seem_2211

Similar to how OpenAI like to use the term "Member of Technical Staff" for Engineers, they like to use "Member of GTM Staff" for their sales team.

I am a sales recruiter, and I was curious what their actual GTM organization looked like. So I manually scraped through all 607 profiles on LinkedIn, ultimately finding 390 US based salespeople.

A few things that surprised me:

• 43% of the team are quota carrying AEs (much higher than the partnerships-first narrative most assume of AI labs)

• They're not hiring a lot of people from traditional B2B SaaS companies - Hubspot, Workday, ServiceNow, Oracle and SAP aren't even in their top 30 companies that they're hiring from. They're going for AWS, Google and Salesforce in a big way.

• They bought a CRO over in December and she's bought 4 additional leaders with her since then.

Methodology: two-pass vision pipeline on screenshotted profiles, function-classified into nine GTM buckets. Limitations: Using LinkedIn data, so biased toward people who maintain active profiles (not usually a huge issue for sales but...).

Full report (free, no signup wall): yournextventure.co/open-ai-gtm-report

I saw someone put phrase it as being "above or below the algorithm"

Chilling and true.

The E Myth is another good example of a business book with a relatively simple message wrapped in an enjoyable narrative.

This is a deluded way of thinking the world works.

Is it how things should be? Probably. But this is nothing close to reality.

I don’t mind it. I drive a v8 Mercedes and love the sound etc... but at the same time, I’ve moved to NYC so the odds that I even keep a car aren’t particularly high.

Couldn't agree more. I'd hazard a guess that 90% of car users aren't wedded to using gas. There are enthusiasts, but they are a small minority.

I would be really interested in understanding the breakdown in F150's as sold by model number.

For a lot of truck owners, there's going to be some resistance because they love having a v8 engine etc. I don't see those people moving over quickly (although they might be swayed by the acceleration/speed). But if you're using one as a tradesperson, this seems like an absolute no-brainer. You're not driving enormous distances regularly and if you're able to run your entire job site for free, as well as have lower servicing costs... why wouldn't you?

The company valuation of BMW and VW isn’t the problem- it’s a problem for Tesla. There aren’t enough nerds in the world to justify it’s insane stock price.

If you are buying a Taycan you would not even consider the Model 3 and if you want to drive far you buy an ICE.

This is also predicated on the idea that every part of Tesla's operations are substantially better than existing automakers.

Do people really believe that Tesla is literally run 10x better than Toyota, Volkswagen, Daimler, BMW or Honda? I don't think so.

Then there's the nightmare of trying to appeal to two wildly different consumer groups.

At the low end: does Tesla have a meaningful reliability advantage versus Honda and Toyota? From what I have seen, it appears not. This matters less when you're dealing with premium buyers, but will not work with the mass market. Fans will put up with hassle (I own an AMG... I'm more than aware of the extra expense I am constantly paying for - and that's a trade-off I'm happy to make in return for a powerful v8).

Secondly from a clout point of view: why would anyone buy a Tesla over a comparatively priced Audi, Porsche, Mercedes or BMW. The people who talk about their Model 3 with a burning passion aren't trading in a 911, or an E Class or a Q7. They're excited to upgrade from a 2015 Camry. Massive expectation gap.

Plus, all of these companies are valued far more realistically. Tesla being worth more than every other automaker or whatever gives them very little room to breathe. If Tesla is ever valued as the hardware manufacturer with relatively low margins (when compared to say a tech stock like Facebook or Salesforce).. is the day that we will see an enormous valuation haircut.

The problem with buying cashflow through ETF investment is you have to make so much money to get to any real level of cashflow.

Buying $30k of index funds will set you back ~$50k pre tax, which is 25% of our doctors income. If you subscribe to the 4% rule, you've "bought" a perpetual cashflow of $1200 annually.

To get a passive income of $200k annually, you need $5m in index funds which is going to take either ~30 years with compounding interest at 10% (assuming you are investing a continuous $30k after tax) every year.

Realistically, to make any sort of actual money (I'm defining this as $200k + annually in passive/semi-passive income), you need an ownership stake in a business or in another asset (likely property).

The vending machine example is stupid for a doctor to do, because it's the sort of opportunity that rewards someone with a lot of hustle and low opportunity cost - good luck competing with an entrepreneurial college student who has a lot more free time. Same thing with the website.

Phoning for anything is my favorite thing. Absolutely I want to talk to customer service. No I don’t want this automated (especially when I’m trying to get myself a slightly better deal). And I hate phone trees with a passion, just get me the operator now.

It’s a very human tendency: we can see the downside so obviously, but the upside is a lot harder to see.

Open offices: another amazing example of enormous value destruction in the name of saving a little bit of money.

I’m saying those programmers should have secretaries to help them with all of the admin etc. They shouldn’t be booking their own flights, or making dinner reservations, or running expenses (or a lot of other manual work)

We've replaced secretaries with software, and now we have people making $150k+ a year busy working on things that they should be paying someone $40k a year to handle.

It's the exact same behavior, but bred in a different environment.

