
Founding Partner @AudaciousHQ | helping founders hire & placing candidates in their dream jobs 🫶 currently in my dgaf era
San Francisco, CA
Joined August 2016
- Tweets992
- Following493
- Followers1.3K
- Likes1.5K
Pinned Tweet
Women in Tech x @AudaciousHQ wine night is back: next Tuesday!
Summertime picks 🍷with the best builders in SF!
partiful.com/e/KUQwndJxeWwB4…
Great to see @tryterac mentioned here!
I asked people: "which data companies should an ambitious future founder join?"
13 votes: Mercor (@BrendanFoody @adarsh_exe @suryamidha)
11 votes: Fleet (@nicoup @andrewthezhou)
10 votes: Proximal (@MatternJustus @navidkpr @calvinchen)
9 votes: Surge (@echen)
8 votes: AfterQuery (@CarlosGeorgescu @spencermateega)
7 votes: Mechanize (@GuiveAssadi @tamaybes @EgeErdil2 @MatthewJBar)
6 votes: micro1 (@aliansarinik)
4 votes: Datacurve (@serenaa_ge @charleyslee)
4 votes: OpenAI (data team) (@BarrAlexandra @phoebethacker)
4 votes: Preference Model (@Ning_Catsnail)
3 votes: Bespoke Labs (@madiator @AlexGDimakis)
2 votes: Anthropic (data team)
2 votes: Datology (@arimorcos @hurrycane @leavittron)
2 votes: Long Lake (@alextaubman @rasmuswissmann @varunshenoy_ @tarasholovko)
2 votes: Sieve (@mokshith @thpicy)
People couldn't pick a company they work at or founded. Disclosure: I'm a small investor in AfterQuery and Fleet (in this post), and in Abundant, Applied Compute, Latch, Olam Labs, Trajectory and Vmax (elsewhere on the list). I didn't vote.
Samantha Price retweeted
We’re hosting a fireside chat with @grinich (WorkOS) and @fat (Pierre Computer Company) on the layer under agents and AI apps - identity/auth, and the git + storage stack that holds the code they write. Join us!
Wed Sep 30 · 5:30 PM · Audacious HQ
RSVP: luma.com/0cuwsrnf
Samantha Price retweeted
“This feeling of ‘hey, I have arrived,’ or ‘okay, a company has been built, we have a stable business’ - it's completely elusive right now.”
Arvind Jain (@jainarvind). @Glean.
The founder in the pole position to own the context layer for AI in the enterprise.
Knuckle Up ↓
In this conversation with Arvind Jain:
00:00 Who is Arvind Jain?
01:56 What is Glean's edge as OpenAI, Google, and Notion pile in?
04:56 MCP vs. context graphs: why did Glean go its own way?
07:56 What structural advantage does Glean claim over the frontier labs themselves?
11:00 How does Glean stack up against AI-native platforms like Notion?
12:38 What happens to the SaaS stack by 2027 and 2028?
14:52 Is Glean an app, an agent platform, or core infrastructure?
19:22 How much of Glean's use today is questions versus real agent work?
20:52 What does a knowledge worker's life look like in three years?
24:08 Why doesn't Arvind think AI will let companies shrink their workforce?
27:32 How does Arvind self-serve strategy, talent, and customer insight with AI?
33:19 Is every department at Glean AI-native, not just engineering?
36:44 What did Arvind find flawed in the AI SDR dream?
38:19 How has AI reshaped hiring at Glean, and who thrives there now?
41:07 Are Glean's 1,500 employees secretly doing the work of 2,500?
41:55 Why does Arvind say you never feel like you've “arrived”?
45:38 What's Arvind's advice for anyone who wants his life?
Samantha Price retweeted
Building a $5B company without 9-9-6
@Immad (Immad Akhund), Co-Founder & CEO, @Mercury, interviewed by @Nakul (Nakul Mandan) @KnuckleupHQ (Knuckle Up with Nakul)
Summary: Akhund has built Mercury to 300,000 customers, a $650M annualized run rate and 4 straight profitable years while refusing almost every intensity norm Silicon Valley reverted to. He is anti-996, still remote-first at 1,200 people, and hires for curiosity and humility. His argument against the grind is arithmetic: 2 extra hours a day never bought him 20% more output, and a sixth employee on a team of 5 does. The line he keeps returning to is that he has engineered his own pressure to fall as the company succeeds, which he says is rare and should be normal.
1. The 9-9-6 Arithmetic. Working 9 to 9 does not make you 20% more productive than working 10 hours. Akhund runs the numbers out loud: the extra 2 hours might buy 5%, and throwing in Saturday might get you to 10%, while going from 5 employees to 6 buys a clean 20%. He also thinks the grind costs you the ideas, because his best ones arrive on a flight or while driving, and a different fork in the road can be worth 10 times more than a few extra hours at the desk. He is not prescriptive about it, and says the tradeoff is reasonable when you are young and cannot afford the extra hire.
