Mobility Innovators

Julian Glaab ([00:00:00]):

I think it’s a common misconception still that people believe you need $10 billion in order to build a self-driving system because it comes from a time when we basically had to teach cars every single possible scenario atomically and then validate this atomically. And now we have systems. So, the technology that we are using and it is also now becoming industry standard very quickly is a so-called vision language action model, which works like an LLM for AI.

And you have on the one side, you have sensor input, like vision LiDAR, radar, whatever you have as input, even microphone audio streams as an input. And then you have a language prompt and the language prompt can be something like turn left at the next intersection. Then as an output, you get essentially driving commands. It can be like a steering wheel angle. It can be a brake pedal pressure value. It can be a turn signal command and everything else in between is internalized.

Jaspal Singh ([00:01:11]):

Welcome to the Mobility Innovators Podcast.

Hello everyone. Welcome to another episode of Mobility Innovator Podcast. I’m your host, Jaspal Singh. On this podcast, we speak with leaders shaping the future of mobility and transportation around the world. Today, we’re joined by Julian Glaab, the CEO of Bliq, a European autonomous mobility company working to make driverless technology practical in real world. With a background in engineering and mobility, Julian has led Bliq from an early ride hailing sharing into a company focused on autonomous vehicle, remote supervision, and future of urban transport.

I’m so happy to welcome Julian Glaab, the CEO of Bliq. Now it’s time to listen and learn.

Julian, welcome to the podcast. It’s great to have you here.

Julian Glaab ([00:02:05]):

Yeah, thank you for having me. I’m really excited for this. Let’s do it.

Jaspal Singh ([00:02:08]):

Great. I’m looking forward to having this conversation with you since I saw the news about Bliq got approval in Europe, which is quite remarkable. So before starting about your company and what are you building, I really want to start with your personal journey because I feel it’s quite interesting what you have achieved in such a short period. I mean, you begin your career with automotive space only Volkswagen and then work for Siemens Mobility, and then you launch your first venture in the parking technology space. And parking is also another area where I’m very interested. And Bliq is your second venture. I mean, can you share how the whole story unfold for you so far? And for the people just meeting you for the first time, what problem in mobility have you been most obsessed with solving? Because you’re working with Volkswagen, Siemens, then Parking, now Bliq.

So what is the real problem you wanted to solve?

Julian Glaab ([00:03:02]):

Yeah, so maybe let me start a little bit earlier. Every single job I had was always in the German transport industry. I grew up in a family in Bavaria, four siblings, large family, and I had to start working early to look after myself, don’t be reading my parents’ pockets. And so I basically started to work right after school. I besides studying and I got into manufacturing as a production engineer and then it always went on. And at some point, German corporates, they tend to be quite slow. And so when I turned 21, I had a very nice job at one of those corporations and I was like, okay, this cannot really be it. It takes a massive amount of energy to get anything done in those large companies. And for me, it didn’t feel exciting anymore at this point. And I said, okay, this is now what my life is going to be.

Julian Glaab ([00:04:06]):

I don’t think that’s it. And so I always wanted to build my own business and I wanted to be an entrepreneur. And so for me, it was never really about the exact problem I’m solving. It was always about this idea of building something on my own because I believe with my co-founders I can do it. And this is really what drives me even today. So even if I go to sleep and I’m thinking, okay, if it’s not that company, if the company wouldn’t exist now, I would have 10 other ideas I would love to bring to life. So I’m like an engineer, I’m a builder really. And so the first business came about when we were working at Volkswagen within the Volkswagen Group.

Julian Glaab ([00:04:51]):

And we saw how Volkswagen was struggling building its connected car services. Specifically my co-founder was working in this area at Volkswagen at the time. And we believed giving people data about where parking spaces are, especially on street, would greatly improve traffic in cities because a lot of the cars that are driving around in the city are actually looking for a parking spot. And I think there’s some statistic that says up to 30% in peak hours of cars on the road are just looking for parking. And so this was the first thing we wanted to solve.

Julian Glaab ([00:05:24]):

And the approach we took was we didn’t want to build an app for people because the intent of an app that tells you to find a parking spot is essentially minimizing its own in-app time because. So it’s going to be hard to build a business around it. So for us, it was pretty clear that this kind of information has to live inside of a bigger product, for example, your in-car navigation system. And so we made it an API and we sold access to the API to different companies, mapping companies, OEMs. I became a Volkswagen supplier myself with this company, which was a massive endeavor because it’s really hard to sell anything to a company this big that becomes part of a production car. So I learned a lot about that and ultimately became clear that this is going to be a nice cash flow business.

Julian Glaab ([00:06:16]):

It’s going to be nice, it’s going to be fine, but it’s slow growing. And we had raised venture capital at this point, and to me it was pretty clear that we were not going to be able to exit this for ourselves, but also for our investors. And so this was not the type of company that we wanted to build long-term. And so this is why we basically got out of that at some point and went on to build a new thing, which was a ride-tailing company, which was the second thing we did. So should I keep telling you a little bit about That? Yeah, no, why not?

Jaspal Singh ([00:06:44]):

Like you mentioned about Bliq, you started as a ride-tailing company and now converted into a driverless company. I’m very curious why that transition happened and why now?

Julian Glaab ([00:06:56]):

Yeah. So first of all, how we got into this in, it was 2020, middle of COVID. And so ride-tailing drivers, which were our first audience, the first product was for ride-hailing drivers, they were basically desperate for jobs. And so there’s not a Uber driver, there is not a Lyft driver. There are drivers and then there are platforms. And so as a driver, you typically work with multiple of these platforms to find the job with the closest pickup point near to you. And so we said, “Hey, it would be really useful if we were to build software that allowed drivers to have all of the different jobs in a single interface in the car, because then you can spend your eyes on the road and you can let the app filter for you the best jobs to make sure that you make the most amount of money every day that you’re out driving.”

That was the product. We built it. It sold like wildfire. It was really, because at the time there weren’t a lot of jobs because people had to stay home during COVID, and so every driver was desperate to find work. And so it grew pretty rapidly, but we always had issues monetizing this because people really high in-ep time, really strong engagement. We had more than a hundred thousand monthly active users. Also, fun fact, besides Europe, number two market was Australia. Number three market was actually Canada of all places.

Julian Glaab ([00:08:30]):

It was very international indeed. And then at some point we said, okay, hey, we also raised venture capital to make it really big and grow it. And it was in 2021, and the mindset of the VCs was like, “Oh, let’s just keep pushing it and we’re going to figure out monetization later.” A very, very VC thing to say.

