20Product: Figma CPO on How Figma Builds Products: What Works, What Does Not | How Figma Does Testing and Product Reviews | The Future of Design, Engineering and Product with Yuhki Yamashita

25:11You mentioned a brilliant word that was constraint. I'm permanently debasing what makes a good constraint versus a bad constraint. How do you think about that with your product teams today? I think everyone has a love -hate relationship with constraints. If you're in the creative world, constraints create creativity and without constraints, it's almost not fun. Yeah, yeah, or constraints give you inspiration to some extent. And the reality is sometimes constraints are arbitrary, right? We say, hey, we want to ship something by so -and -so timeline and that's just an arbitrary constraint But then it's really wild to see what people do with that.

25:46And so, you know, I think there is importance in having constraints, but the wrong constraints can be really dangerous too. So for example, maybe you assume that a team assumes they can't change something about the way the product works, so it has to build on top of what already exists. And that could be a bad constraint because it results in a subpar experience. And so being able to recognize those kinds of constraints is a really important part of product thinking. Is there a constraint that you thought was good that turned out to be bad? That good example for me say would be I was very much a fan of not doing video.

26:21We don't do YouTube, no we are constrained on audio because we do a lot of shows but they're very very good. People don't feel it's comfortable on video, the constraint of channel I thought was very good. Very wrong, very bad. I misunderstood my customers and what they wanted which was a much more visual presentation. A good constraint that I was wrong. Yeah, I mean, I think one thing I would say is a lot of our product philosophy earlier at Figma had been, you know, the power of the infinite canvas. And the beauty of Figma was that you go into a space that feels, conversely, has no constraints in some ways, right?

26:58You can keep creating bigger and bigger things and expanding the canvas in both directions. And that's amazing for collaboration because you can keep building on top of each other without clobbering each other. Whereas, for example, in a doc, it's one dimensional. And so as you add stuff, you're pushing other things down and you have to contend with the space. And so, Figma design, Figma jam, like that was like a big part of the beauty of that. But as they started building other products, they realized, and audit audiences are like, well, no, people are confused by a 2D canvas. They prefer to be in more of a workflow where they can see one thing at a time.

27:33And so, I see contemplated other types of users, like developers or product managers and others, we realized that reducing that dimension in some cases was actually better. How fast do you know when a new product is wrong is not what you thought it was going to be? I would say it's fast to know that it's not working in terms of just put in funds and users and see if it sticks, right? Like we often do some data testing where we put it in front of a team and then we check in a week later and are they still using it? You know, so that's like obvious, but then the difference between good and great can be more subtle, and you have to let it play out a little bit sometimes.

28:11Or you have to kind of see it out in the real world or test it with a bunch of different kinds of users to know. So I would say it's very obvious for something that won't work at all. Maybe it takes more time to discern amazing from good. What was the biggest flop the one that released and it just did not work and it was super clear? And what did you learn about that? I would say that at least from a reception perspective, you know, we had worked on some AI features the year before, which at the time we had called make design where you can go from a prompt and it would generate some designs on the canvas.

28:45And it was a pretty simple feature. You write some prompts and then it would use some templates and some basic variables to make that template look a little bit more custom to your use case or fill it in with content that's a little bit more dynamic. But at the end of the day, it was just matching some prompts to some templates. But because it was called make design and because people didn't exactly know how it worked, anchor community was very unclear as to our intentions. What are you trying to do with this feature? What is it actually being trained on? And there was a lot of backlash to it.

29:19When in reality, what we intended for it to be and we re -need this feature later was is a first draft and to get you going, it's not supposed to replace the active designing. You have to iterate from there. And we wanted to be more clear around, well, what's going on underneath the hood? So we wrote an entire blog post that explained how it worked. And in our recent products too, we're now more transparent about what we use these models. And this is exactly how it works. So there's a little bit of like, does that go against the screens sake of simplicity that we mentioned earlier? Yeah. the clarification, the need for crystal clear communication.

