Sven Spiess - Managing Family Wealth in a Changing Financial World

In this episode, I speak with Sven Spiess, a highly experienced finance professional with a background at institutions such as Morgan Stanley and Citibank, about the profound changes reshaping the banking industry, particularly in Switzerland currently heading a The Family Office in Zurich.

We explore how automation and efficiency gains are transforming banking in ways similar to the industrial automation wave of the 1970s. Sven shares his perspective on rising inflation, global economic pressure, and why recent banking failures, including Credit Suisse, were driven more by liquidity issues than by a lack of capital. His insights highlight how risk management and liquidity discipline have become critical in today’s volatile financial environment.

The conversation then shifts to the human side of finance. Sven emphasizes that emotional intelligence and trust remain essential, especially in wealth management and family office settings. As generational wealth transfers accelerate, understanding clients’ values and long-term goals is just as important as financial expertise.

We also discuss the growing role of family offices as client-centric alternatives to traditional banks, offering greater alignment and fewer conflicts of interest. Finally, Sven shares his view on artificial intelligence in finance—seeing it as a powerful tool to enhance efficiency, but not a replacement for human judgment and relationships.

The episode concludes with a forward-looking view on the future of banking, where success will depend on balancing technology, expertise, and trust.

How do today’s leaders cut through the noise and shape the future?

In each episode of From Noise to Sound, host Dr. Dimitrios Marinos, from the Department of Marketing and Communication at HSLU, dives deep with CEOs, Board Members, and industry innovators to uncover the forces reshaping our world. Through insightful conversations, he explores topics like digital transformation, consumer behavior, and sustainability, revealing strategies and innovations that are driving real change.

Gain actionable insights and fresh perspectives on navigating a complex business landscape. Tune in each month to sharpen your view on leadership, tech-driven success, and what’s next in marketing and beyond.

New episodes every month, brought to you by HSLU, Lucerne University of Applied Sciences and Arts.

Useful Links:

• Linkedin
• YouTube
• Web

Transcript

[0:00] Hello and welcome. This is Dimitrius Marinos from Noise to Sound at the University of Lutern. So I'd like to introduce you today on a very different topic, also very much based in Switzerland, let's say. So one of the central topics is finance and the banking sector. So therefore, we're switching a little bit to English this time. So because the topic is a little more international, I would say, and more relevant in these terms.

[0:25] So one of the topics that is central at this time is, of course, the change in the banking sector in terms of jobs and operations. So there's a lot of change in the market. And on the other side, of course, the great wealth transfer of this generation. So I couldn't find a better person to discuss with this. A close friend of mine who's also been in big banks, also worked before in Morgan Stanley City, but also now very much involved with the family office business. So I would like to welcome Sven also at our podcast. Thank you very much, Dimitrius, for this warm welcome. And of course, welcome as well all the viewers of this channel with a very interesting topic. I'm afraid we're not going to have enough time to really explore it in full length, but let's dive into some of the main themes. Of course, of course. I mean, we're not going to solve the riddle of the banking, of course, but I think it's very much important to make the people a bit more sensible of the change that's happened, of course, in the sector.

[1:28] You have worked before at Morgan Stanley City in the banking sector, so you have seen all the journey of this change.

[1:35] So from your perspective, what is exactly the main factor that have changed throughout those years to the Swiss banking, or let's say, Europe banking and banking in general? What do you consider as, let's say, the main factors? Well, the one thing I think which is a big theme, of course, and not only in banking, insurance, everywhere, you know, sort of in the office space, is the optimization process. And I often compare it to the industry sector, which, you know, what happened in the 70s with robots coming in, automation, all of that, which completely changed the picture. And a similar thing is happening now in our sector with all the benefits and disadvantages. One little side mark. I'm always, I mean, I'm since 40 years now in the business. And the one thing I'm always worried, especially when you look at the global debt situation you have on the governments, is inflation. because, you know, that's the Achilles heel, if you will, of the whole thing. If inflation would get out of control, that you need to either you let it run or you lift the interest rates and that's something which nobody can afford, no government can afford, you know. And I do remember 1982, Paul Falker in the U.S. Lifting the U.S. interest rate short term up to 16%, 17%.

