天天速看：集微访谈｜Tim Ghiriskey：PCAOB对华权限扩展，能否打消中概股在美退市疑虑？

集微网消息，在往期的集微访谈栏目中，爱集微有幸采访了TheSolarisGroupLLC和GhriskeyCapitalPartners的创始人TimGhiriskey。他主要从事管理机构和私人客户管理定制投资组合，Dreyfus Corporation等公司纽约办事处副管理合伙人。集微访谈就关于ARM和证券交易方面提出了一系列问题，并收到了有关中概股在美IPO的有意义的答复。

(资料图片)

问：我的第一个问题目前就像英国政府的发问一样，显然认为ARM更喜欢纽约而不是伦敦，你认为伦敦证券交易所的缺点是什么？

答：基于我对证券交易的理解，与纽约的交易所相比。这真的只在于你的受众或者说投资者是谁。仍然会有美国投资者购买在伦敦交易所上市的ARM 公司。ARM 是全球性的公司，随着时间的推移，它们将在各地上市。

我认为英国政府正在恢复与软银的谈判，关于 ARM 在伦敦交易所的首次公开募股，这是一个非常积极的因素。 我想可能一次只有一件事，伦敦将是第一个，希望它会成功吧，我想接下来是纽约证券交易所。我很期待，会有更多的公司可以投资。

ARM 是一家好公司。 所以我明白这肯定只是时间问题，而且美国上市公司会计监督委员会（PCAOB）需要说，好吧，ARM 有很好的数字或良好的财务状况。 我们可以充分信任他们。 我相信伦敦交易所也会做同样的事情。

顺便一提。 伦敦有很多问题，经济上对他们不利。 多么惊喜？ 我认为这对他们来说可能是一件好事，他们可以接手并成为 ARM 在西方上市的先行者。

我不认为它对 ARM 或纽约证券交易所或伦敦证券交易所有任何负面影响，我想一切都会好起来的。

问：另外，我想一想，你有没有弄清楚ARM为什么不愿意像双重上市一样，同时在纽约和伦敦？

问：我不知道具体的原因，但我不得不认为那是因为他们在纽约交易所受到欢迎。

我可能对此并不乐观，因为这一块可能缺乏财务透明度，我不知道纽约的问题可能是什么，但伦敦交易所似乎对 ARM 的 ip 想法持开放态度。

我认为，如果假设进展顺利并且他们在伦敦上市，这将有助于他们在纽约上市，这将有助于简化他们在纽约上市的手续。

是的，很多公司都会进行双听。但我认为这是一种更明智的做法，无论是对 ARM 还是为其他公司在伦敦、美国和全球上市铺平道路。全球公司在全球上市。 我从投资的角度来看，这不是你从投资的角度提出的问题之一。 我真的很高兴有更多的公司可以进行投资。

中国不仅在今天是世界经济的重要组成部分，而且在未来也将是世界经济的重要组成部分。中国正在发生很多创新。 我认为这将是一件非常积极的事情。 多年来，我一直接触关于中国方面的直接投资。

随着时间的推移，不同的公司——不都是大公司，还有一些更小的公司或至少是中型公司。 我对我看到的数字有足够的信心，认为这些都是好公司和好投资。 回顾过去，我认为我这样做并没有冒太大的风险。

所以我喜欢接触中国。我不知道作为一名投资组合经理，你怎么不能接触中国，因为它是一支全球性的力量。

问：12月底，美国上市公司会计监督委员会（PCAOB）宣布在2022年能够对总部设在中国和香港、在PCAOB注册的公共会计师事务所的发行人审计业务进行完整检查和调查。中国方面调整了之前的立场，这是否意味着中美经济关系在走向缓和？