Julian Glaab ([00:08:52]):

And at some point then was later and we were sitting there, “Okay, now we have to start monetizing this.” And so we realized that drivers wouldn’t pay us maybe just in a minuscule amount. And so then we said, “Hey, interesting observation. In ride-hailing, the driver is always the most expensive thing. So it’s very expensive to acquire a driver and it’s even more expensive to retain a driver on your platform.” And so realized we had solved both these issues with product value. And so the idea was if we were to just start a ride-tailing company ourselves with the drivers we already had, then we could be really competitive because we don’t pay so much incentives and so on towards the drivers.

Julian Glaab ([00:09:43]):

This was then in 2024, and this is when we launched it first in Germany, and this is how the ride-tailing side was born for consumers. We can basically just book a trip from A to B just on Uber, for example. And we launched it. It grew pretty quickly. It was great. We expanded into Poland, basically neighboring country on the Eastern side, and it went nice. We grew it all the way to 20 million in gross bookings on a five million revenue. It was pretty sizable, but there was one mistake that we made in retrospect, and that was that we totally underestimated how hard it is to get consumer attention and how expensive it would be to acquire users in this very mature market. And so it was a good business, but it was not as good as we had planned for. But I mean, it was getting incrementally towards profitability.

Julian Glaab ([00:10:41]):

And then we raised another round to keep expanding the business throughout Europe last year in March last year. And then this fundraise coincided with basically Waymo, the autonomous driving company, the robotaxi company, hitting 30% market share in ride-tailing in San Francisco, one of the largest ride-tailing markets worldwide.

Julian Glaab ([00:11:12]):

So I’ve been reading this news sitting here in this office in Berlin, and I’ve been thinking, “Hey, this is really remarkable. This is now no longer a science experiment.” For a very long time, it was always autonomy is here in two years for 10

Julian Glaab ([00:11:29]):

Years, and now it finally appeared to be that case. And then I sat here and I said, “Wow, okay, this is going to do something to my business, and I’m not prepared for that. I have a sizable business, but I’m not Waymo scale. They’re not going to work with me, I think. And so if this comes here and the experience of having no driver in a car is just so much more clean, the driving perfectly safe, much safer, just on so many levels, so much better.” And I said, “I think this is going to steal my business, and I gave it maybe three to five years. And then this is going to be here in Europe as well. Things are a little bit slower due to regulation and so on, but it’s going to come here and then I have a big problem.” And this happened.

Julian Glaab ([00:12:15]):

And the second thing that happened is that FreeNow, very large European German ride-hailing company, a mobility company got acquired by Lyft. And the outcome of the transaction, while very good for Lyft, was not ultimately very attractive for FreeNow, according to what I know. And so I went to my investors and I said, “Okay, look, this is the likely scenario. If we don’t do anything, this is what’s going to happen to me.” And at the same time, so I sat down with my co-founder having this automotive background, and we looked at the market and said, “Hey, is there any other Waymo-like company that has something that works and is on a market that we can work with?” And then the answer was no. I think it is still no. There is a lot of lab projects and lab companies that do nice experiments, but taking something to the market, coming from the market myself is very, very hard. The real life is messy. And so my girlfriend and I, being maybe a little bit arrogant, maybe a little bit naive, we said, “Actually, we believe we can build this ourselves.” And then I went to my board and said, “Hey, this is the situation now. Here’s our solution. This is what we’re going to do.” And we didn’t ask them for permission, we just did it anyways.

Julian Glaab ([00:13:46]):

I think we made them slightly uncomfortable, but now, I mean, we are back on the market and I’m just super happy how it turned out.

Jaspal Singh ([00:13:53]):

That’s a really amazing story. And I know you’re a builder, so as a builder, one thing you all will lose is a speed. You want to execute at a super-fast speed and you want to always hustle. You don’t want to wait things to happen. You want to make things happen. So, I can see your story with Bliq is like, I don’t want to wait these big giants to kill me. It’s better to do something innovative. And like you said, always keep thinking about it.

Julian Glaab ([00:14:19]):

We want to be on the right side of history. That’s why we took action.

Jaspal Singh ([00:14:24]):

That’s amazing. And now I can correlate how you’re building it and I can see your entrepreneurial mindset. It’s really amazing. Now you said you want to now compete and to compete with these big giants. So what is the Bliq tech stack all about? How you’re building this venture now, how you are creating this whole ecosystem? And I know Bliq is right now using the remote supervision. You guys are starting with that. And can you share why you’re doing that and what is your future plan to make it completely unsupervised operation? Even in Waymo, a lot of people don’t know there is a remote supervision happen. It’s not like it’s completely run by a computer or autonomous. I mean, there is a guy sit behind the wheel somewhere, I don’t know, sometimes they say it’s in Philippines or in Asia and keep monitoring. But what is the technology you are building at Bliq?

Julian Glaab ([00:15:16]):

Yeah, so happy to discuss, and also very super open about this in general. So we had a very limited budget when we got into this. We didn’t have the billions or tens of billions that others have, and this forced us to be very, very intentional about the decisions we were taking. And so the first decision we made was to say, we want to create a level four experience,

Julian Glaab ([00:15:42]):

And that means to me that there is nobody in a driver’s seat and you can essentially sell transportation to someone that is not a licensed driver, that is not in charge. So we are in charge. It was what we wanted to create. Now the question is, how do we create this? And so the answer you already gave me, which was our approach of essentially supervised autonomy. So the idea is essentially that you have an AI driver on the car that is capable of handling a lot of things, but it’s not going to be perfect. It’s allowed to make mistakes because there is a human monitoring what’s going on remotely that is ready to take action when needed. And I think this is a beautiful way of building something quickly, and also the technology of what runs on the car. We have now beautiful, great AI models that weren’t available even 18 months ago that make it radically easier to deal with the complicated long tail of messy situations that can happen in real life. It’s a lot like maybe how LLMs like ChatGPT internalized, generalized a lot of purpose-built AI models in the past for

Julian Glaab ([00:16:58]):

Maybe translation and computer vision and all these kind of things. And a similar thing happens now in robotics and autonomy where you have basically one model that is very powerful that can internalize much of the signal processing from sensors and cameras to understand what’s going on, to planning where you have to go, and then output and driving actions. Now, much like LLMs, these models will not be perfect. They will make mistakes, and this is why we encapsulate them into safety layers. So one safety layer is basically on the car, which is autonomous emergency braking, to make sure that under no circumstances, the car hits something that’s in its driving path, to make sure that the car always breaks by itself because it wouldn’t be the right thing to do to have a human remotely with a latency in between React to something that happens very fast. So we said all the things that are really fast, they have to be solved on the car.

