FiNETIK – Asia and Latin America – Market News Network

Asia and Latin America News Network focusing on Financial Markets, Energy, Environment, Commodity and Risk, Trading and Data Management

China and Mexico: Strategic Partners or Competitors? 中国与墨西哥: 战略伙伴关系还是竞争对手?.

China and Mexico’s bilateral relationship is the subject of an ongoing debate, characterized, in general, by strongly conflicting views. On one hand, there are the ones that quite often quote unfair trade practices from China, or Chinese companies who have suffered losses of time, energy and money when entering the Mexican market.

It is quite common to listen at business meetings that after months of negotiations, companies found out that their potential local partner was not the most adequate. Sadly, cross-cultural misunderstandings often contributed to break the potential association, since the local partner didn’t have the financial strengths nor was knowledgeable enough of the local market, etc. On the other hand, bad experiences are not a must. It is also possible to identify success stories from companies establishing in China, and vice-versa, doing business profitably. The examples include small and medium size companies on trading, sourcing, and exporting to and from China; but also large corporations with standalone investments or join ventures with local players.

At Mexican malls you can buy electronic products with a Chinese brand manufactured in Mexico; in China, flour made “tacos” have paved their way to gain preferences in the Chinese middle class.

Even tough for many specialists the investment and trade flow between China and Mexico is not significant in terms of value and diversity of industries; there are some figures that are worth keeping in mind. Based on official statistics in 1990, Mexico exported nine million USD and imported around fifteen million USD from China. For 2010, the bilateral trade reached almost fifty billion USD, while the bilateral trade between India and China reached about sixty billion USD in that same year. This is an impressive amount if we consider Mexico does not share borders with India, and Mexican population is around ten times smaller than the Indian.

On December 11, 2011; the agreed program between Mexico and China on compensatory import duties will come to an end. It is expected for this to reinvigorate the debate on trade and business practices. Nevertheless, it would be worth it to keep in mind that in a twenty years period, Mexico’s exports to China had a compound annual growth rate of over 36 per cent (CAGR), while imports from China to Mexico registered a CAGR of 49 percent. Moreover, although exports from China are generally associated to end products, during the last decade, imports such as intermediate products have increased significantly.

Therefore, if you are doing business between both countries, it would be relevant to review if your company is growing two digits too. Although there is no “fail-safe” recipe for doing business between China and Mexico, the more informed the company is, the greater its chances are of succeeding. On this issue, you can review complimentary articles on innovation, resource allocation, and metrics, among many other factors to be considered in a successful market expansion strategy.

At Deloitte, from Tijuana to Shenzhen and from Hong Kong to Monterrey, we have highly experienced professionals ready to help you succeed in China and Mexico. For more information on our services email us at: deloitte_contacto@deloittemx.com

Source: Deloitte Mexico, 25.11.2011 –  José Luis Enciso deloitte_contacto@deloittemx.com

Advertisements

Filed under: Asia, China, Latin America, Mexico, News, , , , , , , , ,

Why China and Japan Need an East Asia Bloc

Withering exports and asset bubbles have forced Asians – especially China and Japan — to work harder at free trade pacts.

All kinds of proposals have been floated about creating an Asian bloc a la European Union. Bilateral and multilateral free trade agreements (FTA) have been suggested for various combinations of Asian countries. Lately, there’s been a flurry of new ideas as Japan’s recently installed DPJ government seeks to differentiate from the ousted LDP.

By promoting ideas that lean toward Asia, DPJ’s leadership is signaling that Japan wants less dependence on the United States. This position offers a hope for the future to Japanese people, whose economy has been comatose for two decades. Closer integration with Asian neighbors could restore growth in Japan.

Whenever global trade gets into trouble, Asian countries talk about regional cooperation as an alternative growth driver. But typically these talks die out as soon as global trade recovers. Today’s chatter is following the same old pattern, although this time global trade is not on track to recover to previous levels and sustain East Asia’s export model. Thus, some sort of regional integration is needed to revive regional growth.

Which regional organization is in a position to lead an integration movement? Certainly not ASEAN, which is too small, nor APEC, which is too big. Something more is needed – like a bloc rooted in a trade pact between Japan and China.

