Fraud is showing up far too often in startups.
Not exaggeration.
Not optimism.
Fraud.
Thereâs barely a week that goes by without another story of manipulated numbers, misleading sales processes, exaggerated traction, or founders claiming to have a product that either doesnât exist yet or doesnât actually work.
And when the truth comes out, the most astonishing part is often the reaction. Some people seem genuinely shocked that theyâre being held accountableâespecially when shareholder capital or customer trust is involved.
Recent examples make the point.
The founder of clothing-tech startup CaaStle recently pleaded guilty in a fraud scheme involving more than $300M after prosecutors said investors were misled through fabricated audits and false financials.
Weâve seen similar patterns beforeâfrom Theranos to the collapse of FTX to the implosion of Terra/Luna.
Different sectors.
Same underlying problem: trust being abused.
And even this week there are new conversations circulating around startups like Delve, where allegations about fraudulent compliance documentation and misleading representations to customers are being debated across the ecosystem.
But this isnât only a founder problem.
Investors, advisors, and board members share responsibility too.
We canât celebrate âgrowth at all costs,â demand hockey-stick metrics, and then act surprised when ethics get sacrificed along the way.
Young founders need to hear something clearly:
Growth should never come at the expense of honesty.
A real company starts with a real product.
Not a pitch deck.
Not a narrative.
Not a story about what might exist someday.
Even the best sales pitch in the world must be backed by something real and valid in the market.
And this brings me to something personal.
Years ago, I wrote about the idea of âfake it till you make it.â It was a widely celebrated startup mindsetâincluding by me in my first book.
But âfake it till you make itâ was never supposed to mean lie your way to the top.
It meant having the confidence to step into the market before you feel fully ready. Believing in your ability to build something meaningful.
It was never supposed to mean misleading investors.
It was never supposed to mean deceiving customers.
And it was never supposed to mean fabricating reality.
Somewhere along the way, parts of startup culture twisted confidence into dishonesty.
We need to correct that.
We need to mentor founders better.
We need to teach leaders better.
And we need to expect more from them.
Because trust is the foundation of entrepreneurship.
And when trust disappears, the entire ecosystem starts to break.
đ¤ Made with AI
I want to talk about something uncomfortable.
I agree with Sam Altmanâs view that in the coming months, weâre going to see more and more companies use AI as a scapegoat for workforce reductions.
And thatâs where leadership matters.
Thereâs no question AI will dramatically reshape the workforce in the months and years ahead. It will change workflows. It will eliminate certain roles. It will create entirely new ones.
Thatâs reality.
But thereâs a difference between real structural change and PR spin.
Over-hiring during COVID.
Staffing up for growth that never materialized.
Chasing strategies that didnât pan out.
Now suddenly itâs framed as: âAI efficiencies.â
AI is powerful. Itâs transformative. But in most organizations today, itâs still augmentation before annihilation. The idea that massive portions of teams became obsolete overnight because of breakthroughs in the last 24 months is, in many cases, a convenient narrative.
The harder truth?
Sometimes leadership made the wrong calls.
Letting people go is brutal. Iâve had to do it. My executive team has had to do it. Itâs never fun. Itâs never clean. Itâs never something you celebrate. Itâs a responsibility â and when it happens, you own it.
You donât blame a technology trend.
You donât spin it to juice the stock.
You donât pretend it was always part of the master plan.
Markets may reward optics.
But leadership isnât about optics.
Itâs about integrity.
And while weâre on the topic â the Twitterati narrative doesnât help.
Every day itâs:
âThis company is cooked.â
âThat business is done.â
âAI just ate their lunch.â
Yes â AI will absolutely take a bite out of companies that are slow, rigid, or unwilling to adapt. That has happened in every technological shift in history.
But AI is not going to eat every company on earth overnight.
Itâs not going to replace every function instantly.
Not every business is âcooked.â
Thereâs a difference between disruption and extinction.
As leaders, we have to learn to separate signal from noise.