Julian Glaab ([00:18:00]):

And then for things very allowed to be thinking slowly, I’m doing now quotation marks if somebody listening to this. For this, we have a human. So for example, this is about dealing with a complicated situation, like maybe a policeman or policewoman regulating traffic by hand signals or A construction site, something that is out of the ordinary. And so for these kind of situations, we have humans in the loop. And so it also turns out that most of the autonomy projects, I mean they start with a safety driver in the car, and so there is still somebody involved. And for us, it turned out that our approach to autonomy and to driverless mobility, quite frankly, was greatly appreciated by the regulators because they said, “We actually like it if there is still a human part of the decision making, and then we can learn together over time and we can understand where are the shortcomings, what works, what doesn’t work.” So what regulators are really cautious about always is putting a robot, like a machine that makes in a very in transparent way, some decisions that are very hard to trace. And so I think our approach is implicitly more appreciated or welcomed by many public or government’s bodies because it’s easier to understand and you can clearly see who’s responsible.

Julian Glaab ([00:19:31]):

And I think obviously to us, this is just a stepping stone because right now we are supervising every car 100% of time and It’s very clear that this is only a temporary thing. So right now it’s about collecting data, collecting edge cases, so that the next thing we’re going to do is essentially upgrading to a level three experience, a level three system, which means you can have the car go on its own unsupervised under certain conditions. For example, let’s imagine maybe driving on the highway, and then if you know in two minutes we’re going to exit the highway.

Julian Glaab ([00:20:10]):

Then the system can basically alert somebody to remotely then again supervise and say, “Hey, now we’re going to leave the highway. Now you have to, again, look after me because I’m not allowed to handle this scenario here by myself.” And then we are going to expand this level three operating concept where you just have somebody on standby, step by step across the entire operational design domain. And ultimately, of course, we have the goal to move to full level four, which is basically you have a supervisor on standby all the time, but the car is in control at basically 99%. And the long-term vision remains level five, so there is no human needed whatsoever. The car is capable of handling every situation that it ever encounters perfectly. Right now, nobody’s there. That’s the dream. That’s what we’re working towards, but I think it’s still going to be quite a process.

Jaspal Singh ([00:21:03]):

Yeah. And do you think now with the advancing AI technology that acceleration will happen faster than, like you said, in the beginning, people were thinking autonomy is still sci-fi, but no more. I mean, we can see vehicle running on the road in a quite unsupervised way. And how you think AI will play a big role to accelerate that path?

Julian Glaab ([00:21:29]):

Yeah, I think it’s a common misconception still that people believe you need $10 billion in order to build a self-driving system because it comes from a time when we basically had to teach cars every single possible scenario atomically and then validate this atomically. And now we have systems. So the technology that we are using and that is also now becoming industry standard very quickly is a so-called vision language action model, which works like an LLM for AI. And you have on the one side, you have sensor input, like vision LiDAR, radar, whatever you have as input, even microphone audio streams as an input. And then you have a language prompt, and the language prompt can be something like turn left at the next intersection. And then as an output, you get essentially driving commands. It can be a steering wheel angle. It can be a brake pedal pressure value. It can be a turn signal command, and everything else in between is internalized. And so it turns out that these models fare really great with unseen scenarios where you encounter a situation that has not been part of the training data yet. And it is quite amazing. It’s a technology that originally comes from robotics where basically, because I mean, autonomy is kind of like a sub-domain of robotics to me because you have a car is also just on some level a robot but with wheels.

And so these wheel A models, they come from robotics, and the first thing they learned was how to fold laundry because I guess developers were really lazy. And the second thing these models learned was how to drive a car. And this is I think where we benefit a lot from the advancements in general AI, but also in physical AI robotics, and now this trickles down into autonomy as well. And this is going to increase the speed in which these systems improve now very rapidly.

Jaspal Singh ([00:23:41]):

And like you mentioned, it’s like you just need to solve some of these edge cases, like a policeman with the hand sign. If the traffic signal is not working, the guy is standing and directing vehicle to move and take direction. So those edge cases need to be solved. No, that’s quite interesting. And what you said is very true. Now it’s becoming more and more kind of a standardized model and part of robotic system. Now, what make Blick a little bit more interesting is not only the technology, but also the business model you guys are pursuing. So your business model is a little different from what other companies are trying to do. Why you are going through that business model? Because I feel that business model require much more capital or you’re required to invest heavily into the fleet because you’re looking to go into more subscription-based model for people rather than selling the whole vehicle to people.

So why that model is you want to pursue that?

Julian Glaab ([00:24:36]):

Yeah, I think there is two things. So first of all, I believe that private and business owned cars are in the long term, a much larger market opportunity compared to robotaxi. Because if you just look outside your window, I don’t know where you sit right now, but in most places, if you just look how many of the cars that are passing you are taxis or Ubers or Lyft versus how many other cars are there, I think there are plenty of reasons why people still are going to have and own their own cars or businesses are going to own their own cars in the future. And I see great potential in turning these cars driverless and just based on sheer number of cars, and I think it’s an opportunity approximately 50 times bigger. So we estimate that roughly one to 1.5% of cars on the road right now are taxis or Ubers or Lyft in most places around the globe.

Julian Glaab ([00:25:37]):

And so we basically build for all the rest. And so that’s one thing. And then shorter term, coming from ride-hailing, ride-hailing is a marketplace. So if you have a city and you want to offer ride-hailing a robo-taxi service in that city, then you need to consider wait times, pickup times, because people are accustomed to very high standard that Uber has set, and the high standard is essentially you’re expecting to have a car in five minutes at your doorstep, maybe 10 minutes already pretty bad, right? Yeah, 10 minutes bad.

Julian Glaab ([00:26:16]):

You can do the math just if you have a city that’s maybe round and then you just randomly distribute cars and then you can estimate if you have from a random point customer request coming in, then you need to find the closest car and that car has to travel to you and that car should have a pickup time of roughly five minutes. And now that means before you can even start having a useful service, you need a number of cars that is proportional to the size of the location that you want to serve. And that again means you have to do a lot of upfront investment without making any money for this. So for example, in Berlin, in order to achieve five-minute pickup times, you need a concurrently active car base of roughly 300 to 400 cars. That’s what I know because I’ve done the math here.

Julian Glaab ([00:27:07]):

And this is then just covering the central part of Berlin, not even the outskirts. And then if I’ve done that, I’ve already invested heavily into having three, 400 cars, and then I haven’t made a single Euro rent yet. And then I’m also in competition with the regular rideshare drivers, which can be in the beginning more cost competitive because my cars have sensors on top and stuff. And so I said, this is not really the fight I want to fight. And I believe if we go after private and business owned cars where we have this one-to-one relationship of essentially a leasing contract, I think this can be a much more attainable go-to-market for a small guy like us.

