 Thank you, ladies and gentlemen, for joining us on this one-hour session titled Against the Arts Funding Tomorrow's World. My name is Wang Feng. I'm the editor-in-chief of FT Chinese. It's my privilege to introduce to you our four established distinguished speakers. But before that, a little bit about the structure of our session. I'll make a brief introduction to our speakers. And then, for about 35 to 40 minutes, we have a list of questions that we prepared, would like to discuss with them based on their expertise. Towards the end of the session, we'll leave about 15 to 20 minutes for questions from the audience. And at the very end, a couple of minutes for me to summarize the whole session. So that's the rough work out of this bit. I'm very glad that we have a truly Asia-focused, yet truly international session here. Most of our speakers are Asia-based or Asia-related in a major way, but at the same time, many of them work for international organizations. And the title of our session, of course, is about the funding crisis, especially in the venture capital world, funding for the world's brightest, most innovative entrepreneurs and startup founders. So if you don't mind, ladies and gentlemen, we'll go this direction in the introduction and in asking the questions. First, please welcome Mr. Soichiro Takashima. Takashima is the mayor of Fukuoka in Japan. Thank you very much. Thank you very much. And then Ms. Leung-Wai Ling, she's the managing director and head of Asia-Pacific at a big Canadian public sector pension fund. Please do pardon my French. I'll try to pronounce it. Lacasse de Debout a Placement du Québec. Probably for us non-Franco phones, probably better known as CDPQ from Canada. Then we have Mr. Wilfred Yu. He's the co-chief operating officer and head of equities at Hong Kong Exchange and Clearing, which is known as HKEX. He's based in Hong Kong, of course. Welcome. Last but not least, Mr. Michael Chen, he's the managing director of DST Global, also based in Hong Kong. Again, as I mentioned, this is a very Asia-focused group, at the same time highly international. So I'll start with a list of questions for Takashima-san. For the sake of our interpreter, we'll ask the questions in one go. But Takashima-san, please do feel free to weigh in as a lot of later questions will have, I believe, common interest for most of our speakers. Please feel free to ask questions or chip in or start debates. That would be most welcome. So we looked up a little bit of background information, especially about the economy of Fukuoka. Apparently, Fukuoka is the sixth largest city in Japan, the second largest port city, but maybe not so well known to our audience. Fifth because of the city. It's grown again. It is also known as the start-up city in Japan and also one of the most affordable cities for start-ups for young people. That's amazing, at the same time also some kind of contrast for a lot of the world's major cities. So our questions, of course, will be about how do you manage to build a city into such a start-up friendly environment as the mayor, the administrator, the regulator? What kind of measures does the city of Fukuoka offer to local businesses to foster this innovation culture and ecosystem? At the same time, what kind of lessons do you think other Asian or world cities can learn from Fukuoka? And a second question, how do we close the funding gap? Since the title of our session here is against the odds, of course the odds are funding is drying up in some sectors more so than others, but overall we face a funding dearth. So how do we close this funding gap, especially for social enterprises and impact driven organizations? Thank you. Nice to meet you. Mayor of Fukuoka City, Japan. Have you ever been to Fukuoka? Maybe no. Or really. Thank you. Welcome. Next month, World Aquantic Championship is in Fukuoka City. Okay, if we seek about it, we want to show that Fukuoka could be the very first time you have ever heard such a time, like Fukuoka. And Fukuoka is actually the city where enjoying the fastest growth rate in the population. And the tax income growth rate is the fastest in Fukuoka as well. And the start-up opening rate, fastest. And the highest in Japan. And Fukuoka is probably the youngest city in Japan as well. And in 2012, Fukuoka made this declaration as a start-up center city. And for the growth of the city, we always set the start-up as a core part of our strategy. And in our administration's strategy, Fukuoka was selected as a start-up hub. And based upon that background, we really focused the start-up as our city is starting. And I want to talk about how those local businesses can get their funding and how we can grow start-ups. Obviously as a local city, we face a lot of challenges. Previously, we had a lot of co-working spaces, but we actually consolidated as a platform hub in the really the center of the city. By having such integrated hub, and if overseas investor want to invest in start-ups in Fukuoka, they just have to go to that hub and gather information about all those potential or existing start-ups in Fukuoka. If you think about the local start-up companies, they find it so difficult to send messages and introduce themselves to the potential investors from overseas. And then also, Fukuoka has been selected as a special city for the regulation testing experiment. But utilizing that position, we are asking the central government to further de-regulate the start-up-related regulations. For example, start-up visa, we started that as a pilot city in Fukuoka, and