全球银行无意撤出亚洲市场

Twenty-six banks involved in a single equity raising sounds like a foolhardy strategy in most parts of the world.

在世界大部分地区，26家银行参与一笔股权融资交易听起来像是鲁莽的策略。

But not in Asia.

但在亚洲，情况并非如此。

Here it makes sense to cram on to the ticket of Postal Savings Bank of China’s $8bn initial public offering with more than two dozen rivals.

在这里，与20多个对手扎堆参与中国邮储银行(PSBC) 80亿美元首次公开发行(IPO)是有道理的。

A crowded market is not the only thing banks have to contend with in the populous and diverse continent.

在这个人口多、差异大的大洲，市场拥挤并非银行要应对的唯一问题。

Growth is slowing, costs and risks are higher and bankers face difficult negotiations with clients that refuse to pay the going international rate.

增长在放慢，成本和风险在增加，银行家与客户谈判很困难，因为客户拒绝按当前国际标准付费。

So why are most of the world’s top banks determined to stay in the region — where they invested heavily from the start of the millennium — when they can make easier money back home?

那么，当大多数世界顶级银行在本土赚钱更容易时，它们为何决定留在亚洲呢？从本世纪初开始，世界顶级银行对亚洲进行了大笔投资。

Many would argue that they are not.

很多人会辩称，这些银行并没有决心坚守亚洲。

Big banks’ cuts in Asia — from Goldman Sachs’ recent cull of 15 per cent of its Asia ex-Japan investment bankers to the sharp reductions that Barclays, Deutsche Bank and Royal Bank of Scotland have taken to their businesses — have been well documented.

各大银行近来纷纷缩减亚洲业务：高盛(Goldman Sachs)把亚洲（不含日本）投资银行家人数减少15%，巴克莱(Barclays)、德意志银行(Deutsche Bank)和苏格兰皇家银行(RBS)更是大幅缩减业务。

Eight of the top foreign banks in the region cut front office headcount by between 10 and 15 per cent from 2012 to 2015, according to data compiled by consultant McLagan.

咨询机构麦理根(McLagan)汇编的数据显示，从2012年到2015年，落户亚洲的8家顶级外资银行把前台员工数量减少了10%至15%。

Guy Mozokowski, a US banking analyst at Autonomous, says: Asia is not something the firms have spoken about much of late — but actions speak louder than words, and we’ve seen reports . . . that make it pretty clear that the firms are downsizing in Asia investment banking.

Autonomous的美国银行业分析师盖伊.莫佐科夫斯基(Guy Mozokowski)说：亚洲并非各公司近来谈论很多的话题——但事实胜于雄辩，我们看到很多报告表明……各公司在削减亚洲投行业务。

But reports of scaling back do not capture the full story, with banks once again looking to grow in certain sectors and countries in Asia Pacific.

但是，有关缩减的报告并未体现全貌，因为有些银行再度寻求在亚太地区的某些行业和国家扩大业务。

This is perhaps unsurprising in a region where revenues at 12 of Europe’s and the US’s biggest banks have risen by about 15 per cent — to $81bn — in the past decade, according to data from Capital IQ.

对亚太而言，这或许并不令人意外。资本智商公司(Capital IQ)数据显示，过去10年期间，12家欧美大银行的亚太营收增长了约15%，至810亿美元。

Barclays is selectively hiring.

巴克莱正在有选择地招聘员工。

Credit Suisse and UBS are aggressively expanding, particularly in wealth management.

瑞信(Credit Suisse)和瑞银(UBS)正在大举扩张，尤其是在财富管理领域。

Standard Chartered is upgrading its talent so that it can serve a broader range of industries.

渣打(Standard Chartered)正进行人才升级，以便能为更多行业服务。

Even Goldman, home to the most recent cuts, will not countenance the idea that it is in retreat.

甚至最近削减业务的高盛，也不会支持它在撤退的说法。

We have to be nimble, it’s absolutely not about pulling back, says one senior executive.

我们必须变得灵活，我们绝对不是要后撤，一名高管表示。

We have not pulled out of a single business or region.

我们没有撤出任何业务或地区。

There’s a fascination with the business that does not seem to go away, says Gokul Laroia, Morgan Stanley’s co-chief executive for Asia Pacific on banks’ staying power.

银行业务具有一种魔力，看起来不会消失，摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)负责亚太业务的联合首席执行官高浩澧(Gokul Laroia)在谈到银行的后劲时表示。

There is no denying that the market has some unattractive features.

这并非否认该市场存在某些不招人喜欢的特点。

Fees in Asia are typically 45 to 60 per cent lower than in the US and Europe across deal sizes, according to Dealogic data.

Dealogic数据显示，无论交易规模大小，亚洲投行业务的收费通常比美欧低45%至60%。

Lower fee income is exacerbated by the high cost of operating across several jurisdictions, languages and legal systems and the compliance risks, and it is not hard to see why Asia is perceived as a profitability desert.

在多个司法管辖区运营、应付多种语言、司法体系以及合规风险的高昂成本，加重了收费低的困难，我们不难看出，为何亚洲被视为一块盈利沙漠。

So what do Asia-based investment bankers see in the region? To begin with, bankers do not have to make money in Asia for their Asian strategies to work.

那么，常驻亚洲的投资银行家在当地看到了什么？首先，银行家们未必在亚洲赚到钱，才算是亚洲战略奏效。

There is an explicit understanding and appreciation that you cannot be a global investment bank without an Asian presence, says Reid Marsh, head of APAC investment banking at Barclays, which has made big cuts in Asia.

有一种大家心知肚明的观点是，你必须有亚洲业务，才算得上一家全球投行，巴克莱亚太投行业务主管里德.马什(Reid Marsh)说。该行已大幅削减了亚洲业务。

Bankers say that means the real economics of their businesses is better than the published numbers.

银行家们表示，这意味着，他们业务的实际经济效益要好于公布的数字。

Others point out that banks can find fee sweet spots — for instance, by advising the US buyer of Chinese assets instead of the (penny-pinching) Chinese seller.

其他银行家指出，银行可以找到收费甜蜜点——比如，在美国企业收购中国资产时，向美国买方而不是（吝啬的）中国卖方提供咨询。

As for rising competition, while Chinese banks dominate the league tables for total Asian investment banking fees, once Chinese activity is stripped out, the data tells a different story.

至于说竞争加剧，尽管在总体亚洲投行收费排行榜上占主导地位的是中资银行，但把中资银行参与的交易剔除后，数据就呈现出不同的面貌。

For example, in Asia excluding China, US and European banks have the top four places in the Mergermarket league table that ranks banks by the value of the deals they have worked on so far this year.

例如，欧美银行在今年迄今的Mergermarket亚洲（不含中国）交易排行榜上占据了前四名。该榜单的排名依据是银行参与的交易规模。

Western banks argue for the exclusion of China on the basis that they do not contest much of the domestic Chinese business, either for M&A or for raising money.

西方银行支持在排名时把中国剔除掉，理由是它们并不参与大部分中国国内业务，无论是并购(M&A)还是融资业务。