Rekha's Approach to Automated Authority Activation.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (00:02)
Hello, welcome everybody. Thanks for joining us for another episode of Arthur's Roundtable. Super happy to have Rekha with us today. I'm gonna just make a little editorial comment here. I liken this process to a process that often isn't addressed, like estate planning where you wait for the last minute or something happens that catalyzes you to get your...

affairs in order, so to speak. And ⁓ Rika is going to describe to us a little bit about her journey and then exactly how all this works and how it might apply to the audience and others. So Rika, thanks for doing this.

Auro Rekha (00:47)
Yeah, of course. Thank you, Arthur, for having me here. And I'll talk a little bit about my journey, how I started. So I have been a software engineer for around, for over a decade, a lot in FinTech and WealthTech. And I worked on high frequency trading profiles, identity systems, and also design systems with a lot of the

large scale financial infrastructures. So I naturally think in systems and execution, what led me here was actually quite personal. ⁓ My husband and I were sitting one evening and asking a very simple question. If we weren't around, would, if something were to happen to us, like what would our kids actually have access to? Who would be able to make those decisions?

who would be able to step in and who knows what, who can act. I went looking for something that solves this particular problem and nothing met the bar ⁓ properly around security or anything relates to this gap, which

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (02:10)
There's

trust involved too, right? Like who, the same way that you select a corporate trustee or lawyer or somebody that's gonna act as your proxy or power of attorney, ⁓ it's largely a trust issue, right?

Auro Rekha (02:28)
It definitely is, absolutely. But when we are not around, who knows who to trust first? Who knows who needs to act first? And in a lot of these cases, which led me to speak to a lot of family office operators, advisors, and also estate planners, one thing, the gap that actually kept resurfacing over and over again is authority just gets assumed the moment there is a

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (02:35)
Yes.

Auro Rekha (02:57)
an emergency, a transition or the principle is not an end, someone needs to make decisions, capital still needs to move, everything still, the operations still need to go on. But the loudest person in the room ends up assuming the role of authority or somebody who everyone leans towards, that person would end up having to make decisions. But on paper, that's not it. And incapacitation is a very

And the families go through a lot already. And they have to.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (03:32)
It's enough trouble to

then worry about who's gonna make sure everything's operating properly,

Auro Rekha (03:41)
Exactly. they already have an idea who they want to make those decisions for them. But it's not encoded. It's not operationalized. There are documents. There are charters. There are legal plans. There is everything. But what doesn't exist is the activation in the right moment. And that is the gap that I focus on.

That's exactly what has led me to build Eternal Worlds, which is when I see there is a solution that's missing, I build it.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (04:23)
And so ⁓ tell us a little bit about how this is different than everybody doing the proper, let's say somebody does take the time and do the proper trust work and do the, you know, do not resuscitate or ⁓ power of attorney in the event of some incapacitation or death. How's this weave into that?

Auro Rekha (04:51)
What this yeah so this does not replace any of the legalities or the documents or the structures or anything that currently exists. What this does is it make sure it enforces those decisions and operationalizes them in the exact

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (04:52)
or doesn't.

Auro Rekha (05:10)
it will it just carries out what you said into beforehand so you're not scrambling in the last minute what you need to do

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (05:23)
So can you just give us an example of tactically how this works? Not necessarily the technology, but okay, you decide that this is a problem. Let's assume somebody has done their estate planning, assigned a trustee, assigned an executor or executrix, done some work with trusts and so forth. How does it operationally work to implement this?

program.

Auro Rekha (05:54)
⁓ Right now what typically happens when a principle is unavailable, there is already a plan in place, right? Documents exist, rules are defined. This is the best case scenario. Everything is structured properly. But in that moment, no one is clear who can act, who can act first, in what sequence, and with what intent, and with what

amount of access one can act with. So people start calling, checking, coordinating, that's where authority, the decisions still need to move. Operations still need to continue. And that's where authority just starts getting assumed. And here what it does is all those decisions are encoded. So you are not, it's no more one and done, which is a lot that I hear from a lot of

legal advisors especially and estate planners where they're like it people will not revisit because life happens and they're really busy but now you have something that you are proactively working with let's say you buy a new home you are involving your advisor in there so you're not the advisor is no more just working in silos you they're doing their work the family's doing their part now

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (06:59)
Mm-hmm.

