“And so the saga of this troubled company continues.” Few letters to shareholders start with such candour, but the latest communication from London Asia Capital reads as a cautionary tale for private investors seeking exposure to unquoted Chinese stocks.

　　“這家身處困境的公司麻煩還沒(méi)有結(jié)束。”致股東的信很少如此開(kāi)門(mén)見(jiàn)山。對(duì)尋求投資于中國(guó)非上市股票的私人投資者來(lái)說(shuō)，倫敦亞洲基金股份有限公司(London Asia Capital)最新的致股東信，讀來(lái)有如一個(gè)發(fā)人警醒的故事。

　　After seeing 13 of its investments in small Chinese companies written down to nil-value, and its London Stock Exchange listing cancelled, the company was to have its future decided at an emergency general meeting this week. Its largest shareholder, a Singapore-based investment entity called Richpoint Overseas Group, was hoping to win a vote to restructure the company around one of it last remaining valuable assets: a small Chinese private company called Zhongying, which owns land near the town of Wuhan. London Asia’s new board opposed the vote, but it has now been postponed until February.

　　倫敦亞洲基金在小型中國(guó)企業(yè)身上的投資中，有13筆的價(jià)值已經(jīng)被歸零。該公司還被倫敦證券交易所摘牌。原定本周召開(kāi)的臨時(shí)股東大會(huì)，本來(lái)要就公司今后的命運(yùn)作出決定。最大的股東、總部設(shè)在新加坡的投資機(jī)構(gòu)Richpoint Overseas Group原本希望在會(huì)上表決通過(guò)以下事項(xiàng)：圍繞該公司所剩無(wú)幾的有價(jià)值資產(chǎn)之一——中盈長(zhǎng)江(Zhongying)——對(duì)該公司進(jìn)行重組。中盈長(zhǎng)江是中國(guó)一家小型民營(yíng)企業(yè)，擁有武漢近郊的地皮。倫敦亞洲基金的新董事會(huì)反對(duì)這一提議。但如今投票已被推遲到2月份。

　　But the dispute over Zhongying highlights the failings of London Asia’s strategy of investing in tiny Chinese private companies and then floating them on western stock markets. Zhongying may have some residual value – the directors estimate it could be worth as much as ￡12m – but London Asia was valued at more than ￡50m when its shares were listed.

　　然而，這起圍繞中盈長(zhǎng)江的紛爭(zhēng)表明，倫敦亞洲基金專(zhuān)事投資中國(guó)小型民營(yíng)企業(yè)、然后促成它們?cè)谖鞣缴鲜械牟呗允鞘〉?。中盈長(zhǎng)江或許有一些剩余價(jià)值（董事們估計(jì)最多為1200萬(wàn)英鎊），然而，倫敦亞洲基金上市時(shí)的估值在5000萬(wàn)英鎊以上。

　　In autumn 2008, a new management team led by the Earl of Cromer was brought in by disgruntled institutional investors keen to find out what had happened to their investments in China. New chief executive Keith Nagel found the company’s London bank account had no cash in it, while no reports and accounts had been presented for three years.

　　2008年秋季，在心懷不滿的機(jī)構(gòu)投資者促成下，克羅默伯爵(Earl of Cromer)帶領(lǐng)一個(gè)新管理團(tuán)隊(duì)走馬上任。機(jī)構(gòu)投資者希望查清自己在中國(guó)的投資究竟出了什么問(wèn)題。新首席執(zhí)行官基思?內(nèi)格爾(Keith Nagel)發(fā)現(xiàn)，公司在倫敦的銀行賬戶里沒(méi)有現(xiàn)金，而且公司已3年沒(méi)有提交任何報(bào)告和賬簿。

　　By early 2010, Nagel and his fellow directors had established that 13 of the Chinese companies in which the group had invested were worthless.

　　2010年初，內(nèi)格爾和其他董事們確認(rèn)了一點(diǎn)：集團(tuán)所投資的中國(guó)企業(yè)中，有13家毫無(wú)價(jià)值。

　　Back in the middle of the last decade, the prospects for London Asia looked very different. Led by Simon Littlewood, chief executive, and Viktor Ng, chairman, London Asia was leading the charge of Chinese capitalism into the London markets. Backed by a team of non-executives that included a former Mayor of London, Sir David Brewer (currently head of the China British Business Council) and Jack Wrigglesworth (founder and former chairman of the London International Financial Futures Exchange), London Asia was the “go to” adviser for small-cap Chinese companies seeking a UK stock market listing – including China Education Group, China Biotech and China Mobilnet. Early investors included private individuals and City institutions such as Rathbones.

