work

美国破产还是中国破产 from llylite

2009-12-05T18:30:00.002-05:00

http://bbs.city.sina.com.cn/thread-499-0/table-1027-4314.html

最近有一种论调，认为金融危机证明了中国模式比美国模式强，我倒不是说，不同意这种观点，但是总得拿点事实，拿点有说服力的论据吧，光说别人不好，是证明不了我们就好到那里去的，光用一些假大空的套话和官话，更证明不了什么，除了证明愚蠢。
　　
　　这篇文章，供大家参考。
　　
　　　　提示：
　　　　1，至2008年11月，美国政府国债余额为10.6万亿，其中4.3万亿为政府内债，其余的6.3万亿才是公债；
　　
　　　　2，6.3万亿公债中，只有2.7万亿为外国人持有，也就是说美国政府的外债为2.7万亿美元。
　　
　　　　3，至2008年6月，全美国（包括政府）的净外债为2.8万亿美元。而同期美国国民总收入为14万亿美元。
　　
　　　　在2008年11月10日这天，新华网，人民日报网和中国经济网不约而同地刊登出一篇文章称：“资不抵债--从技术层面说，美国已经破产了”，至于美国为什么还没有被宣布破产，是因为“债权国不能让美国破产”。大概意思是说，如果眼看杨白劳死掉，黄世仁所放的贷就收不回来了，所以杨白劳必须活着的干活。
　　
　　　　这篇文章说：“美国国会所能接受的名义国家债务余额为11.2万亿美元，相对于美国13.8万亿美元的GDP而言，美国债务率为81.16%。尽管，这与日本、英国等国超过100%的债务率相比好像并不算过分。但是，这并非美国的真实债务。如果把美国政府对国民的社保欠账等所有隐性债务统统加在一起，那么，美国的实际债务总额高达53万亿美元。”（比如Medicare：政府用于老年人和残疾人士的医疗福利；Medicaid：政府用于贫穷人士医疗福利；和社会保障等福利项目）。

　　　　我估计这篇文章的作者和新华网，人民日报网以及中国经济网的编辑们压根儿就不知道“Corporate-style Accounting Standards”是个什么样的标准。我想中国政府的预算和统计部门不会用这个标准了。因为用了这个标准，美国政府的负债是53万亿元，而中国政府的负债可能就是530万亿元了。530万亿是什么概念？如果把100元一张的钞票摞起来，530万亿可绕地球20周；2007年，全球的GDP是54.3万亿，这就是说，仅仅中国一个国家的债务，已经使全球的债务率接近100%。（笔者注：照猫画虎）
　　
　　　　美国政府是一个民选的资产阶级政权，当然需要对选民们负责了，这个没有问题。那么中国政府是一个以“为人民服务”为宗旨的人民政府，就更需要为中国人民负责了，也就是说中国政府的“Liability ”（责任）应该比美国政府更深，更广，更多。
　　
　　　　众所周知，美国社会是一个高度自治的社会，美国政府是一个有限的政府，也就是我们常常说的“小政府”。他的最高领导人管不了州长，州长管不了县长，县长管不了乡镇长，乡镇长管不了“村长”。所以说美国政府的责任是有限的。
　　
　　　　而中国政府则是个无所不包的大政府，从上到下，从东南海边到高原天际，它的触角伸到每个角落。它的权力比美国政府大得多得多，因而它的责任也应该比美国政府大得多得多。甚至说中国政府的责任是无限的，这也不算过分。
　　
　　　　那么，美国政府负责美国人的过去，现在和将来的生活福利，医疗福利和退休福利等等。现在的美国政府前瞻性地负责任地考虑到50年后，甚至75年的时候的美国人的福利。这没有疑问（参见《“美国破产论”可以休也》一文）。
　　
　　　　那么，中国政府就更应该负责中国人的过去，现在和将来的生活福利，医疗福利和退休福利等等。现在的中国政府也需要前瞻性地考虑到50年后，甚至75年的时候的中国人的福利。这是应该的。
　　
　　　　原国有和集体企业退休养老这一块，企业和事业的分开是政府定的，政府应该有责任吧。那么多年下来，原国有和集体企业的退休福利只有事业单位的二分之一。那么应该平等吧。过去一二十年里面，政府亏欠一个企业退休职工5万元人民币有吧。全国4000万企业退休人员，那么政府就此一项就拖欠了2万亿。这批人平均活20年，那么政府为了弥补未来的欠债就是8万亿（按1年1万的差额计算）。这样光光企业退休人员养老这一块，政府就欠债10万亿元人民币。还有原国有和集体企业1100万企业退休职工没有医疗保险，另外3000万有医疗保险的退休职工应报销的部分也只有一半能实际报销，这批人平均活20年，那么中国政府为这批人将欠债1-2万亿元。我不说政府负担全部的责任，部分应该有的吧。
　　
　　　　原国有和集体企业下岗失业这一块。目前所累积的下岗长期未能再就业的，国企破产待安置的共有1310万人。他们在达到退休前5-30年间里，平均每人失业救济金10万元不过分吧。这样就是1.3万亿元人民币。这批人今后的养老和医疗平均每人1年1万应该有吧。那么20年下来，就是2.6万亿元人民币了。另外，全国还有3000万需要救济的困难职工及其家属，这样一年救济5千不过分吧。到了退休年龄后的20年，还需要养老和医疗。中国政府得为此负债6万亿元人民币了。我不说政府负担全部的责任，部分应该有的吧。
　　
　　　　60年来，中国政府利用剪刀差强制剥夺农民，搞得城市象欧洲，农村像非洲。政府有责任把中国农村搞得象城市一半那么光景吧。这需要化多少钱？这政府欠下了9亿农民的多少债务？一人10万，就是90万亿元人民币呐。我不说政府负担全部的责任，部分应该有的吧。
　　
　　　　我连续看了多期的凤凰卫视“一虎一席谈节目”，我第一次在节目里同时看到了“少量的”类欧洲人和“大量的”类非洲人。那些类“非洲人”还都是伟大祖国首都的农民，他们坐在那里是那么的与周围环境不协调。他们的脸上刻满了生活的艰辛。他们急促的语调，怨恨的语气让人感觉到了他们内心的抗争。我们的人民政府需要举借多少国债，才能弥补他们的损失啊。
　　
　　　　中国大约有9亿农民没有医疗，9亿农民没有养老，农民也是共和国的公民。这些人也应该享受国民待遇吧。美国政府是把那些没有医疗保险和退休养老金的人大致包下来的。那么，中国政府为了给这些中国公民负责，在年后的几十年里面少则要负债200万亿吧。我不说政府负担全部的责任，部分应该有的吧。
　　
　　　　过去的几十年里，2.5亿亩农民的土地被政府强行给征用了，按每平方米150元算，就值25万亿人民币。到农民手里的有1万亿吗？我看没有。那么光光这些土地，政府就拖欠了24万亿的债务，这些债务在今后的75年间，会累计到多少？至少100万亿吧。我不说政府负担全部的责任，部分应该有的吧。
　　
　　　　中国的自然环境的破坏程度之重，大家有目共睹吧。中国人所赖以生存的环境对于中国人民福祉的重要性，没有争论吧。那么中国政府对于中国大环境的治理责无旁贷吧。这些环保欠债应该有5万亿吧。今后未来的环境治理得要20万亿吧。我不说政府负担全部的责任，部分应该有的吧。
　　
　　　　我粗略地估算了一下，中国政府的未来欠债至少在300万亿元人民币以上，这还是建立在大多估算20-30年间的前提下，如果事事都像美国那些估算到75年，那么中国政府的未来欠债就将在千万亿元人民币以上了。中国政府还得起吗？中国政府会破产吗？
　　　　
　　　　看到这里，大多数读者显然不同意笔者的这种算法，这个其实是照猫画虎的算法。新华网上的那篇文章的作者，显然不会想到笔者也会用 “Corporate-style Accounting Standards ”标准来给中国政府算一算账。当然，这篇文章的作者，也显然没有必要顾忌可能会有人找碴，因为很少有中国人会用笔者的思维去思考一下，绝大多数的中国人会顺着那个作者的笔锋，去同情，或嘲笑可怜的要破产的美国政府。
　　　　
　　　　政法大学教授丛日云先生有一段论述，应该值得我们深思：“中国媒体和许多评论者往往顺着美国人的思路、依美国的标准来认识和评论美国，将美国人的判断当作自己的判断。比如美国人说，生态环境被严重破坏了。我们也跟着喊，替美国人操心。可是，几乎每个来到美国的中国人，都会为美国“蓝天白云，鸟语花香”的自然生态之好而惊讶不已。人们突然发现，原来，环境恶化主要是我们的问题，而不是美国的问题。惯常，美国人敏锐地发现问题，尖锐地提出问题，并且按他们的习惯，比较夸张地描述了问题。美国社会的问题是美国的问题，不是中国的问题；按美国标准它才是问题，按中国标准它不是问题，或不是那么严重的问题。”
　　
　　　　在这个问题上，就是如此，美国人不但操心政府现在的财政，还操心将来的，将来的2030年，2050年，甚至75年后的财政问题。他们提出了问题：如果美国不在一些制度层面上改革，那么在2030年或2042年，美国人的养老金和医疗保险就难以为继了。

