BRUSSELS (Reuters) – Euro zone finance ministers are expected to approve a second bailout for Greece on Monday to try to draw a line under months of uncertainty that has shaken the currency bloc, although there is work to be done to make the figures add up.
Diplomats and economists say they do not expect the package to resolve Greece’s economic problems. That could take a decade or more, a bleak prospect that brought thousands of Greeks onto the streets to protest austerity measures again on Sunday.
The ministers need to agree new measures to square the numbers, given the ever-worsening state of the Greek economy. But they say an agreement on Monday will help restructure the country’s vast debts, put it on a more stable financial footing and keep it inside the 17-country single currency zone.
Senior officials from euro zone finance ministries and the European Central Bank held a conference call on Sunday to go over the final details of the 130-billion-euro programme, including a debt sustainability analysis critical to the International Monetary Fund.
While there is scepticism in Germany and other countries that Greece will be able to live up to its commitments – including implementing 3.3 billion euros of spending cuts and tax increases – officials said momentum was building for approval of the deal.
French Finance Minister Francois Baroin said all the elements were in place to reach an agreement.
“It cannot wait any longer … Greece has debt payments in March and could find itself in bankruptcy, something which France has been trying to avoid for the last 18 months,” he told Europe 1 radio on Monday.
Finnish Finance Minister Jutta Urpilainen said Greece had done all that had been asked of it.
“There are many open details … A big issue is that we have to get Greece’s debt on a level that is sustainable and enables Greece to survive,” she told reporters in Helsinki.
A euro zone official in contact with junior ministers involved in the Sunday conference call said the financing gaps were not so large that they risked derailing the whole process.
“I don’t see anybody wanting to be responsible for pulling the plug on the deal at this late stage,” he said.
“The gut feeling is that this is going to go through – everyone feels the pressure this time to deliver,” he said, indicating that the Netherlands, Finland and Germany, which have been the most critical of Athens‘ ability to commit, looked likely to come on board if the financing gaps could be closed.
GREEK ANGER UNABATED
Several thousand Greeks demonstrated on Sunday against the austerity measures to reduce the country’s debt, although the numbers were much lower than earlier protests.
Greek Prime Minister Lucas Papademos flew to Brussels for last-minute preparations as about 3,000 demonstrators massed on the capital’s central Syntagma square.
Riot police shielded the national assembly to prevent a repeat of riots a week ago when masked youths torched buildings and looted shops across Athens.
Under one crucial element of the deal, Greece will have around 100 billion euros of debt written off via a restructuring involving private-sector holders of Greek government bonds.
Banks and insurers will swap bonds they hold for longer-dated securities that pay a lower coupon, resulting in a real 70 percent reduction in the value of the assets.
The bond exchange is expected to launch on March 8 and complete three days later, Athens said on Saturday. That means a 14.5-billion-euro bond repayment due on March 20 would be restructured, allowing Greece to avoid default.
The vast majority of the funds in the 130-billion-euro programme will be used to finance the bond swap and to ensure that Greece’s banking system remains stable: 30 billion euros will go to “sweeteners” to get the private sector to sign up to the swap, 23 billion will go to recapitalise Greek banks.
A further 35 billion will allow Greece to finance the buying back of the bonds, and 5.7 billion will go to paying off the interest accrued on the bonds being traded in.
The overall objective is to reduce Greece’s debts from 160 percent of GDP to around 120 percent by 2020 – the figure and timeframe that the IMF, ECB and the European Commission, together known as the troika, have established as sustainable.
MEETING THE TARGET
The focus of Monday’s finance ministers‘ meeting will be what “around 120 percent” means in practice.
A debt sustainability report delivered to euro zone finance ministers last week showed that under the main scenario, Greek debt will only fall to 129 percent by 2020.
The IMF has said if the ratio cannot be cut to around 120 percent, it may not be able to help finance the Greek programme.
U.S. Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner urged the International Monetary Fund to support the programme.
“This is a very strong and very difficult package of reforms, deserving of support of the international community and the IMF,” Geithner said in a statement on Sunday.
As well as working to get the number down, there are moves to convince members of the troika that a debt level of 123-125 percent in 2020 would be sustainable.
“If we can get it down to 123 or 124 percent, I think everyone’s going to be okay with that,” the euro zone official said after the Sunday conference call. “Everyone will find a way to tweak the numbers.”
A number of measures, including restructuring the accrued interest portion or reducing the “sweeteners,” are being considered to move the figure closer to 120, a euro zone official familiar with the negotiations said.
There are also discussions about marginally lowering the interest rate on 110 billion euros of bilateral loans already made to Greece in May 2010 – the first package of support – to lighten the financing burden on Athens.
Central banks could help too.
The ECB is weighing up whether to allow Greek bonds held in euro zone central banks’ investment portfolios to be subject to the same writedowns private investors are set to take, central bank sources told Reuters on Friday.
The central banks hold around 20 billion euros of Greek bonds in their traditional investment portfolios and the ECB holds about double that amount from its emergency bond-buying programme. It has also signalled it could forego the profits made on the latter at some point.