2. Culture Is Personalities. Akhund hates the word culture because it is ill-defined, so he reduced it to something measurable: which personalities you hire, and which traits you encourage. Mercury's four founders wrote theirs down at the start, choosing product-minded, humble, helpful and curious, and then built interviews to test against each one. At his previous company he skipped this step, and the salespeople became the loudest voices and set the tone by default. He points at Uber as proof that a high-ego, competitive culture can also build something enormous, so the question is which one fits you and your product.
3. Recruiting Or Nothing. Recruiting only happens when it is the founder's number one priority, and Akhund puts it at about 50% of his time when he is in a hiring phase. He works in phases. He raised $6M from Andreessen Horowitz in 2017, recruited to a team of 8, then stopped hiring for roughly 18 months while they built. Five of those first 8 people had worked with him at his previous company, and all 5 are still at Mercury. After the Series A, advice from Josh at Gusto to hire an in-house recruiter changed the trajectory, and the recruiting team is now around 15 people.
4. The Presentation Interview. Candidates get 45 minutes to prepare a talk on any topic they choose, then present it and defend it. Akhund invented this about 12 years ago as the sales equivalent of an engineering coding challenge, after finding that great salespeople could ace every conventional interview question and then had nothing interesting to say. It grades several things at once: whether they have gone deep on anything, how they handle pushback, and how they respond to a product-thinking curveball like making pickleball popular in America. He says it is one of the best ego detectors he has, because high-ego people cannot take the challenge, and he will never make an exception for a sales hire.
5. No One-On-Ones. Akhund scrapped one-on-ones after hearing Jensen Huang describe running Nvidia without them, and found more CEOs had quietly done the same than he expected. Ten weekly one-on-ones consume a full day plus the head space around it, so he replaced them with group exec meetings: a weekly all-exec, then biweekly GTM, engineering-product-design, compliance and risk, and G&A. Fridays run a 3-hour exec workshop where teams bring work in progress and get decisions made in the room. He says one-on-ones are mostly an avenue for reports to sell themselves. Visibility comes from quarterly written reviews and from watching people perform in group settings.
6. Autonomous Eight-Person Teams. Mercury runs at least 15 product teams of roughly 8 people, typically 1 PM, 1 designer and 6 engineers. Each owns a product surface, a KPI and most of its own roadmap, talks to customers directly, and needs very little approval from Akhund. The friction shows up at the seams. The personal banking team still has to work with risk and disputes, and invoicing still has to work with mobile. With 400 engineers, the whole design is an attempt to recover the efficiency a seed-stage startup gets for free.
7. Metrics Make Local Maxima. Optimizing everything you can measure walks you into a local maximum. Akhund thinks growth teams should be metrics-driven, since sign-up to application conversion has many measurable steps worth grinding on. The counterexample he gives is collecting W-9s from contractors, which materially improves a customer's life and maps to no company-level metric he can name. He points at the Facebook app as a company that became metrics-driven enough to lose its heart. He says EBITDA is the number that finally matters, while most of the route to it resists measurement.
8. Complaining As A Skill. Akhund treats complaining about his own product as a core part of the job. He banks his own fund and his wife's business on Mercury, so he uses it as a customer and files the friction he hits. The skill is manufacturing the mindset of someone who knows nothing about Mercury and gets annoyed at an extra click or a step that makes no sense. He is explicit that product taste at this scale is mostly not his, because the designer on a feature has thought about it far longer than he has.
9. AI Enables The Rep. Mercury tried AI SDRs and Akhund says they were bad then and are probably still bad, because everyone deploying them floods the field and wrecks the signal-to-noise for everybody. What worked was arming human salespeople with context, so an email can open with a specific congratulations on a raise or a note that the company just hired its first finance person. Sales headcount has gone up, and they are hiring aggressively. On support, about 35% of tickets now get answered immediately through Fin, and Akhund expects to bring it in-house to push toward 70% because the next tier requires deep internal integration.
10. The TAM Miscalculation. AI founders keep sizing their market by the labor they replace, and Akhund thinks the number is badly wrong. Once 10 startups compete to automate the same job, the market is whatever the software can charge given that competition, which sits far below the salary line it replaced. The moat question decides where in that range you land. He says this changes how these companies should be valued, and calls it his most controversial view in the conversation.
11. A Regulated Bank That Ships. Mercury has conditional approval to become a chartered bank, and Akhund frames the whole exercise as a contrarian bet. He argues they are already regulated by proxy, running new products and marketing past partner banks, which means third parties dictate the program. The charter buys Zelle, real lending products, direct access to the Fed and later cut-off windows, and removes the disclaimers on mercury.com that cost them trust. He says he would be disappointed if in 5 years they operate exactly like a bank, because the opportunity is building a regulated institution that stays product-led and fast.
12. Bonus Levels. Akhund grew up with parents on welfare and spent his first 10 years as a founder trying to survive, which ended with a $45M exit. The unicorn valuation arrived in 2021, and he describes everything after it as the bonus levels of the game, where the goal turned open-ended and vaguer. Having no scarcity left is what let him commit 3 years to a new bank in 2017, a swing he could not have taken earlier. He has deliberately built things so pressure drops as success climbs, and thinks it is strange that the reverse is normal.
