Full transcript
0:01The ETF market naturally allows for a
0:03breakthrough in the artificial barriers
0:06of bank distribution . By creating an
0:10ETF and introducing it into
0:12distribution , or listing it on the
0:14Warsaw Stock Exchange , for example , we
0:16provide access to it to investors ,
0:18including banking groups , through their
0:20brokerage houses or brokerage offices .
0:24We don't want to compete with
0:26experienced entities like Betam . We
0:29>> don't want to compete with large
0:31entities like the Polish Angular
0:33Coalition ( PZW ) . We want to build our
0:37own playing field and win the match . So
0:40we're building our own playing field .
0:43And once we show it , I think everyone
0:45will understand what we mean . As of
0:48today , I agree that the valuation we're
0:50seeing in the case of treasury — I
0:52believe it's unjustified , considering
0:55the level we're seeing — is too low .
0:58Definitely too low . The cash level
1:00mentioned above . We're valued . At the
1:02cash level . I personally see great
1:07potential here to truly build an entity
1:09that could easily compete with the
1:11largest banking groups in this country ,
1:13regardless of its private nature .
1:26>> Good morning . Good morning . Welcome
1:27everyone to another episode of the
1:29podcast . Today we'll be talking about
1:33what's happening on the Polish stock
1:35exchange , the mood in the mutual fund
1:36industry , and the prospects for the ETF
1:38segment . And above all , whether OOK
1:45will actually fuel an investment boom
1:46on the Polish stock exchange . And my
1:50guest , and yours , is Piotr Szulec , CEO
1:53of Skarbiec Holding . Good morning .
1:55>> Good morning . Good morning everyone .
1:57Good morning to you .
1:58>> Mr. Piotr , I thought we should start
2:00from the beginning . How long have you
2:05been involved in the financial and
2:06investment industry ? From what I've
2:11read , you started your professional
2:13career on the other side , somewhat in
2:15the financial sector .
2:18>> Yes , yes . I've been involved in the
2:22financial industry for roughly 30 years
2:24, starting as a deputy clerk at the
2:25Securities and Exchange Commission's
2:27office in the brokerage house division ,
2:29in the control department .
2:34>> So , you could say that I've moved from
2:36a supervisory role to a truly active
2:38CEO of one of the most important
2:40independent investment fund management
2:42companies on the Polish market . Yes ,
2:46I've had the pleasure of working for
2:48the market regulator , financial
2:50advisory firms , investment fund
2:52management companies , brokerage houses ,
2:54and banks .
2:57>> So , what phase is the market in today ?
3:00Well , you've seen the Polish stock
3:02market in various market periods . Can
3:07we say that today it's a well-developed
3:09bull market , or not yet ? Not yet .
3:16Although , historically speaking , back
3:18then , this mass of investors appeared
3:20in slightly different places . Today , I
3:30have the impression , looking through
3:31the prism of social media , where new
3:33profiles appear , knowing everything
3:35about the market and the stock market ,
3:37that this is already a signal that
3:38we're in an advanced phase of the
3:40growth cycle . So why do I have the
3:50impression that investors are starting
3:52their investment journey with the
3:53riskiest assets ? Because I have a
3:58feeling that the investment world used
3:59to be a bit different . First , you
4:05started with some bond funds , then
4:07perhaps some equity funds , then you
4:09bought stocks , finally some leveraged
4:11instruments , futures , and from the
4:13least risky to the most . And today , I
4:19think these investors are in a
4:20completely different place .
4:22>> No , I disagree . I started in '93 by
4:30buying shares in Pruchnik and Irena , if
4:33I remember correctly . The choice
4:36stemmed from the fact that I was born
4:38in Łódź , so Pruchnik , and my
4:40mother's name was Irena , so IR was an
4:43Irena share .
4:44>> Hmm . And those were shares . And I
4:47remember that investors didn't start
4:49with bonds or low-risk investments .
4:52Back then , they also flocked to stocks .
4:58And today , despite having a much wider
5:00range and access to a much wider range
5:03of instruments and asset classes ,
5:05investors are guided by the same
5:07principles . They want to make a lot of
5:11money quickly and instantly , and that's
5:13why they choose the most — well , if
5:15they invest at all , because that's the
5:17main problem with our market , but if
5:19they invest at all — they choose the
5:23riskiest , most volatile , whether
5:25instruments or stocks .
5:27>> Okay , but when you started , it was
5:29partly because there were no other
5:31investment options , right ? And let's
5:34say the financial industry has changed
5:37so much since the early 2000s that ,
5:39well , you could say , some of what's
5:41available today was already available
5:43back then , and back then , it was
5:45probably more of a banking-based
5:46approach to customer acquisition . Today
5:50, it's completely different . But today ,
5:57if you look at this young generation ,
5:59who are fed online by successful
6:01influencers who drive expensive cars or
6:03spend their time on vacation in
6:05tropical countries and make quick money
6:07on high-risk instruments , I think the
6:19flow that's emerging in the market is
6:21heading towards places like CFDs ,
6:23leveraged products , things like that .