Auro Rekha (07:20)
There is a system where you're checking in each other and you are making sure the decisions that you have made are matching across. And when the moment arrives, responsibilities get activated exactly as they should now because everyone is in the same page. Everyone knows what they should do. There are triggers predefined and there are constraints around each trigger.

There are no single actors, so nobody is going to be taking advantage of the situation either. And this is how it comes in play. They will be going through the moment. They'll make sure that they know exactly what they need to do in that minute and the documents or intent and anything that needs to go through to make those decisions would get released exactly in that minute.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (08:18)
And so how does it practically work? So you have all the work, in the best case scenario, the work's been done, because oftentimes it's not, right? But in the best case scenario, the work's been done. Do you upload these documents in a way that the system says, OK, here's how it should work. So here's the roadmap and the authorities as a result.

Auro Rekha (08:46)
The system doesn't decide anything. What it does is it enforces your decisions with it. You are the one, let's say, again, you buy a house and then you want to make sure that you're...

you want to provide this to only your first kid and you are making sure that those decisions are communicated across. And let's say in case of incapacitation, I want to make sure that these are the financials, the first 30 day plans and all of this needs to go. The person who is able to get access, it's already predefined. They know that they are the ones who have access to. And so does the rest of the family members and advisors. So everyone is on the same page.

they know exactly who they should call. And what happens in that minute is they detailed decisions, detailed predefined decisions that they have made to say that, they get the documents that are related to those decisions released. They also know that they are able to act on behalf of the principal, or if they're just the emergency contact, or if they're just the trustee. You will not have two nodes of

decision makers anymore, you'll have exactly the person who needs to make what decisions because you have predefined those and everyone is across those. And while you deal with life, you have already dealt with who needs to act and everyone knows who they need to go to for what decision.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (10:20)
That totally makes sense. And those, like you said, the system doesn't make any decisions. It just reads the document and says, OK, here's the clear authority based on your intention, based on what the contract says.

Auro Rekha (10:36)
The, again, the system really is, it has the proper constraints to take forward the work. It doesn't, it is not deterministic. It doesn't deal with, it doesn't read a document. You are uploading a document where it is yours. You know what you're doing. You're doing, you are uploading and that's sealed. That's it. You're also saying that.

In case something happens, let's say if I'm away for 10 days, make sure this goes to this person during those days. If I'm not around, if I'm incapacitated, only then make sure you're releasing these. So there are different rules behind it and you are adding different documentation for different scenarios that may happen, which generally don't get covered even if they are the best case scenarios of documents.

And here you can make sure that people are able to see those documents or those steps that are required only in the moment that they need, not before or not when they're not supposed to see them. For example, want somebody, I want certain items to go in only when I'm incapacitated, not in an emergency. So they'll be locked in that moment to rise. And yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (12:04)
Do, have you found that, and again, the best scenario where the documents have been done and the people have done proper planning, that there's another gap that's created between what the documents say and what the intention was?

Auro Rekha (12:28)
There would be, let's say, the legalities are different to what you have encoded in the system. That is, the legalities will always proceed. You will not, but during, but let's say also from the moment till everything comes in play, everyone knows who needs to do what. Once the papers are in place, they take their own, because anything that happens,

has its own timeline. You cannot force, you cannot rush, but decisions still need to move. Authorities, some get just gets assumed, but here you're structuring, you're making sure that whatever you have decided and because you're proactively managing that, it's not just a one time event anymore. You are involved. It's not going to be something that you you set it and you forget it's.

Therefore you're having a look at it, even if it's just five minutes, okay, know, something's done and I've just uploaded or your advisor just uploads it for you and everyone is informed across. It again depends on the amount of roles that around that you have assigned already. So it's all very granular because again, every family is different. Everyone's needs are different. And that's, yeah, the legalities will always proceed.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (13:58)
Take us through the process of like, if somebody says, okay, I recognize there's a gap, what do I do now?

Auro Rekha (13:58)
Whatever you

You mean how we on board or how we are? ⁓ So what we do is this is a, to start with, is a very bespoke infrastructure. And anyone who realizes that this is an issue, we have a quick call with them to understand, you know, what they're seeing on their end. And we talk through the problems that are.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (14:10)
How you yeah, yeah, let's let's do that.