Samantha Price retweeted
adult friendship is basically “i love you, i’m alive, life beating my ass, talk soon.” 😭
Advice for candidates in final rounds: a reference who only says glowing things gets written off immediately.
80/20 is the sweet spot.
80% strengths, 20% learnings.
And yes, backchannels matter more. But provided references still happen.
Looking for recommendations!
Is there anyone in sf that can make me a cake like this for my baby shower?
🍰🍰🍰
When you ask @nakul if he wants a coffee but forget that he has a “no lid” request. The walk back to the office: SF wind + crowded streets + an open latte. Against all odds, he got his coffee and I didn’t wear it.
Today we're shipping Oasis Desktop, a Mac app that lets you share local coding agents with your teammates.
Oasis Desktop can spin up and share Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OpenCode, Kilo Code, Hermes Agent, and Devin CLI sessions as long as they're installed.
Start a session with your team. Bring in Claude Code and say, “What is wrong with auth. The tests have been failing since Tuesday. Help us figure it out.”
The agent reads the files and runs the test suite directly on your laptop. When it asks, “Why did we replace the session middleware last week?” your teammate can answer in the exact same session.
Completely free - try it out today: joinoasis.com/download
For the last 2 years me and @talentwithcath have been heads down building out the Audacious sales practice from the ground up.
Now, for the first time, we’re adding another person to the team and we couldn’t be more excited!
They’ll plug into everything we’ve built and help us scale it everywhere: more talent, more companies, more community, more reach, more Audacious!
Basically, world domination but make it sales.
& we captured some of the fun parts along the way 👇
We're hiring a Sales Recruiter / GTM Talent @AudaciousHQ!
The role is a cross between recruiting, community and platform.
Looking for people on a path to becoming a super connector inside GTM ecosystem in SF and NYC.
Come build with us! DM me!
Getting excited for next Women in Tech x @AudaciousHQ wine night. Thinking it might be time to switch the venue up.
Taking ideas / suggestions!
Doesn't need to be centered around wine.
Could be a private event at Fjord?
Samantha Price retweeted
The future has to start somewhere.
init() is a new conference for the builders, engineers, and founders shaping what comes next in software and AI.
San Francisco. October 7th. SFJAZZ Center.
You won't want to miss this one! 🔥 Apply to attend: workos.com/init
Build rapport. Build rapport. Build rapport. 🪄
On recruiting great ppl:
- great people are (a) rare, and (b) always have tons of options
- therefore once you decide a candidate is great you cannot hesitate or delay. You must drop everything and rearrange heaven and earth to get them
- there are small things (sending flowers), medium things (comp), and big things (their identity and dreams)
- you want the barbell strategy-- put all your energy into small things and big things. Leave medium things till the end
Small things:
- ppl massively underestimate the power of small gestures. TL;DR: love-bomb the candidate
- spend more time than money. Expense accounts are abundant but time is scarce. It's an expensive signal no one can fake
- stay in close contact over text and phone
- send them a first edition used book or an analog oscilloscope or some other random thing they mentioned in passing they like. Make these unique, everyone sends wine
- invite them to computer history museum or moma or something. Spend time with them! Treat these meetings as dates, make them unique. Everyone buys dinner
- be persistent but not annoying. Sometimes ppl need time alone, you should respect that.
Big things:
- there is a gap between what the candidate is doing in life and how they see themselves in the privacy of their dreams. Your job is to help them bridge this gap
- to bridge the gap you must first understand it. Take the candidate on walks to museums and parks. Walks help the candidate drop their guard so you can learn about them. Try hard to get to know them, to understand their dreams
- use your mission, your culture, your people, your company to paint a world for them in which the gap no longer exists. You may need to adjust the role or even change it altogether. For great ppl it is worth it
- don't assume ppl want what you want, dreams can take all kinds of shapes. Maybe they want their work to matter, maybe they want a bigger team, maybe they want to code and avoid meetings, maybe they want to be in the center of the action, maybe they want to learn, maybe all or some or none of the above. Find out!
Medium things (aka closing):
- you've constructed a world the candidate is excited to live in. The purpose of this phase is to remove mundane obstacles to make this world easy to enter
- I don't think I ever sold a candidate on a dream and then lost them on comp. Ppl just want to be compensated fairly and work out some life constraints
- I don't have much to add to all the comp advice out there. My philosophy on comp/closing is to get this part done and move on, don't penny pinch too much, and give more equity
---
Failure modes/don't do this:
- do not ignore candidate's spouse/parents. They have an outsized role in the decision. Most of what I said about the candidate applies to them too (love bomb them, understand their dreams, etc.)
- counterintuitive, but do not talk about the company or even the mission too much. The candidate and their dreams are front and center. At this stage you, the role, the mission are only relevant to the degree they can make candidate's dreams come true
- same w/ perks, what the day is like, etc. Don't blindly talk about these-- use them as tools to reenforce how the candidate seems themselves
- don't get mad if ppl reject you, it happens. Maybe it's not a fit for them now but will be a great fit four years from now. Maybe they become a customer. Maybe you work for them ten years later. Play the long game.


















