Good morning, ladies and gentlemen, and welcome to today's Annual General Meeting. My name is Guy Strapp, and I'm delighted to address you as Director and the Chair of Platinum Asset Management Limited. I would like to begin by acknowledging that I'm speaking to you today from the lands of the Gadigal people of the Eora Nation. I also acknowledge the traditional custodians of the various lands on which each of you joined the meeting from today. I hereby pay my respects to the elders, past, present, and emerging. It's now 10:00 A.M., Australian Eastern Daylight Time, the appointed time for holding the meeting, and I'm advised that the necessary quorum is present. The notice of meeting, dated 13 October 2023, was published on the ASX Market Announcements platform and sent to shareholders. So unless there are any objections, I will take the notice as read. Okay, there are no objections, so I declare the meeting open. This year, we are again holding our AGM as a hybrid meeting, which gives you, our shareholders, the opportunity to attend the meeting in person or virtually. We hope that in doing so, we have been able to encourage broader participation among our shareholders. Please allow me to now introduce your board of directors. Firstly, the executive directors, Andrew Clifford, Chief Executive Officer and Co-Chief Investment Officer. Elizabeth Norman, Director of Investor Services and Communications, and Andrew Stannard, Finance Director. And now my fellow non-executive directors, Anne Loveridge, Chair of the company's Audit, Risk, and Compliance Committee. Brigitte Smith, Chair of the company's Nomination and Remuneration Committee, and Stephen Menzies, together with Philip Moffitt. We also have present Rita Da Silva, the Ernst & Young partner in charge of auditing the consolidated group's financial statements. Before I get started, I'll hand over to our Company Secretary, Joanne Jefferies, to take you through some formalities. Good morning, everyone. As Guy's mentioned, I will take you through some of the procedural matters for today's meeting. However, before I do this, can you please ensure that your phones are switched to silent? Thank you. Now, in relation to voting, for those shareholders present in the room, you should have received a voting card to enable you to cast your votes. If you have not received your card, please see one of the Computershare representatives at the registration desk outside. For those shareholders who are joining us online today, in the top right corner, you should see four icons. You can toggle between these at any time during the meeting. When you select the vote icon at the top of your screen, you will see each of the resolutions that you can cast a vote on. To cast your vote, simply select one of the options. There is no need to hit a Submit or Enter button, as the vote is automatically recorded, and you will see a green tick beside each resolution you have voted on. You have the ability to change your vote right up until the time the meeting chair declares the voting is closed. In terms of voting today, all resolutions are being voted on by poll. Voting is open, and shareholders in the room and online can now cast their votes on resolutions included in the notice of meeting and can do so until the poll is closed. Voting will remain open during the meeting, and the chair will give you a warning when voting is about to close. In terms of asking questions, all shareholders present in the room, online, or by phone will have the opportunity to ask questions in respect of the items of business of the meeting. For those shareholders in the room, if you would like to ask a question, when we move to question time in relation to the relevant item of business, please raise your hand and a Platinum representative will bring a microphone over to you. For those attending online, you will need to select the Q&A icon at the top right. Select the topic your question relates to, and then type your question into the box at the bottom of the screen and select Send. You are able to submit questions on any item of business at any time during the meeting. However, these will only be answered when we get to the relevant item of business. If you are attending online and prefer to ask a question verbally, we have an audio facility which is available. To use this service, please follow the instructions provided on the online platform, which are detailed below the broadcast. You will be provided with a phone number and meeting ID number to dial on your phone. Once joined, you will sit in a waiting room. When you are ready to ask a question, please press star nine on your keypad, which indicates that you have a question. When prompted by the chair, the operator will unmute your line and ask you to introduce yourself to the meeting and then ask your question. Lastly, this meeting is being recorded, and the recording will be made available on Platinum's website in the following few days. I'll now hand back to chair to deliver his... Sorry, to Guy, to deliver his chair's address. Thanks. Thanks, Jo. Let me start by sharing my reflections on the past year. Global equity markets performed strongly over the last financial year, with the MSCI All Country World Net Index delivering 20.4% for the year, despite the initial dampening effect of rising interest rates, several bank failures, and weakness in the Chinese economy. The Platinum Trust Funds, for the most part, also delivered strong, absolute investment performance during this period, with the flagship Platinum International Fund returning 13.9%....The difference between the fund's performance and the index was largely due to the nuances of the index composition being heavily dominated by mega cap U.S. tech stocks, and further exacerbated by market weakness in China. The strongest performing funds during the period were the Platinum Global Fund Long Only, Platinum European Fund, and Platinum Global Fund, which all delivered returns above 20% for the year ended 30 June 2023. While our investment returns for the financial year have generally been very solid in absolute sense, in order to grow funds under management, and hence profits and shareholder returns, our performance outcomes need to be attractive to particular market segments, and for a large number of these, it's still relative performance that matters. Furthermore, as we have previously discussed, competition for investors' savings is fierce, with index tracking ETF strategies crowding the marketplace. More recently, with rising interest rates and term deposits offering returns between 4% and 5%, an additional source of competition for investors' funds has emerged. Unsurprisingly, the asset management sector is under pressure, and Platinum is not immune, with the trend of net outflows continuing during the period. While redemptions were dominated by some large institutional withdrawals, retail outflows, the predominant part of our business, remained steady. Against this backdrop, funds under management at 30th of June 2023 was AUD 17.3 billion, a decrease of 4.9% from the 30th of June 2022, closing FUM of AUD 18.2 billion. Average FUM for the year decreased by 15.4% to AUD 18.1 billion. Profit before tax was AUD 116 million, down 20.4% from the previous year in percentage terms, and earnings per share were AUD 0.14 per share, down by AUD 0.034. Total fee revenue decreased by 19.8% to AUD 202.7 million, and performance fees decreased to AUD 1.2 million. The main drivers of the decrease in profit and earnings per share were a decrease in fee revenues, reflecting changes in average funds under management, an increase in employee expenses, specifically in relation to the investment team, and partially offset by improved returns from seed investments. Underlying profit after tax, excluding gains and losses on seed investments, was down 35.3% to AUD 76.5 million. With respect to dividends, the board determined to pay a 2023 fully franked dividend of AUD 0.07 per share, taking total dividends for the 2023 financial year to AUD 0.14 per share, delivering a yield of 8% based on the closing share price on the 30th of June 2023 of AUD 1.74. Since the 30th of June 2023, the share price has declined further. On the 14th of September this year, we began the execution of the company's 10/12 limit share buyback program. As at the 14th of November 2023, a little over 4.5 million shares had been bought back. The board's primary objective in effecting the buyback is to provide liquidity to existing shareholders and accretion to continuing shareholders, rather than necessarily to support the price of the shares. It is abundantly clear to us that fund under management growth, and consequently growth in revenues, is largely dependent on Platinum being able to deliver consistently good, absolute, and relative investment returns for the flagship funds. This is what drives demand for Platinum's investment strategy and consequently, the share price. On the business development front, to meet the growing managed account segment of the market, we introduced new wholesale pricing for our international and Asia flagship funds, subject to minimum investment criteria. We also added new capability to our distribution team with the addition of an experienced SMA investment specialist to actively market our wholesale fee arrangement in the domestic market. We have been reviewing our broader distribution strategy in light of the changing financial advisor landscape. Pivotal to this review is our product and fee offering. As such, we will be rolling out our wholesale pricing for the remaining Platinum Trust Funds in the near future, with a lower wholesale fee to be made available for the Platinum Global Fund in the