"10 years ago, it’s ‘better be digital.’ What does digital mean? Maybe you have some apps on your phone, you're using some software beyond Microsoft Word to help you with your—you're using Google, maybe—and things like that 10 years ago. And now it’s like it’s embedded. We need to be on top of AI. Think about it as your little competitor. If you're on top of it and you know what your competitor is doing, then you'll always be one step ahead of your competitor, right? Yeah. So you think of AI—if you think of AI replacing your jobs, then AI is my competitor. Then I better be one mile in front of my competitor. Start now. I can't predict exactly what jobs will be replaced or at what rate, you know? Mm-hmm. Right now, we can only guess on some ends. But the safest net for anyone in the job market right now is to be on top. Yeah. Which means to use AI, join communities, learn together—whatever you wanna do." - Elena Chow, Founder of ConnectOne

"So when I preached the borrow to people around me—whether they are startup founders or VCs—buy is very simple: you hire your full-time employees. Build means hiring fresh grads or inexperienced talent and developing them. Borrow is the fractional piece, where you bring in expertise on demand for a specific outcome, but they aren’t part of your full-time bench. People used to be skeptical, asking, 'Why would I bring in someone like that?' and questioning the commitment. But over the last two years, cost pressures and the need for flexibility have made this model more accepted. You now see the word 'fractional' used a lot more—there was a LinkedIn or Harvard Business Review report that said LinkedIn used to have 2,000 profiles with the word 'fractional.' Guess what the number is now? 120,000. That’s the level of change in just two years." - Elena Chow, Founder of ConnectOne

"We know that AI started with language—the power of language. A year ago, we all said they're not analytically great, the scripts are wrong, the numbers they spit out are inaccurate. So we said, 'Okay, it's strong on the language front,' and that mostly affected content marketers—people who write and produce all forms of content. But now, just a year later, AI is super powerful analytically—it can write scripts for you, its databases are accurate, and that shift is dramatic. We're now going, 'Oh my gosh, analytic skills are going to go.' And alongside that, coding is also becoming more accurate. So I think, as a fresh grad, we just have to be on top—first, of what kind of skill AI will possess, and then, how that skill will either replace or reduce the need for a human to have it. That’s the way I look at it." - Elena Chow, Founder of ConnectOne

Elena Chow, Founder of ConnectOne and Jeremy Au reconnect after three years to examine how Southeast Asia’s hiring landscape evolved from rapid expansion to cautious, AI-aware decision-making. They explore how employer expectations have become more structured, why talent strategies now vary across the region, and what individuals must do to stay employable in the decade ahead. Their discussion covers the rise of Malaysia as a hiring hub, Vietnam’s growing edge despite language challenges, and how automation is reshaping job functions. Elena also shares her “skills, markets, and industries of the future” framework, helping professionals make better career moves through strategic alignment.

"People are gonna be cautious, which they should be but they're not at a point where they're saying, 'Hey, we're just not gonna, we're gonna close the checkbooks and we're gonna wait four years to see what happens.' So their companies are reaching the ends of their cash runways. They're gonna need funding. These are companies that I think a lot of investors have conviction in, and I don't think this staring contest to wait for a down round is gonna be as pronounced as it was, for example, back in '23. Founders and existing investors are willing to take that markdown nowadays, from what I've seen. There's not as much stigma attached to it, I think, as there was two years ago. So at least in that sense, I think that the gridlock of this kind of staring contest between VCs and founders is getting progressively better, in a very noticeable way." - David He, partner at Gunderson Dettmer

"Let's hit the brakes a bit on expansion at all costs. Let's focus on the markets that we understand, the customers that we understand. Let's roll out products and see how—rather than just building a pipeline of products—and get to financial sustainability much quicker than we otherwise would. What that means is it will unlock different sources of capital that your traditional VC-backed, loss-incurring, cash-burning startup wouldn't do. So the moment you can become profitable or flip profitable at will, that unlocks access to venture debt, private credit, perhaps small cap PE money." - David He, partner at Gunderson Dettmer

"Hopefully interest rates gradually continue to be brought down. And I think another thing we talk about is AI, the focus on utilizing AI tools, right, as a source to not only build better products for customers but also to reduce costs and optimize internally. So all those things were leading, I think, to what you refer to as an easing of the fund winter or a spring. Personally, I saw more activity, I think, in the second half of '24 than I did in the 12 or 18 months combined preceding that." - David He, partner at Gunderson Dettmer

David He, partner at Gunderson Dettmer sits down with Jeremy Au to dissect Southeast Asia’s shifting startup and legal terrain. From the fallout of the eFishery scandal to the rise of ESG compliance and convertible notes, they explore how investor behavior and founder strategies are evolving. The discussion highlights governance gaps, tougher diligence, and why regional funding optimism may have stalled again.

