, we didn't do any pivots,but they had a rich investor
behind them, but I was leftholding the baby.
The technology stack was flawedand I couldn't raise any money
to take it forward.
Then, through a couple ofmiracles and you know friends
(31:02):
and family I was able to stringtogether and take an awful lot
of personal risks and met thisCTO.
And it was made clear to me byall the people around me that
you know, made clear to me byall the people around me that
you know I would be insane toput the money into the company
that had got the failedtechnology stack with a bunch of
(31:25):
investors that hadn't followedon.
So the only sane way to moveforward and I was very
transparent In fact I looked atall sorts of ways of trying to
carry some of the interests overfor various tax and legal
reasons and the way people canclaim back money from
investments.
(31:45):
It was clear that the two hadto be from an HMRC.
That's our tax people point ofview, that there had to be a
complete clean break between thebusinesses.
So that's when HyperIQ started.
Okay.
Speaker 2 (32:00):
So were there some tough conversations that you
then had to have with theinvestors in the original
business to say, look, I'm sorrybut I can't bring you forward
into the new company and we areshutting down the old one.
Or were you able to get aroundsome of those tax issues and
bring them into the new one?
Speaker 1 (32:17):
I was always completely open.
Most of my suppliers alwaysexpected to have tough
conversations and people beingvery angry and upset.
Actually, everybody was lovelyand very supportive, and this is
startups and they expectthere's high risk All that and I
(32:40):
think they could see that I'dmade a genuine attempt, more
than a genuine attempt.
I'd worked over quite a periodof time to try and stitch a
solution together and there weresome pretty profound legal HMRC
reasons why whatever I wishedto do, that wasn't in anybody's
interest.
Speaker 2 (32:58):
Yeah, yeah.
And so then you get into that.
You've got then the new company, and then did you raise new
investment from a new set ofinvestors?
Speaker 1 (33:06):
We're in a different world now to that earlier
situation.
Raising money I don't know ifyou'd agree with this, but
raising money for because it'seasier to build technology.
Raising money for a startupPeople sort of assume you're
going to build some sort ofminimum viable product.
So we have no external funding.
Speaker 2 (33:27):
So you bootstrap this next iteration, which is
actually very impressive becausewe know many founders out there
know how tough that is, and I'malso interested around the
older tech stack.
One of the things I haveobserved in the past is, if you
get founders who are from anindustry and founders who have
been around an industry for along time, they've often got
(33:47):
contacts and softwaredevelopment contacts that have
also been around the industryfor a long time and can
therefore have slightly oldertech stacks.
Was that your experience?
You had people that were a bitolder themselves building the
code, or actually they wereyounger people but just using
older sort of out-of-date techstacks and I don't think
(34:08):
architecturally.
Speaker 1 (34:09):
With the first generation product let's call it
that that was particularly anissue.
But the way we built this newtech stack, it's all aws and
it's all and actually to get the.
There are yet more tragedies.
Actually that happened alongthe line because we outsourced a
lot of the development to speedit up.
(34:30):
Some very decent people, buttheir team was largely rather
remarkably young team actuallyas well largely destroyed by
COVID.
So we had three developers thatwere young developers working
on a project in a biosecurebuilding in in india die whilst
working on the project and thathas presented an enormous amount
(34:54):
of challenges that should yetfurther delayed the project.
And my very brilliant cto,david weston, has.
Then he was sort ofaccelerating the development and
working through a young teambut to get the product into the
market.
He's taken on a lot of thetechnical development and we've
(35:15):
kept all these differentrelationships alive through all
these difficulties.
Speaker 2 (35:20):
Yeah, I'm also now keen to sort of start talking a
little bit about you personally,as opposed to the business, and
the question I've got is aroundyou know the sources of
inspiration that you look for,whether it's in podcasts or in
books that you like to read,whether it's even escaping and
listening to music or exercising.
(35:40):
How do you recharge?
How do you get you?
You get excited about what itis that you do.
Speaker 1 (35:47):
Great question.
I would say I'm constantlylistening.
I've always been big on.
We have a radio station I don'tknow if it's got over to New
Zealand called Radio 4.
It's a BBC radio station.
I would say it's prettyeclectic, you know, and so I've
always been a huge consumer ofdocumentaries.
(36:10):
And podcasts are reallydocumentaries, aren't they Sort
of?
Actually they're better.
You know, it's a shame the BBChas taken such a long time to
really discover them, becausewhat I liked about podcasts in
the early days of mobile isunlike a TV show where something
is presented to you in apackaged manner, particularly in
(36:34):
the early days of mobileinterfaces, and every week
something was happening.
