The Purpose of Wealth/Scott Saslow - Family Offices, Impact Investing, Greta Thunberg ~ Spark of Ages Ep18 - Spark of Ages

Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Speaker 1 (00:07):
Hello and welcome to the Spark of Ages podcast.
I'm your host, rajiv Parikh.
I'm the CEO and founder ofPosition Squared, an amazing
growth marketing company basedin Silicon Valley.
So, yes, I'm a Silicon Valleyentrepreneur, but I'm also a
business news junkie and ahistory nerd.
I'm fascinated by how bigworld-changing movements go from
the spark of an idea to aninnovation that reshapes our

(00:28):
lives.
In every episode, we do a deepdive with our guests about what
led them to their own eurekamoments and how they're going
about executing it and, perhapsmost importantly, how they get
other people to believe in themso that their idea could also
become a spark for the ages.
This is the Spark of Agespodcast.

(00:53):
In addition to myself, we haveour producer, sandeep, who will
occasionally chime in to makesure we don't get two in the
weeks with tech jargon.
Yeah, yeah, I'm going to keepit honest here.
I'm going to keep it on thelevel, as the kids say.
Today's guest is Scott Saslow.
Scott Saslow is the founder andCEO of the Palo Alto,
california-based One WorldInvestments, which provides

(01:16):
investment capital and advisoryservices to help organizations
scale social impact.
One World also manages anearly-stage impact investing
fund.
Over his career, scott has beena founder or founding team
member of seven startupbusinesses.
Prior to founding One World,scott was the founder and CEO of
the Institute of ExecutiveDevelopment, or ExecSite,

(01:38):
supporting executives in global2000 organizations including
American Express, blackrock,intel, time Warner and the US
Navy.
Scott also worked for Siebel.
I don't think you've heard ofSiebel.

Speaker 2 (01:50):
I haven't heard of Siebel.

Speaker 1 (01:51):
They were eventually acquired he was in diapers, yeah
, and Microsoft Corporation inleadership roles.
Scott is a graduate of myfavorite business school,
harvard Business School andNorthwestern University.

Speaker 2 (02:02):
There's other business University.
There are a few.

Speaker 1 (02:04):
There was just that one.

Speaker 2 (02:06):
It happens.

Speaker 1 (02:06):
There's more.
He got his MBA and a BA ineconomics at Northwestern MBA
from Harvard.
He has authored over 25articles for publications such
as Forbes and Directorship andhas been interviewed and quoted
in Harvard Business Review,bloomberg and Businessweek.
Scott, welcome to the Spark ofAges.

Speaker 2 (02:23):
Glad to be here and just so you guys know, most of
that is kind of true.

Speaker 1 (02:31):
That's what we want to get to, is what's not.
You had ChatGPT.

Speaker 2 (02:33):
Do your bio for you and didn't fact check it.
It happened.
It's not an hallucination yet,but when we dial out, that's
what's up, that's awesome.

Speaker 1 (02:40):
I'm really happy to have Scott here, because he has
such a wide ranging set ofexperiences and he's taught me a
lot about social impactinvesting, and so I just love to
share all that with you.
What I'm really excited aboutlearning, scott, is what you're
doing.
Most recently, I think youmentioned that you are about to
release a new book in the nextmonth.

(03:02):
Tell us about it.

Speaker 2 (03:04):
Thank you so much for having me.
I'm excited to be here.
The book is really exciting.
The book is in part, my ownstory, but it's also reflective
of 20, 30 some folks that Iinterviewed.
The title of the book isBuilding a Sustainable Family
Office.
For those that may not know, afamily office is generally the
infrastructure, the people andthe process and the legal

(03:27):
entities that a wealthy personwill set up to help them manage
their wealth.
But it does a whole bunch morethan that.
It does investing in accountingand taking care of taxes and
estate planning.
It's also where families willgenerally house their
philanthropic activity, so ifthey have a family foundation or
if they're using a donor advicefund and it also supports the

(03:49):
family in various ways.
So these are just.
As a student of business, Ifind these business entities
very interesting.
There's a small number,something on the order of 10,000
in the world.
They represent the order of $6trillion in total wealth, which
is a big number.

Speaker 1 (04:08):
That's a huge number.

Speaker 2 (04:09):
Slightly, slightly huge, but it's actually less
than 10% to what that numberwill grow to in the next two
decades.
So, the point is, this is asmall but yet very powerful
group of investors andindividuals and families, and I
thought it'd be reallyinteresting to dig into them and
understand what makes them tick.
How can they be more efficient?

(04:30):
How can they be sustainable interms of their ability to be
effective and lastingorganizations?
So is this like the Bill andMelinda Gates Foundation.

Speaker 1 (04:38):
This is that kind of thing.

Speaker 2 (04:39):
At the very top of the scale, sure, the Gates and
the billionaires of the world,and it includes a lot of other
investors that may not behousehold names, but they've
accumulated wealth through someway, some form of another, and
they're trying to figure out howto best manage that.
There's a whole bunch of otherelements that go into trying to

(05:01):
manage and grow family officesthat make them not very
sustainable, and that's reallywhere the idea of the book came
from.
Is, you know, these areentities that often will kind of
crash and burn.
We've witnessed a whole bunchof these, and so I find the
topic fascinating and kind ofintellectually interesting.
On one level, it's also relatedto the work of One World.

(05:21):
My belief is, the more healthythese family offices can be, the
more likely they will beefficient and generous as it
relates to their ownphilanthropy, as it relates to
their own impact and sustainableinvesting.
So that's how it ties to thatbroader one.

Speaker 1 (05:36):
It's a really interesting intersection because
most people would not like oneof the things we like talking
about is great innovators Right,would not like one of the
things we like talking about isgreat innovators right.
And so to fuel that innovation,first of all there's innovators
in the sense that a lot ofthese folks, they build a lot of
wealth, whether it's intraditional businesses or in
something that we've never heardof or never built before, and

(05:58):
it turns into something I thinkfamily offices typically start
at people who've built about$100 to $200 million in wealth.

Speaker 2 (06:05):
About right.

Speaker 1 (06:06):
Something like that, and then it just goes up from
there.
They're looking for a way tomanage that money so that they
can do what they want to doafterwards and have somebody
professionally manage it.
Or it can be a way for them tofuel their ambitions in terms of
putting that money towardsareas of interest for them, and
that includes potential impactinvesting or social investments

(06:28):
or charitable investments.
It's a way for them to pushthat in.
So the $7 trillion that you sayis going to grow to $74
trillion right $7 trillion.
If you look at it compared tothe US economy, that's about a
third of the yearly US economy.
Right, US is about over 20 plustrillion dollars.
That's a big third of theyearly US economy.
Us is about over 20 plustrillion dollars.
That's a big chunk of that, andso there's a lot of money

(06:49):
that's being put to work thatcould be put to work in more
innovative ways than typicalpension fund investing or
endowment investing or evenpersonal investing.

Speaker 2 (07:00):
That's exactly right, and so it's really up to the
principals or the owners of thiscapital and these offices to
figure out not only how theywant to invest.
Sometimes they're very keyedinto it and then other times,
quite honestly, they're not.
They'll hire someone and sayshow me some great numbers, show
me some great returns.
That's all I really need you todo.