[2:54] You know, that was a different millennium. I think we're past that. If that happens, I don't think many, many economies are so resilient to survive that. I have to add that was really sort of, you know, for overnight and so on. But other interest rate, about 10, 11 percent, that was normal. And it was very successful to keep inflation, but the debt was not at the same level. So go back to this one, because this optimization process also helped significantly together with the ability to purchase from lower wage countries, Mexico in the first place in the US, China, so we shouldn't forget about this benefit that kept also inflation, in my view, under control. And that's a positive thing on it. And now we're seeing the same thing in our industry, and we will see that. It's just the beginning. And that gives me personally also hope that we keep inflation under control in the years to come because we have these efficiency increases.

[3:50] Hopefully, it will also improve the quality, of course, of the whole setup. And then the next step is, if this is true, you know, what is the value we can add or we in the industry should add in the whole thing? That's exactly the point. I mean, one of the things is, of course, we have considered us that I'm an IT or, of or I'm out of banking, but of course, you cannot leave, let's say, today without being in the banking care attached to banks.

[4:18] So I think the question is, how can banks, let's say, help us in the population, let's say, navigate all these ecosystem challenges, geopolitical challenges, and so on? I mean, inflation is one topic, but there's definitely more in these terms. I mean, And therefore, we expect a strong banking sector in the back end. And are the banks so resilient today to help?

[4:46] That's a very good question. And I also have to admit that's my really personal view. But I've been puzzled about this discussion in Switzerland, for example, UBS with the equity requirements. I mean, which bank did go bankrupt because they didn't have enough equity? It is normally liquidity. I mean, not only banks. Every company, mostly in normal cases, is liquidity. Let's see what happens with credit disease, and that's just my, again, observation and.

[5:15] From an equity point of view, there was no reason to stop the operation, but they were running increasingly out of liquidity. And I have to admit, too, I have a lot of clients with Credit Suisse, and when it happened, was it autumn 22 or something like that? I never thought this would happen. But in order to be on the safe side, I parked all the cash, liquidity, took it off the balance sheet and put it into a money market fund or anything else just to have it off the balance sheet.

[5:44] And if everybody's doing that that increases sort of that's the you know spiral and it ended up being real difficult but again it was not the equity of course if the equity would be much much much higher then you could say hey there's no problem they can always sell some buildings and have the liquidity the other thing may be an observation out of my profession too and maybe i don't know but yeah i'm since 40 years in the business and in the first 10 years i was in trading precious metals trading, foreign exchange trading as a market maker at Citibank and Cantonal Bank Zurich as well, and also options. And then I went into internal audit because it was so fascinating to see how the banks work from behind the scene, you know, revision. So you look behind it and you see how it works. That was very helpful. It was many years in controlling finance, treasury and so on. But what I try to say is you also see changes in, you know, when we see the capital recommended computation, then you had this risk weighted. So you take some balance sheet size and you say, well, this is 10 million assets here, but actually risk weighted is only 1 billion because it should not happen. Volatility is low.

[6:52] Volatility is low. And these are some assumptions which can turn out completely different. We have seen that the financial crisis, how many products were sold in Europe and is mortgage backed?

[7:03] That's very low risk, mortgage backed. I mean, what can happen here? Oops, unless you find out, you know, that the mortgage is very big and so on. We don't need to elaborate too much. But then you have that, that this risk all of a sudden goes up significantly and then leads to that. But do you think the banks are really right now in a risky exposure? Or at least how do you see that in the Swiss market? I mean,

[7:27] are the remaining Swiss banks, I mean, the Swiss banking, let's say, As we know, it was very prominent and prestigious, let's say, in a global scale, of course.

[7:39] Are they exposing such a risk and then from your perspective? And of course, we don't need to make a detailed analysis. But on these terms, do you feel we, I mean, in Switzerland, we have the sector or the privilege that the banking had before under risk control? Very good question. I think it is better than before the financial crisis.

[8:02] They tighten certain things but there's always a certain risk now you could argue you can say well what you mean with risk if it really comes to the problem then you know the government walks in and I mean we have seen it recently two or three years ago when some of the smaller banks in the US in California got into trouble and again it was a mechanical one because interest rates went up and therefore the bonds lost value which in mark to market is normal and all of a sudden those banks who reinvested they didn't have they had some losses they couldn't you know fix and then you know the central bank walked in and said okay we need to fix that so you can lend us that at 100 percent so that equalizes this loss which is only a technical loss so that makes sense to help out this one but not seem and that's maybe a bit a bit um a bit radical and not everybody will agree with that i personally feel um, I personally feel the Glass-Steagall Act, which the U.S. Introduced, I think, 1933 or 34, 33, where basically they said, hey, guys, either you're an investment bank where you take such risks or you're the traditional bank where, you know, the client deposit their money and you can borrow from them and so on. Retail bank. Exactly.

