随着市场涌入大量SPAC，许多SPAC开始与资质欠佳的公司合并，同时宣称营收将实现高达300倍的增 长;这一现象引发美国证券交易委员会(SEC)的打击，投资者也以亏损为由起诉SPAC发起人。 特朗普政府领导下的SEC放松了相关限制，而MAGA阵营的人物迅速抓住了这一机会。卢特尼克主导的 一只SPAC正计划与"二十一资本"(Twenty One Capital)合并——这家比特币公司与软银集团(SoftBank Group)和泰达控股(Tether Holdings)存在关联。卢特尼克旗下六只SPAC中的另一只，正与一家名 为"BSTR"(全称"比特币标准金库公司"，Bitcoin Standard Treasury Co.)的机构合并，以投资比特币代 币。 帕里哈皮蒂亚则为"美国卓越收购公司A"(American Exceptionalism Acquisition Corp. A)募集了3亿美元， 该SPAC计划收购一家涉足特朗普青睐领域(如去中心化金融、人工智能)的公司。其股价在上市最初几 周上涨13%，成为尚未宣布合并交易却表现最佳的SPAC之一。 数据显示，截至10月17日，今年已提交IPO申请或完成 ...

自1991年经济自由化改革以来，印度经济实现了令人瞩目的增长，特别是在2004年至2014年的"黄金十年"期间，年均增长率超过8%，成为全球经济 增长的亮点。然而，英国记者詹姆斯·克拉布特里在《新镀金时代》一书中尖锐地指出，这场经济奇迹的背后，隐藏着深刻的制度性危机。印度并未 实现真正的普惠性增长，而是形成了一种独特的"裙带资本主义"模式，这将对其长期发展构成严重威胁。 事实上，"新镀金时代"（New Gilded Age）并非一个严格的学术定义，而是借用了美国十九世纪末的一个概念框架。彼时的美国经历了前所未有的 工业化和经济扩张，财富急剧增长，城市拔地而起，表面一片繁荣；但是，在这层"镀金"的外壳之下，是日益扩大的贫富差距、猖獗的政治腐败、 垄断资本的无序扩张以及剧烈的社会矛盾。 《新镀金时代》 [英] 詹姆斯·克拉布特里 著，邢玮 译 新经典文化 南海出版公司，2024年1月 一、神秘车祸 2013年12月初，印度的孟买街头发生了一起离奇车祸。凌晨1点半左右，一辆阿斯顿·马丁豪华跑车在路上失控，接连和两辆汽车发生碰撞。随后， 车主立刻被私人保安送上了一辆SUV逃之夭夭。很快，这件事就在印度当地媒体上被报道 ...

2025.09.26 微信编辑| 七三 第一财经持续追踪财经热点。若您掌握公司动态、行业趋势、金融事件等有价值的线索，欢迎提供。专 用邮箱：bianjibu@yicai.com （注：我们会对线索进行核实。您的隐私将严格保密。） 格里芬指出，特朗普政府与大企业达成协议，以规避关税政策的全面实施，此类协议实质上是反美。他 说，当政府参与挑选赢家和输家时，这场游戏只有一种结局：我们都输了。 格里芬发表这番言论之际，美国企业正争相与白宫达成协议，以免使自己受到损害。 最近几个月，包括苹果和英伟达在内的多家大企业亦宣布重大的本土投资计划，外界认为这是为博得特 朗普政府的欢心。 格里芬称如果美国沿着关税的道路走下去，众多企业在白宫门外排队，争辩他们应该被免除进口关税， 这种行为令人作呕。 本文字数：417，阅读时长大约1分钟 对冲基金公司Citadel创办人格里芬抨击特朗普政府实行裙带资本主义，偏袒那些大型企业和关系密切的 公司，这种挑选赢家的做法，不应发生在美国。 ...