(07:21):
There's other investors and Ifall in the latter camp where
I'm actually really keen to knowhow are those dollars being
used?
Who's making money from mymoney?
How are they making money?
Am I in agreement with that?
Does that kind of align with myvalues?
And I'm someone who wants topush it as far as I can.

(07:41):
I understand the role thatphilanthropy has the nonprofit
sector and philanthropic dollarsto support a lot of that
activity.
That's huge.
We need to support that as muchas we can.
But the real dollars?
I think what we learned inbusiness school what is it?
The Willie Sutton rule?
Why did he rob banks?
That's where the money is.
So the real money is in thepublic markets and the capital

(08:03):
markets Right, and if you couldinfluence how those dollars are
invested, how they move around,if you could influence how
companies think about their ownmission.
This gets into some of thetopics around ESG investing,
which I know has beenpoliticized just like everything
, everything else.
I think I read today that waterhas been politicized Water

(08:24):
Literally everything, which is abit of a shame.
But that aside, it's reallythis notion that dollars as an
investor, yes, you can andshould get a return for your
investment.
But I think that's really justtable stakes If you say I'm just
looking for a return.

Speaker 1 (08:40):
Then you can do kind of like Warren Buffett says what
would you advise your family todo with your wealth?
He's like, well, I'll put in abunch of stock index funds.
Now, of course, what he's doingis he's doing the giving pledge
, where he's going to give over50, or probably 90%, to all
kinds of foundations, includingthe Gates Foundation, so he's
actually going to put that moneyto work to help other folks.
I think what you're getting atis I can take money and I can

(09:02):
put it in the S&P 500 or a bunchof different index funds and
let it run passively, or I cando something really clever and
innovative, and I think that'swhat that's, I think, some of
what's guiding you right.
I think you have access tofamily office as well, and
you've talked to so many of themand there's more they can do,
and many of them, many of thefolks that who've been at these
family offices they come fromlike there's the original one

(09:27):
that creates the wealth, andthen they say, hey, what else
can we do?
We can really make a differencewith this.
Let me help you do that.

Speaker 2 (09:35):
So I think you have a lot of stories like that, and
so that is the whole notion andreally sustainable investing
that's probably the umbrellaterm that includes other types
of values, aligned investing, ifwe want to use that kind of
phrase or concept.
That is both in public markets,that's certainly in private
markets.
Sometimes in the privatemarkets that's specifically
referred to impact investing,where you're actually funding a

(09:57):
for-profit business.
That's building a solution to aproblem a social problem,
environmental problem to aproblem a social problem,
environmental problem.
You're actually developing somesort of way to deal with an
issue that the capital ownercares about.
But my point is it's even theiropportunities, really across
all asset classes.
So that's in real estate, that'sin the public equities, that's

(10:19):
in the credit markets, and sothat's something that OneWorld
is trying to do.
With a capital base that wehave, which is relatively modest
, we're saying what are all theways we can support sustainable
investing?
And the key thing for us thisis really important is we
believe there are opportunitiesto do this and we have proven
this thus far in anon-concessionary way.

(10:39):
What's a concession?
I see Sandeep's very confused.
He's giving me that kind offurled eyebrow.

Speaker 1 (10:46):
look, I thought concession Sandeep, with you
corning peanuts at a game.
Is that what concessions are?

Speaker 2 (10:52):
Yeah, it's big league chew right.
May I offer an alternatedefinition?
No, so the notion is basically,as an investor, given the
amount of risk that you want totake on, you need to be
compensated for that risk.
And it is a true statement thatthere are some sustainable and
some impact investments that arewhat's called concessionary.

(11:14):
They do not meet the marketrate.
If the market rate in a givenasset class might be 8% or 15%
or 4%, you may achieve thatminus something concession I'm
giving.
Instead of the 4%, I'm getting3%.
The reality is a subset of allthe sustainable investing that
happens is actually designed tobe concessionary and is done at

(11:38):
a concession, meaning themajority is non-concessionary.
You're actually hitting therates that you get.
And this is really importantbecause I do think the first
wave of sustainable investingand supporting these kind of
impact companies and whatnot,there's those that believed,
kind of on moral grounds, thiswas a good thing to do.
I have a responsibility.

(11:58):
I need to make the world better.
I care about issues X, y and Z.
I want to both be an investorbut also make a difference
through this money, not just geta return, and that's great.
There's nothing wrong with thatphilosophy.
But my point is, I think thefirst wave of impact in
sustainable investors weren't asfinancially sensitive to the
return they're getting.

(12:18):
We're now at a point in thepublic markets.
The statistic I think I've mostrecently heard is we're up to
about a third of all publiclymanaged capital is being
invested in some sort ofsustainable strategy.

Speaker 1 (12:32):
So what are some examples of that?

Speaker 2 (12:34):
Well, I mean, it might be something around the
environment, right?
You say, okay, look, one of thecauses I care about is climate
change and dealing withcompanies.
So therefore, I want to, either, as an impact investor, invest
in companies that are tacklingclimate change.
Maybe it's an innovative carboncapture technology, it's
putting carbon into cement andit's still being done as a

(12:55):
business.
This isn't a nonprofit, butit's something that we believe
achieves both.
It's a good, scalable business,but also has some sort of
environmental impact.
Or maybe it's something relatedto healthcare or public
education.
There are really a variety ofcauses or ways that dollars can
be put to work to do both, toboth serve as a good investment.
And the point I was just makingwas it's really important.

(13:18):
We're at a stage now and that'swhy I share that one-third
statistic where it's reallybecoming more mainstream, and
for that to continue, investorsneed to see this is not a money
losing proposition compared towhat I might be able to get with
a traditional investment.
So that is not only the way inwhich we're trying to do that

(13:40):
with the relatively smallcapital base we have, but we're
trying to actually be kind ofgood advocates for this practice
that sustainable investing canand is being done in ways where
there's no financial law.
In fact, some would say it canbe additive.

Speaker 1 (13:55):
It could be better.
You should be able to do better.
It shouldn't be thisconcessionary notion where you
make less.
It should actually be better.
You've been investing in someof these companies.
Do you want to list a couple ofyour favorites?

Speaker 2 (14:09):
The ones that I think are doing some really
interesting things that we'llhear a lot more of.
One is in the Bay Area, in theEast Bay in Oakland.
It's called Lilac Solutions andthey've developed a process by
which they can refine lithiumfrom these kind of salt brines
where lithium as a mineralexists.
Typically it's a verycumbersome, environmentally

(14:32):
hazardous, expensive, longprocess to mine lithium.
They've developed a way to dothat much more efficiently.
It uses one-tenth the water andlithium, as we know, is very
key for the transition toelectric batteries,
non-polluting vehicles andpowering the whole electric
economy.

Speaker 1 (14:50):
I'm not allowed to put them in my checked luggage.

Speaker 2 (14:52):
Exactly Be careful where you pack them.
Thank you, sandeep.
Good point, so that's just afun one.
On the more technical side,we've also gotten excited over
the years in sustainable foodright.
Our food systems, I think, needa lot of innovation to be more
healthy for everyone involved,from the farmers to the planet,
to the people eating the foodproducts.

