SEA of Startups

Επεισόδια

• The Mirage and the Fork in the Road 24.06.2026 27λ

  Start with two numbers and a question.In May, startups in this region raised $472 million. More than double what they raised in April. Read only that line and you would think the drought had broken.Now the second number. That doubling was built almost entirely on two checks. Take those two out and May was thin, still down on the year before.So here is the question I want to sit inside. When you are a founder in Kuala Lumpur, or Bangkok, or Manila, which numbers are actually telling you the truth?Because two of the loudest numbers in this market, the funding headline when you raise and the IPO pipeline when you want out, are both unreliable. And they are unreliable in different ways. The money coming in is inflated. The money going out is uneven. In between sits a real company, your company, trying to make decisions on top of figures that flatter and figures that lie.The mirage: headlines that flatterThe funding rebound is a perfect little lie. Not a dishonest one. A statistically true one, which is worse, because it is harder to argue with.May 2026: $472 million across 31 deals, per DealStreetAsia. Up 104% on April. The kind of line that gets screenshotted into a pitch deck by Tuesday.Look underneath it. The jump came from the return of mega deals, transactions worth $100 million or more. A data center. An AI hardware platform. April had none. May had two. Two checks did the heavy lifting for an entire region. And even with them, May still came in 18% below the same month a year earlier. Strip the two big ones out and what you have left is quiet.This is not new, and that is the point. We saw the same shape in the first quarter: about $2.8 billion across 98 deals, the lowest deal count in at least eight years, with a single data center raise accounting for more than 70% of all that capital. Once you see the pattern you cannot unsee it. The total goes up. The number of companies actually getting funded does not. The aggregate is being inflated by hardware and data centers, while the count of real operating companies catching a check stays flat.Here is why that matters to you, and it is not academic. If you are raising right now and you benchmark yourself against the headline, you will conclude that capital is flowing and you are simply being passed over. That is the wrong lesson, and it will make you do desperate things. The right lesson is that the deal count, not the dollar total, is the honest gauge. And the deal count says fewer companies, higher bar, slower checks.The honest number is in the marginSo if the aggregate is a mirage, what is the real one? What is the number on a Southeast Asian cap table that does not lie?It is the margin. Which brings me to one of the genuinely good stories in the region this month.Respond.io, a Malaysia-based company, raised a $62.5 million Series B led by Camber Partners, with Endeavor Catalyst and existing backers coming back in, off the back of going through the Endeavor selection network. Big round. But the round is not the story. The story is what was true before the round.$35 million in annual recurring revenue. Growing over 100% a year. At a decent profit margin. Read that again, because they were already profitable. They raised growth money from a position where they did not strictly need it. That is the exact opposite of the burn-first, find-the-model-later playbook the last cycle rewarded and then punished.They run an AI-agent-powered customer messaging platform, the layer that lets a business actually hold a conversation and close a sale across the channels where commerce in this region happens. Billions of messages a quarter, more than 10,000 businesses, over 180 countries. The new money is going west, into North America and Europe, with the possibility of some acquisitions. A profitable company, quietly compounding, raising on its own terms and going on offense into the biggest markets in the world.Take one thing from this. Stop reading the league tables. Read the profit and loss. In 2026, the only honest number on a Southeast Asian cap table is the margin, because it is the one figure nobody can dress up with a single big check.The asterisk Malaysia should be honest aboutLet me complicate my own happy story, because I am not here to wave the flag.This one is close to home, and KL should be proud of it. The founder is not Malaysian. The company did not start here. It was brought here. That should be a feature, not a footnote. A founder who could base anywhere chose to base in KL, and that decision creates things you can touch: engineering jobs, payroll that gets taxed, corporate tax, office leases, local lawyers and accountants, the cafe downstairs, and a signal to the next founder weighing where to land that says people build serious companies here. Malaysia should bank that credit fully and without an asterisk.But the timing is almost too on the nose, because there is an asterisk.At the same moment, the rules on foreign talent are leaning the other way. The salary floor on the employment pass has jumped. Pass lifespans are changing. To me, though, the salary number is not the headline. The harder one is the requirement that you have a replacement plan in place for foreign talent, and some of those plans are short.Detail has been scant, but one person closer to the interpretation told me the employment is treated as tied to the company, not to the title or the role. So if you bring in a foreign hire to fill, say, a junior developer seat, and that person does well and gets promoted, it does not matter that their title has grown. What matters is that they are still there, and the requirement is that you replace them so that they no longer are.Sit with that from the talent’s side. What highly capable person takes a role knowing there is a clock on it? If they have a family, will they uproot to a market that is effectively saying we want you temporarily but not forever?I understand the intent. We do need to build local capability, and you should not let companies park expats in seats indefinitely. Fair enough. But here is the tension I cannot get past as an investor. You cannot run a “come build your global company here” pitch and a “here is your countdown timer, please train your replacement” policy at the same time. The open-door version of this works. There are countries we can point to that prove it.This is a competitive sport. The founder who chooses KL had other options, because Singapore wanted him, Hong Kong wanted him, Tokyo, Bangkok and Manila all wanted him. The risk is that Malaysia celebrates this win in the very quarter it makes the next one harder to land. If attracting mobile founders is how a small market punches above its weight, and it is, then the policy and the pitch have to point in the same direction. For this month at least, they did not.The fork in the roadNow the way out. Every founder eventually asks the quiet question. If this works, how do I get out, and where? Every investor asks it less quietly. In Southeast Asia the answer used to be a shrug. This month, three companies gave three different answers, and together they tell you more about this region than any funding total.Thailand sends its champion abroad. LINE MAN Wongnai, the app more than 10 million Thais use for food, rides and payments, is weighing an IPO, and the venues it is looking at are Hong Kong and New York, not Bangkok. The reporting cites weak domestic conditions and political volatility, with a decision expected as soon as the end of this month. Sit with that. The most-used app in the country looked at its home exchange and decided it could not get a fair hearing there, so it is shopping for a listing 8,000 kilometers away. A market that cannot list its own champions does not have a sentiment problem. It has a plumbing problem. The pipes that turn a great company into a liquid, locally owned public outcome simply have not been built.The Philippines builds a house worth staying in. In the same window, the opposite answer. Mint, the parent of GCash, the finance super app tens of millions of Filipinos live inside, has authorized the filing to go public: a registration with the regulator, a listing application with the Philippine Stock Exchange, an offer of around 12% of the company, targeting the second half of this year and possibly the fourth quarter. It is shaping up to be the largest IPO in the history of that exchange. And it is listing at home. Not Hong Kong. Not New York. The biggest fintech outcome the country has produced is choosing to be a Philippine public company. It is not alone. Maya, the digital bank, is weighing its own listing on a dual track, the local exchange plus NASDAQ, after its first profitable year. One foot at home, one foot abroad, a hedge.Look at the fork honestly. Thailand’s champion is leaving the list. The Philippines has one champion committing to the home exchange outright and another hedging across both. That is not the region as a single sound story. That is the region splitting in real time over the same question: is it worth building a venue people want to stay for? Right now, this quarter, the Philippines is making the bigger bet that the answer is yes.The caveat, because I promised it. Do not let anyone sell you Mint and Maya as a scrappy-startup miracle. Mint sits behind Globe and the Ayala group, with AMP alongside. Maya sits behind PLDT. These are conglomerate and telco children going public, which rhymes with what I said recently about Vietnam, where the giants raise and the startups starve. Hold both thoughts. The optimism is earned: a deep local public market is the single thing this region has always lacked, and the Philippines is genuinely building toward it. But the homegrown-founder fairy tale is not the right frame. Incumbents are listing. That is still good. It is just not the legend.And here is the constructive next move, the one I would want a Filipino policymaker or operator to actually hear. One record listing does not make a market. The test is the second one, and the third, and the fourth. Can the exchange turn Mint’s debut into a habit, so that the next great Filipino company does not even think about Hong Kong or the US? If it can, the Philippines stops being the market everyone underrates and becomes the market with the exit nobody else in the region has.The through lineTwo acts, the same lesson from opposite ends of a company’s life.When you raise, the headline lies. It is inflated by a handful of checks you will never be part of, and the only number that tells you the truth is your own margin. So build like respond.io. Get to profit, and let profit, not a press release, be the thing that earns you a round.When you leave, the region forks. One country will send you abroad to be valued. Another is trying, right now, to build a house worth staying in. Do not assume your exit. Choose it on purpose, the way you would choose a co-founder.In between sits the thing I keep coming back to. The capital around a Southeast Asian founder, the private money coming in and the public money you eventually exit through, is unreliable and uneven. That is not a reason to be cynical. It is a reason to be precise. Read the honest number, pick the real venue, and do not build your company on top of someone else’s headline.The markets that win the next decade out here will be the ones that do both: attract the people who create the margin, and build the place those people can cash out at home. This month, one company showed us the margin. One country showed us the door, opening it and starting to close it at the same time. And one country started building a room worth staying in.Be the reason the money stops sitting still.Real. Raw. Relatable.... --- ... This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• Ep 31 - Oil, iron, and idle money: what the war is really doing to Southeast Asia 10.06.2026 30λ

  Start with a sliver of water between Iran and Oman. On a normal day, roughly a fifth of the world’s oil moves through the Strait of Hormuz. This year it stopped being normal. When the strait seized up, Brent jumped 10 to 13 percent in a single session into the low 80s and kept climbing to the highest level since 2022. The International Energy Agency, which does not deal in drama, called it the largest supply disruption in the history of the global oil market.I am not here to cover the politics. I am here to follow the power. Because that one shock shows up three times in the Southeast Asian startup story this quarter, wearing three different costumes. It sold electric cars. It raised the price of the electricity our data centre boom depends on. And it gave every cautious LP one more reason to keep the chequebook shut. Energy, iron, and idle capital. Follow the power and you follow the whole region.One. The war that sold a million electric carsThe lazy version of this story is “war happened, everyone bought an EV.” That is not what happened. What happened is that a fuel shock landed on top of a shift that was already moving fast, and poured petrol, pun intended, on the fire.The scale first. In 2025, EV sales in Southeast Asia more than doubled year on year to more than half a million vehicles, and more than 90 percent of those were full battery electric, not hybrids. The demand was already there. Then the petrol queues showed up. One Thai market report described long lines at filling stations on the same days that EV displays pulled the biggest crowds at the Bangkok motor show. That is the whole story in one image. One queue for the old thing, one crowd for the new one.Go around the region and the averages hide the real story. Vietnam is the outlier nobody outside Asia talks about: EV share of new cars hit close to 40 percent in 2025, ahead of the UK and the EU, almost entirely on the back of one company, VinFast, which targets 300,000 deliveries this year after 175,000 last. Thailand is the cleanest fuel link, with EV sales tripling year on year to over 44,000 units in January 2026 alone, and logistics fleets switching specifically to cut their exposure to fuel cost swings. When the fleet operators move, it is about the spreadsheet, not the planet. Indonesia crossed 15 percent EV share and passed the United States, with Chinese brands taking more than 75 percent of the market. This is not a Western EV story. It is a Chinese supply story with a Southeast Asian buyer. And Malaysia, my home market, is earlier and more honest: adoption up 14-fold since 2022, but still only about 5.5 percent of cars sold, held back by roughly 5,000 public charge points. You cannot fuel-shock your way past missing infrastructure.None of this is just consumers being noble. It is policy and cheap money. Thailand cut excise on passenger EVs from 8 percent to 2, and to zero on electric pickups. The Philippines went further, putting forward an incentive package worth around 60 billion pesos while ending subsidies for combustion engines, with the reporting tying the move directly to the oil shock. Read that again: a government using an oil crisis as cover to stop subsidising petrol and start subsidising electrons. Then the banks did the quiet part. In Singapore, UOB ran a green car loan at 1.5 percent, DBS at 2.48. When a bank prices your electric car loan below your petrol one, the moral argument is over. The maths makes the decision.The part that matters for operators is the fleet. Grab signed with BYD to put up to 50,000 EVs into its fleets across the region, with an eco-friendly toggle in Singapore and Thailand. GoTo took the other lane, going after two wheelers with a pledge to electrify Gojek’s motorbike fleet by 2030. On autonomy, be honest: the robotaxi headlines are a US and China story. Out here the fundable shift is the powertrain under the existing driver, not removing the driver. If you are pitching autonomous ride-hailing for Southeast Asia this year, the oil shock did not help you. The EV swap did.Here is where I land, and it is not the clean version. The war did not invent this boom. China did, with cheap good cars and a supply chain nobody here can match, and governments did, with subsidies written before anyone fired a missile. The shock just compressed years of slow behaviour change into a few quarters. And demand pulled forward by a price spike can snap back. If Hormuz reopens and Brent drifts back to the 60s, some of this 2026 surge was borrowed from 2027 and 2028. The companies that survive that are the ones building real local supply, financing, and charging, not the ones riding a fear premium.Two. Twenty billion lands in Johor, and DayOne raises four and a halfWe have covered the Malaysian data centre build before, so I will not reread the brochure. I want to follow the money one step further than the headlines do.Announced data centre capex across the region now runs past 20 billion US dollars over the 2024 to 2028 window, and that is committed, not deployed. AWS around 9 billion into Singapore, Google 5 billion plus 2 for its first Malaysian site, Microsoft a couple of billion more into Malaysia and Indonesia. On top of that, private money: AirTrunk alone is putting 12 billion ringgit into two new Johor campuses, taking its Malaysian commitment to roughly 27 billion ringgit, call it 7 billion dollars. And just this month DayOne, the Singapore-domiciled operator that flipped out of China’s GDS, closed a 4.5 billion dollar Series C led by Coatue and Hillhouse with Indonesia’s sovereign fund alongside. Hold that name, because it comes back in the third act.Now the question nobody asks: what is that money actually buying? Land, concrete, power, cooling, and imported chips. A hyperscale data centre is a real estate and energy project wearing an AI t-shirt. The single biggest cheque inside it goes to Nvidia. Very little of that 20 billion touches a local software founder. This is not venture capital landing in the region, it is construction capital.So what is the secondary effect on the rest of us? Three things, and I want to be balanced. First, cost. These campuses pull on the same grid and water local businesses use, and Malaysia stopped approving non-AI data centre proposals back in 2024 to keep the power for AI builds. The state is rationing power and choosing hyperscalers. When your tariff drifts up in three years, this is part of why. Other parts of the world now require operators to reinvest into the local energy and water network to offset that pressure. I have not seen that proposed seriously in Malaysia yet, and I would like to. Second, jobs. A hyperscale campus employs a crowd for eighteen months of construction, then a skeleton crew. It is not a founder-jobs engine. Third, and this is the genuine prize: if the build is done right, founders get cheaper, closer compute and local data residency, the thing that lets a regulated fintech or health startup build on sovereign infrastructure without stitching together a compliance workaround.The roads analogy is the honest one. Infrastructure is an enabler, not the destination. The data centre boom only pays off for the domestic economy if we generate the demand to use it: enterprises and government going properly digital, and a real layer of AI-native startups creating the load these campuses were built for. Lay the road, then you still need the trucks. Capital keeps flooding the iron. Whether it earns its return depends entirely on who drives on it.Three. The lowest deal count in eight years, sitting on a mountain of cashTwo facts that should not be true at once. In the first quarter of 2026, Southeast Asian startups raised about 2.8 billion dollars across 98 equity deals, the lowest quarterly deal count in at least eight years, and even that is flattered by one or two giant infrastructure cheques of the DayOne variety. Meanwhile APAC investors sit on roughly 240 billion dollars of dry powder, down from a 2023 peak near 315 but hardly an empty tank.So which is it, drought or hoard? Both, and the contradiction is the story. The money exists. It is just not moving into Southeast Asian early stage. The last clean read on region-specific dry powder was around 7 billion dollars, a couple of years old and probably overstated, but the direction is the point: funding here fell about 70 percent from the 2021 peak while the cash pile barely moved. That is not a region that ran out of money. That is a region whose investors went on strike.Where did the new money go instead? Peak XV, the old Sequoia India and Southeast Asia team, closed 1.3 billion late last year, labelled India Seed, India Venture, and APAC. India now runs hundreds of active early-stage funds and has climbed from roughly 9 percent of APAC capital markets volume toward 20. The APAC money is concentrating into India for growth and Japan for buyouts, not Southeast Asian seed. So when a Singapore GP tells you the market is tough, hear it precisely. It is not that Asia has no money. It is that the money is choosing India’s depth and Japan’s stability over our fragmentation and our weak record in the asset class. Capital is being selective, and Southeast Asia is the one being un-selected.Then layer the war back on. In March the reporting was blunt that the Iran conflict threatened to deepen Asia’s worst private equity fundraising slump in a decade. An oil shock spikes uncertainty, and uncertainty is the enemy of a new fund commitment. The same barrel of oil that sold an electric car in Bangkok made a pension fund in the West, and a high-net-worth backer here, think twice about a new Southeast Asian VC. Cash gets more cautious exactly when founders need it to get braver.So do not buy the clean drought story, and do not buy the clean abundance story either. The honest version: the tank is full, the driver is scared, and the road out, meaning exits, still looks rough. 98 deals is not a money problem. It is a conviction problem and an exit problem wearing a money problem’s clothes. And even that 7 billion dollar regional figure is fuzzy, because so much of it sits in Singapore holding structures that can deploy anywhere from Jakarta to Bangalore. When the domicile lies, the dry powder number lies a little too.The money is here. It is waiting for a reason. Your job, whether you are building or, like me, allocating, is to be the reason it stops sitting still.Sources and further reading: IEA Global EV Outlook 2026 · RECCESSARY, Thailand EV 2026 · VinFast targets, Nikkei Asia · Philippines incentives, Gulf News · Grab and BYD · AirTrunk Johor, NST · DayOne closes $4.5B, Crowdfund Insider · DayOne, the Singapore flip, Asia Tech Review · SEA Q1 2026 deal review, DealStreetAsia · APAC PE Report 2026, Bain · Peak XV $1.3B, YourStory This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• Ep. 30 - We Called It a Funding Winter. I Think We Built for an Exit That Was Never There. 03.06.2026 23λ

