In recent years, the way the ** circle works has sparked widespread discussion and controversy. Investors tend to be confused and frustrated by losses, while managers seem increasingly reluctant to take responsibility for losses. This phenomenon is manifested in specific situations as frequent turnover of managers, or choosing to run away when there are too many losses.
First, let's focus on the phenomenon of manager turnover. Among the materials provided, the resignation of Shi Minjia, a manager of the Bank of Shanghai New Energy Industry Selection, has aroused the attention of the market. This is not an isolated case, but a phenomenon that has been prevalent in recent years. Manager turnover often makes investors uneasy, as it is difficult to determine whether the new manager will be able to continue to deliver good investment returns.
From an economic point of view, manager turnover may be related to performance. When a company has underperformed for many years in a row, the company may choose to change managers in an attempt to improve its performance. However, this turnover is not always successful, as different managers may have different investment strategies and styles and may take a while to adjust to the new management team. This uncertainty can have a negative impact on investor confidence.
Another reality is that after a loss, managers and companies tend to issue apologies. The emergence of this apology culture suggests that companies are starting to get concerned about the reaction of investors, and they are trying to restore confidence by apologizing. However, there are still questions about whether this approach will actually solve the problem.
From an economic point of view, this culture of apology may be designed to reduce legal risk. If a company loses a lot of money, investors may sue the company, accusing them of failing to do their due diligence. The issuance of an apology can be seen as a way of admitting wrongdoing, but whether it will mitigate legal liability is still up for debate.
One of the most worrying phenomena is that some managers choose to run away when they lose too much. This kind of behavior is not only irresponsible to investors, but also has a negative impact on the market. Investors will be disappointed by the rapid turnover and exit of managers, which may lead to more investors withdrawing and increasing market instability.
From an economic point of view, the manager's runaway may have something to do with their reward system. Some managers' compensation structures may be tied to short-term performance, and if the losses are severe, they may lose bonuses and incentives, so choosing to run away becomes an act of self-preservation. In this case, long-term investment value is relegated to the back burner, and short-term performance becomes the only pursuit.
To better understand these phenomena, let's look at some real-world examples.
Great Wall Quantitative Hedging**, which lost about 40% in 2015, led investors to pull out. The company later issued an apology, but many investors have already suffered losses. After that, **the company chose to dissolve this one**.
Dacheng ** company, the company changed a number of ** managers in 2019 who had managed loss-making **. Although the company explained that the turnover was to improve performance, investors were unhappy and worried about whether the new manager would be able to improve the situation.
Bank of China**, this ** company has changed its managers several times, and one of them lost more than 30% in 2018. Investors are frustrated with the frequent turnover of managers and losses, leading to more outflows.
The above cases show that there are indeed problems with the current situation of the ** circle. Investors need more transparency and stability, rather than frequent turnover and apologies. Companies should focus more on long-term value creation rather than short-term performance. At the same time, regulators should also strengthen the supervision of ** companies to ensure that they comply with ethics and legal requirements to protect the rights and interests of investors.
To sum up, the current situation of the ** circle has indeed sparked widespread discussion and concern. Investors need more transparency and stability, while companies need to focus more on long-term value creation rather than short-term performance. Regulation by regulators is also crucial to ensure the healthy functioning of the market and the protection of investors' rights. Only under these conditions can the ** circle be able to truly create value for investors and the market.