股市中有无数先行者，他们的成败得失，值得后来者总结与借鉴。而其中的规律，对指导我们今后的投资，是大有裨益的。
一、以"我"为主，培养自己独立思考的能力
投资者首先需要修炼内功，并在股市的实践中逐步树立信心。我们在股市中经常看到这样的人：昨天还发誓要紧紧捂住某一只股票，今天却早已更换成另一个筹码，后日也不断改变主意，而后市个股走势却证明其原有思路无比正确。出现这样的结果，是投资者没养成以我为主、独立思考的好习惯所致，总是人云亦云，盲目跟风。
二、关注政策，决胜千里
实践证明，对股市真正起决定作用的仍是政策及国际环境的影响。例如2008年美国次贷危机全面爆发，并引起全世界金融市场剧烈动荡，而国内一系列经济刺激计划的出台，则带动相关板块和个股甚至整个市场大幅反弹。
三、深思熟虑，果断出击
投资者为避免盲目和仓促地追涨杀跌，应学会三思而行，在深思熟虑后，果断出击。如面对最近一个多月来沪深两市大盘触底反弹后的加速上行，以及诸多题材个股的大幅上扬，若不加思考地追涨，很容易成为套牢一族；而一旦选准了个股，在该股回落至自己的心理价位后，就可果断出手。
四、减少操作，力求全胜
在股市中并不是操作得越频繁收益就越大，多劳并非多得。如果自己不是短线高手，操作次数越多，失误也会越多；而失误越多，心态就越差；心态越差，操作失误就会更多，如此就形成恶性循环。若坚持每年进行少有的数次操作，准确出击，并注重低吸有序、高抛有节制的策略，自己的操作能力就会不断提高，而且收益也会放大。
五、持股勿贪多
我有一位朋友用近200万元的资金买了60只左右的股票，望着她那张整日忙碌得红艳艳的脸，我从心里为她着急。因为她的持股太多太分散了。我认为，持股太多首先表明投资者在投资前，没有做好必要的准备，诸如必要的学习、交流和研判；其次，在初次投资遭受损失后，没有选择正确规避风险的措施，误认为"大就是金，金就是好，好就是稳"，而不是缩回拳头，集中资金，集中精力，专注少数个股。每个人的精力有限，切不可作茧自缚，事倍功半。
六、掌握好买卖时机
投资者先要去掉"贪"字，静下心来，认真寻找和追踪可能的潜力股，准备介入；如果手中持有的股票不断攀升，应调整心态，平静心绪，理性思考，把握卖出时机。技术上，如拟买进，投资者应观察个股指标如RSI、KDJ等是否已在钝化区域，要确定之后，再结合其他因素考虑，方可耐心吸筹。如拟卖出，则应分析成交量的放大规模，关键指标是否高位钝化，放量时股价是否不升甚至调头。此时，若贪心大发，风险必大，赚钱梦必破。
七、劳逸结合，看不懂时就空仓
市场永远有机会，但风险无时不在。投资者久战股市，不注意休息，往往会失手。休整是为了以后更好地战斗，这也是理性投资的范畴。宁可空仓观望，去做些分析和研判的工作，也不可心神不定、坐卧不安地持股，那如同每日蚕食自身的精力。记住，空仓不是吃亏，是抢先规避风险、伺机行动前的必要准备。
八、少些凭空遐想，多些心理分析
许多投资者获利不知了结，套牢后不晓得及时止损，满脑子是一厢情愿式的单相思，总是自我安慰地认为，庄家还会拉升的。其实，这些投资者连震仓与出货都区分不出。这种幻觉变成幻想，从而演变成美妙的遐想，再由遐想真正落实到瞎想，结果被动得不可收拾。为了避免这种失误，辨别主流资金出没的真伪，就应该加大对管理层制定政策的心理研究，如政策出台的条件是什么？政策出台的根本动机是什么？主流资金是如何理解和判别管理层心理的？普通投资者又是如何想的？等等，还可以将此心理思维模式引申到板块、行业及个股当中，如此，将不难发现许多技术分析中难以得到的收获和惊喜。
九、自找麻烦
华尔街一位著名操盘手曾说："股市中赚钱很快，但亏钱也很快，而且，每次亏钱都是我赚了钱后，洋洋自得之时发生的。"投资者总沾沾自喜于一得之功，这是不可取的。但更重要的是失误后要善于总结，要自己给自己出难题，而不是简单地后悔，不是单纯地承认失误，要避免再一次摔倒在同一条河里的错误出现。
自我剖析，学习他人之长，补己之短，看似自寻烦恼，自找麻烦，其实是塑造成功的自我。记住，人不可妄自菲薄，更不可狂妄自大。
十、不求完美，只求收获
股市中不可能要求完美，而要有积小胜为大胜、积小赢为大赢的精神。永远记住，和你打交道的另外一个人比你聪明，这也是戒贪的一种方法。
Friday, February 27, 2009
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Oil Primed for Quick Climb, But Don't Fantasize About Return to 2008 Highs
If any market qualifies as rockier than equities, consider oil. Crude prices have done a complete roundtrip from $40 a barrel, up to $147/barrel last summer, only to tumble back down to today's levels under $40/barrel. So what exactly happened?
As our guest James Cordier, president of Liberty Trading Group, explains, oil's recent adventure was the result of a "perfect storm" of many factors.
Global demand was rising, along with hedge fund speculation.
The dollar was falling, boosting all dollar-denominated commodities.
China and other major oil consumers were providing fuel-price subsidies that propped up demand.
But by the summer of 2008, when those subsidies were removed and the global economy sputtered, oil's unraveling began. So is the oil party over? Not exactly. Once the economy begins its recovery, expect oil prices to race up to the $60-$70/barrel levels, Cordier forecasts.
And gasoline prices at the pump, heading into the crucial summer driving season? Higher, Cordier says. While demand may flatten as the economy slows and unemployment climbs, refiners are making less refined products such as gasoline and diesel to improve profit margins. We likely won't see prices topping $4/gallon like last summer, but hovering instead in the $2/gallon range.
And the likelihood of a return to $147 oil? "A fantasy," Cordier says.
As our guest James Cordier, president of Liberty Trading Group, explains, oil's recent adventure was the result of a "perfect storm" of many factors.
Global demand was rising, along with hedge fund speculation.
The dollar was falling, boosting all dollar-denominated commodities.
China and other major oil consumers were providing fuel-price subsidies that propped up demand.
But by the summer of 2008, when those subsidies were removed and the global economy sputtered, oil's unraveling began. So is the oil party over? Not exactly. Once the economy begins its recovery, expect oil prices to race up to the $60-$70/barrel levels, Cordier forecasts.
And gasoline prices at the pump, heading into the crucial summer driving season? Higher, Cordier says. While demand may flatten as the economy slows and unemployment climbs, refiners are making less refined products such as gasoline and diesel to improve profit margins. We likely won't see prices topping $4/gallon like last summer, but hovering instead in the $2/gallon range.
And the likelihood of a return to $147 oil? "A fantasy," Cordier says.
BEST WORLD: Low capex, high cashflow business
BEST WORLD is like a beauty queen who becomes more attractive with time. Year in, year out, since its listing in 2004, the company has delivered strong profit growth, as reflected in the title of a recent press release, “Best World delivers fourth year of consecutive growth since listing”.
As I dig deeper into the financial figures and familiarize myself with the business, I discover how well this company has done for its shareholders. Since its IPO, total shareholder return (that is, capital appreciation plus dividends) has been more than 600% as at Feb 29 this year, according to Bloomberg.
The company has stepped up its dividend payment now (final dividend of 2 cents, interim dividend 1.212 cents a share) when many companies are reducing theirs in times of uncertainty. For FY 2007, Best World increased its payout ratio from 34.8% in 2006 to 45% of its net profit. Better still, the higher percentage is on a higher base, as Best World’s net profit rose 13.9%.
Best World chairman Doreen Tan is a co-founder of Best World along with Dora Hoan.
Despite its fabulous business and shareholder orientation, Best World is a stock that some people hesitate to invest in simply because it is a multi-level marketing (MLM) company. A lot of people wrongly perceive it as pyramid selling, which is illegal in Singapore and many parts of Asia.
There are dubious businesses in the MLM industry, which focus their efforts on recruiting “sales representatives” who end up buying products for their own use and for inventory.
The reputable MLM businesses, on the other hand, mainly employ part-time, or sometimes full-time, sale representatives who use personal relationships and one-on-one selling to market products. The evidence points to Best World being a reputable MLM business.
Its compensation program, called ENP, does not make millionaires out of ordinary folk. However, it enables sales representatives to make decent money to add to their family’s resources. At least, one aspect of a “pyramid scheme” is at work in the Best World compensation plan. Thousands of individuals become its sales distributors to simply buy products at the “wholesale” price in order to use the products.
That’s why there’s only one sales distributor who is making S$500,000 and a few more who are making S$100,000 per year. These super distributors have a full-time commitment to sales and recruiting. Best has an estimated 2,000 such full-timers. On average, Best World’s active sales distributors earn sales commission of S$2,000 to S$2,500 per year.
The commission of top earners (which Best World terms as Silver, Gold and Platinum Directors) ranges from S$70,000 to S$500,000 per annum.
Best World sets a low consumption hurdle for members to sustain their membership. This gives me confidence that reported sales are quite close to actual consumption. In contrast, some competitors have higher entry-level sales hurdles to encourage aggressive selling by the agents.
Although sales growth is superior initially, the structure would leave unconsumed inventory stuck within the distribution channels eventually. According to its latest update, Best World has 148,428 distributors, of whom only 2,000 are full-timers. Best World's distributors consume about 75% of the products they buy.
Their demographics provide telling information about its main target market – females above 30 years old. About 95% of the full-time distributors are business builders.
Gross margins of more than 75%
This business model is undoubtedly compelling. It enjoys gross margins in excess of 75% without any corresponding huge need for capex. The sales force is independent and self-managed. Best World usually enters a new market when existing distributors start selling Best World products in this new market.
Membership has grown rapidly in recent years.
These distributors seek the Company’s permission to set up a Lifestyle Centre (“LC”) at their own expense. This centre acts as a storage and distribution point for the sales distributors. A certain percentage of sales is rewarded to these aggressive distributors for setting up LCs. When sufficient sales volume has been achieved, the company would set up a Regional Centre to enhance the marketing efforts of the products.
Best World has minimum receivables as all products are paid before they are sold. But the company does provide credit terms for some of its best sales people in regional markets. Best World has minimum working capital requirements.
Because of this unique market penetration strategy and the minimum working capital requirement, the company can continue to scale up the business without substantial requirements for working capital, property, plant and equipment.
In FY2007, its cash conversion cycle (that is, the time between the purchase of goods and the collection of payment) was shortened to 115 days as the company tightened collection days and inventory control. This compares well with FY 2006’s 110 days and FY2005’s 147 days.
Notably, Best World generated free cash flow of about S$14 million in FY07, compared to S$10.3 million in FY06.
Best World makes product quality a key priority. It sources for innovative products from its pharmaceutical GMP-certified OEM suppliers which are mostly based outside Asia. It plans to launch 10 new products every year. Sales growth is less driven by the number of launches and more by the emergence of the next blockbuster. While there is no guarantee of future product success, I see an emerging success.
Its DR’s Secret sold 200 sets/month when it was first launched in 1990. Currently, more than 5,000 sets are sold every month. Dr’s Secret sells for $384 per set, placing it among the mid-high tier of skincare product segment. My girlfriends say SK II sells for S$500+. A blockbuster product, the Negative Ionizer, costing S$750 sold pretty well in Singapore over the past 2 years. This same product was launched in Malaysia in May 06.
Best World keeps its SKU (or Stock Keeping Units) below 100 to make the sale proposition relatively simple for their mostly part-time independent sales force.
Hardly any receivables
Best World’s business is attractive because it is extremely cash generative and scalable. In FY2007, Best World's debtor days were 45 days, compared to payable days of 14 days. Receivables are tightly controlled by Best World.
Best World’s gross margins are attractive at 70-78%. The company sells its products to the distributors at a fixed Distributor Price (“DP”). Its distributors can sell the products onward to non-members at a 20% mark-up or Retail Price (“RP”).
However, the majority of the products are consumed by its own members. The company only books revenue at DP and prices its products at about 4-7x cost of goods sold (COGS). Historical margins were around 75%, which are higher than Amway’s 27%, Nu Skin’s 28% and the margins of traditional retailers such as Robinson and Metro. This implies that Best World’s products are priced at the mid-high range. This premium pricing reflects the quality of its products.
SPRING chairman Philip Yeo visiting Best World's HQ at Changi.
Selling and distribution expenses are the biggest cost component for Best World. These expenses are largely commissions for distributors to motivate them but there is a cap to ensure that selling expenses do not escalate out of control. The ENP program ensures that the company does not pay out more than 50.5% of revenue at any point. Instances of 50% payouts are rare, occurring only if all the distributors within a downline become optimally productive.
The beauty of MLM is the low capex requirements. There is little need to spend on fixed assets to run the business. As such, Best World’s free cash flow should be pretty close to its reported earnings. In Best World’s case, FY2007 net profit of S$13.5 million is close to FCF of S$14 million – and this pattern has prevailed in the past. With strong free cash flow, the Company can support sustainable dividends payout. The management has a policy to pay out 30% of its net profit as dividends to shareholders.
In FY2006, the Company paid S$4.125 million, or 2.5 cents per share, as dividend. For FY 2007, the Company increased it to S$6.125 million, or 3.212 cents, per share. I am sure the company can pay more in the future as it has a cash hoard of more than S$35 million and capex plans can be financed by its strong cash flow.
Ideally, Best World should consistently pay out more than 50% of its net profit as dividends, similar to Eu Yan Sang. This would help attract more institutional interest to the company, just as Eu Yan Sang has Aberdeen Asset Management as its anchor investor.
Future Plans
The management looks pretty focused, having publicly stated the markets that it would be expanding to in future. South Korea and the Philippines will be the new markets in 2008, while Japan and India will be next in 2009/2010. Given its track record in Indonesia, Malaysia and other markets, I believe the company should be able to execute its plans – with, hopefully, no more than a few bumps here and there.
A lot has been said about Best World’s expansion into China, touted to be the largest consumer market in the next five years. While there is no doubt that China, with its 1.3 billion population presents enormous opportunity for the company, I also believe that this is not an easy market.
Challenges will come along with opportunities. Let the management execute its plans in China the next 1-2 years and we will see how it grows along. In the meantime, if you are able to shake off any prejudice that MLM companies are bad eggs, this company is worth a second look, at least.
As I dig deeper into the financial figures and familiarize myself with the business, I discover how well this company has done for its shareholders. Since its IPO, total shareholder return (that is, capital appreciation plus dividends) has been more than 600% as at Feb 29 this year, according to Bloomberg.
The company has stepped up its dividend payment now (final dividend of 2 cents, interim dividend 1.212 cents a share) when many companies are reducing theirs in times of uncertainty. For FY 2007, Best World increased its payout ratio from 34.8% in 2006 to 45% of its net profit. Better still, the higher percentage is on a higher base, as Best World’s net profit rose 13.9%.
Best World chairman Doreen Tan is a co-founder of Best World along with Dora Hoan.
Despite its fabulous business and shareholder orientation, Best World is a stock that some people hesitate to invest in simply because it is a multi-level marketing (MLM) company. A lot of people wrongly perceive it as pyramid selling, which is illegal in Singapore and many parts of Asia.
There are dubious businesses in the MLM industry, which focus their efforts on recruiting “sales representatives” who end up buying products for their own use and for inventory.
The reputable MLM businesses, on the other hand, mainly employ part-time, or sometimes full-time, sale representatives who use personal relationships and one-on-one selling to market products. The evidence points to Best World being a reputable MLM business.
Its compensation program, called ENP, does not make millionaires out of ordinary folk. However, it enables sales representatives to make decent money to add to their family’s resources. At least, one aspect of a “pyramid scheme” is at work in the Best World compensation plan. Thousands of individuals become its sales distributors to simply buy products at the “wholesale” price in order to use the products.
That’s why there’s only one sales distributor who is making S$500,000 and a few more who are making S$100,000 per year. These super distributors have a full-time commitment to sales and recruiting. Best has an estimated 2,000 such full-timers. On average, Best World’s active sales distributors earn sales commission of S$2,000 to S$2,500 per year.
The commission of top earners (which Best World terms as Silver, Gold and Platinum Directors) ranges from S$70,000 to S$500,000 per annum.
Best World sets a low consumption hurdle for members to sustain their membership. This gives me confidence that reported sales are quite close to actual consumption. In contrast, some competitors have higher entry-level sales hurdles to encourage aggressive selling by the agents.
Although sales growth is superior initially, the structure would leave unconsumed inventory stuck within the distribution channels eventually. According to its latest update, Best World has 148,428 distributors, of whom only 2,000 are full-timers. Best World's distributors consume about 75% of the products they buy.
Their demographics provide telling information about its main target market – females above 30 years old. About 95% of the full-time distributors are business builders.
Gross margins of more than 75%
This business model is undoubtedly compelling. It enjoys gross margins in excess of 75% without any corresponding huge need for capex. The sales force is independent and self-managed. Best World usually enters a new market when existing distributors start selling Best World products in this new market.
Membership has grown rapidly in recent years.
These distributors seek the Company’s permission to set up a Lifestyle Centre (“LC”) at their own expense. This centre acts as a storage and distribution point for the sales distributors. A certain percentage of sales is rewarded to these aggressive distributors for setting up LCs. When sufficient sales volume has been achieved, the company would set up a Regional Centre to enhance the marketing efforts of the products.
Best World has minimum receivables as all products are paid before they are sold. But the company does provide credit terms for some of its best sales people in regional markets. Best World has minimum working capital requirements.
Because of this unique market penetration strategy and the minimum working capital requirement, the company can continue to scale up the business without substantial requirements for working capital, property, plant and equipment.
In FY2007, its cash conversion cycle (that is, the time between the purchase of goods and the collection of payment) was shortened to 115 days as the company tightened collection days and inventory control. This compares well with FY 2006’s 110 days and FY2005’s 147 days.
Notably, Best World generated free cash flow of about S$14 million in FY07, compared to S$10.3 million in FY06.
Best World makes product quality a key priority. It sources for innovative products from its pharmaceutical GMP-certified OEM suppliers which are mostly based outside Asia. It plans to launch 10 new products every year. Sales growth is less driven by the number of launches and more by the emergence of the next blockbuster. While there is no guarantee of future product success, I see an emerging success.
Its DR’s Secret sold 200 sets/month when it was first launched in 1990. Currently, more than 5,000 sets are sold every month. Dr’s Secret sells for $384 per set, placing it among the mid-high tier of skincare product segment. My girlfriends say SK II sells for S$500+. A blockbuster product, the Negative Ionizer, costing S$750 sold pretty well in Singapore over the past 2 years. This same product was launched in Malaysia in May 06.
Best World keeps its SKU (or Stock Keeping Units) below 100 to make the sale proposition relatively simple for their mostly part-time independent sales force.
Hardly any receivables
Best World’s business is attractive because it is extremely cash generative and scalable. In FY2007, Best World's debtor days were 45 days, compared to payable days of 14 days. Receivables are tightly controlled by Best World.
Best World’s gross margins are attractive at 70-78%. The company sells its products to the distributors at a fixed Distributor Price (“DP”). Its distributors can sell the products onward to non-members at a 20% mark-up or Retail Price (“RP”).
However, the majority of the products are consumed by its own members. The company only books revenue at DP and prices its products at about 4-7x cost of goods sold (COGS). Historical margins were around 75%, which are higher than Amway’s 27%, Nu Skin’s 28% and the margins of traditional retailers such as Robinson and Metro. This implies that Best World’s products are priced at the mid-high range. This premium pricing reflects the quality of its products.
SPRING chairman Philip Yeo visiting Best World's HQ at Changi.
Selling and distribution expenses are the biggest cost component for Best World. These expenses are largely commissions for distributors to motivate them but there is a cap to ensure that selling expenses do not escalate out of control. The ENP program ensures that the company does not pay out more than 50.5% of revenue at any point. Instances of 50% payouts are rare, occurring only if all the distributors within a downline become optimally productive.
The beauty of MLM is the low capex requirements. There is little need to spend on fixed assets to run the business. As such, Best World’s free cash flow should be pretty close to its reported earnings. In Best World’s case, FY2007 net profit of S$13.5 million is close to FCF of S$14 million – and this pattern has prevailed in the past. With strong free cash flow, the Company can support sustainable dividends payout. The management has a policy to pay out 30% of its net profit as dividends to shareholders.
In FY2006, the Company paid S$4.125 million, or 2.5 cents per share, as dividend. For FY 2007, the Company increased it to S$6.125 million, or 3.212 cents, per share. I am sure the company can pay more in the future as it has a cash hoard of more than S$35 million and capex plans can be financed by its strong cash flow.
Ideally, Best World should consistently pay out more than 50% of its net profit as dividends, similar to Eu Yan Sang. This would help attract more institutional interest to the company, just as Eu Yan Sang has Aberdeen Asset Management as its anchor investor.
Future Plans
The management looks pretty focused, having publicly stated the markets that it would be expanding to in future. South Korea and the Philippines will be the new markets in 2008, while Japan and India will be next in 2009/2010. Given its track record in Indonesia, Malaysia and other markets, I believe the company should be able to execute its plans – with, hopefully, no more than a few bumps here and there.
A lot has been said about Best World’s expansion into China, touted to be the largest consumer market in the next five years. While there is no doubt that China, with its 1.3 billion population presents enormous opportunity for the company, I also believe that this is not an easy market.
Challenges will come along with opportunities. Let the management execute its plans in China the next 1-2 years and we will see how it grows along. In the meantime, if you are able to shake off any prejudice that MLM companies are bad eggs, this company is worth a second look, at least.
BEST WORLD: Insights from FY08 analyst briefing
DIRECT SELLER Best World had over a dozen analysts and fund managers at its FY08 results briefing last week, and its management shared candidly how it is meeting the challenge of the tough economic climate.
The consumer-discretionary company netted some S$10.6 million in earnings for FY08, had net margins of 11.1% and sits on some S$30.6 million of cash.
Best World’s revenues come from sales of skincare, health supplements and other lifestyle health and beauty products to its members.
Not only do the members use Best World products themselves, they are also provided with comprehensive sales training as well as commissions for recruiting other members and for promoting sales.
Best World’s successful member-get-member platform has grown its membership base to 186,759 (customers) in about 10 countries in the Asia Pacific region.
Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore are its key markets.
Indonesia is its largest market, with revenue contribution of 46% in FY08. While Indon sales have been robust – growing 14.5% yoy, a weaker rupiah resulted in sales contribution falling by 3.6% in Singapore dollars.
Best World recently met a hiccup in obtaining licensing for direct selling in China. A proposal to acquire 51% in Chinese direct seller Joymain lapsed after the Chinese party failed to obtain approval from their Ministry of Commerce.
Below is a summary of issues addressed by Best World’s executive director, Mr Huang Ban Chin, and its group financial controller, Ms Chew Nam Yeo, at the briefing.
Sales
Q: What is your best-selling product category?
A: Skincare, as most of our distributors are ladies. This contributes about 60% to our revenues.
Q: What is your longest selling product?
A: Health supplements. Our products do not have a limit on its life cycle. The popularity of a product line depends on how much commission it can generate for distributors.
Q: What will your advertising & promo expense look like for FY09?
A: A&P expense is booked as part of distribution cost, which together with commissions and other sales related expenses is about 40% of revenue.
We are not planning any substantial increase in our A&P expense.
Our advertising is prudent; that is, media channels chosen are specific to audience target rather than blitzes. For example, we may advertise in Lianhe Zaobao to reach the Mandarin speaking community but not in the Straits Times.
Best World's negative ionizer is a big ticket item which sells for about S$700.
Q: Why are sales per member declining (from S$668 in FY07 to S$514 in FY08)? How do you deal with this?
A: Our product structure is such that members usually make big-ticket purchases at the point of recruitment. Subsequent purchases are usually to replace consumable supplies.
For example, selling prices of some products like our negative ionizer and water filter are in the high hundreds but these are not consumables that generate replacement sales.
Thus, as our membership base grows, the existence of earlier recruits who buy less than the new recruits for the year will average down sales per member.
To address this, we are constantly rolling out new product lines and phasing out the older models in response to changes in market trends, regulations and cost of ingredients.
In 2009, we have a new product - first milk (Colostrum) health supplement, and Pureflo - a new generation of our water filteration system.
We also smooth out revenue by providing installment payment schemes.
Q: Do members pay to join as distributors?
A: There is a nominal once-off membership fee of S$25. This is payable upon recruitment and is used to offset costs of sales kits which include product and price catalogues, CDs etc.
Q: In your membership structure, what is the proportion of ‘business builders’ versus passive consumers?
A: The number of business builders (members who actively recruit new members and generate high-volume sales) is growing. This is especially true in China.
In the pipeline is a 3rd generation water filtration system capturing form and function.
Indonesia
Q: Have you maintained retail prices in Indonesia?
A: We raised prices twice in Indonesia last year. The first was for passing the burden of value-added tax to customers. The second was to offset the foreign currency loss we would incur as a result of the Indonesian Rupiah’s depreciation.
Q: What is your cash conversion cycle in Rupiah?
A: About 5 months.
Q: How are you planning to offset a decline in revenue from Indonesia?
A: Taiwan is a very resilient market and its people are very solution oriented in hard times. It is one market where direct selling recruitment rises during recessions.
Relationships are very important in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. For example, they would rather buy from someone they know than from a retail mall.
Taiwanese have a natural affinity for selling in China and we see potential in the Greater China market.
China
Q: What are your plans for expanding in China?
A: Joymain has been dropped but we are exploring other business partners. We are no longer considering joint ventures with Chinese direct sellers in order to sell under their license. Rather, we will apply for the license under the Best World corporate name.
Hong Kong is a tough market due to the relatively lower proportion of members who want to be business builders. However, it is important as an entry point to the China market.
Guangdong residents, for example, use established Hong Kong brands as a reference for product acceptance.
Q: Have you recovered your Rmb 20 million prepayment to Joymain for the acquisition?
A: Our prepayment is secured by Joymain’s unencumbered real properties independently valued to be worth about Rmb 40 million in April 2008. Currently we are going through the necessary procedures to recover the prepayment.
Group financial controller Chew Nam Yeo has a prudent cash control policy.
Outlook
Q: Have any of your competitors closed down?
A: A private company named WBG closed shop recently. The closure was due to a management problem rather than market conditions.
Q: Does this present opportunity for Best World?
A: Yes, we certainly see opportunity there.
Balance sheet and cash flow
Q: How did you achieve the improvement in receivables turnover (from 45 days in FY07 to 22 days in FY08)? Is that sustainable?
A: We had better credit management and receivables collection.
Q: Why did payables turnover fall (from 54 days in FY07 to 24 days in FY08)?
A: There are certain vendors with shorter payment terms.
Q: Are you holding your S$30 million of cash reserves in any structured products?
A: We are very prudent in cash management and mostly hold deposits in banks. We do not hold any stocks or bonds for speculation purposes.
A small proportion (S$3.5 million) is in principal-protected variable interest rate notes issued by banks.
We will need cash resources for our expansion as well as business opportunities that may arise in the course of the year.
The consumer-discretionary company netted some S$10.6 million in earnings for FY08, had net margins of 11.1% and sits on some S$30.6 million of cash.
Best World’s revenues come from sales of skincare, health supplements and other lifestyle health and beauty products to its members.
Not only do the members use Best World products themselves, they are also provided with comprehensive sales training as well as commissions for recruiting other members and for promoting sales.
Best World’s successful member-get-member platform has grown its membership base to 186,759 (customers) in about 10 countries in the Asia Pacific region.
Indonesia, Malaysia and Singapore are its key markets.
Indonesia is its largest market, with revenue contribution of 46% in FY08. While Indon sales have been robust – growing 14.5% yoy, a weaker rupiah resulted in sales contribution falling by 3.6% in Singapore dollars.
Best World recently met a hiccup in obtaining licensing for direct selling in China. A proposal to acquire 51% in Chinese direct seller Joymain lapsed after the Chinese party failed to obtain approval from their Ministry of Commerce.
Below is a summary of issues addressed by Best World’s executive director, Mr Huang Ban Chin, and its group financial controller, Ms Chew Nam Yeo, at the briefing.
Sales
Q: What is your best-selling product category?
A: Skincare, as most of our distributors are ladies. This contributes about 60% to our revenues.
Q: What is your longest selling product?
A: Health supplements. Our products do not have a limit on its life cycle. The popularity of a product line depends on how much commission it can generate for distributors.
Q: What will your advertising & promo expense look like for FY09?
A: A&P expense is booked as part of distribution cost, which together with commissions and other sales related expenses is about 40% of revenue.
We are not planning any substantial increase in our A&P expense.
Our advertising is prudent; that is, media channels chosen are specific to audience target rather than blitzes. For example, we may advertise in Lianhe Zaobao to reach the Mandarin speaking community but not in the Straits Times.
Best World's negative ionizer is a big ticket item which sells for about S$700.
Q: Why are sales per member declining (from S$668 in FY07 to S$514 in FY08)? How do you deal with this?
A: Our product structure is such that members usually make big-ticket purchases at the point of recruitment. Subsequent purchases are usually to replace consumable supplies.
For example, selling prices of some products like our negative ionizer and water filter are in the high hundreds but these are not consumables that generate replacement sales.
Thus, as our membership base grows, the existence of earlier recruits who buy less than the new recruits for the year will average down sales per member.
To address this, we are constantly rolling out new product lines and phasing out the older models in response to changes in market trends, regulations and cost of ingredients.
In 2009, we have a new product - first milk (Colostrum) health supplement, and Pureflo - a new generation of our water filteration system.
We also smooth out revenue by providing installment payment schemes.
Q: Do members pay to join as distributors?
A: There is a nominal once-off membership fee of S$25. This is payable upon recruitment and is used to offset costs of sales kits which include product and price catalogues, CDs etc.
Q: In your membership structure, what is the proportion of ‘business builders’ versus passive consumers?
A: The number of business builders (members who actively recruit new members and generate high-volume sales) is growing. This is especially true in China.
In the pipeline is a 3rd generation water filtration system capturing form and function.
Indonesia
Q: Have you maintained retail prices in Indonesia?
A: We raised prices twice in Indonesia last year. The first was for passing the burden of value-added tax to customers. The second was to offset the foreign currency loss we would incur as a result of the Indonesian Rupiah’s depreciation.
Q: What is your cash conversion cycle in Rupiah?
A: About 5 months.
Q: How are you planning to offset a decline in revenue from Indonesia?
A: Taiwan is a very resilient market and its people are very solution oriented in hard times. It is one market where direct selling recruitment rises during recessions.
Relationships are very important in China, Hong Kong and Taiwan. For example, they would rather buy from someone they know than from a retail mall.
Taiwanese have a natural affinity for selling in China and we see potential in the Greater China market.
China
Q: What are your plans for expanding in China?
A: Joymain has been dropped but we are exploring other business partners. We are no longer considering joint ventures with Chinese direct sellers in order to sell under their license. Rather, we will apply for the license under the Best World corporate name.
Hong Kong is a tough market due to the relatively lower proportion of members who want to be business builders. However, it is important as an entry point to the China market.
Guangdong residents, for example, use established Hong Kong brands as a reference for product acceptance.
Q: Have you recovered your Rmb 20 million prepayment to Joymain for the acquisition?
A: Our prepayment is secured by Joymain’s unencumbered real properties independently valued to be worth about Rmb 40 million in April 2008. Currently we are going through the necessary procedures to recover the prepayment.
Group financial controller Chew Nam Yeo has a prudent cash control policy.
Outlook
Q: Have any of your competitors closed down?
A: A private company named WBG closed shop recently. The closure was due to a management problem rather than market conditions.
Q: Does this present opportunity for Best World?
A: Yes, we certainly see opportunity there.
