Thursday, November 29, 2007

SIV該死 滙豐為乜上身?

相信大家噚日已經知道,孫柏文曾經叫過大家一注獨沽嘅滙豐(005),卒之出招去應付佢旗下管理嘅兩間special investment vehicle(SIV)。滙豐點樣搞掂呢兩間SIV,或者搞掂嘅方法啱唔啱,遲啲先講,我首先想解釋SIV究竟係乜。

SIV基本上係銀行成立嘅獨立公司,呢間公司首先會搵投資者,問吓佢哋有冇興趣夾份入股。間公司就由銀行自己管理,先問人入股做股東,集資例如100萬。

之後再向債市舉債,例如借900 萬,以發出短期例如4個月嘅債券借錢。每4個月就會借一批新嘅去還舊一批嘅錢。假設,向債市舉債900萬嘅利息成本係5厘,亦即每年利息開支係45萬。

成功得到1000萬之後,佢哋就會買啲不同嘅資產。可能啲資產因成交不足,又或風險較高,回本期較長,所以就算風平浪靜時,呢批資產嘅回報就都係6厘。 1000萬等於有60萬嘅收入,扣除利息支出45萬,等於有15萬收入。

貴客點可以得罪

因為係銀行管理嘅,佢都要收管理費,咁就可能要收番收入嘅20%作為管理費,即係3萬。

有剩嘅派畀股東,即係等於12萬,對於原先投資100萬嘅股東,即係12厘嘅回報。

買6厘風險回報嘅嘢,居然有12厘嘅回報。所以呢個如意算盤咁多人受落。因為佢理論上獨立於銀行,監管機構唔會煩。咁嘅情況下,監管機構向公眾表示做咗啲嘢,銀行同時又可以收取管理費。表面上皆大歡喜。

最壞情況,就係SIV沒有能力每4個月借新錢去還舊錢。理論上SIV收場,資產被拍賣,首先還錢給債權人,如果有剩就歸股東。

理論上搞SIV嘅銀行毋須上身,咁點解滙豐又要?可以投資落呢間SIV嘅投資者,應該係滙豐非富則貴嘅顧客,唔可以激嬲。如果滙豐唔出手救SIV,迫 SIV「賤賣」資產,餘下嘅股東會覺得滙豐出賣佢哋,怒炒滙豐。

亦都唔知借錢畀SIV嘅人,會唔會因為今次SIV唔肯還錢,而同滙豐一刀兩斷。最後就係滙豐本身擁有類似SIV裏面嘅資產,如果「賤賣」價唔靚,滙豐就要重估手上資產值。所以滙豐要攬個SIV上身,雖然不至於話引火自焚,但係都係肯定高風險,聽日再作討論。

2 comments:

  1. 孫柏文, please do more research before writing your column, I am extremely disappointed about your knowledge and I see your article on SIV today: the content has A LOT OF MISTAKES AND MISINTERPRETATION about SIV!!!
    Firstly, SIV stands for Structured Investment Vehicle, NOT Special Investment Vehicle. So you got the name of your subject wrong!
    Secondly, your comment on "管 理 費 , 咁 就 可 能 要 收 番 收 入 20% 作 為 管 理 費 " is also wrong. The management fee is usually a small amount, with a hurdle rate on performance. Investors are not stupid to pay 20% for a simple leverage play.
    Thirdly, your comments on WHO is the investors of SIV also showed your ignorance on these investments.
    Very few are wealthy individual investors. If you are in the finance industry, you should know that most are institutional investors!!
    Last, most buyers invested in rated Capital Notes, which the return are usually benchmarked against LIBOR. The sponsor, such as HSBC, Citi, and IKB, can be buyers of the equity tranche.
    SIV is basically a leverage return play.

    please please do some more research when writing your column.

    You article today is so crap!!!

    ReplyDelete
  2. yo buddy.

    Are you sure have any clue who's the shareholder of Cullinan and Asscher?

    No seriously.

    I have answered you before.

    Why is the description of who's has enough capital to invest in a SIV such an important sticking point?

    Other than they are individuals/family trusts/hedge funds or banks who are rich enough to do this?

    And after equity...

    Lets face it. HSBC doesn't have to structure its financing if it doesn't want to attract those who buys high grades only.

    You seem really pissed over descriptions which I am not wrong over.

    If i wrote in the way yuou suggested. No one would care about SIV.

    ReplyDelete