6:29Of course , a large portion of the
6:31inflows also ends up in the ETF market ,
6:34but I think that's also a bit random .
6:37Random in the sense that ETFs are
6:38simply associated with something where
6:40you can make a lot of money quickly .
6:44And that's the main reason why the
6:46mutual fund industry isn't
6:48participating in this , in this rush , as
6:50strongly as , say , CFD brokers or banks .
6:54Because banks are also major
6:55beneficiaries of the current situation ,
6:57right ? For example , interest rates .
6:59There are
7:00>> two factors . The first is that the
7:04younger generation doesn't actually buy
7:06funds , especially equity funds . So they
7:12>> prefer to invest themselves .
7:14>> Exactly . They invest themselves . So if
7:17there is an inflow into equity funds ,
7:19it comes from clients who were already
7:21in this market , but their numbers are
7:27probably dwindling in the sense that
7:29these clients are simply arguing about
7:31demographics . And the second is that a
7:36large portion of the inflows , due to
7:38the availability of instruments or
7:40asset classes , is simply spreading
7:42globally . Hmm , it's no longer
7:48>> directed exclusively to the Polish
7:50stock market , as it once was , or if a
7:52TEFI also offered American funds , or
7:55even that one , but today it's spreading
7:57virtually worldwide , so by nature , a
8:00smaller portion goes to Polish equity
8:02funds . This
8:06>> means that the Polish capital market is
8:08competing for the attention of Polish
8:10investors not only among itself , among
8:12its own products , but also , one might
8:14say , with foreign entities and even
8:16foreign companies .
8:18>> Yes . Well , that's perhaps the negative
8:23side of this development that has
8:25reached us . It's good , but on the other
8:31hand , it also limits the inflow of
8:33funds .
8:33>> What about distribution ? Well , there's
8:37talk that this method of fund
8:38distribution has changed significantly .
8:42You have your own platform , right ?
8:44Skarbiec 24 , which
8:47>> you're developing . Could something
8:52>> also happen , or is something happening ,
8:54in this area of TEFI unit distribution
8:56that could benefit the independent
8:58investment fund sector ?
9:02>> It could , but in my opinion , it hasn't
9:04happened yet . Distribution is a
9:08difficult topic for investment funds at
9:10the moment . We have a market divided
9:13into bank and insurance investment
9:17funds , and , let's say , private
9:19investment funds . The majority of
9:23clients are due to various historical
9:25events , but not only that . It's simply
9:27inherently concentrated with banks .
9:31Banks , mainly due to changes in the
9:33distributor remuneration system , but
9:35not only that , also motivated by their
9:37own self-interest , have closed down
9:39this distribution or pushed out private
9:41, independent distribution funds . So we
9:46have two segments : the banking segment
9:48is closing , and the private segment
9:50must develop its own distribution
9:52channels . Hence , investment funds are
9:56increasingly building platforms or
9:58forming alliances with brokerage houses
10:00, thus creating small subgroups of
10:02these private investment funds .
10:06Meanwhile , in the middle lies a
10:07burgeoning market of distributors and
10:09financial advisors . There are no new
10:12entrants . The offerings are certainly
10:18quite broad , but I believe that until
10:20this middle ground is filled by private
10:22companies , let's call them wealth
10:24management , which will manage Poles '
10:26finances at a level similar to banks
10:28without being banks themselves . Hmm .
10:34>> With a full range of products and
10:36services , if something like this
10:38doesn't fill this middle ground , then
10:40distribution will indeed be a problem .
10:43And what about this new group of , um ,
10:45investors ? Well , they say we have this
10:48boom in family foundations , that there
10:50are indeed significant funds there , and
10:52they're growing very quickly . It's
10:56clear that these family foundations are
10:58entering the capital market as
11:00investors . Are these clients for
11:03independent investment funds , or are
11:05they more likely to be entities that
11:07prefer to manage their assets
11:08themselves ? A client for family offices
11:11or for those entities that , in my
11:13opinion , don't exist yet , meaning the
11:15middle ground of these
11:17>> welfare firms that should be
11:18established , private welfare firms that
11:20should be established and deal with
11:24precisely these types of clients .
11:27>> Okay , so let's move on to the ETF
11:29segment , because it's a market that's
11:31clearly growing . Back in 2023 , as I
11:37recall , you were quite skeptical about
11:40it . You argued that a treasury holding ,
11:45well , that's a company that specializes
11:47in asset management . That narrative has
11:50changed . You announced your entry into
11:53the ETF industry . Let's talk a little
11:57about why this industry , this area of
11:59the market , is increasingly attractive .
12:03And where did this change in your
12:04attitude towards this area come from ?
12:07It's a
12:08>> market segment that shouldn't be
12:12underestimated in any way . Hmm .