07:12 E-Fishery Scandal as a Southeast Asian Theranos:

Jeremy Au breaks down why most startups fail and why it’s rarely just one thing. Backed by funnel data and battle-tested case studies, he reveals six patterns that repeatedly kill ventures, no matter how visionary the founders are. From premature scaling to bad macro timing, this talk shows how failure is often structural, not personal.

"I felt that the scale was the reason we focused on agriculture, and the fact that that is where the people at $2 a day are—or even $6 a day, that’s another threshold for poverty. If I want to address the problem, I need to go where they are. So let’s try to figure out what their issues are, what the problems are. As for climate, I had started with that sustainability reporting piece while I was at Keppel. That was in real estate, and it was very well defined. Outside of real estate, it was very hard to come up with concrete, measurable things. I also invested in this company weighting for materiality for listed companies for ESG." - Joanna Yeo, Founder and CEO of Arukah

"People burn agriculture waste because it's not valuable, but if you can aggregate it in a certain way, these biomass-type projects are very valuable in global markets. We see the opportunity to create a very standardized set of projects that can do that. And the other piece—because we are very committed to poverty alleviation—is that we commit 50% of our carbon credit project revenue to the participating farmers, so we can unlock more income for them. That also makes it feasible for them to do things. I feel like a lot of the climate space or carbon markets have this mindset where they're like, 'Oh, it's very hard to get farmers to change their behavior,' but you're asking someone to change their behavior for 10 years with no income." - Joanna Yeo, Founder and CEO of Arukah

"But in 2018, my mentor—who's now one of our advisors—was then the CEO of the IFC's SME Finance Forum. I connected with him through the Harvard network. Alumni networks are very valuable and helpful. I said, 'Matt, I'm very worried about small businesses and market access,' because from where we were sitting, investing in private equity and also in tech, I could see the wedge growing in terms of opportunities. How do they survive, right? He said, 'Oh, I understand what you're concerned about.' He was the one who said, 'Look at mobile and blockchain.' I said, 'Okay, mobile I get, but blockchain? What are you talking about? It's like crypto cowboys.' And he said, 'No, look at blockchain as infrastructure.' The fact that it's immutable, distributed, and secure—these are very powerful in markets where you don't have secure access to centralized sources of data and finance. So look at how you build a credit history." - Joanna Yeo, Founder and CEO of Arukah

Joanna Yeo, founder and CEO of Arukah and former institutional investor, speaks with Jeremy Au to explore how Southeast Asia’s agri-waste can be transformed into a global carbon credit engine. They unpack how her education at Harvard, Cambridge, and Stanford shaped a mission to connect vulnerable communities to opportunity, and how she learned from finance, blockchain, and rapid tech scaling to build a climate startup grounded in data, incentives, and farmer equity. Joanna shares why embedded finance failed to scale in agri, how she discovered the commercial viability of biochar and biogas, and why her company commits 50 percent of carbon revenue to participating farmers. The conversation highlights how Southeast Asia’s agriculture base, low-cost advantage, and digital infrastructure can lead the world in transparent, high-trust climate solutions if builders focus on real data, real problems, and real upside sharing.

"I felt that the scale was the reason we focused on agriculture, and the fact that that is where the people at $2 a day are—or even $6 a day, that’s another threshold for poverty. If I want to address the problem, I need to go where they are. So let’s try to figure out what their issues are, what the problems are. As for climate, I had started with that sustainability reporting piece while I was at Keppel. That was in real estate, and it was very well defined. Outside of real estate, it was very hard to come up with concrete, measurable things. I also invested in this company weighting for materiality for listed companies for ESG." - Joanna Yeo, Founder and CEO of Arukah

"People burn agriculture waste because it's not valuable, but if you can aggregate it in a certain way, these biomass-type projects are very valuable in global markets. We see the opportunity to create a very standardized set of projects that can do that. And the other piece—because we are very committed to poverty alleviation—is that we commit 50% of our carbon credit project revenue to the participating farmers, so we can unlock more income for them. That also makes it feasible for them to do things. I feel like a lot of the climate space or carbon markets have this mindset where they're like, 'Oh, it's very hard to get farmers to change their behavior,' but you're asking someone to change their behavior for 10 years with no income." - Joanna Yeo, Founder and CEO of Arukah

"But in 2018, my mentor—who's now one of our advisors—was then the CEO of the IFC's SME Finance Forum. I connected with him through the Harvard network. Alumni networks are very valuable and helpful. I said, 'Matt, I'm very worried about small businesses and market access,' because from where we were sitting, investing in private equity and also in tech, I could see the wedge growing in terms of opportunities. How do they survive, right? He said, 'Oh, I understand what you're concerned about.' He was the one who said, 'Look at mobile and blockchain.' I said, 'Okay, mobile I get, but blockchain? What are you talking about? It's like crypto cowboys.' And he said, 'No, look at blockchain as infrastructure.' The fact that it's immutable, distributed, and secure—these are very powerful in markets where you don't have secure access to centralized sources of data and finance. So look at how you build a credit history." - Joanna Yeo, Founder and CEO of Arukah

