Domain Ideation - Investments/Debt + Big Picture¶

Date: 2025-12-02 Participants: Emma, Gurjit Pannu, Jennifer Type: Internal

Summary¶

Deep dive into how Palm should model treasury instruments (investments, debt, intercompany loans) vs bank accounts. Key decision: Investments are NOT bank accounts - they're "instruments" or entities that emit cash flows. This enables cleaner architecture, better UX, and reusable patterns across instrument types.

Key Decisions¶

Investments are instruments, not bank accounts - separate data model, separate UI
Common pattern across instruments: Each has a Position (balance/value) and generates Forecasts (cash flow impacts)
Forecasts from instruments = confirmed forecasts - auto-generated based on terms (maturity, interest, etc.)
Entity-level vs Global views - IC positions net to zero globally but matter at entity level

Domain Model Structure¶

Category	Examples	Position	Forecast
Bank Accounts	Operating, Savings	Balance	Category-based forecasting
Cash Pools	ZBA Header/Participants	Header balance + participant "pool balance"	Sweep movements
Investments	Time deposits, MMFs, Notice accounts	Current value	Principal return at maturity, interest, fees
Debt (External)	Term loans, RCF	Outstanding amount	Principal, interest payments
IC Loans	Lender/Borrower views	Balance owed (nets out globally)	Settlement, interest

Key Insights¶

Instruments as "Cash Flow Emitting Machines"¶

"They're little cash flow emitting machines... Everything's cash flow." - Gurjit

Instruments don't need variance analysis or operational forecasting like bank accounts. They have known terms that produce predictable cash flows.

Why Not Bank Accounts?¶

User feedback (Lucia): "I don't think of that as an account. It's an investment."
Bank accounts have variance analysis, categories, intercompany - investments don't
Different UI needs: investments need "rollover" button, "update value" - not in bank accounts
Mixing them makes dashboards look strange (investments are huge, dwarf operational data)

Reusable Patterns¶

Base "instrument" entity with common fields (value, counterparty, servicing account)
Type-specific extensions (time deposit: maturity date, rollover; MMF: NAV updates)
Same pattern applies to debt and IC loans

Commitment/Notional Amounts¶

For facilities (RCF, IC lending): track both the commitment amount and utilized amount. Same concept as cash pool "available balance."

Jobs to Be Done (Emerging)¶

Job	Evidence
Minimize time spent manually calculating investment forecast impacts	"If we can do all that for you... that's absolutely incredible"
Reduce effort to distinguish operational cash from invested cash	"You want that one view of we as a company do have this money"
Minimize confusion when viewing entity-level vs global positions	"At a global view, you lose a lot of stuff... intercompany balances"
Reduce time to clear intercompany/pool balances	"If they could clear it quickly without X, Y, Z... that is pretty powerful"

Next Steps Discussed¶

Start with investments data model (time deposits, MMFs, notice accounts)
Ingest On's file → auto-generate forecasts from instrument terms
Apply same pattern to debt when ready
Consider "molecular" approach: reusable building blocks for instrument types

