SaaStr 799: The Series A Landscape in 2025: Insights from Chemistry VC's Ethan Kurzweil

27:39You couldn't lose. You couldn't lose. I saw some updates during that period where people would project to their future valuation just based on the way the market was evolving. And they were right for a while. And actually, I would. You were right. You were right. Oh, maybe a quarter will be bad. And they're like, no, this is it's just so predictable now. And yeah. And today's point, that was a sign. They weren't. And when the market changed and people got a lot more discerning about what they bought. and you know it's obviously all baked into this i think you're right to lop off the parts of the chart that are like 2020 to the beginning of 2022 because it's just so anomalous relative to how hard it generally is to have startups achieve those kinds of growth rate so that's just not every day that you see that so maybe you have to tell me if you want to address anything before but i was going to then move into the just the one point i think we get it but just to frame folks that have read this if you had to summarize everything you're seeing for is triple double which was the which let's be honest let's get out of the vc mindset that's hard as it is triple triple double requires enormous market pull doesn't it if outside of consumer and b2b it takes there's sales cycles there's awareness there's like triple double is so hard in the real world but that was our gold standard for a decade in b2b is it good enough today in the ai world is triple double double good enough that's a really good question and i think in some cases it's not is the reality it i think it's enough to probably get funded at some level and be healthy and if you're but if your market is fast moving and has a lot of competition then i think what the dollars that are the purple charts here that are piling into stuff are looking for these crazy outlier type companies where they're 5xing or things like that yeah when i look at like developer platforms market, triple, double, double, double is enough usually because I'm looking at like a discrete area where you can improve the status quo and it may not be in the froth of the market.

30:08But if there's a risk of getting disrupted, I think you do have to like risk return. You have to compensate for that. And folks in the, who are looking for the sort of like craziest of AI stories are looking for more than the triple. They're looking for more, right? Yeah. Yeah, they don't even want those guys don't even want to take the meeting today. I don't think. Yeah, hard for me to say because it's like I'm out of the world of that. But yeah, but that may be that I'm sure it feels that way. And I'm sure there's probably getting the meeting with the with getting the meeting that you want is probably a lot harder if you're just a triple.

30:41level now sometimes what we look for in chemistry and maybe this is a good kind of small detour but take me off it if it's not interesting is like can we accelerate this company with with capital and help and resources and stuff like that and so it's maybe even less than a level but but the market demand is very clear and so it's yeah it would be faster but for whatever the resources needed to get there and we'll sometimes have a thesis around hey this particular company They just, they're still doing founder sales at 5 million in revenue. And of course they're not going to triple at that, given that configuration.

31:18And do we believe that it could triple if we were to help them make some - Do you think it's funny? I mean, I have some good experience, but you have more experience for a little bit longer than me. I haven't seen this ever work. In my limited experience, I have never seen capital directly lead to tilting the curve. I've always, every, and in particular, for me, I've made a few investments that were almost, they were almost triple, double, double. And I'm like, I want to believe the space is cool. I've always seen the ones that were almost triple, triple decelerate. I've never seen capital because often they're the most optimized.

31:58There's nothing left on the table for the ones just below the level. Like they're optimized. That's my thesis. Why? I think that's right for the companies that have optimized, but there's a

32:10five or six people total and they really are under optimized and you can tell for sure like these are falling on the floor that's usually more of a c a series a phenomenon too yeah and but maybe the difference between because i think your point is right but actually we're in a little bit of a different era now where where the prior kind of warnings after the zerp era of cut back get to profitability use your cash like people took that real literally and some cases too far too far and in some cases there are companies that like they're just they're just being very precious about their growth because they don't have the resources to grow and i've just in this since we've set up chemistry in the last day you might have seen a few of those where growth will be unlocked i believe it's too early for me to say it say it conclusively but growth will be unlocked with if the team is able to scale itself a little bit.

33:11Now there's risk in that because they've operated in this kind of bootstrappy way for so long that can you actually do that? But I think there's more, I think we will see more cases like that where capital will help. Yeah, I just get the email and let's move on. Sometimes you get the email, the email is so good from a founder, right? And you parse through it and let's say they're growing 80 % at a stage where it has to be a hundred, it. Right. And I'll leave it on my back. I'm listening. Everything looks good. I'm not going to waste your time with the meeting because it just has to be. Everyone's different.

