【文/观察者网 王一】要说英伟达首席执行官（CEO）黄仁勋2025年的工作重点，一定是游说美国政 府，放宽其对华芯片销售的限制。展望2026年的美中关系，黄仁勋直言，美中"脱钩"不符合常识，认为 美国会远离中国"是一种天真的想法"。 在更宏观的层面，黄仁勋认为，美国和中国都应继续投资于自身的"独立自主"。他称，"当你过于依赖 某一方时，关系就会变得过于情绪化"，"保持一定程度的独立性是好事，但也必须承认，两国之间存在 诸多联系和依赖"。 黄仁勋表态称，美中关系需要用更加细致、审慎的策略加以管理，而不是简单的对立或切割，"所有人 都依赖于这两个最重要国家之间富有成效、建设性的关系，这是下一个世纪最重要的双边关系，我们必 须找到答案"。 接着，他不忘拍马屁道，"我很高兴特朗普总统正在寻找一个建设性的答案"。 当地时间1月8 日，播客节目No Priors发布了黄仁勋的采访视频。 视频截图 黄仁勋如此"称赞"特朗普的原因很明显。上个月，特朗普取消了拜登政府时期的一项政策，允许英伟达 对中国出口H200芯片，但前提是需要向美国政府缴纳25%的分成。美国彭博社8日称，英伟达最快可以 于本季度向中国出口H200。 美国" ...

对于这段话，马凯硕表示，这"只是在陈述一个客观事实"。他说，中国如今同世界其他地区的贸易规模 已经超过美国，这是事实。同时，世界各国需要中国提供许多关键零部件用于其本土制造业。中国已经 深度融入世界体系。 马凯硕认为，对美国而言更明智的做法是停止遏制中国发展，因为中国的发展势不可挡。相反，美国应 当寻求以互利共赢的方式同中国合作。他表示，世界繁荣发展同样符合美国的利益，这正是中国的做 法，与世界各国共享繁荣。 责编：李磊、卢思宇 新加坡学者马凯硕日前接受总台《高端访谈》专访，他点明美国试图对华"脱钩"不明智：深度融入世界 体系的中国，不是可被轻易切割的存在！ 0:00 马凯硕曾提出这样一个观点，"如果美国试图与中国企业及其全球影响力'脱钩'，那么他不仅仅是在与 中国'脱钩'，也是在与世界其他地区'脱钩'。" ...

Cleanroom Engineering Investment Opportunity Summary Industry Overview - The cleanroom engineering sector is experiencing explosive demand driven by the surge in AI computing power requirements, particularly in advanced process chips, advanced packaging, PCB, and server assembly fields. Data center investments are expected to grow significantly in the coming years [1][2] - The decoupling between China and the US is accelerating capacity transfer, with Taiwanese enterprises relocating to Southeast Asia, further stimulating cleanroom engineering demand, especially in emerging markets like the US and Southeast Asia, which are facing severe labor shortages [1][2] Key Insights and Arguments - Cleanroom investment density per unit area is increasing as production precision requirements rise. The demand for cleanroom construction is driven by risk aversion due to US-China decoupling and the need for AI computing power [1][5] - The electronics industry is the primary contributor to cleanroom demand, accounting for 70%-80%. In capital expenditures for chip wafer fabs, engineering costs represent 20%, with cleanroom systems making up 60% of that [1][7] - The cleanroom industry has high barriers to entry due to complex technology and high customization, leading to deep binding relationships between clients and service providers. Taiwanese service providers are benefiting from the trend of overseas factory construction [1][10] Market Dynamics - The cleanroom engineering sector has shown strong performance this year, driven by changes in both demand and supply. The global demand for AI infrastructure has surged, leading to significant growth in cleanroom engineering [3][4] - The US and Southeast Asia cleanroom markets are in a developing phase, facing severe labor shortages, which has allowed engineering service providers to increase their prices and improve profit margins [4][14] - Despite significant price increases in major stocks, there remains investment potential due to the ongoing demand for higher production cleanliness and the need for new capacity construction driven by AI computing and supply chain security [5][18] Future Growth Sources - The macro trend indicates that smaller process nodes correspond to higher production precision requirements, leading to increased investment density per unit area. The two main short- to medium-term drivers are risk aversion and AI computing demand [8] - The semiconductor self-sufficiency rate in mainland China has room for improvement, and the ongoing relocation of foreign capital will continue to drive market growth. For instance, the cleanroom construction market in mainland China is approximately 50 billion yuan, with potential investments of about 900 billion yuan if Taiwanese companies fully relocate to Southeast Asia [5][8] Competitive Landscape - The cleanroom engineering market can be divided into three tiers, with the first tier serving chip packaging, PCB, precision manufacturing, and data centers. The competition is intense, especially in mainland China, which is transitioning from an emerging to a mature market [11][12] - Key players in the cleanroom engineering sector include Shenghui Integration and Yaxiang Integration, which are positioned to benefit from orders related to factory construction in the US and Southeast Asia [10][15] Investment Recommendations - Focus on companies that can enter emerging markets like the US and Southeast Asia. Shenghui Integration and Yaxiang Integration are highlighted as key investment targets due to their shared technology and customer resources with their Taiwanese parent companies [15][16] - Shenghui Integration is expected to see significant revenue growth starting in 2026, while Yaxiang Integration has already secured multiple major orders and is expanding its business into Southeast Asia [16][18]

