Building in a broken industry ⚖️ Nick Holzherr

I think everyone who says that it's not, doesn't impact jobs is lying. I think it's just an outright lie. It's natural market dynamics. The technology is available, people will use it if it's a cheaper, faster way to get to the result. Am I trying to replace a lawyer? Like, no, I'm not. We're not a law firm. We're a technology company, not trying to replace a lawyer. But at the same time, like, people are already using ChatGPT instead of going to a lawyer and they're typing it into ChatGPT.

This week's Millennial Master is Nick Holzer, founder and CEO of Gitlaw. Nick turned a TV talent show into a real tech career, built a food AI startup that Samsung later acquired, then walked away from a comfortable global role to start again with an AI legal company built for founders, not law firms. Nick is brutally honest about what AI will do to jobs and very clear on how much broken process sits behind your average legal bill. In this episode, we talk about building and selling a global food tech company to Samsung, hiring 100 people in 9 months without breaking the team, and the truth about AI, jobs, and who gets displaced first. Millennial Masters is brought to you by Jolt—fast, reliable web hosting built for founders. Whether you're launching a WordPress site or scaling an app, Jolt gives your project a rock-solid home starting from just £3.95 a month. You'll get 99.99% uptime, support in under 30 seconds, and flexible payment options including Bitcoin and Amex, so you can rack up those points while you build. Get your first 3 months free jolt.co.uk. Smart hosting for people building what's next.

Nick, welcome to Millennial Masters. Where are you joining from today?

Thanks for having me. I'm from Birmingham, UK.

So technically we're both in the East Midlands, but your first big episode that a lot of people would remember, and I know you can't escape this anywhere you go now, Nick, is back in 2012 when you were on The Apprentice. And before we talk about the AI and law and everything else you've done, I'm wondering, what was that experience like for you as an entrepreneur? The exposure, the rejection, the whole circus. I mean, it was super fun.

No regrets. Would strongly recommend it to anybody. It was kind of a weird process of how I ended up because the first application form was super short, like 80 words max or something. Friend had forwarded it to me. I wasn't like an avid watcher, but I was aware of the show and I kind of liked the premise. And from that application to being offered a place was like really fast. Like the process happened in like a couple of weeks and they're like, here is the offer for you to go on. And I asked some friends, should I go on? And a lot of them said don't, because I've, you know, a lot of people come off it looking stupid because the show is about caricatures and it's about, it's not, it's not about You know, making people look great. It's often about actually mistakes and those are much more fun to watch on TV. And they said, Nick, you've got a relatively kind of posh English accent, which will make you look like a twat. Don't do it. But I did do it because of the exposure. And it's exactly what we got. I didn't win.

And that was in the early days of social media. So TV was an even bigger part of exposure than it is today.

12 million viewers in the final episodes, right? Which is a huge way of getting to market. And so I didn't win. I got to pitch it in the final. It was for like a business plan competition. Essentially, you get investment from Lord Sugar, a 50-50 partnership if you win. I didn't win, but I was part of the, I think it was 4 final candidates that pitched their business plan. And because of that, came off the show, had literally an inbox full of hundreds of people saying, hey, can we talk to you? We'd love to work with you on the business that you pitched. Any other, you know, and we was a food app that we built and we wanted to work with big grocery companies and big publishers and big food manufacturers. And we got all of those inbound and anybody else I wanted to meet for the next couple of years, I could basically send them an email and say, hey, Nick, I was on The Apprentice and people would say yes to a meeting, not because they were interested in what I was selling or trying to partner with, but more because they want to, they're going to, oh, someone from TV. Sure. I'll take half an hour out of my calendar to meet some random person on TV. So didn't always get in the door for the right reasons. But I did get into the door. And as anybody in sales knows, getting into the door is often the big, the big one of the big challenges, right? So massively helped. Without that, we wouldn't have raised our first round of investment, we wouldn't have got our first partnerships, it wouldn't have, you know, the business would not be where it is today. And it essentially helped me start my career.

So I don't talk about it much anymore, because it was quite a long time ago.

Uh, but I, it was great fun and definitely helped.

So basically by appearing and making it into, so to speak, the quarterfinals of the show meant that you had hundreds of leads for Whisk, which started as the, a recipe sharing idea, uh, and then became a serious AI food tech company. That's right. And You obviously started replying to all the inbound leads you had for your idea. What was the first turning point when you thought, okay, this is beyond serious now?

I think, you know, I went into it wanting to build the business. You know, I think there's multiple moments. It wasn't kind of like one defining moment, but there was kind of a pivotal time. The moments leading up to it were investment. So being able to raise money and we didn't raise a big round. Our first round was £180,000, which in today's money feels tiny, right? But it was a reasonable seed round, you know, in today's world, pre-seed round. And then we ended up raising a bit more money along the way too, especially in the UK, especially in the UK at the time, right? This is 2012. The other, the other kind of moments were being able to attract really smart people. Many of those smart people are actually working with me today still. You know, I've been working with them for 15 years now, but we had some really smart people that were open to taking a leap of faith and joining me in the team to build what we built. The other thing was, I think some of the big companies joining us, BBC Good Food joined us as a publisher. So we were live on the BBC Good Food site. People like Tesco, Amazon, Walmart, those big retailers joining was also a moment. But I think the real moment the moment that like felt suddenly, okay, this is working was actually 5 years later. It took us a long time and a lot of pivots, but 5 years later, we had built the AI and it wasn't easy like it is today. You know, we had literally getting on planes, buying literally graphics cards, sticking them into, you know, racks and kind of like running our own AI models. And then this is like before TensorFlow, even like the libraries where you could build the ML models, you had to literally do so much yourself back in the early on. And then TensorFlow came and now the LLMs have come and it's very, very different space now. But like, we have built that stuff, we had the team, we had some of the customers, and we were finally profitable, right? We had 30 people, we were profitable, our team was growing, like doubling every, I don't know, 6 months, it kind of felt like on that kind of trajectory. And things were working.

And suddenly, when you're making money, it feels very different to like chasing the next investment round and like hoping that you can get enough money to, or enough traction to get an SMS because you like, you own that point, you didn't have the worry that, you know, as soon as you closed around, you had to start fundraising for the next to keep the cash flow going. You were at the point where things were stabilizing. What did you think you got right in those early days when you look back now and when you were doubling your team and every 6 months and having in a way that rapid scaling when you look back?

It was less about what we got right and more about what we were forced to get right because investors didn't want to fund us anymore.

