編輯嚴選Season 2 EP4👉🏾Stan哥談GameStop與風險控管+大叔的煮菜哲學
編輯嚴選
2021/03/31閱讀時間約 13 分鐘
#Workhardplayhard #Stan哥GameStop風險控管
老師都說市場上散戶一定會輸給專業經理，那華爾街的避險基金是怎麼被GameStop的散戶給扳倒的呢？本集邀請蕭子昂，Stan哥來聊聊GameStop與風險控管！
蕭子昂 (Stan Siao) 個人簡歷：
退休前：
• 永豐證券投資信託公司 董事長 2015-2018
• 美國遠東國民銀行 董事長 2010-2017
• 永豐金控 總經理 2010-2015
• 中華開發金控 資深副總經理 2004-2008
• 大華證券 董事長 2004-2008
• 香港摩根史坦利 (Morgan Stanley HK) Managing Director 董事總經理 1997-2004
• 美國信孚銀行 (Bankers Trust Taipei and HK) 副總經理 1994-1997
• 美國美林證券 (Merrill Lynch HK) 1993-1994
• 美國摩根大通銀行 (Chase Manhattan Bank NY & HK) 1990-1993
退休後：
燃點公民平台 https://www.sparktaiwan.org/
華爾街的投資銀行從80年代開始，金融產品的交易從純粹為客戶服務慢慢成為摻入投資銀行自己的資金投資。之後產品與手段開始有了重大的改變，其中如投資銀行Salomon Brothers的故事，大家可以參考Liar’s Poker一書（https://cutt.ly/Mxf0XmX）。從一個宏觀的角度來看，利率從80年代開始的10%多，到少於2%的今天，大部分投資人的目標還是在追求高回報率。只是，努力的過程裡也許很多投資人會忘記高回報率同時代表著高風險。
說穿了，華爾街的投資銀行專業經理與散戶的最大差別便在於風險控管（風控）。除了管理交易員與投資部位，投資銀行主管負責的風控手段裡，常會看到主管買與既有投資相反的部位。風險控管不只是每天、全球、甚至董事會等級的管理，必要時如美國的911事件，華爾街的投資銀行會以不計成本的模式，全球性與即時性地控制既有投資部位的風險（翻譯：花粉~多錢去沖銷既有的投資，避免掉入造成破產的無底洞）。
GameStop之所以會讓人跌破眼鏡是因為華爾街的專業風控被散戶攻破。不否認的，華爾街的避險基金有一些是抱持牛仔心態，願意承擔較大風險。因此，有一些專業投資人的風控只看自己的部位而沒有抓這支股票對市場上整體的動向，於是當賣壓出現時才發現出不了場，無法停損。可是從一個華爾街行內行人的角度來看，最驚訝的是現在年輕投資人的邏輯不只限於賺錢，同時還追求社會的認同與爽感。雖然說華爾街接下來的風險控管勢必會把這一環也算進去，但遊戲規則的改變對未來的影響只能說對於現在還是個未知數。
Until the 1970s, trading in financial instruments was primarily a service offered to clients of investment banks. As the financial markets continue to develop, proprietary desks (trading the bank’s own account) gains prominence. The infamous ones that people still remember today are Salomon Brothers and Drexel Burnham Lambert. (Liar’s Poker is a must-read in this regard: https://cutt.ly/Mxf0XmX). In a secular context, this is a story of chasing the vanishing interest rates. As it dropped from the mid-teens in the 1980s to less than 2% today, investors primarily seek higher yields. What many investors do not seem to intuit in this process, however, is that high yield, given low interest rates, must imply higher risks.
Trading in an institutional setting is different from what a retail investor does in one key respect - risk management. Personal vim is not encouraged, despite what Hollywood may say. In addition to managing traders and a good nose on the directions of the markets, risk management is a daily, global, and board level activity in investment banks. At its most common, managers may hedge by betting against his own traders’ positions. At its extreme, when events that nobody could have foreseen, such as the 9-11 attack in the US, happen, hedging against a bank’s own positions takes on a global proportion with a whatever-it-takes mandate.
