Some cynics have sadly posited that the main factor driving global value crea-tion is and will continue to be Man’s exploitation of Man. Many great minds and philosophers behind major political trends have since followed suit. This quarter, we have decided to take a closer look at this issue, with our trademark historic angle. Of course, we are not looking to draw up a historical inventory of human misery, but rather to try and understand how debt, combined with the monetisation of easily-exploitable resources leads to a) a form of enslave-ment and b) an exacerbation of inequalities that are likely to result in value destruction (wars, revolutions, dismantling of organisations). And - surprise! - we have come to the conclusion that there is hope for the future.

CIO L E T T E R

J U N E 2 0 1 9

Servitude, debt, extortion and war: an optimistic view of 130 centuries of economic growth.

Thomas FRIEDBERGERCEO and Co-CIO, Tikehau IM

As usual, it is important not to read any political or ideological agendas into this newsletter. There are none, and it is not

our role to venture into that area. We will also not be making any judgement as to whether the capitalist system is good or bad. What we will do is try to observe how the elevation of economics to the status of an exact science, has led some theorists to align their thinking with the history books in order to legitimise capita-list or socialist systems while completely overlooking the human factor. These

economists have often been advisors to expansionist (colonialist) administrations or lobbyists for banks. That probably explains why they erected their theories as absolute truths, in service of their employers’ interests. We will see how some periods, hosting simultaneous and rapid growth of certain entrepreneurial initiatives, from Spanish conquistadors to GAFAs, coincided with opportunities for gratuitous exploitation of monetisable resources. We will attempt to conclude that sustainable economic value creation is inextricably linked to embed-ding the human factor in economic theory, and that the solutions to inequality are as much the responsibility of national and supranational authorities as they are the private sector.

2

CIO L E T T E R

Getting to the roots of servitudeThe origins of servitude can be traced back to around 11,000 years ago with the advent of food production. At the time, everyone on the planet still belonged to hunter-gatherer com-munities. It was also when, in certain regions of the world, people began domesticating wild plants and animals, leading to the consumption of lives-tock and crops. Food production is the root cause of servitude. Why is that? US anthropologist Jared Diamond explains in his book Guns, Germs and Steel 1 that, in hunter-gatherer societies, the leaders enjoyed no spe-cial privileges, lived in the same types of homes as everyone else, and that decisions were made simply because there was no need for a specific struc-ture since each individual met his own needs. With the advent of farming, the need for specialisation soon arose, with some for example focusing on irrigation work or production of far-ming equipment. Corporations arrived on the scene. Since specialists were unable to meet their primary needs on their own, a form of cooperation be-came necessary, in turn justifying the emergence of a class of politicians, bureaucrats and money-lenders.

A s an organisational structure took shape, leaders began taking on more responsibilities and relying

on other members of their community to supply goods and services. By selecting and raising animal/plant species, then using natural fertilisers and livestock to increase crop yields, the proportion of

edible biomass in a given parcel of land shot up to a mind-boggling 90%. As

a result, a much higher number of calories were produced to feed

not only farmers but also sol-diers, manual labourers, etc.

From that point on, populations settled and crowded in near their production centres, leading to the development of storage - a concept foreign to nomadic hunter-gathe-rers. Food storage was essential to feeding the soldiers, bureaucrats and priests, who did not produce anything, which is why hunter-gatherer societies never had armies. Proximity with animals sparked the rise of germs such as measles and flu strains, which decimated these popu-lations but also led to the production of antibodies lac-king in communities with no organised food production. Storage created the need for accounting and literacy, at which point a political elite was able to take control of the products of other people’s labour. Writing appeared in Sumer around 6,000 B.C., but its primary purpose was far from educating the masses. Quite the contrary; in fact, writing was initially taken up by scribes to keep track of farming output and later became an instrument of servitude. Writing would ultimately afford a significant advantage to conquistadors during the colonisation of the New World, allowing information to be rapidly circu-lated - something the indigenous populations could not do. Priests put the religious stamp of approval on wars, workers produced weapons, and animals could be used for transportation across greater distances.

The combination of germs exported to conquered lands, weapons manufacturing and literacy paved the way for colonisation - a theory as shocking

as it is reassuring, since it automatically discredits any claim of white racial superiority. The world’s colonisation by the white man is thus better explained by geogra-phy: the favourable latitude of Eurasia, mild weather of the Mediterranean climate, and presence of four distinct seasons meant a greater number of plants and animals available for domestication. That is how food production led to the rise of a civilisation capable of colonisation and subjugation. Itis also why Jared Diamond refer-red to the advent of food production in Asia Minor and Europe some 11,000 years ago as the main reason for the world’s domination by the Europeans starting in the Renaissance era!

