10 years later, this unwilling person frequently appeared in various forums and important economic conferences in China, and people paid attention to him for only one reason: the direction of economic reform he advocated coincided with the changing China.
As early as 2003, Hu told the outside world that the floating exchange rate system and the RMB opening under the capital account could not be confused. If the RMB exchange rate is liberalized, necessary controls can still be imposed on the capital account. At the end of 2004, he actively declared that the conditions for the reform of the exchange rate system were ripe. These voices were proved to be forward-looking with the RMB exchange rate reform in July 2, 20051China.
At the same time, Hu Zuliu also actively appealed to relevant domestic institutions on various occasions to eliminate the "irrational fear" of foreign capital entering the financial industry. One of his arguments is that the non-performing asset ratio of a country's banks is negatively correlated with the country's financial openness when other factors remain unchanged.
Because of his judgment, Hu was rated as "gentle and earnest", so it's hard to realize that he is the spokesman of Goldman Sachs Capital, more like a promoter of China's economic globalization.
As the managing director of Goldman Sachs Asia, Hu also personally practiced his theory. Compared with the same period in 2004, the business income of Goldman Sachs in Asia increased by nearly12, of which 50% came from China, surpassing Japanese. It is said that Hu often plays an important role in it.
Goldman Sachs, an international financial speculator
Leave Goldman Sachs
20 10 March10 evening, some media reported that Hu Zuliu, managing director of Goldman Sachs Asia Pacific, resigned today. The head of Goldman Sachs Gaohua Media subsequently confirmed the matter to Sina Finance. It is reported that starting from April, Hu Zuliu will resign from Goldman Sachs, but he will remain an advisory director of Goldman Sachs. It is reported that Hu Zuliu will join the private equity industry in the future. Hu's mobile phone has been turned off.
20 10 March, a sudden news bombarded the major domestic financial media: Hu Zuliu, chairman and managing director of Goldman Sachs China, was about to announce his retirement and resign as a partner. Hu Zuliu, who is only 47 years old, said it was too early to retire, and his next stop naturally became the focus of speculation. It has become a trend for financial talents between "returnees" to enter state-owned banks, regulatory agencies and even decision-making departments, which makes people wonder whether Hu Zuliu will become one of them. And with his resume, he can hold some titles of high positions.
Hu Zuliu joined Goldman Sachs on 1997 and has been working for 13 years.
Social assessment
Hu Zuliu serves international financial institutions under the banner of objective analysis.
Ding Xueliang, a professor at the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology, said: "There are no more than five real economists in China, and some famous economists in China are not qualified to be graduate students in the top 50 international economics departments." Explaining his "Five Theories", Ding Xueliang said: "My statement does not include the economists of the older generation, because their learning environment, research environment and working environment are different from those of young and middle-aged people, and many of them are my teachers and mentors. In addition, this statement does not include professors who are currently teaching in the best or better university economics department overseas and are currently returning to China for part-time jobs. " Ding Xueliang, a Hong Kong professor: Who are the five qualified economists in China? China Youth Daily (2005165438+1October 9) In the west, there are also economists who are big officials, but they only entered the government or big banks for a short time after doing very independent and excellent research in the field of economics, and then they will soon return to the research of economic science, not research. (There are at most five qualified economists in China, China Business Times, 2005, 65438+126 October). The meaning of these words makes people feel that those who graduated from famous foreign universities and temporarily returned to China for part-time jobs are basically "real economists".
It can be seen that Ding Xueliang has actually devalued all the economics majors in mainland universities, so unknown professors are even less qualified. Therefore, he added, "the criteria for selecting associate professors in the Department of Economics of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology can be used as the criteria for qualified economists". This shows that the associate professor in the Department of Economics of the Hong Kong University of Science and Technology is better than the professor in the Department of Economics of mainland universities. It is entirely appropriate to seriously criticize the "famous economists" fooled by the mainland, but those scholars are a minority after all. Taking this opportunity to belittle mainland professors will be indiscriminate and will hit a large area.
Is this related to the economy? Obviously not! This is demeaning university education in the Mainland. We do not deny that there are indeed some "famous economists" in the Mainland who speak for interest groups, especially in the dispute between Langgu and Gu, which exposed the dual personality of some economists-both speaking for interest groups and under the banner of public intellectuals, causing public resentment.
Then, let's look at the situation in Hong Kong! Foreign-funded financial institutions in Hong Kong have hired a group of doctors who graduated from famous universities such as Harvard. How are they doing? Some of them also have dual personalities-speaking for interest groups and objectively analyzing the economy. Let's give an example:
Hu Zuliu is currently the managing director and chief economist of Goldman Sachs (Asia) Co., Ltd. He used to be the chief economist and research director of the Geneva-Davos World Economic Forum. He received a master's degree in Tsinghua University and a doctorate in economics from Harvard University. 199 1 to 1996, a former official of the International Monetary Fund (Washington, D.C.), worked in the Asia-Pacific Bureau, the Financial Affairs Bureau and the Research Bureau successively, engaged in economic research, and participated in multinational macroeconomic policy consultation and technical assistance. His research interests include macroeconomics, public finance, international trade and finance. One of its research achievements, Global Competitiveness Report, has a wide influence in the world.