Balance sheet and cash flow
Q: How did you achieve the improvement in receivables turnover (from 45 days in FY07 to 22 days in FY08)? Is that sustainable?
A: We had better credit management and receivables collection.
Q: Why did payables turnover fall (from 54 days in FY07 to 24 days in FY08)?
A: There are certain vendors with shorter payment terms.
Q: Are you holding your S$30 million of cash reserves in any structured products?
A: We are very prudent in cash management and mostly hold deposits in banks. We do not hold any stocks or bonds for speculation purposes.
A small proportion (S$3.5 million) is in principal-protected variable interest rate notes issued by banks.
We will need cash resources for our expansion as well as business opportunities that may arise in the course of the year.
Paul Krugman on the Malaise of Nations
Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman discusses why the U.S.'s balance-sheet recession could lead to many years of deflationary malaise.
Paul Krugman Is in His Element. The Nobel Prize-winning economist in December put out an updated edition of The Return of Depression Economics, his prescient study from 1999 in which he laid out the risks to nations when recessions spiral into long-term malaise. Timely reading, indeed, and worth picking up, if you haven't already; a copy can be purchased online here. Krugman was kind enough to expand upon his thoughts regarding President Obama's stimulus package and what changes may be in store for the U.S. and world economies in coming years in an e-mail exchange with Barrons.com.
Barrons.com: What's the stupidest thing you've heard said about the current economic crisis and how to solve it? What's the smartest?
Paul Krugman: The stupidest is a very tough competition; I tend to think of whichever mind-numbingly stupid thing I've just heard, like [U.S. House of Representatives] Minority Leader [John] Boehner's statement that we shouldn't "reward" Fannie and Freddie by increasing their resources (he apparently doesn't understand the meaning of "government owned.") But I guess the statements from many players that the Obama plan is a spending bill, not a stimulus bill -- when spending is the whole point -- top the list.
The smartest thing probably comes from Richard Koo, [chief economist for Japan's Nomura Research Institute, part of Nomura Securities] who was one of the first to point out that this isn't just a housing crisis, or even a banking crisis -- it's a balance sheet crisis.
Barrons.com: You've written that the gap between the economy's potential shortfall in production over the next three years -- $2.9 trillion -- and the $800 billion in economic stimulus is a big problem. Why does this gap between production and bailout matter so much?
Krugman: My big concern here is that the economy digs itself into a deflationary hole, which is what can all too easily happen if you have a large, sustained output gap. Once prices start falling, and people start to expect continuing deflation, the balance sheet problems will become much worse than they already are, and much harder to resolve. Watching that happen in Japan is what led me to write the original, 1999 version of The Return of Depression Economics, and now the same thing is all too possible here.
Barrons.com: What's a worst-case scenario if this stimulus fails to kick-start a recovery, as you've argued?
Krugman: A lost decade or more. I don't think, even now, that we're headed for 20+ percent unemployment, Depression-style. But I can see a strong possibility of an economic and political trap: low investment and high savings thanks to deflation and a depressed economy, with effective government action blocked by a combination of concerns about debt and the widespread belief that we tried stimulus and it didn't work.
Barrons.com: Will the $80 billion in aid to holders of underwater mortgages make a material difference?
Krugman: It depends on the meaning of the word "material." It will help millions of families, and somewhat reduce the financial system's losses. It won't revive the housing market, nor will it end the banks' problems.
Barrons.com: Will we ever become a nation of savers again?
Krugman: Actually, we ARE becoming a nation of savers again -- which is part of the reason GDP is plunging. I think the asset wipeout will have a long-term impact on consumer behavior; remember, we had a 9% savings rate as recently as the 80s.
Barrons.com: There's been a dramatic collapse in asset values in the stock market, as measured by the decline in the P/E of the S&P 500. Do you think asset values will bounce back with an economic recovery, or has there been some fundamental long-term shift in asset values that will linger even after recovery?
Krugman: Believe it or not, housing prices are still above-normal, as measured either by the price-rent ratio or the price-income ratio. So housing prices won't bounce back. As for stocks, when I take [Yale University economist] Bob Shiller's data, which give prices relative to a long trailing average of profits, and update, I get a P/E right now of about 13, not so far from historical norms. So it's not clear how much bounceback we can count on, if any. Maybe the bull market was the aberration.
Barrons.com: You've advocated a stimulus for the U.S. along the lines of the Public Works project during the Depression. Assuming such a thing could produce another economic boom, what are the downside risks to a massive infusion of public money?
Krugman: Well, large-scale government borrowing does pose long-term fiscal risks; the U.S. has substantial room for additional borrowing, but it's not unlimited. Aside from that, I don't see big risks.
Barrons.com: One of the themes you explore in your writing is the notion that world economic relationships can change over the course of decades (e.g., from globalism to nationalism to globalism). What are a couple of the biggest economic changes you see playing out over the next ten years, and what might be their social impact in the U.S. and abroad?
Krugman: I think we're heading for a new regime of financial regulation, which might significantly reduce financial globalization, for both good reasons and bad: the good reason is that a lot of what looked like globalization was actually regulatory arbitrage, the bad reason is that governments that are bailing out financial system will tend to insist that the benefits stay at home. I don't think this will affect most Americans' lives much; but a lot of the highest incomes have come from finance, and the Masters of the Universe will definitely end up less masterful.
We're also, I think, going to see some significant reindustrialization, because the conveyor belt moving Chinese and other funds to America will be slowed if not shut down. This will mean a greater reliance on domestic production.
Mainly, though, how society changes will depend on the political response -- whether this really ends up being a new New Deal or just a slight course correction.
Barrons.com: What great books have you read recently that you can recommend?
Krugman: I just reread a good part of John Maynard Keynes's Essays in Persuasion, especially "The Great Slump of 1930," which is awesomely relevant right now. And while it has nothing much to do with the crisis, I'd highly recommend Dan Koeppel's Banana: The Fate of the Fruit that Changed the World, which tells you a lot about the history of globalization along the way.
Paul Krugman Is in His Element. The Nobel Prize-winning economist in December put out an updated edition of The Return of Depression Economics, his prescient study from 1999 in which he laid out the risks to nations when recessions spiral into long-term malaise. Timely reading, indeed, and worth picking up, if you haven't already; a copy can be purchased online here. Krugman was kind enough to expand upon his thoughts regarding President Obama's stimulus package and what changes may be in store for the U.S. and world economies in coming years in an e-mail exchange with Barrons.com.
Barrons.com: What's the stupidest thing you've heard said about the current economic crisis and how to solve it? What's the smartest?
Paul Krugman: The stupidest is a very tough competition; I tend to think of whichever mind-numbingly stupid thing I've just heard, like [U.S. House of Representatives] Minority Leader [John] Boehner's statement that we shouldn't "reward" Fannie and Freddie by increasing their resources (he apparently doesn't understand the meaning of "government owned.") But I guess the statements from many players that the Obama plan is a spending bill, not a stimulus bill -- when spending is the whole point -- top the list.
The smartest thing probably comes from Richard Koo, [chief economist for Japan's Nomura Research Institute, part of Nomura Securities] who was one of the first to point out that this isn't just a housing crisis, or even a banking crisis -- it's a balance sheet crisis.
Barrons.com: You've written that the gap between the economy's potential shortfall in production over the next three years -- $2.9 trillion -- and the $800 billion in economic stimulus is a big problem. Why does this gap between production and bailout matter so much?
Krugman: My big concern here is that the economy digs itself into a deflationary hole, which is what can all too easily happen if you have a large, sustained output gap. Once prices start falling, and people start to expect continuing deflation, the balance sheet problems will become much worse than they already are, and much harder to resolve. Watching that happen in Japan is what led me to write the original, 1999 version of The Return of Depression Economics, and now the same thing is all too possible here.
Barrons.com: What's a worst-case scenario if this stimulus fails to kick-start a recovery, as you've argued?
Krugman: A lost decade or more. I don't think, even now, that we're headed for 20+ percent unemployment, Depression-style. But I can see a strong possibility of an economic and political trap: low investment and high savings thanks to deflation and a depressed economy, with effective government action blocked by a combination of concerns about debt and the widespread belief that we tried stimulus and it didn't work.
Barrons.com: Will the $80 billion in aid to holders of underwater mortgages make a material difference?
Krugman: It depends on the meaning of the word "material." It will help millions of families, and somewhat reduce the financial system's losses. It won't revive the housing market, nor will it end the banks' problems.
Barrons.com: Will we ever become a nation of savers again?
Krugman: Actually, we ARE becoming a nation of savers again -- which is part of the reason GDP is plunging. I think the asset wipeout will have a long-term impact on consumer behavior; remember, we had a 9% savings rate as recently as the 80s.
Barrons.com: There's been a dramatic collapse in asset values in the stock market, as measured by the decline in the P/E of the S&P 500. Do you think asset values will bounce back with an economic recovery, or has there been some fundamental long-term shift in asset values that will linger even after recovery?
Krugman: Believe it or not, housing prices are still above-normal, as measured either by the price-rent ratio or the price-income ratio. So housing prices won't bounce back. As for stocks, when I take [Yale University economist] Bob Shiller's data, which give prices relative to a long trailing average of profits, and update, I get a P/E right now of about 13, not so far from historical norms. So it's not clear how much bounceback we can count on, if any. Maybe the bull market was the aberration.
Barrons.com: You've advocated a stimulus for the U.S. along the lines of the Public Works project during the Depression. Assuming such a thing could produce another economic boom, what are the downside risks to a massive infusion of public money?
Krugman: Well, large-scale government borrowing does pose long-term fiscal risks; the U.S. has substantial room for additional borrowing, but it's not unlimited. Aside from that, I don't see big risks.
Barrons.com: One of the themes you explore in your writing is the notion that world economic relationships can change over the course of decades (e.g., from globalism to nationalism to globalism). What are a couple of the biggest economic changes you see playing out over the next ten years, and what might be their social impact in the U.S. and abroad?
Krugman: I think we're heading for a new regime of financial regulation, which might significantly reduce financial globalization, for both good reasons and bad: the good reason is that a lot of what looked like globalization was actually regulatory arbitrage, the bad reason is that governments that are bailing out financial system will tend to insist that the benefits stay at home. I don't think this will affect most Americans' lives much; but a lot of the highest incomes have come from finance, and the Masters of the Universe will definitely end up less masterful.
We're also, I think, going to see some significant reindustrialization, because the conveyor belt moving Chinese and other funds to America will be slowed if not shut down. This will mean a greater reliance on domestic production.
Mainly, though, how society changes will depend on the political response -- whether this really ends up being a new New Deal or just a slight course correction.
Barrons.com: What great books have you read recently that you can recommend?
Krugman: I just reread a good part of John Maynard Keynes's Essays in Persuasion, especially "The Great Slump of 1930," which is awesomely relevant right now. And while it has nothing much to do with the crisis, I'd highly recommend Dan Koeppel's Banana: The Fate of the Fruit that Changed the World, which tells you a lot about the history of globalization along the way.
BEST WORLD: Trading at 1X PE ex-cash
Results announced last night.
BEST WORLD INTERNATIONAL’S revenue for FY08 declined 6% to $96.1 million while its earnings came in 20.7% lower at $10.6 million.
Notably, net earnings for 4Q dropped more than expected (80%) to $989,000.
Best World, which is a direct seller of various products in the region, said it experienced weaker consumer demand for its products in Malaysia, in particular.
The weaker demand was partly caused by price increases of its products in 4Q in several key markets due to the appreciating Singapore dollar against the local currencies.
Solid balance sheet
Distribution costs, which comprise commissions, advertising & promotion expenses and other sales related costs, decreased proportionately with revenue.
But administrative expenses increased 8.2% to $18.8 million in FY2008 because of a revision in remuneration from the previous year and an increase in headcount, an increase in lease expenses and higher asset depreciation and amortization.
It does seem that Best World’s administrative cost structure stands at around $5 million quarterly and remains pretty fixed.
The company also incurred $2.1 million in unrealized forex exchange losses in 4Q alone. This is something that we have to seek clarification on.
Among the positives, I note that the company has improved its credit management and this has led to accounts receivable turnover decreasing from 45 days as at end-2007 to 22 days as at end-2008.
The company had no bank loan at the end of 2008 and has approximately $30.6 million in cash and cash equivalents. Hence, providing for working capital requirements, the company appears to be in a good position to continue its cash dividend payout in future.
A final and a special dividend totalling 1.0 cent per ordinary share has been proposed. Including the interim dividend of 1.2 cents, the total dividends will amount to 2.2 cents per ordinary share for FY2008.
26% increase in membership
Overall, membership figures grew 26% from 148,428 in FY2007 to 186,759 in FY2008. In the past, I understand that only about 2,000 are active business builders – that is, consumers who take direct selling as a business.
In a poor economic environment like the current one, I believe more white-collar workers will turn to direct selling as a second source of income. This could be a new source of sales folks for Best World, especially in Singapore where most of the sales force is Mandarin-speaking.
People still need to purchase necessities and consumables in good or bad times. And who better to buy from than one's own trusted network of business partners, colleagues, family and/or friends?
For the next 12 months, I would be looking to see if the company can add a substantial number of new members to its sales force and also to evaluate how much of these members are business builders as compared to normal consumers.
China was a disappointment
Best World announced the termination of the JV with Joymain a week ago. This came as no surprise to me as the company had no updates to this JV after its initial announcement in Dec 2007.
What concerns me is whether the company will have to write down its RMB 20 million loan to Joymain.
I also wonder what the company’s China strategy now is. Does it have to do another JV to grow its China market or should it build China slowly via organic growth? The company already has nearly 3,000 members under its franchise-selling scheme in China.
Valuation: 1X PE ex-cash
For an 18-yar-old company with annual revenue of almost $100 million and profit of $10.6 million, one can hardly call it a fledgling company. Yet, the market is valuing it at only 3.8x PE. This is a company that has generated $50 million of profit over the past 5 years.
Ex-cash (remember, it has $30.6 million in cash and zero bank loan), the company is now trading at just around 1x PE.
BEST WORLD INTERNATIONAL’S revenue for FY08 declined 6% to $96.1 million while its earnings came in 20.7% lower at $10.6 million.
Notably, net earnings for 4Q dropped more than expected (80%) to $989,000.
Best World, which is a direct seller of various products in the region, said it experienced weaker consumer demand for its products in Malaysia, in particular.
The weaker demand was partly caused by price increases of its products in 4Q in several key markets due to the appreciating Singapore dollar against the local currencies.
Solid balance sheet
Distribution costs, which comprise commissions, advertising & promotion expenses and other sales related costs, decreased proportionately with revenue.
But administrative expenses increased 8.2% to $18.8 million in FY2008 because of a revision in remuneration from the previous year and an increase in headcount, an increase in lease expenses and higher asset depreciation and amortization.
It does seem that Best World’s administrative cost structure stands at around $5 million quarterly and remains pretty fixed.
The company also incurred $2.1 million in unrealized forex exchange losses in 4Q alone. This is something that we have to seek clarification on.
Among the positives, I note that the company has improved its credit management and this has led to accounts receivable turnover decreasing from 45 days as at end-2007 to 22 days as at end-2008.
The company had no bank loan at the end of 2008 and has approximately $30.6 million in cash and cash equivalents. Hence, providing for working capital requirements, the company appears to be in a good position to continue its cash dividend payout in future.
A final and a special dividend totalling 1.0 cent per ordinary share has been proposed. Including the interim dividend of 1.2 cents, the total dividends will amount to 2.2 cents per ordinary share for FY2008.
26% increase in membership
Overall, membership figures grew 26% from 148,428 in FY2007 to 186,759 in FY2008. In the past, I understand that only about 2,000 are active business builders – that is, consumers who take direct selling as a business.
In a poor economic environment like the current one, I believe more white-collar workers will turn to direct selling as a second source of income. This could be a new source of sales folks for Best World, especially in Singapore where most of the sales force is Mandarin-speaking.
People still need to purchase necessities and consumables in good or bad times. And who better to buy from than one's own trusted network of business partners, colleagues, family and/or friends?
For the next 12 months, I would be looking to see if the company can add a substantial number of new members to its sales force and also to evaluate how much of these members are business builders as compared to normal consumers.
China was a disappointment
Best World announced the termination of the JV with Joymain a week ago. This came as no surprise to me as the company had no updates to this JV after its initial announcement in Dec 2007.
What concerns me is whether the company will have to write down its RMB 20 million loan to Joymain.
I also wonder what the company’s China strategy now is. Does it have to do another JV to grow its China market or should it build China slowly via organic growth? The company already has nearly 3,000 members under its franchise-selling scheme in China.
Valuation: 1X PE ex-cash
For an 18-yar-old company with annual revenue of almost $100 million and profit of $10.6 million, one can hardly call it a fledgling company. Yet, the market is valuing it at only 3.8x PE. This is a company that has generated $50 million of profit over the past 5 years.
Ex-cash (remember, it has $30.6 million in cash and zero bank loan), the company is now trading at just around 1x PE.
Sunday, February 22, 2009
高盛：新台币韩元与新元对美元会续跌
高盛(Goldman Sachs Group Inc.)表示，新台币、韩元和新元对美元还会继续下跌。另外，澳元和纽元对美元汇率连续两周下跌，因担心东欧经济恶化导致市场抛售高收益资产。
高盛表示，新台币、韩元与新元等兑美元今年贬势将扩大。香港高盛分析员莱克（Fiona Lake）在研究报告中写道，新台币3个月内将贬至36元新台币兑1美元。新台币兑美元今年以来贬幅达5.3％，前天触及34.699元新台币兑1美元，创2003年6月以来低点。
高盛预估，韩元兑美元短期内将贬至1500韩元兑1美元；新元兑美元3个月内将贬至1.56新元兑1美元。韩元兑美元年初迄今贬16％，目前在1488韩元水平上交易。新元今年贬5.6％，目前在1.53新元水平上交易。
莱克表示，未来一年人民币汇价可能持稳。它年初以来贬0.2％。
另外，纽元对美元连续第二天下跌，纽西兰财政部表示，由于税收收入减少，预期现金预算赤字将大于去年年底预测。
高盛表示，新台币、韩元与新元等兑美元今年贬势将扩大。香港高盛分析员莱克（Fiona Lake）在研究报告中写道，新台币3个月内将贬至36元新台币兑1美元。新台币兑美元今年以来贬幅达5.3％，前天触及34.699元新台币兑1美元，创2003年6月以来低点。
高盛预估，韩元兑美元短期内将贬至1500韩元兑1美元；新元兑美元3个月内将贬至1.56新元兑1美元。韩元兑美元年初迄今贬16％，目前在1488韩元水平上交易。新元今年贬5.6％，目前在1.53新元水平上交易。
莱克表示，未来一年人民币汇价可能持稳。它年初以来贬0.2％。
另外，纽元对美元连续第二天下跌，纽西兰财政部表示，由于税收收入减少，预期现金预算赤字将大于去年年底预测。
金融海啸第2波 逼在眉睫
香港文汇报报道，金融海啸爆发以来，美国以至各国政府都出招救市、刺激经济，但仍无法改善市场的信心。受华府拟将部分银行国有化的传言影响，美国金融股的沽压沉重，华府需设法澄清。另外东欧国家经济表现差劲，汇率下跌、债台高筑，大有机会影响西欧国家，引发第二波金融海啸。
美国参议院银行业委员会主席多德接受彭博电视台访问，谈到有意见称将部分银行或需短暂国有化时表示：“我一点都不欢迎（这做法），但这有可能发生。我担心我们最终都要这样做，哪怕是一段短时间。”
花旗日泻22% 华府急澄清
多德这段讲话刺激投资者的神经，曾获注资共450亿美元（约3,489亿港元）的美银和花旗股价于上周五的纽约股市急泻，其中花旗的股价更于一天内急泻超过22%，跌破2美元，美银股价也一度跌穿3美元。花旗和美银的市值分别萎缩至106亿美元（约822亿港元）和242亿美元（约1,877亿港元）。有分析认为投资者已不相信两行的市值，忧虑华府随时接管两行。
为安抚市场，白宫和财政部先后表示会保持银行系统的私有制。白宫发言人吉布斯说，政府依然确信私有制银行系统是正确路向。财政部发言人则重申，华府将确保金融系统由私营机构拥有和管理。华府澄清后，稍为止住股市的跌势，不过道琼斯指数收市仍跌100点。
资金急撤离 东欧多国高危
美国和西欧国家受海啸影响，资金撤离东欧市场，东欧经济岌岌可危。世界银行警告，东欧今年的经济前景“黯淡”，非常不明朗。东欧失业率攀升，“末日博士”鲁比尼更指拉脱维亚、爱沙尼亚、立陶宛、匈牙利、白俄罗斯和乌克兰等国是高危国家。
骨牌效应将冲击西欧银行
东欧国家的经济与西欧国家的金融业有莫大关系，西欧银行因在本国发展空间有限，因此向东欧国家放债，数字显示目前西欧国家向东欧的借出贷款达1.5万亿美元（约11.6万亿港元）。
然而，近日东欧国家的货币汇率下跌，令以欧元和瑞士法郎等外币为结算的债务变得更加昂贵，另外多数借款短期内到期，今年就必须还款或者再融资4,000亿美元（约3.1万亿港元），但信贷渠道已关，东欧国家欠债的机会大增。穆迪投资上周便警告，东欧金融体系风险正在加剧，并可能造成骨牌效应，向西欧扩散，情况可能进一步恶化。
分析员警告，东欧可能发生与90年代末亚洲金融危机同等规模的经济动荡，重创本已脆弱的欧洲金融体系，甚至引发第二波金融海啸。
世银警告西欧国家要摒弃保护主义，才不致窒碍东欧国家的经济复苏。波兰已发起东欧各国于下月1日举行迷你峰会，向西欧国家发声，拒绝保护主义，欧盟委员会主席巴罗佐将出席。
美国参议院银行业委员会主席多德接受彭博电视台访问，谈到有意见称将部分银行或需短暂国有化时表示：“我一点都不欢迎（这做法），但这有可能发生。我担心我们最终都要这样做，哪怕是一段短时间。”
花旗日泻22% 华府急澄清
多德这段讲话刺激投资者的神经，曾获注资共450亿美元（约3,489亿港元）的美银和花旗股价于上周五的纽约股市急泻，其中花旗的股价更于一天内急泻超过22%，跌破2美元，美银股价也一度跌穿3美元。花旗和美银的市值分别萎缩至106亿美元（约822亿港元）和242亿美元（约1,877亿港元）。有分析认为投资者已不相信两行的市值，忧虑华府随时接管两行。
为安抚市场，白宫和财政部先后表示会保持银行系统的私有制。白宫发言人吉布斯说，政府依然确信私有制银行系统是正确路向。财政部发言人则重申，华府将确保金融系统由私营机构拥有和管理。华府澄清后，稍为止住股市的跌势，不过道琼斯指数收市仍跌100点。
资金急撤离 东欧多国高危
美国和西欧国家受海啸影响，资金撤离东欧市场，东欧经济岌岌可危。世界银行警告，东欧今年的经济前景“黯淡”，非常不明朗。东欧失业率攀升，“末日博士”鲁比尼更指拉脱维亚、爱沙尼亚、立陶宛、匈牙利、白俄罗斯和乌克兰等国是高危国家。
骨牌效应将冲击西欧银行
东欧国家的经济与西欧国家的金融业有莫大关系，西欧银行因在本国发展空间有限，因此向东欧国家放债，数字显示目前西欧国家向东欧的借出贷款达1.5万亿美元（约11.6万亿港元）。
然而，近日东欧国家的货币汇率下跌，令以欧元和瑞士法郎等外币为结算的债务变得更加昂贵，另外多数借款短期内到期，今年就必须还款或者再融资4,000亿美元（约3.1万亿港元），但信贷渠道已关，东欧国家欠债的机会大增。穆迪投资上周便警告，东欧金融体系风险正在加剧，并可能造成骨牌效应，向西欧扩散，情况可能进一步恶化。
分析员警告，东欧可能发生与90年代末亚洲金融危机同等规模的经济动荡，重创本已脆弱的欧洲金融体系，甚至引发第二波金融海啸。
世银警告西欧国家要摒弃保护主义，才不致窒碍东欧国家的经济复苏。波兰已发起东欧各国于下月1日举行迷你峰会，向西欧国家发声，拒绝保护主义，欧盟委员会主席巴罗佐将出席。
末日博士：黑暗中仍有投资亮点
“末日博士”认为在黑暗的经济中依然有投资亮点，曙光将来自黄金、商品、亚洲股市和石油关联公司。
准确预测1987年美国股灾和1997年亚洲金融风暴，有“末日博士”之称的麦嘉华（Marc Faber），昨天受邀为《商业时报》同瑞士私人银行宝盛银行(Julius Baer)联办的“金融危机：何去何从”论坛上发表演讲，并给予以上投资建议。
提到黄金，麦嘉华说：“如果美国继续印钞票来救市，美元将进一步趋软，使信贷吃紧的情况恶化。美元持续疲弱，人们就会找寻替代品，而黄金价格的上涨折射的美元超量发行。商品价值永远追不上印钞的速度。没有国家因为印钞票而发达，否则非洲的津巴布韦（Zimbabwe）早就是世界上最富裕的国家。”
麦嘉华：如果美国继续印钞票来救市，美元将进一步趋软，使信贷吃紧的情况恶化。
麦嘉华曾经表示，要走出目前的危机，全球应该转而使用一个黄金标准（gold standard）。
不过，他昨天回答有关询问时坦言，由于黄金在过去几年已从首饰和储值的工具变成了投资的工具，这个19世纪的作法应该行不通，但如果局势每况愈下，政府和央行再也无法有效控制，那么一些政府，甚至是企业本身也许会考虑采用某种形式的黄金标准来进行交易。
“市场并没有失效”
麦嘉华尝试解释这场环球金融危机，他说：“市场其实没有失效，失败的是政府的干预手段、政策变革以及金融产品的创新。”
另一名主讲者宝盛银行的亚太区投资主管阿南塔（V. Anantha-Nageswaran）也看好黄金。
阿南塔是宝盛银行内部公认的“末日博士”，于2007年预见前所未见的金融海啸可能发生。
他预测，黄金价格在12至24个月内可能上涨一倍。“人们在恐慌时总是会想到黄金。”
除了黄金外，阿南塔认为，在气候转变和中国及印度的崛起下，软商品(soft commodities）的前途无量，建议投资者趁现在进场慢慢积累这方面的投资。
石油关联公司或挂牌基金受看好
另外，考虑到石油开采公司因石油价格大跌而停止探索新油田，阿南塔也建议投资者考虑石油关联公司或挂牌基金（ETFs），等到经济复苏，需求回升，而到了2012年相信又会碰上石油短缺的情况，相信能从中获利。他指出，美国亿万富翁巴菲特（Warren Buffett）旗下伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（Berkshire Hathaway），近期就悄悄地挪用超过10％的资金，投资在能源公司上，包括ConocoPhillips, Burlington Northern Santa Fe等。
麦嘉华则认为，世界各地的政府如果无法解决眼前一系列金融问题，导致国际关系紧张，危机可能将演变成战争，到时候，拥有商品是最实际和最值钱。不过，他提醒，虽然长期下来商品将走高，但过程中将波动剧烈，价格上下50％相当平常。
展望未来两年，阿南塔相信，市场将在两个极端之间游走，不是过于悲观就是过于乐观，要进行投资就应该看中长期，投资期为6至10年。
他认为，商品的投资应该是中期性，而放眼长期则可考虑亚洲公司股票，但应该首先关注新加坡、韩国、台湾和日本等地的公司股票，之后才探讨中国、印度和印尼方面。
“中国、印度和印尼将是未来的增长引擎，而且有强大的国内经济做后盾，但这些地区的股市未跌至谷底，目前还不是进场的时机。欧美方面，除非能找到金融和房地产业以外的新领域制造新就业机会，经济要复苏相当困难，而美元将因此疲弱下去。”
麦嘉华也建议投资亚洲股市，药剂和酒店管理公司、印尼、马来西亚、拉丁美洲的种植场，白银等，但抛售美国国债，避免澳洲和亚洲主要金融中心的房地产。
希望持守现金者，阿南塔建议分散投资，买入挪威克朗、加币和新元，长期则应考虑人民币、巴西里亚伊和韩元。
准确预测1987年美国股灾和1997年亚洲金融风暴，有“末日博士”之称的麦嘉华（Marc Faber），昨天受邀为《商业时报》同瑞士私人银行宝盛银行(Julius Baer)联办的“金融危机：何去何从”论坛上发表演讲，并给予以上投资建议。
提到黄金，麦嘉华说：“如果美国继续印钞票来救市，美元将进一步趋软，使信贷吃紧的情况恶化。美元持续疲弱，人们就会找寻替代品，而黄金价格的上涨折射的美元超量发行。商品价值永远追不上印钞的速度。没有国家因为印钞票而发达，否则非洲的津巴布韦（Zimbabwe）早就是世界上最富裕的国家。”
麦嘉华：如果美国继续印钞票来救市，美元将进一步趋软，使信贷吃紧的情况恶化。
麦嘉华曾经表示，要走出目前的危机，全球应该转而使用一个黄金标准（gold standard）。
不过，他昨天回答有关询问时坦言，由于黄金在过去几年已从首饰和储值的工具变成了投资的工具，这个19世纪的作法应该行不通，但如果局势每况愈下，政府和央行再也无法有效控制，那么一些政府，甚至是企业本身也许会考虑采用某种形式的黄金标准来进行交易。
“市场并没有失效”
麦嘉华尝试解释这场环球金融危机，他说：“市场其实没有失效，失败的是政府的干预手段、政策变革以及金融产品的创新。”
另一名主讲者宝盛银行的亚太区投资主管阿南塔（V. Anantha-Nageswaran）也看好黄金。
阿南塔是宝盛银行内部公认的“末日博士”，于2007年预见前所未见的金融海啸可能发生。
他预测，黄金价格在12至24个月内可能上涨一倍。“人们在恐慌时总是会想到黄金。”
除了黄金外，阿南塔认为，在气候转变和中国及印度的崛起下，软商品(soft commodities）的前途无量，建议投资者趁现在进场慢慢积累这方面的投资。
石油关联公司或挂牌基金受看好
另外，考虑到石油开采公司因石油价格大跌而停止探索新油田，阿南塔也建议投资者考虑石油关联公司或挂牌基金（ETFs），等到经济复苏，需求回升，而到了2012年相信又会碰上石油短缺的情况，相信能从中获利。他指出，美国亿万富翁巴菲特（Warren Buffett）旗下伯克希尔哈撒韦公司（Berkshire Hathaway），近期就悄悄地挪用超过10％的资金，投资在能源公司上，包括ConocoPhillips, Burlington Northern Santa Fe等。
麦嘉华则认为，世界各地的政府如果无法解决眼前一系列金融问题，导致国际关系紧张，危机可能将演变成战争，到时候，拥有商品是最实际和最值钱。不过，他提醒，虽然长期下来商品将走高，但过程中将波动剧烈，价格上下50％相当平常。
展望未来两年，阿南塔相信，市场将在两个极端之间游走，不是过于悲观就是过于乐观，要进行投资就应该看中长期，投资期为6至10年。
他认为，商品的投资应该是中期性，而放眼长期则可考虑亚洲公司股票，但应该首先关注新加坡、韩国、台湾和日本等地的公司股票，之后才探讨中国、印度和印尼方面。
“中国、印度和印尼将是未来的增长引擎，而且有强大的国内经济做后盾，但这些地区的股市未跌至谷底，目前还不是进场的时机。欧美方面，除非能找到金融和房地产业以外的新领域制造新就业机会，经济要复苏相当困难，而美元将因此疲弱下去。”
麦嘉华也建议投资亚洲股市，药剂和酒店管理公司、印尼、马来西亚、拉丁美洲的种植场，白银等，但抛售美国国债，避免澳洲和亚洲主要金融中心的房地产。
希望持守现金者，阿南塔建议分散投资，买入挪威克朗、加币和新元，长期则应考虑人民币、巴西里亚伊和韩元。
Saturday, February 21, 2009
Warrants
We stumbled upon this advertisement in Singapore from a financial instituition and thought what great marketing material it was.
