Skip to main content

Why seek immigrant investors in China? Much new (& dumb) money, bball fever, little transparency or tough reporting, flexible attitude toward truth

Part 7 of a series

The effort by the New York City Regional Center (NYCRC), the private investment pool federally authorized to accept immigrant investor funds, and developer Forest City Ratner (FCR) to raise $249 million from 498 Chinese millionaires under the EB-5 immigration program may be legal, but there is ample reason to question whether it will serve the public interest.

Part 1 of this series concerned the seven-year extension available on Phase 1 of the project should Forest City Ratner not repay the EB-5 loan. Part 2 estimated the developer could save at least $191 million. Part 3 examined the sales effort in China, with the arena front and center, even though it's already funded.

Part 4 reported on claims made in China, on video and in person, by public officials supporting the project. Part 5 concerned the value of the development rights, contrasted with those in last year's deal for the Vanderbilt Yard. Part 6 described reasons to think the development rights are overvalued.

Part 7 explained why China is such a popular target for those seeking EB-5 investors
. Part 8 provided another reason why the Nets played exhibition games in China in October. Part 9 cited the curious avoidance of Mikhail Prokhorov during the pitch in China.

Part 10 noted NYCRC's belated announcement of the project in a newsletter. Part 11
described misleading promotion in the Chinese media and by Chinese firms working with the NYCRC. Part 12 covered the proclamations that are part of the pageantry in China.

Part 13 concerned the role of the NYCRC's preferred law firm. Part 14 linked the land loan to a previous one from Gramercy Capital. Part 15 analyzed the use of weasel words and ambiguous language. Part 16 took another look at a web video pitching the project.

The wrap-up and FAQ is here.

Under the EB-5 program, investment pools known as regional centers--an increasingly popular increasingly-popular way to raise cheap financing--can solicit immigrant investors from around the world to park $500,000 each in a job-creating investment.

However, the New York City Regional Center (NYCRC), in the case of the "Brooklyn Arena and Infrastructure Project," has focused on China, a country that offers a particular set of advantages to EB-5 promoters, and an even greater set of advantages for this project.

For the NYCRC and Forest City Ratner, China presents a valuable, unique opportunity, given the confluence of basketball fever, plentiful new money, the desire to get children educated (and other opportunities) in the United States, a language barrier, limited watchdog reporting on this issue, little emphasis on transparency, variable amounts of business sophistication, and flexible business ethics.

It's the new Wild Wild West.

(Update 12/24/10: As Reuters reports, the NYCRC is also seeking investors in South Korea.)

Road shows

Even before a series of high-profile sales sessions in major cities in October, involving developer Bruce Ratner and the Empire State Development Corporation's Peter Davidson (but not, as once billed, Brooklyn Borough President Marty Markowitz), the NYCRC was hustling.

As the NYCRC's Gregg Hayden said during a webcast produced by the Kunpeng immigration consultancy (excerpts) in mid-October, "Myself and my assistant General Manager, Zachary Woods, from Shanghai, have just finished a 45-day, 23-city tour, of the China market, raising preliminary interest and pre-sales for this project, and they're going extremely well, we have a lot of strong interest, because of the safety and security of this program, and the abundant job creation that we are producing with this project."

(Well, that's their story. This series challenges the claims of safety, security, and "abundant job creation.")

Since the October sessions, the NYCRC on November 12 began an 11-event, nine-city tour around the country, scheduled to end December 19 in Chongqing.

Why China?

But the larger question is: Why China?

Why such multiple tours and, in mid-October, why bring big guns such as Darryl (Chocolate Thunder) Dawkins, Ratner, and Davidson, and why show videos touting the project with appearances by officials from Brooklyn, New York City, and New York State?

Well, promotional videos, like the one excerpted below from a webcast produced by an immigration consultancy in China, provide a sense of the atmosphere at the road shows.

And below are my answers, some more speculative than others, regarding the choice of China.

Money and demand

1) Quite simply, China is where the money is. It's the largest country in the world, and it's full of nouveau riche. The New York Times Magazine 11/28/10 reported that "Beijing alone has some 150,000 residents worth more than $1.5 million."

EB-5 consultant Brian Su, who helps firms market their projects, wrote 10/31/10 (typos in original):
As the world largest "immigrant exporter", investors in China have a strong interest in EB-5 program as it is the easiest and quickies way to emigrate to the US. However, due to the Chinese government's recent restrictions on over-heated real estate industry and banks tight control over 2nd mortgage lending, it will have an negative impact on US bound immigration.
2) The demand for green cards is high. Many of those new millionaires want desperately to get their kids educated in the United States, as the NYCRC's Hayden told The National: "Most of the investors are interested in emigrating to the U.S. for education purposes."

