Hong Kong was the smallest of the four rooms and the most senior. The debate that still dominates other events — whether prop is a durable business model — barely came up. The assumption in the room was that it is, and the interesting question had become what running one properly actually costs.
Nobody in Hong Kong was arguing about whether prop lasts. They were arguing about what it costs to run properly.
That reframing changes the conversation. Instead of feature comparisons we ended up discussing headcount ratios, the real cost of manual payout review, and what proportion of support tickets a well-designed evidence trail removes.
Two speaking slots, both on risk tooling. The most useful feedback came afterwards from a firm that had built their own rule engine and wanted to talk honestly about what it had cost them to maintain it.