  Singapore just released its report on venture funding for 2025, and almost every write-up reads the same way. Funding winter. Capital’s gone quiet. Hold the line, it’ll come back.I think that’s the wrong story.I’ve been sitting with these numbers for a few days, and the more I look at them, the more I’m convinced we’ve been telling ourselves the comfortable version. The comfortable version is that the money left and the money will return. The harder version, the one I actually believe, is that the region made a strategy bet a decade ago, the bet didn’t have an exit attached to it, and 2025 is just the year the math stopped hiding. We’ve had a few of these years where the math stops hiding. This is another one.So let me do a bit more opining than usual. This one’s a little spicy.* * *The number everyone readThe headline is genuinely rough. In 2025, Singapore recorded 472 venture deals, down 35 percent from the year before. Total capital raised came in at 4.6 billion US dollars, down 34 percent year on year. And Singapore is the strong one. Across the ASEAN-6, both deal value and deal volume hit a four-year low.Now hold that next to the United States in the same year. Silicon Valley deal value nearly doubled, to around 160 billion dollars. A lot of that was two rounds: OpenAI at 40 billion, Anthropic at 15 billion.Two companies, in one country, raised more than ten times what the entire island of Singapore raised across 472 deals all year.The easy conclusion is that capital is concentrating into American AI and starving everyone else. That’s true as far as it goes. There’s real gravity pulling allocators toward the bleeding edge, and that gravity sits in Silicon Valley.But that’s a description of the weather. It doesn’t tell you why our house is the one with the leak.For that, you have to go back further than last year, and look at what we actually spent the money on, and what we expected to get out the other side.* * *The bet we madeHere’s the part that doesn’t get said enough. For most of the last decade, Southeast Asia poured its venture money into consumer. Ride-hailing, e-commerce, food delivery, the super-app. The big, beautiful, blitzscaled consumer story where you capture a young, mobile-first population of 700 million and become the thing they open twenty times a day.I’m not mocking it. I lived through the optimism. Grab, GoTo, Sea, Lazada, Shopee. These companies built the rails the whole region runs on now. Digital payments are everywhere because of them. That’s real, and it was needed. Consumer is the precedent layer. Most maturing markets start there, build the rails, then transition. That part is natural.But look at the allocation. In 2023, more than a third of Southeast Asian venture deal value went into consumer. The honest caveat is that “consumer” is a fuzzy line, depending on whether you fold in consumer fintech, so treat the exact figure loosely. Even on the conservative read, you land somewhere north of thirty percent. Run the same count in the US that year and you’re in single digits. The number I keep landing on is around three and a half percent.Read that again. We put an order of magnitude more of our capital into consumer than the most mature venture market on earth did.And we weren’t growing out of it. We were accelerating into it. Consumer’s share of regional deal value kept climbing while software’s share fell. So while the US was doing the boring, durable thing, funding enterprise software and infrastructure, we were doubling down on the consumer copycat play right as the cheap money drained out.Why does that matter? Because of what happens at the end.* * *The door that was never thereEvery venture dollar is a bet on an exit. Money goes in, and somewhere down the line it has to come out bigger, through a sale or a listing. No exit, no returns. No returns, no next fund.So how did the region do on exits? Here’s the number that should be tattooed on every term sheet. Since 2015, the entire Southeast Asian venture market generated roughly 70 billion dollars in exit value. Sounds fine until you look underneath. More than 55 billion of that came from three exits, all in 2021. Stretch it out and nearly 87 percent of all exit value since 2015 came from six companies. Take it to the top twenty and you’re at 96 percent.Yes, there’s always a power law. Concentration is normal. But strip out a handful of unicorns and the regional market has returned almost nothing to almost everyone. The investment-to-exit ratio has run consistently above twenty to one. Twenty dollars in for every dollar that found its way out.It’s been a trap. The Hotel California of venture. You can check in, but you can never leave.And here’s the part that connects the dots. The few giant exits we did get didn’t happen here. Grab went out via a SPAC on the Nasdaq. Sea listed on the New York Stock Exchange. They had to leave to get out. The Singapore Exchange, the biggest in the region, ranks only ninth by market value in Asia-Pacific, and several regional exchanges still carry listing rules strict enough to keep a cash-burning consumer company out entirely. For a blitzscaled consumer business, the local IPO was a closed door.So put it together. We funded consumer companies built on the growth-at-all-costs playbook, and that playbook only pays off through a big public listing. We never built the public markets to list them on. We built companies for a door that, at home, was never there.That’s not a winter. Winter ends. This was a design flaw.* * *Consumer is the hardest thing to sell, everywhereThis is the part I want founders and investors to chew on, because it goes beyond us. Consumer is one of the hardest categories to exit anywhere in the world.Think about who actually buys companies. In enterprise software there’s a deep, permanent bench of buyers who do this all day. 2025 was the most active year on record for software M&A, with strategic buyers alone accounting for around 42 percent of deals. The most active software acquirers in 2024 included IBM, Cisco, Autodesk, Nvidia. There were 22 firms that each made at least five acquisitions in a single year. That’s a machine. A standing market of people whose job is to buy companies. What are they buying for? Recurring revenue, mission-critical, sticky, hard to rip out.Now ask who the standing buyer is for a regional food-delivery app, or who’s lining up to roll up consumer brands in a market where customers switch the second someone else runs a discount. There isn’t a bench. Consumer internet leans almost entirely on the IPO. And we just covered what happened to that door.Let me be fair, because the honest version is more interesting than the cheap one. Enterprise exits aren’t easy either. Only about ten percent of companies tagged as software ever get acquired. IPOs are about six percent of software exits. The median software acquisition went for roughly three times revenue, not the eye-watering multiple people imagine. B2B is not a golden ticket.What enterprise has is a functioning market of repeat buyers. Consumer mostly has the IPO. It’s a difference in optionality, in how many doors are actually open. We bet the region on the category with the thinnest exit options, and didn’t build the one exit that category depends on until recently. If you wanted to design a liquidity crunch on purpose, that’s how you’d do it.* * *The people who built it are now saying itWhat makes this report worth reading past the headline is the back half, where they ran candid pieces from a row of the region’s investors. To their credit, the honesty is right there.Vishal Harnal at 500 Global names liquidity as the clearest challenge facing the region, pointing straight at underdeveloped exit markets and the long holding periods that wear founders and investors down. Angela Toy at Golden Gate is just as direct, conceding the region still lacks depth in both M&A and secondaries to get people their money out.The one that stuck with me is from Cyril at SOSV, who lays out the question every Singapore founder eventually asks out loud. If the place you ultimately have to go for capital, scale, and an exit is San Francisco, why not just start there on day one? Why build here at all? That’s a tough one to sit with. It’s not a critic on the sidelines. It’s a GP at an active global fund saying the quiet part into a government report.Then there’s Antler. They’ve raised about 1.5 billion dollars globally, from dozens of institutions and sovereign funds. The amount that came from Singapore institutions was around 10 million. The US allocates roughly five percent of its capital to venture as an asset class. Singapore sits well below one. So even the domestic money, the money that’s right here, mostly doesn’t back the local market. The capital sits in the city. It just doesn’t believe in the thing the city keeps saying it wants to be.When this many people who built the market all point at the same missing piece, it stops being a complaint and starts being a diagnosis.* * *So what do we actually doTo be clear, Singapore isn’t sitting still. The response is substantial: an extra billion dollars into Startup SG Equity for growth-stage companies, a new 1.5 billion dollar anchor fund aimed squarely at strengthening exits, and a Singapore Exchange and Nasdaq partnership we’ve talked about here before. Almost all of it is about building the exit door now, after a decade-plus of funding companies that needed it and didn’t have it.I’m not saying that to dunk on the policy. The policy is correct. Real liquidity, a working M&A culture, a credible place to list, that is exactly the right thing to spend on. My point is that we’re building the staircase after everyone already jumped. The companies that needed this in 2018, 2021, 2023 are gone or got out somewhere else. The question is whether the next decade of founders builds for the door that’s finally going up.So here’s where I land. Stop building for the exit that doesn’t exist, and start building for the one that does.That’s been our thesis at Indelible Ventures: back the higher-probability path from where the region actually is, and keep tracking how that liquidity path shifts over time. If the dependable way out is acquisition rather than a hometown IPO, then build the kind of company that has buyers. Real revenue, defensible product, something a strategic acquirer or a private equity firm actually needs to own. Not a big user number you’re hoping a public market rewards someday. Reality over vanity metrics. Capital efficiency stops being a constraint you tolerate and becomes the strategy. The companies getting funded here, and more importantly the ones that can get out, are the ones with clean unit economics, not the steepest growth chart.I want to say something specific about the Philippines, because I’m genuinely optimistic about it and the lesson lands well there. The consumption story is real. Household spending is something like three-quarters of GDP. The young population, the digital adoption, all of it is genuine. The trap would be to look at that and run the same blitzscaled copycat playbook that just left the rest of the region holding companies it can’t sell. The opportunity is to build for that consumption with discipline, with models that travel across similar markets, and with an exit in mind from the start.Same demand, smarter strategy. The fundamentals are a gift. The old playbook was the problem.* * *What it actually saysSoutheast Asia’s problem in 2025 was never that it ran out of money. The region is full of money. Family offices, sovereign funds, the whole lot. The problem is that we built a generation of companies with no clean way to turn into returns, in the category least likely to produce them, listing on markets that mostly weren’t here.That’s fixable. But only if we’re honest that it was a choice, not the weather.The money will come back. The question is whether we’ll have built something it can actually leave through. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• EP 29 - Chatbots to Agents and where Liability Lands 27.05.2026 36λ

  I hopped into a taxi in Bangkok last week and the driver, a man north of fifty, spent the ride telling me what he was building with AI.Not complaining about the economy. Not asking where I was from. Telling me about his project.I’ve been turning that over ever since, because it isn’t an isolated thing. For weeks now I’ve been scanning event listings in whatever city I land in, and the pattern is hard to miss. It isn’t pitch nights anymore. It isn’t another fireside with a fund manager. It’s vibe coding meetups, agentic AI sessions, AI trainings. Paid attendance, no walk-ins, speakers who’ve shipped real apps. KL has them. Singapore has them. Bangkok and Manila have them. Go on Lu.ma or Eventbrite right now and there’s probably one happening in your city this week, maybe two.I know this firsthand because I run some of them. I host AI salon events in Bangkok, and I’ve watched the rooms change.So while the rest of the startup world argues about whether funding is back, looking at numbers that are frankly pretty dismal, there’s this whole other thing happening in cafes and malls across Southeast Asia. Regular people are learning to build software by talking to a machine.Why I trust this oneI dismiss most AI hype on reflex. My feed is littered with slop, articles that read like they were generated by the thing they’re describing, people calling everything the future. I scroll past it.This is different, and the reason is simple. People are paying to show up.And it’s a different crowd than I’m used to seeing at startup events. University students and fresh grads who can see the job market tightening and are choosing to get ahead of the curve instead of waiting it out. Founders who can’t afford a dev team. Marketers. People with an idea and no technical co-founder, who a year ago would have been stuck with that idea trapped in their head, never seeing daylight. This is the no-code, low-code movement, upgraded and supercharged into the current AI era.The category has a name now: “vibe coding”. I’m not a fan of the term, all that talk of vibes and feel grates on me, but it’s the vernacular, so I’ll use it. You describe what you want in plain language and the AI writes the code. That’s the whole thing.I do it myself. I’ve used AI coding to replace most of our software stack. Thinking back to the friction of a couple of years ago versus how good this is now, and then projecting forward to how good it’ll be as the models keep improving, is genuinely one of the more interesting arcs I’ve lived through as an operator.From apps to agents, which is where it gets seriousBuilding an app is one thing. The next rung up the ladder is building an agent, and agents are a different animal.Most people, once you get out of the tech bubble, still picture a chatbot. You type, it types back. You ask, it answers. A better Google. That’s generation. It makes text, images, words.An agent acts. It doesn’t tell you how to clear your inbox, it clears your inbox. It books the meeting. It sends the email. It runs commands on your machine. It talks to other software and gets things done with barely any input from you.That’s the entire ballgame for risk. A chatbot needs a human to type every prompt. Every harm one causes still started with a person asking for it. An agent can plan, decide, and act on its own initiative. It can cause harm nobody asked for.I want to be clear that I’m bullish on this. Hugely. But being bullish and being measured aren’t opposites, and the risk side of this deserves honest airtime.Two examples everyone in the open-source world is talking about. The first is the lobster: OpenClaw. It went viral the moment it dropped. It connects an AI model to your messaging apps and acts on your behalf, books things, browses, runs commands, manages your house. People pulled their old Mac minis out of drawers to run it. Apple caught the wave and nudged the price up. It is not a Southeast Asian product, and we should be honest about that. It went viral hardest in China, which has been well ahead on the open-source movement. Southeast Asia needs to kick into gear as a fast follower, even when we’re not the origin.The second is Hermes, out of a US research lab a few months back. What makes it different is memory. It lives on your own server, runs all the time, and gets better the longer you use it. It remembers what you told it last Tuesday. It writes down how it solved a problem so it never starts from scratch again. By this month it was the most-used agent out there by some measures, hundreds of billions of requests a day, hundreds of thousands of developers piling in within three months.Here’s the part that should make you pause. Three separate security audits this year found malicious code hiding in the add-on skills people share for these agents. Think about what that means. An autonomous thing, running constantly, on your own machine, with access to your messages and files and maybe your ability to spend money, pulling new abilities from a community marketplace that’s already been found to contain things designed to hurt you. That isn’t a future problem. It’s a this-year problem, and it’s happening on hardware people own, in their homes, outside any IT department or compliance check.A friend who’s far sharper than me on this put it well. Permissioning an agent is like onboarding a new intern. You give them enough access to act, but not enough to break things. If humans are entities of action, we have to treat agents as entities of action too, with the same scoping and the same limits. The catch is that getting that right still takes real technical skill, and most of the people downloading the lobster don’t have it.So who’s writing the rulesSurely someone’s regulating this. Here’s where it actually stands, and the answer is more interesting than “nobody is.”Three big global players, three different postures. The US is actively deregulating to keep its lead, tearing up the old safety rules and trying to stop its own states from making their own. The posture is get out of the way, though there was an executive order floated recently that would have made new models notify the government before public release, something closer to how the FDA approves a drug. It got paused, not signed. We’ll see. Europe, true to reputation, has the most serious regime, and just this month agreed to delay the hardest parts, the high-risk rules, by over a year. Competitiveness pressure. So even the strictest regulator in the world is loosening its grip right as agents arrive. And China is the strictest in practice and the only one already acting on agents specifically, real enforcement, thousands of non-compliant services shut down. Telling, the country where everyone installed the lobster also told its own government agencies and state banks not to put it on work devices. The adoption champion got nervous about its own craze.Even the deregulating US quietly started building standards for autonomous agents. So nobody actually thinks this is fine. Everyone sees the gap. They’re just moving at wildly different speeds.Southeast Asia is that same story compressed into one region, running at three speeds. Vietnam, maybe not who you’d guess, has the only real binding AI law here, passed late last year, enforced since Q1, risk-based with actual prohibited uses. It tracks, given how much of the region’s developer talent sits there. Singapore did something very Singapore: the world’s first governance framework built specifically for agentic AI, detailed and thoughtful, and deliberately voluntary. No teeth. The bet is give industry sophisticated guidance, remind everyone they’re still liable when their agent screws up, and keep the innovation onshore. They’ve already refreshed it with case studies from the likes of OCBC, Tencent and Workday. A living document, which is the right call given the pace. And then Malaysia, where I’m based, sitting on one of the most aggressive agent rollouts in the region, with its actual rules still in draft. Not here yet.Here’s the whole thing in one line. Everyone, globally and right here at home, is regulating the last war. The last war was chatbots generating bad content, the stuff you can ban after it spreads. We saw it when Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines banned Grok over deepfakes, including images of children. Three countries, fast, coordinated, and fully deserved. But that’s the model: react after the harm, fold quickly. And every one of those images still needed a human to type the prompt.The next war is agents taking bad actions on their own, because the black box decided that was the thing to do. That war is already shipping. Through anonymous downloads, onto personal machines, learned at meetups across the region, in a place where exactly one country has even a voluntary framework and the country with the biggest rollout is still drafting.We’re banning the thing that needs a human to ask. We haven’t started on the thing that doesn’t.What I keep coming back toI’ll be honest, I don’t have a clean answer. Part of why I raised this is that it was a quiet news week. But the bigger part is that I can’t stop noticing the trend, and I doubt I’m alone. If you’re a CISO or a CTO or sitting in a compliance function, you’re already living this, because the whole enterprise is integrating more automation and more agents by the month, and the risk side is going to drag a regulatory environment into the room whether we invite it or not. It always does, the moment a technology touches enough of society. So it’s worth thinking now about what that reaction is likely to look like, instead of being surprised by it.But I keep coming back to those meetups. To the rooms full of people building. Because that’s the real story, and it isn’t happening in a lab or a boardroom. It’s happening on your street, in cafes, in small event rooms. People in this region are adopting this faster than the people meant to govern it can keep up, and honestly that’s fine, because that’s how technology has always moved. I’m genuinely excited to see Southeast Asia stop being just a fast follower and start leapfrogging, with the macro trends, shifting supply chains, and regional growth all pointing the same way. There’s an enormous opportunity here, and I think this is going to sit at the front of it.So I’ll leave you with the question I can’t answer myself. If you’re building with these tools right now, who’s responsible when your agent does something you didn’t intend? You? The person who built the tool? The government that hasn’t written the rule yet?Right now the honest answer is nobody knows. And everybody’s building anyway.As we should. But take a beat on that one.Tell me where I’m wrong. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• Ep. 28 - The Philippines Just Drew a Line With Washington. Malaysia Just Rewrote Its IPO Rules. And the Whole Region Is Doing Something Nobody Is Tracking as One Story. 20.05.2026 38λ