So investors basically were like, you've had a long time trying to build this like consumer-facing food app and we haven't seen the money, so we're not going to give you any more money.

So the pressures were coming already from the investors. Oh, absolutely.

You know, it was 2014 to 2016, massive pressure of like, you're not going to get any more money from us. And that made us really focused of like, oh, actually forced us basically to anything that didn't make money.

I just said no, I had to say no to, because I had, there wasn't like a, it wasn't, I would have loved to say yes to all these things, but I had no choice. I had to say no.

So, and then people would come to me, like big companies and go, hey, can we can we work with you and do a free trial?

And I'd be like, we don't do free trials, sorry. And it worked. Like, they were like, oh, okay, well, how much do you have to pay you? And it's like, well, minimum amount of money I need for this amount is like this much.

And to take me over into the next quarter. And it worked.

It's amazing, right? So the confidence or the cheek of asking for the money comes out of desperation too.

So I think it was really like, you know, that forced us to make money. And then once you get into the habit of making money, it's actually not— it becomes natural.

And you're like, well, no, no, no, we don't work for free anymore. We work for money. And that worked. And then it just added on.

And then, you know, with money, you can hire smart people. I hired some super smart people in sales as well, who like understood how to price stuff. And then we were able to go for much larger contracts. Literally, we were like fixing our contracts size.

Wow. I think everybody would want to— would want one tip for that? What's one tip to reframe your offering and your pricing to go to ask 100 times more?

Well, it's actually, it's based, it's, you know, value-based pricing is the basics of it is like just, we used to go on like, well, the last customer paid us this much. And we need this much money to survive, you know, therefore I'm going to charge £3,000 or dollars. And suddenly someone comes in and goes, actually, the other people bidding for this exact thing is, you know, we literally were bidding against IBM and some of the biggest like technology companies in the world for like these enterprises. And we're like, well, you can probably charge, they're probably charging $700,000, $800,000 at least for this. It turns out they're charging a lot more, but you can, if we go in at $300,000, we're probably going to win. And that was like, and I was like mind blown. It's like, what? Like there's no way we can get this much money out of these people. But they said yes. And actually it turns out you need that kind of money too. If you really want to be serious and build something really serious, you do need that, those kinds of sales contracts.. But it felt weird to me initially. Again, as you start to do it, you learn it. And people can tell you and you can go, yeah, that sounds, that sounds right. But yet you have to kind of feel it and experience it. And once you felt and experienced it, it just kind of like the momentum carries on. So we basically, you know, we became profitable. And at that point, it's kind of weird as well. We didn't try and sell ourselves. Like I never went and contacted the company and said, hey, do you want to buy me? We just suddenly had literally probably like 5 or 6 large companies all asking to buy us. 3 of them put like, like literally flew in M&A teams and like tried really hard to buy us. And then, and it was like, I was like, sure, you can come and talk to me about buying the business. But like, you know, it's not something I'm like actively trying to do.

That's an experience that not many people pull off. And not many people will be prepared for it because there's not a playbook. But it's interesting to hear from you how the big boys approached you and tried to woo you because you said they literally flew over to see you and ask you about the business. Yeah. How did it feel and how did you navigate when you saw you had multiple offers? Did they all come at once or you had first one, you said no, and then somebody else came along? Did you get to choose or?

We got to choose. They didn't all come exactly the same time, but also something else that I guess maybe is unique to our space or maybe it's normal everywhere is that actually it's quite slow, the process of M&A. It's not At least in our ex— you hear about it on like TechCrunch or whatever of like Zuckerberg turns up somewhere and they agree in a coffee shop and the next day it's signed and it's like a billion dollar deal. Not like that for us, right? For us it was like, you know, can we bring in a team? Initially you don't know they're actually looking at M&A, but suddenly they like want to fly in 5, 10 people to Birmingham to our tiny little office. And I'm like, we've only got like 2 people in our office, like really? And like, yeah, yeah, we want to come into a workshop. You know, we're going to bring like all sorts of people with us, translators and all sorts of stuff. And I was like, Okay, sure. And then it's only kind of like 3 or 4 months later, you realize that I think they're like, I think they want something more than just like, you know, a SaaS, a SaaS API agreement. And then, you know, we had that, they all kind of in the same 6 months, suddenly all these companies wanted to work, started talking to us in this way. Some of them were much more explicit about the M&A part. Some of them were a little bit more caveated about it. Some of them brought in external consultancy firms who are like helping them figure it out whether we were a good fit. Some of them were doing it directly. Ultimately, we chose to go with Samsung because for a few reasons. One was they had a super smart team. So it was a guy called Travis Bogard was like the head of this new Samsung Next division. He was previously a head of product for Uber. He had a really good like track record, like sort of history of building tech stuff in Silicon Valley. And he had a great team behind him too. He had like leaders and these other like leaders from companies I really respected. And I never had the opportunity to work with before. So he was like, the team there was wanting to buy us and I really wanted to work with them. I wanted to learn from them and learn how they built stuff. So I was like, that was really attractive. And then also Samsung's distribution. So like they, they wanted to put our app across hardware they have, they have, that was really attractive. Suddenly, you know, the users that could access our stuff, we could build something much more meaningful. And then of course the money was good too. It wasn't actually in financial terms the best offer alone. There was some like attractive parts of it, like, you know, all cash and stuff like that. But it wasn't like the biggest number, but it was when you kind of, you know, we spoke about this with my other team members and I was like, you know, actually think on balance, this is probably the right deal to go for. And I think it absolutely was.

I know it was an overall package because you, that's what I wanted to move on to next. You not only sold, but you also stayed for 6 years and you already gave me a glimpse of what kept you there.

Yeah. The team, definitely. They, the first, my first task was scale your team, Nick, from 30 to 120 in 9 months. I mean, it wasn't framed like that, but it said scale and here's the, use the, you've got enough money. What do you need? And pushed me scale faster, scale faster, scale faster. And that was amazing fun. Like hiring 100 people essentially in 9 months is a lesson, loads of lessons and probably an opportunity I might not have again. It was super fun. I got to learn loads. Mate, I love the mission.

I'd love to pause there, Nick, because hiring 100 people in 9 months, I'd love to hear some of your lessons. Were there any key questions that gave away certain traits that you were looking for? Any tips that people hiring and scaling should look out for?

