The five biggest outsourcing companies in India added just 17 net jobs in 2025. Seventeen.

George breaks down why the career ladder that lifted billions into the middle class is collapsing — from offshore engineering centers to Fiverr freelancers — and why the squeeze doesn't stop at outsourcing. 

Then he shares a story he's never told publicly: being 18 years old, cold-emailing 300 CEOs to land his first internship, working in his boss's basement, being told "you're doing great" every day — and then getting one of the worst reviews his university had ever seen. 

Plus: would 18-year-old George survive today's job market? What human skills actually remain valuable? And the real solution to AI displacement that nobody wants to hear.

Anthropic published a blog post at 1pm on a Friday. By market close, cybersecurity stocks had lost $21 billion. CrowdStrike dropped 8%, Cloudflare 8%, Okta 9.2%, Qualys 10.2% — the cybersecurity ETF hit its lowest point since November 2023. 

George breaks down what happened in real time (the episode was recorded hours after the selloff), why this is the third sector to get repriced in three weeks, and what it means when a research preview — not even a product launch — can do this kind of damage.

From there, the conversation shifts to trust as the thread connecting everything falling apart. George and John dig into why the creator economy model is dying — information arbitrage is over when AI has everything — and why Founder Reality will never charge for content. 

John brings perspective from Nigerian radio, where national broadcasters are watching the same compression hit: audiences no longer need you for information, so entertainment and originality are all that's left.

George then shares what he calls his biggest character failure: co-hosting the Quarter Life Capital podcast for three years while nodding along with takes he didn't believe, letting the show drift into Bitcoin maximalism because he didn't want to push back on friends. 

QLC averaged 10-20 views per episode. When George started posting under his own name with his actual opinions, the content hit millions of views in weeks. Same person, same brain — the only difference was honesty.

The episode wraps with George's trust-but-verify framework from six years of startup partnerships gone wrong, an airport lunch test for evaluating business relationships, and audience questions on whether VC is ever the only option and why second-time founders still raise despite having exit money.

George and John pick up right where the last episode left off — but this time it gets personal. 

George walks through the three playbooks he's followed over his career (raise capital and sell, build SaaS and scale, consulting on the side) and how AI systematically killed the first two. 

He talks openly about reaching the acceptance stage of grief after shutting down the SaaS business, watching revenue go to near-zero, and resisting the temptation to crawl back to what used to work.

The conversation shifts to the market meltdown triggered by Claude Cowork's launch — over $1 trillion wiped from software stocks in roughly a week. 

George breaks down why he thinks the selloff is justified, not panic, drawing a direct line from killing his own SaaS company in December to questioning why his personal portfolio still holds software stocks. 

He shares the story of a non-technical consulting client who built a full-stack Next.js app without knowing what Next.js is, and how the design agency they've worked with for years has seen new projects dry up — not because they're bad, but because the speed gap has become impossible to ignore.

The episode's strongest thread is on identity. 

George challenges the "what do you do?" culture — especially in places like San Francisco where your job title is your introduction — and makes the case that tying your identity to your role is a setup for crisis when that role disappears. 

He and John both reflect on what made them who they are before any job title existed, and why rediscovering that matters more now than ever. 
Amazon's 16,000-person layoff and the $700 billion being poured into AI infrastructure this year frame the urgency.

Send your questions to [email protected] for the next episode. Subscribe on YouTube for the full video.

Founder Reality is back after a 3-month break — and everything has changed. 

George introduces John as the new permanent co-host, bringing a fresh perspective and a background in media and broadcasting from Nigeria. 

Together they unpack what's happened since November 2025: shutting down the SaaS business, killing the old consulting model that required too much hand-holding, and pivoting toward working with founders who have real skin in the game.

The bulk of the conversation dives into how fast AI has moved in just 90 days. 

George breaks down how Claude Opus 4.5 (released late November) changed his ability to code independently as a CEO — rebuilding the Founder Reality website solo over the Christmas break. 

He then gets into Claude Cowork, which he was initially skeptical about but now uses for 90% of his daily work, from processing 24 months of bank statements to syncing files across Google Drive. 