Transcript¶

Them: Good. We were jamming on intercompany loans right now. If Emma needs to take a nap, please let me know.
Me: There's a reason I didn't end up working in finance and business after business school, Gurjit. And here I am.
Them: We hooked you back in. Hooked you back in. Jenn. How you doing? I'm good. Well, today was supposed to be my first day. Zach was supposed to start nursery today. But he's ill, obviously. It. Doesn't that just always happen? He's like, oh, tomorrow's my first day. Soft launch of the coffee. And then. But hopefully tomorrow will be all right. So I really want to go over and make Christian the new office. Yeah. Did you get a chance to see it yet? Didn't go to dates. I was never going to go today with the Bena's first date, but I said I'll come tomorrow. So, yeah, hopefully I can. It's literally right next to the old Free Trade office, like a couple of doors down. Awesome. So, yeah, definitely know the area. There's, like, loads of good stuff going on around there. That's really cool. Yeah, no, Christian seems pretty pumped about it. Send me some pictures and videos. And I was like, okay. It's hard to believe, like, two years ago that I would have never received an. Have an office. In London. But now we have an office in London. Happy days for me. Houston. Are you in New York? In New York, yeah. Things are pretty good. I think San Francisco was a lot more busier, I think mostly because I had more of a network there. Thanksgiving through a bit of a wrench in the loop last week with everyone pretty much gone from the city, of course. But I'm here until next week and just. Yeah, looking at prospects, some of my consultancy firms in the charging space, which is interesting. Meeting with the Treasury Spring guys tomorrow. Some of that stuff, Cameron. Yeah. So it's nice. It's really cool. I've been just stuck in the apartment for the most part because. No meetings to go to, and it's too cool to just go for a walk. Yeah. Be nice to get back as well, I'm sure. Yeah. I missed the kids, man, big time. I was telling Emma the same.
Me: Yeah.
Them: I feel we have a lot to unpack in this session as well.
Me: I'm afraid so. Let me just. All over the place here today. Should we just, like. I can just share the board. Picture that I made. I've taken into account your feedback already, Gurjit and updated. Stuff. But the point is more like. Because what I'm wondering is if I can manage to understand the domain enough. Then I want to enable the engineering team to make slightly better decisions today. As to how to model some of these things out so that we don't have to again, like, if we can avoid the whole let's do this in a super naive way and then rearchitecture everything if we know better. Maybe we can actually leverage a little bit already now and make sense, make sure it makes sense in how we kind of think about it. So it's mostly about really understanding the domain.
Them: I think that's great. I think it's great. I think that's always been a bit of my own kind of worry is like, I understand the naive approach in a lot of things, but in ways we know what's going to come around the corner. If we prepare for it now, it's going to save us a bit of that headache in the future. If there's a way to identify that now.
Me: And it feels kind of core, like, to have this notion. I don't know if it will be an instrument or if it will be something else, but it's kind of core to the platform. So just, like, a bit of background today. We don't really like what we have today. In terms of investment or debt in palm is the categorization. Right. So we're automatically categorizing transactions. And if we are correct, we can capture. Fees, interest, principles coming and going. But that's basically what we have that we can proxy. It's quite basic. And then what Sarah has done is she has added a few new account, bank account types.
Them: Now.
Me: Where we are currently now able to ingest. Ohms mainly on time deposits data. And put into a time deposit bank account. So that's where we're at. That doesn't really reflect in any forecast right now. There's no automatic connection to that. And also we're happy to question the whole premise of it. Like, should we model everything out as an external account? I'm a little bit loving that idea, but that's also me biasing you now. But anyway. So what I did was just trying to. I'm not even sure if all of these. Labels and everything makes sense. But it is just me trying to take something that's quite complex to me and the team and dumb it down and, like, make it simple. And see what are common denominator. Like, is there a commonalities between all of these things and what's different between them and also sort of. How would it contribute? Like, how can we think about visibility or cash positions? And how can we think about forecasts? And what I did was just like, super. I was just like, well, company has assets and liabilities. Some of those are very relevant to Treasury. Like anything cash related is very relevant to Treasury. Inventory could also be relevant, but. Those things aside. Focusing mainly on anything that directly impacts cash. Like I get that faster inventory movement will free up cash and all of that, but is it fine to just kind of leave that out? If this doesn't make sense, tell me. By the way. To think of it in terms of the balance sheet. But super simple. Just what I told the team today was like, okay, what do we have? Everyone knows we have bank accounts. In this. I call it just the Domain picture or whatever I lumped together. Normal regular bank accounts and savings accounts. I do realize that savings accounts will also produce like an interest. But we can deal with that. Separately. The position is the balance of the account. And this is where we are most. Advanced in terms of our forecasting capabilities. We can forecast the activity and therefore also the future balance of the account. The system forecast, user provided input, and then maybe in the future as well. Via cash flows from connected instruments. If we go down that path or some way. Cash pull similar way like, oh, there are also accounts. The position of that pool is the balance of the header account. If it's a CBA pool like our physical sweeps, that's what we're doing here. And then. But I also want to take into account that there is a balance for the participants as well. So that we could track that whether or not that purely fits into a position, you know? This is where the complexity comes in. Right. And how can we think about it? Can it be thought of as sort of a position? But even we know the context of that position. It sits within a participant of a pool, therefore it shouldn't contribute. It doesn't go into your global cash balance. But it's sort of. It's about that as well. Right. So if we have context which enables us to differentiate what goes into the global balance, what is capital cash equivalents and what is something else? But is it still a position? Like, to someone it's a position, maybe. For the. For the entity that has this account, it's sort of a. It affects what they should expect to see. Like out or inflows, right? In the future, if they owe some other entity money.
Them: Now. And this is where it starts to your point, the complexity starts picking up as well as the overlapping. Right. Because. A ZBA position is different than a loan position is different than a cash position. But they're all connected. Because if you have enough cash, you can use a loan to clear a ZBA position, right? So, like, I do think. I do think. It's relevant. What I would say here on the positions is maybe instead of calling a cash position, it's actually just positioned because it could be cash, it could be non cash.
Me: Cool. Yeah.
Them: Yeah. And it's also in other confusion is that obviously. Every position is an asset to someone.
Me: Yes.
Them: It's almost like everyone. It's almost like all the different entities are all going to have their different positions, all the different assets. As if we need to separate them out with such. Or they owe them. Therefore, they have an asset and they have a liability. Do you know what I mean? It's almost like this top section. They almost are going to offset each other. If that makes sense. Because if there's 100 pound asset in the pool of the header entity, then there will be the position that they will have £100 and then. There'll be £100 owing from the other entity. Yeah. So that cash is 100 positive. But they have a liability in intercompany payable to wherever they pulled £100 from. Yeah, exactly. Because this orange section is assets and liabilities. If we're doing that and the position, I sort of see them as opposite. Do you know what I mean? Maybe I should ask a different question. What is not necessarily understanding the difference between the £100 in the bank account asset. To the current account balance, which is the bank account. I don't know if I understand the difference. Or is it the same?
Me: Is it fair to say, like, they're holding it? At least the holding entity. The entity or whatever, whoever owns the parent account has this balance. But their actual asset is this balance minus whatever they might owe to accounts in. Like if there's a net liability to accounts in the pool? No, like, I guess, because the sweeps zero out every day. So at some point there are some accounts in the pool. That have given a lot of money, some accounts that has taken some money.
Them: Yes.
Me: And I guess that can be, you know.