That is such a good question. That, and it's such a hard thing. I would say self-motivated, you know, people with intuition. And passion is super important. So they can, people who can kind of help kind of figure out the way they go, where they go. I think, I think on balance, I'd say some, some people I hired that were amazing, had great experience. Some people were, didn't have that much experience, but were like, it's so much intuition and like so motivated to learn and, and, you know, really turned up with, with all of themselves there. I think it depends on what kind of role as well you're trying to hire for. We were, we had a mix of very experienced people and people who are not as experienced. I would say interviewing properly, some of the lessons I learned in the process of interviewing properly with like, you know, lots of questions. We had like usually 4 or 5 people on an interview panel, and then each of them would be looking for different kind of things and asking different kind of questions and kind of like, and then, you know, a proper scoring system where you score it all and you review everything. And then you kind of also case studies. So giving people case studies to do where they prepare for, you know, 2, 3 hours, and then you see some of their work so that you can kind of judge it based on that. I'd also say for some roles, we actually would give people trials of like 1 or 2 weeks and to actually be able to actually work with them. So it actually allows you to make a faster decision upfront because you are not as committed, you know, 2 ways. And sometimes they decide to leave and it's not for them and sometimes the other way around.

But I think those— That's quite rare though. That's, you know, 2 weeks is not your typical 6-month probation when somebody decides to leave a job or move somewhere. How did that technically go? I'm Assuming they were paid for their time.

Of course, of course they're paid. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Those are like for contractors who are not leaving, usually are not leaving, not leaving, not leaving another role, right? Who actually are available. And for them, there's not like an opportunity cost in doing that. But yeah, that mix of all those things, also hiring globally was super helpful for us because basically we had, we had recruitment teams. Luckily Samsung brought a bunch of recruitment teams, had them already. We were hiring into 5 offices, I think it was. We had a San Francisco office, LA office, Birmingham office, Seoul in Korea office, and we had a Tel Aviv office. And then we're also hiring into other kind of like centers. You know, we've got a, we had about 15, 16 people in Serbia. We had about 20 or 30 people in Russia. We had like, so we basically hired anywhere in the world and, you know, lots of recruitment teams. So lots of people would do the pre-screening work and then basically I would It's super intense, like every day, 4 or 5 interviews. But you still have 5 or, you know, a large number of interviews every day, right?

And then of course you have— Because you have so many people you need to hire.

Yeah, exactly. So it's pretty intense.

I worked more in those 6 months or 9 months than I probably have ever in my life, which I did not expect because I wasn't paid for it, right? Like, I mean, I was paid, but I wasn't, there was no, my exit was like cash.

There was no, you have to do well. But what was amazing was the manager that Travis was really good at motivating me somehow. And I really wanted to learn from them and do my best for no other reason than kind of like, I don't know, pride or whatever, and learning. So I worked super hard in those for that first year. I mean, I've worked generally, you know, hard, but like never worked as intensely as that because it was just so much, so many, so hard to scale a team at that speed.

Looking back now, what would you say was the hardest part about going from the startup chaos to running a global corporate product?

I think coordination of that many people successfully becomes hard. It's very easy to communicate and coordinate 30 people in comparison to 120, especially it wasn't really just 120. It was actually, if you look at it, probably more like 300, if you include the interactions with all the other people and all the other teams you're working with, right?

Subcontractors and so much more.

Yeah. Or just other teams inside Samsung. Cause like, you know, there's, there's a whole team that builds the fridge, the whole distribution thing we talked, I mentioned the reason of going happened, right? We, we, we, some, they rebranded Whisk to Samsung Food and Samsung Food is live on the fridge. It powers a lot of the things on the fridge. It's live on the ovens. It's live on some of the watches and the phones and TVs. And, you know, it's been in keynotes at Samsung, like on, you know, the big kind of press release of— it's basically is integrated. But that means you have to, you have to basically work with and coordinate with all of these different teams around the world. And that's coordinating information, aligning roadmaps, making sure people know what they're doing when you've got so many different, like requirements or desires from so many different teams around the world and different time zones. We scaled globally, but that meant that we were distributed in -8 to +8 GMT. So it's 16-hour time difference in our team. So it's impossible to get everyone on the same call at the same time. And you've got different cultures and different languages that people speak. So if you've got this like coordinating that team, I had to get really good at distributed work, at async communication, at making sure the team works with artifacts. And so it sort of documents what they're doing well. And turns out, those skills are really valuable in how to work today, if you want to work with AI, because AI is also kind of a distributed team member. And if you have, if you're good at documenting and working async, turns out also really helps with AI integration, but that was not an unexpected benefit, I guess.

What were some of the lessons from that coordinating async work? We're not talking just Slack and having good documentation, are we? And that's relevant because a lot of people would hire globally for a startup depending on the type of business that there is, and they would have members spread out, maybe not as many as you had, but nevertheless, the same lessons would apply. It was basically remote work before you were pushed.

That's right. So we were doing remote work from, I mean, from 2012, but, uh, you know, way before COVID in 2020. So, uh, and, and, you know, by the way, Samsung acquired us as a remote team. There's not many enterprises that have, who are not remote.

And not distributed work, actually ban distributed work back in the day, and who buy a business that's fully distributed, like, wow, I remember the conversations there, there was some really interesting touch-and-go conversations around whether it made sense for them to buy a distributed team when they had no idea how distributed teams work.

But anyway, that aside, the things, it's less about the tools, I think, and it's more about the behaviors, like the culture, the values. So like, yeah, behaviors. So When someone asks you a question, rather than jumping on a call and answering it, write an artifact, a document or a spec or something, and put it into your spec system and share that with them. And then sure, if they still want to call, you can arrange a call, but like, and work in writing a lot is critical to that. There's also, I think you have to be, that's one thing I think once there's many, there's like probably 40 or 50 things I could say on this topic, but, and this is like, that's like a 3-hour podcast on itself. But the other thing is, that's one thing I think is really important is write and document and create artifacts.

Even though it would be so much easier to just jump on a call, you need to put in the sweat to document it and write it down.

