Suggestions
Gokul Rajaram
Profile of Gokul Rajaram
Gokul Rajaram is a prominent figure in product development, currently serving as the General Manager of Caviar at DoorDash. He previously held the position of Product Engineering Lead at Square from 2013 to 2019, where he played a crucial role in leading software development for various products, including Square Register, a comprehensive point-of-sale system designed for businesses.13
Education and Early Career
Rajaram has a strong academic background, holding a Bachelor of Technology in Computer Science from the Indian Institute of Technology, Kanpur, where he was awarded the President of India's Gold Medal for being the class valedictorian. He also earned a Master of Science in Computer Science from the University of Texas at Austin and an MBA from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) Sloan School of Management.23
Before his tenure at Square, Rajaram was the Product Director of Ads at Facebook, where he was instrumental in transitioning Facebook's advertising business to a mobile-first approach. He also worked at Google as a Product Management Director for AdSense, contributing significantly to its development and growth.237
Contributions and Current Role
At DoorDash, Rajaram leads Caviar, a premium food ordering service, and serves on the boards of several companies, including Pinterest and Coinbase. His expertise in product management and development has made him a sought-after advisor and investor in early-stage technology startups.245
Rajaram is recognized for his strategic insights and collaborative approach to product development, emphasizing the importance of understanding customer needs and fostering innovation within teams.67
Highlights
PRICE DOESN"T MATTER AT EARLY STAGE
800+ investments over 20 years have taught me one thing: price is irrelevant at seed/A round, as long as it's below a "reasonable" number (which is a function of geography / space).
If it's a great company, your entry price doesn't matter.
if it's not good/great, your entry price doesn't matter either.
BRAND AS A MOAT?
I’ll be honest - I struggled whether to include Brand in this list of moats.
I ultimately decided not to, because I think it’s too hard to measure, and in many cases the underlying brand strength is due to something something more fundamental — network effects, switching costs, or scale economies — that the brand merely reflects.
A strong brand is often the symptom of a real moat, not the moat itself.
The danger of counting Brand as a moat is that it flatters companies that are actually quite fragile. WeWork had a brand. Peloton had a brand. Both burned through goodwill the moment the underlying economics cracked. Brand without a structural underpinning is just reputation — and reputation is rented, not owned.
So I think about brand the way I think about customer loyalty scores: useful as a signal, dangerous as an explanation. When someone tells me a company’s moat is its brand, my follow-up is always the same 2 questions. (a) what built the brand, and (b) can that be replicated? That answer usually points to the real moat, or in many cases, reveals there isn’t one.