1 Guns, Germs and Steel

Jared Diamond, 2007

3

Lorsqu’on parle d’ESG, on parle souvent de risques, ou de conséquences néga-tives, voire catastrophiques. Nous choi-sissons une approche positive. La tran-sition énergétique est une opportunité d’investissement significative, peut-être l’une des plus excitantes que nous ayons considérées. Le monde continue de croître et les niveaux de vie s’améliorent. Néanmoins, l’accès à l’énergie pour tous doit s’accompagner de la maîtrise des émissions de gaz à effet de serre. Le besoin de financement pour mainte-nir le réchauffement climatique sous les 2 degrés du traité de Paris s’élève à 67 trillions de dollars d’ici à 2040, et ceci est nécessaire pour accompagner le monde vers son changement de paradigme et préserver de manière durable les avan-tages apportés par notre développement économique.

Sur cette thématique, les fonds verts de venture capital et d’infrastructure sont nombreux. Toutefois, nous avons remar-qué que les fonds de private equity de croissance dédiés à la transition énergé-tique étaient rares, alors que les opportu-nités d’investissement sont nombreuses (nous avons analysé plus de 180 proposi-tions d’investissement en moins d’un an). Alors, comment départageons-nous les entreprises ? Le point de départ de tout investissement dans une entreprise est sa viabilité financière : il n’existe pas de durabilité sans durabilité financière. En-suite, dès le début de l’analyse, l’équipe d’investissement renseigne une grille ESG, qui prend notamment en compte la qualité du management des sociétés (expérience, risques liés à une personne clé, etc.), ainsi que la qualité de la gou-vernance générale (alignement d’intérêt, transparence, existence de contre-pou-voirs, niveau d’expertise et diversité). Les critères sociaux et environnementaux sont naturellement aussi revus. Toutefois,

Debt and servitudeIn a previous newsletter 2 , we talked about the first records of debt being traced back to Mesopotamia rou-ghly 5,000 years ago. Archaeologists found evidence of debt renegotiation between lenders belonging to a ruling class and borrowers among the com-mon people. Is that surprising? Not if we consider that the Mesopotamian economy was not devoid of social ties. Recourse to debt was one of the fa-cets of living in a community, and debt forgiveness or renegotiation was a part of social relations. The rules of the game changed, however, when private lenders came onto the scene. Rome was the first ancient society where len-ders weren’t necessarily public or royal figures. It was also where violence between the strong and the weak arose as a debt-driven phenomenon. In the second century , 25% of the Ro-man population was reduced to slave-ry due to debt troubles. Debt between people of the same social rank is ne-gotiated. When one social strata holds power over another, however, that is when debt becomes an excuse for violence. Since that time, human his-tory has seen debt problems become the No.1 cause of revolution. No other cause even comes close. Failure to repay a debt justifies crime when the lender is a mafia boss or a tyrant, and imprisonment or expropriation when the lender is someone in power. When the human factor is removed from debt altogether, it easily transforms the cre-ditor into a persecutor. In The Wealth of Nations 3 , Adam Smith states that Man has a “propensity to truck, barter and exchange.” From that observation, he concludes that the free market eco-nomy is probably the best economic system, provided it comes with a certain morality. History tossed the second part (the morality bit) of Adam Smith’s theory by the wayside, and that changes eve-rything. Since Smith’s day, after all, many brilliant economists have sought to esta-blish economics as an exact science by

2 Tikehau CIO Letter, June 2017 How the Chinese are shedding light on our approach to debt

3 The Wealth of Nations, Adam Smith, 1776

4 Karl Polanyi, 1886-1964. Hungarian economist specia-lising in economic history and anthropology

5 Capitalism a 6-episode documentary series available on iTunes, 2014

omitting the social dimension that would tie it into the less pure human sciences. One of the only economists to bring the social dimension back into play was Karl Polanyi 4 , for whom a disembedded economy begets extreme violence in terms of the social impact of deci-sions made (in socialist and capitalist systems alike). For Polyani, justification of violence between the strong and the weak stems from the fact that Western capita-lism was founded on debt, while dehumanising the rela-tionship between borrower and creditor.

