Free with a sign-in.
The best 13 min of 63
How to Win Deals & Grow a $250B Business | Nikesh Arora, Palo Alto Networks
Nikesh Arora says cybersecurity leaders can grow by acquiring top teams and selling more products to each enterprise customer.
Founders · David Senra
- Nikesh Arora is chairman and CEO of Palo Alto Networks.
The best minutes
- 8:54More products make enterprise customer acquisition pay offPro pick 6 min
- 18:52Align on the product roadmap before signing an acquisition4 min
- 55:07AI raises cyber risk but does not replace security infrastructure4 min
Every moment plays free. PRO marks a write-up that's in Pro.
Also worth watching
- 16:15He buys the top two because profits concentrate there3 min
- 30:54M&A is a tool for executing strategy, not the strategy itself3 min
- 24:00Acquired founders need to learn to use the parent company's scale3 min
- 44:37Google's ad salespeople couldn't control price or volume2 min
- 52:04Parents shouldn't use family wealth to make children feel guilty3 min
Skip the opening five minutes of investor anecdotes, the sponsor reads, and the later discussion of how founders rank within a category.
Full analysis · 6 min read
Real Alpha · Nov 8
Nikesh Arora says 70-plus products help Palo Alto grow
- Arora says Palo Alto went from a firewall company to 70-plus products in eight years.
- His enterprise logic is plausible, but he offers no account-level data to test it.
- It matters whether more products expand existing accounts without weakening product quality.
Free with an account
Read the rest of the analysis
6 sections, the 4 other voices it tests Arora against, and what it means for you. Every episode we cut gets one.
Check your inbox
We sent a link to your address. Click it to finish signing up. Not there in a minute? Look in spam.
or
Signed up before? The same buttons sign you in. The episode, its moments and the transcript stay free.
Palo Alto sells more by making each customer count
Arora's thesis starts with enterprise selling, not a forecast about cyber threats. He says customer acquisition is expensive, so one product may not earn enough from each account.
His P&L sketch puts much of the gap between gross and operating margin in sales, marketing, and customer support. The goal is to spread those costs across later sales.
That logic depends on trust and quality, not catalog size alone. He says buyers must trust Palo Alto and its products must work and be best in class.
For example, he imagines knocking on 20 doors and finding 15 prospects already covered. A broader offer might make those remaining visits more productive.
But that illustration is not a conversion study. The episode gives no customer-level revenue, product attachment, retention, or sales-cost data.
Erik Bernhardsson said on Unsupervised Learning in October 2026 that Modal's largest customers often use several products. That supports multi-product demand, not Palo Alto's economics.
Paul Copplestone said on Latent Space in October 2026 that Supabase measures sales-assisted account growth against a control group. His method shows the evidence this episode does not provide.
“we need to figure out a way that we can find adjacencies to our business”
Erik Bernhardsson · Unsupervised Learning · Oct 28Inference providers need a platform beyond token serving
Paul Copplestone · Latent Space · Oct 28Supabase measures sales by incremental customer growth
Our read
The economics are sensible, but breadth is not proof. Buyers should ask whether attached products expand revenue without raising cost or weakening trust.
Acquisitions buy time, but do not erase product risk
Arora's build-versus-buy case rests on development time. He says a useful technology product can take four to seven years to build.
At Palo Alto, he says a rival may already be a year and a half ahead. Its 50 to 75 people have a functioning product team while Palo Alto is still hiring.
That is different from his Google story. There, he recounts the view that YouTube could build professional video capabilities with $10 million and 20 engineers. He says that calculation never works as neatly as it sounds.
At Palo Alto, buying may close a timing gap, but it creates integration risks too. Arora says acquisitions often fail through poor execution.
His Operato example shows a separate risk. Palo Alto expected IP-based segmentation to grow, but the market moved elsewhere. It cut losses after that direction failed.
Erik Bernhardsson's Modal sandbox story on 20VC in November 2026 adds another caveat. The product took years after launch to become a major business. That was not an acquisition comparison, but it shows demand can remain uncertain after launch.
Our read
Acquisition can purchase a head start, but not market demand. Price the time saved against the risk that a category develops differently.
Category leadership matters more than early customer counts
Arora's rule is to favor category leaders. He says the top two companies take a disproportionate share of category profits.
This is his market view, not a result he supports with profit data. He gives no categories, margins, or acquisition returns that would test it.
Early customer counts can blur the ranking. He says two companies may each have 30 or 40 customers and still show product-market fit.
Then strategy, business model, product fit, and execution shape the choice. Arora says those factors are difficult to project two or three years ahead.
About 35 acquisitions give Palo Alto experience, but do not prove the rule. Arora says Palo Alto bought what it thought was number one, but execution let its rival take the lead.
That weakens any simple buy-the-winner formula. The buyer must also judge the team and its ability to keep moving inside the parent.
Our read
The leader-first rule is a useful screen, not a guarantee. Arora's account shows that buying a leader does not preserve its position by itself.
A shared roadmap screens acquisition fit before closing
Arora's most concrete safeguard is a pre-close product-roadmap test. After agreeing on a deal, he gives founders and Palo Alto's product staff 30 days to design together.
He says he will not sign the definitive term sheet until the founder agrees on a joint roadmap. That exposes disagreement while both sides can still walk away.
An early deal taught him this test. He says a founder spent six months debating product direction after an acquisition. Arora later said that was a problem he needed to catch earlier.
He says Palo Alto walked away twice after closer work exposed poor alignment or weaker technical substance. No founders withdrew at that stage, but Palo Alto did.
Arora wants founders to remain three years, ideally four, to preserve continuity. He says products may need another two or three years of development after acquisition.
Amjad Masad said on Lightcone in November 2026 that Replit should let customers guide its next steps through incremental work. That is a different tool for product direction after launch, not a test of acquisition fit.
“I don't sign the definitive term sheet until I get the founder to sign on the joint product roadmap.”
Our read
The pre-close test makes disagreement visible while either side can still stop. It does not prove the combined team will execute well.