ASEAN’s members are 10 countries in Southeast Asia with a population exceeding 600 million and a combined GDP of US$ 1.5 trillion in 2008. The group embraced an FTA process called AFTA in 1992, which accelerated after the 1997-’98 Asian Financial Crisis and competition with China heated up. When AFTA began, few gave it much chance for success, given the region’s huge disparities in per capita income and economic systems. Today AFTA is almost a reality, which is certainly a miracle.

ASEAN has succeeded beyond its wildest dreams. These days China, Japan, and South Korea join annual meetings as dialogue partners, while the European Union and United States participate in regional forums and bilateral discussions.

China and ASEAN completed FTA negotiations last year, demonstrating that they can function as an economic bloc. Now, China is ASEAN’s third largest trading partner. Indeed, there is a great upside for economic cooperation between the two.

Before the Asian Financial Crisis, the ASEAN region was touted as a “miracle” by international financial institutions for maintaining high GDP growth rates for more than two decades. But some of that growth was built on a bubble that diverted business away from production and toward asset speculation. This developed after credit expansion, driven by the pegging of regional currencies to the U.S. dollar, encouraged land speculation. ASEAN’s emerging economies absorbed massive cross-border capital due to a weak dollar, which slumped after the Federal Reserve responded to a U.S. banking crisis in the early 1990s by maintaining low interest rates.

Back then, I visited companies in the region that produced goods for export. I found that, despite all the talk of miracles, many were making money on financial games — not business. At that time, China was building an export sector that had started exerting downward pressure on tradable goods prices. Instead of focusing on competitiveness, the region hid behind a financial bubble and postponed a resolution. Indeed, ASEAN’s GDP was higher than China’s before the Asian financial crunch; now China’s GDP is three times ASEAN’s.

China today faces challenges similar to those confronting ASEAN before the crisis. While visiting manufacturers in China, I’ve often been discovering that their profits come from property development, lending or outright speculation. While asset prices rise, these practices are effectively subsidizing manufacturing operations – an asset game that can work wonderfully in the short term, as the U.S. experience demonstrates. When property and stock markets are worth more than twice GDP, 20 percent appreciation would be equivalent to four years of business profits in a normal economy. You can’t blame businesses for shifting their attention to the asset game in a bubbly environment. Yet as they focus on finance rather than manufacturing, their competitiveness erodes. And you know where that leads.

I digress from the main focus for this article — regional integration, not China’s bubble challenge.

So let’s look again at ASEAN’s success. In part, this reflects its soft image: Other major players do not view ASEAN as a competitive threat. Rather, the FTA with China has put pressure on majors such as India and Japan to pursue their own FTAs with ASEAN. Another dimension is that the region’s annual meetings have become important occasions for representatives from China, Japan and South Korea to sit down together.

In contrast to ASEAN’s success, APEC has been an abject failure.
Today, it’s simply a photo opportunity for leaders of member countries from the Americas, Oceania, Russia and Asia. APEC was set up after the Soviet bloc collapsed, and served a psychological purpose during the post-Cold War transition. It was reassuring for the global community to see leaders of former enemy countries shaking hands.

However, APEC is just too big and diverse to provide a foundation for building a trade structure. So general is the scope that anything APEC members agree upon would probably pass the United Nations. Now, two decades after end of the Cold War, APEC has clearly outlived its usefulness and is withering, although it may never shut down. APEC’s annual summit still offers leaders of member countries a venue for meetings on the sidelines to discuss bilateral issues. Maybe the group is useful in this way, offering an efficient venue for multiple summits concurrently.

Although ASEAN has succeeded with its own agenda, and achieved considerable success in relation to non-member countries, it clearly cannot assume the same role as the European Union. Besides, should Asia have an EU-like organization? Asia, by definition, clearly cannot. It’s a geographic region that includes the sub-continent, Middle East and central Asia. Any organization that encompasses Asia as a whole would be as unwieldy as APEC.