29:54Yes, and I think that's also maybe, you know, we were having to retroactively do all this explanation. There was an opportunity to have, and the product have named it something more clear. Be very clear. But today, like, if you take a screenshot of Fego Make, you see, like, oh, it's being powered by Claude. And it's like, okay, like no questions. You know, exactly where the code is being generated from. So I think those are some lessons that we could have applied, but you know at the time I think there's something about taking care of it for you without bothering you with the details that might have been a point of view that led us initially to be more office -cated.

30:31So when we think about that process, often it's kind of navigated by PMs and PMs are often told to me on the show are PMs of the CEOs of the product. Is that true that PMs of the CEOs of the product? And how does being a PM change in the next few years? I started my PM career in Microsoft, you know, and the first thing my manager said was basically like, you are a glorified secretary, that's how you should think about yourself. And you're here to unblock your developers. That's what your job is. That has been ingrained in me for a while in terms of, there's a world view where you say, hey, like, you don't have any hard skills, so you're just here to fill in the gaps.

31:07And so that's been my philosophy forever. you know, there are talented designers and engineers who are just have a command of their craft that I could never have. So I've never kind of resonated with the CEO type of language. With the blurring of lines where he fell in the cracks, the cracks are molded over, so to speak. I have many people say that we won't actually have PMs in the few years. Look, I'm open to that idea, but I do think that the nature of the work is still very important. And one of the simplest ways I've heard PM explained before is that they're responsible for the why. Why are we doing this?

31:44Why is this a priority right now? Why this particular use case or user base or whatnot? Creating clarity on that allows everyone else to make really great decisions. I think that somebody does need to play that role. I don't think that it has to be someone called a product manager, but certainly, you know, the best product managers are able to create that kind of clarity. A sub -PM. The Y is at the founder, no? For me, there's like a cascading levels of Ys, right? And there is a very deep existential Y that a founder owns in a smaller company. They are the person who is, you know, doing all of that.

32:19And in fact, that smaller companies shouldn't have PMs because the founder is playing that role. But you get to scale where you need... Could you could figme exist without PMs? I mean, I have a very biased view on that. I think that it could if our other functions step up to play that role. And there's certainly a lot of people in engineering and design that can play that role. But, you know, I don't think overnight you would be able to get there because we've built a function around being able to go deep in the Y and, you know, really work deeply with our customers. And so that is time and skills that needs to be.

32:55It sounds like I'm against PMs, but I'm not a tool. It's a wonderful, does that presence not allow for fragmentation to continue though? Which is like if you have this glue across all the different entities or functions, they don't need to interact in the same way that they would if you took them away and suddenly cross functional communication becomes super important to them because they have to address the way themselves. Right. I think this comes back though to the original thing I was talking about which is that, you know, it can be hard for someone to push on both sides, right? One of the unique things about PMs is they're the ones facilitating the trade -offs between these different points of view.

33:32You know, engineering here is saying what's feasible or what's not. Designers saying what's right for the user. Being able to kind of mediate that. And certainly the two sides can do that. But in a complex business, there are a lot of these kinds of points of view from different functions that need to be accounted for. I know it's almost easier to, you know, tell a designer, an engineer to like really advocate for like one aspect because that is what they're like deeply, you know, ingrained in. And prog managers are uniquely good at being able to objectively look at all that information, think about the goals and the wise and decide, you know, what the best balance of things are.

34:08Like that kind of leadership, I think, is important. What is the most non -obvious trait that the best product people have? And so like we talked earlier, and I said actually being a part of a clan or leading a gaming clan is one of the most deterministic signs of success as a founder. Are there any traits, behavioral backgrounds, commonalities that lead to the best product people? For me, it comes back to storytelling and I'll give a specific example, which is I think a PM is really great at motivating something incredibly boring as existential. And so whenever I'm interviewing PMs, I just ask, okay, well, what are some projects you've led and whatever.