(15:13):
So we've supported sustainablefood products over the years.
Some alternative protein typecompanies, crickets- the great
pizza topping Sandeep is sayingwhere are my crickets?

Speaker 1 (15:26):
I saw an investment recently by investing in a
special company that knows howto make black flies at scale.
You can use that as meal forshrimp and there's going to be a
huge protein shortage.
This is a way to lower the costand higher volume shrimp
production because there arefewer diseases coming out of it.
So it's kind of a quadruple win.

(15:46):
I never knew that we needed toproduce more black flies.

Speaker 2 (15:49):
That's insane Okay.

Speaker 1 (15:51):
Can I step back a little bit and just ask Scott
what's a day in the life ofScott Sassler?

Speaker 2 (15:56):
There's probably some combination of the following.
It's never in the same order,right.
Especially these days it hasbeen very much focused on the
book.
The book is about three weeksfrom being launched, so we're in
the final stages there and overthe last couple of quarters
that's been probably 30, somepercent, 40% of the portfolio,
of my kind of time portfolio.
Another third is probablyrelated to the early stage

(16:17):
investing.
So that's either looking at newopportunities to invest in,
speaking with and thinking aboutthe existing portfolio and
which of those are looking to dofollow-on financings and which
of those we want to participatein.
So I'd say that's another chunkof activity.
And then I'd say the thirdbucket is probably more of a

(16:39):
general bucket related to my ownfamily office and managing that
, so that's coordinating withsome of the other professionals
we work with.
Whether that's on theinvestment side or the legal
side or the accounting, there'salways plenty to do there.

Speaker 1 (16:54):
All these different things every day, you know,
towards all the different areasthat you're looking at.
What are the problems that yousee with impact investing that
you and One World are working ontoday as part of that day in
the life?

Speaker 2 (17:07):
Yeah Well, I think this first problem, if you will,
is this broadermisunderstanding I alluded to
earlier that impact investingequals concessionary or impact
investing.
Oh yeah, yeah, that's kind oflike philanthropy, right, I mean
it's a great way for me to losemoney.

Speaker 1 (17:26):
Exactly, or maybe I'll just get my money back.
I'll get my money back and I'lldo some good.
Thank you.
So that puts you in a differentworld when it comes to how you
think about how you invest right.
It's a pseudo philanthropyslash investing thesis.

Speaker 2 (17:41):
Well, look, I think it's great that there's consent,
just like I think it'swonderful and there'll always be
pure philanthropy.
You give money to a cause or anorganization and you know
you're not going to get anyfinancial return.
That's existed since the startof time and we should put as
much resources behind that as wecan.
I also think that concessionarywhere it's not market rate

(18:03):
investing is a good thing forthose investors that have the
appetite and desire and say,look, I want to do this.
I like supporting for-profitbusinesses that are tackling
solutions.
In addition to you know, everyimpact investor is probably also
a philanthropist.
But where I get most excitedand where I'm trying to kind of
make a change is to say,especially to wealth owners that

(18:25):
haven't ventured into impact orsustainable investing, it can
be done without theconcessionary part.
So if that's your hang up, thatyou're like no, no, no, I must
hit my.
You know if it's a fixed income, you know it needs to be 4% or
if it's, you know, developingmarkets, that you know I need a
certain percentage, that thereare opportunities to do that.

(18:47):
Now that can be hard to findthe opportunities.
It's not as prevalent as yourmainstream investments or the
opportunities that you might see.
I mean the founding story ofWonderworld.
There was, I think, back to itwas 2015.
And I was speaking to a reallybright woman, a recent grad out

(19:10):
of Stanford Business School, andshe was talking about her
startup.
Her startup was really designedto tackle climate change by
helping ranchers that have thesehuge grasslands.
Innovative ways for theranchers to rotate the cattle
that we're feeding on thegrasslands, and doing it in a
more efficient way, wouldgreatly help to sequester carbon

(19:34):
in the grasslands.
It was very kind of simple idea, but something really difficult
in practice to pull off, andshe was approaching it from a
software perspective.
She said this is a data problem.
We know where this data livesright now in a bunch of silos
this, that and the other.
We're going to pull it together.
We're going to build a business.
I know these ranches will payfor it because they'll be more
productive, they'll make moremoney.

(19:55):
This isn't asking them to do afavor, but the point was here
was this really greatentrepreneur with this really
interesting business idea?
And I said well, yeah, you're arecent grad, it's 2015.
It's raining money here inSilicon Valley.
Times must be good.
And she's like yeah, all myclassmates, that's exactly what
they're seeing.
It doesn't matter what they'redoing.
They're getting money thrown atthem.

(20:15):
But for me, some investors areturned off by the idea that I'm
trying to both build a business,but I also have this
environmental goal that I'mtrying to kind of think about
and solve for, and to me thatreally seemed I mean both a
shame from a societalperspective, but also like

(20:36):
there's money on the table.
There needs to be a better wayfor great entrepreneurs like you
, christine, and investors outthere like me and many others
that I know that are looking forthese opportunities.
So that's really been one ofthe things that we tried to do
over the years with OneWorld isconnect entrepreneurs and
investors in new and innovativeways, and I think there's just

(20:58):
great ways to connect them.

Speaker 1 (20:59):
Wealth of ideas to put all this together.
Really, you're connecting thedots.
You're the guy that's going allright.
There's all this money outthere in family offices that we
need to align their values withthese entrepreneurs that are
doing these great things to helpthe world.

Speaker 2 (21:16):
This is correct.
Yeah, the book is not quite atthat level, because the book is
actually taking a step back andsaying look before family office
X, y or Z, you can, you know,and it's your call, right?
I am never going to tell anyonewhat they need to be doing or
should be doing with their funds.
But the point is, the biggestconcern that family offices have

(21:37):
is how to keep the work thatthey're doing and the wealth
they've created and the goodfortune they've been part of,
how to keep that going, how tohave the subsequent generations
participate in that, how to havethem also be wealth creators,
not just be inheritors and takethe money and buy a bunch of
houses, but do somethingmeaningful with that.

(21:58):
So that is something that everyfamily office I've ever come in
contact which is now got to benorth of 100, they all have this
concern.
They're terribly scared aboutspoiling their children.
They realize that they're in aunique situation and they're
going to be treated verydifferently than a lot of other
people and they don't reallylike that to a large degree.
So they're happy and proudabout the wealth they've created

(22:20):
.
They want to be generous andshare with their family.
They do not want their kidsspoiled at all.
They'll do anything to avoidthat, I mean.
And what you see is that theyquite honestly and often will
lie and hide the wealth, noteven tell about it until they're
40, 50, 60 kind of thing.

Speaker 1 (22:38):
Right To make them work for it, to make them feel
like because I think a lot ofthem they earned it on their own
.
They created some business,some idea and they grounded and
pounded and made it happen, andthey don't want their kids to
feel like, wow, life is sosimple, I just have to do a
couple of things, and I thinkthat's how they feel, that way.