12:15>> However , considering that we , in
12:17particular — I'm talking about the
12:19Skarbiec group , and especially Skarbiec
12:22TFI — have been an entity from the very
12:27beginning , but let's just say that for
12:30the past dozen or so years , we've been
12:32strongly focused on the equity fund
12:34segment . Hmm . This change in the new
12:40generation's attitude toward
12:42independent investing , for example ,
12:44through ETFs , unfortunately creates a
12:46barrier when it comes to the inflow of
12:48new funds into equity funds . Therefore ,
12:55it's natural for us to be present in
12:57this market , and hence the decision to
12:59enter this segment , the ETF segment ,
13:05right ? Regardless of the fact that the
13:09investment fund segment , the open-end
13:11fund segment , is still interesting to
13:13us because that's where we have clients
13:15and the assets we manage .
13:19>> It's possible to combine these two
13:21worlds — active management and passive
13:23investing through MTFs . I'm talking
13:26business-wise .
13:27>> It's possible , it's possible , it's
13:29possible . Especially now , when we see
13:33so many synergies and added value in
13:35the form of , for example , Domeski ,
13:37which has been incorporated into our
13:39structure . We are , or I hope we will be
13:46, after the launch or availability of
13:48these ETFs , one or more of them , we
13:50will be able to offer clients a full
13:52range of services , but we will also
13:54leverage this as a group to capture
13:56this value chain entirely on our side .
14:03>> Exactly , because you own a brokerage
14:05house , Noble Securities .
14:07>> And as we know how ETFs work , well , yes
14:10. There must be a market maker , there
14:13must be a distributor , meaning one who
14:17>> primarily offers through an exchange ,
14:19right ? ETFs are sold through an
14:21exchange . So it seems that you actually
14:25have everything covered from start to
14:27finish , a custodian , everything under
14:29control , so from a cost-effectiveness
14:32perspective , you can actually do things
14:34very smartly . I don't know if it's very
14:38smart , but we will have control over
14:40the entire process , and this is
14:41important from the perspective of
14:43trying to deliver value to the client .
14:46That's first and foremost . And secondly
14:49, ensuring sources of income for
14:51ourselves and our shareholders . That's
14:53one thing . And another equally
14:57important thing : the ETF market allows
14:59for a natural way to break through the
15:02artificial barriers of bank
15:03distribution . In the sense that by
15:08creating ZTFA and introducing it for
15:10distribution , or listing it on the
15:12Warsaw Stock Exchange , for example ,
15:14we're giving investors access to it ,
15:16including banking groups through their
15:18brokerage houses or brokerage firms .
15:21Okay , that's one advantage , but on the
15:23other hand , the product must be
15:25interesting enough , distinctive enough
15:27from what's already on the market , to
15:29attract investors . We already have
15:31BTETF , a very significant player in
15:34this market . PZU , an industry giant
15:38entering this area where treasury
15:40holdings will be looking for their
15:42place in this market , which seems to be
15:44becoming increasingly competitive ?
15:49>> Hmm . Of course , I can't reveal what our
15:54first or subsequent ETFs will look like
15:56, as there's not much time left before
16:02we actually unveil them . We don't want
16:07to draw our competitors ' attention to
16:08them just yet ,
16:11>> but it will be this year . The launch of
16:13the first product
16:16>> could be this year , or it could be the
16:18first quarter of next year — it all
16:20depends . However , what's important , and
16:25as I think I mentioned in one of the
16:31interviews , is that it will be a
16:32product different from those available
16:34on our market . That is , we don't want
16:38to compete with experienced entities
16:40like Betam . We
16:43>> don't want to compete with large
16:45entities like PZW . We want to build our
16:50own playing field and win the match . So
16:53we're building our own playing field .
16:56And once we unveil it , I think everyone
16:58will understand what we mean .
17:02>> Okay , but ETFs seem , at least for now ,
17:04to be the domain of riskier assets ,
17:06primarily equities , right ? Because we
17:14have equity indices , um , so it's easy
17:16to construct — let's put it in
17:18quotation marks — easy to construct a
17:20product that tracks this market , but it
17:22seems that bonds , especially corporate
17:24bonds , are still the domain of
17:26traditional asset managers . Um , could
17:35this really be separated , with debt and
17:37bonds being actively managed , and the
17:39riskier equity portion increasingly
17:41tied to ETFs ? Maybe , but it doesn't
17:46have to be . Um , that's also one of the
17:48reasons we're entering the ETF market .
17:53Um , as I mentioned , Skarbiec has
17:55specialized in equity funds and active
17:57management for many years , so uh ... We
17:59see an opportunity for us in the ETF
18:01market as well , given the experience
18:08and results our managers generate .
18:14Firstly , and secondly : in the bond
18:16market , I'd bet more on the
18:17specialization of our brokerage house .
18:24It seems to me that there are entities
18:25— including Nobel Securities , as one
18:27of the brokerage houses operating in
18:29the corporate bond market — that can
18:31handle this topic from start to finish ,
18:40from asset acquisition , to supporting
18:42issuers , to distributing products based
18:44on funds obtained from issuers , and so
18:46on . Okay , let's move on to the next
18:52topic . You maintain your skepticism
18:55about the OKA effect . It's clear that
18:59the market is somewhat euphoric about
19:01this type of product , with everyone
19:02expecting an unknown amount of assets
19:04to flow into the Polish capital market .
