A small thread on China Evergrande, its metioric rise and an imminent financial collapse 🧵 👇
2/
Evergrande is China's second-largest property developer with $110 billion in sales in 2020 alone. Evergrande was founded in 1996 by Chairman Hui Ka Yan in Guangzhou China 🇨🇳
The company was listed in Hong Kong in 2009, helping it grow its asset size to $355 billion today.
5/
Concerns intensified after Evergrande admitted in June it did not pay some commercial paper on time, and news in July a Chinese court froze a $20 million bank deposit held by the firm on the request of Guangfa Bank.
6/
Evergrande's demise came from accumulating massive amounts to debt to grow as quickly as possible.
Evergrande's fast expansion fueled by loans to support its land buying spree, and selling apartments quickly despite low margins so as to start the cycle again.
7/
Its total liability, which include payables, is at 1.97 trillion yuan ($306.3 billion), or around 2% of the Chinas GDP. Other than bank and bond channels, the developer has been tapping the shadow banking market, including trusts, wealth mgmt. products and commercial paper.
8/
Evergrande accelerated its debt-reduction efforts last year after regulators introduced caps on three debt ratios, dubbed the "three red lines" policy. It aims to meet all the requirements by the end of 2022.
9/
Evergrande gave buyers steep discounts for its residential developments & sold the bulk of its commercial properties. Since the second half of 2020, it has had a $555 million secondary share sale, raising $1.8 billion by listing its property management unit in Hong Kong.
10/
China's central bank highlighted in 2018 that companies including Evergrande might pose systemic risks to the nation's financial system. The leaked letter last year said Evergrande's liabilities involve more than 128 banks and over 121 non-banking institutions.
11/
JPMorgan estimated China Minsheng Bank has the highest exposure to Evergrande. Late payments could trigger cross-defaults as many financial institutions have exposure to Evergrande via loans and indirect holdings.
Almost Lehman Brothers style.
12/
In the dollar bond market, Evergrande accounts for 4% of Chinese real estate high-yields, according to DBS. Any defaults will also trigger sell-offs in the high-yield credit market.
A collapse will have a large impact on the job market.
13/
Evergrande has 200,000 staff and hires 3.8 million people every year for project developments.
Evergrande owns an office tower in Hong Kong's Wan Chai district. It has one completed and two nearly-completed residential developments in the city, & a vast undeveloped land.
16/
China's central bank said it summoned executives of the country's most indebted property developer, China Evergrande Group. It comes days after President Xi Jinping highlighted efforts to forestall major financial risks.
17/
Evergrande has more than 240 billion yuan ($37 billion) of bills & trade payables from contractors to settle over the next 12 months.
Concern over the developer's financial health intensified in June when it failed to pay some commercial paper on time.
18/
Its bonds carry junk ratings from S&P, Moody's and Fitch, all of whom recently issued downgrades, and its troubles have sent jitters through China's entire junk-debt market at a time when corporate credit is rallying in the rest of the world.
19/
In the hearings, at least one bond investor said the move could mean Evergrande is on the verge of a default that would reverberate through the banking system.
Lehman Brothers anyone 🤔
20/
Buried under its crushing debt of about $300 billion, Evergrande is so huge that the fallout from any failure could hurt not just China’s economy. Contagion could spread to markets beyond China.
This collapse would be the biggest test of China’s financial system in years.
21/
Banks have responded to its deteriorating cash flow. Some in Hong Kong, including HSBC & Standard Chartered, have declined to extend new loans to buyers of two uncompleted Evergrande residential projects.
Ratings agencies downgraded the firm, citing its liquidity problems.
22/
Evergrande share price plunged nearly 80% so far this year, and trading of its bonds was repeatedly halted by Chinese stock exchanges in the past weeks.
23/
In an August report, S&P estimated that over the next 12 months, Evergrande will have over 240 billion yuan ($37.16 billion) of bills and trade payables from contractors to settle — around 100 billion yuan of that amount is due this year.
24/
A paint supplier to Evergrande, Shanghai-listed Skshu Paint, said in a filing that the real estate firm repaid part of its debt in properties – and uncompleted ones at that.
Who'd want to be paid in incomplete properties instead of cash.
😂😂😂😂
25/
Just in 2021 alone, Chinese billionaires lost so much money due to Evergrande, it's insane.
Colin Huang - $30 Billion
Zhong Shanshan - $18 Billion
Jay Y Lee - $16 Billion
Hui Ka Yan - $15 Billion
Pang Kang - $12 Billion
26/
On a lighter note, choose your disaster pick for 2021
Evergreen vs. Evergrande 😀
To understand the CCP intricacies of what’s going down with Evergrande, Check this out.
Chinese real estate market is the largest asset class of any kind in the world. It’s inflated and if it slides, then the contagion financial effects could be felt world wide to be honest 🤷♂️
A large Chinese shadow bank Zhongrong International Trust Co. missed payments on dozens of products and has no immediate plans to make their clients whole.