我认为这件事情的发生是一件好事。中国这些年经济发展的步伐走得很快很远，世界舞台上的地位令人瞩目。变化会产生误解，当然并非所有的误会是在一朝一夕形成的。

情况转变需要时间，我觉得中国的上市公司能向（美国）监管部门对外公开财务信息是一件好事。

他们公开的对象不仅仅是美国的监管部门，我认为还涉及到全球性的监管和更宽广意义上的人群，他们需要向投资者们表明背后的所有者都是谁。

赢得投资者们的信任感很重要，披露财务信息可以让股东对公司发表的言论更有信心。

这些信息必须是真实并且完整的。我所强调的是，不仅仅是真实性，还要有完整性。这就是美国监管局所关心和想要的。

就算这是一种妥协，我也认为这很棒，很多事情就建立在妥协的基础上。

这不仅仅是中美经济合作持续正常化的信号，也代表着中美以及全球其他国家保持良好关系的愿景。我们处在同一个世界之中，一个值得我们所有人珍惜的世界。

理想状态下，全世界人民应该携手努力，科技就是其中的一个重要议题。

科技真的改变了我们所有人。我们正在走向一个日益全球化的世界，在共同面临的工作和生活等各个方面，全世界需要团结起来，虽然这不会在今天、明天或一年后发生，但我们应该朝着这个方向努力。

我猜测，美国上市公司会计监督委员会（PCAOB）已经发现了一些监管对象的潜在缺陷。目前好像尚未有人知晓具体内容有哪些。在此，“潜在”这个词很关键，因为我猜这不是说有人故意蒙骗或者欺诈什么。

过程其实并不复杂，即在不泄露公司机密的情况下，披露公司资产负债表、公司损益表和所有财务数据。

当然我认为每个公司都有属于自己的机密信息，每个公司都希望自身能发展壮大。公司肯定不会把自己胜过竞争对手的详细计划公布出来。但我认为，上市公司需要向投资者公布有理有据的信息，向他们注入投资的信任感。换言之，让他们确信，他们作为公司股东，投资的钱的是真正他们想投资的内容方向。

我认为这件事向全世界表明，这不仅是迈向中美经济关系正常化的又一步，而且关涉中美和世界其他国家的合作，这是一件好事。

问：你认为像一些可能的，比如金融或物理工具可以用来缓解招聘系统不平衡风险的症状。

我认为招聘会继续。 我想这更多地是他们今天需要人们做的事情的一个因素，而不是他们明天或几年后需要人们做的事情。

所以我觉得就算是科技公司也需要生产这些东西的劳力吧？ 这些手机。

他们现在不需要劳动来思考 5 年后或 10 年后会是什么样子？我不需要挑剔苹果，但苹果实际上是一个很好的例子，因为苹果是一家消费品公司，他们受制于消费者的奇思妙想。消费者现在喜欢这些东西。我猜他们会继续爱他们。但苹果必须不断推出新产品。

我儿子在圣诞节给了这个airpods，我从来没有用过这个，但无论怎样现在我也有了。但是这是苹果的一项伟大发明，而苹果是唯一制造它们的人，但它们很快就进入了这个行业。

我认为苹果将继续让这些人关注短期问题，但我将举一个meta公司的例子，Facebook。他们是否需要所有这些人围坐在一起猜测接下来会发生什么以及它会是什么样子等等？ 对吧？

很可能不会这样。所以它们可以让这部分的人离开，去找其他的工作。

问：我也这么认为。所以应该永远没有界限，比如障碍之间，我认为，当谈到技术运动或类似的事情时，国家与国家之间。但我们也知道公司已经退化，对吧？他们必须保持监视，所以我的下一个问题将是肯定的，也是上市公司会计或橱窗。所以它的东西确定了许多潜在的缺陷。那么是否有可能提供有关此潜在缺陷的更多信息？

我谈了一点。 我不知道那里的任何细节。 我假设在某些时候，董事会将释放它所拥有的任何担忧。希望中国公司能够对这些做出回应。再一次，这都是一个学习什么的过程。信息交换应该是什么样子以及它要深入到什么程度。