Acquired founders must turn scale into leverage
The host frames the scale gap as 6,000 field employees at Palo Alto against eight at a small company. Arora says founders must learn to use that reach.
He sees field teams as product amplifiers, not only as corporate overhead. Their distribution can help carry a founder's product vision to customers.
This is an integration requirement, not an automatic benefit. The founder has to work with a large organization and persuade its people to sell.
Arora warns that founders can keep an underdog mindset after joining a larger company. He says they may treat colleagues as incompetent blockers.
That does not establish that every founder will fit. The parent has to give the acquired team useful access to scale without making collaboration impossible.
Our read
Scale creates value only when the acquired team can access it. Arora's approach depends on preserving influence while making the larger company a partner.
AI expands security demand, but Arora sells the case
Arora says AI can find perimeter vulnerabilities faster, while greater connectivity expands possible entry points. That gives security vendors a plausible demand case.
His proposed response is virtual patching, which blocks known holes until customers fix underlying systems. He says Palo Alto built a service for that gap.
Take endpoint economics. Arora says Palo Alto charges $25 a year per endpoint. He says it inspects 150 megabytes daily, give or take.
He offers $5,000 a day as one possible cost for AI inspection. Then he gives $500 or $50 as other possible examples. Those are hypothetical figures, not measured comparisons.
Palo Alto sells security tools, so its CEO has a direct business interest in this demand case. That does not disprove it, but makes independent cost and outcome evidence important.
Devon Thomas said on MTS in October 2026 that cybersecurity customers welcomed less restricted models for defense. That supports defensive use, not Arora's endpoint economics.
The episode gives no head-to-head costs, incident outcomes, or adoption figures. So the product rationale is specific, while its commercial scale remains untested here.
Our read
AI may create new security work, and Arora describes a response. The episode does not independently establish demand size or the economics of his solution.
What it means for you
- Track account expansion. Measure revenue per existing customer and the share buying multiple products. Separate expansion from new logos to test Arora's customer economics.
- Set a roadmap gate. Before signing an acquisition, record product decisions, owners, and milestones with the founders. Track disagreements and walk-away reasons against the 30-day test.
- Compare build and buy. Compare a target's price with the team and time required to build internally. Make assumptions about time saved and future value explicit.
- Measure security outcomes. Track patch time, inspection cost, and incident response. Compare those measures with AI costs instead of relying on illustrative estimates.
What to watch
- Whether 70-plus products increase revenue per existing customer, rather than only expanding the catalog.
- Whether virtual patching shortens vulnerability exposure before customers install permanent fixes.
- Whether Arora's two-year forecast for AI reliability proves accurate.
Send this to CEOs and corp dev leads evaluating product acquisitions.
Watch the minute where Arora gives the 70-plus product figure
Written by Real Alpha from the episode's transcript and the other moments it links, then checked against the transcript. Quotes are the speaker's exact words.
Minute by minute
A Pro write-up, open to you here. Try Pro free for 7 days
A Pro write-up. The minute by minute is in Real Alpha Pro; the episode, its moments and the transcript stay free.
Read it with Pro, 7 days free- 0:15Oculus nearly became an investment
Arora says he met Egon Durban when Durban was a Silver Lake partner in Europe and invested alongside him personally for about 15 years. They agreed to invest in Oculus after trying its virtual-reality headset, but the deal documents never arrived before Facebook acquired the company.
- 6:59A broader role keeps work varied
Arora says staying at one company can still mean tackling many different problems. During his 10 years at Google, he says the company grew from 2,000 to 60,000 employees and from $2 billion to $62 billion in revenue; at Palo Alto, he joined a firewall company that now has more than 70 products.
- 9:19Enterprise economics favor cross-selling
Arora says customer acquisition is one of the biggest enterprise costs, so a company needs to sell multiple products to the same customer. He says firms typically spend 15% to 18% on product development and argues that reducing sales, marketing and customer-support costs from 60% of costs to 20% could allow a 40% operating margin.
- 12:05Buying can beat a long build
Arora says a strong technology product can take four to seven years to build, so acquisitions can speed entry into adjacent categories. He says Palo Alto exited Operato after the market for IP-based segmentation failed to develop. Arora argues that acquisitions often fail through poor execution, including assigning a product to an internal manager instead of letting the acquired founder lead it.
- 16:15Category leaders capture profits
Arora says companies ranked number one and number two capture a disproportionate share of category profits, so he prefers buying a leader rather than trying to rehabilitate number three. He says the leaders can be hard to distinguish early: both may have product-market fit with 30 or 40 customers, while product, strategy, business model and execution can change which one wins.
- 19:19Deals need an agreed roadmap
Arora says he now negotiates directly with founders and gives them 30 days to develop a joint product roadmap with his team. He will not sign the definitive term sheet until the founder agrees to the roadmap, and says Palo Alto backed out of two deals after finding alignment or product-quality concerns. The company typically reinvests founders for three or four years to preserve continuity.
- 24:10Acquired founders need to adapt
Arora says founders have to adjust to a larger company and see its employees as amplifiers, not obstacles. He points to Palo Alto’s 6,000 people in the field as a way to scale a product, but says a founder who cannot work within that environment may lose the ability to lead it.
- 30:54Acquisitions are tools, not strategy
Arora says a company can buy too early, and that the same target might cost one-third or one-fourth as much three years earlier. He calls M&A a way to execute or amplify strategy, not a strategy on its own, and says Palo Alto could stop acquiring if integration creates more value for customers. He recounts Egon Durban urging him to stay in a London cricket-team auction through 29 rounds, and says acquisitions are ultimately about buying teams.
- 38:05AI expands cybersecurity’s value
Arora calls AI a technology that could democratize intelligence and change how companies organize work over the next five years. He says greater connectivity expands the attack surface, and that products to secure AI are not yet fully developed.
