评论
打印
Ask a banker in Asia about the $25,000 fee that Morgan Stanley accepted for leading an $800m dairy deal in Vietnam, and eyebrows are raised.
问问亚洲银行业者关于摩根士丹利(Morgan Stanley)担当越南一笔价值8亿美元的奶制品业交易的首席财务顾问仅收费2.5万美元的事，对方会惊讶地抬起眉毛。
One wag even joked that he knew bankers who paid more for their suits.
其中一个爱开玩笑的甚至打趣道，他认识的银行业者有的买西服都不止这么多钱。
But, quickly, the surprise and the quips are replaced by another question: what else did Morgan Stanley receive to make the deal worth it?
但是，惊讶和打趣很快被另一个问题取代：摩根士丹利还得到了什么值得它接下这单业务的东西？
A payday of $25,000 is a low absolute number by any standards for a bank that just collected $120m for advising on another deal: Monsanto’s takeover by Bayer.
对于这家为另外一笔交易——拜耳(Bayer)收购孟山都(Monsanto)——收取1.2亿美元咨询费的银行来说，无论以何种标准，2.5万美元的数额都是一个很低的绝对值。
But it is hardly the lowest of lowballs in a region where tales abound of Indian flotations that paid a single rupee and Chinese tycoons who only grudgingly pay up, if at all.
但是，在这个充斥着印度企业花1卢比完成股票发行以及中国大亨勉强付清费用（甚至不付）故事的地区，这也算不上是最低的报价。
Morgan Stanley declined to comment on its reasons for accepting such a relatively small fee for leading the sale of a 9 per cent stake in Vinamilk, worth $830m.
对于为什么愿意以如此少的费用担当Vinamilk售股交易（出售9%股份，价值8.3亿美元）的首席财务顾问，摩根士丹利拒绝置评。
A western rival who was also prepared to do the deal for that fee said the banks involved would make additional money from brokerage charges on the sale of the shares.
一家也愿意以同等费用为该交易提供财务咨询的对手西方投行称，相关银行可以从股份出售的经纪费中赚取额外收益。
Even so, it is still an example of the difficulties of making money in Asia, where the most profitable opportunities are not usually found in the highest-profile deal work.
即便如此，这仍然表明了投行在亚洲赚钱的难度，在这里，利润最高的机会往往不在那些最引人注目的交易业务中。
In the US, the most lucrative market for investment banking, brokerage fees or profits from lending to an investor are the cherry on the cake.
在美国这个投行最赚钱的市场，经纪费或来自向投资者放贷的利润，都是蛋糕上的樱桃。
In Asia, they are — as the structure of the Vinamilk deal suggests — often the cake.
而在亚洲，正如Vinamilk交易的结构所示，这些收入往往就是蛋糕。
This partly reflects the fact that few banks will still accept loss-leading work in the hope of a payout down the line, as they once did — and certainly none will admit it.
这部分反映出已经没有几家银行仍愿意接受亏本业务，以期未来会获得巨额回报，正如许多银行曾经做的那样——当然没有一家会承认这点。
Rather, they have learnt to box clever and find other ways of covering costs, such as brokerage fees.
相反，银行学会了聪明地做业务，找到弥补成本的其他途径，比如经纪费。
Morgan Stanley’s willingness to do this helped it snatch a deal from Goldman Sachs and Credit Suisse two years ago; its loans to an investor helped it steal a $4.7bn private placement for Ping An, the insurer, at the eleventh hour.
摩根士丹利愿意聪明地做业务的态度，帮助它在两年前从高盛(Goldman Sachs)和瑞信(Credit Suisse)手中抢走了一笔交易：摩根士丹利向一个投资者发放的贷款，帮助它在最后一刻偷走了保险公司中国平安(Ping An)一笔价值47亿美元的定向增发交易。
And costs need covering.
成本也的确需要弥补。
Even as Asia produces record investment banking fees — up 15 per cent this year compared with a one-fifth drop in the US, according to Thomson Reuters — the total pool is still small.
