The China Vortex

JP Morgan Chase has just purchased Bear Stearns at $2 a share, an investment bank which was valued at $150 a year last year. Equity and capital markets are poised for a volatile week. The US Fed is set to make another rate cut, a desperation move, on Tuesday. This is likely to push the US dollar into free-fall, and set the stage for inflation in the US and later worldwide. More and more companies and individuals will choose to distance themselves from the US dollar.

Some time ago, I talked about why globalization, at least in its current form, would fail. Globalization has been oversold, especially in the US, where it was seen as leading to some growing kumbaya world where everyone just got along. That is not happening, and will not happen.

There is a strange resemblance between the way globalization was sold and the way real-estate was sold up until last year in the US. Up until 2007, Americans were told that real-estate prices would never go down, they only leveled off in bad times. When the bad times passed, then real-estate prices would climb again. Globalization was sold the same way.

It didn’t matter if American factories were relocated to China because Americans would find something else to do which would add greater value-added. Guess what? Americans haven’t found where that new value-added is, which in turn is leading to higher unemployment, and a generally angry population. We will see how their anger is channeled when the November elections come up.

In the meantime, Chinese government policy, through its VAT policy, encourages local governments to set up factories which waste energy to make products with very little value-added which Americans have bought on credit. Calling this real growth is just a fantasy, to use polite language.

This is why inflation is already flowing through the Chinese economy, first with food prices, and is now working its way through the system. It is likely that the situation will become much worse, and will soon hit the Shanghai and Shenzhen bourses.

The _real_ globalization where value is _really_ created is about enabling people to work productively in different regions with little or no damage to the environment, and enabling them to use their skills in a productive manner without having to travel great distances which previously took a lot of time. But that is not simple to explain, is it?

The business valuation models for these new productivity tools do not yet exist. Ironically, the valuation models for hocus-pocus subprime-mortgages did exist. It’s just that they got turned upside-down in a short time.

So what have all the risk consultants been measuring lately? I’d say that they’ve been out to lunch. That’s why, in these times, the Chinese approach to measuring risk makes more sense.

Chris Masse’s excellent MidasOracle.org, which focuses mainly on prediction markets, has a posting called Journalism Failures - Big Time.

The Midas Oracle article links to an article by Risk magazine nominating Societe Generale as the equity derivatives house of the year.

(You better check out the link soon before the magazine’s management takes it down.)

In case you haven’t heard, Societe Generale has been having some problems lately. We’re talking about US$7B losses because of a rogue trader, which even with the dollar falling, is not chump change.

I couldn’t invent this kind of shit even if I wanted to, and I’m a pretty creative guy.

Now if this is the kind of advice the western risk experts dish out, kind of makes you wonder, doesn’t it?

I’d say that the Chinese way of the CEO making all the risky calls himself according to his or his mistress’s mood at the moment is more reliable, and maybe, even more scientific…

The emperor has no clothes.

In the west, there is a whole industry called “risk consultancy”. Basically, this industry is built around informing large- and medium-sized corporations about risk. Originally, this was built around business risk and would answer questions like “How safe is it to invest $500M in an industrial diamond mine in the Congo (formerly Zaire)?” The consulting firm would then send practice consultants to the target country, where they would study sunk costs (including bribes which were never written about in the report, regulations, who was related to the president, political opposition, major competing firms, etc.) Most of these questions were positioned as questions which any board would ask the CEOs before they would greenlight an investment.

Underlying all this is the belief, at least in west and among western corporations that “risk” is something which can be quantified and measured objectively.

One of the big topics in the west now is China’s investments in Africa. What is fascinating about China’s investments in Africa is that while the amounts of money and people who go to Africa are huge, China really doesn’t have risk consultancies, and Chinese really have not yet started thinking in terms of quantifying risk in the ways western corporations have.

So how have the Chinese judged risk so far, and will the present method change over time to something more akin to the western way of thinking? When it comes to Chinese investments in Africa, many of the early-stage investments were a part of Chinese foreign policy aimed at securing raw materials for manufacturing, and more importantly, energy sources. The typical model has been to find a country, build a new palace for the president and a new sports stadium to win over the people. This would help state-owned construction firms to gain a footing in the country, which were then quickly followed by Chinese logistics firms and wholesale distribution firms which would sell products to the local African population.

Viewing the local African population as customers were one area where Chinese viewed Africa fundamentally differently from the west. While Beijing, Shanghai and the Chinese tier one and tier two cities are relatively modern, it is very easy to forget that when it comes to pervasive poverty, China is only 10-20 years removed from the levels of African poverty. Basically, Chinese companies know how to sell to poor people because they had lots of practice in China.

When you are working from a low cost basis, there really is not a whole lot of need to measure risk because the only way to go is up. Remember, in China labor is still very cheap compared to the west, and the Chinese government is always interested in keeping people employed in the interests of social stability. On the other hand, when you have large risks but your investments are backed by the Chinese government, there is not a need to measure them either. But things get complicated when you are in the middle, and are a mid-sized Chinese company (US50M-1B) which is private and are looking at Africa, as many are now.

Right now, the path many are taking is to send executives, management and staff wholesale to Africa, and basically telling them to figure things out on the ground. This is the Chinese version of “Let’s throw spaghetti at the wall and see what sticks” approach. But what happens when you don’t really have the protection of the Chinese government and local Chinese embassy, and the Africans start complaining that Chinese companies aren’t creating enough local jobs for local Africans? Obviously, these are the sorts of questions which are very complicated, since they include a social factor, in addition to the corporate and economic equation.

Will the Chinese companies turn to the western risk consultancies? Not likely. First of all, they are too expensive by Chinese standards; Chinese management is still very price-sensitive and is not likely to be willing to spend the large amounts which these companies charge. Also, they are not likely to entrust this kind of sensitive information to an outside firm which may recirculate some of the data for a competitor. Most Chinese companies are very tightly held, and risk is whatever the CEO thinks it is at that moment in time.

For western corporations which work from a high-cost basis, risk consulting is an item on “research” for executives, even though it may easily run into the millions of dollars.

For the Chinese, that’s way too much…