I'd like to start with Marco Gay, CEO and head of Zest, certainly a point of reference in Italy when we talk about investing in startups, about open innovation, which is an extremely important topic. Actually, I'd like to reiterate the importance of open innovation in a world that must increasingly hybridize between established companies and growing startups. Is there interest, and what kind of interest do you see in the world of plant engineering, from startups, from startup investors?
Well, thank you. Good morning, first of all. Yes, there is interest. There is interest because there is more and more talk about investments connected to the world of artificial intelligence in its future forms, which are agentic and then physical, which everyone says we'll see in 10 years, but in my opinion that physical, robotic one we'll see much sooner. And so we're starting to talk about sensors, about plants, about how to run data securely and coherently, because in the end everything will be based on data, and so when we talk about data we talk about security in putting that at the center.
There is a lot of talent in this country because open innovation, an American term, we could translate it as applied technology transfer. It means that a company that builds plants can already find semi-finished goods, semi-products in startups that are doing research and development with much faster times than costs, that is, much more rapidly than an established company that has to look at the business. To do this, you clearly need to aim strong investments, because this is a game, given that we have a strongly industrial connotation and a great capacity for talent and technology that we cannot afford not to play to the full, being the only country — this is my observatory, which has both sides, the innovative side and the industrial side, but also a bit of the financial side in the sense of risk culture, equity, and moving in the direction that these companies are then able to sufficiently support the investments needed.
What kind of opportunities does Giovanni Tamburi see in this world, in the world of plant engineering?
Well, there are always plenty of opportunities. The world of plant engineering, as I know it, apart from the fact that today we are in front of an audience that has had the relative fortune of being somehow hooked into the world of energy, which compared to all the other worlds has paid much better, has paid very well, has benefited from many things, and so on. So we are talking about a type of plant engineering, a type of sector or sub-sectors that certainly are not experiencing what very much of Italian manufacturing is experiencing in other worlds, and what very much of plant manufacturing in other sectors is experiencing. So what opportunity? Well, first of all, unfortunately I always tell the same things: the opportunities are there, one has to seize them. Today, as things stand, the biggest problem for investments in plants is where to find the money. Marco alluded to it at the end of his speech, but it's all very well to say we'll do this, Microsoft has 4 billion in investments, everyone does their own, and so on and so forth. But your company, the supplier, the company in the plant sector, not particularly on the Happy Island of Energy, what can it do? Well, the biggest issue that it seems to me this morning — I didn't attend the whole morning — hasn't been touched on, is where do we find this money? Because the real issue is that the dwarfism of Italian industry is still there, the individualism of Italian industry cannot grow, and in my opinion, together with the discussion of opportunities, we must have the discussion of sources, because certainly with the world of banks lending less and less, interest rates rising, yesterday's data on American inflation is shaking up the markets, and so on. The issue is how to grow one's own companies, which is why even with Marco and with Confindustria we are reasoning about how to find formulas to facilitate aggregations. But facilitating aggregations can only be done if your culture, the culture of entrepreneurs and top management of companies, particularly in such an important sector as manufacturing, plant engineering, want to build a system, want to come together, want to understand that artificial intelligence — all the beautiful things said today about returning to digital, which Butti also brought up, and so on — imply shoulders, dimensions that are not consistent with the average and medium-small dimensions of Italian industry. Then, if you like, I can elaborate a bit on this, but my answer for now would be this.
I want to ask you a question, and then I'll go back to Marco, about the risks. Speaking of 'we can't find the money, we don't know where to find the money,' is there a risk that instead the money can come from other countries where there is greater availability of funds, but also for investment, and therefore we might see — not just Italy, but in general all of Europe — a consolidation carried out by extra-European players?
Absolutely yes. I don't see it as a risk, but I see it as an opportunity, in the sense that if the world has become global — then we know that globalization over the last 3-4 years has taken a few steps back, and so there are many silos, more 'pro-domo' than 'pro-domo globale'. But globalization is a fact. If today, as things stand, we pay €100 or €200 for a television of who knows how many inches, we benefit from globalization. We can then say whether the money from those people who come here is a risk — you have to take the good of both. For example, we know that the Arab world, as well as part of the Asian world, is coming to Europe with an enthusiasm, a desire to invest far greater than in the past few years. They are starting from the easier sectors — the famous hospitality, the famous fashion, the famous luxury, and so on. But many data centers are arriving all over the world, financed with Asian money and with Arab money, or money from the Arab world. Not only that, but let's say something that no one has said here either. The issue of money is not just ours, it's global. The magnificent seven American companies are now borrowing money after telling us for decades that they were full of money. What does this mean? That they, first and foremost, the great American technology giants, need money so badly that they have to issue bonds. Google issued a bond a few days ago at a very high rate from my point of view. So your question is perfectly pertinent, because in this global world you have to bring out what's there, and if the negative aspect of paying more for petrol and diesel is that someone in certain parts of the world gets rich, well, let's try to take that money and bring it home and use it in our companies, also because they are ready to do it. We have to be ready. First, to aggregate; second, to open up the capital; third, eventually to think in terms of the stock market or a real opening of capital as there is everywhere in the world. And in Italy we have mega, mega savings and a huge fear of the financial markets sector. So, these, in my opinion, are the things to say, the reasoning to make, because today, as things stand, the world is like this: states are heavily indebted, as are private individuals, even those who were quite rich until the other day are quite indebted, so we need to regulate these flows, understand these flows, and interpret them in the most virtuous way possible.
