中國國企改革未必是投行佣金富礦
China’s move to reform its state-owned enterprises has seen more than $50bn of assets change hands in just two deals that make clear the potential scale of a transformation of the sprawling sector.
在中國改革國有企業的過程中，僅兩宗交易中就轉讓了高達500億美元的資產。這兩宗交易讓人們認識到，這個龐大部門的改革可能達到什麼規模。The two deals are the vanguard of what the region’s investment bankers hope will be a steady stream of work.in the coming years as Beijing pushes forward with reforms intended to streamline lumbering SOEs and boost economic efficiency. What is less certain, however, is how profitable it will be for the dealmakers.
這兩宗交易起到了爲大量類似交易投石問路的作用。隨着中國政府不斷推行意在提高國企效率、提高經濟效益的改革措施，亞洲投行人士希望今後幾年類似交易將爲他們帶來源源不斷的生意。但交易促成者能從中獲得多少利潤，目前還不那麼確定。
Sinopec this week agreed to sell a $17.4bn stake in its retail unit to a group of 25 mostly domestic investors. Just last month, Citic Group injected $37bn of assets into a Hong Kong-listed unit, transforming an ailing $6bn subsidiary into a $44bn financial conglomerate overnight.
本週，中石化(Sinopec)同意將174億美元的零售部門股份出售給一個由25個投資方組成的團體。這25家投資方主要由民企組成。就在上個月，中信集團(Citic Group)向其在香港上市的子公司注入了370億美元資產，一夜之間將一個問題纏身的市值60億美元的子公司變成了一個市值440億美元的金融集團。
“Will reform keep banks busy? For sure. Will it produce a rush of fees? That’s less clear,” says one senior equity banker.
一位資深股權銀行家表示：“中國的改革會讓銀行業務增多麼？當然會。會爲銀行帶來更多佣金麼？這就沒那麼明顯了。”The size of the investment banking fee pool in Asia has tended to lag banker hopes even as the region’s fast-growing emerging markets, including China, have tempted dealmakers east.
在亞洲，儘管包括中國在內的新興市場因成長迅速，使得許多交易商東來，但投行業務佣金總規模卻往往落後於銀行家的期望。Even when Asian investment banking revenue reached record levels in 2010 and 2011 as Chinese mega-listings made Hong Kong the world’s biggest IPO market, Asia accounted for, at best, 17 per cent of the global fee pool, according to Dealogic. On average over the past decade, it has produced 12 per cent of the pie.
2010年和2011年，中國大量上市活動曾令香港變成全球最大首次公開招股(IPO)市場，當時亞洲投行業務營收曾達到創紀錄水平。根據Dealogic的數據，即使在當時，亞洲佣金總規模佔全球佣金總額的比例最多也只有17%。過去10年來，亞洲所佔份額平均只有12%。Citic and Sinopec offer two different approaches to reform. The first was in effect a reverse listing, while Sinopec was a partial spin-off. Bankers expect these will roughly bookend the formats adopted.
中信和中石化提供了兩種不同的國企改革方式。前者其實是一種反向上市，而中石化則是一種部分分拆操作。銀行業人士預計，這兩種操作大致包括了准許採用的改制模式。“There are some SOEs with listed subsidiaries and then there are those where the main entity is already listed, but with subsidiaries that may offer untapped value,” says Mille Cheng, co-head of Asia Pacific equity capital markets at Morgan Stanley, who expects that the process will take a while to evolve. “A lot of them are now exploring what they might want to do.”
摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)亞太股權資本市場部門共同主管Mille Cheng表示：“部分國企的情況是子公司已經上市，部分國企是母公司已經上市。不過，子公司上市的情況下，改制可能會有利可圖。”目前，Mille Cheng預計國企的改制過程需要過一陣纔會發展起來。“許多國企都在探索他們想要怎麼做。”Fees for the Sinopec deal are still being finalised. The oil major was advised by Bank of America Merrill Lynch, CICC, Citic Securities and Deutsche Bank.
中石化交易的佣金仍未最終敲定。爲這家石油巨頭提供諮詢服務的包括美銀美林(Bank of America Merrill Lynch)、中金公司(CICC)、中信證券(Citic Securities)以及德意志銀行(Deutsche Bank)。None of the four would comment on the deal. However, China’s SOEs are known for using their size and importance to push back hard on fees. Banks will also typically accept lower fees on deals like this in the hope they will win a leading place on any IPO – as expected will happen in the Sinopec deal – down the line.
這四家銀行都不願置評這一交易。不過，衆所周知中國國有企業很善於利用它們的規模及重要地位，大力壓低佣金規模。而對於這樣的交易，銀行往往也會接受較低的佣金，希望能在所有IPO過程中都贏得領導地位。中石化的交易中預計也會出現這種局面。Said one person involved in the Sinopec deal: “To be honest, the more important thing is the eventual listing. I think all the banks see it as about that.”
一位參與中石化交易的人士表示：“實話說，更重要的是公司最終的上市。我覺得所有銀行看待這個問題都是這樣想的。”Listing fees in Hong Kong vary. Banks may earn perhaps 3 per cent of the amount raised on smaller, private companies but something nearer 2 per cent on bigger deals. New York fees, by contrast, are much higher, at more than 5 per cent on most deals – and there are usually fewer banks splitting the fee pool.
在香港，上市佣金因事制宜。規模較小的民企上市過程中，銀行可能會收取募得資金的3%，而對於較大規模的交易，這一比例大約爲2%左右。相比之下，紐約的佣金要高多了，多數交易中的佣金比例都在5%以上，而且分享佣金池的銀行通常也要少一些。In Asia, however, listings have an outsized importance to the overall investment banking fee pool, meaning they are worth chasing. About 40 per cent of the industry’s fees come from listings, compared with an average of a quarter globally.
然而，在亞洲，上市業務在投行業務總佣金中佔有極大分量，也就是說亞洲投行對上市業務的偏好是有原因的。該行業40%的佣金來自上市業務，相比之下全球這一比例只有四分之一。Some bankers, however, caution against assuming the spin-off and list pattern would hold true this time round.
不過，部分銀行家警告說，不要想當然的認爲這次的分拆上市模式能推而廣之。“The ultimate goal is not listing in itself. The government wants these companies to be more mature in how they operate and to have a major presence in international financial markets. This will happen in many different ways,” says Eugene Qian, head of China banking at Citi.
花旗(Citi)中國銀行業務主管錢於君(Eugene Qian)表示：“最終目標不是上市本身。中國政府希望這些企業能夠在運營方面更加成熟，並希望他們能夠全面走向國際金融市場。許多不同途徑都可以實現這一目標。”If a steady stream of IPOs fails to materialise, that poses a risk for bankers’ fee hopes.
如果源源不斷的IPO無法實現，投行人士對佣金的期望就可能落空。Only Citic Securities and Morgan Stanley got official credit for Citic’s deal and other largely internal restructurings are likely to produce similarly limited work. Unless, of course, investment bankers manage to persuade SOEs that divestments or spin-offs should be part of those deals, too.
只有中信證券和摩根士丹利在中信的交易中得到了中國官方的認可，而其他在很大程度上算內部重組的交易很可能也不會帶來太多業務。當然，除非投行人士能成功令國有企業相信，資產剝離及分拆也應該被算作此類交易的一部分。