尽管亚洲产生了创纪录的投行费用——根据汤森路透(Thomson Reuters)的数据，今年亚洲的投行费用收入增长了15%，相比之下美国下滑了五分之一——但总值仍然较小。
Asia has produced 17 per cent of the global investment bank fees pool this year while the US accounts for nearly half.
今年，全球投行在亚洲获得的费用收入占总额的17%，而在美国获得的金额占了将近一半。
It’s fair to say the Asian growth story didn’t play out in certain ways where we needed it to, says one long-time dealmaker, in reference to the period since 2010, which marked the last aggressive push by western banks.
平心而论，亚洲增长故事并没有按我们所需要的方式展开，一名资深交易撮合者表示，他指的是自2010年以来的这段时期，也就是西方银行最近一次对亚洲发起攻势的时期。
Staffing levels are certainly under threat.
员工数量肯定在面临威胁。
Goldman cut 15 per cent of its investment banking force and had considering axing up to 30 per cent.
高盛已裁减15%的投行员工，而且曾考虑最多裁员30%。
Rivals see it as the bank reducing its workforce to match their own staffing levels, not a retreat per se.
该行的竞争对手认为它裁员是为了将员工数量减至对手银行的水平，而不是真正的撤退。
But even those rivals talk at best about selective hiring and many bankers say privately they are bracing for cuts.
然而，即便是那些竞争对手谈论的也至多是选择性招聘，很多银行业者私下表示，他们对裁员有心理准备。
For the banks, Asia’s low fees and market fragmentation are hard to change.
对于这些银行而言，亚洲的低费率和市场分散状况很难改变。
Banks need locally based teams in each market they want to target and there is little crossover, say, between a team in Seoul and one in Shanghai.
银行需要在每个它们希望瞄准的市场建立本地化团队，不同地区的团队（例如首尔的团队和上海的团队）之间几乎没有交叉。
That carries high fixed costs.
这带来了高额的固定成本。
Fee structures show little sign of movement.
费用结构几乎没有改变的迹象。
In Asia, equity capital raisings reliably account for the biggest single pool of work for the international banks, producing on average 40 per cent of their total fee pool.
在亚洲，股票融资稳居投行的第一大业务，平均占到总费用收入的40%。
But even in Hong Kong, which has topped the global initial public offering rankings for five of the past eight years, fees are just between 1 per cent and 3 per cent of a deal, compared with between 5 per cent and 7 per cent in New York.
然而即便在过去8年有5年夺得全球首次公开发行(IPO)冠军的香港，费率也只有交易额的1%至3%，而纽约则有5%至7%。
Equity fees have also been overtaken by those from debt deals this year — a factor unlikely to cheer the bigger banks that have invested less in building bond desks as they seek big IPO payouts.
今年，来自债券交易的费用收入已超过股票交易，这一因素不太可能鼓舞较大银行，它们对债券交易部门的投入较少，因为它们希望从IPO中赚取大笔费用。
That leaves China’s M&A boom as the region’s bright spot.
这令中国的并购热潮成为该地区的亮点。
Fees are nowhere near the levels on western deals but some bankers believe they are, in fact, rising.
亚洲交易的费用水平远不及西方交易，但一些银行业者相信，亚洲的费用水平事实上正在上涨。
They are realising there are things we can do that they can’t do on their own, says one bank’s regional head for dealmaking.
他们渐渐意识到，有些我们能做到的事情是他们靠自己无法完成的，一家银行的交易撮合区域主管表示，
Sometimes we’re seeing US-level fees and sometimes lower — but the trend is up.
有时，我们看到费用水平跟美国相当，有时比美国低——但趋势是上升的。
In a region where banks are prepared to assign top teams to a project for $25,000 plus the expectation of brokerage fees, optimism, anywhere, is welcomed.
在这个银行愿意为了2.5万美元的酬劳外加有望获得的经纪费，就将最优秀的团队投入一个项目的地区，无论在哪里，乐观都是受欢迎的。
One Asia hand not on the Vinamilk deal sighed: Vietnam won’t be the first government to ask for something for no money — and it won’t be the last.
一名未能参与Vinamilk交易的亚洲投行员工叹息道：越南不会是第一个要求免费服务的政府，它也不会是最后一个。