If the finance ministers do succeed in reaching an agreement, it will provide immediate relief to Athens and financial markets, which have been kept guessing since the bailout package was announced last October.
But no one is pretending it will end Greece’s problems. Figures last week showed its economy shrank 7 percent year-on-year in the last quarter of 2011, much more than expected, with further cuts likely to make matters worse.
The troika, responsible for monitoring Greece’s reform progress, carries out quarterly reviews, while the European Commission will soon have dozens more monitors on the ground.
Already there is concern that at any one of those reviews of the new programme – if it is approved on Monday – Greece will be found to be behind, especially if GDP continues to slump.
That will again raise the threat the country will have to default if it cannot meet its obligations, and invite questions about its ability to remain in the euro zone.
(Additional reporting by Daniel Flynn in Paris, Terri Kinnunen in Helsinki and George Georgiopoulos in Athens; writing by Mike Peacock; editing by Elizabeth Piper)http://tourism9.com/ http://vkins.com/
2012年2月6日星期一
Caixin Online: The basics of Chinese inbound investment deals
By Andrew Ross
BEIJING (
Caixin Online
) — An accelerating number of Chinese companies are engaging in acquisitions and joint ventures in the United States and while it’s generally understood that a large number of other Chinese companies are also considering doing so, many still hesitate.
The first point to note is that the rate of deals is increasing, and is doing so dramatically. A second point is that as a percentage of the total number of deals, small- to medium-size deals make up the majority, although there are a few larger ones, and the buyers are generally not SOEs (state-owned enterprises). Third, the industries of the acquired companies cover a broad range, from technology, apparel, consulting services, auto parts, hotels and many more.
/conga/story/misc/caixin.html
61611In 2011, several Chinese companies announced their intentions to enter into deals in the U.S., including Shanghai Pharmaceuticals
, with its publicly stated reasons being to seek new drugs to expand its product line and noting declining overseas prices and a strong Yuan, Bright Food Group, China National Materials Co. (Sinoma)
and Fosun Group, which stated it is looking at consumer brands. Many Chinese companies are going global in the U.S., more and more will be doing so, and for those Chinese companies for which this makes sense and which proceed to do so, they will be in very good company.
/quotes/zigman/1859134 CN:601607
+0.51%
/quotes/zigman/40694 HK:1893
+1.72%
So what are some of the strategies, procedures and lessons on pitfalls that can be garnered from recent deals?
Perhaps one of the most important points regarding engaging in transactions in the United States is to recall the reaction of many Chinese businesses when foreign companies came to China and sought to dictate that deals in China be done in the same manner as in those companies’ respective homelands. This generated ill feelings and often did and can easily result in failure in a deal. The same is true in the United States. Companies from many different countries make acquisitions in the U.S. all the time, and one of the accepted norms is that the deal will be done in “U.S. style.”
While not successful on occasion, the advisor for the U.S. company looking to be sold (especially a “hot” company) may seek to create an auction for the company, thus seeking to maximize the price and otherwise obtain the most favorable terms. Even if they do not succeed in doing this, they will generally seek to have the process move as rapidly as possible. Prospective buyers who are unwilling to follow an auction process when established or move too slowly are simply left behind. An important aspect in dealing with this is to be prepared. This means having done industry and market analysis in advance so as to be able to readily determine one’s interest and willingness to devote the necessary resources to explore the deal, and have ready or be able to quickly assemble a team of qualified Chinese and U.S. advisors.
Many U.S. businessmen object to the alleged slow deal pace of foreign businessmen (and not just Chinese), thus often giving U.S. buyers an advantage. Timing delays are, of course, a tactic to be considered; however they should only be used as deemed appropriate, such as to express reservations or concerns so as to try and enhance one’s bargaining position. However, a buyer should not allow its perceived slowness to cost it a deal it otherwise wants.
While most people properly say “a deal is not done until it is done,” in many U.S. negotiations the same often is not true of individual issues. Once an issue is resolved, it is generally not renegotiated absent special circumstances. A party which acts contrary to this undercuts its counter-party’s trust in it.
There is great significance in the U.S. placed on the transaction contract, as each party seeks to maximize its benefits and protections. As a general rule, legal counsel for a U.S. party, will seek as much protection for its client and clarity in the terms of an agreement as possible. This can be especially important for a buyer or investor. This often means lengthy detailed contracts, and also emphasizes the need for the parties to make decisions relatively quickly with respect to the many points involved. In fact, one view is that many U.S. business persons and their lawyers will only encourage ambiguity in an agreement if they think that addressing the ambiguity in the negotiations would result in it being resolved contrary to their interests or if they think they will have greater negotiating leverage on the point once the agreement is signed or the deal is consummated.
By having a contract be as detailed and precise as possible, the likelihood of a dispute is reduced. This is augmented by the fact that in the U.S. there is a very substantial body of court rulings and laws which help determine what a particular contractual phrase will mean in a particular context, thus creating even greater potential certainty. Finally, it should be recognized that other than private arbitrators and mediators and the courts — all of which are objective but the last of which is slow — no governmental entity or person such as a governmental bureaucrat plays a meaningful role in resolving contractual disputes.