- 42:29Focus on what you can control
Arora says Hindu fatalism taught him to focus on what he can control and do his best, a perspective he says he developed in the last five years. At Google, he sold ads without knowing the price or volume in advance: bids set prices and searches set volume. He says his team used customer conversion rates and return-on-investment calculations to help advertisers set bids.
- 47:12Rapid response beats worry
Arora says his teams checked their systems after learning of a vulnerability, found and blocked it, patched their own systems and worked overnight on a patch for customers. He says stress would not change the outcome, but taking action could.
- 49:35Let children build their own drive
Arora says his parents did not pressure him, and he came to the United States with $200; his father later sent $2,000 to help pay part of his tuition. He says he spends more time with his younger children, who are 11 and 10, than he did with his older daughter. He wants his children to be happy, healthy and balanced, and to pursue their interests without being pressured to follow his path.
- 54:36AI raises new security demands
Arora describes cybersecurity as stopping threats at the perimeter, maintaining hygiene inside systems and finding intruders who get in. He says AI can find vulnerabilities faster, and that Palo Alto is building a virtual-patching service while customers fix underlying systems. He argues that endpoint inspection has a zero marginal cost for Palo Alto, while detecting threats still requires security expertise, data ingestion and infrastructure.
- 58:40Arora learns from founders and posts selectively
Arora says he spends at least four or five hours a week with AI founders and talks with five or 10 cybersecurity startups a month, maybe 15, to learn how they think. He says a fellow podcaster encouraged him to build his own brand, so he now posts on X when he has something to say. He writes the posts himself and does not want to make posting every day a job.
Published Nov 8, 2026.
Transcript · 1 h 1 m read
Founders, hosted by David Senra, with Nikesh Arora.
Transcribed by machine (Whisper) from the episode’s audio, so a word may be off here and there.
Did you read Ari Emanuel's new book? No. You've heard that you're in it, though? No, I didn't know that. Okay. He says the way he met Egon Durban was that he got introduced to Marc Andreessen, and Marc Andreessen told Ari that him, Nikesh, and Egon had this, like, affiliated, like, group of, essentially, angel investors that were working together. Yes. Tell me a little bit about that. So I met Egon when Egon had just come to Europe, and he was a Silver Lake partner there, and he reached out to a common friend saying, listen, I want to hang out with some people and get to understand the tech scene over here and see if he'd get an advisor or two at Silver Lake.
And I just, I was early 30s. I used to run Google Europe. So Egon had lunch, and I said, listen, he said, why are you so reluctant on this conversation? I said, look, I tried to do this. They really don't want advice. They make you come for a two-day off-site. They present a whole bunch of stuff to you. The last thing I need is more PowerPoint in my life and free coffee. He says, you know what? This resonates with me. I'm going to call you. And if you tell me that's a good idea, I'll obviously independently consider if it's a good idea or not because I have to make the decision. If you tell me it's a bad idea, I'll think about it similarly.
But don't worry. You'd add as much value in telling me what to invest in, what not to invest in. So then we'll have fun. So I said, sure, and I did that for about 15 years. That's when I met Egon, when he was in Europe. You're just investing your personal money. Yeah, of course. But I'll tell you, there's a funny incident. What happened was one time I flew back from CES with Mark Andreessen, because Mark rarely travels, but when he does, he goes to CES and he goes to dinner. And he had me come, he spoke. I spoke a little bit over there, and I flew back and I sent him, And then I was saying, hey, Mark, is there any cool company that you're working on right now that I could put some money in?
Read the whole transcript
So the guy who spoke at dinner, I said, yes, it goes, Oculus. Palmer Luckey. Yes. Well, Brendan, to be fair. Okay. Brendan Rebe and Palmer Luckey, of course. I said, great. So I said, give me a number. So I texted Brendan and said, hey, we met at the dinner. I'd love to make an investment. He's like, great, but you have to come see this stuff. This stuff's real cool. I said, okay. so I'm in LA and I said Brendan I'm coming to LA can we take a look at the technology it's me and my wife we go there she says yeah but you have to drive on a highway outside of LA because we have this industrial park we're going to go there's a fire so I take a car I go to the industrial park The lights are out, so nothing's gonna work.
So we're kind of hanging out, waiting for the lights to come back on. We go in, he puts this contraption on her face, and it's got this little virtual reality type situation going on. I says, really cool, this is very cool. What's gonna happen? Well, it's gonna be cool because, you know, all the promise of visualization, all the promise of gaming, et cetera, et cetera. I said, great, can I write a check? She's like, sure. He's like, it's you and Blake Krikorian and Vivi Nevo and I have room for one more. So Egon and I do this together and Mark was already in the company. So I said, okay, so me and Egon.
So we agreed to do the deal. He sends me some docs. Oh, he sends me an email. He says, I'm working on the docs. Doesn't respond. Egon says, what's going on? Why haven't we heard from him? So I sent him an email. He says, yes, the docs are just coming. They're going to be here with you anytime soon. No docs. and boom, you wake up one morning and he's just been sold to Facebook. Before you're able to invest. So this group that Ari writes about. We ended up being the technology advisory board to William Morris when it was acquired by Silver Lake. Okay. Mark and I. Okay, well, I don't even know about this.
So what were you guys advising him on? Whenever he had a question on technology, the advisories around Egon and Ari are very straightforward. Ari does the 15-minute phone call. 15, it's like now I did the episode with him. Now his book is called Rolling the Calls. Now he does it to me. So I get a call and it's like, hold for Ari Emanuel. I'm like, you're calling me. And then sometimes they're like 25 seconds and there's no goodbye. Yeah, but you know what? I'll tell you, it was fascinating. So we would do that when we had something to talk about. And I understand his shorthand. He's trying to get something done.
He's a man on a mission. But there was a time when I had left SoftBank and he reached out and said, what are you doing now? I said, nothing. I'm just trying to figure out what I'm going to do. He said, why don't you come by and come see me, and then we can talk about it. I said, okay, I happen to be in L.A., I'll come see you. And my assistant's like, Ari's office says you're having lunch. What time should I schedule to depart? I'm like, listen, it's probably going to be 15 minutes. Why don't you schedule half an hour, and then we'll get me to the airport and get me on a flight back. And that was the only time I spent an hour and a half with Ari.