Them: Sorry. I was just saying it's almost like we're moving. We're looking at assets and liabilities side by side. Rather than having it above and below like you do in the balance sheet. Yeah, I was going to say, I think the balance sheet approach probably this would probably change. I think after this discussion on how to be structured view of this. But ultimately, where I'm getting to is. We're looking at cash separately, then we're looking at intercompany positions. And we're looking at in a company position separately than when we're looking at ZBA positions. And so when we think about. That's why I said, like, maybe take the cash part off is yes. Every instrument bank will have a certain position in an account or entity. It's going to be multidimensional. Visually or from a user perspective? Do you want to see a net position of everything? And what's my position as a company? Probably not, I would say. But you do want to see your cash position, your pool position and your loan position.
Me: Yeah, but. Yeah.
Them: Yeah. Okay?
Me: But so the mentioned in the company in the context of cash pools. So how does work then when, when.
Them: Y. Ep.
Me: Does this all? When is all of this taken care of? Like these balances.
Them: Yes.
Me: When does that kind of. When do you. Is it year? Is it like, continuously? Is it like.
Them: Yeah. It's it's driven by a couple of things. For one, it could be the company themselves. They might have a cadence in which they say, we want to zero out our ZBA balances for whatever reason. Others might do it where they say if you hold a debt position at a certain amount or for a certain amount of time we have to clear it out, because maybe the local tax authorities will deem that as a loan anyway, because they're like, dude, you're always borrowing, you're never paying back. So therefore, this is actually a dean loan, not a deep position. So clearing it out is dependent by company. And the way you clear it out is also very. It can vary, Right? So one could be if. If company A is borrowing a lot of money from the pool, so it owes money back to the pool. We could actually formalize a loan in which you. You lended the money, which is then swept into the pool. So what. What happens is you clear your pool balance, but now you have a formal loan that's accruing its own interest, and you're tracking it as such. That's one way to do it. Another would be like, if there are any sort of intercompany payables that are owed to these accounts, at some point, you just say, hey, let's settle that in a company. It'll organically clear up the pool balance as well. Right. So there are movements that you can do. Again, it depends on the company, and they have to structure that based on their conversation with their tax teams and kind of the instruments they have in play. The country's involved, and there's a whole lot of stuff that's involved that I don't think. A system like ours would at least today take care of and say, hey, this is how you're going to clear your balance.
Me: No, I think what I'm. Where I'm at right now is just like, what's this sort of simple structure we can provide that still allows for those actions, if that makes sense?
Them: Yeah, yeah.
Me: Okay, so we can automate the net swept position. Fine. We can keep track of that.
Them: Yep.
Me: But how do we know that this particular transaction is not just one of those. It's actually meant to. I mean, it should actually zero it out, then, so maybe it's.
Them: Exactly right, because you'll have the. The. The transaction coming through a manual flow or like someone else is going to make that movement, and then the sweep is automatic, and it'll zero that out for you.
Me: Yeah. Yeah, exactly. So maybe we don't even have to bother ourselves too much, then. So it was more like a question on what do they want visibility on, then?
Them: No. And I think the balance sheet, like the. The first, the orange section, does both of those things because every entity has its own balance sheet. So you'll see the position. If you look at just one entity, you'll see how much it owes all the other entities. And if it's positive or negative, it's a liability. That tracks the balance currently in the position. But then when you add them all together and you look at a global view over a regional view,
Me: Yeah.
Them: Then, then. But the. The positions are by design tracked in the entity level balance sheet which we already slice. So if we, as long as we set up these other accounts or like non bank accounts in this way, we'll see the balance.
Me: Then.
Them: You know, we'll just be tracking it still within the entity region. At the recurrency framework. Do you know what I mean? I think we'll be able to show this. Already. If that makes sense.
Me: So what we do know, or what we're imagining or like how I think it's now, is just if you imagine a participant account in our app, the balance would always be zero. You know, the bank. We don't currently track those net, like the sweeps and like have that. We don't currently in our database or anywhere track those. All of the movements to keep track. I didn't even know the name for this balance. Is there a name for this balance, like this conceptual balance? Just.
Them: You can call it intercompany balance or cash pool balance. I think again there's not a. I don't know. Jenny, you've heard any other proposed to Emma that we could call these ledger balance because they're just something that we track. And then anything that is a ledger balance is just tracked. It's not linked to a bank. You know, there's your bank account. In your ledger account. And therefore, you can always post things. The intercompany to intercompany ledger or your loan ledger or whatever. It's like a universal term of account that you have to maintain. You know, it's. Well, it's not that you have to maintain it, but how you think, you know, if you have, like, a reconciliation software. You've got your external ledger, which all message your bank account, and then your internal ledger, which you maintain, which is your loan. Company, your investments, all your other bits, but there's no extra. At the end of the day, everything should match to zero. Your external should match to your internal to zero, but you have to decide how they're allocated. Does that make sense? Yeah, I think what I would say on that, though, is I kind of want to stay away from the accounting principles in the trespass tool. And especially when you talk about ledgers, because you're always in my eyes at least, alleged is an offset within that ledger. Net to zero, as you mentioned. I think in a cash pool you do net to zero, but it's what the different entity, potentially a different ledger per se. And like I want to get away from any confusion of is ledger. Whereas the offset. I think we're looking at this specifically from a we want to track your cash flow balances like a cash pool ledger. Something like that might make sense. Or balance, because let's make it easy for folks that are not accountants either, like myself. I probably wouldn't know what a ledger. If I sold that balance, like, I wouldn't necessarily know what it ties to, but if you can be very. Clear as to this has to do with this being a cash pooled account. I think it's going to probably put us in a better place there. Yeah. But to your point, Emma. Yeah, I think. Look, just maybe I'm getting too far ahead here, but if I'm looking at a bank account, that's part of a cash sweet pool. I know that the bank account balance is zero, but to be able to see. Well, what's my balance within the cash pool? Is helpful because it lets me know. Is it a borrowing entity? Is this a contributing entity? If the balance is really highly negative. Hey, wait a second. I need to do something here. I probably need to execute a loan to pay back this pool ballads and whatnot. So I think being able to track that, and even in its simplest forms we did the way that we did it before in my previous companies, is you just pull out all of your ZBA transactions and you sum them up, and that's your pool balance, basically, for each bank account. What we can do right through Categorization. So if we can categorize transactions, then we could then calculate cash flow balances.
Me: Yeah, I don't think there's a problem calculating it all. I'm just trying to find, like, a conceptual sort of way to. So that our engineers can, A, understand it and B, model our data in a way that supports it. And this is just my personal preference. But I like if you can find like common themes and use some of that across the way your model certain things out, that's really helpful. I get that there might be a bit of a special case here or, you know, when we come to notional pools also. So maybe cash pools are a different beast altogether, and that's fine. But today, if I can tell it's a visibility need they have, it's. Or it's. It's sort of a position, but in this way. It just comes down to terminology and breaking down the complexity so that they can go on and do the other complex work, which is the whole engineering work behind it. Right. So if we cannot communicate the domain and how it works and. In a simple way as we possibly can, it's going to make their job harder. Too.
Them: Can I close one other thing? I think this, how you design, makes a lot of sense in that all the stuff that goes through the bank accounts, that's for the pnl. Doesn't matter. There's just those few treasury bits of the balance sheet that you want to track. And what are those things? And I know we've got some of those examples right now. In terms of the personio and on for the investment and the loans in the intercompany, and then also that future, future FX positions, all the things that go on the balance sheet. That treasurers care about are these things on the in everything else. Is just. The expenses, revenue, the bits and bobs that are gone. So it's almost like having a little hierarchy, a different hierarchy that's not the categories that this match to. And trying. Well, I don't think we'll get all of them, but we'll get most of them. And then each of those has its own little design, you know, in the cash pool. These ones, that's an intercompany one, isn't it? It's that. Yeah. Yeah. I think even taking a step back, if you scroll over to the left, in terms of how we have how you have it kind of set up where it says bank accounts, and then you have cash pools. Right. Cash pools are also bank accounts at the end of the day, right? And so I think, okay, that's for everything. Okay?