Joanna Yeo, founder and CEO of Arukah and former institutional investor, speaks with Jeremy Au to explore how Southeast Asia’s agri-waste can be transformed into a global carbon credit engine. They unpack how her education at Harvard, Cambridge, and Stanford shaped a mission to connect vulnerable communities to opportunity, and how she learned from finance, blockchain, and rapid tech scaling to build a climate startup grounded in data, incentives, and farmer equity. Joanna shares why embedded finance failed to scale in agri, how she discovered the commercial viability of biochar and biogas, and why her company commits 50 percent of carbon revenue to participating farmers. The conversation highlights how Southeast Asia’s agriculture base, low-cost advantage, and digital infrastructure can lead the world in transparent, high-trust climate solutions if builders focus on real data, real problems, and real upside sharing.

"If you look at the news that came out, Sonos released a new soundbar that uses a new technology, right, called the Arc Ultra. So they promised this groundbreaking technology. But what had happened was that about 3 years ago, they had acquired a startup. This startup was a Danish startup that had created a new technology approach to make the sound device much more efficient and much smaller. In other words, instead of having a sound system with 2 speakers, a subwoofer, you can combine all of that into a much smaller device and have the same level of sound quality. It's like a 10X smaller form factor for the same sound quality, which is an interesting pitch they have made." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

"This company called M-A-Y-H-T, they basically raised $10 million of funding. They were very hot in Tech Crunch, and then one year later they were acquired by Sonos for $100 million. So a 10X return in one year as a founder. So they invented technology, raised the money, they acquire it for a 10X return, and then 2 years down the road, their product is now available in the Sonos Arc Ultra. But these are the kind of returns that would be good, because if you're a VC, you invested $10 million today—next thing, you get $100 million, a 10X return, right." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

"For example, we see that Y Combinator invests in 632 companies, and about 1% of them are unicorns. So it's—versus you look at the other side, which is Union Square Ventures, which most of you have not heard of because they're very focused on their geography, which is New York and America. For them, they only invested in 62 startups, but 8% of the companies are unicorns, right? So that's about one in 12. That means every portfolio of 20 investments, they have about 2 unicorns in that portfolio. These are very different strategies. Some of them are snipers at the top—high pick rate, selection rate, good judgment, small number, snipe it, get it done. Whereas YC, that you think is very selective, is actually more like a shotgun—but a very prestigious shotgun approach—where they have that. And then there are other companies in between that have differing versions of that strategy. As a result, we were able to map out how these VC investments are power law." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

Jeremy Au pulls back the curtain on Southeast Asia’s high-stakes venture capital world where 5,000 startups fight through the jungle, but only 10 reach the expressway. It’s a ruthless game of asymmetric bets, power-law outcomes, and make-or-break timing. He reveals what really happens inside VC firms: how general partners juggle investor pressure with founder bets, why a single breakout startup matters more than dozens of average ones, and how the best founders move faster than anyone expects. You’ll hear about billion-dollar exits, internal prioritization dynamics, and why follow-on capital is often more political than rational.

"If you look at the news that came out, Sonos released a new soundbar that uses a new technology, right, called the Arc Ultra. So they promised this groundbreaking technology. But what had happened was that about 3 years ago, they had acquired a startup. This startup was a Danish startup that had created a new technology approach to make the sound device much more efficient and much smaller. In other words, instead of having a sound system with 2 speakers, a subwoofer, you can combine all of that into a much smaller device and have the same level of sound quality. It's like a 10X smaller form factor for the same sound quality, which is an interesting pitch they have made." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

"This company called M-A-Y-H-T, they basically raised $10 million of funding. They were very hot in Tech Crunch, and then one year later they were acquired by Sonos for $100 million. So a 10X return in one year as a founder. So they invented technology, raised the money, they acquire it for a 10X return, and then 2 years down the road, their product is now available in the Sonos Arc Ultra. But these are the kind of returns that would be good, because if you're a VC, you invested $10 million today—next thing, you get $100 million, a 10X return, right." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

"For example, we see that Y Combinator invests in 632 companies, and about 1% of them are unicorns. So it's—versus you look at the other side, which is Union Square Ventures, which most of you have not heard of because they're very focused on their geography, which is New York and America. For them, they only invested in 62 startups, but 8% of the companies are unicorns, right? So that's about one in 12. That means every portfolio of 20 investments, they have about 2 unicorns in that portfolio. These are very different strategies. Some of them are snipers at the top—high pick rate, selection rate, good judgment, small number, snipe it, get it done. Whereas YC, that you think is very selective, is actually more like a shotgun—but a very prestigious shotgun approach—where they have that. And then there are other companies in between that have differing versions of that strategy. As a result, we were able to map out how these VC investments are power law." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