34:50and if they can't make it sound interesting to me, no matter this face, then I am dubious of their abilities to rally a team because part of it is, yeah, like they have to make a case for why it's an important thing to do right now because otherwise there's plenty of other important things to be doing. You know, a team has to be motivated around that. Like even if it's some really boring compliance project, a product manager can make it feel incredibly existential and so strategic and important and get everyone excited around it. And so that's the skill I look for. One thing that's so important, I was listening to a brilliant journey I've talked to we need to talk about the importance of joy and play in design.

35:29How do you think about that versus utility in a world where consumer attention is shorter than ever? But is it important for products to be playful? Play shows the human behind the product and it also shows the care to some extent. You know, I think the most exciting things I look back in our group, my career, or moments when someone decided to care so deeply not because there was some OKR that they had to fulfill, but rather because they just were excited to think about the reaction that someone would have when they discover that little thing, or that people would start talking about it, even though it wasn't in service of a particular kind of metric in the funnel.

36:10And I think the pride in that, the pride in craftsmanship there is what, first of all, just makes product building fun. Get the idea. We're here because these are jobs, but also because we are designers, we are craftsmen and that's what gives us joy. And so if you can't find those moments in your product, then it's quite sad. It's funny. Gustav Sodashram from Spotify, I think, is brilliant. He always says the details are not the details. They are the product. And I think that's so important. How do you think about when to get it shipped and out? first is when to perfect every tiny little bit and the details being so important.

36:50It's the perennial question. I would say that it also depends on the culture. For example, at Figma, we have a culture of everyone wants to get the details right, so sometimes we have to encourage people to be comfortable getting something shipped. Do you struggle to place urgency when the details are so central? There is a very concrete trade -off around learning so that you know which details to perfect versus just perfecting the details. So if you're perfecting the details for a critical part that it's going to help you understand how well this product is going to do in the market then by all means.

37:25But if you're starting to kind of perfect these areas that are much more speculative or areas of the product that you're not sure are going to be used, I'd rather first know If you know we have general product market fit or just know what parts of the product people are drawn to to then like put more of Attention on that. What metric is your guiding North Star within the product team for customer love? Our main product is one that's used five days a week deeply for hours a day, right? Our first product Figma design has always set the bar for what it means to be a kind of tool that people are deeply deeply rely on your own time.

38:00That's kind of the golden standard. But what's the measurement for deep people? We call it ND7s, like how many days in a week that people are using your product, for example? For you, it's five. Yeah, I mean, for designers, it is their core job. You mentioned that the element of the building, beautiful product is in the granularity, which you build to. I'm permanently debating whether the building they will come is true. You mentioned people to share products much more than they love. If you build beautiful product, do they come? Versus Hal -No. Distribution is everything in mold and ever today.

38:33You can build the most beautiful thing, and it's not discovered. And Figma has been the place where I learned that the most, because Dylan and our founder, from the beginning, was very much about the designer community and getting them talking about Figma. So one of the first things he did was he took design Twitter. He visualized it as a graph, and then figured out which people, designers are following the most, and then went to those designers to get feedback on Figma and get them excited about Figma. And that was his strategy. And it worked, right? And design Twitter at the time, especially worked in that way where they were influencing each other's choices in this really profound way.

39:13And so how do you not done that? I'm not sure we would have seen that acceleration and growth or that buy -in from the community. So that's not the way I think usually because I'm just all more focused internally on okay Let's build something great, but I do think that matters a lot But I don't want to like it's a necessary state of that's the only important thing obviously But product distribution wants to ratio of importance 30 60 40 Certainly a lot of things out there today that are fantastic demos that people all try out because they're talking about it and then it ends up not delivering on that.

39:50And then all of a sudden, it's so much harder to win back those users and have them come back. I think the most important thing is finding some small cohort of people who just like freaking love your product, you know? And then like - So a thousand true farms. And then a thousand cuts at these days, but something of that magnitude, that would be my way of building. You mentioned the community aspect that didn't focus on very early there. You see a lot of new products come and go. What are the biggest mistakes you see all those around you might with regards to community building. You know, relationship with community is incredibly important, but you also have to learn how to talk to them.