long-only version. With respect to remuneration, strong weighted average investment performance over one- and three-year periods to 31 March 2023, the metric driving the bonus pool under the plan result rules, resulted in increased STI short-term incentive rewards for our investment team members. We acknowledge that our shareholders experienced a noticeably reduced financial performance.... It is clear to the board that remuneration outcomes for our investment team, the engine room of our business, need to be better aligned with the business outcomes. Accordingly, a key focus of the board's remuneration work during the latter part of 2023 has been to initiate a review of the investment team's STI remuneration framework. Following this review, we are seeking to implement a number of changes, commencing 1 April 2024, which will include ensuring the bonus pool size is more heavily driven by revenue outcomes, placing more emphasis on three-year investment performance numbers over one-year numbers, and providing more transparency around metrics that drive allocation of pool to individuals. This year, we also continued to use shareholder and proxy advisor feedback as a key factor in our decision-making process for our executive key management personnel. The improvements made to our remuneration disclosures in our 2022 remuneration report, which received strong support from shareholders at last year's AGM, were also carried through and enhanced in this year's report. We also used stakeholder feedback to revise the KPIs for our executive KMP for the 2023-2024 performance year, making the following changes: greater alignment of KPIs with financial outcomes and introducing a risk gate opener and consequence management framework. Specifically, in respect of Andrew Stannard and Liz Norman's STI awards for financial year 2023, we used our discretion to reduce their balanced scorecard raw scores by between 69% and 71%. This resulted in STI awards of 55% of the maximum potential, with approximately 1/3 of the awards delivered as deferred equity, subject to a four-year service condition. For the last several years, Andrew Clifford has not received any short-term incentive awards, either in his role as CEO or co-CIO. This year, Andrew did not receive any STI under the CEO plan at his request. However, in his role as co-CIO, Andrew is eligible for STI awards under the rules of the investment team plans, as was the case for other members of the investment team. Under the terms of Andrew's employment contract, these awards must be delivered as deferred equity and subject to a four-year service condition. However, in order to seek better alignment with future shareholder outcomes, Andrew has asked to receive these awards as performance rights under the Platinum Partners Long- Term Incentive Plan. That's resolution three for later today, subject, of course, to shareholder approval. If approved, these awards will need to be retested against the TSR hurdles of the plan before they can vest, and they will also be subject to an eight-year service condition. This proposal shows a strong desire by Andrew to align his personal interests with the interests of shareholders, and in my view, demonstrates a high level of integrity on his part. I therefore strongly urge shareholders to vote in favor of resolution three. Our work to improve our remuneration outcomes across investment and non-investment teams will continue over coming years to ensure we retain valuable talent and total pay is fair, appropriate, and competitive. Resolutions 4- 6 are seeking shareholder approval for the granted performance rights to the Executive KMP under the Platinum Partners Long -Term Incentive Plan, in order to align executive remuneration with future shareholder value creation. We announced to the market on the 23rd of August 2023, that Andrew Clifford will be stepping aside as CEO in order to concentrate on portfolio management. I'm pleased to say that we are well progressed in our search for a new CEO, and hope to make an announcement on this matter very shortly. Stephen Menzies, who has been a long-serving member of the board, has elected not to stand for re-election this year and will be retiring at the close of today's meeting. His experience and insights have been extremely valuable to the board, and I thank Stephen for his significant contribution. Thank you, Stephen. We have received several questions prior to the meeting that can be summarized as follows: What is the board and management doing to improve investment performance, turnaround flows, and thereby increase profitability and the share price? Well, the first thing I'd say is that it's both the board and management are deeply aware of the challenges that the business is facing. Senior members of the team hold equity in the business, either directly or via deferred share awards, and like other shareholders, have been exposed to the downward share price movements. In addition, long-term incentive awards previously granted to staff have not met the TSR hurdles so far, which means that no awards have vested for those grants. As such, the team is strongly incentivized to work hard to address these challenges. As I've already mentioned, the board has taken other practical steps during financial year 2023, including the implementation of the share buyback, as well as providing oversight and support to the management team as they take action to address business development and operational efficiencies. We believe that the splitting of the CEO and CIO roles should allow for greater focus on business results and investment performance that should, over time, improve share price performance. The board is excited by the quality and experience of the CEO candidates we have seen, and optimistic, as I mentioned, that a high-quality hire is not too far away. Another common theme for question has been on expense control. Firstly, to provide some context around this, less than 130 staff delivered over AUD 200 million in revenue in 2023, with a profit margin of over 50%. The business has been active in controlling expenses. Despite significant inflationary pressures, non-people costs, which represent 1/3 of our total costs, are lower today than they were five years ago, thanks to a combination of cost control measures, most notably the competitive retendering of key supplier contracts. On the people side, we have sought to reduce cash incentives in favor of share-based awards and better link remuneration outcomes to the share price. Financial year 2023 cash STI was lower than five years ago, with much of the growth in share-based plan expenses being by way of non-cash accounting charges. We are also well advanced with a review of compensation plans to ensure that they better align with shareholder outcomes. To conclude, despite the challenges facing the firm, Platinum's brand as an Australian retail provider of active global equity market management remains strong. Our balance sheet also continues to be both robust and free of debt, which provides a measure of future flexibility. I thank you for your attention and now invite Andrew Clifford to provide an update on Platinum's general business. Good morning, everyone. What I'd like to do today is to just expand a little bit, go into a bit more detail on some of the items that Guy has been discussing. And as Guy mentioned, one of the most frequent questions we get from shareholders is: What are we doing to improve investment performance? So I'll focus on the International Fund as it's our-- and the associated strategies, as they're our main money earner. But the International Fund has over five years, returned 6.3% per annum versus 9.9% for the market. You may choose whatever adjective you like to describe that, but it's clearly not a good result. The three years for the fund is 9% versus 10.4%, and I would say that that's a result that, again, is not one to get particularly excited about, but it is one that is relatively, in fact, very close to the market outcome. So going to this question of what we're trying to do to improve performance, you would imagine that we would have a very detailed analytical effort going on internally to assess mistakes, where we've done well, where we haven't, and so forth. So on that front, I can share one example, one of many, that we did. So three years ago, clearly in those... There's clearly a big difference between those three-year numbers and five-year numbers, and one of the factors that held back our performance in that period, 4 and 5 years ago, was the short side of the portfolio. So Clay Smolinski, my Co-CIO, undertook an intensive, sort of study of our shorting performance going back to the very beginning. And there were some very clear lessons from that, that we've now put into place. So in the three years since that, in a market that is up over 30%, the short side of the portfolio has made good money for our clients. Other changes we've made in recent years is bringing in Clay as co-CIO, who I believe is the finest investor that I have ever worked with. Nik Dvornak, as a C o-Portfolio Manager on the International Fund, so bringing in additional perspectives on the portfolio. And then 18 months ago, Doug Isles, a long-term member of the team, both in his role as an Investment Analyst and then as, our, heading up our Investment Specialist team. Doug came into a new role as Head of Investments to essentially manage, the team and manage the investment process. That has been a great help to both Clay and myself. But I just want to go back to those performance numbers for a moment. And I said, I point out that the three-year number is close to market. And if we think about that three-year period and the things that