19:09However , you're cautious in your theses
19:12. So , what ? OKA doesn't have to be as
19:15successful as everyone thinks ,
19:19>> and I have no doubt that there will be
19:20some capital shift from currently
19:27existing savings or investment products
19:29, or even some of the new funds , to OKA
19:31when they are launched . So , I wouldn't
19:37be surprised if there wasn't such a
19:39shift . However , it seems to me that
19:44these expectations for a massive inflow
19:47of funds in the coming years are a bit
19:49exaggerated . Currently , looking at
19:56statistics on , for example , IKE or XZE ,
19:59but especially IKE , these limits aren't
20:01fully utilized by the masses . And yes ,
20:10they are , of course , annual , but
20:12they're lower , so why would they be
20:14utilized by the masses in OKIs ? Well , I
20:19know these are different products , but
20:21that raises a question mark . And
20:27secondly , this enthusiasm about how
20:29OKIs could revolutionize our market .
20:37I'd like to remind you that
20:38representatives of other countries
20:40where these products were launched , who
20:42also appeared at conferences organized
20:44by the Warsaw Stock Exchange and other
20:46entities , seemed to say that in their
20:48countries , it also took a very long
20:50time for this product to become
20:52interesting to customers , to accustom
20:54them , to educate them , and to teach
20:56them how to invest systematically .
21:05Firstly , and secondly , they also made
21:07mistakes , for example , by diverting
21:09some funds from these types of products
21:11to banking or savings products . Well ,
21:16this has been replicated here . I'm
21:18surprised why this limit isn't entirely
21:20allocated to the market . Are you
21:23working on any products for Okio ? The
21:27analysis shows you are .
21:29>> Yes , we are . Because this is a product
21:34we can't help but have in our offer
21:36once it's launched . As I mentioned , I
21:40personally don't expect any spectacular
21:43success , but I also want to have an
21:45alternative for our clients . If they
21:48decide that , for example , Okio is more
21:50interesting than an IKE , we'll provide
21:52them with a product they can transfer
21:54to within our company , without having
21:56to go outside . That's more or less how
21:58it will look . And one more thing : this
22:01enthusiasm — well , it's partly driven
22:06by entities , large banking entities
22:11with a state-owned share . Absolutely . I
22:15understand the situation . This mass of
22:19customers , this mass of assets there ,
22:21allows us to look at this type of
22:23product with greater optimism . But it
22:28doesn't stem , I think , from grassroots
22:30customer interest , but from an attempt
22:33to meet expectations .
22:35>> Yes . Because it seems to me that ,
22:37looking at the strategies of all these
22:39banks , I'm talking about the largest
22:41ones , they are increasingly saying that
22:42they want to provide investment
22:44opportunities to their customers . And
22:48from that perspective , I think it's an
22:50ideal solution for customers to
22:52transfer some of their savings , so to
22:54speak , to riskier
22:58>> investments , let's call them that .
23:00>> Although I don't know how banking
23:02groups are prepared for this , I assume
23:04they are very well prepared , but
23:05systemically , it seems to me that this
23:07won't be an easy product to manage . If
23:15we consider its multi-entity nature ,
23:17especially within banking groups , and
23:19the various asset classes that would be
23:21included , whether various forms of
23:23saving or not , then providing the
23:25customer with information about their
23:27portfolio here and now . Exactly . This
23:35is a major challenge , and I see it as a
23:37significant challenge for us . But we
23:40won't have such problems because our
23:41products will be much simpler ,
23:43especially since we're not a banking
23:45group . It's also interesting to see how
23:48this will play out .
23:51>> And OKIs could represent an opportunity
23:53for investment funds ( TFIs ) . They say
23:58there's an aspect of assets that may be
24:00subject to exemption . In the case of
24:07TFI investment funds , if up to 70 % of
24:09assets are Polish
24:13>> and only 30 % foreign , then the entire
24:15fund is exempt . Is there any gap or
24:20opportunity for these actively managed
24:22funds to create a blended
24:23Polish-foreign fund that meets the
24:25exemption criteria ? But this , this very
24:35thing , also shows that it forces the
24:37creation of certain product
24:38combinations to meet this need or this
24:40imposed regime , which is also somewhat
24:43unnecessary , in my opinion , but I
24:45understand the intentions of the people
24:47who created this product , because the
24:49main intention was to direct this
24:51inflow of assets to the Polish market .
24:58This is the guiding principle of both
25:00the current government and the previous
25:02one , through the PPK product , for
25:04example . So , I say this , and I
25:06understand this idea to some extent .
25:11From the perspective of building market
25:14size , it's somewhat okay , but it also
25:16requires a lot of effort to adapt to
25:18this situation product-wise . At one
25:25point , at several events , there was
25:27talk of regulations being introduced
25:29alongside the OKI that would facilitate
25:31the distribution of financial products .
