Skip to content
The Twenty Minute VCThe Twenty Minute VC

99% of Drone Companies Will Die & Why Anduril’s Products Aren’t an Ethics Debate | Matthew Steckman

Matthew Steckman is the President and Chief Business Officer of Anduril. Matt played a central role in securing the $20BN contract Anduril just won with the US military. Prior to Anduril, Matt served as Chief Revenue Officer for Zipline. Before Zipline, Matt held several leadership positions at Palantir. ---------------------------------------------- Timestamps: 00:00 Intro 02:21 What Do Most Defense Founders Get Completely Wrong? 08:42 Can You Build a Billion-Dollar Defense Company Without the US? 09:52 Anduril's $20BN Army Contract Broken Down 14:52 Why Government Contracts Are Brutal (And Why Most Fail) 15:56 How Does Anduril Predict Wars Before They Happen? 18:32 Why Cyber Warfare Is the Most Dangerous Battlefield No One Understands 21:51 Why Defense Startups Must Go Wide 26:13 How Anduril Decides Where to Deploy $100M+ Product Bets 35:28 Should Builders Control How Their Weapons Are Used? 39:36 What Would Anduril Buy If They Had an Unlimited Checkbook? 46:22 Why Anduril Must Go Public 51:55 Quick-Fire Round: The Future of War, VC Mistakes & Career Advice ----------------------------------------------- Subscribe on Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/3j2KMcZTtgTNBKwtZBMHvl?si=85bc9196860e4466 Subscribe on Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/the-twenty-minute-vc-20vc-venture-capital-startup/id958230465 Follow Harry Stebbings on X: https://twitter.com/HarryStebbings Follow Anduril Industries on X: https://twitter.com/anduriltech Follow 20VC on Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/20vchq Follow 20VC on TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@20vc_tok Visit our Website: https://www.20vc.com Subscribe to our Newsletter: https://www.thetwentyminutevc.com/contact ----------------------------------------------- #20vc #harrystebbings #matthewsteckman #defensecompany #anduril #drones #cyberwarfare

Matthew SteckmanguestHarry Stebbingshost
Mar 23, 202657mWatch on YouTube ↗

EVERY SPOKEN WORD

  1. 0:00 – 2:21

    Intro

    1. MS

      You basically can't have a defense company if you don't have a large US business. The government thinks that we can deliver some pretty major stuff now and in the future.

    2. HS

      Today I'm so excited. We've got Matthew Steckman, President and Chief Business Officer for Anduril. Just last week they announced a monster $20 billion contract with the US military, one of the largest ever. We could not have a more apt or pertinent guest as he takes us behind the scenes of both the contract and of Anduril.

    3. MS

      There are very few drone programs that would create a material enough amount of revenue to actually create a real business. You have to create a monopoly. There are lots of VC companies I would love to buy if I had an unlimited checkbook.

    4. HS

      Is there ever like an ethical question of do we agree with sending thousands of missiles to Iran? [claps hands] Ready to go? [rock music] Matt, I am so excited for this, dude. I just got off a, a chat with Christian Garrett and Matt Grimm, and they gave me like incredibly tough questions-

    5. MS

      Oh, boy

    6. HS

      ... so this is gonna be a grueling hour for you.

    7. MS

      Here we go.

    8. HS

      But thank you for joining me, dude.

    9. MS

      Yeah, thanks for, thanks for having me. It's really great to be here.

    10. HS

      I actually wanna start with Trey, weirdly, which was Christian Garrett said that I had to ask this. He said, "What was Trey like at Georgetown?"

    11. MS

      [laughs]

    12. HS

      And what is it about the f- Anduril founding team that has made Anduril so successful?

    13. MS

      Yeah, well, Trey and I were, uh, were classmates. Um, met freshman year, um, played ultimate Frisbee together on the team. Uh, so me and... went on a lot of road trips with one another. Um, you know, I don't think Trey has changed at all. You ever seen the movie Hot Tub Time Machine?

    14. HS

      Yeah.

    15. MS

      Yeah, great movie.

    16. HS

      Hot Tub.

    17. MS

      Yeah. There's a line in it that's like, "Every group of friends has an asshole, but Trey is our asshole." You know? You know what I'm saying? [laughs]

    18. HS

      [laughs]

    19. MS

      Yeah, that's Trey in a nutshell.

    20. HS

      And he's gone on to such things with-

    21. MS

      It's crazy how that works. Yeah. [laughs]

    22. HS

      [laughs] It's, there's hope for you. [laughs]

    23. MS

      [laughs]

    24. HS

      Do you know what? I've never had such a weird start to a show.

    25. MS

      There you go. Yeah.

    26. HS

      It's like-

    27. MS

      No, we're kicking this off right

    28. HS

      ... there's like a movie reference.

    29. MS

      Yeah, we're definitely kicking this off right.

    30. HS

      And then Trey's our asshole. [laughs]

  2. 2:21 – 8:42

    What Do Most Defense Founders Get Completely Wrong?

    1. MS

      Yeah.

    2. HS

      In terms of the team itself, I have so many defense companies pitch me, and I think bluntly the team is always lacking. What do you think it is about the team that Anduril has in terms of founding team that has made it so successful?

    3. MS

      Well, first, like, th- there's kind of some magic in the fact that it's the same leadership team today as it was when we started the company. Um, that, that implies a whole lot of things. I think, um, mainly it's that we're all friends, so I think that's actually pretty critical. Um, there's, there's a bond there that, that basically can't be separated by business or stress, uh, or life. Um, w- we all know each other really well. Uh, but then on top of that, um, we all come at the industry from really different backgrounds and lenses. And especially in defense, which is, uh, it's like everything works against you to get into the defense market. There... It, it's like every headwind you could possibly imagine. If you don't have a lot of perspective and knowledge about what's about to come, it's hard to think around corners, and you get yourself kinda mixed up and gummed up a lot. Founding teams, o- one of the most important things in, in defense is y- some of them can be outsiders and, you know, brilliant technologists, um, and thinkers. Um, it does take a lot of inside knowledge. Um, and I think that, uh, one of the things we got right and keep getting right is that blend of, um, like the outside-inside process. Um, who can think, uh, differently, um, a- and bring in sort of commercial perspective, uh, high-tech perspective, uh, add a kind of entropy into the system. Um, and then who can really deeply represent, um, our customers, how they think, how does that come together uniquely? That, that, that becomes super important to, uh, to having any success in the defense world.