I am always puzzled by the word “Asia,” which the Greeks coined. In his classic work Histories, it seems ancient Greek historian Herodotus primarily referred to Asia Minor — today’s Turkey, and perhaps Syria — as Asia. I haven’t read much Greek, but I don’t recall India being included in ancient Greek references. So as far as I can determine, there is no internal logic to treating Asia as a region. It seems to encompass all places that are neither European nor African. Africa is a coherent continent, and Europe has a shared cultural past. Asia belongs to neither, so it shouldn’t be considered an organic entity.

Malaysia’s former prime minister Tun Mahathir bin Mohamad Mahathir was a strong supporter of an East Asia Economic Caucus (EAEC) which would have been comprised of ASEAN nations plus China, Japan and South Korea. But because Japan refused to participate in an organization that excluded the United States, the idea failed.

Yet there is some logic to Mahathir’s proposal. East Asia has a shared history, and intra-regional trade goes back centuries. Population movements have been significant, and as tourism takes off, regional relations should strengthen. One could envision a future marked by free-flowing capital, goods and labor in the region.

Yet differences among the region’s countries are much greater than in Europe. ASEAN’s overall per capita income is US$ 2,000, while it’s US$ 3,500 in China and US$ 40,000 in Japan. China, Japan, South Korea and Vietnam share Confucianism and Mahayana Buddhism, while most Southeast Asian countries embrace Islam or Hinayana Buddhism, and generally are more religious. I think an EU-like organization in East Asia would be very hard to establish, but something less restrictive would be possible.

Because Japan turned down Mahathir’s EAEC idea, there was a lot of interest when recently elected Prime Minister Yukio Hatoyama’s proposed something similar – an East Asia Community — at a recent ASEAN summit. Hatoyama failed to clarify the role of the United States in any such organization. If the United States is included, it would not fly, as it would be too similar to APEC. Nor could such an organization be like the EU. But if Japan is fully committed, the new group could assume substance over time.

The Japanese probably proposed the community idea for domestic political reasons. Yet the fundamental case for Japan to increase integration with the rest of Asia and away from the United States grows stronger every day. Despite high per capita income, Japan remains an export-oriented economy, having missed an opportunity to develop a consumption-led economy in the 1980s and ’90s. In the foolish belief that rising property prices would spread wealth beyond the industrial heartland in the Tokyo-Osaka corridor, the government of former Prime Minister Kakuei Tanaka pursued a high-price land policy, discouraging the middle class from pursuing a consumer lifestyle as they saved for property purchases.

Even more seriously, high property prices have been a major reason for Japan’s rapidly declining birth rate, as land prices inflated living costs. Now, facing a declining population and public debt twice GDP, Japan has few options for rejuvenating the economy by promoting domestic demand. It needs trade if it hopes to achieve any growth at all. Without growth, Japan will sooner or later suffer a public debt crisis.

Japan’s property experience offers a major lesson for China. Every Chinese city is copying the Hong Kong model — raising money from an increasingly expensive land market to fund urban development, leading to rapid urbanization. But this is borrowing growth from the future. Rising land prices lead to rising costs and, hence, slower growth and the same rapid decline in the birth rate that Japan experienced. Unless China reverses its high-land price policy, the consequences will be even more disastrous than in Japan or Hong Kong, as China shifted to the asset game much earlier in its development.

Yet I digress again. The point is that Japan has a strong and genuine case that favors more integration with East Asia. The United States is unlikely to recover soon and with enough strength to feed Japan’s export machine again. There is no more room for fiscal stimulus. Devaluing the yen to gain market share is not an option as long as Washington pursues a weak dollar policy. Without a new source of trade, Japan’s economy is doomed. Closer integration with East Asia is the only way out.

In addition to Hatoyama’s EAC proposal, a study jointly sponsored by China, Japan and South Korea is considering the possibility of a FTA. Of course, ASEAN could offer a template for any new East Asian bloc. ASEAN has signed an FTA with China and is talking with Japan and South Korea. If they all sign, regional integration would be halfway completed.

Whatever proposals for East Asian integration, the key issue is a possible FTA between China and Japan. Adding other parties avoids this main issue. China and Japan together are six times ASEAN’s size and 10 times South Korea’s. Without a China-Japan FTA, no combination in East Asia would truly support regional integration.