Me: So I tried to do like, this is the bank accounts group. This is just some weird other thing that I've heard about at some point that you want cash in transit is maybe interesting. And so I'm just trying to map how. That's it, guys. And that investment is another bucket. This is just three. Examples of investments.
Them: Yep. Yep.
Me: It. Arrangements don't mean my terms, but more on the asset side. And then I see arrangement on the like liabilities and then debt like. So the most important thing is within each bucket can we find similarities so that we don't have to build completely new things from this, from the, you know, scratch every time, add a new investment type.
Them: Yes. Yeah, makes sense. Okay, then. Then, yeah, that. That's good because then it goes in line with also what Jenn, you were saying around the balance sheet versus PNL and D. Split it up that way and see it. See it in that regard. But okay.
Me: But just challenge your checking because this is good. If we just have that. The forecast for the header account. I know. Maybe it should say header here to make it easier. But here we're mainly forecasting the balance. There might be some individual action going on, like interest or something, feedback fees or stuff like that on the header account too. And those will be. Just like any regular bank account. But otherwise the forecast is essentially. Summing up all of the activity on the participants accounts resulting in the net sweeps. Cool. And then the participants is just like any regular bank account. We forecast by category. The cash flows, and then that results in a positive or negative kind of sweep.
Them: Yes. Yeah.
Me: Cool.
Them: I think that's good. I would just. I would put a caveat that not all header accounts are just header accounts. Like, there are header accounts you could have that can act like regular operating accounts that also are the header. Like the same behavior as a subsidiary child account header accounts technically can do the same. Where you might have. Not only funding movements, but, like you said, bank fees and stuff. But you might have maybe. Some, for whatever reason. A payroll payment that's going out of a header account, but it's also a header to your pool. For me.
Me: So it's more like for header accounts, they also have the sweep. It's more like an additional thing. They have the sweep movement. In addition to any regular account activity.
Them: Exactly right. So the header, the way I kind of. The way I picture it is regular account with a one to many sweep. Movement. Meaning that you might have multiple sweeps across multiple accounts. But in this one account, whereas a child account, it's in a regular operating account with the one to one sweep movement where it's only sending money to that header account. Is a bit of the differentiation between the two.
Me: Yeah. Okay, they have this weep category. Boom. There we.
Them: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Me: And there's always a counterparty. So it's sort of an IC thing. And that's also interesting because IC always has counterparties. And that's why pools are a bit interesting place to start developing how we might also model out the counterpart, like the relationships between accounts.
Them: Yes. Backward.
Me: Okay? But it's so far it's positioned still, like, fairly. Is that fair? To call this a position. Like whatever, we end up naming it. The participant. Artificial balance thingy.
Them: Yeah, I think so. I think, I mean, you call it a position, you call it a balance, but yeah, I guess I think it's an asset over reliability. That's what. Like I'm getting confused. Either is that either the alt of the cash flow or the all from. And you know the position. We can label it position, but I think.
Me: It open to other names, but just trying to find, like, a way to kind of. Help think about.
Them: Yes. Yeah. Let's stick with position.
Me: Yeah.
Them: I think position works in the lens of how we're trying to say cash positions. Are. Actually, I'm wondering if balance is the right term. Because you're either in a. In a negative balance or a positive balance. To the pool, right? So. It has to cover investments and loans and.
Me: But, I mean, these were also balances, like balance balance. But we still say that that's the cash position.
Them: Yeah.
Me: Whereas this is a bit special. You might. Depending on what view you're on, it will be included or not.
Them: Yeah. I think. I think balances is probably better.
Me: Okay, but so for depth. We can call it something else, but investments is. It's not really bad. I mean.
Them: Yeah. Yeah.
Me: It's sort of a. Like a let's. Let's just go down to investments.
Them: Yeah, yeah, yeah.
Me: And try. Okay, we have these three examples. Because that's what we're currently working with Sarah to try and support me at Palm. So we have the time deposits, the MMFs and notice accounts. So then I was just like, oh, well, what would be the position here? Like, it's still cash. Ish. Still part of my position, so it's just not adequate in this case.
Them: Yep. Yep.
Me: This is a bit more liquid. But you know that that can be allowed elsewhere, you know? Or even just if you break down your position by what type of cash is it? You'll see. You know how much is instantly available, how much is not, and so on. Because you know what a time deposit is. You can look at the maturity dates if you want. But yeah. And then. For the mmf, it would be the. Current value. Like however that has developed and that I'm initially would be manually updated as per however, their process looks like. For this. I mean, it's the current value of the principal. And then everything else is captured in the forecast. So, like. For time deposit. In owns case. At least it's fairly straightforward. It's a fixed rate. There's a maturity date, so you would know when you get. I don't know if principal repayment is the correct term, but you would know when you get your principal back. Unless you roll it over. You would know the fees associated with this investment. So we can just, like, produce automatically three forecasted cash flows? Coming from this one time deposit. One for fees, one for interest, one for. When the principal returns.
Them: Yep.
Me: Right? And then. So if. I, you know, want to include in the forecast. I'll get back this money. Like, I can add that somehow. I can either. We can model it out on the instrument, like, hey, I'm planning to redeem this, or, like,
Them: Y. Es. Y.
Me: Whatever. We can discuss the details.
Them: Es.
Me: But essentially the more long term forecast. Naively, I'm imagining it will just be the same as the current value.
Them: Y. Ep.
Me: Like maybe their fees, I don't know. And then the same for notice account. I'm thinking like you have an intent to redempt as well. Like you say, hey, I want to get this cash out, and that takes a few days. Otherwise it's just the same as for time deposit. Any associated fees or interest like this is where it will differ from instrument to instrument.
Them: And this is what Liji was saying is all about the. The accounts that are in their name. Which they want to add as bank account versus the money market fund, which is not their account. It's like. And to add an account that is not a bank account. In the tracking of that. And if it does, like you saying, does it need to be modeled differently? Like or does it not?
Me: Yeah. Like, we could have a page in the app that is called Investments, and then they could see. Think of them as something external. That is an investment. And you know we can. Separate ui for that. For example. Or if the bank account way makes sense, we could stick with that as well. But there are some initial feedback issues on that. Lucia was a bit like, well, I don't think of that as an account. It's like, It's an something else, right? It's an investment. I don't have that account. I don't need to see that account among all my accounts.
Them: Yeah, yeah. I, I and I tend to agree with her, especially on the money market stuff. And even, technically, the time deposit stuff in a way where. When you do make a time deposit, it's sent to the bank. To their wherever they're holding all that cash as I recognize it. So. Yeah, it's not like. Yeah. The accounts are not like bank accounts in the sense where they're, you know, paying things and you're, like, funding them and you're. I guess you are funding in a way, but. I, I, I agree. Like. If we're looking at cash flow forecasting. And you're doing that by your bank accounts because you're actually forecasting your liquidity across your bank accounts. Then a money market account, not money market investment, is not an account per se. It's just cash that's owed to you and it belongs to you and is a part of your cash balance that you can, you can from. Which now even talking out loud seems a bit kind of counterintuitive because you're like, well, if it's my money, then why don't I have it? Why? Why is it somewhere else? And like, how do kind of words I funny things about we need and I know I've done this for Tom and, like, a really happy read. But I think that all the bank accounts should. So there should be the global balance. Which should include them. And then every account should have available balance and you could select it. Then they can see their total because no one wants to panic and not see that the money market fund isn't there. Because it's still in cash and cash equivalents, isn't it? But it's not in a bank account. But if every account is available, cash or not, the treasurer can see. What money they're actually working with. And then that is on the forecast of the page. And I think that differentiation. Takes a lot of boxes, you know, in this sense, because the, the money market accounts, for example. For the most part, they're going to be manually entered into. You know, someone will put in their investment in. They'll enter a one off to say, I'm going to invest on this. You know, it's not going to be something I imagine there's going to be forecasted because it's so decision driven. And you still want that account. In the list, I think. But over time, it can be pulled out into its own investment page and colored in a different way or something. But as long as this does that available cash. Yeah, yeah, yeah. I was going to say that we're the position as well, right? Your money market balance should be a part of your cash position as a company. Like you know that that's money that I have. And how we present that, I think, is the TBD part, whether it's on page. It's another section under the bank accounts. I don't know, whatever. On your dashboard. I, I envision, like, you have your total cash as a company, and you have it kind of in blocks where you say, this is cash on your bank accounts, this is cash and investments. This is maybe restricted cash. This is collateral, whatever. But you, you're able to see, number one, how much money do we as a company have and how much of that do we have access to now? And how much of that is like, invested versus not right. Like, you can slice it in all these different. But the goal is you should have that one view of we as a company do have this money. Even if it's a bank account.