Jeremy Au pulls back the curtain on Southeast Asia’s high-stakes venture capital world where 5,000 startups fight through the jungle, but only 10 reach the expressway. It’s a ruthless game of asymmetric bets, power-law outcomes, and make-or-break timing. He reveals what really happens inside VC firms: how general partners juggle investor pressure with founder bets, why a single breakout startup matters more than dozens of average ones, and how the best founders move faster than anyone expects. You’ll hear about billion-dollar exits, internal prioritization dynamics, and why follow-on capital is often more political than rational.

Jeremy Au and Gita discussed the challenges of doing business in Indonesia, particularly the issue of "preman" (gangster) culture, its effects on businesses, and potential ways to mitigate this issue. They also addressed systemic corruption, the importance of legal reforms, and how emerging markets can better integrate informal sectors.

"So the reason why sourcing is difficult is that because thousands of startups are launched every year with no public data. So if say anybody here right wanted to basically build a company, so let's say Jose says I want to build a fashion tech startup and now's my time to make it go. Too bad Zilingo didn't know how to make it work but now I know how to do it. How would I know? I wouldn't know because he's a startup, he's talking to his founder friends in US Enterprise Club or whatever it is, Entrepreneurship Club. There's no information that tells me you're doing what you're building, what you're thinking, how good you are. So there's no public data, there's no announcement that you have launched. Secondly, the founders who are really good tend to accelerate very quickly. I gave you an example already that a founder can, within a single day, have multiple bids to happen. So the stronger you are, the faster you go. So again, we're looking for power law founders. That 1% tend to accelerate very quickly." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

"I think there is actually a real insight to this, right. The thesis here is that since the majority of the fund will be generated by a few companies only, you should just invest very widely in your first spread and then double down aggressively on the companies that generate home run returns within the next two years. So with a company starting to rocket ship up, what happens is that a lot of people feel like, Hey I can't tell so I just want to go very wide. Because the worst-case scenario is that you went too narrow and said no to 20 other companies, and then the home run company that starts to accelerate takes off in the company you said no to. So you should have a wide top of the funnel and then narrow aggressively onto that." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

"But of course the reason why VCs and private equity make money is because we deal with proprietary information. We know things that other people don't know and don't understand; it's not publicly available. So we are trying to understand, and the people in crypto made money because they understood before others did that crypto was going to be a big thing eventually, so they knew that. Same thing for AI, not everybody understands how big AI is going to be, but they also don't know where it's going to show up. So proprietary information and secrets are really important to make you a stronger VC or not." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

Jeremy Au breaks down how Limited Partners shape the Southeast Asia venture capital landscape and why founders should care. He explores the hidden motivations of sovereign wealth funds, endowments, corporations, and family offices, and how they quietly influence funding decisions. Jeremy reveals how startups move through brutal funding stages, why VCs compete fiercely at the same stage yet collaborate across them, and how different VC fund strategies from index portfolios to venture builders change founder outcomes. Finally, he dives into the race for proprietary information, sharing how top VCs win deals before competitors even know they exist. This conversation is essential for founders navigating opaque markets and VCs fighting to stay sharp in a crowded field.

"If you just had some sort of automated process where all press releases went into ChatGPT and then ChatGPT was crunching the information and spinning it back out, I think the quality of information will eventually degrade, right? It would be a really good — it could create a really good Wikipedia, objective, put-together information, but I think the insights wouldn't be there necessarily. So I think there's still a role for newsrooms to play in the AI world. But whether or not there's a need, I think you would have to be ultimately really niche, like hyper-localized, which I think you're starting to see in some of the US. In the US, there's some really hyper-local state content, deeply insights-driven, tapping into experts' expertise that AI otherwise wouldn't have. And then again, maybe like scoops driven. I don't know. It's my working." - Maria Li, Chief Operating Officer at Tech in Asia

"You know, I think technology is agnostic, right? It's really how you use technology. And I've been getting more into the climate tech space specifically, and I think it's super interesting because, like, on the one hand, technology is one of the things that have gotten us into the climate crisis I think we're now in. And then honestly, AI and the use of data centers and the water and the power usage and energy usage is not great. But at the same time, it's like, okay, then the way we kind of innovate our way out of this is also through technology. And so, you know, technology is what it is. It's just a tool. It's really all about how you use it, how you want to apply it in your life. And it's all about you making sure that you're using the tool as opposed to technology using you. And I think that's probably where, if you think about Facebook's growth model, which was like utilizing the user data without them even really knowing and then being able to build their marketing machines off of that." - Maria Li, Chief Operating Officer at Tech in Asia