went on, first of all, we had the fallout from the COVID pandemic, including what was a spectacular speculative bubble in growth stocks... We had an extraordinary lift off in inflation, the first we've seen in 40 years, and the biggest interest rate tightening cycle in, again, four or five decades. We've seen a property collapse in China, one of the biggest asset markets in the world. We've had bankruptcies of middle-tier U.S. banks and Credit Suisse. We also have watched a deteriorating relationship between the U.S. and China. We've had a war in Europe and now one in Israel. Over those three years, running the fund, which is a long, short global equity fund, we've averaged 70% net exposure to markets. And on face value, you can certainly see that we've been positioned in all the wrong places. We've been in China, we've had minimal exposure to the big growth stocks that have driven the market, particularly this year. And yet we've still kept pace with the market. All I would suggest to you is that there are some good things happening underneath the surface, and that the three-year number being so much better than the five-year number also suggests there's some improvements underway. Now, I don't want you to take it that I am satisfied with these results. I'm not, and nor is the team. And we continue to do work around our results and around portfolio construction that I believe will, like that short review, lead to better performance going forward. Clearly, with a new CEO coming on, there'll be a fresh set of independent eyes to look over what we do and, if necessary, make changes. But for what it's worth, I remain confident that our approach to investing remains relevant and that we can produce good outcomes for our clients. But there is more to the performance of Platinum than just investment performance. And again, to touch on some of the things that Guy was talking about, but again, along with that question about what are we doing to improve performance, investment performance, there is also what are we doing to improve investment inflows and profits? Well, there are a number of issues in the business that need to be resolved. The first one is our product offering. Our funds predominantly are global, long-short equity portfolios or regional, but global equities, and they're long-short. And they're long-short in a specific way in that we maintain significant market exposure. So in the lingo of the institutional world, we're long, short equity, long biased. Everything needs a tag. This is a product set that is deeply out of favor with investors. As the investing world has changed and we have professionalized the role of asset allocation, when a professional asset allocator wants to put X percent into global equities, they do not want their underlying manager changing that by changing their exposures to markets. Now, it may just be that it's deeply out of favor because it hasn't. And this is something that's affecting not us, but similar managers around the world. And it may be that it's just that this approach has not delivered great outcomes for some time, but it may be that this approach is simply out of favor for good. And we see that even today, where we have a great opportunity to bring money potentially into our Japan Fund. Japan is flavor of the day. Our returns there over the long term are outstanding, but in talking to potential clients, they don't want a long-short fund, which is what it is. So there's one very obvious... There's a number of issues around our product set that need to be looked at. I'm just discussing one, but there's one obvious thing for us to do, and that is to take out the long portfolio that we run within our long-short fund and make that a new offering. Clearly, we do already have a long-only fund here already. But the problem with that, again, for the professional asset allocator, is that it allows us to have significant cash holdings, which again, goes against what they desire. So we've long had an approach of telling clients what we think they need. Over recent years, we are trying to change our ways and listening to what they want and where we can help them. So that is a fundamental change that is starting to take place. The other issue in the business is pricing. People have long noted that our fees are high. This, I think, actually we need to be more clear about. For the traditional retail market where we operate, they're not particularly high, and they never have been. But once you move away from those markets to wholesale and institutional markets, clearly our fees are way out of the market. The problem that we face in the business today is that traditional retail market is changing rapidly. So here I'm talking about the financial advisor and their clients. The move underway in that market is for the financial advisor to outsource the management of their portfolio to consultants. This is the reference that, Guy made to the separately managed accounts or SMA market. And clearly, this is our traditional market, but we do not or have not had a pricing, set or a pricing position that works in that market. As discussed, that has now changed, and we've put that in place. We've put in, a business development head to now work on establishing, relationships, with those consultants who advise the SMAs. The third thing that needs to be resolved is distribution, or let's be more direct about what distribution really is, is sales. We do not have a traditional sales team in our domestic market. Indeed, our investment specialists, who I believe do an excellent job, provide primarily a client servicing function at which they're excellent. But the world has changed. It's become extraordinarily competitive in terms of the offerings that are there and available for a financial advisor or for the consultants, I should say, really. So even in just our area of global equities, they have the choice of, today, of hundreds of options. But we compete not just against them, we compete against private equity, venture capital, and a whole raft of products that are there, as well as, of course, passive products as well. We need to do a far better job or need to put in the resources to convince potential clients of the benefits of using us. And again, we've started to look to recruit in this area. So we have started to make some of these changes, but there is a lot of work to be done, and with a new CEO coming in, we'll have someone who is well qualified to lead this process. Thank you very much. Thank you, Andrew, for the update. Ladies and gentlemen, we now come to the items which comprise the formal business of the meeting, as outlined in the notice of meeting. Voting on all resolutions will be conducted by way of a poll. Each resolution set out in the notice of meeting is to be considered as an ordinary resolution, and as such, must be approved by a simple majority of votes cast by shareholders. I will address any questions or comments that have been received under the relevant item of business. I will take questions firstly from any shareholders who are attending in person, and then from shareholders joining us online, and finally from shareholders using the audio facility. Shareholder questions received prior to the meeting, which are relevant to the business of the meeting, will also be addressed under the relevant item of business. The first item of business is to consider and receive the consolidated group's financial report, directors' report, and auditors' report for the financial year ended 30 June 2023. There is no vote on this item. These reports are published in the 2023 annual report, which was lodged with the ASX on the 23rd of August of this year. The purpose of this item is to provide an opportunity for shareholders to ask questions and make comments about these reports. Shareholders will also have the opportunity to ask questions of our auditor, Ernst & Young, relevant to the conduct of the audit and the auditor's report. I'll now invite comments and questions on the financial statements and reports, as well as questions regarding the general business of Platinum, and start with questions from the room. Mark Rampina. Thank you. Just a quick question on ongoing dividend policy. How do you see it playing out from here, particularly as you are positioning buybacks in as well? Thanks, Mark. Well, the policy has remained fairly much unchanged over the decades. So we seek to pay out above 90% of earnings in the form of fully franked dividends, and we continue to do that. Good morning. Wayne Parris, my name. As always, thank you for your time today and throughout the year. The question, I might have this misunderstood, but we'll see how we go. When Andrew was talking, you were talking about the possibility, I think, of all of the funds having a long-only option. That's the question. So have I got that right? And if so, is it... What's the- Is there a plan to allow current holders to move their funds into such offerings, or how are you looking to have that work? So at the moment, really, the plan is to focus on the long-only offering, probably more on the you know, wholesale institutional area. Like, in retail We already have a long-only offering, which, for the moment, we haven't made the decision to make that a fully invested portfolio as yet. I think it's unlikely that we would make, you know, those changes across the board in the retail market. That's, that's not where the concern is. It's more in the institutional space. So it would be more if a client wanted to give us a substantial, you know, some AUD 75 million, AUD 100 million for a Japan-only op, like a long-only offering, we would We're certainly in the position, and we would do that. To create new collective