Five years ago, I wrote an op-ed piece for the Financial Times entitled China and Japan: Natural Partners. At the time, a prevailing sentiment was that China and Japan were antithetical: Both were still manufacturing export-led economies and could only gain at the other’s expense. I saw complementary demographics and capital: Japan had a declining labor force and China needed to employ tens of millions of youths migrating to cities from the countryside. China needed capital and Japan had surplus capital. And their trade relations indeed tightened, as Japan had increased the Chinese share of its overall trade to 17.4 percent in 2008 from 10.4 percent in ’04.

Today, the situation has changed. China has a capital surplus rather than a shortage. Demographic complementarity is still good and could last another decade. As China shifts its development model from resource intensive to environmentally friendly, a new complementarity is emerging. Japan has already made the transition, and its technologies that supported the transition need a new market such as China’s. So even without a new trade agreement, bilateral trade will continue growing.

An FTA between China and Japan would significantly accelerate their trade, resulting in an efficiency gain of more than US$ 1 trillion. Japan’s aging population lends urgency to increasing the investment returns. On the other hand, as China prepares to make a numerical commitment to limiting greenhouse gas emissions at the upcoming Copenhagen summit on global warming, heavy investment and rapid restructuring are needed for its economy. Japanese technology could come in quite handy.

More importantly, a China-Japan FTA would lay a foundation for an East Asian free trade bloc. The region has a population of 2.1 billion and a GDP of US$ 13 trillion, rivaling the European Union and United States. Blessed with a low base, plenty of capital, sound technology and a huge market, the region’s GDP could easily double in a decade.

Trade and technology are twin engines of growth and prosperity. No boom is sustained without one or the other. And when they come together, the boom can be massive. Prosperity seen over the past decade, for example, is due to information technology along with the opening up of China and other former planned economies. But these factors have been absorbed, forcing the world to find another engine. An integration of East Asian economies would be significant enough to play this role.

The best approach would be for China and Japan to negotiate a comprehensive FTA that encompasses free-flowing goods, services and capital. This task may appear too difficult, but recent changes have made it possible. The two countries should give it a try.

It would be wrong to begin by working out an FTA that includes China, Japan and South Korea. That would triple the task’s level of difficulty, especially since South Korea doesn’t have a meaningful FTA with any country. To imagine that the Seoul government would cut a deal with China or Japan is naive. China and Japan should negotiate bilaterally.

A key issue is that China and Japan should put economics before politics. If the DPJ government wants to gain popularity by increasing international influence rather than boosting the economy, then all the current speculation and discussion about an East Asia bloc would be for nothing. But if DPJ wants to sustain power by rejuvenating Japan’s moribund economy, chances for a deal are good.

While Japan is talking, China should be doing. China should aggressively initiate the FTA process with Japan. Regardless of China’s current difficulties, its growth potential and vast market are what Japan will never have at home nor anywhere else. Hence, China would be able to compromise from a position of strength.

Some may say a free trade area for East Asia is beyond reach. However, history belongs to the daring. The world has changed enough to make it possible. China and Japan should seize the opportunity.

Source: Caijing, 10.11.2009 by Andy Xie, guest economist to Caijing and a board member of Rosetta Stone Advisors Ltd.

Full article in Chinese

Filed under: Asia, China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, News, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Enhancing China-Latin America Economic Relations

Amid increased Chinese investment in Latin America, investment volume remains low. Exploring the economic relationship begins with an understanding of complementarity in export and import supply and demand between the two regions.

(Caijing.com.cn) China’s rapidly expanding trade and investment relationships with the countries of Latin America and the Caribbean have created many recent headlines.  From a point of negligible ties less than just a decade ago, China has now become the number one market for Chilean and Brazilian exports and the number two destination for exports from Argentina, Peru, Costa Rica and Cuba. Indeed, China’s overall trade with Latin America has expanded at an average of 40% since 2003.  Latin America has also become a major destination for overseas investment from Chinese firms, especially in important upstream petroleum and iron ore sources.  To underscore the importance of the relationship, especially in the midst of the ongoing financial crisis, Latin American exports to China have only fallen by slightly over 4%, whereas they have fallen by over 35% to the United States and over 36% to Europe.

