rahulchhabra07

Given there's so much PR around Zoom, it's hard to figure if users are actually liking the product for itself. And what are the improvements they'd really want in the product.

- Website instead of desktop app?

- Utilities for transcription/other integrations etc.?

- Better overall navigation for starting/joining meetings?

- Anything else?

Write any email on the go. The software generates an almost realistic video of you reading out your email.

The reader gets to watch it (w subtitles if reqd), read via text

I just realized an important corollary of the Power law in Venture Investing. Basically, think there are so many startups who hire people without ever finding a PMF. And I was thinking how are these startups able to justify their value in the economic world. Like every startup doesn't create enough economic value to hire employees, right. But they don't need to. They just need to convince some VC to raise money. They don't need revenues. They can possibly fail even. But then who loses, if the founders took salaries, employees took salaries, is it the investors? But then you realize, no. Even the investors are fine losing on 9/10 bets if 1/10 is a 10x return generating. Which means the companies which really generate economic value, they just don't create wealth for their employees and investors, but they also financially support so many failed ventures indirectly, hence spurting cycles and ripples of innovation and risk-taking in this world.

I have a few doubts and need clarification.

- I think investors getting board seat - control over the direction of co and preference at liquidation is a lopsided deal.

- Founders and early employees seem to have put in the effort, have context higher by orders of magnitude and real skin in the game - they sacrifice time, effort, take risks and have real opportunity cost - proof of work.

- Both wealth and effort compounds. Investors put in already compounded wealth into to-be compounding efforts founders are making and still own preference over later stage returns of the co.

- This implies even though investors take lesser risks, and put in lesser work, they get more returns than founders who put in more work and take more risk in generating the returns.

- Given this equation, it makes sense for founders & early employees to have control over the direction, more stake, and preference over liquidation. Giving more stake to someone who has higher skin in the game inevitably leads to better results for everyone who owns a stake in co.