33:41Right. This is the thing about investing. Everyone's different. For me, this isn't enough. And then sometimes the response back is, yeah, but if I just had the extra capital and maybe your feedback is sometimes that's OK. But for me, I've decided it's just I don't want to I don't want to lead anybody on. Investors never want to hear. I don't believe I don't believe the extra capital is what's issue. I believe you just need to be 20 % better product. Yeah. Usually that's masking something else. You're right. And you're right. Investors never want to hear that. I think about my own reflexive reaction is probably similar to yours.

34:18What I respond better to is if here's a plan that we have that will enable us to hit these particular numbers. Yeah. It's not capital. It's things that we would do. Now, if it's product things, then I think you have to apply a lot of skepticism for that because you can do product things. If it's I'm going to hire a team to do these product things, I would be skeptical about that. But if it's. We've seen this work at this particular scale and we need this and this, and I know we'll hit this particular number with that. I believe that stuff. I do. Yeah. OK, that's how we have to diligence it. It may.

34:56But I could believe something like that. All right, so let's dive into tips for a successful Series A. And cut at any time, of course, with questions. This is the first place I always tell folks to start. Really important, and I think most people skip it. It's like, why are you raising money? I think it ties to what we were just talking about. A lot of folks just, okay, yeah, I'm a seed-funded company. It's a year or two later. I've done some things. now I want to raise my next round is the worst pitch. And the why has to incorporate the next tip, which is the timing of it. Why is the now? And so I would take these two together, but why are you raising up?

35:44But what are you going to do with it? And hopefully that's very exciting, the why. That should almost start there, is give people a little bit of a framing around product, business, market, and then immediately talk about, hey, we're fine. We've got this business that's doing this. But why we're going to raise capital is to be able to conquer the world in some way. And channel your inner, I don't know, Patrick Collison is very good at this. And some of the iconic founders of this day, Jeff Lawson at Twilio, one of the first investors I was involved with at Bessemer is really good at like, why does Twilio need to exist?

36:24He would show pictures of the telephony phone stack at big companies and how you could rip all that out and make a single API call and send a text message to confirm a package being sent or something like that. And so understand the why and then relate it, as I said, is understand the now, which is really about timing. And so this gets to some of the reasons that certain companies are really hot from the prior discussion that we had is the now often ties into the theme of the moment, AI in some way. And so a perfectly reasonable pitch starts with, we have a product that was not possible two years ago because large language models have made it possible to do X, Y, and Z and be able to have a conversational interface for the application, which allows non-technical users to engage with it.

37:13I'm just, I'm making this up. And now that's going to get even better. And everyone can see and believe that from their own use of large language models in their own daily lives. but it's going to enable all of these things that were not possible before. And to be able to take advantage of that, we're raising capital to hit this sort of beautiful why statement. But the timing tends to be pretty important because a lot of time investors either implicitly or subconsciously will ask themselves, is there a why now moment for this company? Like, why is this company good? It makes sense in this particular era.

37:54And sometimes we can't answer that and we'll still make an investment because it's just the product and the traction is compelling. But usually there is a why now moment. There's connectivity to something. There's large lines of miles. There's code gen that enables whatever that just wasn't possible even a year ago. And then, oh, my God, now the whole stack for how we build software is changing. And so this company can exist now. So I think I've beaten that one enough. So then craft the story. Good storytelling is hard, but it does tend to be really important for investors being able to receive the information in a way that allows them to process it quickly and make a reasoned judgment on it.

38:40Sometimes it's hard to pull apart a story like why, how this company got started, where it is now, where it's going. Even with really good momentum and all the checkboxes that I mentioned. If you can't tell, it just requires a lot more overhead for an investor to be able to process it. And so I always tell founders, think through the story, forget slides and data and all that, just like bullet point out. And as soon as I'll do this for our companies for them, talk about it in a real flow where you could really explain the history, the founding moment. Maybe there's a refounding moment or a pivot moment.

39:18there's a sort of first customer story usually or first set of traction there leading to this moment that you are right now which is like the midpoint which is like the thing about movies they arc around the uh 82nd minute or whatever it is you want your story to like crescendo to like the conflict point at the two-thirds of the way through the pitch that's like today and then you move into the vision and where you're headed and what can happen and your projections for that. And depending on how later you are, if you're actually pinpointing revenue associated with things and stuff like that. But crafting the story tends to be pretty important.