"The reality is that when you're in the negotiation process for the acquisition, everything is rosy, right? You're both like, wow, look at this amazing market opportunity. If we only join forces, we can go capture that. And then the worst case scenario — you've heard about the acquisitions that have gone wrong, like the teams don't get along together. And then within 3 to 5 years or whatever, there's a management buyout or they shut down, right? I think probably the reality is always going to be somewhere in between. And so being able to level set your expectations in terms of like — and you need to be able to think, okay — and to run all the permutations before you sign the SPA, right? It's like, okay, what do I want out of this for my company, best and worst case scenario? What do I want out of this for myself, best and worst case scenario? You know, and just really kind of play out all the possible ways that it could end up. And I think as long as you go into that with that sort of mental framework, you'll be able to handle things a lot better, right?" - Maria Li, Chief Operating Officer at Tech in Asia

Jeremy Au reconnects with Maria Li to explore how Tech in Asia is navigating Southeast Asia’s startup winter, generative AI disruption, and corporate acquisition pressures while maintaining community-first values. Together, they discuss AI experimentation, acquisition integration, leadership dynamics, and balancing the demands of modern media and parenthood. The discussion highlights lessons in adapting to rapid change, staying transparent, and making intentional choices in business and life.

"I feel like, you know, the Singapore of our youth would not have produced this sort of candidate. Right? And yeah, so it's like really refreshing to see folks come out and try. And you know, he made a funny comment, right? He was like, 'Oh, you know, some PAP person's like: Who's this Jeremy Tan? I've never heard of him before.' And then he's like, 'Well yeah, who's my opponent? I've never heard of her before either.' Like, you know, he's just a regular person. So I think that in a place that tends to somehow, like, put people's credentials kind of on a pedestal, I think it was refreshing to have someone come through and sort of be like, 'Hey, I have ideas, I've done research, I care about this, and I'm going to run. I don't need validation from a party or anything.' Yeah, I thought it was kind of neat." - Shiyan Koh, Managing Partner at Hustle Fund

"I did think that, you know, in WP wards where they are taking share — actually, even in Tampines where they lost — they still swung the vote share by quite a large amount. And so that's an interesting sort of result to me, which is that for places where the Workers' Party has been more entrenched, their management of the town council, the familiarity, them seeing their MPs walking around, continues to build trust amongst their constituents. And, you know, I think they're emerging as the most credible and organized opposition party, right? I think the other thing is that, like, ten plus parties contested, but everyone else lost their deposit except the independents. I think it's interesting because it's definitely fair to say that there was a sense that the quality of the candidates had improved for the Workers' Party — especially, I think, less so for the other political parties." - Shiyan Koh, Managing Partner at Hustle Fund

"And I think the question you've got to ask yourself is: is this rewriting of the East and West relationship a four-year thing, or is this a forty-year cycle? Because if you're saying that it's a four-year thing, then Singapore's economic model doesn't have to change — in terms of its ports, logistics, and so forth. If it's more systemic, right, as a forty-year cycle that we're seeing here, then I think that's a serious headwind for the Singapore economy. So I think some serious thinking needs to be done, and we never really got that conversation going. Obviously, a lot of this is new and happening live. But I think there's going to be a serious debate over the next four years, which is like: if this is true, then what do we do? And I think that's a more fundamental debate. Because, I think, if you make an argument that East and West trade — let's say — goes to zero (I'm just saying as an example, right, not saying that's true), if you make that argument and go all the way to one end and say it goes to zero..." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Tech Podcast

Jeremy Au and Shiyan discuss Singapore’s election outcomes, unpacking voter behavior, opposition growth, independent candidates, and future policy challenges. They reflect on global trends, local issues like housing and education, and how politics, tech, and business intersect in a rapidly changing world.

Jeremy Au shares how venture capital evaluates startups, using examples from crypto confusion, post-WWII VC history, and power law returns. He explains why founders often misunderstand their market type, how tech repeats old cycles, and how VCs structure investments. Speaking practically, he highlights why founders must communicate clearly and how VC math rewards big winners and tolerates many losses.