Jaspal Singh ([00:27:53]):

I like your point about the ride-hailing fleet is only three, 4% of the overall market and the private car market is quite bigger and the business market is quite bigger. But the challenge is if you replace all the private car with the autonomous vehicle or driverless car, probably people will drive more and it’ll lead to more congestion or it will actually create more problem. And this is my worry when I look at from autonomous vehicle from public transport or shared mobility point of view, in a way you think the autonomous vehicle or driverless vehicle will kind of compete with the public transport or shared mobility, or are they kind of part of their fleet and complement it? Because that’s a big debate about is it kind of a competition or is it a complimentary stuff to the existing network?

Julian Glaab ([00:28:45]):

So I believe in self-regulation a lot. So if the economics and the economic incentives are set correctly, I think the outcome will fall in place. So for me, I grew up in a Bavarian village, and so we always had to have a car because of the lack of public transit alternative. Now right now in Berlin where I’m sitting, I barely use a private car, a privately owned car because it’s not necessary. And to your point, I’m too lazy to look for a parking space or something.

Julian Glaab ([00:29:20]):

Because it’s inefficient. So I believe people in general are capable of adjusting their own behavior to the options and limitations available. So this is number one, I think these can coexist because they’re going to cover different use cases. That said, I think autonomy is a huge opportunity for anybody active in public transportation because what you’re going to get is you’re going to get vehicles that have a smaller form factor, a lower operating price point, which means you can start serving communities that historically were not easy to reach. For example, in my hometown where I come from, there was exactly one bus and this one bus would show up every two hours. And then you had to drive essentially through all the little villages until you arrive in a city. And you could be in a city in five minutes in a private car, but you had to endure a one-hour ride throughout all the places.

Julian Glaab ([00:30:21]):

It was a nice scenic bus ride, but it was not very efficient. Now, if I think about this scenario now, I could probably sell my old hometown maybe five of my current cars for the price that it costs to run one of those buses or maybe even more. And that means I can on demand, cater to all the different villages outside and still be cheaper off. And I think once people break up to this realization, we’re going to see a transition in the public transport system throughout places like definitely Germany, probably most of Europe, probably also most of Canada, because Canada has lots of rural areas as well. And I think this is a great opportunity. And then again, back to your point, when even people that live in villages suddenly see, hey, there’s credible alternatives to having an own car, then at that point they might also think differently about it.

Julian Glaab ([00:31:23]):

I think it’s a process to get there and I think we need to work on it together and join forces. But I think it’s an opportunity, if anything.

Jaspal Singh ([00:31:35]):

So you basically feel there’ll be a transition phase. It’s not like people will automatically move to the robotaxi and all. It’s like people will prefer to have more autonomy in their own vehicle and slowly when they realize it’s not much of a use and probably they can have a better option available, so people will move to alternative option. Yeah, I mean,

Julian Glaab ([00:31:55]):

Definitely. We’ve been promised that ride-hailing is going to solve personal car ownership and now 15 years later, turns out people still found plenty of reasons why they need their own cars. And I think nobody really likes having an own car. For most people, it’s a necessity and a pretty expensive necessity. So for example, in the US, if you look at the loan terms, the loan payments that people now have to make to even afford a very average car, I think nobody really likes this. It’s just a necessity.

Julian Glaab ([00:32:34]):

This just goes to show how big the gap still is between the promise that ride hailing has made to ability of most people in terms of where they live, what’s the match with the operating area of these companies to the mobility pattern that people have. And I think we have yet to see, so right now robotaxis, if anything, they’re replacing existing ride hailing and they have yet to expand into all of the other models, which requires different unit economics.

Jaspal Singh ([00:33:06]):

And I agree. I mean, the cost of ownership of a car is going high. I mean, in US now you get a loan term for 84 months and 96 months, which is a lot. It’s like buying a house and also the kind of maintenance you need to pay, the kind of money you need to pay to keep that car. I mean, there are a lot of study, we’d say 95% of the car remain in the parking space, not on the road. So there is a lot of cost associated with car which people don’t realize, but eventually when the cost economy will come and people will change. And you’re right, right now the robot taxi is replacing the ride hailing vehicle. What you said in the beginning, the cost of the driver is the biggest cost. So what we are doing is right now removing that cost barrier.

Jaspal Singh ([00:33:48]):

And in future, probably when you have more number of vehicles, it probably will replace the private fleet. So that’s quite interesting, quite interesting approach from others.

Julian Glaab ([00:33:57]):

100%. I can only echo and second what you say.

Jaspal Singh ([00:34:01]):

Great. And now in the beginning you mentioned something very interesting. I mean, you’re building in Europe and Europe is always described as a slow moving on deployment compared to US and China. I mean, you can see a lot of company which are testing vehicle in US and China, whereas in Europe it’s still taking time. Now we see rush of companies coming in. A lot of companies are looking for approval. You also got it. But what will it require to make autonomous vehicle normal in Europe? Because there is a lot of regulation required, like what you said in the beginning, the policymakers are more comfortable when they see human in the decision making, not the computer. But what do you think matter most to make it happen faster in Europe in coming day? Is it the better technology? Is it better regulation or is it better public storytelling or better acceptance from the public?

What it make to be faster to be in Europe?

Julian Glaab ([00:34:54]):

Okay. So first of all, I think what we need to just should treat as a fact for this discussion is that the tech is here, the tech is ready. I mean, you can go to any American city that has way more and it’s part of daily lives. There’s data that proves safety. So it is not about technology. So currently in Europe we have regulation around level four autonomy, but the thing is that places like China and US, they work with the concept of self-certification, which means you have to prove nothing. You just say, “I believe my technology is safe and I’m going to get insurance for my operation.” And then I go on the road and the insurance premium acts as a regulator, as a governor to your business model.

Julian Glaab ([00:35:46]):

Because if your technology is very bad, then your insurance premium to ensure your operation is going to be very high and then you’re going to think twice if it makes sense or maybe if it makes sense to keep developing a little bit more and improving your tech a little bit more and then you go to market. And I think this is a great model for innovation and Europe doesn’t work like that at all. So in Europe we have rules and we have government bodies and technical service agencies and their job is it to assess somebody’s technology if it complies with the law. And the problem is now for these level four systems that are end-to-end AI models and that are super sophisticated and it can encounter a million different edge cases, nobody here has any experience how to basically assess somebody’s technology if it aligns with those requirements.

