安邦大舉收購背後的資金風險 Anbang global shopping spree fuelled by leverage

Anbang has raised the stakes in the bidding battle for Starwood Hotels & Resorts with its latest $14bn offer — but its reliance on high-cost borrowing carries plenty of risks, analysts have warned.

在爭奪喜達屋酒店及度假村國際集團(Starwood Hotels & Resorts)的競購大戰中，安邦保險集團(Anbang)已將價碼加到了140億美元。然而分析師警告稱，安邦依賴於高成本籌資的做法蘊含着很多風險。

Such funding has fuelled Anbang Insurance Group’s global shopping spree — including its $2bn purchase of the Waldorf Astoria — and seen it evolve from an obscure Chinese car insurer into a $290bn global conglomerate with investment strategies more akin to the world of private equity.

藉助這類資金，安邦在全球各地大肆收購，包括以20億美元收購紐約華爾道夫酒店(Waldorf Astoria hotel)；它從一家不太有名的中國汽車保險公司，成長爲資產規模達2900億美元、投資策略更接近私募股權(PE)基金的全球性綜合集團。

Mystery and speculation surrounds the identity of investors who boosted Anbang’s registered capital fivefold in an eight-month period in 2014. But chairman Wu Xiaohui’s ability to draw on political connections to raise equity is only one part of the story.

2014年幫助安邦在8個月內將註冊資本金擴大4倍的神祕投資者引發了外界的猜測，不過，安邦董事長吳小暉利用他在政界的關係籌集股本的能力只是整個故事的一部分。

Anbang collects 44 per cent of its insurance premiums from the sale of so-called universal life policies, high-yielding wealth management products that combine a death benefit with an investment component that guarantees a payout during the policyholder’s lifetime. For many of these, the savings or “cash value” component dwarfs the protection element.

安邦44%的保費收入來自所謂的“萬能型壽險產品”，這是一種高收益理財產品，由死亡保險金和投資收益（保證投保人在世時獲得一定收益）組成。許多萬能險的儲蓄或“現金價值”成分遠大於風險保障成分。

Anbang’s premiums from universal insurance products grew 306 per cent in 2015 to Rmb49bn ($7.5bn), compared with industry-wide growth of 95 per cent, according to regulatory data. Such growth helped Anbang climb the Chinese premium ranks among life insurers from 40th in 2012 to fourth place last year.

根據監管機構的數據，2015年安邦來自萬能險產品的保費增長了3.06倍，達到490億元人民幣（合75億美元），相比之下全行業增長率只有95%。得益於這樣的增長速度，安邦在中國壽險公司保費排行榜上從2012年的第40名升至去年的第4名。

Sam Radwan, partner at Enhance, a consultancy that advises several midsized Chinese insurers, says his clients fear the entry of Anbang to markets where they are active.

諮詢公司Enhance的客戶包括多家中等規模的中國保險公司，該公司合夥人薩姆•拉德萬(Sam Radwan)表示，他的客戶們都擔心安邦會進入他們所在的市場。

“They basically told me, ‘once Anbang comes to town, we know we’re not going to be able to compete.’ They tend to offer higher returns.”

“他們基本上都這麼說，‘我們知道，一旦安邦進場，我們沒法與其競爭’。安邦往往提供更高的回報。”

Yet this strategy carries risks, analysts say. Higher yields enable Anbang to grab market share but also force the group to chase higher returns — and take on greater risk — to meet promises to investors.

不過，分析師表示安邦這種策略是有風險的。提供高收益令安邦能夠搶佔市場份額，但也會迫使該集團追逐更高回報——從而也承擔更大風險——以兌現對投資者的承諾。

Traditional insurers invest mainly in conservative assets such as government bonds and try to earn profits by using actuarial skill to minimise payouts. Anbang more closely resembles a private equity fund, where capital is expensive and investment returns drive profits.

傳統保險公司主要投資於政府債券之類的保守資產，並利用精算技能儘量減少支付，以此賺取利潤。安邦則更像一傢俬募股權基金，這類基金的資金成本高昂，利潤主要來自投資收益。

There are also worries about liquidity risk. Many WMPs carry short maturities, while assets such as luxury hotels cannot be quickly sold. Universal insurance policies from Anbang and other insurers carry a headline maturity of five or 10 years but carry an option to cash out after one or two, sometimes with no penalty.

