英國政府開始出售蘇格蘭皇家銀行股份
Well that took longer than it should have. The UK government has finally started selling down its 78 per cent stake in Royal Bank of Scotland. It should have started the process years ago. The shares closed at 338p on Monday. In August 2013 they were trading at around 340p, and in the intervening period there have been no dividends. About 31bn of UK taxpayers’ money has been tied up for two years in the bank, with no return. The public would have done better had its money been in a savings account, despite the woefully-low interest rates on offer. The government, it seems, is not a good allocator of investment capital.
這件事本不該花這麼長時間。英國政府終於開始出售其所持的蘇格蘭皇家銀行(RBS) 78%的股份。它本該在數年前就開始這麼做。週一，該行股票收於每股338便士。2013年8月，股價約爲每股340便士，而且在政府幹預期間未派發任何股息。約310億英鎊的英國納稅人資金被鎖定在該行股份上長達兩年，沒有獲得任何回報。如果當時把這些錢放在儲蓄賬戶裏，公衆的收益原本還會高一些，儘管銀行提供的利率低得可憐。看起來，英國政府並不擅長配置投資資本。
An earlier sale would have been beneficial all around. Lloyds Banking Groupshares have risen 11 per cent since the government started selling down its stake in September 2013. In the same period, RBS has lost 7 per cent. True, RBS has been in a much weaker position than Lloyds. But the government stake, and the real (and realised) threat of political intervention in the bank has been a drag on the share price. Freed of that risk, the shares might have performed much better. And by selling down the stake earlier, the government might have enabled RBS to raise equity on the capital markets. It has been unable to do that (imagine the outcry if the government had ended up putting more money into RBS), so it has had to sell assets such as Citizens, its US bank, instead.
更早一些出售原本對各方都有利。勞埃德銀行集團(Lloyds Banking Group)股價在英國政府2013年9月開始減持以來已上漲11%。同一時期，蘇格蘭皇家銀行的股價下跌了7%。沒錯，這與勞埃德相比，蘇格蘭皇家銀行的狀況一直疲弱得多。但政府持股以及政治干預該行的切實威脅（這種威脅最終變成了現實）一直在拖累該行股價。如果沒有這些風險，蘇格蘭皇家銀行的股價表現可能會好得多。此外，如果英國政府更早一些減持股份，蘇格蘭皇家銀行原本能夠在資本市場籌集股本。但該行一直無法這樣做（想象一下如果政府最終要向該行注入更多資金所引發的強烈抗議吧），因此它不得不轉而出售資產，例如旗下的美國銀行Citizens。
One of the reasons that the government may have been holding back is the risk of being seen to sell at a discount to the “in” price of 502p. But this argument was always a red herring. The in price is irrelevant. The government did not invest in the bank in order to make a profit, it invested in order to avoid the consequences of a collapse. With the threat of a collapse gone, there was little reason to hold on. As any reader of the small print of investment literature knows, past prices are no guide to the future. RBS shares may never return to 502p — there is no point assuming that day will eventually arrive. Better for the UK taxpayer to sell out now, and to continue doing so (via quick, cheap institutional placements, rather than lengthy, expensive public offerings) until the stake has gone altogether.
英國政府一直不啓動減持的原因之一或許是，這麼做可能會被人認爲是在折價出售（相對於每股502便士的買入價格而言）。但這種論點其實一直是在轉移人們的注意力。買入價格無關緊要。英國政府投資該行不是爲了盈利，而是爲了避免其倒閉。當倒閉威脅消失後，就沒什麼理由再繼續持有了。正如任何讀過投資宣傳材料附屬細則的人所熟知的，過去的價格對未來沒有指導意義。蘇格蘭皇家銀行的股價可能永遠回不到每股502便士，也沒有必要假設那一天終將到來。對英國納稅人來說，最好是立刻拋出並持續拋出（通過快速、低成本的機構配售，而非漫長、高成本的公開發售），直至徹底出清所持股份。