that was successful, and now it has been spread across Japan. So Fukuoka has been used as such a pilot city. Thank you. Again, please do feel free to weigh in with later questions. Ms. Leong, again, you work for this very large public sector pension fund. And pension funds, especially North American pension funds, are traditionally known to Asia start-ups and Asian innovators as a kind of a bedrock, a funding flow as well as a cross-border technology flow. There is a balance, very delicate balance game that funds like yours need to play in terms of fostering innovation as well as providing stable, safe returns for your public sector investors. So my number one question is, how do you manage this kind of very delicate, fine balance between innovation and risk? Yeah, I think that's an excellent question, which we ask ourselves a lot as well. So, you know, managing 300 billion US, that's our asset under management. And that clearly in itself. And yet, the way we see ourselves is that our chief responsibility is towards the 6 million pensioners in Quebec. So, you know, we need to provide that return. So that is first and foremost of what we do. And the truth is, venture capital, especially very early stages, we tend not to do a lot of that outside of Quebec and Canada. And the reason being, you know, very early stages, your returns, you know, I've always called it, it's an analogue situation, you know, it's 1 versus 0. And that's not how we are geared up as a pension fund. So that's the clarification. But having said that, I think moving forward, because today's topic is really about how do we invest forward, you know, with all of these global trends going forward. So if you look at climate, if you look at climate, if you look at energy transition, those are very tough and challenging topics. So, and we see ourselves as a provider of constructive capital. So, just to give you an example, so recently we partnered with an Australian company to do agri-tech, because that is part and parcel of food safety, because that's something that all of us are very concerned with going forward. So we are open to it. It's not exactly very early stage, but that's kind of where we are going. And then the other thing that we're looking at, I think that affects all of us globally, would be, for example, sustainable jet fuel, because that's one of the key things. And that's something which Canada is actually, we're quite big on that, you know, in terms of going forward the future of sustainable jet fuel. So there are a lot of such examples that we talk about. And I'm very, very happy to share also, we actually have got a US $10 billion wallet to finance energy transition. And that is global. We can invest globally. That is quite difficult to execute in reality, because for transition, you know, I think it's much easier to invest in new green ventures, because it's green, it's new. But to do transition, you're basically looking at investing in a company that is highly polluting. And yet investing in the transition. And that is difficult. But that's something that we are committed to doing. So far, we've only done three transactions. Not huge, but I think it's kind of a work in progress there. Great. I'll stop here. Thanks a lot. ESG, in the years before this, this would be one of the hottest topics, but apparently sometime during the pandemic, somebody announced ESG is dead. So we don't see too many people talking about it. But for pension funds, public sector pension funds, especially, even if we don't say ESG out loud, the sustainable social impact is still always a serious criteria that not only your investors, but also local public opinion, local political forces hold pension funds against. And for Asian, especially greater China companies and innovators these days, there's a feeling that well, we do offer good returns. But now you guys face so much political pressure domestically, you're pulling out from some of the most profitable projects. So again, people are holding you to increasingly strict sometimes draconian standards. How do you balance the pressure versus the performance criteria meters? How does this work for pension funds these days? Because it's so specific to pension funds, so I can't even pass the question on. We have tougher ones for him. You have tougher ones for him? All right. I think it's always about a balance. Fortunately for us, because of our size, we tend to do large ticket transactions, whether it is public or private. So the reason being, so as a result of that, we look at every single investment and we always start by looking at the partner, the quality of the partner. And I think we do that with or without ESG angle. The quality of the partner is first and foremost. So we're looking at the quality of the management, we're looking at governance, we're looking at integrity, we're looking at reputation of the partner. And that's something that we're highly cognizant of as a pension fund. The fact that we are returning 8% over a 10-year period, that's our average return. But still, anything that kind of bring us to the headline locally, that creates a lot of unnecessary disturbances. So I think it always comes back to the quality of the partner. And I think that is really first and foremost. And obviously we've invested significantly in our own team to be looking at data mining of ESG. We've also invested, we've also engaged external technical advisers to help us with each and every single large transaction. So I talk about energy transition earlier. So to demonstrate that the