What they wrote seem to imply that their hedging strategies are perfect ( second paragraph) and any gain to the warrant holders are taken from the losses of the warrant issuers' counterparty whom they entered into positions with to hedge their warrant positions. Its not really right to state its a win-win situation between issuers and warrant holders since the issuers are still earning the premiums with no risk ( assuming perfect hedge) but risks still exists for the warrant holders who could still lose the premiums. Maybe this situation exists to " compensate" the warrant issuers for all the hardwork they have done to package such a derivative product.
And the truth of the matter is, in our opinion, its indeed a zero sum game since there is no such thing as a perfect hedge. When warrant holders win, warrant issuers still lose, although, the lost is just minimised. Refer to the following link where it is written :
"According to Financial Supervisory Service data, domestic brokerage houses posted a combined 55.4 billion won loss from equity-linked warrant trading between April and August last year, while foreign houses logged a 1 billion won loss. These warrant issuers failed to hedge adequately against markets moving against them as the benchmark KOSPI jumped 29 percent. "
Anyway, we stumbled upon this somewhere in the internet:
"For the covered warrant, the main concern of the issuer is how to attract the market investors to buy the issued covered warrant when the product is launched. In this consideration, the usual technique for the investment banker is to buy lot of the corresponding share at a low price and suddenly push up the stock price. It then issues the covered warrant at a strike price based on the high stock price. Often they will also support the stock price for a while, but when their warrant have been nearly sold to the market, the stock price will drop. As the strike price of covered warrant is normally quite high, the premium and leverage ratio are also quite high. The high leverage ratio is ideal for investment consideration, but the high premium is very risky, and the covered warrant can easily become "Wall-paper warrant" in bad market situation. Investors should always remember that the issuer of the covered warrant is an investment banker who is VERY EXPERIENCED in market manipulation. When a covered warrant is approaching its expiration date, the issuer will try to beat down the price of the stock, such that the issuer can buy back enough stock from the market to be later distributed to the warrant holders who are willing to exercise the warrant. In the extreme, the issuer may even try to drag down the stock price to make it lower than the strike price. The warrant thus becomes 'Wall-paper' and no warrant holder is willing to exercise it. The warrant issuer thus makes a neat big profit. This normally occurs to the weaker blue chips (there is only covered warrants for blue chip stocks in HK) like Cathay Pacific and Dairy Farm. There are some issuers who are very NOTORIOUS in killing their covered warrant investors! "
Directors' Trades
Insider pares stake in Cosco
Oct 5, 2006
The Straits Times
INSIDERS have almost stopped selling shares in Cosco Corp.
The only exception is Mr Zhou Xie Dong, director of its China unit, Cosco Shipyard Group (CSG).
Records kept by Shareinvestor.com show he sold 100,000 Cosco shares at $1.65 apiece on Sept 20 and another 43,000 shares at $1.66 each on Sept 29.
Following the two sales, his stake has now been pared to 257,000 shares.
Besides Mr Zhou, other parties who sold Cosco shares recently included Madam Mina Chan - the wife of independent director and former MP Wang Kai Yuen - and Mr Wang Zai Zhong, another CSG director.
But dealers have noted that their sales were easily absorbed in the market, as about nine million Cosco shares are traded daily, on average.
One dealer said that interest in Cosco has stayed red-hot because of the fresh issues of covered warrants on the stock.
'New warrant issuers are coming into the market and they are all chasing after the same few hot stocks like Cosco,' said a dealer.
And Cosco's share price may have been chased up by warrant issuers buying the mother shares to 'cover' the risks associated with issuing covered warrants on the stock, he added.
Yesterday, Cosco climbed four cents to a new high of $1.73 on a volume of 17.9 million shares.
The most actively traded Cosco covered warrant was one issued by Merrill Lynch
It ended 2.5 cents up at 26 cents on a hefty volume of 15.7 million units.
What they wrote seem to imply that their hedging strategies are perfect ( second paragraph) and any gain to the warrant holders are taken from the losses of the warrant issuers' counterparty whom they entered into positions with to hedge their warrant positions. Its not really right to state its a win-win situation between issuers and warrant holders since the issuers are still earning the premiums with no risk ( assuming perfect hedge) but risks still exists for the warrant holders who could still lose the premiums. Maybe this situation exists to " compensate" the warrant issuers for all the hardwork they have done to package such a derivative product.
And the truth of the matter is, in our opinion, its indeed a zero sum game since there is no such thing as a perfect hedge. When warrant holders win, warrant issuers still lose, although, the lost is just minimised. Refer to the following link where it is written :
"According to Financial Supervisory Service data, domestic brokerage houses posted a combined 55.4 billion won loss from equity-linked warrant trading between April and August last year, while foreign houses logged a 1 billion won loss. These warrant issuers failed to hedge adequately against markets moving against them as the benchmark KOSPI jumped 29 percent. "
Anyway, we stumbled upon this somewhere in the internet:
"For the covered warrant, the main concern of the issuer is how to attract the market investors to buy the issued covered warrant when the product is launched. In this consideration, the usual technique for the investment banker is to buy lot of the corresponding share at a low price and suddenly push up the stock price. It then issues the covered warrant at a strike price based on the high stock price. Often they will also support the stock price for a while, but when their warrant have been nearly sold to the market, the stock price will drop. As the strike price of covered warrant is normally quite high, the premium and leverage ratio are also quite high. The high leverage ratio is ideal for investment consideration, but the high premium is very risky, and the covered warrant can easily become "Wall-paper warrant" in bad market situation. Investors should always remember that the issuer of the covered warrant is an investment banker who is VERY EXPERIENCED in market manipulation. When a covered warrant is approaching its expiration date, the issuer will try to beat down the price of the stock, such that the issuer can buy back enough stock from the market to be later distributed to the warrant holders who are willing to exercise the warrant. In the extreme, the issuer may even try to drag down the stock price to make it lower than the strike price. The warrant thus becomes 'Wall-paper' and no warrant holder is willing to exercise it. The warrant issuer thus makes a neat big profit. This normally occurs to the weaker blue chips (there is only covered warrants for blue chip stocks in HK) like Cathay Pacific and Dairy Farm. There are some issuers who are very NOTORIOUS in killing their covered warrant investors! "
Directors' Trades
Insider pares stake in Cosco
Oct 5, 2006
The Straits Times
INSIDERS have almost stopped selling shares in Cosco Corp.
The only exception is Mr Zhou Xie Dong, director of its China unit, Cosco Shipyard Group (CSG).
Records kept by Shareinvestor.com show he sold 100,000 Cosco shares at $1.65 apiece on Sept 20 and another 43,000 shares at $1.66 each on Sept 29.
Following the two sales, his stake has now been pared to 257,000 shares.
Besides Mr Zhou, other parties who sold Cosco shares recently included Madam Mina Chan - the wife of independent director and former MP Wang Kai Yuen - and Mr Wang Zai Zhong, another CSG director.
But dealers have noted that their sales were easily absorbed in the market, as about nine million Cosco shares are traded daily, on average.
One dealer said that interest in Cosco has stayed red-hot because of the fresh issues of covered warrants on the stock.
'New warrant issuers are coming into the market and they are all chasing after the same few hot stocks like Cosco,' said a dealer.
And Cosco's share price may have been chased up by warrant issuers buying the mother shares to 'cover' the risks associated with issuing covered warrants on the stock, he added.
Yesterday, Cosco climbed four cents to a new high of $1.73 on a volume of 17.9 million shares.
The most actively traded Cosco covered warrant was one issued by Merrill Lynch
It ended 2.5 cents up at 26 cents on a hefty volume of 15.7 million units.
Saturday, February 14, 2009
How To Tell When The Economy's Getting Better
The stimulus package is finally finished. President Obama is promising a tough new bank-rescue plan to boost lending and limit outrageous pay. Troubled homeowners may even get some relief. All told, the government could spend more than $3 trillion to help end the recession.
So now all we have to do is sit back and watch the economy grow like a beanstalk, right?
If only. One risk of the unprecedented government intervention is that it won't do all that much to hasten the end of the recession. Another risk is that consumers, expecting a magic-bullet fix, could fail to prepare for tough times that still lie ahead. "This is going to be a difficult year," Obama himself said at his first press conference. "If we get things right, then starting next year we can start seeing some significant improvement."
Next year? Afraid so. Most economists agree that it will take that long, at least, before the biggest problems - mounting layoffs, the housing bust, the banking crisis, and plunging confidence - start to turn around. Here's what to watch for to tell whether the stimulus package is actually working, and when the economy might start to mend.
An improvement in the unemployment rate. Of all the economic indicators, this is probably the single most important. But you might want to avert your eyes for awhile.
Obama has talked about creating 3 to 4 million new jobs, and if the stimulus plan works, it might come close to that - over several years, combined. But it's almost certain that through this summer and into the fall, there will be a net job loss, not a gain. Most economists expect the unemployment rate, now 7.6 percent, to hit at least 9 percent by the end of this year. That represents up to 2 million more lost jobs. Many of those cuts are already in the works - just follow the recent layoff announcements from companies like Caterpillar (20,000), Boeing (10,000), SprintNextel (8,000) and Home Depot (7,000). But the pink slips haven't all gone out yet, so the layoffs haven't shows up in the official numbers.
The first sign of an improvement will be...corporate silence. As in no more draconian job-cut announcements. Once that happens (or doesn't), the unemployment rate will plateau. Then, companies might start hiring again, and a couple of months after that, the unemployment rate will start to fall. Three straight monthly declines would be a good sign that the economy is really on the rebound. That probably won't happen until 2010.
If you're wondering what's the point of the stimulus package if it won't do much to help workers in 2009, look to 2010. And 2011. That's where the plan will make a bigger difference. Moody's Economy.com estimates that by the middle of 2010, the unemployment rate will start to drift back toward 8.5 percent. But without any stimulus plan, it would have hit 11 percent. Viva la government.
More stable home prices. The realestate boom and bust is what torpedoed the economy in the first place, and the economy won't start to recover until the housing bubble fully deflates. The good news is that housing prices have already been falling for more than two years, with prices down more than 20 percent nationwide. And we might be more than halfway toward the bottom: Moody's Economy.com predicts that housing prices should stop falling nationwide by the second half of 2009. Overall, the forecasting firm predicts a 30 percent drop in home values from the peak values of 2006.
Others think it will take longer, but whenever it happens, an end to the housing slide will mark an important turning point. Hardly anybody thinks that prices will shoot back up or there will be another buying binge. But a boomlet, maybe. Once prices stabilize, buyers will stop worrying that they could be purchasing a costly asset that's falling in value. As they buy, other kinds of consumer activity - like shopping for furniture and kitchen upgrades - will follow. Slowly.
A consumer confidence rebound. Since consumer confidence closely tracks the job market, the dismal numbers of the last few months probably won't improve by much until late in 2009, or 2010. Homeowners have lost more than $3 trillion worth of value in their homes over the last three years, and investors have seen their stock portfolios shredded. So even people who feel secure in their jobs are dour.
A turnaround in the housing or stock markets would break the gloom and help some people feel better off. So would easier lending by banks, which would help solvent consumers buy a few more cars, appliances, and other goods. But consumer confidence won't really start to improve until workers start to feel more secure about their jobs and income. Think 2010.
A less volatile stock market. Every investor hopes that beleaguered stocks will come roaring back in 2009 and regain some of the ground lost since the peak in 2007 - when the S&P 500 stock index was nearly 50 percent higher than it is today. But a better indicator of economic health would be a steady recovery - without the manic swings that seem to come from every hint of undisclosed trouble at some big bank or rumor of new government intervention.
The stock market is harder to predict than most other parts of the economy, since it's deeply dependent on psychology and other intangibles. The market could bounce back by mid-summer. Or it could remain stagnant for years, like it did for most of the 1970s. The experts can't be any more sure than you or I.
One hopeful sign would be less market sensitivity to events in Washington. The biggest market mover these days is the federal government, since fortunes stand to be won or lost - mostly lost - depending on how deeply the government intervenes in the activities of megabanks like Citigroup and Bank of America, and how much federal spending will be available to stand in for plunging consumer spending. The markets will be back to their old selves when earnings reports, IPO announcements, and M&A deals are what send stocks up or down, and utterings from Washington amount to little more than an echo. Since the government seems to be the only institution spending money so far in 2009, it could be awhile before Wall Street returns to form.
Economic growth turns positive. By economic standards, the current downturn has already lasted longer than the typical post-World War II recession. Yet there's still a lot more pain to endure. A recent survey of economists by the Wall Street Journal found that the majority think the economy will continue to contract for the first half of 2009, with growth turning positive in the second half of the year. That outlook is much worse than a few months ago, and even when growth turns positive the economy could sputter along without many new jobs or bold moves in the private sector.
It's always possible that impatient consumers will get sick of holding back, and start running up their credit card balances once again (if the banks let them). The bank-rescue plan might spur more lending than expected, goosing businesses and consumers alike. Or the stimulus plan might spread goodwill and optimism throughout the land. If you get the urge to spend, that might be the strongest indicator of all. Call the economists.
So now all we have to do is sit back and watch the economy grow like a beanstalk, right?
If only. One risk of the unprecedented government intervention is that it won't do all that much to hasten the end of the recession. Another risk is that consumers, expecting a magic-bullet fix, could fail to prepare for tough times that still lie ahead. "This is going to be a difficult year," Obama himself said at his first press conference. "If we get things right, then starting next year we can start seeing some significant improvement."
Next year? Afraid so. Most economists agree that it will take that long, at least, before the biggest problems - mounting layoffs, the housing bust, the banking crisis, and plunging confidence - start to turn around. Here's what to watch for to tell whether the stimulus package is actually working, and when the economy might start to mend.
An improvement in the unemployment rate. Of all the economic indicators, this is probably the single most important. But you might want to avert your eyes for awhile.
Obama has talked about creating 3 to 4 million new jobs, and if the stimulus plan works, it might come close to that - over several years, combined. But it's almost certain that through this summer and into the fall, there will be a net job loss, not a gain. Most economists expect the unemployment rate, now 7.6 percent, to hit at least 9 percent by the end of this year. That represents up to 2 million more lost jobs. Many of those cuts are already in the works - just follow the recent layoff announcements from companies like Caterpillar (20,000), Boeing (10,000), SprintNextel (8,000) and Home Depot (7,000). But the pink slips haven't all gone out yet, so the layoffs haven't shows up in the official numbers.
The first sign of an improvement will be...corporate silence. As in no more draconian job-cut announcements. Once that happens (or doesn't), the unemployment rate will plateau. Then, companies might start hiring again, and a couple of months after that, the unemployment rate will start to fall. Three straight monthly declines would be a good sign that the economy is really on the rebound. That probably won't happen until 2010.
If you're wondering what's the point of the stimulus package if it won't do much to help workers in 2009, look to 2010. And 2011. That's where the plan will make a bigger difference. Moody's Economy.com estimates that by the middle of 2010, the unemployment rate will start to drift back toward 8.5 percent. But without any stimulus plan, it would have hit 11 percent. Viva la government.
More stable home prices. The realestate boom and bust is what torpedoed the economy in the first place, and the economy won't start to recover until the housing bubble fully deflates. The good news is that housing prices have already been falling for more than two years, with prices down more than 20 percent nationwide. And we might be more than halfway toward the bottom: Moody's Economy.com predicts that housing prices should stop falling nationwide by the second half of 2009. Overall, the forecasting firm predicts a 30 percent drop in home values from the peak values of 2006.
Others think it will take longer, but whenever it happens, an end to the housing slide will mark an important turning point. Hardly anybody thinks that prices will shoot back up or there will be another buying binge. But a boomlet, maybe. Once prices stabilize, buyers will stop worrying that they could be purchasing a costly asset that's falling in value. As they buy, other kinds of consumer activity - like shopping for furniture and kitchen upgrades - will follow. Slowly.
A consumer confidence rebound. Since consumer confidence closely tracks the job market, the dismal numbers of the last few months probably won't improve by much until late in 2009, or 2010. Homeowners have lost more than $3 trillion worth of value in their homes over the last three years, and investors have seen their stock portfolios shredded. So even people who feel secure in their jobs are dour.
A turnaround in the housing or stock markets would break the gloom and help some people feel better off. So would easier lending by banks, which would help solvent consumers buy a few more cars, appliances, and other goods. But consumer confidence won't really start to improve until workers start to feel more secure about their jobs and income. Think 2010.
A less volatile stock market. Every investor hopes that beleaguered stocks will come roaring back in 2009 and regain some of the ground lost since the peak in 2007 - when the S&P 500 stock index was nearly 50 percent higher than it is today. But a better indicator of economic health would be a steady recovery - without the manic swings that seem to come from every hint of undisclosed trouble at some big bank or rumor of new government intervention.
The stock market is harder to predict than most other parts of the economy, since it's deeply dependent on psychology and other intangibles. The market could bounce back by mid-summer. Or it could remain stagnant for years, like it did for most of the 1970s. The experts can't be any more sure than you or I.
One hopeful sign would be less market sensitivity to events in Washington. The biggest market mover these days is the federal government, since fortunes stand to be won or lost - mostly lost - depending on how deeply the government intervenes in the activities of megabanks like Citigroup and Bank of America, and how much federal spending will be available to stand in for plunging consumer spending. The markets will be back to their old selves when earnings reports, IPO announcements, and M&A deals are what send stocks up or down, and utterings from Washington amount to little more than an echo. Since the government seems to be the only institution spending money so far in 2009, it could be awhile before Wall Street returns to form.
Economic growth turns positive. By economic standards, the current downturn has already lasted longer than the typical post-World War II recession. Yet there's still a lot more pain to endure. A recent survey of economists by the Wall Street Journal found that the majority think the economy will continue to contract for the first half of 2009, with growth turning positive in the second half of the year. That outlook is much worse than a few months ago, and even when growth turns positive the economy could sputter along without many new jobs or bold moves in the private sector.
It's always possible that impatient consumers will get sick of holding back, and start running up their credit card balances once again (if the banks let them). The bank-rescue plan might spur more lending than expected, goosing businesses and consumers alike. Or the stimulus plan might spread goodwill and optimism throughout the land. If you get the urge to spend, that might be the strongest indicator of all. Call the economists.
Thursday, February 12, 2009
SMRT - Public transportation ridership
We raise our earnings by 9.4% and target price to S$2.00
SMRT continues to deliver steady earnings growth and a respectable yield of 5.3%. We expect FY10E earnings growth of 10.4% YoY supported by resilient ridership growth and cost savings from lower oil prices. We have raised our earnings by 9.4% in FY10E to account for our lower oil price assumptions. We raise our TP from S$1.95 to S$2.00 and reiterate our Buy recommendation.
Beneficiary of lower oil price, wage deflation, higher ridership and new rail
SMRT should benefit from: 1) a drop in oil prices, 2) lower staff costs, 3) resilient ridership growth and 4) rental income stability due to long leases. SMRT has also secured a contract to operate the palm monorail in Dubai. This contract is based on a cost plus model and could boost SMRT’s revenue by S$20m pa. Our cost assumptions are conservative and should provide further upside to our earnings.
Increase in rail and bus ridership to offset potential reduction in fares
Public transportation ridership could see stronger growth, underpinned by the reduction in transport fares and an increasing trend of moving towards public transport. We cut our assumptions for fares by 5% in anticipation of the potential fare reduction by the PTC at the end of Feb09. We expect the 5% potential rebate in fares to be more than offset by the increase in ridership for rail and bus.
Target price of S$2.00 implies a PE of 16.8x FY10E; risks
We raise our target price from S$1.95 to S$2.00 on our earnings upgrade and a change in our valuation from ROE/PB to DCF. We have used a COE of 7.5% based on a risk-free rate of 2.6%, ERP of 4.8% and a beta of 1.0 with a TGR of 1%.
Downside risks include: a strong rebound in the oil price, decline in ridership, sharp reduction in fares, intense taxi competition and disease outbreak.
SMRT continues to deliver steady earnings growth and a respectable yield of 5.3%. We expect FY10E earnings growth of 10.4% YoY supported by resilient ridership growth and cost savings from lower oil prices. We have raised our earnings by 9.4% in FY10E to account for our lower oil price assumptions. We raise our TP from S$1.95 to S$2.00 and reiterate our Buy recommendation.
Beneficiary of lower oil price, wage deflation, higher ridership and new rail
SMRT should benefit from: 1) a drop in oil prices, 2) lower staff costs, 3) resilient ridership growth and 4) rental income stability due to long leases. SMRT has also secured a contract to operate the palm monorail in Dubai. This contract is based on a cost plus model and could boost SMRT’s revenue by S$20m pa. Our cost assumptions are conservative and should provide further upside to our earnings.
Increase in rail and bus ridership to offset potential reduction in fares
Public transportation ridership could see stronger growth, underpinned by the reduction in transport fares and an increasing trend of moving towards public transport. We cut our assumptions for fares by 5% in anticipation of the potential fare reduction by the PTC at the end of Feb09. We expect the 5% potential rebate in fares to be more than offset by the increase in ridership for rail and bus.
Target price of S$2.00 implies a PE of 16.8x FY10E; risks
We raise our target price from S$1.95 to S$2.00 on our earnings upgrade and a change in our valuation from ROE/PB to DCF. We have used a COE of 7.5% based on a risk-free rate of 2.6%, ERP of 4.8% and a beta of 1.0 with a TGR of 1%.
Downside risks include: a strong rebound in the oil price, decline in ridership, sharp reduction in fares, intense taxi competition and disease outbreak.
Revisiting the REIT model
The REIT model works well in an environment where interest rates are low and the economy is booming, both for the REIT sponsors as well as investors. The value proposition to the REIT sponsors is that they are able monetize their developments and get the cash flow to fund new projects. For the investors, they get to receive regular dividend payouts akin to a fixed income instrument, and yet enjoy the upside potential of the share price.
Not too long ago, the foremost objective of REIT managers is to grow the portfolio size so that they can deliver increasing dividends to the investors. The issue then is the lack of acquisition opportunities. Fast-forward to today’s credit crisis, only a few REIT managers talk about acquisitions despite valuations being lower now. Ability to secure financing is the topmost worry.
In the last quarter, the REIT sector has been plagued by refinancing risk although some of the managers have proved otherwise as they secured new fundings. We believe that in the coming quarters, the market will be taking into consideration the sustainability of revenue and possible tenant defaults.
DPU maintenance or DPU erosion We believe the fundamentals supporting the entire landscape have turned 180 degree. REIT model works best when cost of funds is low and cash flow generated from rentals provides a steady and recurring dividend to investors. Today we are facing the opposite; high cost of funds and potential shock to rental income.
Commercial rents are softening According to the URA statistics, 4Q08 rental index of commercial property in the central area declined 6.5% from the previous quarter.
In our last sector update published in November 08, we presented a historical analysis and postulated the index to fall at least 30% from its peak. If history can be a guide, we should be looking at a trough reading of 145, which is 25% away from the current reading of 193. Vacancy is now at 9.3% as compared to the trough reading of 6.8% at 4Q07. The highest level recorded was during the SARS period in 2003 whereby vacancy was 19.0%.
Industrial rents tend to be more stable as the leases are longer Although industrial rents display much less volatility, we can observe that rents have softened in 4Q08, its first real decline since 2004.
Retail and hospitality Retail sales index fell two consecutive months from Sep 2008 to Nov 2008. Excluding motor vehicles, the index started its decline since Aug 2008 and on a YoY basis, retail sales declined by 3.4%. Excluding motor vehicles, sales declined by 2.2%. Although collection from tourist receipt set a new record in 2008 at $14.8 billion, the trends are not very optimistic. Our argument is that if tenants’ businesses are affected in this recession, landlords will not have it easy, even if leases are signed and locked-in. REIT managers will then have an even tougher job of preventing falling DPU.
Report Card We use a simple metric to see how the various REITs have performed in their stated objective of increasing DPU. We compile the gross revenue and DPU for the most recent announced quarter and compare the percentage variances on a YoY and QoQ basis. We expect percentage changes in revenue to affect DPU in the same proportion. Any deviation demonstrates the REIT managers’ efficiency. We caution that our compilation is not a be all and end all guide, as individual REIT will have its own merits.
From the above, six REITs have registered falling DPU over the year while seven have registered falling DPU over the quarter. The sectoral performance confirms our last view (see REIT update report in Nov 08), where hospitality sector seems to be the most affected, with both QoQ revenue and DPU registering negative growth and healthcare continues to be the most resilient.
We expect rental income to face increasing pressure as businesses implement cost containment measures. DPU will in turn be subjected to a double whammy from higher borrowing costs and management fees. In conclusion, we expect to see more DPU erosion in the coming quarters.
Not too long ago, the foremost objective of REIT managers is to grow the portfolio size so that they can deliver increasing dividends to the investors. The issue then is the lack of acquisition opportunities. Fast-forward to today’s credit crisis, only a few REIT managers talk about acquisitions despite valuations being lower now. Ability to secure financing is the topmost worry.
In the last quarter, the REIT sector has been plagued by refinancing risk although some of the managers have proved otherwise as they secured new fundings. We believe that in the coming quarters, the market will be taking into consideration the sustainability of revenue and possible tenant defaults.
DPU maintenance or DPU erosion We believe the fundamentals supporting the entire landscape have turned 180 degree. REIT model works best when cost of funds is low and cash flow generated from rentals provides a steady and recurring dividend to investors. Today we are facing the opposite; high cost of funds and potential shock to rental income.
Commercial rents are softening According to the URA statistics, 4Q08 rental index of commercial property in the central area declined 6.5% from the previous quarter.
In our last sector update published in November 08, we presented a historical analysis and postulated the index to fall at least 30% from its peak. If history can be a guide, we should be looking at a trough reading of 145, which is 25% away from the current reading of 193. Vacancy is now at 9.3% as compared to the trough reading of 6.8% at 4Q07. The highest level recorded was during the SARS period in 2003 whereby vacancy was 19.0%.
Industrial rents tend to be more stable as the leases are longer Although industrial rents display much less volatility, we can observe that rents have softened in 4Q08, its first real decline since 2004.
Retail and hospitality Retail sales index fell two consecutive months from Sep 2008 to Nov 2008. Excluding motor vehicles, the index started its decline since Aug 2008 and on a YoY basis, retail sales declined by 3.4%. Excluding motor vehicles, sales declined by 2.2%. Although collection from tourist receipt set a new record in 2008 at $14.8 billion, the trends are not very optimistic. Our argument is that if tenants’ businesses are affected in this recession, landlords will not have it easy, even if leases are signed and locked-in. REIT managers will then have an even tougher job of preventing falling DPU.
Report Card We use a simple metric to see how the various REITs have performed in their stated objective of increasing DPU. We compile the gross revenue and DPU for the most recent announced quarter and compare the percentage variances on a YoY and QoQ basis. We expect percentage changes in revenue to affect DPU in the same proportion. Any deviation demonstrates the REIT managers’ efficiency. We caution that our compilation is not a be all and end all guide, as individual REIT will have its own merits.
From the above, six REITs have registered falling DPU over the year while seven have registered falling DPU over the quarter. The sectoral performance confirms our last view (see REIT update report in Nov 08), where hospitality sector seems to be the most affected, with both QoQ revenue and DPU registering negative growth and healthcare continues to be the most resilient.
We expect rental income to face increasing pressure as businesses implement cost containment measures. DPU will in turn be subjected to a double whammy from higher borrowing costs and management fees. In conclusion, we expect to see more DPU erosion in the coming quarters.
Correction in the offing for Reits?
THE Straits Times Index (STI) has been trading sideways on thin volumes over the past one week and we do not expect the market lethargy to improve anytime soon. Judging by the constant stream of profit warnings, there is high probability that markets will remain in this comatose state for some time.
The collective $3.1 billion rights issue exercise by CapitaLand and CapitaMall Trust is also likely to soak up more liquidity from this cash-strapped market.
Despite positive price action in US indices, we believe this global economic crisis has not bottomed; investors are also likely keep their powder dry over the coming months. We surmise that the 500-point rebound in the Dow Jones Industrial Average towards the end of last week was primarily predicated on pure hope that the Senate approval of the US$780 billion rescue plan will do the trick.
Indeed, some optimists have even suggested that the combined prescription of lower interest rates and massive stimulus packages will spare us from a prolonged and deep recession and lead the world to a quick recovery.
However, it is worth noting that if such fiscal and monetary bailouts were an easy solution, then Japan would have emerged from its economic slump a long time ago.
Also, massive spending in the 1930s by then US president Roosevelt did not lift the US or the world out of the Great Depression.
As the dictum goes: A picture tells a thousand words and charts usually reflect the mood of the market. The recent market spikes in anticipation of good news coupled with light volumes provide the perfect recipe for a bull trap to occur.
For the mid-term, the STI has penetrated the base of its rising wedge pattern, pointing towards more downside risk. Reits are forming head-and-shoulder structures, suggesting that an impending correction is about to take place; investors can use KE CFDs to short the sector.
By KEN TAI
Senior Technical Strategist
KELIVE RESEARCH (Part of the Kim Eng Group)
The collective $3.1 billion rights issue exercise by CapitaLand and CapitaMall Trust is also likely to soak up more liquidity from this cash-strapped market.
Despite positive price action in US indices, we believe this global economic crisis has not bottomed; investors are also likely keep their powder dry over the coming months. We surmise that the 500-point rebound in the Dow Jones Industrial Average towards the end of last week was primarily predicated on pure hope that the Senate approval of the US$780 billion rescue plan will do the trick.
Indeed, some optimists have even suggested that the combined prescription of lower interest rates and massive stimulus packages will spare us from a prolonged and deep recession and lead the world to a quick recovery.
However, it is worth noting that if such fiscal and monetary bailouts were an easy solution, then Japan would have emerged from its economic slump a long time ago.
Also, massive spending in the 1930s by then US president Roosevelt did not lift the US or the world out of the Great Depression.
As the dictum goes: A picture tells a thousand words and charts usually reflect the mood of the market. The recent market spikes in anticipation of good news coupled with light volumes provide the perfect recipe for a bull trap to occur.
For the mid-term, the STI has penetrated the base of its rising wedge pattern, pointing towards more downside risk. Reits are forming head-and-shoulder structures, suggesting that an impending correction is about to take place; investors can use KE CFDs to short the sector.
By KEN TAI
Senior Technical Strategist
KELIVE RESEARCH (Part of the Kim Eng Group)
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Why Analysts Keep Telling Investors to Buy
Even now, with the recession deepening and markets on edge, Wall Street analysts say it is a good time to buy.
Still. At the top of the market, they urged investors to buy or hold onto stocks about 95 percent of the time. When stocks stumbled, they stayed optimistic. Even in November, when credit froze, the economy stalled and financial markets tumbled to their lowest levels in a decade, analysts as a group rarely said sell.
And last month, as the Dow and Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index suffered their worst January ever, analysts put a sell rating on a mere 5.9 percent of stocks, according to Bloomberg data. Many companies have taken such a beating in the downturn, analysts argue, that their shares are bound to bounce back.
Maybe. But after so many bad calls on so many companies, why should investors believe them this time?
When Internet stocks imploded in 2000 and 2001, Wall Street analysts were widely scorned for fanning a frenzy that had inflated dot-com shares to unsustainable heights. But this time around, credit rating agencies, mortgage companies and Wall Street bankers have shouldered much of the blame for the Crash of 2008, and few have publicly questioned the analysts who urged investors to buy all the way down.
“Analysts completely missed the boat again with the subprime and credit crises,” said Jacob Zamansky, a securities lawyer who represents investors. “They should’ve given some early warning signs to investors to bail out, or at least lighten up their portfolios. That warning never came.”
Instead, many recommendations urged investors to hold on to their shares, or double down, as the bloodletting worsened.
On Oct. 8, as Congress and the Treasury Department frantically tried to calm the plummeting markets, a Citigroup analyst upgraded Bank of America to buy. Since then, Bank of America shares have fallen 77 percent.
