选购二手房有学问

近年来,随着房地产市场的进一步发展．国内二手房市场交易量也迅速上升,尤其是在北京、上海、广州等大城市表现得更为突出。购买二手房,一是价格便宜,至少可比一手房省25％的费用。二是选择空间大,二手房房源丰富,从低廉混合房到高档社区．应有尽有,     

放低身段的高端豪宅

在环渤海湾的五大城市中,这一有着高贵基因的名仕系产品,或因某种不可控的市场因素,不得不放低身段改走刚需路线。在金地集团的规划中,被归为高端产品系列的名仕系产品,就像一个出身豪门的富家小姐,不但其外表需要体现所谓的新富阶层的品相、品位、精致和高端,内里也需要真才实学以及极高的修养、气质。不过,现实往往没有预想来得那么完美。     

大城市行如何提升市场竞争力

一、大城市金融环境现状当前．我国经济在世界金融危机的背景下,依靠稳健的政策导向和不断优化的市场经济体系．保持着较快的发展速度。今后很长一段时间内,中国的城市化进程将稳步推进,城市中的产业结构和经济结构将进一步完善和优化。各家金融机构都加大了对城市行的扶持力度．加快城市行的发展速度。尤其在一些重点大城市,往往聚集着众多的金融机构．外资银行在进入中国市场后,也都毫不犹豫地将第一站选在了我国上海、北京、深圳等大城市和重点城市,可以说这些城市的金融竞争已进入白热化。目前,这些城市的金融市场环境呈现出以下特点：     

给儿童买保险有招

如今,给孩子买保险已经成为很多父母的选择。据资料显示,在大城市里,80％的父母表示应该给自己的孩子购买保险。不过,真正购买的不足40％,原因是,不懂保险知识,面对众多保险公司和各种各样的儿童产品,无从选择。     

试论成熟社区新建楼盘的产品策略与价格策略

房地产业开发企业营销笄在一个误区，营销笄是整个社区的策划，成熟社区中新建楼盘成功与否取决于先期楼盘策划是否成功，其实不仅新建 楼盘需要策划，而且一个成功的新建楼盘的营销策划，可以反作用于整个社区，带动社区尾盘的销售，新建楼盘营销的关键是其产品策略和价格策略，根据理论与实践的分析，提出同质人群相聚，空间艺术户型的产品策略和在价格阈限范围内浮动的价格策略。     

偿还房贷有讲究

自2008年以来,我国政府陆续出台了多项利好政策来刺激经济的发展,并且针对当前的房地产市场状况出台了一系列强有力的政策：首套住宅贷款利率可享受7折优惠;公积金贷款额度调高;连续5次降息;符合条件的存量房贷也可以享受利率7折优惠;公积金账户可以按月提取等等。这些利好政策都意在推动房地产市场的成交量,使不景气的房地产市场能够尽快地得以健康发展。房贷利好政策的出台的确受惠于民,那么普通的贷款购房者如何还贷更合理呢？     

房市的泡沫到底有多大

去年中国主要大城市房价飞涨的主要原因：一是因为大量的投机需求,使大城市的房地产泡沫越吹越大。二是因为政府对土地的过分管制。三是因为很多在未来几年准备买房结婚的人看到上半年房价大幅上涨了．担心在未来还会这么快上涨,所以提前“非理性”买房。房价本来是不会涨得这么快的,     

地产行业 “小阳春”的诱惑

在经历了短暂的政策观望期后,房地产价量齐升,地王频出,"小阳春"行情有望重现。房地产板块在利空打压下风险释放较为充分,估值优势明显,成交量的回升或成地产股短线反弹的导火线。     

环“都市圈”房地产市场及房地产金融风险研究——以山西晋中为例

近年来,随着我国城市化进程提速,房地产市场发展加快。上世纪90年代,山西提出＂太原都市圈＂概念,而离太原最近的晋中市榆次区凭借其突出的区位优势,逐步形成了＂毗邻而居,恍若同城＂的＂城市后花园、都市休闲区＂的城市空间结构定位,成为太原都市圈中不可或缺的一部分。     

地产商PK购房客,谁能扛到最后

去年10月份时,当沪指站在6000点上方时,如果有人说股指会跌到3500点以下,那肯定会被人骂成疯子。同样在去年国庆节以前,当房价直冲云霄时,如果有人站出来说房价会全面下跌的话,也无疑会被人骂为神经病。然而,仅仅是半年之后,股指确实跌下来了,而且是疯狂下跌;房价也正在开始往下跌,只是房价尚没有如股市那样崩盘式下跌而已。     

Diversification disasters

The recent financial crisis has revealed significant externalities and systemic risks that arise from the interconnectedness of financial intermediaries’ risk portfolios. We develop a model in which the negative externality arises because intermediaries’ actions to diversify that are optimal for individual intermediaries may prove to be suboptimal for society. We show that the externality depends critically on the distributional properties of the risks. The optimal social outcome involves less risk-sharing, but also a lower probability for massive collapses of intermediaries. We derive the exact conditions under which risk-sharing restrictions create a socially preferable outcome. Our analysis has implications for regulation of financial institutions and risk management.     

Is Country Diversification better than Industry Diversification?