  Two stories from Southeast Asia this week, and almost nobody connected them.The Philippines unveiled the marker for the Pax Silica industrial hub in New Clark City. Twenty plus companies expressed interest. A dozen are billion-dollar US firms. And on the same day, Manila publicly rejected the US request for diplomatic immunity and US legal jurisdiction over the zone. The hub will operate under Philippine law.Malaysia rewrote the rules of how startups go public on Bursa. VC firms can act as listing agents. Retail investors can participate for the first time. A real funding escalator from regulated crowdfunding to LEAP Market to ACE Market.But the Malaysia story is part of something bigger. Singapore signed an SGX-Nasdaq dual listing bridge last November. The ASEAN-6 signed a cross-border depository receipts MOU in December 2024. Indonesia is tightening listing rules to chase quality. The whole region is rebuilding its public markets for venture-backed companies at the same time, and almost no one is tracking it as one story.This episode walks through the two races happening in Southeast Asia right now. The industrial race for the AI economy, and the capital markets race for venture-backed exits. Each country is making different bets. Each country is solving for a different segment. Where you build matters now in a way it didn't five years ago.I'm bullish on the Philippines. But the country has a gap on the capital markets side, and closing that gap is the work of the next two years.Real. Raw. Relatable. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• Ep. 27 - Strip Out One Deal and SEA Raised $800M. A Chip Stock Just Got 95x Oversubscribed. And OpenAI Spent $4 Billion Admitting AI Is Hard to Deploy. 13.05.2026 38λ

  There’s a version of this week that looks like a good week for Southeast Asia’s startup ecosystem.The Q1 2026 funding report shows the highest quarterly capital raised since late 2022. Malaysia’s hottest IPO in sixteen years prices and lists next week. OpenAI and Anthropic both announce major new enterprise offerings backed by some of the biggest names in global private capital.Here’s the version where you actually read the numbers.One data centre deal accounts for over 70% of the quarterly funding total. The chip company getting 95 times oversubscribed has three-quarters of its revenue coming from China and a tax exemption that expired eight months ago and hasn’t been renewed. And the AI labs building $4 billion services arms are, if you read what they’re actually saying, admitting that their models are not easy to deploy in the real world.Three stories. Let’s take them properly.* * *The Real Q1 2026 Funding NumberDealStreetAsia dropped their Q1 2026 Southeast Asia funding report this week. It’s making the rounds. The headline: $2.81 billion raised, the highest quarterly total since Q4 2022.One deal, DayOne, a Singapore-based data centre operator, raised $2 billion in a Series C. I’ll put a mild caveat on that: this is a data centre, not technically a startup, and it was spun off from an existing entity. It’s in the numbers because it carries a Series C label. That’s fine. But it’s worth knowing what you’re looking at.Strip it out. You have just under 100 deals and under $800 million combined. The lowest quarterly deal count in at least eight years.That’s the actual funding market founders in this region are navigating right now. Not the headline. The actual market.On the Singapore NumberThe report shows Singapore capturing 91.5% of total capital. I’m honestly always a little skeptical of that figure in isolation, and here’s why.Singapore is the home of the holdco. If you’re a founder in Malaysia or Indonesia or Vietnam trying to raise international capital, you’re not going to stay registered in your home jurisdiction. You’re going to put a holding company in Singapore, because the legal and regulatory environment is cleaner, because international investors are more comfortable with it, because that’s just how it’s done. Your operating company may still be fully onshore in your home market.So some portion of what gets reported as “Singapore funding” is actually capital going into companies operating across the region, just routed through a Singapore holdco. How much? Hard to know. But it’s worth holding that nuance when you see the 91.5% figure.What it definitely does tell you is that the Singapore jurisdiction matters, for capital access, for legal infrastructure, for institutional credibility. That part is real regardless of the holdco effect.Malaysia: Signal or Noise?The report calls out Malaysia as a bright spot, ranking second in Southeast Asia by deal volume for the first time. Eighteen deals, the highest quarterly count since Q3 2024.I’m active in the Malaysian ecosystem. My honest read: take this with some salt. When you dig into what drove the number, a meaningful portion came from small cheques through a single accelerator programme. That’s not nothing, but it’s not the same as organic deal activity across the ecosystem.I don’t want to be the one pouring cold water on every green shoot, and I’m not saying the Malaysian ecosystem isn’t moving. But there’s a difference between an ecosystem inflection and a batch of accelerator cheques inflating a quarterly number. We’ll know more by Q3.Where the Money Is Actually GoingIf you’re a founder asking where capital is flowing: AI. Specifically agentic AI, automation of workflows, tasks that execute with limited human oversight. Not chatbots. Actual agents doing actual work.AI and ML deals came in second by volume in Q1 with thirteen transactions. The biggest was Amity’s $100 million Series D. Worth noting: Amity has a long-standing relationship with CP Group, one of Thailand’s largest conglomerates, which is the lead investor. That context matters for how you read the round. It doesn’t diminish the achievement, it’s still a strong signal of appetite in the space, but it’s worth knowing.The message for founders: if you’re building real enterprise automation, real measurable productivity gains, there is capital. Not a lot. But it exists and it’s consistent.The Quiet Problem Nobody NamesThere’s something that doesn’t get said clearly in this ecosystem, so let me say it.There is a growing number of zombie companies across Southeast Asia. Not failed companies, companies that can’t raise new capital, can’t grow meaningfully, but won’t die. They exist in a kind of operational limbo. Technically alive. Burning slowly.Part of what sustains this is that down-rounds almost never happen here. The funds across the region are still relatively young. The LP relationships are new. Nobody wants to be the one writing a markdown into their portfolio, having that conversation, taking that medicine. So instead, they hold the valuation flat, keep the paper TVPI looking reasonable, and wait.You can talk about your book value multiple all you want. If the company can’t raise and can’t grow, the number isn’t real.The downstream problem: there are cases where this dynamic is actually blocking deals. An investor who doesn’t want to see a down-round may resist a transaction that would otherwise be good for the company, because accepting it means acknowledging the valuation they’ve been carrying is wrong.Sometimes you have to take one step back to take two steps forward. That’s not a comfortable thing to do. But it’s more honest than pretending nothing is wrong until there are no options left.* * *SkyeChip and Malaysia’s Chip MomentI want to start this one with genuine enthusiasm, because it deserves it.SkyeChip Bhd lists on Bursa Malaysia’s Main Market on May 20th. The public tranche closed 95 times oversubscribed. Total retail demand hit RM 3.04 billion. The largest retail subscription in Malaysia since Petronas Chemicals in 2010, sixteen years ago.The whole AI and chip investment wave has been impossible to ignore. NVIDIA’s share price trajectory. The compute boom. The data centre buildout. And now, emerging from Penang, a Malaysian company that sits right in the middle of that stack. That’s a big deal for this ecosystem.Upfront caveat: I’m not a semiconductor expert. What follows is based on my research into the prospectus and what’s been circulating in the analyst and retail investor community. Take it in that spirit.What SkyeChip Actually DoesMalaysia’s semiconductor sector has historically been dominated by the back end: assembly, testing, packaging. Important work. But it’s the low-margin end of the chain. The government has pushed for years, through NIMP 2030, through IC design parks in Selangor and Penang, through various national initiatives, to move the industry up the value chain into front-end design.SkyeChip is the poster child for that ambition. It’s a fabless IC design company, it doesn’t manufacture chips, it designs silicon intellectual property. Reusable building blocks that chip makers integrate into their own products.Think of it this way: TSMC makes the chips, NVIDIA designs what goes on them. SkyeChip is not saying they service either of those companies, but the analogy holds, they sell the blueprints for specific components that go inside chips. Their flagship IP is HBM3E: high-bandwidth memory interface technology, the memory architecture inside the AI accelerators that run the large language models powering frontier AI.That’s the tie-in to the chip craze. And it’s why the hype is real. This isn’t fabricated. The technology is real.The National StoryThe government is leaning in hard, and in this case the support is substantive not just rhetorical. SkyeChip gets access to Arm Holdings design tokens through Malaysia’s Silicon Vision initiative, a national licensing arrangement that gives Malaysian companies access to Arm’s IP architecture. That’s a genuine strategic asset, not a marketing line.The Deputy Minister attended the prospectus launch and talked about SkyeChip potentially reaching the level of Broadcom. Broadcom is a $700 billion company. SkyeChip is listing at RM 1.6 billion. The ambition is clear. The road is long.But what matters is that this company is creating a visible proof point, that a Malaysian IC design house can be built, can reach a meaningful scale, can list on the main market, and can attract global attention. The next founder who wants to build something like this now has an example. That matters for the ecosystem in ways that go beyond the specific valuation.The Numbers Worth NotingRevenue more than doubled over two years. Profit margins around 30%. Analysts projecting roughly 31% earnings CAGR over three years, with the most bullish target price close to double the IPO price of RM 0.88.The business model, IP licensing, is a proven high-margin, scalable model. Arm, Cadence, Synopsys. These are multi-billion dollar businesses built exactly this way: create the IP once, license it repeatedly. SkyeChip isn’t reinventing the model. It’s executing on it with new IP in a hot category.The Risks That Deserve Honest AttentionChina Revenue and US Export ControlsFor the seven months ending October 2025, China accounted for 73.3% of revenue. Almost three-quarters of the company’s most recent revenue came from Chinese fabless IC companies selling advanced HPC and AI chips.The prospectus explicitly acknowledges that if any of their customers are added to the US Entity List, supply must be suspended. None are listed today, but today is a snapshot, not a guarantee. The company is also planning to open US offices, which creates a real balancing act between serving Chinese customers and operating in a US regulatory environment that is actively tightening controls on exactly this category of IP.The Tax Exemption ExpiredThis is the one I keep coming back to.SkyeChip has been operating under a Pioneer Status tax exemption, effectively a 2.7% tax rate. That exemption expired September 9, 2025. They applied for renewal. As of the last published date in the prospectus, the renewal is still under review.The IPO is priced at 44x FY2025 earnings. Those earnings use a 2.7% tax rate that no longer exists. Normalise to a standard 25% rate and you’re paying closer to 57x.Most analysts will have noted this. But it’s worth being explicit about: the multiple headline is priced on a tax rate that hasn’t been legally valid for eight months and may not be renewed. That’s a material question sitting unresolved at the point of listing.Revenue Quality and Customer ConcentrationTop three customers represent around 60% of FY2025 revenue. More importantly, the revenue model is largely non-recurring, lump-sum contracts, one-off sales, high upfront. You need to keep winning new work to replace completed contracts.Retail investors who have done deep dives on the prospectus, the i3investor and KLSE Screener community has been thorough here, have flagged that several of the largest customers from earlier years no longer appear as active. Replaced by new Chinese customers with sub-one-year relationships. Customer names are undisclosed so independent verification isn’t possible, but the pattern is worth understanding before you subscribe.Where I LandMalaysia needs stories like this. We need proof points that deep tech can be built here, that front-end design is achievable, that a Malaysian company can capture global demand in a critical technology category. SkyeChip creates that proof point. Congratulations to the team and their investors, genuinely.The technology is real. The Arm access is real. The revenue growth is real. There’s genuine substance here and, looking at comparable companies globally, there’s still room for upside even from the IPO price.The risks are also real. China concentration, an expired tax exemption, non-recurring revenue, some customer churn buried in the prospectus. None of these are necessarily deal-breakers. All of them require the optimistic scenario to hold.Watch the listing day on May 20th. The market will be more honest than any analyst note about how much of the 95x was conviction and how much was leverage-financed retail applications planning a day-one flip.* * *OpenAI and Anthropic Just Told You the Hard PartThis is the most globally significant story of the week. And I think it has the most direct implication for founders building in Southeast Asia right now.Within the same week, Anthropic first, then OpenAI, both companies announced they are building enterprise AI services companies. Not products. Not model updates. Not API pricing changes. Services companies. Engineers going inside client organisations and building AI systems for them.What They AnnouncedOpenAI announced on May 11th. They’re calling it the OpenAI Deployment Company. Launching with over $4 billion in initial investment from 19 founding partners, TPG leading, with Bain Capital, Brookfield, Goldman Sachs, SoftBank, McKinsey, and Capgemini in the group. OpenAI also acquired Tomoro, an applied AI consulting firm, and brought roughly 150 engineers into the venture from day one. OpenAI retains majority ownership.The model: Forward Deployed Engineers (FDEs) embedded directly inside client organisations. They work with business leaders and frontline teams to identify where AI can have the biggest impact, redesign workflows around it, and build production systems connected to the company’s actual data and infrastructure.Anthropic announced a week earlier, backed by Blackstone, Hellman and Friedman, Goldman Sachs, General Atlantic, Apollo, GIC, and Sequoia. Same fundamental concept. Their framing specifically targets mid-market: community banks, mid-size manufacturers, regional health systems. Companies that could benefit enormously from AI but don’t have the internal resources to build and run frontier deployments.When you look at the roster of investors across both of these efforts, you’re seeing a significant portion of global private capital touching large segments of the broader economy. This is not a side bet.The Palantir ModelTo understand why this matters, you need to understand what Palantir built over the last two decades.Palantir’s entire model was built on one idea: you can’t sell complex software to complex organisations and expect them to use it well. You have to embed engineers inside the organisation. Work through the legacy systems, the internal politics, the messy reality of how things actually get done inside a large enterprise. Build something that functions in that specific environment.That made Palantir extraordinarily sticky. Once you’ve had a team embedded inside an organisation for months, rebuilding core operational workflows around your platform, good luck ripping that out. The model is controversial. Critics call it consulting dressed as software. Believers say it’s the only honest way to sell software to organisations that don’t know what they need.OpenAI and Anthropic are applying that same logic to AI. At scale. With billions behind it.If the models were easy to deploy, these services arms would not need to exist. Full stop.The Deployment Gap Is the Real ProblemEnterprise AI has a gap that doesn’t get enough honest discussion. The models work. Claude works. GPT works. The demos are genuinely impressive. But when companies try to deploy these systems into actual operations, into fifty-year-old legacy software, complicated permission structures, compliance requirements, and workflows that have developed organically over decades, the complexity is enormous.The gap between “this model is impressive” and “this model is running reliably inside our organisation and measurably improving how we operate” is not a small gap. It is enormous. And closing it requires human expertise, people who understand the technology and the specific operational context of the organisation.The fact that both labs are committing at this scale to closing that gap is an admission. Model quality is not the bottleneck anymore. Deployment is the bottleneck. And that reframes where value sits in the AI stack.The Inversion of SaaSHere’s a framing I’ve been thinking about. The SaaS era was defined by software being light on the surface, an interface you accessed yourself. The software sat on top of your workflow but you still had to do the work. Self-service by design.What these services arms represent is something different. The model is going deep into the workflow, understanding it, rebuilding it, and then leaving behind something that runs with minimal human intervention. You’re not delivering software. You’re delivering a running operation. Services as software.If that model sticks, and the fact that it’s being backed this heavily suggests it will, the companies that win are not the ones with the best model. They’re the ones who can deploy the best model inside the most complex environments, with the most contextual understanding of how those environments actually work.What This Means for Southeast AsiaOpenAI’s Deployment Company is starting in US enterprise. Anthropic is starting in US mid-market. Neither of them is starting in Southeast Asia.That means the deployment gap in this region is not going to be closed by Silicon Valley in the near term. Someone local has to do it.The bank in KL running a fifty-year-old core banking system. The Indonesian manufacturer with warehouses of paper records. The healthcare group operating across five countries with different languages and different regulatory frameworks in each market. These aren’t problems that a foreign firm can parachute in and solve. They require local knowledge, local language, local relationships, and long-term on-the-ground presence.The two most credible AI labs in the world just confirmed there is a structural, multi-billion dollar opportunity for exactly this business. The window to build it before the global players get here is not unlimited.If you are building an AI services or implementation company in Southeast Asia right now, this week’s announcements are a green light. Pick up the pace. The clients will move slowly, that’s fine, enterprise always moves slowly. You move fast. Get embedded. Build the local relationships. Develop the deployment expertise. Because once you’re in and the workflows are built around what you’ve built, it becomes very hard to replace.And one more signal worth noting: when AI labs start building services arms, it tells you something about the model layer. If being the best model was a durable, defensible moat, you would not need a services company. You would just keep making the model better and let it sell itself. Both companies have genuinely good models. They’re still building this.The future isn’t won at the model layer. It’s won at the integration layer, the workflow layer, the trust layer. For founders building AI companies in Southeast Asia, that’s the competition you’re actually in. And it’s a winnable one.* * *What These Three Stories Say TogetherPut them next to each other and they’re telling one thing.The funding market is leaner than the headlines suggest. Capital is concentrating, in Singapore, in AI, in infrastructure. The zombie problem is real and growing quietly. There are silver linings: Malaysia is moving, agentic AI has consistent demand, and the data centre boom is real even if it distorts the quarterly numbers.SkyeChip is the most tangible proof point this ecosystem has produced in years that big, globally relevant deep tech can come out of Malaysia. Whether it becomes a durable business depends on questions the prospectus cannot yet answer. The execution has to turn the IPO moment into something lasting.And the global AI labs just spent billions telling you that the hard part of AI isn’t the model. In Southeast Asia, the opportunity to do that hard part, the deployment, the integration, the on-the-ground expertise, is wide open and freshly validated.The founders who understand that and move on it in the next twelve to eighteen months are the ones worth watching.This post accompanies the SEA of Startups episode for the week of May 13, 2026. Listen wherever you get your podcasts.Real. Raw. Relatable.SEA of Startups | Kevin Brockland This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• Four Stories That Explain Southeast Asia Right Now 07.05.2026 39λ