However, even with all of the daily news headlines touting the importance of the burgeoning trade and investment relationship between China and Latin America, it’s important to step back and evaluate the larger contours of the relationship.  Indeed, although there remains vast untapped potential to further increase trade and investment between China and Latin America, there are also key challenges that must be confronted.  Despite the rapid growth of trade and investment relations between China and Latin America, both sides must seek methods to deepen mutual understanding to take advantage of the remaining vast potential for cooperation and development.

Opportunities

The opportunities for further enhancing the already rapidly expanding commercial and investment relations between Latin America and China fall into three categories.  First, China and Latin America share key complementarities in terms of supply and demand.  Since the early part of this decade, China’s demand for a range of natural resources including petroleum and iron ore, among others, has expanded rapidly.  Latin America has these natural resources in abundance.  Trade figures have borne out this complementarity as over 80% of China’s imports from Latin America have been made up of primary products and natural resource manufactures.  Latin America’s abundance of natural resources is an excellent fit for China’s large and increasing demand for those resources.  At the same time, Chinese manufactured exports are making up an increasingly large percentage of Latin American imports, ranking 1st or 2nd in total imports for at least 6 major countries in the region.

The second area of opportunity lies in China not only as a market for Latin American exports but also as a source of finance and investment.  As the UN Economic Commission on Latin America and the Caribbean recently reported, this Chinese demand for raw materials to fuel the country’s rapid growth has been a key factor in sustaining Latin American exports to China even in the midst of the current economic crisis.  Moreover, China’s investments in Latin America have been rapidly expanding, growing by 80% per year since 2003.  In fact, Latin America has become China’s largest destination for foreign direct investment outside of Asia.

The third area of opportunity is directly related to the previous two. Despite the complementarity in export and import supply and demand between the two regions, as well as the rapid rise in trade and investment relations, there is still vast room for increases in both trade and investment between China and Latin America.  The rapid growth in trade and investment between Latin America and China is indeed impressive, but the starting point for this expansion was very limited.  There remains vast potential for increased export of a range of goods from a host of Latin American countries, including commodities and natural resources from countries who are already exporting to China and those who are just beginning to tap into Chinese demand.  In fact, unsatisfied Chinese demand for Latin American products is almost 100% or more (as a share of bilateral Latin American exports) of Andean, Southern Cone and Caribbean exports.

Challenges

While there are a great number of opportunities to further enhance the already burgeoning trade and investment relationship between China and Latin America there are also a number of important challenges that remain.  The first of these challenges is directly related to the complementarity in supply and demand structures across the two regions.  While it is true that China’s large and increasing demand for natural resources and commodities is driving much of the recent expansion in trade and investment with Latin America, there remain concerns that Latin American reliance on exports of primary products may prove too prone to market fluctuations.  In order to confront this challenge both China and Latin America need to seek ways to diversify not only the range of goods and products that are traded but also to expand opportunities for investment in services that facilitate trade.  Two areas that stand out here are in enhanced transportation logistics services as well increased financial integration between the two regions.

The second challenge facing China-Latin American economic ties involves the cultural differences between the two sides.  While there are some long-standing connections between China and Latin America, including large numbers of Chinese migrants in various Latin American countries, the economic relationship has only really taken off in the last decade.  As a result, differences in language, history, business culture as well as labor-management relations all present challenges to a deeper and more solid relationship.  Both sides are making concerted efforts to confront these various challenges to mutual understanding through enhanced educational exchange and as the result of increased direct experience.  However, these efforts will need to be redoubled on both sides in order to take advantage of the many opportunities manifest in the relationship.

The third and final challenge confronting China and Latin America relates to the often confusing connection between government and business on both sides.  On the Chinese side, the connection between government policy and state-affiliated multinational corporations involved in many of the largest trade and investment deals remains unclear, especially to those looking in from the outside.  This can lead to confusion and anxiety on the part of Latin American governments, business partners and citizens.  Equally, from the perspective of the Chinese government and international businesses, often burdensome government bureaucracy as well as underdeveloped infrastructure in Latin America can create obstacles to enhanced cooperation.  Greater transparency at both the government and corporate levels are necessary on both sides to overcome these obstacles.