In this paper, we develop a framework in which one can examine the source of industry and country diversification by examining their underlying return components. We find that the global cash flow factor explains on average 39% of the variation of country cash flows and global discount rates explain 55% of the variation of country discount rates. These are much less than the explanatory power of the two factors over industry cash flow and discount rate variations, which are 72% and 78% respectively. This suggests that global factors are much less important for return components at country level than at the industry level. As a result, both better diversification of expected returns and cash flows across countries determine the larger benefits of country diversification versus industry diversification. Moreover, emerging markets tend to have much smaller co‐movements of both dividends and expected returns with those of the world, suggesting a lower degree of integration with the world goods and financial markets. Our results cast doubt on the prevailing wisdom that country diversification should be replaced by industry diversification.     

Diversification revisited

Many investment companies hold diversified asset portfolios and frequently try to mirror or outperform a market index for each asset class such as stocks and bonds. As Wibaut and Wilford (2009) show, often the same issuers appear in each of those indices and this may lead to undesirable results such as during a crisis period. Our research further explores the topic of diversification with a special focus on the financial crisis period of 2007 through 2009. Our results indicate that there is benefit in terms of correlations from holding bond and stock portfolios. Interestingly, these findings show the benefit is most pronounced during times of market stress.     

Global Diversification, Industrial Diversification, and Firm Value

Using a sample of 44,288 firm–years between 1984 and 1997, we document an increase in the extent of global diversification over time. This trend does not reflect a substitution of global for industrial diversification. We also find that global diversification results in average valuation discounts of approximately the same magnitude as those for industrial diversification. Analysis of the changes in excess value associated with changes in diversification reveals that increases in global diversification reduce excess value, while reductions in global diversification increase excess value. These findings support the view that the costs of global diversification outweigh the benefits.     

一元化还是多元化

多年来,在投资价值理念的驱使下,企业的投资行为一直在理性与非理性之间游走、碰撞;在多种选择与诱惑之间徘徊、进退,成功与失败交织在一起,经验与教训纠缠在一身,一元化还是多元化之争形成一个死结。有人说术业有专攻,企业应集中资源、力量与精力长时期坚持在熟悉的专业上     

Diversification and systemic risk

Portfolio diversification makes investors individually safer but creates connections between them through common asset holdings. Such connections create “endogenous covariances” between assets and investors, and enhance systemic risk by propagating shocks swiftly through the system. We provide a theoretical model in which shocks spread through constrained selling from N diversified portfolio investors in a network of asset holdings with home bias, and study the desirability of diversification by comparing the multivariate distribution of implied losses for every level of diversification. There may be a region on the parameter set for which the propagation effect dominates the individually safer one. We derive analytically the general element of the covariance between two assets i and j. We find agents may minimize their exposure to endogenous risk by spreading their wealth across more and more distant assets. The resulting network enhances systemic stability.     

Global Property Market Diversification

This paper examines global diversification benefits provided by developed property markets over 1992–2007. We employ a cointegration methodology, invariant to pair-wise correlational instability plaguing MPT approaches, to investigate regional and country property market diversification benefits for U.S. domiciled global real estate investors. We show, theoretically and empirically, the cointegration procedure aptly identifies markets integrated by common trends that mitigate diversification potential. We show global property markets are interregionally independent but find intraregional market cointegration. A portfolio of markets independent of cointegrating relationships performs best during the period but is insufficiently diversified relative to a cointegrated portfolio. Independent country markets do account for the bulk of global property diversification gains but cointegrated markets, particularly from the North American and Asia Pacific regions, retain some diversifying qualities. We also show cointegrated markets converge toward benchmark characteristics, reducing their attraction as portfolio candidates.     

Strategic Cost of Diversification

This article proposes a new explanation for the large cross-sectionalvariation in the excess values of diversified firms. The modelapplies the idea of shareholders' limited liability affectingfirms' output market strategies to the analysis of financialand operating choices of conglomerates. The inability of conglomeratesto commit to unconstrained optimal operating strategies, followingfrom the lack of flexibility in choosing their divisions' capitalstructures, reduces their value. Thus, the model highlightsa new type of inefficiency of the conglomerate organizationalstructure, which is suboptimal financing. The predictions ofthe model are generally supported by the data.     

Diversification and cash dynamics

Why do diversified firms hold significantly less cash than focused firms? We study this question using a dynamic model of corporate investment, saving, and diversification decisions. We find that investment dynamics are more important in explaining the cash differences than financing frictions. More efficient internal capital markets increase cash differences and are especially valuable when a firm diversifies or refocuses. Contrary to static models, more diverse conglomerates have lower cash differences. Endogenous selection (diversifying firms are larger and have better growth opportunities) accounts for 68% of the cash difference, and the diversification event itself reduces cash holdings by 32%.     

The Diversification Puzzle: Revisiting the Value Impact of Diversification for UK Firms

Abstract:  The literature on value impact of diversification decisions has focused on US firms and has examined industrial rather than geographic diversification . This study exploits the Lang and Stulz (1994) , Berger and Ofek (1995) and Bodnar et al. (1999) methodologies and controls for form of diversification in assessing value impact for a sample of UK firms, for the period 1996-2000. Using an adjusted value metric that controls for industry effects, we report a significant and perverse geographic discount of 14%, and no systematic industrial value impact, suggesting that sector characteristics may be a significant driver of diversification choice for UK firms.