Speaker 2 (22:55):
Absolutely Not.
Let them get this idea that,hey, I can just coast because I
have this big money cushion tofall back on, but by the same
token, sometimes that practicecan backfire and there can be a
lot of lost opportunity for thebroader family.
So, in any event, the point is,what I wanted the book to do is
just start from the perspectiveof look, any given family you

(23:18):
have, whatever the level ofwealth might be, how do you
maintain that?
That's the table stakes.
You want to maintain that, butyou also want to have a mission
for your wealth and your familyoffice.
You want to think about what'sthe purpose of it.
It's okay, you're not a badperson if you say well, my
number one concern is me and mykids, and I want to have money
and we want to go to niceresorts and buy nice things.

(23:41):
That's okay, you've earned that.
But the point is that's tablestakes.
Let's take it to the next level.
What else could you be doingthat would really engage your
kids, the next gen?
They're millennials or Gen Z.
Well, let me tell you thiswhole notion of sustainable
investing that really resonateswith them.
And if you're not doing some ofthat, I'm not saying go jump in

(24:03):
head first if that's not foryou, but you might want to try
it.

Speaker 1 (24:07):
So the thinking is let's take a step back, because
you said, like I think, about30% of them fail after 40% every
time it's passed in ageneration.

Speaker 2 (24:18):
So it survives.

Speaker 1 (24:20):
And so, instead of furthering it away, let's have
some more purpose behind it.
Let's at least design it so itdoesn't just disappear.
And I think you're taking a lotof what you've learned, because
part of one of your earlierstartups was in the area of
executive development, executiveleadership.
So in part of that you'redriving, helping people
understand their purpose andthen driving that into action,

(24:40):
and it sounds like you'remelding together these multiple
experiences.
You also your family has afamily office.
You also have you know, you'vebeen with entrepreneur, a lot of
entrepreneurs.
You've also done executivedevelopment and now you're also
an impact investing, whichpeople have, impact investing as
well as philanthropy.
So you've seen all sides ofthis and you're bringing it all

(25:02):
together in this book.

Speaker 2 (25:03):
Exactly right and it's interesting I mean back in
the family to the family officeconversation the learning aspect
that they can be benefitingfrom the learning journey that
these offices can some of themdo, but many of them I think
it's still an opportunity forthem.
It's really interesting to puton my learning and development
hat and look at it from thatperspective and say, okay, what

(25:26):
are the skills and capabilitiesthey need?
How do they develop that?
I think we're going to see alot more of that going forward
and, yeah, to your point,ultimately it's in service of
achieving what you want toachieve out of that pool of
resources.

Speaker 1 (25:38):
So I imagine it's got to be tough to be persuading
family offices to allocate thecapital in certain ways.
Right, it's got to be tricky.
So what's your advice?
To say, a social entrepreneurseeking capital from them?
Is it really tough?
No, and then how do they get toit?

Speaker 2 (25:55):
Right.
So family offices will not betold how to invest.
Typically, they're very savvybusiness people, leaders,
thinkers, investors.
No one, especially me, willcome and say, hey, you need to
do this, you need to invest thisway or that way.
The book is not about.
This is how you should investyour money.
The book is about how do youkeep your family office healthy

(26:16):
and sustainable and build it soit's built to last.
That book is about how do youkeep your family office healthy
and sustainable and build it soit's built to last.
That's exactly what the bookdoes and, I think, what's in
large demand.
To your question, maybe morepointedly, when they decide if
and when a family and I thinkthe research shows somewhere
between 40% and 50% of familyoffices are already supporting
sustainable investing in someway, shape or form Maybe they're

(26:37):
not doing it across the wholebalance sheet.
Maybe they've chosen a fewasset classes.
They've said because of my nextgen, we're doing some impact
investments and that's a greatway for me, as the older
principal, and my 20-somethingor 30-something to work on
something together.
We have fun.
Where it's aboutentrepreneurship, you can relate
to it, et cetera.
That's a great technique, oneof many but what I would say is

(27:00):
look, I mean family offices.
Most of them care pretty deeplybeyond things just around how do
I get a return and how do Ifile my taxes on time, and so
forth.
So it's a question of findingout what are their interests.
Right, if you're in contactwith a principal directly, you
can ask them.
You know what are the thingsthey care about, what are the
things they work on?
How are they tackling itthrough philanthropy?

(27:22):
How are they perhaps alreadytackling it through investing
and using the for-profit, youknow business model?

Speaker 1 (27:28):
So will they find you because they already have a
fund out or they already have aninitiative through various
organizations, or do you, as abudding entrepreneur or someone
who's built something, golooking for that?
How would I access it if I'm anentrepreneur?

Speaker 2 (27:43):
Well.
So how do you crack the familyoffice market is the question.
So, yeah, it can be a littletough.
I've actually written aboutthis on Impact Alpha and a few
other places.
You will start to meetindividuals who either work as a
principal at a family office orwork as an executive, a hired
individual who is out therelooking for opportunities.

(28:06):
You can build relations and tryand understand what's their
timeline.
How do they want to be involved?
Typically, just like anyinvestor class, I think family
office principals love beyondthe dollar support so they can
really find a win-win.
Let's say there's a familyoffice that made its initial
source of money was through realestate.
If you're a real estatebusiness seeking capital, you

(28:28):
don't just want their capitalfrom that family office, you
want their expertise, knowledge,networks, contacts and so forth
.
So I'd say that's another keything with any investor type
Understand what are all thelevers that a given family
office has to pull, because thefamily will certainly be more
excited where they can not onlywrite a check but then maybe be

(28:49):
involved or lend their expertise, help to socialize that sort of
thing.
But it can be tricky.
Arguably, most family officestend to be pretty closed off and
they want to stay private.

Speaker 1 (29:01):
So there's not this listing of here's all the family
offices and their interests.
I met a person the other daywho, family, made a lot of
significant wealth in realestate and they were interested
in agricultural technology, sothey created a $30 million seed
fund.
They are just running their ownventure fund.
I ran into another one where,instead of making the normal

(29:21):
returns you make by diversifiedinvestment, they're interested
in helping buyouts of certaintypes of companies.
Right, and they just they'releaders of those office.
Go, look for them, go look forthese things.
So a lot of times you may justbe searching for places as an
entrepreneur, places to go, andyou're just going to what may be
a fund, and that fund mayhappen to be totally backed by a

(29:45):
family office.

Speaker 2 (29:46):
Could be, or indirectly.
I read the statistic that $1 in$10 into all startups come from
family offices.
That's true, not directly.
A lot of them are indirect,right, because family offices
invest in funds which theninvest in startups.
So yeah, family offices do playa major role in
entrepreneurship already, but,granted, it can be a little
tricky to actually identify aspecific one.

Speaker 1 (30:08):
What do you think about the generational
differences?
Are you seeing that, in termsof how this plays out, boomers
versus millennials, gen Z.
In terms of how they manage thecapital, how they manage the
family office or how they eventhink about manage the capital,
how they think about theirpurpose, how they end up guiding
the whole story together,Because you were saying a lot of

(30:30):
people, some people don't evenknow that their family has great
wealth till four or 50 yearsold.
So I mean, I think you'veactually run across some of
these younger folks who do getinvolved and then do make a
difference as part of trying todrive impact for their family
office.