Me: Exactly. And all of these four costs here. They're not. Nothing of this is at an investment account level. This is all on your kind of operation, your operational bank accounts. So any, like, variance analysis, and so that would still remain intact. You could still easily see, like, even if this doesn't live in an account, Sorry, not just on a bit of a tangent here, but it's up to us to essentially define. Hey. Okay. The user wants to see their total cash position. Okay? Then we do a join in the database between the bank accounts table and the investments table and all the balances across the investments and the bank accounts, and we sum that up. And we can let them filter. Hey, exclude investments. Okay, Cool. Hey, I only want to see investments, and I want to drill down into that. And where they have common denominators. It's like the balance, essentially. Right, so maybe not everything will make sense to the way we currently have our global forecast overview for balances. I don't think that investments would necessarily go in there. Because that's. That's actually a page that also, in the current shape, allows you to drill down into variances and, like, what would that mean? In the. If you had an investment account, let's say, for each time deposit, each M and F, what would that even mean? You know, like, what is the variance? Like, it's just like, to me, it's hard to logically kind of, like, place those boxes. Like, this distinction between your actual cash balance. And then your cash equivalents.
Them: Yeah, there is. Yeah.
Me: Now I'm being a bit opinionated, so please, you know, feel this.
Them: I think it makes sense. I think it makes sense. And I'm trying to, like, even think about going back to this, say, investment specifically, and impact on cash and forecasting. You get to a situation where you have a time deposit that matures next week. Right. Today, your cash balances are going to show your investments to be X and your cash to be Y. And in the forecast, what's going to happen is at maturity, your investment should drop down by a certain amount and your cash balance to increase by the opposite amount.
Me: Yep.
Them: So your cash position is technically week over week, the same. But bucket that it sits in is different. Based off of the forecast of, hey, we're redeeming cash from here. And putting it into a bank account now. And so, so, so again, that's the whole idea around, like, depending on the layer that you're looking at, right, and how you slice it and stuff is going to be different. But, like, the net numbers, technically it'll be the same. If there's no actually bank, like, you know, operational activity or whatever. And I agree with Yama on, like, if you think about an investment account as an account, and in our app, it it behaves like an account and you realize, wait, there's no real forecasting in a money market fund. There's no variance analysis. There's no intercompany. Really? I guess there's a little intercompany for you. But it's not a sweep, it's not a zba. It's.
Me: That it's not only intercompany either, because it's not sitting with your company, it's sitting somewhere else.
Them: Yeah, exactly. And it's. It's. Yeah, exactly. So I think investments is a lot easier to like quickly say, that's not a bank account, it's something else. Then I think zba schooling is.
Me: It could open up for a bit more flexibility in the UI as well. If we had investments page and you look at all your time deposits, for example, the time cost representation in the ui, I imagine something could have a button that says rollover.
Them: Is. Yeah.
Me: Where would that button sit? In a bank account, like, or the money market fund. Could have, you know, all of them could have, like, update the current value, blah, blah, blah. It's different. I'm just seeing, like, different kinds needs for action that users want to take.
Them: Y.
Me: That maybe we don't want to. Mix into our bank accounts because that's going to be like, yeah, it's just much more complex for a developer also to dive into and like, whoa, a bank account. You can do all of these things and I need to keep track. It's just another aspect of it all. But it could, if we make it a bit more modular. Instead of a monolithic, like everything is a bank account. If we make it a bit more modular.
Them: Es. Yeah.
Me: We could allow a little bit more flexibility as well in terms of what are the needs for MMF specifically? Maybe at some point we can even do that API integration to, you know, when we're rich, but to automatically update the values of the fund.
Them: Yeah. I, I agree, I agree. I think. And then also if you start thinking about self service, right? And like if someone wants to add a new money market account at some point themselves, like it's a different flow than a bank account because bank accounts, you're asking for bank and Ivan and currency and blah, blah, blah. Blah. A money market account. You might be looking for a QSIP or, like a one and a fire, whatever. So I do see it being. I, I like 100% agree. Investments are not bank accounts. It's instrumental, whatever you want to call it. And also when you start thinking about investments, we, we, we label three. There's dozens more that we can eventually layer on that will act more like these three than they would. Like a bank account. So you'd be all in agreement in. That regard. I think 100. And that can also already say that these things that we've pulled out here. Make all the dashboards in all the data look really strange because they're the biggest things. So they detract from the actual operational forecast already, because whenever there's something misallocated into company, for example, It makes all the graphs huge and then everything else is tiny because it's just. Yeah, by far the largest. So if you do distinguish between operating, but we already do that, but we have to actually exclude it from certain views, I think that would make the usability easier and I would do that in embeddable too. And it would make everything look.
Me: Yeah. And for embeddable, we could then at some point create, like, a data set that is specifically taking everything into consideration, like your total cash position. And otherwise we could use separate. Like these are your investment data set versus your account balances data set. I don't. Yeah.
Them: Yeah, I know that. Also running out of time. Can I also add something about these other accounts and how we could maybe think about them? I was just thinking about before. How, you know, how all of the transactions get allocated to category.
Me: Yep.
Them: We. And at the moment there's no transaction in palm that is not come from bank statement or an upload or a one off. We don't generate any transactions.
Me: No, not really, unless you count the forecast.
Them: Yeah, but a one. Yeah, I guess that a one weekly per category. For the forecast. I guess what I was going to say was we could either generate transactions or we could tag a transaction to a separate account. That you want to track. So you can say, I want to track this balance. And you can tag something as a loan principal or a loan repayment, and that is tagged to a different account hierarchy. And that could cover everything, because everything in here has a cash movement. And that's the whole point I'm trying to think, what is so special about these, these things that you've pulled out? But they all have a cash movement linked to them. So every investment is paid, or every intercompany loan or every cash sweep is paid. So you could have, you could, in addition to all your categories, you could tag that as. This. This bank account, 050. This cash sweep. I want to tag and recognize that or log that as. Cash free contribution in that sort of an account. And you can view those tags. You know, so without. I was trying to think for a way to do this without generating more transactions, because I don't think. I think that becomes quite hard. Without giving them admin and able to create transactions themselves. I think that's quite a hard thing to do, but if we can tag our existing transactions. This one like you're adding more, more. More categories in a way or a different set of categories in a way. Right. The thing. I know we've talked about this. For going from category to maybe like GL and having more layers of categories. Or type things. But you're saying tagging it for, like, I want to specifically track. Intercompany movements between just these two. These two entities. Let me say, hypothetically. And so you want to pull out those transactions that could be in your company. They could be zba, they could be loan, they could be pre funding, whatever. But you want to tag those as just intercompany between A and B that I want to track. Yeah, exactly. Or like, a simple one. Could be a debt because, yeah, I have this facility. And I did this the other day for person. Every single thing with this reference was this debt facility, anything with a principal. So I could tag that as that is my RBS debt facility UK in that tag and you filter that tag. But it's not only it also calculates a balance. That's the difference.