25:36Do you see any solutions that would
25:39>> reduce this , so at least nothing of the
25:42sort has happened so far ? No , I don't
25:48see it , I don't see it here , I don't
25:50see any specific actions that would
25:52facilitate this method of distribution
25:54or communication with customers . This
26:03is a lesson still to be learned by
26:05those in power , by the communities , and
26:07by the entities themselves . Let's move
26:13on to Noble Securities . This is an
26:15asset you acquired last
26:18>> April ,
26:18>> just over a year ago . Just over a year
26:21ago . We can already begin to summarize
26:27the situation from the perspective of
26:28the price the company paid for this
26:30entity . It was a good transaction . It
26:37>> was a very good transaction , regardless
26:39of the price . Of course , if we had paid
26:43too much , it wouldn't have been as
26:44attractive , but it was a good
26:46transaction . In my opinion , it
26:49transformed the entire Skarbiec group .
26:55It changed its approach from a group
26:57based solely on a single entity , an
26:59investment fund company . We have become
27:06a group that , while not yet fully
27:08operational , can offer clients a full
27:10range of financial products and
27:11services in the future .
27:16>> And what ? And this potential area of
27:20development in the form of ETFs is also
27:22an additional argument that makes this
27:24asset worthwhile . Yes , we are , yes , we
27:31are at the stage of filling product and
27:33systemic gaps in the entity or group .
27:41However , we haven't yet reached the
27:43stage of creating an entity that , in my
27:45opinion , has a chance of being part of
27:47the hub we mentioned at the beginning .
27:53So , if we're talking about creating
27:55entities that will be able to , that
27:57will act as wealth managers and manage
28:01the customer service and communication
28:03process from start to finish , with a
28:05full range of services and products ,
28:08then that's probably where I'd like
28:12Skabit to be .
28:13>> And what about its activities in the
28:15commodity market ? It's interesting that
28:21Noblech Securities , perhaps some of the
28:23listeners had no idea about it at all ,
28:25is also a fairly strong entity in the
28:27commodity energy exchange .
28:31>> So , it's also an entity that actively
28:33operates . How did this crisis period
28:36impact this area of activity ? Good .
28:40It's an entity that is very specialized
28:43in commodity energy exchange operations
28:45, and that was one of the main reasons
28:53or factors I considered when I
28:54approached our owners and the
28:56supervisory board for approval for this
28:58transaction . This specialization is
29:04important because there are only three
29:07brokerage houses on the Polish Power
29:09Exchange , one of which is private ,
29:11Nobel Securities . The other two are
29:14associated with state-owned companies .
29:19So , considering the possible further
29:21development of this market , and we know
29:23that energy is important , especially
29:25considering the current development
29:28we're observing . It's an
29:31>> increasingly hot topic .
29:34>> Exactly . I think this will be a part of
29:39our business that will be very
29:40important , or should be very important ,
29:43to our shareholders , and I would like
29:45us , especially Noble Securities , to
29:47continue to grow strongly there .
29:51>> So what will the future of Nobel
29:52Securities be ? In this broader
29:55perspective ? From a broader perspective
30:01, considering what I mentioned , i.e. ,
30:04the idea of creating a wealth
30:05management entity , a brokerage house
30:07should be the axis for the Skarbiec
30:09group , and an investment fund company
30:11should be solely an entity providing
30:13specialized products . But products
30:18nonetheless , how does this
30:20>> differ from , for example , what
30:22Quererkus Tefin does ? They acquired
30:24Xelion Mhm ,
30:26>> and that business seems to be doing
30:28quite well , because if you look at the
30:30numbers , Xelion has generated a really
30:32solid amount of profit . But is this
30:37strategy more or less the same , or is
30:39it different ? Because Noble Securities
30:41reminds me of a more traditional
30:43brokerage firm , right ? Where there are
30:47brokers , market coverage , and a team of
30:49analysts , Aelion isn't an entity that
30:51handles such things , so those are the
30:53differences , the emphases that change ,
30:55plus the commodity business .
31:01>> When I look at the Quercus group today ,
31:03let's call it the Quercus Group , the
31:05dominant entity is the Recession Fund
31:07Company , and Ksion is merely a
31:09supporting entity .
31:13>> Supporting . Regarding the Skarbiec
31:16Group , I'd like to achieve a situation
31:18where the maker's house is the dominant
31:20entity , and the investment fund company
31:22is merely a supporting entity . It seems
31:26to me , yes , I assume , that given the
31:39direction the market is heading ,
31:41brokerage houses or platforms within
31:43these brokerage houses will be , or will
31:45be again , the focus of attention for
31:47financial groups . I mean , there was a
31:53time when brokerage houses dominated
31:55the market . Later , there was a time
31:57when these brokerage houses were
31:59increasingly fading , with the
32:00Investment Fund Company dominating .
32:03Right now , I think there's been a kind
32:05of renaissance in terms of brokerage
32:07houses or entities with brokerage house
32:09licenses .
32:12>> So I understand that this is a vision ,
32:14a bit like wealth management , right ?
32:19Meaning that a brokerage house is no
32:21longer just a place where we place
32:23orders , our gateway to the Polish stock
32:25exchange , but a place where we buy
32:26investment fund companies , ETFs , and
32:28perhaps also some foreign instruments .
32:32>> I see two fundamental areas , a
32:35>> broad range of instruments .