Speaker 2 (30:44):
Yeah, it's true.
So I'd say there's number one,a trend toward being more open
and involving more the youngergeneration.
I think it was more, you know,kind of the older generation.
You know, I think about myfather and his generation.
My father was born in thedepression, okay, and then he
went on to become a successfulbusinessman, but he came from

(31:05):
pretty modest means and I thinkhis attitude around sharing,
communicating that wealth to myfamily myself and my two
siblings was a little bit drivenby, you know, his circumstance
and what shaped him as a youngkid and I'm sure he felt like,

(31:26):
well, okay, the family's doingwell, now that that is true, but
that could change.

Speaker 1 (31:30):
I mean, he saw how quickly things can change and
you know, people were wiped outin a heartbeat right and they
didn't know it and all of asudden this wave came.

Speaker 2 (31:39):
Absolutely.
I just spoke with anotherfamily office based up in
Seattle.
They were a fourth generationfamily business in the real
estate and they were veryfortunate to have sold the
family business right before the2008 crash.
And so had they not, it wouldhave been a very different story

(31:59):
.
So I guess the point is theolder generation is more they
have the perspective that moneycomes, money goes, don't get too
used to it kind of thing, whichI think is healthy to a large
degree.
But I also see younger kind of20-somethings, 30-somethings.
To the extent that they'reinvolved in their family office
and some are, some aren'tthey're very keen to see how the

(32:21):
dollars can do both.
Right, can provide a returnthat makes the financial
managers happy and the othermembers of the office happy Okay
, we're getting a return.
But that it's also some sort ofpurpose behind it, some sort of
way to support the causes thatthey care about.

Speaker 1 (32:36):
Do you ever get into this thing where there's like
the, you know, like so suddenly,when I deal with think about
this with our parents?
Right, they are immigrants fromIndia.
They came here with very little.
They're used to savingeverything.
They never throw away anything.
The ultimate pack rats andwe're more like we've seen life
a little differently.
We're more likely to spend onsome things.
We'll fix more things.

(32:57):
We're willing to do that.
I think it's that we value timeas money, Time as money.
Whereas our parents' generationis like no, no Money as money
only and don't value time at all.
They'll spend five hours on thephone trying to get a $20
discount off their flight.

Speaker 2 (33:13):
Yes, or sign up for credit card offers to get free
miles.
That's how they're wired.

Speaker 1 (33:21):
They are so scrappy and clever, but is there this
thing where you run into itrelated to this topic, which is
like saving it versus giving itaway, and there's that tension
between these offices, betweenthe key members of the office.

Speaker 2 (33:35):
You know it's interesting.
I think that you are seeing someexamples.
There's a few very kind ofpublic examples of family
offices where they've decidednot only do we want to give a
significant proportion of thewealth away, we want to do that
during our lifetime.
Maybe you've heard of thisconcept of a drawdown foundation
where it's like no, no, no, notwhen I die and I'm 60 or I'm 80

(33:55):
, like I want to start doing itnow and get the pleasure and the
benefit of doing that now andcreate good for the world today,
not in 40 years, like theclimate or education system.
You know, we need that today,we need those dollars.
So you are seeing some examplesof that, which is great.
You know, in Silicon Valley, Ithink one of the trends that

(34:17):
seems to have gained a littlebit of traction in certain
crypto and other kind of crowdshere, this kind of what is it
effective altruism, this notionthat, well, we're going to focus
really hard on working andmaking a lot of money and then
one day we're going to give itaway.
I don't know, I'm a littlesuspect toward that.

(34:38):
I think sometimes that kind ofsounds like they're just
justifying not doing anything.

Speaker 1 (34:43):
It's like it's like the chase for the sake of the
chase, yeah no, no, I'm likereally focused on making money
at all costs today yeah, seethat building in the university.
It's gonna have my name on ityeah right so.

Speaker 2 (34:57):
I'm careful not to judge some of these trends and
whatnot.
Don't worry, scott, I canExactly.
I'll be neutral, you'll do thedirty work.

Speaker 1 (35:07):
I think there is some of that tension right and it
makes sense because the peopleare coming from different
circumstances right Now, whenyou think about not just your
book and all these differentbusinesses that you've started.
I'm going to go more towardsthe thing that we care about at
Position Squared, which is go tomarket.
So, let's talk a little bit ofgo to market, just a little bit.
You've seen so many differentcompanies and how they go to

(35:27):
market across different types ofbusinesses, but even in your
own initiatives you've done yourown go to market right, Because
you're building a network, amulti-sided network.
What did you do and what didyou feel like worked?
What experiments worked for you?

Speaker 2 (35:41):
yeah, it's interesting.
I mean I've I I realized kindof now in retrospect I and maybe
, maybe it's a libra.
That's my zodiac sign of balancemakes so much sense, kind of
like two-sided marketplaces.
I I really believed in tryingto serve that role well and try
to do it in such a way that it'sbeneficial to both sides, and

(36:04):
that I wasn't seen as, let's say, yet another provider.
I was trying to do something tobuild the marketplace where
everyone wins.
And I don't know, I guess Ienjoyed trying to and probably,
quite honestly, why did I try todo that in a few different
businesses?
It was this notion that youknow that that's how you get

(36:27):
more scale right.
If you can not just be yetanother provider but you can
actually do something for thewhole ecosystem, that's pretty
cool.
So I mean you know.
Back to the impact investing yes, we are an impact investor.
We take money and we put itinto for-profit social and
environmental impact companies.
However, we try to do and youknow this Rajiv, you guys in

(36:52):
Position Square has been greatsupporters over the years of a
lot of the events and theprogramming and the community
building.
So it's more than just likewe're a fund.
We're going to kind of headsdown, not really share with
anyone else what we're doing andjust try to eke out the best
percentage.
I'd say how some investors.
That's their point of view andif it works for them, great.

(37:14):
But we're more like hey, let'sbe collaborative, let's bring in
more people.
Yeah, maybe I'll bring in moreinvestors and I'll actually
remove a seat from myself at atable or on the cap table of a
company, kind of thing, but it'sstill good for the overarching
industry.
So I'd say it's that it'ssaying like can we be a player

(37:39):
on the field proverbial fieldbut how do we do something that
all the players benefit from?

Speaker 1 (37:46):
Lately I've noticed you have a podcast to talk about
your book.
You're finding folks who havepurpose as well as building
their family office.
In general, it sounds likethat's your favorite approach.
Is the community approach overthe heads down, just pumping
down a list and chasing folksand getting them on zoom calls?

Speaker 2 (38:08):
Exactly.
I think that's a goodobservation.
And then the other, I suppose,is I always like this idea of
trying to own a niche and reallylike find something that you
feel you do really well.
Depends, right.
If your ego and yourpersonality type is like I want
to be in the big pond and bigvisibility, then that may not
work and there's part of me thatfeels that way and operates

(38:30):
that way, but I think more so.
I'm very comfortable like atrue entrepreneur, like I'm
going to be doing something thatmight feel a little weird,
wacky, different black sheep,I'm going to be way over here.
But you know what, if I canactually get good at that and if
that's an area that happens togrow a little bit in importance,
then I mean in 2015,.