Auro Rekha (14:38)
currently there and if it's a lot of the times it is very complex family structures. They have different jurisdictions, a lot of advisors, no coordination. And even if there is, it is scattered. But what they don't, what they are trying to define is to understand what am I going to do in case I'm not around? Like who is going to take over what? Because this is a very big issue right now. And

And then we have a, we map through a scenario that they are currently facing through in case of an emergency, in case of incapacitation, what the system would actually look like. We walk them through the whole thing. then there is a scoping engagement. We understand their structures. We understand, we map out the roles and authorities and to see that if this is a system that they would actually benefit from. And if only

there ⁓ is a match between what they're looking for, what the system does, and if everything, it's exactly what they need. And then we commission the infrastructure for them.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (15:51)
And so being it's bespoke just because everybody's fact pattern is idiosyncratic to their family, for example, right?

Auro Rekha (16:00)
⁓ It is not only that because this is a complete and complete infrastructure where they would get their own system. They would be able to, they would get their advisors get certain dashboards, they get certain dashboards and it is a complete operational.

it operationalizes your documentation. So it is governance as code is how I would put it as.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (16:25)
I actually like that. That's helpful. So can you give us an example, anonymized of a client that you work with and how it worked?

Auro Rekha (16:39)
So yeah, for sure. ⁓

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (16:40)
No, take it down.

Auro Rekha (16:47)
How we worked with them is...

They are a ⁓ family of six and they have a wealth planner and a estate planner and they wanted something that they are... This is ⁓ family managed by themselves. It's not for their advisors yet. So they came in with an issue saying that, you know, we have all of this. We have our kids. We want to make sure that everything is...

we are setting them up for success when the time comes. And also for us to understand that everyone is on the same page and there isn't any confusion when the moment arrives who needs to do what. And this is where they were really clear on the requirements. it resonates with what I build. So I took them through the current system, which is Eternal Vault.

I showed them what exactly it does. we definitely, we had a talk about where we map through, where they're, who are their wealth planners, who are their estate planners and where they are and about the jurisdictions that are, their family lives across two different countries, but they also move a lot and they wanted something that is, that is live.

actually changes with them. It's not something that you've said it and you forget. So then we map the roles that are within their family members and to help them understand that this is how it would look like. once they understood that, they understood what the system did, we started the commission, which means we show them step by step exactly what happens.

We spin up their own, they wanted an isolated infrastructure, which means it's not shared across, which also means that they own their data. Everything, even if it's not ⁓ an isolated, even if it's not an isolated infrastructure, even if it's shared, means everybody owns their own data. are not able to see anywhere, anything. It's called zero knowledge architecture, which again means that only you know what you have uploaded, only.

We have no idea. cannot do anything. We only get a lot of cryptographic data, which just sits somewhere, only unlocks when you want it to unlock. So here they wanted a complete isolation from everything that there is. they get their, ⁓ there is no data, there is no infrastructure sharing. So they wanted us to set that up and that takes a bit of time because it is a completely new engagement.

And it is one of the broader scales that we provide. ⁓ And that takes around six to eight weeks because of the amount of work that's required. And then we also walk them through a certain onboarding and make them understand where sits what, math through the, we are involved as involved as they want. If they want their advisor to take over, they would. But in this case, the family wanted to be involved.

from the get-go, so we walked them through how everything works, ran through some fire drills, and only when they were confident, we handed it over to them. So now they're able to operationalize that.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (20:25)
So do you need to know most, do you most often need to know what the assets are, what the intent of the trusts are, who's the trustee, all that kind of stuff?

Auro Rekha (20:42)
We don't need to know. We don't need to know any of that. We only need to know your family mapping. Even then, even that, you can keep it as anonymized as possible. Privacy is

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (20:57)
Right. Child one,

two or three or whatever. Yeah.

Auro Rekha (21:00)
Or we have five family members and the rest of it, want to discuss with your advisor. That's well and good. They'll be the one setting up and then we'll walk the advisor through the set, different, ⁓ the different screens and everything that they need to do from their end to operational to make sure that the family is up and running. But before that, what we have to do is we have to still make sure we are the ones commissioning the infrastructure. So it is instead of a family.