Given the level of resources and sophistication of institutional investors, what happened to GameStop (see news article: https://cutt.ly/xxf4dIJ) where the high flying hedge funds were brought down by retail investors? Clearly, some funds were acting like callous cowboys. It is also clear that some risk managers only considered their own positions and did not take into account the possibility of a short squeeze. What is most interesting, and uncertain, is whether the GameStop episode foreshadows a new era of social investing by young investors where social approval plays an equal part from the good old fashion profit motives. If true, this will change the rules of the game for investing in ways we have yet to fully understand.
退休前：
• 永豐證券投資信託公司 董事長 2015-2018
• 美國遠東國民銀行 董事長 2010-2017
• 永豐金控 總經理 2010-2015
• 中華開發金控 資深副總經理 2004-2008
• 大華證券 董事長 2004-2008
• 香港摩根史坦利 (Morgan Stanley HK) Managing Director 董事總經理 1997-2004
• 美國信孚銀行 (Bankers Trust Taipei and HK) 副總經理 1994-1997
• 美國美林證券 (Merrill Lynch HK) 1993-1994
• 美國摩根大通銀行 (Chase Manhattan Bank NY & HK) 1990-1993
退休後：
燃點公民平台 https://www.sparktaiwan.org/
華爾街的投資銀行從80年代開始，金融產品的交易從純粹為客戶服務慢慢成為摻入投資銀行自己的資金投資。之後產品與手段開始有了重大的改變，其中如投資銀行Salomon Brothers的故事，大家可以參考Liar’s Poker一書（https://cutt.ly/Mxf0XmX）。從一個宏觀的角度來看，利率從80年代開始的10%多，到少於2%的今天，大部分投資人的目標還是在追求高回報率。只是，努力的過程裡也許很多投資人會忘記高回報率同時代表著高風險。
說穿了，華爾街的投資銀行專業經理與散戶的最大差別便在於風險控管（風控）。除了管理交易員與投資部位，投資銀行主管負責的風控手段裡，常會看到主管買與既有投資相反的部位。風險控管不只是每天、全球、甚至董事會等級的管理，必要時如美國的911事件，華爾街的投資銀行會以不計成本的模式，全球性與即時性地控制既有投資部位的風險（翻譯：花粉~多錢去沖銷既有的投資，避免掉入造成破產的無底洞）。
GameStop之所以會讓人跌破眼鏡是因為華爾街的專業風控被散戶攻破。不否認的，華爾街的避險基金有一些是抱持牛仔心態，願意承擔較大風險。因此，有一些專業投資人的風控只看自己的部位而沒有抓這支股票對市場上整體的動向，於是當賣壓出現時才發現出不了場，無法停損。可是從一個華爾街行內行人的角度來看，最驚訝的是現在年輕投資人的邏輯不只限於賺錢，同時還追求社會的認同與爽感。雖然說華爾街接下來的風險控管勢必會把這一環也算進去，但遊戲規則的改變對未來的影響只能說對於現在還是個未知數。
Until the 1970s, trading in financial instruments was primarily a service offered to clients of investment banks. As the financial markets continue to develop, proprietary desks (trading the bank’s own account) gains prominence. The infamous ones that people still remember today are Salomon Brothers and Drexel Burnham Lambert. (Liar’s Poker is a must-read in this regard: https://cutt.ly/Mxf0XmX). In a secular context, this is a story of chasing the vanishing interest rates. As it dropped from the mid-teens in the 1980s to less than 2% today, investors primarily seek higher yields. What many investors do not seem to intuit in this process, however, is that high yield, given low interest rates, must imply higher risks.
Trading in an institutional setting is different from what a retail investor does in one key respect - risk management. Personal vim is not encouraged, despite what Hollywood may say. In addition to managing traders and a good nose on the directions of the markets, risk management is a daily, global, and board level activity in investment banks. At its most common, managers may hedge by betting against his own traders’ positions. At its extreme, when events that nobody could have foreseen, such as the 9-11 attack in the US, happen, hedging against a bank’s own positions takes on a global proportion with a whatever-it-takes mandate.