    4. HS

      I think one of the things I most look for, honestly, is like GTM experience and ability in a team that I'm looking at in defense. Um, how should we think about analyzing teams for their ability to actually sell and go through procurement? Does it matter if you've got technologists and people with military and combat experience, but no one with GTM experience? How important is that? I know procurement better than fucking anyone.

    5. MS

      It's multidisciplinary, right? So the, the challenge becomes in defense that if you're missing any of the 12 different types of disciplines it takes to really capture a large program, you will fail. Um, and so one of the things that we've done is over the years we've built up a pretty sophisticated apparatus to kind of round out these teams with all of the various skills in acquisition, in budgeting, in technology. Um, and then again, mission and operational analysis, and doctrinally how these types of technologies will integrate into the military. You have to have it all. I think the one, uh, maybe, uh, interesting piece here is there aren't actually a lot of big programs in government, and so one of the things you don't need to necessarily look for, I think what you would in a traditional hiring process, you would look for someone who has demonstrated the ability to capture a large program in the past. But, but since there's so few of these things, you, you can't really look for that. Sometimes you luck into it, and like great, you should certainly hire people who have shown to be able to capture large programs. Um, y- you generally don't actually have that in the hiring pool, and so what you ultimately have to do is piece together the right puzzle for everything that you're going after

    6. HS

      Does it matter if the founding team doesn't have that experience in terms of going through procurement and GTM?

    7. MS

      I think it does. Um, and I think that, you know, I, I advise a lot of, of companies, and, um, if I notice the founding team, at least a portion of it or a person on it hasn't kind of been there, done that, the first thing I recommend is that they have to find someone who represents that piece of the puzzle that, that that's missing to their team.

    8. HS

      When you meet all of the defense companies that you meet today, again, I'm a, you know, I'm an investor. Dude, we have so many different European drone companies. Every fucking UAV... I, dude, I don't, I honestly don't get it at all. They come with some other thing, and I'm just like, "Matt Grimm, please tell me if this is good." [laughing] No, I really do. I'll ask Matt about it. It's very funny. Uh, he sees everything in Europe because of me, um, and tells me that it's shit. Um, but, like, when you look at them, what is the most common red flag that you see when you look at the emerging class of defense companies trying to be, as awful as it sounds, the next Anduril?

    9. MS

      I think it's basically two things. It's, um, uh, not realizing that what they are doing, uh, already exists. There's too much hubris, I think, in the technology market that, um, you know, as high-tech people, we can, we can do everything better than everybody else. I think, um, that causes, uh, some companies to think they have an idea that isn't actually an idea because it already exists, and that's pretty common. Uh, I'll give you an example. I-- Years and years ago, I, you know, was looking at a pitch, or I forgot, maybe I was advising someone, and, "Here's my idea." And I said, "Well, the thing you don't know is in the 1960s we invented that." And so, so there's a, there's kind of a hubris to thinking, like, um, the technology sector has all the answers when, like, actually since the '50s we've had the most brilliant people in the world working on these problems and a heck of a lot already exists. And this is sort of the, the point of, like, if you don't actually have the inside knowledge, you don't know what mistakes you're making. So that's one. The second, which will be more familiar to you, is, is addressable market. Um, I think there's, uh, in many cases an overestimation of addressable market where, like, actually what ultimately they're going after is a very small sliver of a problem, um, which might materialize in a, a single large contract, but a single large contract is not an enduring

  3. 8:42 – 9:52

    Can You Build a Billion-Dollar Defense Company Without the US?

    1. MS

      business.

    2. HS

      And this is one of the big challenges that I face, is when we see a company that in France is saying, "We're selling to the French military." Dude, I don't know how to say it without... I upset everyone these days. I just get used to it. The French military spend less than I do in Chanel for my mother. I mean, it's like, fuck all. And so my point is, like, can you be a European-only next-gen Prime, or do you have to be selling to the US as well? How do you think about that?

    3. MS

      Yeah, I mean, you basically can't have a defense company if you don't have a large US business, right? So fifty percent of defense spending is in the US, and fifty percent is in the rest of the world. And so if you are cutting off half of your market from the get-go, that's, that's probably a big problem. The, the challenge in Europe is it's not, it's not like a European Union in defense spend, right? Each country has its own sovereign, uh, companies and has its own sovereign agenda. And so y- y- you keep getting winnowed and winnowed and winnowed, and you're like, "Oh, well, Europe is my market." Well, if you're a French company, it kinda isn't, right? Fra- France is your, your market. Um, and so you have to be really careful around how you're actually analyzing who your ultimate c- ultimate customers can

  4. 9:52 – 14:52

    Anduril's $20BN Army Contract Broken Down

    1. MS

      be.

    2. HS

      You mentioned fifty percent of that spend is in the US. You guys signed a twenty billion dollar contract. Um, it's pretty incredible. It made me feel thoroughly irrelevant when I look at my companies going from one to four million in ARR for an HR software company, and the whole team's like, "Ah, bugger." Uh, my question to you is, what's actually entailed in the twenty billion dollars? Was it like an accumulation of all the little contracts bringing together? 'Cause I-- It's a big headline number, but I didn't actually get it, and I don't think a lot of people did.

    3. MS

      Yeah, yeah. So let's, let's, like, actually define it, 'cause the stuff I saw posted about it was all over the place. It was like a rainbow-

    4. HS

      Yeah

    5. MS

      ... of interpretations. So this is-- Think about this as, like, a, um, a credit card limit. Um, so the government has said up to twenty billion dollars they can spend on a class of Anduril's commercial technology. Um, there's no obligated money, but it basically creates, uh, a process that reduces a ton of friction that you would ordinarily see in defense procurement, where each individual office would have to go through financing and contracting and evaluation, um, and all of these repeatable things now can-- now only have to happen once. And they did. And they just did. And so, um, s- maybe a fast track is probably, probably the wrong word. It's more like in the arduous process to actually get something contracted, we've cut a lot of the f- first steps out. Um, there's still a lot of hard work. We've just made it slightly easier for the government to access all of our gear.

    6. HS

      Well, when they say, like, dependent on delivery, what does delivery mean?

    7. MS

      They will obligate the dollars as the products, which is hardware and software, are actually materialized. So delivery is revenue to us, right, in our world. So when I deliver something, I recognize the revenue. Um, same thing in government. When we deliver something, they actually... Th- th- then the actual procurement orders and dollars flow.