⁓ So let's say they have their own login and everything. It just looks pretty similar. Like, okay, you know what? I'm just going to go log into my account and see, but that account is built specifically for them. So you are not going to, not everyone would have it. Not everyone would need it, but those who do, we would commission it for them. And we are only as involved as the family wants. If it's the advisors who come to us, they would tell us like,

to what extent they want us to be involved because we would be, we would anyway have to commission it for them. If they want us there to set them up, set them up with the families and everything, we would do that. If they want us to run through the fire drills a few times, we'll do that. If, but what we will do is we'll give them a proper handover, a playbook and everything that is required for them to actually succeed into whatever they're doing. But obviously it is a white glove onboarding. So we are always available to make sure.

that in case they run into something and they need us, we are there.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (22:36)
And so the.

actions are triggered by whatever happens to... So at some point, do you hard code in the ⁓ event that triggers someone to be alerted that here's your task because it's your responsibility and you have the authority to do this?

Auro Rekha (23:08)
that is already pre-encoded within the code. So the code would understand the families are able to select on predefined triggers and they are able to set it up around the different specifications for each trigger. So it is very highly customizable on their end. But for us, need to make sure when we are setting up, we need to make sure the complexity, how many...

Because it is governance as code, has to be dealt with a lot of fragility, which is why we need to understand how complex their family could be. so that we are monitoring it constantly only to understand the technical side of things. If there is an error, we are already there making sure that it's taken care of. you get a tech team without having to...

conducting.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (24:08)
So I'll make up an example. I set the parameters that if I'm in the hospital and I define what incapacitation means and it's five days in, then I can code that in and say, OK, now this needs to happen. Is it that straightforward?

Auro Rekha (24:35)
It is that straightforward. So if there is an incapacitation, you're saying that after incapacitation, you say that you want these instructions to go. It can go in minutes if the advisory also they're approving the request because there are again, they need to verify in case of incapacitation, there are certain verifications that need to go and

ones that's coordinated, it's instantaneously you would know what you need to do. That's the, that is the gap that we are dealing with because every minute that you lose without knowing what you need to do is another minute where someone else is making decisions for you.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (25:20)
So I'm going to do an extreme example here and see if I'm getting it right. So I get into a car accident. My parameters that I set that if I'm unable to communicate for five days, I want my wealth manager to liquidate all my public shares into cash. ⁓ I want my bill payer people to continue to pay the bills.

I want my accountant to have the authority to execute trades and banking and wire. And ⁓ if that's the scenario, right, let's just say that that's all coded in. Who actively

Does the system send an email to everybody and say, okay, here we go. And this is what the intention of Arthur was.

Auro Rekha (26:17)
So what it does is, taking your example, there is a car accident and the incapacitated. What the family members would do, they would log in onto the system. They would say that this person is incapacitated and they need to go through certain steps within that uploading verifications and.

That would then go to the advisor. The advisor would need to verify, which already happens anyway, right? you have something happen and the advisor, I need proof, but here you are not waiting for someone else to say that, okay, you need to still hold on while I go and get these documents for you. Here you're saying, okay, this is the proof, this is what happened. And just before that, because this is an emergency,

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (26:48)
Right, yeah.

Auro Rekha (27:10)
You already have set your emergency person. What that person would do, this is purely operational and intentional. These are my intentions. In case of an emergency, you triggered this and that's logged. Now it's defensible because you are the one who set it when everything was fine. And now the system knows, even your advisor knows, and everyone knows that this event has been triggered. So emergency has been triggered. Your documents have gone through.

that over there you say only now make sure that if I'm incapacitated after five days, make sure you're triggering this. And there are, and let's say the other family members, they'd be like, you know what, I'm not sure if this is what the person meant. are, the families can still take a consensus on the rent to make sure, to, and they would get the same documentation. And all of these are already something that the principal or

You know, you would know, you would know that this is what is going to happen in case when I'm not around, you exactly know what's going to happen because the first point, is an emergency. Let's deal with that. Where are insurance documents? Where are the financials? Where, who I need to call what and my physician. That's the first information that needs to go through. So that gets the person who is responsible for that will trigger it. And they would get that information. Again, the advisor needs to just approve to say that, okay, this isn't it.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (28:18)
Right.

Yeah, who's going to do the banking if you don't already have somebody doing it, right?

Auro Rekha (28:37)
emergency, let's get through that. And while they're dealing with it, you're like, OK, this is an incapacitation now, and it would escalate to the next level. And at that level, then there are different documents that come through to say that something would go to your advisor, something would go to a certain family member, and something else would go to someone else. It doesn't need to be the same one because you've already set it up from beforehand in case of incapacitation. Make sure this happens.