Christopher Columbus: the first unicorn?Contrary to popular belief, the seeds of Western capitalism were likely sewn 200 years before Adam Smith published his seminal work, with the discovery of the New World which began in 1492 in the Caribbean 5 . Why, you ask? Because the conquistadors who planned these expedi-tions were probably the very first private entrepreneurs to assume debt in order to build a business with the goal of making their fortune. The tipping point in the colonisation of the Americas came in 1532 with the assassination of Incan Emperor Atahualpa by Pizarro. When he captured the Incan Emperor to obtain the largest gold ransom in history, this Spanish conquistador pulled off the impos-sible. With just 168 men by his side, Pizarro defeated an army of 80,000 soldiers fighting on their home turf and protecting a population of several million. The violent colonisation of the New World soon gathered pace as the conquistadors transmitted infectious diseases to popula-tions lacking immunity because they were not farmers. Europeans would repeat this colonisation pattern in mul-tiple areas of the world: North America, Africa, Australia and Asia.

Of course, the violence perpetrated by the conquis-tadors cannot be overlooked. The colonists spread disease, could read and write, and

had guns, all of which made colonisation that much easier, but just what was it that drove these men - who were smaller in number and knew nothing of the lay of the land they were there to conquer - to use violence against the local population? After all, the exploration voyages of Chinese admiral Zheng He, which pre-dated Columbus’ travels by 80 years, had recourse nei-ther to slavery nor extortion of resources. Perhaps because - unlike the Chinese, whose expeditions were funded by the Emperor - the Spanish expeditions were

4

positionnement lui permettra de démultiplier son impact ESG, notamment sur les Objectifs de Développement Durable des Nations Unies (« ODD ») 7, 11, 12 et 13. Ainsi, l’équipe s’engage dans une démarche de repor-ting d’impact (émissions carbone évitées, emplois créés, etc.) exigeante, épaulée par des spécialistes de l’impact comme Steward Redqueen.

Poussons plus loin, au risque de déranger. Lorsque la politique ESG est gravée dans la stratégie d’investisse-ment, les critères de sélection financiers classiques de-viennent le marqueur principal de la performance ESG.

la capacité estimée à délivrer un business plan ambitieux sera clé : nous anticipons que le couple risque / retour financier est intimement lié à l’impact ESG, et sera proportionnel.

Ainsi, avec son premier investissement, notre fonds de private equity dédié à la transition énergétique a débloqué un financement de 150 millions d’euros pour un fournisseur d’électricité verte et de services d’efficacité énergétique. Cette somme permettra de développer 1,5 gigawatt de capacité de production d’électricité solaire, alors que dévelop-per une telle capacité au niveau du projet lui-même (et pas au niveau de la société) nécessiterait plus d’un milliard d’euros d’investissement.

En optant pour l’investissement en capi-taux propres, nous choisissons de fournir directement aux entrepreneurs l’euro qui permet de débloquer le reste de la chaîne financière : lever de la dette, développer des projets puis les revendre à des inves-tisseurs « d’infrastructures vertes ».

On peut dès lors tenter de compa-rer l’impact d’un euro investi au capi-tal d’une société comme celle dont nous parlons par rapport à l’eu-ro investi dans un « green bond », c’est-à-dire à l’autre bout de l’échelle de risque et de rendement attendu. Vu avec ce prisme, cet impact bien plus important de l’euro investi en capital qui permet de débloquer toute la chaîne de création de valeur viendra, nous l’espérons, contre-balancer, pour un assureur européen, la charge en capital réglementaire néces-saire associée au private equity, dès lors que celui-ci a une stratégie d’allocation qui vise à maximiser son impact par euro investi.

Notre fonds dédié à la transition éner-gétique ne fait pas de concession sur la performance financière. L’équipe d’in-vestissement est convaincue que son

CIO L E T T E R

easily-exploitable category of society. Like Renaissance times, when so many conquistadors made their fortune by taking on debt and then gratuitously exploiting a sub-sequently monetisable resource, the industrial revolu-tion reproduced simultaneous wealth-making patterns: namely, entrepreneurs rapidly building economic empires not through talent alone, but also by exploiting a work-force not duly compensated for the added value earned from their efforts.