我相信它会随着时间的推移而发展。 我猜肯定会在明年发生。我们会解决所有这些问题，以便财务更加透明和准确。可能是董事会正在寻找太多信息。

不管怎样，我认为这对每个人来说都是一个学习的过程。

问：此外，它还有一个小问题。那么您认为此举对美国上市中国公司的投资者主要有何影响？那些投资者。

我认为这是一件好事。 我坚信透明度。

如果你拥有一家公司的一部分，你想要相信他们所说的是真实的。 我想要它是因为如果我拥有一台苹果电脑，我想知道他们有多少现金。 我想知道他们有多少债务。 我想知道那笔债务。 什么时候办？

我想知道他们的收入和那些真实的数字，他们的客户是谁。

而且公司不必绝对披露所有内容。 他们可能不想透露所有客户是谁。 但如果他们有更大的客户，他们通常会披露一些信息，因为这存在风险。

这是一件好事。 我假设其他人会同意，无论他们是谁，在哪里。 打开所有这些是一件好事。 我认为这是一件好事，在国际关系方面也是如此。

无论是美国还是中国，一起学习说话。 一起工作。或美国和俄罗斯或中国和俄罗斯或任何人。

所以我认为开放是一件好事。技术对此负责。

技术将继续快速发展。 我们正处于这场技术革命中。 你有美国的工业革命和中国的工业革命，那些持续都了很长一段时间。

我认为美国的技术革命也会持续很长时间，真正解决我们的很多问题，也可能会带来其他问题。 社会问题。

问：这是一件好事。但我的第三个问题是，为什么在新闻发布时，我们上市的中国公司股票没有涉及，比如他们的股票价格下跌或类似的情况。而且，就程序和自由问题而言，中国公司在美国进行首次公开募股更容易，或者报复中国公司。我认为是综合系统。

这实际上是一个大问题。美国金融监管机构希望确保在美国纽约证券交易所或其他任何地方上市的公司是透明的，他们正在披露他们的财务状况，并且有信心完全相信这些财务数据是正确的。

所以，我的猜测是 PCAOB和它的任何中方的类似组织都可以一起工作。因此，双方都有共同的信心。这将使中国公司更容易在美国进行首次公开募股，我们可以摆脱这些来自美国制裁中国公司的威胁。

有很多公司，不仅仅是中国公司，因为不想应对无孔不入的监管而放弃在美国上市。

但我希望随着时间的推移，这种情况会发生变化，我们作为一个世界，我们会采用一种版本的金融监督。

我认为这会发生，但我认为这是朝着这个目标迈出的一大步。

这将使中国和所有其他公司更容易。 公司在美国上市，在美国做ip ipo。

它会改变中国公司的合规制度吗？ 我猜，但它也可能会改变一些美国合规系统。

再说一遍，我认为这是一场谈判，不是一场战斗，而是两组会计师齐心协力，为共同利益而共同努力，这是我的看法，我认为这需要一些时间，但我认为这对世界来说真的是积极的，我认为这些公司是全球性的。

有那么多美国公司在中国有业务，在中国销售，并且有中国公司在这里开展业务。当然也包括软银和PCAOB。

这一切都是好事。如果您在全球开展业务，您也应该能够在全球范围内交易证券。这会让事情变得更容易，这是一个非常积极的步骤。

问：我的下一个问题是，在2021 中，最有价值的公司，如苹果、微软、亚马逊、特易购，就像他们损失了数万亿美元的市值一样。那么您认为科技资本市场出现的深层原因是什么？

没有人喜欢熊市。

熊市只是意味着价格下跌。 我想从技术上讲，它应该下降了 20% 以上。

但是世界和美国都变了。当美联储开始加息时，我们最近在美国的利率为零，因为贪图和担心科比会让我们的金融体系和经济体系崩溃。

当美联储将利率降至 0% 时，是为了刺激经济。它确实做到了。突然之间，人们有更多的钱可以花，他们可以买东西，尤其是房地产，可以存下一点钱，但可以以很少的利息获得贷款。

我认为确实是因为在美国，而我在世界许多地方，那些大公司，人们经常说他们的科技公司——我不认为他们都是科技公司——我将苹果视为一家科技公司，但也更像是一家消费品公司。 我们现在都有这些东西。没有它们我寸步难行，我甚至把钱包都放在手机背面。