　　　　而我们中国呢？我们现在的养老基金账户上就几乎快没有钱了，现在的医疗账户上的钱充其量只能够报销57%的医疗费。而且，我们中国的养老基金只覆盖了全国不到20%的人口，我们的医疗帐户只覆盖了全国不到15%的人口。
　　
　　　　美国有美国的问题，按单人标准年收入不到10800美元的美国贫困人口有3600万人(10%)。在2008年，中国的年收入不到785元人民币的有1500 万，年收入不到1067元人民币的有4000万。美国的贫困标准比中国的高67倍。美国的贫困标准是按照全体美国人平均年食品开销的三倍设定的，几十年前就如此，现在美国人已经将“在家上网”作为贫困人口的必需品了。
　　
　　　　中国呢，在2008年，专家们还在争论贫困线要不要提高到 1300元人民币一年的问题，因为这样一来全国贫困人口就是8000万了。中国扶贫，越扶越贫啊。贫困线的划分，关系到党和政府的伟大历史功绩的计算啊。如果按照“中国人平均年食品开销2748元的三倍”算，那么8246元人民币一年才是中国的贫困线，那么中国的贫困人口就不是8000万了，而是10个亿了(70%)。所以说，美国的贫困问题，按中国标准来说不是个问题。中国的贫困问题才是个大问题。
　　
　　　　我举一个实际的例子。我的岳母的父母是浙江温州人，都90多岁了，没有退休和养老金，也就是说年收入为零，但在2008年前没有领到过政府的困难补助。后来经过朋友的帮助，终于进入低保范围了，现在每月每人可以领到110元人民币的低保补助。在2007年，我在《谁在误导我们艳羡温州？》一文中，曾披露过2006年全温州市只有12.5万人领到过政府的低保金，月人均65元钱。而根据温州人自己发布的2006年统计公报，温州有600多万人的月人均收入不足630元人民币，月生活支出不足 500元人民币，这些人是温州的绝大多数，占温州户籍人口的80%。温州还有50%的人口月收入不足400元。温州还有24%的人口，也就是180万温州人的人均月收入不到300元。更有15万人月收入不到125元人民币。这还是在地处东南沿海的浙江温州呐，江西、安徽或者湖南、湖北的情况更好还是更糟？我按下不表。这要算责任，政府需要举借多大的债务啊。
　　
　　　　美国有美国的问题，美国有4800万人口没有医疗保险，但是这些人口享有政府公立医院的免费医疗（条件和方便程度自然不如私立医院）。中国有中国的问题，全国城镇职工没有基本医疗保险的占48%，也就是说中国仅仅在城镇职工中没有基本医疗保险的人数高达1.5亿。也就是，没有基本医疗保险的中国公民达12亿之多。就是在将近2亿的拥有医疗保险的人口中，其医疗保险也只能负担实际花费的57%。当然，你要说，现在的中国农民也有医疗保险了。那么和那些没有医疗保险的美国人相比，他们那个人均几十元钱的医疗保险是个医疗保险吗？如果中国政府也负担起这个责任，那么中国政府的财政赤字又会增加多少？国债又会增加多少？（见附录：《中国保险报》：农村医疗保险报销比例多高？）
　　
　　　　美国有美国的问题，美国的孩子完全免费上学12年直至高中毕业，有高达数百万的儿童享受政府的免费午餐，甚至早餐。如果中国政府也负担起这个责任，那么中国政府的财政赤字又会增加多少？国债又会增加多少？
　　
　　　　美国有美国的问题，美国65岁以上老人，就自动享有养老和医疗福利，甚至住房福利。中国的1.3亿老年人口中，享有养老和医疗保健的是少数，如果中国政府也负担起这个责任，那么中国政府的财政赤字又会增加多少？国债又会增加多少？
　　
　　　　美国有美国的问题，美国的残疾人士得到了美国政府很好的保障。中国的8300万残疾人口中，有多少人享有中国人平均的生活水准？如果，中国政府也像美国政府那样负担起这个责任，那么中国政府的财政赤字又会增加多少？国债又会增加多少？
　　
　　　　美国有美国的问题，美国有个退伍军人事务部，服务于2700万退伍军人和3500万的家属子女。一年的财政预算是700亿美元，其中300亿用于医疗服务，400亿用于福利补贴。条件上乘的退伍军人医院遍布全国。中国的退伍军人有多少？有8000万吧，加上他们的家属和子女有2个亿吧。他们是中国现政权的主要功臣，中国政府应该负担起应有的责任吧，那么，中国政府的财政赤字又会增加多少？国债又会增加多少？
　　
　　　　说起来挺可悲的，大家都是上过小学和中学的人，党和政府教育了大家多年，要你们关心祖国，不想却把大家培养成了“远视眼”。大西洋彼岸的美国的赤字了，债务了，看得清清楚楚，却对自己的祖国的现状视而不见，以至于频频闹笑话出丑。可悲啊，党和政府白白培养了你们多年，白眼狼们啊。

