China & hk stocks/ etfs

[d5dude]

China's retail sales in 2023 were around USD7b, compared to a GDP of USD17b. US retail sales in 2023 were also USD7b++ compared to a GDP of USD27b. From a retail spending perspective, are the Chinese spending too little compared to the GDP? This is the point the speaker in the earlier podcast tried to bring up. The US consumer household spending vs GDP was much higher because they included a lot of service payments.

Consumption is not just goods, US economy is primarily a services economy.

Why did no one bother to find out who are the shareholders of this company? I don't believe there are free lunches everywhere. End of the day, the shareholders might be the State themselves. They started with only RMB50m capital, there is no way a private company can build massive production capacity with that sort of equity. There are hundreds of other solar companies that went bust in China over the past decade, the problem with most Western-origin articles is that they picked on one issue and then imposed the same treatment throughout the rest. I read many of those Solar company's financials (not for the purpose of investing in them), but I don't see a significant amount to guarantee loans on their books.
https://cksilicon.en.made-in-china.com/

Even if we assume they are really privately held and these businessmen are so good at getting financial resources from the State, then I would say that it probably happens everywhere. Many countries dished out guaranteed loans to industries which they want to develop. Below is a list of failed loans by the US Department of Energy in supporting the renewable energy sectors. I don't think it is the complete list, you can probably find more separately.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/adaman...re-hidden-inside-bidens-instructure-proposal/

Of course many countries also engage in industrial policies now, but China pre-empted this. These subsidies go way back, like 2 decades back. Its a well-known fact that China built its industrial base with state subsidies, you dun have to believe this and I'm not going to waste my time convincing you. *shrug*

I won't be surprised if they are given cheap land and loan. But at least for the latest Xiaomi EV venture, they paid RMB800m for some new land in the Beijing area for their expansion.

https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/co...illion-yuan-site-beijing-expand-ev-production

Also, it is not only the Chinese EV companies that got government support, Tesla also got cheap loans, other tax breaks and other subsidies.

https://www.scmp.com/business/compa...ntial-rates-us161-billion-loans-chinese-banks

They have cut state subsidies for the EV industry due to overcapacity, so Xiaomi is likely not getting any subsidy, but they still benefit from the subsidies that helped built the supply chain.

So what if Tesla's Chinese factories also got cheap loans? This is irrelevant.

I don't see anything wrong. It is a good move because, at the rate they are going, the well-being of the kids will be affected. A free market doesn't equate to a free right to stress out the next generation. You need to look behind the reason why they are deleted, is it because they are making too much money or too easy money? If the parents cannot get themselves out of the vicious cycle, then the State should step in and at least they are the few ones with the guts to do that.

If only it changed anything. CNA has a very good documentary on this, watch it and you will know that things have only gotten worse, the industry has gone underground and only parents with above average means can afford private tutors.

The crux of the issue is that there is too much focus on grades in China, unless the Chinese economy can offer alternative career paths (that pay well) for students who dun do as well in school, this obsession with grades will not change. Deleting the private education industry is just a stupid and clumsy move by the CCP because they didnt fix the root of the problem, then again this is nothing new.

 

[Mephist0pheLes]

I don't see anything wrong. It is a good move because, at the rate they are going, the well-being of the kids will be affected. A free market doesn't equate to a free right to stress out the next generation. You need to look behind the reason why they are deleted, is it because they are making too much money or too easy money? If the parents cannot get themselves out of the vicious cycle, then the State should step in and at least they are the few ones with the guts to do that.

EDIT: nvm, my point is basically the same as d5ude.

 

[stanlawj]

So, President Xi is actually fighting the billionaire Soros? Is it no wonder that the Western media overwhelmingly anti-China?

 

[stanlawj]

The strange behaviour of on-shore China A-shares today (it is up) is most likely due to buying intervention by the National Team to prevent a crash disappointment like the H-shares.

