Monday, November 30, 2009

China's State Firms Cling to Their Cash

By ANDREW BATSON BEIJING -- Getting China to spend rather than save turns out to be harder than it sounds. The nation collectively socks away over half its income, an extraordinarily high rate. By comparison, the average for developed countries is about 21%. Putting more of China's money to work would provide a big boost to the global economy, especially with U.S. consumer spending now constrained by high unemployment and debts. China's high savings show up all over the place: They're piling up not just in household bank accounts, but also in company vaults. Those corporate savings -- basically, profits that haven't been invested or returned to shareholders -- have boomed. On central bank estimates, they rose to 23% of national income in 2007 from 12% a decade earlier. Household savings have stayed at around 20% of income during the same period. The financial strains that push Chinese households to save can be addressed by expanded health care and lower education costs. But high corporate savings are a trickier problem. Much of that money comes from China's resurgent state enterprises, now hugely profitable and dominant in key industries. Taking money away from those powerful state firms and shifting it to consumers would be good economics, many observers think -- and seemingly in line with the socialist principles of China's government. But such changes are politically difficult: They threaten the interests of enormous corporations and perhaps even the ideas driving China's hybrid command-market economy. "On the surface, it's a technical question. But in reality, it's a very political question," said Liu Jipeng, a professor at the China University of Political Science and Law. China's large state sector helped it bounce back more quickly from the financial crisis than Western countries, he argues, so the government should be strengthening state firms, not sucking them dry. After a wave of closures in the late 1990s, the government has enthroned a smaller number of strong state firms at the commanding heights of China's economy. There are now three oil companies, three phone companies, two electricity distributors -- all majority owned by the state. The profits of state firms were rising more than 30% a year before the crisis, and their strength is increasingly visible. They've been building lavish new headquarters in Beijing, and on average pay their employees 82% more than private firms. Chinese officials flubbed their first attempt to extract some savings from these cash-rich state enterprises. A requirement for state firms to pay a new dividend to the government has had little impact since its launch in 2008, bringing in revenue of just 0.2% of gross domestic product. And most of the money was used to aid state companies themselves, not support consumers. "State-owned enterprise managers are a very powerful group in the policy debate. So the State Council [or cabinet] has moved very cautiously in implementing this reform," said Zhang Chunlin, private-sector development specialist in the World Bank's Beijing office. Scholars and government officials are debating changing this dividend policy. Many argue that the current payout of 5% to 10% of profits should be increased. And there's also a push for putting the money into the general government budget, where it could support social programs rather than fill a slush fund for state enterprises. Many outside the country also see a shift in this dividend policy as key to making China a more consumption-driven economy. The U.S. Treasury and the International Monetary Fund have both urged China to take more money out of the pockets of state firms and use it to support household incomes. Even supporters are not optimistic that these changes will come quickly. An overhaul to the dividend policy could threaten the agency that now administers it -- the State-owned Assets Supervision and Administration Commission, or SASAC -- and cause resistance in the bureaucracy. "Scholars have put forward a lot of suggestions, but I think there is zero possibility of changing the dividend policy this year. And next year also," said Wen Zongyu, a researcher at the Ministry of Finance's think tank. A gradual approach is more likely to win support, he said, with changes phased in at the end of the dividend policy's initial three-year trial period. Perhaps not by coincidence, 2011 would also be close to the end of the current administration's term -- so the tough calls could be pushed off even further. Write to Andrew Batson at

Are You Too Late for the Junk-Bond Party?

By JASON ZWEIG Christopher Serra Every once in a while, people don't just invest in an asset; they swarm it. That's what has been happening to junk bonds. Goaded by the monstrous returns on junk—53% this year—and the miserable yields on cash, investors have put well over $20 billion into high-yield bond funds in 2009. "The inflow of funds has been phenomenal," says Daniel Fuss, manager of the $18.5 billion Loomis Sayles Bond Fund. "I have not seen a rally like this, ever, in the high-yield market." Mr. Fuss bought his first junk bonds more than 40 years ago. As they so often do, investors are piling in even as the party may be starting to wind down. There have been plenty of reasons to party. A year ago, in the depths of the financial crisis, the bonds of below-investment-grade companies traded at an average of only 61 cents on the dollar, about as cheap as they have ever been. At last fall's depressed prices, junk bonds out-yielded Treasury securities by a staggering 19.9 percentage points. Today, prices have recovered to roughly 92 cents on the dollar and the premium, or spread, above Treasurys has shrunk to 7.6 points, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch. The long-term average spread is 5.6, suggesting that the yields on junk bonds could fall another two percentage points or so. Bond yields fall as prices rise, adding to total return. Christopher Garman of Garman Research estimates that narrowing spreads could contribute to a total return of roughly 13% to 15% over the next year. Still, concedes Mr. Garman, high yield is "no longer the capital-appreciation vehicle it was" a year ago. And if the economy doesn't rebound, more borrowers will end up defaulting on their junk bonds. Mr. Garman's return projections assume a 5% default rate, not much above the long-term average. Right now, the default rate is running about 12%; if it doesn't decline, returns will suffer. Considering its risk, junk's average returns over recent years have been a mixed bag. Steven Huber, manager of T. Rowe Price Strategic Income fund, points out that when you include their 26% loss in 2008, junk bonds have returned an annual average of just under 6% since the beginning of last year — the same as top-quality corporate bonds and only a whisker more than Treasurys. Extend the comparison back a full decade and the results are the same: The returns on high-yield bonds have been no higher than those of safer bonds. Of course, the same could be said for stocks. "With hindsight, it's hard to justify having taken any risk over the past 10 years, since it didn't pay off," says Martin Fridson of Fridson Investment Advisors. "Over the long term, you do get paid to take risk. It's a question of how long the long term is for you." Baylor University finance professor William Reichenstein says that junk-bond returns are highly similar to what you would get if you put two-thirds of the money in investment-grade bonds and one-sixth each in large-company stocks and small-company stocks—all of which you probably own already. "Who needs junk bonds to have a diversified portfolio?" asks Prof. Reichenstein. "I would say nobody. They're a hybrid asset, neither fish nor fowl. They muddy your asset allocation without adding a lot of diversification." Junk bonds do diversify against the risk of rising rates. Because of their fatter current income, junk bonds should lose less than Treasurys and other high-quality bonds if the Federal Reserve jacks up rates. Mr. Fridson notes that the last three times interest rates rose by at least one percentage point, high-yield bonds outperformed Treasurys by up to 13.8 percentage points. So a junk-bond fund might be for you if: you think the economy will continue to recover slowly from recession; if you live off your investment income and you want protection against the risk of rising interest rates; if you can find one that charges well below the average annual cost of 1.2%; if you aren't already loaded up with small stocks and if you can put the junk-bond fund in a retirement account where the interest will be sheltered from income tax. That's a lot of ifs. For most investors, the junk-bond party is already just about over. If you missed the happy hour, there's not much point diving in after the good times have already rolled. Write to Jason Zweig at

Banks Gone Shopping Find Pickings Are Slim

By MATTHIAS RIEKER People's United Financial Inc. wanted to buy failed banks on the cheap. Instead, it struck a deal to buy a healthy equipment-leasing company. Last Monday's change of plans by the Bridgeport, Conn., bank-holding company underscores a problem with the growing pile of terminally ill U.S. banks being wrestled with by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Some are in such bad shape that potential buyers won't touch them at any price, even if the government agrees to eat losses on the failed bank's bad loans. In addition to their depleted capital, many seized banks operate in areas with sluggish growth prospects, are puny and are loaded with expensive deposits gathered through brokers that are likely to leave when the acquiring bank reins in interest rates, some bankers complain. Philip Sherringham, chief executive of People's United, said it is getting harder to find the dream deal that bank officials hoped to hatch from a wrecked bank. The supply of ideal targets—sensible deposit-gatherers that fatally "overextended" their loan portfolio—is slim and the competition fierce, he said. The company's roots go back to 1842. Its biggest deal was the 2008 purchase of Chittenden Corp., including six banks owned by the Burlington, Vt., company. The financial crisis has given People's United an appetite for dying banks that nevertheless might have some valuable pieces. But of the 124 banks to fail so far this year, many of those put up for sale by regulators as part of the seizure process "are of very poor quality," said Norm Skalicky, chief executive of Stearns Financial Services Inc. "It's not as if you can walk in and you are in business." The St. Cloud, Minn., bank has bought five failed banks since the financial crisis erupted, including two in Florida and one in Atlanta, where soured real-estate loans are piling up and deposits are expensive. Fifth Third Bancorp CEO Kevin Kabat complained at an investor conference recently that the "relative quality…of available FDIC transactions have really not been very attractive from our perspective." The Cincinnati bank bought failed Freedom Bank of Brandenton, Fla., in October 2008 and is looking mostly for FDIC-arranged deals in geographic areas where Fifth Third already has branches. Sluggish interest in doomed banks could push the FDIC's losses higher at a time when the agency's fund to shield depositors is in negative territory for just the second time in its history. Kevin L. Petrasic, a lawyer at Paul, Hastings, Janofsky & Walker LLP, said FDIC officials might be forced to bundle some small banks together in order to lure potential buyers. An FDIC spokesman said the agency isn't having trouble lining up buyers. About 95% of banks seized by regulators have been sold. While some attract few bids, the FDIC has "had tremendous success in finding buyers," the spokesman said. Two of the nine banks that failed this month were sold without loss-sharing agreements. People's United has been hunting the U.S. for attractive acquisition targets. The bank has relatively few problems compared with the overall banking industry and $2.6 billion in capital to spend. Last month, regulators notified People's United that its bid for FBOP Corp., the battered Illinois owner of nine banks, wasn't chosen by the government, according to people familiar with the matter. U.S. Bancorp bought the banks and reopened the branches as part of the Minneapolis-based regional bank.

Saturday, November 28, 2009

Some Facts regarding UAE, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi

--Dubai (in Arabic:Dubayy) is one of the seven emirates and the most populous state of the United Arab Emirates (UAE). It is located along the southern coast of the Persian Gulf on the Arabian Peninsula. The Dubai Municipality is sometimes called Dubai state to distinguish it from the emirate. --The entire UAE, including oil-rich Abu Dhabi, registered GDP of only $104 billion in 2005, $37 billion of which came from Dubai. Singapore's GDP in 2005, by comparison, was $116 billion.

Dubai Jitters Infect Debt of Sovereign Spendthrifts

By NEIL SHAH and CHIP CUMMINS LONDON -- Dubai's debt debacle is stoking a new fear for investors across the globe: potential government default by heavily indebted nations. The Dubai government roiled markets this week with its move to delay debt payments owed by its flagship holding company, Dubai World. The company is stressed by tens of billions in debt that funded spending on glitzy real-estate projects from the Middle East to Las Vegas. Deeper stress lines were felt in the sovereign-bond market, where the cost of insuring against defaults in places like Hungary, Turkey, Bulgaria, Brazil, Mexico and Russia rose, fueled by concerns that emerging-market nations may have trouble honoring their debts even as the economy heals. The worry is that sovereign debt may now represent another aftershock of the global financial crisis. "First, people were worried about mortgage debtors. Then, highly leveraged banks. Now the ball has rolled all the way to Dubai," says Mattias Westman, chief executive of Prosperity Capital Management, which has about $3.5 billion under management, almost all of it in Russia. "It's just a lack of confidence in debtors." The price of a $3.5 billion sukuk, or Islamic bond, issued by a subsidiary of Dubai World, plunged to 57 cents on the dollar Friday from 110 cents on Wednesday, according to two investors. Dubai's troubles resonate far beyond the desert fantasyland that its borrowing created, fueling concerns that financially stretched nations like Greece and Hungary may struggle to pay off debts. Investors and analysts say they're worried about the health of Greece's heavily indebted economy and banks, which could suffer as the European Central Bank moves to pull away some of its financial-support measures. These measures have included ultra-cheap bank funding. The gap between the yield on a Greek government bond and relatively-safe German debt -- a key gauge of market fear -- jumped to a peak of 2.2% Friday, before falling slightly. When the pan-European Stoxx 600 index fell 3.3% on Thursday, Greece's market fell twice that amount, over 6%. Work went on at a construction site Friday in Dubai, as pressure rose for the U.A.E. government to step in with more support for the city-state. Sovereign-Debt Shake-Up Click to enlarge graphic. Dubai's debt restructuring drove up the cost of insuring against default in other countries as well Another window into the growing concern about government creditworthiness is the credit-derivatives market. Investors are now paying much higher prices to insure themselves against bond defaults in countries like Turkey and Bulgaria. When Dubai announced its debt standstill on Wednesday, the cost of insuring against a Dubai debt default more than doubled. The cost of debt-default insurance also rose for a range of countries, including Hungary, Brazil, Mexico and Russia. While the cost of debt insurance for stressed countries hasn't hit levels seen at the height of the financial crisis, "the recent rises are altogether more sinister in our view, as they reflect genuine concerns about default within the euro-zone," said Steven Barrow, a currency analyst at Standard Bank in London, in a note Friday. Dubai itself demonstrates how quickly countries can veer off the road to recovery and into trouble. Dubai's surprise move to delay the debt payments of its corporate crown jewel, Dubai World, came just as many economic indicators, and anecdotal evidence, were pointing in a positive direction. Among the optimistic signs for the region: Oil prices have rebounded strongly this year after falling sharply during the global financial crisis. On Friday, oil sank 2.5% to $76.05 a barrel on the New York Mercantile Exchange as investors fretted over the impact of the Dubai debacle on the economic recovery, but that's still up significantly from its lows earlier this year. At the same time, though, years of lavish, debt-fueled empire building is now coming home to roost. For years, the city-state was the epicenter of a dizzying boom in the Persian Gulf. Its ambitions also extended abroad: to golf courses in Scotland and South Africa; the Barneys department store chain in New York; and real estate in Las Vegas, where in 2007 it joined up with casino company MGM Mirage to develop an $8.5 billion condo, hotel and retail colossus called CityCenter -- just as the Vegas real-estate market reached its peak. The oil-fired investment and spending binge culminated in 2008 when crude hit more than $140 a barrel. But by the time of Dubai's biggest bash later that year -- a $20-million hotel opening on a man-made palm-shaped island developed by Dubai World's property subsidiary -- the global financial crisis was already washing ashore. Since then, it has been a steady slide toward Wednesday's debt standstill. Squeezed by frozen credit, international property speculators bowed out of Dubai's market. Prices started a year-long, steep descent. Government-controlled and private developers postponed or cancelled projects, shed workers and stopped paying bills. According to the Association for Consultancy and Engineering, a trade group of British builders, Dubai entities owe as much as £200 million to British contractors alone. Analysts expect Dubai's core property market to take years to claw back to 2008 levels. Even after hundreds of projects were cancelled or postponed this year, new construction is expected to double Dubai's supply of office space by 2011, according to property consultancy Colliers International. In a sample study, the consultancy found office-occupancy rates in recently finished buildings at just 41%. At the end of the third quarter, prices of office space were down by 58% from a year ago. Still, international bankers and executives had started pointing to anecdotal evidence of recovery before the standstill announcement. "You see 'for rent' signs on every building," says Ziad Makhzoumi, chief financial officer of Arabtec Holding PJSC, one of the Mideast's biggest construction companies. "But you don't see them on every floor." —Andrew Critchlow and Oliver Klaus contributed to this article Write to Neil Shah at and Chip Cummins at


