Mary Jo White is Leaving the SEC

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

La presidenta de la SEC, Mary Jo White, anuncia su salida al fin de la administración Obama
Photo: SEC. Mary Jo White is Leaving the SEC

SEC Chair Mary Jo White, after nearly four years as the agency’s head, today announced that she intends to leave at the end of the Obama Administration.  Under Chair White’s leadership, the Commission strengthened protections for investors and the markets through transformative rulemakings that addressed major issues highlighted by the financial crisis.  The Commission also instituted a new approach to enforcement that has resulted in greater accountability and record actions through, among other things, the use of admissions of wrongdoing and enhanced data analytics and technology.

Chair White, who became the 31st Chair of the SEC in April 2013, will be one of the SEC’s longest serving Chairs.

“It has been a tremendous honor to work alongside the incredibly talented and dedicated SEC staff members who do so much every day to protect investors and our markets,” said Chair White.  “I am very proud of our three consecutive years of record enforcement actions, dozens of fundamental reforms through our rulemakings that have strengthened investor protections and market stability, and that the job satisfaction of our phenomenal staff has climbed in each of the last three years.  I also want to express my appreciation for the engagement and dedication of my fellow Commissioners and my financial regulator colleagues, past and present.”

In addition to completing the vast majority of the agency’s mandates under the Dodd-Frank Act and all of its mandates under the JOBS Act, Chair White’s leadership has advanced the agency’s mission through other critical rulemakings and built robust and effective frameworks for the SEC’s regulatory regimes going forward.

“My duty has been to ensure that the Commission implemented strong investor and market protections, and to establish an enduring foundation for future progress in the most critical areas – asset management regulation, equity market structure and disclosure effectiveness,” said Chair White.  “Thanks to the hard work and dedication of the SEC’s staff, we have accomplished both.”

Chair White drove many important rules and other policy measures to completion.  Under her leadership, the Commission advanced more than 50 significant rulemaking initiatives, including:

  •     Fundamental reforms to the money market fund industry and unprecedented new disclosures and protections for mutual fund investors in a major initiative to strengthen regulation of the $67 trillion asset management industry
  •     Enhanced equity market structure oversight, including wide-ranging new controls on how key market participants handle technology and systems issues
  •     A comprehensive framework for enhancing the effectiveness of corporate disclosure for investors
  •     Extensive new safeguards for the financial system and for investors in the more than $7 trillion security-based swap market
  •     New ways for smaller companies to raise capital needed to grow their businesses
  •     New post-crisis restrictions on proprietary trading and investments by broker-dealers and other financial institutions through the Volcker rule
  •     Major enhancements to transparency and risk management for asset-backed securities, which were a significant contributor to the financial crisis
  •     Strong operating standards for the clearing agencies that stand at the center of our financial system
  •     Extensive reforms to the regulation of credit rating agencies and how they address conflicts of interest that can harm investors
  •     First-ever regulatory framework for municipal advisors who are critical to the capital raising activities of thousands of local governments
  •     Modernized rules of practice for conducting administrative proceedings, including providing expanded rights of discovery

To enhance accountability of those who violate the securities laws, Chair White implemented the Commission’s first-ever policy to require admissions of wrongdoing in certain cases where heightened accountability and acceptance of responsibility is appropriate.  Thus far, the Commission has required admissions from more than 70 defendants, including 44 entities and 29 individuals.

During Chair White’s tenure, the Commission brought more than 2,850 enforcement actions, more than any other three-year period in the Commission’s history, and obtained judgments and orders totaling more than $13.4 billion in monetary sanctions.  The Commission charged over 3,300 companies and over 2,700 individuals, including CEOs, CFOs, and other senior corporate officers.

The record number of enforcement actions over the last three fiscal years against companies and senior executives involved many “first of their kind” cases in asset management, market structure and public finance.  Other major cases involved insider and abusive trading, violations of anti-corruption rules and misconduct in accounting and financial reporting.  In the last year alone, the Commission brought a record 868 enforcement actions.  And for the first time, the Commission devoted significant resources and emphasis on using cutting edge data analytics to uncover and investigate misconduct resulting in numerous enforcement actions involving insider trading, asset management and complex financial instruments.

As a result of the successful whistleblower program, the Commission has awarded more than $100 million, since inception — virtually all during Chair White’s tenure — to whistleblowers who provided key original information that led to successful enforcement actions.

