Core Viewpoint - The article emphasizes the need for adaptability and continuous learning in the investment landscape, particularly in the context of emerging technologies like AI and biotechnology, highlighting the importance of maintaining a growth mindset amidst uncertainty [6][7][11]. Group 1: Investment Landscape - The current investment environment is characterized by collective anxiety within the Chinese venture capital community, questioning how to navigate a landscape devoid of simple innovation models [7]. - The transition from traditional investment strategies to hard technology sectors, such as biotechnology, poses significant challenges for seasoned investors who must adapt to new paradigms [9][10]. - The concept of "infinite games" is introduced, suggesting that successful companies focus on continuous evolution rather than short-term victories, which is crucial for long-term sustainability [24][25]. Group 2: Cultural Confidence - There is a deep-rooted cultural confidence in Chinese entrepreneurship, reflecting a historical resilience and a spirit of innovation that persists despite challenges [12][13]. - The belief in a new cycle of innovation, termed "Innovation 2.0," is gaining traction among investors and entrepreneurs, indicating a shift towards optimism in the market [12][16]. Group 3: AI and Future Trends - The emergence of AI is seen as a transformative force that will redefine productivity, enabling individuals and small teams to achieve significant market valuations [17]. - The article discusses the potential for AI to integrate into various industries, suggesting that its true impact will be realized when it becomes ubiquitous in decision-making processes [17][19]. Group 4: Narrative and Collaboration - The ability to create compelling narratives is highlighted as a unique human trait that drives collaboration and innovation, essential for achieving extraordinary outcomes [19][20]. - Successful companies are described as those that not only provide solutions but also construct an attractive vision for the future, fostering a shared sense of purpose among stakeholders [21][22]. Group 5: Learning and Growth - Continuous learning and iteration are emphasized as critical components of success in an ever-evolving business landscape, with failures viewed as valuable learning experiences [28][30]. - The article concludes with a call for entrepreneurs to embrace challenges and maintain a commitment to growth, underscoring that great companies thrive by remaining engaged in the market and evolving over time [30].

这不仅是刘芹个人有过的困惑，也是整个中国创投圈的集体焦虑。人们在问：在这个不再有简单模式创新红利的时代，该如何自 处？是固守旧日的荣光，还是在完全陌生的领域里从零开始？ 刘芹选择了后者，但他并没有用激昂的口号来掩饰转型的痛苦，而是选择剖析自己作为一名"过时投资人"的心路历程。从他的文字 里，能看到一种与时代和自我的和解：接受焦虑是一种常态。而在所有变量都在剧烈波动的当下，唯一不变的最优策略，或许就是 保持在这个游戏里，不要离场，持续成长。 「2025尾声」仍在征集之中，欢迎商业世界和资本市场的思考者们通过后台或chenzhiyan@36kr.com与我们联系。相信，时代变幻， 唯真正的思考不灭。 「 Test early, fail fast, learn faster. 」 文 ｜ 五源资本 刘芹 又到年末，在各种年度盘点、未来预测出街之前，「暗涌Waves」邀请了一级市场里以思考性著称的投资人们，分享一年尾声时自 己最想说的话。这是第一篇，来自五源资本创始合伙人刘芹。 这篇文章来自五源资本近期的创始人年会上刘芹的开场演讲。今年大会的主题是"Prompt()·涌现"，它指向当下这个没有标准答案的 时代，AI ...

Core Points - The videogame maker has postponed its results and requested Euronext to halt trading of its shares and bonds as it finalizes its accounts [1] Company Summary - The company is currently in the process of finalizing its financial accounts, which has led to the postponement of its results [1] - The request to halt trading indicates potential issues or significant changes in the company's financial situation [1] Industry Summary - The postponement of results and trading halt may reflect broader challenges within the videogame industry, potentially impacting investor confidence [1]