Consumer servitude: controlling the middle classThe second industrial revolution, founded on the replace-ment of coal by oil, created a new type of servitude alto-gether. Western industrial powers emerged by exploiting the coal extracted from their own land, allowing them to colonise huge areas and thus usurp arable land and subservient workers. With its incredible energy efficiency, paving the way for the increased number and power of machines, and the limited workforce required to produce it, oil was a major game-changer in the colonies. Ensla-ving entire populations becomes academic when all you have to do is garner the support of a few tribal chiefs to gain access to oil concessions. Thus the keys to colonial dominance evolved from military to capitalist power 6 .

Oil marked the beginning of consumer society. From that point forward, all democracies were rooted in the middle classes. Debt allowed the US middle class to consume virtually eve-

rything available, and owning a home is the foundation of the American dream, the very dream that the United States cultivated in the first half of the 20th century and exported worldwide in the second, and which the globa-lisation of the economy has jeopardised ever since. This lifestyle model, completely incompatible with the quest for self-sufficiency, had provided the US with a certain political stability. And yet, perhaps the American dream, so deeply inspired by freedom, owes some of its success to a form of cultural servitude born of the excessive pro-motion of consumption. Countless entrepreneurs behind famous brands built their fortunes on this middle-class consumer model. Henry Ford got the ball rolling when he encouraged his workers to buy their own Ford auto-mobile. In a consumer society, not to consume/not to own the latest sought-after item can be perceived as a sign of weakness or failure. Buying on credit is bet-ter than not buying at all. Societies producing consumer goods boost revenues by shortening the manufacturing cycle and creating a sense of need in consumers, some-times so successfully that they forget they do not as a matter of fact need the product. For example, is buying overpriced, sometimes stronger-than-necessary (and thus toxic) pain medication, without making any dietary

private initiatives launched by entrepre-neurs and paid for by private creditors. In other words, the conquistadors were in massive debt and based their decisions on the potential gains to be had from their expeditions, the kind of reasoning that drove them to pillage local riches and reduce the indigenous population to slavery. Once on-site, the conquistadors set up outposts, serving as local govern-ments standing in for the State, and ma-king their own rules and laws. There are similarities to be found with the current situation involving GAFAs and sovereign States.

Industrial revolution, free market economy, expropriation and creation of wealth...The considerable wealth created by the conquistadors triggered a sharp rise in Spanish demand for luxury products such as English wool. Until the 14th cen-tury, British agriculture was based on a system of landowners who allowed small self-sufficient farmers to live on their pro-perty in exchange for working the land. This system was completely crushed by the weight of this heightened demand, as landowners sought to consolidate their holdings in order to make them more productive. The practice of enclosures, when small farmers were ejected from the land owned by the nobles, laid the foundation for the future industrial revo-lution. The resulting rural exodus supplied cheap labour for industry. In some ways, their inability to meet their own needs created the consumer society, insofar as small self-sufficient farmers do not make good customers for the genera-tion of gross domestic product. Indebted workers are a much better contributor to economic growth because they have to purchase what they need to survive, and they do so by going into debt. The seeds of Marxist theory were being planted while Europe was in the midst of its first industrial revolution. The problem lies in the fact that the dehumanisation of debt leads to abuses. By criminalising pover-ty, imprisoning bad debtors, the human factor is disembedded from the market economy, creating a subservient and

6 Or noir, la grande histoire du pétrole

(Black Gold: the Great History of Oil)

Matthieu Auzanneau, 2015.

5

7 This century’s Suez Crisis Louis-Vincent Gave (Gavekal Research), January 2019

8 Gavekal Research A Marxist take on the gilets jaunes, March 2019

9 Gratuit ! Du déploiement de l’économie numérique (Free! On the deployment of the digital economy) Olivier Bomsel, 2007.

or lifestyle changes whatsoever, really the only solution for obese patients? Programmed obsolescence is the result of this phenomenon, despite the fact that it seems to make no sense either for the consumer, the manufacturer’s reputation, or the environment. It can also wreak havoc in people’s lives. GMOs are a good example, in that even life itself can be considered up for sale. By destroying a plant’s ability to reproduce, a seed becomes a consumer product that far-mers have to purchase - often on credit - every year in order to grow their crops. This is a form of servitude on a par with the expropriation of British farmers in the 14th century, insofar as it alters their abi-lity to live off their land and draws them into an economic cycle in which they are forced to go into debt to buy what they normally could have had for free through the fruit of their labour. This alienation is combined with the obligation to purchase the pesticides to which their crops are now immune, depleting the soil and fur-ther drawing the farmers into debt. The extent to which this model has failed can be measured by the suicide rate among farmers in developed and developing countries alike.