And then everyone gets a notification again saying you have received these documents and somebody has actually triggered the incapacitation and the advisor is approved. So there is never going to be a single actor to prevent abuse firstly, because that is something that happens. Unfortunately, it happens a lot more than we'd like. And it's defensible because every step that you take is logged.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (29:21)
through all the time.

Auro Rekha (29:32)
Also you'd like, okay, I want someone else to take care of over my operations when I'm not around in case of an incapacitation. And that person would get a certain rights that the principal did. And they would also know what they need to do in case someone isn't around. So it's already triggered and now everything is fine. You're back. And the authority then would only again switch back to you. So everything is back to what it was.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (30:02)
So just again, I don't mean to get into the weeds, but it's super helpful to understand because what you're doing is fixing this gap, right? It's clearly a gap. Who, let's say the same example, five days incapacity, who, I've already designated the person who has the authority to flip that switch and say, okay, let's open up the vault.

Auro Rekha (30:11)
Yeah. Yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (30:30)
and take a look and see what the next steps are.

Auro Rekha (30:33)
Yeah. So that person would already know. They would have to accept the role, firstly, to say that, you know, when this happens, I would be able to do this, ⁓ especially if they are next in operations, if they want to make sure that when I'm not around, I want this person to take care of operations, you know, especially when I'm incapacitated. That person could also be different when...

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (30:40)
Right.

Auro Rekha (30:58)
And in case of death or in case of an emergency or delegation, I'm not around for two weeks or I have a surgery, you need to take care of it. So there are different scenarios that it covers that, you know, one would not always have any kind of legal documentation, but here you already, everything is defensible end of the day. And here you have logs, which actually prove that you have, you already encoded and according to what your intentions were in when you were fine.

we have these triggers. So exactly.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (31:29)
as if you were here. Yeah,

I like that. And do you imagine everything is subject to how much the people want you to know? But are you involved in? Are you telling? Are you oftentimes just saying you have to find this person that has the authority to pull the trigger on opening the vault? And then after that, you don't really need to know anything about the.

the specifics, right?

Auro Rekha (32:00)
I don't even need to know who has a trigger. It is with between you, your family, your advisors. I'm just here providing the operations of it, the mechanism, the governance, again, governance as code. I've encoded those decisions already so that those triggers already so that your decisions are enforced through that. Given the constraints,

For them, I've given, it is a living, a living wall, I wouldn't say, but that's exactly what it is. It is your decisions living there. They'll only get triggered, whatever you have put, I don't need to know anything. I'm not even in picture once. We have commissioned that to you. Build the code, build everything, given the whole access.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (32:51)
Emissioning means built the code, right? Yeah.

Auro Rekha (32:57)
and you have your accounts, your advisor has accounts, they'll have an oversight about where, what is the drifts and everything that come through. Even they wouldn't know who has what because everyone needs that. Exactly. Exactly. Exactly. That is the whole point. is giving them different views without having to compromise anyone's privacy. And I won't even be...

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (33:10)
Unless you want them to know, right? Unless I wanted them to know, for example.

Auro Rekha (33:25)
I don't even need to know anything. All I need to know is making sure that when we are running the fire drills, when we are running anything, if there are any issues that come up, you need to let me know. And that's where I come in. I make sure that it is operationalized. The system is robust, secure, and that is my job and that is what I'll do. And that's it. The rest is for you. Yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (33:49)
Got it.

So one of the biggest pushbacks of getting your state planning done is it's not urgent, right, until it becomes urgent. Are you experiencing that sort of pushback to get this done?

Auro Rekha (34:06)
Yes, definitely, because no one wants to think about it. But right now there is also, there are also a lot of people who are thinking about it very actively because they don't want everything that they have worked for just to be in a state of limbo when they're not around. And the people who are recognizing this are the ones starting the conversation. And

Yes, it is a very, it could be difficult. It is also difficult for a lot of people. But another pushback is also something with everyone believes they have the documentation, everyone believes that they're already set for it. But everyone unanimously agrees that this is the operational gap. They do struggle a lot from

the minute the transition till somebody actually takes into play. Sometimes the decisions that have been made are irreversible and the people who suffer are the families, even for generations sometimes. And I have seen that play out right in front of me.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (35:21)
Many, many times. So

I've thought about this a lot recently. I have three adult children, family, and...

the estate planning has been done. But for example, nobody has the code to this.

except for me, which is a problem, right? And so I could see this simply as a method. I mean, that use case alone, I don't know what you're charged to do this. I imagine it's a function of how much work is done, right? But that'll just get lost.