无论如何，我将苹果视为一家消费品公司。我将亚马逊视为真正的不同公司的联合企业。从超市、杂货店到云计算，应有尽有。

它是巨大的，也是一家科技公司。他们不制造任何技术。 它更像是一家营销公司。

特斯拉是一家汽车公司。 有电动车。 这是否使所有汽车公司都成为科技公司？ 反正，我可能正在讲些显而易见的事。但由于几个原因，它们的价格都大幅下降。我认为主要原因是美联储开始提高利率并使借贷成本更高。

原因是美联储的任务是保持低通胀或控制通胀。以及制造过程中的贪婪、中断和供应链中断都导致了通货膨胀的开始。

我有朋友需要买一台新冰箱，他们的旧冰箱坏了，他们花了 9 个月的时间才得到一台新的。没有人愿意这样。

所以我认为这个群体被专门针对的原因有两点。第一，他们是美国最大的公司，他们的估值、他们的证券估值都被抬高了。它们并不像我们在 2000 年或 2001 年看到的那样高得离谱。但它们被提升到更高的水平。

而且这些公司都是高增长公司。他们的确是成长得非常快。但很多时候当你投资一家公司时，你投资它不仅仅是为了它今天能做的事情。你还会为了它将来可以做的事来投资它。

这些公司的前景非常乐观，他们将在未来继续增长甚至加速增长。

随着利率上升，其中很多都被搁置了。如果经济是因为利率上升，如果经济正在走软，正在走弱，那么未来的增长是确定的，而当前的增长也不太确定。

人们会购买尽可能多的这些东西吗？我认为这些产品就像是我的孩子。如果他们丢了或者坏了，人们就会发疯。他们会想在同一天把这些产品进行更换。很多事情也是如此。

所以我认为这些仍然是非常强大的公司，就像它们现在被极度低估一样。

是的，它们的增长率有所放缓。但是当经济恢复正常时，当利率回落时，不是零，而是更可持续的利率。这些公司将大幅升值。

问：那么，您认为2023 年会是他们让这些科技公司的业绩反弹的一年吗？

我认为没有人确切知道。 正确的？ 投资永远是猜测的游戏，而是理性的猜测，思考可能发生的事情以及发生的概率。美联储仍在加息。他们将提高利率，可能会提高到 5% 左右,联邦基金利率。

我们的感觉是，在今年上半年的某个时候，你会看到美国的通货膨胀率显着下降。我们已经看到通货膨胀温和，有些部分。某些商品的通货膨胀率显着下降，例如二手车、木材等等。 我们还没有看到真正的通胀下降到任何显着程度。

但在某个时候，我们认为在接下来的 6 个月内，我们会看到这种情况发生。我们认为，届时美联储将停止加息，就像他们所说的那样，只会按兵不动或暂停加息。我们认为，这可能是一个重要的 . 对于这些大公司，这些高增长公司，如果你想说它们是科技股，不管怎样，都会引起显着的反弹。

有理由相信，如果你看看过去一年这些股票的情况，它们的价值都在下跌。

但在股市上涨的那些时期，整个市场都在下跌, 在过去的一年里。这些股票的表现明显优于大盘。所以对我们来说，这是投资者想要去的地方。他们想拥有这些股票。这不是拥有它们的合适环境。他们会推迟，直到环境发生变化，直到利率停止上升，随着通货膨胀率下降，他们才会回到他们身边。 但我认为这将在 2003 年二十年后发生。而且我认为这很容易在 2023 年上半年或年中发生。

问：我的最后一个问题实际上是在2022 年下半年，很多半导体公司宣布了很多裁员，就像首席执行官一样，他们发现，声称半导体行业正面临严重的劳动力短缺。从你的角度，如何解读这种自相矛盾的现象。

这是一个很好的问题。如果你回顾历史，科技公司会在不同的时间进行裁员，比方说，工业科技公司往往不看他们的制造方面或生产方面，而是看他们的思想层面，那些正在看的员工 他们将要推出的下一个产品，甚至不是下一个产品，而是未来的产品。