　　　　美国政府为它的国民负责任了，所以美国政府有这些未来债务。显然，美国政府为国民担负了比人民政府多得多的责任，显然，美国政府的必要支出就要比中国政府大得多得多了。因而，美国政府的赤字，欠债多，就不用大惊小怪了。况且，相对于其财力来说，美国政府的赤字和国债并不多。美国现今全部净外债为2.8万亿美元，这跟每年13万亿美元的国民生产总值来比，压根儿就不会是个问题。试想，一对年收入13万人民币的小白领，会因为欠了3万房贷款而破产吗？
　　
　　　　如果中国政府也能为中国公民负责任，那么这高达百万亿的债务就是中国政府的了。当然，像前非洲某个独-裁国家那样，政府只顾自己吃人肉喝人血，那么当然就没有为人民所欠的债务了，道理非常简单。
　　
　　　　某美国政府负债53万亿，中国政府负债530万亿！

Fama and French Three Factor Model

2009-12-04T22:22:00.002-05:00

CAPM uses a single factor, beta, to compare a portfolio with the market as a whole. But more generally, you can add factors to a regression model to give a better r-squared fit. The best known approach like this is the three factor model developed by Gene Fama and Ken French.

Fama and French started with the observation that two classes of stocks have tended to do better than the market as a whole: (i) small caps and (ii) stocks with a high book-value-to-price ratio (customarily called "value" stocks; their opposites are called "growth" stocks). They then added two factors to CAPM to reflect a portfolio's exposure to these two classes:

r - Rf = beta3 x ( Km - Rf ) + bs x SMB + bv x HML + alpha

Here r is the portfolio's return rate, Rf is the risk-free return rate, and Km is the return of the whole stock market. The "three factor" beta is analogous to the classical beta but not equal to it, since there are now two additional factors to do some of the work. SMB and HML stand for "small [cap] minus big" and "high [book/price] minus low"; they measure the historic excess returns of small caps and "value" stocks over the market as a whole. By the way SMB and HML are defined, the corresponding coefficients bs and bv take values on a scale of roughly 0 to 1: bs = 1 would be a small cap portfolio, bs = 0 would be large cap, bv = 1 would be a portfolio with a high book/price ratio, etc.

One thing that's interesting is that Fama and French still see high returns as a reward for taking on high risk; in particular that means that if returns increase with book/price, then stocks with a high book/price ratio must be more risky than average - exactly the opposite of what a traditional business analyst would tell you. The difference comes from whether you believe in the efficient market theory. The business analyst doesn't believe it, so he would say high book/price indicates a buying opportunity: the stock looks cheap. But if you do believe in EMT then you believe cheap stocks can only be cheap for a good reason, namely that investors think they're risky...

Fama and French aren't particular about why book/price measures risk, although they and others have suggested some possible reasons. For example, high book/price could mean a stock is "distressed", temporarily selling low because future earnings look doubtful. Or, it could mean a stock is capital intensive, making it generally more vulnerable to low earnings during slow economic times. Those both sound plausible; but they seem to be describing completely different situations (and what happens when a company that isn't capital intensive becomes "distressed"?) It may be that the success of this model at explaining past performance isn't due to the significance of any of the three factors taken separately, but in their being different enough that taken together they do an effective job of "spanning the dimensions" of the market.

(There's actually another interpretation that's so much less cerebral that it's probably correct. The broad market index weights stocks according to their market capitalization, making it size-biased and valuation blind; so maybe the extra two factors in this model are just a couple of tweaks to adjust for these two problems. This also explains why momentum is sometimes used as yet another factor: market capitalization shows where the market has been putting its money for years, while momentum shows where it has been putting it lately; so if you want to take advantage of market efficiency you start with the index and then tweak it a little with momentum.)

Unemployment Rate Falls to 10%

2009-12-04T09:10:00.001-05:00

By LUCA DI LEO and JEFF BATER

U.S. job losses slowed sharply in November and the unemployment rate unexpectedly declined, in a sign the labor market is finally starting to heal as the economy recovers.

Nonfarm payrolls fell by just 11,000 last month, slowing down from a downwardly revised 111,000 drop seen in October, as the recovery encouraged companies to retain workers, the Labor Department said Friday.

It was the best showing since December 2007, when payrolls rose by 120,000, said a Labor department official. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had expected a payroll decrease of 125,000.

The unemployment rate, calculated using a survey of households as opposed to companies, edged lower to 10% in November from 10.2%. Economists had forecast the jobless rate would remain at October's level of 10.2%, when it rose to the highest level since April 1983.

Employment fell in construction, manufacturing, and information, while temporary help service and health care added jobs.

The boost in service-providing jobs was mainly in professional & business services, up 86,000 with most of that coming from temporary help services, up 52,000. Education & health services and government components also posted increases. However, declines were seen in trade & transportation, leisure & hospitality, and financial activities.

Despite the better-than-expected report, the jobs market has still some way to recover. Since the start of the recession in December 2007, the number of unemployed has increased by almost eight million.

The November jobs report should maitain the Federal Reserve's view that interest rates must remain at a record low to bolster a soft recovery. The central bank's rate-setting committee left interest rates close to zero a month ago in the face of low inflation and still-high unemployment.

Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke Thursday told U.S. senators the central bank expects the unemployment rate to decline only slowly from next year as the economic recovery remains "moderate." Bernanke last month warned the U.S. may be at risk of a so-called "jobless recovery", in which output is growing but employment doesn't increase.