We have real companies to run. Real products to improve. Real clients to serve. And most importantly â real people who built these organizations.
My advice?
Deploy AI inside your teams.
Empower them.
Augment them.
Make them faster, smarter, more effective.
I would rather protect my team and supercharge their output than use AI as a reason to remove them.
If efficiency needs to improve, consider a hiring freeze before a hiring purge.
AI will absolutely change the workforce. Thatâs inevitable.
But leaders need to be honest about whether theyâre responding to long-term transformation â or correcting past decisions under the cover of innovation.
AI is a tool.
It is not a scapegoat.
And people can tell the difference.
Associations are heading toward a massive reset.
For too long, many have confused software with community. Buying another SaaS platform isnât the same as curating a room. Sending another newsletter isnât the same as developing leaders. Hosting a conference isnât the same as convening the right people in the right conversations.
And now AI is accelerating the pressure.
AI can:
â˘Deliver learning and development instantly.
â˘Personalize education at scale.
â˘Connect professionals across industries in seconds.
â˘Provide on-demand insights faster than any committee ever could.
If an associationâs primary value is information, access to a directory, or lightly structured networking⌠AI will outcompete that â quickly.
But hereâs the opportunity:
Associations can win where AI cannot â in intentional curation.
The future belongs to organizations that:
â˘Carefully select who is in the room.
â˘Facilitate meaningful, high-trust conversations.
â˘Design events around outcomes, not agendas.
â˘Create environments where the right people meet the right people at the right time.
Because if the room isnât special, AI will eat that too.
This is the great association reset.
Some will evolve into high-trust, high-curation conveners that thrive in an AI-powered world.
Others will continue mistaking tools for value â and slowly fade.
The question isnât whether AI changes associations.
The question is whether associations are willing to change first.
When I hear a community-based business is raising VC, I get it â capital can help.
But the minute growth becomes the mandate, the model shifts.
Community isnât blitzscaling. Itâs referrals, trust, constant human touch. The second you treat members like numbers⌠the numbers fall.
You canât force intimacy at scale without breaking the very thing that made it special.
Raise too early, and you risk optimizing for growth over belonging â and thatâs a hard thing to win back.
Super Bowl ads donât win because of production value.
They win because of community.
Coinbase proved simplicity + participation beats glitz.
Dunkinâ wins every year because its fans do the amplifying.
The ad starts the convo.
The community turns it into a movement.
Thatâs the real brand moat.
.@axios CEO @JimVandeHei laid out a clear, opinionated blueprint for rebuilding the journalistic core of the Washington Post. I agree with almost all of it.
Hereâs how Iâd extend that thinking into a durable, high-ARR business model built around community and convening power--and when I say community, Iâm not talking about free Slack groups, comment sections, or âmembershipâ as a marketing tactic. Iâm talking about paid, verticalized membership products priced in the thousands of dollars per year, designed around access, privacy, and connectivity.
A threadâŚ
6. Protect the Wall, Increase the Value
This only works if trust remains intact:
â˘Reporters do not sell
â˘Editors curate access
â˘Business teams monetize structure, not coverage
â˘Clear ethical lines around participation
The credibility of the journalism is what makes the membership valuable.
End State
A media company with:
â˘Multiple $10M+ ARR vertical business lines
â˘Deep journalistic authority
â˘Private rooms that shape outcomes
â˘Conferences that feel more like institutions than events
Jim nailed the journalism reset.
This is how you turn that authority into durable, high-margin community businesses.
The next era of media wonât be built on reach alone.
Itâll be built on access, trust, and the right rooms â priced accordingly.
7. Scale Within Verticals Before Expanding Across Them
Growth happens by:
â˘Adding tiers inside a vertical
â˘Increasing frequency, not size, of small rooms
â˘Letting demand pull scale, not forcing it
Each vertical becomes a self-sustaining ARR engine.
Great take from Axiosâ CEO. But hereâs the bigger miss across legacy mediaâincluding WaPo: journalism alone isnât the growth strategy anymore.