Julian Glaab ([00:36:42]):

And this is where the bottleneck is right now. And I think nobody here is at fault in the sense that we don’t have bad engineers or that people are stupid. I think it’s just objectively very hard to prove that kind of safety about someone else’s system if you don’t understand how it works and across all these complexities. And also the set of the art is moving so fast that by the time you’ve finished assessing something, there’s something better has already emerged. So I think this is the bottleneck right now. This is where we have to really change things in regulation. And also, I mean, when I was looking at this when we were making our decisions how to build things, we intentionally went for an approach that circumvents this current problem with L4 certification by not being L4 because what we need is we need L2, L2+, which is regulated on a different level, which is a lot easier to attain.

And then the second thing, what we need is we need remote operation even though we just use it for remote supervision. And this is something that is already legal in quite a few European countries. So Germany has now legalized it in just December of 2025. And so for us, this presents a wonderful opportunity to still be in the market in Europe and not having to wait until some politicians have fixed the situation, which I think still can take years. The good thing is now everybody here has woken up to the fact that, hey, we need to change things in the way how we regulate and how we push for innovation if we don’t want to lose our spot in global rankings. So everybody understands the urgency. But to your point, so this current way how a level four is regulated, this law has to go, it has to be replaced by something that is made better.

Julian Glaab ([00:38:45]):

Also, ideally we’re also consulting the engineers that have to deal with this in a day-to-day and not just some lawyers.

Jaspal Singh ([00:38:53]):

Yeah. I think your point about in some country they reward the risk taking. In other country they reward how you are compliant with the process and ecosystem. So the self-regulation like insurance, you are taking as a risk as an entrepreneur and you know your product, so that’s why you’re taking a risk. But in other country, they don’t want to trust you. They want to trust the legal process and system compliance. It’s good and bad.

Julian Glaab ([00:39:20]):

I think it’s a huge issue because we have world-class education here. I have world-class engineers in my company. So I mean we ensure that things are developed according to the state of the art. And so it frustrates at times that there’s a system in place that trust isn’t there by default. But I mean luckily there’s also ways around this in Europe, for example. So to legalize our tech, we went to Estonia, one of the Baltic states in Northeastern Europe, European Union state. And so it turns out this country, after Soviet Union fell down, the country was in very bad shape. They didn’t have anything to build upon. And so all of their economic growth hinges on innovation.

And So GDP growth hinges on innovation and they’re incredibly pro-business because we went there and I had a meeting with somebody just a few weeks ago in the economic ministry. And first of all, their slogan is making illegal things legal. And I think it’s a wonderful way of putting it. And then we had a discussion and it basically went along the lines of, “It’s great to have you here. It’s great that you’re building here. Please let us know if you see any regulation slowing you down, then we’re going to abolish it.” And I think this just summarizes and captures the mindset so well that then with technically very competent people working directly in the government where you have actual engineers and technicians working for the government, then you can sit down together and you can have a very educated and very grown up discussion and say, “Look, we have this problem with your technology.” And then you can discuss a solution and then you say, “Okay, if you do it maybe this or that way, would that work for you?” And then this is just how things get done.

Glaab ([00:41:19]):

Unfortunately in so many other places, you just have lawyers in the room and they’re needed as well, but it just makes building stuff so much slower.

Jaspal Singh ([00:41:29]):

And that’s a challenge because they look everything from the risk angle. They don’t see things from the opportunity angle, like what you said, making illegal thing legal. Everything is illegal and everything is legal. It’s how you process things. Uber is still legal in many country and still illegal in other country, but you need to find out a way how to work around and how to make it happen.

Julian Glaab ([00:41:52]):

Correct. Yeah.

Jaspal Singh ([00:41:54]):

Now Estonia, like you mentioned, you got this legal approval. Now you’ll be the first company in Europe to launch this driverless operation and they want to move it faster and all. And like you said, the bureaucracy really helped, the bureaucrat really helped there to make it possible and all. So what are your timeline now? When can we see the first vehicle on road? I saw you posted on their LinkedIn dispatching the first fleet of vehicle and all. So I’m curious to know more about that project and what is the plan in next six to 12 month?

Julian Glaab ([00:42:24]):

Yes, of course. So I mean our cars are on the road every day. If you’re in Estonia, you can see them driving around. So also we are showcasing them here in Germany quite a lot. And we are using the current fleet in order to basically run sales demos to show it to potential customers and to collect pre-orders. And then the production version that our customers are going to get, the production is going to start in Q3 this year. And

You can see the first deliveries to customers in Q4. As I mentioned, it’s going to be businesses and private people are going to be using those cars. So that’s a timeline.

Julian Glaab ([00:43:07]):

So right now there’s still a lot of engineering going on ahead of the start of production. So there’s going to be a new generation that I think we’ve shared some pictures online on LinkedIn, et cetera. The new generation is going to be much, much, much sleeker. It has more sensors, it has LiDAR in it that the current version doesn’t have to be prepared for, as I mentioned, the higher levels of autonomy. And that is what keeps us currently busy. So we are doing this, collecting pre-orders for the first few hundred vehicles, and then we’re going to make them and start shipping the first batch until the end of the year.

Jaspal Singh ([00:43:42]):

And how strong is the demand right now you see for the insured order? You have a lot of interest from the businesses and people to be first on the boat to acquire these vehicles?

Julian Glaab ([00:43:53]):

Yes. So this month we have total of 600 sales demos scheduled. In July, we have 2000 scheduled already.

Jaspal Singh ([00:44:02]):

2000.

Julian Glaab ([00:44:03]):

So of course it’s a lot of people just curious. So not everyone is going to buy, of course, and this is totally acknowledged, but quite a few people will. And I think it’s more than enough to keep our initial production batch or our initial production fully occupied. Yeah. That’s

Jaspal Singh ([00:44:24]):

Great. That’s Great

Julian Glaab ([00:44:25]):

And maybe to share a little bit more about plans for the future. So the car that we currently have outfitted is the IONIQ five, which is an Electric SUV that is made by a manufacturer called Hyundai. And the next vehicle that we are going to make, which is I think highly relevant for public transportation use cases, is a van. It’s called a PV5 from Kia.

Julian Glaab ([00:44:52]):

So it has electric sliding doors. It has a nice seat arrangement. It’s very easy to get in and out of, especially for elderly people and for maybe more immobile people. And the cool thing is that this car is extremely attractive price point. It’s actually cheaper than the car that we currently use. And it features the same electric architecture, which means basically getting from our current setup to that setup is relatively straightforward. So we don’t have to develop anything from scratch because the electronics and most of how we actually control a car is very similar and then we need to make some adjustments of course, but then this vehicle is going to be perfectly suited for those discussed rural area public transportation use cases.

