Page 23 - CCFA Journal - Sixth Issue

加中金融 金融论坛 Forum2022

Dan: Actually, there are three things come to mind. One is the new regulation, some of it was just kind of bizarre, I think like in the
education sector was more regulation required. I think there are real reasons why some of these regulations are coming into place,
antitrust, for instance. There was basically some of these sectors, in the past years, I think the regulators took intentionally hands off
approach to allow them to kind of grow and build up really rapidly. And that's exactly what happened. And I think they're now coming
in to try and bring in some balance. And so like, with the when it comes to the antitrust, moves, those are permanent. They're not
going to pull them back tomorrow or a month from now. So in a way, some of these changes are permanent. I still don't think we've
seen the end of it, more sectors will continue to be added to the list. And then the other one why I think, it's kind of here to stay,
because the some of the goals behind the regulatory changes are also about long term structural change, common prosperity, for
instance, I think the authorities, the leadership, their intention is to achieve this over the course of many decades. This is a
fundamentally important paradigm shift right on that side. So I see this as a kind of a long term thing, that will be with us. Although
there's an interesting question out there. The fervor behind some of these changes whether or not that will relax a little bit after 2022
2023. The upcoming party congress, where President Xi, is expected to stay on for a third term, that basically takes off in October,
November 2022. And it completes in March 2023. With the National People's Congress transactions. So that's one thing like the fervor
maybe there's an opportunity that it will decline insignificance after March 2023? Or maybe not.

Dan: 事实上，我想到了三件事。一个是新规定，我认为在教育领域需要改变需要更多的规定。但我认为有。有一些法规
出台的真正原因，比如反垄断。基本上有一些这样的部门。在过去的几年里，我认为监管机构故意采取放手的方式，让它
们快速成长和壮大。事实就是这样。而今当局正试图带来一些平衡。正如当涉及反垄断时，这些举动是永久性的。他们不
会在明天或一个月后撤回这些要求。所以在某种程度上，它是永久性的。我仍然认为我们还猜到结尾，更多的行业将继续
被添加到列表中。另一个是，监管改革背后的一些主要目标也是关于长期的结构性改革，比如共同繁荣，我认为这是一些
当局领导他们的意图不是在一年内实现这一目标，而是要在几十年的时间里实现这一目标。这是一个根本性的重要的格式
转变。所以我认为这是一种长期的事情，这将与我们同在。不过有个有趣的问题。这些变化背后的热情是否会在 2022 -
2023 年之后有所放松。即将召开的党代会预计将于 2022 年 10 月至 11 月召开，习主席将继续第三个任期。它将于 2023 年
3 月完成。与全国人民代表大会交易。这是一件类热点事件也许在 2023 年 3 月之后它有可能会变得无足轻重? 或者不是。

Dawn: I'm not an expert on China, so I think I better refrain myself from commenting. But for me, I think that some of the things
Chinese government is doing now, if you look at the sense is no difference from what the Western government have been doing, in
terms of antitrust to their big IT companies, and education sector. A westerner, typical Westerner living in the UK, in the past, would
those teachers in primary school purposely not to teach the students in the classroom，Just so the students pay extra in order to
learn what they should have learned in classroom？So I think some of those reaction thinking that attorneys government regulation
is something ridiculous, outrageous. I don't 100% agree with how it was done. But I think some of those regulation is much needed.
If you look at how a normal western country is operating.

Dawn: 我不是中国问题专家，所以我想我最好不要发表评论。但对我来说，我认为中国政府现在正在做的一些事情，如果
你看一下，在反垄断方面，与西方政府一直在做的事情没有什么区别，对他们的大型 IT 公司和教育部门。想一个典型的
西方人生活在英国在过去, 这些小学教师会故意不在教室里教学生们, 这样他们可以支付额外费用去学原来在课堂应该学
到的东西。所以我认为一些人的反应认为律师政府的监管是荒谬的，令人愤慨的。我不是百分之百同意这种做法。但我认
为其中一些监管是非常必要的。如果你看一个正常的西方国家是如何运作的。
Steve: I do have one slide, which I think illustrates how wrong US investors or Western investors got it. And if we bring that up, let's
look at the year to date performance on most of the VIE that are listed in New York or NASDAQ. And there's some huge double-digit
declines led by Alibaba. And so that I did get a lot of questions. I know Dr. Wong referred to this speech, people said China is
uninvestible, I got asked that question a lot or what I did say was if you invest in China as a Westerner and expect the same set of
circumstances that you expect from European or North American governments, it's different. They’ve demonstrated that the policies
that Beijing is implementing is what Beijing thinks is right for Beijing, not for foreign investors. And so this is when I gave the comment
that you could throw a dart at a dartboard and invest in anything, it'll go back up. This is the one exception, because the reason for
that is Beijing is bigger than you are as a foreign investor. And you can't just assume that a certain rationale is going to work for you.
And there are plenty of good reasons to be invested in China and plenty of good things, outcomes that will come of it. But if you try
to assert the same sort of logic, the same decision process to Beijing as to what you have to what you might expect out of Washington,
or Ottawa, or London or wherever, it's not going to work for you.

Steve: 我有一张幻灯片，我认为它说明了美国投资者或西方投资者是多么的错误。如果我们看今年到目前为止在纽约或
纳斯达克上市的大多数 VIE 的表现。在阿里巴巴的带领下，出现了两位数的大幅下滑。我也知道王博士提到这篇演讲, 人
们说中国就没戏, 我确实收到了这样的问题。我想说的是相同情况下如果一个西方人，不应以欧洲或北美的政府同样的预
期在中国投资，情况是完全不同的。中国正在实施的政策是中国认为对自己有利的，而不必对外国投资者有利的。所以当
我给出评论时，你可以投掷飞镖，可以投资任何东西，它都会反弹。但投资中国并非投资一个个体，你不能只是假设某种
理论对你有效。在中国投资有很多好的理由也有很多好的事情和结果。但是如果你试图用同样的逻辑，同样的决策过程来
对中国投资，你从华盛顿、渥太华、伦敦或其他地方得到的经验可能都行不通。

CCFA JOURNAL OF FINANCE February 2022
Page 23 第23页