But it's not actually easier. It might be psychologically easier because it's, but actually in time, in time, it's actually not. It's about the same, right? It just, but the time is less about communicating and chatting and having fun. It's less fun. I think I would say it's about thinking deeply. And then how do I think deeply and really think about how I communicate this and make this self-explanatory and holistic. And then the benefit is you probably get asked those questions 2 or 3 more times. In that month or in the next 6 months. And you don't have to do it anymore. Once you've done it, you just, here it is. And that artifact's there. And then you build behaviors into the team that instead of asking every time is check, is there something there already? And actually, once you stop repeating all your work, your work, you start to become more effective, right? And then there's also things like, how do you build relationships while having the distributed team, right? Because you don't just want to be a bunch of people a slave to a computer typing in specs all day long. That sucks as well. So how do you build those, that relationship and actually that team? So there we, every single year, we fly everybody in the team to a location around the world. Samsung thought this was crazy. They're like, you're taking everyone on holiday for it? Like, because all the destinations sounded like holiday destinations, especially to someone in Korea. But they definitely not a holiday, you know, although there was lots of fun to be had. But it's basically about bringing everyone together and main goal is build relationships with each other. And then, you know, we had things like an hour-long call once a week where everyone can just turn up and share a little bit about what they've been up to in their personal life, not talk, not do anything about, not do stuff for, talk about work. These things are kind of common now, I would say, with COVID post-COVID in the distributed world. These things are all common things many, many companies do, but it wasn't common in 2018, 2019, and 2020. And then when COVID hit, so many companies were like, how do we do this thing? And we were actually in a really good position because COVID actually helped, like, from the business. Obviously, a lot of personal lives were negatively affected in our team as well. But from a business perspective, we were perfectly set up for distributed work. And actually, people started doing grocery shopping and recipe cooking a lot more. So then everything basically was like growing. Because you couldn't go out to eat, so you had to cook at home. So yeah, so for us, like, you know, we, The business grew in that time and the team was well set up to handle it because we were already distributed.

After running a global product and having this experience, Nick, most people would either retire or move into advisory. You see a lot of that. So what made you walk away to build from scratch again?

So I did invest in some companies. I did about 30 different startups I've invested into.

That was with after you sold and moved. Yeah. Okay. So you started thinking wisely as an investor as well, not just as an entrepreneur from that moment.

Yeah. And it was super fun because you get to meet so many entrepreneurs and you get to learn from what they're doing as well. And it's actually fun as well. Investing is fun. Yeah. It's, you know, I think time, time will tell because a lot of the investments there are like really hard to gauge whether whether you're successful until like 5 or 10 years later. But so far the portfolio actually looks really successful and I think I did a relatively good job. If it continues to play out like it has, you know, I might end up making more money from my investments than I made from selling my own businesses, which maybe says I should stop building stuff and start investing instead.

That's also a path. Yeah.

But the main, and I did do some advisory, I just, you know, mentored some other startups and helped some other startups, but the The main, it was a bit of an, in a, it's a bit of a weird situation. Like 2, 3 years ago, I didn't know what to do. I had finished my thing at, you know, my mandatory time at Samsung, my kind of, they call it holdback where part of the cash that I was paid for the acquisition was held in an escrow. And if I left the company, they would not give it to me. So I had to stay for 3 years. 3 years went, all the money was paid to me. And I was like, what do I, what do I do? And I don't kind of feel like I don't know what to do. I'm happy with— I like the team. I like the mission. I like working at Samsung. It's great. Like, why? So I hired a personal coach, worked with that personal coach, kept things like diaries and all sorts of things, did some experiments, you know, to try and figure out what do I actually— what motivates me. And I think what the truth of what motivates me is, at least what I think, and I still— who knows? I think everyone is still trying to a little bit figure that out, right? I don't think anybody truly knows exactly what it is. But kind of where my current thinking is, is is I love the creative process of building stuff. I like, it's also really important to me, like who I'm working with every day. I like to see progress and speed. And I think that, but mainly I love the creative stuff. I love building stuff and like being like really hands-on. And when you're at a larger company, you know, inside Samsung Food and Samsung, a lot of my role was more politics, which is also actually, I did also enjoy some of that, but it's also a lot about aligning the whole org to, you know, make sure we have the budgets each year and make sure that our overall mission and vision is aligned with what Samsung's is and everyone knows what we're doing and all this stuff. So, um, I really, uh, you know, I started doing more creative stuff in outside of work, like started painting and started doing more DIY in the house. And then I kind of realized, I think I just need to do a startup.

And the thing that drove the timing was after all the house was sorted, you were like, right, time for startup again.

I think, I think I need to get another startup. And then really what the real driver was AI, right? Like it feels like a moment in time where the speed of progress is so fast and it's got such drastic, like such, such the opportunity to improve how things work in the world is so big. It feels like it's a moment in time, you know, a little bit like the start of the internet or maybe to a lesser extent, the start of mobile. Where you've got opportunity to build some really category-defining products. So that, I kind of wanna be involved in that. I thought this is really fun. This is, this would be a really fun time to build. Let's get involved.

So I took the jump and here I am.

So I'm assuming you worked with AI years before people thought about it like they see it now as ChatGPT. When ChatGPT came out publicly and you were already deep in that area, in the consumer area and interactions, what did you think? How did you feel it's going to change things? Because I'm assuming that interaction in a chat box with AI is also what moved you into your next direction.

So yes and no. The legal, the idea for doing part of what we do is create, make legal documents entirely free by basically taking standard, vetted, trusted templates, and indexing them, making them free. So part of that part of it was already there pre-AI, the idea of that. And that's why it's called Git Law, a little bit like GitHub, or GitLab, or Git, the technology, which is all around like—

Anybody who worked with a dev will know that.

Right. So the document part was there already. But the interface and how you work with AI and integrate it into kind of like content. A lot of inspiration came from some of the vibe coding tools like Replit and Vercel and Lovable and Bulb and all of those. And a lot of people haven't tried them. I'd strongly recommend it. It's super fun. You put a prompt in and it builds an app for you in 10 minutes or something, right? And you can see all the code being written for you and you're just like, wow, this is incredible. And there was a bit of a, there was a bit of criticism early on about those because had some bugs in them and they, it was easy to get a prototype, but not that easy to get an actual thing that works. Turns out you can actually make something that works pretty well if you do it in the right way, put a bit of effort in. Most people don't, most people give up after 10 minutes. But like the, some inspiration came from that. But what did I think when I first saw ChatGPT? Well, I think I had basically spent millions of dollars, many, many millions of dollars building AI models. And suddenly, all the things that the AI models I had spent so much money on building were available immediately and for free in these models. And it just works out of the box. And like, and also they didn't have some of the downsides of some of the things that, you know, like a lot of the previous generation of AI, it kind of like broke when you started to try and like go a little bit out of the exact designed flow. They didn't work anymore. But these LLMs can just take whatever you give them. And sure, they have downsides. Sure, they have drawbacks, but like, they are so good compared to everything I've seen in the past. And on top of that, seeing the rate of improvement, like, you know, especially because of all the competition now as well, right? You now got like, you had one big name model, and now you have like 10. And there's so different flavors, right? And there is a lot of like misinformation, I think, online about these models and people saying, oh, they're going to get more expensive or yeah, there's so much misinformation about them. But the core of what I am seeing is they're getting better and better super quickly. They are already amazingly good. They will be much better in 6 months, much better again in 12 months. And I think, yeah, I think it's the impact is going to be huge, hugely positive for the productive productivity of people. I do worry about jobs. I do worry about the impact it has on the world. What happens if 10% of people lose their jobs? Just 10%, just, right? You've got riots.