你看看工业公司，他们好像没有那群人。工业公司更多只是生产产品。 因此，工业公司往往会在真正的经济衰退期间裁员。当他们的需求下降时，他们不需要生产那么多产品。 所以他们裁员。科技公司倾向于在整体经济疲软时，或有削弱的潜力，他们倾向于削减那些出点子的或那些专注于长期项目的人。所以这很有趣。如果你从历史上看，时间上确实存在差异，我们现在正在看到它的证据。 而科技公司正在裁员，而工业公司还没有。

现在，如果美国最终陷入衰退，我认为这根本没有保证。即使从技术上讲它处于早期衰退，它也将是一场很大的衰退。你可能不会看到工业公司裁员。我们仍然需要很多这些无法获得的产品。所以AA劳动力就会短缺。 就像事物的制造过程中存在劳动力短缺一样。已经有足够多的人在坐下来思考下一个苹果产品会是什么了。

它们只是非常不同类型的劳动，两种不同类型的群体。

所以我认为这就是为什么在这里会有一些矛盾的现象。但我认为裁员不会是压倒性的。当然，这样的事情对整体经济没有帮助。

但这也可能只是人员的重新定位。因此，也许这些技术人员中的一些人会改行，找到更多制造类工作或销售工作或生产产品的工作。

以下是采访原文（英文）：

Q：So my first question would be currently like the UK government, like he revised talks with thought band on London listing for ARM obviously thought ARMprefer New York to London regarding aimcc what do you think are the main disadvantages?

A：My promise on the stocks exchange. So comparing to those in New York.

it"s really just who your audiences who the investors are. There still are US investors who will buy ARM is listed on the London exchange. ARM is a global company and over time they will be listed everywhere.

I think the fact that the UK government is reviving talks regarding with softbank, regarding the ipo of ARM on the London exchange is a very positive factor. I think probably one thing at a time, London will be first, and that hopefully will go well, and then New York stock exchange next, I assume. I look forward to that. I look forward to having more companies to invest in.

ARM is a great company. So I get it certainly will just be a matter of time, and also that that PCAOB needs to say, okay, ARM has good numbers or good financial. We can believe in them and put their stamp of approval on them. And i"m sure the London exchange will do the same type of thing。

By the way. London"s got a lot of problems breaks that has not been good economically for them. What a surprise? I think it"s this is probably aa good thing for them to do and take up the mantle and be the first mover in terms of ARM going public in the west.

I don"t think it says anything negative about ARM or about the New York stock exchange or the London stock exchange, I guess it will all work out.

Q：Also, when I think about it, do you figure out the reason for ARM and is quite reluctant to do like a dual listing,like simultaneously in New York and also in London?.

A：I don"t know specifically the reasons,but I’ve got to believe that it"s because their reception on the New York exchange. May not be positive at this, given perhaps the lack of total transparency of financials, ii don"t know what New York"s issues may might be，but the London exchange seems very open to the idea of ip owing ARM.

I think that will help them if assuming that goes well and they list on the London, that will help ease the way for them to list on the New York.

Yeah, a lot of companies would do a duel. but I think this is a smarter way of doing it，both for ARM and for paving the way for other companies to list both in London and in the US and globally. Global companies listing globally. I from an investment standpoint, this isn"t one of your questions from an investment standpoint. I really cheer having more companies to invest in.

China is a huge part of the world economy not only today, but it"s gonna be a huge part of it in the future.

There"s a lot of innovation happening in china. And I think that"s gonna be a very positive thing. I"ve had exposure in china and direct investment exposure to china for years.

Different companies over time - not all large companies, but also some more smaller companies or at least medium sized companies. I I had enough faith in the numbers that I saw that these were were good companies and good investments. And I look back and I don"t think I took undue risk in doing that.

So I I love having exposure to China. I don"t know how as a portfolio manager, you can"t have exposure to China, because it is such a global force.