company is committed to transition say over a five-year period from a brown to a green, that company will actually have to be subject to a very highly technical audit area just to see that it is indeed progressing. So I think that doesn't quite change. Obviously we're very aware of public opinion about ESG, but deep down in our heart, I think the way we look to be assessed, that hasn't changed at all. So I think that's really important about the quality of the fund. Great, thank you. If I may follow up on ESG, sorry. There seemed to be a diverging trend between Eastern ESG standards, Asian ESG standards and Western ones. You work for a, well, North American pension fund, but you're also based in Singapore. Do you personally feel that between Asia, between the East and the West, ESG is increasingly starting to mean different things? Okay. I think on the East side, on the environment, on climate, I think that definition is quite common across all countries. The only challenge that you have is that we talk about whether it is done with justice, because obviously in this part of the world, we have a lot more of developing nations. So I'm highly, highly aware of that discussion. So we participated in B20 Indonesia. We are participating in the B20 India. And so the debate has always been that the developed nations have benefited by investing in all the polluting industries. And now that the developed nations have become wealthy and it is now the turn of the developing nations who want to develop and yet will not be allowed. So I think that there's a lot of debate on that. But in terms of the definition, I don't think there is a difference between how we measure carbon intensity. But I think we probably need another day to be here. If we want to talk about fairness, if we want to talk about, for example, carbon taxation, we want to talk about how do we solve this? But this is probably not the forum for that. Now I think where there's probably a little bit more of debate is on the s energy. And so that is something which, again, we have to take that into context. But there are some things which I think we kind of draw certain red lines that to say that, look, this is where we will not go. And then the rest, we will look at it case by case, partner by partner. But there are certain red lines where we, as a North America based pension fund, will not cross. Great. Thank you so much for your candid replies. I'd also like to remind all of our speakers, please do feel free to weigh in on issues even when we're grilling one particular speaker with questions. Please feel free to weigh in in their defense or feel free to challenge them some more. Mr. Yu, coming from Hong Kong, I feel I don't really have to put more pressure on you because on the month by month basis, local media is examining HKEX performance. How many more listings today compared with last year, compared with a year before? So you guys are under so much public and government pressure already about helping startups, helping companies raise funds. So my questions are, as a stock exchange, how do you collaborate with other regulatory bodies, industry groups and companies to create this supportive ecosystem even though you guys yourselves are under constant and huge pressure? For example, from Hong Kong's point of view, there seem to be very delicate differences between the different regulatory bodies, for example, in their attitude toward the crypto industry, toward the Hong Kong government's latest push to embrace crypto and digital currency companies exchanges into Hong Kong. So number one question, how do you work with and coordinate with all of these other coordinate bodies and government and public forces? Yeah, I have to agree with you that you do raise some really difficult questions and it's lengthy questions and there are so many dimensions that I can touch on and everything I said can be totally wrong. But having said that, I just think that as an exchange, we have a core role to play. Our core role is actually offering a very resilient market and building a market for the need. And therefore, I think what I personally advocate for a lot is actually we have to be catering the developments in the view of what the market trends and needs are. And working very closely with our regulators, with all the vested stakeholders, and you know Hong Kong, there are a lot of stakeholders, and making sure that they are aware of their developments. Now, if you look at Hong Kong's exchange, we are a super-connected between the East and the West. That's how we're positioning ourselves. And if we look at it, we have been working very proactively in terms of spotting the trends of the future and how we're positioning our market initiatives to cater for those. So if you look at Hong Kong exchange, the evolutions, if you look at maybe our market five years ago, what do we have? We have a lot of state-owned enterprises from Mainland listed, and maybe some private sector companies, in particular real estate companies, and a few of the big tech giants in Hong Kong. And then fast-forward to today, right? You have looked at it. What you realize is Hong Kong has already transformed into a new economy stock market. In the last five years, Hong Kong has successfully built up the first significant biotech segment set. In total, we have 114 stocks listed in Hong Kong Stock Exchange and becomes Asia's number one biotech fundraising hub and also world's number two. So apart from the biotech sector that is worth mentioning, there were a lot of changes that we brought