The takeaway: if your job is repetitive white-collar work, the window is closing fast.

The episode wraps with two audience questions. 

First, why George doesn't want to be a billionaire — and what he'd actually do on a free Tuesday. 
Second, why people work harder for a boss than for their own projects, and the psychological shock of going from corporate to self-employed.

Send your questions to [email protected]. Subscribe on YouTube for the full video episodes.

The $5M Exit That Paid $140K (Why Liquidation Preferences Are Founder Slavery)

Episode Summary

George shares the shocking story of a friend who sold his company for $5 million but only walked away with $140,000 after four years of work. This episode exposes the brutal math of liquidation preferences and why the VC game is rigged against founders. George breaks down the five-phase VC trap, explains why AI has changed everything, and offers three alternative paths to building wealth without giving up equity.

Listen if you're: Considering raising VC funding, currently fundraising, or wondering why bootstrap founders are increasingly rejecting venture capital.

Key Takeaways

The Shocking Math

• $5M acquisition = $140K for founder after liquidation preferences
• That's $35K/year for 4 years of 80+ hour weeks
• Entry-level Google engineers make this in 2.5 months
• DraftKings founder got $0 despite household name status

Why VCs Attack the Truth

• 4,500 likes on Twitter, 200+ on LinkedIn when George shared this story
• 130+ founders DM'd privately saying "thank you for saying this"
• VCs, advisors, and lawyers publicly attacked while privately agreeing
• Everyone in ecosystem benefits from you raising except you

The Five-Phase VC Trap

1. Celebration: Feels like winning, actually taking on unpayable debt
2. Treadmill: Hire, build, burn money monthly while pressure builds
3. Reality: Either shut down with $0 or raise again with more dilution
4. Exit: Press release celebrates "success" while math is brutal
5. Silence: NDAs prevent truth-telling, cycle continues

Three Alternative Paths (2025)

1. Content Business: Build personal brand, 12-24 month timeline to revenue
2. Consulting: $5K-$10K/month using existing expertise
3. Software Products: AI tools mean 90% lower costs, 10x faster development

Timestamps

[00:00] Hook: Friend's $5M exit story
[02:30] What are liquidation preferences?
[05:45] Friend's 4-year journey year by year
[12:20] The brutal exit math breakdown
[18:15] Why VCs and advisors attacked George's post
[22:40] Three types of people who responded angrily
[28:30] The five-phase VC trap explained
[35:45] Why AI changed everything in 2025
[42:10] Three alternative paths to VC funding [48:30] Content business strategy
[52:15] Consulting to software transition
[56:40] Why now is different from 2021
[59:20] Wrap-up and resources

Controversial Quotes

The Real Numbers

Friend's Company Breakdown

• Raised: $3.6M seed round (2021)
• Team: 9 people at peak
• Years building: 4
• Launch: December of Year 3
• User retention: 90% dropped off in first few days
• Exit price: $5M acquisition
• Founder take-home: $140K after liquidation preferences

The Math

• First $3.6M goes to investors (liquidation preference)
• Remaining: $1.4M
• Founder's 20% share: $280K
• After taxes: $168K
• Annual salary equivalent: $42K

Compare to Alternatives

• Entry-level Google engineer: $240K/year
• George's consulting: $5K-$10K/month possible
• SimpleDirect margins: 85%+ profit
• AI development costs: $50/month vs $200K/year engineer

Who This Episode Will Trigger

VCs & Advisors

• Their response: "You don't understand how this works"
• Reality: They've seen this dozens of times but can't say it publicly
• Why they're mad: Need deal flow to raise bigger funds

"Successful" Founders

• Their response: "I raised money and made millions"
• Reality: Survivorship bias - they're the 5% exception
• Missing: The hundreds who tried and failed silently

Finance Bros

• Their response: Know all the terminology but zero real experience
• Reality: Never negotiated term sheet or watched waterfall distribution
• Problem: Confident but never actually done it

Action Items for Listeners

If You Haven't Raised Yet

•  Calculate your real funding needs (probably 90% less than you think)
•  Start with consulting to understand customer problems
•  Use AI tools to build 10x faster for 1/10th cost
•  Stay profitable from day one