Auro Rekha (35:47)
Yeah, that is correct.

Exactly and you're locked out of everything.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (36:11)
Yeah.

How do you address that? Same way?

Auro Rekha (36:16)
Same way, you have everything that you need. You're like, OK, I want this code to actually go to one of my kids. You pre-define who that kid is. You say, in case I'm not around, only then send this document to my kid. And you are making sure that that's already set for you. Now you don't have to worry about nobody knowing that. The whole point is,

I want my decisions to go through when I'm not around. And it is all recorded. it's, yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (36:52)
So let's talk about without saying anything you don't want to say. Is this ⁓ a $5,000 project? Is it a $20,000 project? Is there ongoing fee? How does that all work?

Auro Rekha (37:07)
So there is a one time commissioning fee that is just the one time that we need to set them up with. And then there is a monthly basis, it would be for a year and then we charge. So there is a three, depends on this complexity of the families also. Generally the families who come in, they don't want something that's short term because this is not a short term thing.

It's made for permanence. Now you are because you're also commissioning just for your family. It's not mass produced. It's not a SaaS product. It is an infrastructure that you're building just for your family. So it starts with five figures depending on where you are. And then it can go as high as six depending on the

kind of infrastructure one wants if it's with you or if it's completely shared or partially shared or completely isolated. So there are those also which are very few that we offer in a year. And because of the amount of work that goes in and also we need to make sure that is what the families really need. Yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (38:33)
So unlike ⁓ using Riverside, the guys that run Riverside decide to go out of business, they sell it, no longer interested, I just find somebody else. So in your case, you've done the work. You hold the keys or the code, the source code.

In the event that something happens to your business or you, I'm sure you've addressed that issue.

Auro Rekha (39:06)
Yeah, definitely did. And also this is a self funded, so we don't have any cycle of investors or any of those investment cycles where we need to rely on. And that is the whole point to give more power to the families, their data, which also means that you own your data. We don't even know, we won't even sell it. That's the whole point. There is nothing that addresses that security gap either.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (39:13)
Investors in the Institute.

Auro Rekha (39:37)
and a lot of phishing attacks and everything that happens, the targets are the people like a high net worth and ultra high net worth. that is, that is something that we're seeing more and more of. And data sovereignty is really important right now. And this addresses that.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (39:59)
So what happens if your company goes away or you decide to do something more interesting?

Can somebody hire somebody to go in and update and?

the system. I don't mean to put you in a hard place, yeah.

Auro Rekha (40:17)
in the company is going to heal. No, no, that's fine. I

did because I always, I want to build systems that are paranoid, not people. People should work in calm. So I thought from the place of, know what, if I'm not around, what would, what would happen to the infrastructure in itself, which is why it is built for each family and nobody owns that except you.

Which also means once everything is set up, it is out there running. I also have a co-founder who is, you know, ready to fall back and it's not only fall back, it's come, are completely working together on it. And there are other plans in the background, which I think, yeah, which I would want to leave it out for now, but, but.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (41:11)
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Auro Rekha (41:14)
All that has been addressed and this is built so that even when I'm not around, it's going to work. It's going to make sure that the family's operations aren't stopped. It's going to make sure it is to give families also that peace of mind that, okay, we have commission, it or no else. What now? What if they go bust? We can, we can not go bust because nobody owns us. We are there to make sure that your operations, you and your family are.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (41:16)
Great.

Auro Rekha (41:45)
at the utmost importance here because it is a very serious gap that we're dealing with. It is a very serious problem and that's something that I wouldn't take it lightly. So yes, that is the view that I built from.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (41:57)
Totally.

So tell me a little bit about, if you don't mind, based on your experience so far and maybe ⁓ prognosticating a little bit, who your best customers are. And is it a profile that's interesting?

that you're seeking to engage or is it just a ⁓ like often is the case where it's people that you happen to know that bring other people in it's just a sort of word of mouth thing.