 

[homer123]

boat really come back liao ah
this boat always coming and going...
safe or not

Why keep on boarding a boat that is leaking?

 

[quekkb]

The strange behaviour of on-shore China A-shares today (it is up) is most likely due to buying intervention by the National Team to prevent a crash disappointment like the H-shares.

Not sure how long they can hold it....

 

[TehSi99]

Why keep on boarding a boat that is leaking?

If you have board few months ago, now just enjoy the ride.

 

[sky1978]

If only it changed anything. CNA has a very good documentary on this, watch it and you will know that things have only gotten worse, the industry has gone underground and only parents with above average means can afford private tutors.

The crux of the issue is that there is too much focus on grades in China, unless the Chinese economy can offer alternative career paths (that pay well) for students who dun do as well in school, this obsession with grades will not change. Deleting the private education industry is just a stupid and clumsy move by the CCP because they didnt fix the root of the problem, then again this is nothing new.

I think you are smart enough to know that having a piece of law does not guarantee that no one is breaking it. The question is, how rampant is it, and the evidence points to its rampancy.

Reporters and journalists outside China can write all they want and I don't think anyone has been writing that it is very common for a lot of people to engage in such illegal activities which entails a fine of 100k. Underground illegal activity exists doesn't mean it rampantly exists. They can interview Mr A and Mr B where both can say everyone around them is doing it, but it still won't prove the point on rampancy. If someone were to interview some Mafia or Yakuza in some foreign countries and all of them say everyone around them is a gang member, it also cannot be concluded that those countries are gang-infested.

You are entitled to your belief that perhaps based on your understanding of Chinese people, they will rampantly engage in such illegal acts. Even if there are 100 or 1000 articles or videos covering the same topic, they are all one-sided without the ability to be scrutinised and substantiated. I don't think any of those reporters go into China and seek clarification from the authorities that such illegal activities are so rampant underground and that their policies are useless. I doubt those content creators can even provide 100, 1000 or a million traceable names to prove that such illegal activities are common. What most of them are doing is, they talk about underground illegal activities that may or will happen, but there has been no conclusion that the problem is rampant. Anyone smart enough will know that when they cross into the legal domain, they can only talk all they want outside a country. Once they are inside the country, reporter privilege (if it ever exists there) or even parliamentary immunity will not confer the right to anyhow say things without the ability to be substantiated. To say that a law exists and some people will break the law is a matter of common sense, But to say that a law exists and the rampancy of law-breaking is high, is an allegation which requires evidence and if it is not rampant, then it is not a big problem. As much as some might think it is naive to think this way, it is equally naive to believe/use what has been written nowadays and extrapolate it to an entire country without further evidence.

 

[sky1978]

The strange behaviour of on-shore China A-shares today (it is up) is most likely due to buying intervention by the National Team to prevent a crash disappointment like the H-shares.

Since many China A-shares are state-owned, will the National Team be required to make timely disclosure whenever they buy or sell stakes in those state-owned listed companies?

 

[stanlawj]

Since many China A-shares are state-owned, will the National Team be required to make timely disclosure whenever they buy or sell stakes in those state-owned listed companies?

I don't think they publicise their actions.

 

[boringLife-]

The strange behaviour of on-shore China A-shares today (it is up) is most likely due to buying intervention by the National Team to prevent a crash disappointment like the H-shares.

STAR50 is up 4.5% i dont think the national team needs to support it by artifically prop up prices.

I look at CNN/bloomberg in my office and see random bullcrap analyst with headlines like LIU: CHINA IS IN SERIOUS ECONOMIC TROUBLE. With these sort of news it is no wonder H shares are down

Lucky ccp filter these sort of nonsense in China

 

[1.koln]

Will china's downfall also affect us companies since a lot of them work together?

Seems like a good idea to hoard cash like Warren Buffett now and wait for the discount

 

[spoon69]

Trump & Tariff, China stonks gonna take a beating soon once we hear Tariff. Low can be Lower. Only hope here is Elon who play an important figure bet Xi & Trump

 

[d5dude]

I think you are smart enough to know that having a piece of law does not guarantee that no one is breaking it. The question is, how rampant is it, and the evidence points to its rampancy.

