How is this used?
How is this different? Well, first of all, note that Polestar
is already being used by U.S. military customers across multiple
continents, multiple air cars on fixed sites, on mounted vehicles and on
aircraft. So Polestar, while we're announcing it
for the first time today, ahead of soft week, it's actually been in existence
for years. This is something we haven't been able
to talk about, but we've worked on for a long time.
It's an AI powered electronic warfare tool that can understand what's going on
in the RF domain and then take measures to accomplish your aims within the RF
domain. So jamming, hacking, spoofing,
controlling, identifying things, countering those things, making sure
that your own electronic systems maintain their functionality.
And it's able to do that extremely fast because it's powered by a lattice.
Our A.I. system that powers all Android products,
it's able to do what would have previously taken a team of electronic
warfare specialists in a building full of equipment, weeks or months to
accomplish in just seconds. So to that point and power, I of course,
preface all of this with that from a political perspective, but from a
personal perspective right now, it is an emotional time when we're discussing
war, women discussing warfare. So we're sensitive to that.
But where at the moment is this being used in a different kind of what you
were just talking about, how it's already been basically been used since
2020? This is the first time you can discuss
it. How has artificial intelligence changed
the pace with which you can iterate? But also things are changing within
warfare. Well, I started in URL because I was
concerned that the United States and our allies around the world were losing our
technological edge to some of our near peers.
And even now in many areas, Piers. And I think how things have been playing
out in Ukraine and around the world have really proven proven that out.
A.I. is changing the game in a lot of ways
because it allows you to deploy large numbers of systems that are much more
intelligent, much more useful way than we've ever been able to do before with
even remotely piloted systems, and has been focused on A.I.
since the beginning of our company about seven years ago.
You'll notice that our name Andrew All Industries, is, you know, the acronym is
A.I. then that's for a reason.
We were we believe that artificial intelligence is going to be changing the
nature of warfare long before a lot of people were paying any attention to it.
I remember when we were starting our company and it was hard to raise money
for A.I. companies.
People weren't taking it seriously. They saw it as kind of a science fiction
gem, but not something that was real. And unfortunately, the reality of the
world today has forced people to start paying more attention to what I can do
on the battlefield. People are paying attention.
A government they have to all the defense sector in particular.
And I mean, I speak to the fact that the Air Force in the United States has got,
with the program, understood the impact that you're making and ultimately what
brought you one, you're now doing a program.
You're sort of seen as a new type, a new force of of defense tech startup.
You actually call it a non-traditional defense company.
Can you talk us through the Collaborative Combat Aircraft program?
Basically, this is about aircraft that fly alongside those that are manned.
Sure. I mean, this is an area where the U.S.
Air Force and Secretary Kendall deserve a lot of credit for their vision.
They want to deploy AI powered aircraft at scale alongside manned aircraft on a
timeline that is relevant to the conflicts that we are trying to deter
and that have the ranges and capabilities that we need to be
meaningful to the adversaries that we might have to fight.
I'll just name the name. It's China.
S.K. The Collaborative Combat Aircraft
Program is the program to have to develop and then build over 1000 Kias
that are going to fly alongside manned aircraft.
Loyal wingman, the loyal wingman they've been called and are I'll just beat out
Lockheed Martin, Northrop Grumman and Boeing for a slot on the KIA program.
We're going to be using that slot to build production representative
aircraft, not prototypes, but production representative aircraft that are going
to be ready to go to scale at manufacturing.
If we can hit all of our if we can hit all of our milestones and prove that we
are as good at building airplanes as we are at building our.
You went there and you mentioned China. I'm interested as to therefore where you
will manufacture and ultimately see deploying of of these particular
autonomous fighter jets. Well, they're going to be deployed right
here or built right here in the United States where they're going to be
deployed. That's up to our customer.
I don't have a ton of insight into where exactly they might do that, though.
I've got some ideas. I'm interested where you see that for at
the moment, the US taking leadership back or do you still worry since splashy
the founding of Agile, whether you do think that US has reasserted itself,
become again the leader. I think that we have a long way to go in
certain areas. But the really powerful thing is that
we've recognized the areas where we have problems.
I think people have been pulled out of their slumber.
They realize that there's areas we can move much faster.
We can do things in months, not years, that just were not possible to do within
the bureaucracy before, within the previous construct of how we are
supposed to get things done. I mean, the Air Force taking a bet on
and all on CCAR is just one of many examples of people realizing that
business as usual is not something that we have time for, not in the modern
timeline, not in the modern threat environment.