That same month, Jeffrey Harte, a top-rated analyst at Sandler O’Neill and Partners, also lifted Bank of America to buy, from hold, and a month later, he gave Citigroup
the same upgrade, according to Bloomberg data.
“Our ratings are based on 12-month price targets,” Mr. Harte said. “Given the nature of economic cycles and, really, the focus of the new administration, I did expect and still do expect that the sector will improve considerably over the long term.”
With every wrenching decline, stocks seemed to be only better and better bargains to the most bullish market watchers, and their buy ratings seemed to reflect a hope that the market would soon turn a corner.
One analyst at Davenport & Company called the aluminum maker Alcoa a strong buy on March 24, Bloomberg data shows, when its stock was a buoyant $35 a share and commodities prices were rising. He then affirmed the rating 13 times as metals prices plunged, manufacturing dried up and Alcoa shares fell more than 70 percent.
“You can look back and say you were wrong as you go back and try to do a post-mortem on things,” said John Roger s, director of research at the market research firm D. A. Davidson & Company. “I don’t think there’s ever 100 percent accurate predictive expertise. I wish there was.”
In July, Mr. Roger s put a buy rating on Chicago Bridge and Iron, an engineering and construction company whose stock fell sharply during the first half of 2008. The rebound Mr. Roger s hoped for never came: the stock plunged 65 percent more.
Mr. Roger s said he did not expect oil prices, then hovering near $145 a barrel, to dwindle to $40.. He did not expect Chicago Bridge and Iron to hit snags on British natural gas developments. And he did not expect such a broad economic downturn.
“If I had a rewind button and I could have done it, I would have downgraded on the day it peaked,” he said. “I was wrong on that, and I think any analyst would have to acknowledge that.”
In their defense, analysts point out that most regulators, economists, journalists and investors failed to foresee this financial catastrophe. And the worsening economy did prompt a cut in their buy recommendations.
Investors, for their part, may have simply been following the lesson that had been beaten into them time and again during the bull years of the last decade: buy cheap because the market will always go up.
“The market went up, up, up and up. You were rewarded for saying, ‘Don’t worry, be happy,’ ” said William A. Fleckenstein, president of Fleckenstein Capital, a money management firm in Issaquah , Wash. “Each time the market went down was a new opportunity to buy the stock even cheaper.”
When the storms of last year hit, few investors realized that this pattern would suddenly vanish, with disastrous results. “They didn’t understand the world they were operating in every year was a false reference point,” Mr. Fleckenstein said.
Still, the optimistic adage holds: the greater the fall, the greater the upside. Just give it some more time.
“Any analyst with a buy rating looks bad in a bear market,” said Anthony Polini, an analyst at Raymond James who rates banks. “This group is dramatically oversold. It’s down 75 percent. If you don’t have some strong buy ratings at this point, you’re doing a disservice to your customers.”
Mr. Polini, who has a strong buy rating on Bank of America, said it was a mistake to cut long-term outlooks for companies just because their stock price fell.
The actual investment recommendations coming from a sales desk can tell a different story from analysts’ publicly released research. To gauge what clients are actually hearing from their investment managers, the investment-tracking firm First Coverage collects buy and sell recommendations from about 1,000 analysts that serve independent and midsize firms.
At the end of January, 34.5 percent of the recommendations seen by First Coverage were for a sell or short call. That was up from 24 percent in December 2007. At the height of the market crash, in October and November, the proportion of sell calls reached about 45 percent.
In all of 2008, sells never outweighed the buys.
Why, even amid cascading losses, could not the majority of analysts simply slash a company’s rating to sell and tell investors to cut their losses?
“It doesn’t matter if you’re in a bear market, a bull market, a flat market, you’re going to get 95 percent of the research coming out telling you to buy,” said Randy Cass, chief executive of First Coverage. “It’s just the way it’s always been.”
Although reforms after the dot-com bubble sought to make analysis more independent by separating it from investment banking, the broader culture on Wall Street still favors bulls.
Some attribute the surplus of optimism to a widespread expectation that stocks — like home prices — will always increase in value over time. After all, the S.& P. 500 has posted annual returns of more than 9 percent during the last 80 years.
Still. At the top of the market, they urged investors to buy or hold onto stocks about 95 percent of the time. When stocks stumbled, they stayed optimistic. Even in November, when credit froze, the economy stalled and financial markets tumbled to their lowest levels in a decade, analysts as a group rarely said sell.
And last month, as the Dow and Standard & Poor’s 500-stock index suffered their worst January ever, analysts put a sell rating on a mere 5.9 percent of stocks, according to Bloomberg data. Many companies have taken such a beating in the downturn, analysts argue, that their shares are bound to bounce back.
Maybe. But after so many bad calls on so many companies, why should investors believe them this time?
When Internet stocks imploded in 2000 and 2001, Wall Street analysts were widely scorned for fanning a frenzy that had inflated dot-com shares to unsustainable heights. But this time around, credit rating agencies, mortgage companies and Wall Street bankers have shouldered much of the blame for the Crash of 2008, and few have publicly questioned the analysts who urged investors to buy all the way down.
“Analysts completely missed the boat again with the subprime and credit crises,” said Jacob Zamansky, a securities lawyer who represents investors. “They should’ve given some early warning signs to investors to bail out, or at least lighten up their portfolios. That warning never came.”
Instead, many recommendations urged investors to hold on to their shares, or double down, as the bloodletting worsened.
On Oct. 8, as Congress and the Treasury Department frantically tried to calm the plummeting markets, a Citigroup analyst upgraded Bank of America to buy. Since then, Bank of America shares have fallen 77 percent.
That same month, Jeffrey Harte, a top-rated analyst at Sandler O’Neill and Partners, also lifted Bank of America to buy, from hold, and a month later, he gave Citigroup
the same upgrade, according to Bloomberg data.
“Our ratings are based on 12-month price targets,” Mr. Harte said. “Given the nature of economic cycles and, really, the focus of the new administration, I did expect and still do expect that the sector will improve considerably over the long term.”
With every wrenching decline, stocks seemed to be only better and better bargains to the most bullish market watchers, and their buy ratings seemed to reflect a hope that the market would soon turn a corner.
One analyst at Davenport & Company called the aluminum maker Alcoa a strong buy on March 24, Bloomberg data shows, when its stock was a buoyant $35 a share and commodities prices were rising. He then affirmed the rating 13 times as metals prices plunged, manufacturing dried up and Alcoa shares fell more than 70 percent.
“You can look back and say you were wrong as you go back and try to do a post-mortem on things,” said John Roger s, director of research at the market research firm D. A. Davidson & Company. “I don’t think there’s ever 100 percent accurate predictive expertise. I wish there was.”
In July, Mr. Roger s put a buy rating on Chicago Bridge and Iron, an engineering and construction company whose stock fell sharply during the first half of 2008. The rebound Mr. Roger s hoped for never came: the stock plunged 65 percent more.
Mr. Roger s said he did not expect oil prices, then hovering near $145 a barrel, to dwindle to $40.. He did not expect Chicago Bridge and Iron to hit snags on British natural gas developments. And he did not expect such a broad economic downturn.
“If I had a rewind button and I could have done it, I would have downgraded on the day it peaked,” he said. “I was wrong on that, and I think any analyst would have to acknowledge that.”
In their defense, analysts point out that most regulators, economists, journalists and investors failed to foresee this financial catastrophe. And the worsening economy did prompt a cut in their buy recommendations.
Investors, for their part, may have simply been following the lesson that had been beaten into them time and again during the bull years of the last decade: buy cheap because the market will always go up.
“The market went up, up, up and up. You were rewarded for saying, ‘Don’t worry, be happy,’ ” said William A. Fleckenstein, president of Fleckenstein Capital, a money management firm in Issaquah , Wash. “Each time the market went down was a new opportunity to buy the stock even cheaper.”
When the storms of last year hit, few investors realized that this pattern would suddenly vanish, with disastrous results. “They didn’t understand the world they were operating in every year was a false reference point,” Mr. Fleckenstein said.
Still, the optimistic adage holds: the greater the fall, the greater the upside. Just give it some more time.
“Any analyst with a buy rating looks bad in a bear market,” said Anthony Polini, an analyst at Raymond James who rates banks. “This group is dramatically oversold. It’s down 75 percent. If you don’t have some strong buy ratings at this point, you’re doing a disservice to your customers.”
Mr. Polini, who has a strong buy rating on Bank of America, said it was a mistake to cut long-term outlooks for companies just because their stock price fell.
The actual investment recommendations coming from a sales desk can tell a different story from analysts’ publicly released research. To gauge what clients are actually hearing from their investment managers, the investment-tracking firm First Coverage collects buy and sell recommendations from about 1,000 analysts that serve independent and midsize firms.
At the end of January, 34.5 percent of the recommendations seen by First Coverage were for a sell or short call. That was up from 24 percent in December 2007. At the height of the market crash, in October and November, the proportion of sell calls reached about 45 percent.
In all of 2008, sells never outweighed the buys.
Why, even amid cascading losses, could not the majority of analysts simply slash a company’s rating to sell and tell investors to cut their losses?
“It doesn’t matter if you’re in a bear market, a bull market, a flat market, you’re going to get 95 percent of the research coming out telling you to buy,” said Randy Cass, chief executive of First Coverage. “It’s just the way it’s always been.”
Although reforms after the dot-com bubble sought to make analysis more independent by separating it from investment banking, the broader culture on Wall Street still favors bulls.
Some attribute the surplus of optimism to a widespread expectation that stocks — like home prices — will always increase in value over time. After all, the S.& P. 500 has posted annual returns of more than 9 percent during the last 80 years.
Fishing through the storm
China Fishery Group Ltd (CFGL) is the world’s top producers of fish and fishmeal products. Its fishing operations accounted for 76% of revenue in 9M08 and its fishmeal & fish oil operations accounted for 24%. According to the Food and Agriculture Organisation, global demand for fish is expected to grow by 50m tonnes to 183m tonnes from 2001 – 2015. We believe that CFGL is in the right industry for growth going forward.
CFGL is currently benefiting from China ’s growing demand for aquatic products. China accounts for 57% of CFGL’s revenue. According to the National Bureau of Statistics of China , aquatic products CPI rose 11.2% YoY in Nov 2008, suggesting that demand remains robust relative to supply. We believe that this trend could persist for a few more quarters.
Falling oil prices will benefit CFGL. Crude oil prices have fallen from a high of US$147/bbl in July 2008 to US$40/bbl as of Feb 2009. We are assuming FY09 average crude oil price of US$65/bbl, lower than FY08’s US$100/bbl. Consequently, we forecast FY09 bunker cost of US$61.8m, 35% less than our FY08 estimate. We forecast FY09 net profit growth of 18..7%, which we believe will excite investors.
High gearing, but strong operating cash flow. We are concerned that CFGL has a high gearing ratio of 0.93x and a sizeable US$245.8m long term loan.
However, CFGL has strong operating cash flow (US$60.2m for 9M08) which is expected to persist and help its refinancing of US$80m short term loan. Its 9M08 interest coverage was an acceptable 4.5x. In addition, we believe that lower interest rates in FY09 will be positive.
We rate CFGL a BUY with a target price of S$0.86. We have a price target of S$0.86 based on 3.9x FY09 P/E which is pegged to the FSTC FY09 P/E of 3.9x.
CFGL is currently benefiting from China ’s growing demand for aquatic products. China accounts for 57% of CFGL’s revenue. According to the National Bureau of Statistics of China , aquatic products CPI rose 11.2% YoY in Nov 2008, suggesting that demand remains robust relative to supply. We believe that this trend could persist for a few more quarters.
Falling oil prices will benefit CFGL. Crude oil prices have fallen from a high of US$147/bbl in July 2008 to US$40/bbl as of Feb 2009. We are assuming FY09 average crude oil price of US$65/bbl, lower than FY08’s US$100/bbl. Consequently, we forecast FY09 bunker cost of US$61.8m, 35% less than our FY08 estimate. We forecast FY09 net profit growth of 18..7%, which we believe will excite investors.
High gearing, but strong operating cash flow. We are concerned that CFGL has a high gearing ratio of 0.93x and a sizeable US$245.8m long term loan.
However, CFGL has strong operating cash flow (US$60.2m for 9M08) which is expected to persist and help its refinancing of US$80m short term loan. Its 9M08 interest coverage was an acceptable 4.5x. In addition, we believe that lower interest rates in FY09 will be positive.
We rate CFGL a BUY with a target price of S$0.86. We have a price target of S$0.86 based on 3.9x FY09 P/E which is pegged to the FSTC FY09 P/E of 3.9x.
China Fishery Group Ltd.
• 4Q08 results preview. 4Q08 results are likely to come in slightly below our estimate of US$19m, which is already 25% below consensus estimate of US$25.3m, given a sharp drop in fishmeal prices to close to US$800/tonne in 4Q08 and the company’s
advance purchase of bunker fuel at higher prices.
• Strong fish prices, stabilised fishmeal prices. Alaskan Pollock prices have firmed
by 19% yoy to US$1,600/tonne on substitution demand from more expensive fishes.
Meanwhile, fishmeal prices have recovered to the US$850/tonne level after dipping
close to US$800/tonne in 4Q08, with management guiding for prices of US$800-
850/tonne for FY09.
• Potential catalysts in 2H09. We believe soymeal prices should strengthen in 2H09
as the impact of lower supply from reduced plantings and lower fertiliser usage bites.
Firmer soymeal prices will likely lead to firmer fishmeal prices due to the substitution effect. Meanwhile, better-than-expected progress in the South Pacific operation offers upside to our forecasts.
• Maintain Outperform, target price of S$1.34 (5.9x CY10 P/E) and EPS estimates.
We are keeping our EPS estimates unchanged, although we note risks of weaker
pollock selling prices going forward. Current valuation of 2.6x CY10 P/E appears
attractive vs. the peer average of 7.8x.
advance purchase of bunker fuel at higher prices.
• Strong fish prices, stabilised fishmeal prices. Alaskan Pollock prices have firmed
by 19% yoy to US$1,600/tonne on substitution demand from more expensive fishes.
Meanwhile, fishmeal prices have recovered to the US$850/tonne level after dipping
close to US$800/tonne in 4Q08, with management guiding for prices of US$800-
850/tonne for FY09.
• Potential catalysts in 2H09. We believe soymeal prices should strengthen in 2H09
as the impact of lower supply from reduced plantings and lower fertiliser usage bites.
Firmer soymeal prices will likely lead to firmer fishmeal prices due to the substitution effect. Meanwhile, better-than-expected progress in the South Pacific operation offers upside to our forecasts.
• Maintain Outperform, target price of S$1.34 (5.9x CY10 P/E) and EPS estimates.
We are keeping our EPS estimates unchanged, although we note risks of weaker
pollock selling prices going forward. Current valuation of 2.6x CY10 P/E appears
attractive vs. the peer average of 7.8x.
China Paper Holdings : Cash-rich to fund growth
We recently paid a visit to China Paper’s plant and also to one of its key customers, Xinhua’s printing plant in Linyi, Shandong Province.
China Paper has a strong balance sheet and is in a net cash position of S$82mn. This should help fund its plans to double its paper chemical capacity and act on capacity potential acquisition opportunities to expand and enrich its product mix.
With increasing average selling price and recovering utilization rates, we expect China Paper will see record high sales in FY08 and 15-20% YoY growth in net profit. Capacity expansion and M&A opportunities, if completed in 2009 as expected, should further fuel growth in 2009 and onwards.
The stock is currently trading at 2.8x PER of estimated 2008 EPS with even lower forward earnings ratios as earnings are set to grow on firm’s double-digit top line expansion. This is slightly below peers in HK and other S-chips, which are at c.3x-4x PER.
It is also trading well below its book value of S 37 cts per share despite an ROE of 15.7% and even below its net cash of S 20cts per share. As such, valuations are
undemanding but re-rating would depend on delivery of earnings and acquisitions.
China Paper has a strong balance sheet and is in a net cash position of S$82mn. This should help fund its plans to double its paper chemical capacity and act on capacity potential acquisition opportunities to expand and enrich its product mix.
With increasing average selling price and recovering utilization rates, we expect China Paper will see record high sales in FY08 and 15-20% YoY growth in net profit. Capacity expansion and M&A opportunities, if completed in 2009 as expected, should further fuel growth in 2009 and onwards.
The stock is currently trading at 2.8x PER of estimated 2008 EPS with even lower forward earnings ratios as earnings are set to grow on firm’s double-digit top line expansion. This is slightly below peers in HK and other S-chips, which are at c.3x-4x PER.
It is also trading well below its book value of S 37 cts per share despite an ROE of 15.7% and even below its net cash of S 20cts per share. As such, valuations are
undemanding but re-rating would depend on delivery of earnings and acquisitions.
Tuesday, February 10, 2009
花旗樓市何時有運行？
傳統智慧告訴我們，股市走在經濟前頭，而經濟又行先樓市一步。是耶非耶，看看2003年沙士前後恒指、本地生產總值（GDP）和樓價指數，便知不中不遠。
供過於求問題嚴重
然而，大多數專家都相信，美國經濟、股市要有運行，先決條件是樓價止跌回升。老畢第一個感覺是，這好像跟傳統智慧背道而馳，因為如此說來，樓市豈非先於美股和美國經濟復甦？不過，想深一層，今年踏入「三歲」（次按在2007年夏天爆煲）的信貸危機由樓市出事觸發，而今次風暴跟1982和1991年美國經濟衰退最大的分別，在於當年金融體系對聯儲局放寬銀根反應很快，減息效應在各式信貸市場立竿見影；今天則有信心問題，銀行對借款人疑神疑鬼，甚至連同業也不信，聯儲局的零息政策無法適時在信貸市場「落實」，大量待售房屋積壓難清，加上銀主盤泛濫，美國樓市供過於求情況嚴重。
老畢可以肯定，花旗物業市場在經濟不景和銀行危機前後夾擊下，樓價跌幅會比1982和1991年更深，在谷底橫行的時間亦將更長！由於美股和美國經濟都在苦候樓市見底，引伸下去，經濟何時復甦、牛市幾時重臨，關鍵在於物業供求需時多久才能回復平衡。
花旗樓市是否沒有正面因素？答案是否定的。目前樓價中位數比2007年春高位回落超過二成，按揭利率同時下跌，意味美國人置業負擔能力顯著上升（樓價相對收入倍數下降）。不過，負擔能力雖處於上世紀七十年代初以來的最高水平，但按揭需求不僅並未相應增加，反而跌至二十年來最低！
你可以怪責格老甚至中國製造信貸泡沫、狂轟銀行向沒有資格置業的「三無人士」（無工作、無收入、無恒產）胡亂放貸，但美國樓市的根本問題是供求失衡，市場上有太多賣不出的房子。與其用「倒後鏡」看問題，不如前瞻「存貨積壓」（inventory overhang）的問題何時才能解決。
根據老畢手頭上的資料，可以用四個字來形容：大事不妙！
自上世紀六十年代有紀錄以來，美國待售新屋數量從未超逾十二萬五千間。可是，一年前數字突破了二十萬，創出歷史新高；去年11月雖回落至十九萬六千，但依然遠高於歷史平均水平。值得大家注意的是，美國去年12月有多達二萬二千間新屋售出，許多人以此推斷樓市可能已見底。可是，發展商若非劈價6%（12月比 11月），這批貨尾能成功賣出嗎？如果一個月減價6%也可視作樓市指標，那麼樓價一年要跌多少？見底，你話呢？
按照目前的銷售速度，充斥美國市場的待售新屋，至少要六個月時間才能沽清。驟耳聽來，這好像不太長，但不要忘記，新屋佔美國每年整體房屋銷售不足 8%，置業人士多買二手房舍。若把二手供應納入，再加上在拍賣會求售的銀主盤（佔美國眾多州份房屋銷售逾半），清理待售房屋需時估計長達十六個月！
美國樓市還有一個世界各地俱無的特性（拜房利美、房貸美這兩家被華府接管的政府資助機構﹝GSEs﹞「孭起」按揭市場所賜），就是銀行收回斷供物業，抵押品（房屋）價值即使低於借貸金額，即物業變成負資產，只要業主交回鑰匙，銀行便無權追討差價。那等於說，美國人斷供的誘因，比香港以至世界任何地方的業主都大，意味銀主盤供應量於可見將來仍會維持在高水平，令花旗樓市百上加斤。
美國樓價離底尚遠
美國樓價跟高位比較雖跌了不少，但供過於求一天未見改善，樓市一天也難言見底。根據以往經驗，物業市場不景、待售房屋積壓，存貨清理過程一般需時三年。可是，與過去不同，銀行今天紛紛收緊信貸，待售物業之多亦遠非昔日可比。種種迹象顯示，花旗樓市要回復供求平衡，需時恐怕不止三年。換句話說，樓市至少有幾年無運行，美國股市和經濟前景，還不可思過半？
最近，聲討金融業的聲音響徹大西洋兩岸，繼奧巴馬限制受助金融機構領導層的薪酬後，英國四家對沖基金的經理亦被傳召到下議院財政特別委員會作證。罪狀？因為眼光獨到沽空銀行股獲利也！果真世事如棋光怪陸離，為投資者賺取厚利的基金經理要向公眾交代，導致百年基業一朝喪的金融機構巨頭，卻連半句「鎖你」都懶得說。
代議士煞有介事，可能因為這個年頭賺錢的對沖基金實在太罕有，少得令議員們疑心大起。數據顯示，對沖基金去年平均虧損18.3%，是自1990年以來最差劣的表現。與標準普爾五百指數同期下跌37%比較，這個回報說不上羞家，但考慮到對沖基金收取相當於二成回報的表現費，18.3%的虧蝕，當然不及格。
不過，亦非所有對沖基金都一敗塗地。PFP Wealth Mangement的普賴斯（Tim Price）就向投資者推介，去年平均錄得9.8%回報的「系統性趨勢」（systemic trend）基金。系統性趨勢策略極之倚賴電腦模型，經常押注長線趨勢，例如油價走向。
普賴斯推介的AHL多元化基金（AHL Diversifeid Fund）及Whinton Futures，前者去年錄得三成升幅，後者回報亦達二成。兩基金表現同樣卓越，但入場門檻天差地遠，AHL最低投資額3萬美元，Whinton 的入場費卻高達100萬美元！
美滙指數由去年12月開始上升，1月23日在86.81水平遇上阻力調整；1月28日低見83.57，其後反彈至2月2日的86.07收市，進入敏感三角形待變。美元前景不明朗，投資者轉炒交叉盤，而英國銀行業最近不利消息頻傳，商品大王羅傑斯更斷言英國「玩完」，英鎊於是成為交叉盤的軸心貨幣而備受沽壓，兌美元在1月23日創下1.3505的十多年低位，歐羅兌英鎊在1月26日最高見0.952，與去年底的0.98歷史高位僅一步之遙，部分分析員甚至作出英鎊將邁向兌美元及歐羅平算的預測！不過，英鎊兌美元卻力守1.35不破，歐羅兌英鎊亦在0.9以上水平遇到回吐壓力，而市場對英倫銀行是否應該繼續減息首次出現意見分歧，再加上英國1月份Halifax房價指數出乎業界意料上升1.9%，由是觸發拆倉平盤，鎊滙在英倫銀行宣布減息半厘後不跌反升，兌美元衝破並企穩在1.46近期阻力之上，歐羅兌英鎊更跌穿近月重要技術支持位0.88，英鎊挑戰1.50美元心理大關的可能性不能排除。
供過於求問題嚴重
然而，大多數專家都相信，美國經濟、股市要有運行，先決條件是樓價止跌回升。老畢第一個感覺是，這好像跟傳統智慧背道而馳，因為如此說來，樓市豈非先於美股和美國經濟復甦？不過，想深一層，今年踏入「三歲」（次按在2007年夏天爆煲）的信貸危機由樓市出事觸發，而今次風暴跟1982和1991年美國經濟衰退最大的分別，在於當年金融體系對聯儲局放寬銀根反應很快，減息效應在各式信貸市場立竿見影；今天則有信心問題，銀行對借款人疑神疑鬼，甚至連同業也不信，聯儲局的零息政策無法適時在信貸市場「落實」，大量待售房屋積壓難清，加上銀主盤泛濫，美國樓市供過於求情況嚴重。
老畢可以肯定，花旗物業市場在經濟不景和銀行危機前後夾擊下，樓價跌幅會比1982和1991年更深，在谷底橫行的時間亦將更長！由於美股和美國經濟都在苦候樓市見底，引伸下去，經濟何時復甦、牛市幾時重臨，關鍵在於物業供求需時多久才能回復平衡。
花旗樓市是否沒有正面因素？答案是否定的。目前樓價中位數比2007年春高位回落超過二成，按揭利率同時下跌，意味美國人置業負擔能力顯著上升（樓價相對收入倍數下降）。不過，負擔能力雖處於上世紀七十年代初以來的最高水平，但按揭需求不僅並未相應增加，反而跌至二十年來最低！
你可以怪責格老甚至中國製造信貸泡沫、狂轟銀行向沒有資格置業的「三無人士」（無工作、無收入、無恒產）胡亂放貸，但美國樓市的根本問題是供求失衡，市場上有太多賣不出的房子。與其用「倒後鏡」看問題，不如前瞻「存貨積壓」（inventory overhang）的問題何時才能解決。
根據老畢手頭上的資料，可以用四個字來形容：大事不妙！
自上世紀六十年代有紀錄以來，美國待售新屋數量從未超逾十二萬五千間。可是，一年前數字突破了二十萬，創出歷史新高；去年11月雖回落至十九萬六千，但依然遠高於歷史平均水平。值得大家注意的是，美國去年12月有多達二萬二千間新屋售出，許多人以此推斷樓市可能已見底。可是，發展商若非劈價6%（12月比 11月），這批貨尾能成功賣出嗎？如果一個月減價6%也可視作樓市指標，那麼樓價一年要跌多少？見底，你話呢？
按照目前的銷售速度，充斥美國市場的待售新屋，至少要六個月時間才能沽清。驟耳聽來，這好像不太長，但不要忘記，新屋佔美國每年整體房屋銷售不足 8%，置業人士多買二手房舍。若把二手供應納入，再加上在拍賣會求售的銀主盤（佔美國眾多州份房屋銷售逾半），清理待售房屋需時估計長達十六個月！
美國樓市還有一個世界各地俱無的特性（拜房利美、房貸美這兩家被華府接管的政府資助機構﹝GSEs﹞「孭起」按揭市場所賜），就是銀行收回斷供物業，抵押品（房屋）價值即使低於借貸金額，即物業變成負資產，只要業主交回鑰匙，銀行便無權追討差價。那等於說，美國人斷供的誘因，比香港以至世界任何地方的業主都大，意味銀主盤供應量於可見將來仍會維持在高水平，令花旗樓市百上加斤。
美國樓價離底尚遠
美國樓價跟高位比較雖跌了不少，但供過於求一天未見改善，樓市一天也難言見底。根據以往經驗，物業市場不景、待售房屋積壓，存貨清理過程一般需時三年。可是，與過去不同，銀行今天紛紛收緊信貸，待售物業之多亦遠非昔日可比。種種迹象顯示，花旗樓市要回復供求平衡，需時恐怕不止三年。換句話說，樓市至少有幾年無運行，美國股市和經濟前景，還不可思過半？
最近，聲討金融業的聲音響徹大西洋兩岸，繼奧巴馬限制受助金融機構領導層的薪酬後，英國四家對沖基金的經理亦被傳召到下議院財政特別委員會作證。罪狀？因為眼光獨到沽空銀行股獲利也！果真世事如棋光怪陸離，為投資者賺取厚利的基金經理要向公眾交代，導致百年基業一朝喪的金融機構巨頭，卻連半句「鎖你」都懶得說。
代議士煞有介事，可能因為這個年頭賺錢的對沖基金實在太罕有，少得令議員們疑心大起。數據顯示，對沖基金去年平均虧損18.3%，是自1990年以來最差劣的表現。與標準普爾五百指數同期下跌37%比較，這個回報說不上羞家，但考慮到對沖基金收取相當於二成回報的表現費，18.3%的虧蝕，當然不及格。
不過，亦非所有對沖基金都一敗塗地。PFP Wealth Mangement的普賴斯（Tim Price）就向投資者推介，去年平均錄得9.8%回報的「系統性趨勢」（systemic trend）基金。系統性趨勢策略極之倚賴電腦模型，經常押注長線趨勢，例如油價走向。
普賴斯推介的AHL多元化基金（AHL Diversifeid Fund）及Whinton Futures，前者去年錄得三成升幅，後者回報亦達二成。兩基金表現同樣卓越，但入場門檻天差地遠，AHL最低投資額3萬美元，Whinton 的入場費卻高達100萬美元！
美滙指數由去年12月開始上升，1月23日在86.81水平遇上阻力調整；1月28日低見83.57，其後反彈至2月2日的86.07收市，進入敏感三角形待變。美元前景不明朗，投資者轉炒交叉盤，而英國銀行業最近不利消息頻傳，商品大王羅傑斯更斷言英國「玩完」，英鎊於是成為交叉盤的軸心貨幣而備受沽壓，兌美元在1月23日創下1.3505的十多年低位，歐羅兌英鎊在1月26日最高見0.952，與去年底的0.98歷史高位僅一步之遙，部分分析員甚至作出英鎊將邁向兌美元及歐羅平算的預測！不過，英鎊兌美元卻力守1.35不破，歐羅兌英鎊亦在0.9以上水平遇到回吐壓力，而市場對英倫銀行是否應該繼續減息首次出現意見分歧，再加上英國1月份Halifax房價指數出乎業界意料上升1.9%，由是觸發拆倉平盤，鎊滙在英倫銀行宣布減息半厘後不跌反升，兌美元衝破並企穩在1.46近期阻力之上，歐羅兌英鎊更跌穿近月重要技術支持位0.88，英鎊挑戰1.50美元心理大關的可能性不能排除。
身处通缩心存通胀投资策略不败之道
美国国会将于今天凌晨通过二党经过一番讨价还价后达成的振兴经济及金融业修订方案，不管金额是八千多亿或七千多亿（美元），这笔资金，都是国库空空如也的政府所没有，因此只能通过借入或开动印钞机筹集。
當紅的英國史家、哈佛大學教授、《世界金融史─金錢的崛興》的作者富格遜，不久前在達沃斯「經濟論壇」上發言，指出「美國政府○九年必須籌措二萬二千億政費，不論用什麼方法，都不可能不左右利率或通貨膨脹」。
眾所周知，政府向市場舉債，除了有利息支出的長期財政負擔，還會迫升利率（這便是過去說之屢矣的「排擠效果」〔crowding out effect〕；貨幣派批評凱恩斯財政政策衍生的赤字預算〔先使未來沒有的錢〕，等同在「乞丐兜搵食」，必然刺激利率上揚）。由於香港及其近鄰如中國、日本、新加坡和台灣等，都有大量外滙儲存，因此港人對其他國家資金短絀情況不大了解。
事實上，如今「水緊」缺錢的，不僅是先進國家，發展中國家亦大多債台高築，ING銀行月初發表的一項報告，便指出新興市場國家和企業，在未來數年內，必須償還、贖回及支付（利息）的資金總額為六萬八千億（尚不包括這些國家為刺激經濟而計劃投入的資金），加上歐盟諸國現年度約一萬一千億的赤字開支及本文見報時應已通過的美國「救市計劃」，各國政府需要的資金高達十萬億！
市場哪來這麼巨額資金，最終政府只有開動印鈔機，而其後果一如夜以繼日，通貨膨脹率驟升無法避免。
可是，如今「官民一體」，憂懼的是通縮而非通脹，高盛去月底在「外滙交易會議」上對約五百名與會者的調查，顯示擔心通縮的有百分之83、認為通脹惡化的只有百分之17；這種「民情」，在筆者看來，是「反智」的，因為事實清楚指出，歷史上12次惡性通脹（Hyperinflation）的導因均為「大量創造貨幣以融資公共財赤」。
當前的情況豈能例外？
奧巴馬總統的閣員及顧問的學養及經驗以至要搞好美國經濟的企圖心都不必懷疑，可是，他們開出的藥方，不外是師凱恩斯故智（數十年來，宏觀經濟學產生了以千計的計量程式，卻對經濟學的進步並無幫助），而經驗告訴大家，凱恩斯的財政政策有嚴重的後遺症，昨天《華爾街日報》對奧巴馬希望通過「花錢」使經濟走出困局的做法表示懷疑，大有道理。天下沒有免費午餐，天下又怎有沒有代價的經濟復甦，大量注入未來沒有的金錢，其副作用必然是經濟長期受害。
在經濟風雨飄搖、英國和日本已相繼宣布正式進入通縮期的大環境下，筆者仍持惡性通脹將至的態度，其「不識時務」、「不得人心」，彰彰明甚。近月來「真理在我」的通縮分子（deflationists），眾口一詞，指出世界性需求下降、消費者負債過甚需要長期減債（deleverage）、國際貿易萎縮、環球性失業率高企、貿易和金融保護主義升溫以至美國金融制度因互信不足頻臨崩潰……。
種種情況和通貨膨脹背道而馳。這些都是天天見報的事實。不過，事實的另一面是，美國（和其他資本主義國家）經濟陷入困境，急需注入更多資金；而美國政府的總負債達十三萬七千億（大多以債券形式存在），目前說美國可能無法還債（贖回），當然是杞人憂天，所以如此，皆因她仍有印刷鈔票的能力；但美債的外國持有者對美國經濟的信心日漸消褪，如果奧巴馬的振興經濟計劃未如人意，「拋售美債會對持有者本身帶來損失她們因此不會拋售」的「傳統智慧」便面臨嚴峻考驗。 只要外國債權人不再購入（遑論拋售）改持非美元資產，美元泛濫成災，事屬必然。
通貨收縮是通貨膨脹之母，不僅見諸20世紀20年代的德國，事隔近百年，兩者的關係依然不變。 通縮意味貨幣流動性放緩、人民撙節開支、增加儲蓄（或購入孳息較存款利率高的短期票據）；這種情況迫使政府必須「大手筆」注資（貨幣及財政政策）刺激經濟，不過，由於大部分人民致力於減債且擔心減薪、失業，不敢消費，政府的注資不一定會收到刺激經濟成長的效果，結果政府只有供應更多鈔票；儲蓄有如水壩，當貨幣供應大增至人民對其失去信心時，他們便會開始肆意花費，情況有如水壩崩塌，市場為紙幣淹沒的惡性通脹便出現！
加州史學教授費特明十多年前的《大混亂─1914至1924年德國通脹下的政治學、經濟學和社會》（上網找G. Feldman的著作便見），對當前的經濟形勢有啟發作用：「馬克滙價貶值，當然是壞事，但它突然敗部復活（recuperation）轉強，帶給經濟的傷害愈甚。」貨幣強勢令出口下降、失業率上升、股市急挫、上市公司無力派息、銀行和企業倒閉……。
1921年12月馬克強力反彈如德國經濟迴光返照，馬克滙價轉強成為德國經濟致命一擊；1922年馬克大貶值，惡性通脹（嚴重程度媲美津巴布韋）降臨。德國經濟由是一蹶不振，種下了納綷黨在大選中勝出執政的禍根.
