Joseph L. Shaefer's  Instablog

Joseph L. Shaefer
Send Message
Chief Investment Officer, Stanford Wealth Management. Retired senior exec of Charles Schwab.  36 years active and reserve military service -- 6 in special operations, 30 in the intelligence community. Geopolitical analyst.  Author -- investment book Bringing Home the Gold.  Editor -- The... More
My company:
Stanford Wealth Management
My blog:
The Investor's Edge
My book:
Bringing Home the Gold
  • Debunking the China Myth 0 comments
    Nov 8, 2010 9:56 AM | about stocks: CEO, CAGC

    Globalization is seductive.  And data may be presented, especially beyond the pale of strong accountancy, that creates a false confidence.  In times when our own market have been more volatile, an economy like China’s is particularly seductive.  It seems to be on the straight-line progression the current generation of US investors enjoyed, and came to expect, from 1982-2000 (and now feel cheated that it ended, as all secular bull markets do.)


    I would advise caution in pursuing this investment avenue too wholeheartedly.  That is not to say I would eschew international diversification!  Nor that I don’t own some Chinese stocks.  Simply that I prefer to place the bulk of my and my clients’ portfolios in nations where the rule of law trumps the rule of a central committee, where physical and intellectual property rights are respected and enforced, where nepotism and favoritism are subjected to the harsh sunlight of a free press, and where entrepreneurialism abounds alongside natural and intellectual resources.  In this last I can recommend China; in the others, I fear we must tread lightly.


    Here’s why I recommend greater diversification: First and foremost, if the USA and the EU are the primary customers for China’s products (most of which are consumer rather than industrial products) and consumers in both the US and Europe snap their wallets shut, what will power the Chinese juggernaut?  They have virtually no middle class at home and their Asian neighbors often produce goods more cheaply than China does.


    As importantly, Chinese workers are no different than American workers or Japanese workers or German workers.  Each in their time had numerous laborers willing to work for a pittance so they could have a better life for themselves and their children.  Each in turn began to demand higher wages as being only fair, given the experience and talent they gained, which leads to increased productivity. 


    It will be no different in China.  It is actually in China’s interest to pay its workers more; doing so will create the middle class that is now missing so that in future tough times, they can rely on their own consumer base to muddle through.  Higher wages would make other nations less protectionist, as well.  But even if neither of these revelations sink in, it will simply happen because farm kids subsisting on rice and dried fish will move to the cities and happily labor for next to nothing for the first few years.  It’s new, it’s exciting, you can now afford to eat meat or poultry twice a week, maybe you and your roommate even share a motorbike.  But it is simply immutable human nature that the thrill wears off and you’d like chicken three times a week or you’d like to have your own motorbike.  The pressure to increase wages genie is out of the bottle and there’s no putting it back in. 


    I add to this volatile mix simmering ethnic strife; horrible air and water pollution; a lack of fresh potable water; poor corporate governance standards; the need to create 24 million new jobs a year; an aging population with no social safety net; a banking system that is used for political goals and therefore instructed to loan where politicians decide, not where responsible bankers decide; and a statist government that engenders false reporting from the hinterlands by its draconian punishment of those who fail to deliver.  With this tsunami just over the horizon, I don’t see a straight-line progression of success for China.  


    There are certainly some well-run companies there and I own some of them.  CNOOC (NYSE:COO) seems to be a fine company that meets international reporting standards, as are many others.  I like small cap China Agritech (OTCPK:CAGC), for instance, as a fertilizer play.  I have even speculated in China – we own Shun Tak Holdings (OTCPK:SHTGY), the biggest ferry operator from the mainland to the newer, bigger Las Vegas on Macau – a play on gambling and the Chinese love of same.

    But for me, the best way to play China is via other nations that have what China wants and needs: Canadian timber, Australian oil, Singaporean markets, and US grain all leap to mind.  In these places, I can enjoy good corporate governance and the rule of law, yet still benefit from China’s growing needs by buying quality companies in nations I am more comfortable will experience significantly less upheaval.  I’ll discuss some of these firms in the coming weeks.  When you see them, see if you don’t agree that you can profit from China’s growth without taking on China’s potential problems…



    Disclosure: Long CAGC and SHTGY, have been long other China stocks in the past and likely will be again.  But prefer to play "China growth” via those companies from nations that supply China with what it needs to keep its economy going.


    Disclaimer: As Registered Investment Advisors, we see it as our responsibility to advise the following: we do not know your personal financial situation, so the information contained in this communiqué represents the opinions of the staff of Stanford Wealth Management, and should not be construed as personalized investment advice.


    Past performance is no guarantee of future results, rather an obvious statement but clearly too often unheeded judging by the number of investors who buy the current #1 mutual fund only to watch it plummet next month.


    We encourage you to do your own research on individual issues we recommend for your analysis to see if they might be of value in your own investing. We take our responsibility to proffer intelligent commentary seriously, but it should not be assumed that investing in any securities we are investing in will always be profitable. We do our best to get it right, and we “eat our own cooking,” but we could be wrong, hence our full disclosure as to whether we own or are buying the investments we write about.



    Stocks: CEO, CAGC
Back To Joseph L. Shaefer's Instablog HomePage »

Instablogs are blogs which are instantly set up and networked within the Seeking Alpha community. Instablog posts are not selected, edited or screened by Seeking Alpha editors, in contrast to contributors' articles.

Comments (0)
Track new comments
Be the first to comment
Full index of posts »
Latest Followers


  • "DOHA" was always "DOA." Just the Saudis jawboning prices higher to lock in a little more on a few more contracts. Iran play nice? Never!
    Apr 17, 2016
  • When did institutions & investors become such WIMPS?Fed gov talks,market drops 150+. OF COURSE they will raise rates. Old news. Get over it.
    Nov 13, 2015
  • mercy
    May 26, 2015
More »

Latest Comments

Instablogs are Seeking Alpha's free blogging platform customized for finance, with instant set up and exposure to millions of readers interested in the financial markets. Publish your own instablog in minutes.