If You've Already Raised

•  Read your term sheet liquidation preferences clause
•  Calculate exit scenarios (need 3-5x funding for meaningful returns)
•  Build sustainable growth, not just growth rate
•  Develop backup plan if you can't raise next round

For Everyone

•  Question success narratives (headlines hide liquidation preferences)
•  Do the math on real exits, not paper valuations
•  Talk to founders privately about post-exit reality
•  Consider content/consulting/bootstrap alternatives

Resources Mentioned

George's Products

• SimpleDirect: AI-first business tools
• ANC: Immigration/international expansion services
• Free Book: "The Anti-Unicorn: The Consulting Way"
• New Tool: "Quit Your Job by SimpleDirect" (free coaching)

Websites

• Blog: founderreality.com
• Newsletter: newsletter.founderreality.com
• Company: getsimpleroute.com
• Twitter: @thegeorgepu

Tools George Uses

• Cursor: AI coding assistant ($20/month)
• ChatGPT: Problem solving and de...

The "Machine, Platform, Crowd" framework that dominated tech thinking for years is dead. In this episode, George shares the new framework that's actually driving success in the AI-first world: Capital, Code, and Audience - but not in the way you think.

Running two companies from Toronto with just 5 people (no VC, no SF office), George breaks down how small teams can outcompete 50+ person companies with millions in funding. This isn't theory - it's the exact playbook he's used to build SimpleDirect and ANC.

Capital Isn't About Funding - It's About Efficiency

• Built SimpleDirect's initial product for under $20K (not $5M)
• Reduced team from 14 people to 5 - moving faster than ever
• 50+ months of runway through strategic cost management
• Toronto base saves $100K+ annually vs. San Francisco

Code Means Direction, Not Implementation

• Haven't shipped production code in 2.5 years, but direct all development
• AI tools ($8K/year) replace traditional co-founder functions
• Cursor + Claude + strategic oversight = full technical capability
• From 5 co-founders to 0 through AI-powered automation

Audience Trumps Everything

• 30,000 engaged Twitter followers > expensive marketing campaigns
• Distribution without permission beats cold outreach every time
• 2-5% cold LinkedIn response rates vs. direct audience access
• Start building before you need it - compounds over time

Controversial Takes

• You don't need to be technical to run a tech company anymore
• Geographic location is now almost irrelevant for success
• More people = less productivity (14 people = 91 communication paths)
• AI can replace most co-founder functions if you know how to direct it

Actionable Framework: Your Three C's Audit

Capital Efficiency Check:

• Can you deploy capital anywhere quickly?
• Can you reposition if something isn't working?
• Does it compound without constant time investment?

Code Capability Check:

• Do you understand your tech stack enough to direct it?
• Are you using AI strategically vs. randomly?
• Can AI replace functions you're considering hiring for?

Audience Reality Check:

• Could you reach ideal customers in 48 hours?
• How many people would pay attention if you launched today?
• Are you building trust or just followers?

Tools & Resources Mentioned

AI Development Stack:

• Cursor (primary development tool)
• Claude (strategy, content, brainstorming)
• ChatGPT (customer support automation)
• GitHub Copilot (code assistance)
• MCP servers (business context for AI)

Content & Distribution:

• Twitter: @TheGeorgePu
• Newsletter: newsletter.founderreality.com
• Blog: founderreality.com

Best Quotes

"Capital isn't about how much money you have. It's about how efficiently you deploy it and how long you can keep it working."

"You don't need to write code anymore. You need to direct it. Think film director vs. cameraman."

"One person with liquid capital, AI-multiplied code capabilities, and a trusted audience can outcompete a 50-person team in a fancy SF office."

"Audiences don't trust brands - they trust people. We follow founders, not companies."

Connect with George

• Twitter/X: @TheGeorgePu
• Newsletter: newsletter.founderreality.com
• Website: founderreality.com

Enjoyed this episode?

The old startup playbook is broken. The Three C's framework is how small teams win in 2025. Share this episode with a founder who needs to hear this reality check.

Want more unfiltered founder insights? Subscribe to George's newsletter for behind-the-scenes content and frameworks he doesn't share publicly.