全文——前言   中国证券市场10年来第一份对机构交易行为有确切叙述的报告,跟踪1999年8月9日至2000年4月28日期间,国内10家基金管理公司旗下22家证券投资基金在上海证券市场上大宗股票交易记录,客观详尽地分析了它们的操作行为——大量违规、违法操作的事实昭然其中。   今年6月以来,三起公开报道的事件,引起了证券市场上对于证券投资基金问题的种种议论。 ----关于嘉实基金管理公司内部“地震”的报道是其一。6月12日,根据总经理洪磊的提议,嘉实基金管理公司以公司的名义,提请中国证监会审查公司董事王少华的任职资格。过了三天,嘉实基金管理公司召开董事会,王少华获董事长马庆泉授权主持会议,通过了罢免总经理洪磊的决议。这起风波在有关新闻媒体及本刊2000年7月号刊出,揭示了嘉实基金内部关于投资理念的长期争论;争论的焦点,就是证券投资基金究竟应当进行长期分散化投资,还是进行重仓短期炒作?   ----由于在此次“内斗”的前后与新闻界颇多接触并披露出部分基金的运作内情,洪磊受到证券业内的诸多抨击,被认为坏了“行规”。然而,就在洪磊备受指责颇显孤立之时,另一位职位要高得多的权威人士在全局的意义上发表了更为尖锐的谈话。   ----6月22日,在全国人大关于《投资基金法》起草的工作会议上,全国人大常委会副委员长成思危言辞激烈地抨击了证券投资基金操作中的违法、违规行为,指出“目前我国证券投资基金有一种不好的倾向,就是几家基金联合操纵几只股票,最后把老百姓给套牢”。成思危素被称为“风险投资之父”。上述措辞严厉的指责在次日《中国证券报》头版头条刊出,中小投资者闻之大为震动,而众多证券投资基金则深表不满。   ----公众舆论对于证券投资基金的质疑还在继续。8月14日,《中国证券报》发表了中国社科院金融研究中心投资基金课题组的一份长篇专题报告,题为“四问证券投资基金”。该文的执笔人与课题主持人是著名金融专家王国刚博士。文章提出四大具有根本性的问题——“证券基金本身具有稳定股市的功能吗?”“证券基金本身具有分散股市风险的功能吗?”“证券基金的投资收益一定高于股民投资的平均收益吗?”“发展机构投资者就是发展证券基金吗?”专题研究给出的答案全部是否定的。   ----在近几年对于证券投资基金的一片赞颂声中,这三次“负面报道”虽然规模并不很大,但产生的震动却相当深远。中国证券市场上众多具有机构背景的“消息灵通人士”完全明白,针对基金业的批评之音并非无的放矢,其背后还有关于证券投资基金大规模违规、违法操作的更充分的调查结果在说话。在一个不很小的圈子里,人们不约而同地传述着同一个话题:上海证券交易所监察部的一位监管人员有一份对证券投资基金操作进行跟踪研究的报告。这份报告最近经某种渠道摘要报送到国务院高层,引起极大重视,中国证监会已开始严密关注证券投资基金的运作……   ----还有消息说,此份报告的执笔人甚至因为报告被新闻单位知晓而受到处分。   ----如此传言,事关重大。《财经》对有关材料与背景进行研究之后,很难无动于衷。9月间,本刊记者专赴上海证交所,并了解到,正是该所监察部人员赵瑜纲今年6月27日受到“严重警告”处分,理由是“未经批准,擅自将工作中知悉的内部信息外泄他人”,违反了《上海证券交易所保密工作条例》。   ----赵瑜纲在记者面前取回避之态,只是反复强调“那份报告只是我个人做的,并不代表交易所或者监察部的意见”;“我没有外传,是有人不小心……”   ----他不愿接听记者的电话,甚至请同事向记者称“已经休假”。   ----虽然没有得到赵本人的合作,《财经》经过种种曲折,还是拿到了那份在市场中传闻已久但多数人尚未目睹的报告。   ----该报告由两份文件组成,主要内容是通过对国内10家基金管理公司旗下的22家证券投资基金在上海证券市场上大宗股票交易的汇总记录的跟踪,分析证券投资基金在市场上的操作行为。第一份题为《基金行为分析》,完成于1999年12月;第二份题为《基金风格及其评价》,完成于2000年5月。报告客观、详实地记载并分析了1999年8月9日至2000年4月28日期间证券投资基金的操作行为,大量违规、违法操作的事实昭然其中。   ----中国的基金业从90年代初起步,1992年至1993年出现“基金热”,曾发展到相当规模。在后来被称为“新基金”的证券投资基金问世前,中国已有基金78只、基金类凭证47只,总募集规模76亿元。这些基金被公认为规模较小而且运作不规范,市场上称“老基金”。   ----1997年11月,国务院发布《证券投资基金管理暂行办法》后,中国证券市场热情洋溢地迎来了“新基金时代”。1998年3月底,金泰、开元两只新基金正式问世,是为新时代之新起点。此后至年底,共有5只基金登场,6家基金管理公司相继成立。到1999年,被认为具有“稳定市场”之效的新基金更获得加速发展,5月有第二批5家基金问世,4家基金管理公司加盟;6月,由一家基金管理公司管理两只基金的“一拖二”办法开始实行,到年底便有9只基金诞生。   ----到1999年底,10家基金管理公司管理并上市的新基金总数达22家,其资产总值574.22亿元。今年5月以来,又有9家老基金经过资产置换,加入了证券投资基金的队伍。目前,全国31家证券投资基金的发行规模已达536亿元(不含正在扩募中的8亿),净值总和为769.14亿元,在A股市场流通市值中的比重达到11.34%,在证券市场上地位举足轻重。   ----证券投资基金早在正式推出之前,就被广泛地期待为市场上最重要的“健康力量”,投资者对其“稳定市场”之功能热望殷切。1998年以来,每一批基金来到市场,无不承载着监管层的厚爱和舆论的褒扬,更被视为引入西方成熟市场经验、培育机构投资者的重要举措。一些公开的说法更称,基金以其相对稳健和守规的操作,对稳定市场发挥了重大作用。   然而,事实真相究竟如何?今年以来,随着各项法律、法规的逐步健全和监管的加强,舆论开始出现对基金运作“有欠规范”的指摘,不少长于观风辨向的市场人士对于某些基金的违规违法行为也早生疑心。   ----当然,任何批评都抵不过事实本身的陈述。特别是依据大量数据调查进行定量分析的结果,才能够准确地描述出当前证券投资基金行为的真实状况,并为监管者树立正气、查处不法提供可靠的依据。从这个角度看,毕业于北京大学经济系的赵瑜纲所完成的报告,具有重要的积极意义。   ----证券市场理应“公开、公正、公平”,投资人有权知晓这份报告。我们不愿断然作结论,指称中国的证券投资基金(新基金)发展已经出现严重的路径失误;但我们相信,报告的公布会有助于监管层正视基金业尚存的制度性缺陷,并在加强监管、规范基金行为方面有更多作为,也有助于社会对于中国证券市场现状有更全面的了解,从而以更有效的合力推动市场向健康方向发展。   ----需要说明的是,这份报告主要记载了22家证券投资基金在上交所的交易状况,其跟踪研究期为1999年8月9日至2000年4月28日的9个月。报告执笔人在当时完稿时认为,因为这一期间沪市经历了一个“V”字形反转行情,并且已经突破了历史最高位,因此通过对基金在此阶段的行为分析,可以基本反映基金的操作风格。此外,因为在此期间沪市的走势要明显强于深市,而且在成交量上也占有一定优势,研究结果应该反映基金投资的一般特点。   ----当然,从那时至今已过数月,而且从今年5月以来,市场上出现了9家老基金改制重生的证券投资基金。当我们对这一报告进行公开报道时,应当承认此间市场形势发生了一定的变化。另外,此报告主要系个人职务行为,虽然作者的职业素养值得尊重,但今后仍有必要安排较多专职人士共同研究,以求数据及结论更为可靠严谨。   ----考虑到报告用专业语言写就,若非精熟于A股市场的操作,许多业内术语未必全懂,《财经》特聘请资深专业评论家与本刊记者合作,以通晓流畅的方式进行解析式报道,以飨读者。   《基金黑幕》全文——正文   【1】“基金稳定市场”——一个未被证明的假设   中国的证券投资基金业的发展,还只有两年多的时间。该报告研究区间集中于1999年8月至2000年4月底。此间,我国有10家基金管理公司管理着22家规模较大的证券投资基金。作为报告的研究对象,这10家基金管理公司分别为博时公司、华安公司、嘉实公司、南方公司、华夏公司、长盛公司、鹏华公司、国泰公司、大成公司和富国公司;10家公司管理的基金分别为裕阳、裕隆、裕元(博时),安顺、安信(华安),泰和(嘉实),开元、天元(南方),兴和、兴华(华夏),同益、同盛(长盛),普惠、普丰(鹏华),金泰、金鑫(国泰),景宏、景福、景阳、景博(大成)和汉盛、汉兴(富国)。基金规模主要为30亿元、20亿元、15亿元和10亿元四种。   报告的作者指出,“发展证券投资基金,究竟为谁服务的问题,可能目前还不十分明确”。   这涉及到基金的定位问题。新基金的各种说明书都说得明明白白,“基金是一种代客投资理财的工具”;媒体上普遍出现的论点是,“基金要为稳定市场服务,是中国市场理性机构投资者的生力军”。   最初的逻辑是相当简单的,即认为随着市场扩容,资金的供给方出现了问题,而老百姓或一些保险公司虽然手上有钱,却因不会投资或没有时间而不敢或不能入市,因此应当把钱交给专家管理操作,这样供需就会平衡了,也就稳定了市场。   这种看法在一开始当然是符合实际的。两次研究都证实,证券投资基金刚入市时基本上有稳定市场的功效。   但是,当证券投资基金随着上市“老化”之后,其作用又如何?   报告将1999年8月9日到2000年4月28日的172个交易日具体划分为三个阶段,即1999年8月9日到1999年9月9日的盘整期,1999年9月10日到1999年12月27日的下跌期,以及1999年12月28日到2000年4月28日的上升期。   “在盘整期,除了新入市的基金天元(行情,净值,基金吧)以外,15只基金中基金泰和(行情,净值,基金吧)和普丰没有交易,其余12只参与交易的基金4只净买入,8只净卖出,基金总体表现为净卖出,净卖出金额31018万元;在下跌期,除了新入市的4只基金外,16只参与交易的基金4只净买入,12只净卖出,基金总体表现为净买入,净买入金额为11262万元;在上升期,除了新入市的2只基金外,20只参与交易的基金5只净买入,15只净卖出,基金总体表现为净卖出,净卖出金额为421680万元。而从整个样本期来看,除了新入市的基金汉兴(行情,净值,基金吧)和基金景福(行情,净值,基金吧)外,20只基金中,7只为净买入,13只净卖出,基金总体表现为净卖出,净卖出金额为441436万元。”   接着,报告作了进一步分析。   作者指出,从基金总体减仓的情况看,无论在盘整期还是上升和下降期,“都有近三分之二的基金始终处于减仓阶段”。在三个阶段中均为净卖出的基金有9只,均是1999年上半年以前发行的基金,其减仓的主要原因可能在于:一是受到年终基金分红的现金压力;二是这些上年上市的基金仓位一直较重,尤其是一些基金的重仓股流动性较差,在年初的行情中借科技股走强大量减持重仓股票;三是部分基金对后市看法比较谨慎,特别是在沪市创历史新高后大量减持股票,例如基金兴和(行情,净值,基金吧)4月12日在沪市抛出股票市值3.77亿元,创下单日基金卖出股票金额最高记录。三个阶段总体为净买入的基金有9只,除了基金普惠(行情,净值,基金吧)以外,均为新上市的基金。此外,在沪市的上升阶段,净买入的基金除了新上市的基金天元、汉兴、景福、景阳、景博、同盛和1998年上市的基金普惠等7只,其余15只基金均为净卖出,15只基金的净卖出金额超过65亿元。   作者的结论是:“这表明了基金对后市的看法并不乐观。”   在分析基金交易的进度时,作者又指出,在22只基金中,除了新上市的基金景福和基金汉兴,样本总区间为净卖出的基金裕阳(行情,净值,基金吧)、裕隆、景宏、汉盛、泰和、同益、普丰、金泰、安信、安顺、兴和、兴华和开元13只基金中,主要减仓都发生在样本期间的第三阶段,即1348点到1832点之间。其中第三阶段减仓幅度相对最低的基金兴华(行情,净值,基金吧)也有46%。这同样表明基金对后市的不乐观看法。   作者介绍说,在样本总区间为净买入的7只基金中,新上市的基金裕元、景博、景阳、金鑫和天元的建仓主要完成在第二阶段下跌期,对基金的业绩较为有利;基金同盛(行情,净值,基金吧)第二阶段完成了41%的建仓,相对并不十分有利;基金普惠在第三阶段增仓占整个样本期间净买入的99%,这在1998年期间上市的诸基金中截然不同。   以上还只是“宏观”面上的统计。接下来,作者又对“中观”作了一番实证研究。他的方法,是研究上证指数涨跌幅较大的交易日(报告名之为“事件日”)基金交易行为可能会对大盘产生的影响(参见附表“事件日的基金买卖行为”)。由于研究期间包括上升和下跌两个阶段,作者确定上升期的涨跌幅在40点以上为事件日,下跌和盘整期的涨跌幅在30点以上为事件日。   经过研究,作者发现在盘整期和下跌期的事件日中,基金均为净卖出,尤其是涨跌幅103点的9月9日和涨幅54点的10月27日,参与交易基金的净卖出金额最高,分别为17176万元和17448万元;而在上扬55.8点的8月19日,参与卖出的基金在总数及交易额上都相对较少。他认为,这说明“9月9日以前是盘整期,大多数基金对大势的走势判断还不明朗,而在9月9日以后,对大势判断趋于一致,认为在政策底部探明之前,大势基本不会好转”。   作者通过研究还发现,在12月27日之后的上升期,参与交易的基金家数明显增多,而且呈现出两个特点:一是新的基金入市对前4个事件日整体基金对大势的稳定作用至关重要。第二,在扣除新的基金入市的影响后,上升期的15个事件日中,除了2000年3月17日和3月27日的上涨日,基金整体均为净卖出。这说明在大盘上升期,尤其在涨跌幅超过40点的事件日中,基金总体为净卖出,即一直处于减仓中;其中在1月12日净减仓净额超过10亿元,占当日沪市股票交易额的6.6%,对当日沪市下跌起着一定推动作用。   很显然,定量分析的事实使我们看到,至少在1999年8月至2000年4月底的“样本期间”,基金稳定市场的作用并不显著。相反,就总体而言,基金在大盘处于下跌期中,一般借高位反弹减仓;而上升期中,则一直处于显著的减仓过程中。   【2】“对倒”——制造虚假的成交量   或许,更长期的观察可以说明基金仍有稳定市场的作用?然而,从报告中进一步披露的证券投资基金减仓手法中,我们仍难以得出肯定性的结论。   众所周知,要将一种商品卖出去,必须有人来买。如果买家和卖家的需求和供给差不多,价格和交易行为都会十分稳定。可惜的是,市场经常会产生供不应求或求不应供的现象。当求不应供的时候,商家只能靠降价来吸引顾客,甚至不得不“大甩卖”。股票也是一种商品,被迫低价抛售股票亦即“割肉”。但是,由于“买涨不卖跌”的顾客心理,“割肉”也未必有人买,做鬼的办法就是自己做托。在证券市场上,这种做法被称为“对倒”,系严重违法行为。   “对倒”,自己买卖自己的股票,目的是制造虚假的成交量。过去股市中的一句格言:“只有成交量不会骗人。”因为价格比较容易操纵,如某只股票的开盘价、最高价、最低价和收盘价都较易由人来操控,但要操控成交量则较为困难。所以市场中人经常说“缩量”或“无量”上升下跌,意即成交量没有配合,会令人缺乏兴趣。而一旦价格变动与成交量同步,则会引起投资者——当然也包括投机者的注意,被认为某只股票的基本面发生了变化,而且流动性好,适宜参与。   现在的情形已经有了变化。因为自买自卖式的“对倒”发展起来,而一旦在对倒操纵下的虚假繁荣出现,其他投资人在盘面上很难识别。这是机构利用大额资金和持股量优势所采取的恶劣行为,在任何股市中都会被指为操纵市场甚至欺诈。这在我国的《证券法》中也有明确的界定和判断。   此外,按照1999年12月25日第九届全国人民代表大会常务委员会第十三次会议通过的《中华人民共和国刑法》(修正案)第一百八十二条的规定,这些行为属于操纵证券交易价格,获取不正当利益或者转嫁风险,应该处五年以下有期徒刑或者拘役,并处或者单处违法所得一倍以上五倍以下罚金。   令人遗憾的是,从这份报告的分析看来,大部分基金都发生了“对倒”行为。   在第一次研究中,作者就发现,从1999年8月9日到12月3日的80个交易日中,同一家基金管理公司管理多家基金进行同一只股票的同时增仓、减仓或有增有减所涉及的股票有76只,自身对倒的7只,基金间双向倒仓的11只。此外,经对参与交易的基金管理公司分析,博时基金管理公司和国泰基金管理公司存在较多的双向倒仓行为。这主要在于这两家公司在研究期间均有一只新的基金入市,可以通过“旧减新接”的方法减轻原有基金的仓位压力。而且因为博时管理的基金裕元规模较小,对倒主要集中在基金裕隆(行情,净值,基金吧)和裕阳之间,规模一般在十几万股到几十万股之间;国泰管理的金鑫规模较大,与金泰的对倒规模可高达日300多万股,这主要体现在北京城建(600266,股吧)和爱建股份(600643,股吧)两只股票中。作者还指出,博时和大成管理的基金存在着较多的自身对倒行为,主要集中在这些基金的重仓品种中。   第二次研究从1999年12月3日扩展至2000年4月28日,其间基金共同减仓、增仓或有增有减涉及的股票140只。作者的分析表明:(1)2家以上(含2家)基金管理公司共同增仓或减仓的股票57只,其中基金参与配售的新股17只,除了2只新股,参与交易的基金均是在配售上市日抛出股票;基金重仓的科技股11只,重组概念股6只,其余主要是国企大盘股。(2)除了基金泰和,其余基金在17只新股配售上市当日均有减仓行为。(3)博时基金管理公司、南方基金管理公司、国泰基金管理公司管理的多家基金存在着较多的自身对倒行为,且品种主要集中在重仓股票中;嘉实基金管理公司没有对倒行为;其他6家基金管理公司均有自身对倒行为。