April 23, 2024

Auction House C.E.O. Moves to Hong Kong

HONG KONG — In a move that underscores the growing importance of Asia as a market for goods as varied as fast cars, fine wines and postage stamps, Spink Sons, a small auction house founded in London in 1666, announced on Tuesday that its chief executive had relocated to Hong Kong.

Olivier D. Stocker, a former investment banker who spent many years in Asia before buying the auction house in 2002, moved to Hong Kong from London this month, a step he said was aimed at galvanizing Asian growth.

“If you really want to focus your mind and business on the region, you have to live here,” said Mr. Stocker, who is French. By basing himself and his family full time in Hong Kong, he said, “you are sending an important message to your customers and your staff that you believe in the region, that you are committed to it.”

Mr. Stocker’s remarks echo those of a growing number of senior executives from non-Asian companies who have based themselves in cities like Singapore, Hong Kong and Shanghai, rather than in the countries in which their companies have headquarters.

The phenomenon is fairly recent, but has picked up rapidly in the past few years as Asia’s appetite for industrial, consumer and luxury goods has emerged as a key engine of growth for Western companies struggling at home.

In 2008, for example, just 19.1 percent of non-Asian multinational companies surveyed by the Economist Corporate Network had one or more board members living and working in Asia. By last year, that figure had reached 38.3 percent. What is more, 52.6 percent of the respondents in the Economist Corporate Network’s 2012 survey expected to have board members in the region by 2017.

Among those who have chosen to base themselves in Asia in recent years are John Rice, vice chairman of General Electric and president and chief executive of global growth and operations, who moved to Hong Kong in 2011; Jean-Pascal Tricoirse, the chief executive of Schneider Electric, a French engineering company that derives more than a quarter of its sales from Asia, spends so much time traveling in Asia that his family has moved to Hong Kong.

The auction world, too, has seen Asian spending power become a key driver of growth over the past decade as affluence has increased throughout the region, industry experts say.

Hong Kong, for example, has emerged as a key venue for high-end jewelry auctions in the past six or seven years and now ranks alongside Geneva and New York as a center for such sales.

Likewise, Mr. Stocker said, Hong Kong has long been an important market for the stamps, coins and other collectibles that his auction house specializes in.

“But you have really seen Asian buyers picking up steam and momentum over the past decade,” he said. “The region is the fastest growing in the world.”

Asian buyers now account for about one-third of the money spent at Spinks sales, which take place in London, Hong Kong, Singapore, New York and elsewhere. That proportion, he said, could rise to about 50 percent in the next five or 10 years.

Article source: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/25/business/global/auction-house-ceo-moves-to-hong-kong.html?partner=rss&emc=rss

Economix Blog: Americans Want to Cut Spending. They Just Don’t Know What to Cut.

CATHERINE RAMPELL

CATHERINE RAMPELL

Dollars to doughnuts.

As the sequester looms, it’s worth noting that there’s no significant federal spending category that a majority of Americans wants to cut:

Survey was conducted among 1,504 adults. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points. Survey was conducted among 1,504 adults. The margin of sampling error is plus or minus 3 percentage points.

That chart comes from a Pew Research Center poll conducted Feb. 13-18. In every category except for “aid to world’s needy,” more than half of the respondents wanted either to keep spending levels the same or to increase them. In the “aid to world’s needy” category, less than half wanted to cut spending.

This is part of the problem with heeding any public concerns about getting the budget under control. According to Pew, 70 percent of Americans say it is essential for Washington to pass major legislation to reduce the federal budget deficit this year. But they can’t identify anything worth axing, and it’s not as if tax increases are so terribly popular, either.

By the way, Pew asked similar questions about what categories of government spending to cut in 2011. There has been little change since then, with the exception of attitudes toward military spending. In the most recent poll, 24 percent said the government should cut spending for the military, compared to 30 percent two years ago.

Note that the military would bear a major share of the sequestration-related spending cuts, and as a result much has been written in the last few months about the scary consequences that such cuts would cause. So it’s possible public attitudes have shifted in response to greater coverage of this spending category.

Article source: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/22/americans-want-to-cut-spending-they-just-dont-know-what-to-cut/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Economix Blog: Rings of Unemployment

CATHERINE RAMPELL

CATHERINE RAMPELL

Dollars to doughnuts.

Four out of five Americans know relatives or family friends who were laid off during the last few years or were laid off themselves, as I reported in an article on a new report from the Heldrich Center for Workforce Development at Rutgers University.

Note: Respondents counted only once using the innermost social circle for those knowing more than one person. Those counted in outer rings did not report knowing anyone from the inner rings.Heldrich Center for Workforce Development, Rutgers University Note: Respondents counted only once using the innermost social circle for those knowing more than one person. Those counted in outer rings did not report knowing anyone from the inner rings.

In a January survey, the Heldrich Center asked Americans about their exposure to layoffs in the recession or its aftermath. A lot of respondents knew several people who had been laid off, but the researchers decided to segment responses by greatest proximity.

They found that:

  • 23 percent lost a job themselves;
  • among those not touched so far, another 11 percent said someone in their household had lost a job;
  • another 26 percent said a member of their extended family had lost a job;
  • another 13 percent said a close personal friend had lost a job;
  • if not touched by any of the conditions so far, another 5 percent said a close personal friend of someone else in the household had lost a job; and
  • the remaining 21 percent of respondents answered “no” to all these questions.

The findings were especially striking because unemployment has been unusually concentrated during the last few years, relative to previous downturns.

