China Aims To Centralize Underground Stock Exchanges

Informal economies are symptomatic of the state of affairs for economies struggling with byzantine legal and bureaucratic entanglements.

But in today’s modern finance based economy, it’s my first time to hear of the proliferation of informal stock exchanges.

From Bloomberg,

China will ban trading of securities and futures on unauthorized exchanges to regulate the market and prevent financial risks, the State Council said.

Some of the trading activities have led to price manipulation and fund embezzlement by the exchange managers, China’s cabinet said in a statement dated yesterday. Such problems may cause regional financial risks and endanger social stability, the statement said.

There are over 300 unregulated bourses across the country, the Financial Times reported today, citing analysts. Turnover on the three authorized commodity futures and a financial futures exchanges in China fell 4 percent to 113.4 trillion yuan ($18 trillion) in the first ten months from a year ago, according to the China Futures Association.

“Regulators are concerned because these exchanges do not pay much attention to risk control, and volatile trading could hurt the participants and have a spillover effect on other companies and related industries,” said Shen Zhaoming, a Shanghai-based analyst at brokerage Changjiang Futures Co. “Local governments all hope for bigger economic influence, and they think establishing such exchange platforms is an efficient way to achieve the goal.”

Apart from the stock and futures exchanges approved by the State Council, no other bourses are allowed to list new shares, offer centralized pricing or make markets, the statement said. Exchanges that trade gold, insurance or credit products must receive approvals from financial authorities under the State Council, it said.

Price manipulation and fund embezzlement (e.g. MF Global Holdings) have also been present in ‘regulated’ exchanges.

Centralization does not sanitize or prevent markets from having miscreants. To the contrary, politicized regulated markets may even spawn them e.g. Philippines’ BW Resources Scandal and the US shadow banking system, where the former is the result of cronyism and the latter has mostly been product of regulatory capture and regulatory arbitrage.

So price manipulation and fund embezzlement would be a flimsy pretext by the Chinese government to exercise control over informal exchanges.

Besides, bailouts, unilateral credit margin maneuvering, quantitative easing, artificially low interest rates, Operation Twist (manipulation of the yield curve), Basel Accord (Financial Repression), ban on shorts and other forms of politicization of the marketplace represent price manipulations which has been the du jour policies being undertaken by global governments at the expense of the average market participants and the taxpayers.

So it is ‘legal’ for governments and their cronies to finagle or to manipulate or to exercise insider trading of the markets. To add, governments are beyond or are exempt from the laws which they implement. Again this implies that 'what may be legal is not moral'. One would call this political inequality.

Finally it is simply amazing how “300 unregulated bourses” exists in China.

Again some possible drivers here,

-regulated exchanges have been too much bureaucratic or extensively politically controlled to force many financial market investors to go underground,

-the major bourses of mainland China Shanghai and Shenzhen have not expanded enough to cover the entire country. However, the current state of technology seem to reduce the odds of such dynamic unless restrained by politics.

-China’s capital markets have been so limited or constrained such that boom bust policies have been compelling many investors to seek ways to stretch on yields by participating in the informal stock exchanges. And a possible symptom of this would be the China’s version of the shadow banking or financing system that has funded the recent property boom (and possibly informal stock exchanges too?).

This should be a great example of how the markets are always way ahead of and manage to circumvent regulators—a perpetual cat and mouse game.

China Aims For Global Financial Center, Plans To List Foreign Shares

China proposes to internationalize her stock exchanges.

From the Bloomberg,

China is “basically ready” to allow foreign companies to sell equity in the world’s second- biggest stock market, according to the Shanghai Stock Exchange official in charge of the so-called international stocks board.

The exchange has finished working on listing and trading rules, while the technological, regulatory, and system requirements are “basically ready,” Xu Ming, executive vice president of the Shanghai Stock Exchange, said in a Nov. 11 interview at the bourse. While there is no timetable for introducing the board, it should start “as soon as possible when the time is ripe,” he said.

“The internationalization of the securities market will benefit the whole nation and overseas companies are highly motivated,” Xu said.

Shanghai, home to one of China’s two stock exchanges, is luring overseas companies to list as part of the local government’s drive to make the city a global financial center by 2020. HSBC Holdings Plc, Coca-Cola Co. (KO) and NYSE Euronext are among the multinational companies that have expressed interest in selling shares to investors in China. Shanghai, the nation’s financial hub, has been contacted by foreign companies in the finance, telecommunications, consumer goods and manufacturing industries, Fang Xinghai, head of the city’s financial services office, said in a May 2010 interview.

Listing in China would let foreign companies benefit from higher valuations and give them access to Chinese currency to fund their expansion in the world’s second-biggest economy, Arjuna Mahendran, Singapore-based head of investment strategy for Asia at HSBC Private Bank, overseeing $460 billion globally, said in a June interview…

Xu said the Shanghai bourse has set no priority on which foreign companies can list first, refuting media reports that so-called red-chips, or overseas-incorporated Chinese businesses listed in Hong Kong, would be first. Hong Kong-listed Cnooc Ltd., China’s largest offshore energy producer, would sell stock if it received regulatory clearance, Chairman Fu Chengyu said in March.

Companies seeking to list on the international board should have a market value of more than 30 billion yuan ($4.7 billion) and combined three-year net income of more than 3 billion yuan, the 21st Century Business Herald reported in April, citing a draft plan. Ten companies may be allowed to sell shares initially, according to the report.

“We have no plan for the first batch of companies to be listed or how many there will be in the first batch,” Xu said. “We don’t give priority to whether foreign companies or red- chip companies should be listed first. Whoever is ripe will get listed first.”…

There are about 104 million investors in China, including mutual funds, institutional investors and 85 million individuals, the Shanghai exchange said.

“China and its capital markets don’t lack money,” Xu said. “Once the companies are listed, it will have a huge advertisement effect.”

Basically this means that China wants to local investors to diversify.

On the other hand, this also allows foreign companies to tap on Chinese savings.

While this should be seen as substantially a positive development, this may not be enough as China ought to open more her stock markets to foreigners and not just to allow trading of foreign shares.

Cross listing with her neighbors may even seem better.

And another thing, Chinese equity investors represent about 8% of the population which is substantially more than the Philippines with about less than 1%.

Nevertheless, to wean dependence away from the banking system, capital markets in Asia will need, not only to grow, but to modernize, deepen and outperform the world.