(参见附表“基金共同增减仓及对倒情况”)(4)在本次研究期间,没有双向倒仓行为。   作者还将两次研究的结果进行了综合分析,发现:(1)从新股配售来看,除了基金泰和,其余基金一般在配售上市的首日或次日抛出配售新股;(2)除嘉实基金管理公司,其他基金管理公司都存在着一定的自身对倒行为;其中,博时、南方和国泰的自身对倒较为严重,对倒品种仍然集中在重仓股票中,例如博时的国脉通信、清华同方,南方的南京高科(600064,股吧)、东方通信(600776,股吧),国泰的第一百货、爱建股份等,这对基金维持或提高净值有着重要作用;(3)同一家基金管理公司管理的多家基金存在明显的共同减仓或建仓行为,其中博时、南方和长盛基金管理公司涉及的股票家数较多,对于共同建仓的基金,对提高基金持股集中度、通过维持或提高重仓股票股价、提高或稳定基金净值有重要作用;(4)第二次研究没有发现双向倒仓行为,主要体现在新入市的汉兴和景福基金上,原因可能在于前次研究期间在大盘下跌期,仓位较重的老的基金压力较大;此次研究期间在大盘上升期,仓位较重的基金压力不大。   【3】“倒仓”——更能迷惑人的操纵行为   上述引用的报告中还有“倒仓”的概念,即甲、乙双方通过事先约定的价格、数量和时间,在市场上进行交易的行为。   由于这里所涉及的甲方、乙方是同一家管理公司的两只基金,也有自买自卖的意思,也称双向对倒   事实上,倒仓在市场中时有发生。我们还可以宽泛地描述这样的现象,即使双方在价格、数量和时间上没有事先约定,由于对某只股票的价格空间有分歧,也可以出现甲方将手中持有的大量股票抛售给乙方的现象。   但是,这样“倒仓”对甲方而言经常是求之不得的事。因为做庄的人都知道,从收集筹码(股票)到将股价拉抬至高位,仅仅是完成任务的一半;最困难的事是如何将筹码抛给别人,最终变现。所以,市场上流传着许多故事:庄家糊里糊涂地吃进许多股票,却怎么也走不了,最后做庄做成了大股东,进了董事会。   所以,一家基金公司管理的两家基金相互倒仓,无疑解决了先上市的基金的流动问题,又不影响甚至可以提高净值,真是“得来全不费功夫”。我们需要观察的是,及至开放式基金出现,是不是会再将封闭式基金的大量股票倒给后者?   倒仓比对倒在市场上更容易让普遍投资者看不懂。既然要倒仓,股票交易一定放量,但股价的波动却不一定很大,投资者稍有动摇,也被倒出去了(因为倒仓的价位一般较高,大家疑为庄家出货)。   在第一次研究中,作者如是描述“倒仓”的交易特征:   “从股价的波动性分析,大规模百万股以上的倒仓中,虽然倒仓量占了当日交易量的较大比重,但股票价格的波动并不明显,均在2%以内。在自身对导(即对倒,为报告作者笔误,下不赘述——编者注)中,除少数交易清淡日外,大多交易日的对导净额占当日成交量的比重较小,对价格不产生显著影响。”   第一份研究中还描述了两家或两家以上同“字号”的基金如何“增仓”和“减仓”:   “在增仓的行为中,主要有两种方式:一是以一家基金为主,其他基金进行辅助建仓,在大成和博时管理的基金中较为多见;一是两家基金建仓总量差异不大,有的只是小规模买入,有的共同持仓筹码较高。而在交易行为中,一种是一家基金进行个股的经常性买卖,一家基金进行时机性买卖,如防止深幅下跌或波动性过大的时机性买卖,在博时的基金中相对较多;一种是一家基金先大规模买入,完成建仓后,多家基金再间断性小规模买入,在大成管理的基金中相对较多。在共同减仓的行为中,主要是多家同时较大规模的减仓较为多见。”   【4】“独立性”——一个摇摇欲坠的幻觉   从对倒到倒仓,乍一看都是为了基金投资人的利益。不过,当倒仓行为频繁出现时,人们不可能不会想到,这种倒仓不仅可以发生在同一公司的两只基金之间,也可在更大范围实现利益目的。这就牵涉到了基金的定位。   作者在论述基金的定位时,认为“如果基金发展为股东或发起人服务,那么基金的独立性就很成问题。非理性操作例如高位‘接仓’等就会损害投资者的利益。”   这里已经在对基金的机制发问。当年第一批基金成立时,市场上就曾质疑其是否会应合股东或发起人而出现倒仓行为,现在作者提出了同样的疑问。   他还指出,保持基金的独立性是衡量维护投资者利益的重要标准。由于我国的证券投资基金多是由证券公司发起,其独立性相对较差,不同程度地存在着与其发起人共同建仓的行为。其中,南方管理公司的基金天元和开元的独立性较差,在南京高科、飞乐股份(600654,股吧)、江苏工艺等重仓股上,与其发起人南方证券存在着共同建仓行为;博时基金管理公司管理的基金独立性也较差,与第一食品(600616,股吧)等存在着共同建仓行为;国泰管理公司、长盛管理公司、华夏管理公司、大成管理公司的独立性相对较差;华安管理公司、嘉实管理公司、鹏华管理公司的独立性较好;富国管理公司的汉兴和汉盛在泰山旅游上存在着高位买入股票,其独立性也较差。   虽然在研究期间并未发现基金与股东或发起人相互倒仓的直接事例,但从两者共同建仓的合作关系看,从基金双向倒仓时的肆无忌惮看,人们很难相信在机制上并未独立运作的基金与其股东和发起人之间没有更严重的违法联手作庄行为。特别是我国证券投资基金几乎都是以证券公司为母体,基金与发起人关系过分密切,公司决策人员主要来自大券商高层,交易经理大多来自券商自营盘的操作人员。   有人形象地将基金管理公司比喻成大券商的“资产管理二部”,事实上这是并不过分的。   对基金持有人造成损害的,可能是关联交易和内部人交易;但由于基金经理的权利和责任不对称,倒仓还可能以更恶劣的方式发生。   《财经》记者在采访中获悉,证券投资基金在一只股票股价高位接盘的情形在市场上并不鲜见。一个场景在市场口口相传:在热气腾腾的桑拿浴房中,谈判的双方“坦诚相见”,没有录音或者泄密的可能,希望基金接盘的机构开出价码,“每接我一股,我给你个人一块钱”。   据说,基金高位接盘的市场行情是:每股一元起,甚至有每股十元的情形。全部现金,支付给个人,不用任何单据与签字。不少拥有巨额资金使用权的基金经理都有机会接到这类约会的电话和来访。   从理论上讲,“投资基金三角”——持有人、管理人、托管人之间是靠基金契约来调整各自的权利义务关系的——持有人持有基金资产,管理人管理和运用基金资产,托管人托管基金资产,它们的背后分别体现着所有权、经营权和保管监督权。   但是,由于基金持有人高度分散,有的基金达五六十万人,召开持有人大会的成本及难度均很大,重要事项审议所需要的50%以上表决权很难凑齐,因此持有人对基金管理公司实际上较少监督与制约;而国有商业银行作为托管人,基本上是“无为而治”的态度,地位超脱,监督不多。   由于制度方面的因素,基金运作的内部监控和外部监控都远远达不到应有的力度。其实倒仓早已在众多投资者的意料之中;见怪不怪,这才是证券投资基金真正的悲哀。   【5】“净值游戏”——不仅仅是表面的欺瞒   从上述分析中我们还可以看到,基金为了互相攀比,采取对倒、倒仓等手段将股价做高,提高自己管理的基金净值。这是否能够得出结论,为净值而对倒的仅仅是在“表面”上欺瞒投资者呢?问题不那么简单。   第一,目前基金都是封闭式基金,以对倒来提高净值,似乎只能说是“徒慕虚荣”。但今后一旦管理开放式基金,由于其规模随业绩的好坏而增减,如果继续以此手法提高业绩,就与上市公司做假账虚增业绩、吸引投资者如出一辙。   第二,表面上提高净值,最后的客观结果还是为了方便出货。很多人有一个误解,以为股价在高位下跌且无量,就把庄家也给套住了。其实,在很多情况下并非如此。因为如果庄家在上升的阶段反复洗盘,亦即经常高抛低吸,作阶段性的盈利,而且时间足够长,到了最后,它的成本已经极低。此时,即时股价暴跌,它仍有一倍甚至几倍的利润。   这样,若股价跌了1/3,很多投资者以为可以抢反弹了,庄家就可以把股票卖给他们;若股价又跌了1/2,更多的人以为见底了,又进去了,庄家再把股票卖给他们。最后,庄家仍大有斩获。   其实,这种利用“高价幻觉”的手法至少在1929年前的美国股市中就已经出现,并被当时的投机者记录下来。   由于除了嘉实基金管理公司,其余9家基金管理公司都管理着2家以上的基金,市场人士通过各种迹象早就在推测,同样“字头”的基金极有可能发生倒仓行为,只是没有确切证据,更不知道数量有多少。此次专题研究披露了有价值的信息,证实了识者的估计。   另外,市场上对基金获得的种种配售优惠的非议也并非没有道理。报告中指出,基金大多是在配售股上市日即抛出。这么简单的一级、二级市场套利行为,并不需要理财专家的慧眼。   将对倒直接用于提高净值是基金特有的做法。过去的庄家或机构由于没必要公布自己的经营业绩,所以一般不会这样做。然而,由于股票质押贷款的合法出现,机构质押的股票市值与质押的款项的数量正成比。如不严加监控,庄家机构极有可能出现类似基金为净值而进行的对倒行为。   【6】“投资组合公告”——信息误导愈演愈烈   《证券投资基金管理暂行办法》实施准则第五条证券投资基金信息披露指引中规定,基金管理人应当在每个基金会计年度结束后90日内编制完成年度报告;于每个会计年度的前6个月结束后60日内编制完成中期报告;投资组合公告每季度公布一次,应在公告截止日后15个工作日内公告。   在这90、60、15日的工作期内,没有法规限制投资基金的仓位不准变化,也没有法规要求这种变化应该进行公告。于是,在投资基金进行公告的日子里,投资者看到的证券投资基金公告中持有股票的信息并不是“现在时”或者“现在进行时”,很可能已经变成了“过去时”。   但和许多猜想一样,“事出有因,查无实据”,我们难以知道基金在“现在时”变为“过去时”的日子里,特别是季度投资组合公布的15天时间差中,究竟干了些什么。   根据目前读到的基金行为研究报告,可以获知基金在公告前的15天中作为多多,其持仓情况已有很大改变。这种“失真率”有日益扩大的趋势,而且极易在市场上造成信息误导。   作者在第一次研究中以1999年9月30日基金在沪市的重仓股为例,发现在公告基准日到公告日期间,76家基金重仓股中,存在着明显减仓或增仓(同公告日重仓金额相比在5%以上的)的股票18家,占全部样本的24%。因此可以说,基金公告日存在着20%左右的信息误导效应。   在第二次研究中,作者增加了对1999年12月31日和2000年3月31日两次基金投资组合中重仓股的信息披露研究,而整体期间包括了大盘的上升和下跌期间,因此更具有说服力。   研究显示,基金在公告基准日到公告日显著增减仓样本占沪市重仓样本的比例,按照时间先后顺序依次为15%、34%和32%;而基金在公告基准日到公告日后11个交易日内显著减仓样本占沪市重仓样本的比例,按照时间先后顺序依次为24%、56%和34%。   研究把公告基准日到公告日之间的信息误导定义为狭义的信息误导,把公告基准日到公告日后11个交易日内的信息误导定义为广义的信息误导,发现狭义基金信息误导有加重的趋势。1999年9月30日有15%的样本在公告日前已经发生显著增减仓行为,而在随后的两次公告中,显著增减仓的样本比例上升到30%以上;从时间序列看,基金利用公布投资组合的时机增减仓,越来越侧重在公告日前增仓或减仓,例如在1999年12月31日和2000年3月31日连续公告投资组合的基金重仓样本中,在公告前发生减仓或增仓的样本与公告日后11个交易上内减仓或增仓的样本之比,前者为38:54,后者为52:16。   进而观察基金管理公司,研究又告诉人们,在三次公布投资组合的基金中,嘉实基金管理的基金泰和信息披露没有误导性,国泰管理的基金金泰(行情,净值,基金吧)和金鑫、南方管理的开元、华夏管理的基金兴华和兴和、博时管理的基金裕隆和裕阳、富国管理的基金汉盛(行情,净值,基金吧),其信息披露的误导性最强;鹏华管理的普惠和普丰、长盛管理的同益、大成管理的景宏、华安管理的安顺和安信,其信息披露的误导性相对较弱。   有人也许会认为,这是基金在合理利用“规则”。我们认为,至少有必要让投资者了解基金在如何利用“规则”。以后投资者们要各自小心,千万别轻信“基金是理财专家,所以它们的长期投资或看好的股票是值得理性投资的”的论调了。   无论如何,报告作者有关将15个工作日改为5个工作日的建议,是值得中国证监会的有关部门采纳的。   就信息披露一项而言,在该报告作者进行研究之后,市场的监管制度又有所更新。今年5月,中国证监会发布《证券投资基金信息披露指引》补充通知。该通知规定,基金中报、年报需列示按市值占基金资产净值比例大小排序的所有股票明细,至少应当包括股票名称、数量、市值、占基金资产净值之比;基金需列示报告期内新增及剔除的所有股票明细,至少应当包括股票名称、数量。   然而,政策刚刚下发,对策已经产生。厦门联合信托投资公司的胡立峰对此颇有研究,这又证实了基金行为研究报告的作者所揭示的相关问题具有某种根本性。   胡立峰仔细研究了26家证券投资基金按新规定所公布的2000年中报后发现,证券投资基金信息披露上最大的问题,在于“报告期内新增及剔除的所有股票明细”。   在各只基金的中报中,对此项的界定与解释是(有的基金未解释):本期新增股票包括股票期初为零、期末有余额,买入卖出数量为报告期内累计买入卖出总量;本期剔除的股票为期初有余额、期末为零的股票或期初和期末都为零,但本报告期内有买卖的股票;买入卖出数量为报告期内累计买入卖出数量。显然,各基金的“新增与剔除股票”与持有人及市场想要的基金股票增减变动信息有很大区别。   胡立峰举出了非常方便的操作手法:如果一只基金期初持有A股票1000万股,报告期期末余额1万股,但在这次中报中却不必披露累计买入卖出数量。因为这只股票不属于新增或者删除的股票。“如果所有的基金都很‘聪明',虽然大规模甚至完全出货,但只要期末象征性持有100股,就可以‘逃避'信息披露,尤其是关键性的重仓股可以‘逃避'披露。”   一个简单的例子可以说明这一点。据胡立峰介绍,基金裕阳就没有披露风华高科(000636,股吧)、乐凯胶片(600135,股吧)、清华同方、电广传媒、东方钽业(000962,股吧)、东大阿派在报告期内的累计成交量。因为这6只个股期初、期末均有余额,于是就可以不必披露了。而报告期间,风华高科有增发新股、乐凯胶片10转增5、清华同方10转增4、东大阿派10转增3,裕阳持股均有重大变动。这6只重仓股的市值高达12亿元之多,期间可能创造了巨大的滚动成交量。   按新《刑法》第一百八十一条规定:“编造并且传播影响证券、期货交易的虚假信息,扰乱证券、期货交易市场,造成严重后果的,处五年以下有期徒刑或者拘役,并处或者单处一万元以上十万元以下罚金。”   虽然上述种种信息误导行为没有直接构成犯法,但至少涉嫌“传播影响证券交易的虚假信息”。然而,证券市场中人在这方面很少感受到法制的威严,所以,政策总有对策,道高一尺,魔高一丈。   《基金黑幕》全文——后记庄家之变   ----我们的解析只针对这份报告中对市场影响最为严重的部分,报告对基金行为的分析远比此处披露的更为详尽。由于报告作者所拥有的数据资源优势以及令人惊叹的认真,使得此次对于基金行为的研究,成为中国股市10年来第一份对机构的交易行为有确切叙述的报告。它使得市场中流传各种的机构交易行为的说法和富有想象力的臆测黯然失色,并将成为后来人研究世纪之交的中国股市状态的历史文献。   ----中国股市自产生之初就有了“庄家”这个名词。但那时的“庄家”力量还很薄弱,资金实力也不够,所以有所谓“股票齐涨齐跌”。后来有一个股票叫“界龙”的,很牛。牛在哪儿呢?它在大市低靡时连拉了三十几根阳线,也就是说连涨了三十几天,走出“独立行情”,庄家本色尽显。当时的证券公司也比较小心,最典型的是申银。市场上流传过这么一种说法,说是申银做股票赚个几毛钱就跑,所以总经理阚治东被戏称为“阚二毛”(二毛钱)。外地的机构最牛的则是辽国发。   ----1994年和1995年,上交所开辟了第二战场——国债期货,为了让市场成功,自己做了“庄家”,于是机构也胆大了,结果海通证券(600837,股吧)首先出局,接着是万国证券与辽国发。这是机构与机构的对决,对决的结果是国债期货市场关闭,宣告了上海地方证券公司势力的终结。   ----1996年,深圳的证券公司卧薪尝胆,终于雄起。上海见深圳指数这么涨,也急了。于是,两地各自“做庄”,大对决。最后到当年12月《人民日报》特约评论员文章一出,罢了。当时的申银万国和海通证券负责人随之去职。1998年,最有市场影响力的深圳君安证券也开始谢幕。   ----但是,证券公司庄家们并未就此蜇伏,只是手法更显“高明”。在庄家眼中,证券投资基金未始不能被利用为做庄程序之一环。此次《财经》披露出证据的诸多证券投资基金,也颇多庄家气了——庄家不会消失,它们只是前赴后继。   ----于是,有两点建议:   ----第一,“超常规地发展机构投资者”的说法不谨慎,很容易(其实已经在)被利用。“超常规”意味着你可以超常规我也可以超常规。回想国债期货市场,上交所的超常规带来了辽国发的超常规,带来了更多有权势机构的超常规,其中教训值得总结。而且,凭什么说只要是机构力量就一定是积极的、稳定的?光举国外的事例不行,中国的情况很不一样,应该拿些国内的调查和证据来佐证或再做结论。   ----第二,市场的泡沫不可怕,可怕的是系统性的泡沫。市场的泡沫不可避免,市场不可能永远那么理性,但调整一下,就可以恢复健康了。1987年美国股灾乃至世界性的股灾,一会儿就过去了,就是这个道理。但还有一种泡沫就可怕了。只要想一想南海泡沫、郁金香泡沫和美国三十年代的股市崩溃究竟是怎么回事,看看描述这些股灾的历史,就应当明白,它们已经将上上下下都牵进去了。当时投资者也没有这么傻,只是他们有一天觉得系统的“信用”已足以抵消一切市场的风险时,才那么奋不顾身的。