[9:17] And I think that was a good thing. And, you know, because each time you have that on the investment side, something goes wrong, big losses, and then the clients with their money, with their savings are at risk. And that should not be the case like that. I mean, in my view, I think that would be the solution.

[9:35] And then maybe just quickly, again, it's maybe political, but with UBS, you know, if we raise the equity standard, of course, it could be, from a marketing perspective, more attractive for Swiss banking. But I'm not sure it really gives, you know, the ultimate advantage. Advanced safety.

[9:53] That's what the CEO also said. I mean, there's the fight, I think, at the moment. Do we have to increase the equity or not? And what is for the UBS as an entity and what is for the market itself? Yeah, yeah. And a bit radical. The trader is coming back. Let's say if they do something extreme and then the stock price, currently $34,50 or something like that, drops to $15,000 because with this return on equity calculation, it doesn't make sense anymore. So, someone in the U.S. or somewhere else is going to buy, happily, this stock at 15 Swiss francs or 17, take over the company and move the headquarter to the U.S. And you're back to 35 Swiss. Excellent.

[10:32] Yeah, well, I think that will be, I would say, I mean, technically, yes.

[10:37] Practically, I think putting UBS outside of Switzerland, it will be a completely different case, right? Well, I fully agree. And I don't think that's just a mind. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I think that's what I'm saying. I think theoretically that would save the entity, but it will harm the, let's say, the face of the culture of it. I mean, that's the case. It's not the same anymore. It's not the same anymore. And I think right now, of course, UBS is sitting prominently on the... We could say then UBS means used to be Switzerland.

[11:15] No, that would be radical. Yeah, that would be radical. But hopefully it's not going that far. All my friends at UBS, apologies. I'm defending the case, I think. No, obviously. But I think this is the discussion we have. I want to come back to a different topic. We were discussing, when we have all this turmoil, we discussed about the Credit Suisse case, the integration with UBS, the banking sector itself, the way it's changing, of course, it's affect the market inside Switzerland. And I want to come to this topic right now because I think when the merge happened

[11:50] between Credit Suisse and UBS.

[11:54] People have a lot of stress, a lot of jobs will be lost, integration will happen, things will not work as before.

[12:00] What about the image of Swiss banking and so on and so forth? And not everything tragically happened, but it's a fact that jobs have been lost. And we fear also in the news that jobs will get lost by the time integration gets most mature. So to me, it's like a point, I mean the Swiss banking in terms of a job I mean if you're a student or a young professional or you're in your mid-career where would you who should you play your cards if you are in finance in terms of a job right so to feel a little bit more safe in terms of putting your head down and doing the work yeah well I think it's not only down to banking but in general you know what we will we will have an increased need or importance of personal emotional contact. And I make an example, you know, if you're a watch producer, I think you have to decide either you produce a watch which costs in the future 25 Swiss francs, digital shows you the time perfectly, but there's no emotion. It's just very practical. Or you produce a watch which costs 5,000 or 10,000 Swiss francs with a lot of emotions on it. And the things in between, yeah, they don't have a character. So in our case, you know, in a couple of years from now, I assume a lot of the mechanical process will be done with the support of artificial intelligence.

[13:25] Of other items which help us in this one. But you still need the key between the humans that you can explain that, you can give the comfort to the client and the person. And that's what I see. I'm now since, oh my God, 26, since 14, 15 years in a family office and something I really enjoy, that you can have the personal contact, you can explain the situation, you can calm down. And I have to admit, I cannot tell my clients, come to me, I have the better performance. I mean, after 40 years, I learned my lessons. Also, as a professional trader, how often did I make money for a completely different reason than I thought in the morning?

[14:08] At least you're honest. Well, it's the advantage, you become humble, but I think that's very important. I mean, a very senior trader at Citibank told me once, US is different, of course. He said, look, before you're not fired three times, you're not a real trader. What he meant is you have to go through some of the, you know, that ego gets a bit under control and do it practically. But what I can promise is that after 40 years, I do not fall into traps. I'm not tempted into this and that and items like that. And that is quite a lot. It is quite a lot emotionally for the client to know. I have someone who can steer around these temptations which are out there everywhere. You know, I look at YouTube or this and that and they promise and so on. Oh, my God. You know. Yeah, of course. There is no free lunch. Yeah, there's no free lunch. Even not with artificial intelligence. Yes, this is a good ask because I actually want to jump to this topic right now. I mean, a lot of people accuse, you know, we're losing the jobs because of AI, which is not completely true, but partially yes.