The creation of non-vital needs in consu-mer cultures, dependent on debt, was a major contributing factor in the 20th cen-tury to the exacerbation of inequalities, leading to the rise of immense fortunes and the impoverishment of entire cate-gories of populations - a phenomenon not very far removed from enslavement. These populations become slaves to the consumer culture, having lost their ability to meet their own needs, with the added bonus of generating disastrous conse-quences for the environment.

What if the next form of enslavement were digital?Since Roman times, most empires have been built the same way: through military conquests sustained by the creation of an economic and cultural system founded on commercial trade, and consumption of goods and ser-vices by the conquerors imported from empire countries. Construction of roads and waterways is essential to buil-ding an empire 7 . Surrounding areas are invited to adopt the central power’s currency for trade and debt, until these areas catch up economically and emancipate themselves from the central power. European colonialists followed in the footsteps of ancient and medieval empires in applying this model. The US was no different after World War II, when it tied the reconstruction of Europe and Asia to the Bretton Woods agreements and the US gold standard. It is this supremacy that China is now attempting to bypass by applying the same principles: trading with its Eurasian neighbours in its local currency and creating a Chinese consumer society that imports and consumes goods and services produced by neighbouring countries, (preferably manufactured using capital borrowed from China). This is the philosophy behind the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), which goes much further than the establishment of phy-sical trade routes. Through BRI infrastructure projects, China is also working to build digital routes, which is why the stakes surrounding information and communication infrastructures (5G, artificial intelligence, big data) and the associated players (Chinese giants in the sector) are so strategic and are triggering tensions with the United States 7 . Technology is the imperial road of the 21st cen-tury, and that road is paved with data!

Economist Charles Gave 8 pointed out that, in the 21st century, a fourth factor should probably be added to the three production factors cited in Karl Marx’s Capital (land, labour and capital): that factor is knowledge. In his book Gratuit! 9 (Free!), Olivier Bomsel explains that, whereas the industrial era was the era of the accumulation of capi-tal and material wealth, the industrial revolution we are currently witnessing is characterised by the decreasing value of material goods in the economy, one that could ultimately see goods offered for free but services still for a fee. The scarce resource in that scenario is the consu-mer’s attention span, rather than raw materials. In other words, societies like this will increasingly tend to offer products free of charge to grab attention and control access to the consumer, potentially resulting in the crea-tion of platforms holding dominant positions in terms of information.

6

10 La nouvelle

servitude volontaire (The new willing

enslavement) Philippe Vion-Dury,

2018

11 Eli Pariser

The Filter Bubble. What the Internet

is Hiding from You, 2011

12 Bloomberg Magazine,

February 2019. Yngve Slyngstad, CEO

of Norges Bank Investment Management, who manages

Norway’s oil profits totalling around $1,000 billion.

CIO L E T T E R

In La nouvelle servitude volontaire 10 (The New Wil l ing Enslavement), Philippe Vion Dury goes one step fur-

ther, positing that tech giants are now looking to reverse the asset-liability ratio in the individual’s relationship with the me-dia. Of course, individuals no longer have to make the effort to seek out the ser-vices they want. Now services come right to them, into their homes, served up on platter to taste, in order to stimulate even more demand. As Vion Dury explains, this reversal of the natural order is often seen as harmless: “yes, I’m being watched, but what is so bad about getting offers for products, videos, music and services that interest me [...]?” Okay, but the problem is that in exploiting the cognitive bias that encourages individuals to prioritise and settle for information that confirms their own viewpoint, these companies are enclosing consumers in what Eli Pariser 11 refers to as a “filter bubble.” “Since I’ve been identified as someone who likes a given style or thinks a certain way, I’ll primarily be receiving offers for products or content that suit my so-cal-led tastes and can only be happier for it.” It isn’t hard to imagine the consequences of this trend on populations exposed to rising nationalism, communitarianism, or movements preaching exclusion and hostility for anyone or anything different