"I see venture as possibly the only asset class where you could systematically make outsized returns, right? Mm. The outsized returns are the multiplier returns. Mm, yeah, which basically negates a lot of the other asset classes, including, well, real estate, unless you have a long enough holding horizon, right? Mm. Because, like, the time equation is really important. Right. I don't think it's a guaranteed return, but I think it's systematic in that it's statistical that you could reach those outcomes through, you know, kind of sound investing principles, like seeing enough deal flow, all of this stuff, right? It literally is one of those things where you just need the one deal. Mm. Literally that pays out, right, and it's just a game of probabilities." - Jed Ng, Angel investor

"I think it's maybe also the universe giving me a sign that 'Well dude this is not your path,' which is fine, and so over the last four years I've learned an incredible amount about this structure. It's very nuanced, it's very complicated, it's a very fascinating vehicle. But let me net it off. Why do a syndicate versus a fund? On a personal level, it's timing. I talked about my ambition that, you know, within three years I want to be able to be in a position to retire. I'm not saying that I would, but I just like to be in that position that if one day I said 'I had enough,' if you do a fund it's a 10 or 12 year commitment, so you have to stay the course. And for me, I like the optionality. I would start a fund under different ambitions. That's a whole other topic, but anyway, with the syndicate, what's good and bad, right?" - Jed Ng, Angel investor

"What does it mean that we say, you know, it's all about the team? And I don't know, right? It's still a very subjective thing, but I think the subjective things, these soft skills, like characteristics like, is somebody hard enough to want to build a company and a venture-scale company? It takes a certain kind, and I don't think everyone is cut out for it. I think that we live a bit in a world where venture is romanticized in some kind of unhealthy ways. One of these is like, 'Oh, we gotta help all the founders,' or 'Everybody's got a shot, ra-ra-ra.' And I was like, 'No, some people are not cut out for it.' It's not a value judgment on the individual. They're not bad people, they're not lesser people. I'm just saying it takes a certain kind." - Jed Ng, Angel investor

Jeremy Au chats with Jed Ng, founder of AngelSchool.vc, about why he chose angel syndicates over VC funds as a faster, more flexible path to financial freedom. They discuss the current venture downturn as a rare opportunity, the gaps in angel education, and how Jed scaled his 1,400-member syndicate globally. Jed also shares how he evaluates founders and the hard truths of building solo in Southeast Asia’s venture scene.

"Accountability doesn't mean stripping them of their ability to serve, but there has to be some sort of a pain, whether it's a financial pain, or a temporary suspension, or at least an investigation for accountability on how do you guys actually sign off on these numbers. Thumb Chicken did a report that was highly scoped. It did clear that, okay, we're only referring to these fishermen that we're talking about. Then at least we know in the next cycle that we can't rely on the scoping by the founders. We have to randomly pick them ourselves. So I think that's a really important point, and I hope that we pick this up. And I think that if I may add one point, it is that I empathize with why individual private parties do not feel the incentive to conduct a civil investigation, right? Because if you're a VC and you already lost 85 cents on a dollar, are you really going to spend are so expensive." - Rachel Wong, Startup Lawyer

"So my perspective is that if there is no enforcement action against a public confession, clear facts, clear paper trail, in his own words he explains how he did it and why he did it. And if nobody investigates him in either Indonesia, because that's where the company was domiciled, or Singapore, where his co-holding company was and where there are significant investors, then I think Southeast Asia ecosystem, the regulators will suddenly find, oh wait, there is now a systematic lack of trust because bad apples walk away scot-free." - Jeremy Au, Host of BRAVE Southeast Asia Podcast

"So I'll just bring up another example where I was a bit bolder by then because I was perhaps seven years, eight years into practice. I was a little bit bold because I had the ability to curate my own style. And I actually told the investor not to do the deal. The thing that I picked up was not legal. I was only engaged to do legal due diligence, but I looked at the contract and I said, you guys are investing half a million dollars into this company. The founders, when you add their compensation together, pay themselves half a million dollars each a year. Are you sure your money is going where it's going? And it's simple things like that." - Rachel Wong, Startup Lawyer

Jeremy Au and Rachel Wong unpack eFishery's founder’s public confession to systematic fraud. They dive into how cultural pressures, ecosystem gaps, and misplaced investor trust contributed to the fallout. They discuss the challenges of cross-border enforcement, the limits of traditional due diligence, and the real-world consequences for Southeast Asia’s startup reputation. Together, they reflect on how founders, investors, and regulators must learn from these failures to rebuild trust and resilience in the next cycle.

Jeremy Au shares insights into how venture capitalists evaluate early-stage startups in Southeast Asia. Speaking directly to aspiring founders, he breaks down how investors assess potential through three core lenses: exponential growth, clarity of thinking, and personal trust. Drawing on personal stories, failed bets, and breakout wins, he explains that execution matters more than the idea itself, and that successful fundraising often comes down to preparation, communication, and timing. He also demystifies how power shifts when founders build momentum moving from pitching for approval to choosing among term sheets. The conversation is a practical roadmap for anyone serious about turning a startup into a venture-backable business.