Under Chair White’s leadership, the Commission made significant enhancements to its examination program, including increasing staff by about 20 percent by hiring new examiners where funding permitted and redeploying staff from other program areas to heighten focus on the fast-growing investment management industry.

The exam program also increased its use of advanced quantitative techniques to enable examiners to detect misconduct by more quickly analyzing large amounts of data.  Over the past year, the examination program conducted more than 2,400 formal examinations of registrants, an increase over each of the prior seven fiscal years.  The Commission also enhanced technology in its examination program through the National Exam Analytics Tool (NEAT), which enables examiners to analyze large volumes of trading data much more efficiently.

Chair White serves as a member of the Financial Stability Oversight Council and on several other domestic and international organizations, including the International Organization of Securities Commissions, the Financial Stability Board, the International Financial Reporting Standards Foundation Monitoring Board, the Financial and Banking Information Infrastructure Committee, and the Federal Housing Finance Oversight Board.

Chair White added, “It has been and will always be critical for this agency and the public that the SEC remain truly independent.  That independence is crucial to our ability to protect investors, safeguard our markets and facilitate the capital formation that fosters innovation and the growth that is essential to our national economy.”

Prior to her arrival at the Commission, Chair White spent decades as a federal prosecutor and securities lawyer.  As the U.S. Attorney for the Southern District of New York from 1993 to 2002, she prosecuted cases involving complex securities and financial institution frauds, other white collar crime and international terrorists.  She also served as an Assistant U.S. Attorney and was Chief Appellate Attorney of that office’s Criminal Division.  She served as Acting U.S. Attorney for the Eastern District of New York as well as the First Assistant U.S. Attorney.  In private practice, she was a litigation partner and chair of the litigation department of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP, overseeing more than 200 lawyers.  Chair White is also a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the American College of Trial Lawyers.

The European Commission Wants to Align the Application of PRIIPs and MiFID II

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

La Comisión Europea confirma el retraso de PRIIPs al 1 de enero de 2018
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Antonio de la Mano, Flickr, Crative Commons.. The European Commission Wants to Align the Application of PRIIPs and MiFID II

The European Commission announced on November 9th  that it will take the necessary legal steps to postpone the PRIIPs Regulation for 12 months. The announcement aligns the dates of application of PRIIPs with MiFID II.

The European Fund and Asset Management Association (EFAMA) stated in a press release that they very much welcome the proposal by the Commission to delay the application date of the PRIIPs Regulation by 12 months.

In order to do so, the European Commission will publish its proposals in an amending draft Regulation, which must be quickly passed by Parliament and Council if the existing 31 December 2016 application date is to be successfully pushed back by one year.

“There is only one reason why we considered a delay absolutely essential, and this is because it is materially impossible and simply unrealistic for product manufacturers and distributors to meet the original 31 December 2016 deadline.”

A postponement therefore proved necessary and will now materialise in a more realistic timetable to comply with the Regulation.

They believe that this delay will allow companies to appropriately implement the new rules.

“Equally important is the fact that this postponement will also ensure more time is available for solutions to be found on the revised RTSs. Allowing past performance, and fixing the misleading methodology of transaction costs must absolutely be addressed. This remains a crucial part of ensuring the KIDs’ success.” EFAMA concluded.

 

Can Capital Spending Pick Up the Slack From a Weakening Consumer?

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

¿Puede el gasto de capital repuntar el déficit de un consumidor que se debilita?
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Yann Gar. Can Capital Spending Pick Up the Slack From a Weakening Consumer?

I often think of consumer spending and industrial production as the yin and yang of the U.S. economy. In the years since the financial crisis, I am struck by the juxtaposition of the resilience of the consumer against the weakness on the industrial and manufacturing side of the economy.

Now, however, there are troubling signs that the consumer is coming under pressure. “Something bad is going on that we can’t explain.” This quote about the U.S. consumer was spoken to us recently by the management of a home-goods retailer. Dramatic? Yes, but not atypical of what we are hearing from other consumer companies. For example, Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz said the company has never in one quarter seen a convergence of social and political turmoil at home, weakening consumer confidence and increasing global uncertainty.

Digging into the numbers a bit, recent data don’t tell an upbeat story either. For example, half of retailers reported negative year-over-year same-store sales growth in the second quarter of 2016 .

Of course, traditional retail is facing structural challenges from e-commerce and the continuing rise of Amazon. But there’s something else going on here.