Jaspal Singh ([00:45:45]):

That’s nice.

Julian Glaab ([00:45:45]):

Both from a form factor perspective, but also from a cost perspective.

Jaspal Singh ([00:45:50]):

No, that’s important because I think when the people buy the vehicle or businesses buy the vehicle for the cost is very important. The other thing which is important, because again, it’s a different model compared to the robotaxi, which is more shared vehicle and all, is the cybersecurity and privacy. I mean, these vehicle will be used by individual or businesses. How will you make sure that you protect the privacy and cybersecurity issue and what kind of safety layer you are putting in these vehicle?

Julian Glaab ([00:46:20]):

Yes, of course. So I mean, first of all, there is some data that is operationally relevant in order to keep the operation safe. But other than this, there are industry standards for encryption, for storing data locally, for only sharing minimal amounts of data. So that is something that is almost like standard process. And I mean, I’m a German guy, my company is German. We sort of like heartland of European privacy, I guess. So this is something that has been baked into our DNA for better or worse.

Jaspal Singh ([00:46:58]):

That’s why sometimes the regulation is good, which make you ready to think about some of these issue which can come later. So privacy and cybersecurity is another thing. And like you said, the regulation is so strong that you have to build anything with those thing in the mind. So cybersecurity by design or privacy by design. Now, the competition is growing in the European market. I mean, every day I hear a news about new companies entering into Waymo, Tesla, WeRide. There was a new Bolt now launching with Stellantis. So the market is seeing or attracting a lot of new players or I would say the other international player into this area. Do you think the market is big enough for everyone? And how are you getting ready to face the competition? Because this is what you mentioned in the beginning, you don’t want to be eaten by another big player, like what happened with Lyft and Fi now.

So how do you making sure you’re building your own moat?

Julian Glaab ([00:47:54]):

Yeah. So first of all, I think it’s great that we are now seeing this push onto the European market because I believe it is for all the right reasons.

Julian Glaab ([00:48:02]):

Europe as a market has more people than the United States of America. I agree. It’s a very rich continent. It has lots of people owning vehicles and lots of people requiring transportation. So I think the push to unlock that market is very legitimate. Now, having said that, I think it is fair to look a little bit more into all the different announcements that are coming up right now, because if you look closer, a lot of these unfortunately right now are also built on very thin fundamentals when it comes to what is actually being done on the ground. And that said, I think it’s still great that we’re seeing this push.

Julian Glaab ([00:48:49]):

Also, I think it is worth looking also on competition from technology providers outside of Europe. So there is, for example, if you look at China, and there’s a lot of Chinese companies, and I’m highly skeptic that we are going to see large Chinese fleets at scale because transportation is critical infrastructure. And for example, the European Union has decided to collectively exclude Chinese suppliers such as Huawei, for example, from 5G infrastructure for mobile connectivity altogether because they deemed the risk too high to have a dependency on basically someone being able to turn off your infrastructure. And now if you think about transportation, which is also critical infrastructure by export law in many places, I mean, do we really want to have cars that send data to some random unknown server and are potentially being remote controlled? And in a driver’s car, if you know what you’re doing, you could, in the worst case, disable a brake, you couldn’t drive the cars, you can do locate things.

Julian Glaab ([00:50:00]):

So I think this is a risk that more and more is now becoming part of public discourse. And so I think that’s where we have some kind of a natural barrier.

Julian Glaab ([00:50:13]):

But then coming back to where I believe the modes are, I think right now the biggest advantage we have as a small company is speed and really shipping fast because in the traditional European automotive industry, product development life cycles are six years.

Jaspal Singh ([00:50:31]):

Yeah, that’s very long. And in startup times, six years, if you look at the AI companies, I mean in six years, companies get from founding to IPO, a trillion dollar IPO. I think the incumbents are totally not ready for this. And this is what incredibly excites me because by just being fast and deploying something that works really well and that people want, I think my vision or my dream is I want to build something maybe like a new OEM that captures this amazing opportunity that we have in Europe now.

Jaspal Singh ([00:51:10]):

Yeah, no, I agree with you. It’s like the execution speed make a huge difference. I remember I had a discussion with one of the bus manufacturers long back. They launch an electric bus and I said when you will have the production ready in two and a half year. I was like, why? They said, oh, we will do extensive testing. We will do this, we will do that. And then after two and a half years it will be launched. And I was like, man, by that time the market will be gone because somebody else will capture the market. So like you said, we need that speed make a huge difference. The execution taking risk create a huge opportunity. And now in the AI world, now it’s becoming more and more commodity. It’s like how fast you can actually execute that make a difference, not the technology because technology is becoming accessible.

Jaspal Singh ([00:51:55]):

These are becoming a standard. But that’s really nice. I really love your entrepreneurial energy. And now I want to really discuss a little bit about your entrepreneurial side because the way you are building, the way you’re thinking. In one of your posts, you mentioned the typical day at Bliq is design it, build it, test it, break it, repeat, like what you just said, build it quickly, faster and all. Why it is hard to build businesses and what lesson you have learned so far in your journey. Because a lot of people want to create startup, but it’s not easy. So I just want to understand from your journey, it’s not like you said, you were comfortable at years of 21, year of age, you’re working in a big automotive company at a good role, so you could have a comfortable life. Why you want to take this pain?

Julian Glaab ([00:52:42]):

Yes. So I think my biggest learning was that taking a risk is not actually risky. I think there is many situations in life and also in business where the really risky thing is to be risk averse.

Julian Glaab ([00:52:59]):

I think also in the grand scheme of things, in most situations, I think as humans, we overestimate the actual risk associated with a certain action. And once you’ve done this a few times and you grow confident in your own abilities and your team’s abilities, you learn this. And I think it is like a superpower because industries realize you can’t just do stuff and it’s amazing. And so I think the biggest learnings that I made along the journey were, I mean, you shouldn’t really not try to hold onto things too much. For example, I had to let go at 20 million gross bookings business in order to build this year because I firmly believe that this is where the future was going to be.

And I had the data points. And I think it would be a mistake to not make this decision because now a year later I would maybe be at maybe 30 or 40 million gross bookings, but still I wouldn’t be able to sleep at night probably because I would worry about, okay, what am I going to do once Waymo is here? And I would freak out every time somebody makes some press announcement in the news. And now I can sleep really well because I did this with my team. And so probably another big learning is you have to be really fast. So you have to don’t worry too much about the impacts of individual decisions. It’s more important that you make the decision and then get a data point quickly and then you can make the next decision in a better way.