But what about the competition from the Boeings, from the Lockheed's?
Are they not getting with the program, starting up their own internal start ups
or indeed making acquisitions? You know, I don't feel like those guys
are really the competition. I feel a bit of a kinship with them.
Look, I'm not running my business the same way that they're running their
business. But at the end of the day, we're all
trying to protect the same country. We're all trying to protect the same
values, more or less here and around the world.
I'm actually much more worried about the competition from Iran.
I'm much more worried about the competition from Russia and China.
We've had systems in Ukraine since the second week of the war and the
innovation that I've seen coming out of Russia, China and Iran as kind of a
coalition of very technologically advanced adversaries.
It worries me a lot more than the competition that I have here in the U.S.
There's things that I'm going to build that I do better than Boeing, for
example, And there's things that Boeing is going to build that where they're
better than me. And I recognize that.
And I think we're doing a pretty good job of finding how we can continue
working together with all of these different companies and all these
companies that I just mentioned as building on this program.
We're working with all of them in some capacity on other programs.
It's actually a little less cutthroat than people would think because of that
very strong shared sense of mission that you see in the United States national
security apparatus. And you're aligning incentives with
allies as well. And we note, of course, an autonomous
sub that you've been working with about Australia and actually sort of
co-developing and keeping on pace, unheard of kind of in the defense
contract space of actually being on time and in budget.
But where else might you manufacture, might you co-develop?
It was interesting that one of our own reporters highlighting that the VP of
Taiwan was speaking at a US event, would there ever be manufacturing in Taiwan?
Well, you're right on the Go shark program.
That's an autonomous robotic submarine the size of a school bus that we've been
developing with the Royal Australian Navy.
And we actually just delivered the first submarine a year ahead of schedule and
on budget, which as you mentioned, is rare.
It's it's practically unheard of. There are other areas where we're
looking to expand. I can't talk about the specifics of it,
but I can tell you that I have in Taiwan frequently.
I was just there a few months ago. I'm going back in just a few weeks.
Taiwan is obviously one of the key technological partners of the United
States, especially in the region. It's critical for United States military
security that that Taiwan remains free and independent and democratic.
But it's also very important for our economy.
I would say there might not be another country in the world that is really
underpinning so much of our way of life when it comes to semiconductors and all
of the things that they power throughout our consumer and industrial and defense
economy. You talk about how things have changed
certainly from a Ministry of Defense perspective, but what's also changing is
the politicization ultimately of companies that are working within
warfare. And we certainly see that from protests
here among students. How have you been feeling and is being
embraced still by the private sector from a money perspective?
Are you raising money? Is it easy to do so?
Are you looking to go public? Well, luckily, I think that there is a
very big gulf in sophistication around international affairs between the types
of people who are funding and are all and the types of people who are skipping
class to camp out on campus, on campuses.
I think that there's a lot of people who recognize that the United States should
have the best technology. The only way to credibly deter warfare
is to have a backstop of credible threat of violence.
There is no way that you can deter every adversary with the threat of a sternly
worded letter or this idea that sanctions are going to cripple their
economy, especially in areas where we don't even have the leverage to make
that true. I think that on the funding side, we
don't have any problems. We've got a lot of money in the bank.
We have a very healthy revenue pipeline. We're on the path to being a publicly
traded company and a lot of people are really excited about that because Andro,
in addition to building tools that keep our men and women on the front lines
safe, which is something people want to be invested in, is also just a good,
credible business with a really good roadmap that's doing well on our
existing products. And it's a healthy pipeline of future
products. We just announced Pulsar.
We just showed off some other new products like Menace X.
We're going to be announcing products through the rest of the year.
We've got about a dozen products that we've publicly announced and we've got
another dozen that are not even publicly talked about yet, and they're of a
similar caliber. And I think that our investors recognize
that perspective and existing. I look forward to you coming back and
talking about it when they can talk about it publicly.
But quickly, IPO 20, 24 or 2025. Well, I can almost promise you it won't
be 2024. If it was, we'd already have to be way
down that path. You know, Wants to be a publicly traded
company for a variety of different reasons.
It's something that we've wanted to do since the very beginning.
You know, this is my second company. You might know I started a company
called Oculus VR when I was 19. I sold that to Facebook for a few
billion dollars. I was there for a few years before I was
fired, and I've decided that I want to go on a different path this time.
And luckily that aligns with what our customers want us to do, what our
investors want us to do. And I think what the American people
want to do, where they want to be able to buy into these companies, not have
them operate as private entities beyond reach and beyond control.