Reporters and journalists outside China can write all they want and I don't think anyone has been writing that it is very common for a lot of people to engage in such illegal activities which entails a fine of 100k. Underground illegal activity exists doesn't mean it rampantly exists. They can interview Mr A and Mr B where both can say everyone around them is doing it, but it still won't prove the point on rampancy. If someone were to interview some Mafia or Yakuza in some foreign countries and all of them say everyone around them is a gang member, it also cannot be concluded that those countries are gang-infested.

You are entitled to your belief that perhaps based on your understanding of Chinese people, they will rampantly engage in such illegal acts. Even if there are 100 or 1000 articles or videos covering the same topic, they are all one-sided without the ability to be scrutinised and substantiated. I don't think any of those reporters go into China and seek clarification from the authorities that such illegal activities are so rampant underground and that their policies are useless. I doubt those content creators can even provide 100, 1000 or a million traceable names to prove that such illegal activities are common. What most of them are doing is, they talk about underground illegal activities that may or will happen, but there has been no conclusion that the problem is rampant. Anyone smart enough will know that when they cross into the legal domain, they can only talk all they want outside a country. Once they are inside the country, reporter privilege (if it ever exists there) or even parliamentary immunity will not confer the right to anyhow say things without the ability to be substantiated. To say that a law exists and some people will break the law is a matter of common sense, But to say that a law exists and the rampancy of law-breaking is high, is an allegation which requires evidence and if it is not rampant, then it is not a big problem. As much as some might think it is naive to think this way, it is equally naive to believe/use what has been written nowadays and extrapolate it to an entire country without further evidence.

Bruh you sound like a triggered wumao or PRC.

I didnt say that its rampant and thats not the pt either. The pt is that there is evidence pointing to continued demand for these services because the CCP didnt get to the root of the problem. People will always find ways to get ahead as long as there are few lucrative alternative career paths in the economy. Btw CNA is not the only MSM to have reported on this, but you will probably write it off as "western media" blah blah blah.

I see no point in continuing this conversation with you, ciao.

 

[d5dude]

STAR50 is up 4.5% i dont think the national team needs to support it by artifically prop up prices.

I look at CNN/bloomberg in my office and see random bullcrap analyst with headlines like LIU: CHINA IS IN SERIOUS ECONOMIC TROUBLE. With these sort of news it is no wonder H shares are down

Lucky ccp filter these sort of nonsense in China

If only these analysts have any clout (they wish).

 

[d9_lives]

Guh.....my 700 and baba are in deep red.
Has comrade Xi been betraying me?

 

[boringLife-]

Guh.....my 700 and baba are in deep red.
Has comrade Xi been betraying me?

Trump set to appoint 2 anti pooh xi men to his team so market reaction is he will whack china 9696

 

[mooseolly]

Trump set to appoint 2 anti pooh xi men to his team so market reaction is he will whack china 9696

Good mah, they are helping people to buy the dippy dip.

 

[d5dude]

H shares and A shares have diverged greatly recently, CSI300 is still up about 8% from Oct lows but HSI is already below its Oct lows.

Looks a lot like hedge funds running a short book on HK to offset their US long exposure, this is turning into a battle ground for Trump's policies.

I think I'm going to bring forward my EIMI liquidation, also maybe bring forward my EOY rebalancing at the same time.

 

[Tiny Shrimp]

H shares and A shares have diverged greatly recently, CSI300 is still up about 8% from Oct lows but HSI is already below its Oct lows.

Looks a lot like hedge funds running a short book on HK to offset their US long exposure, this is turning into a battle ground for Trump's policies.

I think I'm going to bring forward my EIMI liquidation, also maybe bring forward my EOY rebalancing at the same time.

any chance they will get squeezed?