    8. HS

      Again, I'm so sorry for being-Dumb or naive? I'm, I'm a venture capitalist for a living. You, you should be used to us by now. Um, is this replacing prime spending? Is this net additional? How, how should we think about this? And is this just the sign that Anduril is now another prime?

    9. MS

      Yeah. It basically means that we have enough business with the federal government to justify putting together what is a fairly sophisticated contracting vehicle. Uh, so yeah, the short version of it is, like, yeah, the government thinks that we can deliver some pretty major stuff, uh, now and in the future. Um, it took a lot of work by a lot of people on the government side to actually make this thing happen. They are not gonna do that unless they think that it's worth it.

    10. HS

      What do they spend with, like, a Lockheed or a Northrop for, like, comparison?

    11. MS

      So Lockheed, I think, is in the, like, hundred billion revenue a year. Um, I think we'll, we'll do a couple billion in revenue this year. So, so we're still s- you know, small in the grand scheme of things.

    12. HS

      When you look at the software and the hardware element, how do you guys sit internally? Are you a hardware company? Are you a software company? Are you a services company?

    13. MS

      There's a lot of ways to look at it.

    14. HS

      Ultimately, how do you-

    15. MS

      So I think one of the things we've done maybe uniquely is we've given our customers a lot of ways to access our company. So wh- what I mean by that is, um, uh, we've been very creative in, okay, a customer wants a piece of software, uh, but it's difficult in government to contract for software. And so we can wrap it in a hardware appliance, right? Or they want a piece of hardware, but they know the software is the sophisticated piece of it, uh, and so they're willing to pay more for it because of that sophistication. Or, uh, in government, um, you get these weird things where, uh, money is... it's called, uh, the color of money, so money is obligated to certain types of spend. So maybe a customer only has money that they can spend on services. Well, okay, can I do an as-a-service product? Um, and actually one of our, our first major contracts was with, uh, US Special Forces, uh, for, uh, all of their counter UAS, uh, systems. That started as an as-a-service contract, where they weren't buying hardware, they weren't buying software, they were literally buying a, a service that obligated us to defend certain sites from certain types of threats. And as long as we were meeting the KPIs on the contract, um, we were fulfilling the obligations of, um, of the agreement. Um, so quite novel, uh, and that contract has, you know, since gone in a lot of different directions and we do a lot of different things on it, not just that. But we have been kind of dogged in our, uh, a- approach to this, like, basically real- realizing that the more ways we give our customers to get at us, the better it's

  5. 14:52 – 15:56

    Why Government Contracts Are Brutal (And Why Most Fail)

    1. MS

      gonna go.

    2. HS

      What's the hardest thing about working with the government? When you look at the structures that you have to contort yourself in to get a deal done, what is the hardest thing? I've interviewed Shyam, who I, I presume you worked with from Palantir days.

    3. MS

      Yeah, yeah. I worked for Shyam for a really long time. He's a good friend of mine.

    4. HS

      Yeah.

    5. MS

      Um, there's a lot of answers to this question, but maybe from my lens, uh, it is, um, it is how few and far between the large wins are and how hard it is in between those periods of time. So if you look at our business, you know, this year we'll do a couple billion in revenue. We'll do 600 separate contracts this year. Um, only 20 of those are probably of material revenue size. I think the hardest thing is, like, what happens in between the 20 and what are you doing to position yourself for the 21st? And because it's so concentrated, every single one of those deals is considered risk to the business, right, if it goes right or if it goes wrong,

  6. 15:56 – 18:32

    How Does Anduril Predict Wars Before They Happen?

    1. MS

      so...

    2. HS

      Why specifically is it hard in between? Is that morale? Is that revenue predictability? Is that... Uh, what is it that's hard in between?

    3. MS

      The government can sometimes tell you where they want you to go, but oftentimes they don't. And so a lot of this, um, is trying to predict an unpredictable system, right? So how many lenses can you look at at sort of the next couple of years? I can look at it through what the government is saying, through their rhetoric and through their budgeting. I can look at it through a war fighting lens and what general officers are saying and what, uh, military theorists are saying. I can look at it through a technology lens, like what technologies do I, I think are gonna influence the battlefield in the future. And I need to kind of blend all of that together today to make decisions on what I wanna build that will be available, you know, five to seven years from now. Um, no one is saying today, "This is what I need five to seven years from now." It, it's, it's all sort of a educated guessing game over time.

    4. HS

      What did you not do that with the benefit of hindsight you wish you had done, and what did you learn?

    5. MS

      Um, there's been a couple of areas that, you know, have, have kind of emerged that maybe we were a bit slow in that we would've accelerated. I'll give you an example. Um, uh, there's a huge movement in, um, not just in the US, but NATO and the rest of the allies, um, into offensive cyber warfare. Um, and you're seeing this now becoming public for the first time, which is really, really interesting. Um, you know, to date, this has been one of the, the spookiest of all spooky things, right? Like something that just no one ever talks about, and now you're, you're literally seeing public officials talking about it for the first time. We should've moved into that seven years ago and been the first, the first in it. We weren't big enough probably to really even understand it seven years ago, but, like, in hindsight it was kind of obvious. You know, we'll, we'll probably try and play some catch up here and, and get into the game, but, you know, there's a couple of examples like that where you see these things kind of thematically in hindsight, um, and you're like, "Well, obviously five years ago I should have done it," right? And you only realize that today.

    6. HS

      What is the fear with offensive cyber when we look at, like, the worst-case scenario, just so I understand it?

    7. MS

      Well, it's a lot of things. So it's both what are our adversaries doing and do we understand it, and are they asymmetrically influencing, uh, battlefield tactics? And the answer is yes, they are. Um, and then it's, okay,

  7. 18:32 – 21:51

    Why Cyber Warfare Is the Most Dangerous Battlefield No One Understands

    1. MS

      well, if our capability-

    2. HS

      Sorry, sorry. Can I just stop that again? Um, before I get lost in your next statement. What does it mean by asymmetrically influencing battlefield tactics?

