Mar 5th 2009
From The Economist print edition
Is HSBC's $17.7 billion rights issue a sign of weakness or of strength?
匯豐177億美元的增股是好還是壞呢？
THERE are two radically different tales doing the rounds about HSBC, Europe's biggest lender by market value. The first says that HSBC, deep down, is still an emerging-markets operation run by rugged types who disdain the sorcery of modern finance. Under the temporary grip of an evil spell in 2003 they bought Household, an American consumer-credit firm that then haemorrhaged losses. On March 2nd they snapped out of it. HSBC's chairman acknowledged that it was 「an acquisition we wish we had not undertaken」, wrote off its cost and promised to run down its book of dodgy loans. Having opened its heart, HSBC felt able to lower its dividend and raise its core tier-one capital ratio to 8.5%, above those of JPMorgan Chase (6.4%) and Santander (7.2%), two more of the Western world's biggest banks also vying for the title of the safest one.
對於歐洲市值最大的借貸商，匯豐銀行來說，一直以來有兩個風馬牛不相及的故事圍繞著它，第一個故事是說：實際上匯豐仍然在新興市場裡運營一個不論是誰都會放棄的現代金融的類似巫術般的困難類型的項目。在2003年那段黑暗的時期，他們購買了房產，是一個連美國消費者信貸公司都蒙受巨大損失的項目。在3月2 日，他們東山再起，匯豐主席意識到「這是我們希望，卻不可能得到的東西」，註銷了其成本，並且答應減少不良貸款。事實上，匯豐能夠降低他的紅利和提升其核心一級資本充足率至8.5%，高於摩根大通的6.4%和桑坦德銀行的7.2%。更多西方國家的最大的銀行們都在競爭最安全銀行的名號。
Against this there is a horror story. It says that HSBC's definition of capital excludes mark-to-market losses on asset-backed securities (ABS). Furthermore, particularly demanding critics say that it also excludes mark-to-market losses on its loan book. Like almost all banks, HSBC carries these at book value and impairs as customers default. However, include both these items and the core tier-one ratio would drop to just 2%. Treating loan books on the same basis, JPMorgan would be at 5% and many other banks would be insolvent.
（除了上面提到的故事），這裡有一個恐怖故事，據說匯豐的資本定義是不包含資產證券化過程中的市值損失。此外苛刻的評論家們還說資產定義也不包括貸款項目的市值損失。和幾乎大多數的銀行一樣，匯豐銀行將這些損失和貸款人的違約損失一併入賬。然而包括這些項目和核心一級比率會降至2%，影響到貸款項目的相同基準，摩根大通大約5%，許多其他銀行則相繼破產
This would suggest that HSBC is in fact poorly capitalised, and needs to raise even more equity. The alternative, advocated by, among others, Knight Vinke, an activist investor, would be to cut loose Household, which HSBC does not legally guarantee and which accounts for just over half of the additional mark-to-market losses. Household's credit spreads are much higher than HSBC's, suggesting that investors think this is possible, despite HSBC's verbal assurances to the contrary.
這暗示匯豐事實上是資本不充裕的，需要提升股本。在很多的投資者中有一位叫Knight Vinke的提出一種方法，就是割斷匯豐不能合法的提供擔保並且也是佔據額外市值損失高達一半的房產項目。儘管匯豐不能提供書面擔保，投資者認為房產的信貸差額高於匯豐估計的可能性很大。
Which story is right? Given the risk of litigation, the reputational hit and the fact that HSBC has itself loaned Household some $13.5 billion, its mark-to-market loss would have to get a lot worse before HSBC was prepared to let it default. And like many banks, HSBC argues that there is at least some chance mark-to-market losses overstate the ultimate impairments it will face. The ABS loss has been very volatile, doubling in six months and stands at ten times HSBC's 「stress test」 estimate of the probable hit. The mark-to-market loss on Household's loan book is double what optimistic analysts think the likely ultimate impairment will be.