39:56You go to, you make it too boring. Investors don't get it, are less likely to get excited about it. And I can remember, I can still remember some pitches of just founders that were amazing at that i mentioned twilio earlier just really amazing at storytelling and a number of other really good companies kind of had that same the founders just were unnaturally talented at that okay be intentional now what does this mean this means run you run the process don't let someone else do it. And that's maybe counterintuitive because you're getting interest from investors and you want to just be accommodating.

40:47But think through in advance all the elements of this. And again, I tend to think of more focused processes or better than just talking to anyone and everyone that will talk to you. There's debate about that and many different approaches work but at least in the beginning i always say be intentional have a story ready have a plan a and a plan b and go out to your a limited set of folks that you feel like you know well or can get to take the meeting that you think will be receptive to it before you go blanket the universe. Now, like the best laid plans always get a little derailed and be open to the serendipity.

41:31If you get a note from chemistry, you should respond to that. I'm just kidding. But be open to the serendipity of, hey, maybe in the process, you will adjust your plan because a great investor you didn't know before surfaces and they would actually be a really good fit, but at least start out with a sort of intentional intentionality to it. And then finally, and this debate spilled out into the open and if we have some time we can go into it a little bit that we have some slides on what are the metrics that matter but focus on the right metrics it can be there's a lot of shoving vanity metrics out there as a sign of something and maybe other investors will disagree with you but that is credibility destroying at least for me when it's when a metric is, I would rather be excited by the deeper dive than disappointed by it.

42:24And so I think you want to really be super intellectually honest about what your actual metrics are and what you think is achievable. And it's fine to be bold in your projections, but have them be grounded. But certainly there are ways to spin your metrics that I think most good investors will uncover, we'll figure it out. And so I wouldn't suggest too much of an overreliance on vanity metrics, at least in this context. Yeah, bullshit. You're going to get 95 out of 100, maybe a YC demo day when things are hot, you can get away with a bit of a bullshit metric. But if there's any time to invest, just assume you're going to get caught.

43:04Lead with the good stuff. Lead with your attributes. If your churn is high, you can be honest about it, but lead with your growth, right? If your growth is epic, put a polish on it. But if you bullshit something and there's more than a week, it's going to get caught. Almost certainly. Almost certainly. Yeah. There may be contexts where our vanity metric is fine, but just know that it's a vanity metric. And certainly when you're having a deep dive with an investor and you're talking about it, admit it. This metric isn't really that. It's something we say publicly because it has marketing benefit or something.

43:35But here are the metrics we really look at. And they may be different in all businesses. I don't want to give some prescriptive recipe that is you have to use but maybe we'll skip this but this was a little bit of the debate that spilled out into the public sphere on vanity metrics but here's what here's for most businesses most sas businesses or developer platform businesses these are the metrics that chemistry and i think most firms are trying to get to the first one's the most important, how fast are you adding new recurring revenue? And that's the one that got debated recently around, I think it was 11X, where the accusation was that they were including non-sticky or trial revenue as part of ARR, which is actually okay.

44:28Companies do that. But I do think you have to sort of caveat and explain what's in your ARR and what's not. I think people got that wrong. If you call it out, people are going to get it. Just call it out. Just have a stack chart. That's why we have different colors and stack charts. You could have different pieces. And everyone's been around the block. They know that, especially earlier stage, there's different types and qualities of revenue. Just call it out. Just stack it. 100%. I think it's fine, actually, to do what it sounds like that company did, which is including all the revenue and trials that we're going to cancel.

45:02Don't include trials that have already canceled. That's not okay. but if something's in trial it's part of your arr if they're paying not and but i do think you have to make that's why i add this but i would have said just tell people their net new arr but actually that made me think give the indication of stickiness is it a trial rev is long term is it what is it and that goes to the next one which is like your net dollar retention which is really important and so if like most of your net new arr is not converting your net dollar retention is going to look bad. It can look really bad. And so you can't have it both ways, right?

45:36So you have, it would have to then show if you're including everything in that new ARR that a lot of that revenue does churn. And you may have a model that lots of people try and the ones that stick really stick and land and expand. But I think you just have to provide all the elements of that rather than just talking about the top line numbers without getting into the nuance. And the stack bar chart. It doesn't really matter how you display it, but yes, that bar chart is the way to show it. We look in that dollar retention, which is like, how much are the same source sales metric from retail?