"Now, what's interesting is that this asset class of investing in companies in late-stage unicorns in the US—like SpaceX, Perplexity, OpenAI, Anduril—these are probably names that a lot of people have heard before. But generally, you can only really buy them on platforms like Forge or EquityZen, which are US secondary trading platforms. Here, you'll encounter a wide variety in price per share, oftentimes trading above the primary price, meaning the price at which the company has raised money. It's also very difficult to access at ten- to twenty-thousand-dollar check sizes, and the companies themselves may not necessarily like that—they don’t want their information flooded in the market. If you're a larger family office, you can go to Macquarie Bank or other banks or brokers in the US and buy a larger block of shares. But even then, let’s say you're worth ten or twenty million dollars—would you really put half a million into SpaceX? If that’s five percent of your net worth, it's still probably too high a chunk for a single asset class." - Milan Reinartz, CEO at NonPublic

"And we figured that here in Southeast Asia, you actually have almost an oversaturation of funds, not enough exit liquidity downstream, and therefore it's quite a difficult game to play. There hopefully will be some winners and some fund managers who will show significant returns and DPI—distributions per capital—back to their LPs, to their investors. But at this point, this isn't really a proven-out thesis, right? And so, from a fund manager's point of view, at some point you have to go after larger family offices—ideally institutional capital, sovereign funds, et cetera. And that didn’t seem to us as an easy thing to do. And so we were thinking, okay, what does the market need, and what are the problems in the market in terms of early-stage investing? And that led us on a path of really focusing more on a platform business, where we figured, hey, what if we could build technology that provides more transparency and more liquidity to investors within this whole realm of early stage?" - Milan Reinartz, CEO at NonPublic

"The intellectual side of investing is actually super interesting because, when I was working in advertising technology, basically I would wake up every morning and think about how can I show more ads to people—how can I make sure that people buy more burgers or shampoo or whatever the advertiser wants to sell, which, obviously, there's a big market there. But you're basically looking at one problem all the time. And the interesting thing about investing is you really shift your focus a lot between different verticals, because industries change so quickly and technology changes so quickly. So now, I'm probably deeper on some other verticals than ad tech because of investing. My brain is constantly stimulated by looking at all these different verticals. I really enjoyed it, and I wanted to spend my time full time on the subject matter of investing." - Milan Reinartz, CEO at NonPublic

Jeremy Au reconnects with Milan Reinartz to explore how angel investing evolved into a community-led platform, why Southeast Asia’s VC math doesn’t work, and how late-stage private markets offer new opportunities for retail millionaires. They talk through founder quality, opaque incentives, and the need for real diligence in a fragmented region. It’s a grounded take on what needs to change in early-stage investing and what’s already shifting.

"Actually, Malcolm Gladwell did a challenge many years ago for people to come up with a seven-word biography. So in seven words I cheated la so 'full-time' I hyphenated as one word and 'part-time' also hyphenated as one word. But I thought it kind of really described me, that I really want to never forget that I'm first a human before I'm anything else. And that also informs a lot of the work I do, the ideas I have, the things that I spend and give time to, right? And therefore also how I show up in my relationships, right? So that's kind of foregrounding who I am." - Anthea Ong, Former Parliamentarian & Leadership Speaker

"So what Well Leaders' rallying cry is, 'Be well to lead well' really wanting to bring the attention back to taking care of yourself before you can take good care of others and lead the organization to success. It's the same sort of notion as 'put on your oxygen mask first before you put on the oxygen mask for others.' And so we really want leaders to start making the change for themselves. I mean, it's going back to Gandhi's quote, right? 'Be the change you want to see in others.' So if you want to see better well-being in your people, you have to start with yourself, because you role model that and you also change the culture when you do that." - Anthea Ong, Former Parliamentarian & Leadership Speaker

"It's actually bringing CEOs together to stop thinking of workplace well-being or the well-being of your people as an HR responsibility it is not, right? It is actually the responsibility of every leader, and especially the CEO. It is an organisational well-being that you need to aspire towards and make that happen. I think enough study and we've just finished a study with NUS to show that organizational well-being contributes directly to organizational performance. In a time today where growth is a struggle, where there's so many macro challenges coming our way, we really cannot think of workplace well-being and employee well-being as secondary. It's very central to performance. It's very central to why we lead in the first place." - Anthea Ong, Former Parliamentarian & Leadership Speaker

Jeremy Au reconnects with Anthea Ong for a candid conversation on what it means to lead with integrity, empathy, and independence. They trace her journey from corporate leadership into the social sector and eventually into Parliament as a Nominated Member of Parliament (NMP). Anthea shares how she first declined the NMP role, then later accepted it after realizing that structural change especially around mental health and vulnerable communities required policy influence. She recounts her unconventional first speech in Parliament, starting with three collective breaths to bring mindfulness into the chamber. They discuss how debate still matters in a supermajority system, why recent mid-term resignations have damaged the credibility of the NMP scheme, and the need to rethink Singapore’s political structures in light of global democratic shifts. Anthea also talks about her current work leading WorkWell Leaders, a nonprofit that helps CEOs prioritize employee wellbeing and lead more sustainably.