    3. MS

      Yep. So for a very ... Uh, ah, one version to think about this is just cost. For a very low cost, they can create an effect that has, um, a major implications for us, NATO, and our allies. That's asymmetric. So, um, often people refer to terrorism as an asymmetric tactic, right? For a minimal set of people-

    4. HS

      But this would be like a $10,000 drone that hits-

    5. MS

      Yep

    6. HS

      ... a $1 million-

    7. MS

      Drone warfare is as- an asymmetric w- battlefield tactic, exactly. Um, and cyber being not only asymmetric, but you'll often hear the term, um, non-kinetic associated with it. So I'm asymmetric, as in I'm, I'm cheaper and more, more nimble, and I can get a large effect, but I'm also non-kinetic. And, and why is that so, so dangerous? Well, when something explodes, um, we react to it, and we react to it, um, with the full force of, uh, of the military. When things are kind of simmering beneath the surface in sort of a Cold War-ish type of a way, it actually becomes really hard to react. And so in cyber warfare in particular, if assets are affected that we care about, well, can we, can we do attribution? Do we know where it came from? How do we respond? Do you respond with a non-kinetic attack by going kinetic? Is that an escalation of force? How is that perceived by the global community, right? So you, you get into all of these really challenging doctrinal, uh, positions because of, um, uh, just how sort of unexplored offensive cyber is. Um, and then on the flip side, right, it's like, do we have the ability to amass cyber effects on our own, right? 'Cause what you would wanna do is you would wanna do tit for tat. You wouldn't wanna do an, for the most part, uh, a set of like escalatory decisions. You would want to, you know, match force with force. Do we have the ability to amass the same kind of force non-kinetically, right? So all of these are super [laughs] important questions that, uh, in my opinion, to date, have not been debated publicly and, and absolutely need to, to be.

    8. HS

      Can I ask you what cyber assets do we care about versus not care about?

    9. MS

      What do we care about protecting, or what do we care about affecting?

    10. HS

      Uh, bo- both actually, if that's okay.

    11. MS

      Yeah. Well, protecting, right, probably the main one is like the list of critical industries. Um, the military is included on that list. Um, but think about infrastructure or think about power or think about, um, energy, think about all these things, right?

    12. HS

      Okay, so it's like a foreign adversary impacting energy supplies in large-

    13. MS

      Yep

    14. HS

      ... cities or-

    15. MS

      Yep

    16. HS

      ... water supplies or-

    17. MS

      For sure. Um-

    18. HS

      ... healthcare data or financial systems, I guess?

    19. MS

      Yes. Yep. But even, even now though on the battlefield, it's a foreign adversary impacting our military systems such that we can either not mount an offense or we can, uh, not, uh, successfully defend ourselves.

    20. HS

      Okay. Got you. And so that- that's the cyber assets that matter on the defense side.

    21. MS

      Yeah.

    22. HS

      On the kind of offense side-

    23. MS

      Yeah

    24. HS

      ... do we think the same in terms of proactive?

    25. MS

      Everything that they would do, we would do, too. Yeah, exactly. That's

  8. 21:51 – 26:13

    Why Defense Startups Must Go Wide

    1. MS

      the way to think about it.

    2. HS

      Is there any part of you that's like Northrop or Lockheed have $100 billion spend? With the greatest of respect, we have a $20 billion spend. We're nowhere in offensive cyber. Fuck it. Let's not try and catch up.

    3. MS

      [laughs]

    4. HS

      That's progress. No, I mean it in a nice way. You can laugh at me. And may- maybe I'm gonna get killed for this, but I don't really care. Uh, like, let's just accelerate where we're doing great.

    5. MS

      Yeah.

    6. HS

      Like, why bother catching up when you're seven years behind?

    7. MS

      Well, let's like talk about just, like, our strategy as a whole. So when we started the company, we knew we had to go really wide really quickly, right? 'Cause to, to the point of like what do other defense companies or newer founders getting wrong, it's that addressable market question. So in every technology class in defense, there's probably one, sometimes two actual programs that if you capture them, you have a business, and if you don't, you have no business. Um, so take small drones as an example. There are very few drone programs for small drones that, uh, would create a material enough, uh, amount of revenue to, like, actually create a real business, right? And so, like, you're basically shooting the moon. You, you have to create a monopoly. We knew that, and so what we did is we created a bunch of fundamental technologies that are applicable to a lot of different types of problems. Um, if you read about us, and this is called Lattice in a lot of our, like, published literature, it's fundamental tech that allows you to consume data, make sense of it, and then, uh, manipulate robots basically. Like, that's what it is. Those technologies apply to tons of different things, and so we have 20 different P&Ls at the company, uh, all that are going after different parts of the defense apparatus that take a lot of these fundamental technologies that we build and kind of piece them together in different ways. And so-

    8. HS

      So just so I understand, so it's kinda like a horizontal foundational technology that you then verticalize and specialize-

    9. MS

      Yeah. Lattice is a software platform

    10. HS

      ... to fit different industries.

    11. MS

      Exactly. Like, oh, I can talk about software platforms with you. Like, it, it's hard to actually talk about software platforms with a lot of people 'cause it's like if you don't actually understand, like, what we're talking about, it's, it gets a bit weird. But yeah, Lattice is basically just a software platform that we can branch from. Um, and it's led us into all of these, um, interesting places. So like, um, as a, as a really crazy example, um, the first product we builtWas a sensing tower, um, that just allowed us to automatically, through a bunch of computer, computer vision technologies, and this is by the way, pre like cool AI, this was like old school CV AI, uh, in 2017. Um, just allowed you to spot threats at distance, right? But automatically without a person having to look at a screen. There are pieces of that technology that are resident in our autonomous jet fighter today, right? Not, not all of it, right? Like there's been a lot of advancements since then, but there are code blocks, right, that are, are shared in common between all of our pieces of technology. That becomes like pretty magical when you approach whatever the next problem is because you've already got pieces of it solved. Um, gives us a head start, allows us to get to market at usually reduced cost, usually a better schedule, kind of hitting all of the performance characteristics that our customers care about. So, okay, so back to the actual question on cyber, right? So, so why go after it? Like we, we kinda have to go wide and we have to believe that we have parts of the problem already solved with the platform in order to even approach a market. We wouldn't get into a market if we didn't think we already had applicable technology or a technology tailwind. But where we do, we're, we're definitely gonna go after it.

    12. HS

      What you said was, was fascinating to me. You were like, basically, you have to assume a monopoly market if you wanna build a big enough company for drones. Why the fuck are there so many drone companies then?

    13. MS

      Yeah. Um, I don't know. [laughs]

    14. HS

      [laughs] I've seen like, I've seen so many, like 30, 40-

    15. MS

      Yeah

    16. HS

      ... in Europe, just European ones.