into our stock connect program to just make sure capital gets connected with the opportunities to make it life easier for everyone. When you have money, you want to invest. You want it to be invested. You want that risk to be managed properly in all the right dimensions that you want. And therefore, we have that role to play to enhance our connect programs. And just last year, we launched multiple of our connect programs, Swap Connect being one of them, ETF Connect, and that's on the back of a first successful stock connect and bond connect program. So we become the effective, very efficient trading, settlement clearing and risk management hub for all those risks that everybody want to transact day in, day out and in massive, massive ticker size. So that, I think, is what we have been working very hard on. And the next journey is important as well where we have latest announces our specialist technology chapter 18C, which we are helping some pre-commercialization tech companies to come to Hong Kong to list. And that will include areas like advanced material, advanced software, hardware, chips, AI, cloud computing, agricultural technologies, new energy, you name it, right? All these are all right in the center of what we have been discussing these two days in this forum. So I'm really excited about that. And I think the important point is focus on what the market wants and deliver what the market wants. A second question also has to do with social impact and ESG. Again, on this front, Hong Kong, especially HKEX, faces multiples of demands from international investors, local Hong Kong investors, Chinese investors, companies from all sorts of different backgrounds. You need to take care of local social impact in terms of fostering innovation, creating jobs. You need to take care of international companies coming to Hong Kong to list to show them that there's enough liquidity, there's enough support for them. At the same time, you need to take care of, at least you need to be very much aware of mainland regulatory trends. So, again, people are holding you to a whole host of different standards in terms of impact, social impact, in terms of governance. How does that balancing game work out for you and your colleagues? Yeah, I think another great question, but a tough one as well. So my view is actually that we are very fortunate that Hong Kong being the most international city of China, being the most Chinese city of global. I think that is, we have a very strong foundation that we can cater for a lot of cultural differences, a lot of languages differences, the ecosystem differences. So on one end, when I turn here, I may be able to speak English here and turn this side and Mandarin, and then that part of movements is natural, become part of our natural DNA because of the evolution of our marketplace and the professionals who have been very successfully coming up in Hong Kong to help catering on all those needs. And again, that gap can be very, very wide, right? And that journey can be very difficult. And how you get good at certain things is a lot coming from lessons that you learn along that journey itself, and that's what makes you who you are today, right? So I think we are Hong Kong and in particular in that locations, I think help us to allow that to be in that position and therefore coming back a little bit more on the ESG front that we are a very strong advocate for ESG here in Hong Kong, apart from ourselves being a regulator also for listed issuers. We have multiple programs that we have, a lot of governance requirements, disclosure requirements that are falling into either climate and gender and all these other issues that we want to put in and advocate for our listed issuers. And on ourselves, right, from a natural commitment, we have also have signed a couple of those agreements to make sure that we remain on track with that as setting ourselves as an example. And also as a market operator, we promote a lot of ESG products also in Hong Kong and we want to draw on more the increasing trends on how the global adaptations of different ESG standards in Hong Kong. And I strongly believe that, you know, well the world can be diverse in this approach and this preference and slowly, slowly, what things likely going to happen is they are going to converge into an areas of an appetite and risk statements which is going to be leading to a next kind of big, you know, kind of wave of growth. Great, thank you very much. Mr. Michael Chen, DST Global obviously is a big name in the venture capital world with stellar records, with American tech companies, with Asian, especially Chinese tech companies. There are some great success stories going back as many as 20 years, even more. So in today's world full of geopolitical uncertainties, economic headwinds, how do you manage to detect the emerging trends and technologies that are shaping the future? How do you manage to still be on the front catching all of these opportunities compared, you know, with rising competition from every corner? What's the secret here? For the question. So as our moderator mentioned, we are a late-stage, perfectly firm, focused on technology and internet sectors. We have the fortune to have invested in most of the largest consumer internet companies in the world. In the next cycle, we think, you know, one thing we're spending a lot of time on is artificial intelligence. You probably have all heard a lot about artificial intelligence, but I would just offer my two cents on the subject. So I think a lot of the magic happening