To: TobagoJack who wrote (61393 ) 2/22/2010 12:10:46 AM From: Hawkmoon Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 217591 chinese speculators are mostly doing with equity, not leverage Ah.. so that makes it alright to build entire cities, not to mention beautiful skyscrapers and malls, that lie empty and unproductive? Maybe you should read this article that explains that not all bubbles are financed via leverage:Nothing in this process inherently requires the “over exuberant” bout of investment to be funded by debt. Two of the most famous bubbles in history, the Tulip Mania of 1637 and the South Sea Bubble of 1720, were not caused by borrowing, but investors putting their own money into commodities or projects they barely understood (in fact, the South Sea Bubble was actually funded by de-leveraging, in which investors swapped claims on Britain’s national debt in exchange for equity shares in a company that proposed to restructure that debt). seekingalpha.com China’s banks may not have invested in risky mortgage securities like CDOs, but they make most of their business loans based on collateral in companies’ real estate assets , which frequently are pegged to the going price of nearby residential developments. If that collateral were suddenly cut in half, China could face a banking meltdown that makes the West’s financial crisis look like a walk in the park. ...... .....As a Beijing homeowner myself, I’ve experienced this puzzling phenomenon firsthand. We have been told that the value of the condo we bought last year has gone up 30% based on sales of new nearby developments, but it’s impossible to confirm since there is no secondary market. Originally we tried to rent the place, but we couldn’t find takers at any price that could remotely cover the mortgage , despite a prime location. feer.com It should be pretty obvious that when brand new buildings, and beautiful ones at that, are built and not occupied, there's "something rotten in Denmark".. ;0) And if China's unemployment issue doesn't remedy itself, which seems to be dependent upon exporting stuff to the West, who's going to rent all that real estate, let alone maintain it? We understand from "mark to market" accounting principles that the value of something is what someone else is willing to pay for it in a secondary market, but that seems to be lacking in a lot of the Chinese real estate market. People just build it, park their money in it due to no property taxes (a concept I DO like), but the actual value never seems to properly reflect what people are able to pay for it. So yes.. I think even you can acknowledge the distortions that exist in those markets. Distortions that PALE in comparison to what we're seeing in the US and Europe. But yet you believe it's not a bubble merely because people aren't using credit to build those empty buildings. But eventually, every investment has to either net a return, or face a market revaluation. And since a lot of loans in China are based upon RE collateral, what happens to those loans when the value of the collateral eventually deflates to reflect the populations general ability to occupy and utilize it productively? Hawk