经过近十年的高成本投资，成果参差不齐，穆罕默德·本·萨勒曼正在主导沙特重要的主权财富基金进行重组。沙特王储本周访问华盛顿时，与美国 总统特朗普和美国工业巨头们的亲密互动展现了一幅外界熟悉的画面。这种财富象征性支撑着沙特在美国和国内的权势与形象，同时沙特政府曾 承诺要实现经济转型。在周二的椭圆形办公室，沙特王储穆罕默德·本·萨勒曼宣布将向美国投资1万亿美元，但并未透露具体的投资内容。然而， 在利雅得和华尔街的权力中心，关于这一切的另一面却在悄然流传：沙特一直自豪的公共投资基金（PIF）——作为兑现国家承诺的资金来源—— 目前正面临新投资资金不足的难题。实际上，这一困境正是因为王储及其团队将国家大部分财富投入了财务状况不佳的项目，而他们正在努力试 图扭转局面。根据11位知情人士透露，这些困难已经变成了不可否认的事实，这些消息来源包括现任员工、董事会成员、投资者及其代表。 在沙 特北部，有一片被称为沙特新未来城（Neom）的广袤土地。原本，这里应成为一个充满机器人劳工、滑雪胜地和大理石海滩的理想区域，但现在 却陷入了层层的延期和困境。沙特公共投资基金的其他项目也同样进展缓慢：一家咖啡连锁店至今仅开设了一家分店，却梦 ...

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the significant drop in the virtual skin trading market for the game CS2, which lost approximately $2 billion (around 142 billion RMB) in a single day due to a new policy by the game's developer, Valve Corporation (V社) [5][28]. Group 1: Market Impact - On October 24, the CS2 skin trading market experienced a dramatic decline, with assets evaporating in just a few hours [5][7]. - Valve's new policy allowed lower-tier skins to be combined into higher-tier skins, drastically reducing the value of previously rare items [10][12]. - The price of popular items, such as the butterfly knife, saw a significant drop, with some players reporting losses of up to 600,000 RMB [14][16]. Group 2: Player Reactions - Many players expressed their frustration on social media, blaming Valve's CEO for the sudden market crash [18][21]. - Professional players and skin traders faced substantial financial losses, while some players viewed the policy change as beneficial for regular gamers [24][28]. Group 3: Economic System Design - Valve's economic system for CS skins has evolved over the years, starting from the introduction of cosmetic items in Team Fortress 2 to a complex trading platform in CS:GO [30][35]. - The market for CS skins became a significant financial derivative platform, with a peak market value exceeding $6 billion (approximately 43 billion RMB) [38]. - The lack of regulation and the speculative nature of the market have led to repeated cycles of boom and bust, similar to traditional financial markets [50][51].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent collapse of the virtual skin trading market for the game CS2, which resulted in a loss of approximately $2 billion (around 142 billion RMB) in a single day, affecting many players who treated these skins as investments [9][11][52]. Group 1: Market Collapse - The virtual skin trading market for CS2 experienced a dramatic decline, with a reported loss of $2 billion in just one day [9]. - The decline was triggered by Valve's announcement allowing players to synthesize high-value skins from lower-tier skins, drastically reducing the rarity and value of existing high-end skins [15][18]. - Many players, particularly those who had invested heavily in skins, faced significant financial losses, with some reporting losses of up to 600,000 RMB [23][26]. Group 2: Valve's Strategy - Valve's introduction of a skin synthesis feature is seen as a strategic move to revitalize the official market and increase player engagement by making high-value skins more accessible [56]. - The company has historically designed a complex economic system around its games, which has led to the emergence of a substantial external trading market [39][47]. - Valve's economic model has been criticized for lacking regulation, leading to speculative trading and market volatility, similar to financial markets [68][69]. Group 3: Historical Context - The article traces the origins of the virtual skin market back to Valve's 2007 game "Team Fortress 2," which introduced a trading system that allowed players to buy and sell cosmetic items [40][42]. - The success of this model was further developed in "CS:GO," where skins became a significant part of the game's economy, leading to a market that at one point exceeded $6 billion [52]. - The rise of speculative trading in CS skins began around 2020-2021, with many players treating them as investment assets, akin to cryptocurrencies [48].

Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the recent collapse of the virtual skin trading market for the game CS2, which resulted in significant financial losses for many players, likening it to a stock market crash [8][11][63]. Group 1: Market Collapse - On October 24, the CS2 skin trading market lost $2 billion (approximately 14.2 billion RMB) in just a few hours [8]. - The introduction of a new game update allowed players to synthesize high-value skins from lower-tier ones, drastically reducing the value of previously rare items [14][19]. - Many players, including skin traders and professional players, faced severe financial losses, with some losing up to 600,000 RMB [25][30]. Group 2: Market Dynamics - The skin trading market for CS2 evolved from a gaming feature to a significant financial market, with a peak valuation exceeding $6 billion (approximately 43 billion RMB) [63]. - The market's growth was fueled by speculative trading, with players treating skins as investment assets, similar to cryptocurrencies and NFTs [59][60]. - The lack of regulation and the volatility of the market led to significant risks for investors, as evidenced by the recent crash [85]. Group 3: Company Strategy - Valve Corporation (V社), the developer of CS2, has strategically designed the skin economy to maximize its profits, including implementing a 15% transaction fee on official trades [68]. - The company has shifted its focus from being a game developer to operating more like a financial institution, capitalizing on human psychology and market dynamics [86][87]. - The introduction of new policies is seen as a way to reinvigorate the market for regular players while sidelining speculators who do not engage with the game [69].

