Uninvestable? Part of the game

Sure people can argue they were seeing many absurd things in China over the past couple of years, but in the grand scheme of things, this may also be considered a part of the game.

Just like in some countries, there are various forms of “cost of doing business”.. including developed countries. They are different. So one often needs time to study, and may feel unacceptable.

China is the same; maybe a bit more special – unpredictability of rules is a cost of doing business. Maybe somewhere else, the cost of doing business is “written” in the rules so you know the “cost” before you play. Here, it’s like a higher level of “costs” – changing rules is part of the game & thus this “cost” is hard to calculate/predict. If you can’t calculate costs, and you don’t know the probability, you can’t calculate your return.

However, when you recognize that unpredictability is part of the “game”, then it can become “investable” from time to time.

The “best” player might be able to predict when is investable and when is not.

It’s also okay to be a bit behind. The key is to protect yourself when it’s “uninvestable”, and be reasonably participating when it’s “investable”.

Focus on those periods. You may temporarily forget other “costs”. But you can only pretend that you forget, with a reminder/timer. You have to remember this cost on a deeper level.

The safest period is right after the most dangerous period.


Normally, I prefer not to play poker with Chinese, as they often too good at playing with people.

This doesn’t mean I can’t play. It’s just too energy-consuming.

Smart cars

I have had this concerns about smart cars for quite a few years.

I could be old-school on this, but I like ICE, and I like traditional cars that are not connected / fully controlled by electronics.

The recent Lebanon pager explosions is not only for pagers.

EV batteries could have more powerful explosion.

In addition, EV can move.

More importantly, they can go autonomous.

In some sense, they could become autonomous moving “bombs”, especially if hacked by malicious actors.


Of course, a tank of oil (ICE) can do the same, with some autonomous features.

So it’s really important to build trust between countries and companies.

I don’t know if that’s happening.

A story about elevators

Something I recall vividly – during college, I live in a high-rise on campus. Before we push button on an elevator, we look at what’s already be pressed. If one floor above or one floor below has been pressed, we shall not push button. Instead, we walk the stairs.

This is such a good norm that I follow immediately. This is such a powerful norm that brings positive energy to people.

This is actually faster if you run a bit, as the stair is close to elevators.

More importantly, all passengers’ time combined will be saved.

I have never experienced this in China. For myself, I can’t find stairs actually..

I hope this is not only for elevators and we may replicate this spirit in other areas.

China reported numbers’ discrepancy seems lower

China’s reported number can be very different from reality.

What numbers can you really rely on?

I would assume the number reported today but happened a year ago is more accurate than the number reported last year.

For example, for 2024 Jan to Aug, fixed asset investment rose by 3.4% to 32.94 trillion rmb.

While you need to believe in the current number, it’s more acceptable to me to assume the number for 2023 Jan to Aug is 31.86 trillion rmb [32.94 / (1+ 3.4%)].

Then you can compare with last year’s reported number, and see the discrepancy is -3% – last year’s reported number is 3% higher than current year implied number.

If you do the same for all month since December 2021, you can see the discrepancy grew from 0% for Dec 2021 to -15% for Dec 2022 and now back to only -3% for Aug 2023.

Indeed, the discrepancy has been low for May 2023 to Aug 2023: -4%, -3%, -3%, -3%, which seems to be a good thing.

China’s over-consumption

Over-consumption is ingrained in Chinese culture.

When Chinese people invite other to dinner, they usually over-order to show hospitality. This is over-consumption.

When Chinese people drink liquor on the dinner table, they can push beyond their bodies’ alcohol limit – drinking beyond the limit is usually seen as sincerity and deep friendship. This is over-consumption.

When Chinese people send gifts to each other during holidays, they often send things that are higher end then they consume. This is over-consumption.

The concept of “over-consumption” doesn’t mean it’s not necessary; indeed, those can be seen as “normal” rather than “over-consumption” for most Chinese. It’s only when you compare those consumption levels to countries like US, you can say it’s above the needed/common level.

