They are the 2nd biggest after Swisslife (I think?), but the profitability is kind of a bad metric because they are required to both fund their pension fund (36 thousand employees) and invest into infrastructure from this money. They make something like 250mio CHF before their commitments to infra + pensions and only have 30 million left over.

There are now a lot of complaints/demands that they should be required to make more affordable housing with their portfolio.

That's what I heard yes, that SwissLife was the biggest. I kind of like the idea, but at the same time it creates a lot of conflicts of interest.

EU can't put up these trade barriers because they need to keep interest rates below 3% and this would definitely get them above that.

Not to be underestimated is the fact that the healthcare argument (I got like 5 flyers of a boomer in a wheelchair with a sad looking face with some nurse standing behind) is coming on the backs of boomers voting themselves the 13th AVS, which already pissed a lot of people off and is either going to lead to a pretty significant VAT rise or more direct taxes.

Once you have an index, you can offer all sorts of products around it.

-You can offer a return swap to an investor so he can "invest" in the index. You can alternatively build a whole list of derivatives and products around it and offer them to investors instead (think Itraxx,Vix,etc)

-A fund manager can use it as his benchmark and you get to see if he is good or not.

-If its a factor index you can now use it for risk management and return attribution.

The key thing today is that creating a new index that isn't a fad is very hard. There has also been a lot of consolidation of indices into few players (SP, MSCI, Bloomberg) as it's obviously an economies of scale business.

Real jewels aren't trying to grow into a shrinking TAM that's being whittled away by the expansion of terrestrial wireless farther into the not yet served, but rich enough to be served countryside in places where that demographic exists.

>Real jewels aren't trying to grow into a shrinking TAM

Why do you think TAM is shrinking? It's pretty clear, to me at least, that Starlink is basically one of a kind military contractor that has a freeway to both raise prices and expand offerings.

Civilian market sure, but it's pretty clear the milltech path is going to be a money printer for satellites and it looks like you have a clear moat (i.e European sattelite companies won't be able to bid on those contracts).

>What does a CEO actually do for 60 hours a week

In tech I dunno, in finance/trading the answer is pretty simple: European markets open at 9am, US closes at 10pm. There is your 12 hours with 1 hour lunch break.

>Where actually went all the productivity gains of the last decades?

Most productivity gains went into enterprise value because most of the productivity gains of the last decades are the result of capital investments.

As a salaried worker the only stable way to increase your wage is to upskill yourself (99% of companies don't do that anymore).

I had to deal with 1C once for a client who insisted on reconciling his (mid-9 figure) assets into it. The good part of it is that a competent 1C programmer (of which he had 2) can basically make it do anything, exactly like SAP, but the out of the box experience is terrible.

> With no massive loans on her books, she can profitably offer lower prices than PE can

Depends entirely on fixed vs variable costs. Rollups (which are very common now) work mainly because most "mom and pop" businesses can easily be "unlocked" by pooling the treasury, HR, accounting, commercial banking, supplier negotiations etc.

There are multiple reason:

1. If you assume that P.E is uncorrelated/has a low correlation to the stock market (subject of many years of diatribes), then you decrease volatility of your portfolio by adding it.

2. Because a pension fund has a lot of years until they need start to paying out, then it is natural for it to attempt to harvest the illiquidity risk premium.

3. The (edit: removed extra words) "high required rate of return problem" is really a defined benefit problem. A DC plan can (and probably should) just be in mostly straight indices unless it's so big it can negotiate a good fee with asset managers for other classes.