Core Insights - Electronic Arts (EA) reported a 9.2% year-over-year decline in revenue for Q2, totaling $1.84 billion, which fell short of analyst expectations of $1.87 billion [1] - The company's net profit was $137 million, translating to earnings per share of $0.54, significantly lower than the $294 million or $1.11 per share reported in the same quarter last year [1] - Net bookings decreased by 13% year-over-year to $1.82 billion during the quarter [1] - EA announced a privatization plan valued at $55 billion, and due to this ongoing transaction, the company will not hold a conference call for earnings or provide forward-looking guidance [1]

Core Insights - The recent update by Valve Corporation (V社) has significantly impacted the virtual item trading market, particularly affecting the prices of rare items like knife skins and gloves in CS2, leading to a market crash for high-value items [2][5][16] - The update allows players to combine five ordinary red-quality weapon skins to create a knife or glove, breaking the monopoly of random box openings for acquiring these rare items, thus increasing their potential supply in the market [3][12] Market Dynamics - The CS2 item market operates on a consensus-driven model where the value of items is primarily derived from their rarity and unique appearance, with the lowest drop rate for rare items being approximately 0.26% [3][6] - The introduction of the new crafting system has disrupted the established market logic, leading to a collapse in the prices of previously high-value items, while simultaneously causing a surge in the prices of the crafting materials (ordinary red-quality skins) [5][12] Community Reactions - Following the update, many players who had invested heavily in high-priced items expressed their frustration and regret, with reports of significant financial losses circulating on social media [5][6] - The update has prompted a shift in player engagement, with more ordinary players participating in the crafting process, aligning with Valve's goal of making the game more accessible [16] Historical Context - The volatility of the CS2 item market has been a recurring theme, with past events like the "Black Egg" incident illustrating the risks associated with speculative trading in virtual items [6][9] - Similar speculative behaviors have been observed in other virtual markets, such as the "Banana" game, where the value of items became detached from their functional use, highlighting the speculative nature of these markets [11][12] Regulatory Implications - Valve's intervention through the crafting update reflects a broader trend of game developers needing to balance market vitality with the control of speculative risks, aiming to return the focus to the gaming experience rather than purely financial speculation [12][16] - The introduction of a trading protection period prior to the update was an attempt to mitigate short-term speculation and promote more rational trading behaviors among players [14][16]

Core Viewpoint - The update from Valve on October 23, 2025, led to a significant crash in the CS2 virtual item market, resulting in an estimated loss of nearly $2 billion in value within hours, highlighting the inherent risks of investing in virtual goods controlled by game developers [1][2][4]. Group 1: Market Dynamics - The CS2 virtual item market was previously valued at nearly $6 billion, evolving into a complex speculative arena beyond mere gaming items [2]. - Valve's design of scarcity, with a mere 0.26% chance of obtaining top-tier items, created a luxury-like value for rare items, leading to prices reaching tens of thousands of RMB in secondary markets [2][4]. - A robust third-party trading market emerged, with players analyzing item price trends akin to stock trading, further intensifying speculative behavior [2]. Group 2: Risk Factors - The artificial scarcity of virtual items, controlled entirely by the game developer, poses a fundamental risk, as opposed to natural scarcity found in physical assets like gold [3]. - The update on October 23 allowed players to create top-tier items through a "Trade-Up Contract," fundamentally altering the supply logic and leading to a collapse in perceived value [4]. - The sudden increase in supply led to panic selling among holders of top-tier items, resulting in a price crash and a dramatic rise in the value of the materials used for crafting [4]. Group 3: Investor Behavior - Many young investors, drawn by the narrative of high returns and low entry barriers, lacked awareness of the true risks associated with virtual asset investments [5]. - The CS2 market upheaval serves as a cautionary lesson about the dangers of treating virtual items as investment vehicles rather than entertainment products [6]. - Game companies hold the ultimate power to modify rules and supply, which can lead to abrupt changes in market dynamics, emphasizing the speculative nature of virtual goods [6].