現在的市場共識是今年上半年美元「可以看好」，美元滙價回揚，其對美國經濟的傷害，將在下半年浮現。 這是投資者不可掉以輕心的發展！
當前世界經濟特別是資本主義經濟奄奄一息，預期通縮是理所當然的；但一如較早前在這裏指出，筆者愈來愈相信身處通縮環境的投資者，應做好如何迎接惡性通脹來臨的部署。
當紅的英國史家、哈佛大學教授、《世界金融史─金錢的崛興》的作者富格遜，不久前在達沃斯「經濟論壇」上發言，指出「美國政府○九年必須籌措二萬二千億政費，不論用什麼方法，都不可能不左右利率或通貨膨脹」。
眾所周知，政府向市場舉債，除了有利息支出的長期財政負擔，還會迫升利率（這便是過去說之屢矣的「排擠效果」〔crowding out effect〕；貨幣派批評凱恩斯財政政策衍生的赤字預算〔先使未來沒有的錢〕，等同在「乞丐兜搵食」，必然刺激利率上揚）。由於香港及其近鄰如中國、日本、新加坡和台灣等，都有大量外滙儲存，因此港人對其他國家資金短絀情況不大了解。
事實上，如今「水緊」缺錢的，不僅是先進國家，發展中國家亦大多債台高築，ING銀行月初發表的一項報告，便指出新興市場國家和企業，在未來數年內，必須償還、贖回及支付（利息）的資金總額為六萬八千億（尚不包括這些國家為刺激經濟而計劃投入的資金），加上歐盟諸國現年度約一萬一千億的赤字開支及本文見報時應已通過的美國「救市計劃」，各國政府需要的資金高達十萬億！
市場哪來這麼巨額資金，最終政府只有開動印鈔機，而其後果一如夜以繼日，通貨膨脹率驟升無法避免。
可是，如今「官民一體」，憂懼的是通縮而非通脹，高盛去月底在「外滙交易會議」上對約五百名與會者的調查，顯示擔心通縮的有百分之83、認為通脹惡化的只有百分之17；這種「民情」，在筆者看來，是「反智」的，因為事實清楚指出，歷史上12次惡性通脹（Hyperinflation）的導因均為「大量創造貨幣以融資公共財赤」。
當前的情況豈能例外？
奧巴馬總統的閣員及顧問的學養及經驗以至要搞好美國經濟的企圖心都不必懷疑，可是，他們開出的藥方，不外是師凱恩斯故智（數十年來，宏觀經濟學產生了以千計的計量程式，卻對經濟學的進步並無幫助），而經驗告訴大家，凱恩斯的財政政策有嚴重的後遺症，昨天《華爾街日報》對奧巴馬希望通過「花錢」使經濟走出困局的做法表示懷疑，大有道理。天下沒有免費午餐，天下又怎有沒有代價的經濟復甦，大量注入未來沒有的金錢，其副作用必然是經濟長期受害。
在經濟風雨飄搖、英國和日本已相繼宣布正式進入通縮期的大環境下，筆者仍持惡性通脹將至的態度，其「不識時務」、「不得人心」，彰彰明甚。近月來「真理在我」的通縮分子（deflationists），眾口一詞，指出世界性需求下降、消費者負債過甚需要長期減債（deleverage）、國際貿易萎縮、環球性失業率高企、貿易和金融保護主義升溫以至美國金融制度因互信不足頻臨崩潰……。
種種情況和通貨膨脹背道而馳。這些都是天天見報的事實。不過，事實的另一面是，美國（和其他資本主義國家）經濟陷入困境，急需注入更多資金；而美國政府的總負債達十三萬七千億（大多以債券形式存在），目前說美國可能無法還債（贖回），當然是杞人憂天，所以如此，皆因她仍有印刷鈔票的能力；但美債的外國持有者對美國經濟的信心日漸消褪，如果奧巴馬的振興經濟計劃未如人意，「拋售美債會對持有者本身帶來損失她們因此不會拋售」的「傳統智慧」便面臨嚴峻考驗。 只要外國債權人不再購入（遑論拋售）改持非美元資產，美元泛濫成災，事屬必然。
通貨收縮是通貨膨脹之母，不僅見諸20世紀20年代的德國，事隔近百年，兩者的關係依然不變。 通縮意味貨幣流動性放緩、人民撙節開支、增加儲蓄（或購入孳息較存款利率高的短期票據）；這種情況迫使政府必須「大手筆」注資（貨幣及財政政策）刺激經濟，不過，由於大部分人民致力於減債且擔心減薪、失業，不敢消費，政府的注資不一定會收到刺激經濟成長的效果，結果政府只有供應更多鈔票；儲蓄有如水壩，當貨幣供應大增至人民對其失去信心時，他們便會開始肆意花費，情況有如水壩崩塌，市場為紙幣淹沒的惡性通脹便出現！
加州史學教授費特明十多年前的《大混亂─1914至1924年德國通脹下的政治學、經濟學和社會》（上網找G. Feldman的著作便見），對當前的經濟形勢有啟發作用：「馬克滙價貶值，當然是壞事，但它突然敗部復活（recuperation）轉強，帶給經濟的傷害愈甚。」貨幣強勢令出口下降、失業率上升、股市急挫、上市公司無力派息、銀行和企業倒閉……。
1921年12月馬克強力反彈如德國經濟迴光返照，馬克滙價轉強成為德國經濟致命一擊；1922年馬克大貶值，惡性通脹（嚴重程度媲美津巴布韋）降臨。德國經濟由是一蹶不振，種下了納綷黨在大選中勝出執政的禍根.
現在的市場共識是今年上半年美元「可以看好」，美元滙價回揚，其對美國經濟的傷害，將在下半年浮現。 這是投資者不可掉以輕心的發展！
當前世界經濟特別是資本主義經濟奄奄一息，預期通縮是理所當然的；但一如較早前在這裏指出，筆者愈來愈相信身處通縮環境的投資者，應做好如何迎接惡性通脹來臨的部署。
經濟愈墮落市場愈快樂？
美國上周五公布的就業數據認真無眼睇，1月份職位流失59萬8千，失業率升至7.6％的17年新高. 如果你信國家經濟研究局（NBER）的判斷，即花旗經濟早在2007年12月已陷入衰退，那麼美國在短短一年裏減少的職位便多達3百60萬，半數於過去三個月內出現！
從資金流向捕捉趨勢各位想必同時發現，美股在數據公布後不跌反升；一周計，道指錄得3.5％升幅，S&P漲5.2％，納指更急升7.8％，帶動港股周一造好。
老畢上周說過，對投資者而言，經濟學家的意見不妨記在心上（克魯明等人針對奧巴馬刺激經濟方案的評論有參考價值），但以真金白銀下注時，學者的話大可拋諸腦後，因為資產市場的走向往往跟他們的警告背道而馳。
試舉一例，美國救市方案有「購買國貨」條文（奧巴馬承諾作出修訂，但聽其言不如觀其行，一切有待事實證明）；西班牙的政客也在大搞Made in Spain運動，聲聲抵制進口；英國各地上周爆發野貓式罷工，矛頭直指外國勞工；中美在人民幣滙率上針鋒相對……，種種迹象均在發出全球化「岌岌可危」、經濟民族主義（economic nationalism）張牙舞爪的訊號。 可是，本港上市航運股不僅未因環球貿易在保護主義抬頭下雪上加霜而捱沽，反而追隨波羅的海乾散貨指數（BDI）急升。 順道一提，BDI過去14天持續上揚，累積漲幅達9成；自去年12月5日見底後，至今反彈148％。
另一例子是，經濟榮辱繫於資源出口的巴西，今年股市表現跟內地相比不遑多讓，與環球經濟和貿易前景「分道揚鑣」。
與去年波羅的海指數、巴西股市和內地A股暴跌，為今年初的強勁反彈創造條件一樣，美國政府雖遲遲未公布挽救金融業新方案（最新消息財長蓋特納將於本港時間周三凌晨發表聲明），但市場注意力已從銀行困局轉向其他環節，其中科技股表現出眾，反映在去年9月雷曼失救引發拋售潮中受累的部分行業，已開始吸引資金回流。
今年以来，金融股跌幅由单位数至六成不等，只有已变身银行控股公司的两大投行──大摩和高盛──股价上升。 這反映市場對一再狂瀉的金融股戒心不減，華府一天仍在壞銀行、資產擔保和國有化之間舉棋不定，投資者對金融股將繼續敬而遠之。可是，銀行以外的行業，今年股價跌幅普遍不足一成，尤以科技股走勢最醒神。
這個趨勢，從年初以來納指表現遠勝道指和S&P五百指數可見一斑。
從附圖可見，在2008年8至11月金融海嘯最黑暗的日子，道指走勢遠勝納指，但強弱趨勢自年底開始逆轉，意味去年科技股遭過分拋售，為投資者製造了低吸機會。
老畢並非在說全球化前路暢通無阻（事實剛好相反），只是建議大家，與其浪費時間聽經濟學家爭辯救市有效無效，不如多點注意市場發出的訊號，從中探索資金流動的趨向。
歐美銀行業正處於水深火熱之中，其中最頭痛的是不停注資銀行的英國。
由美國次按引發的金融海嘯，令金融界及相關專業機構形象大受損害，如果還不設法修補改善，在人前人後「多加幾分」，以後怎能順利跟客戶打交道？
普世價值未動搖誠然，源於美國禍延全球的金融海嘯令西方的自由經濟政策備受質疑，而外儲冠全球的具中國特色社會主義經濟成就引起不少學者研討。然而，不要忘記，中國經濟之所以飛躍增長，實有賴於與西方接軌的開放政策，目前遭到批評的只是過度「放縱」的金融市場機制，但自由民主這普世價值並未因而稍有動搖。 「有特色」的民主社會，未知何日在中國實現？
從資金流向捕捉趨勢各位想必同時發現，美股在數據公布後不跌反升；一周計，道指錄得3.5％升幅，S&P漲5.2％，納指更急升7.8％，帶動港股周一造好。
老畢上周說過，對投資者而言，經濟學家的意見不妨記在心上（克魯明等人針對奧巴馬刺激經濟方案的評論有參考價值），但以真金白銀下注時，學者的話大可拋諸腦後，因為資產市場的走向往往跟他們的警告背道而馳。
試舉一例，美國救市方案有「購買國貨」條文（奧巴馬承諾作出修訂，但聽其言不如觀其行，一切有待事實證明）；西班牙的政客也在大搞Made in Spain運動，聲聲抵制進口；英國各地上周爆發野貓式罷工，矛頭直指外國勞工；中美在人民幣滙率上針鋒相對……，種種迹象均在發出全球化「岌岌可危」、經濟民族主義（economic nationalism）張牙舞爪的訊號。 可是，本港上市航運股不僅未因環球貿易在保護主義抬頭下雪上加霜而捱沽，反而追隨波羅的海乾散貨指數（BDI）急升。 順道一提，BDI過去14天持續上揚，累積漲幅達9成；自去年12月5日見底後，至今反彈148％。
另一例子是，經濟榮辱繫於資源出口的巴西，今年股市表現跟內地相比不遑多讓，與環球經濟和貿易前景「分道揚鑣」。
與去年波羅的海指數、巴西股市和內地A股暴跌，為今年初的強勁反彈創造條件一樣，美國政府雖遲遲未公布挽救金融業新方案（最新消息財長蓋特納將於本港時間周三凌晨發表聲明），但市場注意力已從銀行困局轉向其他環節，其中科技股表現出眾，反映在去年9月雷曼失救引發拋售潮中受累的部分行業，已開始吸引資金回流。
今年以来，金融股跌幅由单位数至六成不等，只有已变身银行控股公司的两大投行──大摩和高盛──股价上升。 這反映市場對一再狂瀉的金融股戒心不減，華府一天仍在壞銀行、資產擔保和國有化之間舉棋不定，投資者對金融股將繼續敬而遠之。可是，銀行以外的行業，今年股價跌幅普遍不足一成，尤以科技股走勢最醒神。
這個趨勢，從年初以來納指表現遠勝道指和S&P五百指數可見一斑。
從附圖可見，在2008年8至11月金融海嘯最黑暗的日子，道指走勢遠勝納指，但強弱趨勢自年底開始逆轉，意味去年科技股遭過分拋售，為投資者製造了低吸機會。
老畢並非在說全球化前路暢通無阻（事實剛好相反），只是建議大家，與其浪費時間聽經濟學家爭辯救市有效無效，不如多點注意市場發出的訊號，從中探索資金流動的趨向。
歐美銀行業正處於水深火熱之中，其中最頭痛的是不停注資銀行的英國。
由美國次按引發的金融海嘯，令金融界及相關專業機構形象大受損害，如果還不設法修補改善，在人前人後「多加幾分」，以後怎能順利跟客戶打交道？
普世價值未動搖誠然，源於美國禍延全球的金融海嘯令西方的自由經濟政策備受質疑，而外儲冠全球的具中國特色社會主義經濟成就引起不少學者研討。然而，不要忘記，中國經濟之所以飛躍增長，實有賴於與西方接軌的開放政策，目前遭到批評的只是過度「放縱」的金融市場機制，但自由民主這普世價值並未因而稍有動搖。 「有特色」的民主社會，未知何日在中國實現？
趨勢大師大前研一
日本管理大師大前研一，見識過石油危機與日本泡沫經濟後，失落的十年如何掙扎存活。面對變動，他建議大家不要太快回應表象，急於找答案，應該建立系統性的思考，找到問題原因，才能盤點機會和優勢，找到商機。
大前直指，金融海嘯讓國際情勢丕變，美國將不再是以前的美國，台灣因為是「過手經濟」，過去利用中國便宜人力出口產品，並未厚植基礎實力，容易在這波消費緊縮中受到影響，必須在危機中思考，可以依靠什麼、緊抓什麼，才不會被淹沒。
他並認為，就算中國經濟成長率只有四到五％，但是這個龐大經濟體不會消失，台灣仍然可以利用中國在調整體質時，獲取商機。
對於個人就算是面臨裁員或者無薪假，大前研一建議，「不要為打翻的牛奶傷心」，應該積極學習，挑戰提升能力。對於即將出社會的年輕人，他建議用網路和雙腳親自確認事實，培養溝通、洞察、探索世界的三種能力，培養出不被淘汰的DNA。以下是專訪內容：
《商業周刊》問（以下簡稱問）：日本在1990年代遇過經濟泡沫化，經歷失落的十年，這次全球金融風暴你認為需要多久時間復甦？
大前研一答（以下簡稱答）：需要十年，可能更糟，因為所有政府都在承諾他們無法做到的事情。
你要知道，所有金融危機會經歷三階段，美國在十月時是第一階段；銀行流動性危機，第二階段是銀行活化負資產會遇到困難，因為股價低落，銀行根本無法從股票市場找到新資金，第三是企業倒閉，只有解決三項問題，才可能走上復甦的長路。
問：但是各國政府都在努力救經濟，真的需要十年嗎？
答：處理金融危機有三點原則：第一要視此為系統性問題，而非個別銀行的危機；第二，瞭解會發生什麼慘劇，你才能在第一時間找到解決答案；第三是建立國際組織防範危機再發生。
消費不是首要之事 因為一直花錢就必須有人償還
上面三點美國通通沒做到，美國財政部長鮑爾森（Hank Paulson）決策時放入太多個人的判斷，只對單一現象（Phenomenon）反應，他讓雷曼破產、拯救花旗銀行，只因為他前老闆魯賓（Robert Rubin）是花旗前財務長，都是個人利害關係。美國政府、機構和學者，到目前為止只有恐慌，即便是克魯曼（Paul Krugman），或者其他學者，都叫大家消費、消費、消費，我們要學小羅斯福政策，這很可笑！根本不是首要之事，因為一直花錢就必須有人償還。
問：所以，問題的來源在美國，解決動能也來自美國？
答：這是美國犯下的罪，跟他們責怪中國散播病毒、毒奶是如出一轍，美國散布金融有毒物，讓世界陷入恐慌！就像是中國的殺蟲劑餃子，房地美（Freddie Mac）和房利美（Fannie Mae）賣了五兆安全保證給全球，因為標準普爾說這是AAA產品，他們讓金融危機流散到各地。
沒有人知道（美國金融產品）裡面有什麼，就像是中國餃子，根本不知道裡面到底有什麼肉，可能有豬肉、牛肉甚至是兔肉或貓肉。他們必須瞭解，這是美國對全人類犯下最大的罪，美國必須認錯……。
問：如果需要十年才能復甦，台灣會不會走向日本長達十五年衰退期的後路？目前日本已經復甦了嗎？
答：歡迎加入我們的俱樂部。但如果你們像日本還算幸運，日本有強勁的支撐底部，不是像海綿彈彈跳跳不穩。日本有很多存款，扎實的技術和經營支撐。
台灣沒有，台灣的經濟是「過手（pass through）」經濟，到全世界去買零件，拿到中國製造賣到全球，拿利潤，沒有人真的從零組件做起，除了TSMC或者UMC之外，沒有人真的生產什麼，因此你們才急於利用中國便宜人力和市場。
放輕鬆，問題沒有想像嚴重 台灣應緊盯中國的調整找商機
問：台灣這樣的經濟體，企業和個人如何面對？
答：放鬆一點，你們的問題沒廣東嚴重，你到廣東看看，他們主要出口到美國，被影響更大，印度更嚴重，因為他們科技公司主要賣東西給美國金融機構，現在這些美國金融機構不買了。
這個時間台灣正好可以思考一下自己的根源。當危機來臨，我們可以依靠什麼，抓住什麼才不會被淹沒？
中國正在做一個大調整，你們應該緊盯中國的調整，假設我是台灣人，我會利用中國的調整找到商機。
問：像是哪些機會？
答：像中國這樣大的經濟體不會消失，只會改變她的體質，單靠自己改變相當困難。如果中國人失業了，他們會開職業訓練課程，再訓練中國人，假設中國失業他們需要提升能力，台灣人會開補習班，你不用擔心，我相信台灣人會從中國的問題裡找到賺錢的機會。
你們也可以更深入看中國內部的需求，將產品和服務輸入中國，這是歐洲、美國和日本想做，但是台灣人更瞭解中國需求，台灣人會講日文、中文和英文，這是黃金組合（Golden combination強調語氣），沒有人可以做到；唯一可以瞭解三個主要市場就是台灣人。
問：你不擔心中國房貸的問題，造成中國經濟縮水？
答：中國地產商應該擔心，但是一般人不需要擔心，中國經濟相較於過去每年成長一一％，即便降低一、兩個百分點，也是很好的經濟體，超出你能吃的範圍了；即便當中國經濟只成長四到五個百分點，台灣還是可以調整腳步，再次定義中國市場，然後獲得利益。
問：其他亞洲地區未來呢？
答：要注意韓國。韓國一直在強調GDP（國內生產毛額）的成長，好幾年前，日本就已經放棄強調GDP的成長，現在我們是第二十名，我們都不再講經濟成長，這意味著GDP已經不重要了，但是韓國還持續強調，希望有七％的成長，GDP成長為全球七大經濟體之一等等。
每次成長，他們都知道那是經濟泡沫，然後又再次被拉回現實，把重點放在強調GDP是很大的問題，因為他們的經濟成長沒有底部支撐力道；他們沒有人才、基礎建設，沒有零件製造商，沒有設備製造商，他們到中國生產產品，再賣到其他地方，這都非常虛無，現在他們被拉回現實，發現過去十五年根本沒有什麼成長。
新加坡沒有分析錢從哪裡來 他們開了兩個國際賭場是個笑話
問：你過去認為，新加坡是個很好的貿易商，懂得槓桿出自己最大的好處……。
答：不，現在我認為新加坡正失去競爭優勢，新加坡開了兩個國際賭場是個笑話。
想想誰會到新加坡賭錢啊？新加坡看到澳門和香港結合，就開始驚慌他們會失去展覽、開會和購物人潮，他們以為自己失去競爭力，但是他們不懂，九成澳門的賭場成功來自於貪污，一個籌碼就是一千塊，那是一個相當好用的洗錢工具。一般外國旅客只小賭個二十美元，澳門賭場成功是因為這整個機制就是中國洗錢機器，沒有人願意跟新加坡政府在洗錢上打交道。
我想他們犯的很大的錯誤，就是沒有分析錢從哪裡來，犯了一個歷史大錯。
問：但是不要說是國家政策，商業世界也變化很快，根本很難下對的決定。
答：下決定的基本條件就是瞭解目前狀況，不要回應或者太快回應一些膚淺的表象，你不應該回應表象，因為每個表象都有其原因，像是澳門會興盛，真正的原因是因為中國的貪污文化。
要瞭解並不困難，我就是自己發現的，我用腳來蒐集資料。
問：所以你建議大家不要太快回應現象？
答：正是。
年輕人必備的三個關鍵能力 溝通力、找答案、建立世界觀
問：如果不立即回應外在狀況，那麼如何準備自己，在寒冬下面對未來？
答：第一，現金為王。第二，現在不是跳槽的時機。要投資你自己，尤其要好好檢視你之前所認知的所有事實，建構屬於自己的世界觀。例如，你知不知道因為美國已經不再是以前的美國了，中國也經歷改變，不只是因為金融海嘯，而是中國在奧運後正在定義自己要成為怎樣的角色。
我對台灣年輕人的建議相當簡單，投資自己，讓你在任何國家和狀況都可以成為堅強的領導者，不要把自己局限在台灣。
問：這要建立哪些競爭力？
答：三種關鍵能力，第一，語言和溝通能力，不止是語言能力，而是理解對方的能力，像是你可以強硬說，「在週三前看完這些東西！」你也可以說「幫我個大忙，下週三把這些還給我，可以嗎？」同樣一件事，溝通的方式很多，在多重文化、規範和狀況下，擁有溝通能力就等於全部，因為每個人都有不同意見，你必須整合這些意見，執行，並且達到目的，這是你在商業世界，唯一需要發展能力。
第二，當你有問題，必須找到事實，讓事實說話。在確定你表象的原因和分析之前不要有動作。分析事情的原因，找出最終解決問題的方法，這是黃金能力：不是依賴單一的知識，找出答案的方法才是真正的能力。有時候洞察能力必須跳脫你原本的位階。
溝通能力和解決問題能力後，第三種能力，知道世界正在發生什麼事，讓自己對於世界大事有觀點。第三種能力相當重要，因為可以塑造你的職業生涯計畫和未來計畫，瞭解你想做什麼。
即便到現在我每年都會選擇一個國家，研究這個國家，去年是羅馬尼亞，今年是俄羅斯，下一年是印尼。
問：但是我們必須有意識的去學習解決問題的方法？
答：對，不要只是讀書或者看雜誌，必須有一個主題，做網際瀏覽或者到當地旅遊，然後就會有一個獨特的見解，擁有自己對於世界大事的觀點，相當重要。
另外，你也許會發現自己還欠缺一兩樣才能，或者想發展第三樣才能，像是除了中、英和日文外，也許你發現自己需要另一個語言，但是你要先有第三種能力（瞭解世界），因為商業機會永遠都在，如果每個人都在同一個領域找機會，根本沒有商機可言，因為速度快，有錢，最強的人都已經先探索過了，後進者必須在已有的領域之外探索，為了知道這些商機，你必須有些假設，幸運的是，現在你也可以在網路上蒐集資料，不需要親身旅遊。
問：國際勞工組織曾公布，2009年將會有兩億人失業。對於已經被裁員的人，你有什麼建議？
答：那就重新開始。不要擔心重新開始，不是有句話說，不要為了打翻的牛奶悲傷，因為已經打翻了，如果被裁員就被裁員吧！放輕鬆點，你已經辛苦大半輩子了，現在是停下來休息的時候了，你不會餓死，而且你自由了。
被裁員就是學習的好時間 繼續幫明年可能破產的公司更可怕
這是學習的好時間，在日本，被裁員了就是上課，日本有稱為「哈囉！工作」的計畫，我很多朋友去了職業訓練所，學著做木工、縫製地毯、學電腦，繼續幫一家明年可能會破產的公司工作還讓我比較擔心。
問：你對於人們現在遇到的問題很樂觀？
答：在我生活經驗裡，擔心並無法解決任何事，當我試著改進但是仍然沒有幫助，我也會煩惱，但是我從經驗得知，擔心無法解決問題，必須做些事才行。
目前為止，你們很有奮戰精神，永遠可以往上走，對吧？永遠有能力往上走，如果你們停止奮戰、停止提升自己，就完了；如果你想掌握自己生活，必須繼續挑戰，提升自己。
大前直指，金融海嘯讓國際情勢丕變，美國將不再是以前的美國，台灣因為是「過手經濟」，過去利用中國便宜人力出口產品，並未厚植基礎實力，容易在這波消費緊縮中受到影響，必須在危機中思考，可以依靠什麼、緊抓什麼，才不會被淹沒。
他並認為，就算中國經濟成長率只有四到五％，但是這個龐大經濟體不會消失，台灣仍然可以利用中國在調整體質時，獲取商機。
對於個人就算是面臨裁員或者無薪假，大前研一建議，「不要為打翻的牛奶傷心」，應該積極學習，挑戰提升能力。對於即將出社會的年輕人，他建議用網路和雙腳親自確認事實，培養溝通、洞察、探索世界的三種能力，培養出不被淘汰的DNA。以下是專訪內容：
《商業周刊》問（以下簡稱問）：日本在1990年代遇過經濟泡沫化，經歷失落的十年，這次全球金融風暴你認為需要多久時間復甦？
大前研一答（以下簡稱答）：需要十年，可能更糟，因為所有政府都在承諾他們無法做到的事情。
你要知道，所有金融危機會經歷三階段，美國在十月時是第一階段；銀行流動性危機，第二階段是銀行活化負資產會遇到困難，因為股價低落，銀行根本無法從股票市場找到新資金，第三是企業倒閉，只有解決三項問題，才可能走上復甦的長路。
問：但是各國政府都在努力救經濟，真的需要十年嗎？
答：處理金融危機有三點原則：第一要視此為系統性問題，而非個別銀行的危機；第二，瞭解會發生什麼慘劇，你才能在第一時間找到解決答案；第三是建立國際組織防範危機再發生。
消費不是首要之事 因為一直花錢就必須有人償還
上面三點美國通通沒做到，美國財政部長鮑爾森（Hank Paulson）決策時放入太多個人的判斷，只對單一現象（Phenomenon）反應，他讓雷曼破產、拯救花旗銀行，只因為他前老闆魯賓（Robert Rubin）是花旗前財務長，都是個人利害關係。美國政府、機構和學者，到目前為止只有恐慌，即便是克魯曼（Paul Krugman），或者其他學者，都叫大家消費、消費、消費，我們要學小羅斯福政策，這很可笑！根本不是首要之事，因為一直花錢就必須有人償還。
問：所以，問題的來源在美國，解決動能也來自美國？
答：這是美國犯下的罪，跟他們責怪中國散播病毒、毒奶是如出一轍，美國散布金融有毒物，讓世界陷入恐慌！就像是中國的殺蟲劑餃子，房地美（Freddie Mac）和房利美（Fannie Mae）賣了五兆安全保證給全球，因為標準普爾說這是AAA產品，他們讓金融危機流散到各地。
沒有人知道（美國金融產品）裡面有什麼，就像是中國餃子，根本不知道裡面到底有什麼肉，可能有豬肉、牛肉甚至是兔肉或貓肉。他們必須瞭解，這是美國對全人類犯下最大的罪，美國必須認錯……。
問：如果需要十年才能復甦，台灣會不會走向日本長達十五年衰退期的後路？目前日本已經復甦了嗎？
答：歡迎加入我們的俱樂部。但如果你們像日本還算幸運，日本有強勁的支撐底部，不是像海綿彈彈跳跳不穩。日本有很多存款，扎實的技術和經營支撐。
台灣沒有，台灣的經濟是「過手（pass through）」經濟，到全世界去買零件，拿到中國製造賣到全球，拿利潤，沒有人真的從零組件做起，除了TSMC或者UMC之外，沒有人真的生產什麼，因此你們才急於利用中國便宜人力和市場。
放輕鬆，問題沒有想像嚴重 台灣應緊盯中國的調整找商機
問：台灣這樣的經濟體，企業和個人如何面對？
答：放鬆一點，你們的問題沒廣東嚴重，你到廣東看看，他們主要出口到美國，被影響更大，印度更嚴重，因為他們科技公司主要賣東西給美國金融機構，現在這些美國金融機構不買了。
這個時間台灣正好可以思考一下自己的根源。當危機來臨，我們可以依靠什麼，抓住什麼才不會被淹沒？
中國正在做一個大調整，你們應該緊盯中國的調整，假設我是台灣人，我會利用中國的調整找到商機。
問：像是哪些機會？
答：像中國這樣大的經濟體不會消失，只會改變她的體質，單靠自己改變相當困難。如果中國人失業了，他們會開職業訓練課程，再訓練中國人，假設中國失業他們需要提升能力，台灣人會開補習班，你不用擔心，我相信台灣人會從中國的問題裡找到賺錢的機會。
你們也可以更深入看中國內部的需求，將產品和服務輸入中國，這是歐洲、美國和日本想做，但是台灣人更瞭解中國需求，台灣人會講日文、中文和英文，這是黃金組合（Golden combination強調語氣），沒有人可以做到；唯一可以瞭解三個主要市場就是台灣人。
問：你不擔心中國房貸的問題，造成中國經濟縮水？
答：中國地產商應該擔心，但是一般人不需要擔心，中國經濟相較於過去每年成長一一％，即便降低一、兩個百分點，也是很好的經濟體，超出你能吃的範圍了；即便當中國經濟只成長四到五個百分點，台灣還是可以調整腳步，再次定義中國市場，然後獲得利益。
問：其他亞洲地區未來呢？
答：要注意韓國。韓國一直在強調GDP（國內生產毛額）的成長，好幾年前，日本就已經放棄強調GDP的成長，現在我們是第二十名，我們都不再講經濟成長，這意味著GDP已經不重要了，但是韓國還持續強調，希望有七％的成長，GDP成長為全球七大經濟體之一等等。
每次成長，他們都知道那是經濟泡沫，然後又再次被拉回現實，把重點放在強調GDP是很大的問題，因為他們的經濟成長沒有底部支撐力道；他們沒有人才、基礎建設，沒有零件製造商，沒有設備製造商，他們到中國生產產品，再賣到其他地方，這都非常虛無，現在他們被拉回現實，發現過去十五年根本沒有什麼成長。
新加坡沒有分析錢從哪裡來 他們開了兩個國際賭場是個笑話
問：你過去認為，新加坡是個很好的貿易商，懂得槓桿出自己最大的好處……。
答：不，現在我認為新加坡正失去競爭優勢，新加坡開了兩個國際賭場是個笑話。
想想誰會到新加坡賭錢啊？新加坡看到澳門和香港結合，就開始驚慌他們會失去展覽、開會和購物人潮，他們以為自己失去競爭力，但是他們不懂，九成澳門的賭場成功來自於貪污，一個籌碼就是一千塊，那是一個相當好用的洗錢工具。一般外國旅客只小賭個二十美元，澳門賭場成功是因為這整個機制就是中國洗錢機器，沒有人願意跟新加坡政府在洗錢上打交道。
我想他們犯的很大的錯誤，就是沒有分析錢從哪裡來，犯了一個歷史大錯。
問：但是不要說是國家政策，商業世界也變化很快，根本很難下對的決定。
答：下決定的基本條件就是瞭解目前狀況，不要回應或者太快回應一些膚淺的表象，你不應該回應表象，因為每個表象都有其原因，像是澳門會興盛，真正的原因是因為中國的貪污文化。
要瞭解並不困難，我就是自己發現的，我用腳來蒐集資料。
問：所以你建議大家不要太快回應現象？
答：正是。
年輕人必備的三個關鍵能力 溝通力、找答案、建立世界觀
問：如果不立即回應外在狀況，那麼如何準備自己，在寒冬下面對未來？
答：第一，現金為王。第二，現在不是跳槽的時機。要投資你自己，尤其要好好檢視你之前所認知的所有事實，建構屬於自己的世界觀。例如，你知不知道因為美國已經不再是以前的美國了，中國也經歷改變，不只是因為金融海嘯，而是中國在奧運後正在定義自己要成為怎樣的角色。
我對台灣年輕人的建議相當簡單，投資自己，讓你在任何國家和狀況都可以成為堅強的領導者，不要把自己局限在台灣。
