Public capital markets have been a key cornerstone of the investment landscape for centuries. They have fueled economic growth, value and jobs. From a societal perspective, public equity markets have given ordinary investors a pathway to invest their savings and to participate in the corporate growth story. Public equity markets currently stand at about 110 trillion USD, with the public bond markets at around $120 trillion in size. They offer investors access to liquidity, large pools of capital and a diversified shareholder base. In the past, raising large amounts of money meant going public. But over the last 10 to 15 years, stock market listings have dropped significantly as the sands between public and private asset markets have shifted. In today's world, many companies opt to stay private for longer than they would have previously. But why is this the case? There's just no doubt that when you look at the evolution of the regulatory landscape in public markets versus private markets in the last 10 or 15 years, it's massively favoured private. There's a regulatory arbitrage going on and free market private agents don't need a royal invite to shift resources, their creative resources to less transparent, less regulated, higher fee paying markets, and that's what's happened. So I do think that at least part of the story for that growth is this regulatory arbitrage. Prior to the global financial crisis, banks were the key source of funding from mortgage and consumer loans to providing capital to listed companies. As banks retreated in the aftermath of the economic emergency that paved an alternative path to source funding, and this coincided with an explosion of disruptive technology. What is new in the last 10 to 15 years is that has happened in a world that's more connected than it has ever been. And so we have this vintage in the last 10 or 15 years of entrepreneurs that have been able to attack massive problems, access billions of consumers, and as a consequence, build businesses very quickly that scale to billions of dollars in revenue. That did not happen in previous decades. That is an organic, fundamental thing that has shifted. So what we've seen is something of a positive, virtuous circle in that part, at least, of private equity markets where massive value is genuinely being created, and not just because of valuation expansion. There's obviously been some of that going on, but because of value creation and that's been reinvested and has created amazing ecosystems actually within private markets.  Between 2009 and 2020, private equity gave super returns of about 19%. Whether that's repeatable is open to debate, given that that took place during an extended period of low interest rates. But the prospects for those return levels still remains quite high in an era of rapid technological change. The question is, will there be increasing bifurcation between the public and private worlds, or is there an opportunity for investment managers to build a harmonized ecosystem between the two?  At the very start, at the inception of an idea, that kind of disruptive force often happens in a smaller, smaller environment with private initiative, the ability to make mistakes, the ability to try over again. That, to me is the kind of disruptive energy that you find anywhere. And sometimes it does come from public companies, but you know, you have a lot of private examples. But then you need to put muscle behind that initiative, you need to bring it to the next level. You need to make it commercially viable.  In terms of the industry at large, active management in public equities can take a leaf out of the private assets world in terms of adding value to companies, which is a durable moat around certain private assets businesses. They own it and they can't sell it tomorrow because it's not liquid. They have to roll up their sleeves, get involved and add value to those businesses. The opportunities set for the active management industry in public equities is to create long term partnerships with companies and add value to them, as opposed to uniquely playing the role of steward in that principal agent problem. This is where the lines between the public and private worlds are blurring and the opportunity for building that viable ecosystem is there for the taking.