After reading these, we can first refute Ding Xueliang's statement that "some famous domestic economists are not qualified to enter the top 50 international economics departments for postgraduate study", because Hu Zuliu graduated from Tsinghua with a master's degree, and if "some famous domestic economists are not qualified to enter the top 50 international economics departments for postgraduate study", the level of teachers is low. So who trained him to be admitted to Harvard? There are many similar situations. For example, Ding Xueliang himself went to Fudan University to study for a master's degree in the late 1970s. During my master's degree, I published several thought-provoking papers, which attracted the attention of Yu Guangyuan, then vice president of China Academy of Social Sciences, and some old gentlemen. 1982, Ding Xueliang was transferred to Beijing after graduation. From 65438 to 0983, Ding Xueliang's master thesis "An Overview of Marx's All-round Development View" won the first prize in the first "Young and Middle-aged Social Science Award". This award will also help Ding Xueliang recommend studying in the United States. 1In August, 984, when he boarded the plane for the first time, he left the country with $600 temporarily borrowed from the government in his pocket. (Ding Xueliang: Dr. Harvard's sweet and sour past, Market News, 7th edition, June 2005 165438+ 10/)
We know that the economist Mr. Yu Guangyuan helped Ding Xueliang, but unfortunately, because "the learning environment, research environment and working environment of the older generation of economists are different from those of the young and middle-aged people", Ding Xueliang's so-called "international standards" are not applicable, and Mr. Yu Guangyuan is not listed as a "real economist" in Ding Xueliang. After the U-turn, you still need to have the experience of studying abroad to become a "real economist". There is a contradiction here, but Ding Xueliang forgot one thing. How could he be recommended to study in the United States without the reward of China scholars? In other words, Harvard University in the United States still recognizes the evaluation of China scholars.
Here, we don't look at the resumes of Mr. Ding Xueliang and Mr. Hu Zuliu, but analyze them according to the information published in newspapers and periodicals, which leads to a question: If the professors in Chinese mainland universities are of low level, why can the students recommended by them be recognized by famous foreign universities? Because as we all know, recommending this step is in line with international standards and is also a necessary condition for studying abroad.
Professors in China University have worked hard to teach many students and then recommended them to study abroad. In the end, it became "some famous economists in China are not qualified to be graduate students in the top 50 international economics departments", and even ordinary professors are not qualified. This is a paradox: how do these professors train international students who can go abroad? Why should foreign universities recognize Professor China's recommendation? Is this inconsistent?
Let's take a look at Hu Zuliu, managing director of Goldman Sachs Asia.
At the beginning of 2003, Hu Zuliu, managing director of Goldman Sachs Asia, said in the report "Trends and Opportunities in Global Investment Markets" that QFII investment in Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets should be based on optimistic market fundamentals, not just for RMB appreciation, and exchange rate speculation is very risky. Through the calculation of "exchange rate equilibrium model", Goldman Sachs believes that RMB is indeed undervalued, but this underestimation is not serious, but moderate underestimation of 10% to 15%. China has maintained a trade surplus, with foreign exchange supply exceeding foreign exchange demand and foreign exchange reserves exceeding $350 billion. If the exchange rate is liberalized, the RMB will definitely appreciate. If QFII only speculates on the exchange rate, and completely hopes for the rise of foreign exchange, and is not optimistic about the fundamentals and prospects of the stock market, it would be a big mistake. Goldman Sachs is not engaged in stock speculation and will not care too much about the short-term ups and downs of stocks, but what is certain is that Goldman Sachs is still very optimistic about the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets and many domestic industries.
People can't help asking: Since 200 1, some foreign-funded institutions in Hong Kong have been critical of the Shenzhen and Shanghai stock markets. Why are they uncharacteristic? Hu Zuliu, managing director of Goldman Sachs Asia, declared when the QFII policy in China was just released: "Most overseas institutions will not enter the stock market through QFII immediately, and overseas fund managers will also be discouraged from the China stock market because of the strict investment restrictions of QFII rules." However, the actual situation surprised him. Goldman Sachs became an active applicant for QFII and began to invest in A shares shortly after it was approved. For Hu Zuliu's contradictory remarks, we should look at the essence through the phenomenon.