with AI comes from the ability for us to train very large models on very large data sets. This comes from both innovation in hardware and software. And as you can imagine in these data sets, there are a lot of human knowledge in there, a lot of critical thinking, and a lot of even some human social behaviors. So when model after learning all those, they have all those, so example, chat GPT was able to achieve 100 million monthly active user within two months. This compares to nine months for TikTok, 30 months for Instagram, and it's able to do that because it's so human-like. So we're surprised by that ability, and that's why it has grown so fast. So that's one thing on user uptake. But what people usually miss is just on the change on the supply side. As we interact with those chatbots using natural language, these innovations also lower the barrier to create programs. Everyone can become a programmer. Every company will become an IT company. So imagine that once that barrier is lower, there will be an explosion of new innovation happening there. So then you have both supply and demand. So that's why we are quite excited about this space. But that's that in order to make this work, I think it takes everyone's work on it. Because today, AIDs are models. They are probably like high school students or maybe college students at best who have learned a lot of books, read a lot of books. But they have not gotten a job. They have not get trained in the vertical space. They don't know what's right, what's wrong. So I think that's where people here can make a difference. All business leaders, political figures, regulators, scientists, engineers have to work together to shape a better future with AI. So that's what we think would be quite exciting. Thank you. I think this is the first panel I've moderated, I don't know how many months, that the word chat GPT didn't appear until the second half of the session. So now that you've brought it up, let's get on with it. AIGC obviously, among this landscape of funding gaps and funding shortages, AI, AIGC, chat GPT-like, large language models, these are getting tons and tons of money. But still, even within the very hot AI sector, there are certain sectors where startups are still getting starved for funding. Eagle-eyed investors, deep-pocketed investors may have their eyes dead set on a very tiny pocket of opportunity. You can ignore everything else. But what about advice for innovators that focus on other sub-sectors within AI? I mean, some of them may prove promising a couple of years in or later on. But if they do face a funding shortage right now, what kind of advice would you have for them? Yeah, maybe I will talk about an example outside of AI because that term has been talked about so much. So we invested in a company called Baibu, which is a textile B2B marketplace. What they do is they connect demand from apparel brands with textile companies. So think of, you know, similar to how Uber and DD connects user demand and drivers, right? So, and a lot because a lot of these apparel brands used to base near the regional area of China. So these weaving mills that they work with are also located in the regional areas, coastal areas. And as, you know, wage increases over time, these weaving mills they have to move inland, right? But in order for them to move inland, they need infrastructure first. They need warehouses. They need, like, electricity and the like, right? But investing in infrastructure is not necessarily a high return, very proposition for investors, to be honest. So what happened was that local government, provincial government, they invested in this infrastructure. And they invited our company as well as a lot of small business owners to join them over there. So essentially the government took care of infrastructure and get the job creation and get the future tax revenue. And then our company does the IT, does all the order, you know, orchestration, the coordination. And then this small business owner, they are responsible for the day-to-day operation of these weaving mills, right? So this is actually a pretty good example, in my opinion, for the public sector, public capital and the private capital to work together in a pure market-driven way. Great. Thank you. Somehow I still feel that this session doesn't have high enough of chat GPT or AI content. So before we open the floor to questions from the audience, I would love for every speaker to very quickly address the question of AI again or chat GPT. The question is basically how do you think AI is going to change your particular sector, especially in terms of helping with a funding gap, either as a target of investment or as a technology that could help improve your mechanisms, your processes? Takashima-san, is that something you may be interested in? AI, running a city, running a city for startups, how does AI help you? I see. That's a very difficult question. In Japan, the chat GPT and AI, there are lots of sectors which are trying to think about and starting to debate how to utilize those technologies, AI, chat GPT. So especially this is starting. So you mentioned about the word market driven. The chat GPT's answer doesn't become, I mean, it's not supposed to get some rational answer. But what I'm thinking is the difficulty or challenge of that we may not be able to get the rational answer with the chat GPT in terms of economical rationality, they might be not really matching, but we got some issue that the problem of the poverty and social issues. So these issues, challenges