46:09Like how much are the prior customers from prior periods? How many are still around? And then how much are they buying? And are they buying more and more? And then we look at gross logo retention. And again, like businesses like Shopify have whatever 50, 60 % gross logo retention because they're dealing with very small businesses that come in and out. That can be okay to have whatever half the logos that ever use your product go away, but just talk about what your model is and what your conversion on those logos is and be honest about it. But I always look at gross logo retention because I want to understand, not because if it's low, I won't invest because I want to understand the nature of the business and the nature of the funnel that you're building.

46:46CAC payback, that means like how long does it take to break even on$1 of marketing? It's usually represented in months. And for stickier products, that might be longer. It might be perfectly reasonable to have a long CAC payback because the product is going to be implemented and adopted for a long time. And for more prosumer, it's got to be shorter, but we have all sorts of benchmarks for that that we can share. ACV, that's your contract value. What's the size of a customer engagement? And then burn multiple. And again, these are burn multiples have been looking very good lately because I think a lot of companies have corrected for maybe they're less likely to hire, even starve themselves a little bit.

47:32It's not an unhealthy thing, but be very clear about what it is. So folks can realize this is a company that's kind of starved, or this is a company that's already burning a lot and just is raising more money just to burn more. That may not be as good a proposition for an investor, but you should be aware of what your burn multiple, how much you're spending per incremental dollar of ARR that you add. And I put some benchmarks for that one on the right there that I think most folks agree if you were to generalize or where you want to be. That's it for the metrics part. I was going to do a commercial for Christina at Saster that I think Jason already started with speaking on.

48:14I think it's Wednesday afternoon at Saster. Correct me if I'm wrong there. Sounds right. On the main stage, something like that, Amelia. tell the actual so definitely go and see her now ethan let's be clear we've been doing this for while everyone's on the main stage but you're right like literally the smallest stage in the corner is like you gotta learn you're oh of course you're on the main stage main stage there is yeah yeah main stage smv7 dot t-i-n-y you're right on on the main stage but yes it will be great actually we're all heroes of service titan right we all it's a girl we talk done so much it's great yeah Oh, yeah.

48:51And she's speaking with Ross. It'll be great. Part of building up the business. So that'll be exciting. She was part of working with Byron Dieter at Bessner when they made that investment back in, I don't know, 2016 or something like that. It was a while ago now. Maybe earlier, 2014. So anyway, that's all the content I have. I'd love to take questions if there are some. We've got about six minutes. It's good. But maybe can I synthesize a couple of things for folks? Just things that, again, that I think lessons in series A and beyond that maybe people take wrongly from X and Twitter and social media.

49:28Okay. One, I want to get your thoughts running a tight process. Okay. I love why Combinator. I think it's one of the greatest gifts to founders in the mankind. but this idea that everyone should run a tight process, I feel is one of the worst pieces of advice to mankind. I literally, I've had two big deals done like the last 30 days in Saster Fund, little Saster Fund. And one literally last week, a mid-stage fund opened up the data room to five people Monday morning, got five term sheets in 48 hours, okay? That's what internet says to do. But the metrics were perfect. not really perfect but i view that for most deals i think this is terrible advice if you if your metrics aren't perfect and i tell chemistry you have one hour to look at our data room what do you think of this advice of running a type process what how do you nuance it i nuance it to run an intentional process yeah i like intentionality more than type process is bad generally for the series because it's a real relationship and yeah we really want to get to know you because like we we just feel we can be better partners if we know who we're partnering with like a business development relationship more than like buying a trading a stock and so i agree i think i mean you can depends what your definition of type but i think you want to allow in the intentionality and the intentional process time to get to know someone for your own benefit who this person that has going to be working with you on your board maybe for a decade or more and it's something you can't divorce and you want to know the firm behind them because maybe that person's not going to be there for very long so yes i think tight tight process is a mistake.

51:25If you mean by that fast process, yeah. But I think a process that you don't want to go on forever because it distracts you from the business, but you want to be able to do your diligence on the investor and give them time to get to know you so that they can make a reason judgment too, because you don't want them to feel tricked, feel like, okay, they didn't really understand what they're investing in. Those are the, I've been on boards where they've gone out to raise rounds, they've raised them quickly. And then the person didn't really understand the business or the flaws in the business. Yeah.