Q： So last month actually the public company accounting oversight board claim that it has gotten through exercise a full exercise to inspect and investigate firms in china for the first time. Chinese authorities had prevented it from completely inspecting and investigating. So does it indicate that Chinese authorities from the compromise solution or is it a sign that us is normalizing its economyrelationship with like china?

A：I think it"s great that it"s occurred. I think china has come so far and so fast in terms of its economic development and its place on the world stage, change creates confusion, and not everything gets done all at once.

So these things take time. I think it"s great that they are gonna open up the financial books of their companies to some type of oversight board.

that should be a purely us board. I think it should be some type of global board or a mix of people。

to assure investors of what they own。

that investors are just relying on faith.Have some confidence that the company says。and。

produces financial results。that are，true and complete. I it"s not that they"re untrue. I think they"re complete. Right? That"s what。the oversight board。has been looking for.

If it was a compromise, that"s wonderful. I think everything should be a compromise.

I it"s a good sign of like the continued normalization of not only economic, but all relations relationships between china and the us and the rest of the world as well.We are one world and。 it"s a precious world.

or anywhere else. Technology is really changed that for all of us. And I think it really means we"re on a path towards an increasingly global world. U united world in terms of working together and living together.

And I think it"s not gonna happen today, tomorrow, or a year from now. But it will continue I to evolve.

The the us board, the pcaob identified some potential deficiencies, I guess. Nobody seems to know what those are. Also. the word potential is critical here because。

It"s simply again, this process of unveiling corporate balance sheets, corporate income statements, all the financials。

of a company without giving away corporate secrets. I think every corporation has secrets, every corporation is trying to grow. They"re not gonna come out there and say, here"s our plan for doing better than this other company.

But I think opening up a reasonable information that，

investors can have faith that what they buy is。Is actually or what they think they"re buying is actually what they are buying.

own a piece of a company.

I don"t know if that helps or not.

But I think it does show that the world, it"s another step towards normalization of economic ties between the us and china, but also the rest of the world and china and the us and I I a it"s a great thing. It"s a good thing.

Q：do you think like some possible, like financial or physical tools can be used to alleviate the symptom of unbalanced risk recruiting system. Do youthink there will be some to be using that。

A：I think recruiting will continue. I think it"s more of a factor of what they need people to do today, as opposed to what they need people to do tomorrow or years from now.

So I think even technology companies have a need for labor to produce these things, right? These phones.

But they right now they don"t need labor to think about what"s this gonna look like 5 years from now or 10 years from now? I don"t need to pick on apple, but apple is actually a it"s a great example because apple is a consumer goods company, and they are subject to the whims of the consumer. And consumers love these things right now. And my guess is they will continue to love them. But apple has to keep coming up with that new thing.

My son gave me airpods or whatever they are for Christmas.And I think that is, and i"ve never had them anyway. But what a great invention by apple, they were the only ones making them, but they very quickly got into that business.

I think apple will continue to have those people focusing on sort of near term issues, but I i"ll give an example of meta, Facebook. And do they need all those people sitting around and guessing what"s gonna happen to the metaphors and what it"s gonna look like and all that? Right?

Now probably not.So they could let some people go. Hopefully those people find other jobs。

Q：I think so too. So there should always be like no boundaries, like between barriers, I think, between countries and countries when it comes to like technology movement or something like that. But also we know that the firms has degrades, right? And they have to they have to keep their eyes. So my next question will be sure, also the the public company accounting or sideboard. So it"s stuff identified numerous potentialdeficiencies.

So is it possible that more information about this potential deficiency? I I think you just mentioned it potential deficiency.

A：I talked a little bit about it. I don"t know any specifics there. I"m assuming at some ., the board will release any concerns it has.And hopefully the chinese companies will respond to those. And again, it"s all a process of learning what。 what the exchange of information should be like and how deep it goes.

I"m sure that it will evolve over time. Ii would guess certainly over the next year.we"d have some resolution of all those issues so that the the financials are more transparent and more exact.It could be that the board is looking for too much information.

Anyway, I think it"s a learning process for everyone.