央视网炮轰《财经》 称中国媒体人成西方爪牙

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 信息时报 2009-11-27 21:03:34 核心提示:日前CCTV网站刊发了一个名为“财经不能不说”的匿名帖,炮轰内地一些经济学者和传媒人是西方敌对势力经济及文化入侵的“爪牙”,故意打压内地股市,为西方财阀利益服务。而最近辞职的《财经》总编胡舒立,被该文视为西方爪牙的代表人物。此文洋洋万言,文风犀利,造成了相当大的轰动效应,同时也招来反击的声音,指责其是“多年未见的文革手艺重现江湖”,是“从政治上抹黑”传媒人。 综合消息 日前CCTV网站刊发了一个名为“财经不能不说”的匿名帖,炮轰内地一些经济学者和传媒人是西方敌对势力经济及文化入侵的“爪牙”,故意打压内地股市,为西方财阀利益服务。而最近辞职的《财经》总编胡舒立,被该文视为西方爪牙的代表人物。此文洋洋万言,文风犀利,造成了相当大的轰动效应,同时也招来反击的声音,指责其是“多年未见的文革手艺重现江湖”,是“从政治上抹黑”传媒人。 炮轰帖的主要内容之一,是说《财经》等传媒用揭黑报道打压内地股市,帮助外国资本低价进入中国市场。 将3月暴跌归咎《财经》 文章说,“1998年‘君安震荡’,将中国百姓对券商的崇拜打垮;2000年‘基金黑幕’将中国百姓对公募基金的信赖击碎;2001年‘庄家吕梁’将中国百姓对私募基金的痛恨煽动到极点;而接下来2001年6月,正是A股2245点的时候,‘亿安科技’出台,A股信心开始涣散,掉头向下;到8月A股稍微反弹一下,‘银广夏’宜将乘勇追穷寇,中国百姓对上市公司的信心完全崩溃。此后,贱卖银行1万亿,贱卖其他国产至少还有1万亿的五年慢慢大熊市,就此开始。” “然而,《财经》关键时刻的揭黑报道对于外资来说是个大利好。来看一个事实:2001年11月10日,中国加入WTO,此后外资金融机构叩开国门,五年大熊市,此时的上市公司成为‘舞弊’和‘诈骗’的代名词时,外资一进来就得到了一个非常便宜的好价格。” 该帖把今年3月金融危机后的内地股市暴跌,同样归咎于《财经》唱黑的结果。 暗示胡舒立是西方爪牙 炮轰帖的另一“吸引眼球”之处,是对《财经》前总编胡舒立赤裸裸的人身攻击。胡舒立曾在美国留学,接受过美国外国记者中心(COFJ)的培训,获美国《商业周刊》评选为“亚洲之星”,这些都成了她可疑的海外背景。 文章酸溜溜地质疑:“一个中国人用中文写作,在中国媒体工作,报道中国人的事情,也是给国人看的,但是美国人却用‘访问’、‘培训’、‘进修’等孜孜不倦的给予培养,在她还没有‘杰出’的时候,就提前预支给她‘杰出新闻记者奖’;在《财经》初出茅庐的第三年,美国人就从亚洲30亿人中,将她选拔出来,评她为50位‘亚洲之星’之一,让她和全亚洲当年最优秀的政治领袖、科技精英平起平坐。” 文章又质疑,“凭借胡舒立《财经》之前乏善可陈的从业经历,如何足以使她刚刚切入陌生的证券行业,就能够步骤鲜明、点穴掏心地完成《财经》一举成名的五大杰作呢?是不是有资本市场阅历丰富的资深人士,对《财经》的工作给予了精心的规划?” 文章炮轰的不仅是胡舒立一个人,不仅是一个《财经》,而是一群“连锁”了的媒体。新浪、搜狐、金融界、和讯、东方财富网、《环球企业家》等网络媒体和平面媒体,都被点了名。文章认为,这些传媒利用其偏颇报道,人为造成“完全信息不对称”,破坏了中国老百姓支撑中国股市的信心。 央视网匿名帖原文:《财经》不能不说 据新华社《瞭望》杂志报道:境外利益集团利用在华获得的丰厚利润,自己培育并拥有分析师,或高薪聘请优秀华人学者担当顾问或独立董事,通过境内外媒体精心包装、刻意打造,提供各类活动舞台,提高其知名度、美誉度,从而成为 中国国内行业精英,拥有强大的话语权,以其影响行业乃至国家宏观经济决策。 文章所指并非危言耸听。随着一些媒体“得天独厚”的资金实力、传播手段等优势,在极短的时间内制造了一连串轰动的“黑幕”、炮制了一系列所谓独立经济学家,在中国经济的决策面颐指气使,误导国内舆论,严重干扰了中国市场经济的正常运行。 《财经》杂志揭黑性报道的实质 “中国财经记者第一人”胡舒立创办的《财经》,在创办开始的几年内屡有斩获,以其全景式的报道方式透析“琼民源事件”,披露“基金黑幕”,揭发“银广夏”,掀开“庄家吕梁”、“亿安科技”、“蓝日”、“德隆”等一系列黑幕,震惊全国。 现在回转头来看《财经》的揭黑报道,其对中国证券市场造成的影响可谓深远。 1998年“君安震荡”,将中国百姓对券商的崇拜打垮;2000年“基金黑幕”将中国百姓对公募基金的信赖击碎;2001年“庄家吕梁”将中国百姓对私募 基金的痛恨煽动到极点;而接下来01年6月,正是A股2245点的时候,“亿安科技”出台,A股信心开始涣散,掉头向下;到8月A股稍微反弹一下,“银广夏”宜将乘勇追穷寇,中国百姓对上市公司的信心完全崩溃。此后,贱卖银行1万亿,贱卖其他国产至少还有1万亿的五年慢慢大熊市,就此开始。 然而,《财经》关键时刻的揭黑报道对于外资来说是个大利好。来看一个事实:2001年11月10日,中国加入WTO,此后外资金融机构叩开国门,五年大熊市,此时的上市公司成为“舞弊”和“诈骗”的代名词时,外资一进来就得到了一个非常便宜的好价格。 再反过来思考,假如当时的揭黑报道是偶然所谓,《财经》掀起的“揭黑风暴”,为什么这几年却不见踪影了呢?为什么在外资幸福地进入中国之后,就渐趋沉静了呢? 并且,与对待中国企业不同,面对外资金融机构在中国的种种弊行,胡舒立和《财经》企业却又变得大度和宽容了,譬如瑞银承销中石油卑鄙肮脏,《财经》不谴责、不判断;更有对高盛高华这样的国际金融资本绕开中国监管壁垒,设立假合资券商的违法行为,2004年8月16日《财经》杂志竟然以“高盛进入中国证券业突破即将来临”为题,称颂这一违法行为为“酝酿近三年而操作一年有余的精巧运筹,终于导出一个引入外资市场化处置证券公司风险的创举!” 所以,当三月份股市暴跌复暴跌的时候,以“独立、独家、独到”自诩的胡舒立及《财经》杂志,联合谢国忠、许小年对亿万百姓喊出“不应救、不能救、亦不必救”时,或许就一点也不奇怪了。 所以,当“谢国忠们”唱空中国楼市、股市的时候就不能奇怪《财经》照样在显著位置,用特别的标题,将谢国忠奉为“《财经》特约经济学家”,连篇累牍的让他抒发“泡沫中国”“崩溃中国”的论调了。 胡舒立:中国铁娘子,最危险的女人 2008年5月12日,《财经》双周刊创始人、主编胡舒立正在北京西郊的一家宾馆主持一场奖学金项目学员典礼。一条短信告诉她:四川省发生了强烈地震。她向身边的钱钢凑过去,请这位曾经报道过唐山大地震的资深新闻人估计这场地震带来的破坏情况。钱钢判断:至少这场地震没有发生在大家熟睡的时候。但很快,他就意识到:学校正在上课,“学生们的伤亡将会很惨重。” 胡舒立出发前往北京市区,在车的后座上通过电话和电子邮件工作。她指挥员工租赁一台卫星电话,并派出一队记者前往四川。身材小、健谈、好斗的胡舒立——她手下的一名记者在第一次见到她的时候觉得她就像一位“女教父”——决定报道这场地震。 不到一小时,第一位出发的《财经》记者已经在前往四川的飞机上,在他之后还有九名同事。她相信《财经》可以找到报道此事的方法。她认为,一篇用正确的口吻和事实写成的报道将能够被刊出。“如果这事不是被绝对禁止的,”她说,“那我们就要做。” 5.2英尺高,身材苗条,精灵短发(pixie haircut),一柜子色彩协调的衣服,她经常未见其人,先闻其声。在北京闹市区的泛利大厦19层,整洁而开放的灰色砖砌空间构成了《财经》杂志的编辑部。走廊上,鞋跟敲出的急切脚步声预告了胡舒立的到来。她迅速穿过编辑部,滔滔不绝地发布自己的命令和想法,然后再次走出门去——“就像一阵风般突然和迅速”,如今在香港大学从事研究工作的钱钢说。 我认识的不止一个人都将与胡舒立聊天的经历比作接受机关枪连珠炮般的攻击。一些人对她的这种强度不太对胃口。胡舒立的一位老友,《经济日报》编辑汪郎曾经再三谢绝她加入《财经》一起工作的邀请,因为汪认为“保持一定的距离对我们的友谊更好”。在有的观点看来,和她在一起要么令人惊心动魄,要么令人丧失勇气。她的老板,财讯传媒集团董事局主席王波明半开玩笑地告诉我说:“我怕她!”  1998年,胡舒立依靠两台电脑和一个借来的会议室创办了《财经》。当美国印刷媒体处于衰退的时候,中国的传媒正在成长,《财经》是第一份有望跻身世界级的出版物。“它与你在中国见到的任何东西都不一样,”前摩根士丹利经济学家,为《财经》写专栏的谢国忠说,“它的存在,从某种程度上说,是一个奇迹。”   《财经》杂志印刷光洁,版式设计和《财富》杂志类似。它很沉,广告很多,包括卡地亚手表、信用卡、奔驰SUV。它的写作有意保持高信息密度,甚至是精英式的。这份杂志进入了中国政府、金融机构、学术机构的许多最重要的办公室,这为它带来了非凡的影响力。最近几年,它开始通过中、英文的一对网站延伸自己的影响范围,网站对《纽约时报》的网站进行了少量的模仿。这两个网站每月吸引320万独立访客。胡舒立为杂志和网站写作专栏,并被广泛引用。《财经》最新未公开的计划,是以布隆伯格和道·琼斯为目标:和香港大亨李泽楷合作一个英文通讯社,该通讯社将发布《财经》记者的报道。   当加州大学圣地亚哥分校的政治学者Sam Popkin和她的妻子,从事中国研究的学者谢淑丽(Susan Shirk)第一次目睹胡舒立做报道的时候,他想起了《The Boys on the Bus》一书对《纽约时报》记者R. W. Apple的描绘:“Apple常常每天打上百个电话。”Popkin说:“她总是在想办法弄清到底是这个体制里的谁有权力知道发生了什么。”Popkin补充说:“她是一个人体U盘,你写入信息,然后她继续去找其他人。”胡舒立的竞争对手当然记得最清楚。近20年前,时任一家主要商业报纸记者的林力博努力与她竞争对一轮闭门会谈的了解程度。他回忆说:“她甚至搞到了他们的菜单!”  1992年,胡舒立是国内第一份全国性商业报纸《中华工商时报》的国际版编辑,她开始报道一小群在西方经济制度下接受训练的中国人回国后推动中国证券市场的工作。他们当中的许多人与她同龄,是高干子弟。这群人将自己的团队称为“中国证券市场研究设计中心”,他们在崇文门饭店租用了一些房间,搬出床铺,设立了办公室。其中一张办公桌属于高西庆,他在杜克大学获得了法律学位,回国前在理查德·尼克松位于纽约的律师事务所工作。另一张桌子属于王波明,作为前驻外大使、副外长之子的他曾在哥伦比亚大学学习金融,并曾在纽约证券交易所的研究部门担任经济学家。他们赢得了一批中共明日之星的支持,比如一位副总理的女婿王岐山,具有改革头脑的政治家后裔周小川。 “我决定采访中国所有的顶级金融家,”胡舒立回忆说。她称之为自己的“家庭作业”,而时任《华尔街日报》驻京记者的James McGregor也开始注意到,胡“与他们中的所有人交谈,从他们身上抽取信息,就好像一个研究生在同德高望重的教授们谈话一样。”作为成果,胡舒立得到了一连串的独家新闻,并逐渐和他们建立了联系,这串名单是无人能比的:今天,高西庆掌管着中国两千亿美元的主权财富基金,王岐山是副总理和经济政策制定者,周小川则是央行行长。 北京的很多人都想知道,早年建立起来的这些关系在多大程度上保护了胡舒立。但她坚持认为,人们高估了她和权力的接近程度。“我不知道他们的生日,”她说,“我是一名记者,他们也把我当作记者对待。” 早前:《财经》创始人胡舒立率60余人集体辞职 原《财经》杂志主编胡舒立。 11月9日,中国证券市场研究设计中心("联办")证实,《财经》创始人,现任主编胡舒立与60多位员工集体辞职。起因是以胡舒立为首的员工,和“联办”在编辑理念等诸多方面意见失合。消息称,胡舒立有意在中山大学执教。 新文化报11月10日报道 据中国证券市场研究设计中心(联办)消息人士透露,《财经》杂志总经理吴传晖已于9月25日正式辞职。包括副总经理及8位部门总监在内的经营部门60多位员工,也于9月29日递交辞呈。有关人士称,《财经》杂志创办人兼主编胡舒立也可能被迫离职。 “对于证监会和交易所而言,维护市场健康发展当然是题中应有之义,然而,其职责应集中于规则的制定与执行,而非代市场选择……”这段话出自11月9日出版的2009年第23期《财经》杂志,名为《创业板的错位与复位》,作者胡舒立。 胡舒立在完成11月9日的《财经》后,已于昨天向“联办”正式递交了辞呈。

Friday, November 27, 2009

Dubai Debt Freeze to Hit Property Recovery

By STEFANIA BIANCHI DUBAI -- Dubai's fragile real-estate market could suffer another collapse in prices after the city-state asked for a standstill on Dubai World's debt and its struggling real-estate unit Nakheel. "Should they effectively default, it can become one of the biggest sovereign defaults since the Argentinean crisis," said Marina Akopian, partner at HEXAM Capital, which manages about $440 million in emerging markets. "It will certainly have a very negative impact on the Dubai property market and I suspect on property markets globally." Dubai's decision to seek a six-month reprieve on the debts of Dubai World, which has liabilities of almost $60 billion, spooked markets in Asia and Europe amid concern that major international banks are heavily exposed. But the restructuring of Dubai World and its subsidiaries could also undermine confidence in the sheikdom's nascent property recovery. An estimated 50% has been wiped off the average price of real estate in the emirate since its peak. But in recent months, prices have shown signs of stabilization -- and even modest recovery. Property consultancy Colliers International earlier this month reported the first increase in prices for residential property since the market started plummeting late last year. Prices for residential property at developments open to foreign purchasers climbed by 7% in the third quarter, it said. At the heart of Dubai World's problems is Nakheel. The developer borrowed billions to build grandiose projects such as Palm Islands. Its closely watched $3.52 billion Islamic bond due in December has been a focal point for whether Dubai can pay its debts. "The Dubai World announcement could play into investor psyche," said Saud Masud, senior real estate analyst at UBS AG. "It sends a strong message to people that Dubai isn't out of the woods yet." Earlier this month, UBS said Dubai property prices could drop a further 30% over the next 18 months and may take at least 10 years to recover to peak levels. Mr. Masud said although the bank is unlikely to change its estimate for the drop in prices, the further fall may happen sooner than anticipated. "This type of crisis brings fundamental weaknesses to the surface faster. This could play out in the next six months or so," he said. UBS said one of the biggest concerns for Dubai real estate is the "funding gap" to finish properties that are already started and on which investors are defaulting. The bank estimates that $11 billion is needed to complete an expected 40,000 residential units by the end of 2010. Eric Swats, head of asset management at Dubai-based Rasmala Investments, said liquidity, which had started to return to the property market, will come under pressure as banks based in the United Arab Emirates try to limit their exposure to Dubai World. "They are going to have to take quite a big haircut because of the loans they provided to Dubai World and Nakheel," he said. "As a result, they are likely to be less able to make mortgages and other types of funding." As well as the uncertainty surrounding Dubai World and its entities, the standstill could also affect other listed developers such as Emaar Properties PJSC, the U.A.E.'s largest, Union Properties PJSC and Deyaar Development PJSC. "I continue to believe that I don't see Nakheel as a standalone entity in the long run," said UBS' Masud. Dubai World's move also appears to have affected the sentiment of foreign property buyers who helped fuel the boom. "I believed all the PR and hype that Abu Dhabi was looking after Dubai," said one Nakheel investor with two properties in the emirate who declined to be named. The 38-year old British investor, who paid close to $200,000 for an apartment in Nakheel's Discovery Gardens development and $50,000 for a retail outlet at Dubai's International City, said he's losing about $2000 a month as the shop stands empty. "I'm being hit from all sides," he said. Write to Stefania Bianchi at