  This week’s episode is a news episode. No guests. Just four stories that I think every founder, investor, and operator in Southeast Asia should be paying attention to right now.Here’s what we cover, and why each one matters.1. China forced Meta to unwind a completed acquisition. Mid-honeymoon.In December, Meta acquired Manus — the AI agent startup that went viral in 2025 as China’s answer to deep research tools. The deal closed. Manus’s website was already saying it was part of Meta.On April 28th, Beijing’s NDRC told both parties to reverse it.The Singapore-washing playbook — where Chinese founders restructure as Singapore entities to access US capital — is now provably dead. Beijing just proved it can reach into a completed acquisition, across jurisdictions, and pull the plug.But the surface story is not the interesting story. The interesting story is the mechanics of what an “unwind” actually looks like. Money has already flowed through to investors and their LPs. Engineers have been working inside Meta for weeks. Knowledge transfer has happened. How do you reverse that?And then there’s the Meta question. Did they make a mistake — or did they knowingly race the regulator, betting that if they got the technology embedded before enforcement could land, a slow unwind would be better than no acquisition? Their public statement — “the transaction complied fully with applicable law, we anticipate an appropriate resolution” — says absolutely nothing. Which might be exactly the point.Singapore has been conspicuously silent throughout all of this. What that silence costs them is a conversation the episode goes deeper on.2. eFishery. Nine years. And it still doesn’t feel like enough.Gibran Huzaifah was sentenced to nine years on April 29th. Two other former executives received nine and seven years respectively.The numbers, if you haven’t heard them: the company told investors it generated $752 million in revenue from January to September 2024. Actual revenue was $157 million. They reported a $16 million profit. The actual result was a $35 million loss.SoftBank. Temasek. KWAP — Malaysia’s civil servant pension fund. All recovering less than ten cents on the dollar.But this episode is not a crime recap. The eFishery story is a prompt for a harder question about what kind of ecosystem we’re building here.Fraud exists on a spectrum. At one end: criminal fabrication at scale. At the other: things that happen every week across the region that would never see a courtroom — vanity metrics dressed as traction, pilots treated as revenue, LOIs presented as signed contracts. None of that is eFishery. But it is on the same continuum.And it is not only founders. Investors do it too.The reason this matters beyond the immediate case is economic. In a high-uncertainty market like Southeast Asia, trust is the operating system. When it erodes — when every investor assumes every founder is telling the most optimistic version of the truth — the whole system gets more expensive. More friction. More time on verification. Fewer deals done.A high-integrity environment is a high-output environment. The ecosystem gets the standards it is willing to enforce.3. Indonesia capped ride-hailing commissions at 8%. GoTo just posted its first-ever profit. Congratulations.On May 1st — International Workers’ Day, timing very much intentional — President Prabowo signed a regulation capping the maximum commission ride-hailing platforms can take from drivers at 8%. Down from 20%. Drivers now get a minimum of 92% of every fare.GoTo shares dropped nearly 6% on the news. Analysts estimated the ride-hailing segment accounted for roughly 48% of GoTo’s EBITDA. Grab, which derives about 20% of its total EBITDA from Indonesia, is also in the firing line.Both companies will either raise fares, eat the margin hit, or some combination of both. None of those options is clean.Here is the part that might be unpopular in a room full of investors: Prabowo is not entirely wrong.Indonesia has around four million ride-hailing drivers. The platform without the driver is just an app with nowhere to go. The economics for drivers have been genuinely rough. The system was designed to extract maximum value from a class of workers with very little negotiating power.The underlying question — how do we ensure the people who actually do the work get a fair share of what they create — is legitimate. If platforms do not answer it voluntarily, governments will answer it for them.The risk, of course, is that fares go up, volumes drop, and drivers end up worse off than before. That is the irony of heavy-handed regulation. But that is a problem for GoTo and Grab to solve. They had the data. They should have got ahead of this before a president had to sign a decree on Workers’ Day.4. Malaysia is building gas plants to power AI data centres. The energy transition did not plan for this.This week, a Melaka-based company called DPS Resources — until recently primarily a furniture and property developer — announced it signed an MOU with an Alibaba affiliate to explore building a $1.1 billion AGI data centre in Melaka. 150 to 180 megawatts. DPS provides the land, the power, the infrastructure. Alibaba’s entity handles operations and brings the computing demand.This deal is not an anomaly. It is a perfect emblem of what is happening across Malaysia right now. Everyone wants a piece of the data centre gold rush. The question not being asked loudly enough is whether Malaysia actually has the power to sustain it.TNB’s pipeline is 7,500MW across 56 data centre projects. Current actual load from those facilities: 850MW. The draw-down is coming as facilities rack up through 2026. At the same time, 6,400MW of coal-fired generation is scheduled for retirement between 2029 and 2031.To cover those retirements and meet rising demand, Malaysia needs roughly 12,000MW of new generation by 2031.Right now, the Energy Commission has an open tender — NewGen26 — for new gas-fired generation to plug that gap. Bids close July 1st. Eight weeks away. This is Malaysia racing to build baseload capacity before the demand wall hits. The fact that it is gas, not solar, tells you everything about the timeline pressure.The Iran conflict makes this personal. TNB’s Automatic Fuel Adjustment mechanism means global oil and gas price spikes feed directly into Malaysian electricity bills within 30 days. Data centres in Johor were approved on the premise of cheap, stable Malaysian electricity. That premise is now under pressure from a war on the other side of the world.The deeper question is who actually benefits from this boom. DPS provides the land and the power. Alibaba keeps the data, the models, and the IP. Research consistently shows data centres create the lowest number of jobs per square foot of any major facility type. Thousands of construction roles during the build, then roughly 200 operational staff when running.Malaysia is providing the real estate, the utilities, and the environmental cost. The hyperscalers are keeping the value.That is not a reason to stop. But it is a reason to be far more deliberate about what we are trading and what we are getting in return.Watch the episodeFour stories. One theme running underneath all of them: the rules are being rewritten. Who controls AI. Who controls capital flows. Who gets a fair share of the value created. Who owns the infrastructure the future runs on.These are not settled questions. They are live negotiations — between governments, between companies, between regions.Southeast Asia is not a passive observer in any of this.[Watch / listen to the full episode → link]SEA of Startups is a podcast for founders, investors, and operators building in Southeast Asia. Real. Raw. Relatable. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• Four people are flying around the moon right now. 09.04.2026 32λ

  Episode Title: The New Space Age Is Actually Here | Artemis II, SpaceX IPO & The Rise of Orbital InfrastructureEpisode SummaryRight now, four humans are flying around the moon. Not in a simulation. Not in a film. For real. Kevin uses the launch of Artemis II on April 1, 2026 as the jumping-off point for a deep dive into the most consequential shift in space exploration since the Apollo era — and why this time, it's not just governments leading the charge.From SpaceX's against-all-odds origin story to the trillion-dollar IPO that just rocked public markets, this episode charts how the economics of space fundamentally changed, what that means for a new generation of startups, and whether the science fiction stories we grew up watching are finally, actually, coming true.What We CoverArtemis II — Who's on board, what they're testing, and why this 10-day lunar flyby matters beyond the symbolismThe cost collapse — How SpaceX drove launch costs from $10,000–$20,000/kg down to under $2,000/kg (and potentially below $100 with Starship)The space economy by the numbers — $8B+ raised in 2025 alone, 154% YoY growth, 35,000+ companies globally, a projected $1T market by 2033Startups reshaping the supply chain — Rocket Lab, Apex, Hadrian, The Exploration Company, and the infrastructure plays most people aren't watchingEarth observation goes commercial — How Planet Labs and others turned satellite data into a sovereign government revenue modelThe SpaceX IPO — Filed confidentially the same day as Artemis II, targeting a June NASDAQ listing at a reported $1.5–2T+ valuation (potentially the largest IPO in history)Starlink's numbers — 10M subscribers, $10B revenue in 2025, projected $24B by end of 2026, and what direct-to-cell really meansOrbital data centers — Star Cloud's H100 GPU satellite, Google's Project Suncatcher, Blue Origin's TeraWave, and why AI's energy problem might get solved in orbitThe moon as infrastructure — Lunar ice mining, the South Pole fuel depot play, and Lone Star Data Holdings building a data center on the lunar surfaceThe sci-fi question — Are the stories we grew up with finally coming true?Key NumbersStatFigureSpace tech funding raised in 2025$8B+YoY growth in space funding154%Projected space market by 2033~$1 trillionNew employees added in the past year~200,000Cost to orbit in the 1990s$10,000–$20,000/kgCost to orbit today (Falcon 9)Under $2,000/kgStarlink subscribers (end of 2025)10 millionStarlink revenue 2025$10BSpaceX IPO reported valuation$1.5–2T+Star Cloud Series A valuation$1.1B (18 months old)Companies & Missions MentionedSpaceX · Artemis II / NASA · Rocket Lab · Planet Labs · Apex · Hadrian · The Exploration Company · Star Cloud · Lone Star Data Holdings · Blue Origin (TeraWave) · Google (Project Suncatcher) · xAI · StarlinkPeople MentionedReed Wiseman — Artemis II CommanderVictor Glover — Artemis II Pilot; first Black person to travel to the moonChristina Koch — First woman to travel to the moonJeremy Hansen — First Canadian to travel this far from EarthJared Isaacman — NASA AdministratorElon Musk — SpaceX / xAI / XChad Anderson — Founder, Space CapitalQuotes Worth Sharing"SpaceX didn't just build a business. It rewrote what was possible.""The interplanetary story is no longer confined to Elon Musk's conference slide decks. It's in regulatory filings. It's in rocket test programs. It's in the hiring plans of hundreds of companies.""The gap between what the stories promised and what actually happened at times felt like a wound. But now I look at what's actually happening and I find myself genuinely surprised."Follow the Show🎙️ SEA of Startups — Real. Raw. Relatable. YouTube | TikTok | Instagram This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• AI-First Starts Inside: What Tiwa York Actually Said (And Why It Should Worry You) 26.03.2026 58λ