The New York Times adapted by bundling lifestyle, games, and daily habits. B2B media is building conference real estate. Trade pubs are expanding into products and services. All smart moves.
But the biggest miss? Convening community.
Axios figured it out early: events + private rooms = leverage. The Washington Post should be hosting the most consequential, invite-only conversations in the worldâoff-the-record salons, policy and industry summits, and members-only communities around power and influence.
Journalism remains the core. But the future business model is premium ARR layered on top: verticalized events and private communities people will happily pay $2.5Kâ$10K/year forâjust to be in the right room, at the right time, with the right people.
Media doesnât just inform culture anymore. The winners convene it.
My breakfast crack at itâŚYouâre on the clockâŚ
Mission: Restore @washingtonpost to its gloryÂ
⢠2 reporters on every federal agency, small WH team w/ 3 top-tier reporters and governmentwide specialists in federal rule-making and contracting and spending
⢠Entice Post stars who left to return as service to their city, profession and nation.  They talk a big game on X - call their bluff!Â
⢠Two reporters on each of top local biz sectors: defense, tech, HC, lobbying & influence, etc.Â
⢠Buy @PunchbowlNews to anchor Hill. Make @apalmerdc CEO and you head of Hill + Sports + smack-talking
⢠Bonus thought: buy @theinformation and make @Jessicalessin EIC.  DC and Silicon Valley are essentially merging.Â
⢠Poach @peterbakernyt as DC news chiefâŚ
⢠Work w philanthropists or @propublica to fund investigative public trust w stories made available to other outlets upon publication. Team w Post staff reporters on most consequential projects.  Ask @PostBaron and @realBobWoodward unit and train a new generation of diggers and grindersâŚ
⢠Reporters in top dozen global capitals covering interplay w US/DC - make @IgnatiusPost central to thisÂ
⢠Fortify War unitÂ
⢠2 reporters on each of the pro sports teams w daily newsletter by team. Lure @SallyJenki back for sweepâŚ
⢠Go hyper local w local w coverage by parts of city, DMV or neighborhood (other than DC govt)
⢠Sunday print only or preferably none at all. AI-first for all operations beyond reporting, editing, sales, leadership.Â
⢠Scrap opinion: city has enough noise.
⢠Two tier pricing: current lowest price for consumer and $1000+ for insider coverage produced by above team thatâs not of broad citywide interest.Â
⢠Set up as future profit share for all employees to be incentivize w shared business mindset and goal of permanent durability.Â
⢠First step last: sell it to someone who will do this⌠then declare war on @Politico to retake what we took and make peace w/ inevitability and distinctiveness of @AxiosâŚ
what say you fella?
The AI platform war (OpenAI vs Anthropic vs Gemini) isnât really about featuresâitâs about who shapes reality.
Multiple models. Multiple answers. Multiple âtruths.â
So who decides whatâs right? Whatâs real?
At some point, does AI need a shared source of truthâor are we signing up to see the world through competing lenses?
This battle feels bigger than picking your favorite tool.
AI wonât kill human businesses. Businesses that forget theyâre human will.
Everyoneâs racing to âremove humansâ from business because of AI. Thatâs not innovationâthatâs confusion.
AI is one of the most powerful tools ever created. But in human businesses, Iâm more bullish than ever on humans. Relationships, trust, and real connection donât scale despite peopleâthey scale because of them.
Thatâs why Iâm such a believer in community as a business model. You canât AI your way into trust. You canât automate belonging. And no algorithm will ever replace a real relationship when it matters.
Use AI. Learn it deeply. Let it amplify your humanity and extend your reach. But the faster you try to remove the human touch, the faster your business hollows out.
Iâve seen every platform, tool, and âcommunity softwareâ that claims it can replace people. None do. Not because the tech isnât impressiveâbut because the promise is a lie.
The lie is that technology can replace human connection.
The opportunity is building businesses that double down on it.