But, in that case, isn’t data a new type of resource that some are able to collect free of charge, only to exploit and sell it to generate profits that are impos-

sible to measure simply because the quantities involved are so enormous? Letting yourself get trapped in a filter bubble by giving up your personal data, isn’t that just another form of enslavement? Just as the conquistadors sold the gold they pillaged (“free of charge”) to Ameri-can indigenous populations at a high price, just as the entrepreneurs in the late 19th century sold the products manufactured by subjugated workers at their mercy (also at a high price), aren’t modern “tech giants” simply inven-ting a new form of enslavement? Isn’t the explosion in the number of unicorn companies today comparable to the enrichment of so many industrial families in the 19th century and conquistadors in the 14th? Try explaining to your children that giving away their data, pictures and relationships to digital platforms takes some of their free-dom away and ultimately brings them one step closer to a state of willing enslavement, in which they are freely giving up part of themselves to be later sold for a profit. From experience, explaining things that way meets with very relative success...and yet, tech unicorns are just as guilty of monetising a free resource as the entrepreneurs of long (and not so long) ago.

T ech giants have such a huge capacity for taking advantage of legal and tax voids, and for deve-loping global businesses, that we would even

venture to compare them with the outposts created by the conquistadors: alternative forms of government operating outside national laws and outside the grasp of government control. In a recent interview on the subject, the Chief Executive Officer of Norges Bank Investment Management 12 said that tech giants are in the business of capturing data and monetising its value. And that de-mocracies, which should be responsible for how informa-tion is collected and distributed, will not be able to leave this sector without stricter regulation for much longer.

7

13 See Tikehau CIO Letter “ESG : le moteur ou la carosserie” (ESG: the horse or the cart?), March 2019..

Elevating economics to the rank of an exact science by robbing it of human considera-tion helped pave the way for the introduction of violence to social relations. It also facilitated the massive and rapid enrichment of certain entrepreneurs under questionable distribution of wealth conditions, which may well be why Adam Smith’s conclusions about the free market eco-nomy were left out of the economic textbooks. All of which was much easier to maintain in closed and segregated ecosystems, where grey areas could be sustained as long as the right sources of leverage (political, media, economic, or even military and religious) remained under control. Today, however, information techno-logies and globalisation are breaking down the walls between societies. Information is available on anything and everything. It circulates at the speed of light and is very difficult to control. The slightest breach of human rights, whiff of corrup-tion, misconduct, negligence in a factory/buil-ding/procedure, or deviation from environmen-tally or socially responsible policy can become the “shot heard round the world”, with potentially enormous consequences. Such is the down-side of the disembedded economy.

At the same time, the popular protest move-ments currently happening in Europe, the Arab Spring, the boycotts of certain products and destroyed reputations on social media can be seen as manifestations of the very high cost of leaving the human factor out of economic and political decisions alike. In today’s over-in-formed, data-saturated world, it is possible for entrepreneurs and shareholders to get rich be-cause they are visionaries, but only if they res-pect other people and follow the rules, or else

run the risk of being punished, boycotted and dethroned. Technology has brought the human factor back into the equation, and recent events have proved this applies even to the tech giants that created these information platforms.

Even if we wanted to be totally cynical by suggesting that even today, Man’s only goal is to seek out his own personal

gain, we can’t ignore the fact that spreading compromising information now comes with an increasingly substantial financial penalty 13 . And that’s good news, because it means that in to-day’s world, where the walls are coming down, taking the human factor into account could be a vector for economic value creation over the long term. In other words, individual interest is not the only driver of the capitalist system. Solida-rity, respect and empathy also have their place. Too idealistic, you say? Not necessarily. The key to reducing inequality may well lie in the private sector: education, training, sponsorship, philanthropy, environmental and social policy, fair governance, and promotion of diversity... all the responsibilities that private corporations can and should uphold. For those who think there is no way to reconcile capitalism with the fight against inequality, like it or not, pri-vate corporations have a real financial interest in factoring social considerations back into their business model: namely, creating economic value and outperforming their competitors over the long term.

An optimistic conclusion!

32, rue de Monceau 75008 Paris

FRANCEPhone : +33 (0)1 53 59 05 00

Fax : +33 (0)1 53 59 05 20

This document are not an offer of securities for sale or investment advisory services. This document contains general information only and is not intended to represent general or specific investment advice. Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results and targets are not gua­ranteed. Certain statements and forecasted data are based on current expectations, current market and economic conditions, estimates, projections, opinions and beliefs of Tikehau Capital and/or its affiliates. Due to various risks and uncertainties, actual results may differ materially from those reflected or contemplated in such forward­looking statements or in any of the case studies or forecasts. All references to Tikehau Capital’s advisory activities in the US or with respect to US persons relates to Tikehau Capital North America.