The fifth part of the "Human 2040" series entitled "I use" shows that the dilemma "to have or to be?" will not lose its importance in the future. In the latest episode, analysts from Polityka Insight investigate the issues of ownership and use. What will we be the investment hits of 2040? Could clothing selection become a subscription service? And will the shift away from existing ownership models reduce the youngest generation's sense of security? The data we have today already allows us to make predictions in this regard. In turn, Piotr Konieczny, a computer security expert and founder of the Niebezpiecznik.pl website, is a guest on a podcast hosted by Andrzej Bobiński, managing director of Polityka Insight. During their conversation, they take a closer look at what today's trend of abandoning ownership will mean for us in the future and what the consequences of this phenomenon may be in 2040.

Record-breaking result on the WIG-LUDZIE index

For the first time ever, the WIG-LUDZIE index, which reflects the quotations of companies investing in human capital, has become the most capitalized index. It outperformed the WIG-OZE which has prevailed over the last decade.

The trend of investing in people and their skills has become popular with a change in the wealth structure. The move away from ownership and wealth-sharing forced the introduction of new investment tools. Since the 30s, there has been a gradual reversal from building property on the basis of ownership. CIFs (Closed-end Investment Funds) specialised in intangible assets gained popularity. However, the real revolution started with the introduction of CIFs invest-ing in human capital.

Funds investing in people, initially controversial and now widespread, are funding career development paths. In a situation of professional success, the beneficiaries repay the capital received plus interest – RFRR (reference risk-free rate) and a margin of usually 15-20%. The highest earnings are related to CIFs that specialise in jobs with the greatest level of competition and also the most prestigious ones (high salaries, social recognition). Luxury CIFs, trading in e-athlete certificates, algorithm curators, politicians and activists, promise a final ROI (return on investment) at the level of 15%. In parallel with the development of CIFs and the march to the top of the WIG-LUDZIE established in 2036, the market of ETFs (exchange traded funds) has grown. In addition to technological ETFs, those based on WIG-LUDZIE are the most popular today. 

Some experts have started to worry about the WIG-LUDZIE funds and the love of investors and banks for derivatives such as ETFs. According to experts, the ‘human bubble’ will soon burst. A source of concern is double-digit growth, frequent uncertainty, risky human assets in investment packages, low transparency of the largest units (theoretically safe CIFs, e.g. those specialized in programmers), but above all rapid changes in the labor market. Any technological breakthrough causes great displacements between specializations, which requires investment in industry change and new skills, disrupting market rules. The hologram revolution a few years ago meant that CIFs specializing in 3D graphics had to be additionally funded by FFGs (Financial Guarantee Funds), due to the losses suffered on investments in graphic designers who had difficulties in finding a job.

ONEDEMAND, A CANADIAN SERVICE INTEGRATOR, ANNOUNC-ES ONE SUBSCRIPTION FOR EVERYDAY ITEMS AND ALL NECES-SARY SERVICES

This is a departure from its existing personalization and indi-vidualization.

OneDemand intends to merge all the services already provided by different suppliers. Today, we are talking about integration of offers, such as  clothing-as-a-service, nutrition-as-a-service, paid restaurant outings, mobility-as-a-service, ride sharing, public transport and leisure (including holiday and sports). The offer will be available at one price.

Analysts consider OneDemand’s plans to be a bet with the market. What is at stake is the success of the company, which, in an individualized world, relies on clustering and partial imposition of tastes. The project has been developed in contrast to the customization trends that have shaped the market in recent years. The user will select the program from a limited menu of options (25 lifestyle persons – in each with a five-year age range). Each option is prepared by a team of experts to analyze data on the preferences and consumption of millions of subscribers.

Experts believe that a single, non-excessive subscription fee for a packet is a risky move by the Canadians. According to critics, an excessively low price may dissuade customers who fear that the company will save on the quality of services. According to the competition, few users will subscribe and the low share will translate into a lack of scale to ensure profitability. However, some experts believe that OneDemand intends to use low prices to dominate the market, and it is thanks to this and the planned hyper-aggressive marketing campaign that a scale allowing very favorable prices with producers to be negotiated will be achieved.

OneDemand builds its product and marketing message on the anonymity of users (who do not need to share their digital footprint to get what they need). Another advantage of the project is that it is one simple offer – one, low, lumpsum payment makes it impossible to think about other expenses and temptations. And the choice made by reputable advisors and their algorithms will enable subscribers to feel part of a larger, safe lifestyle community. According to OneDemand, ‘subscribers will not have to worry whether their personal algorithms and choices enable them to be fashionable or cool. Thanks to the company's influencers, they will always be trendsetters.’

Finally, OneDemand highlights environmental benefits. All the services and products will be manufactured together. According to OneDemand, a return to upstream planned mass production reduces financial and environmental costs. Personalisation and the creation of everything for modest needs and tastes leads to an increase in production and logistics capacities which unnecessarily absorbs space and resources.

SENIORS AND YOUNG PEOPLE ARE LONGING FOR OWNERSHIP

The SIPG (Social Security Index) has fallen for another month in a row. Experts warn that the readings of recent months are very disturbing and could herald a record feeling of uncertainty in the second half of next year.

The SIPB index lost 3 points compared to last month and this is the third month of decline in a row. According to experts, the growing feeling of uncertainty is due to a lack of ownership. Partial security indices, such as health, digital and occupational indices, are fixed or slightly increasing. The life security index is responsible for the decrease of the entire index.

Analysts reviewed the partial data and sentiments are mainly responsible for decreases in two age groups: senior citizens (75+) and young people (16-29). The SIPB panel carried out in-depth studies in these two age groups and, per-haps surprisingly, the reasons for the decline in the sense of life security in both groups are similar. This is the feeling of uprooting resulting from the shrinking of ownership in society.

At the press and scientific conference, experts explained the reasons for these concerns. The sense of uprooting for older people is a long-standing phenomenon. Senior citizens say they do not want to own an apartment, clothes or cars. It has long been known that it is the elderly who have adapted to the colossal changes taking place in our lifestyle in the longest and least beneficial manner.

In contrast, research readings from the young are surprising. Adults (30-39) and the middle-aged (40-60) are comfortable in a world that opponents are maliciously calling AaaS (Anything-as-a-service), which is a world without ownership. For many years, non-ownership has become trendy, and escaping this trend has been seen in most Western societies as a sign of backwardness. However, the youngest generation does not feel this social pressure and is rebelling against anti-ownership paradigms. Young people declare that they want to own to exist. The same concerns were repeated in conversations with researchers. The world is changing very quickly, and things or places give a sense of safety and anchorage.