40:25You know, we're always motivated by what people ask of us, but we have to ask deeper questions than that. It's easy to just keep building what people ask, but we want to be like, well, why are you asking that for that future? And they'll say, well, it's because I have this problem. But why do you have that problem in that first place? You know, at Figma engineers have this ritual around the five wise, right, to, you know, get to the bottom of like, you know, why did this mistake happen? And you kind of get deeper and deeper to find the root cause. And I think that same exercise needs to be done with the community.

40:55And that's not to say the community's wrong. It's not, they're not always expressing their needs via problems. There's just, they might be talking about a feature that just comes to mind. And so important is to build a deeper relationship with them to be able to ask. That's a great idea, but maybe help me understand why you then want that. Maybe we can come up with something better. What would you most like to change about the Figma design across any product? Could be horizontal or it could be about as product specifically? But for some reason, you're unable to. Could be, Dylan, could be product teams, could be whatever.

41:28I would like our products to be even more closely integrated than they are today. You know, we just recently went from four product state products, which is really exciting, but there's so much more room to make it so that it just feels like a cohesive experience where you can maybe start one product but fluidly move to another. Do you think it was the right decision to have that many products that quickly? Like the cadence of rollout is very fast when it was all at once. Sometimes you need to drip feed people so they can understand the expansion. I guess time will tell. I mean, this is the first time we've tried something like this and we'll learn a lot from it But it's also indicative of the diversity of our user base at this point, right?

42:10There are plenty of people who are excited about a subset of these products and there are different audiences that were Beginning to reach and so maybe to the average user they might not kind of perceive it as Four new products to learn necessarily because a couple of them really resonate and they're gonna go explore those first When you think about those four new products, do all of them work? If you place four or three years, do those four products will still exist? Or is it a case of, no, we're likely dropped to? Well, certainly we don't launch with the assumption that we'll drop any A. But at the same time, many of them are in beta and we fully expect to learn from that.

42:46And if there's an opportunity to kind of like... Kind of like... We take as long as we think is needed to get the product to a state we're proud of. Some of these are pretty sophisticated products and the kind of interesting thing about building a tool is a tool is very different from a typical consumer product where you know there's a funnel and you're trying to optimize a metric like you're building something so that other people can build other things. Yes, and so it's hard up front to imagine all the ways in which someone will take your tool and build something, right? I mean, you definitely have some use cases in mind that you start with, but everyone always surprises you.

43:24And so I think there's some amount of humility you need to have as a tool maker to let people's creations help you understand where to take the tool or where to double down or what's working what's not. And as a result of that, we need to give people the time to create on a tool. I'm just wondering if it's a little bit like firing people, which is you always know well ahead of time And you just let it go on for too long and my question is do you know what a product's failing? But you let it go for too long in my career certainly I've seen products that probably should have spun down or Sunset it earlier which is the most prominent that comes to mind and what did you take from that?

44:02I don't know if I can comment That's one of those faces where it's like, I know exactly what products, but it don't want to piss anyone off too much, which is totally far out. That's very funny. What product have you not built in Vigma? I think we would most like to build. And why? As much as we celebrate or we talk about things in terms of products as units of accomplishment or something, you know, at the end of the day, like, we have one thing we're trying to support our users in doing, which is building software or building digital products. For me, it's less about, oh, what other product do I need to build to help teams do that?

44:40And rather, word all the gaps today that still exist that make that job hard. For us, that can manifest in features in an existing product or a stronger connection between products or things like that. So there's plenty of things where, if you ask the average person, okay, well, what's hard about building products today? They'll list a thousand things that like make it difficult or take a lot of time and those are the things that we need to go and build. What is the one fee? There's still a strong disconnect between what people design and what ends up in user's hands. And for me, the thought experiment is next time a designer shares a portfolio with you.

45:19Are they sharing the designs that were beautiful mocks? Are they sharing the designs as screenshots from production? And chances are they're sharing the ones that were designed in a perfect environment with perfect data. And for me, my goal would be for them to be as proud to just pull up any person on the street, pull up a screenshot of what they have, and be like, that is my design. I'm so excited about it. Is the chasm between design and implementation a feature or a bug? Oh, that's a great question. I would say it's primarily bug today. Okay, perhaps that time's masquerading as a feature because I think designers are always designing ahead, right?

