Snowy Start:

With all the snow in New York, I saw something on X that I found incredibly interesting.

The concept of a “sneckdown” is an accumulation of snow on a road that has not been driven over, usually at intersections or along curbs, which reveals unused, too-wide, or underutilized road space. Initially coined by Streetsblog, it highlights areas where roads could be turned into literally anything else. Past just accumulating animal feces (maybe human?? who knows in this city) it reminded me of another concept.

Desire Paths:

Photograph: Alamy, Source

Take a look at this park. There were probably hundreds of man hours and hundreds of thousands of dollars spent on planning out the roads, trees, benches, all to make it the most enjoyable for park goers. But in true human ingenuity, people decided the urban planner's path was suboptimal. Was everyone thinking about the Triangle Inequality Theorem? Were people thinking to themselves that if “a^2+b^2=c^2 in Euclidean Space, then since a and b are positive numbers the hypotenuse has to be strictly less than the sum of the two sides”? Surely not. They saw the path in front of them, decided they had a better way to go about it and just did it, and others came to the same conclusion until it became a path itself. I think this has interesting implications when you think about it from the lens of venture and investing.

Cyberstarts and the “Sunrise” Methodology:

While working on a deep dive on the Cybersecurity industry, I had the pleasure of listening to Gili Raanan’s interview with Patrick O’Shaughnessy on the Invest like the Best podcast. While Raanan’s story itself is incredibly inspiring and something I think all young people should take as a lesson of overcoming adversity, something stood out to me. While most VCs are trying their best to find and sniff out the best founders with the best deals, Raanan and co create their own “desire paths” within the cybersecurity industry. Gili and cyberstarts take a much different approach. They find exceptional founders (many from the storied 8200 Unit, where Gili himself served and won the Israel Defense Presidential Prize in 1996), and go to F500 CISO’s and ask a variety of questions. The ethos of those interviews boils down to “What is a product/capability you would pay for that you don’t have right now?” and “What vendor do you hate the most?”. What do they do after? Build, Ship, Break, Fix, and repeat this over and over again, until suddenly, you have it. A product that fixes issues, reduces headcounts, is an easy sell to management, and resolves more than it alerts.

Side Note: Cybersecurity is actually a super interesting space to be in right now. Disclaimer, I made this chart in 2025, but a recent search shows it still holds. The average cybersecurity company’s EV/NTM Revenue (Next Twelve Months) multiple post-2023 is actually slightly higher than the average cloud/SaaS company. Crowdstrike’s EV/Rev multiple is one of the highest, if not highest out of the SaaS/Cyber space commanding an impressive 23-25x EV/TTM Revenue (Trailing Twelve Months) multiple.

The reasoning behind this uptick is many-fold, largely stemming from GenAI expanding the threat vector many orders of magnitude from what it used to be and legacy parameters failing against new threat vectors, but I will save that deep dive for another article.

This “Sunrise” methodology and its results speak for itself. Cyberstarts has built one of the most statistically dominant early stage track records of any cybersecurity focused firm: a flagship outcome in Wiz (pending ~$32B acquisition by Google), plus a deep bench of multi billion dollar companies it seeded early including Island (~$3B+ valuation), Fireblocks (~$8B peak valuation), Armis (~$3.4B valuation), and Cyera (~$1.4B valuation). A report by NightDragon credits Cyberstarts backed companies with the highest total exit dollars from Israeli cyber startups since 2019, the largest number of $100M+ exits (7), and a tie for most total exits (8) among Israeli cyber seed specialists. The same dataset shows Cyberstarts seeded 5 of Israel’s 21 cyber unicorns (~24%), which arguably is the highest concentration of unicorn creation for a firm in this specific niche.

Elegant Solution?:

This brings me to the big question in this article, in which I pose a question to you. As an early stage fund pre-seed to Series A, we operate in a world that is fundamentally rate limited, meaning the number of truly exceptional founders you can both access and win allocation in is constrained. At the same time, your returns are capped by holding periods, entry prices, and ownership dynamics, which means you cannot rely on financial engineering or late stage multiple expansion to manufacture outcomes (also, you just don’t have the money to sit at the table as much as larger funds!). So the only real lever left is value add: increasing the probability that the companies you back become outliers. If deal flow is finite and return ceilings are real, then the edge must come from meaningfully improving the trajectory of the few companies you choose to concentrate behind.