32:37>> Yes , I see two areas where such
32:39entities should dominate this market .
32:42First , platforms , because trading is
32:45becoming , let's call it , digital . And
32:50second , relationship-based , because not
32:52all clients , even those using digital
32:55channels , want these direct
32:56relationships . And these two things —
33:03trading , digital access to products ,
33:05and relationships — are what
33:07characterize , or can characterize ,
33:09brokerage houses . Due to their
33:16limitations , fund companies are de
33:18facto unable to offer certain things ,
33:20provide certain services , or maintain
33:22certain relationships .
33:25>> Well , that's interesting . So what ? So I
33:27understand that these emphases are
33:29indeed changing , and the brokerage
33:35house will be the one that will be most
33:36heavily marketed and presented to
33:38clients as the first source of contact .
33:43>> Yes , I would say that this
33:44characterizes not only independent
33:46financial groups , because when I look
33:54at it , we have entities like XTB , we
33:56have entities like the PKO brokerage
33:58house , one or the other . I think these
34:04entities are currently attracting
34:06investor interest . Despite the size of
34:13the assets managed by the investment
34:15funds of the two bank groups mentioned ,
34:17it seems to me that , even from a
34:19communication perspective , this is
34:21where it should be located , and I think
34:23that's natural . I also see it this way ,
34:26that this is where all kinds of
34:28customer contact should be located . And
34:32>> Popoma is probably a good example on
34:33the Polish stock exchange of an entity
34:35that combines these two areas quite
34:37well . Ipopema is going its own way , but
34:43also in this direction , because we have
34:45Ippema , Private Investment , which was
34:47founded some time ago
34:49>> and is , I would say , its equivalent .
34:54It's an entity created at Ippa
34:56Securities , but it's probably intended
34:58to be the future window to the world
35:00for investors .
35:02>> What about consolidation of the mutual
35:04fund industry ? You once said there was
35:08potential to create an entity that
35:09could have 30 billion in assets , an
35:11independent mutual fund , but the
35:13obstacles are the ambitions of some
35:15individuals and entities . Are these
35:20barriers insurmountable and therefore
35:22require a different direction , or is
35:24consolidation still possible within
35:26independent mutual fund companies in
35:28this area ? It is , but they aren't
35:33talking to each other , so I don't see
35:35any breakthrough here . I haven't
35:39managed to interest competitors enough
35:46to engage in these discussions . And
35:51reaching the 20-30 billion level of
35:53assets is becoming less and less of a
35:55challenge at the moment . If you look at
35:58it , combining two or three investment
36:00funds ( TFIs ) , especially those that
36:06also have entities like Xion , Nobel
36:08Securities , or any other , within their
36:11groups , I'd go further . Easily , two or
36:16three entities could create groups that
36:19could have as much as 40 or 50 billion
36:21in assets , if calculated correctly by
36:23assets under management or assets under
36:26management at financial advisory firms
36:28or brokerage houses .
36:31>> So ,
36:33>> the scale achievable isn't a problem .
36:36The problem is , uh , reaching an
36:38agreement . And I think the chances of
36:44achieving this consolidation are
36:46dwindling because these individual
36:47entities are becoming increasingly
36:49stronger . We're also a very good
36:53example . Well , as long as we were just
36:55an investment fund ( TFI ) , our
37:00willingness to talk was greater . Now
37:03that we have a brokerage house in the
37:05group , our willingness to talk remains .
37:08But on the other hand , we see that
37:10having a brokerage house in the group ,
37:12and having our own distribution
37:13platform , we become self-sufficient .
37:16The more self-sufficiency there is in
37:18these entities or groups , the more
37:20difficult it will be to implement this
37:22consolidation . So it was a good option .
37:27I don't know if it's still on the table
37:28.
37:30>> And what level of cash do you have ?
37:32It's not just you , because if you look
37:34at the competition , even the ones
37:36listed on the stock exchange , some are
37:38in a similar situation . That is , a cash
37:42level equal to the market
37:44capitalization is also a resource that
37:46makes these opportunities for
37:47negotiations more difficult .
37:52>> It depends on how you look at it . If
37:56you look at how much additional funds
37:58could be generated to further increase
38:06the strength of such a combined entity ,
38:08I think it's only a positive factor . I
38:14mean , if we look at it today and
38:16consider that significant cost savings
38:18can be generated by merging individual
38:21investment funds or entities —
38:23>> this is a business of scale —
38:27>> and if you combine these free funds
38:29that are available here , here , and
38:31there , then the firepower of such a
38:33combined entity is even greater , right ?
38:37So I personally see great potential
38:44here to truly build an entity that
38:45could easily compete with the largest
38:47banking groups in this country ,
38:49regardless of its private nature .
38:55>> Okay , now we need to move on to the
38:57most important question . Because if the
39:01potential for acquisitions is
39:03diminishing , why do you , the treasury
39:05holding , need so much money ? Let me
39:08remind you that , if you do the math
39:10correctly , there's 260 million in cash
39:13there . I think we'll find it . That's a
39:16huge amount of money . Why aren't you
39:21deciding to distribute these funds to
39:23shareholders ? Because we want to ,
39:28because we still see a chance to , uh ,
39:30firstly , reach an agreement with at
39:32least one entity .
