- 近期网站停站换新具体说明
- 按以上说明时间,延期一周至网站时间26-27左右。具体实施前两天会在此提前通知具体实施时间
主题:风险在累积 -- 清风席卷
This is a common practice in United States for many years. The earliest example dated back to 1950s. Large equipment makers use this approach to squeeze small players who might be of low-cost, but can not compete on financing (their balance sheet is too weak to support such a long-term commitment).
Vendor financing allows the vendor to charge premium price, control one's customer and get constant cash flows. But the vendor MUST be very sophisticated IN FINANCE. The vendor must have a very strong balance sheet (low leverage ratio) so that it can easily borrow money from the corporate bond market or large banks. And banks do not dare to say "NO" to you because you are such an important client.
In United States, large equipment makers, such as Catepillar, lower financing risk by transferring all long-term receivables from their customers to a separate finance subsidiary. Finance subsidiary borrows money cheaply to finance those long-term A/R financing, therefore, the manufacturing side is not exposed to the finance risk. GM Finance is another example.
Another option is to invite investment bank to put up special legal structure (SPE) so that long-term receivables can be sold to SPE and get financed through medium-term commercial papers issued to pension funds, money market funds...
Last option is to let the manufacturing firm to operate a retail bank too (Canadian Tire model) so that it can get cheap and stable deposit base to finance its long-term customer A/R ( of course, you must charge an implicit high interest income there to compensate for your deposit interest and branch costs).
The second option is very very common and cheap in US, but China does not have that infrastructure there.
First option separate the bankruptcy risk to a finance subsidiary, but the manufacturing firm MUST BE VERY SMART IN FINANCE. I do not expect that among Chinese manufacturers.
The last option can not be applied in China since it will bump into legal trouble too.
只要资金链不断--very Chinese term, 资金链 is that working capital or just financing cash flow? These two are totally different concepts in finance.
- 相关回复 上下关系8
😜1929年之前的米国,德国难道不都是在正向提升?所以危机 1 胡大四海 字90 2010-11-13 21:51:32
🙂恩,上周和朋友小聚的时候说的是制造业风险的另一面 55 葡萄 字0 2010-11-13 21:22:32
🙂给葡萄大牛献花就是好 1 日月星辰 字26 2010-11-15 18:57:40
🙂professional comments
🙂三种都不可以? 清风席卷 字28 2010-11-13 17:10:41
🙂俺原来以为第三产业比较浮躁,原来制造业也难免这股风气 11 zzbzerg 字930 2010-11-12 06:29:02
🙂洋泾浜.... shaking head.... parishg 字0 2010-11-13 08:20:28
🙂【讨论】这是银行避险而创造出的风险(这话不矛盾) 50 伪叔叔 字1195 2010-11-12 04:32:36