[15:12] I mean, as you mentioned, processes will be streamlined, automation will kick in, and of course, jobs will be consolidated, obviously.

[15:21] But it's also tempting to think that you have a super intelligence that actually, I don't need to trade anymore, I don't need to manage my money differently. I think experience is where it comes in. But for me, it's also the point now, considering the banks part, how much AI do you think, also from your perspective now, you know, the journey from, let's say, from basic computers to today, I mean, you have lived everything, you know, in banking. So now we have AI. I mean, that's the hot cookie. So we will need less traders, but highly efficient, much more, let's say, IT guys in terms of their way of thinking and less finance. Or we need both. I mean, instead of one finance smart guy, now two guys. One who supports the IT part, the AI part, and one who will support the financial part, the experience part, as you mentioned. Very good question, because also for the IT side, then you ask yourself, when is AI better in creating AI? And all the risk behind, you know, it makes me nervous a bit. Yeah, you cannot be good in both. You're either good in finance, you know, the mechanism, or you can be good in IT. But being both in both perfect, it's, I mean, how many people? Well, I mean, the one thing I observed too in these years is that someone once said, each time I find the key to the market, it works for a while, and then someone is changing the lock.

[16:49] And why is that? Because you have many, maybe, I don't know, say a thousand influence factors. And they stay the same. So you say, it must be possible to have a system and you put it in and you know how it works. But the weighting of the factors change. I'll give you a nice example. Inflation 10 years ago, it was not a theme. Inflation was not a theme. Three, four years ago, it was the theme, you know, and inflation a little bit higher than shock in the market and so on. And that is an example, and it is correct. And that's where then some intuition is also an experience needed to say, you know, we have to change the model a bit to this and that. And don't be extreme, is my view too. Don't be extreme and exactly and open to that. But I don't think I really answered your question. I think, you know, in terms of, I think that's the key message, don't be extreme, it's very relevant.

[17:48] Because you can't be extreme nowadays, you're tempted to be extreme. You get the IT guy, which is special in IT, you have the financier, who's expert on that, and you go in an extreme to beat the market in something that the market sometimes... Per se, as you mentioned, it's changing the lock. So even the IT guy doesn't understand, the financier tries to understand as well. Both are surprised. Yeah, yeah.

[18:14] Yes, and there's another factor coming in, eventually psychology. Because, I mean, the markets are not rational. I mean, let's say if your stock which trades at 100 and then something is changing in the business and the real new value is 120, then in theory, it should go to 120 and continue. No, it's doing like that. And then it overshoots to 130 and comes back and so on. And that's all psychology because some believe, some don't believe. There are other interests behind. It's another reason, for example, also since my early days as a trader, I use charts because for me, that's a reflection of the psychology. You can read, you can learn to read the mental state of the investors in that and identify patterns where you say, you know what? Like silver, you know, in the last few weeks. And I have to admit, I then, you know, reduced for my clients because in the new year, I felt this is just overdone. I had no clue, but just a pattern. I did it a bit too early, I have to admit, you know, too early. And then on this Friday, it happened.

[19:17] And by the way, the pattern was, I mean, I experienced in 1997, we had a similar picture. Silver went up from somewhere to $60 and then in the years to come fell down to $450 where it stayed for years. For years, especially silver. And there's no interest, nothing. There's no value created within. Now, it's a different story. Again, interest rates are very high. That is harmful for such a metal. And today we have a bit of a different situation. But the psychology is a stage two. And here, the important pattern, and that's where we can also add value because we are more experienced or we went through that, you know, losing money. It gives you much more stress than winning. You know, you, yeah, it's true. You know, you have, you invest a hundred thousand and you make 10,000 and you say, great. And, oh, next holiday, maybe we can go from the four to the five-star hotel. You have the money. It's easy. I mean, yeah, it's much easier. But losing to 90, I mean, is that, and of course, when it goes to 90, there's a lot of bad news. Otherwise it wouldn't go to 90. So that continues and then fear comes in and then 80,000, oh my God, I cannot afford that. I have an example. I said, look, imagine you buy a new expensive car, which costs 140,000 Swiss francs in the shop. You buy it, you're very happy. And then the next day, they save a special action. We sell them for 15,000.