Usually a lot of people churn in and out of unemployment during a recession. In the wake of the recent financial crisis, however, the layoffs were large but appeared more targeted, with people being very unlikely to cycle back into a job once displaced — hence the record lengths of unemployment duration for those who did lose their jobs.

These new Heldrich data suggest that a lot more people were exposed to layoffs through friends and family. This is seen in other areas of the survey, too; for example, 4 in 10 respondents said they lent money to family or friends in the last few years. (Three in 10 said they were on the other side of this transaction, meaning they borrowed money from family or friends.)

Article source: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2013/02/07/rings-of-unemployment/?partner=rss&emc=rss

Despite Fears, Owning Home Retains Allure, Poll Shows

Nearly nine in 10 Americans say homeownership is an important part of the American dream, according to the latest New York Times/CBS News poll. And they are keen on making sure it stays that way, for themselves and everyone else.

Support for helping people in financial distress over housing is higher than support for helping those without a job for many months.

Forty-five percent of the respondents say the government should be doing more to improve the housing market, while 16 percent say it should be doing less. On the politically contentious issue of direct financial assistance to those having trouble paying their mortgages, slightly more than half of those polled, 53 percent, say the government should help. And almost no one favors discontinuing the mortgage tax deduction, a prized middle-class benefit that has been featured on some budget-cutting proposals.

President Obama, who has been criticized for both doing too much to help the housing market and for not doing enough, was given poor marks. Only 36 percent of those polled approve of what Mr. Obama has done, while 45 percent disapprove.

In assessing blame for the housing crash, people are increasingly seeing financial institutions as the central culprit. Amid the swirl of recent disclosures about banks following improper and illegal procedures in pursuing foreclosures, 42 percent blame lenders, while 29 percent blame regulators. When the question was asked in early 2008, as the crisis was still building, the numbers were reversed, with 40 percent blaming regulators and 28 percent blaming lenders. Only a handful of respondents at either moment blamed the borrowers themselves for taking loans they could not afford.

“I believe the financial institutions willingly and knowingly allowed people to apply and receive credit at a rate higher than they could afford and this has degraded our economy,” said Steven Goode, an environmental health manager in Las Vegas, in a follow-up interview.

Making an offer for a house, something often done in past generations with little apprehension, is now riddled with worry. Only 49 percent call it a safe investment, while 45 percent feel it is risky. In a market where prices are consistently dropping, there is no easy exit.

“For the average person, it might not be a good idea today to buy,” said another respondent, Beth Lovcy of Troutdale, Ore., who bought a year ago. The value has already shrunk, but Mrs. Lovcy is unfazed. “It works out better financially than renting now because we can claim the interest on the mortgage.”

As the housing market slumped over the last few years with a speed and magnitude not seen since the Great Depression, aspects of homeownership have been debated as never before. There are tough questions about the role the government should take. These include how much of a down payment lenders should demand, whether lenders should be restrictive or expansive in granting new loans, how much assistance to give those on the verge of foreclosure, and whether real estate will ever again be the retirement savings vehicle it once was.

While the debate has been loud, there was little evidence of people’s views that went beyond the anecdotal. This poll offers a window onto widespread opinions at a critical juncture.

Before the crash, housing was widely deemed one of the safest possible investments. Few experts thought there was the possibility of a nationwide downturn. But after it happened, the effects were widespread and painful.

Diane Sherrell, a substitute teacher in North Carolina who retired on disability, traded up to a bigger house four years ago to accommodate an adopted son. “It’s been very difficult since then and we’re barely making it,” she said.

Half of those surveyed say the market’s continuing downward spiral has affected their long-term plans. One in five people say the crisis has prevented them from moving to another city or taking a different job. Nearly one-quarter of homeowners say their home is now worth less than what they owe on their mortgage, a condition known as being underwater. Families in this predicament are much more prone to foreclosure if they suffer job losses or other setbacks.

Over all, people are bleaker about the economic outlook than those surveyed in October. While most still think the current downturn is temporary, those saying it is permanent rose to 39 percent, up from 28 percent.

In the last two years, the stock market has recovered strongly while house prices have gone sideways at best. Yet those polled dismissed stocks as a long-term savings vehicle in favor of a savings or money market account (22 percent), a house (26 percent) or a 401(k) or individual retirement account (41 percent).

Who should be helped to buy is another contentious issue. Whether buyers need to come up with a 20 percent down payment — the standard for decades, but beyond the reach of many families now — is hotly debated. Fifty-eight percent of respondents say lenders should require this, while 36 percent say they should not.

People who cannot pay their mortgage are foreclosed upon. If they can pay but feel that doing so is pointless on a property that has lost so much of its value, it is called strategic default. While two-thirds of Americans say strategic default is not justified, 28 percent think that it is.

When houses are abandoned for any reason, it causes trouble for the neighbors. Three-quarters of those surveyed say foreclosures are a problem in their communities.

“Our home is worth much less now because houses are foreclosing around us,” said William Mack, an assembly line worker in Taylor, Mich.

Beyond all these ills, however, a persistent belief endures that the market will eventually improve and housing will regain its traditional importance.

Donna Boyd, a transportation supervisor in Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio, acknowledged “it might take a long time” for property values to go back up.

“But I don’t think I’m throwing my money away,” she said in a follow-up interview. “I rented for years when I was younger, and I just don’t like the idea of putting money in someone else’s pocket for something I will never own.”

The nationwide telephone poll was conducted June 24-28 with 979 adults and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus three percentage points for all adults.

Marina Stefan and Marjorie Connelly contributed reporting.

Article source: http://feeds.nytimes.com/click.phdo?i=e438b43a4fdde8041ba617c8943d8d87