You could hear the opinionsbeing shaped around the table,
and that is so much richer thana pre-packaged you know,
brilliantly produced bbcdocumentary.
Speaker 2 (36:54):
Perhaps I think so, um, so I yeah it's interesting
because I think you know, formillennia humans have engaged
with one another through storiesand we share knowledge, almost
going back to where we startedthe show, talking about
conversation and thetranscribing of conversation.
Actually, the creation ofstories and sharing of stories,
(37:17):
particularly in an audio manner,like an audio-only podcast, has
a profound impact on ourability to listen, to think
about the ideas being created.
Obviously, it has thatadvantage with the audio-only,
of being able to do other thingswhile you're listening, whether
you're exercising or cleaningthe house, you know whatever it
is.
So that's interesting.
Speaker 1 (37:37):
Have you ever come across a show, bbc show called
it's a history show calledYou're Dead?
Speaker 2 (37:41):
to Me.
I have heard about it, but Ihaven't seen it oh you must.
Speaker 1 (37:45):
It's such an interesting format.
It's got three people in it oneis a comedian, one is an expert
and the other is the producer,director, presenter, guy.
You know the person in yourrole and because there's three
people, it wouldn't work.
You still need this sort ofinterview.
This is doing a different job,but because it's got three
(38:09):
people in, it's got a sort ofintellectual unpredictability
about it.
Yes, and there are some veryintelligent, very able comedians
that are also very wellinformed on that particular
subject matter.
So, for example, there's awonderful one.
I think the world's mostsuccessful pirate was a Chinese
(38:30):
lady that had 70,000 otherpirates working for her
somewhere around the 18thcentury.
Speaker 2 (38:39):
That's an interesting the mind starts to boggle.
She clearly was that's almost,you know one of the first female
global entrepreneurs.
I know I actually heard a story, I read a story about madame
clico so verve clico and she wasprobably the first truly global
entrepreneur with the champagnehouse, obviously.
(39:00):
So now, and in terms ofpodcasts, I know you, you also
consume a lot of us content, doyou find that also is, you know,
enormously helpful?
Speaker 1 (39:09):
I found that a very rich learning curve.
I was innately suspicious ofthe way we were doing things in
europe and I don't know how youregard us europeans.
You know old world type ofstuff, but they talk about being
institutionalized.
We're sort of pompous andpatronizing and think we know it
(39:30):
all, and I think the Europeanstartup world has always been
somewhat like that and too manygovernment agents with money
that they're wasting.
And I came across this guy thatyou're probably aware of called
jason calacanis.
Yes, and I literally listened Iwas listening to this week in
tech and and he then had theidea, you know, to sort of
(39:54):
slightly borrow their name.
It caused a bit of friction atthe time, as I recall, and start
up this week in startups andwhat I liked about it is that he
went for all these horribleentities that were, oh, just pay
me two thousand dollars andwe'll raise money for you, and
of course, it's a completelydysfunctional way of doing
(40:17):
things.
You know rich peoplepatronizing them, and he, you
know he's been incrediblysuccessful.
Seven unicorns is he up to.
And then we've got, you know,bbc, you know, with a I think
it's a japanese, frenchfranchise and dragons dead.
You have dragons then, yes,yeah, in new zealand, and
(40:40):
they've got a bit better.
Actually, somebody's told themto behave, but they're sort of
showing off.
We're the big rich people andthey've got a bit better.
Actually, somebody's told themto behave, but they're sort of
showing off.
We're the big rich people andthey haven't ever had a unicorn
in their bloody life.
All they've done is bullying,populism, and so it's a bit like
you know, throwing theChristians to the lions, whereas
Jason has, you know, genuinelyfunded hundreds of businesses.
Speaker 2 (41:04):
Yeah, and has the track record to back it up.
And is there a philosophy or amantra that you like to live by
in life or that you use, youknow, regularly?
That's sort of an approach tohow you live life.
Speaker 1 (41:17):
That's a good question.
Integrity, I think matters.
Well, I don't think I know itmatters.
So you know I strongly believein integrity, being decent to
people.
I'm sure I fail at that all thetime, but I do try and I call
myself a social Christian.
In other words, you know,culturally try and do the right
things.
But you know I don't believeall the floaty spiritual stuff
(41:41):
yeah, it's that helps.
Speaker 2 (41:42):
I'm not sure I've ever answered the question, but
that's me being honest well,it's a nice segue into another
question, which is because youare a very intelligent guy and
you see the world in quite anice, unique way, in the way
that your brain works.
Is there something that youbelieve very strongly in in the
world that actually very fewpeople do?
(42:02):
It might be somethingrelatively scientific, it might
be something philosophical orpolitical.
Is there something that youhold quite a strong view on but
actually very few people do?