are not really investors driven or it's not going to match with the investors return. So what are we going to do with those things? That does not match with the market returns. So I cannot answer to your, I mean, I have not answered directly to your question, but that's the way I feel as an answer. Thank you. Thank you very much. I think that provokes further thinking for us on this. Ms. Leung? I'm quite convinced that for the investment community, AI would definitely be playing a very big part. So I think we, as investors, if you look at, so from the public equity point of view, we've always been looking at whether you are a value investor, whether you're a growth investor, whether you are quant. There are so many different permutation and combination. And I think AI would definitely have the ability to help us plow through the data and help us to make some sense, more sense out of it. And ultimately, we will still have a core team to be deciding as to which are the best options. But I think from that perspective, I'm quite confident that it will definitely play a very significant part. And then on the, on what do we invest in? Again, I think AI is really not really just about the tech sector. It's really going to cut across every single sector, almost every single sector that we invested. So I think as global investor, we have to kind of understand and think through what is the impact and not just about today. And that I think is the difficult part is to kind of think through what is the potential likely scenario for all the sectors that we invested. So I'm just using myself as an investor as an example. I'm not a good investor personally. So I remember I was laughing my head off, what, 15 years ago when my kids were telling me, oh, you know, you could go stay in somebody's house and pay for it. And I think you would have guessed which company I was talking about. And I said over my dead body, you know, never ever. Why would I stay in a stranger's house? That would be the most scary thing. And I'm totally proven wrong. So I think that it's kind of, it tells us that I think what is the potential impact of AI on all the sectors that we invested. We have to kind of think it through and, you know, be very out of the box and come up with various scenarios. And that's real. I don't think any of us here have all the answers. But it will be here. That's a very illuminating anecdote. Thanks a lot. Mr. Yu. That's a really great question. I'm always intrigued by how that is going to affect the trading market. And for a moment, it allowed me to just, you know, take myself out from my exchange role and I have to go back to my own career, has been in sales and trading. You know, the first phase of my career has been in active risk-taking positions where it's done more by human, okay? And then the next phase I saw the market evolving into is more rule-based, core models, and passive investment. So very deterministic, you can say, okay, well, this is doing better, this is doing less well, other generations, and you can measure all those. And now we are moving into this phase where, well, you think about the trading market and that would be more AI coming in. They can be coming into robotic trading in other areas. And people will mine different kind of data set themselves to try to give themselves a bit of an edge versus the others. And that will also affect the way the market behavior looking like in terms of stock selections and how you handle the tackling of the different liquidity segments of the markets with certain predictive models around liquidity profile changes across events, for example, and be more systematic and disciplined in executing those strategies in this version of robotic trading and AI trading. So I think a combination of those things will be adding on a lot more fund in the trading market itself, and also adding challenges, I think, to the associated regulatory regime that should be fit for future as well, so that this segments can be actually properly addressing the future needs. So that is, I think, from a trading market perspective that I think is, I very much look forward into how that is affecting the market. Great, thanks a lot. And Mr. Chen, we went through this already. Maybe you could tackle this from a different perspective, a different angle. Maybe on how AI could help you with making investment decisions or something like that. Yes, of course. So I think there's a lot of worry in the market that, or in the world that AI will replace jobs. I think, but we believe that AI is here to make our lives better fundamentally. Some jobs will be lost, but they will be replaced by new jobs. So I can give you an example how they will change with AI. So suppose you go to work. You need to study a subject. Instead of reading through a 100-page document, today you can just ask the model the three questions that you care about the most. Why should I read through 100 pages if I'm only interested in three questions? So you can quickly go through that. So that's a big change to education, to learning. And then you need to write an investment memo, for example. Make an investment decision or investment recommendation. With the learning you take from the model, you can use natural language to quickly produce a document. So that's already doable today. And lastly, because you finish your job so quickly, you have more time to play, more time to play. And you go home, you can use natural language to create a game. Today, if you know how to do roadblocks, you still need to drag and drop, and you need to know how to program, very basic programming, in order to create a game. But in the future, you can just use natural language to create a game. You can create a game on the spot, a game that only you would like, or you, you know, based on your preferences. So I think AI will fundamentally change the way we work and live. And I totally agree. AI will take over the moderator job. You don't need me to ask questions in the future. I think I've done my damage. Now let's turn forward our audience. Please do feel free. Any questions for our distinguished speakers? You're very fast. