Los administradores de TransicionEstructural no se responsabilizan de las opiniones vertidas por los usuarios del foro. Cada usuario asume la responsabilidad de los comentarios publicados.
8 Usuarios y 39 Visitantes están viendo este tema.
Vanke’s bondholders reject extension plan on 2 billion yuan of bonds, raising default riskThe rejection in a three-day vote that ended late on Friday gives the developer a grace period of five business days to pay 2 billion yuan of onshore bondChina Vanke failed to secure bondholder approval to extend by one year a bond payment due on Monday, a filing showed, increasing the risk of default for the developer and renewing concerns about the crisis-hit property sector.The setback for state-backed Vanke, one of China’s highest-profile developers with projects in major cities, renews concerns about the property sector, where some of the country’s best-known developers have defaulted in recent years.The rejection in a three-day vote that ended late on Friday gives the developer a grace period of five business days to pay 2 billion yuan (US$280 million) on the onshore bond, the filing to the National Association of Financial Market Institutional Investors showed.Vanke may propose extending the grace period to 30 business days, said Yao Yu, founder of credit research firm RatingDog. “If bondholders approve, it would give the developer more time to communicate with investors and reach a consensus.”Buyers of China Vanke’s Le Mont residential project in Tai Po at the sales office in Cheung Sha Wan on March 15, 2025. Photo: Nora TamVanke did not respond to Reuters’ request for comment outside business hours on the rejection by bondholders.
2026 Outlook: A Brewing StormDark clouds gather on the horizon but the storm might not make landfall next yearI am by nature an optimist, but when I look toward 2026 and beyond, I feel like the man in the picture below — standing on the shoreline, watching a dangerous storm gather, knowing that sooner or later it will make landfall.The bad news is clear. Two storm fronts are forming at once: stretched U.S equity valuations and increasingly fragile government debt markets. Each on its own would warrant caution; together, they create the conditions for a foreboding sight. These are not entirely distant clouds. They are already visible on the horizon.The good news is that the storm does not appear imminent. Barring a resurgence in inflation or some sort of external shock, Fed policy shifts may be enough to mean that 2026 is unlikely to be the year of impact. That buys time - time for markets, policymakers, and investors to prepare portfolios.With the storm forming but not yet breaking, the rest of this outlook focuses on three questions: how severe the damage could be, when landfall is most likely and is there anything we can do to prepare.The Approaching StormU.S equity valuations, by almost any metric, look stretched. I’ve used the chart below many times this year, but it remains the cleanest way to convey the scale of the current bubble. Its sheer size dwarfs prior episodes - not just reminiscent of past manias, but larger and more concentrated.What makes this storm unusual is that it wasn’t formed by easy money. As I wrote last week, the Fed has kept monetary policy tight, yet valuations in a handful of AI-related names has continued to swell.The narrow market leadership is a concern. If anything begins to weaken inside the core AI complex, the pressure front could change rapidly. Even whispers of accounting irregularities at Nvidia are alarming. And any earnings disappointments or operational missteps at Intel, Oracle, AMD, or Microsoft could be enough to pull the AI storm inland and puncture the bubble.Alongside the equity storm, a slower but far more structural front is gathering in government debt markets. Many developed economies are edging into something that looks uncomfortably like a debt vortex: vast issuance feeding higher yields, higher yields swelling interest costs, and those interest costs widening the deficit and forcing yet more issuance. The mechanics are straightforward, but once the spiral begins, it becomes exceedingly hard to stop without either a political consensus for fiscal restraint or an unexpected burst of real growth.And the traditional stabilisers are missing across much of the developed world. Central banks that once absorbed vast quantities of sovereign debt - from the Federal Reserve to the ECB and the Bank of England - are now shrinking their balance sheets. Foreign demand has softened too, with reserve managers diversifying away from dollar- and euro-denominated assets, and long-standing anchor investors such as Japan likely returning home due to Bank of Japan rate hikes.That leaves more and more of this rising debt to be absorbed by whoever is left - from households to fast-moving trading funds - buyers who often step back just when markets turn rough. If volatility picks up, the stabilisers disappear and the turbulence can intensify. And this isn’t just a U.S story as