39:37>> Mhm .
39:40>> Secondly , to reach an agreement or make
39:42an interesting offer . As I mentioned ,
39:46these entities or groups are getting
39:47bigger and bigger . We also need more
39:51and more funds . So this is a bit of a
39:58problem stemming from the fact that de
40:00facto , certain transactions cannot be
40:02carried out with debt , simply because
40:04it's impossible .
40:08>> Mhm .
40:10>> So it has to be share capital . And
40:14that's why these funds are so important
40:15to have . Of course , you can always ask
40:20shareholders to conduct directed or
40:22targeted offerings . And , yes , if an
40:28offering were to occur , such a process
40:30would probably have to be carried out
40:32anyway , but having a large amount of
40:34cash provides comfort . We don't know
40:41how the future will unfold , we don't
40:43know how long the growth trends we're
40:45observing will last . Perhaps a more
40:47difficult period in the market will
40:49come . Cash is , as our name suggests ,
40:54treasury . Cash is sometimes the most
40:58important thing .
41:01>> Yes , but you don't have an overview of
41:03strategic options . Yes , it hasn't been
41:07announced .
41:11>> But conversely , Skarbiec Holding could
41:13also be an attractive target for some
41:14other group . Who actually controls
41:19Skarbiec Holding today ?
41:22>> How so ? The shareholder structure is
41:24known . We have one dominant shareholder
41:28. We also have several smaller ones ,
41:35such as the Juroszek Foundation and
41:37Querkus funds , as well as two open-end
41:39pension funds with relatively large
41:41stakes . So the shareholder structure is
41:46somewhat known . Everyone can take a
41:48look and see who our shareholders are .
41:52I'm personally very happy with this
41:54shareholding . Many entities would like
41:58to have such entities in their
42:00shareholding .
42:00>> So what ? Skarbis Holding will remain a
42:02public company , because there were some
42:04attempts at delisting at the time , but
42:06they weren't entirely successful .
42:08>> No , I hope it will remain , because it
42:11carries a lot of value . If I were to
42:17argue whether Skarbis Holding should
42:19remain on the stock exchange or be
42:21delisted , I'd support its remaining .
42:25However , this is one of the best ways
42:28to value the company . As of today , I
42:38agree that the valuation we're seeing
42:40for Skarbis Holding — I believe it's
42:42unjustified , considering the level
42:44we're seeing — is too low . Definitely
42:48too low . And the aforementioned cash
42:50level . We're valued at cash level .
43:00Without even delving into the specifics
43:02of the valuation , if we consider 6.5
43:05billion in assets , we'll calculate it
43:07by 2 % of those assets . Although there
43:16were groups that sold at 4 % , let's
43:18calculate it by 2 % . Here , we have a
43:20rough estimate of 130 million for the
43:22investment fund management company
43:24alone . I'm thinking 50-60 million for
43:28the brokerage house , without much
43:30difficulty . That's 200 million plus 250
43:35million in cash , 450 million . Today ,
43:38the treasury is valued at 250 million ,
43:42meaning 200 million higher for 7
43:45million shares , which is 28 PLN more
43:48than today's price . 37 PLN for the
43:51share price , 28-65 PLN . In fact ,
43:57roughly speaking , this is the valuation
43:59that should appear on the treasury's
44:01quotes today . I would also add the
44:07provision for the variable fee , which
44:09you recognized after the first half of
44:11the year .
44:12>> It amounts to over 136 million PLN . Yes
44:15, obviously , it's unclear whether it
44:17will be recognized , because markets
44:19change , and success can change . It's
44:22kind of calculated , I understand , for
44:25this period , yes , for this closed
44:27window . But it already shows that the
44:28first half of the year was phenomenal
44:30in terms of financial results . Yes ,
44:32>> that's right . That's right . Only with
44:34the variable fee , we know what it's
44:35like .
44:36>> Today , it might last one month , then
44:38disappear . Today we have a bull market ,
44:40tomorrow we might have a bust , so um ...
44:43I'm not particularly attached to it ,
44:45and I wouldn't advise shareholders
44:47either . However , when we actually see
44:49at the end of the year that the results
44:55of the funds we manage are still good ,
44:57and the managers are beating the
44:59benchmarks for these funds , then the
45:01potential in terms of achievable
45:03profits is still um ... very high . So , as
45:09I mentioned , the valuation is y ... low ,
45:11or even absurdly low in my opinion , but
45:14I still think it's better to be listed
45:16on the Stock Exchange and let the
45:18valuation remain as it is , and let
45:20investors have access to the full range
45:23of information . When might this window
45:29for this M transaction potentially
45:31close ? Is this actually the prospect of
45:36this fiscal year and the end of this
45:38fiscal year ? And , of course , spring and
45:42summer are the times when dividends are
45:44decided . Is this still a window that
45:47could last longer , or who knows how it
45:49might turn out ? I mean , I'll stick to
45:53the thesis that shareholders decide on
45:55dividends anyway .