Rate & Review: If this episode challenged your thinking about building companies, leave a review on Apple Podcasts. It helps other founders discover real talk vs. startup theater.

After months of failing to learn React from books and courses, I discovered a method that worked in 15 minutes. Failed 6 times debugging code with AI this morning, finally understood on attempt 7. Why traditional education is broken for builders and the daily practice system that actually works.

The 6 failures that changed everything:

• This morning on subway: failed 6 times debugging React code with ChatGPT
• Felt embarrassed even though just talking to AI, no one judging me
• Each time: "George, you're close, but you're wrong" with patient explanation
• AI asked after attempt 4: "Should we move to next section?"
• Said no - wanted to keep trying until I actually understood
• Attempt 7 (15 minutes total): finally got it right because I understood, not memorized

Why I've been failing for months:

• Tried learning React/Next.js for months - bought books, read documentation, enrolled in Frontend Masters
• Every time opened book or video: wanted to fall asleep (not exaggeration, actual drowsiness)
• Eyes would glaze over at code blocks and syntax
• Even morning sessions left me drained for entire day
• Same problem in college CS courses - struggled with motivation, not ability

The college trauma that shaped bad learning habits:

• First year CS: did poorly on midterms/finals, thought I was bad at computer science
• Problem wasn't me - was how I was forced to learn
• Was the contrarian student asking "why learn impractical stuff nobody uses?"
• Afraid to ask questions - wanted to be "George who knows everything"
• Fear of judgment from professors/peers stopped me from learning effectively
• Got internship, realized I was actually okay at CS - teaching method was the problem

What I did differently this morning:

• Opened ChatGPT on phone, VS Code on laptop on subway
• Asked: "Give me React code with bugs, let me debug them, if I fail tell me what's wrong"
• First exercise: React state and rendering (didn't understand coming from HTML/CSS/JS world)
• Failed 6 times, AI gave 6 different scenarios testing same concept
• Had to explain in natural language what was happening and what caused bug
• If professor: would be pissed and move to next student
• If peer: would be dismissive "you still don't get it?"
• AI: patiently explained differently each time until I understood

Active vs passive learning (the critical difference):

Traditional (Passive):

• Read documentation about React state
• Watch video explaining rendering
• Complete teacher's exercises
• Hope you remember later

AI-Assisted (Active):

• Look at actual buggy code
• Try to figure out what's wrong
• Fail, get immediate feedback
• Try again with different example
• Repeat until actually understand

In 15 minutes of active debugging, learned more than 30 minutes of lecture

Why curriculums are broken:

• Every system (colleges, bootcamps, Duolingo) uses curriculums to scale
• One teacher → 100 students, one course → 10,000 people
• But curriculums assume everyone is same - they're not
• ANC consulting: no curriculum, one-on-one because every founder at different stage
• Your context is unique: designer understanding devs, PM estimating complexity, founder prototyping, student building portfolio

The new learning system (15 minutes daily):

Step 1: Pick Your AI (all have generous free tiers)

• ChatGPT, Claude, Google Gemini, Hugging Face Chat, Meta AI, DeepSeek
• Don't let cost stop you - free versions work excellently

Step 2: Define Your Context (critical - be specific)

My React prompt: "I'm a founder trying to understand React and Next.js because my repos are built on them. I can read some code, but I fall asleep reading documentation or tutorials. I need to review code and make architectural decisions for my team. I'm not trying to write production code. I have 15 minutes per day. Please design daily debugging exercises for me."

My French prompt: "I'm learning French for work in Canada. I'm currently at A2 level (CLB 4-5). I have basic understanding but struggle with speaking, writing, and French accents. I have 30 minutes per day. Please give me daily reading and writing practice with corrections."

