The number of cross border joint ventures between British and American fund managers with their counterparts around the world is down 50% from last year, according to the latest research from Cerulli Associates.
During 2000 US and British fund managers only participated in 13 global joint ventures, compared to 26 in 1999.
According to Cerulli, cross-border fund management joint ventures, whilst still popular, have clearly peaked as market entry strategies. Cerulli believes that despite the fact that markets like India and China restrict foreign fund managers to joint ventures, it is unlikely that the globalmarket will ever again witness the large number that were struck in 1999.
The Cerulli report also notes that just under 70% of all of the joint ventures announced so far his year were focused on Asia and Africa. Three each took place in India and China, two in Korea and one in Japan. This is unchanged from previous years, which shows that joint ventures have traditionally focused in the emerging and less developed markets.
The report also claims that many US and UK fund managers believed, sometimes mistakenly, that joint ventures were necessary in order to leap the apparently higher cultural barriers to entry into the Asian fund management market.
Cerulli defines cross-border fund management joint ventures as alliances between two or more asset management firms from different countries.
By Geoffrey Ho
The closure of the BT Pension Scheme (BTPS) to future accrual means 20,000 active members will move to an 'enhanced' defined contribution (DC) scheme, after the company reached a deal with the union.
In this week's Pensions Buzz we want to know what you think of the government's proposals set out in the DB white paper, which include new powers for the regulator.
The pensions watchdog has been through some testing times and is making significant changes to the way it regulates. Speaking to Stephanie Baxter, Mark Boyle takes stock and looks to the future
Enhanced powers for The Pensions Regulator (TPR) to prosecute and fine company directors who "wilfully or recklessly" put their defined benefit (DB) pension scheme at risk will be hard to enforce, commentators say.