問：這要建立哪些競爭力？
答：三種關鍵能力，第一，語言和溝通能力，不止是語言能力，而是理解對方的能力，像是你可以強硬說，「在週三前看完這些東西！」你也可以說「幫我個大忙，下週三把這些還給我，可以嗎？」同樣一件事，溝通的方式很多，在多重文化、規範和狀況下，擁有溝通能力就等於全部，因為每個人都有不同意見，你必須整合這些意見，執行，並且達到目的，這是你在商業世界，唯一需要發展能力。
第二，當你有問題，必須找到事實，讓事實說話。在確定你表象的原因和分析之前不要有動作。分析事情的原因，找出最終解決問題的方法，這是黃金能力：不是依賴單一的知識，找出答案的方法才是真正的能力。有時候洞察能力必須跳脫你原本的位階。
溝通能力和解決問題能力後，第三種能力，知道世界正在發生什麼事，讓自己對於世界大事有觀點。第三種能力相當重要，因為可以塑造你的職業生涯計畫和未來計畫，瞭解你想做什麼。
即便到現在我每年都會選擇一個國家，研究這個國家，去年是羅馬尼亞，今年是俄羅斯，下一年是印尼。
問：但是我們必須有意識的去學習解決問題的方法？
答：對，不要只是讀書或者看雜誌，必須有一個主題，做網際瀏覽或者到當地旅遊，然後就會有一個獨特的見解，擁有自己對於世界大事的觀點，相當重要。
另外，你也許會發現自己還欠缺一兩樣才能，或者想發展第三樣才能，像是除了中、英和日文外，也許你發現自己需要另一個語言，但是你要先有第三種能力（瞭解世界），因為商業機會永遠都在，如果每個人都在同一個領域找機會，根本沒有商機可言，因為速度快，有錢，最強的人都已經先探索過了，後進者必須在已有的領域之外探索，為了知道這些商機，你必須有些假設，幸運的是，現在你也可以在網路上蒐集資料，不需要親身旅遊。
問：國際勞工組織曾公布，2009年將會有兩億人失業。對於已經被裁員的人，你有什麼建議？
答：那就重新開始。不要擔心重新開始，不是有句話說，不要為了打翻的牛奶悲傷，因為已經打翻了，如果被裁員就被裁員吧！放輕鬆點，你已經辛苦大半輩子了，現在是停下來休息的時候了，你不會餓死，而且你自由了。
被裁員就是學習的好時間 繼續幫明年可能破產的公司更可怕
這是學習的好時間，在日本，被裁員了就是上課，日本有稱為「哈囉！工作」的計畫，我很多朋友去了職業訓練所，學著做木工、縫製地毯、學電腦，繼續幫一家明年可能會破產的公司工作還讓我比較擔心。
問：你對於人們現在遇到的問題很樂觀？
答：在我生活經驗裡，擔心並無法解決任何事，當我試著改進但是仍然沒有幫助，我也會煩惱，但是我從經驗得知，擔心無法解決問題，必須做些事才行。
目前為止，你們很有奮戰精神，永遠可以往上走，對吧？永遠有能力往上走，如果你們停止奮戰、停止提升自己，就完了；如果你想掌握自己生活，必須繼續挑戰，提升自己。
Monday, February 9, 2009
投资心态
我只能讲讲我自己的经验，说明我自己的理由。看报表，看书，看杂志，然后实地走走。要有充分的兴趣做这件事情，而不是为了赚钱的冲动。做了判断，长期跟踪，不断思考，不断修正。
智者千虑，必有一失，愚者千虑，必有一得。我是普通人，智力水平非常一般，只有反复思考，天天思考，带这问题再去看书，与历史上真正的大师做交流。再看报表，看杂志，实地走走。
不要轻易下结论，不要急功近利。就我个人而言，在判断新上市公司的投机机会方面，还算正确率很高，但可怜的是，对判断其之后的发展变化方面，失误率在 80%以上。就是说当新股上市的时候我看过资料，如果很自负的做一判断，往往在股票价格上是对的，但时间稍微一长，发现对其发展的判断是偏离真相很多的，甚至出现过方向性错误的情况。相对应的，对我观察了5年以上的公司，看法的正确率就高很多。
对我而言，其中的差异无非是看的时间长，自然会得到的有效信息多，另外，时间是研究者的好伙伴，做永远比说要更能体现一个组织的行为逻辑。现实生活中企业遇到的挑战比我们脑中的情况要复杂的多，所以我们可以从它们实际遇到的情况以及处理的方式中得到这些家伙的真实行为逻辑。
千万不要急。另外，我个人不赞成狗熊掰棒子式的研究模式。我不想研究流星，哪怕它辉煌的仿佛是一颗太阳。我喜欢慢慢做，不走捷径，但也不走回头路。曾在一个汽车厂拜访的时候，管理层讲他在德国的经历。德国人作事情，不走捷径，在中国人看来很多方法笨的要死，但由于按照他们的逻辑，这些路径符合逻辑，只要一步步走，就可以达到目的，所以就慢慢做。但5年后一看，人家没走回头路，居然跑前面了。走捷径，很容易逐渐偏离最初的目标的。又能找到捷径，又能控制自己不偏离方向，这是需要大定力和大智慧的。
我是普通人，实在不想挑战人性的弱点。我不想去学天才，那样我会死的很难看的，小马过河的故事我终身难忘。做一个普通的投资者和研究者，挺好。
智者千虑，必有一失，愚者千虑，必有一得。我是普通人，智力水平非常一般，只有反复思考，天天思考，带这问题再去看书，与历史上真正的大师做交流。再看报表，看杂志，实地走走。
不要轻易下结论，不要急功近利。就我个人而言，在判断新上市公司的投机机会方面，还算正确率很高，但可怜的是，对判断其之后的发展变化方面，失误率在 80%以上。就是说当新股上市的时候我看过资料，如果很自负的做一判断，往往在股票价格上是对的，但时间稍微一长，发现对其发展的判断是偏离真相很多的，甚至出现过方向性错误的情况。相对应的，对我观察了5年以上的公司，看法的正确率就高很多。
对我而言，其中的差异无非是看的时间长，自然会得到的有效信息多，另外，时间是研究者的好伙伴，做永远比说要更能体现一个组织的行为逻辑。现实生活中企业遇到的挑战比我们脑中的情况要复杂的多，所以我们可以从它们实际遇到的情况以及处理的方式中得到这些家伙的真实行为逻辑。
千万不要急。另外，我个人不赞成狗熊掰棒子式的研究模式。我不想研究流星，哪怕它辉煌的仿佛是一颗太阳。我喜欢慢慢做，不走捷径，但也不走回头路。曾在一个汽车厂拜访的时候，管理层讲他在德国的经历。德国人作事情，不走捷径，在中国人看来很多方法笨的要死，但由于按照他们的逻辑，这些路径符合逻辑，只要一步步走，就可以达到目的，所以就慢慢做。但5年后一看，人家没走回头路，居然跑前面了。走捷径，很容易逐渐偏离最初的目标的。又能找到捷径，又能控制自己不偏离方向，这是需要大定力和大智慧的。
我是普通人，实在不想挑战人性的弱点。我不想去学天才，那样我会死的很难看的，小马过河的故事我终身难忘。做一个普通的投资者和研究者，挺好。
Sunday, February 8, 2009
倒金字塔式的资金投入是亏钱的根源
巴菲特经典的投资理念是“安全边际”理论，持有一只拥有足够安全边际的股票，比如用1元买到了价值10元的股票，还会亏钱吗？
当然，如果买入后一直持有到股价回归价值的时候，亏钱的可能性极小，但这忽略了投资者的资金组合的变化，比如，市场极度低迷的时候，股价1元，投资者试探性地买入了1000股，当股价涨到10元的时候，股票市值1万元，投资者赚了10倍，信心膨胀后毫不犹豫又增加投入9万元，此时的资本总额10万元。
如果此时市场出现回落，只要股票下跌10%，就亏损了1万元，相当于吞噬了前面10倍的收益。当牛市火爆的时候出现10%甚至30%调整的概率是很大的，所以一旦投资者陷入了“倒金字塔”式资金投入方式的陷阱，普遍亏钱就造成了。
股市上涨的过程中不断追加资金，股市下跌的过程中不断减少资金，这种“倒金字塔”式投资方式其实是非常普遍的。当市场极度低迷的时候，所有的迹象都在向投资者表明市场已经无望，各种媒体都在发表针对股市消极的言论，牛市中的股神都销声匿迹了，此时投资者的心态普遍低落，大多数人都选择空仓等待牛市的到来，只有少数有胆量的人才敢持有部分仓位，然而牛市不期而至，从熊到牛的过程中，很多股票涨了N倍，但大部分投资者初期持仓不大，所以获得收益并不高；市场景气度到达顶点后开始回落，但此时投资者普遍满仓或重仓，导致亏损巨大，把前面赚的都吞噬了。随着市场景气度的不断回落和股指的下跌，投资者不断降低仓位，等到了底部的时候，基本空仓了。每轮牛熊都在上演这样的故事。
投资者的这种 "趋势投资”心态看起来很正常，但这种操作思维值得怀疑。很多人的亏损不是因为选错股，而是在资金投入上掉入了“倒金字塔”的陷阱。
价值投资之父本杰明·格雷厄姆，在著作《聪明的投资者》中批评了股市中常常出现的一个根本性错误：把股票和生意当作是两回事。
他指出，流行极广的“趋势投资”原则，即某只股票或行情已经上扬，所以应该买进，某只股票或行情已经下跌，所以应该卖出，这个原则完全违反了“健全的商业常识”，也就是说，在日常经验中，一般商品跌价了，我们得赶紧买进才是。每个人都信奉“低买高卖”的赚钱法则，但具体实施的时候往往成了“高买低卖”，这种现象很奇怪。
所以从资金投入角度来解释“7输2平1赢”的现象就很容易了。正是“底部低，头部高”的资金分布结构，决定了牛市赚钱少，熊市亏钱多的必然结果。
本轮大牛市中，中小投资者没能逃脱“倒金字塔”的迷局，各类机构和基金同样没逃脱这个魔咒。2007年下半年股市高歌猛进，一路闯关4000点、5000点、6000点，投资机构信心暴涨，很多人甚至预言年底到1万点。基于对后市强大的信心，基金在此时获得大批量发行，等基金入市后，不料市场峰回路转，从高点迅速回落，随后陷入持续的暴跌，无数基民被套在5000点到6000点的巅峰上。笔者在想，如果按照“正金字塔”的资金投入方式操作，结果也许会完全不一样。
当然，如果买入后一直持有到股价回归价值的时候，亏钱的可能性极小，但这忽略了投资者的资金组合的变化，比如，市场极度低迷的时候，股价1元，投资者试探性地买入了1000股，当股价涨到10元的时候，股票市值1万元，投资者赚了10倍，信心膨胀后毫不犹豫又增加投入9万元，此时的资本总额10万元。
如果此时市场出现回落，只要股票下跌10%，就亏损了1万元，相当于吞噬了前面10倍的收益。当牛市火爆的时候出现10%甚至30%调整的概率是很大的，所以一旦投资者陷入了“倒金字塔”式资金投入方式的陷阱，普遍亏钱就造成了。
股市上涨的过程中不断追加资金，股市下跌的过程中不断减少资金，这种“倒金字塔”式投资方式其实是非常普遍的。当市场极度低迷的时候，所有的迹象都在向投资者表明市场已经无望，各种媒体都在发表针对股市消极的言论，牛市中的股神都销声匿迹了，此时投资者的心态普遍低落，大多数人都选择空仓等待牛市的到来，只有少数有胆量的人才敢持有部分仓位，然而牛市不期而至，从熊到牛的过程中，很多股票涨了N倍，但大部分投资者初期持仓不大，所以获得收益并不高；市场景气度到达顶点后开始回落，但此时投资者普遍满仓或重仓，导致亏损巨大，把前面赚的都吞噬了。随着市场景气度的不断回落和股指的下跌，投资者不断降低仓位，等到了底部的时候，基本空仓了。每轮牛熊都在上演这样的故事。
投资者的这种 "趋势投资”心态看起来很正常，但这种操作思维值得怀疑。很多人的亏损不是因为选错股，而是在资金投入上掉入了“倒金字塔”的陷阱。
价值投资之父本杰明·格雷厄姆，在著作《聪明的投资者》中批评了股市中常常出现的一个根本性错误：把股票和生意当作是两回事。
他指出，流行极广的“趋势投资”原则，即某只股票或行情已经上扬，所以应该买进，某只股票或行情已经下跌，所以应该卖出，这个原则完全违反了“健全的商业常识”，也就是说，在日常经验中，一般商品跌价了，我们得赶紧买进才是。每个人都信奉“低买高卖”的赚钱法则，但具体实施的时候往往成了“高买低卖”，这种现象很奇怪。
所以从资金投入角度来解释“7输2平1赢”的现象就很容易了。正是“底部低，头部高”的资金分布结构，决定了牛市赚钱少，熊市亏钱多的必然结果。
本轮大牛市中，中小投资者没能逃脱“倒金字塔”的迷局，各类机构和基金同样没逃脱这个魔咒。2007年下半年股市高歌猛进，一路闯关4000点、5000点、6000点，投资机构信心暴涨，很多人甚至预言年底到1万点。基于对后市强大的信心，基金在此时获得大批量发行，等基金入市后，不料市场峰回路转，从高点迅速回落，随后陷入持续的暴跌，无数基民被套在5000点到6000点的巅峰上。笔者在想，如果按照“正金字塔”的资金投入方式操作，结果也许会完全不一样。
长期投资的离场策略
关于长期投资的离场策略，这是一个绝对很大气的投资家才具备的风范。当股市迎来真正的顶部时，我们需要做的是彻底离开这个市场。然后只看不做。这叫做战略性撤退或者资金的转移。
比如在2001年指数达到最高点的时候，谁如果能够看清楚市场的本质，断然离开股票市场，这样的思维方式就是长线投资的离场策略，这种策略必须建立在国家政策的充分理解，对市场的宏观把握，以及超人的胆略和大气。
我接触过一些投资者，他们是本世纪初房地产价格上涨的绝对受益者。认识他们是在我做房地产调研的时候，没想到的是他们在2001年之前都是股民。难能可贵的是他们能在2001年断然离开股市去做房产，而在2006年初抛售房产而重新回到股票市场。这种思路就是具备投资家战略到长线离场思维。
在我的投资概念里，长期投资的离场是一种绝对看淡一个市场而做出的策略，这需要战略性思维。一旦这种策略确定，资金将会完全撤出这个市场，然后等下一个绝对的安全边际。这种思路适合多元化投资的投资人。如果您是职业的股票投资人，或许很难做到。就像我上面提到的那些投资人，他们有自己的实业，他们可以投资房产，他们只需要关注股市，而不是像职业股民那样泡股市。对于职业股民长期离场需要超然的心态和雷打不动的定力。在中国股市，一个只能通过做多才可以真正实现盈利的市场，即使遇到大的熊市也只能通过下跌后的反弹去盈利，所以作为长期离场的确很难，但是作为一种思想我必须指出的是，长期投资的离场策略就是在股市上升周期已经彻底结束，我们需要做的只有彻底离开这个股市。当然，股指期货推出之后，我们可以通过股指期货盈利。但是作为一种战略，我们还是有必要清楚这个战略到本质。
那么，如果去制定这个战略呢？我想，首先我们要学会判断长期离场的信号，如果我们发现如下这些信号，我们应该引起足够的重视。
1、经济已经处在极度过热状态，金融风险随即爆发，通货膨胀严重，本币已经无法在继续升值。
2、大多数上市公司成长性已经得到充分挖掘，业绩增长的速度在下降甚至出现负增长；
3、国家对股市的调控力度空前强烈，针对股市的组合拳不断并且异常坚决，尤其是出台对股市资金面具有实质性的调控政策。
4、市场表现上，估值已经高的离谱，没有人去关心上市公司业绩，只是关心概念和一些虚无飘渺的传言，市场获利筹码非常丰厚。
对于长期离场的策略，巴菲特和彼得•林奇林奇等价值投资大师也曾给出过建议，可归纳为：
1、 基本面是否已经恶化或发现购买时判断有重大差误？
2、 股价是否严重超出公司的内在价值（或者市场价值）？
3、 是否存在明确的更具长期投资价值的投向？
4、 在投资组合中，单只股票是否配置了过高的资金比例？
以上四点大多原则上进行界定，我本人总结的4条原则更具体，更且如市场。因为，股价超出内在价值过高大多情况下都发生在牛市末期，而那个时候市场一般都出现了极度疯狂或泡沫明显，市场处于明显的高位风险区域，并累积了相当高的结构性调整风险，大多数个股的股价已经严重透支了未来企业业绩，超出了公司的内在价值。这些现象已经给了我们充足的理由来长期离开这个市场。
比如在2001年指数达到最高点的时候，谁如果能够看清楚市场的本质，断然离开股票市场，这样的思维方式就是长线投资的离场策略，这种策略必须建立在国家政策的充分理解，对市场的宏观把握，以及超人的胆略和大气。
我接触过一些投资者，他们是本世纪初房地产价格上涨的绝对受益者。认识他们是在我做房地产调研的时候，没想到的是他们在2001年之前都是股民。难能可贵的是他们能在2001年断然离开股市去做房产，而在2006年初抛售房产而重新回到股票市场。这种思路就是具备投资家战略到长线离场思维。
在我的投资概念里，长期投资的离场是一种绝对看淡一个市场而做出的策略，这需要战略性思维。一旦这种策略确定，资金将会完全撤出这个市场，然后等下一个绝对的安全边际。这种思路适合多元化投资的投资人。如果您是职业的股票投资人，或许很难做到。就像我上面提到的那些投资人，他们有自己的实业，他们可以投资房产，他们只需要关注股市，而不是像职业股民那样泡股市。对于职业股民长期离场需要超然的心态和雷打不动的定力。在中国股市，一个只能通过做多才可以真正实现盈利的市场，即使遇到大的熊市也只能通过下跌后的反弹去盈利，所以作为长期离场的确很难，但是作为一种思想我必须指出的是，长期投资的离场策略就是在股市上升周期已经彻底结束，我们需要做的只有彻底离开这个股市。当然，股指期货推出之后，我们可以通过股指期货盈利。但是作为一种战略，我们还是有必要清楚这个战略到本质。
那么，如果去制定这个战略呢？我想，首先我们要学会判断长期离场的信号，如果我们发现如下这些信号，我们应该引起足够的重视。
1、经济已经处在极度过热状态，金融风险随即爆发，通货膨胀严重，本币已经无法在继续升值。
2、大多数上市公司成长性已经得到充分挖掘，业绩增长的速度在下降甚至出现负增长；
3、国家对股市的调控力度空前强烈，针对股市的组合拳不断并且异常坚决，尤其是出台对股市资金面具有实质性的调控政策。
4、市场表现上，估值已经高的离谱，没有人去关心上市公司业绩，只是关心概念和一些虚无飘渺的传言，市场获利筹码非常丰厚。
对于长期离场的策略，巴菲特和彼得•林奇林奇等价值投资大师也曾给出过建议，可归纳为：
1、 基本面是否已经恶化或发现购买时判断有重大差误？
2、 股价是否严重超出公司的内在价值（或者市场价值）？
3、 是否存在明确的更具长期投资价值的投向？
4、 在投资组合中，单只股票是否配置了过高的资金比例？
以上四点大多原则上进行界定，我本人总结的4条原则更具体，更且如市场。因为，股价超出内在价值过高大多情况下都发生在牛市末期，而那个时候市场一般都出现了极度疯狂或泡沫明显，市场处于明显的高位风险区域，并累积了相当高的结构性调整风险，大多数个股的股价已经严重透支了未来企业业绩，超出了公司的内在价值。这些现象已经给了我们充足的理由来长期离开这个市场。
长期投资 股票投资成功的奥秘
去年有一首歌曲在国内投资者中广为传唱，这首歌的名字是“死了都不卖”。据歌曲作者讲述， 2001 年至 2005 年的熊市中，为了坚定持股决心而创作了这首歌曲。作者是这么说的，也是这么做的，据他讲，他一直坚持到这波大牛市的来临。我认为，这首歌带来的启示是 , 股票投资成功有两大要素，一是长期持有，二是股票不能中途灭失。
长期投资风险小回报高
有人会说:“股票投资是最没谱的，谁能保证肯定获利而不亏损”那么，到底有没有肯定获利的策略呢？答案是肯定的，只是很多人没有耐心去执行该策略。股票是没有到期日的，只要你持有的股票一直存在且持有的时间足够长，就可以保证股票投资获利。所以说，长期投资是股票投资成功的真正奥秘。
对于一般投资者来说，长期持有股票是可以做到的，但所投资的股票会不会灭失却是个人控制不了的。怎么解决这个问题呢？我的建议是投资交易所指数基金，比如ETF50 和ETF180 等。究其原因，一是上证50 指数和上证180 指数的成分股有动态的新陈代谢机制，也就是说，如果有的成分股出现业绩下滑或不再符合条件时，它就会被业绩更好的股票替代；二是上证50 指数和上证180 指数的成分股绝大部分都是国家的经济支柱，如果这些支柱企业中途都灭失了，其他的企业存在的可能性就更小。
长期投资不仅风险小，而且回报率也高。例如，1896 年，美国道琼斯工业平均指数为40 点，至 1998 年末，道指涨到9181 点。由于道指是价格加权的指数，而不是市值加权的指数（我国的上证指数和深证综指等都是市值加权的指数)，而且道指的编制是忽略红利因素的，如果考虑红利因素，也就是假设每一年将红利再投资于道指，那么到1998 年的时候，道琼斯工业平均指数应该是 652230 点。这也从一个侧面说明对股票进行长期投资，其回报率会高得惊人。
仍以美国股市为例，1926 年至1998 年，大盘蓝筹股的年平均回报率是13.2% ，标准差是 20.3% ，扣除通货膨胀因素后的年平均回报率为9.9% 。而同期美国国债的年平均回报率只有 5.5% ，标准差是5.7% ，扣除通货膨胀因素后的年平均回报率仅有2.4% 。从上述数据可以得出以下结论：一是风险大收益也大。股票投资的特点是风险大收益大，而国债的风险小收益也小。标准差大意味着股票价格的波动幅度比较大，也就是风险较大；二是从长期投资的角度看，股票投资的回报率要远大于国债投资。而且从长期的角度看，股票投资的风险并不大，因为投资期限长可以有效化解股票短期波动的风险。再如，1980 年至1998 年，美国标普500 的年平均回报率为17.89% ，标准差是13.22% ，变异系数（coefficient of variation )是 0.74 。而同期政府债券的年平均回报率为10.7% ，标准差是7.15% ，变异系数为0.67 。从长期投资的角度看，根据变异系数，股票投资仍然要优于国债投资。
入市时估值越低越可能成功
有投资者会问：“我从去年10 月持有到现在亏损累累，何来长期投资收益？”我的回答是：上述有关回报率的统计是基于同样一种估值水平下（比如市盈率相同）进出市场的统计结果，也就是说，投资者在60倍市盈率进入市场，必须在长期持有后的若干年后同样是60倍时出来，才会获得上述收益率。而投资者在20倍市盈率进入市场，若干年后同样是20倍时出来也同样能获得上述收益率。显然，若干年后20倍市盈率出现的几率要远远大于60倍的市盈率。因此，入市时的市场估值水平越低，则取得上述回报率的可能性越大。
因此，我们可以这样说 , 如果从短期投资的角度看，股票是风险大收益小的投资品种，而债券是风险小收益大的投资品种。如果从长期投资的角度看，股票是风险小收益大的投资品种，而债券是风险大收益小的投资品种。 这就应了华尔街关于股票投资的那句谚语：“股票投资似海洋，如果你往远处看，它静若止水，如果你往近处看，它永远波涛汹涌。”
长期投资风险小回报高
有人会说:“股票投资是最没谱的，谁能保证肯定获利而不亏损”那么，到底有没有肯定获利的策略呢？答案是肯定的，只是很多人没有耐心去执行该策略。股票是没有到期日的，只要你持有的股票一直存在且持有的时间足够长，就可以保证股票投资获利。所以说，长期投资是股票投资成功的真正奥秘。
对于一般投资者来说，长期持有股票是可以做到的，但所投资的股票会不会灭失却是个人控制不了的。怎么解决这个问题呢？我的建议是投资交易所指数基金，比如ETF50 和ETF180 等。究其原因，一是上证50 指数和上证180 指数的成分股有动态的新陈代谢机制，也就是说，如果有的成分股出现业绩下滑或不再符合条件时，它就会被业绩更好的股票替代；二是上证50 指数和上证180 指数的成分股绝大部分都是国家的经济支柱，如果这些支柱企业中途都灭失了，其他的企业存在的可能性就更小。
长期投资不仅风险小，而且回报率也高。例如，1896 年，美国道琼斯工业平均指数为40 点，至 1998 年末，道指涨到9181 点。由于道指是价格加权的指数，而不是市值加权的指数（我国的上证指数和深证综指等都是市值加权的指数)，而且道指的编制是忽略红利因素的，如果考虑红利因素，也就是假设每一年将红利再投资于道指，那么到1998 年的时候，道琼斯工业平均指数应该是 652230 点。这也从一个侧面说明对股票进行长期投资，其回报率会高得惊人。
仍以美国股市为例，1926 年至1998 年，大盘蓝筹股的年平均回报率是13.2% ，标准差是 20.3% ，扣除通货膨胀因素后的年平均回报率为9.9% 。而同期美国国债的年平均回报率只有 5.5% ，标准差是5.7% ，扣除通货膨胀因素后的年平均回报率仅有2.4% 。从上述数据可以得出以下结论：一是风险大收益也大。股票投资的特点是风险大收益大，而国债的风险小收益也小。标准差大意味着股票价格的波动幅度比较大，也就是风险较大；二是从长期投资的角度看，股票投资的回报率要远大于国债投资。而且从长期的角度看，股票投资的风险并不大，因为投资期限长可以有效化解股票短期波动的风险。再如，1980 年至1998 年，美国标普500 的年平均回报率为17.89% ，标准差是13.22% ，变异系数（coefficient of variation )是 0.74 。而同期政府债券的年平均回报率为10.7% ，标准差是7.15% ，变异系数为0.67 。从长期投资的角度看，根据变异系数，股票投资仍然要优于国债投资。
入市时估值越低越可能成功
有投资者会问：“我从去年10 月持有到现在亏损累累，何来长期投资收益？”我的回答是：上述有关回报率的统计是基于同样一种估值水平下（比如市盈率相同）进出市场的统计结果，也就是说，投资者在60倍市盈率进入市场，必须在长期持有后的若干年后同样是60倍时出来，才会获得上述收益率。而投资者在20倍市盈率进入市场，若干年后同样是20倍时出来也同样能获得上述收益率。显然，若干年后20倍市盈率出现的几率要远远大于60倍的市盈率。因此，入市时的市场估值水平越低，则取得上述回报率的可能性越大。
因此，我们可以这样说 , 如果从短期投资的角度看，股票是风险大收益小的投资品种，而债券是风险小收益大的投资品种。如果从长期投资的角度看，股票是风险小收益大的投资品种，而债券是风险大收益小的投资品种。 这就应了华尔街关于股票投资的那句谚语：“股票投资似海洋，如果你往远处看，它静若止水，如果你往近处看，它永远波涛汹涌。”
港股处处是黄金
在过去六个月当中，宣布市场底部的所在似乎已经成为了一种流行的游戏，几乎任何人都可以参与进来。在我们的这一次衰退当中，寻找底部已经变成了一种家庭作坊式的作业。
大家各说各自的看法，各有各自的理由，但是至少一点其实是确定无疑的，这就是没有任何一个人真正知道未来六个月乃至于十二个月期间之内，市场上究竟会发生怎样的故事。当然，这样的说法似乎在其他的时候也依然能够成立，但是在今天仍然有予以强调的必要，因为今日的市场，局面千变万化，充斥着众多的变数，更不必说那些诸如信用体系崩溃等市场之外的故事——换言之，在今日的市场上，所有的历史经验恐怕都要失去效力。毋庸赘言，任何人都可以就市场和经济的前景发表自己的看法，但是无论你怎样说，都不可能完全驳倒认定你是蒙上眼睛投掷飞镖的指摘。
目前看上去，美国股市似乎已经找到了一个相对稳定的波动区间，即道琼斯工业平均指数7000点至9000点的所在。2000点的波动区间在别的时候已经足够令人非常不安了，但是考虑到当今市场去年九月以来的崩溃局面，以及各种变数的急剧增加，在今日我们对有这样一个区间就应该谢天谢地了。
可是，假如你将自己投资回报计算的起点放在去年的夏季，你就很难对任何人有感恩的心情了，更不必说你是在这个十年刚开始的时候进行的投资。当然对于前几年的行情，我们也可以使用“牛市”这样的描述，但是我们都知道，从2000年春季的高点至今，市场其实基本上是无所进益，而纳斯达克综合指数较之史上最高点仍然有着70%的距离。即便市场从现在这极端低迷的水平开始反弹，我们也不能不将反弹的行情和这长达十年的熊市结合起来看待。
转折点
不过，无论如何，我们同样需要看到，今日股市的糟糕行情其实已经充分地反映了未来糟糕的盈利前景，以及全球经济衰退的现状，因此我们也很难预测美国乃至全球的主流市场指数还将大幅走低。“万年熊派”们当然会说当前的盈利预期仍然有过高的嫌疑，他们的说法或许有正确的一面，但是这并不足以改变当前股票市盈率已经很低的现实，尤其是我们还必须考虑到，我们现在所处的，几乎就是一个零通胀的环境。许多人都在谈论股票相对于历史模型的合适价位，但是却很少有人谈论通货膨胀在位或者不在位时的股票价格模型。
简而言之，当前很多投资者都相信股票价格还应该更低，在这种情况下，假如通货膨胀是非常高涨的，则我们看到的盈利数字还必须被打上若干折扣。可是，现在的情况却恰恰相反。根据这样的逻辑，我们就会明白，今日的股票，其实很多都不应该被安置在这样一个明显较低的价位上，但事实恰恰就是如此。
此外，我们也应该明白，所谓市场周期，总归会在某一时刻发生变化，这样的变化并非是针对这支或者那支股票，而是针对整个体系的。我们总说，股市是能够迅速变化，以反映未来的趋势的。这样的说法或许是多少夸大了市场的理性——众所周知，市场是众多因素的综合，而其中很可能恰恰没有理性的位置。