    17. MS

      Yeah. There'll be one that wins, right? It's gonna be really hard to pick it, I think is the problem. Um, like the-- but there will definitely be one winner. Uh, I think the challenge for investors is actually figuring out which one it is.

  9. 26:13 – 35:28

    How Anduril Decides Where to Deploy $100M+ Product Bets

    1. HS

      So we should invest in, you know, offensive cyber and defensive cyber. How do we think next then? You're CBO, you're president. Are you like, "Great, we should put a billion dollars against it and, and build that out as a separate business unit"? No, and please tell me where I'm prying too much, right? What's the subsequent thought to that?

    2. MS

      Yeah. So the way that we do this is, um, when we have a new idea, um, we basically start a really small tiger team that we generally piece together from various parts of the business. Um, and we, we kind of match our own internal motivation and, and spend our own IRAD, um, to what the market is whispering to us. So in government, what this generally looks like is you, you piece together, uh, some tech really, really quickly so that you have a demonstrator or at least a dart to throw. Uh, and then you start to pulse the market and you see how, how close was that dart throw to what the customer actually cares about, how they think about the problem. Do you modify it? Were you totally off and you just need to scrap it and start over again? Um, and I think in government, uniquely, you know you have something when the customer's excitement starts to match your own, and all of a sudden you're kind of walking down a path together as opposed to this weird like vendor-customer relationship. That's always how we kind of identify that we're onto something. I would say all of these things can be characterized by like a singular champion on the other side of the table that gets it, that believes in it, that wants to shepherd it. Uh, actually, you mentioned Sham. He talks a lot about this kind of like heroism. Like it actually comes down to a single person in government a lot of times. Same experience for us. Um, and if you do it right, it, it kinda tracks similarly. You know, the first year's low dollar spend, but there's a lot of learning. Um, and you sort of jump from, uh, I, I tend to use this like lily pad example. You kinda jump from pad to pad, and this is what I mean by the, the 600 contracts in between the 20 that matter. You're basically jumping from contract to char- contract trying to figure out, do I have it right? Uh, is the customer excited? Are they telling me things? Do we keep going? Do we keep spending? And ultimately, the thing you're trying to jump at is something very large.

    3. HS

      How do you know when you have something really special and when you should concentrate capital? Again, as a... I think the best founding teams are the best resource allocators. When do you unleash the funding tap and open it up versus constrain and move from lily pad to lily pad?

    4. MS

      Yeah. There's a lot of ways to look at our business, but, but one way I, I think you hit on it is we've been very good at allocating capital. Like we, we basically guess right most of the time. If you do this correctly, you have enough data to develop conviction to open the tap, right? And so I think in the beginning, we were working in areas where if we made a mistake, um, it wasn't, we weren't like too far in on spend that if we pulled back, it wasn't like a disaster for the company. I think a lot of the stuff we're building now is, is quite sizable and expensive, and so you're looking for certain proof points along the way and, and that can be, um, formal, uh, feedback from a customer, that can be informal, that can be, um, um, successful operator, uh, feedback, that can be, um, successful engagements, um, uh, with the legislative branch. Like remember in the US, like your funder is, is the Congress, right? And so they have a say in all of this. What actually it is, is all of those things pieced together. And so we run like basically an investment committee internally, where, um, these tiger teams ultimately have to present, "Here's what we did, here's what we discovered, here's what we wanna do next. Here are the gates. Here's what it'll cost." Um, and very similarly to how, you know, most financial institutions do it, um, the investment committee says, "Go." And I, I think maybe uniquely when we say go, um, we have the ability to do it faster and at a higher level of spend than most of our peers.Which is a huge advantage. And so when we actually develop conviction in something, we pretty much believe we can get there faster than everybody else because of it.

    5. HS

      If we think about it as an investment committee, we're speaking a language that I know now. Which tiger team was the most successful bet and which was the least successful bet?

    6. MS

      The most surprising, uh, cases to the upside right now, um, is in our, uh, missiles portfolio. So we started our missiles business a couple of years ago. Um, if you read about us, um, the, the best example we call the Barracuda family of systems. So it's, uh, it's basically a, a, a, a set of, uh, cruise missile, uh, systems, different sizes, different shapes, things like that. We basically got into, uh, the missiles business, um, looking mainly at, um, sort of this... the actual like military warfare lens. Like there is clearly a gap in capability. We clearly believe that we can be ahead of everybody else if we've already developed it, and when the customer asks for it, we'll have it. And that, that turned out to be quite, like, quite prescient. Now, I, I don't know if you've seen, but there's like a war going on with Iran. Um-

    7. HS

      [laughs] I, I have seen, yes.

    8. MS

      Yeah. It... And so it's like, okay, so we, we got into this market, um, years ago, uh, with a certain set of theses and geopolitics now has dramatically changed what those theses are to the upside.

    9. HS

      When you say it's changed them, do you mean it's confirmed them?

    10. MS

      It's confirmed them, but it's, it's confirmed them in such a way where it feels wholly different. You know, I think the original theory was we have to get low cost, we have to get more ubiquitous, um, we have to have a mix of exquisite systems and mass. Um, like all of these kind of major theories of warfare kind of all converging at the same time. Um, we have to be able to build, uh, something that takes advantage of commercial supply, uh, and commercial manufacturing techniques as opposed to, uh, aerospace and defense supply and technique. Y- y- you know, this kind of like crazy crystallization of a lot of things at the same time. And now, okay, we, we, there, there's a war in Iran, we, we fire a lot of our arsenal. You know, now, now there's public reporting that, um, you know, large percentages of our offensive and defensive missile systems have been expended and they're really hard to replace. They take a really long time and they're very expensive, uh, because they take advantage of parts of the market that are kind of strange and very specific and very exquisite. You know, just to give you an example, the cruise missile we build, the, the actual airframe is built like you build a bathtub. Um, and so we can take advantage of tons of contract manufacturers in the United States that can actually build a bathtub, right? So just thinking through the design differently from the very beginning has led us to build something that we can just turn on. It- it's like, um, another way to think about it is you can handle elasticity of demand for the first time. Um, and that, that's not really a thing that's ever existed in the missiles business, right? Where you have a fairly, uh, labor intensive process to increase or, or frankly sometimes decrease demand. Um, I, I think we've... we are onto something in that we've built kind of a first of its kind that can handle the ebb and flow of geopolitics and warfare. Uh, we can turn lines on and off. We can scale up and down based on the nu- the number of contract manufacturers that we engage.