President Barack Obama is concerned about the persistently high jobless rate. His administration Thursday kicked off a jobs summit, with the president promising to take "every responsible step to accelerate job creation."

In minutes released after their Nov. 3-4 meeting, Fed officials increased their growth estimates slightly, but projected an economy rebounding so slowly that it barely dents unemployment. They expect the jobless rate to remain between 9.3% and 9.7% by this time next year, and to settle above 8% in 2011, levels usually seen in recessions.

The U.S. economy expanded in the third quarter for the first time in more than a year, growing an annual 2.8%, but the jobs market's weakness, tight bank lending and a fading government stimulus is expected to keep the recovery contained.

"We expect the jobless rate to start falling very gradually in the first half of 2010", said Antulio Bomfim, a former Fed economist now with forecasting firm Macroeconomic Advisors in Washington.

The payroll data reflects a notable improvement in the jobs market. In the prior three months, payroll job losses had averaged 135,000 a month.

Employment in the service sector -- the main source of U.S. jobs -- rose by 58,000 in November. But that was more than offset by manufacturing companies shedding 41,000 jobs and construcion companies cutting 27,000.

Health care employment continued to rise in November, by 21,000. The industry has added 613,000 jobs since the recession began at the end of 2007.

Friday's report showed that average hourly earnings rose by 0.1%, or $0.01, to $18.74.

The average workweek rose by 0.2 hour to 33.2 hours in November.

海外投行集体唱多明年A股高盛力荐医保与券商股

2009-12-03T22:59:00.002-05:00

高盛维持明年年底沪深300指数目标点位4300点的预测.

　　A股在3300点徘徊之际，颇有市场号召力的高盛、瑞信等海外投行开始集体唱多明年的A股市场。其中，高盛维持明年年底沪深300指数目标点位4300点的预测。沪深300指数昨日收报3590点。

　　高盛首选医保、券商

　　高盛亚洲公司中国策略分析师邓体顺昨日在上海预计，中国经济增长前景仍然向好，上市公司盈利明年将大幅增长，除金融业和电信业以外的工业企业盈利将比今年增四成。

　　在看好的行业板块方面，高盛首选医保概念和券商组合。在邓体顺看来，中国深化改革及一体化的趋势，将给股市带来不少题材。

　　其中，改革题材具体包括医改、刺激内需、汽车、A股大量发行对券商股的刺激以及海外上市股票的回归;而一体化趋势带来的题材包括上海世博会及海峡两岸共同发展。

　　邓体顺预计，今年起的三年内，国家将投入8500亿元改善国内医保体系，最近国家发改委也在考虑降低医疗等垄断部门的准入门槛，再加上老龄化趋势将使医疗保健开支加大，医疗保健业将为长线投资者提供重要的投资机遇。

　　高盛推荐的高流动性医保股组合包括吉林敖东和复星医药等股票。

　　此外，邓体顺认为，今年第四季度至明年底，A股市场的新股发行额可能达到400亿美元，而红筹股和跨国公司的A股上市可能进一步扩大发行规模，承销收入对券商收入增长的潜在贡献可能较为明显;期待已久的股指期货和融资融券等创新若能推出，亦将有助于券商扩大收入渠道。

　　高盛推荐的券商股包括海通证券和中信证券等。

　　瑞信喜好能源、银行

　　瑞信集团也唱好A股。瑞信集团亚太区策略师及环球新兴市场策略师SakthiSiva昨日告诉记者，在亚洲各市场当中，仍然看好内地股市表现，仅次于韩国、印尼及印度。

　　瑞信发布的最新报告预计，A股市场未来12个月仍能上涨16.8%.

　　瑞信相信，内地经济数据仍然强劲，未来中国出口能从低位复苏，消费增长持续强劲，但投资增长则会相对放缓。

　　SakthiSiva喜好能源股和银行股，包括中国神华、建设银行、工商银行，还有中国远洋。

　　与瑞信的观点较为一致，瑞银12月2日也发布研究报告，唱好能源股和银行股。这份将中国股市明年上半年定义为“大牛市”的报告主要推荐H股(恒生国企指数，主要代表中资股走势)，其建议增持房地产、保险、银行、非核心消费(如汽车、零售)、水泥、石油及天然气、生产原料;减持电力、航空、航运、电信及公路。瑞银给出的首选股票包括中石化H股、中国人寿H股、广深铁路H股等。

　　瑞银的理由与高盛和瑞信如出一辙——中国“强劲的经济增长、企业盈利改善”。

　　值得注意的是，瑞银和瑞信都对明年下半年的市场持审慎态度。(东方早报)

Assessing Housing Risks

2009-12-03T13:04:00.001-05:00

December 02, 2009

By Richard Berner New York

Despite recent improvements in housing demand, construction and home prices, housing risks are turning negative immediately ahead. A ‘payback' from the end of the first-time homebuyer tax credit likely will be the main catalyst, and additional negatives involve the interplay among less-favorable demographics, looming foreclosures and rising joblessness. Yet we strongly believe that renewed housing recovery is coming, courtesy of improved affordability, some easing in credit availability, a renewed tax credit and a return to positive employment gains. The upshot: Weakness in demand, activity and prices is likely through year-end, but we still expect modest improvement in 2010 and beyond: A 10% rise in demand and housing activity is still the most likely outcome next year.

Improvement in many housing metrics. There is no mistaking the improvement in many housing metrics from their trough, at least through October. Sales of new and existing one-family homes jumped by 24.6% and 27.8%, respectively, in the six months ended in October, reflecting some of the positive factors mentioned above. Although one-family housing starts tumbled in October compared with September, they have risen 33% from their February lows. Inventories of new and existing homes have plunged dramatically, promoting a better balance between supply and demand. New home inventories stand at 239,000, the lowest since 1971 in absolute terms. Inventories of existing homes, at 3 million, are well below their peak of 3.8 million in late 2007, although still near the previous peak last seen in 1985. And home prices are either flat or up, depending on the measure used: Over the past six months, the FHFA purchase-only home price index has been flat, while the Case-Shiller S&P home price index is up 2.5%. That compares with declines of 11% and 32% over the previous two and three years, respectively.

Payback coming, plus barriers to activity. Yet those improvements must be set in perspective for two reasons: First, the first-time homebuyer tax credit boosted new and existing sales through October, and a payback is coming. Second, three hurdles still linger for housing: The overhang of inventories of existing homes on the market and a ‘shadow inventory' of yet-to-be foreclosed homes likely will continue to depress new home sales and housing activity for some time to come; demographics are still unfavorable; and rising joblessness is a barrier to qualifying for a mortgage.