The so-called Goldman Sachs, through the calculation of "exchange rate equilibrium model", thinks that the RMB is indeed undervalued by 10% to 15%. Is this calculation accurate? If QFII is optimistic about the Shenzhen and Shanghai stock markets, why buy a lot of bonds and funds? Do you expect foreign exchange to appreciate? There are reports that:
On July 23, 2003, the subscription results of Guodian Power Convertible Bonds were announced. Among them, two QFII—— that were allowed to enter the market at that time-Citigroup Global Finance Limited and Swiss Bank Limited appeared on the distribution list at the same time. The subscription funds used by the two companies exceeded 654.38 billion yuan and 500 million yuan respectively. In the end, the former was allocated 654.38+0044 lots, and the allocated amount was 654.38+0044 million yuan. The latter was allocated 4,835 lots, and the allocation amount was 4.835 million yuan.
On August 20th, two more news about QFII were announced. First of all, a QFII subscribed for the index fund Yufu in the issuance period, and invested the first order of QFII in the open-end fund. On the other hand, Citigroup Global Finance Limited purchased 265,438+0.7% of Shan Ying convertible bonds. This shows that they want the RMB to appreciate, so they buy more bonds and reduce stocks.
Wu Nana, a reporter from China Business News, reports that QFII will invest far more in bonds than A shares. Investing in stocks seems to be just a smoke bomb of QFII. Although QFII announced its "first order" to the media, its "intention" is in bond open-end funds. This move at least shows that QFII is not very optimistic about the A-share market at this stage. QFII chooses more bonds in investment, which also shows its full confidence in RMB appreciation. With the increasing voice of "RMB appreciation", QFII's large orders will also settle bonds.
These obvious facts show that Hu Zuliu's so-called "not only for RMB appreciation" and "very optimistic about Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets" are also smoke bombs.
What is even more puzzling is that in September 2003, Hu Zuliu advocated that mainland foreign exchange should enter the Hong Kong stock market. He said: "QDII uses foreign exchange funds, which will have little impact on the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets. China's foreign exchange reserves have exceeded 350 billion US dollars, and 10% will have 35 billion US dollars, which is enough to support the implementation of QDII. " (Shanghai and Shenzhen stock markets have great long-term development potential, and Goldman Sachs is optimistic about the market outlook. International Finance News, September 2003 16)
Everyone knows that QDII has not only a financial impact on the mainland, but also a psychological impact brought by the price comparison effect. Hong Kong H shares are much lower than mainland A shares. Once QDII is opened, this psychological influence will be further expanded. On the other hand, the Hong Kong stock market rose and many stocks doubled. At this time, isn't it necessary for the state to provide 35 billion US dollars to support QDII to give sedan chairs to international speculators? From the end of 20001to the Spring Festival of 2003, why didn't Hu Zuliu spend $35 billion to support QDII? If the intervention at that time was a bargain-hunting, Hu Zuliu began to promote QDII "very enthusiastically" in September 2003, and the tone became higher and higher. In April 2003, after the opening and promotion of foreign institutional investors, Hu Zuliu proposed that the state provide 35 billion US dollars to support QDII. What is its intention? Please don't forget that Hu Zuliu is the managing director of Goldman Sachs Asia. He got a high salary and worked for Goldman Sachs first. He just serves foreign financial institutions under the banner of objective analysis.
Some experts pointed out that the Hong Kong stock market already has 30% mainland funds, and H shares have soared. In fact, many people are counting on the appreciation of RMB and QDII. In fact, this mentality of expecting good and selling on rallies is the same in the international market. In this case, what is Hu Zuliu's intention to ask the state to provide $35 billion to support QDII? Precious foreign exchange is a national resource and the property of the people. Who will bear the risk of foreign exchange losses in case of B shares?
Professor Lang Xianping, a financial expert who has been active between the Mainland and Hong Kong, said in an interview with the reporter of International Finance News that the expectation of QDII in Hong Kong's capital market was somewhat "misguided", and he stressed that what Hong Kong needed was structural adjustment, not just these preferential measures.
This analysis is in line with the facts, especially reminding us to "beware of changes in international finance and its possible impact on monetary and financial stability." It should be said that Lang Xianping is responsible for the country's foreign exchange resources, especially the risks. We can't help asking Mr. Hu Zuliu: After H-shares have doubled and reached a new high for several years, what does it mean to ask the state to allocate 35 billion US dollars to enter the Hong Kong stock market? What should international investors do if they ship on rallies? A friend who has been following Hu Zuliu's remarks in Hong Kong newspapers and TV stations told me that Hu Zuliu is a bit like a mainland stock critic. I dare not jump to conclusions, but judging from his inconsistent remarks on QFII and his excessive enthusiasm for QDII, I really doubt it.
Finally, we would like to ask Professor Ding Xueliang whether he is a "real economist" because he graduated from Harvard University like Hu Zuliu and the Global Competitiveness Report has a wide influence in the world. If so, whose interest is in his analysis of the inconsistency in the securities market? It seems that not only the mainland, but also Hong Kong has some economists who serve special interest groups under the banner of objective analysis.
In fact, everyone knows that some famous economists in the Mainland speak for special interest groups under the banner of promoting reform, while some economists in Hong Kong serve international financial institutions under the banner of objective analysis, showing dual personalities.