Speaker 1 (42:12):
I'll give you one, probably several, but I'm going
to name a person in the lastthousand years who's been one of
the most influential people inthe world.
She's a woman and certainlyprobably been the most
influential British person,english person, and therefore
had quite a big influence on therest of the world.
I would say.
(42:32):
Unfortunately, henry VIII cuther head off and Berlin, yes, I
can remember the BBC, I think itwas, or somebody doing a, you
know the 10 Greatest Britons,and Parson with all his sort of
bluster, the one with Brunel.
But if you think about AnneBoleyn, two things that she
(42:54):
achieved One was she madeEngland or the British
Protestant.
That's pretty significant, hugecultural implications.
British Protestant that'spretty significant, huge
cultural implications.
Secondly, she was the mother of, historically, our most
important and influentialmonarch, elizabeth I, and you
(43:15):
think of Shakespeare and thewhole and the building of the
English Navy.
That all started.
How she respected, had to work,you know, because she was a
woman and she wasn't, you know,sort of confrontational in the
way that men would be.
Respected had to work, you know, because she was a woman and
she wasn't, you know, sort ofconfrontational in the way that
men would be.
She had to work with parliamentso you could say you know, it
laid the foundations ofdemocracy.
And we don't even recognize herproperly in history.
(43:38):
We talk about henry the eighthbecause all these murder.
We don't even talk about himbeing a corrupt fat murderer.
But we completely fail to seehow important somebody like
Amber Leonard is.
Speaker 2 (43:52):
Absolutely.
And final question for me isthere a question actually I
haven't asked that you wouldwish that I had One that you
would love to be able to answerif somebody would only ask it,
that's an unexpected one, I'mtempted to say.
Speaker 1 (44:10):
You know, one of the things I've learned from running
is why aren't we taught how torun properly?
Eighty percent of people runheel strikers.
I don't know if you know whatI'm talking about.
Yes, I do.
Yeah, the natural gate, youknow, if you run in your bare
feet, is to run on your forefoot, and that's sort of a metaphor
for life.
If we can't learn how to runproperly and we can't be taught
(44:34):
at school something as basic asrunning, it sort of raises quite
a lot of questions abouteverything, doesn't it?
Speaker 2 (44:41):
Absolutely.
And everything we are taught inschool and everything we are
not taught about school, I oftenthink about most of the biggest
things in life how to buy ahouse, how to fall in love, how
to grieve at a funeral are nevertaught in schools.
They're just something thatescapes our scholastic system.
Look, that's kind of a funnyplace for us to finish today.
(45:02):
Simon, it's been an absolutepleasure chatting to you.
I would love to be able to sitdown, I'm sure, over a wine, and
chat more fully, because Ithink we'd have a really cool
conversation.
Appreciate you staying up latein the UK.
If it was only a way we couldflatten the earth and solve the
problem of time zones, thatwould be wonderful.
But I really do appreciate thetime that you've given today.
(45:23):
I will include ways that peoplecan connect with you in the
show notes to the episode,because I know there will be
some people who would love tokind of hear a little bit more
about HyperIQ and may want toconnect with you personally.
So I'll include those.
But thank you again for yourtime today.
Speaker 1 (45:38):
Greg, it's been a huge privilege.
Thank you for such perceptiveand interesting insights and
questions.
Thanks, Simon.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Follow now to get the latest episodes of Dateline NBC completely free, or subscribe to Dateline Premium for ad-free listening and exclusive bonus content: DatelinePremium.com
Stuff You Should Know
If you've ever wanted to know about champagne, satanism, the Stonewall Uprising, chaos theory, LSD, El Nino, true crime and Rosa Parks, then look no further. Josh and Chuck have you covered.
My Favorite Murder with Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark
My Favorite Murder is a true crime comedy podcast hosted by Karen Kilgariff and Georgia Hardstark. Each week, Karen and Georgia share compelling true crimes and hometown stories from friends and listeners. Since MFM launched in January of 2016, Karen and Georgia have shared their lifelong interest in true crime and have covered stories of infamous serial killers like the Night Stalker, mysterious cold cases, captivating cults, incredible survivor stories and important events from history like the Tulsa race massacre of 1921. My Favorite Murder is part of the Exactly Right podcast network that provides a platform for bold, creative voices to bring to life provocative, entertaining and relatable stories for audiences everywhere. The Exactly Right roster of podcasts covers a variety of topics including historic true crime, comedic interviews and news, science, pop culture and more. Podcasts on the network include Buried Bones with Kate Winkler Dawson and Paul Holes, That's Messed Up: An SVU Podcast, This Podcast Will Kill You, Bananas and more.