Julian Glaab ([00:54:42]):

I mean, you’re not going to get every decision right. You don’t even have to try that. So it’s fine if you’re wrong a lot of times, but the volume, you have to make the volume in your favor. And so for example, I think I try to, if someone on the team asks me for input or for some kind of approval or something, I try to get this done for them as quickly as possible because I know then I keep my organization moving and we are doing stuff. And this is the kind of spirit I’m trying to infuse with everyone because that’s the only. I mean, we cannot win on money raised. We cannot win on, I don’t know, legacy customers. We have to win on building something that is valuable for users fast. And this is the only way how is this done? And I think it’s such a simple concept, but it still took me quite a few years to really understand what it actually means.

Jaspal Singh ([00:55:43]):

It’s a simple concept, but I would say it’s very hard to implement. And like you said, you need to take decision. A lot of decision will be wrong, but you need to take more decision so that you can have more right than wrong. It compensates each other. And that’s what I learned in my angel investing journey. When I start investing, out of 30, my nine investment were dead. The first nine were dead. And I was like, “Man, I’m a bad guy. I can’t evaluate company.” But what happened, the company which were good, they sustain, they were building and now you see the return coming after it because the bad one will die quickly, the good one will last long, and that’s very important. You need to take more risk so that you can learn about it. Now, like you mentioned about it’s not the money which help you to do everything, so it’s not the money can bring everything in the company.

Jaspal Singh ([00:56:35]):

And your journey is quite interesting. I mean, from the public sources I collected, you raised something around 30 million. I don’t know if it’s right or wrong, but that you didn’t raise too much of money. And you compare with Waymo, which just raised $16 billion this year alone. I mean, they have invested huge money in the project and all. So one, is it easy or difficult to raise money for autonomous vehicle startup nowadays because you have a competition in big companies? So when you go to VC, is it easy to convince them to invest your company? And how did you manage to accomplish so much with such a small capital base? You don’t have raised a big funding ground, but you still manage to pivot and grind and deliver stuff with such a small capital base.

Julian Glaab ([00:57:21]):

Yeah. So to the first question, I guess if you don’t have anything to show, raising money is very hard. This is also for any kind of company. If you have something that is working on the road that people can go and check it out and sit inside and experience it, if they see the customer interest is there, that the orders are there, that the deliveries are there, then it is very straightforward.

Julian Glaab ([00:57:53]):

Now, what currently challenges us is definitely this misconception that you need tens of billions to build something in this space because this clearly no longer holds true.

I think if you start building an autonomy company in this year, you only need a fraction of the money needed that Waymo had to put up in the. Because they did a lot of foundational research. I mean, they started 15, 20, way, way back. And my thinking is that probably the current code base that is running the Waymo today is maybe two years old, not older than that. So everything else before, I mean, if you try to make a driver of this vehicle like 2009 technology, I would agree, you need billions of money. But today we have these VLA models that are making it so much, it’s less lines of code. It’s less complexity that you have to manage because it internalizes more. I mean, a couple of things still stay. I mean, you have to operationalize it, you have to have the safety concept, you have to do a validation testing, all of that stuff stays and that costs money.

Julian Glaab ([00:59:09]):

But the actual building just became a lot easier, much like in other places where AI is really driving a lot of productivity, especially in small teams. And so if you have an engineer and you prepare them with the right tools, you just get so much more output, high quality output. And I think this is another thing that really speeds up in the shipping process right now. And it’s also something that holds true for all AI companies basically right now, that small teams can achieve really, really high outcomes.

Julian Glaab ([00:59:44]):

And I don’t see why these mechanics shouldn’t also apply to physical AI startups like ourselves.

Jaspal Singh ([00:59:52]):

That’s very true. I mean, I don’t know how many employees Anthropic has now. I mean, I think it’s very less than compared to Google. Another big company when they build a product and it’s already $1 trillion company. And like you said, it’s becoming much more easier. And actually the code you prepared two year back probably is no more relevant because now you have much easier way or simplistic way to do work. And no, kudos to you. I really feel inspired what you’re doing and what you said, you have to show things on the ground if you really want to raise money. If you have something on ground, it’s much easier. Now, as a founder, one of the biggest challenges to build a strong team because that’s a real asset. So I really want to understand what is your experience about hiring people and what do you think and what do you look for people when you hire them?

What are the key skill you want to make sure they have when you hire these people?

Julian Glaab ([01:00:48]):

Yes. So first of all, we had to go through rough patches as well. So I mentioned last year we decided to shut down the existing right hailing business that unfortunately meant that we had to part ways with part of the team that was responsible for running operations and building software for this part. This was a hard but necessary decision. But on the flip side,

Julian Glaab ([01:01:11]):

The team that stayed was usually after layoff, motivation and teams go down. In that team here, I think we really released a splotch of energy because the idea of working, I think for an engineer or for anybody for that matter, I think there cannot be many more exciting things than to work on making cars go driverless. And so I think just the simple fact, I think that gave a huge motivation boost despite having to go through a rough patch because this idea for the future just excited everybody a lot. Now, quite frankly, working on something very interesting makes hiring a lot easier because you can, I don’t know, work on some B2B SaaS tool for, I don’t know, an AI driven CRM, something surely good business, but probably pretty boring for an engineer. And

Julian Glaab ([01:02:01]):

So here you can work on genuinely really interesting things. And in my eyes, great engineers always want that. And so get to your question, so right now building. So we have right now no problem with inbound. We get loads of applications, also loads of great applications because we are in a weird way benefiting from the fact that the current German automotive industry and supplier industry is a little bit weak in a traditional sense. And so everybody’s really open to taking the call from us. And I think in that sense, it’s now a great time to build this team and also to also switch roles because I think your job isn’t any more safe in one of these very big but very risk averse legacy companies versus taking a bet and taking a swing, working at a company like mine. And so if we interview people, what we are looking for is mostly attitude.

Julian Glaab ([01:03:01]):

So we are looking for a very high degree of self-organization and internal drive because you cannot infuse this kind of drive that I’m looking for into somebody if it’s not already there.

Julian Glaab ([01:03:14]):

And typically we are looking for something. So one of the questions we ask everyone is if they have done something, they’re really doing late night shifts for some private project can be, I don’t know, you have this idea for some software that you want to create to life or some hobby that you’re super crazy about. I want to work with people that have demonstrated they’re super crazy about anything in their life to the point that they annoy everyone around them about this topic so that the others cannot hear it anymore because this person is so crazy about it because I think that’s exactly the kind of energy you need in order to build and thrive in an environment like ours.