    11. HS

      What do margins look like for these types of products? What, what, what is good?

    12. MS

      Yeah. As a business, we run, uh, sort of forty percent plus gross margin across the board, um, and which by the way in hardware and defense is quite good. Um, uh, but every product like kind of lives along a spectrum, as you can imagine. The best way to think about this is things that you make more of, like missiles, where you're selling thousands and thousands tend to be a little bit lower gross margin, um, and things that you make less of, uh, you can, you can tend to, to get a decent price for it.

    13. HS

      Sorry, I'm naive. Why is that? I thought the more you produce-

    14. MS

      Yeah, it's weird, right?

    15. HS

      ... the better the margin.

    16. MS

      Yeah.

    17. HS

      Because you have bulk materials, bulk buying, no? Like how does that work?

    18. MS

      It mostly comes down to customer expectation for what these things like should cost over time, and then your ability to, uh, gain back margin by cost saving in the long run. Yes, you can close a firm fixed price contract. It doesn't necessarily mean that you can fix that cost forever. Um, and again, it's just like another weird aspect of government

  10. 35:28 – 39:36

    Should Builders Control How Their Weapons Are Used?

    1. MS

      business.

    2. HS

      Can I ask you a weird one? But Matt did say I could ask it.

    3. MS

      [laughs]

    4. HS

      Is there ever like an ethical question of like, do we agree with sending thousands of missiles to Iran? I'm not saying right or wrong, but is there ever an eth- ethical question of how your products are used?

    5. MS

      If you, um, if you work in defense and if you start a defense company, your moral compass tends to be pretty clear on this question, which is we have a democratically elected set of governments that represent the US, the Alliance, NATO, all of the countries participating. They set the rules, uh, and we abide by those rules. Um, and if you start to mess around with anything within that framework, you create a, a pretty dramatic set of slippery slopes that, that if you play the actual thought experiment to its end, um, end up in a pretty messy situation. And so the, the key here is people that live in the world that I live in, we, we tend to think a little bit differently than, um, a, a person not connected to the national security community on this front. We tend to think a bit more long term as well.Um, where I'm building missile systems that might only field in 2035, right? And so if you fundamentally lack a trust in democratic institutions, this is not the game, and this is not the business for you.

    6. HS

      As weird as it sounds, and as horrible as it sounds, is war not great for business?

    7. MS

      I think that's the wrong view. I, I think, um, if you look at... Again, if you look at things that span multiple decades, which is probably the right horizon to think through, everything kinda nets out. Um, and so yes, you'll have spikes in, in conflict, um, but like as an example, there are many companies that are, um, profiting off of, uh, the war in Ukraine. Um, and I, I would posit that for the most part, if those companies are myopically focused on that conflict, they will not have a business coming out the other end. So it's very... You have to be very careful around over-rotating on the problems of today, um, because it c- it can really mess up your strategic thinking.

    8. HS

      Do you think you took advantage enough of the opportunity in Ukraine?

    9. MS

      We were still a baby company when the conflict started. Um, so, you know, just as a reminder, we were zero people in 2017 when we started the company. Uh, we're about 8,000 people today. Um, we were quite small, a couple of hundred people when, um, when the war in Ukraine started. Um, and just sort of as a reminder, and now this is kind of lived experience for me and my colleagues, you go to war with what you have. Like, that, that saying is very, very true. Like, you do, you do not invent new stuff along the way. Um, you, you, you take what you have and you, you see if it works, and then you adjust. And so we, we had some stuff in Ukraine, but we were just too small. Um, I think if, um, uh, I think if you play that forward to today, we're heavy participants in the current conflict in the Middle East, uh, mainly on the defensive side. We build, um, um, some pretty sophisticated air defense systems that are widely deployed. So it's a wholly different experience because we're a wholly different company.

    10. HS

      Are Anduril drones used in Iran?

    11. MS

      I can't speak to specific weapons systems used in specific situations, uh, but we are, for the most part, a defensive company in the Middle East, as in we are defending against, um, incoming threats. So if you've read about, uh, the Shahed drone as an example-

    12. HS

      Yeah

    13. MS

      ... um, we're one of the principal systems to defend against, um, that threat in the Middle East. Yeah, other than that, you know, it's hard to get into specifics.

    14. HS

      Yeah, I would hate for you to reveal [laughs] some inherent military secrets-

    15. MS

      Yeah

    16. HS

      ... on TwentyVC.

    17. MS

      You become, you become pretty good at talking around these things when you, [laughs] when you do this work. [laughs]

    18. HS

      I'm gonna be completely honest. That is not in my interest either. [laughs]

    19. MS

      [laughs]

    20. HS

      Please don't. I'm really comfortable-

    21. MS

      Yeah

    22. HS

      ... with my nice life. [laughs]

    23. MS

      Yeah. [laughs]

    24. HS

      Um,

  11. 39:36 – 46:22

    What Would Anduril Buy If They Had an Unlimited Checkbook?

    1. HS

      can I ask you, if I gave you an unlimited checkbook, what would you spend on that you're not spending on today?

    2. MS

      I think there are some venture capitalist-backed defense companies that are making some really, really awesome technology, and they are entirely unaffordable to us today, um, because of-

    3. HS

      And when you say they're unaffordable, you mean they won't sell at a appetizing price to you given the amount of money that they've raised?

    4. MS

      Correct. Yeah. Yeah. The, their, their valuations are just too high for us to justify the buy. We, we've bought, I think, almost a dozen companies, maybe more, um, but for the most part, they've been more traditional style defense companies, um, with what you would command in the commercial market for that type of company. There, there are lots of VC companies I would love to buy if I had an unlimited checkbook, but right now the multiples today are... They, they put it out, out of reach for us.

    5. HS

      This was gonna be one of my questions, which is, is there a universe of buyers for the massive VC-funded companies that have been generated in the last few years, and what happens to them?

    6. MS

      Actually, uh, Trey, uh, I, I will always remember when he said this, that, um, never be surprised around how long a company can continue to exist. Uh, meaning like, you know, I think we were sitting around a table being like, "Oh," like, uh, "it's gonna come to the point where the multiples will, you know, decrease and all this stuff." And, and Trey's point was... And he, you know, Trey has this annoying tendency to mostly be right. I don't know if, I don't know if you know that about him. Um-

    7. HS

      But he's our asshole.

