Albert M.

From early hire to CBO, Art L. shares how Brex scaled from a corporate card for startups to a global spend platform built for enterprises, with lessons on building trust, navigating M&A, and leading through change. Catch it all on the latest Sourcery drop 🎙️⬇️

14

1 Comment

INTUIT’S DISTRIBUTION MOAT One of the most powerful moats for software is a proprietary distribution channel. Intuit has incredibly sticky and loyal mindshare and distribution among the CPA community. When I was doing my startup, I tried to use another accounting software, but my CPA forced me to cancel that other subscription and switch to Quickbooks. It was an eye opening attestation to the strength of their hold on CPAs. I think Intuit will be extremely hard to displace as the accounting platform of choice for SMBs.

247

35 Comments

DID WHITE HOUSE CONSIDERS TECH STARTUP WILL BE DISADVANTAGED BECAUSE OF H1B $100,000 VISA FEE COMPARED TO BIGGER TECH COMPANIES There is credible reporting and commentary that the White House’s proposed $100,000 H-1B visa fee would tend to disadvantage tech startups relative to larger, better–capitalized companies. Here’s what the evidence and analysis show: What is the $100,000 H-1B fee proposal? • The Trump administration announced a proclamation that would impose a $100,000 fee on new H-1B visa petition filings. • The White House clarified that this fee won’t apply to renewals or existing visa holders. • It’s intended as a one-time fee, not an annual recurring charge. Why people say this would hurt startups 1. Lack of financial cushion Startups typically have tight budgets and lean operating models. Paying a $100,000 nonrefundable fee for each new visa is a large capital expense, which a big tech firm might absorb as part of talent acquisition, but riskier for a small company. 2. Barrier to hiring global talent Many startups rely on attracting skilled engineers and specialists globally (because of local talent shortages). If the cost is prohibitive, they may be unable to compete for such talent. 3. Advantage to big, well-capitalized firms Large tech corporations have more liquidity, more funding, and greater ability to absorb “visa overheads.” They may also have more internal resources (legal, HR) to manage complexity. This shifts the playing field further toward established incumbents. 4. Distortion of hiring and salary practices To justify the visa cost, startups may feel pressured to offer very high salaries (to signal a “very high-value” hire) or avoid hiring foreign talent altogether—reducing flexibility in staffing. 5. Possibility of pushing operations or talent overseas Some critics warn that firms may relocate development or R&D functions abroad (to avoid U.S. visa costs) or use remote teams outside the U.S. rather than deal with the burden. In the public debate and in statements from analysts, it’s clear that the potential disproportionate burden on startups has been discussed and criticized. But whether the White House officially factored those disadvantages into its policy design is less clear in the public record so far. • Some of the justifications by the administration emphasize preventing “abuse” of the H-1B system and ensuring that the visas go to higher-wage, highly skilled roles. That rationale implicitly favors larger firms able to pay higher salaries. • Commentators and industry voices are openly warning that the policy will advantage big tech and penalize startups — so the awareness is certainly there.

2

Reaching a $1 billion annual payment volume is a massive milestone, but what I love most about this post is that the focus is already on "what’s next." 🚀 Working with the Stripe team every day is a masterclass in scale and innovation. Their support has been instrumental in helping Aesthetic Record empower thousands of medical practices to grow with fewer headaches and faster results. Huge thanks to Moshe Zrihen and the entire Stripe crew for their tireless partnership. Their expertise in embedded finance allows us to stay focused on our mission while they handle the heavy lifting of global payments. We’re just getting started! #Fintech #SaaS #AestheticRecord #Stripe #Payments #Growth

6

1 Comment

GTM Engineering is just Rev Ops. It's not a new thing, and it's not the future. It's a clever rebranding. Having experience with a new tech stack, doesn't change the function. You support the GTM org with tools, solutions, and process that drive desired outcomes. There are people who sell, and people who support them. The tools today are way over engineered and not built for sellers. In time, that will change... and sellers will be better for it! ...and the supporting cast of "specialists" will be far less necessary.

22

9 Comments

Now that big tech companies are laying off tens of thousands of employees, which is sadly nothing to celebrate, the silver lining is that more talented young people will once again look to start or join earlier-stage startups. California and the world will benefit far more from fresh entrepreneurial energy and less “ex-Google, ex-Apple” employee energy that had taken over the past decade or so. We need more entrepreneurial mindset and less big-tech employee mindset. Gone are the “a day in the life at big company XYZ” Tik Tok videos and people will need to learn to build something again. Building is much harder than being an overly paid big-tech employee with a cushy non-impactful role, but it’s much more rewarding and a much better learning ground. If you are young, and really want to learn and grow, join a great startup or scaleup. Best advice I ever got when I was in my twenties.

55

3 Comments

Stripe is mulling an acquisition of all or part of PayPal, Bloomberg reports, citing anonymous sources. Though Stripe is the younger of the two payment processors, it's one of the industry's most valuable, worth about $159 billion as of Feb. 24. PayPal, meanwhile, has seen a brutal stock slide that's wiped out nearly half of its value over the past year, drawing takeover interest from several parties other than Stripe. PayPal has in recent years ceded market share to rivals Apple Pay and Google Pay.

1

Jensen Huang says a $500K engineer should spend $250K a year on AI tokens. That sounds insane. But most CFOs are missing the real shift: AI is no longer a software cost. It’s becoming a utility. And like every utility, cheaper units don’t lower your bill. They increase usage. I’m seeing this in my own workflow. A year ago, I used 10 to 15 prompts a day. Now I regularly hit token limits. One variance analysis or modelling session can burn more tokens than an entire day used to. Not because AI got more expensive. Because I rely on it more. That’s the shift finance teams haven’t internalized yet: Your AI bill won’t scale linearly. It scales with behaviour. Which means the real job of a CFO is changing from: “What does this tool cost?” to “What is our cost per output?” Cost per analysis. Cost per report. Cost per decision. I broke this down in my latest piece, including: - A 5-part token budgeting framework. - Model pricing differences (5x spread depending on usage). - How I would allocate AI spend across a 25-person team. Link in comments. For the finance leaders here: Do you actually know your team’s total AI spend right now? (Not just subscriptions. The real number.)

24

5 Comments

I hate telling founders they just missed out on $100k+ in cash because of a calendar date. But it happens every year. R&D deadlines are approaching. If you’re a tech startup, you can likely get 40% to 60% of your R&D spend back in cash. You've got until 30 April to sort it! If you want to check, shoot me a DM. I’ll tell you if you’re eligible in five minutes. #N2RD #RDTI #RDTLC

75

1 Comment