Utilities Seek Round of Rate Increases

By REBECCA SMITH Face with declining electricity sales and growing demands to invest in their power networks, utilities across the nation have launched a round of rate-increase requests that would raise bills for millions of consumers in the coming year. The last big rate increases, in the middle of the decade, mostly stemmed from higher prices for natural gas and coal -- fuels used to make electricity. This time, fuel costs are low but utilities are investing more money in their electricity networks, even as many utilities have reported sharp drops in electricity sales this year. In some cases, utilities are aiming to beef up the current, lower-voltage distribution system so it can handle more stresses -- like the kind expected from the charging needs of electric vehicles, which will begin entering the market next year. "Smart grid" spending is on the upswing, too, as utilities install millions of advanced digital meters on homes. "Utilities are playing catch-up" and putting more money into their distribution systems, which often have been a lower-margin part of the business, said Jim Robb, a senior vice president at Northeast Utilities System of Hartford, Conn. His company recently filed a rate case for Public Service of New Hampshire and likely will file a case for Connecticut Power & Light before the end of the year, Mr. Robb said. Pension obligations are another weight on the sector. Moody's Investors Service estimated that the industry faced as much as $40 billion in underfunded pension obligations at the end of 2008. Moody's warned in a recent report that rate increases stemming from increased utility spending could result in consumer pushback, as electric utility costs rise from the 3.5% of disposable household income they represent today to 5% to 10% of disposable income. Moody's said it is waiting for "the theoretical inflection point beyond which consumers will no longer tolerate annual rate increases without protest." The Energy Information Administration, in a report issued Wednesday, said retail electricity prices now exceed 10 cents a kilowatt hour in the U.S. The average price was 11.63 cents for residential customers, who pay the most, for the eight-month period ended in August. That compared with an average U.S. residential power cost of 11.36 cents for 2008, 10.65 cents for 2007 and 6.6 cents for 1999, a decade earlier. Xcel Energy Inc. recently got approval to increase rates $91 million a year in Minnesota, about two-thirds of the increase it had sought. It still has rate cases pending in South Dakota, Wisconsin and Colorado of roughly 10%, 5.6% and 6%, respectively. Xcel Energy recently reached agreement with staff of the Colorado Public Utilities Commission in the Colorado case which, if approved, would provide a $136 million annual increase, somewhat less than the $180 million increase, about 8%, it had sought. If the settlement is approved, it would lift residential bills by $4.66 a month and small-business bills by $7.16 a month. Duke Energy Corp. reached a settlement in South Carolina Nov. 24 in a case that would provide an overall 5.2% rate increase next February, if approved by state regulators. It would include more spending on energy-efficiency programs and higher pension contributions. Duke customers in North Carolina would see utility bills rise as much as 8.7% by 2012, if a rate settlement reached in that state is approved by regulators. For residential customers, it would consist of increases of 4.3% next year, 3.3% in 2011 and 1.1% in 2012. Industrial users would see costs jump the next-highest amount, or 8.2%, over that same period. Pepco Holdings Inc. has rate cases pending in Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey and the District of Columbia. Requested rate increases for residential customers range from 2.6% for Delmarva in Maryland to 6.1% for Potomac Electric Co. in Washington. In addition to increasing revenues to cover such things as higher pension costs and losses from delinquent accounts, the utility is trying to get "decoupling" provisions in place that make its revenues less sensitive to fluctuating power sales. Mark Browning, director of rates at Pepco Holdings, said the mechanisms differ but all meet the utility's objective "to be able to push conservation and help customers reduce energy use" without seeing earnings decimated. In general, utilities are seeking returns on equity of 10.5% to 11.5%. Write to Rebecca Smith at

Thursday, November 26, 2009


银国宏 市场对于2010年一季度以前的经济复苏势头以及刺激政策退出担忧逐步达成了一致预期,认为发生不利于股票市场事情的可能性很小,因此对于A股市场继续上涨的大趋势也有统一认识的迹象,但仍有相当一部分投资者担心,当前估值水平是否已经充分反映了经济复苏预期?笔者以为,认识这一问题的方法之一就是回顾历史,借鉴历史经验来解决当前的困惑。 首先,从几个方面来看,当前A股的背景和状态与2006年下半年有很大的相似性。一是从影响市场运行趋势的因素来看,宏观经济成为主导因素始于股权分置改革之后,2006年下半年之后的上涨是典型阶段,而当前A股市场的走势显然主要取决于经济复苏势头;二是从流动性和通胀背景来看,2006年下半年所面临的人民币升值预期导致流动性泛滥和通胀预期并引发储蓄搬家,当前的情况则是信贷和货币政策宽松引发通胀预期并出现了储蓄搬家的迹象;三是从市场累积涨幅来看,2006年下半年所面临的是累积上涨75%以后的震荡调整,当前市场面临的是累积上涨90%以上后的震荡调整。四是从上证综合指数所处的估值区域来看,2006年下半年和目前的3200点左右区域都处于20──25倍PE之间。 其次,既然2006年下半年的市场环境和市场状态与当前具有相似性,那么后续的趋势演变就值得借鉴。2006年市场在大幅上涨基础上经过4个月左右调整再度上扬的驱动力来自于经济加速增长下的企业盈利能力增长。2006年下半年的季度GDP同比增长较上半年略有放缓,但随后重新进入加速增长轨道,与之相匹配的工业增加值也经历短暂调整后,从月度同比增长16%的水平提升至18%的水平,企业盈利能力非常强劲。A股市场正是在这种经济加速增长的驱动下再度大幅上涨,而且在上涨80%之后,整个市场的PE运行区间仍然处于20─25倍之间。 再看目前的经济运行和企业盈利能力,GDP处于探底回升阶段,且回升速度和斜率比2006年下半年以后的数据更强劲。再看以工业增加值增长率衡量的企业盈利能力,目前累计增长率已经达到10%左右,而10月份的月度同比增速达到了16%,尽管存在去年基数低的翘尾因素,但换个角度理解则是当前企业业绩改善的空间和弹性比当初更大。从借鉴2006年下半年之后的走势出发,当前经济加速复苏有望推动A股市场也出现一次较大幅度的上涨,由于经济增长的质量还无法与当时相比,所以幅度也应当小于当时。 按照2009年四季度上市公司盈利水平与三季度相当来估算,2009年全年的每股收益增长将接近25%,在这种经济加速复苏预期下2010年业绩增长预期也在20%左右,那么以当前上证综指为基础,即使维持20─25倍PE运行区间不变,再考虑市场已经在一定程度反映2009年业绩增长,那么继续上涨30%左右还是较为合理的。 最后,仍然以历史比较的眼光来看,如果是一波以经济复苏为驱动力的上涨行情,那么以金融、地产、煤炭为代表的周期类股票表现的机会仍然很大。目前,整个市场的上涨推动力来自大消费概念和年底重组预期,但是大消费概念经过近期较大幅度上涨后,汽车和家电的平均PE已经超过26倍,而医药和白酒达到34倍左右,与银行15倍左右和地产、煤炭23倍左右的PE相比,比较优势正在快速降低。结合2006年下半年调整后的上涨驱动力来看,当时的主流机会正是从食品饮料等消费品和军工等重组预期品种转化为金融、地产、资源领涨。因此,综合而言,我们认为接下来的市场风格或投资机会有望再度实现转换,从消费品种逐步向周期品种转换,或至少是扩散。 由此可见,我们通过历史视角审视当前市场所处阶段的结论有二:第一是对截至明年1季度之前的市场保持乐观看法,维持跨年度行情已经展开的判断;第二是认为周期类股票应该比消费类股票机会更大,这种风格转换应是大概率事件。那么还需要关注的因素是促成这种投资风格转换的催化剂是什么?笔者以为主要是乐观预期充分达成一致,特别是在大量新基金发行和储蓄搬家的推动下,具备估值比较优势和业绩增长确定性的周期股有望成为指数上涨的新主导力量,煤炭、地产和金融显然是兼具估值比较和业绩增长优势的代表性品种。 (银国宏是东兴证券研究所所长。文中所述只代表他的个人观点。)

Wednesday, November 25, 2009

Dubai World Seeks to Delay Debt as Default Risk Soars (Update1)

Share Business ExchangeTwitterFacebook| Email | Print | A A A By Arif Sharif and Laura Cochrane Nov. 25 (Bloomberg) -- Dubai World, with $59 billion of liabilities, said it will seek to delay debt payments, sending contracts to protect the emirate against default surging by the most since they began trading in January. The state-controlled company will ask all creditors for a “standstill” agreement as it negotiates to extend maturities, including $3.52 billion of Islamic bonds due on Dec. 14 from its property unit Nakheel PJSC, the builder of palm tree-shaped islands, Dubai’s Department of Finance said in an e-mailed statement. Moody’s Investors Service said it would consider the plan a default should bondholders be forced to accept the terms. “Extending the maturity of Nakheel debt is feeding the market’s uncertainty on which debt Dubai will honor in full,” said Rachel Ziemba, a senior analyst covering sovereign wealth funds at New York-based Roubini Global Economics. “They look desperate and the market is concerned that in the long term Dubai’s indebtedness is rising not falling.” Dubai accumulated $80 billion of debt by expanding in banking, real estate and transportation before credit markets seized up last year. Contracts protecting against default rose 116 basis points to 434 basis points today, the most since they began trading in January, ranking it the sixth highest-risk government borrower, according to credit-default swap prices from CMA Datavision in London. The contracts, which increase as perceptions of credit quality deteriorate, are higher than Iceland’s after climbing 131 basis points in November, the biggest monthly increase since January. ‘No Clarity’ Investor concern is growing because the emirate hasn’t disclosed how it will pay more than $9 billion of debt coming due in the next four months. Dubai said today it borrowed $5 billion from Abu Dhabi government-controlled banks, half the $10 billion Dubai ruler Sheikh Mohammed Bin Rashid Al-Maktoum said he planned to raise by yearend. “There is no clarity about what exactly is happening,” said Emad Mostaque, a London-based Middle East equity-fund manager for Pictet Asset Management Ltd., which oversees more than $100 billion globally. “They have to clarify if there is going to be a voluntary rollover or if there is going to be a forced rollover. If there is a forced rollover it will mean technical default. If they don’t clear this up then the whole market will want to sell.” Bond Program Dubai, the second biggest of seven sheikhdoms that make up the United Arab Emirates and home to the world’s tallest tower and the biggest man-made islands, set up a $20 billion Dubai Financial Support Fund after the credit crisis triggered the world’s worst property crash and hurt its finance and tourism industries. Home prices in Dubai plummeted 47 percent in the second quarter from a year ago, the steepest drop of any market, according to Knight Frank LLC. Property prices may drop further, a survey by Colliers International showed Oct. 14. The emirate raised $10 billion by selling bonds to the U.A.E. central bank in February, with some of the money going to property developers. Sheikh Mohammed said Nov. 9 the emirate’s bond program to raise a further $10 billion will be “well received,” and those who doubt the unity of Dubai and Abu Dhabi should “shut up.” Abu Dhabi, the U.A.E.’s capital, is owner of the world’s biggest sovereign wealth fund and holds almost all of its oil. Repayment Schedule The Dubai ruler last week removed the chairmen of Dubai Holding LLC and Dubai World, two large state-owned business groups, as well as the head of U.A.E.’s biggest developer Emaar Properties PJSC from the board of the Investment Corp. of Dubai, the emirate’s main holding company. He also ejected the governor of the Dubai International Financial Centre, Omar Bin Sulaiman, who had led efforts to transform Dubai into the Middle East finance hub. Dubai owes $4.3 billion next month and another $4.9 billion in the first quarter of 2010 through government and corporate debt, Deutsche Bank AG data show. Dubai World had $59.3 billion in liabilities at the end of last year, its subsidiary Nakheel Development Ltd., said in a statement posted on the Nasdaq Dubai Web site Aug. 20. It didn’t provide a breakdown. The company had total assets of $99.6 billion at the end of 2008 and total revenue of $14.2 billion, according to the statement. Some $18 billion of Dubai World’s debt is with units such as DP World that have enough cashflow to service their obligations, two bankers familiar with the group’s finances, who declined to be identified, said last month. The remaining debt amounts to $22 billion, they said. The price of Nakheel’s bonds fell to 86 cents on the dollar from 110.5 yesterday, according to Citigroup Inc. prices on Bloomberg. Abu Dhabi Banks Abu Dhabi government-controlled banks, National Bank of Abu Dhabi PJSC and Islamic lender Al Hilal Bank bought all $5 billion of bonds from Dubai’s government, Dubai’s Department of Finance said in an e-mailed statement today. Dubai will draw down $1 billion from the bonds sold to the Abu Dhabi banks to provide funding through a sale of securities to National Bank of Abu Dhabi PJSC and Islamic debt, or sukuk, to Al Hilal. Dubai’s Supreme Fiscal Committee hired Deloitte LLP to lead the restructuring of Dubai World debt, the Department of Finance said. Deloitte’s Aidan Birkett, managing partner for corporate finance, was assigned. “The Dubai Financial Support Fund, working with the chief restructuring officer, will start to assess and evaluate the extent of the restructuring required,” the Dubai Department of Finance said in a statement. “As a first step, Dubai World intends to ask all providers of financing to Dubai World and Nakheel to ‘standstill’ and extend maturities until at least May 30.” Credit-default swaps linked to Abu Dhabi rose 34.5 basis points to 134.5, according to CMA prices at 4 p.m. in London. The cost of the contracts increased throughout the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia climbing 11.5 to 86.5 basis points and Qatar rising 5.5 basis points to 99, according to CMA DataVision. The cost of Dubai’s contracts is 51 basis points more than for Iceland, where the failure of the banking system triggered the collapse of the currency and economy last year. To contact the reporter on this story: Arif Sharif in Dubai at