2025.09. 26 格里芬称如果美国沿着关税的道路走下去，众多企业在白宫门外排队，争辩他们应该被免除进口关 税，这种行为令人作呕。 本文字数：417，阅读时长大约1分钟 推荐阅读 捷豹路虎3.3万名员工被告知"停工停产" 对冲基金公司Citadel创办人格里芬抨击特朗普政府实行裙带资本主义，偏袒那些大型企业和关系密 切的公司，这种挑选赢家的做法，不应发生在美国。 格里芬指出，特朗普政府与大企业达成协议，以规避关税政策的全面实施，此类协议实质上是反美。 他说，当政府参与挑选赢家和输家时，这场游戏只有一种结局：我们都输了。 微信编辑 | 七三 第 一 财 经 持 续 追 踪 财 经 热 点 。 若 您 掌 握 公 司 动 态 、 行 业 趋 势 、 金 融 事 件 等 有 价 值 的 线 索 ， 欢 迎 提 供 。 专 用 邮 箱 ： bianjibu@yicai.com （注：我们会对线索进行核实。您的隐私将严格保密。） 格里芬发表这番言论之际，美国企业正争相与白宫达成协议，以免使自己受到损害。 最近几个月，包括苹果和英伟达在内的多家大企业亦宣布重大的本土投资计划，外界认为这是为博得 特朗普政府的欢心。 ...

Core Insights - The rise and fall of Takafumi Tsuji exemplifies the interplay between capital logic and human obsession, highlighting the risks of unchecked ambition and governance failures [2][7] Group 1: Rise of Takafumi Tsuji - Takafumi Tsuji's ascent began with a "political-business symbiosis" model established by his father, which allowed the Seibu Group to gain policy advantages through land and railway acquisitions [3] - By the 1980s, during Japan's economic bubble, Tsuji amassed land equivalent to one-sixth of Japan's territory, capitalizing on a 20% annual increase in land prices [3][4] Group 2: Governance and Management Style - Tsuji's management style was characterized by autocracy, with no board meetings for seven years and decisions made solely by him, leading to impressive growth rates during the expansion phase [4] - However, this lack of oversight created significant governance risks, as evidenced by his refusal to dilute family control through strategic investments, which later contributed to financial crises [4][5] Group 3: Financial Decline and Ethical Failures - The collapse of Japan's real estate bubble in the 1990s led to a dramatic decline in Tsuji's wealth, which fell from approximately $20 billion in 1990 to $500 million by 2000 [5][6] - Tsuji resorted to financial fraud to maintain control, misreporting ownership stakes and ultimately facing legal consequences, including arrest for insider trading and accounting fraud [6][7] Group 4: Lessons for Investors and Entrepreneurs - The case of Takafumi Tsuji underscores the importance of genuine asset valuations over mere scale, emphasizing that cash flow health is critical [8] - It also highlights that governance structures are essential for risk management, as autocratic management can lead to vulnerabilities during economic downturns [8] - Lastly, the story illustrates that obsession can be detrimental to capital management, as Tsuji's refusal to sell during the bubble's peak led to catastrophic losses [8]

Group 1 - Elon Musk announced his resignation from the Office of Government Efficiency, citing the bureaucratic inefficiency of U.S. federal agencies as a significant issue [1] - Musk's role in the government has been criticized for potential conflicts of interest, as he oversees multiple companies that have contracts with federal agencies [5][6] - The Trump administration's efforts to cut federal spending and reduce the workforce have been linked to Musk's influence and financial contributions to Trump's campaign [2][4] Group 2 - The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) has faced scrutiny for its opaque funding processes, with reports indicating that less than 10% of aid actually reaches intended recipients [3] - The government efficiency initiatives have revealed significant waste and corruption within various federal departments, including the Department of Defense [4][6] - The intertwining of political donations and policy-making has been highlighted as a systemic issue, with billionaires exerting influence over government decisions [7][9] Group 3 - The concept of "pay-to-play" politics has been normalized under the Trump administration, leading to a perception that political contributions directly affect policy outcomes [7][10] - Historical patterns of political patronage and the "revolving door" phenomenon continue to characterize U.S. governance, raising concerns about accountability and transparency [8][9] - Public sentiment reflects a widespread belief that corruption is a major issue within the government, with many doubting the effectiveness of efficiency reforms [9][10]