So you can tell, he actually wanted to get into what I was going to go do next, and he actually spent time and invested time in that conversation. So he does have a soul. When it's really important to you, he's going to spend a lot of time. But most times, he's actually transactional when he wants to get something done. One of the things I love about Ramp is their... mission is easy to understand they want to help your business save time and money and that is why they have built router do me a favor while you're listening to this go to router.com router was built to reduce your company's inference costs by matching every request to the most efficient ai model router automatically balances cost speed and quality of output router is built for ctos and loved by cfos your engineering team gets the best model for every workload and your finance team gets lower inference spend. One customer of Router has the perfect description of why your company should be using Router. Choosing the right model makes a meaningful difference to our AI spend. We run billions of tokens through Router and have reduced our model costs by 92%. Tokens are money. Save both. And you can do that by going to router.com.
Deal is how the best founders turn the world into their talent pool. I've been studying how history's greatest founders operate for a decade. And one thing they all have in common is they understand that recruiting and hiring the very best talent is your most important priority. A players recognize other A players, which is why top companies like Ramp, Shopify, ElevenLabs, Uber, and DoorDash all use Deal. Many of the top founders I know have personally invested in Deal after using their product. And what they discovered is that Deal is the best company in the world at building infrastructure for global hiring. Deal will help your business hire, pay, and manage any worker anywhere in the world so you can retain the best talent anywhere and spend the rest of your time focusing on what you do best, delivering value to your customers. The founder of ElevenLabs has a great description of the value Deal can give your company. He said, we built ElevenLabs to break down language and communication barriers. With Deal enabling us to hire and support exceptional talent anywhere, We can accelerate our innovation and bring more voices, stories, and ideas to every corner of the world.
Deal is trusted by over 40,000 companies and growing fast. Learn how they can help your business by going to deal.com forward slash Senra. That is deal.com forward slash Senra. We were talking a little bit about some of the people that we either know jointly or know of. And you were saying like some of the people like jump around a lot. Like, they have an idea, and then they're working on it for a little bit, and then they're almost like they have, like, ADHD. What's, like, how do you think about you? Because you seem to have had these jobs for a long time. You're at Google for 10 years. You've been at Palo Alto Networks for how long now?
Eight. Eight. Like, I like to focus on one thing for a long period of time. Like, how do you? Do you work? Well, the good news is, like, even at Power of the Networks or when I was at SoftBank or when I was at Google, you know, Google went from 2,000 employees to 60,000 employees when I was there. It went from $2 billion in revenue to $62 billion in revenue. So you realize even though you're in one place, you're actually doing so many different things. At that point in time, we went from search and YouTube and double-click and, like, you know, buying tons of businesses, thinking of all kinds of stuff.
So I think it's not what you do at one point in time. It's how much your brain can get challenged, how many different problems can you get involved in. So you can swap from problem to problem, solve many things in the same space, and as long as you get the right environmental structure right. If the opportunity is big enough, when I joined, that was eight years ago, we're a firewall company today, and now we do 70-plus products. We're in every aspect of cybersecurity. We're all over AI, trying to make sure we pivot hard on the AI stuff. So you can always keep yourself challenged as long as you get the right platform in front of you.
I just talked to Nick from Revolut, and that was his thing. He's like, there's no way I was going to run a company with one product. He's like, that would be boring. He's running like 20 different experiments at all given times. I think he's in like 30 or 40 countries. He wants to get to 100 different countries. When you got recruited to become the CEO of Palo Alto Networks, they had essentially one product, right? Yes, for the most part, yeah. Okay, was your, this expansion that has since occurred in the last eight years, is that, did you come in with that plan or you're just like, what was the conversation?
I didn't have a plan when I came in.
“the biggest expense in enterprise is customer acquisition. That's what costs the most.”
Why do you think so many other CEOs make the mistake? Is it like an ego thing, where it's like, no, I can build this? I don't think so. What is it? I don't think it's an ego thing. I don't think CEOs set out to make mistakes. No CEO stands up saying, let me try and make a mistake this morning. They believe whatever they're doing is right, and they most likely identify the right company. I think often M&A fails because of bad execution. Your tendency is, you're too busy, you're doing a lot of stuff.
You buy the company and say, great, I have a guy. or a gal who manages this topic. Okay, this person does video streaming. He or she's been trying to do video streaming for the last five years. I'm going to buy a video streaming company and give it to him or her. And you instead put the founder of the company. Yeah, I'm like, whoa, wait a minute. This person just got their ass kicked with all the resources and all the money we had to that guy who got funded by venture capitalists and who went out and lived in a crummy warehouse, hired people, blood, sweat, and tears, built something that has product market fit.
And he or she should work for the empire? That's not going to work. He should be part of the empire. So I switch it. I say, okay, this person did really well. This person is now going to be the head of video streaming. Everybody can learn from him. He can work for him. That sometimes doesn't go down well with some of the people who have to end up working with him. Any existing organization. Of course. They wind up leaving or whatever. It doesn't matter, right? They were the ones who were chartered with winning. They had access to resources. And they didn't. And they didn't. You can't reward that behavior by giving them a prized asset or on the risk that they destroyed the prized asset.
So that's kind of one failure mode. The other failure mode, people say, you know, I always say this, like, you know, my innovation is my genius. There's this pure dumb luck, right? Which means I'm a founder. I created something cool. These guys are not smart. I'm just going to buy number two or number three. I'm going to spit and shine it, make it look like new, and I'm going to kick their ass. That never works. I want to buy number one. Well, you talk about this a lot.
“If you look at most markets, number one and number two end up with disproportionate share of the profits in the category.”
“I don't sign the definitive term sheet until I get the founder to sign on the joint product roadmap.”
