• Ernie Diaz

Sorry State

Getting a financial firm to give you your money back can be difficult, even when they’re contractually obligated to do so. Thus, Vanguard’s recent return of almost $27 billion, voluntarily, to China state institutions, speaks volumes about the pitfalls of working with government-backed clients.

Whether local Vanguard employees’ patience or livers gave out first, we’ll never know. What is clear is their stated rationale of going after China’s retail investors, citing the move as more profitable. Curious, considering Vanguard’s chief retail offering of micro-fee index investing.

“Vanguard’s opinion underlines our position on China’s investment industry,” says Jimmie Jeremejev, “in that it is vastly underserved. Only 3% penetration, by our partner Raffles’ reckoning.”

More prescience points to Vanguard in betting that China’s main street investors are ready for products which have been extant in the West for years, but denied them thus far. “The same people who believe it’s too early for Chinese index investing are the same people who thought China wasn’t ready for coffee, wine, and the NBA twenty years ago,” Jeremejev jests.

4 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All

Let's tick off all China's bad news, before getting to the good news. Good news, that is, for investors looking to diversify their global portfolios. Not so good for Gordon Chang and other patient app

Like Hollywood, the western press is invested in narratives and emotional manipulation. Unlike Hollywood, that press has no compunction about skipping the third act of a story, if it doesn't fit that

Politics makes shortchanged bedfellows. As we've written before and will no doubt write again, the paradigm that China stocks = the VIEs of giant tech companies that make it to New York is keeping ave