Source: Caijing.com.cn, 20.10.2009 by Matt Ferchen and Alicia Garcia-Herrero

Matt Ferchen is a professor in the Department of International Relations at Tsinghua University.  Alicia Garcia-Herrero is the Chief Economist for Emerging Markets at the Spanish bank BBVA.

Filed under: Argentina, Asia, Brazil, Central America, Chile, China, Energy & Environment, Latin America, Mexico, News, , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Emerging Asia inflation tumbles, more rate cuts seen

Inflation rates slowed once again in emerging Asia, pointing to a fresh round of interest rate cuts in Thailand and Indonesia as the region battles to reinforce tentative signs that economies may be on the path to recovery. Indonesia said annual inflation stood at 7.3 percent in April, its lowest level since December 2007, while South Korea also reported a fall in April inflation to a 14-month low of 3.6 percent. However, Thailand saw a fourth straight month of falling prices or deflation with April consumer prices falling 0.9 percent from a year earlier.

Core consumer prices in Japan fell 0.1 percent in March from a year earlier, heralding what the Bank of Japan expects to be two-years of deflation although the central bank has dismissed the idea of an economically damaging spiral of falling prices.

Prices are tumbling across the world as buyers tighten their belts in the face of the global recession and because of the collapse in commodities prices from record high levels last year. Crude oil for example, has dropped to around $50 a barrel from its near $150 record set in July.

Central banks globally have slashed rates in the hope that cheaper credit will spark a revival in their economies. Government have spent hugely on fiscal stimulus package and some data suggests the worst of the crisis may be over.

In Asia, exports have collapsed as recession in major demand centres such as the United States and Europe hammered demand. But signs that the recession is easing has raised hopes that Asia’s export engine may see a return of some demand, albeit from low levels.

Indeed, major exporters South Korea and Japan have both seen a pick up in monthly exports even if they are still much lower than year-earlier levels. Annual falls in exports elsewhere have become less severe.

SOME WILL CUT, SOME WILL NOT

In Thailand, the fall in prices is seen as largely technical and reflective of the sharp falls in the past year in commodities prices rather than the result of falling demand.

The latter is feared by policy makers because it can add an extra weight on growth or push an economy deeper into recession.

“With very, very little risk of inflationary pressures, and with monetary conditions still fairly tight, there remains a scope to cut rates to support growth,” said Carl Rajoo, an economist at Forecast in Singapore said of the Bank of Thailand.

“The central bank is likely to make a measured cut in May, and then wait and see before additional loosening is started,” he said.

The Bank of Thailand is due to review policy next on May 20, when analysts expect a 25 basis-point cut in the policy rate to 1.00 percent, the lowest level since the central bank started targeting inflation in 2000.

The Bank of Thailand has already cut its policy rate by 250 basis points since December to support an economy widely seen as in recession and pressured not only by the global downturn but by political unrest.

In Indonesia, an easing in food price pressures and a 14 percent rise in the rupiah against the dollar since early March, making imports more expensive, has weighed on prices.

Inflation has come down steadily from above 12 percent just seven months ago giving the central bank room to keep cutting interest rates to support Southeast Asia’s largest economy, whose exports are falling at close to 30 percent.

“We expect Bank Indonesia to cut rates by 25 basis points in May and (in) June,” said Helmi Arman, an economist at Bank Danamon in Jakarta. The central bank next meets on Tuesday.

However, South Korea’s central bank is seen holding fire for now.

It has skipped rate cuts at its last two meetings and is expected by financial markets to leave rates unchanged at a record low of 2.0 percent at its next meeting on May 12.

Inflation has fallen steadily, but growing optimism the economy may be starting to turnaround suggests the central bank will save its monetary ammunition for now. Since the financial crisis blew up last year, it has cut rates by an unprecedented 325 basis points.

South Korea’s inflation rate fell to 3.6 percent in April, its lowest level in 14 months but with some signs in the trade-reliant country that exports are picking up, the central bank is unlikely to use inflation as a cue to cut rates again.