  Most AI content gives you a framework. Tiwa York gives you a verdict.The founder who built Kaidee to 35 million users and guided it to a successful exit sat down with SEA of Startups and said what most operators are afraid to say out loud: your team is probably performing AI adoption, not doing it. And the longer you stay there, the harder it gets to move.Here’s what he actually said — the numbers, the examples, the provocations.The 5 Levels of AI Maturity (And Why 1.5 Is a Trap)Tiwa’s framework runs from 0 to 4. Most conversations stop at listing the levels. The more important conversation is why so many companies get stuck halfway through Level 1.Level 0 — Unaware: No AI tools in use. Working like it’s 2019.Level 1 — Curious: ChatGPT is bookmarked. It gets used for emails and translation. Actual work output: unchanged.Level 1.5 — The Trap: This is where Tiwa spends most of his time on stage. A few people are experimenting. Strategy decks mention AI. But workflows, decisions, and output haven’t moved. He calls this adoption theater — and it’s where the majority of SEA companies currently sit.Level 2 — Active: AI is genuinely built into daily work. Measurable productivity gains of 25–50%.Level 3 — Integrated: Multiple AI tools connected in smooth workflows. The data analyst goes from one report a week to one a day. The PM tests ideas overnight with simulated customers. 2–3x productivity — and completely redesigned ways of working.Level 4 — Transformative: Creating value streams that simply didn’t exist before. Tiwa estimates this is roughly 2% of the global workforce today.The goal isn’t to inch from 1.5 to 2. It’s to move from 1.5 to 3, and then to 4. Anything less is rearranging deck chairs.The Mental Model That Changes EverythingTiwa’s most useful reframe isn’t a framework — it’s a metaphor.Think of AI as the most capable but most forgetful intern you’ve ever hired. It can do almost anything better than any employee on your team. But the moment it leaves a conversation, it remembers nothing. Zero context. Starting from scratch.This metaphor matters because it tells you exactly what your job is: you’re not a user of AI. You’re a systems designer for AI. Your task is building the handoff infrastructure — the context-carrying mechanisms, the memory systems, the structured prompts — that prevent that amnesia from killing your output quality.Tiwa draws a direct parallel to the Toyota Production System. You’re not optimising one conversation. You’re building a manufacturing process for intelligence, with daily standups, continuous improvement loops, and institutional memory that compounds over time.Most companies treat AI like a vending machine. High performers treat it like a factory floor.The Numbers That Should Stop You Mid-SentenceIf you think the efficiency gap between good and great AI usage is somewhere between 20–30%, Tiwa has a number for you.The difference between a 30% productivity gain and a 300x productivity gain isn’t the model you’re using. It’s how you’re using it.That’s not a typo. 300x. The delta between someone using AI as a faster search engine and someone who has built genuine fluency — with context management, iteration discipline, and system-level thinking — is not incremental. It’s categorical.On token economics specifically, Kevin cited Jensen Huang’s framing directly: a developer earning $500K annually should be spending roughly $250K a year in AI tokens. That’s the ratio of a high-performance AI-native engineer. For context: serious power users are already spending $500+/month on tokens. Some AI-native startups are at $1,000 per person per day.If your developers aren’t asking for AI budget, Tiwa’s take is unambiguous: that’s a performance issue.The Hiring Freeze Argument (And Why It’s Not Crazy)The most provocative position Tiwa took in the recording:Freeze all hiring until your AI implementation is complete.The reasoning is mathematical. Communication pathways explode non-linearly with headcount:* 5 people → 10 pathways* 10 people → 45 pathways* 20 people → 190 pathwaysEvery person you add before you’ve stabilised your AI workflows creates coordination overhead that compounds. You’re layering human complexity on top of unresolved process complexity. The problems don’t add — they multiply.The implication for most early-stage SEA founders: your instinct to hire for growth may be the thing slowing your growth. A team of 6 people who are genuinely at Level 3 will outrun a team of 15 people stuck at Level 1.5, every time.The Middleware Trap: A Warning for BuildersTiwa is an investor. He’s pattern-matching on where value will be captured — and where it will evaporate.His verdict on horizontal and middleware AI companies: 18-month obsolescence risk. The major frontier models are absorbing middleware functionality as a matter of course. If your moat is sitting between the model and the enterprise, that’s a shrinking gap.The defensible positions he sees in SEA:* Vertical solutions with deep workflow integration and hard-to-replicate domain understanding* Regulated, complex legacy environments where switching costs are real and proprietary data is locked in* Physical AI — Tiwa cited MUI Robotics, which has deployed an AI tongue (taste and smell sensors) across dairy companies, water utilities, and hotel renovation monitoring, and is currently running a research project on early liver cancer detection through smell. 300+ clients. 50+ multinationals. That’s not a middleware play.The common thread: proprietary data, physical integration, or regulatory complexity. If you can be replaced by a model update, you’re not building a business — you’re building a feature.Two Real Examples, Not Hypothetical OnesThe Jira/Confluence Replacement: A software development house replaced its entire project management stack — Jira, Confluence, the lot — in four days using AI-assisted development. Annual savings: $24,000. More importantly, they own the system now. No vendor dependency. No per-seat pricing. No waiting for a roadmap that doesn’t match their workflow.The HubSpot Replacement: A friend of Tiwa’s replaced their entire HubSpot instance with a custom-built CRM in eight hours of AI-assisted coding. Eight hours. The off-the-shelf tool cost thousands annually and didn’t fit the workflow. The custom solution does — and it cost a weekend.The pattern here isn’t “build vs. buy.” It’s “stop buying things that make you dependent when you could own the thing in a day.”What AI-First Actually Requires From LeadershipTiwa’s framework for leaders isn’t about tool selection. It’s about accountability architecture.The key shifts:Every function owns its own transformation. This can’t live with the CTO alone. Engineering, product, marketing, finance, customer success — every team lead is responsible for their own AI integration roadmap.Model the behaviour publicly. If leadership isn’t visibly using AI — and visibly failing with it, learning from it, sharing what they found — no one else will take the cultural signal seriously.Measure outcomes, not activity. Logins aren’t fluency. Licenses aren’t execution. The metrics that matter: workflow velocity, decision speed, output quality. Not hours of AI training completed.Daily continuous improvement. Not a quarterly AI review. A daily standup cadence for what’s working, what broke, what gets refined tomorrow. Toyota didn’t build the production system in a sprint. Neither will you.The Real QuestionTiwa closed with the line that stayed with everyone in the room.“The question isn’t how do we find extraordinary people. It’s whether extraordinary people get unleashed inside this org — or leave to do it on their own.”For founders in SEA: you probably already have the talent. The judgment is in the building. The only variable is whether you build the systems that let it operate at full power — or whether you stay at Level 1.5 long enough that the people who figured it out first come back to compete with you.Watch the full conversation with Tiwa York on SEA of Startups This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• The SEA SaaSpocalypse & The Rise of the Space Lobsters 12.03.2026 44λ

  In the ever-changing landscape of technology and business, the term “SaaSpocalypse” has emerged to describe the recent downturn in public software stocks. But what does this mean for the future of SaaS companies, especially in Southeast Asia? In this blog post, we’ll explore the nuances of the SaaSpocalypse, the potential for growth amidst disruption, and what established and emerging companies can do to adapt.Understanding the SaaSpocalypseThe term SaaSpocalypse refers to the recent significant decline in the valuations of publicly traded SaaS companies. This decline has raised concerns about the future viability of these companies. But is the doom and gloom justified?The Current Landscape- Valuation Adjustments: Many SaaS companies have seen their valuations drop sharply, leading to discussions about overvaluation in the sector. As Chris Birrell notes, some of these companies were indeed due for a correction.- Growth Continues: Despite the downturn, many SaaS companies are still experiencing growth rates of 15-20% year-over-year, which, although lower than previous highs, indicates resilience in the market.Key Insight: The SaaS market is not dying; it’s evolving. Companies that can adapt to new technologies, especially AI, may find new opportunities for growth.The Role of AI in SaaSAI is a game-changer for many industries, and SaaS is no exception. As the demand for AI integration grows, traditional SaaS companies must adapt.Embracing AI Technologies- Increased Demand for AI Solutions: Companies are under pressure to integrate AI into their workflows. This presents both a challenge and an opportunity for incumbents who can leverage their existing customer relationships to offer new, AI-driven solutions.- The Risk of Disruption: While established companies may have a strong foothold, they are not immune to disruption. New entrants who can offer innovative solutions may quickly gain traction.Example: Companies like Salesforce are well-positioned to sell AI-driven solutions, thanks to their existing customer base and established workflows.Navigating Change: Strategies for SaaS CompaniesAs the industry evolves, SaaS companies in Southeast Asia must consider their strategies carefully. Here are a few key areas to focus on:Focus on Core Competencies- **Defensible Moats**: Companies with deep integrations into their clients’ workflows are better positioned to weather market fluctuations. Understanding what makes your service indispensable can help you maintain customer loyalty.- **Avoiding the Surface-Level Solutions**: Companies that offer point solutions without deep integration risk losing market share to more comprehensive platforms.Capitalizing on Regional NuancesSoutheast Asia is a unique market, and understanding local dynamics can provide a competitive edge.- Local Expertise: Companies with founders who understand regional challenges are likely to succeed where larger, global firms may falter. This localized approach can help companies tailor their solutions to meet specific market needs.The Future of SaaS in Southeast AsiaLooking ahead, what does the future hold for SaaS companies in Southeast Asia?Opportunities Amidst Challenges- Emerging Startups: As Chris mentions, startups that can build reusable software components tailored for AI-driven environments may find success. There’s a growing need for specialized solutions that can integrate seamlessly with existing workflows.- BPO Evolution: Business Process Outsourcing (BPO) companies are also on the brink of transformation. By leveraging AI, they can enhance their service offerings and improve efficiency, setting the stage for a new era in service delivery.Conclusion: Adapting for SuccessIn conclusion, while the SaaSpocalypse presents challenges, it also opens up avenues for growth and innovation. Companies that can adapt to the changing landscape—embracing AI, focusing on core competencies, and understanding regional market nuances—will be well-positioned to thrive in the future.Key Takeaways:- The SaaSpocalypse is not the end, but a transition. - Embrace AI and focus on integration to maintain your market position. - Understand regional dynamics to tailor your solutions for success.---Frequently Asked QuestionsWhat is the SaaSpocalypse?The SaaSpocalypse refers to the significant decline in valuations of publicly traded SaaS companies, raising concerns about the future of the industry.How can SaaS companies adapt to the changing landscape?By integrating AI solutions, focusing on their core competencies, and understanding regional market dynamics, SaaS companies can navigate the challenges ahead.Is the SaaS industry dying?No, the SaaS industry is evolving. Companies that can innovate and adapt will continue to thrive. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• EP 22 - Meta's $2.5B "Butterfly Effect" 19.02.2026 31λ

  KeywordsMeta, Manus, acquisition, Singapore, AI, geopolitics, startups, tech industry, business growth, investmentSummaryIn this conversation, Kevin and Kim discuss Meta's recent acquisition of Manus, a Singapore-based startup, exploring its implications for founders in the region, the geopolitical landscape, and the evolving nature of AI in business. They analyze the rapid growth of Manus, the significance of Singapore as a tech hub, and the challenges posed by regulatory scrutiny. The discussion highlights the potential for Southeast Asia to emerge as a key player in the global tech ecosystem, while also addressing the complexities of company nationality and the future of AI amidst geopolitical tensions.TakeawaysMeta's acquisition of Manus raises questions about the future of startups in Southeast Asia.The deal signifies a shift in how tech companies navigate geopolitical landscapes.Manus's rapid growth showcases the potential for startups in the region.Acquisitions are not just about money; they often buy time and talent.AI is changing the valuation landscape for tech companies.Singapore is becoming a strategic hub for tech companies looking to scale globally.The concept of 'Singapore washing' raises important questions about company nationality.Geopolitical tensions could impact future tech acquisitions.The success of Manus could inspire more founders in Southeast Asia.Southeast Asia has the potential to be a significant player in the global tech ecosystem.TitlesMeta's Bold Move: What It Means for FoundersNavigating Geopolitics in Tech AcquisitionsSound bites"They just bought time.""Does it really matter? Not really.""Singapore is the neutral zone."Chapters00:00 The AI Landscape and Major Players02:45 Geopolitical Implications of AI Investments05:53 The Role of Singapore in the Global Tech Ecosystem08:54 The Evolution of AI and Market Dynamics11:54 Regulatory Challenges and Market Valuations14:17 The Future of AI and Founders' Perspectives18:01 Navigating Nationality and Compliance in Tech20:45 The Balance of Speed and Long-term Value Creation This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• EP 21 - The "Elon Singularity" 12.02.2026 32λ

  SummaryIn this conversation, Kevin and Kim discuss the recent merger of Elon Musk's companies, particularly focusing on the implications of combining AI and space technologies. They explore the potential of data centers in space, the evolving role of Tesla, and the regulatory challenges that come with these advancements. The discussion also touches on the future of sovereignty in space and the messy landscape of regulations that may arise as private companies take a more significant role in space exploration.TakeawaysElon Musk is merging his companies to simplify operations.The merger signifies a shift towards a unified intelligence layer.Data centers in space could revolutionize computing.Tesla's role is evolving beyond just electric vehicles.Regulatory challenges will complicate space exploration.Sovereignty in space is a complex issue.The landscape of space regulations is becoming messy.Private companies will play a crucial role in space.Non-terrestrial data centers are on the horizon.The future of AI is tied to its infrastructure location.TitlesThe End of the Discrete Company EraMerging AI and Space: A New FrontierSound bites"AI just got X'd.""Tesla isn't an EV company anymore.""It's going to be messy."Chapters00:00 The End of the Discrete Company Era02:07 The Merging of Tech Giants05:48 Data Centers in Space: A New Frontier09:53 The Unified Intelligence Layer14:56 The Future of AI and Space Exploration20:05 Regulatory Challenges in Space24:54 The Wild West of Space Law29:55 The Dawn of a New Era This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙EP 20: Singapore did it...again: How the SGX–NASDAQ Dual Listing Bridge Rewrites Southeast Asia’s Exit Game 04.12.2025 35λ

  Heyyyy guys,🧠 TL;DR — What Actually Changed* SGX × NASDAQ dual listing is a real regulatory breakthrough — but U.S. liquidity remains unproven* The fintech “funding collapse” was actually capital consolidation into Singapore* Southeast Asia is shifting from emerging → maturing, with real scaffolding for a capital stack* Founders + investors have a 24-month window before this becomes table stakesThe Setup: Why This Moment MattersSGX and NASDAQ just launched a dual-listing bridge — something Southeast Asia’s growth-stage founders have wanted for a decade.But here’s the twist:This isn’t about IPO convenience.It’s about Singapore silently building its own version of Silicon Valley’s capital stack — adapted for Southeast Asia’s geopolitical reality.And it’s happening while the rest of the ecosystem is still parsing the headline.We are at an inflection point,but not for the reasons most people think.1. SGX × NASDAQ Dual ListingReal Liquidity or Ego Liquidity?**What It IsA streamlined structure allowing ~$2.5B+ companies to list simultaneously on SGX and NASDAQ without:* duplicate filings* conflicting disclosures* multi-jurisdictional legal chaosA real regulatory achievement.What Everyone Assumes“Finally! A viable U.S. exit path for Southeast Asia tech.”What It Actually IsA partial solution — with one massive unanswered question:Does this create real U.S. liquidity, or just better press releases?Regulatory friction? Solved.Liquidity, analyst coverage, and market-making? Not solved.Let’s be blunt:* Who in New York is covering a $3B ASEAN B2B SaaS they’ve never used?* Who is trading your stock at 2 a.m. EST?* How do you compete for attention against trillion-dollar tickers?In Singapore, you matter.In the U.S., you are… a symbol on a screen.Who Wins (Right Now)?* SGX — they can pitch “NASDAQ access” to the entire region* Founders — they gain optionality and cleaner paperworkWill U.S. liquidity appear?TBD.Yes, AvePoint dual-listed in 2025 — but one data point does not equal a trend.2. The Fintech Funding ‘Collapse’ That Wasn’tIf you only saw the headline:“SEA fintech funding down 39% YoY.”You missed the real story:Singapore captured 84–88% of all fintech dollars.Capital didn’t disappear — it moved to safety.The Numbers* $829M raised (SEA fintech, first 9 months of 2025)* Singapore → 84% (with multiple quarters at 88%)* Mega rounds continued quietly:* Thunes — $150M Series D* Airwallex — $150M Series FThis isn’t contraction. It’s radical selectivity.When markets tighten, capital flies to clarity.In Southeast Asia, clarity has a postal code — Singapore.The Nuance No One MentionsMany “Singapore rounds” are Singapore TopCos with operations elsewhere.But even adjusting for that, the trend is undeniable:Singapore is becoming the gravitational center of SEAs capital stack.If You’re Building Outside Singapore…You need a Singapore strategy now, not “when we hit Series B.”* Entity structure* Regulatory setup* Investor relationships* Capital accessYou cannot retrofit a cap table at scale.If You’re a Seed Investor…Your job just became extremely difficult.You must identify the 10–15% of founders who:* can reach late stage* understand jurisdiction strategy* can navigate regulatory complexity* know how to design an intelligent capital stackMost seed funds will not do this.The ones who do will win disproportionately.3. From Emerging → MatureIs Southeast Asia Finally Growing Up?**Silicon Valley is built on a simple assumption:Build → Scale → Exit on NASDAQ.Because the infrastructure exists.Southeast Asia has never had that luxury.Grab went to NASDAQ.Sea went to NYSE.No major regional champion listed on SGX — because the liquidity + coverage didn’t justify it.What’s Shifting Now?Singapore is positioning itself as the region’s public-market on-ramp:* SGX × NASDAQ dual listing* Extreme fintech capital concentration* Temasek + GIC reallocating toward deep tech and infrastructure* Robust IP protection* $28B RIE2025 deep-tech planTo become a mature ecosystem, you need:* A complete capital stackSeed → A → Growth → Pre-IPO → Public markets* Exit pathways that convertNot theory — execution.* Signaling mechanismsReal wins → real returns → capital recycling.We’re not fully there.But for the first time, the scaffolding is real.4. The Implicit Geopolitical SubtextU.S.–China decoupling has reshaped global capital flows.China still owns ~75% of Asia biotech funding…but diversification is accelerating fast.And Singapore is playing its hand masterfully- clever and very typical.Singapore is now:* Neutral* Globally aligned* Legally predictable* Highly trustedSignals:* Biotech capital shifting to Singapore & South Korea* Flagship Partnering × A*STAR: $100M deep-tech commitment* Talent and IP migrating to strong-jurisdiction hubsThis isn’t incremental.It’s a generational repositioning. (See it now?)5. What Founders Should Actually Do(Immediately)**1. Five-Decision AuditLabel your last 5 decisions: Offense or Defense.If you’re 4–1 defensive, you’re playing not to lose.2. Entity Structure ReviewMake your TopCo dual-listing ready:clean cap table → clean governance → clean audit trail.3. Live Capability Target ListEvery month, update your list of 10 companies/tech you may:Acquire → Partner → Replicate.4. Board Transformation AgendaShift board meetings from quarterly KPIs → 3–5 year capability maps.This is how category-defining companies build.6. What Investors Should DoLate-Stage InvestorsDual listing optionality changes your entire underwriting model:* valuation ceilings shift* secondary liquidity widens* crossover investor interest increases* exit horizons changeAudit portfolio readiness now.This advantage won’t last long.Seed InvestorsYour edge becomes:jurisdiction strategy + regulatory guidance + capital stack architecture.This is no longer “nice-to-have.”It’s competitive advantage.7. The 24-Month WindowHere’s the uncomfortable truth:The founders and investors who move now will define the next decade.Infrastructure windows don’t stay open:* SGX is motivated today* NASDAQ is paying attention today* Capital is concentrating today* Regulations are flexible todayIn 3–5 years?This either becomes table stakes —or a missed opportunity we’ll reference for a generation.8. The Question Southeast Asia Has Been Asking WrongFor years the ecosystem asked:“Can Southeast Asia produce the next Google?”Wrong question.The real one is:“Can Southeast Asia build systems that consistently produce category-defining companies?”For the first time, the answer is trending toward yes — cautiously, but convincingly.Not because of one unicorn.But because the infrastructure is finally being built.* dual listing bridge* capital consolidation* sovereign repositioning* regulatory maturity* talent density* deep-tech investmentTogether, they form the early blueprint of a Southeast Asian capital stack.Purpose-built for this region.Not imported.Before You GoThis year stretched us — in the best way.We decoded:* orbital compute* fintech infrastructure* regional capital flows* AI rails* cross-border regulationA pattern emerged:Southeast Asia isn’t catching up.It’s reshaping itself.We’re taking a short break — a reset, a recalibration (maybe even one day off our phones… maybe).But 2026?We’re coming back with the founders building the next layer of infrastructure — the kind that defines decades.Stay curious.Stay ambitious.Keep building.The ecosystem is leveling up.All we need now is you.— Kim & KevinSEA of StartupsSGX NASDAQ dual listing, Singapore capital markets, Singapore fintech funding 2025, Southeast Asia IPO pathways, SEA startup ecosystem, Singapore dual listing strategy, capital stack Southeast Asia, NASDAQ Asian companies, Singapore startup hub, venture capital SEA, fintech Singapore trends, deep tech Singapore RIE2025, Singapore TopCo structure, regional tech IPO strategy, Southeast Asia exits, liquidity Singapore market, Singapore economic strategy This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙EP 19: While We Argue About Electricity, Google Is Moving Compute to Space. Southeast Asia Has 36 Months to Wake Up. 20.11.2025 43λ