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. This has been great. My name is Claire Dilka. I'm a property developer here in China, but in this here out of interest, some very passionate angel investor. And a question really for each of you, particularly just given the funding gap that we're in and may be in for a while with traditional VC is, what do you think angel investors can do to be more active or to really build up that network to make sure that we're not missing that next wave of funding these great entrepreneurs during this time? Kind of for all of the panelists, but I'm quite curious to think how Michael, how you think about it and then also from a pension perspective. But really for everybody, I think this is across the board. If you have invested some good companies, we can talk. But I think depending on which stage you are in, I think for later stage investors, we tend to be more sort of called momentum driven or we have to look at where the market is. But if you're earlier stage, you have to do it day in, day out, year in, year out in a more sort of consistent way. And I think because of the funding environment, it would be difficult for early stage company if they don't have a very good product, for example. They don't have differentiation, right? Things that you could do in the last 10 years, subsidy driven growth or using a lot of online marketing to drive growth, those days are probably gone for now. So what you want is to find companies that are more product driven, more fundamental, right? More sort of have disruptive technology, right? So I think if you can find those, they would do well when the next, you know, when the market comes back. You know, I see more questions. You know, but I think for angel investing, that's not something that we do. But my point, I think for angel, I mean, the market is the market. If the market is soft, the market is soft. And that's reality. And I think in today's world, a lot of the, of the very early stage companies would, are very likely to have to tap on government grants incentives to start. And I think that's kind of the reality on the ground here because they're not, because the market as a whole, it's not as active. And that will probably last, I think, for the next one, two, three years or so. And you kind of have to find a way to survive and to live until the very next stage. Thanks. Hi. I have a question for you. So I am Canadian. We have a pretty substantial AI R&D site in Montreal. And we also do a lot of drug discovery work here in China. And I am a very firm believer that, you know, people misunderstand China nowadays because it's growing. It's more open than it used to be ever. Much more democratic than it used to be ever. But in the media, we see a lot of negativity about China. As a matter of fact, when we decided to open a site in Montreal, even though I'm Canadian, we almost got into the national security review, believe it or not, which was very strange. And it looks like people are very allergic to China because of the media pressure. So my question for you, you are running a large pension fund, $300 billion. So first, how do you deal with this media pressure, right? Because again, investing in China is guaranteed return long term, right? More than 7%. So if you invest conservatively, the economy grows at 5%, right? And I think that you need to invest in China. And I think that right now, media pressure and just political disarray is dissuading companies like, I mean, organizations like yours from investing in China. So I wonder how do you deal with that? And how do you deal with the negative sentiment? And also, are you planning to invest in China? Our public statement is that we are invested in China. So that's the first thing. And I think as investor, there are, and I think it's not specific to China. There are always sectors that, you know, you get a lot of pressure. You get a lot of negativity because there are cycles. So, you know, if I just to give you an example, so we invested in crypto. So we invested in a company called FTX, right? So that in itself. So I'm just using that as an example. So the fact that we invested in FTX and the truth is, it was 150 million US. And 150 million US out of a $300 billion fund. So for us, it's always about a total portfolio allocation and it's resuggested. But you are absolutely right. We got a lot of negative press for months, for months, and it appears as headline every day, every other day. And to use, and one of our Asian peer was also a pension fund. You know, did the same thing. They invested in FTX too. So they had the same experience as us. We both appeared in local papers. We both were called to local congress to explain why we made such investments, et cetera, et cetera. So all I'm saying is we will obviously take all of this into consideration. But a large part of what we do is total portfolio allocation. So we look at concentration. We look at diversification. We look