I think that already happened. Well, in certain industries. Yep. If we're looking at marketing, if we're looking at admin, if we're looking at customer service, there are a lot of fields where that possibly already happened. Maybe even in dev with junior devs and the Vibe Coding tools you, you met.

Yeah, exactly. And there is a question about which— it is kind of the sort of white-collar junior roles, right, that are currently getting automated. But like, what happens if 10% of the whole population becomes unemployed? Like riots, maybe? Typically in economies, that's kind of what happens, right? So, you know, that doesn't— so it doesn't matter whether you're employed or not.

If everyone's rioting, it doesn't matter whether you're the one with a job or not.

It will affect you.

It will affect you, right?

So like, I hope that doesn't get to that. I hope all the economic theory and promises, which says every time we become more productive, everyone kind of like filters into the right, it recalibrates and everyone's fine. Everyone's just more productive. I hope that's the outcome. Half of me thinks that is the outcome. But yeah, I do think whatever.

What does the other half say?

There will be people out of work.

And I've spoken to other entrepreneurs who work in AI, and what they told me is that they're not trying to replace jobs. And get people out of work. What they're trying is to augment people with AI. What's your approach considering we already discussed that we know the junior roles have been going or are gone already? Is it making everybody else more productive and pushing them further than they would ever go?

Absolutely. Of course it's that, but it's also, I think everyone who says that it's not, doesn't impact jobs is lying. I think it's just an outright lie. And I don't think they should be individually to blame. It's natural market dynamics. The technology is available. People will use it if it's a cheaper, faster way to get to the result. So like, you know, am I trying to replace a lawyer? Like, no, I'm not. We're not a law firm. You know, we're a technology company. I'm not trying to replace a lawyer, but at the same time, like, you know, people are already using ChatGPT instead of going to a lawyer and they're typing it into ChatGPT. So it's—

I know I have friends and colleagues who do that. People already do it. Yeah, all the time. That's, that's what brings us back to Gitlaw, because I know you've said that you spent hundreds of thousands on lawyers over the years, especially through the process. But I think you possibly realized that the system was a bit broken as well.

Oh, 100% broken. Like even just like the, look at the pro rata of what you're paying a lawyer. So some, you know, if you go to a reasonable law firm, which place, which in the US, $2,000, $3,000 or $1,000, $1,000 to $3,000 an hour is not unusual. In the UK, it's probably more like somewhere between $300 and 800 an hour, right? But like, multiply that by the number of hours that people work in a law firm, typically about 2,000 that they bill out. You, you, you end up with, um, pretty big numbers, a very, very, very big salary. And the lawyers are not getting that, right? The lawyers are not getting that. That in the UK, they're on probably somewhere between 70 and maybe 150. Some of them might be higher if they're a partner and they have equity in the law firm. But that's exactly the point is the equity in the law firm, the money goes to the law firm. Who does that go to? It goes to the partners that worked there previously that worked that did their shift in junior 10, 20 years ago, who are now equity partners and have huge salaries. And basically small businesses, if they want access to law, have to pay that tax, right, which goes to those equity partners. Now that model, it's natural. It's not nothing bad about the law firm. It's a natural thing to try and like build a business that is profitable, of course. And that's a great thing. And we should celebrate that, I think. But for a small business, that doesn't actually— that's not in their interest, right? Like, and ultimately, it holds back small businesses.

Even for basic stuff. Yeah. All the time.

90%. I mean, the stats are— it's very hard to find real stats on this. But the stats, some of the stats say 90% of small businesses when they have a problem, don't go to a lawyer, right? So what they used to do, well, they used to might hack it together in some document. Now they use ChatGPT. What we're building is something that's better than ChatGPT, for the same thing. So are we replacing lawyers? Well, we're replacing ChatGPT a little bit in, in like for that use case and other AI models. But will, but the broader question you're asking is like, you know, is AI replacing people? I think clearly the answer is yes. When you think about how firms are hiring, they're not hiring junior marketing people anymore. They are hiring more senior people that can use AI. So they just need less people. So, and also, you know, a lot of these panels, a lot of these like talks with founders, these leaders of these models, or leader of these companies, you know, I've sat on some of these panels myself and on stage, they all literally say, yeah, yeah, no, it doesn't, it doesn't replace jobs. We're not replacing jobs. And then you come off stage and you're just like, dude, like, what you just said, it doesn't make any sense.

Like, yeah, I know. You do call them out. I love it. I do personally.

Yeah. I say like, it doesn't make sense. They go, yeah, I know, but I can't say that publicly. It's like, literally, I was, I had that exact conversation 2 days ago with 2 founders who had exactly that.

And they're like, yeah, I know, but I'm not, I've decided not to say anything like that publicly because it's not good for the company.

It's not good PR to say that.

Am I looking to replace people? No.

But like, is AI as a whole gonna replace jobs? Of course it is. But it might shift them, right? The economic theory says it shifts them. I hope that's true for the world, 'cause I want the best for the world.

So I really hope that's true.

So you are trying to solve more than one problem, I guess, with Git Law. Is it because, is it the time, the cost, or the fairness of the system?