  THIS WEEK'S REALITY CHECKGoogle just published research that makes every data center in Southeast Asia look obsolete.Project Suncatcher: Space-based AI data centers hitting cost parity with terrestrial operations by 2035. Launch costs dropped from $10,000 to $1,500 per kilogram. SpaceX is targeting $200/kg.This isn't science fiction. It's a $100 billion economic shift happening right now—and Southeast Asia has exactly 24-36 months to position itself as the ground station hub or watch the value flow elsewhere.This episode breaks down why orbital compute is inevitable, what it means for AI and agriculture in the region, and the moves founders need to make before the infrastructure moats lock in.WHAT WE COVER🚀 The Economics That Just FlippedLaunch costs: $10K → $1.5K per kg (and falling to $200/kg by 2035)Why Google's betting on orbital over terrestrial8x more solar efficiency + free cooling in vacuum of spaceHow SpaceX made the impossible economically viable☀️ Project Suncatcher BreakdownWhat Google's actually building (and why now)Technical challenges: maintenance, thermal radiation, data latencyWhy StarCloud just launched NVIDIA-powered mini data center into orbitThe radiation hardening problem (and how it's getting solved)🌾 The $400B Agriculture Angle Nobody's ConnectingHow satellite-based Earth observation transforms Southeast Asian farmingThailand could gain $8-12B annually from precision agricultureReal-time insights: soil health, planting windows, pest predictionWhy AcerX raised $30M+ to build this infrastructure now🏗️ Infrastructure Gets Its God's-Eye ViewMining companies using orbital imaging for mineral explorationUtilities gaining real-time grid monitoring capabilitiesWhy Southeast Asia's equatorial position = massive strategic advantageGround station networks as the next critical infrastructure moat💰 Who's Building What (And Who's Getting Funded)AcerX (Singapore): $30M+ for satellite data platformsOne Orbit: $12M for environmental monitoringLunaSat (Malaysia): Affordable small satellite manufacturingPlanet Labs: $500M raised, largest Earth observation constellation⏰ The 24-36 Month WindowWhy regional coordination matters right nowWhat happens when infrastructure moats lock inFive tactical moves for AI, agriculture, and infrastructure foundersPolicy frameworks that need to exist yesterdayKEY QUOTES"While Malaysia debates water usage for data centers and Singapore worries about electricity grids, Google's preparing to bypass all of it with orbital compute." - Kim"Southeast Asia is either positioning itself as the ground station hub for the orbital economy, or it's watching $100 billion in economic value flow elsewhere." - Kevin"Agriculture in this region is a $400 billion industry that's been fundamentally inefficient for centuries. Space-based analytics running in orbit and beaming down real-time insights changes everything." - Kim"The window for Southeast Asia to position itself in this ecosystem is 24-36 months. After that, the players are locked in and we're customers, not builders." - Kevin"I have to give credit where it's due: Elon Musk basically came in and inspired everyone to look at space as economically viable. Nobody was thinking about private sector space before SpaceX." - KevinFEATURED DATA POINTS🚀 Launch cost trajectory: $10,000/kg (2005) → $1,500/kg (2025) → $200/kg target (2035)☀️ Solar collection efficiency: 8x more productive in space than terrestrial panels💰 Economic opportunity: $100B+ potential GDP contribution to Southeast Asia🌾 SEA agriculture market: $400B annually📊 Thailand agriculture gains: $8-12B potential annual productivity increase⚡ Power advantage: Constant solar (if positioned in dawn-dusk synchronous orbit)❄️ Cooling advantage: Thermal radiation in vacuum = no water consumption💸 Funding activity:AcerX: $30M+ raised (Singapore satellite data platforms)One Orbit: $12M raised (environmental monitoring)Planet Labs: $500M raised (largest Earth observation constellation)⏱️ Latency advantage: 1-7ms orbital (vs 150ms trans-Pacific)🛰️ StarCloud: NVIDIA-powered orbital data center launched November 2025TACTICAL TAKEAWAYS FOR FOUNDERSIf you're building AI:Map which workloads could migrate to orbital compute (training jobs especially)30-40% cost reduction potential on frontier model trainingBuild relationships with space tech companies now (AcerX, One Orbit)Factor orbital into your Series B infrastructure assumptionsIf you're in agriculture:Pilot satellite data integration immediately (don't wait for perfect tech)Partner with companies deploying Earth observation analyticsOperational knowledge compounds—5-year head start mattersThailand, Vietnam, Indonesia = massive precision agriculture TAMIf you're infrastructure/utilities:Real-time satellite analytics for grid monitoring, pipeline integrityGround station partnerships should be strategic priorityAsset tracking, disaster resilience, environmental complianceGovernment engagement needed now for spectrum/site allocationFor all founders:Don't assume compute stays terrestrial foreverEngage policy conversations on orbital infrastructure earlyBuild optionality: not all-in on space, but not ignoring itThe companies learning to operationalize space-based insights now win in 2030For VCs:Space tech is no longer government-only domainLaunch costs dropped to venture-backable levelsRegional companies competing against Silicon Valley with 1/10th the capitalGround station infrastructure = strategic moat worth backingRESOURCES MENTIONED📄 Google X: Project Suncatcher Research Paper📄 SpaceX Launch Cost Analysis 2025📄 Southeast Asia Agriculture Market Report📄 Singapore Space Agency: Industry Updates📄 StarCloud: NVIDIA Orbital Data Center Launch Announcement📄 Planet Labs: Southeast Asia Partnership Programs📄 AcerX: Satellite Data Platform for SEA Supply Chains📄 One Orbit: Environmental Monitoring Constellation📄 Malaysia LunaSat: Small Satellite ManufacturingCOMPANIES TO WATCHBuilding in Southeast Asia:AcerX (Singapore): $30M+ raised, satellite data platforms for supply chains & agricultureOne Orbit: $12M raised, AI-powered environmental monitoring constellationLunaSat (Malaysia): Affordable small satellite manufacturing for regional deploymentGlobal Players Seeking SEA Partnerships:Planet Labs: $500M raised, largest Earth observation network, actively seeking SEA partnershipsStarCloud: Just launched NVIDIA-powered orbital data center (Nov 2025)SpaceX: Targeting $200/kg launch costs by 2030Blue Origin: Ramping up commercial launch operations🔗 CONNECT WITH US📧 Newsletter: https://seaofstartups.substack.com💼 LinkedIn:Kim (WeiiSyuen) Yeoh: https://www.linkedin.com/in/weiisyuenyeohacmacgma/Kevin Brockland: https://www.linkedin.com/in/kbrockland/🎧 Listen:Spotify: [Link]Apple Podcasts: [Link]YouTube: [Link]💬 Comment below: Is your five-year plan accounting for orbital compute? Or are you assuming infrastructure stays terrestrial forever?TAGSspace tech, orbital computing, Google Project Suncatcher, AI data centers, SpaceX, satellite technology, Southeast Asia startups, agriculture technology, precision farming, infrastructure innovation, venture capital, deep tech, AcerX Singapore, space industry, renewable energy, AI infrastructure, LEO satellites, Earth observation, ground station networks, digital infrastructure, ELon Musk, Steve Jobs WHAT'S NEXTNext episode: Interviewing the CEO of a solar company that just IPO'd—directly relevant to space-based power infrastructure discussion.Upcoming: More deep dives on infrastructure shifts reshaping Southeast Asia's tech ecosystem.📌 PIN THIS: If you're building in AI, agriculture, logistics, or infrastructure in Southeast Asia, this episode is required listening. The decisions made in the next 24-36 months determine who participates vs. spectates in the $100B orbital economy.Share this with:Founders building deep tech or AI infrastructureVCs evaluating space tech investment opportunitiesGovernment officials planning digital infrastructure policyAnyone who thinks data centers will stay on Earth forever⚡ VIRAL SHARE QUOTE:"Southeast Asia has 24-36 months to position itself as the ground station hub for orbital compute—or watch $100 billion in economic value get built elsewhere while we're still debating cooling systems." This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙EP 18: 400% Returns: How Transformational M&A and AI Will Redefine Southeast Asia’s Next Decade 06.11.2025 38λ

  Episode Title: 400% Returns vs S&P: The 6 M&A Habits Turning Acquisitions Into Capability MachinesTHIS WEEK'S REALITY CHECKCompanies that transform while they transact are delivering 400%+ returns vs the S&P 500 over the last decade.That's not incremental. That's a different category of value creation entirely.Deloitte just mapped how they do it: Six habits that separate transformational acquirers from traditional ones. Grab mastered 5 out of 6. Most Southeast Asian corporates? Still haven't shown up to the fight.This episode breaks down the playbook—and why Southeast Asia keeps getting M&A backwards.WHAT WE COVER📊 The Numbers That MatterWhy 400% outperformance isn't a fluke—it's a patternHow transformational M&A differs from traditional sequential approachesWhy most Southeast Asian corporates are still using outdated playbooks🎯 The Six Habits of Transformational AcquirersLeadership Mandate: C-suite strategy, not finance functionAlways-On Portfolio: Capability P&Ls, not just revenue P&LsTransform As You Transact: Concurrent, not sequentialAI at the Core: Business model shift, not cost optimizationPower in Collaboration: Ecosystem plays, not solo executionWorkforce for Tomorrow: People as bedrock, not afterthought🏢 Southeast Asia Case StudiesGrab: Programmatic capability stacking (but still not profitable)PropertyGuru: Pre-SPAC ecosystem building that attracted $1.1B private take-outDBS Bank: The 27,000-person tech company that happens to do banking🤖 The AI M&A FutureHow AI changes targeting, diligence, integration, and synergy captureWhy build vs buy calculus is shifting (and M&A volume will increase)The vibe coding question and what it means for Southeast Asia⏰ The 24-Month WindowWhy the next 2 years determine the next decadeWhat founders should do this quarterWhy most local corporates will still get it wrongKEY QUOTES"If your M&A strategy is still 'integrate first, transform later,' you're bringing a butter knife to a lightsaber fight." - Kevin"Dead weight kills optionality. And Southeast Asian corporates are carrying a LOT of dead weight." - Kimberley"You're not buying revenue. You're buying capabilities. You're not integrating headcount. You're integrating ecosystems." - Kevin"Grab didn't succeed because they had the best technology. They succeeded because they built teams that understood Jakarta differently than Singapore." - Kimberley"The companies that move in the next 24 months will define the next decade. The ones that wait will watch the window close." - KevinFEATURED DATA POINTS📈 Transformational M&A returns: 400%+ vs S&P 500 (over 10 years) 📊 Deloitte report: Six habits of transformational acquirers 🏢 Grab acquisitions: Kudo, Bento, GrabInvest, Jaya Grocer, digital bank license 💰 PropertyGuru exit: $1.1B private take-out by EQT (2024) 🏦 DBS workforce: 27,000 people (tech company that does banking) ⏱️ Traditional integration timeline: 18+ months ⚡ AI-enabled integration: Near real-time synergy capture 📉 SEA M&A volume: Historically low, ticking up slowly 🎯 Timeline prediction: 3-5 years for local corporates to adopt programmatic M&ATACTICAL TAKEAWAYSFor Founders:Five Decision Audit: Label last 5 strategic calls as defense vs offense. Rebalance if skewed.Live Capability Target List: 10 companies/partners/tech you could buy/partner/replicate. Refresh monthly.Board Agenda: Put transformation on board agenda with 3-5 year capability map.For Corporates:Treat M&A as C-suite strategy, not finance functionBuild capability P&Ls, not just revenue P&LsStart transformation pre-deal, not post-integrationEmbed AI at the core of M&A processBuild corp dev function if you don't have oneFor Investors:Track which companies are stacking capabilities vs chasing revenuePrioritize teams that understand ecosystem playsWatch for AI-enabled M&A processes as competitive advantageRESOURCES MENTIONED📄 Deloitte Transformational M&A ReportSHOW NOTES (DETAILED TIMESTAMPS)[00:00] Cold open: The gut check every SEA founder needs [01:01] The 400% number: Why transformational M&A outperforms [01:30] Six practices from Deloitte's new playbook [02:32] Old M&A vs transformational M&A: What actually changed [04:38] Southeast Asia receipts: Grab, PropertyGuru, DBS [08:21] PropertyGuru's capability thesis pre-SPAC [09:48] DBS masterclass: 27,000-person tech company [11:39] The build vs buy calculus is shifting [13:57] Vibe coding and what it means for M&A in SEA [17:12] Deloitte's six habits breakdown begins [18:30] Always-on portfolio: Capability P&Ls vs revenue P&Ls [21:20] Will startups still want to be acquired? [24:09] AI at the core: Not cost-out, business model shift [25:17] Power in collaboration: Why SEA is designed for this [27:34] The next 3-5 years: M&A volume predictions [28:52] AI-enabled M&A: Targeting, diligence, integration [31:05] Programmatic M&A: Will SEA corporates adopt it? [33:31] Catalyst analysis: What drives M&A volume increase [34:44] Family businesses and relationship-based economies [36:01] Why corporates keep losing: Bad tech experiences [37:12] Three reps to build your transformation muscle This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙️ EP 17: 680 Million People. 11 Regulatory Systems. 1 Opportunity: Turning ASEAN’s Chaos into Capital. 29.10.2025 34λ