The Philippines is expected to report on Tuesday that its consumer prices inflation fell to a 16-month low of 4.7 percent in April, also paving the way for the central bank to cut its overnight borrowing rate, already a 17-year low of 4.5 percent, at its next meeting on May 28.

Source: Reuters, 04.05.2009

Filed under: Asia, Indonesia, Japan, Korea, News, Thailand, Vietnam, , , , , , , , ,

FiNETIK speaks at Events

11.2008 FiNETIK speaks at State Gov. of Veracruz, Mexico  Agri-producer event about import and export requierments and business connectivity “Exportando a Singapur, Mercados Asiáticos” / “Exporting to Singapore and Asian Markets”

10.2007 FINETIK speaks at Shanghai Stock Exchange/ FISD East Asia, Shanghai, October 18 “Impact of Growing Market Data Volums

05.2007 FINETIK speaks ATIC Asian Traders and Investor Conference, Ho Chi Minh, Vietnam,” What do Institutional Investors expect of Vietnam”

10.2006 FINETIK speaks at FISD Asia Financial Information Summit, Singapore;” Does Unified Data lead to a Unified Market?”

05.2006 FINETIK speaks at GBST Client Forum, Melbourne; “Asian Financial Markets

11.2005 FINETIK speaks at Inside Market Data, Asia, 2005, Hong Kong; “Local vs. Global Vendors

12.2004 FINETIK speaks at ARIMI Risk Management Seminar, Singapore; Data Management Risk

10.2003 FINETIK speaks at PRIMIA in Shanghai; “Operational Risk in Financial Information Management”

11.2002 FINETIK speaks at Investors World Services Asia, Singapore; The Challenges of Implementing STP

10.2002 FINETIK speaks at DAMA-METADATA Europe in London, UK; Data Strategy: Global Design for Local Content

05.2002 FINETIK speaks at DAMA-METADATA International, San Antonio, USA; Data Strategy: Global Modeling & Knowledge Management for Local Content

Filed under: Australia, China, Corporate Action, Data Management, Data Vendor, Events, FiNETIK Events, Hong Kong, Library, Market Data, Mexico, News, Reference Data, Singapore, Standards, Vietnam, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

“Exportando a Singapur, Mercados Asiáticos” seminario en materia de exportación impulsado por Fidel Herrera, Veracruz

Ciudad de México.- Concluyó el seminario “Exportando a Singapur, Mercados Asiáticos”, cuyo objetivo es abrir nuevas oportunidades de exportación para los productos veracruzanos, a fin de incentivar el crecimiento económico de Veracruz. En este evento, apoyado por el gobernador Fidel Herrera Beltrán, participaron empresarios y productores del estado.

A invitación del gobernador de Veracruz, se reunieron empresarios agropecuarios y empresarios con negocios que participan en los mercados financieros de América Latina y Asia, para abrir nuevos mercados a la producción estatal.

El seminario se realizó en la Torre Financiera de la Secretaría de Economía, en Boca del Río, Veracruz. Participaron importantes agrupaciones como el International Enterprise Singapure, representado por su director Daniel Seah, quien destacó el potencial de los productos veracruzanos en el mercado asiático, por ejemplo los cítricos, melón, café, vainilla, flores, mariscos y cárnicos procesados.

Otro participante es la Firma Consultora de Negocios Finetik especializada en el financiamiento para el comercio en mercados de la región Asia Pacífico. Su director general analizó cómo afrontar las regulaciones en importación y exportación, además de la conectividad con ese mercado.

Finalmente, se evaluaron los esfuerzos del gobierno de Fidel Herrera Beltrán para abrir nuevos mercados a los productos del estado. Incluso, el gobernador apoyó la visita de productores de la región a Singapur, para participar en el Latin Biz 2008, evento que también favorecerá el ingreso de mercancías jarochas en Asia.

Source:

El Sol de Mexico, 27.11.2008

cronica.com.mx, 28.11.2008

Inforural, 27.11.2008

Filed under: FiNETIK News, Mexico, Singapore, , , , , ,