热钱大举涌港 香港内地急谋对策

  聚焦1 资金大举东来埋下“超级大炸弹”   □本报驻香港记者 高云岗 潘燕   香港媒体近期持续关注热钱涌港并流入内地的问题。   《香港经济日报》24日报道说,金融海啸后各国政府大松银根,这笔本来是为挽救银行体系的“救命钱”,一年后变成在资产市场兴风作浪的热钱。头戴“新兴”及“亚洲”两顶帽子的中资股则成为热门选择,今年以来,中国股票基金已吸资315亿港元,内地与香港股市新股集资额合共超过2500亿港元。该报当天题为《热钱再涌入资产价涨不停》的一篇报道说,分析人士认为,内地真正担心的是“通胀预期”下所产生的资产价格膨胀问题。今年以来上证指数累计上升超过8成,平均市盈率直逼30倍;内地楼市转趋炽热,部分城市的楼价已升至2007年的水平。在美元贬值、全球流动性泛滥的格局下,热钱有再度大举流入内地的迹象,令资产价格问题更为复杂。   香港金管当局已紧急干预。香港金融管理局24日宣布,将于12月1日、8日、15日、22日及29日举行的投标中增发总值627亿港元外汇基金票据,以应付银行体系流动资金充裕。   同样在24日,香港金管局再向市场注资38.75亿港元,使本周五即27日的香港银行体系结余达3121亿港元,而正常的银行体系结余应为100亿港元左右。   据悉,自去年10月至今年11月中,流入香港的资金高达5675亿港元,香港金管局总裁陈德霖称其为“前所未见,闻所未闻”。为此,金管局大量承接美元沽盘,自去年9月起共向市场注入资金5877亿港元;期间为遏制流动性泛滥,金管局发行了超过3000亿港元外汇基金票据。   大量资金流入香港造成流动性泛滥,会助长资产泡沫的形成。香港恒生指数已自低位累计上升近100%,超过美国标普500指数同期61.6%的升幅;香港楼价飙升特别是“豪宅”创下“天价”,已成为全社会关注的焦点。陈德霖20日撰文说,在全球低息环境和大量游资充斥下,香港明年要面对一个潜在风险,那就是资产价格上升过急,超乎实体经济的支持。   《明报》23日题为《资金大举东来资产泡沫隐患大》的社评说,欧美地区由于经济仍然疲弱,所以维持超低息环境是可以理解的,但背靠内地的香港形势却很不一样。这次金融海啸对香港的影响远低于欧美地区,但由于香港实行联系汇率制度,港元跟美元挂钩,也进而令香港失去自行调节利率的空间。结果,本来经济形势不弱的香港也被迫维持超低息。这样一来,便埋下超宽松货币环境催生资产泡沫的危机。金管局总裁陈德霖表明不担心欧美太早“退市”,反而担心他们太迟“退市”,因为届时香港资产泡沫的风险便会大增。陈德霖说,“防范资产泡沫形成,是香港最大的挑战。”   社评最后提醒说,美元及美息何时转势,没有人可以未卜先知。但几乎可以肯定的是,若不加大调控力度,大量资金涌入香港再加上低息环境,势必令香港资产泡沫愈来愈大,结果为香港经济埋下超级大炸弹。   香港科技大学经济学者雷鼎鸣在接受本报记者采访时表示,热钱涌入香港主要与去年以来欧美量化宽松货币政策向市场释放的大量资金有关。由于当时市场缺乏投资机会,各方面投资风险较大,故大量资金处于“蛰伏”状态。随着市场信心恢复,热钱自今年3月起开始活跃,在推高欧美股市的同时,瞄准香港等复苏势头活跃的经济体并开始大举流入。   中银香港高级经济研究员苏志欣在接受本报记者采访时表示,目前的形势与2004至2007年类似,香港又将成为国际资金热炒人民币升值的热点。美国维持超低利率,内地恢复高增长,美元持续贬值及港元被动贬值,人民币的升值压力,这些因素使得香港成为最易形成资产泡沫的地方,对此风险要有足够的认识和准备。   近期许多香港分析人士指出,热钱涌港,一是推高香港本地股市楼市等资产价格,二是以香港为中转流入内地。在内地货币供应量持续高企、楼市股市泡沫隐现的背景下,大量热钱流入必将继续推高资产价格,加速楼市股市泡沫形成速度;另一方面,外币热钱流入将迫使央行向市场释放大量人民币以进行对冲操作,对通胀形成压力。   雷鼎鸣对本报记者表示,由于香港经济复苏势头不及内地,加之香港楼市及股市容量有限,可以断定境外热钱涌港主要是冲着内地复苏概念而来。他表示,热钱之所以取道香港是因为这里有两大优势:一是资金在香港进出自由,热钱既可以香港股市为平台炒作中资股,借内地复苏概念获利,又可规避内地对海外资金进出的监管,资金流速和安全性相对较好;二是香港与内地有成型的地下资金融通渠道,热钱可以香港为中转流向内地股市楼市套利。   《信报》24日报道说,市场对人民币升值预期促使热钱持续流入香港及内地,导致资产价格飙升。摩根大通中国市场主席李晶表示,香港部分豪宅已经出现泡沫,内地部分城市的楼价也有泡沫化迹象。《信报》的一篇报道引述瑞银、高盛等机构的分析报告说,鉴于美元贬值且境外资本流入增加,人民币面临日益增加的升值压力;如果人民币汇率再一次开始缓慢升值,且未来升值预期进一步提高,可能吸引更多热钱盯上人民币并流入内地,从而导致内地更加难以控制流动性过剩。   聚焦2 跨境手段多样控制热钱难度加大   □本报记者张莫   从香港到内地,伴随着经济的逐渐回暖,热钱再次成为困扰监管部门的一道难题,更多的人正在为“中国热钱之痛如何化解”寻找一个合理的答案。   推升香港热钱规模上涨的因素众多,但终究离不开一个词———“中国因素”。   兴业银行经济学家鲁政委在接受《经济参考报》记者采访时表示,香港市场的冷暖主要受到三个因素的影响:美国市场、东南亚市场以及中国内地市场。不论囤积在香港的海外资金是否直接意在进入内地,其着眼点都是中国市场的短期增长和长期发展。   中国建设银行(6.01,-0.09,-1.48%)高级研究员赵庆明对《经济参考报》记者表示,香港的吸引力在于其资本流动不受管制,是国际资金的自由进出港,且背临中国内地。   “在香港,有很多和人民币相关的金融衍生品,NDF(海外无本金交割)就是其中一种。”鲁政委说。而从数据来看,目前,一年期人民币NDF正在不断走强。   赵庆明说,大部分在香港“趴着”的热钱并不是在进到香港之初就为了借道香港涌到内地,但是这些资金趴在香港,一旦有机会,也不会放过进入内地的可能。   鲁政委说,目前香港的资金进入内地有几个途径。一是在金融危机爆发之后,国家对FDI的相关规定进行了一些修改,国家审核流动资金的难度进一步加大。二是国家为了“保出口”,对出口企业的应收账款、应付账款等管制有所松动,通过贸易渠道将不明资金转移进来的操作更加不易被监管部门察觉。另外,也是很重要的一个途径,就是地下钱庄。   一位业内人士透露,一些金融机构通过货币互换的手段能够实现这种地下钱庄式的“资金转移”,有的规模能达到几亿甚至几十亿人民币。“一些人为了能够把香港的钱倒腾进内地,不惜支付5%的手续费,对于上亿的资金,5%的成本绝对不是小数目。但是,据我了解,大批的人等着要通过这种非法渠道把钱转移到国内来。”这位业内人士说。   “即使大部分囤积在香港的资金没有进入内地,只是在香港市场上炒买炒卖,但是H股和A股的联动性本身这么强,一点点香港市场的风吹草动就会在内地市场上产生泡沫效应。”赵庆明说。   中国社科院世界经济与政治研究所研究员张明撰文指出,内部充裕的流动性加上外部加剧流入的短期国际资本,导致至少未来9个月时间内(在美联储步入加息周期之前),中国国内将面临显著的流动性过剩。过剩的流动性很可能将造成通胀压力或资产价格泡沫。目前市场达成的共识是,受制造业产能过剩以及农产品(12.30,0.27,2.24%)供求大致平衡的影响,在未来较长时期内,通货膨胀率不会显著上升,因此,资产价格泡沫就成为迫在眉睫的风险。   热钱的加速涌入及其带来的风险引起了监管部门的高度重视。据媒体报道,国家外汇管理局相关部门在今年四五月份就对跨境资金流动形势提出预警,称外汇净流入的压力越来越大,应当考虑使用市场手段予以调节。   曾有专家建议通过人民币一次性升值来打消热钱的涌入冲动。“这个想法并不现实,一次性升值的幅度到底为多少才合适?幅度小的话市场的预期仍然不能被打消,幅度大的话中国的外向型企业又没有这个接受能力。”赵庆明说。他指出,人民币从2005年7月汇改以来一直在小步快跑式的升值,但是升值预期随着升值“水涨船高”,所以用升值来解决“升值预期”并不现实。   赵庆明表示,目前针对热钱,监管部门一方面需要尽量分化升值预期,另一方面加强监测。“要加强对热钱进入的灰色渠道的监测和管理,堵住这些可能的路径。目前对中国而言,外需仍然面临不确定性,用汇率的方式来堵住热钱的冲动并不可行。”他说。   聚焦3 热钱引发东亚资产泡沫之忧   □本报记者王云   目前主要发达国家的利率仍然保持低位,过多的流动性在全球涌动,一些新兴经济体成为热钱觊觎的对象。   据路透社报道,亚洲开发银行24日在一份名为“亚洲债券观察”的报告中称,新兴东亚地区经济迅速反弹、货币大幅升值以及利率较高,吸引大量海外投资和资本流入,这可能会造成区内经济不稳定。亚洲开发银行所指的新兴东亚地区包括中国、中国香港、印度尼西亚、韩国、马来西亚、菲律宾、新加坡、泰国和越南。   国际货币基金组织(IMF)首席经济学家布兰查德日前在接受法国《世界报》专访时指出,一些新兴经济体目前有资本流动失控、泡沫成形、储备增加的风险。“这些国家的利率高于发达国家,汇率的压力较大,”布兰查德表示。   美国《华尔街日报》文章指出,对各国政府和央行刺激复苏的举措可能带来不良副作用的担忧正在与日俱增,这种副作用就是在亚洲尤为明显的房地产、股票和外汇市场的资产泡沫。   世界银行此前曾警告说,东亚一夜之间重新涌现出的数十亿美元投资资金增加了对亚洲股市和中国内地、中国香港、新加坡和越南房地产市场资产价格泡沫的担忧。   美国纽约大学斯特恩商学院教授鲁里埃尔·鲁比尼近日为英国《金融时报》撰稿指出,自今年3月以来,各类高风险资产———股票、石油、能源和大宗商品———的价格一直在强劲上扬,新兴市场资产类别(新兴市场股票、债券和货币)的上涨幅度则更大。资产价格大幅上涨的原因受益于近零利率和定量宽松政策带来的一波流动性。但助长这轮资产泡沫的一个更重要的因素,是由所有利差交易之源动力造成的美元疲软。   鲁比尼还表示,美元已成为利差交易的主要融资货币。那些做空美元、以很高的杠杆买入高收益资产和其它全球性资产的投资者,他们简直是在以负利率(年化利率为负10%或负20%)借入美元。利差交易持续的时间越长、规模越大,同时资产泡沫变得越大,那么随后资产泡沫破裂的规模也就越大。美联储和其它政策制定者似乎没有意识到,他们正在制造一个极其可怕的泡沫。他们无视于此的时间越长,市场未来下跌得就越惨。   目前,部分新兴经济体已开始采取措施控制热钱流入。路透社报道,亚洲开发银行区域经济整合办公室高级顾问赤松范隆24日称,若政府或货币当局试图限制资本流入短期流动性领域,他认为这是合理的,因这种流动可能令经济复苏的可持续性遭到破坏。路透社文章说,印尼央行正研究限制外资持有一个月期印尼央行存单(SBI)的可能,作为控制热钱流入的方法之一。赤松对此举表示支持。(经济参考报)

Tuesday, November 24, 2009

Calibrating the Credit Crunch

November 24, 2009 By Richard Berner New York Credit headwinds to growth abating. The credit crunch is not completely over; far from it. This most severe financial crisis since the Great Depression likely will leave lasting scars on risk appetite and a legacy of impaired balance sheets that will take time to repair. Indeed, with housing activity turning lackluster and home prices starting to decline again, consumer sentiment declining, and commercial real estate fraught, it might appear that those scars are resurfacing in weaker activity. But in our view, courtesy in part of aggressive monetary, credit and quantitative easing, the credit headwinds to growth are subsiding. That abatement is evident broadly in funding markets, credit spreads and risky asset prices - indeed, in most indicators except in net credit creation itself. Moreover, we believe that what was a vicious circle of credit losses, tightening lending standards and economic recession is starting to turn virtuous and will gather strength in 2010. The ongoing improvement in financial conditions supports our call for a moderate and bumpy but sustainable recovery, and Fed moves away from an ultra-accommodative monetary policy next year. Two-tier improvement in financial conditions. Despite this improvement, there is a sharp dichotomy in financial conditions that not only makes calibration difficult, but also casts doubt on the basic thesis. Access to and functioning of many parts of the capital markets have improved dramatically. But banks remain relatively reluctant to lend. Consequently, credit availability for households and small businesses still seems to be impaired. But is it really? There's no mistaking the improvement in money and capital markets. Start with the cornerstone for funding and transacting, namely short-term money markets. Thanks to the ongoing effects of strong government backstops for financial institutions, the Fed's and other central banks' liquidity and funding facilities, as well as an unprecedented flood of liquidity, short-term money market spreads are back to pre-crisis levels. Suppliers of term (up to 90-day) unsecured and secured funding are now willing to assume counterparty risk for a few basis points, the ‘basis curve' has normalized to a more traditional upward slope, and haircuts have settled at economically viable levels. Despite the prospect of synchronized fiscal year-ends for both new bank holding companies and their customers, Libor-OIS forwards evince little pressure over the turn of the year. That reflects reduced systemic tail risk in the banking system, conditional commitments by officials to keep policy rates low, and the extension of liquidity facilities through February. But it also reflects genuine improvement in perceived counterparty risk, with higher capital buffers, lower leverage and thus greatly reduced idiosyncratic tail risk. As a result, the use of Fed facilities that carry a penalty rate has steadily dwindled and the Fed this week trimmed the provision of term funding at the discount window, reverting from 90 days to the pre-crisis 28-day repo maximum. Capital markets revival. This funding improvement, coupled with the Fed's securitization facilities and the Treasury's Public-Private Investment Program (PPIP), has revived parts of the capital markets, providing borrowers - including some consumers - with greatly improved access to credit. The Fed's Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF) has breathed life into the asset-backed securities (ABS) market that is critical for financing consumer loan portfolios. To be sure, the government lifeline remains a huge source of support for markets and institutions. Yet so much has the market improved that the utilization of TALF financing has clearly waned. Since the TALF's inception in March, about US$90 billion of securities have come to market. In addition, there is a growing list of non-TALF consumer ABS issuance. My colleague Vishwanath Tiruppatur notes that after months of anticipation, and thanks in part to TALF, we have finally seen new issuance in the commercial mortgage-backed securities (CMBS) market with the Developers Diversified Realty Corp (DDR) transaction (US$400 million of bonds backed by 28 shopping centers in 19 states). The enthusiastic response to the DDR CMBS transaction set a positive tone to the CMBS market, which had been bereft of new issuance for well over a year-and-a-half. The TALF program for legacy CMBS, which has not had as much traction as the consumer ABS version, has nonetheless contributed to increasing liquidity in the secondary markets. Likewise, the so-called public-private investment funds (PPIF) launched under the PPIP umbrella, while still in their initial stage, have resulted in a buying capacity of over US$15 billion and helped buoy secondary markets in non-agency RMBS and CMBS. More traditional corporate borrowers, including many who lacked access to markets a few months ago, have also benefitted from this improvement, as investors flocked back to credit markets. Both the investment grade and high yield debt markets have provided a significantly higher volume of funding this year. Investment grade issuance has reached US$440.6 billion year-to-date versus US$289.8 billion in 2008. And monthly average high yield issuance has nearly quadruped since March to US$19.6 billion. Contracting bank credit: Weak demand. In contrast with these improvements, bank lending is contracting, partly because credit demand is weak. There is strong evidence for weak demand: Businesses are in the time-honored, early-cycle process of deleveraging, as cash flows are far outstripping declining inventories and capex, implying scant need for external funds. Since commercial and industrial (C&I) loans are mainly used to finance working capital and inventories, it should hardly be surprising that C&I loan originations are nil and outstandings are contracting. That is not an impediment to growth, and we expect that loan demand will increase with financing needs next year. Critically, moreover, CFOs are paying down credit lines drawn at the height of the crisis and are ‘terming' out loans by issuing longer-term debt in the capital markets. So businesses are liquidating C&I loans originated months ago. To quote the Fed's October Senior Loan Officer Survey: "In response to a special question on the sources of the decline in C&I lending this year, the two sources domestic banks cited most often as being ‘very' important were decreased originations of term loans and decreased draws on revolving credit lines." That willingness and ability to substitute borrowing in markets for bank loans is healthy and important, because it indicates that larger businesses are confident enough to issue longer-term debt and have the flexibility to fund their needs even when bank lending standards are tight. For their part, consumers are also deleveraging in a process that is proceeding rapidly, but likely has another 12-18 months to run. Repairing consumer balance sheets is a difficult, but ultimately constructive development. Looking more closely, some of the demand-driven deleveraging is voluntary and prudent, reflecting wealth losses and recession-induced uncertainty. But some of the change is involuntary and immediate, as defaults, the credit crunch and income losses squeeze consumers and businesses. Of course, looking to loans outstanding does not help identify these cross-currents in credit; arithmetically, the change in outstandings reflects the sum of new originations, repayments and defaults (net charge-offs), each of which has demand and supply elements. But also supply restraint. We also have strong evidence that constrained supply, or reduced availability of credit, continues to play a role in the contraction of bank credit. Banks continue to tighten the terms on which they grant credit and the standards for most loan types. Collateral requirements or downpayments are higher, spreads over benchmark funding costs are wider, covenants are more stringent, and maturities are shorter. Small wonder: Credit losses in 2007 and 2008 eroded the capital base for leveraged lenders, promoting the credit crunch. In turn, an ‘adverse feedback loop' from the credit crunch to the economy and back to credit losses promoted a deleveraging of the financial system that pushed the US economy into recession. Despite the incipient economic recovery, delinquencies and charge-offs continue to rise, lagging behind the economy in time-honored cyclical fashion. Moreover, policy uncertainty is likely contributing to banker caution. As Fed Chairman Bernanke noted this week, cautious banks are holding much larger cash buffers than before the crisis. We suspect that uncertainty about capital and liquidity regulations is making lenders more conservative. And changes to accounting rules under FAS 166/167 will require banks to bring conduits, securitized credit card and other assets back onto their balance sheets at the start of 2010. Looking further ahead, commercial real estate developers face US$2.6 trillion in maturing debt that must either be rolled over or paid down over the next five years. Listening to loan officers: Pace matters. Although improvement in capital markets is an offset to bank credit restraint, the substitution is only partial. As a result, the ominous litany of bank credit headwinds at first sounds inconsistent with a moderate recovery. The key to reconciling the two is pace: For example, the Fed's Senior Loan Officer Survey indicates that banks were still tightening lending standards in October, but at a significantly slower pace. To quote the October Survey: In the October survey, domestic banks indicated that they continued to tighten standards and terms over the past three months on all major types of loans to businesses and households. However, the net percentages of banks that tightened standards and terms for most loan categories continued to decline from the peaks reached late last year. The cumulative tightening in standards affects the level of lending or activity, but it is pace (or the proportion of respondents tightening) that matters for growth. Correspondingly, tight lending standards are still depressing the level of lending and thus output relative to what they would otherwise be, but their effect on growth is abating. To be sure, the Senior Loan Officer Survey results are presented as a diffusion index, and readings greater than zero mean that more banks are tightening standards than easing. The survey is qualitative, not quantitative, so we don't know how to calibrate the difference between tightened ‘considerably' and ‘somewhat'. Thus, empirical work is needed to quantify the impact. Empirical evidence. Updating past empirical work by Fed researchers supports our conclusions: Given aggressive policy stimulus and the healing in capital markets, the recent slower pace of tightening bank lending standards is consistent with slower declines in bank lending and an improving economy. Two studies pioneered in examining the relationship between the proportion of lenders changing standards and loan and economic growth. They show that changes in loan standards have a strong correlation with loan volume and business activity: Tighter standards trigger events resembling credit crunch, easier standards promote recovery. Importantly, the proportion of lenders changing standards (the numerical level of the survey responses) influences growth in loans and output. Our replication and updating of these results revealed a striking development: The influence of changes in lending standards on loan growth increased over time and became much more statistically significant. In contrast, the influence of such changes on output or demand, while important, was relatively stable over time. For example, for the periods ending 1998 or 2000, the Fed and we estimate that a 10 percentage point change in standards, other things equal, allows a 0.6 percentage point change in business loan growth. Extending the results to 3Q09, we find that a 10-point drop in the proportion of banks tightening standards allows a one-point increase in business lending growth - nearly half again more sensitivity as in the earlier period. And the statistical precision of the estimate more than doubled. In contrast, our work and others' suggests that the effects of changes in lending standards on business activity are relatively stable over time. For example, other things equal, a six-point drop in the proportion of banks tightening mortgage lending standards will promote a one-percentage-point increase in housing demand. Estimates by Macroeconomic Advisers suggest that a 10-point increase in banks' willingness to lend would yield a 0.3 percentage point increase in PCE. These empirical results underscore three important developments. First, despite the steady disintermediation of banks and other depository institutions, the availability or supply of bank credit - proxied here by changes in bank credit standards - has an important effect on bank loan and economic growth. Second, the recent increased sensitivity of bank credit growth to changes in lending standards probably reflects the increased availability of credit through the capital markets through 2007. In other words, when banks tighten standards but markets are still functioning, borrowers may turn to other sources of credit, and banks lose market share. Third, however, systemic shocks that promote deleveraging across banks and capital markets will result in deep and lasting recessions. Positive but bumpy outlook. In our view, the reversal of those systemic shocks is now promoting recovery, and renewed gloom about the economy and concerns about an intensifying credit crunch are overdone. While uncertainty about the economy and policy are creating borrower and lender hesitation, we see a positive feedback loop developing from financial conditions to the economy that will promote a sustainable recovery in 2010 and 2011 (see Hiring Still Poised to Improve Early in 2010, November 9, 2009). In particular, we and our large-cap bank analyst Betsy Graseck believe that bank risk appetite will improve as uncertainty over capital and liquidity requirements dissipates; this uncertainty should lift when regulators release capital and liquidity proposals in early 2010. In addition, banks are currently holding excess liquidity in part to show the breadth of resources they have available to repay TARP loans. As growth in bank earnings accumulates, and banks repay those loans, the excess liquidity will likely translate into securities purchases and loan growth.