Must include: Role, current level, goal, time commitment, learning style preference

Step 3: Commit to daily practice

• Doesn't matter if 1, 5, or 10 minutes - just do it daily around same time
• Like Duolingo but personalized: your pace, your goals, infinite patience
• I do 15 min React + 15 min French = 30 min total daily
• On subway, before bed, whenever works

Step 4: Embrace failure

• You will get things wrong - that's fine
• AI explains differently each time until you understand
• No shame in failing 6 times - it's AI not human, be shameless in learning
• Don't pretend you understand to move on - make sure you actually get it

Step 5: Track progress

• Every few days: "Based on my progress this week, what should I focus on next?"
• Let AI adjust curriculum to your learning pattern
• Creates structure that works FOR YOU, not generic structure for everyone

The French learning breakthrough:

• Duolingo 10 min daily for 5 months = A2 level = saved $6-8K skipping 2 semesters
• But still passive - completing exercises for things already knew
• With ChatGPT: 10 daily vocab words with testing, paragraphs at exact level, 5 questions with corrections
• AI predicts what I don't know and addresses proactively
• "George, all 5 correct. However, punctuations wrong. Here's how to fix. In future if you want to say this, here's how."
• Not just testing what I know - teaching what I'll need next

Why structure is a scam (sort of):

• Everyone says "you need structure to learn effectively"
• Truth: structure is valuable but YOUR structure is not THEIRS
• Generic curriculums designed to sell courses, not optimize your learning
• Real structure personalizes to: current level, goals, learning style, time availability, context

What this means for founders:

• I'm founder not developer - don't need to write production code
• Need to: review team's code, make architectural decisions, give implementation feedback, guide team
• Traditional courses assume I want to become full-time developer - I don't
• AI learning focuses on exactly what I need: understanding React state, debugging issues, reading codebase
• No wasted time on syntax I'll never use or forcing through 500-page books

The fear of judgment problem:

• In college: afraid to ask questions, everyone seemed so good at CS/math
• Wanted to be "George who knows everything" - rather struggle silently than show weakness
• Fear of professor/peer judgment stopped effective learning
• With AI: fear is gone, no judgment, no embarrassment, just patient explanation
• Revolutionary for learning

Template prompt for anything you want to learn: "I'm a [your role] trying to learn [skill] because [reason]. I'm...

How 80% of my revenue disappeared twice in 60 days because I built on someone else's infrastructure. The brutal lessons about middleman businesses, the four principles for building anti-fragile companies, and the three-question audit that reveals if you're one policy change away from disaster.

The double shock that almost crippled both businesses:

• Two massive shocks hit SimpleDirect and ANC within 60 days
• 80% of inbound leads vanished for both businesses simultaneously
• Not because products got worse, not because of competitors
• Because third parties I had zero control over changed the game
• Almost crippled my income overnight

Currently living through this (70-80% to the other side):

• Both businesses pivoting right now - websites changing, value props changing
• Still figuring things out, rebuilding, getting stronger
• Sharing while living through it, not after everything's solved
• This is raw, real, and happening to more founders than want to admit it

ANC story: When government changes the rules:

• Consulting business helping international students establish businesses in Canada
• Focused on Start-Up Visa pathway - 10-15 premium clients yearly
• Strong margins, real transformations, happy clients
• But the pathway (controlled by government) was the hook bringing people to us
• Government approval timeline: used to be 12 months, now stretched to 85-87 years
• Not a typo - EIGHTY-SEVEN YEARS for approval
• No warning, no announcement - just pulled levers behind scenes
• 80% of our leads evaporated as rules kept changing
• Built valuable service on trap door someone else was holding

SimpleDirect story: When lending partners control your fate:

• SimpleDirect Financing was flagship - connected contractors to lending marketplace
• One application, 10+ banks/fintech lenders, best rate matching
• Relied solely on lending partners for approval rates
• Customers came for financing results, not because they loved our product
• When lenders' APIs went down or made bad decisions, customers blamed US
• Customer support tickets became overwhelming
• Shutting down SimpleDirect Financing December 31st, 2025
• Launching ChangeLock - product we control end-to-end with no third-party dependencies

The pattern I missed twice (same mistake, two businesses):

• I was facilitator, not builder
• Helped people navigate someone else's system
• Expertise was valuable, transformations were real - but didn't own the outcome
• Was coordinator/customer experience wrapper, not actual infrastructure
• Felt safe at first - had revenue, getting paid, business working
• Lower upfront investment, faster to revenue - made total sense
• Until it didn't

Why you can't diversify fast enough when primary channel dies:

• Building new infrastructure takes 12-18 months minimum
• When something dies, you're digging yourself out of hole - doesn't work that way
• Runway burning, team stressed, customers confused, you're scrambling
• Even content marketing: can't launch Twitter tomorrow and get thousands of likes
• Need consistency and time for everything

Historical examples - infrastructure owner always wins:

• BlockFi: Billions in crypto lending, great UX, real value - vanished overnight when counterparty collapsed
• Travel agents: Knew everything about booking until airlines launched direct booking + Expedia happened
• Music labels: Controlled distribution until Spotify, YouTube Music, social media emerged
• Pattern: Middlemen create value initially, then infrastructure owners cut them out

The four non-negotiable principles for what I'm building now:

Principle 1: Own the transformation, not the transaction

• Old: "Come to us, we'll help you access this pathway/lending"
• New ANC: Transform founders $0 to $500K ARR with fundamentals so strong they qualify for 5+ options worldwide
• When one door closes, route to four others
• Transformation itself is the moat, not the pathway

Principle 2: Own the full stack

• SimpleDirect new: Build entire founder operating system (ChangeLock, Roadmap)
• Control pricing, UX, features, roadmap - no external dependencies
• Like Basecamp: build everything end-to-end, even own calendar and email client
• ANC new: In-person transformation experiences, not routing to someone else's program

Principle 3: Diversify ruthlessly

• ANC old: 80% leads from one source
• ANC new: Five sources, none over 30% - if one closes, four backups remain
• Product diversification: SimpleDirect (SaaS) + ANC (services) + equity in supported businesses
• Three revenue streams, three customer types
• Not about launching bunch of products - different business models that de-risk startup

Principle 4: Equity over transactions

• Take less cash, own piece of customers' companies
• Had chances to take equity in past, thought "we're consultants, not equity investors" - wrong
• Going forward: align incentives, make less transactional
• Own piece of customer experience and customer equity

The three-question audit every founder must run:

Question 1: What if they change the rules tomorrow?

• List every external dependency (platforms, APIs, partners, governments, suppliers)
• For each: "If they change terms tomorrow, would I survive?"
• If answer is no, you're a middleman
• Examples: Facebook ads CPM triples, supplier cuts margins 50%, approval process breaks

Question 2: Do I own the outcome?

• Do you deliver transformation/service end-to-end or coordinate someone else's delivery?
• Social media creators: if platform changes rules, traffic goes to zero
• George's mentor knew someone who jumped off building when Google algorithm change dropped web traffic to zero
• Don't build entire business on one thing you don't control - could be lethal

Question 3: Can I get cut out by infrastructure owner?

• Could customers go directly to your supplier/partner?
• SimpleDirect: customers could go to 10 lenders directly, we made money from information asymmetry
• In AI-first world, information arbitrage doesn't last
• If business hadn't failed for other reasons, this would have killed it eventually

The 30% Rule (critical for survival):

• No single dependency should represent more than 30% of revenue
• Not single customer over 30%
• Not single partner over 30%
• Not single platform over 30%
• Not single demographic/geographic market over 30%
• Violate this = danger zone

Example from The Anti-Unicorn book:

• Even at $10K MRR, if banking on 1-2 customers, you're in danger
• Need at least 5-10 different customers at $10K MRR before safe to quit job
• If rely on 1-2 customers, they can easily leave

What to do if you fail the audit:

Option 1: Expand your wedge

• Offer more pathways, product lines, features, partners
• Own more layers of your service
• Add service...

After 10 years of reading business books, I finally figured out why most of them waste your time. 

The uncomfortable truth about performance reading, why AI summaries work better than cover-to-cover consumption, and the builder's system for actually learning instead of just feeling productive.