[20:41] What do you do? Do you sell the new board because the market is 15,000? I cannot afford that. Or do you buy a second one? You say, oh, that's cheap. That's cheap. Let's buy the second one and I'm done for the rest of my life. I mean, four hours of investment. It makes sense. It's a bit colorful. And I mean, you look at successful investors like Warren Buffett or value investors. And I remember in the financial crisis, the Goldman Sachs share came down from, I don't know, 450. And don't put the numbers, but around 170 he bought. So the market, ah, Warren Buffett is buying Goldman Sachs. He knows something. The market went down to 130. Ah, you see, even he doesn't know where it's going. Even he's wrong. But he himself, he was very happy because he said, I looked at the company, I looked at the stock and having this stock for 170 is worthwhile.

[21:33] And the point behind this, because he's not thinking in dollars. But in the stock, it's like with the car. I mean, you're happy with your car. Who cares what's the worth today? I mean, it's a bit extreme, of course. Of course, the company has a value and it can increase and increase. But I think, just touching this point of Warren Buffett, he mentioned there, I'm happy when the stock goes down and I've bought in some place because then I can buy cheaper. So he continues to buy in. So that's the point.

[22:02] If the conviction is right. If the conviction is right. But I think in the volumes that he trades, I think he can move a little bit also.

[22:12] On the other side, I want to come back to another topic. You said you're 16, 20 years in the family office business. And now we see family offices becoming very prominent, let's say. I've read in the news, UBS has exposed this study of the great wealth of the generations. A lot of wealth will be transferred to the new generations. And of course banks used to manage that now a lot of family offices came into the game a lot of rich families would like to have their own family office some of them, because of lifestyle I have a family office like having an expensive car some of them of course they have interests and of course multi-generational.

[22:53] Where's the truth in that is it a trend that everyone now in this transfer world tries to have its own family office or join a family office or it's really a family office exactly taking out this value from the banks outside of it. Yeah, I mean, maybe two elements which separate the family office. Well, I have to be careful from the banks because banks might do it as well at a certain point. But the important point is I see it for myself. Yeah. I own only to my clients. They pay me and nothing else and I have no conflict of interest whatsoever. And that's one advantage. So you can really act, you know, in the best interest of the client. Besides, well, I'll leave that another point too about the control mechanism. And the other thing is, it's like going in a hotel, you know, if a very good concierge downstairs where you can ask for the cinema ticket or the theater you would like to get or an upgrade, he can help you. So that adds a lot of value. And for me as a family office, I see myself, I mean, I've been CFO at Morgan Stanley for a while too. I mean, not for whole Morgan Stanley, but for continental Europe.

[24:08] That's not a small thing. Yeah, yeah, yeah. But I'm going to create a wrong impression. But you're responsible, you know, for the financial belongings, other things, from taxes to this and that. And you can take out complexity. And today the world is very complex, increasingly complex. And it's good to have to have the insight and also i mean we do a lot of focus as well with our clients on inheritance the planning with that we have lawyers where we work together again no financial interest i don't earn anything but i want to make sure a client of mine as a one stop shop if he has a question here i can help him to resolve that we do a proper financial planning and at the same time this financial planning might influence the way i invest the money as a family of it because it matters, you know, what is the liquidity requirements, the risk appetite and so on and so forth. And you can also take the next generation on board already and introduce them to the business, which of course is also in my interest. I'm honest about this one. Of course. But it leads to the win-win situation for everybody. Yeah, but I think that's the biggest challenge, I think, because we've also, outside of wealth transfer...

[25:21] We've seen it very often, let's say, in various topics that the first generation maybe makes the wealth, generates the wealth. The second generation tries to preserve the third generation, perhaps losing the wealth. And or perhaps if you're unlucky, perhaps the second generation already losing a part of it. So I think the family is trying to preserve, even if sometimes it's against the interest of an investment, but it's pro to the interest of the family. I think that is a completely different perspective to a bank, perhaps.

[25:55] That's also true. And you can have dialogues with the next generation, coaching them in a way, showing up what's happening and these are these patterns. And I have to admit, sometimes in my experience, I've also seen it's sometimes a bit almost sad because it's then eventually difficult because you're always in the shadow of your grandparents or your parents and to create something out of it. And I mean, in the end, money is not the most important thing. It's important, yes, and it's preserved, but it's not essential to life, I think. No, no, I think that especially the families or us, if you come to a certain

[26:37] level, let's say, I think you really realize that it's not the answer to all questions, definitely. It helps, it gives speeds, it gives flexibility, but it's not the answer to all the questions, mainly to the most important ones, I would say, in life. But let's say if we consider, again, the family office part, now, considering the family office itself, you have different elements also to manage. What is the hardest part, let's say, in the family office business? Is this the interpersonal?