(38:52):
Sustainable investing and allthat that was not well known.
I mean that's for sure and someof that's luck.
It's not like oh, it was genius.
I saw the trends, you know, butI was like that's a space that
I just think is really cool.
So I always think that that'skind of good advice to anyone is
just like find something thatyou really get excited about,

(39:12):
find a way to become really goodat.
You know some sliver of itwhere you're, that you know
you're that person or you'rethat firm.

Speaker 1 (39:20):
I think you've talked a lot about what sparks you,
but if there's a person, ahistorical event, a person or a
movement that inspires you today, who or what would that be?

Speaker 2 (39:32):
Well, honestly, this might sound a little corny, but
like a lot of One World, andwhat was behind that was my kids
.
I have two daughters, you know,one's in middle school, one's
in high school, and in 2015,when I started my work in this
whole area, they were stillpretty young.
But you know, like anyone who'shad kids will say, those are

(39:55):
life changing events and theychange your perspective on you
and your purpose on this earthand how much time you have left
on this earth and all thoseissues in a really healthy way.
And so a lot of One World, Ithink is not just for my two
kids, but it's kind it a fewtimes.

(40:17):
Today, the millennials and Gen Zthey just seem to be wired in a
way where they are veryconcerned about finding purpose
in their life.
They're very concerned aboutthe environment.
They're very concerned aboutcompanies and jobs, that where
they can have their cake and eatit too.
Yes, a job, and it'schallenging and it's interesting

(40:37):
, but it's also making adifference.
Maybe I'm a young soul asopposed to an old soul, like I
really resonate with thatgeneration and I hope they, you
know, I hope they kind of keepit up and that those ideals
don't kind of fade away, as theymaybe hit their thirties.

Speaker 1 (40:53):
So is there a person that captures that for you?

Speaker 2 (40:56):
Greta Bromberg, the activist, the environmentalist
from I think it's Sweden, theyoung environmentalist.
It's not just her as anindividual, but again kind of
that younger generation Someone.
In her case it's really, Ithink, inspiring.
Here you have a pretty youngindividual who was really able

(41:21):
to bring a lot of attention tothe issues that she cared about,
I mean in a pretty unapologeticway and a very inspiring way.
So yes, here's to you, kiddo.

Speaker 1 (41:30):
Yeah, we stan Greta.
That's pretty amazing.
Before we go to our game, Ihave one more question I'm
always trying to discover.
Is a person motivated to dowhat they're doing today by what
they did as a child, or didthey did as you go through it?
Come upon what you did.

(41:50):
Did you have a grand plan at 15, 14, 12?

Speaker 2 (41:56):
I was always yes and no, so I always loved the idea
of being in business.
I think you know, even when Iwas in high school, I knew I
wanted to work in business andgo to business school.
In particular, I chose mycollege specifically because it
did not have a business school.
It was a liberal arts collegeand I was an economics major the

(42:19):
discipline science, as they say.
But I chose that because I didhave kind of this game plan.
What a nerd I was and still am.
To be honest, whatever 17, Iwas like yeah, yeah, no, I want
to go to like a liberal arts andthen I'm going to go get an MBA
.
I love the idea of becomingkind of a professional again,
whatever it was I'm choosing Now.
That said, I had no idea thesefields of impact, investing and

(42:41):
social entrepreneurship andfamily office none of that was
on my radar at all.
So it is kind of interesting.
I mean, I have worked in avariety of different careers and
industries and that's my ADD.
I'll just get too bored if I'min one kind of place doing one
thing.
The leadership development Idid.
That was my longest.
That was 12 years in the sameindustry.

Speaker 1 (43:01):
That was a lot.
We're approaching that.

Speaker 2 (43:04):
With one world.
It's kind of nine years in.

Speaker 1 (43:06):
That's amazing.
Shall we jump to the game?
The game, okay.
Well, scott, this has beenreally fun chatting with you,
getting to know you, but nowit's time to really test you.
So welcome to the Spark Tank.
This is where two CEOs enterand only one of you gets Greta

(43:27):
Thunberg's handshake.
This week is all about socialgood initiatives as it relates
to profitability.
So in one corner we have ScottSaslow, the impact investment
guru, ready to prove that doinggood is good for the bottom line
to profitability.
So in one corner we have ScottSaslow, the impact investment
guru, ready to prove that doinggood is good for the bottom line
.
And in the other corner, we'vegot my brother, rajiv Parikh,
the marketing maestro, here toshow us that even he has a heart

(43:48):
, or at least knows how tomarket.
To those who do, we're playingthree rounds Better than the
Grinch Playing three rounds oftwo truths and a lie.
Your task is to identify thelie.
I'm going to read them out,you're going to mentally lock in
your answers and then, on thecount of three, you're both
going to raise your hands andgive me a one, two or three as
to which one you think is thelie.

(44:09):
All right, so let's find outwho's got the business acumen to
spot the feel-good fib.
I'm going to dive in and findout.
Here we go.
Dive in and find out.
Here we go.
Ready Round one.
We're ready, ready.
Okay, I'm going to read threestatements.
One of these is a lie.
Nike's Dream Crazy campaignfeaturing Colin Kaepernick led
to a 31% increase in onlinesales in the week following its

(44:31):
release.
Pepsi's controversial KendallJenner ad attempting to co-opt
social justice movementsresulted in a 15% boost in sales
in the quarter of its release.
Or Airbnb's we Accept campaign,promoting diversity and
inclusion, led to a 10% increasein bookings within the first

(44:53):
month of its launch.
Which of these do you think isthe lie?
One Nike's Dream Crazy campaign.
Number two Pepsi's KendallJenner ad.
Or number three Airbnb's weAccept campaign.
I'm ready, yes, three, two oneTime for two.
You both chose two and you areboth yes correct.

(45:15):
That's right, I'm winning.
That was one heck of an ad.
It was widely criticized fortrivializing social issues and
ultimately led to a decrease inbrand sentiment.
I don't remember that beingpopular didn't do well in
kaepernick being done reallywell and because I know someone.
I had a little bit of insidetrack on airbnb so I knew that

(45:36):
something might happen.

Speaker 2 (45:37):
This game has an asterisk now Sorry.
The Kendall Jenner was prettyridiculous.

Speaker 1 (45:42):
Yeah, yeah, yeah.
I wonder if Coke sales went upfor that.
All right, so far we're tiedRound.
Number two Starbucks' RaceTogether campaign, which aimed
to spark conversations aboutrace relations in their stores,
led to a 15% increase in coffeesales during the campaign period
.
Number two Dove's Real Beautycampaign, promoting body

(46:05):
positivity and self-esteem, ledto a 700% increase in sales over
a decade.
Patagonia's worn wear program,which encourages customers to
repair and reuse their clothing,led to a huge influx of new
customers, reporting that 70percent of all worn wear online
sales in 2022 were from firsttimers.

(46:27):
All right, all right, so startnumber, one number two is dove,
number three is patagonia.
Here we we go.
Three, two, one.

Speaker 2 (46:38):
Ding Okay, Scott thinks.