45:57So they're always thinking about V1, V2, Vnext. And so as a result of that, it is natural for the designs to always be a little bit better because they're thinking ahead and they're upstream. But that being said, I think too often designers are designing far too ahead and not sitting in the reality of how their product exists today. That makes sense. Have your teams ever gotten a product funk? And what I mean by that is like a lack of creativity, a lack of energy, and how do you reinvigorate a product team to be creative, ambitious, hungry, excited when it's a little bit for me like? Yeah, that's certainly happened.

46:37Sometimes it can happen because you just have this very hard problem that you've been banging your head against the wall for such a long time. That can be solved with a variety of different things. maybe it's change up the makeup of the team or revisit some constraints because something in there is maybe causing people to kind of think that they have to constrain their solution space in a particular way. But I think things like Make Your Week are exactly that kind of rhythm to disrupt the everyday. Is once a year enough? Perhaps not, perhaps not. Teams have their own hack week sometimes or my favorite is actually quality week where people kind of like step back from their roadmap and go back to, oh, I wish I could go polish that other thing that I didn't have time to do or fix that longstanding bug or you know, something of this nature that again kind of pulls you out of your current project.

47:29In fact, some of our most popular launches are these small little things that we brand them as little big updates or users love it. Little big updates. Yeah. It's a wonderful way to kind of caveat something that maybe doesn't work, but maybe what? If it doesn't work, where's the middle of that? If it works, it's absolutely goddamn. You know what I mean? Well, I mean, you know, often times there are small little bugs, there are small little, you know, I call them like microtragities that finally get addressed. So they're very much celebrated by users. If I gave you unlimited resources today, as far as I guess would be the most obvious, how would you change what you do and build?

48:09It's a good question. Oh, first caveat it with, it's not always the case that throwing more people or resources that a problem makes something go faster. And I say this because we just launched a bunch of new products and perhaps the hardest problem still is how do we make them connect better and making them connect better requires the systems thinking, seeing the whole picture that just throwing more people at that isn't gonna necessarily solve. you need to solve, like throw the right people at that problem or give yourself the time to do that. So I'll kind of caveat with that and maybe also add that my personal hope is to be able to, I know it's a little bit like high level, but you know make things connect better and that's the problem I would want to solve a little bit more.

48:53And the biggest reason for lack of connection is, I think one of the things philosophically that this time we focused on is before we prematurely say that everything has to be very deeply connected. I mean, they still are very connected. You can copy, they speak to you in things. It's all in one platform, so that's great. But I think that one of the reasons for that was, we're trying out new use cases, and we need to learn from that. And before we prematurely make everything work together, let's learn what's working, what's not, and each of those products great. And then it'll become more obvious how things fit together.

49:27So I think it's kind of by design to some extent, But I also want to recognize that for an end user it might feel overwhelming if there's like a lot of products and not knowing where to start, for example. Does AI make discovery more challenging in a product world where everyone is democratized to create anything they want? The supply side of new product creation is infinite in many ways and discovery becomes more of a problem. How do you think about it? Well, it's discovery, but I think it's more, we think about it more as craft, which is that there's a sea of software, you know, everyone can make some product and it's really about, well, what is going to help differentiate one product from the next?

50:11And we deeply believe it's great design, great craft. That's not something that like you can rely on an AI to figure out by itself. like you need human guidance to push it to think about the experience more deeply or think about something really unique. And that is the first problem to solve because like if you're just helping people discover mediocre software, that's not helping the world, right? Totally agree with you. Before we do a quick part, I do just want to touch on the Uber experience because it's fascinating. When you think about biggest product win that you worked on, what was that and what did you learn from a product perspective.