I think incubating the N-of-1 founders, similar to Cyberstarts, is the perfect desire path, to the paved road that is venture :)

Subscribe now

At the outset, the Joker appears as a criminal mastermind detached from Gotham’s underworld. He works alongside the mob but remains outside of their hierarchy, testing Batman and Gotham more than serving any traditional purpose of profit or power. His early moves, robbing banks, undermining mob bosses, paint him as a clever but somewhat mercenary antagonist.

As the film progresses, however, the Joker escalates. Burning the mob’s money signals a decisive break from conventional criminal motivations. No longer about wealth or influence, his agenda becomes much more ideological. His violence shifts from opportunistic to symbolic, from attacks on hospitals, ferries, and civic figures that reveal a desire to unravel Gotham’s social fabric. This evolution suggests a process of radicalization: he feeds off the chaos he creates, and each success emboldens him to pursue even larger-scale destabilization.

The Joker’s manipulation of Harvey Dent is a turning point. By corrupting Gotham’s “White Knight,” he proves that even the city’s purest symbol of justice can be broken. This moment isn’t just tactical, it’s very philosophical. It demonstrates that the Joker no longer sees himself as merely a criminal but as an agent of moral collapse. The Joker’s ideology solidifies. Anyone, given the right circumstances, can be pushed into madness. His own persona becomes the embodiment of that worldview.

The line about soldiers and gangbangers: “If a truckload of soldiers blows up, nobody panics” is one of the few grounded clues about his possible background (which he keeps switching in the course of the movie further hinting at the fact that he “discovers” himself throughout the movie. His tactical awareness, weapons proficiency, and ability to anticipate law enforcement responses lend plausibility to the idea that he might have military training. A Marine background would explain both his technical competence and his disillusionment: exposure to systemic violence could have shaped his nihilistic worldview. While the film deliberately keeps his past ambiguous, these details invite speculation about a disciplined man who turned his skills toward chaos.

The Joker’s radicalization parallels Batman’s transformation. Both figures are outsiders who refuse to conform to Gotham’s expectations. Batman becomes the “Dark Knight”, a protector condemned by the very city he saves. The Joker, meanwhile, becomes a villain untethered from conventional crime, embodying chaos itself. Their trajectories intertwine: as Batman accepts being the hero Gotham needs rather than the one it wants, the Joker embraces being the villain Gotham deserves, an opposite but equally absolute role.

The Joker’s journey isn’t static; it is one of escalation and radicalization. What begins as a villain playing games with Gotham’s institutions evolves into a nihilistic crusade against order itself. His interactions with Harvey Dent, his rejection of money and the mob, and his large-scale terror plots all reflect a deepening ideological commitment.

Subscribe now

Recently, while applying to an internship, a question on the application asked me what I thought the next “nascent market opportunity that has the potential to be the next trillion-dollar opportunity” was. This was one of my favorite questions I have been asked to date because it not only allowed me to synthesize a thesis I had been thinking about for a while, but showed me I should be asking myself these questions and answering them. Okay enough self-reflection.

The Issue:

Nuclear energy provides a lot of the solutions to the current issues facing the energy sector. Renewable energy sources like wind and solar are intermittent, necessitating large-scale energy storage or backup baseload power sources, making them inefficient at tackling the world's issue of rising CO2 emissions and global warming. Advanced nuclear solutions offer carbon-free, 24/7 baseload power, reducing reliance on fossil fuels. Additionally, many countries rely on imported fossil fuels, which reduces their independence, threatening economic stability as well as national security. Further, with companies like Meta, Microsoft, and NVIDIA, all fighting for dominance in the AI space, everyone needs to find a cheaper, faster, and more efficient way to power the massive data centers needed to drive this innovation and growth. Just this December, Meta came out and said it wants to add 1-4 gigawatts of new U.S. nuclear generation capacity starting in the early 2030s (Also see Sam Altmans new fling with Oklo).

So our drivers for the need for nuclear energy becomes 3-fold. We have a geopolitical lens, a consumer facing lens, and finally a corporate competition lens (it doesn’t hurt that this competition just so happens to be in the era-defining race of AI). Countries/nations, regular people, and corporations.

