@einarvollset For the data nerds, here's the actual data. On real test scores, the union link is weak, leans almost entirely on Mississippi and Louisiana, and vanishes by 8th grade.
2. Vertical Integration - Waymo is relying on indirectly providing field data to Zeekr to optimize the design and efficiency. That's months-to-years-long cycles. Cybercab is directly integrating software/hardware updates in a continuous loop and can make changes in weeks to months.
@aakashgupta 1. Cost - my understanding is Waymo is $78k (with tariffs) and the sensors are an additional $25k for a full-in cost of $103k. On efficiency, Waymo is 0.562 kWh/mi vs. 0.162 kWh/mi for Cybercab. Its a big difference.
Judging by the UGC (ad library) I don't think you have a volume issue, but an audience, messaging, and landing page mismatch. Most of the UGC seems to be pointed broadly rather than at a specific ICP. The landing page is speaking to all users. Feel free to take or discard any of this.
Totally agree. We both lived it… I was at Lyft while you were at Uber and we were all just pouring fuel on the fire because that’s what you did. You’re right that companies should exhaust low hanging fruit first. The problem is most don’t have anyone who actually knows how to find and underwrite those other bets. So they default to the thing that’s easiest to buy.
While cross-country skiing this morning, Dr. Karp decided to launch a new program: The Neurodivergent Fellowship.
If you find yourself relating to him in this video — unable to sit still, or thinking faster than you can speak — we encourage you to apply.
The final round of interviews will be conducted by Dr. Karp personally.
Application link coming soon.
Thank you and good luck.
@vxanand@clay@vxanand - super interesting. Mind sharing more about your hiring methodology and what you looked for in terms of pattern matching at the sourcing level to find non-traditional fits?
@oliviaakory Thanks Olivia, great to see the neutral stance Haus has taken. I think its very important to have someone being "Switzerland" and not playing the old game many are often doing. For the record, we've found your team to be one of the most balanced platforms out there.
@ron_ecomm It’s rarely intentional but more often large teams are locked into “this is how it’s always worked / how we planned”. Getting folks to update their world view on this if often the hardest part.
The core issue for McKinsey isn’t investment in tech - it’s that the model itself hasn’t changed.
Acquiring analytics firms and branding AI units still leads to the same output: rented headcount and recommendation decks.
Palantir, by contrast, changed the form of value. It installs an operating layer that governs how decisions are made in real time. That’s structural, not cosmetic.
What’s interesting is how many still haven’t recognized that shift. Most people still see Palantir as a “data company,” not a direct competitor to McKinsey.
The consulting market is quietly splitting between two models: advice and accountability.
Super useful.
We’ve got a pretty large partner where we might be able to run this as a formal test.
Intuitively your structure makes sense to me: 1 campaign per core persona, keep sub-personas inside it, push volume through fewer ad sets.
What I see is a lot of teams (agency + in-house) struggle to actually commit to that and stick with it at scale.