[27:10] I would assume personally it's the interpersonal because you have to discuss with the family, with individuals. You don't see just numbers and portfolios which you try to optimize, let's say. I think that makes it complex and it makes your job also more complex because you're not only a banker or financier, let's say. You are sometimes, as you mentioned, a coach, a psychologist, a friend, a concierge. You have all these cuts, right? Absolutely. And I think that's where we can add the biggest value, to be quite frank. And with the trend, too, with the artificial intelligence and all of that, and that's now not in my interest, but I hope with that we can increase the efficiency, which would lead to lower costs as well, which is also beneficial to the investor. So, and again, I mean, if I can produce cheaper and put this onto the client, I'm happy with that. And I can focus on what is really, what is really interesting and motivating too. And that's the interpersonal contact and also understanding where a client is. Also, the next generation to provide that. Absolutely. And now I'm going to be provocative.

[28:24] Now I'm the second, third generation you know, 2026 2040, 2035 I'm discussing

[28:31] my personal issues with ChatGPT and AI, why not? Why should I have a family officer, let's say I mean, I've done this part with my private life, let's say I'm just provoking now, with ChatGPT why.

[28:49] Can not, let's say, AI also play the financial officer about me and then is this perhaps a danger for your let's say now family office business that it shrinks in them in this part and say okay, banks are coming in i mean financial obviously interpersonal sinks as well because ai takes a little bit of a space and then it shrinks can it happen or it's do you think still you know this interpersonal cannot go out when you reach this family office needs or level of help let's say maybe i'm too old or influenced or that but i personally think and i see there's an opportunity i mean i mean sorry just deviate quickly also if you think about society 200 years from now, 500 years from now. I mean, in 500 years, nobody has to work repetitive work anymore. Hopefully. Probably nobody has to work. So what are we doing all day long? You know, praying or meditation or looking? No, but looking for the sense in life. And I'm sure we will work, but not necessarily, you know, we will survive, we will do something. But it's one of the challenges we have in society. I mean, you see how it goes. Now, if that continues, in theory, You have a few people who are extremely wealthy because they get all the benefits and a lot of people without a job, which have to be supported by social system, blah, blah, blah. So how do we then share that? Because the rich person also needs people who have money to buy his product.

[30:15] It's circular. So society will change. And similar to in our industry, too, I think that it's not different from this point of view. So, yes, this interpersonal contact and then very critical. I mean, I use ChatGPT as well. I'm surprised sometimes about, oh, my God, you know, it's amazing. But I still trust this mechanical process. And we had before the meeting a discussion about logos and mythos, logic and emotion, which ideally are in sync with each other and not separate. And it's important in that balance. Now, I ask you, would you prefer, you know, you're winning the lottery or you've got your money and you use ChatGPT and you fully trust ChatGPT, whoever is behind and whoever is controlling the service and whoever is controlling the program that you follow.

[31:05] Or would you prefer to have someone with 40 years experience in a family office using ChatGPT and therefore reducing the fee because he has less work to do, but he can judge whether this makes sense, what ChatGPT proposes or not? And if something goes wrong, you can sue me or try to sue ChatGPT for the wrong advice. No chance.

[31:27] No chance. No chance. But I think that's very essential. I mean, I think the key element here is a responsibility. Because, of course, everyone likes AI and thinks it will not solve all the issues. And, of course, privately, we all use AI somehow in any sense. But we know that AI can say whatever with own responsibilities. So it's actually good. We see the knowledge. It's fast, but there's no responsibility. So I think the mix is great. So I want to ask you a last question. I mean, giving back a little bit, getting back to your experience. Now, ask Sven, what would be your wish for the Swiss banking or the financial sector in Switzerland? I mean, you know the history, you can forecast a little bit, you know the status quo. If you had a wish, what would it be? I mean, if you could change things. I mean, let's say you are the judge.

[32:24] It's a good question. And it's starting rotating already because the one thing is, when we say when you say banking do you mean these legal, corporations in the current the finance sector the finance sector I would say finance sector sure because you know I also was in contact with someone else lately we were discussing that a younger person and I mean.