Does a flagging consumer mean the stock market can’t continue to move higher? Of course not. In fact, there are some reasons to hope that the industrial sector and a rebound in capital expenditure (CapEx) might pick up the slack from the U.S. consumer.

It is widely mentioned that consumer spending accounts for about two-thirds of the U.S. economy. However, consumer spending has contributed only 20% of the variation in GDP growth over the past five years. Meanwhile, private investment, which accounts for less than 20% of output, has contributed 52% of the variation in growth.

Yes, consumer spending is a huge part of the economy, but it might be the wrong place to focus right now. Productive capital, or spending on plant and equipment, may be a small part of the economy, but it is much more volatile than consumer spending. This makes sense intuitively. To take a simple example, consumers at the grocery store might spend slightly more on higher-priced items if they feel confident. But they won’t double their consumption of food.

CapEx is different. Companies can fairly quickly change their capital spending if their outlook changes. Because business spending is more volatile, a pickup can meaningfully swing the economy’s trajectory.

In other words, CapEx is where the real action is for the economy, and it’s been missing during the muted recovery.

There are several reasons for this.

First, in the wake of the financial crisis, investors have rewarded companies that generated free cash flow, dividends and buybacks. Investors have wanted yield and haven’t been enthusiastic about companies making expensive, long-term investments. We’ve also seen more industries with a relatively small number of large companies that have kept supply and capacity constrained, avoiding market share fights. Finally, in many industries, regulation has become a much more significant factor in recent years. That has forced companies to divert resources inwardly and raised uncertainty about the long-term outlook for their businesses.

Overall, it’s been a tough slog for the manufacturing sector. A rising U.S. dollar has hurt exports, falling oil prices have hit energy companies and auto sales have pulled back, albeit from record 2015 levels. The Institute for Supply Management’s (ISM) Purchasing Managers’ Index (PMI) has been hovering around 50, indicating flattish growth.

Ampliar

Overall, companies have cut back on spending and didn’t invest in new plant and equipment. Looking at the macro data such as ISM and shipping, things are soft.

But there may be reasons to hope. The November election will bring clarity and potentially policies that support growth in the industrial economy. These policies may include repatriation of a significant portion of the $2 trillion of overseas cash, reductions in the U.S. federal corporate tax rate from 35%, infrastructure spending and reduced regulation. The best-case scenario would be a virtuous circle of increased capital spending, which would boost productivity and lead to stronger economic growth.

Bottom line: A pickup of investment in productive capital is what’s needed more than debt-fueled consumer spending.

Column by Edward J. Perkin CIO at Capital Eaton Vance Management.

The Morning After: What Now For Markets?

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

El día después: ¿Qué pasará ahora en los mercados?
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Bradley Weber. The Morning After: What Now For Markets?

In a shocking development reminiscent of Brexit, Donald Trump, the Republican nominee, was elected the forty-fifth president of the United States on Tuesday, 8 November. In addition, Republicans maintained control over both houses of Congress.

Trump’s unexpected victory brings with it a great deal of policy uncertainty, given his lack of specificity during the presidential campaign. Judging by the tone of his campaign, one can surmise that foreign trade will likely be a major focus of the new administration. It is quite unlikely that the Trans-Pacific Partnership will be ratified against the present backdrop, while the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) could be renegotiated or even abandoned. Uncertainty over immigration policy is likely in the near term, which could potentially impact labor markets.

On the campaign trail, President-Elect Trump vowed to lower taxes and repeal the Medicare tax on investment income. He also promised to repeal the complicated alternative minimum tax, while taxing carried interest as ordinary income. Corporate tax rates would be reduced to 15% from 35%, and repatriated foreign profits would be taxed at a one-time rate of 10%, if Trump’s plan is enacted. Economists, however, question whether this package would spur enough economic growth to offset lost revenue from lower tax rates, which could widen fiscal deficits.

Sectors that may be advantaged under a Trump presidency include:

  • Fossil fuels: Trump repeatedly promoted US energy independence during the campaign, calling for leasing federal land for energy exploration, repealing some regulations on coal and reviving the Keystone XL pipeline project.
  • Pharmaceuticals: Price controls will be less of a concern for the industry than they would have been under a Clinton presidency.
  • Financials: Trump has called for repealing or significantly revising Dodd-Frank. Regulatory burdens could be reduced across the economy, based on his campaign rhetoric.