Speaker 1 (46:39):
Patagonia's was BS, it turns out.
The only BS is that stuff inthat Starbucks mug.
Yes, rajiv, you get this,answer Turns out.
The campaign, while itgenerated widespread discussion,
was met with a lot of criticismfor being superficial and
opportunistic and having veryminimal impact on sales.

(47:00):
The real beauty one, I think,is one of the biggest winners of
all time.
Yeah, how, uh?
I I think that's a, uh, anexample of fantastic marketing,
where this was the one wherethey would, uh, they would have
a sketch artist who would, um,talk to the person, like be
separated from the personthrough a curtain, and that

(47:22):
person would describe themselvesand they would draw that versus
how the person actually looked.
Well, let's get to the beautyof who wins this game, Round
number three.
Here we go.

Speaker 2 (47:35):
How many rounds are there, by the way?

Speaker 1 (47:36):
This is the final round.

Speaker 2 (47:37):
So you got to make it up right here, Scott.
This is your chance, Scott.

Speaker 1 (47:40):
And I do have a tiebreaker, so if you do make it
up, we got one more, all right.
So these get a little wilder,okay, a Japanese company created
a poop-powered motorcycle, sothese are sorry, I should say
All three of these are more.
They're less well-knowncompanies and they're more like

(48:01):
ideas they had that theyactually implemented versus the
lie will be.
One that did not is totallyuntrue.
This is not a real company thatdid this.

Speaker 2 (48:10):
Got it.

Speaker 1 (48:10):
So number one a Japanese company created a
poop-powered motorcycle thatruns on biogas generated from
animal waste.
Number two a Canadian, companyBullshit.
Get it Bullshit.
Sorry, yeah, could be bullshit,pure BS.
A Canadian company sellsunicorn tears gin, donating a
portion of fares going to musiceducation programs.

(48:32):
Which of these initiativesnever happened?
Okay, here we go.
Three, two, one Ding.
You both said two and you'llboth be crying unicorn tears.

(48:56):
Because you're both wrong, itturns out that that is a real
company with a real initiative.

Speaker 2 (49:01):
But there's no unicorns.

Speaker 1 (49:05):
That is the brand name.
They didn't strap a bunch ofhorns onto horses' heads and
claim they were unicorns, thoughI'd love to see it, it is in
fact the german car company thatdid that, did not launch a
carpool karaoke service.
That's not real.
Sadly, scott, you did not takedown my brother uh, he reigns

(49:25):
supreme, I know, this neverhappens this is this really
never happens, really, uh, socongratulations usually you're
somewhat intelligent, not today,I guess, do you?
want to throw in the tiebreaker,see if you can double or
nothing.
You want to try it?
Sure, do you want to try the?

Speaker 2 (49:41):
tiebreaker.
Do we have time Now that youput that on the table?

Speaker 1 (49:44):
of course, Now we have to do it.
Okay, double or nothing.

Speaker 2 (49:46):
This is your chance of beating me.
Bring it on.

Speaker 1 (49:58):
I'm so used to letting all right here, if you
get it.
These again are more, uh, moreof the same of the of the last
one, where these are initiativesthat may or may not have
happened.
Okay, a company in icelandcreated a beer brewed with whale
testicles, which proceeds goingto marine conservation efforts,
that's beautiful a germancompany created a fart wait,
wait, wait, wait, wait, wait,hold on why?

Speaker 2 (50:17):
would they take the?
If they're concerned aboutocean health, why would they be
messing with whale testicles?
The best way is not to touchany whale testicles.

Speaker 1 (50:27):
Here's what I'm going to assume about the whale
testicles is that it was already.

Speaker 2 (50:32):
they were already harvested, I assume that they're
not going out hunting whaletesticles.
I don't even need to hear theother two.

Speaker 1 (50:37):
I'm just voting one.
This is my favorite round so.
I'm so glad we're doing thisround.

Speaker 2 (50:42):
I'm shooting three, but I know my answer.
You're going to want to hearthese.
Let's go Number two.

Speaker 1 (50:49):
They're all interesting and scatological.
This is all very Simpsons-y.

Speaker 2 (50:54):
You can look into Sandeep's subconscious.
This is the segment that willdefinitely be cut from the show.

Speaker 1 (50:58):
Okay, here we go.

Speaker 2 (51:05):
A.

Speaker 1 (51:05):
German company created a fart-neutral underwear
line that uses activated carbonfilters to neutralize the smell
of flatulence, with a portionof the proceeds going to climate
change research.

Speaker 2 (51:14):
Okay.
I saw that at one of Scott'sevents.

Speaker 1 (51:21):
Just remember that two of these are real.
Okay, just remember that.

Speaker 2 (51:25):
One of those two are real.
Okay, that is so good.

Speaker 1 (51:34):
Number three a UK company launched knitted
knockers, handmade prostheticbreasts for breast cancer
survivors, made by volunteersand donated to those in need.
So two of these are real.
One of these is a lie.
Do?

Speaker 2 (51:43):
you have your answers locked in.

Speaker 1 (51:44):
This is your chance, scott to beat me.

Speaker 2 (51:46):
Your tie goes to the guest.

Speaker 1 (51:49):
Yeah, this is worth two points.
Basically, I'm going number onebaby, what do you got Scott's
going number one.
I want to produce an outcome,so I'm going to say three.
Amazingly, you did produce anoutcome, but the outcome was
that you're both wrong.
So Rajiv remains in the lead,and that is right.

(52:11):
Folks, you can get beer brewedwith whale testicles, with
proceeds going to MarineConservation.

Speaker 2 (52:15):
Office.

Speaker 1 (52:15):
This is a real product called Havur 2, made by
the Stedgy Brewery.

Speaker 2 (52:20):
I love it.
I love it so throw one back ifyou find yourself in Reykjavik.
Yeah, these are some goodcompanies that you might get
wrecked at Reykjavik with whaletesticles.
And I think awesomely.

Speaker 1 (52:32):
There's this UK company that does knitted
knockers for prosthetic breasts,a real organization with
chapters worldwide.
But yes, I like number twobecause I feel like there's a
real need.
Yeah, alas, it's a real blow tothe Parikh family.
There is no fart neutralunderwear line.
So thanks for playing, thanksfor entering the Spark Tank.
Rajiv you win one, greta.

Speaker 2 (52:55):
Thunberg, I'm honored to be the first guest that did
not beat Rajiv.

Speaker 1 (53:00):
I don't think you're the first, but you are in small
company.

Speaker 2 (53:05):
He's like, this never happens.
Wow, all right.

Speaker 1 (53:09):
I have a final question.
In your opinion, for impactinvesting, from what you've seen
, what makes a startupsuccessful?
For impact investing, from whatyou've seen, what makes a
startup successful?
Is it product adoption, usage,profitability, or are there some
other ways that you measureimpact in terms of how you pick
your investments and which oneswill be the winners for you?

