作为金融中心，香港在过去10年的成长令人瞩目，说它担心自己的未来，听起来似乎有些奇怪――尤其是考虑到香港去年成功地击败纽约和伦敦，摘得首次公开发行(IPO)交易的全球桂冠。
然而，目前在香港，人们对上海的崛起明显感到紧张和不安。在中国这个全球最具活力的经济体，上海已经是一个国内主要金融中心，它毫不掩饰自己恢复昔日国际地位的渴望。对此，香港的担心是如此明显――或者说传闻如此，以至于香港的要员游说北京方面，要求推迟或取消上海证券交易所设立国际板的计划。上海的国际板可能会吸引目前在港上市的"红筹"公司（及其它公司）前往上市。香港许多人担心，大型内地国企在港上市业务将有所下降――过去10年，正是这些企业推动香港股市出现了可观的增长。
我认为，这些担心有些过头。中国内地证券市场的日益成熟，加之中国规模庞大的国内储蓄，自然会使上海成为"中国的纽约"。香港应接受这一现实，并为己所用。比如，鼓励企业在其国际板两地上市。香港以往的长处一直在于，它能够灵活地适应不断变化的环境。
在证券领域，这意味着开发新的服务和产品，配合中国市场的发展。例如，20世纪90年代，当觉察到北京决策层希望通过市场规律重组国有企业后，香港为股市创造了新的动力。香港帮助提供了一套通过上市来解决问题的方案，而上市必然要求企业遵循国际投资者所要求的原则。目前，香港股市2.3万亿美元市值的60%、成交量的70%都来自于内地企业。目前香港股市的成交量，是1990年的50倍，这是惊人的增长。
香港如何才能再现这一辉煌？我想强调，香港在以下三个方面最能够满足内地日益复杂的需求。第一，开发以人民币计价的金融产品。中国未来几年的目标之一，是逐步实现人民币的国际化。香港是中国大陆和全球货币市场之间一个天然的"缓冲带"， 大陆可以在此试点。中国政府已经采取了一些措施，例如选择香港作为第一个境外人民币贸易结算中心，以及在港发行人民币计价的债券等。
其次，香港应致力成为衍生金融产品和大宗商品交易的风险管理中心。香港拥有大批具备国际风险管理经验的金融市场专业人才，同时拥有经受住了时间考验的清算及结算体系，以及强大而成熟的银行业体系。目前，内地企业若要进行跨境交易，要前往芝加哥和伦敦的商品交易所。使用中国自己的交易所，并在香港进行结算，肯定会更好，这将为它们的国际对手方提供必要的信心。
第三，在资产管理和财富管理领域，还存在更多的机会。香港资产管理业信誉卓著、成熟且高度发达。目前已经管理着7500亿美元的投资。中国内地的基金管理业仍处于萌芽阶段。中国需要将其投资渠道多元化，以缓解巨额外汇储备和国内储蓄带来的压力――它们有可能催生泡沫。对于香港的资产及财富管理公司而言，在这其中发挥建设性作用、并赚取利润的空间显而易见。
除以上三种方式之外，香港还有一些其它方法，可使它从内地自然的沿革中获益。因此，上海的崛起，远不会威胁香港作为金融中心的未来，反而有助于确立香港的这种地位。
本文作者为香港交易所前任主席
译者/功文
http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001032459
Hong Kong has grown so dramatically as a financial centre over the past 10 years that it seems odd for it to be worrying about its future. Especially so, one would have thought, after its triumph last year when it beat both New York and London to host the largest volume of initial public offerings in the world.
Yet there is a palpable nervousness in Hong Kong these days about the rise of Shanghai. Already the main domestic financial centre in the world's most dynamic economy, Shanghai has an unconcealed aspiration to regain its position on the international stage. So palpable is the concern that � or so it is rumoured � important people in Hong Kong lobbied Beijing to delay or cancel plans for the Shanghai stock exchange to establish an international board. Such a board might attract (among others) "red chip" companies currently listed in Hong Kong. Many people in the territory fear a fall-off in the flow of listings in Hong Kong by large state-owned enterprises (SOEs), precisely the companies that have propelled the impressive growth of the territory's equity market over the past decade.
In my view, such concerns are overdone. The increasing maturity of China's domestic securities market, combined with the huge scale of China's domestic savings, make it natural for Shanghai to become the "New York of China". Hong Kong should accept this and use it to its advantage, for example by encouraging dual listings on its international board. The territory's strength in the past has been its flexibility and ability to adapt to changing circumstances.
In the field of securities, this has meant developing services and products that complement the evolution of China's markets. In the 1990s, for example, Hong Kong created a new impetus for its equity market by perceiving what policymakers in Beijing wanted to achieve � the restructuring of SOEs through market discipline. Hong Kong helped to provide a solution via listings which, of necessity, required companies to conform to the disciplines required by international investors. Now 60 per cent of Hong Kong's US$2,300bn market capitalisation and 70 per cent of its turnover � the latter an astonishing 50 times what it was in 1990 � is represented by mainland-based enterprises.
How can Hong Kong repeat the trick? I would highlight three areas where the territory can best meet the mainland's increasingly sophisticated needs. First, the development of renminbi-denominated financial products. One of China's objectives over the coming years is gradually to internationalise its currency. Hong Kong is a natural "buffer zone" between China and global currency markets in which pilot programmes can be conducted. Some such steps have already been taken, for example the selection of Hong Kong as the first offshore renminbi settlement centre for trade finance, and the territory's issuance of renminbi-denominated bonds.
Second, Hong Kong should seek to establish itself as a risk-management centre for the trading of derivative financial products and commodities. The territory has a large body of financial market professionals with international risk-management experience, together with clearing and settlement systems that have stood the test of time and a strong and sophisticated banking system. Mainland-based enterprises presently go to commodity exchanges in Chicago or London when they want to undertake cross-border transactions. Surely it would be better to use China's own exchanges and settle trades in Hong Kong, which would provide the necessary confidence to their international counterparties.
Third, there are further opportunities in asset and wealth management. Hong Kong's asset management industry is well-established, mature and sophisticated. It already manages US$750bn of investments. The fund management industry on the mainland is still at a nascent stage. China needs to diversify its investment channels to relieve the pressures created by high foreign currency reserves and domestic savings, which risk creating bubbles. The scope for Hong Kong-based asset and wealth management firms to play a constructive and profitable role is obvious.
These are only three of the several ways in which Hong Kong can turn China's natural evolution to its advantage. Shanghai's rise, far from threatening its future as a financial centre, should help seal it.
The writer is a former chairman of the Hong Kong stock exchange
没有评论:
发表评论