Chinese companies tweak with overseas markets
Released on 2011-10-21 17:54 | readings
全球经济逐步复苏的背景下,中国企业海外上市也日渐活跃。截止到2011年1月11日，中国在美上市企业12个月市盈率中位数处于7.3的低值，该数据低于罗素2000指数公司市盈率中位数20.2。而中国在美上市企业12个月平均销售额为29.4%，盈利增长是38.7%，分别高于罗素2000指数公司3.38%和14%的数额。美国资本市场明显估计错误。根据《中国经济新闻》以往的数字统计，2009年就有77家中国企业在海外9个市场上市,合计融资271.39亿美元。上市公司数量比上年增加40家，融资额增加了2.92倍。
二者都可以表明，中国企业与海外投资者之间的信息沟通还存在很大的问题。由于地理位置、市场、文化和制度等方面的差异，海外投资者关系管理面临着更多的复杂性。要去理解一个与本国文化完全不同的市场，透彻洞悉政府职能、政策、与各方的利益等，都会让海外投资者感到障碍重重。海外市场的磨合主要面临以下几个问题：
第一，控制权弱：投资者对中国企业的信誉价值和银行业的健康程度抱有一定程度的担忧，这导致一些国外投资者在估测中国企业的发展时会采取谨慎的态度，容易造成控制权的削弱。上市的实质是出让公司股权来获得投资人的资本，这直接导致原有股东对公司持股比例下降，对公司的控制能力降低。很多时候上市公司不得不迎合股东的意愿改变公司的发展策略甚至发展方向。搜狐董事局主席张朝阳曾公开抱怨“为了向股东交差去做什么短信业务，忘了网民的真正需求”。
第二，成本高：中国企业海外上市不仅是融资的过程，更是付出成本的过程。相关数据显示，上市后的维护费用美国最高，占其募集资金总额10％以上，香港占8％，中国内地不超过5％。海外上市的高额费用增加了公司的运作成本，赴海外上市公司还需精打细算。如2007年9月德国化工巨头巴斯夫的总裁贺斌杰宣布从纽交所退市， “节约成本”以帮助巴斯夫每年节约500万欧元的费用。而且，由于海外的投资者对中国的本土企业不够熟悉，中国企业很难以较高的价格发行股票，在国内IPO的市盈率一般为海外市场的两倍左右。
第三，信息障碍。国外市场对企业透明度及公司治理有着严格的规定，许多中国公司在财报发布和运营情况预测时，还达不到海外市场本土公司披露的水平，这导致了很多潜在的问题。网易CEO丁磊认为美国资本市场在信息披露方面过于苛求，如需详细披露财务报表，包括每款游戏的营收，玩家数量的增减情况，甚至公司的战略安排等。上市公司不得不花费大量的资金和精力来应对，处理不当，就会引发调查和诉讼，公司股价受到牵连。如果最后诉讼失败，后果更加不堪设想。数据显示，在纽约上市的香港和内地公司受到过集体诉讼的比例高达11.5%，在纳斯达克这一比例更是高达17.2%。
大成律师事务所高级合伙人、资本市场法律事务专家王汉齐律师认为不少中国企业“交易量小，流动性不足，这对大型投资机构缺乏吸引力”并且“公司距离投资者较远，透明度不高，普遍被证券研究机构所忽略，也被投资者认为风险过大。”从而导致中国在海外上市的大量中小企业被边缘化。
对于中国企业来说，应该采取更加积极的方式与投资者沟通，而不是仅仅依赖传统的财报发布和投资者大会的方式来介绍公司情况。
Under the backdrop of economic recovery worldwide, Chinese companies are also brisk to go public abroad. By January 11, 2011, China's listed companies in the United States have so low a median price-earnings ratio as 7.3 in 12 months that is even lower than 20.2 as the median price-earnings ratio of Russell 2000 Index. The listed companies have an average sale of 29.4% with the profit growth by 38.7%. Both are respectively higher than the 3.38% and 14% of Russell 2000 Index. The U.S. capital market obviously miscalculated. According to “China Economic News”, some 77 Chinese enterprises got listed on 9 overseas markets in 2009, raising a total of US$27.139 billion. The number of companies listed overseas in 2009 increased 40 over that in 2008, and the amount of capital raised by 2.92 times.
Both can show that there is still big communicative problem between Chinese companies and overseas investors. Due to the differences between geographical locations, markets, cultures and systems, the foreign investors’ relationship management faces more complexity. To understand a different market in its own culture, and thoroughly figure out the government functions, policies, and interests of all parties, the foreign investors have just started a difficult journey. Tweaking with overseas markets usually has the following problems:
Firstly, the control is weak: investors have a certain degree of concern about the value and reputation of Chinese companies and the health of the banking industry, which led to the adoption of cautious approach for some foreign investors to estimate the development of Chinese companies, likely to cause weakening control. The essence of companies going public is selling equities to obtain the investors’ capital, which led directly to the equity ratio of existing shareholders of the company decline, thus weakening the original control. Sometimes the companies have to cater to the wishes of shareholders to change the company's development strategy or direction. Zhang-Chao-Yang, the Chairman of the Board of SOHU has publicly complained that "in order to please the shareholders by providing text messages service, they forget the real needs of internet users."