Me: I was thinking actually the other way around. If that Depth facility is in Palm. Then as we automatically create those forecasts, they will automatically be associated with that facility. So you could, like, the relationship would be there.
Them: Yes. Yeah, like, I guess that's the next thing. The more things you tag to.
Me: I don't think the user needs to tag anything. It would be automated, right? So it would be like, hey, they set up a depth instrument, Whatever about the term naming.
Them: The.
Me: But in palm and then. You produce forecasts based on the terms. Like, when am I supposed to kind of pay stuff back? But you mean the actual. Like, I'm using this now? Or like.
Them: Can I probably explain just because I want to make sure I'm not also in that. Emma, in your example, you're saying that if I have a loan facility with bank of America, And I draw down on that bank of America loan facility. Now I'm going to in palm. Hypothetically, I should see a balance of. Okay. I've drawn X amount from my bank of America loan facility. And based off of that, here's what my interest looks like for the next six months because of whatever the agreements are.
Me: Yeah.
Them: But that's not going to be categorized as bank of America loan facility. It's categorization is going to be just loan draw or. Whatever.
Me: Yeah, yeah. No, I'm just saying that maybe we can. That relationship could be automatic or, like, be, you know. Yeah. I haven't thought too much about how to model this perfectly, but there is. Okay, I can use. I have $10 million that I can use. I use one of them. When I set this up, I also define which servicing account is related to this loan. I guess that's typically how it standards one account that gets the money.
Them: Yes.
Me: Okay, cool. So, you know, maybe we don't even do anything. We just recognize that transaction as it comes in as a kind of. It's a loan. It's a print. I don't know. The drone balance or whatever. And since we already know that this loan is set up, Like the user wouldn't have to tag anything unless we. Unless there is multiple loans, of course. And they need to say, hey, which one does this belong to?
Them: In most cases, these things the user have to enter, like for the forecast, like, you know, see if you just got a term loan.
Me: Yeah. For the forecast. Yeah.
Them: Just stick in a book upload, I think, and.
Me: But if it's that, if it's like, okay, I'm going to use a million in a month. Maybe I can enter something here. Or, you know. And then that will automatically just produce the resulting forecasted impact on this account.
Them: Yeah. Yeah. Because you could always. You could always enter in. I want to draw my million. And you put your one off. And it's going to come into this forecast. And then if you add like you say, this is my rcf, it's also. You've got one. Your loan balance now is 9 million. And.
Me: But I think. I think we could have like, a little source field, like on forecast, if you want, and then you can just click and the source is this instrument, and then you. I don't know. But, yeah, I get your point. In terms of, like, I'm just thinking, like, do users want to manually tag everything? Or should we try to, like. They need to at some point take an action that is. Hey, I'm planning on utilizing parts of. This. And while they're already doing that, could we also just automatically make everything else make sense? For them. Create those connections between the forecasted impact on the account whenever you will land. So that forecasted transaction, Hey, a million dollars will land in this account in a month from now. Would already. Be connected to like this. Depth that's also in palm.
Them: Does that also create the position? In the middle.
Me: Yeah. The idea is that all of it would just be automated, right? So it's like, if we can. Think of it as things that kind of emits or creates cash flows or events. Then it could. That's the. That's the date idea that I'm playing around with right now, at least just thinking of, like, how can we make this. More automated. But of course. It's a bit of complexity there.
Them: No, I think. I think you're 100, right, Emma? I think the thing is that in that first orange section, Everything's going to come from those transactions. And then we're either going to have them in the purple section, the bank balances, or these debt balances. I think balances just make sense, like the balance that is.
Me: I don't think these as transactions. I think of these as entities. Right. So bank account, like. Sorry. Now, in a database. Right. So a bank account is an entity. An investment can be an entity. The investment can have fields, it can have, like, current value, it can have the interest rate, it can have. The expected fee, all of those things, and the maturity date or whatever. And. And from the information we have, Of this one. Time deposit. Time deposit number one. From whatever they call it. We automatically produce the forecasts for the actual own bank account.
Them: Is.
Me: Unless they click rollover or whatever. They'll see their principal being repaid out the maturity date along with any interest and fees. And I was just thinking, if it's possible to do something similar around debt like I set it up. I know the terms. Maybe we'll start simple. Maybe it'll have to be a fixed interest rate. Or they can manually, once a month, update the rate if they want to. And then that will just produce a similar. Just automatically, as if someone uploaded a file containing this information, you know. But we would just do that automatically for them, produce these kind of resulting forecasts. Does it make sense?
Them: Yeah, yeah.
Me: If there is, I get that it's not always as easy. Like, maybe there's not always that perfect schedule for when I pay back on my debt or when I draw from it. So that's. But the question is more than where and how is that managed within palm. Is it something they just find the loan in palm and they say, hey, that and that. Wait, I plan to use this and this much. Or that. And that date I plan to.
Them: Yeah.
Me: Pay back.
Them: I actually liked your one thing that you mentioned around the one offs and having an option to select a source. So like maybe if there's a thing around especially, especially when from a positioning perspective, when we say a counter overdrawn, the next step is what we need to fund it. Be interesting if you say, hey, we're going to fund. And then the question is, are you funding from an intercompany transfer? Are you funding from a loan? Are you funding from your rcf, whatever? And that then allows us to then build the forecast of what's going to happen now that you decided where the money comes from and where it impacts, right? And again, even in your company's one where you say, well, I'm going to fund this from just my parent account or whatever, my other bank account. That's already been giving us enough visibility to say, hey, there's going to be a money movement from here to here. Now let's add that to your forecast. I think, but, like, maybe that's further down, but, like, yeah, I think generally what you're saying around being aware of funding sources or things that are going to drive a cash movement at some point in your bank account. And being able to leverage that knowledge to then forecast kind of what the impact is, not only of maybe an initial draw or funding, but also what subsequently happens after that. Is is super cool. Because essentially, you're like, you're building this again. I keep calling it a puzzle, but you're building this Pu. But all the right pieces come into place. When they're supposed to. Based on the information that you've already kind of given us versus you having to say. My time deposit I'm going to add over the next. It's a three month deposit. I'm pretty sure I'm going to roll it for three more times after that. So let me add in three different items now and my my debt position, I don't know what I'm going to borrow. And then once I borrow, I have to calculate what my interest is and blah blah. If we can do all that for you. I mean, I think that's absolutely incredible. And it makes our forecast more robust as well, because then all of a sudden, These are confirmed forecast technically.
Me: Exactly. Exactly. So that was the. My main idea. Like, could we just use that same table in a date? Sorry, no. But, yeah, exactly. Conceptually, it's also just a confirmed forecast, only that it automatically was created for you based off of the terms of your investment or debt.
Them: Yeah.
Me: Or any like you say, points of entry like user experience wise and how to. Connect that source to this funding movement that I'm inputting. Like, if it's via a manual runoff, we can expose the source field. Yeah. Please select from where you're going to fund this. You can also be an option to do it at the actual instrument level.
Them: Y.
Me: So many ways to do the same thing can sometimes be a good thing, like making it easy to just. Hey, I want to draw on this. Okay. Where is. Where is it going? You know, probably when you set it up, it already has the destination or a servicing bank account. Right. And it will.