We want them to continue to execute in that direction. I spent the last decade reading more than 400 biographies of history's greatest founders, and if I had to distill what I learned down to a single word, it would be focus. The best founders spend all their time on the thing that makes them great. They spend their time building products, serving customers, and growing their companies. The greatest founders would not spend time rebuilding authentication infrastructure. That is why more than 3,000 of the fastest-moving and most important companies in the world use WorkOS. Companies like Anthropic, OpenAI, and Cursor all use WorkOS.
WorkOS makes it easy for you to sell your products to enterprise customers. If you build software and you want to sell to the largest companies in the world, there are some requirements that you cannot ignore, like single sign-on, SCIM, role-based access, audit logs, and more. You could spend months building all this yourself, or you can use WorkOS. WorkOS provides the infrastructure to make your software enterprise-ready. Go to WorkOS.com and get started today. That is WorkOS.com. I want to go back to this idea of looking at the number one and number two, and then you get really close to them.
“My job is to motivate 6,000 people to go out there and sell my product because they do.”
But remember, one and two is also a judgment call. It could be one and two. You could have one. You could have this one, A called one, and B called two, and I could have B called one and A called two because I'm looking at the difference of the criteria to measure it. There's no obvious criteria. who's one and two they would have 30 customers they would have same amount of ARR which one is one and two are you a tennis fan yeah I'm not really but sure why don't you use a tennis analogy but I'm gonna tell you because I had dinner it was really interesting I had dinner I had dinner one time with uh he's a mental coach to some of the top tennis players and when he says mental coach he's like literally like they got other people to help him with their swing yes my conversations are all about what's going on in their mind and he said something that's very fascinating he's like you know take the top 200 tennis players he's like the difference between one and three is negligible. He goes, the difference between four and 200 is smaller
than the difference between four and three. And he was explaining like, like what appears from the outside, like, oh, that person's number four, that person's number three or two. It's like, that seems the gap is like really small. It's like, it's actually a lot bigger when you get deeper and you actually understand what is going on in their, like, in his case, he's like, what's going on in their mind is actually counting. It's not like a physical, it's not like number three and number four are that different physically. This is like a lot in their mind. So I like this personal fascination whether it's sports business or otherwise of like, oh, kind of from the outside, it's kind of looks similar.
And I've run across a ton of founders. And you spend time with them like, oh, this is why this person, the gap between them and their next competitor is so large. As you said, the criteria depends, right? Some could have clear company attributes which make them one or two. Somebody's got twice the error than the other one. Yeah, we get it. They could be deemed as one much easier. Sometimes they have similar starting grounds. They start in the same place. One came at it from a different angle. Then it becomes, which founder is going to lead this to success or the other? And that's where you're getting into the mindset of the founder and the leadership team.
And that's what we say differently. I say, my job is to fund, once we identify one and two, remember, they also have to be willing to sell. Which the people we were talking about before we started recording are not selling for any price. That's right. Yes. So there's also that. You know, you've got to reanalyze that from that vantage point saying, well, these could be alpha founders. They could be winners. But, dude, they're also sending you a signal by saying, I'm willing to sell. Have you talked to Hawk Tan about this? Have I talked to Hawk Tan about selling? He does a lot of acquisitions. He does it very differently.
I know. But have you talked to him about this? His mindset's a little extreme. So, me and you were together. Educate me, yes. Okay. Well, me and you were together at Dale's house. and this is where I heard this story where he was advising a younger founder that was also there and he was just like just make sure that on day one of your acquisition that the acquired company that you are the conqueror and they are the conqueror. That's a slightly different philosophy. I know you do. Then I asked him, I was like, Hock, why don't you do any podcasts? Do you want to do my podcast? He's like, oh no. He goes, my wife forbids me to do podcasts.
I go, why? He goes, she said I would get canceled. See, I say the opposite. I tell my team, when you're starting a negotiation with a company, remember, they're going to be a colleague. Don't treat them with disrespect. He's obviously an extreme character. I wasn't taking it to disrespect, but like. So which one's right? Which one's one and two in your mind? I obviously know that. Think about it. There's no way you could think of it like he does because you just said, no, this guy's coming in and now he's your boss. Look, my point is that I see differently. I cannot win if 20 people around me don't feel they're winning.
And for them to believe that they're winning, they have to believe they're a first class citizen. They have to believe that they're part of the team and their winning matters. And their winning is as much for themselves as it is for me. Has there been any acquisitions you did too early?
“M&A is not a strategy. M&A is a mechanism to validate or to amplify your strategy or to execute your strategy.”
that was kind of fucking up the deal. And Egon comes in, who has way more experience to this, he goes, you're never going to remember the $400 million. And he's like, is this an asset we want or not? Like, you're going to remember fucking up the deal, but you're not going to remember the $400 million.
And, you know, they obviously closed the deal, and it's been way more valuable to that. Well, Egon and I bought a cricket team together in London. I thought you did that with Devesh. No, no, Egon and I are the equal owners. He and I came up with this together, and he called me. I was about to go play golf at the AT&T, and he called me. He says, how's the auction going? It's like 6 o'clock in the morning because it's in London. I said, the last auction went for two rounds. We were at round number 24. He's like, I know. You're going to want it cheap because you like value. This is your upbringing.
This is sport. Welcome to sport. Don't stop bidding. I was still on the phone with you to give you moral courage. Wait, how many more rounds? You were at 24. How many did you have to go? We ended up at 29 rounds. But once he said that, you're like, fuck it, we're getting this? He was like, yeah, what's the worst? We're bringing like half of it. It doesn't matter. Because this thing is going to be a huge success or it's going to be a failure. So he did it to you too. I did the same thing, but I was trying to be cute on the other one. And he just reminded me that, you know, you say that in your professional life, think about it in your personal life too.
So that's what we did. You know, I saw him at the range at seven o'clock and he said, do we own the team? Like, yeah, we own the team now. It happened. So yeah, he's consistent in his point of view. I've heard this phrase differently before. I'm curious if you agree with this characterization. You're not buying companies, you're buying founders. You're buying teams. You're buying teams. you're buying their point of view, you're buying their strategy, you're buying their execution. A company is just a construct that is around the team. That allows us to be held in some legal entity, protect IP, and eventually turn that into sort of a go-to-market capability.