那麼那個是對的呢？在給定的法律風險下，名聲的打擊和匯豐借出房貸，即市值損失高達135億美元之巨這一事實所造成的惡劣影響，以致其不如讓這些借貸者違約所產生的影響要來的小。和很多的銀行一樣，匯豐認為至少有一些可能使市值損失誇大了他所面臨的損失。6個月內翻倍，或在匯豐壓力測試中的可能損失的估計值的10倍，都表明資產證券化的損失是不穩定的。房貸項目的市值損失是樂觀分析師他們估計的可能最大損失值的2倍。
Pleading that fair-value accounting is cruel is hardly unique, but what makes HSBC's position more credible than most is that it has the capacity to wait and see. Its funding position is excellent with deposits exceeding loans, reducing its dependence on wholesale markets. And the core business continues to generate lots of pre-provision earnings. If spread out over several years, the bank could absorb the hit from Household implied by the mark to-market valuation without damaging its capital.
拜公允價值會計嚴格之所賜，這幾乎不是唯一的。，匯豐銀行的地位比大多數銀行更可靠的原因是他有能力觀望。他的資金條件的優勢是儲蓄大於借貸，這就減少了對批發市場的依賴，而且他的核心業務不斷的產生大量的預先規定的收益。如果儲蓄和借貸之間的差額已經持續好幾年的話銀行就能吸收來自房貸市值損失的衝擊，從而避免他的資本受損。
Indeed the real moral of the tale is different. Compared with other banks HSBC is protected by its big deposit base and its profitability. It looks therefore as if investors will back the rights issue. Others do not have even that comfort.
的確，故事的真實道德是不同的。與其他銀行不同，匯豐受其龐大的儲蓄和高盈利業務的保護，避免損失。因此這看起來似乎投資者要支持增股。其他銀行就沒有這麼好的待遇了。
翻譯：http://ecocn.blogbus.com/
出處：www.economist.com
From The Economist print edition
Is HSBC's $17.7 billion rights issue a sign of weakness or of strength?
匯豐177億美元的增股是好還是壞呢？
THERE are two radically different tales doing the rounds about HSBC, Europe's biggest lender by market value. The first says that HSBC, deep down, is still an emerging-markets operation run by rugged types who disdain the sorcery of modern finance. Under the temporary grip of an evil spell in 2003 they bought Household, an American consumer-credit firm that then haemorrhaged losses. On March 2nd they snapped out of it. HSBC's chairman acknowledged that it was 「an acquisition we wish we had not undertaken」, wrote off its cost and promised to run down its book of dodgy loans. Having opened its heart, HSBC felt able to lower its dividend and raise its core tier-one capital ratio to 8.5%, above those of JPMorgan Chase (6.4%) and Santander (7.2%), two more of the Western world's biggest banks also vying for the title of the safest one.
對於歐洲市值最大的借貸商，匯豐銀行來說，一直以來有兩個風馬牛不相及的故事圍繞著它，第一個故事是說：實際上匯豐仍然在新興市場裡運營一個不論是誰都會放棄的現代金融的類似巫術般的困難類型的項目。在2003年那段黑暗的時期，他們購買了房產，是一個連美國消費者信貸公司都蒙受巨大損失的項目。在3月2 日，他們東山再起，匯豐主席意識到「這是我們希望，卻不可能得到的東西」，註銷了其成本，並且答應減少不良貸款。事實上，匯豐能夠降低他的紅利和提升其核心一級資本充足率至8.5%，高於摩根大通的6.4%和桑坦德銀行的7.2%。更多西方國家的最大的銀行們都在競爭最安全銀行的名號。
Against this there is a horror story. It says that HSBC's definition of capital excludes mark-to-market losses on asset-backed securities (ABS). Furthermore, particularly demanding critics say that it also excludes mark-to-market losses on its loan book. Like almost all banks, HSBC carries these at book value and impairs as customers default. However, include both these items and the core tier-one ratio would drop to just 2%. Treating loan books on the same basis, JPMorgan would be at 5% and many other banks would be insolvent.