Gauging the payback. To gauge the coming payback in sales of existing and new homes, we must calibrate the impact of the first-time homebuyer tax credit on demand. That is difficult, because the US$8,000 maximum tax credit incentive represented only about 5% of the price of homes typically purchased by first-time homebuyers and because there is scant basis for comparison - there is only one example of a similar credit (in 1975, and that was for new homes only). This time around, lawmakers enacted two credits for first-time homebuyers. A US$7,500 credit launched in July 2008 was really an interest-free loan. Then, in February 2009, Congress replaced it with a true credit running up to US$8,000 for low-income buyers who had not owned a residence in the last three years, expiring on December 1, for both new and existing properties.

The just-expiring credit stimulated demand, but it is unclear by how much. According to the National Association of Realtors (NAR), about 350,000 of the 1.8-2.0 million buyers who will claim the credit this year would not have purchased a home without it. But it is uncertain how much of that was genuine additional demand and how much was simply brought forward. Traditional measures of affordability have soared, courtesy of the plunge in home prices and in mortgage rates. But with lenders demanding bigger down payments, and with the credit not available until the deal is closed, down payments and credit availability remain hurdles for many buyers, especially first-time ones.

The 1975 homebuyer credit represents the sole historical parallel and may shed light on the potential payback this time. That earlier incentive, which was aimed only at new homes, initially boosted sales and then triggered a second surge as the expiration date neared. Fueled by lower mortgage rates, pent-up demand and the credit, new home sales jumped by 63% over 1975, but declined by 16% over several months in 1976 after the credit expired. That moderate ‘payback' may foreshadow today's experience, and we assume both home sales and single-family housing starts will soften a bit in the next few months (into early next year) and rise moderately thereafter. Indeed, the sharp decline in mortgage applications underway since early October already hints that the payback is coming. Yet, as discussed in more detail below, a new credit that extends through April 30, 2010 likely will limit the weakness.

Three hurdles for housing. No catalogue of housing risks would be complete without acknowledging three other headwinds. The recession has slowed household formation, looming foreclosures will dump more inventory on the market, and rising joblessness will deter lenders and buyers. Moreover, homebuilders are struggling to compete with distressed property sales, and financing to start construction is still hard to come by.

Less favorable short-run demographics. Demographic trends are critical for assessing long-term housing demand, but short-term changes in demographic fundamentals that are influenced by the business cycle also matter. In the current downturn, both slowing household formation and declining interstate labor mobility have been housing headwinds. The latest Census Bureau report showed that new households grew by only 398,000 between March 2008 and March 2009, compared with increases of 772,000 and 1.6 million in the two previous years. Data are incomplete for March 2009, but it appears that the growth in prime-age households (25-54) slowed even more significantly. That's a time-honored cyclical pattern; many couples postpone marriage and having children in recession, and this time is no different. What is different is the depth of the contraction in payrolls that has affected a broader swath of the population. Thus, the annual demographic increment to housing demand has slowed to perhaps 250,000, even assuming a pick-up in household formation and a 65% home ownership rate.

In a related development, the percentage of grown children moving back in with their parents has also escalated according to data from the Pew Research Center. The authors note that, "Overall, the proportion of adults ages 18 to 29 who live alone declined from 7.9% in 2007 to 7.3% in 2009. Similar drops in the proportion of young people who live by themselves occurred during or immediately after the recessions of 1982 and 2001." In addition, the interplay between housing woes and labor mobility has created frictions in the labor markets: Without a new job, workers wanting to move are unable to do so, depressing housing turnover; conversely, the inability to sell one's home has limited labor mobility and thus the capacity of workers to move to take a new job in another venue.

The ‘shadow inventory': How big? Fully 4.47% of all loans were in the foreclosure process and 9.64% were delinquent at the end of 3Q09, up 150bp and 265bp, respectively, from a year ago according to the Mortgage Bankers' Association; both are records. With about 55 million mortgages outstanding, some analysts estimate that the ‘shadow inventory' of yet-to-be foreclosed homes will rise to more than 13% of that total, or 7 million mortgages. A key trigger for foreclosure is when home owners are in a negative equity position; that is, when the amount they owe exceeds the value of the home. According to First American CoreLogic, 23% of all mortgagees are underwater. Such a surge in foreclosures, even if spread out over a couple of years (as seems likely in any case), would reverse the improved supply-demand balance seen over the past year, put renewed downward pressure on home prices, further discourage housing lenders from offering attractive loans, and pressure household wealth.

Several related factors could reduce the coming rise in foreclosures. First, lenders may be increasingly willing to modify outstanding mortgages by writing down the outstanding mortgage amounts to eliminate negative equity; previous efforts to modify the terms of mortgages by lowering rates or forbearing did not help many lenders or borrowers, because redefault rates ran between 50-60%. Second, lenders may also be more willing to accept short sales (in which they eliminate the sellers' negative equity to allow a sale to occur). Third, the Administration is promising to increase resources to enable eligible borrowers who have undergone trial modifications under the Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) to convert to permanent modifications. If successful, these developments could limit price declines by holding otherwise foreclosed homes off the market or taking them out of the supply chain completely. So far, however, delays over documentation and other snafus have held up the modification process, so progress may be slow in coming.

Are there upside risks for housing? In our view, improved affordability, a better balance between supply and demand, some easing in credit availability, a renewed tax credit, and a pick-up in job and income growth are all likely to offset these housing headwinds and promote a modest recovery. The improvement in affordability lately has been the result of lower interest rates, but subdued home prices have also helped. Current coupon MBS yields have recently plunged to the lows seen in the spring, or 3.9%. With 30-year conventional mortgage rates already at a record-low 4.78%, and further declines likely, housing affordability is soaring. The 2.5% recovery in home prices over the past six months only represents a tiny offset to that improvement.

Further, although supply still exceeds demand, the balance is improving. The rebound in new home sales and the plunge to record lows in September housing completions has rapidly normalized inventories of newly constructed homes. As mentioned, new home inventories fell by 4% in October to 239,000 units, a 38-year low. At current sales rates, supply fell to 6.7 months' supply, close to the six months generally thought to represent balance. We may see a bit of renewed upside in months' supply if there is a temporary pullback in sales, but it now seems likely that inventories of newly constructed homes (although not the total, which includes the ‘shadow inventory') will be back to balanced levels by early next year.

