Joe Weisenthal

They do not have to worry at all about a quick run, whatever.

And so they can harvest assets.

They can harvest that illiquidity premium.

They could put their money into assets that do not trade very much.

And that's very intuitive to me.

Talk to us, though.

You're operating an unconstrained fund that is a publicly traded 40-act mutual fund.

Talk to us about what it means.

You say you look for opportunity online.

Why are there private credit assets that aren't all locked up in these long-term vehicles?

Why does it sometimes make sense for private credit assets to be in a vehicle that is just sort of more opportunistic and has a daily quote potentially?

Just can you clarify, sorry, I think you explained it, but why is it that with the traditional private asset, not private, private asset model, that they only call on the capital once it's needed?

Because what you explained is, okay, once you take in the capital, if it's not being invested, it's a drag on NAV, very intuitive.

Just explain, why is the other parts of the private capital world able to do the thing where you only call up the LPs when you have a deal, whereas that's not the case with private credit where you take in the money up front?

I guess what I'm trying to establish is why couldn't private credit work the same way where it's like, okay, I go out and raise $5 billion worth of commitments.

And then as I get a lending opportunity, then I call up my LPs and say, okay, you needed to pony up that 50 million to us that you've committed and whatever.

Why couldn't it work that way?

I'm glad you said this because this is a perfect segue into the question I was going to go to next, which is, OK, we trace the history of private credit to physical things, the type of things that a GE would sell, maybe like a wind turbine or

Or, you know, get natural gas turbine, whatever it is, et cetera.

And we were talking about the big megatrends of the 2010s.