（除了上面提到的故事），這裡有一個恐怖故事，據說匯豐的資本定義是不包含資產證券化過程中的市值損失。此外苛刻的評論家們還說資產定義也不包括貸款項目的市值損失。和幾乎大多數的銀行一樣，匯豐銀行將這些損失和貸款人的違約損失一併入賬。然而包括這些項目和核心一級比率會降至2%，影響到貸款項目的相同基準，摩根大通大約5%，許多其他銀行則相繼破產
This would suggest that HSBC is in fact poorly capitalised, and needs to raise even more equity. The alternative, advocated by, among others, Knight Vinke, an activist investor, would be to cut loose Household, which HSBC does not legally guarantee and which accounts for just over half of the additional mark-to-market losses. Household's credit spreads are much higher than HSBC's, suggesting that investors think this is possible, despite HSBC's verbal assurances to the contrary.
這暗示匯豐事實上是資本不充裕的，需要提升股本。在很多的投資者中有一位叫Knight Vinke的提出一種方法，就是割斷匯豐不能合法的提供擔保並且也是佔據額外市值損失高達一半的房產項目。儘管匯豐不能提供書面擔保，投資者認為房產的信貸差額高於匯豐估計的可能性很大。
Which story is right? Given the risk of litigation, the reputational hit and the fact that HSBC has itself loaned Household some $13.5 billion, its mark-to-market loss would have to get a lot worse before HSBC was prepared to let it default. And like many banks, HSBC argues that there is at least some chance mark-to-market losses overstate the ultimate impairments it will face. The ABS loss has been very volatile, doubling in six months and stands at ten times HSBC's 「stress test」 estimate of the probable hit. The mark-to-market loss on Household's loan book is double what optimistic analysts think the likely ultimate impairment will be.
那麼那個是對的呢？在給定的法律風險下，名聲的打擊和匯豐借出房貸，即市值損失高達135億美元之巨這一事實所造成的惡劣影響，以致其不如讓這些借貸者違約所產生的影響要來的小。和很多的銀行一樣，匯豐認為至少有一些可能使市值損失誇大了他所面臨的損失。6個月內翻倍，或在匯豐壓力測試中的可能損失的估計值的10倍，都表明資產證券化的損失是不穩定的。房貸項目的市值損失是樂觀分析師他們估計的可能最大損失值的2倍。
Pleading that fair-value accounting is cruel is hardly unique, but what makes HSBC's position more credible than most is that it has the capacity to wait and see. Its funding position is excellent with deposits exceeding loans, reducing its dependence on wholesale markets. And the core business continues to generate lots of pre-provision earnings. If spread out over several years, the bank could absorb the hit from Household implied by the mark to-market valuation without damaging its capital.
拜公允價值會計嚴格之所賜，這幾乎不是唯一的。，匯豐銀行的地位比大多數銀行更可靠的原因是他有能力觀望。他的資金條件的優勢是儲蓄大於借貸，這就減少了對批發市場的依賴，而且他的核心業務不斷的產生大量的預先規定的收益。如果儲蓄和借貸之間的差額已經持續好幾年的話銀行就能吸收來自房貸市值損失的衝擊，從而避免他的資本受損。
Indeed the real moral of the tale is different. Compared with other banks HSBC is protected by its big deposit base and its profitability. It looks therefore as if investors will back the rights issue. Others do not have even that comfort.
的確，故事的真實道德是不同的。與其他銀行不同，匯豐受其龐大的儲蓄和高盈利業務的保護，避免損失。因此這看起來似乎投資者要支持增股。其他銀行就沒有這麼好的待遇了。
翻譯：http://ecocn.blogbus.com/
出處：www.economist.com
全站熱搜
留言列表