Trump’s focus on trade during the campaign and the risk that NAFTA might be revisited could pressure the currencies of two of the US’s largest trading partners, Mexico and Canada. Additionally, emerging market currencies will likely be pressured, since any additional US trade barriers would probably further slow the growth of global trade, which could negatively impact both producers of raw materials and of finished goods.

If the US puts trade barriers in place on imports, US exporters may be hurt as a result of trade partners retaliating against US actions. With roughly 40% of earnings from S&P 500 Index companies earned outside the US, there appear to be significant risks to US-based multinationals. A full-fledged trade war would be damaging to growth and employment, and could have ripple effects beyond US borders. Companies whose business is more domestic in nature may fare better against a backdrop of global trade friction. If financial markets have a persistently negative reaction to a Trump victory in the run-up to the December FOMC meeting, odds of an interest rate hike could shrink.

A front-loaded agenda

Given the political ebbs and flows of recent decades, it is reasonable to expect Republicans to try to pack as much policy change into the first two years of a Trump presidency as possible, much as Democrats did in the first two years of the Obama administration. In 2009–2010, Democrats controlled the White House and both houses of Congress and passed a large economic stimulus package and the Affordable Care Act. Oftentimes, when one party controls both Congress and the White House, voters perceive political overreach and seek to balance the scales during the midterm elections.

In 1994, President Bill Clinton’s Democrats lost both the House and the Senate and never regained congressional control during the balance of his two terms. Losing control of one or both houses in the midterms would limit Trump’s ability to achieve his agenda, suggesting that policy change could become more incremental later in his term. 

Erik Weisman is Chief Economist at MFS.

 

 

 

 

Andy Rothman: “The Chinese Debt Problem is Concentrated to Some Sectors and Standardization Will Not Be Traumatic”

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Andy Rothman: "The Chinese Debt Problem is Concentrated to Some Sectors and Standardization Will Not Be Traumatic"
CC-BY-SA-2.0, Flickr. Andy Rothman: "The Chinese Debt Problem is Concentrated to Some Sectors and Standardization Will Not Be Traumatic"

Many experts predict a dramatic story for China, claiming that an economic crisis or a hard landing of the Asian giant is just around the corner. But the reality is less dramatic: Although China faces many challenges, it is more likely to continue to account for about one-third of global growth than to be at the center of a collapse.

Speaking at Matthews Asia’s 2016 Investment Forum in San Francisco, Andy Rothman, investment strategist at the firm, explained that a misunderstanding of how much the economy has changed in recent years is what drives the extreme pessimism for China’s prospects.

“China’s growth deceleration is indeed a fact, but, How possible is a ‘hard landing’?” he queried. “From the media’s point of view, the story of China’s collapse is very appealing, and given the misunderstanding of its economy, it’s an argument that easily gains adherents,” he said.

“The average citizen in developed economies imagines China as an economy which is fully controlled by the state, with a very communist background, ghost towns, “zombie” companies, and a huge weight of exports and investment in its GDP. But the reality of China’s economy is more like this:

  1. 80% of employment in China is in private hands.
  2. All employment growth is generated by SMEs
  3. China has become a market for entrepreneurs
  4. It is headed for its fifth consecutive year in which services and consumption account for a larger part of its economy than manufactoring and construction.”

The rebalancing of the Chinese economy from investment to consumption implies lower growth, said the expert, “but we must not forget that last year China was responsible for 35% of the global economy’s growth and that, ultimately, what happens in China has a huge impact on the global economy and in most of the companies in which we invest, both inside and outside China. Therefore, it is important for investors to understand what is really happening there,” Rothman pointed out.

As an example of this transformation, the strategist mentioned the prevalence of private companies, and not of state-run enterprises, as is widely believed. Also, the services and consumption sectors already exceed manufacturing and construction.

Mistrust indata

It is true that when dealing with the macroeconomic data published by China, there is certain mistrust, which is very hard to overcome. For the Matthews Asia fund manager, skepticism is quite clear. “There are reports that growth in electricity consumption is much lower than the GDP growth data. And that is so. That does happen, but the same is true in the United States. Growth comes from companies and industry sectors which are much less electricity intensive, such as Alibaba,” he explained.

“Another thing which is also frequently mentioned is the drop in imports of raw materials, but that data is always reported in dollars, not volume. And the reality is that the price of raw materials has plummeted in recent years, so when looking at imports of raw materials in terms of volume (tonnes), the slowdown is far less dramatic,” he said.