Credit availability is also easing somewhat. The proportion of banks reporting that they tightened mortgage lending standards in the Fed's October Senior Loan Officer Survey dropped to 26%, down from 77% a year ago. While lending standards are still tight, it is the change in standards that matters for growth (see Calibrating the Credit Crunch, November 20, 2009).

Extending the credit. In addition, the payback from the expiration of the first-time homebuyer tax credit may be short-lived because new relief is on the way. Earlier this month, Congress passed new legislation that extends the credit for first-time buyers and expands it to cover current home owners purchasing a new or existing home (up to a maximum credit of US$6,500) between November 7, 2009 and April 30, 2010 (the purchaser will have until July 1, 2010 to close). Current home owners must have used the home being sold or vacated as a principal residence for five consecutive years within the last eight. Married couples with incomes up to US$225,000 are eligible for the maximum credit, higher than the US$175,000 under the credit expiring this week.

Finally, improving job and income growth are critical for any lasting improvement in housing demand. On that score, there is already some good news. High-frequency labor market indicators, such as initial and continued claims for unemployment insurance, point to some improvement in the immediate future. And the just-reported US$82 billion (1.3%) upward revision to 2Q wage and salary income likely foreshadows more cyclical improvement for both pay and payrolls. The upshot is that despite significant headwinds and near-term payback from the expiration of the first-time homebuyer tax credit, we think powerful offsetting factors will help housing mount a modest recovery into 2010 and beyond.

中美双双挑起减排大担三大领域受益最多

2009-12-03T08:38:00.000-05:00

就在几天前，中美双方政府十分默契的相继抛出令世界瞩目的“绣球”，以极大的诚意相继公布巨额减排计划：白宫25日宣布，2020 年温室气体排放量在2005 年基础上减少17％，2050年减排83％，而几乎在当天，中国国务院常务会议决定，2020 年中国单位GDP 二氧化碳排放比2005 年下降40-45％。

　　这一强度明显超出预期。业内专家普遍认为，这使得即将召开的哥本哈根会议将取得超出预期的成果。对此，资本市场表现兴奋，其相关板块股票也在近日表现得非常活跃。

　　从政策暖风看，金太阳工程、风电上网电价政策、建设坚强的智能电网初步规划、新能源汽车补贴政策已经相继出台，而等待出台的有：新能源发展规划、节能减排规划、战略性新兴产业发展规划、十二五规划、光伏上网电价政策、新能源汽车发展规划、智能电网规划及试点、内陆核电站项目启动，而后面大部分政策有望在明年上半年推出。

　　利好叫得多了，往往容易被虚化成一个笼统的概念，其实，对于谨慎的投资者来讲，还是有必要区分细分领域，挑出受益最大的板块，做长期价值投资准备。

　　哪些细分领域将获得蛋糕中的大头？国际能源署认为，2010-2020年，中国将投入1.2万亿到交通运输领域，8720亿到电力供应领域，4400亿到建筑节能减排领域，3000亿到工业领域。而2021-2030年，中国将投入4.7万亿到交通运输领域，2.9万亿到建筑行业，超过电力供应行业的2.5万亿，工业领域也将达到3万亿。也就是说，减排重点集中在电力供应、建筑、交通运输三个领域。

　　电力供应方面主要指的是替代能源和智能电网领域，申银万国发布报告认为，值得关注的有，核电方面的嘉宝集团（600622 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、海陆重工（002255 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、东方电气（600875 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖），智能电网方面的思源电气（002028 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、国电南瑞（600406 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、荣信股份（002123 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖），光伏方面的海通集团（600537 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、天威保变（600550 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、特变电工（600089 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖），风电方面的东方电气、湘电股份（600416 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、金风科技（002202 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）。

　　建筑领域，中投证券认为，短期来说，建筑节能领域的减排动力明显，投资回报期较短，相关上市公司有三安光电（600703 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、南玻A （000012 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、海螺型材（000619 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、北新建材（000786 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、烟台万华（600309 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）。而工业领域则关注可通过碳交易带来赢利的减排重点企业，比如：巨化股份（600160 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、三爱富（600636 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）。

　　交通运输方面，中投证券分析认为，投资重点将会在以混合动力汽车和电动汽车为代表的新能源汽车行业。从这个行业看，中国宝安（000009 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、杉杉股份（600884 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、安凯汽车、上海汽车（600104 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、福田汽车（600166 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、长安汽车（000625 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、大洋电机（002249 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、科力远（600478 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、江苏国泰（002091 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）、西藏矿业（000762 股吧,行情,资讯,主力买卖）值得关注。(中国证券网)

Comcast, GE Ready to Announce Deal

2009-12-02T22:07:00.002-05:00

By SAM SCHECHNER, JEFFREY MCCRACKEN And MAX COLCHESTER

After marathon negotiations, Comcast Corp. and General Electric Co. are poised to announce a deal Thursday that would give Comcast control of GE's NBC Universal, turning the cable-television giant into one of the world's largest suppliers of TV shows and movies.

Journal Communitydiscuss“ Comcast is a major player in broadband access, and networks like NBC have been trying to figure out for years how to monetize their productions over the Internet. I expect this transaction will go a long way toward answering that question. ”

The deal—which has been in the works for nine months—comes after Paris-based telecom and media company Vivendi SA agreed this weekend to sell its 20% stake in NBC Universal to GE for $5.8 billion, according to people familiar with the matter.

If approved by regulators, the deal would give Comcast control of the U.S.'s oldest television network, more than a dozen cable networks and Universal Studios, which includes both the movie studio and theme parks.

Together with its existing businesses, Comcast would oversee assets with revenue of $51 billion in 2008, greater than that of Time Warner Inc., Walt Disney Co. or News Corp.

It is possible the deal's announcement could still be delayed beyond Thursday.

The deal runs against Wall Street's recent preference for breaking up media companies. Time Warner, which owned cable networks of its own, was cheered when it spun off its cable operation this year. Stockholders have pushed Comcast's shares down more than 11% since word of a potential NBC Universal deal surfaced in September.

But for Comcast, the deal is in part a way to cope with the tumultuous media business. An explosion of ways to watch TV and movies on the Web threatens to undermine some of the most lucrative parts of the entertainment industry. DVD sales are down. Advertising sales are increasingly fragmented.

Even after Comcast absorbs the new business, more than three-quarters of its operating profit will flow from its core cable- and Internet-service business. That business is under siege from satellite, telephone and Internet companies pushing TV shows directly to consumers. In late October, Steve Burke, Comcast's chief operating officer, warned at a conference that the growing popularity of online video could prompt a new generation to cut off their subscriptions to cable TV.

