評論
打印
The directive to know your counter-party can be hard to fulfil in China. As the government’s anti-corruption purge has spread into the private sector, even standardbearers for Chinese industry and finance are no longer in the clear. The ripples may be affecting their ability to do business.
了解交易對手方的指令在中國可能難以執(zhí)行。中國政府的反腐敗斗爭已波及私營部門，連中國工業(yè)和金融界的頭面人物也難幸免。由此掀起的波瀾可能會影響他們做生意的能力。
Yesterday Fosun International, the Chinese investment conglomerate, said it would no longer buy Phoenix, the Israeli insurance company. The deal, at $462m, was not large by Fosun’s standards — the company spent more than $30bn in 2014 and 2015 to purchase Club Med, the French tour operator, and Cirque du Soleil, the Canadian entertainment group. With net debt of $9bn and net debt to equity of 63 per cent, the sum to be paid for Phoenix was manageable.
中國企業(yè)集團(tuán)復(fù)星國際(Fosun International)近日表示，將終止收購以色列保險公司Phoenix。這筆價值4.62億美元的交易按復(fù)星的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)規(guī)模并不算大——該公司在2014年和2015年斥資逾300億美元收購了法國旅游運營商地中海集團(tuán)(Club Med)和加拿大娛樂集團(tuán)太陽劇團(tuán)(Cirque du Soleil)。對于凈負(fù)債90億美元、凈債務(wù)與股本之比為63%的復(fù)星，購買Phoenix的支出還是可控的。
The cancellation is significant for other reasons, though. It is the second time Fosun has stepped away from a deal in three months — and in its targeted financial sector. In December, Fosun withdrew from the battle to buy Kleinwort Benson, the merchant bank. Last month, it sold its 29 per cent stake in the bank to Oddo. To be fair, Fosun may not have wished to compete against a bid that was 10 per cent higher, and it made a profit on the sale of its stake. Yet for a company that models itself on the acquisitive style of Warren Buffett, the axing of deals sits awkwardly. And competition did not deter Fosun from buying Club Med — to win that battle, Fosun paid 45 per cent more than its initial offer price.
但是，此次放棄收購因為其它原因不尋常。這是3個月來復(fù)星第二次在收購交易中半途而廢——而且都在它有意收購的金融領(lǐng)域。去年12月，復(fù)星撤出了對商人銀行克萊沃特-本森(Kleinwort Benson)的競購戰(zhàn)。上月，它將該行29%的股份賣給了法國的奧多(Oddo)。客觀來講，復(fù)星有可能不想與高出10%的出價展開競爭，而且出售所持股份還賺了一筆。然而，對于一家效仿沃倫·巴菲特(Warren Buffett)收購風(fēng)格的公司來說，退出這些交易顯得很不自然。何況，競爭并沒有讓復(fù)星放棄收購地中海集團(tuán)——為了贏得那場勝利，復(fù)星比最初報價多付了45%。
Market conditions are different; Fosun stipulates that global turmoil was a factor behind the decision to step back from Phoenix. Still, one might think that Mr Buffett’s mantra to “be greedy when others are fearful” might lend more courage to a true disciple of the Sage of Omaha.
市場條件有所不同；復(fù)星稱，全球動蕩是其放棄收購Phoenix的原因之一。然而，人們也許會認(rèn)為，巴菲特那句“在別人害怕時要貪婪”的箴言，應(yīng)該會給“奧馬哈先知”的真正弟子帶來更多勇氣吧。
More informative may be Israeli press reports suggesting that the regulator there did not want the deal to go through. There could be numerous reasons for this, but the most obvious is uncertainty. Last DecemberGuo Guangchang, Fosun chairman, was detained, purportedly to help judicial authorities with their “investigations”. In China, this can mean he was under suspicion himself. Although Mr Guo was subsequently released and permitted to travel overseas, the episode remains shrouded in mystery. Unless the truth can be known, Fosun’s ambition may be curtailed.
更具信息量的說法，可能是以色列媒體報道中所暗示的：該國監(jiān)管機構(gòu)不愿放行這筆交易。這可能有很多原因，但最明顯的原因是不確定性。去年12月，復(fù)星董事長郭廣昌曾經(jīng)失聯(lián)，據(jù)稱是為了協(xié)助司法機關(guān)“調(diào)查”。在中國，這也可能意味著他自己也是嫌疑人。雖然后來郭被釋放，還獲準(zhǔn)出國，但那件事的具體情節(jié)仍籠罩在神秘之中。除非讓世人了解真相，否則復(fù)星的雄心可能難以實現(xiàn)。