  THIS WEEK'S REALITY CHECKThe 47th ASEAN Summit just wrapped in Kuala Lumpur. Trump was there. China's Premier showed up. Everyone talked about integration.Meanwhile, the smartest founders in Southeast Asia are betting on something completely different: That the chaos isn't a bug—it's the entire competitive moat.This episode unpacks why ASEAN's fragmentation might be its biggest strategic advantage, and what founders need to do in the next 24 months before the window closes.WHAT WE COVER🌏 The ASEAN Integration ParadoxWhy 58 years of "working toward unity" might be missing the pointThe middle child syndrome: Too big to ignore, too fragmented to dominateWhy EU-style integration would probably destroy what makes SEA interesting💰 Why Silicon Valley Keeps Failing HereGoogle, Uber, Amazon—the graveyard of Western tech in Southeast AsiaHow Grab succeeded where Uber failed (hint: it's not just execution)The competitive moat that only local players understand🎯 The Strategic Non-Alignment PlaybookMalaysia's simultaneous partnerships with China, UK, and U.S.Singapore's multi-ecosystem strategyHow to become the Switzerland of the tech cold war🏙️ The Tier One City ThesisWhy KL has more in common with Bangkok than with Alor SetarHow to think about regional expansion without waiting for perfect alignmentThe borderless team concept that actually works⏰ The 24-Month WindowWhy the next 2 years determine the next 2 decadesWhat happens when ecosystems lock inFive tactical moves that separate exits from shutdownsKEY QUOTES"What looks like chaos is just Southeast Asia building its own operating system." - Kevin"Grab took 12 years to navigate 11 different regulatory systems. That's not a bug. That's the training ground that creates anti-fragile companies." - Kimberly"The tier one cities have more in common with each other than they do with tier two cities in their own countries." - Kevin"Strategic non-alignment isn't fence-sitting. It's positioning yourself as the translator when two superpowers don't speak the same language." - KimberlyFEATURED DATA POINTS🌏 ASEAN population: 680 million people (3rd largest market globally) 💰 Combined GDP: $4+ trillion 📊 ASEAN age: 58 years old (middle-aged in geopolitical terms) 🚀 Grab market presence: 12 years across 8 countries 🏢 SEA Group: 10+ years building in fragmented markets 🏛️ Number of ASEAN regulatory systems: 11 different frameworks 💳 Payment structures: 10+ different systems across regionTACTICAL TAKEAWAYS FOR FOUNDERSIf you're fundraising:Default to regional thinking from day onePlan for 24-30 month runways (not 18)Map policy advantages across markets systematicallyIf you're scaling:Build borderless teams with deep local knowledgeStudy government priorities in each marketEngage regulators as partners, not obstaclesIf you're entering SEA:Don't wait for perfect alignment—it's never comingFocus on tier one cities firstBuild for fragmentation, not uniformityRESOURCES MENTIONED📄 47th ASEAN Summit Outcomes (May 2025) 📄 Malaysia-US Trade Agreement Details 📄 ASEAN Digital Economy Framework 📄 Startup ASEAN Summit Agenda🔗 CONNECT WITH US:💼 LinkedIn: Kim Yeoh and Kevin Brockland 📧 Newsletter:https://seaofstartups.substack.com/ALSO ON: Apple Podcast and Youtube TAGS:ASEAN, Southeast Asia, startups, venture capital, regional expansion, fragmentation, competitive strategy, market entry, emerging markets, Grab, SEA Group, government relations, cross-border business, tech ecosystem, strategic partnerships This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙️ EP 16: The $1 Trillion AI Feedback Loop: Why OpenAI's Circular Deals Will Either Create the Future or Collapse Like Cisco in 2000 16.10.2025 50λ

  Your grandmother probably thinks AI is just fancy autocomplete. Your investors think it’s the next industrial revolution. Both might be right. And that’s exactly the problem.Welcome to the most expensive game of musical chairs in human history.In October 2025, OpenAI—the company that made you question whether your job is safe—signed roughly $1 trillion worth of deals. Not over decades. Not in theoretical future value. One trillion dollars in commitments that locked together the biggest names in tech like a high-stakes game of Twister.Nvidia committed up to $100 billion to OpenAI’s data centers. AMD followed with tens of billions more. Oracle inked a $300 billion cloud contract. Each company took equity stakes in OpenAI while simultaneously becoming its customer and supplier.It’s beautiful. It’s terrifying. And if you’re building anything in Southeast Asia, it’s about to force your hand.The Flywheel That Might Break the WorldHere’s what’s actually happening beneath the surface of those press releases.OpenAI needs computing power—not just a lot, but an almost incomprehensible amount. We’re talking 20 gigawatts worth of data centers. That’s the output of 20 nuclear reactors, running continuously, just to train the next generation of AI models.They can’t pay for this upfront. So they’ve structured deals where chipmakers like Nvidia essentially finance OpenAI’s infrastructure in exchange for guaranteed orders. Nvidia’s money buys data centers filled with... Nvidia chips. Which OpenAI uses to train AI models. Which drives demand for more Nvidia chips. Which justifies Nvidia’s stock price. Which gives Nvidia more currency (in the form of valuable equity) to invest in... OpenAI.See the loop?Now multiply this across AMD, Oracle, Microsoft, and a web of cloud providers and startups. Everyone is simultaneously the investor, the customer, and the supplier. Capital flows in a perfect circle, each deal reinforcing the next, each rising stock price validating the previous bet.This is either the most sophisticated value-creation flywheel ever constructed, or it’s vendor financing on steroids.The Cisco Parallel Nobody Wants to Talk AboutIf you’re over 35, you remember what happened to Cisco Systems.Late 1990s. Internet boom. Cisco was the arms dealer of the dot-com gold rush—selling routers and networking equipment to every startup that raised venture capital. Their stock went parabolic. They briefly became the most valuable company on Earth.Then came the vendor financing strategy. Cisco would invest in or loan money to internet companies... so those companies could turn around and buy Cisco equipment. Revenue exploded. Wall Street cheered. Cisco executives became billionaires.Until the music stopped.When the dot-com bubble burst in 2000, Cisco discovered that a huge chunk of their “revenue” was actually just their own money cycling through customer companies. Those customers went bankrupt. Cisco’s stock dropped 90%. The playbook that seemed genius became the textbook example of bubble economics.Nvidia’s $100 billion stake in OpenAI looks uncomfortably similar.Is this time different? Maybe. AI is real in a way many dot-com businesses weren’t. ChatGPT has 200 million users. Companies are deploying AI in actual workflows, not just buying vaporware.But here’s the uncomfortable question: How much of AI’s current growth is real demand versus artificially inflated demand created by these circular financing arrangements?Why This Matters for Southeast Asia (And Why You Have Less Time Than You Think)While this trillion-dollar poker game plays out in Silicon Valley and Shenzhen, Southeast Asia is being forced to make a choice it didn’t ask for.Do we join this ecosystem on whatever terms we can get? Or do we try to build our own capabilities knowing we’re years behind?The honest answer: We need to do both. And we have maybe 24 months before the window closes.Here’s why the timeline is so tight.Right now, these mega-deals are still being structured. Standards are still fluid. The technology stack is still evolving. There’s room for regional players to position themselves as integration layers, deployment partners, or specialized service providers.But once these circular deals lock in—once Nvidia’s chips only work seamlessly with Microsoft’s cloud which only optimizes for OpenAI’s models—the interoperability window slams shut. You’re either inside the ecosystem or permanently outside it.And if you’re outside? Good luck competing when your opponent has access to computing power you can’t afford, AI models you can’t replicate, and partnership networks you can’t penetrate.This is the new digital divide, and it’s being drawn right now.The Robot Revolution Nobody’s Pricing InIf the AI investment loop was just about software and cloud services, we could debate whether it’s sustainable. But there’s a second wave coming that changes everything: embodied AI.Translation: Robots with AI brains, walking around in the physical world.July 2025. Shanghai. World Artificial Intelligence Conference. Over 150 humanoid robots on display. Chinese companies selling working humanoids for $16,000. Some models as low as $5,900.Morgan Stanley just published research projecting the humanoid robotics market could hit $5 trillion in annual revenue by 2050. That’s twice the size of the global automotive industry.Let that sink in. We’re not talking about science fiction or distant futures. We’re talking about a trillion-dollar manufacturing ecosystem that needs to get built in the next 10-15 years.And Southeast Asia has a real shot at being a major player—but only if we move now.Why China Is Winning the Robot Race (And What We Can Learn)Here’s the uncomfortable geopolitical truth: China is currently best-positioned to dominate “embodied AI.”Not because they have the best AI research (though they’re closing the gap fast). But because they’ve cracked three things that matter more than pure technology:1. Manufacturing ecosystem at scale. China can produce robots cheaper and faster than anyone else. Their supply chains for motors, sensors, batteries, and materials are unmatched.2. Guaranteed internal demand. Chinese state-owned enterprises will buy domestic robots as a matter of policy. That gives Chinese robotics companies a market to refine their products before going global.3. Strategic patience combined with tactical speed. Beijing identified robotics as a national priority years ago. They’re playing a 20-year game with 6-month sprints.Meanwhile, American robotics CEOs went to Congress in 2025 literally begging for a national strategy, warning that without coordinated policy and investment, the U.S. will lose both the robotics race and, by extension, the AI race.The robots are where AI’s economic value gets captured. If you lose robots, you lose AI.Where does that leave Southeast Asia?The Strategic Non-Alignment PlaybookHere’s the move: Southeast Asia should become the Switzerland of the AI-robotics cold war.Not in the sense of being neutral and boring. In the sense of being the place where East meets West, where interoperability gets figured out, where multiple tech ecosystems coexist and connect.Malaysia is already doing this. They signed AI cooperation agreements with China while simultaneously licensing chip design technology from UK-based Arm and partnering with U.S. firms on industrial automation. They’re building relationships on all sides while developing domestic capability so they’re not completely dependent on anyone.Singapore is even more sophisticated. They use Chinese robotics for some infrastructure, Western AI for financial services, and invest heavily in their own research. They’re building genuine optionality.This isn’t fence-sitting. It’s strategic positioning.Because here’s what most people miss: The company or country that can integrate Chinese hardware with Western software with local applications becomes incredibly valuable. You’re the translator in a world where two superpowers speak different languages.But this only works if you have actual capability, not just diplomatic skill. You need engineers who understand both ecosystems. You need companies that can deploy and maintain robots regardless of where they’re manufactured. You need software that works across platforms.Building that takes time. Hence: 24 months.What Founders Should Actually Do This QuarterEnough strategy. Let’s get tactical.If you’re a founder or operator in Southeast Asia right now, here are five moves that matter:1. Pilot robots now, even if they’re imperfect.Don’t wait for mature technology. If you’re in manufacturing, logistics, or warehousing, start testing robot deployment today. The companies that learn how to integrate robots with human workflows now will have compounding advantages by 2030.The cost of being five years behind in operational knowledge will vastly exceed the cost of adopting imperfect technology today.2. Build the integration layer, not the hardware.Unless you’re exceptionally well-funded, don’t try to compete with Chinese firms on robot hardware or Western firms on foundational AI. Instead, build the software and services that make those technologies useful in Southeast Asian contexts.A robot designed for a Japanese factory doesn’t automatically work in an Indonesian palm oil plantation. Someone needs to adapt it. That someone could be you.3. Make your pitch anti-fragile.If you’re fundraising, assume it will take twice as long as you think and that 80% of pitches will fail. That’s not pessimism—that’s the new baseline.Series A deal volume is down 18%, dollars deployed down 23%, and median fundraising timeline has stretched to 20+ months. Build your financial model assuming you need 24-30 months of runway, not 18.4. Get specific about your AI story—or drop it entirely.VCs are getting sophisticated about AI-washing. If you claim to be an AI company, you’ll get grilled on model architecture, training data, and inference costs. If you can’t defend those claims technically, don’t make them.Better to be a great logistics company that happens to use AI than a mediocre AI company trying to find a use case.5. Map your stakeholder ecosystem before scaling.For every market you want to enter, identify the regulators, incumbent players, and local partners who will determine whether you can actually deploy. Then engage them early.In Southeast Asia, your ability to navigate complex stakeholder dynamics is often more important than pure technological superiority.The Bet You’re Making Whether You Realize It or NotEvery founder right now is making an implicit bet about the future—even if you’re trying to avoid making a bet.If you’re building in AI or robotics, you’re betting that this wave is real, that the investment will eventually find profitable returns, and that there’s room for new players despite the trillion-dollar incumbents.If you’re staying away from AI entirely, you’re betting that the hype will deflate, that most AI companies will fail, and that there will be opportunities in the aftermath for more traditional businesses.Both bets carry risk. But only one bet has upside if you’re wrong.If you bet on AI and it turns out to be overhyped, you’ve still built capabilities in cutting-edge technology. You can pivot. You’ve learned. You have optionality.If you bet against AI and it turns out to be transformative, you’ve built capabilities in a world that no longer exists. You’re starting from zero.This is why the smartest founders I know aren’t asking “Is this a bubble?” They’re asking: “How do I build something that has value regardless of whether this is a bubble?”The answer? Focus ruthlessly on unit economics, real customer problems, and sustainable business models. Use AI as a tool, not a story. Build partnerships that give you leverage, not vendor relationships that make you disposable.And move fast—because in 24 months, the rules of this game will be set in stone.The Uncomfortable Truth About TimingWe’re at an inflection point that happens maybe twice in a generation.The last comparable moment was probably the late 1990s with the internet, or the late 2000s with mobile. Decisions made in the next 2-3 years will shape the next 2-3 decades.The leverage available to individual founders, operators, and investors right now is enormous. But you have to be willing to grab it.That means accepting uncertainty as the baseline condition. That means making decisions with incomplete information. That means being wrong sometimes and adjusting fast.The biggest mistake isn’t picking the wrong technology or the wrong market. The biggest mistake is paralysis—waiting for perfect information that will never come, watching the window close while you’re still analyzing.Southeast Asia has a genuine shot at being a major player in the AI-robotics revolution. But only if we’re willing to act while the rules are still being written.The trillion-dollar flywheel is spinning. The robot factories are being built. The investment decisions are being made.You can shape this, or you can watch it happen to you. But you can’t do both.What’s it going to be?Kim Yeoh is co-host of Sea of Startups and writes about technology, strategy, and building in Southeast Asia. Kevin Brockland is her co-host and occasional voice of reason. They’re both trying to figure this out in real-time, just like you.Subscribe to Sea of Startups for weekly insights that won’t make you dumber: 🎧 Spotify | Apple Podcasts | YouTube💬 What’s your take? Are we in a bubble, a revolution, or both? Comments are open.DISCLAIMER: All views expressed are personal opinions and do not represent any organizations mentioned. Content is for informational and entertainment purposes only and should not be considered professional, investment, or legal advice. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙️ EP 15:When Regulators Win: What Singapore's Robotaxi Rollout Reveals About the Future of Deep Tech" 09.10.2025 32λ

  When Regulators Win: What Singapore's Robotaxi Rollout Reveals About the Future of Deep TechWhile Silicon Valley's AV companies fought regulators and burned billions, Singapore just orchestrated the future of transportation. WeRide partnered with Grab. Pony.ai partnered with ComfortDelGro. Both launching in 2025.This isn't just about self-driving cars. It's about how deep tech scales when you work WITH regulators instead of against them.Meanwhile, Series A funding collapsed 23% year-over-year. Fundraising timelines stretched to 3.5 years for many companies. The easy money era is over.This episode connects autonomous vehicles, strategic partnerships, and the brutal fundraising reality of 2025. If you're building deep tech or raising in Southeast Asia, this is required listening.WHAT WE COVER🚗 The Singapore AV StrategyWhy WeRide + Grab partnership changes everythingWhat Pony.ai brings to ComfortDelGroHow Singapore's Land Transport Authority orchestrates (not just approves) innovation💸 The Series A ApocalypseFunding down 23%, deal volume down 18%Median time Seed→Series A: 20 months (but 3.5 years for many)Hot sectors vs cold sectors: Where money is actually flowing🎯 Strategic Partnerships vs Solo ExecutionThe question every deep tech founder must askWhy being a vendor means you have no leverageHow to become a strategic partner instead🔥 The AI Hype Reality CheckWhat investors actually ask about AI startupsHow to tell if you're AI-washing your pitchWhen to force the AI angle (hint: never)📊 What's Actually Working in 2025The death of triple-triple-double-double-double5 things Southeast Asia founders must internalizeWhy government backing is your fastest path to scaleIn This Episode:[00:00] Intro: Continuing from climate tech and policy dynamics [02:01] WeRide + Grab and Pony.ai + ComfortDelGro partnerships in Singapore [05:22] US vs Singapore AV playbook: Chaos vs orchestration [10:13] Why Punggol is the perfect testbed for autonomous vehicles [15:16] Building trust through strategic partnerships and familiar brands [18:24] The fundraising apocalypse: Series A down 23%[22:06] Hot vs cold sectors: What's actually getting funded in 2025 [25:12] The death of triple-triple-double-double growth expectations [27:24] Why Southeast Asia needed this correction[31:52] Practical advice: Extended runway planning for founders💡 KEY TAKEAWAYS:✅ Strategic partnerships > solo execution in deep tech✅ Series A funding is down 23% YoY—plan for 2x longer fundraising timelines ✅ If you're a vendor, you have no leverage. Be a strategic partner. ✅ Singapore's government-orchestrated approach scales faster than Silicon Valley's chaos ✅ Extended runway (24-30 months) isn't optional—it's survival📊 FEATURED DATA POINTS & SOURCES :📉 Series A dollars deployed: Down 23% YoY 📉 Series A deal volume: Down 18% YoY ⏱️ Median Seed→Series A time: 20 months (up to 3.5 years for many) 🚗 WeRide autonomous driving: 50M+ kilometres 🚗 Waymo 2024 rides: 4M+ rides, 96M projected miles by mid-2025 🇸🇬 Pony.ai-ComfortDelGro MoU: July 2024 🇸🇬 Grab Ai.R launch: September 2025SOURCES: Grab Singapore press release (Sept 2025) Pony.ai investor relations announcements (Sept 2025)Land Transport Authority AV trial dataCarta Series A market reportWaymo operational metricsFOR FOUNDERS LISTENINGIf you're fundraising right now:Plan for timelines 2x longer than you thinkRaise 24-30 months runway, not 18Have burn reduction plan BEFORE you need itIf you're building deep tech:Identify established players who need youPosition as strategic partner, not vendorWork WITH regulators, not around themIf you're in Southeast Asia:Stop copying Silicon Valley playbooksGovernment isn't your enemy—it's your accelerantBuild for the market you're actually in🎙️ ABOUT SEA OF STARTUPS:Sea of Startups is your weekly reality check for building in Southeast Asia. Hosted by Kimberly Yeoh and Kevin Brockland, we cover what's actually happening in the ecosystem—no fluff, no hype, just the truth about fundraising, regulation, and what it takes to build here.🔗 CONNECT WITH US:💼 LinkedIn: Kimberly Yeohhttps://www.linkedin.com/in/weiisyuenyeohacmacgma/ | Kevin Brockland:https://www.linkedin.com/in/kbrockland/📧 Newsletter: https://seaofstartups.substack.com 📌 MENTIONED IN THIS EPISODE:WeRide (autonomous vehicle technology)Grab (Southeast Asia ride-hailing)Pony.ai (Chinese AV company)ComfortDelGro (Singapore transportation)Waymo (Google's AV division)Cruise (GM's AV company - shut down SF operations)Land Transport Authority SingaporeCarta (startup cap table platform)🏷️ TAGS:#AutonomousVehicles #Singapore #StartupFunding #SeriesA #SoutheastAsia #VentureCapital #Waymo #Grab #WeRide #PonyAI #DeepTech #AIStartups #FundraisingTips #StartupStrategy #TechInvestment #SmartCities #Robotaxi #ComfortDelGro #LandTransportAuthority #SEAStartups💬 JOIN THE CONVERSATION:What are you seeing in your market? Are strategic partnerships the new playbook, or are you still going solo? Drop a comment below.Subscribe for weekly insights on building in Southeast Asia 👇⚠️ DISCLAIMER:All views expressed are personal opinions and do not represent any organizations mentioned. This content is for informational purposes only and should not be considered investment advice. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙️ EP 14: Heat, Hype & Hard Truths: Why Climate Tech Keeps Failing in Southeast Asia’s Torture Chamber (And How Founders Can Survive It) 01.10.2025 29λ