不过，我们至少可以清楚地看到，投资者总是试图将尽可能多的未来的信息纳入市场的轨道，而现在，关于企业盈利和经济状况的数据显然都是悲观的占据压倒比重，折射出一个令人失望的未来。未来的任何变化，哪怕它是向着悲观的方向，只要悲观的程度没有我们想象的那么严重，就都可以被理解为利好的消息，这就是消极的预期所带来的必然结果。
这也就意味着，假如我们看到政府的经济刺激计划的结果，或者是一些具体企业的盈利情况，或者是商业或者个人开支的数据，等等，只要有什么是好过我们当前绝望的预测的，今日的股价看上去就会让人产生低廉的观感。哪怕这并不意味着全球经济体系的未来就突然变得明亮起来，不意味着市场将重新回到2008年的水平，但是这的确意味着我们将不再那么悲观，意味着市场将产生相对的回报。
寻找猎物
与此同时，这是一个资金总归要投入工作的世界，全球各国的政府都在诉诸激进的开支措施，希望以此来带动经济活动的活跃。诚然，这些计划当中肯定有一些会遭到失败，但是认为有一些会获得成功，无论如何也不能说是不够客观的。
归根结底，只要中国还在投入巨额的资金，来建设自己国内的基础设施，那么就会有许多跨国公司因此而收获利润。至于美国的国内开支，其结果就更加是如此。
当前，正有许多跨国公司的股价处于严厉打压之下，考虑到中国政府将投入的大量资金，考虑到奥巴马政府的经济刺激计划，我们显然有理由认为这些企业的股价至少有一部分会迎来自己的涨势。
局面的这种变化也完全可能为原材料公司的股票提供额外的支持，后者的股价也因为市场近期的抛售遭到了连累。当然，我们研究这些企业时，必须注意他们拥有多少现金，又承担着多少债务。在这里，我们的首要目标当然是找出那些现金储备和现金流都非常可观的企业，假如一家公司背负着债务，我们就必须判断它是否能够在2009年经济活跃情况大受抑制的局面之下游刃有余地处理自己的债务。
归根结底，尽管我们现在看到的各种经济数据都是非常糟糕的，但是它们基本上反映的都是2008年年末全球经济遭受严重冲击时候的事情。全球经济总不可能从悬崖上跌落一次又一次。2008年年末时发生的事情已经非常了不得了，不是什么趋势，也不是什么规律，认为这种情况会成为常态是错误的。
当然，谁也没有能够透彻看到过去未来的水晶球，但是我们至少说，考虑到当前的市场情况变得更糟的可能性已经非常有限了，现在入场至少不能说是愚蠢的做法。假如最糟糕的是其真的已经过去，那么未来即便再有下跌，也应该不会是不可忍受的，而当一切云雾最终散去，涨势自然会非常可观。
大家各说各自的看法，各有各自的理由，但是至少一点其实是确定无疑的，这就是没有任何一个人真正知道未来六个月乃至于十二个月期间之内，市场上究竟会发生怎样的故事。当然，这样的说法似乎在其他的时候也依然能够成立，但是在今天仍然有予以强调的必要，因为今日的市场，局面千变万化，充斥着众多的变数，更不必说那些诸如信用体系崩溃等市场之外的故事——换言之，在今日的市场上，所有的历史经验恐怕都要失去效力。毋庸赘言，任何人都可以就市场和经济的前景发表自己的看法，但是无论你怎样说，都不可能完全驳倒认定你是蒙上眼睛投掷飞镖的指摘。
目前看上去，美国股市似乎已经找到了一个相对稳定的波动区间，即道琼斯工业平均指数7000点至9000点的所在。2000点的波动区间在别的时候已经足够令人非常不安了，但是考虑到当今市场去年九月以来的崩溃局面，以及各种变数的急剧增加，在今日我们对有这样一个区间就应该谢天谢地了。
可是，假如你将自己投资回报计算的起点放在去年的夏季，你就很难对任何人有感恩的心情了，更不必说你是在这个十年刚开始的时候进行的投资。当然对于前几年的行情，我们也可以使用“牛市”这样的描述，但是我们都知道，从2000年春季的高点至今，市场其实基本上是无所进益，而纳斯达克综合指数较之史上最高点仍然有着70%的距离。即便市场从现在这极端低迷的水平开始反弹，我们也不能不将反弹的行情和这长达十年的熊市结合起来看待。
转折点
不过，无论如何，我们同样需要看到，今日股市的糟糕行情其实已经充分地反映了未来糟糕的盈利前景，以及全球经济衰退的现状，因此我们也很难预测美国乃至全球的主流市场指数还将大幅走低。“万年熊派”们当然会说当前的盈利预期仍然有过高的嫌疑，他们的说法或许有正确的一面，但是这并不足以改变当前股票市盈率已经很低的现实，尤其是我们还必须考虑到，我们现在所处的，几乎就是一个零通胀的环境。许多人都在谈论股票相对于历史模型的合适价位，但是却很少有人谈论通货膨胀在位或者不在位时的股票价格模型。
简而言之，当前很多投资者都相信股票价格还应该更低，在这种情况下，假如通货膨胀是非常高涨的，则我们看到的盈利数字还必须被打上若干折扣。可是，现在的情况却恰恰相反。根据这样的逻辑，我们就会明白，今日的股票，其实很多都不应该被安置在这样一个明显较低的价位上，但事实恰恰就是如此。
此外，我们也应该明白，所谓市场周期，总归会在某一时刻发生变化，这样的变化并非是针对这支或者那支股票，而是针对整个体系的。我们总说，股市是能够迅速变化，以反映未来的趋势的。这样的说法或许是多少夸大了市场的理性——众所周知，市场是众多因素的综合，而其中很可能恰恰没有理性的位置。
不过，我们至少可以清楚地看到，投资者总是试图将尽可能多的未来的信息纳入市场的轨道，而现在，关于企业盈利和经济状况的数据显然都是悲观的占据压倒比重，折射出一个令人失望的未来。未来的任何变化，哪怕它是向着悲观的方向，只要悲观的程度没有我们想象的那么严重，就都可以被理解为利好的消息，这就是消极的预期所带来的必然结果。
这也就意味着，假如我们看到政府的经济刺激计划的结果，或者是一些具体企业的盈利情况，或者是商业或者个人开支的数据，等等，只要有什么是好过我们当前绝望的预测的，今日的股价看上去就会让人产生低廉的观感。哪怕这并不意味着全球经济体系的未来就突然变得明亮起来，不意味着市场将重新回到2008年的水平，但是这的确意味着我们将不再那么悲观，意味着市场将产生相对的回报。
寻找猎物
与此同时，这是一个资金总归要投入工作的世界，全球各国的政府都在诉诸激进的开支措施，希望以此来带动经济活动的活跃。诚然，这些计划当中肯定有一些会遭到失败，但是认为有一些会获得成功，无论如何也不能说是不够客观的。
归根结底，只要中国还在投入巨额的资金，来建设自己国内的基础设施，那么就会有许多跨国公司因此而收获利润。至于美国的国内开支，其结果就更加是如此。
当前，正有许多跨国公司的股价处于严厉打压之下，考虑到中国政府将投入的大量资金，考虑到奥巴马政府的经济刺激计划，我们显然有理由认为这些企业的股价至少有一部分会迎来自己的涨势。
局面的这种变化也完全可能为原材料公司的股票提供额外的支持，后者的股价也因为市场近期的抛售遭到了连累。当然，我们研究这些企业时，必须注意他们拥有多少现金，又承担着多少债务。在这里，我们的首要目标当然是找出那些现金储备和现金流都非常可观的企业，假如一家公司背负着债务，我们就必须判断它是否能够在2009年经济活跃情况大受抑制的局面之下游刃有余地处理自己的债务。
归根结底，尽管我们现在看到的各种经济数据都是非常糟糕的，但是它们基本上反映的都是2008年年末全球经济遭受严重冲击时候的事情。全球经济总不可能从悬崖上跌落一次又一次。2008年年末时发生的事情已经非常了不得了，不是什么趋势，也不是什么规律，认为这种情况会成为常态是错误的。
当然，谁也没有能够透彻看到过去未来的水晶球，但是我们至少说，考虑到当前的市场情况变得更糟的可能性已经非常有限了，现在入场至少不能说是愚蠢的做法。假如最糟糕的是其真的已经过去，那么未来即便再有下跌，也应该不会是不可忍受的，而当一切云雾最终散去，涨势自然会非常可观。
丑到极处便是美到极处
无论过去现在，总时不时地有人冒出来宣称，格雷厄姆原则已经过时了。尤其是在中国股市，经过一年超过70%的持续下跌，一些人们对价值投资和长期投资理念的信任度从沸点降到了冰点。
作为格雷厄姆原则的忠实执行者，约翰·聂夫长达31年执掌温莎基金的成功经历——22次跑赢市场，基金增长55.46倍，累计平均年复利回报率达13.7%，超过市场平均收益率3%以上——极有说服力地印证了格雷姆原则的长久生命力。
虽然有人称聂夫为逆向投资者，但他本人更偏好另一个称呼：低市盈率投资者。因为这更加精确地描述了他引领温莎基金走向持续成功的投资风格。
聂夫的投资风格比较独特之处，笔者以为，有三个方面：
第一是选股七要素。
1、低市盈率。一般低于市场平均值的40％至60%。低市盈率的股票通常是冷门股，能带来双重的获利边际：向上则积极参与了可能大幅增值的股票，向下则很有效防范了风险。
2、基本增长率超过7%。一个低市盈率股票到底值不值得关注，关键还得看其成长性。低市盈率的股票同时拥有7%以上的增长率，聂夫就认为它被低估了，股价上涨空间巨大，如果它分红也不错，更是机会难得。
3、收益有保障。除了公司的收益增长率，还重视分红回报。低市盈率的投资策略的好处之一就是经常可以享受到很高的分红，而且因为股价的形成总是建立在预期收益增长率的基础上，分红前后对股价的影响很小，所以股东分红相当于是免费的。
4、总回报率相对于支付的市盈率两者关系绝佳。总回报率是聂夫战胜同行的法宝之一，它描述的是一种成长预期：收益增长率加上股息率。例如，一家公司的收益增长率是12%，股息率是3.5%，总回报率等于15.5%。聂夫偏好市盈率是总回报率一半的股票。
5、如果市盈率没能获得补偿，不买周期性股票。对周期性股票，时机的把握就是一切。周期性行业的高峰和低谷很难准确预测，对此聂夫采取了保护措施：只购买那些预计市盈率就要跌到底部的周期股。一般，采用低市盈率购买周期公司在公司报道收入增长的6至9个月之后获利最大。
6、成长行业中的稳健公司。它们有着稳固的市场地位和巨大的上涨空间，当被坏消息打击而进入低市盈率状态时加以关注。
7、基本面好。仅有低市盈率还不够，基本面和平均标准接近，而市盈率却很低，才说明公司的价值作未被充分认识。买卖决策取决于基本面的导向。
第二是“衡量式参与”投资组合策略。
传统的投资组合策略是按照行业分类，而聂夫打破了这样的束缚，发明了独特的“衡量式参与”投资策略，重建了4大投资类别：高知名度成长股、低知名度成长股、慢速成长股与周期成长股。在这个全新的投资框架中，最与众不同的就是德高望重的蓝筹成长股在重要性等级上处于最底层。原因不言自明，这些股票家喻户晓，已被过度挖掘了。与此同时，一些单调乏味的股票反而在投资组合中占据突出地位。
第三是简单务实的卖出策略。
聂夫认为，温莎基金的出色业绩不仅依靠选择低市盈率的优质股票，还依靠一个坚定的出售策略，两者具有同等的重要性。
他卖出股票的最终原因只有两条：
1、基本面变坏。通过两个指标衡量：预期收益和5年增长率。如果对此失去信心，将全速撤离。
2、价格达到预定值。即建立目标价格，并且在股价靠近该价格的过程中持续卖出。“我们不会试图抓住最后一美元，在股价顶部逃走不是我们的游戏法则。追求投资利润最大化将面临之后不断下跌的风险，这是让人悲痛欲绝的事情。”
10年前，我就读过约翰·聂夫作为“低本益比射手”的传奇故事。今天阅读约翰·聂夫本人撰写的《约翰·聂夫谈投资》，颇有温故而知新之感。我现在更多思考聂夫的“低市盈率投资哲学”持久成功背后的秘密。
秘密之一：逆向投资。
聂夫奉行严格、系统的逆向投资策略。深刻的头脑一定是反向思维的头脑。小时候聂夫就有和路标争辩的倾向，长大后则和整个市场争辩。格雷厄姆说过：“如果总是做显而易见或大家都在做的事，你就赚不到钱。”低市盈率投资是逆向的，反大众的，反人性的，正是因为和大家做的事不一样，几乎没有竞争，“夫唯不争，故无尤”，才具备持久成功的基础。
秘密之二：物极必反。
清代刘熙载在《艺概·书概》的怪石论中说：“怪石以丑为美，丑到极处，便是美到极处。”无独有偶，大洋彼岸的约翰·聂夫在《约翰·聂夫谈投资》序“花旗的投资传奇”中总结道：“对我们来说，丑陋的股票往往是美丽的。如果温莎基金的投资组合看起来就很容易让人认同，那么可以说我们在敷衍了事。”
丑陋的股票之所以变得美丽，和投资者收益的基本原理密切相关。西格尔教授在《投资者的未来》一书中曾说：“股票的长期收益并不依赖于实际的利润增长情况，而是取决于实际的利润增长与投资者预期的利润增长之间存在的差异。”丑陋的股票通常都是公司碰到暂时困难，遭遇坏消息的袭击，人们的预期自然很低，而且往往夸大负面因素，走向极端，一旦真实的基本面情况没有大家想象的那么坏，利润增长超过了市场预期的水平，投资者就能从这个“剪刀差”中获得高额收益，丑陋的股票反而变得美丽起来。
比尔·盖茨曾经说过：“人们总是高估一年内发生的事情，而低估十年后发生的事情。”在目前的全球金融危机中，悲观主义四处漫延，在看重眼前的人们眼里，股票已经丑到了极处，那么，在聂夫式富有远见、善于逆向思考的投资者眼里呢？
作为格雷厄姆原则的忠实执行者，约翰·聂夫长达31年执掌温莎基金的成功经历——22次跑赢市场，基金增长55.46倍，累计平均年复利回报率达13.7%，超过市场平均收益率3%以上——极有说服力地印证了格雷姆原则的长久生命力。
虽然有人称聂夫为逆向投资者，但他本人更偏好另一个称呼：低市盈率投资者。因为这更加精确地描述了他引领温莎基金走向持续成功的投资风格。
聂夫的投资风格比较独特之处，笔者以为，有三个方面：
第一是选股七要素。
1、低市盈率。一般低于市场平均值的40％至60%。低市盈率的股票通常是冷门股，能带来双重的获利边际：向上则积极参与了可能大幅增值的股票，向下则很有效防范了风险。
2、基本增长率超过7%。一个低市盈率股票到底值不值得关注，关键还得看其成长性。低市盈率的股票同时拥有7%以上的增长率，聂夫就认为它被低估了，股价上涨空间巨大，如果它分红也不错，更是机会难得。
3、收益有保障。除了公司的收益增长率，还重视分红回报。低市盈率的投资策略的好处之一就是经常可以享受到很高的分红，而且因为股价的形成总是建立在预期收益增长率的基础上，分红前后对股价的影响很小，所以股东分红相当于是免费的。
4、总回报率相对于支付的市盈率两者关系绝佳。总回报率是聂夫战胜同行的法宝之一，它描述的是一种成长预期：收益增长率加上股息率。例如，一家公司的收益增长率是12%，股息率是3.5%，总回报率等于15.5%。聂夫偏好市盈率是总回报率一半的股票。
5、如果市盈率没能获得补偿，不买周期性股票。对周期性股票，时机的把握就是一切。周期性行业的高峰和低谷很难准确预测，对此聂夫采取了保护措施：只购买那些预计市盈率就要跌到底部的周期股。一般，采用低市盈率购买周期公司在公司报道收入增长的6至9个月之后获利最大。
6、成长行业中的稳健公司。它们有着稳固的市场地位和巨大的上涨空间，当被坏消息打击而进入低市盈率状态时加以关注。
7、基本面好。仅有低市盈率还不够，基本面和平均标准接近，而市盈率却很低，才说明公司的价值作未被充分认识。买卖决策取决于基本面的导向。
第二是“衡量式参与”投资组合策略。
传统的投资组合策略是按照行业分类，而聂夫打破了这样的束缚，发明了独特的“衡量式参与”投资策略，重建了4大投资类别：高知名度成长股、低知名度成长股、慢速成长股与周期成长股。在这个全新的投资框架中，最与众不同的就是德高望重的蓝筹成长股在重要性等级上处于最底层。原因不言自明，这些股票家喻户晓，已被过度挖掘了。与此同时，一些单调乏味的股票反而在投资组合中占据突出地位。
第三是简单务实的卖出策略。
聂夫认为，温莎基金的出色业绩不仅依靠选择低市盈率的优质股票，还依靠一个坚定的出售策略，两者具有同等的重要性。
他卖出股票的最终原因只有两条：
1、基本面变坏。通过两个指标衡量：预期收益和5年增长率。如果对此失去信心，将全速撤离。
2、价格达到预定值。即建立目标价格，并且在股价靠近该价格的过程中持续卖出。“我们不会试图抓住最后一美元，在股价顶部逃走不是我们的游戏法则。追求投资利润最大化将面临之后不断下跌的风险，这是让人悲痛欲绝的事情。”
10年前，我就读过约翰·聂夫作为“低本益比射手”的传奇故事。今天阅读约翰·聂夫本人撰写的《约翰·聂夫谈投资》，颇有温故而知新之感。我现在更多思考聂夫的“低市盈率投资哲学”持久成功背后的秘密。
秘密之一：逆向投资。
聂夫奉行严格、系统的逆向投资策略。深刻的头脑一定是反向思维的头脑。小时候聂夫就有和路标争辩的倾向，长大后则和整个市场争辩。格雷厄姆说过：“如果总是做显而易见或大家都在做的事，你就赚不到钱。”低市盈率投资是逆向的，反大众的，反人性的，正是因为和大家做的事不一样，几乎没有竞争，“夫唯不争，故无尤”，才具备持久成功的基础。
秘密之二：物极必反。
清代刘熙载在《艺概·书概》的怪石论中说：“怪石以丑为美，丑到极处，便是美到极处。”无独有偶，大洋彼岸的约翰·聂夫在《约翰·聂夫谈投资》序“花旗的投资传奇”中总结道：“对我们来说，丑陋的股票往往是美丽的。如果温莎基金的投资组合看起来就很容易让人认同，那么可以说我们在敷衍了事。”
丑陋的股票之所以变得美丽，和投资者收益的基本原理密切相关。西格尔教授在《投资者的未来》一书中曾说：“股票的长期收益并不依赖于实际的利润增长情况，而是取决于实际的利润增长与投资者预期的利润增长之间存在的差异。”丑陋的股票通常都是公司碰到暂时困难，遭遇坏消息的袭击，人们的预期自然很低，而且往往夸大负面因素，走向极端，一旦真实的基本面情况没有大家想象的那么坏，利润增长超过了市场预期的水平，投资者就能从这个“剪刀差”中获得高额收益，丑陋的股票反而变得美丽起来。
比尔·盖茨曾经说过：“人们总是高估一年内发生的事情，而低估十年后发生的事情。”在目前的全球金融危机中，悲观主义四处漫延，在看重眼前的人们眼里，股票已经丑到了极处，那么，在聂夫式富有远见、善于逆向思考的投资者眼里呢？
介于产业与股票之间 产业投资信托股
当你驾车经过吉隆坡市区，仰望高楼大厦时，你心里是否曾经这么想：假如我拥有一座这样的大厦，收取租金，长期有稳定的收入，那是多么理想的事。
市中心的办公大楼，每座动辄以亿令吉计，有能力购买的人，毕竟少之又少。但这不等于你与这些大楼无缘。通过购买产业投资信托股票，你其实也有机会拥有这类大楼的一部分——尽管只是微不足道的一部分。
在马来西亚股票交易所挂牌的上市公司中，就有一类叫产业投资信托股(REITS)。
由于这类股票上市的历史最短，又只有区区的13 家，投机气氛不如别类股票那么热络。所以一般投资者都不大注意。实际上，假如你留意的话，你一定会发现，这类股票的周息率(D/Y，就是股息回酬巴仙率)，比大部分股票都高。
REITS 就是REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS 的缩写，中文为产业投资信托股。
历史悠久收入稳定
这类股票在外围股市有相当长的历史，也是寻求稳定收入的投资者的宠儿。这类公司的营业模式其实很简单：它收集了投资大众的资金，以收购大宗的商业性产业，如办公大厦、购物中心、工厂、酒店等等，交由一家产业管理公司去管理，管理公司负责收租及维修建筑物，从租金中扣除管理费后，将结存的租金净额分发给投资者。
政府规定：产业投资信托公司必须将90%以上的租金，分发给信托股股东。为了鼓励更多产业信托公司成立，当局规定，信托股的股息只需缴税10%。
产业投资信托股的概念其实很简单，收集大量的资金，以收购大宗产业供出租，把收到的租金分发给信托单位持有人。这其实跟单位信托大同小异，只不过单位信托投资于股票，而产业信托投资于产业而已。产业投资信托为有意投资产业的人士提供了另一条投资管道，不但更容易做到，手续也更简单。
让我们比较买屋子和买产业投资信托股的优劣点：
大马产业信托(AMFIRST)昨天公布本财务年上半年的业绩，半年每单位净利为4.268 仙。该信托宣布把盈利全部发给股东，每股派息4.268 仙。假如该信托下半年保持上半年的表现，则全年每单位净赚8.536 仙，该信托曾许下诺言，在未来三年中，将全部盈利派给股东，则每单位股息为8.546 仙(已扣税)。以该信托目前80 仙的股价计算，周息率为10.67%，比定期存款的利息高两倍。
假设你有计划买屋子作为投资，又假设你的投资额为50万令吉，假如你以50万令吉在八打灵购买一间双层排屋出租，每月可收到租金1千500令吉。假如你以每股80仙，买进大马产业信托股票，50万令吉可买到RM500,000 ÷ RM0.80 = 625,000股，以每股8.536仙的股息计算，你一年可以收到RM53,350的股息，平均每个月的股息收入为RM4,445令吉，比排屋租金高两倍。
不单是大马产业信托，其他产业信托股，以目前的股价买进，大部分都可以取得10%以上的周息率，其中亚天产业信托(ATRIUM)，以目前65 仙左右的股价计算，周息率高达13%。目前大部份产业信托的市价，均比其每股净有形资产价值低20 至30 多巴仙不等。
产业信托的股息回酬比产业租金高，而风险则比股票低，可说是介于产业与股票之间的投资。假如你手头有多余的资金，一方面担心股票的风险太高，另一方面又嫌定存和买屋收租回酬太低，一个折衷的办法，是购买产业投资信托股票。
回酬高于定存利息
但在买进之前，最好对全部13 家产业信托股，进行研究，比较各家所拥有的产业、租户是谁、租金回酬率、负责数额，以及每单位预期可得之股息。作个比较之后，再从中选择你最有信心的股项，买进作为长期投资，可以赚到比定存利息高两倍的回酬。
市中心的办公大楼，每座动辄以亿令吉计，有能力购买的人，毕竟少之又少。但这不等于你与这些大楼无缘。通过购买产业投资信托股票，你其实也有机会拥有这类大楼的一部分——尽管只是微不足道的一部分。
在马来西亚股票交易所挂牌的上市公司中，就有一类叫产业投资信托股(REITS)。
由于这类股票上市的历史最短，又只有区区的13 家，投机气氛不如别类股票那么热络。所以一般投资者都不大注意。实际上，假如你留意的话，你一定会发现，这类股票的周息率(D/Y，就是股息回酬巴仙率)，比大部分股票都高。
REITS 就是REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUSTS 的缩写，中文为产业投资信托股。
历史悠久收入稳定
这类股票在外围股市有相当长的历史，也是寻求稳定收入的投资者的宠儿。这类公司的营业模式其实很简单：它收集了投资大众的资金，以收购大宗的商业性产业，如办公大厦、购物中心、工厂、酒店等等，交由一家产业管理公司去管理，管理公司负责收租及维修建筑物，从租金中扣除管理费后，将结存的租金净额分发给投资者。
政府规定：产业投资信托公司必须将90%以上的租金，分发给信托股股东。为了鼓励更多产业信托公司成立，当局规定，信托股的股息只需缴税10%。
产业投资信托股的概念其实很简单，收集大量的资金，以收购大宗产业供出租，把收到的租金分发给信托单位持有人。这其实跟单位信托大同小异，只不过单位信托投资于股票，而产业信托投资于产业而已。产业投资信托为有意投资产业的人士提供了另一条投资管道，不但更容易做到，手续也更简单。
让我们比较买屋子和买产业投资信托股的优劣点：
大马产业信托(AMFIRST)昨天公布本财务年上半年的业绩，半年每单位净利为4.268 仙。该信托宣布把盈利全部发给股东，每股派息4.268 仙。假如该信托下半年保持上半年的表现，则全年每单位净赚8.536 仙，该信托曾许下诺言，在未来三年中，将全部盈利派给股东，则每单位股息为8.546 仙(已扣税)。以该信托目前80 仙的股价计算，周息率为10.67%，比定期存款的利息高两倍。
假设你有计划买屋子作为投资，又假设你的投资额为50万令吉，假如你以50万令吉在八打灵购买一间双层排屋出租，每月可收到租金1千500令吉。假如你以每股80仙，买进大马产业信托股票，50万令吉可买到RM500,000 ÷ RM0.80 = 625,000股，以每股8.536仙的股息计算，你一年可以收到RM53,350的股息，平均每个月的股息收入为RM4,445令吉，比排屋租金高两倍。
不单是大马产业信托，其他产业信托股，以目前的股价买进，大部分都可以取得10%以上的周息率，其中亚天产业信托(ATRIUM)，以目前65 仙左右的股价计算，周息率高达13%。目前大部份产业信托的市价，均比其每股净有形资产价值低20 至30 多巴仙不等。
产业信托的股息回酬比产业租金高，而风险则比股票低，可说是介于产业与股票之间的投资。假如你手头有多余的资金，一方面担心股票的风险太高，另一方面又嫌定存和买屋收租回酬太低，一个折衷的办法，是购买产业投资信托股票。
回酬高于定存利息
但在买进之前，最好对全部13 家产业信托股，进行研究，比较各家所拥有的产业、租户是谁、租金回酬率、负责数额，以及每单位预期可得之股息。作个比较之后，再从中选择你最有信心的股项，买进作为长期投资，可以赚到比定存利息高两倍的回酬。
专访大马股神冷眼
金融海啸，全球肆虐，股市和金融，同属一个范畴，当然劫数难逃。我国股市，由1500多点，降到今天800多点，可以说是凄风苦雨，惨不忍睹。
许多股友都在问股市还有前景吗？此时此刻，可以下场吗？
原名冯时能的冷眼，研究股票投资，已超过30年，即使股市大落，也能屹立不倒，到底有什么秘诀？
“要想在股市赚钱，不能只听贴士，一定要认真研究！”冷眼开门见山说：“尤其股市像现在，忽起忽落，只听贴士，往往会输到倾家荡产，不只是血本无归。”
从不听信股票贴士
冷眼从不听信贴士。
他早年特辟一个书房，专收股票报告书，天天认真研究，对我国上市公司每一间股票公司，了如指掌，问他任何细节，对答如流。他的收藏，是马来西亚记录的缔造者。
如今，冷眼用电脑，也是天天认真研究。在回答记者问题之前，冷眼先谈这次令人不寒而栗的金融海啸。他说，这次海啸中心是美国，其次欧洲。再其次是南美洲、阿根廷、冰岛。
“亚洲可以说最轻微，主要是包括我国在内的亚洲国家，比较落后，这次海啸是由衍生产品引爆。”他说。
冷眼举例说明衍生产品，譬如一个人向银行贷款100万买屋，订下合约，银行又把合约转实，卖给像这次渡不过难关的雷曼兄弟，这类像雷曼兄弟的公司，100万往往可赚37倍。
庆幸贷款制度谨慎
冷眼庆幸，我国贷款制度谨慎，不够资格不能获得贷款。而且，贷款直接，一张合约，不会卖来卖去，要乱搞也不容易。银行不能乱借钱，有一元的资本，最多只能借出十二元，逾越就成了违法。也因此，不会陷入泡沫的地步。
话题一转，冷眼又举美国股票为例。他说美国有5千个单位信托公司。美国有56%的人民购买单位信托。行情看落，个个要拿回钱。单位信托公司那来现款？只有毫无选择性，拼命卖股票，股票能不落吗？
曾出版：“30年股票投资心得”一书，销售超过一万本，11次上榜，成为大马华文畅销书排名榜的冷眼，又是如何看待当前的海啸？
冷眼非常肯定，那些说经济没前途，股市没前途的人，是盲人模象。他说：“海啸一定能过！”
他说一定能过时，语气坚定。最主要原因，是全球政府倾全力打救。当然救得了。只是时间问题。
多长时间？冷眼保守推测，是三到五年时间。
冷眼特别指出，这次海啸和1929年的经济大萧条完全不同。当时，是各家自扫门前雪。
这次，是全球一条心。冷眼因此作出结论，这次金融海啸，会导致经济衰退，这是无可否认的事实。但是，绝对不会大萧条。
选择最好底子股票
明白了这次海啸的来龙去脉，冷眼才回过头，详细剖析我国股市。冷眼以他纵横股市30年的经验告诉股友。此刻是：“进场的最好时机！”但是，一定要作长期投资的准备。
长期，最少三年。冷眼指出股票是公司股份。
公司是做生意。
现在，如果某人要做生意，要招股或者自己注入资金，要付出多几倍的钱，如果要从事地产，为什么不买产业股？要种棕油，为什么不买棕油股？
冷眼说：“现在买股，比你直接投资便宜几倍！”
“当然，不能闭上眼睛乱买，那真的会血本无归。你一定要在这最好时机，选择最好底子的股票，尤其重要，是最好股息的股票。”冷眼说。
收购省时又省事
说到这里，冷眼又提出他的看法，认为除了投资是最好的时机。收购，也是最好的时机。
在记者要求之下，冷眼举出CSC钢铁控股为例。
这只股，今年最高，1令吉6角9分，现在8角。冷眼说：“这只股共3亿8千万股，每股8角，是3亿令吉左右。如果自己成立一家有规模的公司，要耗资7到8亿令吉，再加上制造业要经过漫长的五年才有规模，现在只要收购，既省时，又省事，更能早获利，你说，这是不是收购的最好时机?”