Chinese Real Estate bubble and the lack of demand for Chinese exports is a major cause for concern.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
The failure to name, defame, indict, or arrest the clients of Jeffrey Epstein, Ghislaine Maxwell, and Sean "Diddy" Combs, despite their own high-profile arrests, points to a troubling pattern of selective accountability that protects the powerful. This seems to run across party lines, not specific to Democrat or Republican. These individuals operated within elite circles, allegedly facilitating or engaging in egregious acts of exploitation and trafficking, yet the focus remains narrowly on them as individuals rather than the broader networks they served. The clients—often wealthy, influential figures in politics, business, or entertainment—appear shielded by a system that prioritizes discretion over justice. This suggests a deliberate effort to limit exposure, perhaps to avoid destabilizing institutions or reputations tied to these networks. The lack of transparency fuels suspicion that those in power are complicit in preserving a status quo where the elite evade scrutiny, leaving only the orchestrators to face consequences while their patrons remain untouched.
This disparity in accountability undermines public trust in the justice system and perpetuates a culture of impunity for the privileged. If Epstein, Maxwell, and Combs were indeed central to criminal enterprises, their clients were not mere bystanders but active participants who enabled and benefited from these schemes. The absence of indictments or even public naming of these individuals raises questions about whether investigations are intentionally curtailed to protect those with the means to influence outcomes. Systemic barriers, such as sealed records, private settlements, or prosecutorial reluctance to challenge powerful figures, may be at play, ensuring that the client lists remain shrouded in secrecy. By failing to pursue these clients, authorities risk signaling that justice is a privilege reserved for the few, leaving victims without full reckoning and society grappling with the unsettling reality that some are above the law.
A thread on Epstein, Maxwell, Diddy and their criminal elite sex trafficking networks👇
The National Institutes of Health has shut down research labs accused of conducting deadly experiments on thousands of beagles over the past 40+ years.
EACH AND EVERY TIME GOVERNMENT TRIES TO SOLVE A PROBLEM, THEY END UP CREATING MORE
Chaos: Governments, in their attempt to impose order, often create chaos by disrupting established systems. For example, a sudden policy to nationalize industries can lead to mismanagement, supply chain breakdowns, and public unrest as businesses struggle to adapt.
Assault: Governments may use force to enforce laws, sometimes escalating to violence against citizens. For instance, during protests, police deployed by the state might use tear gas or batons, injuring peaceful demonstrators.
Theft: Through taxation or seizure, governments can take property without consent, resembling theft. An example is eminent domain, where a person's home is taken for public projects, often with inadequate compensation.
Extortion: Governments can pressure individuals or businesses for money or compliance under threat of punishment. For example, a small business might face hefty fines or closure unless it pays inflated licensing fees demanded by local officials.
Intimidation: State authorities may intimidate citizens to suppress dissent or enforce compliance. A citizen criticizing government policy online might receive threatening visits from law enforcement, discouraging free speech.
Collusion: Governments can collude with private entities to prioritize elite interests over the public. For instance, a government might award contracts to a favored corporation in exchange for political donations, sidelining fair competition.
Discrimination: Policies may unfairly target or exclude certain groups, fostering inequality. An example is a law banning specific religious practices, disproportionately harming minority communities while favoring others.
Trauma: Government actions, like forced displacements or aggressive policing, can inflict emotional and physical trauma. For example, children separated from parents during immigration enforcement may suffer long-term psychological harm.
Tyranny: Overreaching authority can lead to oppressive rule, stifling freedoms. A government imposing strict curfews and censoring media to control a crisis can erode personal liberties, resembling tyrannical rule.
Death: In extreme cases, government actions result in loss of life. For instance, a poorly planned military operation to address insurgency might lead to civilian casualties due to collateral damage.
In just three months as the 47th President, Donald Trump has governed with a ferocity that seems fueled by the trials of his past—indictments, investigations, assassination attempts, and impeachments—emerging not as a man diminished, but as one emboldened to deliver on his promises with unrelenting focus. His campaign pledges, once dismissed by critics as bombastic rhetoric, are materializing at a breakneck pace, reflecting a leader who thrives under pressure and channels adversity into action. From sweeping border security measures to economic policies aimed at revitalizing American industry, Trump’s early tenure feels like a defiant rebuttal to those who doubted his resolve, proving that the chaos of his journey has only sharpened his determination to reshape the nation in his image.
What’s most striking is how Trump has turned promises into tangible outcomes, defying the inertia that often bogs down presidencies. He’s tackled illegal immigration with a vigor that’s already shifting the landscape, while imposing tariffs to bolster domestic production, moves that echo his “America First” mantra and resonate with a base hungry for results. Gas, grocery and egg prices have eased, a practical win for everyday Americans, while his administration’s bold strokes—like dismantling bureaucratic excess and confronting global adversaries—signal a rejection of the status quo. For a man who’s faced relentless scrutiny, Trump’s first 90 days suggest not just survival, but a triumphant assertion of his vision, delivering a governance style as unapologetic and unconventional as the path that brought him back to power.