many advanced economies now face the same pressures: heavy issuance, fewer reliable buyers, and market structures that work only in calm weather. Together, they form a second storm front on the horizon - slower moving than the equity storm, but potentially far more powerful when it finally comes ashore.Does the Storm Make Landfall Next Year?Worries over valuations and government debt dynamics are not new - they’ve been building all year - but the question that matters for investors is whether these storm fronts will actually make landfall in 2026.It’s a hard question to answer but an important one. If the storm stays out at sea equities could continue to rally - investors who opt to sit on the sideline risk significant underperformance vs peers and benchmarks. For this storm, there is one variable that has the potential to influence the weather more than anything else: the U.S Federal Reserve.Markets are already pricing in two to three rate cuts in 2026, and that expectation alone helps to hold the storms back. Furthermore, at the December meeting, the Fed announced that it would do small but stealthy QE to gradually re-expand their balance sheet in 2026 to deal with the ongoing challenges in the repo market. Should the Fed follow through and deliver on this policy easing, it would likely ease liquidity restraints and help equity market performance, through lower yields. Furthermore a reduction in borrowing costs would give governments a little more room to finance their increasingly unstable debt dynamics.But there is a clear risk here - a resurgence of inflation. If price pressures re-emerge, the Fed may have to pause or even halt its cutting cycle. And that shift could be enough to pull both storms inland which would expose stretched equity valuations and fragile debt markets to far rougher conditions. There is also the chance that human emotion may prevent the Fed from further cuts in the immediate future. Fed Chair Jay Powell knows his term is ending soon and will likely not want to go down in history as the Fed chair that inflated a bubble or caved to political pressure - this may mean he looks to keep rates steady until his term ends in May, meaning the cuts for 2026 may end up being back-loaded into the later parts of the year.But for now, the inflation outlook for 2026 looks moderate and a re-expansion of the balance sheet should act as a wind - which means that, in all likelihood, both storm fronts will stay out at sea… for now.Time to Grab an AnorakIf Fed easing helps keep the storm at bay, the temptation is there to just leave portfolios alone - easy monetary policy is likely to see bond yields drift lower in 2026 - helping life both equities and government bonds. However, I think this year gives us a rare window to grab an anorak and prepare our portfolios for whatever eventually comes ashore.One practical step in equity markets is to consider shifting some exposure from a market-cap-weighted S&P 500 to an equal-weighted version. The chart below shows how far the two have diverged: equal weight has lagged by around 3% a year on average over the past decade, a gap well beyond its long-run trend.An overweight to equal weight now makes sense because it protects investors in both directions. If the AI bubble bursts, equal weight limits your concentration risk. If AI delivers on its promise, the benefits should spill across a broader range of companies as productivity gains take hold, lifting equal-weighted indices. The only scenario where you fall behind is if the already-expensive names stretch even further - and I’m comfortable not chasing that final, frothy leg higher.Beyond equities, I think a conservative stance makes sense. In fixed income, bond yields likely grind lower in the face of Fed cuts and stealth QE but I wouldn’t expect a collapse in global borrowing costs. Bond vigilantes remain concerned about fiscal dynamics and the unravelling in Japanese bonds markets - which has long acted as an anchor on global yields - will likely limit how far global bond yields can fall. Corporate debt and some higher quality government issuers (e.g. Germany and Switzerland) still looks resilient, while precious metals and broader commodities may offer ballast if inflation surprises to the upside or there are adverse political shocks.And for those willing to venture out in the gloom, emerging-market equities - particularly in Latin America and parts of Africa - could provide selective opportunities. As we talked about a couple of weeks ago, these regions have historically thrived when the dollar weakens and commodity prices rise.So I enter 2026 feeling apprehensive. Fed easing is likely to keep both the equity and government-debt storms offshore for now, but the clouds haven’t cleared. In fact, monetary policy actions may cause the storm to grow in size. And, like the man standing on the cliff in my opening image, we may not know exactly when the storm will turn. But when you feel that first hint of rain on your cheek, it’s best to have already reached for an anorak.
