Thanks for sharing, @RLX. Interesting read, but I can’t shake the feeling about not being written objectively. It has a dismissive connotation and in some parts tries to isolate the events in the last year. Maybe it’s just me. 
Besides their philosophy, I’m invested in SMT because of the fact, the partners put their money where their mouth is. It gives me solace.
Wholly owned by its roughly 50 partners, the firm has staked its future on the belief that it can spot the next big thing.
If I remember correctly, I felt a little disappointed with that article, because I were expecting some juice about the portfolio, investments, reasons about the last 1,5 year performance. Maybe because it’s Bloomberg, a financial media, talking about a financial company. 
I felt bored half way (maybe sooner) because it’s very generic and superficial, talk about a lot of things, but few about financial matters.
Anyone else noticed the redesigned page? Looks nice. 
https://www.scottishmortgage.com/en/non-uk/non-uk-shareholders
Spotted that the other day, it does look good. The portfolio looks relatively unchanged since the last time I checked a few months back.
Guys, what are your recent thoughts on BG, especially SMT after the change of managers?
I’m still investing in SMT alongside S&P.
My thinking hasn’t really changed as it’s an investment I’ll hold for 30 years or more. I added a bunch in 2022 to bring my average price to just over £8.
However, I have reined in exposure to BG over the past couple of years. SMT makes up about 15% of my portfolio, which I’d like to bring down to nearer 10%, so I won’t be adding to it for a while.
Thanks for sharing. It’s not just SMT, but the broad market and its cycles that’s negatively impacted, so I don’t understand what could the fund have done differently … well, it’s easy to have the answers directed to the past, but still.
His concerns about the private equity exposure seem reasonable and I think it can be helpful to have dissenting voices around the table.
The FT story – by Dan McCrum, of Wirecard fame – makes the point that the chair should have retired by now in line with the corporate governance code.
Bhide adds: “My concern is that no one on the board has any professional investment experience. This board desperately needed people who knew what they are doing.”
While it’s important to remember he has an axe to grind, it is concerning to hear him question the chair’s independence: "Her role so far as I can see is to protect managers from criticism.”