investment vehicles, you need to be clear that you are gonna get up around that AUD 100 million mark is the thing, and at the moment, I don't particularly, you know, we would, it would be a case-by-case basis, but at the moment, there's no particular plan to change that. But again, new CEO might have different ideas. Okay. Thank you. Can we move to questions online? The first question online comes from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Regal Partners briefly became a substantial shareholder in Platinum and then disappeared. Their share price has plunged from a peak of AUD 17 in late 2019 to AUD 2 recently. Did we have any discussions with Regal? What is the size of their current holding, and how much did they lose buying a substantial stake in our business? So Regal did have, I think, through their firm's business, a substantial stake, which is now non-substantial, so they've sold down slightly on that position. But, I can't comment on any other discussions that we did or didn't have with Regal and nor on their share price movement over the last six years, five years. Next question, also from Stephen Mayne. Many of the best-known... Hang on. That just disappeared. Let me just take the next one. Next question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Again, relating to Regal. I'll just take the next one there, sorry. Despite our share price performance, we still have around 21,000 retail shareholders. How many of them have been or once were also clients of the firm? Well, we currently have about 19,000 direct retail clients, and we have a number of retail clients who sit under the platform. So we don't have visibility about the exact number because there's always some crossover across that. But the number's indicatively correct, yes. Okay. Another question from Stephen Mayne: Could you please comment on how relations are with our founder and largest shareholder, Kerr Neilson, since he retired from the board 12 months ago and then became a public critic, calling for M&A discussion and separation of the CEO and CIO role? Kerr remains a substantial shareholder of the business, and I have conversations with Kerr on a range of topics, sometimes frequently and sometimes less frequently. I think we have a good relationship. Okay. Another question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. For the first time, our market capitalization of AUD 695 million has recently fallen below our claimed net assets of AUD 752 million. Could the auditor please comment on which assets, if any, were examined for impairment leading into the full year results? Maybe I'll just- Yeah. -have a crack at it, if that's okay with you. The net assets of the firm are about AUD 329 million, as at the end of the financial year. So, I'm not sure what you're referring to there. Thank you. Question from Mr. Mariano and Ms. Jacqueline Casillo. In a business such as Platinum, where the culture is so intimately tied to the investment process and to the CIO, how does the board and the CIO think about tensions developing between CEO and CIO? Well, from my experience, there's always a healthy tension that's absolutely appropriate in the business between the chief exec and the board, for that matter, as well as between chief execs and the senior team, including CIO. So, I think that's the dynamic that's that is appropriate to play out, and there'll always be differing views across the business, and yes, they'll come to loggerheads from time to time. That's what you expect. Thank you. Final question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Many of the best-known names in equity fund management have exited in recent years, including Hamish Douglass, John Sevior, Kerr Neilson, and Rob Luciano. Does Andrew Clifford still have the fire in his belly to keep going when the whole sector seems to be in structural decline, with the rise of industry funds and ETFs, which have delivered long-term better performance than listed equity managers? And how does Andrew think he will go answering to an external CEO? Won't it be frustrating not to be in control? Thanks, Stephen. I love my job, and indeed, I... The thing about it is that when things are not traveling well and things aren't easy, I love it even more. Like, I don't understand. I mean, I, I'm not gonna comment on the, the, the people you've mentioned who had great careers and, and moved on, but, you know, you will often see managers, leaving and saying, "It's all too hard." I mean, that- this is when it's great. So I know is that... I don't know if anyone's ever said I had fire in my belly or not. I'm not quite the fire in the belly sort of person, but anyway... I think it's a great job, and it's a, it's a privilege to have it. I mean, I get to come in and talk about weird and wonderful things with the team. You know, the other day, we had a presentation from one of our tech analysts on the importance of the switching network in a server farm for AI applications, and it's very arcane and, you know, we didn't even get to the point of whether we should own the company that provides it, but that's, that conversation is to come. It's a great job, so. Sorry? External CEO. Well, I, you know, have been part of the process and have interviewed the CEOs, and I think that we had some great candidates. And look, I think that because of the changes that need to take place in the business, I mean, I think it's just a reality and I mean, I've, you know, I'm all about wanting this company to do well. So, I'm... Yes, there are probably, you know, as I said to the CEOs, like, whatever they come in and do, I obviously already disagree with it or I would have done it. So that's gonna be, you know, there are gonna be times where that's difficult, but I... That's just what we need to move forward, so I'll work with that. Thanks. No further questions. Guy - Mr. Chairman, I come to this late. I apologize for that. But, my name is Michael Hoy, and I have to say I'm totally dismayed at the way my investment in this company has been virtually, almost absolutely decimated over the years. Now, I am further dismayed at what seems to be a public spat with the biggest shareholder, and it being dismissed as you regularly have conversations with him doesn't seem to cut it in my book. I'd like to know what is being constructively done to repair that relationship and to publicly ensure that it's seen as being repaired, and that he's back on side with the future planning of what this company's hoping to do in the way of a turnaround. Sure. So I think you'd be referring to an article in the Financial Review from February? Yes, not just that. I'm aware. Confidence flow as a result. Okay. So I presented to the analysts. I think it was about the week of our half-year results, and I attended the analyst briefing at that time, and yes, there had been some comments flowing backwards and forwards in the press. It wasn't our place to publish a counter-debate. I mean, the Australian Financial Review is not the place to hold a boxing match. We've, as I said, had frequent conversations with Kerr and with members of the board over that period. But you know, it's up to Kerr to determine how he wants to view his stake in the business and how he views the business as a whole. I can't answer on his behalf what he thinks of us as a firm. He still holds 20% of his shares, and he's free to do with those shares what he chooses fit. I'd prefer us not to have public spats. Well, I agree with that. At the moment, it looks like an enormous overhang in this company. Great uncertainty as to what his plans are, and he's got the stature, both in the market and as a shareholder, for the chairman to be having more than just a regular chat with him. I'd like the confidence in something in the way of confidence and belief that it's been resolved, whatever his differences are. Well, from my point of view, again, I can't speak on behalf of Kerr. From my point of view, the conversations I've had with him have been appropriately balanced. He has not said to me that he's going to dump his shares, but of course, he has the right to buy and sell shares in the firm just like anyone else in the room. And I'm happy to ask Kerr if he would like to make any form of comment. I didn't realize he's in the room. I'd have asked him myself. There's no spat that I'm aware of. There's differences of points of view, which is inevitable, I believe. I do not feel that the remuneration structure is appropriate to achieve the ends we need, but in every other respect, I'm fully supportive of the changes that are taking place, and the very diligent search that has been undertaken. I'm very hopeful the new CEO can introduce changes that allow the company to really achieve much stronger investment performance. I think several things are well in place for that to keep building. I think we've already seen some improvement, but I think that will expedite... A new CEO will expedite that improvement. There's no fundamental agreement. I do recall that the work of a journalist is to stir things up... That's not a mystery to anyone. The words that were chosen to be reported by the journalists were not my words. I think I need to say no more than that. Thanks, Guy. Do we have audio questions? Okay, thank you. Thank you for those questions. First resolution for voting on concerns my own re-election. So I will hand over to Brigitte Smith, Chair of the Nomination Committee, to handle this resolution. Thank you, Brigitte. Thank you, Guy, and it's good to give his voice a rest. Okay, the first resolution that will require a shareholder vote is the re-election of Guy Strapp as a non-executive director. The company's constitution provides that a director may not hold