Given the level of resources and sophistication of institutional investors, what happened to GameStop (see news article: https://cutt.ly/xxf4dIJ) where the high flying hedge funds were brought down by retail investors? Clearly, some funds were acting like callous cowboys. It is also clear that some risk managers only considered their own positions and did not take into account the possibility of a short squeeze. What is most interesting, and uncertain, is whether the GameStop episode foreshadows a new era of social investing by young investors where social approval plays an equal part from the good old fashion profit motives. If true, this will change the rules of the game for investing in ways we have yet to fully understand.
#TUXIdentification
#謝聽眾時間
非常感謝，來自台北的吉兒！
#TUXOfficeHour #食譜的藏私
大叔Sa’an算是對於煮菜有些心得，但曾經被抱怨食譜藏私。其實大叔Sa’an的食譜很簡單：肉片醃鹽與醬油、蒜頭剁碎、熱炒（食譜1）；肉片改成肉塊或肉絲（食譜2,3）；肉醃鹽與醬油後加太白粉（食譜4,5,6）。被抱怨食譜藏私的同時，大叔心裡偷偷OS，其實如果三種肉（雞、豬、牛）都參考這些食譜的話就會有十八道菜了。
相信大部分的人都能了解複雜的菜也是簡單的步驟一個一個堆疊出來的，可是很多人卻搞錯，其實簡單並不代表容易。簡單是指步驟清楚且聽得懂，可是要把任何一個簡單的步驟輕鬆做到並不容易。就跟走路一樣，只需要左腳右腳輪流前進就好了，但要走得快、走得遠不一定是容易的；說一口好菜容易，但光說不練就想做出一道簡單的菜是不容易的。
古人曾說過「治國如烹小鮮」。在市井小人的世界裡，與其說魚不好煮，或許該想的是如何把這道菜變成一個一個簡單的步驟，然後在能烹煮成美味海鮮之前，做很多很多的練習。總而言之，「乖乖」練習就不會錯了！
節目中提到的推薦書籍：Harold McGee, On Food and Cooking: https://cutt.ly/pxgjrXl
Here are six (6) simple recipes. First, season pork slices with salt and soy sauce. Second, mince some garlic. Third, stir fry all ingredients in a pan with oil. This is one (1) recipe. Now, instead of pork slices, change them into julienne or cubes. This makes three (3) recipes. Then, add cornstarch during the seasoning in the first step for the first three recipes. Voilà! This makes six (6) recipes.
People sometimes think cooking more complicated than what it truly is. Complex and fancy food are usually built from one simple step after another. Instead, there is confusion between simple and easy. Namely, even when a task is simple to understand, it is quite another to be able to perform the task with ease. Practice is what it takes to make a simple task easy.
There is an old Chinese expression that suggests managing a country is like cooking delicate seafood. Instead of thinking of cooking seafood as an impossible task, maybe what it meant to say is that only by breaking things down into simple tasks is it possible for beauty and complexity to arise. And, yes, practice is not optional.
Harold McGee, On Food and Cooking: https://cutt.ly/pxgjrXl
People sometimes think cooking more complicated than what it truly is. Complex and fancy food are usually built from one simple step after another. Instead, there is confusion between simple and easy. Namely, even when a task is simple to understand, it is quite another to be able to perform the task with ease. Practice is what it takes to make a simple task easy.
There is an old Chinese expression that suggests managing a country is like cooking delicate seafood. Instead of thinking of cooking seafood as an impossible task, maybe what it meant to say is that only by breaking things down into simple tasks is it possible for beauty and complexity to arise. And, yes, practice is not optional.
Harold McGee, On Food and Cooking: https://cutt.ly/pxgjrXl
最後，附上大家最期待的「謝伯伯時間」專訪語音檔或Podcast連結：
· Apple podcast：
· Youtube：
· Spotify：
· KKBOX：
· Google Podcast：
聯絡我們👉🏾Email: [email protected]
留言0
查看全部