  Your battery just died. Not your phone—your entire business model. This week on Sea of Startups, we're diving into why most climate tech fails within months in Southeast Asia, how tropical conditions are a torture chamber for hardware, and why the smartest founders are turning brutal constraints into billion-dollar competitive advantages. Plus: Why Chinese AV companies are playing a completely different game in Singapore, and fresh Series A data that might make you cry into your pitch deck (but also why this might be the best time to build).What You'll Learn:Why 90% of battery technologies fail in tropical conditions and what to do about itThe four frameworks climate tech founders need to survive Southeast Asia's regulatory mazeHow software-defined adaptation is beating hardware brute forceWhy Singapore's autonomous vehicle strategy looks nothing like Silicon Valley's approachThe brutal truth about Series A fundraising in 2025Featured Topics:Tropical Batteries Report 2025 from Malaysia's SEDA and CiceroClimate tech hardware survival strategiesEnergy policy challenges across Southeast Asia marketsAutonomous vehicle partnerships in Singapore (Pony.ai, WeRide)Series A fundraising reality check with Carta dataTimestamps: 00:00 - Introduction: Heat, Hype, and Hard Truths 01:15 - The Adapter That Couldn't Adapt 05:30 - Tropical Batteries Report 2025: Why Hardware Dies in SEA 09:45 - Three Engineering Strategies (And Why Software Wins) 15:20 - The Policy Problem: When Regulators Block Innovation22:40 - Four Frameworks for Climate Tech Survival 28:48 - Segment Transition: From Climate Heat to AV HypeKey Quotes:"Southeast Asia isn't just a market. It's a torture chamber for hardware.""If your adapter can't survive Southeast Asia, neither can your startup.""Don't think of tropical conditions as a constraint. Think of them as a feature.""The real competitive advantage isn't having the best technology. It's having technology that regulators understand, incumbents can partner with, and customers can actually deploy."Resources Mentioned:Tropical Batteries Report 2025 (SEDA Malaysia & Cicero)Malaysia's Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA)PTT, EGAT, Petronas, Pertamina energy programsShell LiveWire programHosts:Kimberley (Kim) Yeoh - @WeiiSyuenYeohKevin Brockland - @KevinBrocklandSEGMENT 1: TROPICAL CLIMATE TECH - THE TORTURE CHAMBER (00:00 - 28:48)The Core Problem: Most battery storage technologies were designed for temperate climates (Silicon Valley garages, German engineering labs), not Southeast Asia's brutal conditions:Daily temperatures: 35°C+ (surface temps hit 60°C on rooftops)Humidity: 90% for months at a timeSalt spray near coastsBiblical rain patternsThermal cycling causing mechanical stressReal-World Impact:Lithium-ion cells that should last 10 years only reach 60% of expected lifespanElectronic components corrode rapidlyHousing cracks from thermal cyclingWarranty claims sink company valuationsThe Report: Tropical Batteries Report 2025 from Malaysia's SEDA (Sustainable Energy Development Authority) and CSIRO provides the first comprehensive playbook for hardware founders building in tropical markets.https://www.csiro.au/en/research/technology-space/energy/Electricity-transition/Southeast-Asia/tropical-batteries-MalaysiaMalaysia's Context:Target: 70% renewable energy by 2050Battery storage is critical for grid stabilityBut current technologies aren't built for these conditionsThree Engineering Strategies:Engineer the Environment (Reactive)Active cooling systemsHeat-dissipating materialsSmarter packagingProblem: Adds cost and complexity without solving root causeDifferent Chemistry (Better, but limited)Sodium-ion batteries: Better heat tolerance, less energy denseIron-air batteries: Incredibly robust, slower charge/dischargeSand batteries: Trap and hold heat (Vietnam example)Problem: Still competing on manufacturing scale with Chinese giantsSoftware-Defined Adaptation (The Winner)Predictive thermal managementDynamic load balancingWeather-aware charge/discharge algorithmsAdvantage: Compete on intelligence, not manufacturing scaleStartup-friendly and defensibleThe Policy Elephant: Technology is only half the battle. Energy policy often works against startups:Thailand Example:Ambitious renewable goals on paperReality: Energy sector dominated by massive incumbentsPeer-to-peer energy trading technically feasible but legally grayResult: "Behind-the-meter" projects only (on-site consumption, can't scale to grid)The Structural Challenge:What works in Singapore doesn't work in IndonesiaWhat's legal in Malaysia might be restricted in VietnamDifferent regulatory approaches across 11 Southeast Asian marketsDifferent incumbent interests and political sensitivitiesFour Survival Frameworks:Framework 1: Environmental Design ThinkingDon't just stress test in labsGet into real tropical conditions ASAPPartner with universities in Malaysia, Indonesia, PhilippinesSet up test installations in actual field conditionsFail fast and cheap in R&D, not after scaling manufacturingFramework 2: Regulatory Arbitrage StrategyFind pockets where policy already supports your modelMalaysia: Feed-in tariffs and net metering policies support distributed solar + storageSingapore: Regulatory sandboxes for energy innovationStart there, prove model works, then expand to trickier marketsFramework 3: Stakeholder Ecosystem MappingMap key players for every target market: regulators, incumbent utilities, local partnersThailand: Partner with PTT or EGAT instead of disrupting themMalaysia: Work with PetronasIndonesia: Engage with PertaminaAll have CVC arms and innovation programs looking for partnershipsShell's LiveWire program operates across the regionFramework 4: Climate Adaptation as Competitive AdvantageDon't view tropical conditions as constraint—it's a featureIf hardware survives 35°C heat + 90% humidity, it works anywhereTropical market = Southeast Asia + huge chunks of Africa, Latin America, India, Middle EastTorture chamber produces the strongest survivorsThe Meta Lesson: Climate tech is a systems challenge, not just engineering:Building better batteries that work within political, regulatory, climate realitiesBuilding systems that intelligently adapt vs. brute-forcing solutionsBuilding partnerships with incumbents vs. declaring warBuilding for business model sustainability from day oneSmart Founder Strategy: Spend as much time in government ministries as in labs. Don't just build tech—help shape regulations that determine whether tech can scale. Become part of the policy conversation, not an obstacle to it.SEGMENT 2: AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES IN SINGAPORE (Teased at 28:48)The Setup: Chinese companies Pony.ai and WeRide launching autonomous shuttles in Punggol, Singapore. But their strategy looks nothing like Silicon Valley's "move fast and break things" approach.Key Insight Preview: They're playing a completely different game—and it might be genius. (Full segment to be covered in next episode)SEGMENT 3: SERIES A FUNDRAISING REALITY CHECK (Teased)What's Coming:Fresh data from CartaInsider commentary from VC circlesNumbers that might make you cry into your pitch deckWhy this might actually be the best time to build if you're smart about it(Full segment to be covered in next episode)ACTIONABLE TAKEAWAYSFor Climate Tech Founders: ✅ Test in real tropical conditions early—don't wait until post-manufacturing ✅ Consider software-defined adaptation over hardware brute force ✅ Map regulatory landscape before scaling—find friendly markets first ✅ Partner with incumbents rather than fighting them ✅ Position tropical durability as global competitive advantageFor Investors: ✅ Due diligence must include field testing in deployment environments ✅ Account for regulatory risk, not just technology risk ✅ Demand unit economics from day one, not just deployment numbers ✅ Evaluate founder's understanding of policy landscapeFor Corporate Executives: ✅ Partner with startups solving real problems, not pitching moonshots ✅ Ensure digital transformation infrastructure works in actual operating conditions ✅ Make strategic investments that support ecosystem resilienceCONNECT WITH USSubscribe to Sea of Startups: 🎧 Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/0k6pc3PvXDeSltPINsBkJy?si=abfb938374b64ca7 Apple Podcasts https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/sea-of-startups/id1641090926 YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/@SEAofStartupsFollow the Hosts: 💼 Kim (WeiiSyuen Yeoh) on LinkedIn 💼 Kevin Brockland on LinkedInJoin the Conversation: Is your hardware actually tropical-ready, or did you just check a box on a spec sheet? Share your experiences in the comments.MENTIONED IN THIS EPISODEOrganizations:Malaysia's Sustainable Energy Development Authority (SEDA)CSIROPTT (Thailand)EGAT (Thailand)Petronas (Malaysia)Pertamina (Indonesia)Shell LiveWire programTopics:Tropical Batteries Report 2025Lithium-ion vs sodium-ion vs iron-air batteriesSand battery technology (Vietnam)Feed-in tariffs and net meteringBehind-the-meter projectsRegulatory sandboxesPeer-to-peer energy tradingUpcoming:Pony.ai and WeRide autonomous vehicle partnershipsSeries A fundraising with Carta dataSpecial guest on distributed energy (launching end of year)TAGS & KEYWORDS#ClimateTeч #TropicalBatteries #HardwareStartups #SoutheastAsiaStartups #RenewableEnergy #EnergyStorage #MalaysiaTech #BatteryTechnology #CleanEnergy #StartupStrategy #RegulatoryStrategy #EnergyPolicy #SEDA #TropicalConditions #SustainableTech #SEAofStartupsNext Episode Preview: We'll dive into why Chinese AV companies are taking a radically different approach in Singapore, plus the Series A data that's separating winners from cautionary tales. Stay tuned.Disclaimer: All views and opinions expressed are those of the hosts and do not represent any organizations mentioned. Content is for informational and entertainment purposes only and should not be considered professional, investment, or legal advice. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com
• 🎙️ EP 13:The $12B Unicorn Teaching This Malaysian Founder How to Scale Without Losing His Soul 25.09.2025 1ώ 1λ

  This conversation explores the messy middle of entrepreneurship through Ryan Ng’s unique journey of building YouDigital while leading APAC expansion at $12B unicorn Deel. We dive into cultural barriers holding back Southeast Asian professionals, the myth of work-life balance, and what it really takes to build something meaningful while maintaining financial stability.⏱️ Key Topics DiscussedThe Deel Experience (05:00–10:30)Inside the world’s largest remote companyScaling across ASEAN’s complex regulatory landscapeFrom LinkedIn’s “bullet train” to Deel’s “rocket ship”Managing 24/7 Slack notifications across time zonesThe Paiseh Problem (17:00–22:30)Southeast Asia’s cultural humility vs. global visibility requirementsWhy opportunities go to the most visible, not the best personThe cost of staying silent in today’s professional landscapeBreaking free from “let your work speak for itself” mentalityThe YouDigital Origin Story (20:00–27:00)The moment Ryan couldn’t not build somethingFrom LinkedIn DMs to TikTok content in Bahasa MalaysiaThe nine-month transformation of a bypassed professionalExpanding from Malaysia to inquiries from Botswana and SpainBuilding While Employed (27:00–35:00)Why Ryan didn’t quit his day job (and why that’s strategic)The unfair advantage of financial stability while buildingTransparency with managers and avoiding conflicts of interestChoosing harmony over balance: “Balance is a trap”Family Dynamics (35:00–47:00)Honest conversations with his wife about opportunity costsThe end of weekly “Fridates” and adjusted holiday schedulesRaising a three-year-old while juggling two demanding rolesWhen your toddler crashes Zoom calls with enterprise clientsThe Visibility Challenge (47:00–52:00)“You don’t have to be loud to be powerful”Leadership without a leadership titleThe infrastructure of professional development in Southeast AsiaCultural authenticity as competitive advantage💬 Memorable Quotes“The opportunities always go to not the best person but the person that’s most visible.”“You shouldn’t try to aim for balance, right? Try to aim for harmony instead, because balance is a trap.”“Hit that post button. Post something honest. Just post that being genuine and hit that button.”⚡ Rapid Fire InsightsBiggest fear holding back SEA professionals: Fear of being visible before feeling 100% readyMonthly question every professional should ask: “What do they want to be known for? And how are they showing up?”Key mindset shift for side project builders: Don’t be a perfectionist – be comfortable with uncertainties and different seasonsOne action to improve visibility this week: Hit publish on something honest and genuine🔗 Resources MentionedYouDigital → youdigital.asiaDeel → Global HR tech unicorn valued at $12BTikTok Content → Career advice in Bahasa MalaysiaSlush’D Penang → Where Kim and Ryan first connected👤 Connect with Ryan NgYouDigital → youdigital.asiaLinkedIn → Ryan Ng LinkedIn Profile📝 About Ryan NgRyan Ng is a Southeast Asian thought leader in career and personal branding, with over 18 years of experience spanning Canon, LinkedIn, Deel, and now YouDigital. Followed by more than 35,000 on TikTok and widely recognised for his thought leadership on LinkedIn, Ryan makes career insights relatable, practical, and actionable for today’s talent.Currently Founder & CEO of YouDigital, Ryan partners with universities, corporates, and government agencies to help students, founders, mid-careerists, and professionals build visibility and opportunity readiness. He also serves as an Adjunct Mentor at INTI, guiding design-thinking projects and mentoring the next generation of leaders.Previously at LinkedIn, Ryan led public sector workforce programmes across Malaysia, working alongside government agencies to shape employability and economic growth strategies. At Deel, the world’s fastest-growing HR tech startup, he drove regional expansion across ASEAN, advising multinationals on global hiring and compliance.Ryan has been a speaker at Slush’d Penang, AmCham, Taylor’s University, UiTM, MDEC, and TalentCorp events, and served as a panel judge for TalentCorp’s Life at Work Awards, underlining his commitment to strengthening Malaysia’s and ASEAN’s talent ecosystem.Through his work, Ryan believes in a simple truth: the best opportunities don’t always go to the most qualified — they go to the most visible. His mission is to ensure Southeast Asians are not just ready for opportunities, but noticed and chosen. In a world where AI can replicate skills, the one thing it can’t replace is your brand.🌊 SEA of Startups — Support & Stay Connected🙌 Support the ShowIf this episode made you rethink what “ecosystem building” really means:👉 Tap Follow on Spotify🔔 Turn on notifications so you never miss a new drop⭐ Leave us a 5-star rating & review📤 Share this episode with a founder or operator navigating cross-border challenges💬 Let’s ConnectKim Yeoh → LinkedInKevin Brockland → LinkedInNewsletter → Subscribe on Substack🌐 Follow us for more stories:Spotify → Follow SEA of StartupsLinkedIn → SEA of Startups LinkedIn PageSubstack → seaofstartups.substack.com🌊 SEA of Startups is where the region’s real startup stories live. No puff pieces. No fluff. Just what’s actually happening under the surface. This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit seaofstartups.substack.com