Don't Panic! Innovate. Tech Turbulences & Shifts (Ametsreiter, McAfee, Wilkinson) | DLD Munich 20

Yeah, thank you Amy, happy to do that. So I think if we look at where we are at the moment, then I would see and feel that we are somehow torn between courage and fear. Courage because we do have some fantastic companies, it's the developers in Berlin, it's Solonius in Munich. But great fear: political situation pretty unclear, trade wars. It is also are we falling behind other continents, countries? What happens to us? And it feels like a train, but it feels like we are passengers of the train and not a locomotive. I would like to see Europe and Germany being locomotive, being ahead, being a hub for pioneers, for ideas, for growth. And if we then have a look at the effects, we see two things. One is the domestic market in Europe is the biggest in the world. Does it feel like that? Maybe not, that is bad. We should be more confident on that one because it's a great thing to sit on the biggest single domestic market. The other one, if we look, that also shows that some parts of the feeling is right. And it is the most valued and most valuable companies in the world only two European and German companies. That doesn't feel good. That means we are missing future. All the valuation of companies, 70% is future, only 30% is actual. So if you're selling 11 million cars VW, fantastic, but why is Tesla valuation higher, bigger? So we're missing that huge. And we need to realize that we are in the age of digitization, and if we are not playing a role, we will not play a role in the future. And therefore we miss that. We need to go back to that, to really be hub for pioneers, startups, ideas, and generate more momentum and be more digital. So I really believe this is missing. So I think both our existing fear correction, we just need to find a way out of that. But that's where we're sitting, that's at least my assumption.

I think it always starts with a shared vision. If their vision is right, so that everybody is really part of it, understands it, and they always need to be rational argument and also the emotional one. You need to also understand with a heart. And therefore it is very much depending on that vision. If a noun would ask the question, is the vision of the European Union, what is the vision of Germany? Could anybody please tell me? Then there might be some answers, but not very accurate ones. And I think that we do have some things which are greater here. Normally a building concept for a company, for a country, on strength. What is a strength? I mean, if I walk through the streets of Munich, it's different than walking through the streets of San Francisco. So that's a positive here. Living here is fantastic. So if we make it a great place to live, that would be one part and we are already pretty good on that one: speed, sustainability, green, public transport, security, all of that. The second one, also make it a great place to learn and work. So universities, some very good ones, but only few. Much better ones in the US. Learning IT courses for kids not existing really. So learn and work, we need to do something there. And then its infrastructure. So it's really hard to understand that we are now in this... I am not gonna sit here and describe Germany infrastructure as so-so. Yeah, that's true. But what I do not understand, we are sitting on 15 billion in subsidies and nobody is using them. Money on the table, nobody using it. We should have used that. And then the last point, it's venture capital, its capital. Where does capital go? There is ideas. Where you find ideas, you have companies. Where you have companies, you have jobs. It is ridiculous that Germany has lower venture capital than France. I mean, you find the president in France writing an article in Wired around artificial intelligence. Was our politician wording around that one? So I mean, this is something we really believe. If we ignore that, then there is plenty of money. International money. But why in the second and third phase, in the C round, all the companies are leaving Europe? Spotify now New York, Booking.com now Priceline US. How is that? I think that we should have the biggest fund in the world, or at least having as much as the US funds. So 100 million for Europe would be a decent amount, and then being invested in Europe and beyond that also in the world, generating momentum, because we need to believe in ideas. Only ideas and innovation are generating future. And I mean, this is what you mentioned before: don't panic, innovate. Think what you could do, how to use technology for sustainability, how do you use technology against many things. And I think this we are not doing in the best and most accurate and future-oriented way, and we miss the path and should be much better.

I don't think it's an America only problem. And I mean, maybe a follow-up on the capital and venture capital question. I think there's a huge thing which could be changed in Europe and in Germany especially. Because in the US, it's normal that insurance, banks, foundations are using the money, and the money can be used and will be invested into startups. Oh, yeah, yeah, it's forbidden. It's forbidden, forbidden. So that's two things. One is this money. An insurance is sitting on a lot of money, same with banks. It's not allowed to them to do that bigger because it's not an asset class they are allowed to invest in. Interesting, which is stupid. It's just stupid. If you would be enabling everybody to invest the money, then you would invest the money in the place where you live. You would have billions, multi billions to be invested like in the US. And the other thing, the pension funds are investing in some startups and off of Greece or some other stuff, and this is seen as risk-free. Interestingly, risk-free. So it doesn't make sense. The return is zero. If you have your money in a normal savings account, you get a return, dividend yield of 0.12%. If you're happy. This means that people having their money there, at the pension fund or at savings, it will be a difficult and tough situation for them if they are old, if they are retired, because they are losing that money. It's not growing, they're losing money. So I mean, this is unfair and nobody talks about that. Why? Because somehow shares are not liked by many politicians, which is not logical, it's not rational, and it's wrong. So that's something where really we could improve. Very simple. It just takes some courage, it just takes some decision-making, and then you would get that one.