The bookstore experience that changed everything:

• Went to bookstore yesterday, couldn't get past chapter one of ANY book
• 40 pages of backstory before frameworks, entire chapters that could be one paragraph
• Wasn't distracted or lazy - physically couldn't tolerate how long books take to get to the point
• Used to carry boxes of books between dorms in college, refused to donate them
• Realized: I'm not reading less, I'm reading more - just stopped reading the wrong way

The most useless book I read this year:

• Trailblazer by Mark Benioff (Salesforce CEO)
• 300 pages of billionaire congratulating himself for being socially conscious
• Zero insights on how he built Salesforce, just self-performance
• After finishing: "What an absolute waste of time"
• Can count life-changing books on one hand (5-6 books total)

The uncomfortable truth about business books:

• Most written for people who want to READ, not people who want to BUILD
• When you want to read: you want journey, backstory, feeling of learning
• When you want to build: you want insights in 30 seconds, then move on
• Book industry stretches 30 pages of insights into 300 pages of filler
• People buy books to feel productive, not to actually produce

The performance trap everywhere:

• Founders posting reading lists: "This month I read these 5 books"
• Society tells us reading = intellectual, self-improvement, serious person
• Reality: If you're reading business/self-help and not immediately applying it, you're procrastinating
• You're not learning, you're performing that you're learning

Why newer generations avoid reading:

• Being told to read 400-500 pages just to learn one thing is ridiculous
• Creates image that reading = boring
• Don't see people reading on subways/buses anymore (except retirees and 40-50s)
• Younger generations prefer TikTok, Instagram, visual content with short attention spans

My three reading phases over 10 years:

Phase 1 (College 2017-2018): Read everything cover to cover

• Read to catch up, feel motivated as broke student
• Didn't know anything about startups or business
• Books helped me not feel helpless

Phase 2 (Few years ago): Got selective like Naval

• Naval flips through books, throws away if not interesting
• Started flipping in bookstores, reading first/last chapters
• If not actionable, put it down
• Stopped reading self-help books entirely - rarely make you do anything concrete

Phase 3 (Now): Builder system - format agnostic and AI-assisted

• Fully evolved to extract knowledge, not perform reading

The self-help guru problem:

• Jay Shetty (the monk author) - journalist discovered he never actually went to India to be a monk
• Self-help authors make money from people thinking they can help them
• Books designed as lead magnets → $700-1400 courses → conference tickets
• One guru selling $700 course to financially unaware people using buy-now-pay-later
• "This is so dark and disgusting - exploiting people at bottom of society"

The two books that were actually worth it:

• Zero to One by Peter Thiel - lived through PayPal mafia, raw and real
• The Hard Thing About Hard Things by Ben Horowitz (A16Z founder) - read 2016, still remember
• Both felt like real people with real experiences, not performance

Recent books I actually liked:

• The Subtle Art of Not Giving a F*ck - raw, direct, challenged pressures
• Value Investing by Bruce Greenwald - super niche, solved specific problem
• Realized: Best books aren't bestsellers, they're written for specific person with specific problem

New episodes Monday/Wednesday/Friday at 9am EST. Real founder lessons, not startup theater.

Daily thoughts: @TheGeorgePu on Twitter/X

Full episodes: founderreality.com

Email: [email protected]

Newsletter: newsletter.founderreality.com

The VC market deployed $97 billion in Q3 2025, yet 84% of 2022 seed companies still haven't raised Series A. How both things are true, why the market split into two different games, and what founders should do about it.

The paradox that made me investigate:

• Three years ago I was raising capital, met incredible founders who raised seed/Series A
• Checked in last week - only handful raised additional rounds since 2021
• Meanwhile VCs on Twitter celebrating record fundraises, expanding, thriving
• How can founders be struggling while VCs are thriving? Both things true simultaneously

Q3 2025: The data nobody talks about:

• VCs deployed $97 billion total in Q3 2025 (looks like record territory)
• One-third ($32B) went to just 18 companies
• Anthropic raised $13B, Elon's xAI raised $5B, Mistral raised $2B
• Those 18 companies averaged $1.8 billion each
• Other 7,500 companies split remaining $65B = average $8.7 million each
• That's a 200x difference between the two groups

The market has split into Game A vs Game B:

Game A (The AI Elite):

• AI companies, especially LLM and foundational models
• Repeat founders with previous exits
• Top-tier accelerator graduates (YC, etc.)
• Companies fitting current narrative
• Based in San Francisco
• AI captured 55% of all US funding in Q3 2025
• Anthropic alone got 35% of all AI funding

