The Bending Spoons acquisition of Airtable works because Airtable's growth was stunted by a venture-backed board forcing an unnatural sales-led motion (only 30% of its sales team hit quota), which Bending Spoons can strip away to restore product-led-growth profitability of $300–400M a year.
David Sacks reads Airtable's 30% sales-quota attainment as the tell: it was a healthy product-led-growth company (20% growth) that a high-valuation board pushed into a failing sales-led motion. The acquirer can simply eliminate most of that cost structure and turn it into a highly profitable, slower-growing business. ✦ AI generated
David Sacks · All-In Podcast · 2026-08-08 · original ↗
starts at this moment · 50:00
“Sacks. When we look at this, this was a company that had done a lot of things right... What can we take away from this transaction in bending spoons? Are they the buyer of last resort now?”
There was a really interesting data point that I saw in the commentary on this, which is only 30% of Air Table sales team was making quota. They had a 30% sales attainment number... this was a company that had a successful PLG motion, productled growth, and they were growing about 20% a year. But that was not good enough for its board... they're looking for a venture type outcome. So the board pressures the founders to do something that frankly is unnatural for them... 'Look, you should bolt on a traditional salesled motion here to get the growth up faster.' Does that work? No... they only get 30% attainment... Bending spoons can go in here and do what Elon did at Twitter. Eliminate 85 90% of the cost structure. Don't do this salesled motion. Just go back to your productled growth roots. You'll probably keep most of that 20% growth and it'll be a very profitable company.
verbatim transcript · starts at 50:00
49:54means in a second. We want to focus on the new thing, the AI company. That's where the big value creation is going to be in the future or the potential for it. So essentially, the talent is going to focus on the venture play and then they're selling the private equity play to Bending Spoons. Now, why do I think this could be a good acquisition for Bending Spoons. I think there was a
50:13really interesting data point that I saw in the commentary on this, which is only 30% of Air Table sales team was making quota. They had a 30% sales attainment number and that told me a lot about this business. Okay, what it told me is, and I'm reading between the lines here, but this was a company that had a successful PLG motion, in other words, organic growth, productled growth, and they were
50:41growing about 20% a year. But that was not good enough for its board. You know, these are investors, some of whom invested at an 11 billion peak valuation. So, they're looking for a venture type outcome. So, what happens? The board pressures the founders to do something that frankly is unnatural for them, which is they say, "Look, you should bolt on a traditional salesled motion here to get the growth up
51:08faster." Does that work? No. They probably get a little bit of growth out of it, but they only get 30% attainment. So they've got hundreds and hundreds of sales reps here trying to push on a string and it's not making it grow faster. So now what's the opportunity for the acquirer here? Bending spoons can go in here and do what Elon did at Twitter. Eliminate 85 90% of the cost
51:30structure. Don't do this salesled motion. Just go back to your productled growth roots. You'll probably keep most of that 20% growth and it'll be a very profitable company. you'll be able to >> 80% profitable probably right >> probably. I mean >> 400 million to the bottom line pays for the acquisition in a couple years. >> People are saying they're only going to generate 30% ebidom margin. I think like
51:52you're saying it could be 80 90%. I don't think you need to keep most of this business or most of the cost structure associated with this business. Um Air Table is a company that has its fans. Um I think they will probably stick with it and you know you'll you'll be generating I don't know you could probably generate 300 million of Ibida a year or 400 million uh while growing you
52:14know 10 to 20%. So that's a play for bending spoons >> and the venture investors here Sachs they're happy to get their money back and move on to the next thing. It's a bit of a push for them, you know, in terms of at the blackjack table rather than they've got to go 10x just to catch up and then they would have to go 10x again to make their LPs happy. It's not
52:34going to happen. >> I think the question is if Bending Spoons can basically take this business that's not making money and probably generate 400 million a year of EBA and pay for the acquisition in just three years. >> Amazing. >> Why isn't that something that the company could do on its own? And I think that's the structural problem is I think it's very hard for both VCs who are on