Also speaking as a recruiter. We often get ghosted by candidates.

As an industry, recruiters (myself included), need to do a better job managing rejection. But it is not as simple as name and shame.

You say that you know more about what students want and need than themselves. I doubt that.

This seems like a bad frame to look at the situation from. We don’t know what we don’t know, and don’t always actually know what we want.

When I went to university there was a ton that I didn’t know. It took me at least a semester to get accustomed to how the institution ran.

If my university responded only to what I wanted and “needed” then I would be quite worried about the education they are serving.

Also optimizing for employer preferences seems to make sense you know... if you’re focused as a vocational style institute?

Yeah that's 100% the truth. You also have to assume that multiple things happen at the same time - what happens if you buy a house two weeks before you get laid off at work and that's swiftly followed by your wife finding out that she's pregnant. Suddenly having 6 months worth of cash in the bank gives you a TON of breathing room.

The more we specialize, the more life becomes fragile, and the smaller the gains become. A Formula One car is incredibly fast, but the amount of attention and money each car requires is orders of magnitude higher than say a Ferrari road car, which is comparatively simple to manage.

I mean it's "smart" and "efficient" but it's also fragile. The simplest way to manage your finances is to avoid debt wherever possible (especially consumer debt). Very hard to go into bankruptcy when you don't owe anyone anything!

The "smartest" way to manage your finances is to use credit cards that give you points and pay you back via a few hundred dollars worth of free flights a year. But there's a bunch of opportunity costs associated with pursuing that route, and a level of diligence that frankly most people do not have.

The best thing about debt is that it lets you move really really quickly - if you don't have $2k for that furniture set, you can just finance things and pay it off over 2 years. But that's the worst thing about debt as well - you now have a monthly obligation that's going to be a line item expense for the next 24 months. If you'd spent 12 months saving up for that furniture set and paid cash, the day you buy the goods is the day your financial obligations start and end.

I am not opposed to debt entirely, and think it can be a great strategic lever (I used a credit card to finance my initial move to America which has done wonders for my income and my career, far exceeding the interest costs that I paid). However I think for most consumer purposes it's less of a help and more of a hindrance. Take the new 84 month car loans. That's 7 years! That's a long time to assume that your life will have no material changes, or that nothing will go wrong.

There were a ton of Quibi ads on Tik Tok. But it doesn't have the virality and originality, and honestly I don't think it ever will. Big production budgets and incredible story lines are something that Hollywood does a really good job of (and we've seen that come to TV over the past 10 years). But the sort of Tik Toks and Youtube videos that I like are pretty basic, and would be laughed out of the room as boring. It's like comparing a newspaper article with a novel. They're different products that do different jobs.

Mailbox and Sunrise being acquired are some of the saddest losses over the last few years. Both superior products, that would remain extremely competitive today.

I'm extremely bitter about Sunrise in particular, because both Google and Apple have such mediocre calendar platforms.

Probably - I think raising a family will probably be a catalyst.

Pros: pretty, relatively relaxed lifestyle, much lower pressure than the US, minimal gun violence, healthier attitudes towards childrearing, good public healthcare, relatively good education systems, (mostly) competent government.

Cons: low wage economy, distant from everywhere, overall ambition of people is low, high taxes (top tax rate isn't crazy high, but kicks in very early)

Note, when I talk about 'the US' I'm talking about SF / LA / NYC type cities. I don't have any intention of living in small town USA.

This is a great piece.

I immigrated from New Zealand to America. It's interesting being in the US and hearing people exalt New Zealand. Same thing, some pros, some cons.

+1 for working with Peter and his team. I worked with them, and secured an EB3 Greencard last year.

I think of sales & marketing as two sides of the same coin, but the tactics change based on your deal size.

Coca-Cola have a field sales team, selling into convenience stores and gas stations and making sure the shelves are full, but that's dwarfed by their enormous marketing budget. It doesn't make sense to have someone making cold calls or doing door to door sales for a $2 bottle of coke.

Oracle has a marketing team, and they sponsor certain things to get visibility in the public eye, but almost all of their spend goes into a large team of salespeople. No Facebook ad, or coupon in the mailbox is going to convince a CIO to spend $5m on a new database solution.

Sales recruiter here. If you want to scale your company, and attract the help of any salesperson worth a damn, you need to go out and get some customers on your own.

Being a founder / CEO is the closest thing to magic in sales. While it's certainly hard moving into a sales role, you will come across as far more credible than any salesperson you'll ever hire.

Hell, your first and third sentences basically sums up your pitch. It's going to be a lot more convincing coming from you, the person who knows the infrastructure and the product than a salesperson.

Good founders tend to be involved in sales for a while. Not to say you will be doing it forever, but if you can't close customers, you'll also struggle to close candidates & investors. Sales is a critical skill that you simply must learn.

Oh I meant my comment more in the 'power of marketing' sense, rather than saying he's a bad guy

It's one of those things... if you follow Aston Martin at all (as a company) - they'd have died a long time ago if it weren't for James Bond propping them up.

looks at Daly City with befuddlement