Game B (Everyone Else):

• First-time founders
• Non-AI companies
• Companies that raised in 2020-2021
• Anyone outside SF/NYC/Boston
• Anyone without previous exit
• Fighting for scraps with terrible odds

The Series A crisis gets dark:

• 84.6% of companies that raised seed in early 2022 STILL haven't raised Series A
• Not struggling to raise - haven't raised at all, period, in 3 years
• Back in 2020-2021: 50-60% chance at Series A
• Now: 15% chance (one in six)
• Some have $1M ARR (used to be golden ticket) but investors won't return emails

The VC conversation that explained everything:

• Spoke with top-50 Silicon Valley VC two weeks ago at pitch competition
• His answer: "I'm just investing in AI. Our firm's thesis has turned to AI"
• "If it's not AI, it's really hard to get partnership approval"
• "We have a mandate from our LPs - they want AI exposure"
• "We cannot physically invest in anything else right now, even when we want to"
• VCs have bosses (LPs) who are pension funds, foreign investors, Middle Eastern money

Real founder stories from my network:

• Friend stuck for 4-5 years since last round, has revenue and customers
• Can't get down round without getting crushed
• Can't raise at current (pandemic-level) valuation
• Can't pivot fast enough
• Options: bridge round with massive dilution, down round that kills you, or shut down

What you can actually do - if trying to raise VC:

• Be brutally honest: Are you building AI? Previous exit? $2M+ ARR with 3x growth? In SF?
• Yes to most = Game A, keep pushing
• No to most = Game B, change strategy or accept VC isn't right fit now

Critical runway math:

• Takes 6-9 months minimum to raise right now (used to be 3 months for seed)
• If you have less than 12 months runway and no interested VCs yet, you won't make it
• Need to pivot to profitability RIGHT NOW, not next quarter
• Open Excel today and calculate exactly how many months you have left

The hardest advice - if you raised in 2020-2021:

• If it's been 3 years since last round with zero additional funding despite revenue/customers, consider shutting down
• Bar went up 200x, the 15% making it to Series A now are playing different game
• No shame in shutting down - return money to investors, be honest with team, move on
• Don't spend another 5 years struggling against rigged game
• Your time is worth more than that

Why bootstrap founders have the advantage:

• Best time in 20 years to be bootstrap founder
• 7,500 companies fighting for $65B will struggle because funding goes to Anthropic/OpenAI
• Bootstrap founders compete for customers and revenue, not VC money
• Customers don't care if you're VC-backed or AI-powered - just if you solve problems
• Even if you want to raise later, stabilize profit/revenue first

YC was right (and I didn't want to believe it):

• 2022: YC told all portfolio companies to survive until 2026
• I thought it was hyperbolic and ridiculous
• They were right - they saw something we didn't
• Only thing they didn't predict: ChatGPT and AI wave
• Changed math again but only for AI companies - tech winter continues for everyone else

Key insights on the "record VC deployment" headlines:

• 20 companies building AGI got billions each
• 7,500 other companies split what's left
• 84% of seed companies can't raise Series A
• Bar went up 200x for everyone not in Game A

The mistake most founders make:

• Think they're in Game A when actually in Game B
• Two completely different games happening in same market
• Partners matter way more than firm names
• Must understand which game you're actually allowed to play

Red flags you're playing the wrong game: Raised 3+ years ago with no follow-on funding, investors not returning emails despite $1M+ ARR, trying to raise at 2021 valuations, thinking "just one more pivot" will fix it, spending years on something clearly not working.

Bottom line: VCs deployed record capital but only to 20 companies building AGI. For 84% of seed companies who can't raise Series A, the bar went up 200x. If you're not in top 5%, you need completely different strategy: pivot to profitability, consider shutting down if stuck 3+ years, or go bootstrap where you compete for customers not VC money.

Free one-on-one help available: No charge, just honest feedback on your specific situation.

New episodes Monday/Wednesday/Friday at 9am EST. Real founder lessons, not startup theater.

Daily thoughts: @TheGeorgePu on Twitter/X

Full episodes: founderreality.com

Email: [email protected]

Newsletter: newsletter.founderreality.com