Para los que aun pensais (incluido Asustadisimos) que vamos a ver un repinchazo: lo que estamos viviendo es una burbuja de demanda real y solvente, no una de oferta inflada y apalancada La compra de viviendas como inversión nutre la firma de hipotecas mientras la cuota media supera el 40% del sueldo de los jóveneshttps://www.20minutos.es/vivienda/compra-viviendas-como-inversion-nutre-firma-hipotecas-mientras-cuota-media-supera-40-sueldo-los-jovenes_6909787_0.htmlUn 33% de gente que pidió visados de nómada digital en 2024 fueron a vivir a Barcelona. Casi el doble de los que eligieron Madridhttps://www.genbeta.com/laboral/33-gente-que-pidio-visados-nomada-digital-2024-fueron-a-vivir-a-barcelona-casi-doble-que-eligieron-madrid
Cita de: grillo35 en Hoy a las 19:20:10Para los que aun pensais (incluido Asustadisimos) que vamos a ver un repinchazo: lo que estamos viviendo es una burbuja de demanda real y solvente, no una de oferta inflada y apalancada La compra de viviendas como inversión nutre la firma de hipotecas mientras la cuota media supera el 40% del sueldo de los jóveneshttps://www.20minutos.es/vivienda/compra-viviendas-como-inversion-nutre-firma-hipotecas-mientras-cuota-media-supera-40-sueldo-los-jovenes_6909787_0.htmlUn 33% de gente que pidió visados de nómada digital en 2024 fueron a vivir a Barcelona. Casi el doble de los que eligieron Madridhttps://www.genbeta.com/laboral/33-gente-que-pidio-visados-nomada-digital-2024-fueron-a-vivir-a-barcelona-casi-doble-que-eligieron-madridCuando tu inviertes en ladrillo, la inversión debe calcular los posibles retornos. Pagar caro como inversión es porque das por hecho que te lo van a alquilar caro, o que vas a dar el pase aún más caro. Es cuestión de expectativas. Es una inversión aproductiva, depende exclusivamente de la capacidad de los salarios de afrontar un bien básico de primera necesidad y consumo obligatorio. Pero si tu pagas, por ejemplo, 300.000 por un pisito, y los potenciales compradores para vivir, o los posibles inquilinos, se mueven entre el mileurismo y el dosmileurismo, nadie te lo va a comprar por más de lo que se ha pagado, y debido a la necesidad de hipotecarse a 30 años para pagar esos precios, la ventana de oportunidad de los posibles compradores pasa cada vez más rápido. Y los alquileres en gran parte de España, por la subida de precios, donde ya no son ni compatibles los más baratos con las ayudas autonómicas al alquiler, se están quedando vacíos mes a mes. Sobran viviendas de alquiler y sobran habitaciones. Lo que falta son viviendas asequibles, pero por más que apreten, de donde hay no se puede sacar. Muchos ya han tomado la decisión de simplemente, esperar a heredar. Esas noticias solo me muestran una cosa: a esos himbersores les han tomado el pelo. ¿Crees que con este nivel de salarios se puede afrontar una compra de vivienda por mas de 120.000 o 150.000 euros? Ya te digo yo, que he hecho números, no se puede. Y estoy cerca de los dos mil cien brutos mensuales. La vivienda va a bajar por incapacidad de los salarios de afrontar el acceso a la vivienda, algo que pasaría igualmente si el agua, la comida o la energía sufriera una burbuja de precios similar. El problema no es si van a bajar, sino cuando y qué consecuencias traerá.
U.S.-U.K. Trade Deal Hits Stumbling BlockThe U.S. government has paused a tech-focused trade pledge with Britain over broader disagreements about Britain’s digital regulations and food safety rules.President Trump and Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain in September, after signing an agreement that pledged to extend research collaborations and deepen partnerships in the tech industry.Credit...Doug Mills/The New York TimesWhen Britain became the first country to reach a trade agreement with President Trump in May, critics warned that the terms were loose and the commitments vague. Now, the risks of that ambiguity are becoming apparent.The United States informed the British government this month that it would pause fulfilling a technology-related agreement between the two countries, which included more collaboration on artificial intelligence and nuclear energy, according to two people familiar with the decision who were not authorized to speak publicly. The move came because American officials felt that Britain wasn’t making sufficient progress in lowering trade barriers, as promised in the May trade agreement, the people said.Earlier this year, when Prime Minister Keir Starmer of Britain was courting Mr. Trump to avoid punitive trade tariffs, he delivered an invitation from King Charles for a state visit. When Mr. Trump arrived for the visit in September, British officials were keen to show that it wasn’t just about banquets and pageantry. At the time, the two countries vowed to deepen their partnership and signed the so-called Tech Prosperity Deal, which extended research collaborations and encouraged deeper commercial partnerships. America’s biggest tech companies announced more than $40 billion in investments in Britain for A.I., data centers and other technologies.But the language in the tech deal between Britain and the United States said it only “becomes operative alongside substantive progress being made to formalize and implement” the May trade agreement, which was called the Economic Prosperity Deal.Now, the Trump administration has argued that Britain has made insufficient effort. It shows how the administration is continuing to leverage trade policy to push foreign governments to make more concessions on trade and other policies. The White House has kept negotiations with countries open months after the president has proclaimed that deals were done.Some of the terms in Britain’s agreement were particularly loose. While there were firm commitments to lower tariffs on British cars exported to the United States, up to a quota, and to increase American beef exports to Britain, other issues were left unresolved.Those included the United States’ desire to increase agricultural exports