Ultimately, the fairness of the system, because I think it feels unfair. It feels, it does not feel fair that most people can't access legal advice. The vast majority of people cannot access legal advice. It's basically reserved for the ultra successful companies, the ultra, I think the successful big companies or the ultra wealthy people who can afford. So basically give them a leg up against everybody else in the world. That feels unfair. And for me, as a previous You know, now I can afford a couple of thousand dollars an hour, and I do pay people sometimes that kind of rate for certain things, because lawyers, I still find, you know, I literally paid someone that last week. Like, I do, there are definitely really good reasons to pay lawyers. And if you need legal advice, get it. I strongly recommend it. It's just, um, if you can afford it, which many people can't. Um, but like, but, uh, there are so many cases where I was held back in time, or just the ability with money to be able to do things I needed to do. Also, today, people work so fast. You can build partnerships and sales and everything with AI so quickly. And then you ask a lawyer to do something. And it's like, you're in their queue, and their queue, they might sign the contract with you very quickly to do the work for you. But then the work often is delivered 2 weeks later. And actually, AI can do that super, super quickly. And for many cases, I think people doing, using kind of best practice tools like ours can do a good enough job, certainly better than scribbling it themselves on a piece of paper. Absolutely.

So for founders listening, how much legal work can they generally handle with Git Law today without crossing into risky territory?

So the funny thing is, right, is like literally as soon as you build a company like the one I'm trying to build, you have all these legal organizations approach you to say, as in like the lawyers have these like representation groups, right? And so you're not allowed to say certain things about what you're allowed to do with AI. Literally you get cease and desist and court letters.

But like, there's only so much you're actually allowed to talk about.

Like in short, like, you know, AI tools are not allowed to give you advice, the word advice, right? So not allowed to advise you on which tool, which clause to use, or they're not allowed to advise you on which, which contract is best. But what it can say to you is the best practice in the market is this one for the thing you're trying to do. And the best practice is these clauses for the clause you're trying to do. It can say that, and it can say all the most common or things like that, which— so if you're a founder, and you're happy to use best practice and use the standard, the standard being, you know, a lawyer-vetted, industry-vetted standard template with the standard market terms. If that's good enough for you, then anything where that's good enough for you, an AI tool can do a really good job. I think ChatGPT, I'd be quite careful with. I love ChatGPT. I'm in it every day. I'm a huge fan of it. But for legal work, often if you put a document into it, it will actually read the first like 30 or 50 lines of it. It won't actually deeply read the rest of it. It'll give you its response on the part. So it's actually quite dangerous. It will often miss stuff. And I've spoke— I obviously, now what I'm building, I'm speaking to a lot of lawyers who have the same, who've seen the same issues that we have seen, and they make big mistakes. So I would just be careful using a generalist model. Um, I would say, you know, what we've built, I genuinely believe, is, is somewhat, some step above. It's better, and it will continue to get better. But, um, yeah, if you're happy to use market standards, which I certainly was when I was founding my companies. I didn't want to get one up on the other company. If you and me do an NDA, I don't want to add anything.

You just want a fair deal, right? I just want to—

I don't want a cheeky clause to get one over on you and make you pay me extra money in 2 years. But I— that's not what I'm—

to be honest, that's not what lawyers do most of the time either. If you're doing a big M&A deal or something which is super complex, definitely get a lawyer.

You definitely—

you don't want to do that on ChatGPT or on Gitlaw, I don't think, today at But if you're doing an NDA, an employment contract, terms and conditions, privacy policies, employment, so many, all the standard contracts basically, right? If you go to a lawyer, what they do, they go to a template bank, they download a template, they fill in the template itself has like instructions of what to change. They do that for you and they send it to you. They use a bit of judgment as well, but like, you know, they judge what's market standard. So as long as you're happy with market standard, I think AI can get you a really, really long way.

And Since you're basically telling that the legal industry, 90% of it is working on templates, and you mentioned cease and desist, have you had any backlash yet? Yeah, we have. Is it under an NDA?

There's no NDA, but I don't want to talk about it publicly.

Maybe not about the backlash itself, but maybe how you handle it. When you're building something that affects other people and that, you know, you're tackling a well-ingrained industry, how do you handle, how do you stay strong and handle the backlash?

So to be honest, I've had backlash, I think with every single business. Let me talk about Whisk. So we launched Whisk and somebody, this is public information, someone, a cook who had a book called James Whisk, had whisk in the title, you know, said that we were stealing the idea from them and that we should cease and desist. So, you know, I've had every, almost every business, once you get to any level of like success, you will get people who, for whatever reason, different reasons, sometimes they're valid, sometimes they're, and to be honest, some of the like legal inquiries we're getting are valid. They're like, it's actually fair. Like, let's figure out the right balance of where we should be. Like, I'm actually grateful for a lot of the stuff that, you know, when people come to me with an issue, I'm usually like, even, even, even via legal routes, usually grateful. Let's figure this out. Because like, it's, we're not, we're not, we're not out to try and like, have conflict or do something wrong. So I would say, you know, you need a lot of resilience. I think you also need, I think experience helps a lot. I've had many legal letters sent to me. So when I, when one is sent to me, I don't go into some kind of tailspin and I just like look at it and go, well, You know, like, it is what it is. And let's— do we need to respond? Sometimes you do. I remember really clearly with my first investors in Wisk, board, senior member of my board, one of the legal letters we received, just looked at it and went, no, and just threw it in the bin. He was, I don't know, 50 or 60 years old.

He had probably received 100 of these, right? And he was like—

So he knew what mattered and what didn't. Yeah.

And obviously as an early, early founder, You don't know what matters and what does matter. Often I didn't. And that can be really, really worrying. So like, I think it all comes down to, you know, I would not recommend just throwing stuff in the bin, but like it, yeah, it, you have to have a thick skin if you're trying to do anything that disrupts anything, right? Like, and it's very hard not to disrupt anybody at all. Even with like Whisk, which was a recipe app, we disrupted a cookbook author, right? You know, so I could that's not nice. I didn't want to do that.

But I had no idea.

So like, it's, you're always going to disrupt somebody, even if even with something that's very innocent, like, like a recipe app.

And of course, we're not, you know, legal is much more serious.

We are building something that will probably reduce the demand for some law firms. So like, yes, that's, that is, of course, is going to create some unhappy people.

A truly disruptive business.

I mean, look how many Look how many lawsuits Uber, Airbnb, all of them have, like OpenAI, like Google, Google, they're all just full of lawsuits, right?

Literally full of them. All of them. Literally every big tech company is embroiled in multiple lawsuits at once. Exactly.

So mine, I have no lawsuits, by the way. So like, I've actually never had a lawsuit. So I've like, luckily, it's always been solved before that.

But like, Yeah, if we have a lawsuit—

Well, you know, when the DOJ comes after you, it's a bit different.

It is a bit different, yeah. So hopefully, you know, if we have one, I think it'll be a sign that we're successful, right? Not— and then obviously we have to be— but yeah, that's not to say that I'm looking for one. I'd much rather not have any lawsuits or legal letters. So if anybody listens to this podcast and sends legal letters, do not send me any legal letters, please.