Q：All also, it has a little side question.So what do you think like this move main to the investors of us listed chinese firms? Those investors.

I think it"s a great thing. I"m a big believer in transparency.

If you own a piece of a company, you wanna have faith that what they who they say they is truthful. I want it for if I own a piece of apple computer, I wanna know how much cash they have. I wanna know how much debt they have. I wanna know about that debt. When"s it do?

I want to know about their earnings and are those real numbers, who their customers are.

And companies don"t have to disclose absolutely everything. They might not want to disclose who all their customers are. But they"ll often disclose some if they had larger customers, because there"s risk in that.

It"s a good thing. I am assuming that others would agree, no matter who they are, where they are. that it"s a good thing to open all that up. And I think it"s a good thing, also in terms of international relations.

whether it"s the US and china, learning to speak together. work together.or the us and russia or china and russia or whoever.

So I think that opening up is a good thing. Technology is responsible for that.

And technology is gonna keep evolving very quickly. We"re in this technological revolution. You had the industrial revolution in the US and industrial revolution in china, those lasted a long period of time.

I think technological revolution in the US is gonna last a long time, too, and really solve a lot of our problems, create other problems probably as well. Social problems.

We complain now how there aren"t enough workers. Technology really removes the need for a lot of workers, right? So there"s gonna be aa continuing I revolution from technology, its impact on the world, economically and socially.

Every generation has its own revolution in terms of how it wants to live and what it wants to to be.

I think it"s gonna be, I"m excited for the future of everywhere, really, because I think of the evolution of technology.

So anyway, it"s gonna be an amazing future.

Q：It"s a great thing. But my third question will be why us listed shares of chinese companies are not pertained when the news was published, like their stock"s price was down or something like that. And also, as far as the procedural and liberal issues are as concerned, so where it make easier for chinese firms doing ipo in us or where revenge chinese firms.

Comprehensive system, I think.

A：Like that actually has been a big issue and that the US financial regulators want to make sure that the companies that list in the US on the New York stock exchange or wherever are transparent, they"re revealing their financials, and that there is faith or confidence or total belief that those financials are correct.

So again, My guess is that the pcaob and whatever the Chinese version of that is, will work together. So there is that joint confidence from both groups. And that"s gonna make it a lot easier for Chinese firms to ipo in the US and we can get away from this these threats by the US of delisting Chinese names.

There are a lot of companies, not just Chinese companies that have left listing in the US because they didn"t want to deal with all the oversight.

But I think hopefully over time that changes and we as a world, we come to one version of financial oversight.

And i think that"s gonna happen, but I think this is a great step towards that.

It will make it easier for Chinese and all other firms. Companies to list in the US and do an ip ipo in the US。

will it change Chinese firms compliance systems? I guess, but it also might change some US compliance systems.

Again, I think it"s a it"s a negotiation, it"s not a battle, it"s not a war, it"s two groups of accountants snore coming together and working together for the common good is how I see it and ii think it"s gonna take some time, but I think it"s gonna be a positive for really, I think for the world, I think these companies are global.

There are so many US companies that have operations in china and sell in china. And there are Chinese companies that have operations here. And softbank certainly and PCAOB.

That"s all a good thing there. And if you do business globally, you should be able to trade the securities globally as well. It is gonna make it easier, and it"s aa great positive step.

Q：My next question would be so in 2,021 and the most valuable companies, such as apple, microsoft, amazon, tesco, like they lost trillions in market capitalization.

So what do you think is the deep reason of the tech capital market?

A：Nobody likes a bear market.

Bear market simply means prices have gone down. I guess it"s more technically it"s supposed to be have gone down more than 20 %.

But the world and the US changed. When the federal reserve began to raise interest rates, we had zero interest rates in the US most recently because of covet and fear that kobe was just gonna crash our the financial system and the economic system.

When the fed moved to 0 % interest rates, it was to stimulate the economy. It certainly did that. All of a sudden people had more money to spend, and they could buy things, especially say real estate, and put down a little bit of money, but get a loan for very little interest.