and for Britain to loosen its food safety standards. American officials have also expressed frustration with Britain’s online safety rules and digital services taxes. The agreement said the two countries would “plan to work constructively in an effort to enhance agricultural market access” and “negotiate an ambitious set of digital trade provisions.”In the subsequent months, Britain hasn’t made changes to its digital services tax, which raises most of its money from big American firms like Amazon and Google. There also hasn’t been a new agreement on food exports.Peter Kyle, Britain’s minister for business and trade, was in the United States this past week and met with U.S. officials, including Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, U.S. Trade Representative Jamieson Greer and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, to discuss advancing the May trade agreement.According to a spokesman for the Department for Business and Trade, Mr. Kyle “raised the importance of keeping up momentum on implementing all aspects of the U.K.-U.S. deal” and discussed tariffs on whisky and steel, as well as collaboration on critical minerals. “Both sides agreed to continue further negotiations in January,” the spokesman added.A government spokesperson said on Saturday that Britain “is firmly committed to ensuring the Tech Prosperity Deal delivers opportunity for hardworking people in both countries.”A spokeswoman for the U.S. trade representative declined to comment.The Trump administration has now struck limited trade agreements with 15 nations in an attempt to change what it perceives as unfair trade practices and boost U.S. exports.But negotiators have often hit obstacles as they have worked to turn verbal pledges between leaders into the text of a trade deal. Some agreements that have been announced verbally have yet to be finalized.Another issue has been whether some foreign countries are growing more reluctant to make concessions to the United States. The Trump administration has begun offering some exemptions to tariffs amid growing concerns about the effects of the levies on prices and affordability. The administration is also facing a Supreme Court case that could invalidate many of the president’s tariffs, though administration officials have said they could use other legal authorities to replace them.
Cita de: Zugzwang en Hoy a las 20:09:09Cita de: grillo35 en Hoy a las 19:20:10Para los que aun pensais (incluido Asustadisimos) que vamos a ver un repinchazo: lo que estamos viviendo es una burbuja de demanda real y solvente, no una de oferta inflada y apalancada La compra de viviendas como inversión nutre la firma de hipotecas mientras la cuota media supera el 40% del sueldo de los jóveneshttps://www.20minutos.es/vivienda/compra-viviendas-como-inversion-nutre-firma-hipotecas-mientras-cuota-media-supera-40-sueldo-los-jovenes_6909787_0.htmlUn 33% de gente que pidió visados de nómada digital en 2024 fueron a vivir a Barcelona. Casi el doble de los que eligieron Madridhttps://www.genbeta.com/laboral/33-gente-que-pidio-visados-nomada-digital-2024-fueron-a-vivir-a-barcelona-casi-doble-que-eligieron-madridCuando tu inviertes en ladrillo, la inversión debe calcular los posibles retornos. Pagar caro como inversión es porque das por hecho que te lo van a alquilar caro, o que vas a dar el pase aún más caro. Es cuestión de expectativas. Es una inversión aproductiva, depende exclusivamente de la capacidad de los salarios de afrontar un bien básico de primera necesidad y consumo obligatorio. Pero si tu pagas, por ejemplo, 300.000 por un pisito, y los potenciales compradores para vivir, o los posibles inquilinos, se mueven entre el mileurismo y el dosmileurismo, nadie te lo va a comprar por más de lo que se ha pagado, y debido a la necesidad de hipotecarse a 30 años para pagar esos precios, la ventana de oportunidad de los posibles compradores pasa cada vez más rápido. Y los alquileres en gran parte de España, por la subida de precios, donde ya no son ni compatibles los más baratos con las ayudas autonómicas al alquiler, se están quedando vacíos mes a mes. Sobran viviendas de alquiler y sobran habitaciones. Lo que falta son viviendas asequibles, pero por más que apreten, de donde hay no se puede sacar. Muchos ya han tomado la decisión de simplemente, esperar a heredar. Esas noticias solo me muestran una cosa: a esos himbersores les han tomado el pelo. ¿Crees que con este nivel de salarios se puede afrontar una compra de vivienda por mas de 120.000 o 150.000 euros? Ya te digo yo, que he hecho números, no se puede. Y estoy cerca de los dos mil cien brutos mensuales. La vivienda va a bajar por incapacidad de los salarios de afrontar el acceso a la vivienda, algo que pasaría igualmente si el agua, la comida o la energía sufriera una burbuja de precios similar. El problema no es si van a bajar, sino cuando y qué consecuencias traerá.Creo que es un error mirar esas gráficas de salarios medios de los españolitos medios (y que ya llevan años por encima de sus niveles de equilibro, sin que nada ocurra). El problema no esta en Merida o Cuenca; está en las grandes capitales donde se juntan las rentas mas altas, los ex-pats rubitos, y los inmigrantes que comparten habitación entre cuatro. En Barcelona o Madrid no hay un puñetero piso de alquiler disponible por menos de 1.500 eur, y se siguen pagando locuras a pesar de los indices de precios, gracias a utilizar mil y una triquiñuelas. El que tiene un piso no lo suelta ni loco. Con subidas anuales de precios de venta del 10%, que más te da que te limiten el alquiler. La decisión de que no bajen los precios de la vivendas, al igual que la de manetener la fronteras abiertas para que entre todo quisqui, es una decisión política. El pisito no se va a tocar, y menos ahora donde partidos politicos outdiders están subiendo como la espuma. Al jubilado rentista hay que tenerlo contento hoy más que nunca; y los traidores a la patria de Sánchez y Feijó lo tienen clarisimo.