51:57And so I agree with the comment that was just made an organized, structured process. That's what I meant by intentional, not tight, not past. All right. Next one that I've been thinking about a lot that is discussed, but maybe under discussed what it means for venture. Although you and I alluded to it before we went on, look, no matter what anybody says on Twitter, if you want to make money in venture, okay, which is people's job in venture. I think you got to grow 50 % at 500 million to IPO. That's what the late, all the last batch did. Okay. Every single one of them was 50%. Sure. Can you IPO with the$600 million market cap?

52:33Sure. But you're not going to make your series B investors any money. Right. And so no one wants to do those deals. So if that's really the bar to make money, right. What does that mean rolling all the way back to A and C? I think it's intimidating. And I think it's pretty, because even when we look back, Shopify IPO did a billion, right? Twilio traded up, but it IPO did a billion HubSpot IPO did 800 million. The growth was insane for all three of those, but it was also earlier. Like the bar is so high to IPO. Are we pretending it's not there? Like, what does that mean for venture today? Well, I think that's the bar now.

53:10That's right. Demonstrably true. and I might come down a little from those numbers, but not by a lot today. I think what people are counting on, I hate to say it, it's like another frothy period that's not going to happen tomorrow, but people have short memories. Probably, right? Five, eight years from now, it might be like back to crazy times again. Who knows? Historically, that's been the pattern is there's these like kind of moments of like extreme excitement in the public markets for what's new and then they close and then you have to be like an exceptional company on the order of Service Titan or Stripe.

53:48Stripe's not public or Databricks or something, but those companies almost are public. So I think, but what does that mean for founders? You definitely do not want your plan to be predicated on a market bubble. That's just, that sounds like a bad plan to me. And so you want to be ready for any situation and you want to have a strong business where you have enough funding to run it. If you're going for an accelerated plan, which could make sense to the discussion we had, it could absolutely make sense to go fast, but you want to make sure you have a backup plan such that your default is alive. And I think the default is alive terminology, I forget who coined that, somebody around Y Combinator, I mean, it was Michael.

54:27I think it's a good framework for once you hit your Series A, you want to just have a plan to be default to live, even if you're going for it and burning cash, because the markets made, that markets, you just can't predict, you can't on demand sell a company. There may just not be buyers, even if it's a great company. And so you have to reflect that in your thinking. Yep. All right, let me squeeze one last one in and then we'll break. Especially because you've done a lot of developer focused stuff that's been successful. Let's talk for just a second. I want to get your thoughts on moats in 2025.

54:59It took me a minute to really understand Windsurf and Cursor. But when I watched it rip through my portfolio and I watched my son pay for the first time out of his own pocket and he showed me what he did, I get it, right? And there's Replit and there's Lovable. But you can switch. Folks are switching, right, quickly. So there's a meta question about that. But as an investor, when you're a Series A investor, when you see someone growing at the rate of Kodi and Windsurf, Or do you just not care about moats because you got to pick your jaw off the floor for growth? Or how do you rethink moats in the age of AI?

55:44It's tough screwing really fast. You sometimes have a cognitive flaw and forget to think about it. And there have been some very prominent examples of companies that were going really fast and stopped because they just they became irrelevant quickly. and I don't want to salt any companies, but they're out there, those examples. They're stories, right? But we're betting on the upside, not the downside. It still may be a perfectly rational move to go for that as an investor or a founder because usually momentum continues. But I think in this era where switching costs are a little lower, you have to think more about what the lock-in is.

56:24The way I evaluate it, come back to maybe a framing of it is love developer love user love so that's harder to ironically the like lock in of oh you're contracted for three years or whatever or you're you've signed this or you've embedded it in your technical stack somehow those modes are shrinking but if you love something they are shrinking yeah and it's wow the the cursor type reaction now and i think replets pretty cool too yeah that is the people's minds don't ship this fast and so i the companies that grew really quickly because they hit a narrow need need but didn't have love those are more likely to have been disrupted by something else than where people are like, I just love using this product.

57:18I can't think of a company where like the developer love or the user love was off the charts that then, and was moment, had momentum that then fell apart. Maybe there's an example somehow. Maybe you should add that to the KPI lovability at the end of burn rate lovability. Yeah, developer. Some sort of a lovability. When we published our developer platforms command back in originally in 2013 and again in 2019, developer love is right on there. It's like the fourth law. Make sure you have that. And put the classic old Twilio tagline, ask your developer, right? It's a - Ask your developer, is your developer into this?