记者希望冷眼介绍几只可作总期投资，而且股息偏高的股。
冷眼不假思索说“PLENITUDE。”这只股，没有中文名，是属产业股。今年最高价3令吉4分，现在是1令吉7角。冷眼说这间公司，在吉打、首都、尤其柔佛都有庞大的地库，资产值6令吉，当然买得过。
接着，冷眼提出一只属于消费股的ZHULIAN作说明，并强调“这是我的最爱”，这只股上市价是1.23令吉。上市是2007年。现在90仙左右。去年每股赚18分。今年赚20分。难得是，去年派息15分半。资本1亿7千200万。竟然有现金1亿令吉。这是一家直销公司，产品超过800样。是以假首饰和保健品为主。产品85％是自家生产，远销至泰国和印尼，在我国主要对象是马来人。
冷眼说：“许多人对直销生意怕怕，才造成这只股不热门！”此外，冷眼还透露，这只股的老板为人务实，很低调，知道的人不多。这老板还有一个可取之处，不愿接见分析师。冷眼的结论是这只股最近斥资4千多万建新厂，而且资产价值和赢利都属优质，当然是可以考虑了。
选择高派息股票
冷眼继续给喜欢买股票的人，提出以下的忠告。
要选什么股，最保守的答案，是有没有钱好分？
一定要重视股息，也就是有分红。
分红多少才理想？
答案很简单，比银行定期存款至少高一倍。如果1000令吉存银行，一年可获35令吉，买股则至少要有70令吉。理由是买股风险高。很多进入股市的人，忽略了股息，只希望股价节节上升，从股票赚钱，因此股市上升，股票交易所门庭如市，跟风的人挤破头，听“贴士”的人也挤破头，股市一落，都成了笼中困兽。
冷眼看到，那些天天在股市流连的人，是赚不到钱的。因此冷眼给股友的另一个忠告，是劝大家进入股市，要量力而为，然后抱着储蓄的心理。
“尤其年纪大的人，经不起打击。期待股价上升而赚钱，往往会赔了棺材本而欲哭无泪，为何不重视股息？股息持续发出，便等于有固定收入了。”冷眼说。
在记者的整个访谈中，知道了冷眼这位报馆前总编辑，是用30年时间，倾全力研究股票后，有了自己的心得，他进入股市，最相信的人，只有一个，是自己。
研究之后，他用逆向思考，人弃我取。因为他对每一只股票，能如数家珍，像这次股市大滑落，别人输得焦头烂额，痛不欲生，他呢，当然也有一些折损，但是，他手中握有许多派高股息的优质股，仍然可以安坐家中，等待领取股息。
后记
这次访问冷眼，是他刚从西班牙旅游回来，第二天又将要飞去广州参加美食团的。最后问他股市大落，何以有这种闲情? 冷眼说是靠股息之赐。
许多股友都在问股市还有前景吗？此时此刻，可以下场吗？
原名冯时能的冷眼，研究股票投资，已超过30年，即使股市大落，也能屹立不倒，到底有什么秘诀？
“要想在股市赚钱，不能只听贴士，一定要认真研究！”冷眼开门见山说：“尤其股市像现在，忽起忽落，只听贴士，往往会输到倾家荡产，不只是血本无归。”
从不听信股票贴士
冷眼从不听信贴士。
他早年特辟一个书房，专收股票报告书，天天认真研究，对我国上市公司每一间股票公司，了如指掌，问他任何细节，对答如流。他的收藏，是马来西亚记录的缔造者。
如今，冷眼用电脑，也是天天认真研究。在回答记者问题之前，冷眼先谈这次令人不寒而栗的金融海啸。他说，这次海啸中心是美国，其次欧洲。再其次是南美洲、阿根廷、冰岛。
“亚洲可以说最轻微，主要是包括我国在内的亚洲国家，比较落后，这次海啸是由衍生产品引爆。”他说。
冷眼举例说明衍生产品，譬如一个人向银行贷款100万买屋，订下合约，银行又把合约转实，卖给像这次渡不过难关的雷曼兄弟，这类像雷曼兄弟的公司，100万往往可赚37倍。
庆幸贷款制度谨慎
冷眼庆幸，我国贷款制度谨慎，不够资格不能获得贷款。而且，贷款直接，一张合约，不会卖来卖去，要乱搞也不容易。银行不能乱借钱，有一元的资本，最多只能借出十二元，逾越就成了违法。也因此，不会陷入泡沫的地步。
话题一转，冷眼又举美国股票为例。他说美国有5千个单位信托公司。美国有56%的人民购买单位信托。行情看落，个个要拿回钱。单位信托公司那来现款？只有毫无选择性，拼命卖股票，股票能不落吗？
曾出版：“30年股票投资心得”一书，销售超过一万本，11次上榜，成为大马华文畅销书排名榜的冷眼，又是如何看待当前的海啸？
冷眼非常肯定，那些说经济没前途，股市没前途的人，是盲人模象。他说：“海啸一定能过！”
他说一定能过时，语气坚定。最主要原因，是全球政府倾全力打救。当然救得了。只是时间问题。
多长时间？冷眼保守推测，是三到五年时间。
冷眼特别指出，这次海啸和1929年的经济大萧条完全不同。当时，是各家自扫门前雪。
这次，是全球一条心。冷眼因此作出结论，这次金融海啸，会导致经济衰退，这是无可否认的事实。但是，绝对不会大萧条。
选择最好底子股票
明白了这次海啸的来龙去脉，冷眼才回过头，详细剖析我国股市。冷眼以他纵横股市30年的经验告诉股友。此刻是：“进场的最好时机！”但是，一定要作长期投资的准备。
长期，最少三年。冷眼指出股票是公司股份。
公司是做生意。
现在，如果某人要做生意，要招股或者自己注入资金，要付出多几倍的钱，如果要从事地产，为什么不买产业股？要种棕油，为什么不买棕油股？
冷眼说：“现在买股，比你直接投资便宜几倍！”
“当然，不能闭上眼睛乱买，那真的会血本无归。你一定要在这最好时机，选择最好底子的股票，尤其重要，是最好股息的股票。”冷眼说。
收购省时又省事
说到这里，冷眼又提出他的看法，认为除了投资是最好的时机。收购，也是最好的时机。
在记者要求之下，冷眼举出CSC钢铁控股为例。
这只股，今年最高，1令吉6角9分，现在8角。冷眼说：“这只股共3亿8千万股，每股8角，是3亿令吉左右。如果自己成立一家有规模的公司，要耗资7到8亿令吉，再加上制造业要经过漫长的五年才有规模，现在只要收购，既省时，又省事，更能早获利，你说，这是不是收购的最好时机?”
记者希望冷眼介绍几只可作总期投资，而且股息偏高的股。
冷眼不假思索说“PLENITUDE。”这只股，没有中文名，是属产业股。今年最高价3令吉4分，现在是1令吉7角。冷眼说这间公司，在吉打、首都、尤其柔佛都有庞大的地库，资产值6令吉，当然买得过。
接着，冷眼提出一只属于消费股的ZHULIAN作说明，并强调“这是我的最爱”，这只股上市价是1.23令吉。上市是2007年。现在90仙左右。去年每股赚18分。今年赚20分。难得是，去年派息15分半。资本1亿7千200万。竟然有现金1亿令吉。这是一家直销公司，产品超过800样。是以假首饰和保健品为主。产品85％是自家生产，远销至泰国和印尼，在我国主要对象是马来人。
冷眼说：“许多人对直销生意怕怕，才造成这只股不热门！”此外，冷眼还透露，这只股的老板为人务实，很低调，知道的人不多。这老板还有一个可取之处，不愿接见分析师。冷眼的结论是这只股最近斥资4千多万建新厂，而且资产价值和赢利都属优质，当然是可以考虑了。
选择高派息股票
冷眼继续给喜欢买股票的人，提出以下的忠告。
要选什么股，最保守的答案，是有没有钱好分？
一定要重视股息，也就是有分红。
分红多少才理想？
答案很简单，比银行定期存款至少高一倍。如果1000令吉存银行，一年可获35令吉，买股则至少要有70令吉。理由是买股风险高。很多进入股市的人，忽略了股息，只希望股价节节上升，从股票赚钱，因此股市上升，股票交易所门庭如市，跟风的人挤破头，听“贴士”的人也挤破头，股市一落，都成了笼中困兽。
冷眼看到，那些天天在股市流连的人，是赚不到钱的。因此冷眼给股友的另一个忠告，是劝大家进入股市，要量力而为，然后抱着储蓄的心理。
“尤其年纪大的人，经不起打击。期待股价上升而赚钱，往往会赔了棺材本而欲哭无泪，为何不重视股息？股息持续发出，便等于有固定收入了。”冷眼说。
在记者的整个访谈中，知道了冷眼这位报馆前总编辑，是用30年时间，倾全力研究股票后，有了自己的心得，他进入股市，最相信的人，只有一个，是自己。
研究之后，他用逆向思考，人弃我取。因为他对每一只股票，能如数家珍，像这次股市大滑落，别人输得焦头烂额，痛不欲生，他呢，当然也有一些折损，但是，他手中握有许多派高股息的优质股，仍然可以安坐家中，等待领取股息。
后记
这次访问冷眼，是他刚从西班牙旅游回来，第二天又将要飞去广州参加美食团的。最后问他股市大落，何以有这种闲情? 冷眼说是靠股息之赐。
Saturday, February 7, 2009
进场！ 巴菲特吆喝买美股
美国“财星”杂志报导，根据投资大师巴菲特使用的一项投资基准，当美国股市总市值落在国民生产毛额（GNP）的70%到80%之间，就是合理的投资时机，现在似乎就是时候了。
这项理论的论点在于美国股市总市值与GNP之间应该有个合理的比率，根据85年来的线图走势以及巴菲特本人的说法，现在应该是进场购买美股的适当时候。
2001年网路泡沫破灭，道琼指数从高点大幅回挫2000点时，很多人都在讨论重返股市的时机。但当时股市总市值仍相当于美国GNP的133%，所以巴菲特并未轻举妄动。
巴菲特后来具体设想一个进场的合理时刻，他说：“如果总市值与GNP的比率落在70%到80%之间，进场购买股票可能会很有利。”
按照这项说法，美股的买点如今可能已经浮现，因为该比率1月时已降到75%左右。巴菲特对于总市值占GNP比率重返正常，丝毫不感到讶异，他告诉“财星”说，这项变化让他想起投资家葛拉罕（Ben Graham）对股市运作方式的描述，他说：“股市在短期间像是投票机，但在长期间就像是体重器。”
巴菲特不仅相信线图传达的讯息，还亲身力行。他去年10月17日在纽约时报的舆论版上说，有很长一段时间，他个人除了美国公债外，没有拥有任何股票（波克夏股票当然是例外），但现在他已开始进场购买。
他还说，如果股价继续下滑，他会继续加码。他发表这些言论之后，美股的确继续下滑，道琼指数在这段期间下跌约10%，所以按理巴菲特应该也不断买进。遗憾的是，我们的投资大师并未透露他买了哪些股票。
这项理论的论点在于美国股市总市值与GNP之间应该有个合理的比率，根据85年来的线图走势以及巴菲特本人的说法，现在应该是进场购买美股的适当时候。
2001年网路泡沫破灭，道琼指数从高点大幅回挫2000点时，很多人都在讨论重返股市的时机。但当时股市总市值仍相当于美国GNP的133%，所以巴菲特并未轻举妄动。
巴菲特后来具体设想一个进场的合理时刻，他说：“如果总市值与GNP的比率落在70%到80%之间，进场购买股票可能会很有利。”
按照这项说法，美股的买点如今可能已经浮现，因为该比率1月时已降到75%左右。巴菲特对于总市值占GNP比率重返正常，丝毫不感到讶异，他告诉“财星”说，这项变化让他想起投资家葛拉罕（Ben Graham）对股市运作方式的描述，他说：“股市在短期间像是投票机，但在长期间就像是体重器。”
巴菲特不仅相信线图传达的讯息，还亲身力行。他去年10月17日在纽约时报的舆论版上说，有很长一段时间，他个人除了美国公债外，没有拥有任何股票（波克夏股票当然是例外），但现在他已开始进场购买。
他还说，如果股价继续下滑，他会继续加码。他发表这些言论之后，美股的确继续下滑，道琼指数在这段期间下跌约10%，所以按理巴菲特应该也不断买进。遗憾的是，我们的投资大师并未透露他买了哪些股票。
Friday, February 6, 2009
Swiber Holdings: Hidden value in stock price
Swiber Holdings is a service provider in the offshore oil and gas industry, offering offshore EPCIC, marine support and drilling services across the Asia Pacific and the Middle East .
With the drastic fall in oil prices, Swiber is unlikely to be spared by cut-backs on E&P expenditures from oil companies, but it should be kept busy for this year with its strong order book of US$607m (last announced 30 Sep 08).
Swiber is still bidding for US$4.2b worth of contracts for execution over the next five years and we account a 15% (historically ~20%) win rate, translating to US$630m worth of possible contracts. We are mindful that contract flow might be slow in 1H09 due to the cautious outlook on oil but any wins will be a positive share price catalyst.
The stock has fallen more than 85% since Jan 08 and we see limited downside risk. Swiber is currently trading at its historical low valuation of ~2x FY09F earnings. We initiate coverage on Swiber with a BUY recommendation and S$0.66 fair value estimate.
With the drastic fall in oil prices, Swiber is unlikely to be spared by cut-backs on E&P expenditures from oil companies, but it should be kept busy for this year with its strong order book of US$607m (last announced 30 Sep 08).
Swiber is still bidding for US$4.2b worth of contracts for execution over the next five years and we account a 15% (historically ~20%) win rate, translating to US$630m worth of possible contracts. We are mindful that contract flow might be slow in 1H09 due to the cautious outlook on oil but any wins will be a positive share price catalyst.
The stock has fallen more than 85% since Jan 08 and we see limited downside risk. Swiber is currently trading at its historical low valuation of ~2x FY09F earnings. We initiate coverage on Swiber with a BUY recommendation and S$0.66 fair value estimate.
Shipyards: Wrong medicine? (CAUTIOUS)
We believe that share prices for SGX-listed Chinese shipyards were uprecently on the false impression that new orders will pick up upon the Ministry of Communication’s (MOC) initiative to eliminate 17% VAT on vessels built by Chinese yards and ordered by Chinese shipowner.
In our opinion, this demand-side stimulus does not resolve the supply-side issues plaguing the shipbuilding industry in China, namely increasing difficultiesto get funds for new purchases due to falling collateral values, and oversupply of vessels to pressure freight rates at below breakeven levels.
We see the recent share price run-up as an opportunity to sell into strength.
Maintain CAUTIOUS on the Chinese shipyards.
Share prices up on old news ? Our on-the-ground checks confirmed that the elimination of 17% VAT on vessels built by Chinese yards and ordered by Chinese shipowner has been implemented since 1 January 2009, and is part ofthe Chinese government's initiative (in November 2008) to eliminate VAT for new capex for all Chinese companies. Hence, the market talk that the Ministry of Communication is considering eliminating the 17% VAT on vessels built by Chinese yards and ordered by Chinese shipowner is just a catch-all extension to this earlier initiative for shipowners' vessel transactions.
In our opinion, this VAT cut was mis-intepreted by the equity market as a turnaround for Chinese shipyards' fortunes, including Cosco Corp and Yangzijiang.
Supply-side factors are hard to overcome. We believe that this demand-sidestimulus will have limited impact on new orders, due to tighter credit lending as collateral values plunge, and operating losses even at there bounded freight levels. Instead, these unresolved supply-side problems will result in more order delays/cancellations, and create an overhang on the share prices for Cosco Corp (20% order delays/cancellations to-date,vs. our expectation of 40%) and Yangzijiang (zero order delay/cancellation to-date, vs. our expectation of 15%).
Run up in share prices present an opportunity to sell out of Chinese shipyards. The global oversupply of dry bulk carriers in 2009 is imminent, given the general reluctance of shipowners to cancel orders since 4Q08.
Maintain FULLY VALUED ratings on Cosco Corp (Fair value is S$0.76) andYangzijiang (Fair value is S$0.34).
In our opinion, this demand-side stimulus does not resolve the supply-side issues plaguing the shipbuilding industry in China, namely increasing difficultiesto get funds for new purchases due to falling collateral values, and oversupply of vessels to pressure freight rates at below breakeven levels.
We see the recent share price run-up as an opportunity to sell into strength.
Maintain CAUTIOUS on the Chinese shipyards.
Share prices up on old news ? Our on-the-ground checks confirmed that the elimination of 17% VAT on vessels built by Chinese yards and ordered by Chinese shipowner has been implemented since 1 January 2009, and is part ofthe Chinese government's initiative (in November 2008) to eliminate VAT for new capex for all Chinese companies. Hence, the market talk that the Ministry of Communication is considering eliminating the 17% VAT on vessels built by Chinese yards and ordered by Chinese shipowner is just a catch-all extension to this earlier initiative for shipowners' vessel transactions.
In our opinion, this VAT cut was mis-intepreted by the equity market as a turnaround for Chinese shipyards' fortunes, including Cosco Corp and Yangzijiang.
Supply-side factors are hard to overcome. We believe that this demand-sidestimulus will have limited impact on new orders, due to tighter credit lending as collateral values plunge, and operating losses even at there bounded freight levels. Instead, these unresolved supply-side problems will result in more order delays/cancellations, and create an overhang on the share prices for Cosco Corp (20% order delays/cancellations to-date,vs. our expectation of 40%) and Yangzijiang (zero order delay/cancellation to-date, vs. our expectation of 15%).
Run up in share prices present an opportunity to sell out of Chinese shipyards. The global oversupply of dry bulk carriers in 2009 is imminent, given the general reluctance of shipowners to cancel orders since 4Q08.
Maintain FULLY VALUED ratings on Cosco Corp (Fair value is S$0.76) andYangzijiang (Fair value is S$0.34).
Thursday, February 5, 2009
公司估值要简化
记得钟兆民老师在《东方港湾2007年投资管理工作分析与总结》中写道：“投资杰出的上市公司，长期持有，是我们战略层面的事，尽力追求估值的准确性，则处在战术的层面。我们会用一辈子的时间去坚守价值投资，同时我们也要用一辈子的时间去追求估值上的精益求精。”
钟兆民老师是一位值得尊敬的前辈，也是一位坚定的长期价值投资者；但在具体问题上，我并不是很赞成他对某些问题的判断，比如说：他认为长期持有是“战略层面的事”，而“尽力追求估值的准确性，则处于战术的层面”。
对此我的看法则相反：
1）长期持有并不是战略问题，只是战术问题；而估值不是战术问题，估值为价值投资的安全边际原则提供了数据支撑，是一个相当重要的战略问题。
2）估值是一门艺术，不存在“准确性”、“精益求精”的问题，估值大体只有2个作用：
a.为买入时评估安全边际；
b.为持股提供战略支撑，以判断是否“极度高估”。
我个人认为，投资的艺术性很大程度上就是估值的艺术性。从理论上说，估值也是一门科学，学院派已经开发出很多估值模型，如各种DCF模型、EVA模型乃至实物期权定价法，比较权威的教材有：Richard Barker的《价值决定—估价模型与财务信息披露》、Aswath Dmmodarn的《投资估价——确定任何资产价值的工具和技术》、Stephen Penman的《财务报表分析与评券定价》。这3本书理论性较强。最近几年，Aswath Dmmodarn教授出了一本简易版的估值的书——《高管商学院教材 价值评估》，大体的逻辑与《投资估价——确定任何资产价值的工具和技术》一样，有意思的是，Aswath Dmmodarn教授仍坚持用CAPM来确定折现率，他认为如果没有更好的替代方法，就不应该反驳CAPM。
既然估值是一门科学，那为什么估值还这么难呢？原因在于投资的不确定性，估值并不仅仅是一门科学，更是一门艺术，其艺术性甚至超过了科学性。
事实上，理性金融学的体系自建立以来，尽管从数学逻辑上是完美的，但在实践中总是遇到了诸多问题和挑战，理性金融学最根本的缺陷在于：a.总的来说遵循一套线性定价法则，而现实世界是非线性的；b.假定条件过于苛刻；c.逻辑上存在循环检验，即要证明A正确，必须B正确；但要证明B正确，则要先证明A正确。联合检验往往不可行，显然，这是一个死结。
闲话不表。在金融领域，理论与实践之间的鸿沟让人震惊，学院派的估值方法放在现实世界就有问题，因为其估值模型尽管是精巧的，但参数很多，这些参数都需要预测；模型再正确也没有用，如果输进去的是垃圾，出来的也必须是垃圾。如：估值模型中要用到10个参数，即使你每个参数的准确率都达到了90%，最终准确率也只有35%。
由于绝对估值的艰难，投资界后来专注于盈利预测和PE估值。但后来问题又来了：EPS预测就一定准确吗？该给多少PE？事实上，投资中从来就不应该有预测的一席之地，不仅市场行情不可预测，宏观经济也是不可预测的，而且公司未来的收益也同样是不可预测的，巴老多次宣称“我根本就不知道我们的子公司下一季度的收益会是多少”。
那价值投资者又该怎样解决估值的难题呢？
巴老的意见是——化复杂为简约：
1、所谓公司价值，是一家公司在其余下寿命里所能产生的现金流量的折现值；内在价值只是一个估计值，不是精确值，而且还是一个利率或者现金流量改变时必须更改的估计值。巴老还强调，“内在价值为评估投资和企业的相对吸引力提供了唯一合符逻辑的手段”。因此，企图精确估值是很难做到的。我们的分析师经常把EPS估计到几毛几分，具体股票的估值也是经常精确到分，显然这是一个“精确的错误”。
2、具体估值方法上，巴老认同John Burr Williams的《投资价值理论》中的折现现金流量法。巴老在2000年的年报中引用《伊索寓言》的“一鸟在手胜过二鸟在林”的说法，本意是说明“确定性最重要”。巴老不认同相对估值法，他说“一般的评估标准，诸如股利收益率、PE、PB或者成长性，与价值评估毫不相关，除非它们能在一定程度上提供一家企业未来现金流入流出的线索。事实上，如果一个项目前期投入超过了项目建成后其资产产生的现金流量的折现值，成长反而会摧毁企业的价值。有些分析师口口声声将‘成长型’和‘价值型’列为两种截然相反的投资风格，只能表现他们的无知，绝不是什么真知。成长只是价值评估的因素之一，一般是正面因素，但有时是负面因素。”因此，巴老坚持绝对估值的方法，他从来就不认同相对估值，认为这些方法“与价值评估毫不相关”。
3、如何选择现金流量和折现率？既然绝对估值法是唯一的估值方法，那么怎样确定现金流量和
折现率呢？
对于现金流量，巴老坚持用“所有者收益”（其实就是自由现金流）。可以说，这是很多相对估值法的死穴。财务报表人为遵循“会计分期”的假设，人为将一些公司的经营周期切割为1年1年的，但事实上，会计年度与公司的经营周期经常不合拍，不少公司的收益经常出现波动。比如说一家非周期性公司和一家周期性公司在未来10年内年均利润均为1亿，但非周期性公司的估值可能是25亿，而周期性公司的估值可能只有10亿甚至6亿，这其中的原因何在？单从利润来看，是看不出问题的，原因就出在自由现金流上，周期性公司为了同样的收益水平，往往要增加营运资本和长期经营资产，同样的EPS其自由现金流比非周期性的公司低得多。因此，大体预估资本支出和营运资本的追加，也比貌似精确的现金流折现重要得多。
对于折现率，巴老用的是长期国债利率。这很好理解，巴老看重的是机会成本，如果一只股票未来的收益率跑不赢长期国债，他根本就不会选择它；CAPM有天然的缺陷，他认为β在逻辑上毫无道理，而且未来的风险水平并非不变，无风险利率并不是固定不变的。巴老选择的是有持续竞争优势的公司，对于他来说，未来不存在其他的不确定性，他干脆用长期国债利率作为折现率。
关于巴老的绝对估值，在《巴菲特之路》这本书里有不少例子，如可口可乐、吉利等。
4、如何破解绝对估值中的地雷？面对估值的不确定性，巴老提出了2种解决方法：
a.坚持能力圈原则，固守自己能理解的行业；
b.坚持在买入上留有很大的安全边际。巴老说过“如果一项资产目前市价只是略低于其内在价值，我们没有兴趣买入它；只有在有‘显著折扣’时我们才会买入”。
5、估值最根本的方法：彻底了解这家公司。
总之，公司估值是是一门艺术，体会其真谛需要艰苦的历练。价值投资者必须重视估值，没有估值，就无法确定安全边际；要放弃学院派的繁杂的估值方法，更要放弃荒谬的“EPS预测+PE估值”法，化复杂为简约。只要走在正确的路上，坚持不懈，多下苦功夫，掌握好一些行业的背景知识，估值的难题是可以破解的。
钟兆民老师是一位值得尊敬的前辈，也是一位坚定的长期价值投资者；但在具体问题上，我并不是很赞成他对某些问题的判断，比如说：他认为长期持有是“战略层面的事”，而“尽力追求估值的准确性，则处于战术的层面”。
对此我的看法则相反：
1）长期持有并不是战略问题，只是战术问题；而估值不是战术问题，估值为价值投资的安全边际原则提供了数据支撑，是一个相当重要的战略问题。
2）估值是一门艺术，不存在“准确性”、“精益求精”的问题，估值大体只有2个作用：
a.为买入时评估安全边际；
b.为持股提供战略支撑，以判断是否“极度高估”。
我个人认为，投资的艺术性很大程度上就是估值的艺术性。从理论上说，估值也是一门科学，学院派已经开发出很多估值模型，如各种DCF模型、EVA模型乃至实物期权定价法，比较权威的教材有：Richard Barker的《价值决定—估价模型与财务信息披露》、Aswath Dmmodarn的《投资估价——确定任何资产价值的工具和技术》、Stephen Penman的《财务报表分析与评券定价》。这3本书理论性较强。最近几年，Aswath Dmmodarn教授出了一本简易版的估值的书——《高管商学院教材 价值评估》，大体的逻辑与《投资估价——确定任何资产价值的工具和技术》一样，有意思的是，Aswath Dmmodarn教授仍坚持用CAPM来确定折现率，他认为如果没有更好的替代方法，就不应该反驳CAPM。
既然估值是一门科学，那为什么估值还这么难呢？原因在于投资的不确定性，估值并不仅仅是一门科学，更是一门艺术，其艺术性甚至超过了科学性。
事实上，理性金融学的体系自建立以来，尽管从数学逻辑上是完美的，但在实践中总是遇到了诸多问题和挑战，理性金融学最根本的缺陷在于：a.总的来说遵循一套线性定价法则，而现实世界是非线性的；b.假定条件过于苛刻；c.逻辑上存在循环检验，即要证明A正确，必须B正确；但要证明B正确，则要先证明A正确。联合检验往往不可行，显然，这是一个死结。
闲话不表。在金融领域，理论与实践之间的鸿沟让人震惊，学院派的估值方法放在现实世界就有问题，因为其估值模型尽管是精巧的，但参数很多，这些参数都需要预测；模型再正确也没有用，如果输进去的是垃圾，出来的也必须是垃圾。如：估值模型中要用到10个参数，即使你每个参数的准确率都达到了90%，最终准确率也只有35%。
由于绝对估值的艰难，投资界后来专注于盈利预测和PE估值。但后来问题又来了：EPS预测就一定准确吗？该给多少PE？事实上，投资中从来就不应该有预测的一席之地，不仅市场行情不可预测，宏观经济也是不可预测的，而且公司未来的收益也同样是不可预测的，巴老多次宣称“我根本就不知道我们的子公司下一季度的收益会是多少”。
那价值投资者又该怎样解决估值的难题呢？
巴老的意见是——化复杂为简约：
1、所谓公司价值，是一家公司在其余下寿命里所能产生的现金流量的折现值；内在价值只是一个估计值，不是精确值，而且还是一个利率或者现金流量改变时必须更改的估计值。巴老还强调，“内在价值为评估投资和企业的相对吸引力提供了唯一合符逻辑的手段”。因此，企图精确估值是很难做到的。我们的分析师经常把EPS估计到几毛几分，具体股票的估值也是经常精确到分，显然这是一个“精确的错误”。
2、具体估值方法上，巴老认同John Burr Williams的《投资价值理论》中的折现现金流量法。巴老在2000年的年报中引用《伊索寓言》的“一鸟在手胜过二鸟在林”的说法，本意是说明“确定性最重要”。巴老不认同相对估值法，他说“一般的评估标准，诸如股利收益率、PE、PB或者成长性，与价值评估毫不相关，除非它们能在一定程度上提供一家企业未来现金流入流出的线索。事实上，如果一个项目前期投入超过了项目建成后其资产产生的现金流量的折现值，成长反而会摧毁企业的价值。有些分析师口口声声将‘成长型’和‘价值型’列为两种截然相反的投资风格，只能表现他们的无知，绝不是什么真知。成长只是价值评估的因素之一，一般是正面因素，但有时是负面因素。”因此，巴老坚持绝对估值的方法，他从来就不认同相对估值，认为这些方法“与价值评估毫不相关”。
3、如何选择现金流量和折现率？既然绝对估值法是唯一的估值方法，那么怎样确定现金流量和
折现率呢？
对于现金流量，巴老坚持用“所有者收益”（其实就是自由现金流）。可以说，这是很多相对估值法的死穴。财务报表人为遵循“会计分期”的假设，人为将一些公司的经营周期切割为1年1年的，但事实上，会计年度与公司的经营周期经常不合拍，不少公司的收益经常出现波动。比如说一家非周期性公司和一家周期性公司在未来10年内年均利润均为1亿，但非周期性公司的估值可能是25亿，而周期性公司的估值可能只有10亿甚至6亿，这其中的原因何在？单从利润来看，是看不出问题的，原因就出在自由现金流上，周期性公司为了同样的收益水平，往往要增加营运资本和长期经营资产，同样的EPS其自由现金流比非周期性的公司低得多。因此，大体预估资本支出和营运资本的追加，也比貌似精确的现金流折现重要得多。
对于折现率，巴老用的是长期国债利率。这很好理解，巴老看重的是机会成本，如果一只股票未来的收益率跑不赢长期国债，他根本就不会选择它；CAPM有天然的缺陷，他认为β在逻辑上毫无道理，而且未来的风险水平并非不变，无风险利率并不是固定不变的。巴老选择的是有持续竞争优势的公司，对于他来说，未来不存在其他的不确定性，他干脆用长期国债利率作为折现率。
关于巴老的绝对估值，在《巴菲特之路》这本书里有不少例子，如可口可乐、吉利等。
4、如何破解绝对估值中的地雷？面对估值的不确定性，巴老提出了2种解决方法：
a.坚持能力圈原则，固守自己能理解的行业；
b.坚持在买入上留有很大的安全边际。巴老说过“如果一项资产目前市价只是略低于其内在价值，我们没有兴趣买入它；只有在有‘显著折扣’时我们才会买入”。
5、估值最根本的方法：彻底了解这家公司。
总之，公司估值是是一门艺术，体会其真谛需要艰苦的历练。价值投资者必须重视估值，没有估值，就无法确定安全边际；要放弃学院派的繁杂的估值方法，更要放弃荒谬的“EPS预测+PE估值”法，化复杂为简约。只要走在正确的路上，坚持不懈，多下苦功夫，掌握好一些行业的背景知识，估值的难题是可以破解的。
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)