While concerns abound over the possible legal burdens that Chinese companies face in the U.S., there are many reasons for Chinese companies to go global, and in particular to do so in the United States.
Read this commentary on Caixin Online.
Andrew Ross is partner and chair of the mergers and acquisitions practice group at Loeb & Loeb LLP. This article is an abridged version of a paper titled, “Acquisitions by Chinese companies in the United States: The case for moving forward now.”
http://tourism9.cm/ http://vkins.com/
BEIJING (
Caixin Online
) — An accelerating number of Chinese companies are engaging in acquisitions and joint ventures in the United States and while it’s generally understood that a large number of other Chinese companies are also considering doing so, many still hesitate.
The first point to note is that the rate of deals is increasing, and is doing so dramatically. A second point is that as a percentage of the total number of deals, small- to medium-size deals make up the majority, although there are a few larger ones, and the buyers are generally not SOEs (state-owned enterprises). Third, the industries of the acquired companies cover a broad range, from technology, apparel, consulting services, auto parts, hotels and many more.
About Caixin
Caixin is a Beijing-based media group dedicated to providing high-quality
and authoritative financial and business news and information through
periodicals, online and TV/video programs.
• Get the Caixin
e-newsletter
Caixin is a Beijing-based media group dedicated to providing high-quality
and authoritative financial and business news and information through
periodicals, online and TV/video programs.
• Get the Caixin
e-newsletter
61611
, with its publicly stated reasons being to seek new drugs to expand its product line and noting declining overseas prices and a strong Yuan, Bright Food Group, China National Materials Co. (Sinoma)
and Fosun Group, which stated it is looking at consumer brands. Many Chinese companies are going global in the U.S., more and more will be doing so, and for those Chinese companies for which this makes sense and which proceed to do so, they will be in very good company.
/quotes/zigman/1859134 CN:601607
+0.51%
/quotes/zigman/40694 HK:1893
+1.72%
So what are some of the strategies, procedures and lessons on pitfalls that can be garnered from recent deals?
Perhaps one of the most important points regarding engaging in transactions in the United States is to recall the reaction of many Chinese businesses when foreign companies came to China and sought to dictate that deals in China be done in the same manner as in those companies’ respective homelands. This generated ill feelings and often did and can easily result in failure in a deal. The same is true in the United States. Companies from many different countries make acquisitions in the U.S. all the time, and one of the accepted norms is that the deal will be done in “U.S. style.”
While not successful on occasion, the advisor for the U.S. company looking to be sold (especially a “hot” company) may seek to create an auction for the company, thus seeking to maximize the price and otherwise obtain the most favorable terms. Even if they do not succeed in doing this, they will generally seek to have the process move as rapidly as possible. Prospective buyers who are unwilling to follow an auction process when established or move too slowly are simply left behind. An important aspect in dealing with this is to be prepared. This means having done industry and market analysis in advance so as to be able to readily determine one’s interest and willingness to devote the necessary resources to explore the deal, and have ready or be able to quickly assemble a team of qualified Chinese and U.S. advisors.
Clinton calls U.N. veto on Syria a ‘travesty’
U.S. Secretary of State Clinton called the veto by Russia and China of the U.N. resolution on Syria a “travesty” as Syria’s President Bashar al-Assad attended mosque service. (Video: Reuters/Photo: Getty Images)While most people properly say “a deal is not done until it is done,” in many U.S. negotiations the same often is not true of individual issues. Once an issue is resolved, it is generally not renegotiated absent special circumstances. A party which acts contrary to this undercuts its counter-party’s trust in it.
There is great significance in the U.S. placed on the transaction contract, as each party seeks to maximize its benefits and protections. As a general rule, legal counsel for a U.S. party, will seek as much protection for its client and clarity in the terms of an agreement as possible. This can be especially important for a buyer or investor. This often means lengthy detailed contracts, and also emphasizes the need for the parties to make decisions relatively quickly with respect to the many points involved. In fact, one view is that many U.S. business persons and their lawyers will only encourage ambiguity in an agreement if they think that addressing the ambiguity in the negotiations would result in it being resolved contrary to their interests or if they think they will have greater negotiating leverage on the point once the agreement is signed or the deal is consummated.
By having a contract be as detailed and precise as possible, the likelihood of a dispute is reduced. This is augmented by the fact that in the U.S. there is a very substantial body of court rulings and laws which help determine what a particular contractual phrase will mean in a particular context, thus creating even greater potential certainty. Finally, it should be recognized that other than private arbitrators and mediators and the courts — all of which are objective but the last of which is slow — no governmental entity or person such as a governmental bureaucrat plays a meaningful role in resolving contractual disputes.
While concerns abound over the possible legal burdens that Chinese companies face in the U.S., there are many reasons for Chinese companies to go global, and in particular to do so in the United States.
Read this commentary on Caixin Online.
/quotes/zigman/1859134
Volume: 17.31M
Feb. 6, 2012 1:34p
Feb. 6, 2012 1:34p
/quotes/zigman/40694
Volume: 7.48M
Feb. 6, 2012 1:33p
Feb. 6, 2012 1:33p
http://tourism9.cm/ http://vkins.com/
订阅：
博文 (Atom)