But effectively, what is a company? When you come up with an idea, your first instinct is not that I'm going to start a company. Your first instinct is I'm going to go build something amazing. When you go build, you call yourself a builder, you go find like-minded people who have shared the vision, and then you're the most charismatic person in the room because you're trying to convince people to get on the bandwagon for your story because you had the idea, and it's typically one or two or three people. So you're doing everything. You're a builder. You're building. You're validating your strategy every time you hire the next person.
You're looking in their eye and telling them, this is what we're going to build. The person gets excited. And if you're hiring smart people, they also have to buy into it. So you're basically building a team. You're building a team of like-minded people. You're bashing out the edges. You're aligning the strategy and getting to a point and saying, OK, now we all agree we're going to build this. Now let's go to warp speed and build this shit because you're going to beat everybody else to the punch. That's what you're doing. That the company is just not a legal entity. Think about most of these guys.
They probably have one administrative person who does HR, finance, facilities, and brings coffee. So it's sad. I mean, the company is a construct in which you organize, but you're actually buying a well-functioning, cohesive team. That's what you test for. Can this team execute better than other teams out there? And when you think about it like that and say, I'm going to compete with that team that spent an year and a half getting together and training together, and they're on the field every day. They live in the same house. They work 80 hours a week. and say, I'm going to beat them by hiring a bunch of corporate people, by going through my HR team, going through four interviews, and going through internal process.
I was like, holy shit, you're never going to beat them. They're far ahead. There's a couple things that are popping in my mind while I'm listening to you. Have you ever heard this guy named Henry Singleton? No. Okay, Henry Singleton, essentially like the proto-Buffet. He ran this very successful conglomerate called Teledyne in the 1960s. I found him because I read, when I'm interested in somebody, I read every single thing they've ever, like, written about them or written by them. And they will all tell you the people they studied. And so Buffett and Munger kept talking about this guy named Henry Singleton.
Munger said that Henry Singleton was the single smartest person I ever met. Buffett said it was a crime that American business school students didn't study him. His returns were utterly ridiculous. And a lot of the ideas that I thought that Buffett used for Berkshire were actually he learned from Singleton for Teledyne. But he grew by acquisition just like you did. And at one point, he, I think he does like, I should know this, I just did another episode on him. Let's say 135 acquisitions. I think at one point he owned 135. 30 companies, 129 of them were profitable, so he bought really well. But then he changed his strategy and he stopped acquiring.
And then from there, he never acquired another company for another 15 years. I'm thinking about him while you're talking. Is there a chance where Palo Alto Networks stops acquiring? Possible. As I said, it's not an existential strategy for us. It's a way we can maximize the value for the business. It's a way we can maximize the outcome for our customers. At some point in time, we believe we've reached a point where the marginal value to accrete to the customer is through us making sure all of our stuff works at a customer. Maybe we focus on that. There's no hard and fast rule that we have to keep acquiring.
Is anything going on in AI changing how you think about acquisitions? Yeah. Can you say more about this? This is the most transformative technology we've ever seen in our lifetimes and possibly will be. So if you look at the impact it's already having, it's fundamentally changing how everybody works. Like, and I say this differently when I was at Google, we democratized knowledge or information. This is democratizing intelligence, right? We all have in our back pocket something that gets more and more intelligent over time. So we basically have access to intelligence we never had. Like, I'm pretty sure two years from now, AI will get to a point of reliability where we will trust it as much as a human being who's an expert on the topic.
You talk to your nutritionist, you talk to AI and say, you know what? My nutritionist is not smarter than my phone giving me nutritional advice or my physiotherapist or my trainer. So you suddenly find that AI gets to a point where it's going to have so much data, so much tribal knowledge that it's going to be able to decide. You'll be able to torque it, saying, listen, give me advice which is at the frontier, which has got a little bit of risk, or give me advice down the mainstream. You'll be able to torque, saying, how much intelligence do you want? How much differentiation do you want in the intelligence that you're going to get?
So if that's going to be true, it's going to fundamentally change the way we work. It has to, right? A lot of organizations are structured in work that has been broken down into silos, right? Even the process of product development is split across eight different teams. You have documentation people, you have testing people, you have coding people, you have product people, you have UI people. So you've got eight different sets of people who combine together to build a product, which makes no sense. The only reason we did it because we sort of created a specialization because nobody could be great and amazing at everything.
But if you believe that you can harness all this intelligence in a way that one person could master all these. It crossed because they have very able assistants, which will do 90% of work for them. It fundamentally changed the way we get shit done, the way we build things, the way we do anything in our lives, the way companies are created. So that's going to be true. The shape of a company, the shape of the organization that we run today is going to be fundamentally different five years from now. I found one of my all-time favorite quotes when I was reading the book Zero to One. The quote says, the single most powerful pattern I have noticed is that successful people find value in unexpected places. And they do this by thinking about business from first principles instead of formulas. That is exactly what AppLovin has done with their advertising platform. AppLovin connects you with over a billion potential new customers in mobile games. AppLovin allows you to capture undivided attention. AppLovin ads are full screen videos that are watched for an average of 35 seconds. That is retention that blows other ad platforms out of the water. And you can launch on AppLovin in minutes. You set the goal and AppLovin achieves it. No complex setup,
no expertise needed. And AppLovin scales quickly. They can put your ads in front of over a billion potential customers. Other businesses have seen immediate results, scale to hundreds of thousands of dollars of spend per day, and increase their revenue by millions. So you want to get started quickly before all of your competitors are on AppLovin. And you can do that by going to AppLovin.com. That's AppLovin.com. Doesn't AI make cybersecurity companies more valuable? Yeah, I think even more so, more technology, more interconnectedness makes cybersecurity companies more valuable. Look, cybersecurity didn't exist 25 years ago because there was no connectivity. You had a mainframe, you logged in, it was secure. There's no problem. The problem is Now, David can log in from here into his bank account.
