【英语国际】无视七篇托市文章 沪指5月跌幅近10%

On a day that China's stock market concluded May trading in deep losses, the People's Daily published its seventh article this month arguing for, albeit not always convincingly, a stronger performance.

It looks like the days are gone when influential editorials or opinion pieces disguised as neutral-looking jounalistic articles in official mouthpieces would easily sway investor views and dictate market direction.

At its current level of 2592.15, the benchmark Shanghai Composite Index has accumulated a 9.7 % monthly decline and is down from its year high of 3306.75 in January.

The latest 'news article' in Monday's edition bears this headline: 'Are Macroeconomic Policies Sending Bullish Signals to a Falling Stock Market?' http://finance.people.com.cn/GB/11732478.html Using a Q&A format, the article lists three big questions from investors.

Question A: 'Is the market's decline due to economic fundamentals'? Answer: 'No need to be overly pessimistic about future economic trends'. Without citing sources, the author, Xu Zhifeng, goes on to say that such economic pessimism betrays 'an irrational attitude' on behalf of investors. 'At present, the economy is still recovering and is unlikely to suffer a double dip,' says the article. Again, without citing sources, the People's Daily writes: 'Especially after this round of declines, the valuations of the A-share market are already at historical lows and some good-quality stocks are worth long-term investment.' (Well, you don't get valuable stock picks from the government that often.)

Question B: 'Are there bullish signals in the macropolicies?' Answer: 'Macropolicies are striking a balance amid fine-tuning.' Elaborating on the point, the article says for example, despite all the uncertainties, 'the initial tensions and pressure that the recent property tightening measures have brought to the stock market are fading.'

Question C: 'Does the dismal performance of new stock listings suggest the market is hitting a bottom?' Answer: 'Yes according to history but case-by-case analysis is needed.' The question and the initial brief answer might be misleading here. The real point that the author is making is that it's premature to conclude that the recent weak stock debuts (where many share prices fell below IPO levels) show the market is entering a depressed state. Xu argues that the disappointing stock debuts were mostly due to the overly expensive IPOs.

The People's Daily had run a series of similar market-friendly articles earlier this month, with themes ranging from supportive economic fundamentals to the denial that the launch of stock index futures was the culprit behind a weak cash market.

However, Chinese investors have apparently paid no heed to any of this. Instead, when China Securities News, one of the three industry newspapers serving as mouthpieces for the country's securities regulator, ran a front-page story on May 20 arguing for a delay in an interest-rate hike, the Shanghai index did react, albeit very briefly, by jumping 0.8%. It closed down 1.2% on the day.

This probably shows how many people are reading the People's Daily nowadays, compared with the securities papers.

In a sense, Chinese investors' growing indifference toward such official rhetoric is in itself a sign of progress. In an era when the authorities increasingly use the official media to convey political messages but often run the risk of overloading the information, the investment community is looking for real substance.

That said, the numerous desperate-looking attempts by the People's Daily to talk up the market also betray the government's deepening concerns over a slowing economy and weakening capital markets. But in a country where the authorities are still relying on editorials and disguised news reports to influence investor mood while at the same time they have turned the stock market into a piggy bank for poorly-run state-owned enterprises, such as the newest IPO aspirant Agricultural Bank of China, how can investment decisions be based on fundamentals? Perhaps such decisions can't even be based on politics anymore.

中国股市5月最后一个交易日以大跌收盘，而当天的《人民日报》发表了本月第七篇认为股市应有更好表现的文章，尽管这些文章无法总是让人信服。

看起来，官方喉舌发表的有影响力的社论或以貌似中立的报道形式发布的观点文章能轻易动摇投资者的观点并决定市场运行方向的日子一去不复返了。

周一上证综指收于2592.15点，5月份月跌幅累计达9.7%，此前该指数于1月份创出本年度高点3306.75点。

周一《人民日报》最新文章的标题为《股市跌跌不休 宏观政策释放有利信号？》，文章以问答形式，解答了投资者的三大疑问。

一问：“股市下跌是否缘于基本面”？答曰：“对未来经济走势不应过于悲观”。作者许志峰没有引用来源，但代表投资者们说对未来经济走势的这种悲观观点，不是“理性的态度”。文章说，“目前来看，宏观经济正处于恢复性增长的进程中，出现二次探底的可能并不大”。同时，仍然没有引用来源，《人民日报》这篇文章写道：“尤其是经过这一轮下跌后，A股市场的估值水平已经处于历史相对低位，一些优质股票也具备了中长期投资价值”。嗯，你可不会经常从政府那里获得有价值的选股观点。

二问：“宏观政策是否出现有利信号”？ 答曰：“宏观政策或正在微调中求得平衡 ”。就该观点，文中展开详细阐述，称尽管有种种不确定性，“但政策推出之初给股市投资者带来的紧张和压力，随着时间的推移正逐步淡去”。

三问：“新股频频破发是否预示底部已近”？答曰：“从历史经验看是这样，但也应具体分析”。这一问题与开头简单的回答可能会产生误导。作者的真实观点是，近期新股表现不佳，许多跌破发行价，据此得出这表明市场已经进入一个相对低迷的状态的结论为时过早。作者认为，新股表现不佳，“很大程度是因为新股发行过高的市盈率”。

《人民日报》本月早些时候已发布了一系列类似的对市场有力的文章，文章主题涉及经济基本面对股市构成支持，以及否认股指期货是股市下跌的罪魁祸首等内容。

但中国的投资者显然对此根本并做理会。事实上，中国证券监管层三大报业喉舌之一的《中国证券报》于5月20日在头版发文，认为加息将延迟，当日上证综指开盘即短时跳升0.8%，但最终收盘下滑1.2%。

或许这表明一个问题，与《中国证券报》相比，如今有多少人还在看《人民日报》。

从某种意义上说，中国投资者越来越不关心这种官方的说辞本身是一种进步的表现。在当局日益通过官方媒体传达政治意图但通常会冒信息过载风险的时代，投资界正在寻找信息的实质。

然而，《人民日报》接连发文以托市的急迫努力，揭示了政府对经济放缓、资本市场疲弱的担忧加剧。但当政府当局仍依赖社论及貌似新闻报道的文章来影响投资者的情绪，而同时又将股市变为经营不良的国企(如最近要IPO的中国农业银行(Agricultural Bank of China))的存钱罐，在这样一个国家，投资决策怎么能看基本面呢？或许，这种投资决策甚至也不能再基于政治面了。