Auro Rekha (42:33)
It is a bit of both. It's not always about the profile. It is more about the complexity. It is about their family complexity structures that require something robust to forward their legacy, the continuity basically for the family. And that exactly where we need to make sure that they already feel the pain. They know that they're stewarding this.

part of change within the families. The family advisors and estate planners generally work with them a lot because they already know what's happening in the space. And they are the ones who are already helping the families and they want to give that peace of mind and be more proactive with the families. So that is the angle that we are with right now. ⁓ So yeah, it is.

a mixture of both, it's more to understand, if the people we're working with already think in those terms, and if all the families who already know that, you know what, we have this issue, we have everything, but we don't know who's going to act when. that, yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (43:45)
Yeah.

What's the, in the absence of your service, which has been the case up to this point, the estate planners, the lawyers, wealth managers, what was their default position in solving this problem?

up to this point.

Auro Rekha (44:11)
So the intention was always there to do right by the families that they're serving because the advisors that I have spoken to have been, they do really care about the families. But right now they are limited also with the providers or the services that are out there because there is, we have solved.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (44:22)
Yeah, they do care. Yeah.

Auro Rekha (44:37)
about wealth management. Everyone knows where wealth is. There are a lot of apps that do that. There are a lot of infrastructures probably that do that. But what doesn't solve is what happens to the family. Even if the advisors and the estate planners, everyone really wants to do that. They do see the gap that

For example, you showed the device that you're holding. said only you know the code to it. And that's something that we see more and more of. It's also not about just holding a document. It's about releasing the right document to the right person, which is because abuse around that is also a lot. one of the stories that I've heard from ⁓ one of the estate planners I spoke to just a few months ago. She was dealing with a family and

She was worried about the documentation abuse and somebody accessing documents that they shouldn't. And this is something that happens way more than we'd like. So they do deal with the best way now in a legal way, because that you cannot rush it. That has to go that way. But what you can do is control. Control is not the right way to say it, but at least you know what's going to happen.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (45:51)
Right? Yeah.

Auro Rekha (46:01)
from the moment you are not there, till somebody comes into your place or even if you're back.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (46:06)
If you're back, yeah.

And so. ⁓

It's really fascinating because, like I said, I've thought about this a lot recently. Never mind all the passwords that nobody knows about.

I it just, in my case, it's probably not much different than many. I don't even know half my passwords because it's in my locker, right?

⁓ Yeah, what a problem.

Auro Rekha (46:43)
Definitely. It just gets more and more evident the more you look at it. once you see it, you can't ignore it anymore. There are...

We see a lot more conversation around succession. We see a lot more around how to help the families, which they say that, you know, have more structures, more documentation, more meetings. know, nobody's taking those meetings away, but who knows what's going to happen from now till the date of your meeting. And that is something which people work with thinking time is on their side.

But that's the reality that it's not.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (47:26)
Yes.

What do you say to the people who, for example, say, nope, I addressed this. I've got a note with my lawyer. It says, here's what I want to have happen. He finds out that I'm incapacitated. He has the power of attorney to alert all these people. And that's my way of solving it.

Auro Rekha (47:52)
That is a lot that I hear, which I think I've, yeah, it's something that I do hear a lot more. It's also pretty natural for people to understand, to think that, you know, they have already solved the issue because so far nothing has existed. Everyone did think that the issue is resolved. But everyone also knows that there is...

There are weeks that go by where someone just assumes authority. And it's also weird that anytime you need your advisor or estate planner, anyone that you need is always traveling. You always have that they need to come back and sign for something. They need to be, you know, they are away. But now you already have a system like, you know what, I'm away. Let me just click and see, approve your emergency. At least you're not locked out for next 30, 60 days.

Well, while I resolve that and, I'm back and now you're moving in clarity, not in chaos and confusion anymore, because you've already solved what needed solving and documentation is not really activation. That is something that people miss. have documentation, but you don't have any operational capabilities that do this now because nothing existed. It only came in play because I wanted something to

do this for my family. And then I've spoken to a few more families and they can see the same issue. So we've onboarded a few more. it is, once you see it, you can't ignore it. It's right there.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (49:30)
That's true.

Yeah, the other thing is, is ⁓

Of the ones that you've done thus far, they ones where whoever's controlling the system, the patriarch, matriarch, can go in and say, hey, I just fired the accountant. I had to put somebody else in. Is that something that you build in so they can change those things on the fly easily?

Auro Rekha (50:08)
So if it comes from the advisor, then that's their decision because the advisor would be the one, let's say their company serving their customers that.

then you know there is it's their decision but if the family is the one who brought this in then yes of course they have the right to do anything they want now so it depends who who on boarded whom first yeah

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (50:39)
Right.