office for a continuous period in excess of three years or past the third annual general meeting following the director's appointment, whichever is longer, without submitting for re-election. Guy last stood for re-election at the 2020 AGM. He's therefore retiring from office in accordance with the company's constitution and offers himself for re-election. The board is confident that Guy has the capacity, the requisite skills, experience, and independence to discharge his obligations to Platinum, and I now call upon Guy to provide a statement in support of his re-election. Excuse me, re-election. So, not much of a break for your voice. That's right. Thank you, Brigitte. You stay there or- That's all right. As we've been talking, look, there is still much work to be done. There is a lot in train, and I think that over the three years as my tenure as Chair of the Board, we have put a lot of steps in place. There's no silver bullet, and it takes time to reform a firm like this. But, you know, these are the drivers that will see us improve investment performance. Andrew referred to sharpening our distribution, some further product refinements, whether it be long only, other potential investment capabilities to diversify the base, appropriate cost management, nurturing our talent, getting the right alignment around compensation structures, with outcomes. And those sorts of topics have been the things that I've focused on over the last 35 years in my career, as I'd call them, the keys to success in any firm. And it's where my experience has been grounded over those 35 years. And I think, therefore, I bring an appropriate set of skills to the challenges in front of us. I think I agree that Platinum has a strong brand, but we need to secure that. We have a healthy balance sheet, and that gives us some opportunity for the future. There is upside opportunity. I'm looking forward to working with the new chief exec and extracting maximum value for our clients and our shareholders. Thank you. Thank you, Guy. So the screen up there shows the proxies received for and against this resolution. In regard to open proxies given to me, I will be voting in favor of this resolution. So I'll now take any questions or comments on the re-election of Guy Strapp, and I'll start with questions in the room. No? Okay, I'll now move to questions online. Doug? I have a question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Regal recently bought Chris Mackay's 6.6% stake in Magellan. Were we given an opportunity to buy this stake, or did we read about the transaction in the newspaper? As chairman of this company, how well connected is Mr. Strapp to the key industry players as consolidation plays out? I can't comment on Chris's shareholding, but I have not just conversations. I meet face-to-face with a number of the key players, CEOs, CIOs, from a number of our peers in the Australian marketplace. So we don't have a formal club, but we do get together and talk about common issues. That's all. Thank you. Okay, great. Any telephone questions? No. I'm now gonna hand back to Guy for the remainder of the meeting as the chair. Sorry about your voice. Thanks, Brigitte. The next resolution is the adoption of the remuneration report for the year ended 30 June 2023. The 2023 remuneration report forms part of the company's annual report and provides disclosures relating to executive and non-executive director remuneration. While it should be noted, the resolution is advisory only and non-binding, the directors take shareholder input on this matter very seriously. In accordance with the Corporations Act, the company will disregard any votes cast by key management personnel whose remuneration details were included in the company's 2023 remuneration report or by any closely related parties or proxy holders of any such persons. I note that the institutional proxy advisors, ACSI, CGI, Glass Lewis, and Ownership Matters, have all recommended a vote for the adoption of the remuneration report. The board also recommends shareholders vote for the adoption of the remuneration report. The screen shows the proxies received for and against this resolution. In regards to open proxies given to me, I'll be voting in favor of this resolution. I'll now invite questions on resolution two, starting with questions in the room. There's no questions. We'll move to online questions. We have a question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. "Thank you for disclosing the proxy. Thank you for disclosing the proxy results to the ASX with the formal addresses. It looks like a narrow strike, with 29% against the Rem report, but the turnout is low. Please, can you re-clarify which proxy advisors recommended against any of today's items? Why there was a 15% vote against the chairman's re-election, and whether you know if founder, Kerr Neilson, has voted or intends to vote in the room today? Okay, so the proxy advisor was ISS. We have conversations with all the proxy advisors and major shareholders. They determined, unfortunately, and I think there was some confusion between the compensation paid to Andrew Clifford as CEO, and that component which relates to his role as co-CIO, and I think it was the co-mingling of that that led them to believe that the remuneration committee was acting inappropriately by making a recommendation that Andrew, in his role as CEO, should have been given a large payment. As we discussed earlier, Andrew was entitled to a payment under the investment team plan. That was to be taken all in deferred rights. There is a resolution forthcoming that says that he not only wants to do that, but he wants to roll it into the Partners Plan, which means it's an eight-year deferral, effectively, and retested against TSRs. So if anything, we've got gone from what was absolutely appropriate under the plan rules, et cetera, to something that's even more conservative and has greater alignment with shareholder outcomes. So it's unfortunate that in that particular instance, the proxy advisor recommended a no vote. And I was bracketed up with that because I'm a member of the Nomination and Remuneration Committee, and have served on that committee for three years. They deemed me to be guilty as well of making an inappropriate compensation recommendation to our chief exec, which I think we have explained and articulated is actually not the case. So yes, on those votes, unless the room decides differently, it will be a narrow strike, and we'll just have to work better over the next 12 months in communicating those outcomes. Obviously, a large chunk of that will go away because we'll have a separate CEO and a separate CIO by the time of the next AGM, but we'll need to make sure that we, we clarify any confusion there. All the other proxy advisors. All the other proxy advisors voted in favor. So the question was actually- Yeah. -all? Yeah. Yes, so all proxy advisors voted in favor of all other resolutions, including this one. And the vote against- ISS voted in favor of all resolutions except my re-election and the remuneration report. Anything about Kerr's intention that you're aware of? That's the only question on this topic. Okay. No telephone? No telephone. Sorry. Yes. We have 400 million shares, and we voted less than 200 million. I'm not very good at math, but less than half the shares have been voted. Yes. Is there a reason why there'd be such a big absentee? It's just vote of choice. People don't care? Shareholder choice. Yeah. I mean, how many... We had more than 400 shares. 500 and- Yeah. 580. It's more like about 580 million. And the reason is we have quite a large retail shareholder base, who probably have individually relatively small amounts, and therefore, probably don't really want to be bothered to vote. But in aggregate, they all add up to quite a lot. So the institutions tend to vote, but the institutions aren't a very huge amount of our register. They're about 1/3. I'm just saying that less than half the shares have been voted. Correct. Correct. It's always that way. This is not unusual versus other years. That's just the way it seems to be with our register. Just wondering how huge those single figures were? Yes. Thank you. So, there's no other questions on this? No other questions on this one. Okay. So we turn to resolution three. This relates to the grant of performance rights under the Platinum Partners Long -Term Incentive Plan to Andrew Clifford, in place. This is one I had previously explained, in place of his STI, his short-term incentive award, that he would otherwise have been entitled to take as deferred rights. This proposal shows a strong desire by Andrew to align his personal interests with the interests of shareholders and demonstrates a high level of integrity on his part. If this resolution is not passed by shareholders, Andrew will receive his STI awards as deferred rights under the deferred remuneration plan, in accordance with the terms of his employment. There's a detailed explanation of the difference between deferred rights and performance rights in the explanatory notes within the notice of the meeting. I note the key institutional proxy advisors, as we have just discussed, have all recommended voting for this resolution, and the board, with the exception of Andrew Clifford, who is abstaining, recommends shareholders vote for resolution three. The screen shows the proxies received for and against this resolution. In regards to open proxies given to me, I will be voting in favor of this resolution. I'll invite questions on this resolution starting from the room. If not, we take any online questions? We have one online question from Mr. Stephen Mayne. Could Andrew comment as to whether he has fielded any recent