50:50I mean, I would say that it was that transformation of helping Uber, believe it or not, it's hard to remember, but Uber worked very differently back then, where you would pick a car based on a type, get in the car, and then at the end, get a receipt. And only until you get the receipt, did you know how much you would pay, right? So, surprise. Yeah, yeah, Yeah, yeah, yeah, and we got caught out a lot for New Year's Eve for that, you know, you know, and that's how taxis worked. So by far the biggest transformation to that experience was being able to enter your destination up front, show the price and time on our end, knowing your destination up front before you get into the car was a huge win because we could optimize everything, optimize routes, we could do pricing based on your destination, all these kinds of things.

51:37So I think that was transformative. People want reliability, people want transparency, people want... I think the lesson was actually at the time there's huge pushback to doing this internally. The most profitable parts of the business at the time was our Uber Black business. People were worried that when Jax deposed against the cheaper Uber X or Uber Pearl prices, that would take a hit. It wouldn't be profit maximizing, I guess, for the business. And given that industry didn't have that precedent, it was kind of like, why are we forcing our own hand to do that? But at the time, Travis, let's see, at the time, is just like, yeah, this is about principles.

52:20And he was very insistent that part of the magic is the transparency, and we're going to go change the industry, and everyone else is going to follow. So we might as well be the first ones to do it and learn from it. And he was absolutely right, but it was a very hard thing. Yeah. I would love to do a quick far around this. I say a short statement. What's been the hardest moment of thick myself all? I would say probably, I mean, if I'm fully being honest, it was coming out of the breakup with Adobe and making sure that our community understood that we're business as usual and we're here and we're the Figma you know and love and we're just gonna continue to focus on them, right?

53:05And I think that while it's true that during that period, we were building and heads down and everything and it was still a moment for us, right? To prove to the community that we have as much momentum as ever before and we're excited about our path forward and it was just a big moment. What did Dylan say to galvanize the team? That is the hardest, most challenging moment. And this, Figum is now in an incredible stand -alone and campaigns that's like, what is that well? But that moment is very hard. What did he do and say to galvanize the team? He just really went back to the mission and how big it is.

53:42And he often likes to, you know, at least internally index on an original vision that he had for Figma, which is just going from imagination to reality. That's kind of where he started with before people were like, and what maybe you should be more specific than that. But it's just like reminded everyone of this founding vision and how broad that was. And I think that was really important to show. There's so much to do. Basically, it was kind of like the message, first and foremost. And then the second thing was just, a lot of it was really focused on our community, right? Like when all this is happening, there's so many people, so many were users who were just really excited about our future and pointing everyone to that and saying, like, hey, like look at everyone who believes in us who are excited for all the things that we're going to be doing, rallying everyone around our community and their excitement.

54:31We're going to do a feedback session and you're giving a review on yourself as a product leader. If you were to say, hey, this is the weakness you need to work on this. What would you say to yourself that is? I tend to be not a very emotional person and oftentimes I would get this feedback of, You should use emotion as a lever more, or it's hard to know what you're thinking. Because sometimes I'm just processing without giving immediate visual reaction. I think with every strength there's a shadow kind of thing, and I think that's an example of this. But there's a way in which I can be better as a leader to not just rally people around the intellectual interest of building products, but just the emotional part of it more.

55:16It's funny, I would say my biggest weakness is I'm too Italian. Which is like, you know, if someone says me, I'm like, I hate it. That's terrible. Yeah. Yeah. And then like, five minutes said, I'm like, no, not that idea. But like that one. But I've already kind of done the damage of like, you know, bluntly being far too emotional upfront. When you think about great product leaders, which product leader do you most respect to Nemaah and why then? One of them is a mentor of mine who is now CEO of Grammarly. And he used to lead product at YouTube, she's here. His such an incredible systems thinker.

55:50He just knows how to run an organization. And he obsesses over rituals and basically kind of designs. I think a lot of times you know you think about building a product and designing a product. But he also thinks about designing a culture very intentionally by designing very unique and interesting processes, meeting cadences, and everything is just so beautifully structured and intentional. and yeah, it's just really fun to be a part of and impressive. What is bad about the Figma product culture that remains and you would like to change? It's still a very tribal knowledge. You kind of have to know this random nuance here, which is why this backstory, which is why we can't do this.