Debt

“The debt problem is serious, but the risk of a hard landing or banking crisis is, in my view, low. The key reason for that is that the potential bad debts are corporate, not household debts, and were made at the direction of the state—by state-controlled banks to state-owned enterprises,” Rothman said. This provides the state with the ability to manage the timing and pace of recognition of nonperforming loans. It is also important to note, he points out, that the majority of potential bad debts are to state-owned firms, while the privately owned companies that employ the majority of the workforce and account for the majority of economic growth have been deleveraging. Additional positive factors are that China’s banking system is very liquid, and that the process of dealing with bad debts has begun.

A massive devaluation of the Renminbiis not expected

Last year, the Renminbi depreciated by about 6% against the dollar, while so far this year, it’s down by about 4%. “The Chinese currency is unlikely to depreciate, or appreciate by more than 5% per annum, and the direction will most probably vary depending on the strength of the dollar against the other world currencies. The reality is that China remains a competitive exporter, even though wages have grown on average 15% annually in recent years and the Renminbi has appreciated over 40% against the dollar from 2005 to 2015” Rothman, concluded.

Maitland Restructures its Institutional Client Team

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Maitland rediseña su equipo directivo para organizarlo por tipo de producto
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Federico Mena Quintero . Maitland Restructures its Institutional Client Team

Maitland, a global advisory and fund administration firm, has announced a major organisational restructure of the leadership team of its institutional client services arm. The management team will now reflect the five fund services products on offer – Traditional Fund Services, Transfer Agency, Hedge Fund Services, Private Equity & Real Estate Fund Services and ManCo Services.

The move reflects Maitland’s impressive expansion over recent years, both in terms of size and geographical reach as well as breadth of internal expertise and talent. The product approach empowers each product head to drive all aspects of the delivery to clients, both in terms of day-to-day service as well as longer-term strategic alignment.

The entire institutional product offering will be led by Jim Clark, who joined Maitland in May 2014 from State Street and brings over thirty years of industry experience to the role. The TFS team will be led globally by Rob Leedham, with Guido Frederico leading the South African business. TA and HFS teams are led globally by Mark Bredell and Ben Pershick respectively while Bruce McGlogan will head up the PERE team as it builds on its current period of success in Europe and South Africa.

Steve Georgala, CEO of Maitland, said: “Maitland is a unique firm in terms of its product capability and breadth of services we are able to offer institutional clients. We are delighted to have a leadership team full of deep industry experience, with each member bringing substantial knowledge and expertise to their domain. Our focus is to stabilise the areas of Maitland that have enjoyed substantial growth recently, whilst continuing to actively grow products and regions where our offering is attracting considerable market interest. Given this, it made sense to restructure our organisation to reflect our client-centric approach, and to empower our business leaders to deliver the best service possible. These are exciting times for the company.”

How will Bond and Currency Markets React to the US Election Result?

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

La renta fija estadounidense vivirá escenarios diferentes dependiendo de si gana Clinton o Trump, mientras el dólar subirá
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Colleen P. How will Bond and Currency Markets React to the US Election Result?

With the latest polls suggesting the race to become the 45th President of the United States is neck and neck. Bond and currency managers around the world are currently trying to assess how a win for either candidate might affect their portfolios. M&G’s Anthony Doyle offers his best estimate as to what might happen.

A Clinton win

A Clinton victory is seen by the markets as a continuation of the current US political environment, particularly if the Republicans retain control of the House of Representatives. This would be the most benign scenario for bond and currency markets as measured by price volatility. Following a Clinton win, the bond market would likely price in a higher probability of a move in interest rates, with the removal of perceived political uncertainty paving the way for a Fed rate hike in December. The US dollar stands to be the main beneficiary of this change in market pricing in the immediate future, though any gains are likely to be measured.

Ampliar

 

In a Clinton win scenario, bond prices across the Treasury curve would likely remain under pressure in the coming weeks given the high chance of a rate hike, rising inflationary pressures, and the possibility of an easier fiscal policy stance by a Clinton administration. A Clinton win is not likely to radically alter bond investors or economists views on the outlook for the US economy. If Clinton is able to implement easier fiscal policy in the US in the medium term, US growth and inflation would likely increase, meaning a rise in term premiums and a steeper yield curve.