[32:47] You can ask yourself, I'm sorry, bankers, but I have to say that here. You have to ask yourself whether we still need banks in the future. That's a good question also. I mean, banks, yeah, well, no, but banks traditionally, they were a place where you can deposit your surplus cash and it's safe in the safe there in the bunker and you can borrow money. So that's a transmission of money and you need a bank license to facilitate that. Now, the pure facilitation process is nowadays not needed anymore from a pure perspective.

[33:23] In theory, I could go to eBay and say, who lends me money and so on. Now, what is still needed is the research who says, yeah, you can trust this guy. You can give him $100,000. Oh, no, don't trust him. That's something the banks do. But for this part, you don't need a bank license. Yeah. And also, if you do it in a big extent, then you can cross an economy. Yes. And then, in addition to that, because you had the money there, then the banks also became the key to the stock exchange because then they have a seat on the stock exchange. By the way, I had the pleasure when I was young also for a couple of months being Zurich on the old exchange. Oh, that's nice. I was in pictures. A la crie. That's really nice. A place to be, I would say, that should be buzzing. Yeah, you're welcome. Nevertheless, you need the bank, so you have your money there, and then the bank can buy for you stocks and have it in deposit and all of that. Now, this guy said, I don't need banks. We go directly to a deposit bank. We have a broker-dealer license. We do that. I don't need a bank. What for?

[34:26] And here you could say, well, I personally, I work with banks and I enjoy it too because what I need is also their research, their recommendation, the dialogue, the exchange. But again, for all of that, you don't need a formal bank license. Yeah, true. You can be a research house. So I'm not saying banks will disappear, but I guess the form, and we're not talking about next 10 years, but the form will change over time. Because the need will change, apparently. Sorry? Because the need will change, apparently. Yes, and the abilities, and I personally think there are still very, very interesting jobs out there. But you have to be strong on the interpersonal skills to do that, be interested in the clients.

[35:07] Also, don't be driven by money. That happens too much. I mean, sorry, you know, I remember when I came to Morgan Stanley in 1994. Okay, and that was a nice time. In London. And I saw some of the salaries. And I said, hey, guys, in Zurich, in Switzerland, you have a lot of bankers. They would do that for a third of the price. But that was a different model because it's an entrepreneurial model. Because they were paid on what they produce. And they can take 20% of what they produce. And if they produce nothing, they get nothing. And if someone is producing 100 million for the bank, then give him 20 million. I mean, that's an American way. And I'm not saying it's wrong. It's a different story. It's a different story. It's a different story. And then also you treat people like an entrepreneur. But, you know, especially on the management side, sorry, a bit critical again.

[35:50] You know, a real entrepreneur, he can make a lot of money or he's losing everything. Yeah, and you have the risk on your shoulders. You know, it's your company. Yeah, yeah. And I don't want to mention names, but I mean, you know, within Switzerland, we have someone when he was young, he went into the heavy metal, the sort of industry producing trains. I don't know. He's very wealthy today. He deserved every penny of it. You know, he could have gone different. And then in the bank, sometimes as a manager, you're paid for taking risk. On both sides. And then if things go good, you get a huge bonus, huge bonus, huge bonus every year. And if something goes wrong, you get fired and you write the book and you get probably a lump sum to go. I mean, the temptation has become reckless, unfortunately. And again, I mean, 99% of the people were proper.

[36:42] Yeah, obviously. You're right there. But of course, we, the mere mortals, we see this 1% and of course, you know, the movie's extravagant that, of course, of course pushing that as well. But I understand. I mean, I think also as well in the future that banks will change and it will change.

[36:59] Younger generations are losing this interpersonal need some of the times. You know, we see it also in other interactions, not only with the banks. So the culture shift of working in finance will be different. That is, I think, definitely a fact. But Sven, thank you very, very much for your inputs. I think it was a pleasure and very much seeing you and the energy that you bring also from the sector, actually your insights are very important because you have done this journey, you know it's in depth and you have not only the finance part in terms of banking but also the family offices which is also a case, you know, certainly these years will increase apparently so thank you very much for being here today. Thank you Dimitrios, thank you very much for your attention. Thank you very much as well so thank you very much also from your side keep on writing some feedback also let me know who else we should invite and in any case we'll stay in touch also over the the channels that we are already connected linkedin instagram and looking forward to your feedback thank you very much.