Yeah, please don't. What's been the toughest part you'd say about building in such a regulated space? Because in food AI, there wasn't such a fine line to thread.

Honestly, I don't think it's as difficult as people make out. So like when I started, all these lawyers were coming to me, oh, it's gonna be so difficult. It's gonna be so difficult. And really like the rules—

Because Codlets say that, right?

Yeah. But also I think it's very different if you're a lawyer as well, right? 'Cause if you're a lawyer, you're regulated by an authority, and that authority has the right to take away your license to practice law. So if, imagine if you, imagine if there was an authority that had the right to take away your ability to do podcasts, you, you prop, you naturally would be a little bit scared of this authority and didn't want to upset them because they could literally just rule that you are no longer allowed to do podcasts. And that's basically what lawyers have, right? And obviously those organizations protect lawyers and they protect the consumer. So they have, they have some, they do some great things too. Like, There's lots of value in them, but naturally the lawyers are very risk-averse for that reason. You know, I don't think the, the, there are rules. They're not that complicated. It's basically, if you're building legal tech, don't pretend you're giving legal advice because legal advice, only lawyers are allowed to give legal advice. And we don't, we, I try really hard not to make, to make it clear that we don't give legal advice. We're a tech tool. We are free. You can pay $20 a month if you want, uh, for more API credits. And that is very, very, very different pricing model to a law firm.

We are definitely not a law firm, right?

So like, I try to make that really clear. But of course, you know, there's always more we can do to make it even more clear, like bigger disclaimers, more information, making sure we never use the word advice.

Lots of things like that. What have you done differently in setting up Git Law versus when you've done Wisk? Did you try to do deliberately certain things differently so you don't have maybe similar challenges you've had before?

Um, one thing, well, to be honest, I took the best practice of things that I learned last time and tried to apply them here. So I've done a lot of the same things, a lot of the same team. A lot of the same, you know, my co-founder who had left Wisk decided to join us. Some of the engineers I previously worked with decided to join us. The marketing person who had previously worked, led the Wisk marketing has joined us. The designer who previously led some of the design in Wisk joined us. So basically like a lot of the team members that I'd previously worked with had come again. So that's good experiences. And that's probably the most important thing was Who's the team? Do they work well together?

Do you— You are more intentional with the team.

Much, much. I mean, as able, as lucky, because I knew all these people and they knew me and they wanted to work together again, right? So like, yeah, that's definitely one. The other thing is building a distributed team. I've done it again and I've used best practice there. I think the thing that's new is how many AI tools there are. So what I'm really doing differently is how deeply we are integrating AI tools into our workflow. And it's been incredibly productive. Like, for example, like, before I jumped on this podcast, I was literally editing our spec product specification documents that are like in Markdown folders that are automatically ported to context for AI models to help us build and just make decisions in the business. So basically, you know, as long as you document as Going back to earlier on.

The context.md. Yeah. Anybody who's done a custom GPT will know what you're talking about.

So like, it's so important. So we basically built this whole, all these structures to do that. Code reviews with CodeRabbit, code writing, small features, you know, literally a user will ask for a certain feature. They will, um, uh, you know, we'll put it into the, into our system and literally Cursor jumps in, does the work, creates the ticket for us to review, you review it. And it goes live so that you can go from like feedback to fixed issue in 5 minutes, like literally. So like it's amazing for certain issues, not for, not for everything, obviously. It's amazing what you can do with tech now. Designs, first versions of designs, you just stick it into Claude or one of the other engines and they design, usually do a really good job of helping you kind of iterate on stuff. So that's new is how we work with AI. But what's the same is the team and distributed way of working. Those things are the same.

The distributed team obviously has been a key element throughout your career. And you shared at the beginning that you're in Birmingham and you stayed in Birmingham instead of London or Silicon Valley. What did building from Birmingham teach you about access, funding, talent?

That you basically don't need to be anywhere particular. You can still hire people anywhere in the world and you can, you can still build anywhere in the world. Gitlaw is a Delaware registered entity. It's our head office is in San Francisco. But yeah, I'm here and I'm physically here in Birmingham. My daughter goes to school here and, you know, my, it's, we have like a setup here in the UK. Now that doesn't mean that at some point it doesn't make sense to move to San Francisco and build there because there are a certain scale of business. I think it probably does make sense to have some physical presence from the CEO. But like, actually, you can, I think you can get a really, really long way with a distributed team. And you certainly can hire people anywhere in the world. I don't hire a single person in Birmingham, not because I don't want to, I'd love to, I have to have tried. But every time I put a job advert out, you know, I open it up anywhere in the world. And people who apply end up being ones from all over the world. And then we, it's, it's, it's the chances of them actually being in Birmingham are quite low. So I'm very much into like hiring in a distributed way. Speeds up hiring much, much more. You open your talent pool much, much more. So yeah, that's, I'm a huge fan of that way of building and you don't, it doesn't, it really doesn't matter where you're based. You can be, one of my good friends runs a tech company with people all over the world from literally the middle of the countryside, somewhere near Wales. You have to drive like an hour through fields to get there. And you wouldn't know, right?

I'm going to ask you for the contact for an episode, but I'll come back to that.

Let's do it.

But Nick, Silicon Valley though is in a way different. I've spoken to founders from Silicon Valley. Everything is so intense there and it's nonstop. It's not like you have a pace of life. Every entrepreneur there seems to have just a business life.

Yeah, it's, um, first of all, I would say It's amazing how open Silicon Valley is to learn, to sharing information globally on YouTube and on other channels. So it doesn't matter where you are, you can learn about that mindset and the way they think by watching stuff on YouTube. You know, I used to love watching Y Combinator's videos online. They interview some of the best founders in the world in deep interviews, and you can learn so much. Like, and people think, oh, well, you know, I can't go physically to see them. Well, you wouldn't be able to physically see them if you were there in San Francisco either. You can learn from them anywhere. So learning, the material available to learn from the kind of West Coast America tech way of thinking is amazing. And so just that doesn't stop anybody. I think what is a little bit, well, kind of on my mind is, you know, that the work culture, as you say, is especially at the moment is super intense. People talk about 6, 9 AM to 9 PM, 6 days a week, because the moment in time to build companies with AI is now, and they don't want to miss it and they want to get ahead. And I, you know, so that is something that I do sometimes struggle with because like I can't do 9 AM to 9 PM, 6 days a week.