GDP Growth Revised Lower to 2.8%

By LUCA DI LEO and JEFF BATER The U.S. economy's recovery wasn't as strong as earlier believed, the government said Tuesday, revising its third-quarter numbers to show a wider trade deficit and lower consumer spending than previously estimated. Gross domestic product rose at a 2.8% annual rate July through September after falling by 0.7% in the second quarter, the Commerce Department reported. A month ago, the department first estimated that GDP rose by an annual 3.5% in the third quarter. The new figure was in line with forecasts. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires were expecting the GDP revision to show growth of 2.7%. Although the data confirmed that the economy expanded for the first time in more than a year as the government's stimulus boosted consumer spending, the latest report showed that motor vehicles spending in September was lower than had been estimated. Overall consumer spending rose a quarterly 2.9% in the third quarter and contributed 2.1 percentage points to GDP at annual rates, the new figures show. That compares to earlier estimates that spending had risen a quarterly 3.4% and contributed 2.4 percentage points to GDP. A wider trade deficit, with an upward revision to imports offsetting an upward revision to exports, and lower nonresidential business investments also contributed to the lower third-quarter GDP number. Still, the rise in GDP was the first since the second quarter of 2008 and the strongest in nearly two years. The U.S. is emerging from its worst recession since the Great Depression. Persistently high unemployment and a fading government stimulus, however, are expected to keep a lid on consumer spending, a key growth engine in the world's largest economy. A survey released Monday by the National Association for Business Economics showed that 48 forecasters from companies and academia expect the U.S. recovery to firm in 2010, but that unemployment won't fall until the second half of next year. The economy should expand by 2.9% in 2010 thanks to strength in the housing sector and business investments, after contracting 2.4% this year, the NABE survey said. That compares with a forecast made Oct. 24 that GDP would rise by 2.6% next year. Home resales leaped to the highest rate in more than two years during October as buyers emboldened by a big tax credit pushed aside fears of unemployment, data showed Monday. As a result, analysts at Macroeconomic Advisers upped their fourth-quarter GDP forecast slightly to an annual 3.1%. But with more than 7.3 million jobs lost since December 2007, 61% of the NABE panelists said they don't expect a complete recovery in the jobs market until 2012. A jobless rate at a 26-year high of 10.2% in October is expected to keep a lid on consumer spending. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke last week warned the U.S. may be at risk of a so-called "jobless recovery", in which output is growing but employment doesn't increase. The government's first estimate of fourth-quarter GDP -- and for 2009 as a whole -- will be released Jan 29. The final estimate for third-quarter GDP will be published Dec. 22. Most Fed officials have underscored in recent weeks that interest rates will stay close to a record low near zero for some time due to a fragile recovery and low inflation. Tuesday's report showed gauges measuring third-quarter price inflation were subdued. The government's price index for personal consumption increased 2.7% in July through September, compared to the previously estimated 2.8% climb and the second quarter's 1.4% rise. The core PCE gauge, which excludes volatile food and energy prices, increased 1.3% in the third quarter, compared to the previously estimated 1.4% climb and the second quarter's 2.0% rise. The Fed is set to release its new economic forecasts for inflation, growth and unemployment later Tuesday. Write to Luca Di Leo at and Jeff Bater at

Monday, November 23, 2009


新华社昨日授权刊发11月3日国务院总理温家宝在首都科技界大会上的讲话。在这篇长达1.2万字的文章中,温家宝回顾了近代中国错过的四次科技发展机遇,并指出了中国战略性新兴产业的选择标准和方向。   这四次发展机遇分别是:第一次是当欧洲工业革命迅速发展的时候,我们正处于所谓“康乾盛世”。“天朝上国”的盲目自尊和“禁海令”,关上了中国通往世界的大门。第二次是1840年鸦片战争以后,西方列强的坚船利炮打开了清朝的大门,洋务派发动“师夷长技以制夷”的自强运动,但因落后的封建制度和对近代科学技术认识的肤浅终告失败。第三次是20世纪上半叶,由于军阀混战及外敌入侵,使中国失去了科学救国和实业救国的机遇。第四次是“文化大革命”时期。   温家宝表示,20世纪上半叶,发生了以量子力学和相对论为核心的物理学革命,加上其后的宇宙大爆炸模型、DNA双螺旋结构、板块构造理论、计算机科学,这六大科学理论的突破,共同确立了现代科学体系的基本结构。自从20世纪下半叶以来,尽管知识呈快速增长的态势,但是基本表现为对现有科学理论的完善,没有能够出现与这六大革命性的科学突破相提并论的理论成就或重大发现。从这个意义上说,“科学的沉寂”至今已经有六十余年了。   温家宝表示,科学选择战略性新兴产业非常关键。选对了就能跨越发展,选错了将会贻误时机。战略性新兴产业必须掌握关键核心技术,具有市场需求前景,具备资源能耗低、带动系数大、就业机会多、综合效益好的特征。目前我国经济运行中的最大困难,就是外部需求急剧减少,而且将来在相当长的时间也很难恢复到危机之前的水平。   他表示,选择战略性新兴产业的科学依据最重要的有三条:一是产品要有稳定并有发展前景的市场需求;二是要有良好的经济技术效益;三是要能带动一批产业的兴起。   新能源 突出清洁能源和可再生能源   中国在调整能源结构、提高能源资源利用效率、应对气候变化方面,已经并将继续作出积极努力。新能源发展要突出清洁能源和可再生能源,包括水电、核电、风力发电、太阳能发电、沼气发电,以及地热利用、煤的洁净利用等。   新材料 形成新材料与智能绿色制造体系   目前,中国许多基础原材料以及工业产品的产量位居世界前列,但是高性能的材料、核心部件和重大装备严重依赖于进口,关键技术受制于人。必须加快微电子和光电子材料和器件、新型功能材料、高性能结构材料、纳米材料和器件等领域的科技攻关,尽快形成具有世界先进水平的新材料与智能绿色制造体系。   生命科学 10年实现优良品种的显著改良   要发展转基因育种技术,这是提高农业产量和改善产品质量的重要途径。科学家建议超前部署分子设计育种,大规模挖掘动植物种质中蕴藏的优异基因资源。这样,中国10年左右就可能实现小麦、水稻等主要农作物和猪、牛、羊等主要牲畜的优良品种的显著改良。   生物医药 力争在干细胞研究领域取得领先地位   要把生命科学前沿、高新技术手段与传统医学优势结合起来,研发适应多发性疾病和新发传染病防治要求的创新药物,突破应用面广、需求量大的基本医疗器械关键核心技术,形成以创新药物研发和先进医疗设备制造为龙头的医药研发产业链,大幅度提升生物医药产业的国际竞争力。我们要力争在干细胞研究的更多领域取得领先地位,同时要高度重视、切实防范干细胞研究引发的伦理问题。   信息网络 突破传感网、物联网关键技术   全球互联网正在向下一代升级,传感网和物联网方兴未艾。“智慧地球”简单说来就是物联网与互联网的结合,就是传感网在基础设施和服务领域的广泛应用。我们要着力突破传感网、物联网的关键技术,及早部署后IP时代相关技术研发,使信息网络产业成为推动产业升级、迈向信息社会的“发动机”。   空间海洋开发 加强海岸带可持续发展研究   我们要实施好“载人航天计划”和“嫦娥计划”,有效进入并和平利用空间。中国是一个海洋大国,海洋资源开发和海洋产业发展是“蓝色聚宝盆”。国际上正兴起海岸带可持续发展研究,我们要切实加强这方面的工作。   地质勘探 提高资源勘探开采水平和效益   在地球深部资源探测方面,中国已有固体矿产勘探开采的深度大都小于500米,而世界一些矿业大国已经达到2500米到4000米,南非计划开采的深度达到6000米。澳大利亚在本世纪初率先提出“玻璃地球”计划,也就是要使地下1000米变得“透明”。加拿大人近期提出的类似计划,要搞到3000米。中国人均资源短缺,资源勘探水平不高,开采利用率也比较低,这是制约未来经济发展的突出矛盾。我们要千方百计提高资源勘探开采水平和效益,充分挖掘和利用好各类资源。

Saturday, November 21, 2009

The State's Take

--US and Industries countries tend to tax more in income while BRIC, especially China and Indian tends to tax more on consumption.
--The chart lists the revenue sources of major countries.
Nov 19th 2009 From The Economist print edition Governments differ dramatically in how they tax—and how much they raise THANKS to the collateral damage from the financial crisis, government deficits have surged across the rich world. Once the recovery is entrenched this fiscal deterioration will need to be tackled. Although spending cuts could, and should, be the preferred route to prudence, taxes are all too likely to be part of the mix—at least judging from the experience of those countries that have already acted. Spain will raise its value-added tax rate (VAT) from 16% to 18%. Ireland has raised its top income tax rate from 41% to 46%. In both Britain and America current law promises higher future tax rates on wealthier folk. The economic consequences of raising taxes will depend not just on the scale of the tax increase, but also on how the revenue is raised. The less efficient the type of taxation, the greater the burden on the economy. There is already striking variation in the size of the state and the structure of taxation, both among advanced economies, and between them and their emerging counterparts. Comparing countries’ tax takes can offer useful clues to the most efficient ways to raise funds in future. The table above compares government revenue and its sources for some of the world’s biggest rich and emerging economies. The state looms largest in France, where almost 50% of GDP flowed through the government’s coffers in 2007 (the most recent year for which statistics comparable across all countries exist). In China, in contrast, government revenue accounts for less than 20% of GDP. Broadly speaking, total government revenues (including both central and local) are a bigger share of the economy in continental Europe than in Anglo-Saxon economies, and are higher in richer economies than in poorer ones without generous social safety-nets. But not all emerging economies have a low tax burden. At almost 35% of GDP, Brazil’s government revenue is bigger relative to the size of its economy than America’s. Taxes of varying kinds form the bulk of governments’ revenues. But non-tax receipts—such as profits from state-owned enterprises—are often significant sources of cash, especially for commodity exporters. Russia’s overall government revenue, which includes oil proceeds, is almost 50% of GDP. Its tax take is closer to 30%. These broad ratios suggest that there is less room to increase taxes in Europe than elsewhere. But they mask big differences in how governments raise their funds. Anglo-Saxon economies tend to rely most on income taxes (on wages, profits and capital gains). In Australia 60% of tax revenue is raised from such levies. In America it is almost 50%. Most governments gain the bulk of their income-tax revenue from individuals, though in both Japan and South Korea almost half the total is extracted from firms. Contrary to popular perception, European countries rely much less on corporate taxes than America does. European countries reap a bigger share of revenue from payroll taxes and other social contributions, as well as from indirect taxes on spending. France and Germany gain more than 40% of their tax take from social contributions and around a quarter from expenditure taxes, particularly VAT. America, the only industrial country without a VAT, gets only a sixth of its government revenue from expenditure taxes, most of that through sales taxes at the state and local level. Brazil’s tax structure roughly mirrors that of European countries, while China and India raise more money from indirect taxes than any other big economies. Over 60% of China’s central government tax revenue comes from expenditure taxes. How best to inflict pain Which of these combinations is best for economic growth? In theory, expenditure taxes are better than income taxes, since they do not punish saving. Flat tax-rates on a broad base are less distortive than high marginal rates on a narrow base. By the same token, taxes on things that cannot be moved easily, such as property, are less distortive than taxes on mobile economic agents, particularly firms. Among expenditure taxes, a flat tax-rate on final goods is less distortive than a panoply of excise taxes since it affects spending decisions less. (That said, sometimes, such as with carbon taxes, the goal is to influence decisions.) An analysis of the relationship between tax structure and growth in 21 rich countries between 1970 and 2004 by Jens Arnold of the OECD bears out these theoretical insights. He found property taxes were the least damaging to growth, followed by consumption taxes. Income taxes were the least growth-friendly, especially those levied on firms. The study suggests that shifting tax revenues from income to consumption and property taxes could have a significant impact on GDP per head. Most tax systems have become more growth-friendly in recent decades. The top rate of marginal income tax in OECD economies, for instance, has fallen from an average of almost 70% in 1981 to just over 40%, with the biggest declines in Japan and America. Still, America’s tax system stands out as one of the least efficient. The heavy reliance on income taxation is compounded by the narrowness of the tax base, thanks to oodles of complexity-inducing deductions. Though Europeans still rely too much on job-deterring social contributions, they have been able to extract higher revenues overall thanks to greater use of more efficient taxes, especially VAT. Expenditure taxes are not always well designed, however, particularly in federal countries. Brazil has long been trying to reform its VAT, which is levied in a fragmented manner at the state rather than national level. India, too, is trying to reform its potpourri of expenditure taxes. China’s heavy reliance on consumption taxes may not be optimal in an economy that saves too much and spends too little. Nor is tax policy only about efficiency. Politicians also care about fairness and political appeal. Property taxes may be non-distorting, but they are deeply unpopular with voters. Tax progressivity is often at odds with efficiency. A VAT, for instance, falls disproportionately on poorer people who spend a higher share of their income than richer folk. Thanks to its reliance on income taxes, America—by some measures—has the most progressive tax system in the OECD. Different countries will always strike different compromises between efficiency, fairness and simplicity. But as their debt burdens rise, the world’s big rich economies would do well to focus most on efficiency.

Friday, November 20, 2009

Russia Joins Push to Curb Speculators

Commodity Exporters Like Brazil, Indonesia Seek Currency Stability; 'Tobin Tax' Solution? By IRA IOSEBASHVILI Russia is considering ways to discourage speculative currency traders from driving up the ruble exchange rate, including a tax on cross-border currency transactions, a central-bank official said Thursday. Such a plan would put Russia in line with other commodity-exporting economies including Brazil and Indonesia, which view inflows of speculative money as a threat to the profitability of their raw-materials exporters. "We need to develop an effective way of controlling cross-border transactions, something similar to the Tobin tax," said First Deputy Central Bank Chairman Alexei Ulyukayev. Russia would enact such measures only after extensive discussions, Mr. Ulyukayev said at a conference on the ruble in Moscow. Nobel Prize-winning economist James Tobin proposed a tax on foreign-currency transactions in order to reduce exchange-rate volatility after the 1971 collapse of the Bretton Woods exchange-rate system. Since then, Mr. Tobin's intent has been broadened in policy debate to include wider taxes on financial transactions of other types. In Brazil, Thursday was the effective date of the government's new tax on Brazilian stocks traded as American depositary receipts. Brazilian Finance Minister Guido Mantega has said the 1.5% tax on ADRs is part of a bigger effort to stem appreciation of the real, which has gained 36% against the dollar so far this year. Last month, Brazil imposed a 2% tax on foreign portfolio investments into fixed-income and equity accounts. South Korea announced on Thursday several measures aimed at helping local firms better manage foreign-exchange risks and reducing imbalances that have made its market susceptible to bouts of volatility. To slow the ruble's appreciation, the Russian central bank bought about $21 billion of foreign currency in October and the first half of November, while lowering the country's refinancing rate by 3.5 percentage points this year to an all-time low of 9.5%. The measures have done little to stop the ruble, which has risen by 10% against the dollar since September. An Indonesian central banker said this month that the country would consider similar controls. Taiwan in November banned foreign funds from investing in time deposits in an effort to deter currency speculation. In September, Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, hoping to encourage investment, said the country wouldn't reintroduce capital controls, which were abandoned in 2006. Officials and economists have warned that such tools come with dangers. "Measures designed to limit risk are necessary, but there is no need to go overboard, because then you risk distorting the pricing mechanism," said Konstantin Korishchenko, the head of Micex, the country's largest stock exchange. It isn't likely that any country would unilaterally introduce a Tobin tax, because transactions would simply migrate to another tax jurisdiction, said Rory MacFarquhar, chief economist at Goldman Sachs in Moscow. Still, he said, Russia's central bank "does have the tools to make it more expensive for banks to borrow abroad." Wednesday, the central bank Chairman Sergei Ignatyev discussed "soft" options for dealing with speculative capital, including limiting foreign borrowing by state-owned firms. Capital is unlikely to stop flowing into Russia anytime soon, as investor concerns about oil prices and Kremlin policy dissipate, said Chris Weafer, Uralsib chief strategist. "Russia is now in a favorable position, and funds are moving to increase their exposure to a more substantial overweight," he said. The steps Thursday by South Korea's Financial Services Commission follow a draft plan in September and mark an effort to reduce the risk of swings in currency rates driven by South Korean firms hedging foreign cash flows and managing foreign liabilities. The FSC aims to have the rules take effect early next year. The FSC will limit the size of forward transactions that companies can enter in the foreign-exchange market to a total of no more than 125% of the revenue they are hedging.