45:56>> Well , yes .
45:57>> Um , we
45:59>> can recommend you .
46:00>> Yes . At the last general meeting ,
46:07considering the information we had , we
46:09asked , or did we abandon , the
46:11application for a dividend payment and
46:14asked shareholders for 12 months to
46:16complete the two processes we're
46:24conducting . If it turns out that
46:28nothing actually comes of these
46:29processes , because , as I mentioned , the
46:34current market consolidation is
46:36increasing , then I see no obstacles to
46:39filing for dividends again . It's the
46:47nature of things , considering this
46:49year's results , which look quite
46:50interesting . There will be room for
46:54dividends .
46:55>> So what ? So you could say that Skarbiec
46:59Holding's long-term vision has probably
47:01already been formed , as to the
47:02direction the company is heading .
47:06Because you have a quite successful MNA
47:08transaction . Well , from my perspective ,
47:10that was a question mark . It's unclear
47:13what will be purchased , at what price ,
47:14whether it will even make sense . I
47:19think the Noble Securities acquisition
47:21was , let's call it , an interesting deal
47:23. That's how I would call it . It fits
47:29into the company's long-term vision .
47:32There's some plan for long-term growth .
47:35And despite everything , the market
47:36seems to be still favorable in the long
47:38term . Because the needs of wealth
47:41management seem to only grow in the
47:43future .
47:44>> Yes . I definitely see a place for the
47:48Skarbiec Group in this market . I see a
47:52place for a much larger Skarbiec Group ,
47:57whether through organic growth or
47:59acquisitions . I see a place for the
48:03business we run . I see a place because
48:09we want to be a wealth manager that
48:11will be a unique alternative to what
48:13banks and insurers offer . I see a place
48:21for private entities , preferably one ,
48:23or two , or three large entities , that
48:25could also attract banking clients .
48:31That space definitely exists . I hope
48:36that changes in regulations will also
48:42improve this distribution space . But
48:47even if they don't , the actions we've
48:49taken over the last three or four years
48:51— establishing our own distribution
48:53platform , where we already hold
48:55approximately 30 % of the funds our
48:57clients have entrusted to us in
48:59investment funds , and approximately 20 %
49:01of our clients already operate through
49:03that platform — show that this path is ,
49:06um , the right one and that this
49:07decision was a good one . And secondly ,
49:12establishing a second distribution
49:14channel , namely the purchase of the
49:16Nobel Securities brokerage house . I see
49:24this as a space for further work on
49:26expanding this entity's offerings and
49:28changing its character . I would like it
49:35to be , as I mentioned , a wealth manager
49:37.
49:38>> Okay , of course , this will depend very ,
49:40very largely on the Nobel Securities
49:43management board , because these are not
49:45just my ideas , but rather my colleagues
49:47on the Nobel Securities management
49:49board who absolutely want to develop
49:51them . This space is there . I
49:54>> don't want us to follow some narrow
49:56path like some entities . However , I
49:59would like us to offer the broadest
50:01possible range of services and products
50:03.
50:04>> So what ? So , really , the unknowns . If I
50:07were to bet today , it's whether a
50:09transaction will actually happen ,
50:10because we don't know . It might happen ,
50:13or it might not . And how well will the
50:17ETF business go , right ? Because it's a
50:22business that ,
50:24>> well , profitability requires some time
50:26to make sense , but I guess from the
50:28perspective of the resources and the
50:30puzzles you have , it's not such a huge
50:33challenge . There are directions you
50:37can't , like , pursue right now . I mean ,
50:40you can't not pursue right now . It's a
50:44bit like this . We have these large
50:50banking and insurance groups , we have a
50:52pool of independent entities , but
50:54investment funds ( TFIs ) , what two ,
50:56three , or four entities from this TFI
50:59group are currently trying to do is
51:01move into a third playing field . That
51:08means creating groups that would
51:09include both an investment fund and a
51:11design house or a financial advisory
51:13entity . And what else ? Anything else .
51:19What character this will take in the
51:21future , I don't know , but these three ,
51:23four entities , or groups , are actually
51:25trying to separate themselves from this
51:28TFI group , to find themselves in a
51:29different playing field , seeing what's
51:31happening in terms of technological
51:33development and customer interest . And
51:37that's the direction we're heading in .
51:40The best solution would be for these
51:42three or four entities to merge .
51:44>> Mmm , and they created a very strong one
51:47. But I don't know if it will happen .
51:50This space to create a single large
51:57entity that would have a lot of assets
51:59under management in the investment fund
52:01, that would have adult companies , that
52:03would have a brokerage house with a
52:05modern platform — well , that's
52:06something that personally appeals to me
52:08, and that's where I'd like us as the
52:10Schabiec group to get to . Okay , well ,
52:15we're keeping our fingers crossed .
52:17We're keeping our fingers crossed that
52:19the scenario will work out , and we're
52:21also keeping our fingers crossed that a
52:23dividend will finally be paid to
52:24shareholders . Thank you very much for
52:27the conversation . My guest , and yours ,
52:29was Piotr Szulec . Thank you very much .