If Chinese people are going to normalize their consumptions, there can be an oversupply in those categories.

Every Chinese companies’ overseas story needs a regulatory check if involves the US

Every company needs to go through this process.

Ask this question – has the overseas business been challenged?

Quality companies should welcome the challenge and prove themselves to overseas regulators.

Only if the company passes the test, the international story is fair and square.


PDD/Temu is going through this process; the challenge just came up around de minimis exemption.

CALT’s licensing agreements in the US is also being questioned to some extent.

Wuxi Bio is going through this process (US Biosecure Act) and hasn’t proved itself yet.

Beigene is being challenged over IP by Abbvie.

No need to mention ByteDance/TikTok.

etc.


Chinese companies need be prepared to fight uphill battles in overseas if they want the US market. Behaving better then a local company seems to be a minimum; be careful about anything that may seem “unfair” for overseas regulators.

Tencent’s 3A games problem

Black Myth: Wukong is hot. Tencent is a shareholder in Game Science (developer of Wukong), a distributor for Wukong in China, and a significant shareholder in Epic Games (Wukong uses Epic Games’ Unreal Engine).

However, Tencent might have more problems with the rise of 3A games.

1/ For game development, mobile game are too profitable for Tencent. 3A games incurs more costs and is hard to monetize over the long run if can’t develop a long lasting IP.

2/ For game investment, Tencent can’t leverage its powerful Wechat/QQ as much in distribution, which can help increase portfolio value by a lot. In addition, 3A games take much longer to develop and can fail – Tencent is hard to wait that long with unknown result. So overall, the investments become more unpredictable for Tencent in 3A studios.

 

Macau gaming – why bother?

Concerns for those names.

1/ what’s the long-run prospect for gambling? 

seems that the rich shall just go to Singapore etc.; too risky in Macau

mass market? why would the PRC gov wants gambling to grow?

for certain people (mainland gov officials etc.), it’s hard to go to Macau.

there is the licensing renewal issue every 10 years

2/ luxury shopping?

near-term most Chinese middle class families are still not in the mode of spending on luxury stuff.

shopping in tier-one cities like Shanghai, Beijing etc. is very convenient, although a bit pricer; if it’s in the $3k range, there’s not much difference (say 10% cheaper so saving $300 in shopping, but need to spend on flights & hotel)

the rich can go to Japan for shopping for weak Yen.

3/ food?

Portuguese egg tart? it’s very good indeed!

but you can try the KFC version of Portuguese egg tart in China; it’s about the same.

Hamas and ASML

A very random thought on two seemingly unrelated events.

Hamas political leader was killed in Iran.

Iran uses Huawei equipments I assume.

Huawei also needs foundry which uses ASML.

ASML and Japan’s equipment makers are exported to be exempted from a new drafted rule.

Is this weird that these two things are happening & making to the headlines this week?

Is there any possibility that someone from China “helped” US/Israel on Hamas and someone from the US “helped” China on semi control?

This is like a prisoner swap on another level.

Wanting it all

The “Wanting it all” mentality is dangerous.

In Chinese, a trendy phrase is “既要又要还要”. It’s often used to describe/complain what regulators want in China in recent years.

Some examples:

China wants economic growth and security, and it wants high tech.

When local gov wants growth, it wants a market participant that can do the construction (industrial park, infra, city updates etc.), plus bringing in good businesses, and it doesn’t want to give monetary support.

In economics, there is this impossible trinity – fixed exchange rate, free flow of capital, and independent monetary policy. China wants it all – policy needs to be “independent” and not influenced by others; it doesn’t want RMB to depreciate fast which could be a “loss of face”; and it wants foreign flows/investments to support its “open” narrative.

It’s not just China. US has this “wanting it all” mentality in drug pricing and supply (insulin for example) – US wants innovation in biotech; it wants low drug price; it wants de-risked supply chains. Companies are put into a hard position and are challenged if decisions like this are made (Novo Nordisk to discontinue Levemir in the US).

—-

One doesn’t become a leader just by making requests; one leads with directions.