Very good, thank you. I'll go back to Marco Gay and I'd like to bring to the audience's attention the opportunities — then I'll also ask you a question about investing in startups, but I'll get to that shortly. The opportunities of so-called open innovation, where do you actually see the opportunities? Companies are understanding that it's good to go out more and talk with startups that are not necessarily startups formed by young people. It's not always like that.
Well, yes, and I must say that not only do I see it, but we [clears throat] as a company, for a few years now we have started changing our model in this direction. Let me explain: one thing is selling open innovation as consulting — what you should do, there are X startups that can give you this service. The other thing is taking concrete steps. And why do I say it's changing? Because the response is positive. Concrete steps for me means: you want to do an open innovation project, you understand what technologies are available in startups. Then the theme of 'young people' I'd put aside for a moment, because the average age of our startuppers is 38, so they're not children. But the very interesting thing is that you find managers of large international groups who at a certain point say, 'I have an idea, I have the resources to start, I'm going to market, and I have the skills, the ability to aggregate it.' How do I say we're changing? We link the so-called POCs, proofs of concept, so direct experimentation with companies, to scouting. So it's not just — and it was an effort, because right from the start, as you can imagine, the client's reaction wasn't, 'Excuse me, I want to give you money for a service, and you want me to spend more to make a prototype?' And the answer was: if you keep putting money into services and then never put anything on the ground, this change will never happen. Well, in the final analysis, with Fondazione CRT in Turin, together we invest over 2.5 million. Of these 2.5 million, almost half is dedicated to proofs of concept, which means finding the technology, finding the company, getting them to work together to see if there's a product. The maturity of even small and medium enterprises is clearly greater. There is objectively an issue of capacity to invest, because it's not that because one is a startup it costs little. If one works well and has a good product, it costs like any of our companies. But the central point is that the will to take this path is beginning to emerge, and this path delivers results, because when in my company, which builds plants, I find a sensor, I develop a piece of process, maybe with a bit of agentic artificial intelligence — that is, the kind that makes choices if well instructed — I end up with not just a cost cut, and this is the other step that I think is especially emerging among SMEs, but I end up with a competitive advantage, that is, added value on production. It's beginning to become, in reality, the norm for large companies, with hundreds of thousands of euros; today an extra effort should be made, especially by SMEs. Let's turn to startups — at first it's strange, but not because we have to be Italian at all costs, but because what do these young people do? At a certain point they go abroad, find capital abroad, list abroad, sell abroad, and we have invested time and resources to make an entrepreneur very good, and I'm happy about it. I must say that every time I do an exit abroad I'm happy, because I do the exit, but I say, 'Isn't there anyone in Italy who...' and this then scales up. But if companies come together, do sector projects — which is a nice first step in starting to share risks and opportunities — then you get results, and when the results come, now speaking as an entrepreneur, I don't stop anymore, because I see it's growing, adoption is growing, open innovation is no longer a taboo. Working with a startup has a certain procedure. I often define myself as a cultural mediator, because you're dealing with someone who couldn't care less about your company processes. Of course, he has the coolest product in the coolest way with the best solutions, and he believes in it like crazy. You have to punch him in the face to keep him still. But fine. The company says, 'I have my processes.' The cultural mediator serves to find that space to do the so-called proof of concept, which then becomes investment, which then becomes a product, but above all becomes believing in a system. And to conclude: in a country that has made its greatness and its wealth out of SMEs, today I can't understand how one cannot believe in SMEs that are simply called startups — which are, after all, SMEs, right? Well done.
So, I share your feeling when the investment takes a promising SME abroad. I'll cite the case. The company is still in Italy, but the capital has come from the United States. I'll cite the striking, fantastic, wonderful case of Exein, which is a startup in Rome that does cybersecurity, embedded security — maybe it's a topic that interests you, that interests your world too, and probably all of you know it — it received 170 million, which for an Italian startup is a very important figure, on a valuation of 1 billion, predominantly from US funds, and this is exactly the problem you were underlining. Ah, sure. Italians who found capital abroad. They're all Italians who wanted to stay here. Yes, yes, yes, yes. Then effectively Vantage is here in Milan, Exein is in Rome, so they continue to develop in Rome, but it's still a dynamic that has to be taken into consideration. We have 5 minutes to say a couple of things. So, Marco, and then I'll conclude with Tamburi.
From open innovation to corporate venture capital — does it make sense? Is it something that's happening, or are there very few companies that invest with the posture of venture capital in startups?