And I think it really is in the US and I in lots of parts of the world, those big companies, people often say their technology companies. I don"t look at them all as technology companies. Ii look at apple as somewhat of a technology company, but also more of a consumer goods company.We all have these things right now. I don"t go any anywhere without them. I even have my wallet in the back of my phone.

Anyway, I look at Apple as a consumer goods company. I look at amazon as really conglomerate of different companies. You got everything from supermarkets, grocery stores to to cloud computing and everything else in between distribution.

It"s huge. Is a technology company. They don"t make any technology. It"s more of a marketing company.

Tesla is a car company. There are electric cars. Does that make all car companies tech company? Anyway. I"m preaching to the choir, probably. But I they"re all down significantly in price for several reasons. I that the primary reason is the fed started to to raise interest rates and making it more expensive to borrow.

The reason for that is the fed"s mandate is to keep inflation low or under control. and with covet and interruption and supply chain interruption in manufacturing. Inflation took off.

I have friends who need to buy a new refrigerator, their old one broke, and they 9 months to get a new refrigerator. Nobody wants that.

So I think the the reason why this group was targeted specifically is a couple of things. One, they are the largest companies in the US to their valuations, evaluation of their securities were elevated. They weren"t crazy high, like we saw in the year 2000 or 2001. but they were elevated at a higher level.

And also these companies are high growth companies. They are, they"re growing very fas. But a lot of when you buy a company, you"re not only buying it for what it"s doing gonna do today. You"re also buying for what it"s gonna do tomorrow.

And the outlook for these companies was very strong that they were gonna continue to grow or even accelerate growth in the future.

With interest rates up, a lot of that is put on hold. If the economy is because of higher interest rates, if the economy is softening, is weakening, there"s a certainty about that future growth, and less certainly about current growth as well.

Are people going to buy as many of these things? I think they are my kids. If they lose theirs or it breaks, they go crazy. They go nuts. They want a replacement the same day. The same goes for a lot of things.

So I think these are still extremely strong companies like they"re now extremely undervalued.

Yes, their growth rates have moderated somewhat. But when the economy returns to normal, when interest rates come back down, not to zero, but to a more sustainable rate.These companies are going to appreciate significantly.

Q:My last question would be actually in the second half year of 2022, quite a lot of semiconductor companies announced lot of in the layoffs where like the chiefs and finds that, claim that the semiconductor industry is facing like the critical labor shortages.

From your perspective, how to interpret this self contradictory phenomenon.

A:It"s a good question. Tech companies, if you look historically, do layoffs at different times than, say, industrial tech companies tend to look not at their manufacturing side or production side, but at their thought level side, the employees who are looking at the next products that they"re gonna be introducing or not even the next products, but the future products.

You look at industrial companies, they sort of don"t have that group of people. Industrial companies are more just producing the product. So industrial companies tend to lay off people during an actual recession. When their demand has declined, they don"t need to produce as many products. So they lay off people. Tech companies tend to when the overall economy gets weekened, or there"s potential for weakening, they tend to cut those thinkers or the ones focusing on the long term. So it"s funny. If you look historically, there"s really a difference in the timing, and we"re seeing evidence of it right now. Whereas the tech companies who are doing the layoffs while industrial companies aren’t doing it yet.

Now, if the US ends up going into recession, which I don"t think is guaranteed at all. And even if it is technically recession early, it"s gonna be much of a recession. You might not see industrial companies laying off. We still need a lot of these products that aren"t available. So there is AA labor shortage. There"s like there"s a labor shortage in the manufacturing process of things. There are plenty of people out there who wanna sit around thinking about what the next apple products gonna be.

They"re just very different types of labor, two different types of groups.So I think that"s why you had the somewhat contradictory phenomenon here. But hopefully, I think the layoffs aren"t gonna be overwhelming. Certainly things like that don"t help the overall economy.

But it could just be a repositioning of people as well. So maybe some of those tech people will move over and find more manufacturing type jobs or sales jobs or something that produces a product.

Now or gains business. Now, instead of way out into the future sometime.