Then, we stumbled on human and plant biotech. We were fortunate to have some good people and decided that Reliance can build this business over 5-10 years without any great revenue pressures. In the mainstream business, there was telecom or what I call infocomm.

Mukesh took that vision [His father’s vision] to the next level at the beginning of India’s explosive growth in the late 1990s and 2000s and turning his father’s growing conglomerate into India’s largest company, whose taxes alone provide 5percent of all national government revenues.

Mukesh Ambani joined reliance in 1981 and imitated Reliance’s backward integration from textiles in to polyester fibres and further into petrochemicals.

Dhirubhai will go one day. But Reliance's employees and shareholders will keep it afloat. Reliance is now a concept in which the Ambanis have become irrelevant.

The most discussed building in Mumbai is probably the twenty –seven- story of Mukesh Ambani India’s wealthiest man and the head of Reliance Industries. Ambani’s personal wealth is estimated at just under $ 25 billion, just about a billion for each floor of his Mumbai home.

We got into telecom in the '90s by bidding for cellular licences. But I felt that the real value is in the convergence of information and communication; pure communication will not deliver a sustainable value; that is why we called ourselves infocomm. It was learning a whole new domain. We brought in experts from the outside but we essentially did it with proven Reliance people.

Reliance will get listed on wall street because we want to benchmark ourselves with the top 100 companies of the world.

Even when I was doing chemical engineering, I was working almost full time for Reliance. I finished college at 2.30 pm and went straight to the office. I remember, we were raided and my father was in the US.

I was very focussed on building various competencies in Reliance and we were not ready to do two things at the same time. It was a big risk for us to get into IT, especially because it was hugely effort-intensive. In my language, I said we have too much soap on our body and we need to take a bath in the chemicals business.

The growth of the creator economy has accelerated much faster than I ever could have dreamed of when we began this journey eight years ago. We are at a critical inflection point and I’m excited to partner closely with Tiffany to scale our teams to power our next phase of growth.

Recognizing when a technology is exiting the trough of disillusionment and beginning to rise up the slope of enlightenment is critical for entrepreneurs.

Quirky, Airbnb, and Uber are great examples of entrepreneurs taking advantage of the expanding scale of exponential impact. They have created billion-dollar companies in record time. They are the absolute inverse of everything we believed was true about scaling up a capital-intensive businesses. For most of the twentieth century, scaling up such businesses required massive investments and time. Adding workforce, constructing buildings, developing vastly new product suites — no wonder implementation strategies stretched years into decades. It wasn't unusual for a board of directors to "bet the company" on a new and extremely expensive direction whose outcome would remain unknown until long after most of those board members retired. That was then.

Once people understood the technology and once the technology became vaguely affordable (vaguely, that is, because cell phones in the third world are often micro-financed), their rate of growth became exponential —

Quirky, Airbnb, and Uber are great examples of entrepreneurs taking advantage of the expanding scale of exponential impact. They have created billion-dollar companies in record time. They are the absolute inverse of everything we believed was true about scaling up a capital-intensive businesses. For most of the twentieth century, scaling up such businesses required massive investments and time. Adding workforce, constructing buildings, developing vastly new product suites — no wonder implementation strategies stretched years into decades. It wasn’t unusual for a board of directors to “bet the company” on a new and extremely expensive direction whose outcome would remain unknown until long after most of those board members retired. That was then.