Radio Albacete03/06/2025 - 07:36 CESTAlbaceteURVIAL sigue sin adjudicar la totalidad de las 88 VPO en el sector 10. Unas 55 ya tienen compradores; el resto, siguen ofreciéndolas a la lista de espera, tras los numerosos rechazos a la opción de compra por motivos económicos o de posible financiación. Han comenzado incluso con la nueva lista que se abrió a principios de abril.
How the EU can make the single market work betterBrussels has more power to apply and enforce the rules than it is currently using© FT montage/DreamstimeThe EU’s single market is called the jewel in the bloc’s crown. Together with the single currency and the Schengen passport-free travel area, it represents one of history’s most consequential voluntary efforts to share sovereignty.Yet things are not well. As a Financial Times series lays bare, the integration of national markets remains elusive in services, is incomplete in goods, and is in many ways going backwards rather than progressing. Simply put, national authorities leave too many obstacles in the way of equal access to their markets for other member states’ companies and workers: in the history of the single market, only one French baker has ever had their certificate from their home country recognised in Germany. National rules, even if well-intentioned, means cross-border activity must carry the cost of multiple sets of regulations, such as on labelling.IMF and European Central Bank estimates of these non-tariff barriers are shocking, equivalent to tariffs of 45-65 per cent for goods and 100-110 per cent for services. That is certainly a big overestimate — but as ECB president Christine Lagarde told the FT’s Global Boardroom last week, even if it is only half as much, the cost is still enormous.At a time when the EU worries about its competitiveness and finds its productivity lagging behind its geoeconomic rivals, leaving the single market to rot would be disastrous. The bloc is well aware: last year’s reports by former Italian prime ministers Enrico Letta and Mario Draghi were both about how to realise the promise of the EU’s unified scale. The right policies, which vary by sector, are no mystery. Making them happen is a different matter.There are three across-the-board strategies the commission should pursue as a matter of priority. One is (as Letta recommends) to shift from using directives — which each capital then tailors for its own purposes — to regulations, which impose identical rules throughout the bloc. Beyond new legislation, there must be an agenda to convert existing directives into regulations. Brussels has promised one in the financial policy field.The second is to put in place opt-in “28th regimes” to coexist alongside national rules where it is politically too difficult to harmonise them. Both reports recommend this for the corporate code, and the commission has promised imminent proposals. It is crucial to get this right: a nimble, effective corporate code specially tailored to enabling innovative start-ups to scale up easily, but without excluding others.The third is enforcement, where Brussels has fallen asleep at the wheel. It is the commission’s duty to vigorously police member states’ resistance to letting goods, services, capital and labour flow freely according to EU law. But the rate of enforcement actions has been in decline. Enforcement efforts need to be adequately resourced and receive the political attention to make would-be European champions feel the commission has their back.Adding a tier of specialised commercial courts to the EU judicial system with the power to process single market-related disputes swiftly, as three academics have proposed, could work wonders.These strategies essentially amount to the commission taking its gloves off. It has much more power to make the single market work than it is currently using. And where the politics is too paralysed, Brussels should encourage and help along “coalitions of the willing”, where some but not all states integrate their markets further.A step change in the single market is justified in Europe’s self-interest — but beyond that it would show the world that the ideal of frictionless cross-border exchange is far from dead.