offers for his 5% stake in the company? And why he needs ongoing LTI and STI grants to stay motivated when he already owns 33 million shares in the business. Well, for the first part, no. I own exactly the same number of shares today as I did on the first day of our listing. So I've no intention of selling them. I'm not particularly motivated by money, so I don't need any of that to keep me there, even nor does my 6% or 5.6% of the company keep me motivated. My motivations come from elsewhere, and it's primarily about ensuring the long-term success of this company. Having said that, what I would say on the topic of re-remuneration, for the team, is that in these businesses, it's an incredibly important part of the structure of the business. And, you know, we've already acknowledged that what we have in place is not working, and it needs to change. But my view, very clearly, is that if Platinum is to succeed from here, and we are to build it into something, bigger and better than we are today, it is critical that the team participate. The team who bring that into life are well rewarded for it. Because the very simple thing that will happen is if they're not rewarded, those people will get up and walk, and they'll go and do it themselves. So... But, don't worry, Stephen, my motivation comes from another place. Any telephone? No, no telephone questions. Okay, thanks. Thank you for those questions. Resolutions four, five, and six relate to the grant of performance rights under the Platinum Partners' Long Term Incentive Plan to each of the executive directors, Andrew Clifford, Elizabeth Norman, and Andrew Stannard. Separate resolutions will be put up for each grant. There's a detailed explanation of the performance rights in the explanatory notes within the notice of meeting. However, in summary, each grant of performance rights is divided into four equal tranches and tested annually over four years. A tranche will only vest if the relevant total shareholder return performance hurdle is achieved. If the performance hurdle for a tranche is not achieved, that tranche will lapse. Exercise of the performance rights is also conditional on continuous service of eight years, subject to good leaver provisions. The performance rights are granted as a long-term incentive to retain key talent and to align our executive directors' remuneration with long-term value creation for shareholders. I know that the key institutional advisors, as we have discussed, have all recommended voting for these resolutions. So to each one in turn. Resolution four is in respect of the grant of performance rights to Andrew Clifford, Platinum's Managing Director and Chief Executive Officer. The board, with the exception of Andrew Clifford, who has abstained, recommends shareholders vote for resolution four. The screen shows the proxies received for and against this resolution. In regard to open proxies given to me, I will be voting in favor of this resolution. I'll now invite questions on this resolution, starting in the room. If not in the room, we move online. There are no questions online or on the phone. Or on the phone? Okay, thank you for those. Resolution five in respect to the grant of performance rights to Elizabeth Norman, Platinum's Director of Investor Services and Communications. The board, with the exception of Liz, who has abstained, recommends shareholders vote for resolution five. Screen shows the proxies received for and against this resolution. In regards to open proxies given to me, I'll be voting in favor of this resolution. I'll now invite questions on the resolution starting in the room... Or online or phone. There are no questions online or on the phone. Okay, thank you. Resolution six is in respect of the grant of performance rights to Andrew Stannard, Platinum's finance director. The board, with the exception of Andrew, who's abstained, recommends shareholders vote for resolution six. The screen shows the proxies received for and against this resolution. In regard to open proxies given to me, I'll be voting in favor of this resolution. I'll now invite questions on this resolution, starting in the room... or online. There are no questions online or on the phone. Okay, thank you for that... So ladies and gentlemen, that concludes the formal business of the meeting. A Computershare representative will now collect the voting cards from the floor. For those voting via the online platform, voting will remain open for a further two minutes, following which voting will close. Please ensure that you have cast your votes on all resolutions. The results of the poll will be announced to the ASX later today and published on Platinum's website. Andrew Clifford will shortly provide his informal address on investment performance and global markets more generally. He'll also take any questions that you may have. If you are joining virtually, you'll be able to ask questions of Andrew through the online platform and telephone line, which will remain open. Please ensure that you stay online to hear from Andrew. I now declare the meeting closed. Over to you, Andrew. Thanks. So I'll just make some brief comments on markets and opportunities, and then happy to take your questions on whatever topics you'd like to discuss. You know, if you look at the commentary in the press on markets, there's still a huge focus on where interest rates are going and inflation. And I think like all discussions about macro, there's two issues with them. They don't help very much help investors, particularly. But I think this one really misses the point. And the point at the moment, I think, is simply where... Not that, you know, how much further rates are gonna go up, they're unlikely to go up a lot more. Inflation is clearly softening. Short of some change in government policies, that's probably, you know, the direction for the year or two or three ahead. The question is: How much can interest rates come down? And I think, where I would probably come down on that is, I think it's gonna be very hard for rates to come down a great deal without particularly reigniting those inflationary pressures. So while we might get a rate cut or two in the years ahead, I doubt the 10-year interest rates, which are the most important one for the stock market, are gonna change a great deal. And I think that is the new environment we're in. I may or may not be right on that. For what it's worth, what does this mean? I think that we have very clear historical relationships between interest rates and the economy and interest rates and the stock market. It's simply this: with a long delay, the tightening of monetary policy, the increases of interest rates, create recessions. In Europe, that's already apparent, and you can't miss it. In the U.S., that's far from clear, but we will need a very big change from history. So I'd simply expect that it's highly likely, not only that we get a recession in the U.S., in the year or two ahead, that it'll be a very deep one. And the relationship between that and the stock market is also a simple one. That impacts earnings and ultimately stock prices. And in fact, underneath the surface, we can already see this happening. It's a daily occurrence for companies to be coming out either with disappointing results or downgrading their outlook for next year. We're seeing many stocks fall very heavily while the indices are held up by the big cap names. Again, very apparent in both the U.S. and Europe. I would expect very simply, that we will get a broad bear market in the U.S. and developed markets generally. It's interesting, while this is going on, Europe has also been very strong. But that may not occur, and it's certainly not the basis on which we make investment decisions. What we are doing is looking for where the opportunities are in the markets here and now. And so what I would point out is that there are many sectors or individual companies that are already experiencing their own recession. So for example, in the U.S. housing market, mortgage applications, which are a function of people buying homes, but also refinancing their mortgages, are down around 95%. This is an industry that's in an extraordinary recession. There are companies whose earnings and revenues are a function of that. One, TransUnion, which is a credit bureau. So whenever you as a consumer make an application for credit, whether that's a mortgage, a car loan, a credit card, a personal loan, the lenders access TransUnion's data to make a credit decision on that application. So clearly, one part of their business is in steep decline, and the others are in clear sight of a fall, being the credit cards and car loans. But TransUnion, as a business, has changed dramatically. Those parts of the business account are already... mortgages are a very small percentage of their revenues, and that general typical finance part of the business is less than 30%. Their data is being used for more and more applications. So, for example, insurance underwriters will use it to make pricing decisions when you apply for insurance. For fraud detection, when you get on your phone and buy something, and the credit card company wants to know whether it's you or not, they potentially can use TransUnion's data to make that decision. When an e-commerce company wants to deliver up a recommended item to you for purchase, they can also use this data. Now, all of these things can deteriorate further in a recession, but TransUnion was one of the much-loved companies of the recent bull market. It was seen as a high-quality stock that had many years of growth ahead of it. And of course, what's happened with interest rates has been a big pause in the growth of that business. Having traded at 35x earnings