  今年9月,国家主席胡锦涛在联合国气候变化峰会上提出,中国将大力发展可再生能源和核能,争取到2020年非化石能源占一次能源消费比重达到15%左右。前不久,国务院总理温家宝向首都科技界发表题为《让科技引领中国可持续发展》的讲话,强调要高度重视和发展新能源产业等新兴战略性产业。   然而,也是在前不久,多晶硅、风电设备和钢铁、水泥等产能过剩的传统产业一起,出现在国务院的调控"黑名单"中。这在社会上引起很大反响。   人们在关注:在化石能源逐渐枯竭、环境代价日益受到重视的今天,中国新能源产业如何走上健康有序的可持续发展之路,新能源面临着怎样的发展前景和瓶颈制约?   过剩的是设备产能,并不是新能源   新能源又称非常规能源,包括传统能源之外的各种能源形式。我国有关部门把新能源界定为风能、太阳能、生物质能、核能等新的能源,以及对传统的能源进行技术变革所形成的新的能源,比如对煤炭的清洁高效利用、车用新型燃料等。   最近几年,特别是2006年1月1日《可再生能源法》实施以来,我国的新能源产业取得较快发展。   渤海之滨,山东东营,中凯风电设备制造有限公司2008年5月在这里建厂投产,当年年底产值8700万元、利润1700万元,今年底产值将达5亿元、利润将达6000万元。"当初真没有想到发展这么快。"中凯公司董事长、东营市新能源协会会长王金源说,"明年10亿产值、1个亿利润没有问题,订单已经接到明年了。"   王金源更没有想到国内风电设备产能扩张速度如此惊人。   近年来,我国风电产业快速发展,风力发电装机容量连续4年翻番。与此同时,出现了风电设备投资一哄而上、重复引进和重复建设现象。目前,我国风电机组整机制造企业超过80家,2010年我国风电装备产能将超过2000万千瓦,而每年风电装机规模只有1000万千瓦左右。   值得注意的是,这80家企业指的是整机制造企业,还不包括风力发电设备的叶片、变速箱、塔架等零部件生产企业。   光伏产业的基础材料多晶硅,也出现了类似情况。2008年我国多晶硅产能2万吨,产量4000吨左右,在建产能高达约8万吨,产能明显过剩。另外,多晶硅属于高耗能产品,我国光伏发电市场发展缓慢,国内生产的太阳能电池98%用于出口,相当于大量输出国内紧缺的能源。   9月26日,国务院发出《批转发展改革委等部门关于抑制部分行业产能过剩和重复建设引导产业健康发展若干意见的通知》,多晶硅和风电设备被列入应"调控和引导"的行业。这一通知明确:新建多晶硅项目规模必须大于3000吨/年,到2011年前淘汰综合电耗大于200千瓦时/千克的多晶硅产能;原则上不再核准或备案建设新的风电设备整机制造厂。   怎样看待这个问题?记者采访的多位专家强调,这样的调整有利于行业长远健康发展。不过,要注意别把多晶硅和风电设备等同于新能源,部分设备产能过剩,并不是新能源过剩。   此外,专家认为,多晶硅和风电设备制造存在的是"潜在的产能过剩",不少企业准备进入或刚刚进入,还没有真正形成产能。对待"小荷才露尖尖角"的新能源产业,既不能"捧杀",也不能"棒杀"。   目前,无论装机容量还是实际发电量,新能源所占的比例还相当小。就拿发展最快的风电来说,虽然目前全国风电装机容量已居世界第四位,风电装机达到1600万千瓦,但在全国8亿多千瓦总装机量中只占不到2%;我国风力发电量只占总发电量0.4%左右,而丹麦风力发电量占总发电量25%,西班牙占11%。可再生能源学会副理事长、高级工程师孟宪淦认为,"这样一个数字,不可能过热!"   国家发改委能源研究所副所长李俊峰指出,国务院通知中并没有说新能源过剩了,并没有限制高水平建设,限制的是低水平重复建设。比如,综合电耗220千瓦时/千克的多晶硅产能不批了,但电耗150千瓦时/千克的项目还是支持的。   左脚迈出去,右脚要及时跟上来   普遍认为,我国新能源资源丰富、潜力巨大,发展新能源可以收到"一石三鸟"的效果:一是应对当前国际金融危机,扩大内需、拉动投资、增加就业;二是应对气候变化,调整能源结构,推动能源可持续发展;三是抢占未来经济发展的制高点,提升中国能源的国际竞争力。   新能源前景看好,怎样才能实现又好又快地发展?   科技部部长万钢表示,在研发、推广新能源的时候,要注意协调性。就像一个人走路一样,当你左脚迈出去,右脚还没有跟上来时,不能说左脚迈得太远,关键是右脚要跟上。   解决好电网制约难题,是新能源"右脚"能否迈出去的关键因素之一。目前,电网瓶颈成为新能源发展中的一个突出问题。我国的风资源集中西北、华北和东北这"三北"地区,很多地方经济不发达,处于主干电网的末端。另外,风能和太阳能发电受气候条件影响较大,具有间歇性、随机性的特点,不具备传统水电、火电的可控性、稳定性,因此在接入现行电网时遇到了不少困难。在内蒙古、甘肃局部地区,由于不能及时上网发电,出现了风机建成后"晒太阳"的现象。   对此,有关部门和单位正在努力加快电网建设速度、提高电网覆盖面、发展智能电网及储能技术,为新能源大规模并网创造条件。国家能源局新能源和可再生能源司副司长史立山说,"虽然现在做了一些研究,但政策上、技术上都还没有得到很好的解决。"   制约新能源大规模发展的另一个原因是价格偏高。目前,风力发电电价约为一度电五六毛钱,太阳能发电电价约为一度电1元多,虽然已经有了大幅度的下降,但和水电、火电比起来价格仍然要贵不少,在与传统能源的竞争中处于劣势。   "靠市场自己发展时间会很长,需要政府推动、政策支持,还要做很多研究和探讨工作。"史立山说。目前我国已建立了可再生能源电价附加资金制度,收取一度电2厘钱的电价附加,扶持可再生能源发展,一年大约征收40亿元。要促进可再生能源及新能源未来大规模发展,这笔资金还远远不够。史立山等专家建议,可以考虑征收能源税、碳税,专项用于补贴新能源研发;此外,要加强科研,通过科技的不断进步来降低新能源的成本,形成规模化、产业化。   保定英利集团首席战略官马学禄则认为,新能源的价格在逐渐下降,而目前化石能源的环境资源成本是没有完全算在其价格里面的,"如果充分考虑到环境资源成本,二者的价格对比情况会发生重大变化。"   新能源产业发展不能走老路,要研发、拥有核心技术   "谁掌握可再生能源谁领导21世纪。"今年2月,美国总统奥巴马在国会发表上任后首次演讲,呼吁加强对清洁能源的投资,并重申将在3年内使美国的可再生能源产量翻一番。奥巴马政府把绿色能源作为"美国复兴和再投资计划"的重要内容,将投入上千亿美元支持新能源技术的研发和推广。   面对气候变化等全球性环境问题的挑战,世界各国特别是发达国家,把开发新能源等清洁能源、减少化石能源的使用和温室气体排放放在重要战略地位,纷纷提出了新能源发展蓝图及目标。中东的石油生产大国,也开始发展风电、太阳能等新能源。   李俊峰说,发展新能源等清洁能源,中国是世界上最积极的国家之一。目前,我国正在修订《可再生能源法》,编制新能源产业发展规划,推进这一新兴战略性产业加快发展。规划提出,到2020年,太阳能发电、风电、核电装机目标将比2007年提出的规划目标成倍增长。   当前,全国许多省区市都出现新能源发展热潮,100多个城市提出建设新能源基地。然而,我们在大力发展新能源的同时,也要保持清醒的头脑--新能源还远没有到"唱主角"的时候。回顾世界能源发展的历史,每一次能源转型,都要经历艰巨、长期的发展过程。尽管石油和煤炭等化石能源是导致全球气候变暖的原因之一,但世界对化石能源的依赖将长期存在,未来数十年新能源都难以占据主流地位。   值得注意的是,当前国内很多新能源企业在走老路,没有核心竞争力,只是拼成本、拼价格。"没有核心竞争力是做不长的,和贴牌做耐克鞋没有什么区别。"广东高空风能技术公司董事长张建军说。   中国可再生能源学会投融资委员会负责人李峰认为,新能源产业发展的关键是要走自己的路,突破核心技术,培养国际竞争力。   他举例说,风力发电机有永磁直驱等不同技术路线,欧洲不做直驱,主要原因是缺稀土材料,而中国有丰富的稀土资源,利用稀土材料开发永磁直驱技术具有得天独厚的优势,就不必照搬欧洲的技术。   专家提醒说,对传统能源煤炭的清洁高效利用不可忽视,这也属于新能源的范畴。中国富煤、少油、贫气,一次能源中69%靠煤,发电量的80%以上来自火电。在相当长的时间内,中国以煤为主的能源结构都很难改变,解决能源问题的关键是如何清洁高效利用好煤。如果整体煤气化 (000968 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖)联合循环等技术取得突破,前景将非常广阔,对解决我国能源的可持续发展问题意义重大。(刘毅 人民日报)

Thursday, November 19, 2009


  周小川是在当天由商业周刊举行的《2009全球CEO年会》上作出上述表示的。   以下是演讲全文:   周小川:各位与会代表大家好!受中国企业联合会和《商业周刊》邀请参加今天的CEO论坛。   选一个什么题目给大家讲一讲,考虑了一下觉得还应该是金融界怎么为实体经济做好服务。金融危机以来,大家在对抗金融危机的政策制定过程中会观察到有不同的现象,有的地方财政当局和货币当局向金融体系注入了大量的资金,但是资金没有非常有效地来支持实体经济的发展。因此,大家可能比较担心就业和其他方面所产生的问题。   中国也是非常关心这件事情的,出现的情况稍微有些不一样,今年的信贷总额增长是非常快的,应该说有效地支持了实体经济的发展。如何能够进一步探讨这方面的制度和政策原因,我讲三点:   第一,金融体系能否更好地为实体经济服务,一个关键因素是金融机构自己本身的健康性。   金融机构如果在危机中自己生了重病,就会住医院治疗,修复自己的资产负债表,考虑怎么充实自己的资本金,怎么能够消化自己的有毒资产。在这种情况下,对实体经济支持的考虑就有可能受到影响,自己的能量也可能受到影响。因此首先要保持金融经济的健康性,有几个方面是最重要的。   1、资本。金融危机的出现都是消耗资本的,资本没有了,根据健康性的标准和监管的标准都不能更好地为实体经济服务。   2、有毒资产(不良资产)。不良资产在危机期间肯定会比较明显地上升,同时也在消耗资本。   3、杠杆率,也就是融资的方式。在正常情况下和在危机的情况下,融资的条件是不一样的。   像人一样,健康的问题都是有周期性变化的,很多人都是隔几年会生一次病,或者10年会生一场病,很难事先做到预防。中国有一个好处,亚洲金融危机期间我们的金融体系是受到了重挫的,有大量的信托投资公司、信用社、中小金融机构关门倒闭。大家都记得,当年比较出名的广国投的关闭,粤海的充足,在那个时间花了很大精力解决健康性问题。   从商业银行的角度来看,不良资产正式宣布的数在亚洲金融危机期间是25%,已经非常高了,实际比这个数还高,因为当时还有标准的问题,比如贷款分类标准和会计标准的执行问题。我们有一个好处在亚洲金融风波刚刚开始恢复的时候,启动了一轮注资和股份化制改革,改善公司结构。这一轮改革之后我们遇到了这次全球金融危机,正好中国大型金融机构资本金是充足的。加上这几年经济发展比较好,从健康的角度来看是有能力继续向实体经济提供有效服务的,同时没有出现太大的拖后腿的现象。   大家还要保持警惕,这一轮问题很好,这一轮情况好,并不意味着以后就安全了,就像人一样,以后还是会得病的,得病的原因之一有时是放松了警惕,对自己的健康考虑不周到,也容易生病。   第二,有关央行的政策制定。   对于金融社会来讲,要保持金融系统向实体经济提供服务的压力和动力。从压力情况来讲,一方面是竞争,竞争就会产生压力,除了竞争之外还也价格。这次危机过程中我们也观察到利率,特别是存款利率过低或者将近零利率有时就会减少金融机构向实体经济进行服务的压力。我们在危机最开始的时候发现有一些金融机构囤积现金,主要原因是因为解决区域杠杆化的问题,可能资金来源不可靠,别人不再提供或者不给他融资,尽管现金的成本可能是高的,但有很多金融机构有囤积现金的现象。   之后宏观调控当局向金融市场投入了大量的流动性,还有囤积现金的现象,也就是手里有大量的流动性的资金,但与此同时也非常谨慎地向实体经济放贷和提供融资。里面有多种多样的原因,其中一个原因是负债方的利率太低,囤积也不会占用太多资源,不放出去压力也不大。针对中国我们也考虑到这样的现象,存款利率已经降到2%,再降下去究竟对金融体系是好还是不好。活期存款已经很低了,金融市场短期拆借利率也很低,但定期存款一年期还在2%左右。这当然也有好处,金融机构拿到了存款就一定要考虑用出去,因为要付2%给储户,这样就有压力,一定想办法把资金运用出去。这就使得金融机构能够看到为实体经济服务的时候得到收入、得到利润,能够充实自己,在利差方面还要保持一定的水平。特别是对于发展中国家来说,由于整个经济体系中产生不良资产的机会还是比较多的,有时市场还不成熟,银行体系需要有一定的利差,使得它为实体经济服务的时候自己也能够得到加强。   这一点通过股份制改革、公司治理的改革得到了加强,商业性金融机构都有相当强的获取利润的动机。首先考虑股东利益,因为现在都是股份制的公司,要考虑为股东创造利润。其次考虑自己的持续性。因为随着资产不断增长,必须不断地补充自己的资本金,相当一部分来自于自己本身创造的利润。再次考虑在这样的过程中要增强拨备,对风险的应对。所有这些通过上一轮的改革都有助于他们持有强烈的利润方面的动力,这个动力也和利率政策的制定使得他们保持在这方面的动力有关系。考虑他们和实体经济之间的关系,把资金运用出去就会获得好处。   相反来说,如果利差过小,国际上有一些金融机构,机构内部部门之间的关系会发生变化。可能大家觉得信贷赚钱太少没意思,还是交易部门赚钱,人也不多,结果交易部门膨胀的很厉害,信贷部门处于萎缩的状态。这就需要我们考虑在金融市场的结构上、政策上等各个方面如何保持金融部门向实体经济服务的压力和动力以及其中还有的价格机制。   第三,这一轮中国克服金融危机一个重要的口号是扩大内需。   扩大内需有什么特点,我们有鼓励小排量汽车的政策,有家电下乡的政策,各种各样的政策使得制造业能够不至于明显地下滑。可能大家还需要观察更多的内容。   首先和我们之前遇到的困难时期不太一样,比如亚洲金融危机时期,很多人感觉到流动资金紧缺,这一轮中国的政府对危机的响应非常快,很快就发出了大量的流动资金,特别是商业票据,这样基本上缓解了在生产过程中流动资金的需求,也对中小企业比较有利。扩大内需必须有最终需求,最终需求无非是投资、最终消费、净出口。在这几项里,中国在最终消费上还是取得了很大的进展,但在投资方面必须小心,因为中国在某些方面已经有产能过剩的现象,特别是在一些常规的制造业中。基础设施投资中也有一些人在担心有些基础设施是非常必要的,但也有一些基础设施,比如某些公路,虽然从长远来看是有必要的,但投资太早会出现没有车流量的问题,也有类似于产能过剩的问题。所以我们必须在投资方面找到新的增长点。   从今年前三季度的情况看,中国城镇化的过程产生了大量的投资需求,城镇化的过程是中国所特有的,中国有几亿农业劳动力,还要随着农业生产力的提高不断减少,会有更多人到城里,到城里就需要有住房、需要有公共设施,需要城镇改善环境,需要扩大城镇范围。因此就代理了城镇扩大城市内部基础设施的需求,城市内部公用设施的需求,城市社会事业包括医院、学校等等需求,相比较之下最大的还是住房的需求。今年中国克服金融危机的过程中,这个需求表现的比较明显,我们也在密切关注。