Core Viewpoint - The core positioning of finance should shift from being a provider of funds to becoming a co-creator of value and an ecosystem builder, deeply participating in the incubation and integration of the industrial innovation chain [1][3][4]. Group 1: New Quality Productivity - New quality productivity is driven by revolutionary technological breakthroughs, innovative allocation of production factors, and deep industrial transformation, enhancing total factor productivity through qualitative changes in labor, materials, and objects [2]. - The cultivation and growth of new quality productivity require a financial system to provide systematic support, with precise matching and efficient allocation of financial resources at every stage [2]. Group 2: Financial Ecosystem Transformation - Traditional financial models focus on collateral assessment and financial metrics, driven by risk aversion, while finance that empowers new quality productivity must integrate deeply into the innovation chain, making forward-looking value judgments based on technological evolution and industrial transformation trends [3][4]. - The financial ecosystem should be built around scenario-based financial product design and an open financial platform that integrates research institutions, industry chains, and venture capital, facilitating the efficient circulation of innovative elements [3][4]. Group 3: Structural Challenges in Financing - There is a structural mismatch between traditional financial practices and the characteristics of technology companies, which often have high R&D costs, low fixed assets, and lack of collateral, making it difficult for traditional credit assessment systems to accurately measure their true value and growth potential [4][5]. - A case study of an AI chip design startup illustrates this issue, where the company was denied a loan due to insufficient collateral despite having significant intellectual property and revenue, highlighting the need for innovative financing solutions [5]. Group 4: Comparison of US and Chinese Market Structures - The comparison of the top ten listed companies in the US and China reflects differences in economic structure, industrial policy, and innovation ecosystems, with the US favoring technology giants and long-term capital support, while China remains focused on traditional economic pillars [7]. - The US capital market has a higher tolerance for long-term, high-risk investments, encouraging disruptive innovation, whereas China's financial system is primarily based on indirect financing, limiting the growth of technology companies [7][8]. Group 5: Financial System Challenges and Reforms - The financial system faces challenges in adapting to structural changes in the economy, particularly in serving technological innovation and industrial upgrading, with traditional risk assessment models being rigid and regulatory frameworks lagging [9]. - Proposed reforms include optimizing credit structures, deepening interest rate marketization, and enhancing the efficiency of financial resource allocation to ensure funds are directed towards key areas like technological innovation [9]. Group 6: Government Investment Funds and Risk Management - Government investment funds should have clear functional positioning, employing a "negative list + due diligence" approach to manage investment risks while maintaining market-oriented operations [10]. - Innovative funding models, such as "mother fund + sub-fund" structures, can help balance fiscal safety and investment risks, focusing on cluster investments to mitigate the impact of individual project failures [10].

Core Viewpoint - Postal Savings Bank of China plans to establish a financial asset investment company with a capital of RMB 10 billion, responding to national calls and supporting the construction of a technology-driven economy [2][6]. Group 1: Company Initiatives - The establishment of the investment company, named China Post Investment, will be managed as a wholly-owned first-level subsidiary of Postal Savings Bank [2][6]. - This investment is part of a broader trend where financial asset investment companies (AICs) are expanding, with three other banks receiving approval to establish AICs in 2025 [2][5]. Group 2: Industry Context - AICs are an innovative product of China's financial system reform, with five existing AICs established by major state-owned banks since 2017, primarily to manage non-performing assets [4]. - Recent regulatory changes have expanded the scope for AICs, allowing more national commercial banks to establish their own AICs and increasing investment in strategic emerging industries and infrastructure [5][6].