    8. MS

      Yeah, yeah. Exactly.

    9. HS

      Okay.

    10. MS

      He's our asshole. Uh, his point was, like, we don't know, but it might be a while before we can actually buy these companies. And so I, I don't know. Uh, there's still a lot of investment in defense tech. Uh, multiples are still very high. I actually think our multiple's quite low compared to most of them. Um-

    11. HS

      Why would you say your multiple is low?

    12. MS

      Because it is. Because it is.

    13. HS

      Hit me.

    14. MS

      Um-

    15. HS

      Like what-

    16. MS

      10 or 14X forward, something like that. Um, but you're seeing deals in 20, 30, 40X forward.

    17. HS

      My dear friend, you're seeing deals a lot more than that. [laughs]

    18. MS

      [laughs]

    19. HS

      I think you're sorely mistaken on that one. [laughs]

    20. MS

      Great, so it's even worse. [laughs]

    21. HS

      20, 30, 40? Why, why are you times that by five?

    22. MS

      [laughs]

    23. HS

      Dude, I see like 200.

    24. MS

      [laughs]

    25. HS

      Who would you most like to buy-

    26. MS

      Oh, man

    27. HS

      ... but can't?

    28. MS

      No, that's a tough one for me to answer. I, like, I would probably either compliment or offend people that I don't wanna compliment or offend. Um, but I'll give you, like, the classes of technology. Super interested in space domain, like the... There's a, a s- a couple of companies that are doing some absolutely fascinating things, uh, both ground segment and on orbit. Um, there's a couple of companies flying fast and, and-

    29. HS

      Why is ground segment and on orbit interesting?

    30. MS

      There's this, like, interesting th- thing happening in space domain where, um, you've got the legacy primes on the military side that-Have these very large contracts, um, but they, they perform sort of traditionally, right? So it's gonna be very, very high performance, but it'll come at a, a cost, and it'll probably take a while to get there, right? And then you have, um, SpaceX, which is just dominating on the commercial side, and when their commercial tech applies, um, you know, they do a bunch of government business as well. There's a weird kind of gap in between those two types of companies where the government wants to move really fast, um, but it's not necessarily commercially adjacent to what SpaceX is doing, and so there's a kind of a dearth of providers. And, and, you know, it's certainly something that we wanna run at. Right now, we do a bunch of partnerships. Um, we build a bunch of our own stuff. We, we integrate a bunch of really interesting technologies, but it's a, it's a huge open hole, I think, in the market that is something we definitely would run at.

  12. 46:22 – 51:55

    Why Anduril Must Go Public

    1. MS

      thinking like that.

    2. HS

      Totally understand. But what I don't understand is why you wanna go public. We see companies like Stripe who are able to never go public, be a brilliant business, uh, and avoid the glare of public markets very efficiently. Why would you want to go public?

    3. MS

      Yeah. There's a pedigree to it in the work that we do, and ultimately, if you are a part of the national security apparatus in the United States, I wouldn't say it's, like, an expectation and no one would ever say it out loud, but when you are a public company, there is an additional level of trust that is afforded to you that you don't have when you're a private company.

    4. HS

      Do you wanna go public in '26? [laughs]

    5. MS

      Still a couple years out, but we're close. We're in the window.

    6. HS

      It's in the sniff zone?

    7. MS

      Yeah, yeah, yeah.

    8. HS

      It's in the, like, close enough?

    9. MS

      Yeah, yeah. Like, we're already spending an insane amount of money trying to, trying to do all the internal system stuff and all that kind of stuff.

    10. HS

      What do you not have ready yet that needs to be ready to be public?

    11. MS

      So I mentioned we have 20 products. Um, and, um, only about a quarter of those are in any kind of rate production and throwing money back to business. Everything else is in low rate or development, meaning they're losing money. Um, and so, right, it's, it's kinda your standard product J curve. So we need more of those 20 core products to come up the curve to throw money back to the business and then, and then you trigger the, the public event.

    12. HS

      What does that J curve look like from a duration standpoint? Is it, is it months? Is it years?

    13. MS

      Yeah.

    14. HS

      And then how long do you put up with a losing product before you shoot it?

    15. MS

      Yeah. So in defense, typically in a traditional, uh, sort of product curve, it's 8 to 10 years. Um, we're doing it in three to five, which is kinda part of the magic of the company and the thing we've become known, known for with our customers is, like, you're effectively having the traditional path to rate production. Um, Roadrunner is a good example. Roadrunner was, I think, 24 months from, like, a back of a napkin drawing to a fielded system.

    16. HS

      How much goes in in that three to five year period?

    17. MS

      Oh, so much. It's a crazy amount of money. Um...

    18. HS

      But just, like, from my naive brain-

    19. MS

      Yeah

    20. HS

      ... it's like 100 million or, like, 500 million or, like, a billion?

    21. MS

      Yeah, so Roadrunner is a moderately sized, uh, air defense kinetic intercept system, and that's, you're over 100 million easily before you're generating revenue

    22. HS

      [chuckles] A-and we have 20 of these separate products?

    23. MS

      Yeah. So it's a lot of investment, right? So you really have to believe that they're gonna come up the curve. Um, and then to your other question about, like, when you, when you schwack a product, w-we schwack it before we even... Like, it-- the better way to think about it is, like, don't even enter the curve if you don't have faith that it's gonna come through the other end. And so we kill a lot of developmental products well before they ever get into high spend, because once you get into that curve, you're, you know, 10, 20, 50, a hundred million dollar plus in.

    24. HS

      W-we spoke about what, what did you not do, and you said, like, offensive cyber and the cyber that we discussed earlier. What did you do that you shouldn't have done, and what do you learn from that?

    25. MS

      That's a good question. Um, way early, I mean, we, we got into some tech that we weren't ready for. Um, we got into some markets that we weren't ready for. We tried to early on build a pretty sophisticated, uh, aerial system. We didn't have the core building blocks. We didn't have the core team. Uh, I think we were 20 million or 40 million in before we kinda realized that it was a, it was a scrap. We didn't have the sophistication with the customer. We didn't know how the customer was gonna buy a, a, a vehicle of that sophistication. The kinda crazy part about all of this is like, well, okay, given all of that, and given that that was not a good business decision, like, clearly by most metrics, do we even get to build the autonomous jet fighter if we had never made that mistake? And so, like, it's hard to replay history sort of perfectly, right? And it's like, I don't think so. I, I think part of that failure was a stepping stone to getting to success. Um, yeah, we probably spent too much money on it and could have gotten out quicker, but, like, I think we had to learn that lesson in order to then reapproach the aviation market in a new way, which obviously has, has been quite successful for us, um, you know, in recent history. And so if y- if you look at a lot of these failed things that we've done, it's hard to separate that from what came after it.