Now, that becomes an attack vector. So the more people who can log into shit from everywhere just expands the attack surface. I saw this morning Facebook says 3.65 billion people who are daily users. There's 3.65 billion people getting into their infrastructure every day. Every door into their infrastructure is a potential cyber attack surface. You do that across the world, I don't know, between the 8 billion people we have, we must interact with hundreds of consumer applications. There must be trillions of interactions every day, which are on a line that allows you to interact with some enterprise infrastructure.
The more you do that, the more likely that you need security across all those vectors. The more technology changes, you need more capability around security. For example, the products that will secure AI don't exist fully yet, because AI is so new. So, yes. It's good for our business the more you connect things. You're like a, I don't know, like more of like a stoic kind of person. You seem like you don't get stressed. Or you said like, I read something like you said your business doesn't stress you, which is a very unusual thing to say. Yeah, but the life shouldn't stress you. You should wake up every morning, do the best you can.
And then, remember, if you grew up sort of in India with Hinduism, it was like there's a strong sense of fatalism. All you can do is you do your best. Okay, I don't know about this. Explain how you grew up in like this fatalism thing. Remember, like, you've got 1.8 billion people in the country. You've got to make sure that they all understand that they can do their best. And eventually, there is a hand of God which dictates what eventually happens. Or it's the notion that it is uncertainty. You can't create full certainty. Things will happen to you which you can't control. The only thing you can control is what you do.
And if you do what you do really well, then you should sleep well. Because you can't get worried about everything that can happen to you from an uncertainty perspective. That is a sense of fatalism. That is what keeps society somewhat orderly. But you do understand it's easy to say that and very hard to apply for a lot of humans. Well, it doesn't stop anyone from trying, right? We try and control every outcome that we can around us. We try and minimize risk around us. We all do that. But at some point in time, we're going to say, I've done my best. Did you have this ability when you were younger and early in your career?
No. This is recently found in the last five years, yes. You're saying this is the last five years. So you're working at Google. High stress? More anxious person? No. Google's the best business. Like, you know, the search business keeps going. That was like the greatest. Like, that seems to me, and maybe I'm wrong, is like you had like a lot of success before that, but you know you're working on like, you know, once in a hundred year company at that point. You had it and you were young. You were in your 30s, right? It can get to your head. But I feel like the pressure to like, this is a huge opportunity.
This could be a once in a lifetime. This opportunity will change my life. It's funny, it didn't feel like that when you were there. Okay, say more about this. It just felt normal. It just felt, wow, this is this great rocket ship that's working. And remember, you're 34. You've never actually worked in any other company of a similar ilk. You're now at the center of attention of technology. And you're like, great, everybody's searching around you. Every morning you wake up, there are more searches.
And it's like very easy to sell as long as I can give them back more than that. We'll come back to Google in one second. So I want to get to this though. From the outside looking in, it seems like because of the proliferation of AI, the fact that it, there's like, I think you were just on my friend's show, I'm friends with John and Jordy from TPBN. And I caught a clip of that today and there was some kind of. Yeah, there was a discovery of a vulnerability called PHP, which is like used like 22 and a half million places, which is being used right now.
Yeah. And so my point is like, you've got to be waking up every day hearing more crazy shit. It's only going to get crazy in the future. Yes. And you seem to not allow yourself to be stressed by it, which from the outside seems like this would be the most intense, stressful part of your entire career. Why am I wrong about that? I can't do anything about it. And we all have to go figure this out. We've got to fix it. But stressing is not going to change the outcome. The outcome is going to be changed by us getting on and getting something to do with it, right? We all discovered this morning. I found out about it yesterday in the morning.
Our teams went and looked at everything we have to make sure we don't have the vulnerability. We found it. We blocked it. We found the patches. We patched ourselves. We said, how do we go protect our customers? Team worked overnight, built a patch. When it came out this morning, they announced their patch. We announced our patch. We put it out in the public domain. We're getting on the phone to any customer who has a problem. We'll solve it. That's all we can do. So how do you describe this philosophy, though? I'm just saying, wake up every morning. Do the best you can to the best of your ability.
Leave no stone unturned, and then let fate do the rest. Is this real? Yeah. Well, OK. When were you the most stressed or anxious in your life? I was the most anxious in my life. and I had to give a speech at my daughter's wedding. Is this the daughter that just started the fund? Yeah, this is the daughter who got married in February in India. What's her name? Ayesha. Congratulations. She used to work in marketing in Brex. Wait, she used to work in marketing for Brex? Yes. Kids don't take advice from parents for the most part. But I'm blessed that once in a while she'd listen to something and she'd go process it differently.
And I said to her, I said, you know, what excites you? I said, Dad, you know, it's exciting when marketing doesn't seem to be the most important function in the company. so I'm working in marketing, what should I be thinking about? I said, look, if you look around here in Silicon Valley, the most exciting jobs are people who get to talk to founders, people who get to understand what they do, get excited about business. If you're excited about business, you've got to think about venture capital. So she thought about it. She did her own research, figured out that she's going to go work. And she worked with Bill Maris at Section 32, and then she's getting married this year.
And she's like, I think I should start my own fund. I said, that sounds like a great idea. You should. So she's been through the motions. She's done a lot of research, figured it out. Then she started going around thinking who would be people who would invest in her. And she said, will you be my advisor? Now, this is the best thing a father can get. And she calls me once or twice a day. We talk about companies. We talk about what she's thinking about. It's a blessing. It's great. That's beautiful, man. When you think about your own childhood, this innate drive that you had to achieve, largely internal, I would imagine, did you get a lot of pressure from your parents?