at macroeconomy. We look at sector trends. So we combine all of that before we decide. And that is something that will remain how we invest. I hope that answers your question. Great. Thanks. We have time for maybe two more questions. Thank you. First of all, happy to see DST Global's name because truth to the topic of funding the gap, DST just led the round that we were an investor in. It was a company called Levit that was based in Korea just last week announced. So my name is John Hall. I'm the CEO of GS Ventures, which is a corporate venture arm of a GS Group, which is a Korean conglomerate that is a corporate of some of the carbon producing because we do over refinery and power generation. The question that I wanted to ask across the board is that what the trend we see, including ourselves, is that corporate conglomerates such as ourselves do is increasing corporate ventures as part of open innovation. And we are trying to have a more expansive role because we're trying to use startups as part of our transformation in terms of transforming our existing big companies. How does that in terms of perspective from both as a government or both as a pension fund or a VC investment? Because traditionally startups traditionally don't accept a lot of big corporate money and it was purely by financial investors. There's always a fine line of how big of a corporation plays and how active and how passive that is. I wanted to hear the perspective from financial institutions and also from the city perspective how they feel about that. Maybe I will start. I think we really welcome the participation from corporate ventures and companies in general because they are very different from financial investors in the sense that they can invest very long term. As long term as we are, we have a fiduciary duty to return capital to our limited partners. So that usually will not last more than five, seven years. But corporate, you can invest 10, 15, 20 years. So that really complements what financial investors can do. That's number one. Number two, because a lot of these startups or innovations happen in the same or adjacent area of the corporate operating. So they have a lot of insights and there are a lot of synergies between the smaller company and the larger company. And they can provide a lot of capital for that development. So we actually work quite actively with corporate investors. Takashima-san, corporate ventures, is that something you may be able to respond to? Yes, there is a lot of experts and you're talking about various and very, very high expertise and I don't have any, probably it's not proper for me to talk about the topic. But you are talking about investment. That's the main topic. And of course this summer doubles has been all realized in four years in the pandemic. Everything was stopped. And also ESG has been stopped. But in order to better the world and global arena and simply the ROI, I mean there are some things that we have to invest or that flow the fund in the area where we cannot see the ROI in short term. So I think this is the question that we should fundamentally ask about. And of course I know we don't have time to think about it but if we can, we would like to talk together with you. Thank you. Thank you very much. Maybe one more question from the audience. I wanted to thank the moderator for bringing up AI. I have a question. So I understand that, you know, robot advisory, robot trading is a big thing with the capital markets now. I'm more interested in how AI is going to play a role in more traditional evaluation of assets under management. So one of the things that really bothers me, sorry I didn't introduce myself, I'm Charlie, I'm a CEO of Urban Metry, we are a city data company. One of the things that worries me is how traditional like real estate, big infrastructure assets are valued and how AI is going to transform that and that's going to change the balance sheet in any way. So I wanted to hear some perspective from the panel if you see any sort of big disruption in that sense by AI towards the traditional ways of valuing real assets. I guess we're talking about private assets here. Yeah, I mean real assets precisely. So I mean, but because it's public, you know, it's a lot more transparent. So, you know, so if we're talking about private here, I think today, I think there are only that few methodology out there in terms of how you arrive at evaluation of a private market, right? And this is something that I think it's still very much work in progress as to see what are some of the additional validations that can be brought in to basically help with the actual valuation process. And I think that validation is probably a very key segment of that because today it's kind of, you make your best judgment based on representation from the company. You look at industry peers. You try to do all of that. But I think if you have sufficient AI data where you could really be having a lot more real life data coming from users, be it corporate or consumer, I think that will change the landscape with regards to validation significantly. I don't know whether how long that will take, but I think that will be the direction. Great, thanks a lot. I think our last woman standing deserves a round of applause. Thank you very much. Takashima-san, Ms. Leon, Mr. Yu, Mr. Chen for your very strategic thinking on the balances between short-term returns and long-term vision, long-term impact especially. And also your thoughts on AI, very much appreciated. And thanks a lot to our audience. Thank you.