Current Landscape:

If the pain points are so clearly defined, and current offerings in renewables not solving, why haven’t the traditional large-scale nuclear plants swooped in and taken this trillion dollar opportunity for themselves? First, traditional nuclear power plants take too long to build, and deal with these issues in a timely manner. Further, they are ridiculously expensive, often with cost overruns. Both of these issues are exacerbated by strict regulations around the use and building of nuclear power plants, leading to long/expensive legal battles as well as time delays.

However, governments worldwide are increasingly recognizing nuclear’s role in decarbonization, introducing favorable regulations and subsidies (like the U.S. Inflation Reduction Act and the European Union Green taxonomy). But this still doesn’t deal with the fact that building nuclear reactors is still expensive, dangerous, and time consuming.

Opportunity:

This is where the market opportunity comes in. If a company can develop a truly modular, easily manufactured nuclear generator, it could experience exponential growth, similar to how microchip companies or data center providers have scaled. By doing this, they can potentially capture an enormous slice of the global energy market.

Looking at a similar comparison, early computers were massive, expensive, and were almost exclusively used/funded by government entities (sound familiar?). However, the semiconductor revolution shrank computers from room-sized mainframes to personal devices accessible to almost everyone. Now, personal phones and computers permeate nearly every corner of society enabling, a trillion dollar industry.

So what does this offering look like in terms of nuclear reactors? Advanced Small Modular Reactors (or SMR’s) and microreactors represent a similar paradigm shift. Nuclear reactors become smaller, cheaper, and more versatile, driving broader adoption by not only the private sector, but municipalities, and large scale corporate campuses.

Relating to VC Firms:

Historically, VC firms have shied away from investing in the nuclear space due to large capital requirements, lengthy development cycles, and regulatory complexities. This goes the same for fossil fuels as well. Returns relating to fossil-fuel adjacent tech have always been volatile, because they often fluctuate due to commodity cycles leading to some pretty high-profile write-downs (except Workwise aka RigUp you killing it).

Additionally, these types of startups require significant capital for R&D, equipment, and testing in the field. All of this results in longer runway needs and multiple financing rounds, highlighting the very reasons why VC firms in the last 10-15 years have thrown bags of cash at anything “SaaS”.

At this point, you might be asking yourself, “Ankith, what the hell? Nuclear reactor tech faces all the same issues that made fossil-fuel investments bad! (insert angry face emoji)”. Well yes, but also no.

Why Nuclear Is Different:

1. Regulation Support: I am a strong believer in “we collectively cannot all be this stupid”. Global warming is a serious issue, with so many countries aiming to decarbonize their grids, I think that at the very least, sovereign funds have an incentive to invest in these startups. Concurrently, because fossil fuels are bad and icky, there is so much more scrutiny around them (ESG babyyyy) which can reduce growth on these investments, and deter more investment into nuclear. Additionally, nuclear energy has way more bipartisan support, which I think will help drive making favorable regulation, reducing the lead times on these plants, allowing VC’s to see returns earlier (matching 7-10 year timeline) on the money they put in. Additionally, the push for clean data centers powering AI make it much more of a pressing need.

2. Decreased Volatility: Nuclear power is less susceptible to commodity cycles, making it less volatile compared to fossil fuels when thinking about variables like global demand, OPEC decisions, and geopolitical events. While CapEx for nuclear currently is still high, OpEx is relatively low. This is because while uranium prices do fluctuate, they only account for about 10% of a nuclear power plants operations costs. This is also mitigated by the fact that nuclear operators secure uranium through long-term through multi-year contracts, locking in prices and insulating themselves from spot market volatility (by contrast many natural gas and oil facilities are more exposed to short-term price movements).

3. Moats and Returns: Making a nuclear reactor is no small feat, and making one that’s small, modular, cheap, and efficient, is 10x harder. This could act as a moat for successful ventures that lock in their IP early on, giving them significant competitive advantage. Additionally, nuclear plants often operate for decades (40-60 years) creating sustainable yields long after investment.

As advanced reactor technologies simplify manufacturing and reduce costs, more and more venture-scale opportunities are emerging, sparking an “Atomic Renaissance.” In my opinion, the commercialization of nuclear generators stands at an inflection point, where a startup that successfully engineers a safe, modular, and cost-effective nuclear generator could achieve the kind of explosive, category-defining growth that mirrors that of companies it aims to power.