57:53Yeah. Twilio is an example, right? We've brought them up a bunch or a company, maybe PagerDuty for DevOps. They just loved it because it like saved them from, it saved a lot of people from getting the page because it was really designed with the DevOps persona in mind. And it routed to only the one person that needed to get woken up at that moment. Not everyone else. So we've loved it, even though now there's a lot of ways to do similar things, but people still love that product. Yeah. That's a good answer. That's harder to disrupt. But it's not infallible. Yep. I just think we've been trained.

58:30We should break. I think the world of ChatGPT and LLMs, I actually think just, and then we'll break. I'm all with you, but I do think it's retraining us. it's retraining us to expect much more for free because so many of these products are like super oh yeah slack and zoom are free but chat gbt for free is 10 000 times better a deal than 42 minutes on zoom i would argue both are a good deal so things are getting freer and then you know what i use claude and chat gbt for fungible and then when deep seek launched i used it for a niche case which is i wanted to find out how tv shows ended after the last episode i've gone back and forth.

59:08But I'll bounce. Like, honestly, if there's something better, I'll bounce. So I agree with all these things, but I just think value-free, us turning into prompt engineers, even if we don't realize we're them, I think it's changing the way we think about switching modes and software. I don't have the answers, but I do think it's changing. Yeah, I think that's right. I think it's certainly in the prosumer world where it's like kind of the tools we adopt in our daily lives bring into work, the switching costs are lower and lower. It's easier than ever to prompt the thing to know what it needs to know.

59:39Yeah. Some data export, implementation, Salesforce, upload. Impossible for a lay user to do. Impossible to export that data and do anything with it. Impossible, right? Yeah. We're in a different world now. And I think that's good for all of us that are thinking about disrupting something else because they're trying to disrupt somebody. And so the fact that it's easier than ever to do that is good. But you got to think about that on the flip side, too. All right. We're at time. Ethan, thank you. This is great. Go to Chemistry VC to learn more. Come see Christina. She's Saster OG. She'll be at Saster Annual with, it really will be great.

1:00:18One of our, all of our hero companies service Titan, which is one of the great leaders in vertical SaaS. They'll be together with the CRO. So you'll see chemistry in everybody in May at Saster. So thanks again, man. Really appreciate the time. All right. Thanks so much for having me. Thanks for the great time. Take care. Thanks, everyone. Bye.

1:00:38All right, everybody in SaaS, this is it. The biggest, most action-packed SaaS and AI event of the year. SaaS, your annual 2025. It's coming this May. Yes, this May. Three full days, 10 ,000 SaaS, AI, and cloud leaders, and more tactical, no-fluff content than you'll find everywhere else. Hundreds of workshops, thousands of brain dates, and one-on-ones. If you want to scale faster to 10 million, 50 million, 100 million, 300 million ARR and beyond. You need the right playbooks, the right relationships, the right connections, and the right people in your corner. And Saster Annual is where it happens.

1:01:10We'll have hundreds of legendary speakers from companies and CEOs from Snowflake, HubSpot, OpenAI, Canva, and more. We'll have more networking than you can handle. You'll meet your next VC, your co-founder, the next biggest deal. I was just talking with the founder that closed a$450 ,000 deal just the month after Saster annual last year and we'll have a new ai demo and pitch stage where hundreds of you will be able to do quick pitches of your hottest new ai feature or product and a chance to win up to five million in vc funding from mayfield apply right on saster annual.com to pitch your ai startup so don't wait grab your tickets now at saster annual.com and if you want use my code jason 100 jason 100 to save 100 before prices go up again that's jason 100 at saster annual.com see you in may may 13th through 15th in the SFA.

1:02:02Hey, Saster, do you know what would make your customer service help desk dramatically better? Tumping it and switching to intercom. But you're not quite ready to make that change. We get it. That's why Finn, the world's leading AI customer service agent, is now available on every help desk. Finn can instantly resolve up to 80 % of your tickets, which makes customers happier and you get off the customer service rep hiring treadmill. Fid by Intercom. Name the number one agent in G2's winner report. Learn more at inter.com slash saster. That's I-N-T-E-R dot com slash saster.