and higher, in the recent past, today on those reset earnings expectations, you can buy it on about 15 x. That may not be the end of the bear market in that stock, but we have an initial position, and this, I think, is a great opportunity, whatever happens next. Or we could look at Allfunds, a European company, and what Allfunds does is provide a network between fund managers and their clients. So in a sense, it plays the role of what the wrap accounts or the fund platforms do in Australia, except it's much more akin to Visa or MasterCard, where it really provides a network to exchange data. So it allows straight-through processing of fund applications and redemptions and all the sort of ancillary services that go with that, like tax reporting and so on. And it does this for free for the financial planner and their client, and for 3 basis points-5 basis points cost to the fund manager. If you know anything about what's charged for that service in this country, you'll know that's an extraordinary bargain. But Allfunds is a business. Obviously, it's the revenues are a function of the amount of assets that are under its administration as such. And clearly, we've had weak stock markets, but we've had an extraordinary bear market in bonds, which account for 60% of the assets. Additionally, fund flows, as with higher interest rates, flows into funds of all types have dried up. So the growth of this company has again slowed dramatically, but it is undoubtedly a company that will take market share for a long period of time and will grow again once we see the end of the fall in bond prices, assuming the stock market falls are not too dramatic. But again, we're buying a very high quality business on a mid-teen multiple. So they're two examples of companies that have already had their recessions. We can go elsewhere. Memory chips for computers and your phone and servers and the like. This is a, an industry that has already seen a huge collapse in demand and prices for memory chips post all the excitement in COVID, when we're all buying new phones and laptops, and there was huge investment going in by the very large e-commerce players and the like. So we've had a collapse here, massive oversupply. These are companies that have been in and out of the portfolio for a long time, but companies like Micron and Samsung and SK Hynix, who are both already seeing a strong recovery in their share prices well ahead of the bottoming of that cycle. But there's beyond one place where there is obviously already a recession, at least of sorts, underway, and that's China. And of course, I, I'm not... The stories about the dire situation in the property market in China are accurate, but what is not reported is how the rest of the economy is going, or not widely reported. So, for example, we see car sales at all-time highs. We see e-commerce volumes and advertising up 20% on a year ago. And even though last year was a particularly miserable year in China, remember, the volumes never actually fell to any great extent. So we have companies like ZTO Express. It's a business of parcel delivery, like FedEx or UPS in the U.S. They will deliver 30 billion parcels this year, up from 6 billion 5 years ago. UPS and FedEx combined globally will do around 12 billion. The companies, one of the, the reasons this was an opportunity, it was in a very fiercely competitive area where pricing competition has receded, and they are seeing a huge increase in their margins. They also have been continually taking market share as the low-cost provider. So on what we expect to be around 24% volume growth for them, we think their operating earnings can grow at the rate of around 50%, and you can buy this stock for 15x earnings. There's another set of opportunities out there in the market today, and that's where the economy probably doesn't matter that much. In Japan, which we've spoken about a lot in recent times, there's significant corporate reform going on, mainly around how they are better using their balance sheets, returns of excess cash and securities, sell downs of property that are held excess to use, and focusing the companies on profitable business units. So we have a company like Toyo Seikan, a maker of aluminum cans, a pretty simple business. When we were buying it originally, over a year ago, it traded at a discount to its cash and securities and real estate holdings. It's been a good performer, but their recent announcement, or a few months ago, they announced that they would be returning... would be selling off excess, securities and real estate, refining their business portfolio and stock buybacks and dividends, where at that point would account over the next five years for more than half of their market capitalization. People may question the story around Japan, but the, this reform has hit the Toyota Group. We've seen that in their own pronouncements and clear actions by Aisin, one of their, their group companies. And again, Toyota is one of these extraordinary companies who have played the whole EV cycle to perfection and are now, having refused to go early, are now in a great position with their hybrid lineup and what they're promising to be, solid state batteries in their vehicles by 2028. Or another, where the economy doesn't really matter is UBS. It's an investment bank. Well, it's really a wealth manager, I should say. Not probably the most inspiring of businesses, but they were recently gifted some tens of billions of dollars when they were asked to take over Credit Suisse in its bankruptcy. And why I say tens of billions of dollars is I haven't finished counting quite how many it is as yet. Finally, there are still great opportunities on the short side. There are many of the companies that were part of the speculative boom of 2021. Many of these businesses, particularly around, or as an example, I should say, around the area of green hydrogen, they clearly have business models that... Well, they do not have a business model, and yet many of these companies still hold market capitalizations of billions of dollars while they lose vast sums of cash each quarter and are in the process of running out of money. There are, of course, a lot of very expensive stocks as well, still in some of the favored areas, such as software. So what I would say to you is there are extraordinary opportunities in markets. They're here right now, and that's where we'll be focusing our time. Thank you. So very happy to take any questions. Thank you for that, Andrew. What's the current net long position of the International Fund? Okay, so the long position is about 80%, and the shorts currently take that down to a net position of around 60%. Make those rough numbers because they do change day to day. So really, I understand the... Well, the logic of your stock picking, and I think that makes a lot of sense. The question is, when you're only 60% long, you're really making a big bet on macro, which is the belief that we will have better opportunities in the future than we have them today. And yet it would seem you're finding bets you can make today that are going to return you potentially double-digit returns. It seems like if you're wrong on the macro, then it's going to, yet again, produce results that unfortunately, Yeah. are not matching the index, and hence, of course, that affects the future outlook of the company. Yes, I understand your point. What I've found alongside of the portfolio is this, is that what we're seeing every day are new companies coming out with poor results and those downgrades, and we're getting spectacular moves, 20% and 30% moves in very large stocks. So even a case like a company like TransUnion, which we bought it, I think originally around AUD 65, it ran up to AUD 85. We sold some of it, came back to AUD 65. It had the obvious bad result that was coming, dropped to AUD 45. We've bought some more. It's back up to AUD 50 or over AUD 50. So-... I think strategically, like, yes, I could rush out and spend every single dollar on those companies that we're buying, but I think, you know, I mean, I think tactically, you just want to bide your time a little bit here when, you know, there are new things coming out every day. And, you know, similarly, on the short side, you know, the changes we've made is we have much tighter controls around, you know, position sizing and stop losses and the like. So I don't know. It's about each position making their money in its own good time. I don't particularly believe. There are days where the market goes up, and we do better, and days when the market goes down, and we don't do better. Just the net, the portfolio is so different to what that index looks like that you're not particularly getting that outcome. I understand, but over time, if your approach is right, and I. It's so hard to know the future of the macro that I can't say you're wrong, and you can't, you know, no one can prove another person's position on macro is wrong. You would clearly be outperforming the index, and the problem is that it's very hard to do that. Yep, but it's just, it's not a static position, so we do change positions and, you know, not that long ago, we were much closer to 80% or mid-70s anyway. So we're not, we're not static. And as I said, I talk about macro at the start because that's what everyone wants to talk about. But in nowhere in the portfolio is there particularly a bet that I'm betting on a U.S. recession or a European recession. All I'm saying is that's sort of my base case, and I know fully well it may be different to that. And that might mean that if I see interest rates falling, then that might be the time to really step up the position in TransUnion, for example. But it's not- I hear you. I'd just