Them: Eah. Yes. Yeah. It ultimately gets us to those outcomes where hopefully you're in the app and you're saying, okay, I see my balances are increasing in account xyz. I want to do this funding movement of moving the money from A to B. And I know that B is connected to my money market. And so I know that a month from now, I'll be able to invest $25 million because. As I've been kind of clearing out my balances, all these numbers are kind of linking up to where does that money eventually end up, which isn't connected to your investment or your loan, loan facility, whatever. But that's what you want to get to, right? Is that as a user, knowing what's going to happen based off of all these confirmed forecasts across all different things that are happening. I know in 13 weeks from now. I could actually invest a big chunk of this. That in and that's. I think that's how we're putting all the pieces together little by little. Outside of just machine learning, just one offs, it's also a company, it's also investment draws. It's all of that stuff's combined is just going to give you your true end. Position. And yeah, the more of these items you have, it's more stuff. You're manually trying to figure it out. Whereas, can we do that for you automatically? You know, all of a sudden, confidence. Can I add to that I'm team said to you, which is quite interesting, which is linked to this. So adding this stuff is one offs. Now you know how we have that verified plug? Doesn't make sense because this is their stuff. If they put in a debt in investment, they know what it is and when it's going to happen.
Me: Will.
Them: This is like this. Separate. This is connecting all the dots. Of you make your plan of your investment, and then it becomes a reminder to do it later on. You know, you said you were going to invest, then you've put it in. Separate to the flow that we have, which is payroll told me that we're going to pay this, and I've entered in that actual and I need to verify that with them. And that's a separate reminder. This almost segregates the operational stuff, which is what we've done for now. Through user input. We know this is different, and it triggers different behaviors. In 13 weeks, I'm going to put in 5 million. I don't need that to sit there for 30 weeks. You know, that's. That's a new to do list on my investments page. Reminder to invest 30 million in 13 weeks. With, but it's. Yet that's something that they gave. And I was like, that's actually so true. You know, what we've designed does work. It's just not. Not all one offs are the same. Basically. Yeah. Yeah.
Me: Will. Really? Cool. I have more questions on intercompany stuff, to be fair, but I also know we're out of time.
Them: I don't have a hard stop, but happy to do a follow up if that makes sense. Yeah. I'm so sorry. This carnage going on through that I need to go.
Me: Yeah, that's fine. Do you have like 10 minutes? Could you just a quick. I just want to sound it like the concepts, but in the company wise. And what does it mean?
Them: Yeah, thanks. I love that.
Me: So much, Jennifer.
Them: See you.
Me: Oh, this is. It's really good that I have Granola. So? So? So if I'm an intercompany lender, Like now, I'm very naive, but I'm imagining in some way or another, like I have a loan that I'm giving. It's sort of an asset because it's producing interest and it's giving me something, you know, in the broad term. I don't know, but the position. Is there are any concept of a position or any need for visibility in terms of, you know, this is the money that I have actually lent to other entities.
Them: Down. Yeah, there is, right? There's two, if even.
Me: But it's not cash.
Them: It's not cash. Right, because the cash is recognized as. The cash is recognized on the bank account as whatever you categor it as, intercompany, loan out or whatever it's going to be. The balance on that bank account is going to change because it sent money now. So that's the cash part is captured in the bank account in the transaction.
Me: Yes, for sure.
Them: But what's not being captured is going to be the balances, which is like the accrual of all these outflows that every time, maybe every month, you sending a million. Right. So then it's all of a sudden, 12 months later, it's 12 million and not 1 million. That's 1. And number 2 is. The. The piece that I showed you in the workbook is in some of these revolving facilities, you have a notional amount, so you can lend up to a certain amount. You want to be able to track that, right? You want to be able to know that, hey, do I have to update my loan here? I kind of, like, maxed out how much I could send or how much I agreed to send to this other subsidiary. I think.
Me: This is a bit like input. Cash pools.
Them: Yeah.
Me: Too. It's the same, or at least very similar concept.
Them: Actually. Very simple.
Me: We need to come up with a name for it, but it's the same thing.
Them: Yeah. Yeah, yeah, yeah. Automatic and one is done through a transfer that someone puts in.
Me: I'm just. Gonna. Okay? And then they also want to see how much. I'm just gonna put it in terms my understand commitment, whatever, like.
Them: Yeah. Yeah. I think even commitment amount is. Is a good. Is a good term as well. By the way, instead of notional amount.
Me: Okay. Yeah, it just makes sense to me. Like, I promised that I can lend you up to this amount, so I need to make sure, I guess, that I actually am able to.
Them: Yeah. Yeah. Y. Eah, yeah.
Me: It's also, in the future, something interesting that might be needed to pop up as decision support when you look at stuff. But leaving that for now.
Them: Yeah.
Me: And then the forecast to me is pretty clear. It could be the same thing. And that's why I'm like, is this an instrument? Is it not any. That's the thing, right? Conceptually, it shares behaviors. Like, it's also sort of like you have a contract. You know you're gonna get paid interest or. Amortization. You know, this is still, like, a little bit, but if we keep it simple to win, does it make sense? Like, it's. It's.
Them: Yep. Yeah. At the end of the day, this is just a. It's just a debt. It's a term loan, but instead of the lender being a bank, it's a different entity. And I think this is. This is a lens from the lender, by the way, so. So actually.
Me: From the land point of view. And then down here I have from the borrower point of view. So it's the same kind of. But from the different. Yeah, it's the same thing. So this is just as if I would have borrowed from an external bank. If I want to see current outstanding amount owned here, why wouldn't I want to see it here?
Them: Y. Eah. Exactly.
Me: Yeah. And I just including accrued interest as well, I think. Like that's also a thing. In its simplest form, Like, I'm just keeping it to the basics now, but. So I'm just trying to, you know, conceptually, like, where does things overlap and how can we think, like, keep it simple in our database? And then we can always, for each kind of. Liability or each kind of asset, or, like, they don't have to be named assets or liabilities anywhere in our database, but just helping us think for each kind. Each bucket here. They could have, like, a specific field that says, Cash equivalent, or this is cash or whatever. However, we want to set that up smartly so that when we make our views. But it should be fairly more simple than that. It should also just be. Well, it's an investment, so it's not an account balance. Excluded. Like, this is external debt, this is internal. Debt. So these things at the global level, this one plus this one.
Them: Yeah.
Me: Would. Either we would just hide them, or they would just naturally cancel each other out. If we show some form of position that I don't know.
Them: Yeah. Yeah.
Me: But look at the entity level. It might be interesting. That's what I meant. Like, if I go into a specific entity and I want to see stuff about that entity, Then all of a sudden, this isn't zeroed out by anything. It's actually a liability of this entity.
Them: Yeah, exactly. Yeah. I think in a way, pool, ZBA pools, intercompany loans and external debt facilities are all very similar. But I kind of just like, maybe some small nuances, but, like, generally pretty much of borrower, lender, amount, balance, interest.
Me: Yeah, and I suppose, like, the external debt won't net out or zero out at the global level or anything like that. But it still sits with some entity.
Them: Yes. Yeah, exactly. So I think that all kind of connects. And, yeah, in terms of this kind of drill down into the entities, I think this is where we have an opportunity to be super, super powerful. Is. And we're seeing this in demos and POVs, and they're like, yeah, cool. Like, I love the global view. Great. I see my cat, but I want to see this kind of just one slice of the world, because that's what impacts me, and it's. It's completely like. At a global view, you. You lose a lot of stuff. You lose variances, you lose intercompany balances, you lose all that. Whereas here, you can then eventually say, yeah, like, hey, I have. It'd be really interesting where you say, oh, I have. Like, I would love to get to a point where you're like, wow, I owe my cash pool a million dollars. But I also have lent a million dollars to this entity that has the million dollars now. Well, why don't I just pay? Have them pay me the loan back and also clear the pool balance all in one go. Because hey, I see that. I see that I have a payable and loans, but I have a receivable in pools and my cash is going to be zero. In that case I would mention. But that's where you want to be able to allow people to start making decisions. That are not, that have nothing to do with business operations. Like your vendors and payroll and all that shit's going to get paid no matter what because you're part of the cash pool. But hey, by the way, your job is to clear this cash pool balance because you're getting a tax fucking bill or something that if you don't. So now we're really getting into that true non generic treasury function of more of like. This is the stuff that's going to for larger companies. It doesn't matter. For large companies. They do want, they don't want to hold a 50 million dollar intercompany balance. And if they could clear it quickly without having to do X, Y and Z, and we can show that to them. That is. That is pretty powerful for them. And I think this is the. The first steps towards that. Which again starts to differentiate us from just a right money at the right time at the right place, blah, blah, blah narrative, which is also true, but.