I would say yes, yeah, which is bad. And I mean, in the US, it's called experience and know-how. Here it's called, you failed, you are a loser. So I mean, it might have gotten a little better, so it's not that harsh anymore, but it's still not a great story if you are starting a company, some game, and you fail. People remember, people talk about that, and it's clearly seen with a negative connotation.

I think that there are areas where we are really trying to find a common commitment and alignment on certain things. I mean, that's a good democratic process, I love that one. So that's really good. It's also clear that politics and governments need to be caring, support people who need help, health systems, medical service, etc. So I think around that, that's a good setup. Could also be better, but overall I think the direction is a very humanistic direction which is excellent. And what really depressed me for instance in California, which I mean, converting is really strong, it could be a country in Europe and a strong country, also a great successful federal state. If you are there for instance Santa Monica, you see people sleeping at the beach, then going to some shower rooms, taking a shower, putting on a tie suit, and go to work. This for me is depressing. That's something I mean, will you find it here? Maybe not to that aspect and not so many. So therefore, this humanistic aspect I think is a very important one, and this has been taken care of by politicians, by companies, by society. And what I also believe is that we are overregulated. You know, we are known for to-do lists. To-do is great, but too much stuff is not great. And therefore we need to move out of this overregulation. I mean, it's not necessary to regulate everything and to do it on a very high level. We need to see some market dynamics. If we are missing market dynamics, that's not good. And therefore it should be in a social context, but market dynamics are super important and we should see more. But I also think you're moving in the right direction in some important areas.

I think, I mean, the topic of legacy is a big one. And I really believe that what you mentioned, monopolistic situation is bad. It's bad for innovation, it's bad for consumers, clearly bad. The same for old legacy stuff. If there's no new things coming, it's boring, it's no innovation. So therefore, I think one of the most difficult things is to ignore legacy and make a move into the future. It is the same for countries. If you once have a system set up and they are used to, 'I receive normally 100 million from the bonus house,' it's difficult to only give them 60. They just would not understand it. It would be a big riot, it would be a big thing. So therefore, legacy can be dangerous, it can endanger your future. And therefore, if you are not anymore looking into the future and having that very clear vision, that very clear understanding, and also follow that with clear decisions, then you are in trouble. For companies, this could be a huge billing system which we are running, it's super difficult to bring something new in. Why? It's so human. People are working for that legacy system technology and they know what to do, it's their job. This new stuff, machine learning or whatever, is coming in, they don't know it. So they will protect that and have a million arguments to keep stuff. And so therefore it is difficult for countries, for companies, to really move into the future and make hard and tough decisions.

Okay and Hannes, so 5G, I know infrastructures. I mean, what are we adding, what should I add? I think there's this famous saying that Plato once used, but also some others, you would like to leave the world a little better than it was before. And I think this is great if you do some inventing, to invent to do so, to invent some things, initiate something which makes the world a little bit better. It could be around sustainability, I think we all have clearly responsibilities around that one. That also means future. And the other one is, of course for us it's infrastructure. I mean, it's the job, it's the position. We are bringing gigabit to the country. I do remember four years ago everybody in Germany said 50 megabit is enough, 1,000 is enough for a moment. And then we moved to 10 gigabit and then 200. And that's something you need to think big to move things. If you are complacent, you're not moving anything. And therefore making things a little better, contribute personally, sometimes it needs to hurt a bit or a lot. So that's something where we should add something to society, to companies, leave a legacy. Be it gigabit, be it 5G, fantastic infrastructure. It will totally revolutionize our industry. I mean, the industry with Internet of Things, with edge computing, with 5G, with things connected to 5G, the industry, production of the future will be totally different. Why? At the moment it's Wi-Fi in the production halls. In the future it will be 5G. Wi-Fi is losing data packets, so it's not precise. 5G is precise, it's not losing anything. I mean, this is just some ideas why it's better. And therefore I think that should be roughly the direction.

Well, I think, I mean, what is always good, and that's not new, but do what you love. I mean, you just pay down in doing that. And then think not only for yourself but in a bigger context. I mean, that is good for you and good for others. And that's something which always helps and go forward. And definitely work together. I think we need to look for more common ground, to be together. So help me thank the panel.