say 60% long tells me you think there's some really good opportunities coming in the future that you can't see today, but I really should stop yakking and let someone else have a say. Thank you, Andrew. Just a couple of notes I've made while you've been talking. Just, you talked about the recession in China, so I guess the obvious question to ask there in terms of investment, how exposed or not are the funds to the Chinese property downturn? A separate question, in terms of some of the business changes that you've been talking to, do you see artificial intelligence coming into some of the investment processes that you've that people are using? And if so, can you talk to that? Sure. The last question is, in terms of the overall changes that you've talked about for the business, what's the timeframe for implementing those, and how will you know that they've worked? Right. So on China, so I might get you to remind me the questions. So we are actually directly exposed to the Chinese property market in both the International Fund and the Asia Fund. So what's interesting there is that, you know, we actually, that at the core of the problem in the property market is the government broke people's confidence by trying to put in price caps. People stopped buying property, hugely leveraged sector. The vast industry, the vast part of it has actually, you know, obviously got, financial problems. As a result, they stopped building, further driving people away from wanting to buy property. You know, property starts or property sales at the moment are extraordinarily low levels, unsustainably low levels. There are, however, a very small number of developers who actually had strong balance sheets, who have continued to build and, deliver, and clearly, they're garnering a large part of the sales that are there. So, you know, around a company like China Resources Land, who look, right off the top of my head, I'm just gonna say sales to them are down more like 20% than 50% or 60%. But also within that business is a huge shopping mall, business, sort of akin to Westfield, which is a very high-quality earnings stream. So you are, as you'd imagine, the fear around property, some of these assets are incredibly cheap, and, I don't know where property sales bounce back to, but the country actually still needs, a build-out of its modern housing stock. There'll be cities where that's we've overbuilt, there'll be developments that'll never be moved into, but at the core of it, there's still a lot of housing that needs to be built. So, that's the direct exposure, but you'd have to say other exposures, like our financial stocks in China, where we own, companies like Ping An Bank or China Merchants Bank, are potentially exposed, although at the moment, they have very minimal exposure. And, you know, they're just very well-run financial companies, but again, people are concerned about the role they might be forced to play, in, you know, making things good. So I, I have forgotten your second question? Artificial intelligence in the context of making investment decisions for the investment team. Yeah. So look, we're very focused on AI. What are the opportunities? You know, it's a classic chain. You know, where are the opportunities on both companies benefiting it, but also being hurt by it? In terms of the investment process itself, clearly people are out there working on it. In a way, you know, quant funds, which is in a way, not really AI in that sense, but have certainly been mechanistic, you know, driven by machines, have been around for a long time and have actually had a pretty bad 15 years, most of them. You know, we only have our own efforts in that area, but we're not really at the point of, you know, doing anything in-house. I mean, we're looking at some... There are some in the team who are looking at some tools and what have you, but I think that's the way to go. And then changes in terms of the way, like, the work we're doing on our, you know, internal sort of investigations and well, you know, it's hard. It's always hard to know whether the changes you've made actually give you better results or not. Because, you know what. You know, the live example I was able to give you, we've clearly got much better results from shorting in the last three years than we did previously. Maybe we would have anyway. It was, there was one year there where it was a fantastic period to be shorting. What I'd probably emphasize is that the year before that, we lost little. This year, we've lost some more and, you know, again, that probably there's some thinking to be done around why the performance there is less this year, you know, poorer than it was in prior years. I think we've identified what that is, but it's really hard to say. But at the core of it, you know, I think we have some very capable investors doing very good work. And, you know, the core principle of what we do is simply this, is that, you know, investment opportunities come about because of uncertainty. And investors, like individuals, we are programmed in our DNA to avoid uncertainty. And so when something goes wrong, whether it's happening with China or whether it's just a poor result for a company, the natural response is to overreact, and in fact, the natural response is to project that into the future. That's what humans do. That's where opportunities come from in markets. And while that, you know, human element remains in markets, I mean, humans can be well aware of their biases and their decision-making shortcomings. But while that remains, while humans are making the decisions in the stock market, I think, you know, those opportunities will remain there ongoing. Thank you. So we have some questions on the line from Mr. Mariano Casillo and Ms. Jacqueline Casillo, and there's a few about China, so I'll read them all out. You can kind of summarize them. If China does not manage to rebalance its economy, as seems likely, and experiences a long-term deflationary trajectory with anemic consumption share of GDP, do you expect your bottom-up process to nevertheless manage an adequate return? They also ask if the current or the China's demographic cliff keeps you up at night, and finally, whether you're familiar with China-based economist Michael Pettis, and whether you agree with his long-argued position that China's supply side and infrastructure-driven growth model is unsustainable and thus driving a growing debt burden. If so, would you accept that government supply-side stimulus will only keep China on this path and therefore will not rebalance China to a healthier consumption share of GDP? Yep. So what I would say is that, you know, we don't invest in the Chinese economy, and we don't invest in the Chinese stock market. We buy Chinese companies, and they're very clearly picked for, you know, the qualities that those businesses have and the growth opportunities. So I do believe, even if the worst outcomes for the Chinese economy remain, that there will be great opportunities to make money, and I think that's something if you look at the returns of our Japan fund over the last 25 years, it's a place where we have generated double-digit growth or investment returns, while the market has given you, I can't remember right now, but, you know, 2 or 3%, maybe a little higher. Sorry, Doug, there was a middle- The demographic cliff. No, the demographic cliff doesn't keep me awake at night. Not much does. Demographics move very slowly. They just don't impact... I mean, you know, is the... You know, did that is that cliff, is it gonna impact how many parcels that ZTO delivers this year or in five years' time? Well, of course, there'll be some degree of it, but, not particularly. Other businesses, if you're buying into baby formula, well, clearly there's, there's a big issue there with a, a rapid drop in, births at the moment. Doesn't mean that you may not want to buy a company doing that, but you'd want to be certainly well aware of it. And Michael Pettis, yeah, I'm well aware of his arguments, and that style of argument. I actually-... You know, and having watched Japan and this, I don't really buy into his case. I mean, markets do what they do, and there'll be areas of overinvestment, and maybe there's areas of overinvestment in infrastructure and property. This year is a perfect example. The property market is terrible. What are Chinese consumers doing? They're going back online. They're buying motor vehicles. If they can get away on a holiday, they're doing that. There are some limitations to that around the visa process at the moment. You know, the economy is clear, and I think it's just about being in the right area rather than worrying about that big picture. I'd actually be far more positive. I think there are huge differences between China and Japan. But again, we could have a lovely discussion about that, and I don't think it'll help any of us particularly. Okay, I have one final question from Mr. Mariano and Ms. Jacqueline Casillo. Do you see the new CEO in an attempt to increase marketing, watering down the Platinum method, mindset, and culture? I think we can make a lot of changes without doing that. So, I think all of the candidates that we spoke to could see that there is something there, there are some very special qualities about us as an asset management business and that they need to be maintained. But clearly, some changes need to be made as well. So I think everyone is well aware of that, and, you know, we'll take care. There's no further questions online or on the phones. No more questions? Okay, well, thank you, everyone, and... Sorry. Oh, yes, yes. I was gonna say, when we have coffee and tea and some biscuits outside waiting for you, so please join us.