56:35And sometimes that prohibits some of the new people from being able to get to a better solution faster, or know how their product affects other products. And I just wish that we did a better job codifying it some way so that everyone can understand or simplifying it so there aren't all these like strange dependencies. Final one, what's a recent product strategy in particular, or product that you've been most impressed by? And why that one? So like for me, it was actually Julego. So what happened on the show? But it was the attention to detail, how they use haptics for progression through levels.

57:14This granularity of user delight was so obvious, actually. What's your favorite product in the consumer realm that you think is beautiful? The consumer product right now that I love is LEMO, but it's more the physical experience of it. I mean, part of it is obviously just how impressive it is in making you feel incredibly safe in something that didn't seem plausible. and all the little cues that they have in the product that kind of make you feel they are on top of it. And just even the attention to detail, like, there's a biker coming by like before you open the door or stuff like, you leave your bag, you know, they'll let you know as you're walking away, right?

57:57Stuff that a driver could do too, but it's just the default. And I think the it's ability to kind of like make the average experience the best experience. almost because of that tension to detail. It's just really something. We said at the beginning, the basketball conversations are conversations. I so appreciate this conversation. I don't actually know to be honest if I went through any of these questions really. I don't like to look. It takes away from the conversation. Yeah. You've been fantastic. So thank you so much. No, you've been a great host. So thank you for that. I so enjoyed that show with you, Keen.

58:34If you want to watch that show, you can find it on Spotify by searching for 20VC, that's Spotify and searching for 20VC. But before we leave you today, are you struggling to beat model benchmarks or implement Gen AI in your product? If so, you need churring. Churring is an AGI infrastructure company backed by incredible investors like Foundation Capital and Westbridge Capital. And they do two things. Number one, they help leading companies in AI labs. Like Salesforce, Anthropic and Meta, enhance their LLMs with advanced reasoning, coding. multilinguality, multi -modality and more. Number two, they combine human and artificial intelligence expertise to deploy cutting edge AI systems for awesome companies like Rivian and Reddit.

59:19Right now, Turing offers a free five minute self -assessment to help you pinpoint your place in the Gen AI journey, get tailored next steps to optimize your model strategy, and then finally learn how Turing can refine and implement your models for better performance. Take the guesswork out of Gen AI, visit churring .com -4 -2 -0 -VC to start your free assessment today. And once your Gen AI strategy is on point with churring, now let's switch gears to the future of mobile and how one company is turning your screen into real returns. We spend nearly half our waking hours glued to our phones, upwards of 50 hours every week.

59:58Recently, one company transforming this reality stood out so much I personally became a shareholder mode mobile. Mode mobile created the earn phone. The smartphone that pays you for daily activities. Instead of big tech, profiting billions from our attention, mode returns over $325 million, directly to users through earnings and savings. Mode's revenues surged an incredible 32 ,481 % in three years, recognized by Deloitte as 2023's fastest growing software company in North America. And here's why I'm excited. Moad's equity offerings have raised over $30 million from 20 ,000 plus retail investors.

1:00:38One of 2025's standout public raises. And you can now join me as a shareholder with as little as $1 ,000 at invest .modemobile .com forward slash 20 VC for a limited time unlock up to 100 % bonus shares and a free earn phone, email us for the investor brief at 20 VC at modemobile .com or check out invest .modemobile .com. 4 -2 -0 VC. We've talked about making money from your phone. Now let's talk about making your product do exactly what you want it to. Whether it's the software you build or the software you buy, your text act should be creating results, not creating roadblocks. Or Pendo's no code software experience management platform makes your software better with tools to see where users get stuck, guide them within our messaging and constantly improving your UI.

1:01:28It's so easy that over 14 ,000 businesses use Pando to increase revenue, lower costs, and reduce risks. Businesses love the control, engineers love the freedom. Everyone wins! Star for Freedstay at Pando .io -4 -Slasht20 -Product. As always, I so appreciate all your support and stay tuned for an incredible episode with the founder of Duolingo on Monday.