Me: This is so good, but yeah.
Them: This is where it starts to get, especially for large enterprises. Really interesting. And now you're. You are truly moving money in a way that you have to to facilitate business. And it's not necessarily just operations.
Me: Yeah.
Them: So I think it's cool, man. I think this is. This is where.
Me: You know, my brain is like, you know, we could even, like, the engineers are going to hate me, but we could even do, like, you know, these little blocks. Oh, this is a fixed term loan. It's a whatever. Like, could we do reusable smaller blocks that they could use to construct whatever it is, or we. Can have like templates for rcf. A template. For an intercompany loan, receivables, whatever, and then they can kind of. Discard or include whatever they want. That sort of applies to their deal. Okay, now, this sounds crazy, but, like, you know, almost like a little bit like we, we have little molecules that they can reuse and then they can call that. This is our template for how we do intercompany loans. So this is our, you know, whatever. And if it's like the interest rate field for example could be then, hey, it's a fixed rate. Or, hey, this needs to be updated monthly and that shows up somewhere. Hey, you get update this if you want your forecast to be correct.
Them: We.
Me: Or I don't know how I appreciate that, that is. But you're like, how would you. Without the direct API integration, you'd still need to update those interest rates.
Them: Yeah. Yeah. Which is fine. I think so. Again, I'll give you the Cariba example. They allow for this? Where they give you and anytime you do an RCF or a loan or whatever.
Me: Uh huh.
Them: You can go to the section and fill out the details. Who's the bank? What's the amount?
Me: Yeah.
Them: Blah, blah. But it's everything. And it's every time, it's 100 different options you have to go through. And as you can imagine, after a while you're like, I don't even know. What do I select? What is it? I think, the molecular approach. And can you get to a place where you could somewhat customize it to where this is stuff that you as a company care about, and this is what you have to put in here? And then you go from there. I think it gets a little bit easier, of course. Right. And a lot easier, actually.
Me: You set it up one so you have your own company specific templates.
Them: Yeah.
Me: And card in palm for this, a little card in palm for that, and then you can just kind of copy it and. Or you can up the new file and have that automatically fill out that template for you or whatever.
Them: Right. Exactly.
Me: Now. Now I'm dreaming a little bit, but just. Like.
Them: You know, in my eyes, I'm just dropping a loan agreement into palm, and then it just does the things, everything else for me.
Me: 100%. 100%.
Them: But anyways. But yeah, no, I think so. So again, like, the TMS is out there. They do allow for the ability to. Structure and build up these. These instruments, whether it's. The intercoming stuff is not that great, but for any of the debt stuff, they do have modules for it. So whether it's resolving credit facilities, fixed term floating, blah blah blah, all of that stuff that you already have. It's a bit complex because they give you everything and every go, and you have to kind of figure out what's the relevant stuff for you to put in. I think then, yeah. A differentiator is if you have a tool that's intelligent enough to understand only your context that's needed and not anything more, not anything less. And yeah, maybe it sucks in the beginning that you have to enter in the rates and dates and all that stuff. If we don't know, maybe not date the like rates. But if you're alerted to say, hey, by the way, you know, every first of the month, usually the rates you need here's the way that maybe it's just a bulk upload action has dropped your rates file into here and we'll map them to the right ones, blah, blah, blah. I don't know. I think it should be fine. I think they should be really fine. But the more visionary long term. I think where things get super interesting is when we have that picture of all of these facilities across your accounts and entities. And we know your cash because we're forecasting it really well and we understand intercompany relationships. Is that piece where we can start suggesting how do you clear balances? And, you know, do it efficiently. How do you fund correctly? How do you not trap cash? And I think it's funny. Like, in a way, I feel like we're almost. We're building the. The knowledge of this company without them even realizing they're giving us that knowledge. Right? If they start saying, oh, yeah, I have an rcf because it affects this, this, and this. Okay, they've done that once. Now we see that. Oh, now have a new investment going to do this, and they're, like, kind of doing an easy way of giving us the three columns. On, where does it sit on balance? What's the position and how does it affect forecasting? In a way, we're kind of starting to put the web together of how do. How does all of this stuff interact to itself without the user feeling like they've had to do that? And then can we now surface it to them in a more proactive way? I think it. Would be super exciting. But I know it's going to take a while to get that even. Got to figure out, are these instruments or bank accounts?
Me: Yes.
Them: I think they are instruments, right? I think that's. That's the big takeaway.
Me: So what I think will probably happen is we'll start looking in the back end for investments, maybe. Some notion of that. Okay? Let's take these three. Fine. We know sort of what fields are needed. It's very straightforward in terms of. The position. And then we just need to figure out how to. Essentially, we treat this as something not at all exactly like that, but the user could just as well just upload a file with these cash flows. But we produce these forecast cash flows based on the information we have about the time deposit. So we will have a little service in our back. End that. Oh, it's a time deposit. Oh. I make calculations. Boom. I make cash flows. Fun. And I think we would start on Haster file. So we could start there. We just ingest the file and then it's automated from the file ingestion onwards. That would be really cool. That's a really good learning experiment, also for the engineers.
Them: Yeah.
Me: Or for Sarah Porca. She's going to do most of this, but.
Them: Yeah.
Me: She's going to wait.
Them: Yeah. And it's funny because then again, like to what you said earlier, that then you start seeing similarities on behavior, right? And all of a sudden, like to do ADD instead of a time deposit. We had some other investment. You're like, well, acts and behaves everything like a time deposit, except for maybe one or two. Things. And you're like, okay, cool. Just replicate and redo.
Me: Yeah, exactly. So we could replicate, like, a foundation for an investment, and then we could have, like, maybe. Yeah, sorry. But, like, in the database, it could be, like, joint fields. Like, it's the same basic base entity. But since this is of the type time deposit. It relates to this table that has time deposit specifics. Oh, it can be rolled over. Like, we need to keep track of both the original investment date, all the maturity dates in between, because it's been rolled over. So all of this, like, specific behaviors. We also then have mine space to kind of model out a little bit.
Them: Yeah.
Me: Specifically for that type without making everything super complex. And, oh, my God, everything is so different and everything needs. You know, imagine that database. Keeping track of all of that. Is just.
Them: Yeah.
Me: I want to be that person. So.
Them: There are bank accounts, you mean? Right. Like, then it's like you have bank accounts, but you have so many different data input sources, but it's not the same across all of them, and all of a sudden it's just like, yeah.
Me: And then it's a matter of like, oh, shit, we have to exclude all of these bank accounts from this view, otherwise it's going to look like they have more money than they have. And, oh, we have a debt bank account. And we have a. What is a debt bank account. And, you know, it's. Just becoming a bit also weird. I think at some point from. I don't know. It's just a thought. Where? I'm gonna speak to Sarah and Rodell about this, obviously, as well. But.
Them: Yeah. I mean, I prefer my naive knowledge, at least to me. I, I, yeah, I see these as completely separate than bank accounts from this backhand structural perspective. Yeah, they impact bank accounts. They're not bank accounts.
Me: Yeah, they're little cash flow emitting machines.
Them: Yeah. Everything's cash flow.
Me: Exactly.
Them: Cool. Emma. Thanks for this. Thanks for putting this together. I think I. I hope you got what you needed out of it. I know. We tend more times. Go. Start taking tangents. Because there's just so. There is actually. You realize. All right, I realize that in my head, it's like, oh, this is so simple. And then you start talking about it. You're like, oh, shit. It's actually pretty complex, and it's. Simple because we've lived it for so long, Jenn and I.
Me: Yes. Yeah. For you, it's, like, intuitive. But then it's always like any kind of intuitive knowledge might be complex at its core, and then you try to just make it simple for someone. But if you manage to do that exercise. Break down the complexity structure. It doesn't have to be the perfect structure, but now it's simple. Cool. Now we can work with this.
Them: 'll keep practicing.
Me: Okay. Thank you, Gurjit I hope you have a nice day in New York.
Them: Have a good night. Thank you, emma.
Me: Thank you.
Them: Yeah.
Me: See ya.
Them: Bye.