Secondly, the costs are high: It’s not only the financing process for Chinese companies going public in overseas markets, but also the process of paying bills. The relevant data shows that maintenance costs after the listing has been the highest in U.S. accounting for more than 10% of its total raised funds, while the same cost accounts for 8% in Hong Kong and for no more than 5% in Mainland China. The high costs of overseas listing caused the companies’ operating costs arise and the companies need careful planning to go overseas. For example, in September 2007 German chemical giant BASF’s president Hambrecht announced delisting from the NYSE, "saving costs " to help BASF save 500 million EUROs annually. Moreover, since foreign investors are not familiar with China's local companies, it is difficult to issue shares at higher prices and the domestic IPO price-earnings ratio is generally double the ratio of overseas market.
Thirdly, there are information barriers: since the rules governing corporate transparency and management are very strict in foreign markets, many Chinese companies still can’t achieve the level of disclosure as required while releasing earnings and forecasting operations, which led to a lot of potential problems. Ding Lei, the CEO of NETEASE, thinks the U.S. capital markets are too strict with information disclosure, such as the disclosure of detailed financial statements including the revenues of each game, the increase or decrease of players, and even the company's strategic arrangements are mandatory. The Listed companies have to spend a lot of money and effort to handle everything properly. The mishandling can lead to the investigation and litigation, which will impact the company stock price. If the last litigation fails, the consequences can be even more disastrous. Data shows that the Hong Kong and Mainland companies listed in New York going through collective action accounted for 11.5%, and the ratio is even higher in NASDAQ as 17.2%.
Wang Han QI, the senior partner of DA Cheng Law Firm and the law expert of China’s capital market, said that many Chinese companies have "small trading volume with a lack of liquidity, which is not attractive for large institutional investors" and "the companies far away from investors with a low transparency are usually ignored by securities research institutions and have been considered risky by investors. " which leads to a large number of overseas-listed Chinese SMEs are marginalized.
The Chinese companies should take more proactive approaches to communicate with investors, rather than introduce the companies solely relying on traditional approaches to release earnings and hold investor conference.
全球经济逐步复苏的背景下,中国企业海外上市也日渐活跃。截止到2011年1月11日，中国在美上市企业12个月市盈率中位数处于7.3的低值，该数据低于罗素2000指数公司市盈率中位数20.2。而中国在美上市企业12个月平均销售额为29.4%，盈利增长是38.7%，分别高于罗素2000指数公司3.38%和14%的数额。美国资本市场明显估计错误。根据《中国经济新闻》以往的数字统计，2009年就有77家中国企业在海外9个市场上市,合计融资271.39亿美元。上市公司数量比上年增加40家，融资额增加了2.92倍。
二者都可以表明，中国企业与海外投资者之间的信息沟通还存在很大的问题。由于地理位置、市场、文化和制度等方面的差异，海外投资者关系管理面临着更多的复杂性。要去理解一个与本国文化完全不同的市场，透彻洞悉政府职能、政策、与各方的利益等，都会让海外投资者感到障碍重重。海外市场的磨合主要面临以下几个问题：
第一，控制权弱：投资者对中国企业的信誉价值和银行业的健康程度抱有一定程度的担忧，这导致一些国外投资者在估测中国企业的发展时会采取谨慎的态度，容易造成控制权的削弱。上市的实质是出让公司股权来获得投资人的资本，这直接导致原有股东对公司持股比例下降，对公司的控制能力降低。很多时候上市公司不得不迎合股东的意愿改变公司的发展策略甚至发展方向。搜狐董事局主席张朝阳曾公开抱怨“为了向股东交差去做什么短信业务，忘了网民的真正需求”。
第二，成本高：中国企业海外上市不仅是融资的过程，更是付出成本的过程。相关数据显示，上市后的维护费用美国最高，占其募集资金总额10％以上，香港占8％，中国内地不超过5％。海外上市的高额费用增加了公司的运作成本，赴海外上市公司还需精打细算。如2007年9月德国化工巨头巴斯夫的总裁贺斌杰宣布从纽交所退市， “节约成本”以帮助巴斯夫每年节约500万欧元的费用。而且，由于海外的投资者对中国的本土企业不够熟悉，中国企业很难以较高的价格发行股票，在国内IPO的市盈率一般为海外市场的两倍左右。
第三，信息障碍。国外市场对企业透明度及公司治理有着严格的规定，许多中国公司在财报发布和运营情况预测时，还达不到海外市场本土公司披露的水平，这导致了很多潜在的问题。网易CEO丁磊认为美国资本市场在信息披露方面过于苛求，如需详细披露财务报表，包括每款游戏的营收，玩家数量的增减情况，甚至公司的战略安排等。上市公司不得不花费大量的资金和精力来应对，处理不当，就会引发调查和诉讼，公司股价受到牵连。如果最后诉讼失败，后果更加不堪设想。数据显示，在纽约上市的香港和内地公司受到过集体诉讼的比例高达11.5%，在纳斯达克这一比例更是高达17.2%。
大成律师事务所高级合伙人、资本市场法律事务专家王汉齐律师认为不少中国企业“交易量小，流动性不足，这对大型投资机构缺乏吸引力”并且“公司距离投资者较远，透明度不高，普遍被证券研究机构所忽略，也被投资者认为风险过大。”从而导致中国在海外上市的大量中小企业被边缘化。
对于中国企业来说，应该采取更加积极的方式与投资者沟通，而不是仅仅依赖传统的财报发布和投资者大会的方式来介绍公司情况。
Under the backdrop of economic recovery worldwide, Chinese companies are also brisk to go public abroad. By January 11, 2011, China's listed companies in the United States have so low a median price-earnings ratio as 7.3 in 12 months that is even lower than 20.2 as the median price-earnings ratio of Russell 2000 Index. The listed companies have an average sale of 29.4% with the profit growth by 38.7%. Both are respectively higher than the 3.38% and 14% of Russell 2000 Index. The U.S. capital market obviously miscalculated. According to “China Economic News”, some 77 Chinese enterprises got listed on 9 overseas markets in 2009, raising a total of US$27.139 billion. The number of companies listed overseas in 2009 increased 40 over that in 2008, and the amount of capital raised by 2.92 times.