Comcast-GE and the Fairytale of Media M&A Comcast executives argue that owning more cable networks, which have thus far proven resilient, is a good investment and that NBC Universal will give Comcast scale to expand its dominance, according to people familiar with their thinking. Comcast executives often point to others, such as Liberty Media Corp. Chairman John Malone, who built up fortunes controlling content and distribution together.

Already, Comcast, which provides cable-TV service to 23.8 million homes and Internet service to 15.7 million homes, is rolling out a system that will put TV shows on the Web for its customers. Comcast has also been aggressive in pushing video-on-demand services. With NBC Universal, Comcast will gain a ready source of content for those subscription-only ventures.

For GE, giving up control of NBC Universal represents a major shift more than nearly a quarter century after it bought NBC. The media business has been a checkered arena for the financial and industrial giant.

While NBC's prime-time lineup has stumbled in recent years, GE also oversaw the founding of CNBC and MSNBC and the company's 2004 acquisition of Universal and cable networks including USA Network from Vivendi.

In part, GE's growing willingness to give up NBC Universal was a question of capital allocation. GE was unwilling to invest more money to buy other media assets, such as cable channels, that NBC Universal executives thought they would need to grow, according to people familiar with the matter.

The Comcast-NBC Universal tie-up is likely to draw scrutiny from regulators and lawmakers for six months to more than a year, according to legal experts and others familiar with the matter. While the government isn't expected to block the deal, the new venture may be forced to accept tough conditions on how it conducts business, these people said.

Already, at least some owners of competing television networks are communicating their concerns about the deal to Washington legislators and regulators, people familiar with the matter said.

The terms of the deal largely follow a template that Comcast and GE executives first hammered out over the summer, people familiar with the talks said. It merges NBC Universal, valued at approximately $30 billion, with Comcast's portfolio of cable networks and some of its Web assets, valued at about $7 billion.

Comcast will inject cash in the range of $6 billion and receive an initial 51% of the venture, the people said. GE will at first retain the remainder but is slated to be bought out in the seven years following closing.

The deal structure presents risks, said Bob Wright, former chief executive of NBC Universal. "It's going to be a management challenge when one party is looking to grow and the other party is looking to get out," Mr. Wright said. But GE could benefit if the venture performs well, he said, adding, "Yes, it's a risk, but there's also upside."

GE has publicly stated its intentions to focus its spending and research in coming years more on its industrial businesses such as energy turbines, aircraft engines and health care, rather than on service-oriented businesses like finance and media.

For Comcast's part, there are mechanisms in the deal that could reduce the company's cash contributions, potentially lowering the effective valuation of NBC Universal, according to people familiar with the matter.

One mechanism could credit Comcast with some of NBC Universal's cash flow before the deal closes, those people said. Another could alter Comcast's cash contribution based on the financial performance of both the Comcast and GE assets being combined in the joint venture, they added.

"It's an extremely positive transition for both parties," said Scott Singer, a Bank Street Group investment banker who focuses on the media sector. "This is a stellar set of assets with a stellar brand name."

—Paul Glader and Shira Ovide contributed to this article.
Write to Sam Schechner at sam.schechner@wsj.com, Jeffrey McCracken at jeff.mccracken@wsj.com and Max Colchester at max.colchester@wsj.com

Growth's Albatross: Inventory Rebound By MARK GONGLOFF

2009-12-01T08:37:00.002-05:00

When businesses dumped inventories ruthlessly during the depths of the recent recession, it made the bad economy worse. But there was supposed to be a silver lining: a quick restocking would make the recovery stronger.

Those hopes are still unfulfilled.

A fresh read on inventories of manufactured goods—among the most sensitive to the economy's ups and downs—will come on Tuesday, when the Institute for Supply Management releases its November manufacturing indexes.

The ISM's inventories index for the past four months has bounced back from a deep trough to its highest level since August 2008. The index is still below 50, meaning inventories are still vanishing.

That has been the case since 2006. What matters for the economy is the pace of inventory reduction. If inventories merely shrink more slowly quarter to quarter, then gross domestic product growth benefits.

Inventories are being depleted more slowly now, but that hasn't helped growth as much as economists had hoped. Inventories added 0.9 percentage point to third-quarter GDP growth. But they subtracted 2.4 and 1.4 percentage points, respectively, from the first and second quarters.

If inventories soar from here, then growth will benefit. But there is little sign that is going to happen.

The gap between the ISM's indexes of new orders and inventories has slipped from a 34-year peak in August to a level just above its long-term average, indicating less appetite to gear up production and risk boosting inventories.

Meantime, the ratio of inventories to actual shipments of durable goods is still high, at 1.76, compared with a 10-year average of about 1.5, according to the Commerce Department. This suggests inventories are still high relative to demand.

The ISM also asks manufacturers to assess customer inventory levels. In October, 63% said customer inventory levels were "about right," highest since August 2008. This suggests little need to move the needle in either direction.

More broadly, as long as final demand is anemic, crimping revenue, businesses will keep squeezing costs, notes MFR Inc. chief U.S. economist Joshua Shapiro. Having already slashed payrolls to the bone, inventories make fat targets for future cost-cutting.

Chinese Manufacturing Accelerates as Asia Leads Global Rebound Share Business Exchange

2009-12-01T08:25:00.001-05:00

By Bloomberg News

Dec. 1 (Bloomberg) -- China’s manufacturing grew last month at the fastest pace in five years, a survey showed, helping Asia to lead the recovery from the global economic slump.

The purchasing managers’ index released by HSBC Holdings Plc rose to a seasonally adjusted 55.7 from 55.4. The government’s PMI, also published today, held at an 18-month high. A report later today may show that U.S. manufacturing grew for a fourth month in November, a Bloomberg News survey showed.

Stocks rose around the world after the Chinese figures added to evidence that the country is powering a global recovery from the worst recession since World War II. Australia’s central bank cited the speed of Asia’s rebound in today’s unprecedented decision to raise interest rates for a third straight month. India beat economists’ forecasts yesterday with 7.9 percent growth in the third quarter and South Korea said today its exports gained for the first time in 13 months.

“China’s at the center of Asia’s outperformance and that will continue to be the case at least through the first half of 2010,” said Glenn Maguire, chief Asia-Pacific economist at Societe Generale SA in Hong Kong. “Without China’s aggressive policy response to the crisis, the region wouldn’t be where it is now.”