A Trump win

A Trump victory would result in heightened volatility across a number of markets given the uncertainty around what the implications are for the US economy. Following the result, risk aversion would likely increase meaning a rising US dollar, lower bond yields and a weaker US high yield corporate bond market. In the fixed income universe, emerging market bonds and currencies would likely be hit the worst in this environment given Trump’s tough stance on China and Mexico. This market reaction could look similar to previous US risk-off events such as the 2008 financial crisis, the 2011 loss of the US government AAA rating, and the 2013 taper tantrum. Equally, should the Fed push ahead with a rate hike in an uncertain political environment, we may see an adverse reaction in markets similar to the 2014 rate hike.
 

Ampliar

 

Turning to credit markets, Trump’s proposal of a repatriation tax holiday would likely be positive for US investment grade corporate bonds at the margin and may lead to a reduction in corporate bond issuance. It is estimated that companies hold almost $1trn offshore, with around 60% denominated in US dollars. The big question is how companies would use this cash: will they pay out special dividends to shareholders? Will they increase capital expenditure and expand their operations? High yield companies would be less affected, as most companies have domestic sources of revenue.

Over the medium term, Trump’s proposals on large tax cuts for all is the equivalent of a large Keynesian injection of cash into the economy which would benefit economic growth but also raise inflation. The implementation of trade barriers would also be inflationary, as import prices rise from current levels. Immigration reform means the already tight US labour market would tighten further, leading to higher wages. Fed policy would need to counteract the rise in inflation, meaning much higher interest rates and a bear market for bond markets. The US treasury market would return to a world of higher yields and a much steeper yield curve. In this environment, the US dollar would likely strengthen given the contrasting monetary policy stance with other developed market economies. A Trump win would be good for government bonds in the short term, bad for bonds in the long term.

The bottom line

A Clinton victory would likely result in lower volatility in the near term relative to a Trump victory. In the immediate aftermath of a Clinton win, there may be some slight risk-on moves from investors but over the medium term much will depend upon the make-up of the United States Congress. Credit markets should prove to be relatively resilient, given that default rates are expected to remain low and the Fed remains cautious in removing policy accommodation, thereby reducing the chances of a policy error.  A Trump victory would be seen as a risk-off event in the short-term, resulting in lower treasury yields, a higher US dollar and weaker risk sentiment towards emerging market assets. Given both candidates are advocates of an easier fiscal policy stance, government bond prices are likely to come under pressure in 2017 under both scenarios. Over the longer term, like a Clinton win scenario, the policies that Trump is able to implement given the make-up of Congress will be key to determining the outlook for the economy and consequently bond and currency markets.
 

Brickell City Centre Opens its Retail Center

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Ya se puede comprar en Brickell City Centre
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrBrickell City Centre. Brickell City Centre Opens its Retail Center

Destined to become one of the country’s most visited retail destinations and a new landmark instantly identifiable among Miami’s skyline, the retail center at Brickell City Centre opened to the public on Thursday, Nov. 3 with its first group of stores.  A select group of more than 100 committed retail stores showcased their concepts at the center for the first time at 10 a.m. that day. The kickoff was followed by a larger rollout of not-to-be-missed experiential events that will welcome the majority of retailers opening their doors throughout the next few weeks.

Developed by Hong Kong-based Swire Properties Inc, along with retail co-developers Whitman Family Development and Simon Property Group, Brickell City Centre will fill the void in Miami’s retail landscape by bringing one of the most diverse offerings of over 100 luxury, contemporary, international and local brands to Brickell’s underserved financial district.

“Brickell City Centre is certainly a first for Miami and will inevitably solidify the city as a true world-class destination. What we’ve done here is unique; there’s no handbook or manual for it because it hasn’t been done before,” said Stephen Owens, president of Swire Properties. “We have carefully created a vertical shopping experience that is very urban in its design, with many firsts and many internationally recognized retailers. I feel privileged to finally share with the world what we felt was always missing in Brickell: a destination.”

After four years of construction, the expansive three-level, open-air retail center will unveil half-a-million square feet of high fashion, dining and entertainment, anchored by Miami’s first new Saks Fifth Avenue in 30 years and the country’s first CMX theater, a subsidiary of Mexico-based Cinemex, the sixth largest cinema chain in the world. In 2017, Brickell City Centre will also welcome Miami’s first Italian food hall, which will take up three floors of the project.

The center joins the project’s other completed towers, including its two, 390-unit luxury condominium residences, REACH and RISE, two class-A office buildings, which are leased so far by Akerman LLP and WeWork, Uruguayan restaurant Quinto La Huella and signature rooftop bar Sugar, both of which are located at Brickell City Centre’s flagship hotel, EAST, Miami.