Core Viewpoint - The article expresses skepticism towards Bitcoin, asserting that it is ultimately worthless despite its recent price surge to over $100,000, and compares it to historical speculative bubbles like tulip mania [2][3][4]. Group 1: Historical Context and Speculation - Historical speculative bubbles have always led to the same outcome, with participants believing "this time will be different," but the results remain unchanged [4]. - The article draws parallels between Bitcoin and past speculative events, suggesting that Bitcoin will eventually return to its origins, similar to the fate of tulip bulbs in the Netherlands [3]. Group 2: Economic Implications - The rise of Bitcoin is attributed to the decline of the U.S. dollar's credibility, which has led to a surge in gold prices as well [6]. - The article argues that Bitcoin's popularity is being inadvertently supported by the U.S. government, which sees it as a necessary outlet for excess dollars due to the decoupling of the U.S. and China [9]. Group 3: Future Outlook - The duration of Bitcoin's dominance is uncertain and will depend on the collapse of the old order and the establishment of a new one [10]. - While short-term participation in Bitcoin speculation may not pose immediate risks, it is suggested that long-term consequences will eventually emerge [11].

Core Insights - The article discusses the ongoing shift in China's economic focus away from reliance on the U.S. market, as highlighted by Goldman Sachs' analysis of trade dynamics and structural changes in China's economy [2][4][11]. Economic Transition - Goldman Sachs reports that China is systematically reducing its exposure to the U.S. and is instead focusing on broader global markets and domestic innovation [4][6]. - By 2025, China's export growth is expected to slow, but government stimulus and supply chain optimization will help mitigate the impact of U.S. tariffs [4][6]. Export Structure and Trade Partners - China's export structure is evolving, with a higher proportion of high-end manufacturing exports, such as electric vehicles and solar panels, which are in high global demand [7][14]. - The share of exports to emerging markets is increasing, with trade with Belt and Road Initiative countries projected to rise from 32% in 2020 to 47% by 2025 [9][14]. Impact of Decoupling - The decoupling between the U.S. and China is seen as a mutual trend, with both countries pushing for reduced interdependence [11][12]. - Despite U.S. efforts to bring back supply chains, Goldman Sachs indicates that this will be challenging due to China's critical role in global supply chains [11][12]. Future Economic Outlook - Goldman Sachs has adjusted its GDP growth forecasts for China to 4.0% for 2025 and 3.5% for 2026, primarily due to tariff risks, but emphasizes the acceleration of structural transformation towards domestic demand and innovation [12][16]. - The report suggests that while geopolitical tensions and tariffs pose uncertainties, China's strong policy execution can help offset potential economic downturns [16]. Investment Opportunities - The article highlights that Chinese companies are increasingly becoming brand exporters rather than just manufacturers, with significant growth in technology exports, particularly in AI software and consumer electronics [14][16]. - The RCEP agreement has strengthened China's trade network, making ASEAN its largest trading partner, surpassing both the EU and the U.S. [14][16].

Group 1 - The article reviews historical bull markets in China and their ending reasons, highlighting the concerns of investors regarding the sustainability of the current bull market [3][4] - The bull market from 1996 to 2000 ended due to high valuations, policy shifts from supporting the market to regulating it, and an oversupply of stocks following state-owned share reductions [3][4] - The 2005-2007 bull market was characterized by simultaneous high economic growth and stock market performance, driven by currency appreciation and a favorable economic environment [3][4] Group 2 - The 2014-2015 bull market was fueled by interest rate cuts, leading to a surge in bank stocks and subsequently other sectors, but ended due to regulatory tightening and external currency pressures [4][5] - The article suggests that the end of the A-share bull market is closely related to policy changes, with a current need for a bull market to stimulate the economy and manage local government debt [6][7] - The relationship between A-shares and the USD exchange rate is emphasized, indicating that a strengthening USD could lead to capital outflows from China, potentially ending the bull market [7]