No. My parents didn't tell me what to do. I used to come home from school, do my homework. My mom would be happy that I did it. She'd be chasing my sister around, trying to get her. Find out what the homework she had. I got my shit done. My dad didn't know how I got into university. He didn't know how I got into business school in the U.S. I just went to him and signed me $2,000. He was like, I don't have that. He said, can I give me $200? He's like, yeah, I'll take $200. I took $200 and showed up here. Then he sent me $2,000 afterwards to pay part of my tuition, and that was it. You don't put any pressure on your kids?
No. Like, how different are you as a parent than your parents were to you? That was a different era. At that point in time, parenting was different. Parenting is different now. Parenting in India is different. Parenting in the U.S. is different. So, you know, you obviously have all those differences that come into play. I have two younger kids who are 11 and 10, so more involved in their lives than I was with my 29-year-old. Why? More time. I consciously try and take out time, and I'm sure my kids will say it's never enough, and my wife will say it's not enough, but I try and take out time as much as I can.
So it's different. No, I don't believe in putting pressure on my kids. The kids have to be able to express themselves and do what they believe is best. Look, I have seen some bizarre thing. I don't know how many people have been born since humanity started. It must have been the tens of billions, right? No, I think it was, I mean, we read about this a long time ago. It was like over 100 billion. Okay, 100 billion people have been born. It's a well-known problem. Every kid has a parent by definition. And even now we struggle with parenting as a problem because there's probably so many variants of parenting that most people can get it wrong.
So I just want my kids to be happy in their lives. If they're happy, my mission is accomplished. Because I've seen so many scenarios where kids are not happy. And it's not clear where things go wrong. It's not clear from a parenting perspective or it's in the DNA. It's in circumstances. So I just want to make sure my kids are healthy, happy, and balanced. If I can achieve that, they can do whatever they want. I love the framing you just put on there. It's like everybody's had a parent. Parenting is a known thing. It's been around and we still don't have it figured out. No, you show me where's the ultimate guide to parenting.
I'm particularly interested in this because most of the biographies I read, obviously the person usually starts out, there's some people that are born into wealthy families and they wind up cheating a lot. Obviously most of humanity is not wealthy, so therefore most of the people you're going to read about weren't.
“I think it's very dangerous to take that circumstance and keep reminding your children, remember, I was poor, you should be more grateful.”
Toby Luque was on this show earlier this year. I'm going to see him again in like two weeks to record again. And his whole point was like, we're going to look back on the year 2026. Because of AI, like every business is up for grabs. So every business is being transformed somewhat, right? But I feel like yours might be the most out of anybody else I've had on the show. No, no, no. So let's break it down, right?
“AI is set up to charge you every time you run traffic through AI in terms of tokens.”
Yeah, from outside, that's what I was assuming was the case. That's what I was like. It's always assumed that CEOs are trying to maximize their businesses from the outside.
Generally, that's a good rule. Yeah, but we talked about no one wakes up wanting to lose, but a lot of people lose every day. So this is what I was trying to get to. Who do you go to when you want to learn about the frontier of AI? Who do I go to when I want to learn more about AI? There are different people. I spend, I want to say, at least four or five hours a week with AI founders of some sort. Because these kids are young. They possibly worked at OpenAI. They probably worked at Google somewhere. They've got these companies. They're very kind. They spend time with me. They try and tell them what they do about works.
So I learned about open-weight models. I learned about training. I learned about training data. I learned about guardian agents. I go around, I talk to tons of people. I talk to probably five or 10 cyber startups a month, maybe 15. I'm trying to absorb how they're thinking about it. Because in a bizarre way, this is a new and developing science, for lack of a better word. There are no real experts. People know how to do their shit. Everybody else is trying to imagine the implications to everything else around them, and they're trying to build a mental model so they can build product and go win in this category.
right there is no concept of you know data labeling before you started having self-driving cars Now that's turned into reinforcement learning, simulation models, neural networks that are trying to simulate data so we can train AI. So you literally have to stay in the conversation with tons of people to understand and absorb what people are talking about. So you just have to spend a lot of time on Twitter, spend a lot of time talking to people, spend a lot of time reading stuff. It's kind of like half I understand, half just gets through the other side. I can't absorb everything. That's how I learn.
Now you brought up another thing I wanted to ask you about. What's behind your new presence on X? Well, I think I said that. I was giving shit to one of your fellow podcasters. Harry? Yeah. I was giving Harry shit saying, this is great for you. You keep bringing all of us in. You build your own brand. All of us are effectively props for your brand. He's like, well, that's your fault, not mine. I'm like, what do you mean? He's like, well, you give the right to build your own brand if you want to. He's just don't. I'm like, how would I do that? He's like, well, go tell people on the next. What do you think?
You have a lot to say in a podcast. Why do you wait for me to ask the question? That's a good point. So then he told me to tweet every day. I'm like, okay, and then... I'm enjoying your tweets. And you are tweeting almost every day. No, no, it's at lower frequency now. I listen. Oh, you can't listen. You're really good at it. But, you know, you can only put your foot in your mouth if you say something too often because you almost have to not feel the pressure to tweet every day. So I like that advice. Don't feel the pressure to say something all the time. You end up making it a job. I don't want to make it a job.
I want to do it when I have something I want to say. So I think I say stuff when I want to say stuff. People ask me how much time I spend. Who writes it? Actually, I do. I just write it in the back of the car. It's obvious that you write it. Come on. You know, once I had it checked by Claude or something, and it made some grammatical edits, and people just gave me so much shit. Oh, I saw that one. You're like, you're writing AI. My idea is AI, I check it, and I'm never going to do that again. No, you're really good at this. In fact, there's a guy that's always on this camera that gives me a heads up when we hit a certain time, and he just gave me the heads up, and I was fucking shocked at how fast this time went.
So that's usually a good, uh, it's a good sign, man. I really appreciate you doing this. This was awesome. We've got to do this every few months. I hope you enjoyed this episode. Please remember to subscribe wherever you're listening and leave a review and make sure you listen to my other podcast founders for almost a decade. I've obsessively read over 400 biographies of history's greatest entrepreneurs searching for ideas that you can use in your work. Most of the guests you hear on this show first found me through founders. Thank you.