還有一種擔憂是與流動性風險有關。許多理財產品的期限很短，而豪華酒店之類的資產無法迅速出售。安邦及其他保險公司所售萬能險的期限大多爲5年或10年，但投保人也可選擇在一兩年後退保把錢取出來，有時候還無需繳納違約金。

“There is an issue with selling long policies for the short term. But you have to invest in long-term assets like equity or infrastructure debt if you want to generate the high returns,” said Zhang Fenghua, insurance analyst at China Chengxin Credit Ratings. “This can lead to liquidity mismatch.”

中誠信國際信用評級(CCXI)保險業分析師張鳳華表示：“將長期險按短期產品銷售會有問題。但是，如果你希望產生高回報，就只能投資長期資產，像股權或基礎設施債務。這就可能導致流動性錯配。”

WMPs have surged in recent years as Chinese savers looked for alternatives to low-yielding bank deposits. Commercial banks are the biggest sellers but regulations limit the assets that lenders can buy. Insurers such as Anbang have benefited from deregulation allowing them greater freedom to invest in equity and real estate.

近些年來，隨着中國儲戶尋找可替代低收益銀行存款的投資渠道，理財產品發展迅猛。商業銀行是理財產品的最大銷售方，然而監管條例卻限制了銀行可以購買的資產。而安邦等保險公司則從去監管化中得到了好處，這些去監管化措施令它們獲得了投資於股權和房地產的更大自由。

Bank WMPs with guaranteed payouts currently offer yields of about 3-4 per cent, while those from insurers reach 5-6 per cent. Yet the true cost of WMP funding to insurers is even higher than the product yield. When sales commissions to banks or online platforms such as Alibaba's Taobao are included, the cost to the insurer may reach 7-8 per cent.

目前銀行理財產品的收益率約在3%到4%，而保險公司同類產品的收益率則達到5%到6%。不過，保險公司通過銷售理財產品獲取資金的真實成本要高於產品的收益率。如果將付給銀行或阿里巴巴(Alibaba)旗下淘寶網(Taobao)等在線平臺的銷售佣金包括在內，保險公司的資金成本或達到7%到8%。

To be sure, Anbang’s solvency ratio is among the highest in the industry, and analysts do not expect near-term problems. But Mr Radwan says the experience of Japan and Taiwan shows that aggressive selling can sow the seeds of future disaster if falling interest rates depress asset returns for insurers committed to paying high yields.

誠然，論償債能力比率，安邦排在業內最高之列，分析師也預計該集團近期內不會出現問題。然而，拉德萬表示，日本和臺灣的經驗證明，激進的銷售模式可能播下未來發生災難的種子。對於承諾提供高收益的保險公司來說，一旦利率下滑抑制了資產回報率，這種災難就會發生。

“(Mr Wu) is building an atomic bomb. It may work out fine, or it may explode in a big way,” said Mr Radwan.

拉德萬表示：“（吳小暉）在造一枚原子彈，可能進展順利，也可能猛烈爆炸。”

Regulators are aware of the risks. Last week Caixin, a respected financial news website, reported that Chinese regulators may block the Strategic and Starwood deals because they would put Anbang on the wrong side of a regulation limiting foreign investments by Chinese insurers to no more than 15 per cent of total assets.

監管機構對相關風險已有所察覺。就在上週，受尊敬的財經新聞網站財新網(Caixin)報道稱，中國監管機構可能會否決安邦對Strategic和喜達屋的收購交易，原因是這兩宗交易或致安邦違反有關中國保險公司境外投資不得超出總資產15%的監管規定。

“If there is any risk that the takeover activities will slow, it would likely be due to tighter regulations of bidders’ financial leverage,” Vincent Chan, head of China research at Credit Suisse, wrote in a recent report.

瑞士信貸(Credit Suisse)中國研究主管陳昌華(Vincent Chan)在近日一份報告中寫道：“如果說有什麼風險因素會使收購活動放緩，那很可能是由對競購者財務槓桿的規定收緊造成的。

“China’s insurance regulatory agency has already stated concerns about the usage of funds raised from insurance products to support these bids.”

“中國保險業監管機構已經表達了對利用險資支持此類收購活動的擔憂。”

Anbang could not be reached for comment.

記者未能聯繫上安邦請其置評。