The MSCI Asia-Pacific Index climbed 1.2 percent, Europe’s Dow Jones Stoxx 600 Index gained 1.6 percent and Standard & Poor’s 500 futures advanced 0.5 percent. The euro advanced 0.4 percent to $1.5064. The yen slid 0.7 percent against the dollar.

Chinese Stocks

Twelve-month non-deliverable yuan forwards were little changed at 6.6305 per dollar as of 5:21 p.m. in Shanghai. The Shanghai Composite Index closed 1.3 percent higher, extending this year’s gain to about 78 percent.

The HSBC PMI rose to the highest level since the 57.1 reading in the survey’s first month in April 2004. HSBC’s report painted a brighter picture of export demand than the official survey. The PMIs have different methodologies.

“China’s recovery has been consolidated,” said Qu Hongbin, the chief China economist at HSBC in Hong Kong.

Australian central bank Governor Glenn Stevens said today that capital flows into Asia and other emerging markets have been picking up and the region’s financial sectors are not “impaired.”

China and India are the fastest-growing of the world’s major economies. In China, gross domestic product will expand 10.5 percent this quarter, helping the government to top its 8 percent target for the year, according to the median estimate of 38 economists. The nation’s growth fuels demand for Australian resources such as iron ore.

German Economy

Growth in Asia is helping the rest of the world. Euro- region manufacturing expanded more than economists originally estimated in November and German unemployment unexpectedly dropped, separate reports showed today.

The U.S. Institute for Supply Management’s manufacturing index probably slipped to 55 from October’s three-year high of 55.7, according to the median forecast of 72 economists surveyed by Bloomberg News. The report is due at 10 a.m. New York time.

The world’s recovery from the financial crisis is nevertheless still uneven. Dubai shares tumbled and Abu Dhabi’s stock index dropped the most in at least eight years on Nov. 29 after the government announced state-run Dubai World may delay debt payments.

In Russia, a manufacturing contraction deepened last month after export demand sagged, raising concern that a recovery in the world’s biggest energy exporter may be stalling, VTB Capital’s Purchasing Managers’ Index showed. An index of U.K. manufacturing fell to 51.8 in November from 53.7, Markit Economics said. Economists had predicted a reading of 54.

Emergency Meeting

The pace of Chinese growth is also causing some political tension as it refuses to bow to calls to allow the yuan to appreciate. Premier Wen Jiabao rebuffed yesterday calls by European leaders for China to let its currency strengthen, saying that a stable yuan helped global financial stability.

The nation has effectively pegged the yuan to the U.S. currency since July last year to shield exporters from slumping global demand.

The stability of China’s currency against the dollar contrasts with gains this year by the yen and the euro that have hurt exporters in Japan and the euro region. After an emergency meeting today, Japan’s central bank said it would provide short- term loans to commercial banks, aiding an economy that is also grappling with deflation.

Eisuke Sakakibara, formerly Japan’s top currency official, said today that the yen may rise beyond 80 per dollar by March, approaching its 1995 record, and any attempts to halt its advance through intervention will fail.

Chinese Investment

In China, growth is stabilizing and becoming more sustainable, and government investment, which is driving the recovery, will gradually be reduced, Zhang Liqun, a researcher at the State Council Development and Research Center, said in the statement with the government’s PMI.

The “velocity of the recovery in China has indeed been surprising,” Marius Klopper, the chief executive of BHP Billiton Ltd., the world’s largest mining company, said Nov. 26. “Chinese growth will continue and will continue to be resources-intensive.”

Still, Kevin Lai, an economist at Daiwa Institute of Research in Hong Kong, saw signs of weakness in the government’s PMI, as indexes of orders, including for exports, slipped even as a measure of output rose.

“Instead of everything being positive we begin to see things being a little bit mixed,” Lai said. “Global demand is getting a little bit soft again.”

In a note, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. called the PMI “slightly disappointing but not weak.”

Inflation Pressures

Both PMIs showed input prices climbing, signaling inflation pressures.

Overall, the government PMI was unchanged at a seasonally adjusted 55.2, the Federation of Logistics and Purchasing said. That was less than the median estimate of 55.7 in a Bloomberg News survey of 17 economists.

The government is on alert for inflation and asset bubbles after an unprecedented $1.3 trillion of new loans in the first 10 months of 2009 drove a rebound from the nation’s weakest growth in almost a decade.

“The recovery is quite strong with all economic indicators except exports now pretty much back to pre-crisis levels,” said Isaac Meng, a senior economist at BNP Paribas SA in Beijing. “The key challenge is how to cool off excessive liquidity and pre-empt the asset bubble and inflation risks.”

For Related News and Information: Most-read stories on China: MNI CHINA 1W Most-read China economy stories: TNI CHECO MOSTREAD BN For top economic news: TOP ECO For top China news: TOP CHINA Credit crunch page: WCC Government relief programs: GGRP

China's State Firms Cling to Their Cash

2009-11-30T18:49:00.004-05:00

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 andrew.batson@wsj.com

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB125953211574968639.html#mod=todays_us_page_one

Are You Too Late for the Junk-Bond Party?

2009-11-30T09:14:00.000-05:00

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 intelligentinvestor@wsj.com

Banks Gone Shopping Find Pickings Are Slim

2009-11-30T08:57:00.000-05:00

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.

Some Facts regarding UAE, Dubai, and Abu Dhabi

2009-11-28T16:29:00.002-05:00

--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

2009-11-28T15:56:00.002-05:00

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 neil.shah@dowjones.com and Chip Cummins at chip.cummins@wsj.com

基金黑幕-2008年07月11

2009-11-28T12:09:00.003-05:00

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

2009-11-28T11:29:00.000-05:00

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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。

Dubai Debt Freeze to Hit Property Recovery

2009-11-27T11:16:00.002-05:00

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 stefania.bianchi@dowjones.com

Utilities Seek Round of Rate Increases

2009-11-27T11:03:00.001-05:00

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 rebecca.smith@wsj.com

历史视角下的当前A股市场

2009-11-26T10:19:00.002-05:00

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。）

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

2009-11-25T13:24:00.000-05:00

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 asharif2@bloomberg.net

热钱大举涌港香港内地急谋对策

2009-11-25T09:10:00.001-05:00

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)

Calibrating the Credit Crunch

2009-11-24T16:06:00.002-05:00

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%

2009-11-24T09:13:00.002-05:00

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 luca.dileo@dowjones.com and Jeff Bater at jeff.bater@dowjones.com

家宝在首都科技界大会上的讲话

2009-11-23T22:22:00.001-05:00

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。

The State's Take

2009-11-21T22:22:00.000-05:00

--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.

http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=14924473