Subscribe now

Remora Carbon

The first company I ever properly sourced, diligenced, did a founder-call with and created a deck for, was Remora Carbon. In this post you will get my elevator pitch, my lessons learned from this pitch, and how the company is doing currently.

Inception

When I first sourced Remora, it had raised $5.5 million at a $20 million dollar valuation in 2023, which to me was impressive traction despite being a hard-tech company (usually very capital intensive to produce an mvp) founded in 2020. They are a company that makes filters that fit on the back of semi-truck exhausts (patented tech). The filters would capture and store the carbon produced by semi-trucks and the filters would be powered by the heat from the exhaust (self sustaining baby!).

When the filters were full, during refueling stops, the drivers would switch out the filters with a new one kept on the rig, and at the end the trucking company could sell the captured carbon back to Remora who would then sell it to a different company that uses it. The whole draw for this was that it was a way for trucking companies to reduce emissions, while creating a new revenue stream (the filers after a certain point would pay for themselves and then put the company in the green). Additionally, with carbon credits/lowering emissions, these trucking companies could get very lucrative tax benefits/write-offs.

To me, this was a win win for all parties involved, especially when you consider the global carbon capture and storage (CCS) market was estimated at 2.01 billion U.S. dollars in 2021. The CCS market was also forecasted to register a CAGR of 19.5 percent from 2021 to 2028 to reach a value of seven billion U.S. dollars (still holding strong).

To be fair, my pitch was not the best, and of course there were concerns. Was there added work for the trucking companies to train drivers on this, where would the captured carbon be stored, how capital intensive is it for Remora to get and transport this carbon? etc etc.

I also thought there were a bunch of applications past just trucks. Because the screw on filter was such a ubiquitous design, I thought exhuast was just the start. Factory smoke stacks, corporate buildings, regular peoples cars. I thought that little yellow cylinder would be seen everywhere.

Lessons Learned

1. Separate your love for the company and what it looks like as an investment

   1. I was way too invested in this company because I thought it was the best thing in the world, I was unable to see the issues with the company

2. Founder Calls are biased

   1. the founder is always pitching their company, take nothing they say at face value, do your own diligence, and get other more qualified opinions than your own, the stupidest thing you can do is not ask for help.

3. Perception Matters

   1. While I am a big believer in content>design, do not discount the power of a well designed deck. It shows thoughtfulness, an iterative mindset, and a consumer facing mentality that some founders lack. At the end of the day, no matter how good your product is, you still have to sell it. A good deck goes a long long way.

Remora Now

Bang.

Hello

My name is Ankith Bharadwaj, I am currently a 2nd year at NYU Stern, but I am originally from Acton, MA. I have 0 clue what I am doing, I did not want to recruit banking because it just was not for me (no hate to industry I just knew I wouldn’t thrive there). I really like startups, entrepreneurships, and investing and have had some pretty cool opportunities to explore this space (I have been pretty lucky in my life). You can go to my linkedin to see more so I won’t bore you with talking them.

My mentor in my club told me I should start a substack (see I listen to your advice Sharanya) to share my thoughts on these topics so I will share a small thing I find interesting today and start more later on.

Blockchain+Calling Cap

I have a very surface level amount of knowledge on blockchain, crypto, etc but one thing I find that could be a really cool (maybe somewhat useless) application of blockchain is calling cap on things (or verifying not-cap on things).

Say for example, you and your boy are talking about music, sports, etc. and the topic of who was a fan first or who put who on a certain song comes up. This turns into a whole finger pointing game he-said-she-said nonsense. BUT what if everytime you had a strong opinion on something (x player was going to be a star, y artist was going to blow up, z company was going to be a unicorn), you plugged it into a platform and you bought verification on the fact that this was your opinion at this time, with a sliver of crypto (ETH, BTC, whatever shitcoin idc).

Now, not only have you turned the fact you had an opinion on anything at a certain point in time into a verifiable fact, but you have turned said opinion into a potential asset. What if you were able to go to a firm/record label/sports agent and say “look, I am really fucking good at picking the next big [actor, company, artist, athlete]” and are able to show them out of the 5000 opportunities you saw that year you were right about x% of them. And no one can say “cap” because it is verified by Blockchain :)

Maybe this post can serve as the verification that I had this idea at this time!

Subscribe now