Jeremy Au speaks with Valerie Vu about Vietnam’s sudden shock from the 46% US tariff under Trump. What started as optimism turned into panic factories collapsed, partners pulled out, and even personal tragedies occurred. The government acted fast, but trust with the US was damaged. Vietnam is now shifting toward multipolar trade, owning more of its value chain, and exploring new diplomatic lanes with countries like China, Singapore, and the UAE. They also explore how digital platforms like TikTok are emerging as tools of modern diplomacy.

“So if the Trump administration only does tariffs, that's not going to be enough to increase the production inside the US, but if they figure out how to cut these various—and it's not just cutting the red tape where the red tape is completely useless—there's even scenarios where, yes, we want these environmental regulations. We don't want you dumping toxic chemicals into the river, but we're going to have you prove that you're doing this in a far more cheap and efficient way than you had to prove in the past. So you pay less lawyers, less consultants, and the project gets going much faster, which lowers the cost of capital of the project in total. And there's ways where hopefully that can result in a lot more manufacturing being done inside the US. And that's the positive scenario where the US industrial base is revitalized from a collection of these policies in total. And maybe the rest of the Western world as well also realizes that they need to pivot away from the dependency on China and that they also are able to do something similar in their economies.” - Jeffrey Lonsdale, Investor and Advisor

“I would just advise them not to panic as much about this as they seem to be panicking, and also to realize that there is far more of a method to what's coming out of the U.S. than people think. The Europeans are now scrambling to do exactly what the U.S. has been trying to get them to do for the last 10–15 years, which is actually spend more of their money on defense and take care of themselves. They're doing it because they're angry at Trump, but they're actually doing it now. And so people say, oh, it was a mess-up, like how he angered all those people. But he got exactly what—not just what Trump wants—but what the U.S. has always been trying to accomplish.” - Jeffrey Lonsdale, Investor and Advisor

“From the perspective of the US, one of the positive scenarios is that instead of actually trying to only use tariffs to fix this problem—tariffs are one part of the solution—they implement other aspects to make it easier to build in the US. You always look at these numbers where it costs more for the US to build roads, it takes almost twice as long for them to build new semiconductor plants compared to other places around the world, and there's all this red tape and regulation that needs to be cut through in order to allow people to build as quickly and as efficiently inside the US as they do outside the US.” - Jeffrey Lonsdale, Investor and Advisor

Jeremy Au sits down with Jeffrey Lonsdale to unpack the US-China trade standoff, the Taiwan flashpoint, and how Southeast Asia is adapting to global shifts. They explore how tariffs are reshaping supply chains, the risk of trade wars escalating, and the difficult position countries like Vietnam and Singapore now find themselves in. The conversation also looks ahead at how governments, investors, and founders should think about resilience in a volatile world.

“I think for young people, I generally tell them: you should go work in the US at some point in your life, because you should work in a big, deep market that's incredibly competitive. I think for people who are older—who have kids and families and aging parents and things like that—the calculus is a bit harder, because it isn't a purely professional calculation. And then everyone kind of has to weigh that themselves. I mean, I think on a personal level, even when you live in a blue sort of bubble like San Francisco, the sort of anti-immigrant rhetoric is quite tiring. And it sometimes makes you feel unsafe. Right? And then it raises questions around like: is that the environment you want your kids to grow up [in]?” - Shiyan Koh, Managing Partner at Hustle Fund

“But if you look at the actual math, they basically just looked at the trade balance, divided it in two, and declared that number to be the non-trade barrier amount imposed on the US. I feel like everyone who's done econ has studied comparative advantage—there are reasons why you produce chips, or the classic guns and butter: you produce guns, I produce butter, and we trade so both of us are better off. You can make more guns, I can make more butter, than if we both tried to do both ourselves. So I don't know, I find the whole thing just a little bit ludicrous.” - Shiyan Koh, Managing Partner at Hustle Fund

"They're like, 'Okay, well, let's tax the rest of the world,' which is really what the tariffs are, right? So that's one way to raise revenue. And you know, I guess you could sort of make the argument that over time, as the US dollar also— I guess—depreciates a little bit, that also makes US exports more competitive in the market, which should help trade balances and all that other stuff. So, I mean, you could tell yourself some version of that story. I think it assumes that the impact of the tariffs will not be outweighed by the decrease in demand as prices go up, right?" - Shiyan Koh, Managing Partner at Hustle Fund

Jeremy Au and Shiyan Koh unpack the April 2nd U.S. tariff hike and its sharp break from decades of free trade. They break down the Trump administration’s logic, the impact on emerging markets like Vietnam and Cambodia, and what it means for investor trust and supply chains. They also reflect on how Southeast Asian founders and families can stay resilient by building locally and reassessing long-held assumptions about the American dream.