Jaspal Singh ([01:03:55]):

That’s so true. When you reach to the point of annoying others, it means you’re really crazy about something. You can spend hours and hours on that.

Julian Glaab ([01:04:03]):

So as long as it’s not crypto, literally anything else with sports or building something really cool or having a crazy hobby, but it needs to be something I can see that this person is really burning for something.

Jaspal Singh ([01:04:20]):

Yeah, no, I really love what you said about added use in the team. I remember I was talking to one of the founder, very young founder, 25-year-old. I don’t know what’s your guess, I’m pretty sure you’re quite young. But that guy, when I ask him how do you hire people, he’s like, “Hey, my key idea is what can I learn from that other person because my age, what is the value that person will bring to me and as well as to the team?” And like you said about added value, that’s very important. Now looking ahead 10- 15 years, let’s say 2035 – 2040, what do you think will fundamentally change in urban mobility? I mean, are we over hyping autonomy or we are underestimating them? Because like you said, there are still two type of people. One, they are feeling sci-fi and others are very bullish.

So what do you think 10- 15 years look like?

Julian Glaab ([01:05:11]):

I’m sure you know this idea of the Gartner hype cycle, where it’s some new idea and then that gets hyped up and then there is this – Valley of death. And then there is the path to enlightenment. And so I think right now there is a misconception around the globe in society where we are in this hype cycle because I think we are now on a path to enlightenment and a lot of people are still down in the disillusionment valley.

Julian Glaab ([01:05:37]):

So a lot of people are still like, “Ah, this is never going to work.” And we’ve seen so many attempts at this and I genuinely, I’m a hundred percent convinced that all of these issues are solved and we are now on a path to mass deployment. So that’s I think where we stand and I think where we’re going to go in 10-15 years, I mean this stuff is in this physical infrastructure, so it’s going to take a while until it reaches global scale. But I think this is going to reshape the way even how cities are built and look because right now cities are very dense places because of proximity. But then if I don’t need to spend time driving myself and I can just go into the city, I can live far outside and I think we can rearrange. I think the way our cities are going to be, how people are arranged in relation to each other and how the function of roads and cars connect people, I think this is going to mix up totally.

Julian Glaab ([01:06:47]):

And I think this has wide implications for real estate, for commercial real estate, for urban planning. I don’t know how exactly to be clear because I haven’t thought much about it yet, but I think it’s amazing and I think this again creates a lot of opportunity to build new exciting companies, new businesses in that. So I think in that sense, autonomy is going to unlock a huge wave of new potential to grow GDP in countries in ways that are going to be obvious maybe in two, three years, but are right now maybe hypotheses at best.

Jaspal Singh ([01:07:20]):

Yeah, no, I like your analogy about Gartner hype cycle and you’re right. Now I see the latest one, it show the autonomous vehicle are into the path of enlightenment, which is mean down with the mass scale will happen. No, that’s great. Thank you so much, Julian. I mean, it was really wonderful conversation. Really enjoyed your way of thinking and what you’re building and all. Generally we end this podcast with this rapid fire round and we ask some of the personal question to understand more about you as well. So if you’re ready, I’ll start with the rapid fire.

Julian Glaab ([01:07:49]):

Sure, let’s do it.

Jaspal Singh ([01:07:51]):

Okay. So if you are not working in mobility space, what do you think you would be doing?

Julian Glaab ([01:07:56]):

I would either build a healthcare company or a robotics company, but definitely running some kind of a startup and I would be building.

Jaspal Singh ([01:08:04]):

Building something. It doesn’t matter which sector, but yeah, building something. No, that’s amazing. Which city you like the most in the world and why?

Julian Glaab ([01:08:14]):

I guess it’s Rome because it has loads of history and Rome in winter is a great place if it’s empty and it has loads of things to explore. I had to take Latin in school, so I had to learn a lot about it for better or worse. And yeah, I think it’s one of my favorite places in Europe.

Jaspal Singh ([01:08:34]):

Yeah, Rome is always beautiful. I mean, especially for Canadian in winter, it’s a good escape for us to avoid snow. Any book or idea or person that has shaped your thinking?

Julian Glaab ([01:08:47]):

Yeah, so over Christmas, I’ve been reading a book which is called When Breath Becomes Air. It’s a little bit of a sad book because it’s basically about a brain surgeon who gets a cancer diagnosis and then he sort of self-reports on his journey with cancer being a surgeon, but also affected. And it changed my perspective on life because it’s easy to just get lost in day-to-day and just taking the time to appreciate the time that we have, I think was a very positive learning discovery in a very sad story. And so that’s why this book has changed me.

Jaspal Singh ([01:09:30]):

That’s really nice. No, I’ll put in my reading list. I mean it’s something similar to the man in search of meaning Viktor Frankel. It’s like how the life is fragile and how you can find the meaning. No, really thanks for sharing this. What is the one lesson you wish you should have learned earlier in life as a founder or as a person?

Julian Glaab ([01:09:49]):

That it’s okay to be wrong and as long as you don’t make the same mistake twice and as long as you arrive at a decision that is turning out wrong later fast. So to my point I made earlier, I think this is probably the biggest learning that I made.

Jaspal Singh ([01:10:06]):

That’s amazing. Now this is my last question, and I generally ask this question to all the people on the podcast. If you can change one thing in life, what would it be?

Julian Glaab ([01:10:20]):

I probably wouldn’t have studied because looking back, it was probably a waste of time. I would’ve just gone into building.

Jaspal Singh ([01:10:28]):

Oh man, that’s a very powerful lesson. Yeah. I mean, my kid, he always tell me, “I don’t want to study, but I want to build things.” But as a parents, you always push them back into the

Julian Glaab ([01:10:42]):

Study. Yeah, I know. I don’t have kids yet, so maybe I can mention me it holds true for sure.

Jaspal Singh ([01:10:47]):

Thank you so much, Julian. Really, really enjoyed this conversation. Thanks for joining us and really wish you good luck whatever you are building with the Bliq success and any way we can help, so more than happy to help, but really wish you good luck with your new venture.

Julian Glaab ([01:11:05]):

Yeah, thank you for having me. It was a great conversation.

Jaspal Singh ([01:11:09]):

Thank you for listening to this podcast. If you like this episode, please don’t forget to give us our five-star rating as it will help us to spread our message. If you have any feedback or suggestion for this podcast, please feel free to reach out to us info@mobility (hypen) innovators.com. I look forward to see you next time. Thank you so much.