Both can show that there is still big communicative problem between Chinese companies and overseas investors. Due to the differences between geographical locations, markets, cultures and systems, the foreign investors’ relationship management faces more complexity. To understand a different market in its own culture, and thoroughly figure out the government functions, policies, and interests of all parties, the foreign investors have just started a difficult journey. Tweaking with overseas markets usually has the following problems:
Firstly, the control is weak: investors have a certain degree of concern about the value and reputation of Chinese companies and the health of the banking industry, which led to the adoption of cautious approach for some foreign investors to estimate the development of Chinese companies, likely to cause weakening control. The essence of companies going public is selling equities to obtain the investors’ capital, which led directly to the equity ratio of existing shareholders of the company decline, thus weakening the original control. Sometimes the companies have to cater to the wishes of shareholders to change the company's development strategy or direction. Zhang-Chao-Yang, the Chairman of the Board of SOHU has publicly complained that "in order to please the shareholders by providing text messages service, they forget the real needs of internet users."
Secondly, the costs are high: It’s not only the financing process for Chinese companies going public in overseas markets, but also the process of paying bills. The relevant data shows that maintenance costs after the listing has been the highest in U.S. accounting for more than 10% of its total raised funds, while the same cost accounts for 8% in Hong Kong and for no more than 5% in Mainland China. The high costs of overseas listing caused the companies’ operating costs arise and the companies need careful planning to go overseas. For example, in September 2007 German chemical giant BASF’s president Hambrecht announced delisting from the NYSE, "saving costs " to help BASF save 500 million EUROs annually. Moreover, since foreign investors are not familiar with China's local companies, it is difficult to issue shares at higher prices and the domestic IPO price-earnings ratio is generally double the ratio of overseas market.
Thirdly, there are information barriers: since the rules governing corporate transparency and management are very strict in foreign markets, many Chinese companies still can’t achieve the level of disclosure as required while releasing earnings and forecasting operations, which led to a lot of potential problems. Ding Lei, the CEO of NETEASE, thinks the U.S. capital markets are too strict with information disclosure, such as the disclosure of detailed financial statements including the revenues of each game, the increase or decrease of players, and even the company's strategic arrangements are mandatory. The Listed companies have to spend a lot of money and effort to handle everything properly. The mishandling can lead to the investigation and litigation, which will impact the company stock price. If the last litigation fails, the consequences can be even more disastrous. Data shows that the Hong Kong and Mainland companies listed in New York going through collective action accounted for 11.5%, and the ratio is even higher in NASDAQ as 17.2%.
Wang Han QI, the senior partner of DA Cheng Law Firm and the law expert of China’s capital market, said that many Chinese companies have "small trading volume with a lack of liquidity, which is not attractive for large institutional investors" and "the companies far away from investors with a low transparency are usually ignored by securities research institutions and have been considered risky by investors. " which leads to a large number of overseas-listed Chinese SMEs are marginalized.
The Chinese companies should take more proactive approaches to communicate with investors, rather than introduce the companies solely relying on traditional approaches to release earnings and hold investor conference.