顯示具有 UBS 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章
顯示具有 UBS 標籤的文章。 顯示所有文章

2011年6月23日 星期四

財富管理東移惠及獅城


羡煞帕拉多廣場(Paradeplatz)上的銀行了!

監管少利潤可觀

帕拉多廣場是瑞士蘇黎世的銀行中心,曾幾何時,富裕人士很倚賴在這裏落戶的財富管理銀行,然而,兩者今天的關係卻疏遠了。這並不令人意外:瑞士銀行(UBS)在金融危機時陷入困境,不僅導致客戶流失,甚至威脅瑞士私人銀行業的信譽。事實上,除了瑞銀的問題,當地私人銀行業甚為健康。

不過,正如瑞士銀行家及他們在英美的同儕漸漸發現,新興市場的富裕客戶希望在老家附近獲取財富管理意見及服務。事實上,考慮到亞洲財富管理收入今年預料增長多達20%,比發達市場的增長步伐快一倍,羅兵咸永道(PwC)就估計,新加坡或會在2013年前,晉身為全球首屈一指的環球財富管理中心。

歐洲傳統財富管理公司正嘗試打好亞洲的根基,在當地開立「在岸」(onshore)前哨基地,以爭取中國及印度企業家的生意。

除了亞洲財富的誘因外,還有其他具說服力的理由,支持銀行向東方拓展業務。在亞洲,監管機構對銀行業的干預較少。再者,不同於在發達市場每每要倚賴錯綜複雜的轉介網絡,亞洲的生意不僅較易做,利潤也較可觀。

全球總體而言,財富管理銀行平均賺取的毛利,相當於管理資產總值的72個基點;未來兩年,有關比例預料會增加6個基點。對於綜合銀行而言,巴塞爾III(Basel III)新資本標準落實後,拓展財富管理業務的誘因就更大,皆因財富管理業務消耗的智力資本比金融資本多。

不過,銀行要管理好自己的成本倒有困難。接受羅兵咸永道訪問的二百七十五家金融機構中,近四分三的成本對收入比率(cost-to-income ratios)超過60%;整體行業平均比率達71%。

缺人才成本比率高

而且,財富管理業務的最主要開支,在亞洲愈來愈難控制:在瑞士或英美,銀行可以利用大批擁有豐富經驗的人才。但若要拓展東方業務,銀行要麼重金禮聘,向對手「挖角」;要麼大灑金錢自行培訓人才。進軍東方的市場回報也許難以抗拒,但卻要付出代價。

譯自THE LEX COLUMN

版權所有:FINANCIAL TIMES

2010年3月30日 星期二

China Property Bust May Prove Temporary, BOJ, UBS Analysts Say

By Mayumi Otsuma

March 31 (Bloomberg) -- China’s stage of economic development means any property-market bust following the current boom may prove temporary, according to economists at the Bank of Japan and UBS AG.

China today shares characteristics of Japan’s real-estate boom of the 1970s, when the nation quickly recovered from a slump, according to a Bank of Japan research paper. The Chinese economy will be able to keep expanding even in the event of a property contraction, said UBS’s Beijing-based Wang Tao.

The view contrasts with that of Kenneth Rogoff, the Harvard University professor who said last month China may see growth plunge to as low as 2 percent in the aftermath of the collapse of a “debt-fuelled bubble” within 10 years. Premier Wen Jiabao is trying to rein in property speculation after prices rose the most in almost two years.

“People tend to compare China with Japan in the late 1980s but the two situations are very different,” Wang, the head of China economic research for UBS, said in an interview last week. “The biggest difference is of course that China is still at a low stage of development, so if there is a big correction it still has the potential to grow out of it.”

Economic growth of almost 10 percent, surging incomes and a rapid flow of people into cities spurred “real demand” for housing and boosted property prices in Japan in the 1970s, similar to China today, according to the paper co-written by four BOJ economists.

Parallels With Japan

The parallels also include a low ratio of debt used to buy homes, the Japan central bank officials said in the paper released yesterday. Wang also said the lack of a mortgage- securities market in China means property buyers aren’t borrowing as much as Americans did during the U.S. housing bubble.

Property prices in Japan rebounded “pretty quickly” after plunging in 1974 amid the global oil shock, because brisk economic growth fueled incomes, the officials said. In contrast, Japan’s asset-price collapse at the start of the 1990s drove the country into prolonged doldrums because urbanization was almost complete and growth slowed.

Japan’s experiences show “the depth of the property-market adjustment would differ depending on the stage of economic development,” the economists said. “Given its high potential growth and low leverage, China won’t likely suffer a severe property-market adjustment, like the one Japan went through in the 1990s.”

Development Stage

Growth in Japan averaged 9.3 percent in the decade through 1973, compared with 9.9 percent in China between 2000 and 2009, according to the paper. About 45 percent of Chinese currently live in urban areas, the same level as Japan in the early 1960s, it said. Per-capita gross domestic product in China, the world’s fastest-growing major economy, is about $3,500, similar to Japan’s $3,800 in 1973.

Wang also said the possibility of a “boom-bust is quite high” and “avoiding a property bubble in China will be very, very difficult.”

Rogoff, the former International Monetary Fund chief economist, said in an interview in Tokyo last month that land is “the best bet” for the cause of a China crisis. A collapse would cause a “very painful” period which would persist for about a year and a half, while falling short of a 1990s Japan-style lost decade, he said.

Local Authorities

Local governments in China are aggressively developing properties to boost revenues and are welcoming market rallies, the BOJ report said. The paper was written by Ichiro Muto, Tomoyuki Fukumoto, Miyuki Matsunaga and Satoko Ueyama, all economists at the bank’s international department.

Capital inflow from overseas is also providing short-term speculative money, the report said.

Bank lending in China also draws parallels with Japan in the 1970s. Loans by Chinese banks equal between 110 percent and 120 percent of nominal gross domestic product, the same level as Japan around 40 years ago, the researchers said. The ratio jumped to around 180 percent in the 1980s in Japan.

“During Japan’s bubble economic boom in the 1980s, real- estate prices rose without real demand for houses related to urbanization,” the BOJ paper said. “That makes a difference from the booms in Japan in the early 1970s and China today.”