　　在2005年前后，倫敦亞洲基金的前景與現(xiàn)在大不相同。在當(dāng)時(shí)的首席執(zhí)行官西蒙·利特爾伍德(Simon Littlewood)和董事長(zhǎng)維克多·吳(Viktor Ng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)下，倫敦亞洲基金堪稱將中國(guó)式資本主義帶到倫敦市場(chǎng)上的先鋒。非執(zhí)行董事陣容中包括前倫敦金融城市長(zhǎng)、現(xiàn)任英中貿(mào)易協(xié)會(huì)主席白樂(lè)威爵士(David Brewer)，以及倫敦國(guó)際金融期貨交易所創(chuàng)始人及前董事長(zhǎng)杰克?維格勒沃斯(Jack Wrigglesworth)。對(duì)于中國(guó)小型企業(yè)來(lái)說(shuō)，要去英國(guó)上市，自然應(yīng)當(dāng)咨詢倫敦亞洲基金。這些企業(yè)包括網(wǎng)大教育集團(tuán)(China Education Group)、China Biotech和China Mobilnet等。初期投資者包括一些個(gè)人投資者以及Rathbones等坐落在金融城的機(jī)構(gòu)。

　　Since the new management took over last year, only ￡5m in cash has been recovered – and any hope of recouping more appears to rest on the prospects for the land owned by Zhongying.

　　新管理團(tuán)隊(duì)從去年接手以來(lái)，到目前只收回了500萬(wàn)英鎊資金。未來(lái)能否收回更多資金，似乎取決于中盈長(zhǎng)江名下地皮的前景。

　　Some shareholders believe London Asia’s troubles should serve as a warning that China is still a high-risk territory to invest in. “With the increased visibility of China as a key market, there is a belief that it is safer – this belief may be unfounded,” says Doug Steen, a private shareholder. “Unless the UK authorities sit up and take action, foreign markets will see the UK as a soft touch and investors will continue to be at risk.”

　　一些股東認(rèn)為，對(duì)于倫敦亞洲基金遇到的問(wèn)題，人們應(yīng)當(dāng)引以為鑒，明白中國(guó)仍然是一個(gè)高風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的投資地。“由于中國(guó)這個(gè)重要市場(chǎng)的透明度有所提高，有人認(rèn)為它現(xiàn)在比較安全——這種觀點(diǎn)可能毫無(wú)依據(jù)。”一名私人股東道格·斯蒂恩(Doug Steen)表示，“除非英國(guó)政府當(dāng)局著手采取行動(dòng)，否則外國(guó)市場(chǎng)仍會(huì)以為在英國(guó)好忽悠，投資者也仍將置身于危險(xiǎn)之中。”

　　Another shareholder, John Slater, says the London Asia affair highlights the need for UK company directors to “understand the way business is done in China and have good advice on local laws and customs”.

　　另一位股東約翰·斯萊特(John Slater)表示，倫敦亞洲基金之事，表明英國(guó)企業(yè)的董事們有必要去“理解中國(guó)人的行事方式，充分了解當(dāng)?shù)胤珊土?xí)俗”。

　　Evidence from the US suggests these problems are not unique. Dozens of small Chinese companies are listed on Amex and Nasdaq – but a growing number are being targeted by short sellers convinced that the curse of London Asia Capital will strike. In the view of one Chinese national who now advises western investment funds on Chinese small caps: “2011 is the year it’s all going to come tumbling down.”

　　美國(guó)的情況表明，這些問(wèn)題并非只存在于英國(guó)。Amex和納斯達(dá)克市場(chǎng)有許多小型中國(guó)企業(yè)，但它們正越來(lái)越多成為賣(mài)空者的目標(biāo)。賣(mài)空者確信，它們也無(wú)法逃過(guò)倫敦亞洲基金遭遇的魔咒。一位為西方投資基金提供有關(guān)中國(guó)小型企業(yè)建議的中國(guó)人認(rèn)為：“2011年里，這一切都將土崩瓦解。”