Speaker 2 (53:30):
Because we're investing so early we're
typically seed or pre-seed Ilike to say we invest in people,
not products, and by that I tryto take some of my talent
management background and putthat to work.
When looking at individuals andask myself what are the skills
they have?
What are the skills they needto build to be successful in

(53:53):
what they're doing?
Are they aware, do they havethe self-awareness that they
need to build skills and arethey open to it?
And I don't get terriblyexcited one way or the other
about the product that they mayhave built, because the truth is
I want that, I need that tochange.
If that product doesn't change,you know from what I'm when I'm

(54:15):
looking at it at a pre-seed um,that that's a sign of kind of
stalled progress.
So, yeah, it's kind of lookingat people and and also I would
say it's trying to understand.
You know, do they?
Is this really just in theirDNA?
I mean, I do think that'sactually one of the things that
make social entrepreneurs, if wecan use that, compared compared

(54:38):
to just the general populationof entrepreneurs, they are, yes,
they want to be successful attheir business, they want to
make money and all these typicalkind of things, but they're
also really passionate abouttheir cause and kind of the
purpose of the company, and somy question is how long had they
been thinking about this, right?
Did they just, like someone inbusiness school, mentioned some

(55:00):
idea about X, y, z market andtherefore now they're in that
market and they want to?
Or, if they like, in highschool and in college, and you
know, since college have theybeen thinking about this area.
So those are, those are kind ofthe things.

Speaker 1 (55:13):
It's like a deep-seated passion.
If you feel like it's adeep-seated passion, they're
going to fight for it to the endExactly.

Speaker 2 (55:21):
Because I mean, it's a game of attrition, right.
It's like who can stay alivethe longest, you know, or maybe
from our generation, you know.
It's like Frogger, you know.
You just got to keep going,avoid the obstacles.
You know a little, half stephere, half step there, and so

(55:41):
those are kind of the things.
Now.
That said, I do want to see someinvention, and when I say
invention, you know it could be,yes, a technical invention like
this one Lilac.
You know they have a chemicalprocess they've invented and
patented.
But it could be, you know,they've invented a new business
model or they've invented a newway of engaging, you know, the,

(56:02):
the customer set or some of themajor players in an industry
that gives them the quote unfairadvantage.
I want to see that they'veactually invented it, not that
they will.
That's that's kind of the trickwith pre-seed and seed is like
will.
That's kind of the trick withpre-seed and seed is like we
will do X, y, z.
And then you're kind of, as aninvestor, saying like okay, I'm

(56:23):
betting on your ability tocreate something.
I want to see that you'vecreated some of it already.
Even at the pre-seed stage thereshould be some element of a
creation.
And then you say, okay, well,it's a creation, it's, it's
novel.
Is it what the market needs,you know?
Does it?
Can it scale?
You start asking thosequestions.

(56:44):
So I guess I'm throwing a lieat you, but I I'd probably say
the number one is back to theperson, um, and hopefully it's a
team of people.
I mean, we have backed kind ofsolo, solopreneurs, but I think
you know there's a saying thatif you can't even like recruit a
co-founder, that can be a flag,and so yeah, I am definitely

(57:06):
biased toward at least twoco-founders.

Speaker 1 (57:10):
That makes a lot of sense.
If you can convince at leastone other person to do what you
want to do with thempassionately, you can change the
world together, and I've seenthat in some shared investments
of ours.
Scott, thank you for coming onour show today.
We really appreciate having you.
It was so much fun.
Thank you for having me, and somuch learning too, so I think
you brought both together, so Ireally appreciate it.

Speaker 2 (57:30):
I appreciate you guys having me.
I hope there's some goodlearnings for your listeners.

Speaker 1 (57:38):
It's a pleasure, I love the work you're doing and
thank you so much.
All right, that was a wonderfulepisode with you, know.
First-time author Nowfirst-time author Scott Saslow,
multi-time entrepreneur, yeah,community builder in the fields
that he's cared about, and heputs it all together, combines

(58:00):
that, oh great.
You're going to steal mytakeaway.
I already know it.
Go ahead, fine.
What's yours?
You do yours first.
Go first.
You're younger than me, why not?
No, okay, fine.
Yeah, it is about the nextgeneration that's of this
brothership, so you know it wasthat it was the community
building aspect of it.
Right, like that.

(58:23):
Like that was the piece thatreally resonated to me was
thinking about like hey, how areyou not just creating a cool
product or doing something youknow, picking the right
portfolio, that's best for youand for you to succeed?
The thing about how, hey, howcan you make sure that the
entire industry that you are apart of uh can also, you know,
uh, rise with the tides?
I didn't realize, uh, thiswhole family.

(58:45):
I didn't know a lot aboutfamily offices till, I'd say,
the last decade, and it wasn'tsomething they taught you about
in business school.
It wasn't something you evenknew about when I was raising my
first company money for myfirst company.
It hasn't really been sincemore recently that I came upon
this understanding that there'sways in which families manage

(59:06):
their wealth and then how theycan take that and make that form
the basis of even a differentset of purpose and a greater
sense of purpose.
And when you listen to some ofScott's podcasts, you have a
chance to post where those are.
He's interviewing people whocome from these family offices.
But they have a greater purposein life and they're trying to

(59:28):
drive it via their family office.
And that kind of innovationinside of what just typically is
about asset allocation andwealth preservation is just
really interesting.
Because if you're an innovatorand we're trying to spark
innovators or highlight greatinnovators, you want to know
where all this is coming fromand who you might bump into and
who you might meet and how thatperson might make a difference

(59:50):
in the world for you.
And so Scott puts it alltogether in just a really
interesting, unique way and hewrites this book Building a
Sustainable Family Office allabout that.
Well, it really forces you tothink fourth dimensionally, as
we would say, from back to thefuture, like about future
generate.
Like you know, you're not justbuilding the thing to pay the
mortgage or get a new pool.
You're thinking about yeah, howam I building something that's

(01:00:13):
going to last you know of timeand really affect my kids, their
kids' kids, and what kind ofworld are they going to be
living in?
It forces you to reframe thatconversation about whatever it
is that you're trying to buildin your companies, and I think
that's a great place to bethinking about.

(01:00:33):
From Jump Street, scott's theone that taught me about impact.
It's why one of the funds thatI work closely with is all about
impact, and this isspecifically with deep tech in
India, and I never would haveknown about this if I hadn't
gone to all of Scott's a lot ofScott's events and so credit to
him for teaching me somethingnew and something more
interesting about how you buildbusinesses Hopefully teaching

(01:00:55):
you the same, dear listener.
So thank you guys for listening.
If you enjoyed this pod, take amoment to rate it and comment.
You can find us on Apple,spotify, youtube and everywhere
podcasts can be found.
That's right.
The show is produced by SundeepParikh and Anand Shah,
production assistance by TarynTalley and edited by Sean Maher
and Aidan McGarvey.
I'm your host, rajiv Parikh,from Position Squared, an

(01:01:18):
AI-based growth marketingcompany based in Silicon Valley.
Come visit us at position2.com.
This has been an F and funnyAI-based production and we'll
catch you next time.
And remember folks be evercurious, but not about a guy.

All Episodes

The Purpose of Wealth/Scott Saslow - Family Offices, Impact Investing, Greta Thunberg ~ Spark of Ages Ep18

Episode Transcript

Popular Podcasts

Dateline NBC

24/7 News: The Latest

Therapy Gecko

.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;}The Purpose of Wealth/Scott Saslow - Family Offices, Impact Investing, Greta Thunberg ~ Spark of Ages Ep18