Are you finding that the advisors are willing to pay for this on behalf of the family?

Auro Rekha (50:47)
They are, so what they're looking at is because this is something that they have to proactively be involved with the family. So this would, they would offer it as a service. So for example, you have another wealth management tool that they offer, but this would operationalize everything above. So it would, it would not, yeah, they would, they are all right to pay for what it does.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (51:13)
Yeah, interesting. Yeah. I think it's going to, especially with, and I don't mean to lean on the crypto argument, but the crypto arguments huge because I mean, I know I have friends that have 30 of these, right?

Auro Rekha (51:26)
Yes.

that's.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (51:36)
Nobody,

you know, they've got it on a piece of paper somewhere.

Auro Rekha (51:41)
Yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (51:43)
You know, not cool, right?

Auro Rekha (51:47)
Yeah, I mean, that is that's a reality, though. It is something that even I have seen. Even my my parents, they have a book that they have been maintaining for ages. And it's still. Yeah. And that's something that I've been trying to operationalize, as I've seen the family issues starting here, that is the first thing I've addressed.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (51:58)
Yeah, right. Old school.

Auro Rekha (52:13)
But it is something that I have to manage actively for them, which is fine because now I'm able to share. So there is that aspect of things. So, yeah.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (52:23)
You know, there's a fair, Rekha, there's a fair amount of people that have been helping families perfect in either video or print their archival stories. And I imagine that while everybody's interested in promoting their own business, I imagine that that might be a lead source for you as well.

Auro Rekha (52:50)
Yeah, definitely, because everything is for the family and it's supposed to bring your family together. You're working together towards something, right? And having, let's say, even when you, if you want to share a story, you're not comfortable to share now, you want to share it at some other, at a later stage when you're not around. That would go then, you know, you are, there is also that component, the heart.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (53:09)
Other point.

Auro Rekha (53:19)
to the application. It's just not, it's everything surrounding the family to understand where the decisions are going to go.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (53:29)
And being that it's customized, if you wanted, like for example, I have three adult children, like, and I've addressed all this some other, some very simplistic way, but ⁓ I could decide that I want you to build it so they have access. So everybody knows what's going on to this much, but not this much, right?

Auro Rekha (53:52)
Exactly. So each one now, if you want me to talk in a very product sense of the way, you log in, all the family members have the same login. So you are entering the same house. Each one has their own dashboard. Now that's separate. Each one will have their own passcodes. Each one has their own room, keys to their own room. And what they store, what they share is up to each person. But the principle here would have

For example, you would have a view on different capabilities on the family continuity where you want certain decisions that you want the first child to take over. You're like, OK, you know what? Can you please take over these tasks? So when the moment arrives, they exactly know what they need to do. And you can see it like, OK, I have already assigned a task that is surrounding this decision I want them to make. And they have done. I'm fine with it. So they are comfortable. You're comfortable.

Right now there's nothing that works towards that moment when you're not around here. Everything works towards a moment when you're not around, even if it's briefly.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (55:02)
Right.

Like you could be traveling and plane crashes and that's that, right?

Auro Rekha (55:07)
Exactly. That is another scenario I've heard which is like, that was the first time I've heard that.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (55:16)
So ⁓ this has been amazing. Thanks for doing this. Tell everybody how to get ahold of you. What part of the world are you in?

Auro Rekha (55:23)
I'm in Australia and it's early. yeah, no, that's fine. It is. And the way to get in touch with me is I'm on LinkedIn and they can get in touch with me and we could have a chat and to see if this is something that they'd like, or ⁓ if they want a conversation around how this is. I'm open to that also.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (55:26)
so it's late there.

Early, sorry,

Yeah, that would be awesome.

Yeah, we published this. We'll make sure that LinkedIn link is there as well. Super grateful for you doing this, Rekha.

Auro Rekha (55:59)
Yeah, of course.

Thank you. I appreciate you inviting me here.

Arthur Andrew Bavelas (56:04)
Yes, my pleasure. Fascinating stuff. We'll do it again in a few months. See what the update is. That's okay with you. Great. Yeah. Thank you everybody for joining us today. Till next time. Thank you.

Auro Rekha (56:07)
Thank you.

Yeah, yeah, of course. Absolutely. Anytime. You know where to reach me.

Thank you.