Group 1 - The core viewpoint of the articles highlights the ongoing tensions in US-China trade relations, with both sides agreeing to hold new economic consultations to avoid further tariff conflicts [1][2] - The US has threatened to impose a 100% tariff on Chinese imports if China does not lift restrictions on rare earth materials, indicating a potential escalation in trade disputes [1] - China's Ministry of Commerce expressed strong dissatisfaction with the US's recent actions, which they believe undermine the atmosphere for negotiations and harm Chinese interests [2] Group 2 - The international community, including the IMF and WTO, is closely monitoring the situation, with calls for both nations to ease tensions to prevent negative impacts on global economic growth [2] - The IMF president emphasized the need for stability in US-China relations, as uncertainty in trade can affect supply chains and overall economic performance [2] - Hong Kong's Financial Secretary noted that there is a widespread belief in the US that stable US-China relations are crucial not only for the two countries but also for the future of the global economy [3]

Group 1 - The core issue for the U.S. is its dependency on Chinese rare earth elements, which are critical for military and high-tech industries, leading to potential systemic paralysis without them [1][7][9] - The U.S. has a significant challenge in developing its own rare earth supply chain, with estimates suggesting it would take at least 8 years and $150 billion to achieve self-sufficiency [9][16] - China's dominance in rare earth production is underscored by its control over 70% of global patents and over 90% of refining capacity, making it nearly impossible for the U.S. to replace this supply [7][12][22] Group 2 - The technological gap in rare earth refining processes in the U.S. is substantial, with only a handful of companies capable of handling the complex extraction and refinement needed for military-grade materials [10][11] - The U.S. has previously invested heavily in its rare earth industry, but past efforts have failed, highlighting the difficulties in establishing a competitive domestic supply chain [9][10] - The geopolitical landscape is shifting, with the U.S. recognizing that it cannot afford to ignore China's strategic control over rare earth elements, which has implications for its military capabilities and technological advancements [1][22][26] Group 3 - The ongoing decoupling between the U.S. and China is evident, with a significant decline in U.S. imports from China, indicating a broader trend of supply chain reorganization [23][24] - The competition in technology and industrial capabilities is intensifying, with projections suggesting that by 2030, China will significantly outpace the U.S. in various high-tech sectors [20][26] - The U.S. is facing a critical juncture where it must either adapt to the new reality of its reliance on China or risk falling further behind in technological advancements and industrial capacity [22][26]

Group 1 - The ongoing debate on the potential decoupling between China and the U.S. reflects the long-term impacts of the trade war, suggesting that isolationism has no winners and could lead to significant economic downturns for both sides [1][10][12] - China's strategy focuses on boosting domestic demand and technological independence, with exports to the U.S. decreasing from over 20% to an estimated 14.7% by 2024, while exports to ASEAN countries are projected to rise by 25% [2][4] - The resilience of China's manufacturing sector is highlighted, with companies like Huawei and SMIC making significant advancements in technology, indicating a shift towards self-sufficiency in critical industries [4][6] Group 2 - The potential consequences of decoupling for the U.S. economy include increased inflation and higher costs for consumers, as 60% of products in major retailers like Walmart are made in China, leading to an estimated $100 billion loss for the U.S. if a complete decoupling occurs [6][8] - U.S. tech giants such as Intel and Qualcomm could see revenue declines of at least 15% if they lose access to the Chinese market, which is crucial for their earnings [8] - The global supply chain disruption resulting from U.S.-China decoupling could lead to increased prices worldwide, exacerbating inequality and impacting emerging economies, while also providing opportunities for countries in Latin America and Africa to strengthen ties with China [10][12] Group 3 - Reports indicate that China's economic resilience is stronger than expected, while U.S. growth may slow due to tariffs, emphasizing the need for rational cooperation over confrontation [12][13] - The overall conclusion is that decoupling represents a lose-lose scenario, and collaboration is essential for mutual prosperity, as the global economy is interconnected and isolation could lead to poverty [13]

Core Insights - Recent market volatility, particularly a 20% drop in Bitcoin, may be influenced by broader geopolitical tensions, specifically U.S.-China relations [1][3] - The trade war has escalated beyond mere rhetoric, with significant declines in import and export figures between the two nations, impacting global supply chains [3] - The Federal Reserve's signals of weakening interest rate hikes have not alleviated market risk aversion, raising concerns about the dollar's value in the context of potential economic decoupling [3][5] Market Dynamics - Bitcoin's price has seen significant fluctuations, dropping from approximately $68,000 in mid-June to over $54,000 by the end of the month, correlating with trade war developments [5] - The People's Bank of China's data indicates a 29% year-on-year increase in cross-border payments in RMB, suggesting a shift towards local currency transactions amid current international conditions [6] - The tightening of U.S. monetary policy is leading to a reduction in global risk capital, disproportionately affecting high-volatility assets like cryptocurrencies [6] Currency Implications - The dollar's dominance in global forex trading, currently at 88%, could be challenged if major economies begin to bypass dollar transactions, potentially impacting cryptocurrency prices [8] - The interconnectedness of various asset classes means that fluctuations in the dollar's stability can have widespread effects on perceived asset values, including cryptocurrencies [8][10] - Ongoing economic friction between the U.S. and China may lead to further volatility in the cryptocurrency market, as local currency systems gain traction [10]