Jared Kushner: BrainCo, Affinity Partners, and the Geopolitics of AI

After leaving government, I considered how to apply my diverse learnings to my next business venture. As I researched various firms, I realized the world didn't need another multi-billion dollar private equity firm. Instead, I focused on what investors truly needed and the value we could provide. We recognized our strength as complex problem solvers, a skill honed in government. We believed we could leverage this in partnership with other firms. Therefore, Affinity's aspiration is to be the most value-added and outcome-determinative partner for the world's best entrepreneurs and companies.

My general framework from government is that it has limitations. At its best, government can set the right policy, especially with great leaders. However, you still need the private sector as a partner to provide expertise, technical knowledge, project management capabilities, and capital. They also need local navigation skills. If you only have three out of those four elements, it's a recipe for disaster. The private sector isn't always organized in a way that governments need to achieve their ambitions. But if you can combine these elements effectively, there's amazing potential for what can be achieved.

Singapore is a blue-chip example. When I was in government, I handled all the really challenging problems. If people didn't know what to do, they'd give it to me. My first question was always, "What do they do in Singapore?" I learned that even though every problem seemed crazy, nothing was truly new. I started reading history and studying other countries because every issue I faced had been dealt with before, either at a different time, in a different form, or in a different place. I wanted to extract all possible learnings to inform my approach.

AI is the biggest technological shift I've seen in my lifetime. As an investor, when such a significant change occurs, it's crucial to step back and recognize that the future won't simply mirror the past. We need to deeply understand this transformation. How will it affect every investment, past or future? It could positively impact margins, growth, or value, or negatively create unforeseen vulnerabilities for businesses.

We really attacked this problem, initially not realizing it was more of a research project than anticipated. Now, we've accomplished two things. First, the client will reduce the steps in their permit process. By building the AI deployment process, they discovered their human-designed process was inefficient, allowing them to eliminate over ten steps. Second, as model updates came through, a challenge arose: how to convert submitted spatial plans for the AI to read and score. This changed with a model update.

I start by asking: Do they have a complex problem where AI can create significant efficiency? Second, do they possess the necessary data to build a solution? Third, is their company's command and control structure conducive to adoption? You might have the first two, but if there's resistance within the ranks or leadership, and they're unwilling to encourage adoption, it can be challenging. People often fear change. It's like heaven; everyone wants to go, but nobody wants to die. We've found that those initially most resistant become our biggest champions once they see how AI improves their job performance.

The second part of President Trump's roadmap focused on stimulating as much innovation as possible. In contrast, the regulations in Europe have stifled AI development there, which isn't necessarily bad for America. The goal should be to avoid over-regulating before fully understanding what needs regulation. Regulators and politicians, seeing this technology emerge, often focus on worst-case scenarios and then consider how to regulate. However, at this stage, we should stimulate innovation by attracting the best talent to the U.S. to work on this problem, as everyone wants to innovate here.

This was one of the most exciting, yet cautious, aspects of pursuing the investment. Many of my investors are from the Middle East, specifically the Gulf countries, and I wanted to demonstrate the positive experiences of investing in Israel. Our primary criterion for this was to partner only with blue-chip entities. Our two investments in Israel have performed exceptionally well, both with top-tier firms. One investment that received significant scrutiny was in Phoenix Holdings, Israel's leading financial institution. They are a massive company, managing approximately $160 billion, and we became their largest shareholder. However, we invested in July of last year, just before the war with Hezbollah in the north began.