Brickell City Centre currently has 92 percent of its retail spaces committed. A sizeable percentage of these brands, approximately 20 percent, are using Brickell City Centre as the venue to enter the South Florida market.  A full list of tenants opening throughout the holiday season and beyond can be found here. 

Celebrations will continue with Brickell City Centre’s holiday season kickoff on Nov. 17, by which time another wave of soon-to-be-revealed retailers will be opening in time for the busy holiday season. The retail center will come alive with the work of famed production designer and Marvel extraordinaire, Kirk M. Petruccelli (set designer for The Incredible Hulk, Fantastic Four, Blade, Ghost Rider and more), who will be creating an iconic and sustainable spectacle that infuses holiday spirit into the interior and exterior elements of the center. The kickoff will also launch BCC’s curated music program by famous runway DJ and BCC’s Music Director, Michaelangelo L’Acqua.

 

Muzinich & Co Achieves Double Award Success

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Muzinich & Co logra dos premios como especialista en renta fija
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: Investment Week Specialist Investment Awards 2016. Muzinich & Co Achieves Double Award Success

Muzinich & Co, an institutional asset manager specialising in corporate credit, earned two fixed income awards in the Investment Week Specialist Investment Awards 2016.

The Muzinich Europeyield and Muzinich ShortDurationHighYield funds won the European High Yield and Short-dated Bond categories.

In addition, Muzinich Americayield was highly commended in the US High Yield category and the company was highly commended in Specialist Fixed Income Group of the Year.

The awards were judged using a combination of quantitative and qualitative criteria, based on independent performance data and analysis by a panel of leading industry figures.

Josh Hughes, Managing Director of Marketing & Client Relations at Muzinich said: “We take great pride in the fact that a panel of highly respected industry figures have recognised our success in delivering superior risk-adjusted returns for our investors, which has been the focus for Muzinich & Co for more than two decades.

It underlines the quality and specialist expertise of our credit team, who we believe are among the most experienced in the industry.”

The awards are designed to recognise consistency of returns by asset managers focused on specialist asset classes. Muzinich & Co was also recognised in last year’s awards when it earned four awards and was highly commended in two categories.

The US Is King In The Global Hedge Fund Community

  |   For  |  0 Comentarios

Estados Unidos domina la industria global de hedge funds
CC-BY-SA-2.0, FlickrPhoto: foreverseptember . The US Is King In The Global Hedge Fund Community

The US is the dominant component of the global hedge fund community, accounting for 72% of the approximately $3.1tn of global assets under management (AUM), as of 30th June 2016. Although other regions are emerging as regards hedge fund activity, the US is home to 3,170 of the 5,092 (62%) institutional investors active in hedge funds, and 3,209 of the 5,377 (60%) active hedge fund managers tracked by Preqin.

The US hedge fund industry has also seen strong growth in recent years, increasing by $13bn in the first half of 2016 – despite global outflows – and by $138bn since the start of 2015. Moreover, in Preqin’s recent survey of over 270 hedge fund managers, notably more US-based managers reported an increase (26%) in the proportion of their AUM allocated by investors than reported a decrease (4%), depicting a positive outlook for the US hedge fund industry.

Hedge funds located in Pennsylvania charge the lowest average performance fee (17.54%) of the top 10 most active US states, with funds based in Virginia charging the highest average fee of 20.00%. Massachusetts-based vehicles charge the lowest mean management fee, at 1.25%, while those located in Illinois have the highest fee of any state (1.58%), on par with New York-based funds (1.57%). 


Hedge funds based in Texas have generated 3-year annualized performance of 8.96%, the highest of any of the top 10 US states, while Virginia-based vehicles have recorded returns of 8.13%. Hedge funds in Illinois, Connecticut and Massachusetts have fared less well over the same period, with annualized returns of 2.54%, 2.80% and 2.88% respectively. 


Over one-third (37%) of US-based fund managers are based in New York, and collectively these firms hold $1.1tn worth of assets – 36% of global industry AUM. Furthermore, New York represents nearly half (46%) of US-based funds incepted since 2009. 


New York has the most active institutional investors (544) of any state in the US, while California are second in the list with 341 investors located in the state. The 77 New Jersey-based investors have an average current allocation to the hedge fund industry of 18.8%, by the far the highest of any state.