You're in a super competitive space at the same time. But I'm in a super competitive space.

So how do I win while within the context of having a family as well? I do work much harder than, you know, I have in other times, but like I don't do 996. So I think You know, I think the answer is partially, I hope experience helps, partially hiring teams. I have other big advantages. My other real big advantage I think is I've raised capital in the US, so I have, you know, US kind of levels of access to capital, but I'm hiring globally so I can hire super smart, experienced people who already know each other, who've already worked together multiple times previously.

That's the only real alternative to that.

I think, well, it's certainly one. There might be some others that I haven't thought of, but yeah. Yeah, so that's, I'm trying, but it's like, yeah, it's, it certainly does. That keeps me up at night. You know, I do sometimes sit there thinking like, how do I, I need, I need to win despite not being able physically with my family to do 996.

Now, Nick, I'm going to run through a couple of quickfire questions and then one final one as we move on to wrapping up. We could talk for hours, but maybe another time. The best decision you ever made as a founder?

I think to marry my wife. An unexpected answer here. But like, she—

you'll be surprised.

She has a stable— she's a doctor, she's got a stable career. And in times when everything is all it has been in the past, all over the place in my life, and I was almost certain that Wisk was going to fail, and I was going to have no money. And, you know, she was the stability and the also the encouragement. So I think having an encouraging, stable life outside of work is very, very helpful, especially early on. So I think that is— and she also gave me some of the encouragement to go and go again. Like, I knew I wanted to go again, but like, it's— I knew it was going to be a lot of work. And, and yeah, so I think having an encouraging surrounding doesn't have to be obviously a wife or a husband or whatever, but like having an encouraging, supportive life, super, super helpful.. I'm super grateful for that.

And Nick, what's a mistake you'd never repeat?

I think hires. It's not, it's not, it's not, it's not one that I can never repeat, but try not to. Try not to is like the hiring the wrong people has a very negative like repercussions. It reduces the motivation of others. It's a huge waste of time trying to onboard them and then offboard them. Hiring the wrong people, I think, is probably one of the things that I'd I'd really like to avoid if at all possible. So that means putting more time and more effort into the early part of the interviewing part. So like being, yeah, that's, I think one of the ones that comes to mind immediately. I'm sure there are thousands of others as well.

Is there a founder or leader you'd love to trade places for a week and find out how they work and operate?

I mean, right now it's probably Sam Altman, I think would be. Fascinating, right?

You want to peek into that?

I think that would be the one that I would choose because it's just such an interesting business and it's going so fast. And the numbers they're talking about are just so astronomical in terms of everything, money they're raising, how they're thinking about the world of like where are the data centers, where's the energy infrastructure to basically power what seems—

the resources for the energy infrastructure.

Yeah, it's 'cause it's like, it's just a whole, it's a whole like level above what anybody that I'm ever gonna meet is thinking about, right? Super impressive. So like, that would be amazing if you could arrange that for me. I'll be forever grateful.

I'm still trying to get Sam on Millennial Masters as well. Nick, has there been a book or maybe a podcast that generally changed how you think about business throughout your career?

It's— they're not— I haven't got anything genius here. The ones that— Lean Startup early on was really helpful. I found— I haven't read it for 15 years, but that was helpful then. 4-Hour Workweek, I found super helpful too. I never worked— Tim Ferriss, is that? Yeah, Tim Ferriss. I would say that's the— probably the single— the book I would recommend if there's one. I never ended up working less because of it, but I was much, much more productive because of it. So like, basically, how can you outsource tasks and focus on what really, really matters.

And actually, Tim did a review 10 or 20 years on and whether it still stands. And I think that was the key lesson. So you nailed it there, Nick, I think.

I didn't even know there was that review. Yeah.

Last but not least, Nick, I know this one's a tricky one, but since we've gone a bit introspective, what's the biggest sacrifice you had to make to be where you are today?

Personal, definitely sacrificed. Going on certain, doing certain things for myself. I, I, I, there's, but it's paid back in other ways, so I, I don't regret it at all. But like, you know, there's like a last week, like 3, 4, 3, 4, no, maybe like 6, 6, 7 months ago, there was a bunch of friends went on some canoes through the Spanish mountains and did some like treks up the, the mountain. That's awesome things that people are doing, right? Regularly have to say no to because I just can't fit in. It's like concentric circles, right? Of like family and kids and wife and friends, health. So having time to go to the gym and not let yourself deteriorate because that's so important to be healthy. I think when you're trying to work well as well, you have to keep yourself healthy and then also deliver on work. And you have, they, you only got a finite amount of time. You can't flex the time, total time you have. So you have to choose. And things that sometimes drop off are the things that, like that, like take out 5 days to go and do like an amazing trip. I wish I could do that. I get, you know, there's other things I get to do in return. I've been lucky to do amazing travel for work, but it's not the same as going, you know, on a canoeing trip in the Spanish mountains. So it, I, yeah, that's definitely a sacrifice.

And if there would be one thing you'd say to Nick back in 2012, before you went on The Apprentice, what would you tell him?

The people you hire are going to have probably the biggest long, medium to long-term impact on whether you're successful or not. So really, really spend time thinking about choosing smart people that you really want to work with. That is probably the single most important thing. And I think if I look back, like, what did I do well? I, relatively high amount of perseverance. We didn't talk about some of the really big failures I had before Wisk. I had some big failures, but I persevered enough. So I think I persevere more than others, and I think I spend more time than others trying to find smart people to work with me. Those two things, I think, are what have led to me having the success I've had. You know, I haven't— I'm not as successful as I would hope to be one day. But like, the success I have had, I think, has come through those. So those are, I think, my two big, like, things I would say is like persevere, and really look for— spend, invest the time and energy to find really smart people to join you on the journey.

Those are two tips that will definitely resonate. And I love how this has come full circle. So Thank you, Nick, for sharing your wisdom so far. Everybody, if you're building, you have to check out Git Law, and looking forward to seeing what you're going to do next.

Thank you for having me. It's great. Super fun.

Thanks for tuning in all the way to the end of this episode. If you enjoyed it, please share it with someone you think would get value from it.

And don't forget to subscribe on YouTube, Spotify, or Apple Podcasts fast, so you never miss an episode.

For the best way to stay in the loop, head to millennialmasters.net. That's where you'll get all the latest features and new episodes straight to your inbox every week. Catch you next week!