Q: You have invested in some very diverse portfolios. What is the current geographic distribution of your investments?
A: Yes, we are investing in very diverse portfolios across the globe. Our investment is approximately 40 percent in the US, 40 percent in Asia and 20 percent in the rest of the world. Right now, the rest of the world for us means Europe, to be fair.
We think that Latin America and Africa are also emerging markets, but we still think it is three to five years before technology will really develop there. In my opinion, the Middle East is one of the most interesting markets today, which offers a lot of growth opportunities.
Q: Which areas are you investing in?
A: Talking of Europe specifically, we are very focused on financial services technology and insurance technology. We have invested in a digital health company in Ireland. We are still seeing some great technology coming up in Europe, but the continent itself is going into a kind of redefinition. So still there are a lot of questions about Europe and they have impacts on financial services technology.
My belief is that the UK will probably make a hard Brexit (and face difficulties due to this decision), as the fintech companies will look toward other places in Europe. 2016 was the first year when fintech companies in Germany out-raised those in the UK. I do not think that happened by chance. In fact, it will be a trend to see in the coming days. Germany is taking over the sole leadership position of the EU and fintech is a very important part of the financial services area. So we will continue to see Germany’s rise in the fintech segment. Amsterdam and Dublin are the other alternatives for growth in this industry.
Q: How important are partnerships when it comes to ensuring the sustainability of tech start-ups or new technologies?
A: You know, one of the reasons why we believe in these partnerships is that we have seen that tech start-ups do not have an influence to really impact the agenda of the governments. But very large companies do have that ability.
So, by partnering with large companies, we have been able to have more influence on government agendas. We are pro-immigration, we are pro-data protection, we are pro-free trade and free-markets. And unfortunately, the populist movements that are happening around the world are not a UK phenomenon or a US phenomenon. Look at a country such as the Philippines – and there are a lot of places in the world, even places like Taiwan – where you see more of this nationalistic agenda. They really have an impact on where technology is going.
Q: Has there been any positive disruption in the tech business last year, generally, across all of the major sectors?
A: I think there is a huge positive disruption in insurance tech and in the sector of PFM (personal financial management).
We have observed that everyone needs advice on how to better manage and invest their money, not just about where to keep their money, but about how they could actually use their money better.
Usually, banks are the common places where people keep their money, but they do not help the customers leverage and use their money better. Therefore, sectors such as PFM promise good avenues.
Q: How you see technology companies in China when compared to the US? Do you see any challenge for companies such as Google and Facebook?
A: I think they (US tech companies) have had tremendous challenges from fast-emerging countries such as China and India. These countries are increasingly thinking about how they can have more control over various technology platforms. However, there is a bit of a problem, because China and the US are working on two different models. The Chinese model has been to build players that can compete. But the problem is that, because they grew up only in China, they only know how to do this in China – no offense to Alibaba.
I mean, every time they try to go outside China, they have not been very successful. The main reason for this is because they spent a long time growing in China without going global, whereas US companies go global at a much faster pace.
Q: Do you feel the US has been spreading itself at a geopolitical level for many years, whereas China has been far more inward-looking?
A: I do not totally believe that China has been completely inward-looking. They are all over Africa, they are all over South East Asia, but they love to say that they are neutral.
Yes, it is true that the US has a much more official policy of exporting US values around the world, but I believe that the Chinese, as they are becoming a superpower, have been doing the same thing.
The difference is that, in China, the government has always been in the lead, whereas in the US, it has been the private sector that is at the forefront.
The US power is exported through US companies and increasingly through US tech companies, whereas for Chinese power, it has been exported in many ways through the Chinese government.
Q: Are you concerned with what we have been seeing in the past few years, which is a complete transformation of the fundamental value of the free, open Internet to a very different model that seems to be rigged sometimes?
A: You have actually touched on the issue that is the most important challenge that we are facing today. It is fundamentally about the Internet, which was created for the free exchange of ideas, data and information. However, due to a number of reasons and some really pressing issues, such as the consolidation of power and the idea of net neutrality, the idea of a free and open Internet is withering away or is being severely controlled.
The post A disrupted society appeared first on .