    26. HS

      Final one before we do a quick fire.

    27. MS

      Sure.

    28. HS

      I always think to this question of, like, the biggest challenges in life are not, like, i-it sounds so corny, but, like, not iron or gold, but unmade decisions. I never made the decision to move to Silicon Valley, and everyone always reminds me that it will be the decision that haunts my career. Is there an unmade decision that ever haunts you?

    29. MS

      No, but I'm kind of weird that way. I have trouble separating indecision and failed decisions from the current success that we're actually seeing as a company. I, I just do. And so people talk a lot about, um, I, I think, like, these overblown, uh, sort of ideas around, like, "Oh, you have to learn from failure and, and fail fast." Like, yes, all that's true. Most people suck at actually doing that. And y-you know, so, so for me it's... I deeply learn from indecision and from bad decisions. Um, but it doesn't, like, haunt me, and it doesn't, like... I'm not gonna, like, kill myself over it, right? I'm gonna, I'm gonna move on, and I'm gonna make the next best decision.

  13. 51:55 – 56:53

    Quick-Fire Round: The Future of War, VC Mistakes & Career Advice

    1. HS

      Dude, I wanna do a quick fire with you. So I say a short statement, you give me your immediate thoughts. Does that sound okay?

    2. MS

      Sure.

    3. HS

      What's one belief you have about modern warfare that most people think is insane?

    4. MS

      I think a lot of my beliefs and our beliefs, uh, that we started the company on are now becoming a bit more commonplace. You know, when we started the company, maybe we were a bit out of on a, on a limb of, like, could I replace every single mission that the current set of technology provides us with, uh, an autonomous system? I believe that that is true in the long run. I, I also believe that we're not even close to where a l- a lot of people think we are on it. [chuckles] Like, I think we're still in the early days on, on tons of this tech. Um, but as time goes to infinity, like, absolutely, every single mission can be replaced, uh, with this new way of thinking. In 2017, when we started the company, n-not only was that not widely held, uh, you know, that, that was a headwind for us, I think that's changed pretty dramatically.

    5. HS

      What do VCs fund in defense that you think will most go to shit?

    6. MS

      [chuckles]

    7. HS

      What are you like, "Oh"?

    8. MS

      It's really companies that there is only one large program to capture. That's, like, fundamentally what it is. Um, if you're, if you... In defense, you have to be wide by the very nature of how acquisitions occur. Um, and so I think anything is a risk where it's like, nope, there's kinda one program, and if you don't win it, you're not a good company.

    9. HS

      When you think about your kids, what do you tell your kids or kids graduating college about the world when it comes to career advice, knowing and seeing all that you do?

    10. MS

      Yeah. I mostly say, um, a couple of, of things. I think it's about the community that you surround yourself with. Um, I, I... And that, that's a reflection on sort of my own personal story. I mean, everything that I've done in my career, um, has been the community of people around me that, um, have helped me, have gotten me jobs, have afforded me responsibility. You know, it's not like some big machine or process. It's, it's really just the people you surround yourself with and, um, I like to think I made some pretty good choices early on that helped. And then the other piece would be, I think people tend to overthink a lot of their steps and don't appreciate how much you just can learn along the way. Um, you know, I, I talk to a lot of, um, military folks that are transitioning out into the commercial world, and I, I would say for the most part, they, they kinda like hem and haw over what company they should go to. And I... You know, my main advice is I actually think you just need to start, and you're actually a really smart person. Um, if you don't like it, you can leave. If you like it, you got lucky. And you should talk to a lot of companies, you should pick, and you should change your mind when you need to. And I think-Oftentimes there's a hesitance to change your mind, right? And I, I don't think that's actually true. It doesn't need to be true.

    11. HS

      Final one for you, and this is the most unfair of all and that will get you most in trouble. When you look at the founding team, in a hypothetical world in 10 years' time, you start another company, but you can only take one of them with you as your co-founder. [laughs] Um, which, which one and why?

    12. MS

      Hmm. I can't, I can't take them all?

    13. HS

      No.

    14. MS

      No.

    15. HS

      No.

    16. MS

      Huh. It's a trick question 'cause there's no way that I'm starting another company after Anduril. [laughs] I don't know if you know this, but starting companies is really tiring. Um-

    17. HS

      No, I'm a venture capitalist.

    18. MS

      Yeah, yeah. [laughs]

    19. HS

      We don't... We, we know it's tiring.

    20. MS

      So-

    21. HS

      We, we, we're much wiser than you

    22. MS

      ... I'm just gonna, I'm just gonna retire to the countryside and live with my family and I'm gonna do that.

    23. HS

      Dude, you gotta choose one.

    24. MS

      Yeah. I'm not choosing. Don't make me choose. You know, I live in Washington, DC. I'm very good at not answering questions. Maybe it's Bhavik just 'cause the contrast of his baldness and my hair would make us a pretty, pretty formidable duo.

    25. HS

      Do you think Palmer's brand is helpful?

    26. MS

      I do. Unequivocally. In defense, anything highly regulated, right, every single thing is a headwind, and so the main thing you do to cut through headwind is you try and establish trust relationships with people who matter. Uh, I think Palmer is an N of 1 when it comes to establishing trust relationships with people who matter.

    27. HS

      I, I've loved this. This is so not how I thought it would be, to be totally honest. It was so nice. It was so fun. I learned. I totally didn't do anything that I kinda thought I would. But thank you. This, I... It reminds me why I love doing what I do.

    28. MS

      This was great. I, honestly, it was great to meet you. I do listen to the pod, uh, most episodes. Um, I love listening to it. Um, so thanks for having me on. It was cool.

Episode duration: 57:03

Install uListen for AI-powered chat & search across the full episode — Get Full Transcript

Transcript of episode Qc6hjJ9Zze0

Get more out of YouTube videos.

High quality summaries for YouTube videos. Accurate transcripts to search & find moments. Powered by ChatGPT & Claude AI.

Add to Chrome