The EB-5 program for some may be an investment opportunity, but not this one, if no interest will be paid. More likely the lure includes other lifestyle factors, as reported by Press TV: "China’s Overseas Affairs Office say many rich Chinese citizens are also emigrating because of the cleaner environment, safer food, and free medical service in the developed world."

Scratch "free medical service" from the U.S. and consider what Peter Hessler wrote in his 2006 book Oracle Bones: A Journey Between China's Past and Present. While many Chinese may believe "that America was evil incarnate... I also met others who had complete faith in the wealth, opportunity, and freedom of the United States."

Presumably those pursuing green cards are in the latter category.

Basketball fever

3) Basketball is the most popular sport in China, as noted by China Daily. It would be much harder to turn heads concerning a questionable "arena project" in a country where soccer or cricket or hockey ruled.

4) Compounding that basketball fever, the NYCRC and FCR were able to market this project in October in conjunction with two pre-season basketball games, both involving the Nets and the Houston Rockets (the team of China's most famous player, Yao Ming), along with raffles, autographed basketballs, and retired NBA stars to add flavor.

The Chinese market

5) The New York City Regional Center already has experience in China, marketing two previous EB-5 projects, involving the Brooklyn Navy Yard, to a group that included a significant share of Chinese investors.

6) Business is conducted in translation, so the potential investors do not necessarily know what they're missing. Public presentations, for example, stress information about the job creation aspects of the investment and the collateral, but not the plan to pay them back.

Promotional videos, like the one excerpted below, aim to convey excitement and luxury. (As noted, the excerpts come from webcasts in China.)

Little transparency and marketing misrepresentations

7) Chinese business culture relies significantly on personal relationships. News articles, promotional web copy, and statements in China regarding this project stress the commitment of the "New York Government," a misleading formulation but one that suggests official support.

(While there has been government investment in the Atlantic Yards project, it has not come through the NYCRC, and it was committed long before the "Brooklyn Arena and Infrastructure Project" was conceived.)

In China, there's "a love of ceremony and ostentation and obsession with brands," as Christina Larson wrote in the November/December 2010 issue of the Washington Monthly, all of which play into the elaborate seminars presented to potential investors.

8) Neither the United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) nor any foreign governments have scrutinized EB-5 marketing schemes too thoroughly, though that may be changing.

Even some official bodies in China are looking more closely. In August, reported:
In July, the Guangdong Provincial Exit and Entry Administration issued a warning about the EB5 investment visa program stating that the projects are risky and advising migration brokers and potential investors to exercise caution when considering the large volume of EB5 visa regional center projects and investment immigration initiatives now being marketed.
Flexible attitude toward truth

9) It's easier to push questionable marketing claims, as Chinese business culture has a far more flexible attitude toward truth, according to James McGregor's 2005 book One Billion Customers: Lessons from the Front Lines of Doing Business in China:
The sad fact is that the Chinese system today is almost incompatible with honesty.
Contrasting guilt and shame in the west and in China, McGregor writes:
As a result, the Chinese can feel pretty good about doing almost anything as long as they don't get caught.
The New York City Regional Center, along with its Chinese partners, as I have described, have presented numerous questionable statements and exaggerations. The Chinese media have provided more promotional copy than scrutiny of the project, as I will describe.

McGregor writes:
China is not the legalistic society that typifies the West. If the Chinese want to do something, they find a way to skirt rules or laws.
That's still the case, apparently; see the 10/7/10 New York Times article headlined Rampant Fraud Threat to China’s Brisk Ascent.

China: home of the hard sell

10) Any tendency toward civic skepticism may be trumped by the desire to get ahead. McGregor writes:
A country that was until recently poor but safe has become one that is unsettled and insecure. There is nothing to believe in but making money.
Because of the latter, and other cultural factors, Chinese investors may be particularly vulnerable to the hard sell, as some EB-5 observers have noted.

Florida immigration attorney Jose Latour, writing in his Immigration Insider blog in May, suggested that China was the country where unsophisticated EB-5 investors could best be found:
Still, despite their best efforts at selecting qualified translators, the intricacies associated with both the investment and immigration aspects of the EB-5 are such that even fairly accurate translations tend to miss the subtleties and nuances which, in and of themselves, provide the "big picture" needed before a rational person is willing to plunk down a half million dollars. (It is notable that in the Far East, particularly China, this issue is substantially tempered; perhaps for cultural reasons -- certainly not because the Chinese investor is any less concerned about his or her investment than an investor of another nationality -- or perhaps due to a pragmatic understanding of the value of a clear path to US permanent residency, the Chinese EB-5 investors tend to commit more rapidly to a particular regional center, most often without an in depth understanding of the particular investment program to which they are committing.).
(Emphasis added)

A month earlier, Latour put it more pointedly:
Besides, except for the mass marketing of the Far East, I haven't met a single EB-5 RC prospect who could be "sold" via a hard sell...these people didn't make their money by being dumb.
(Emphasis added)

"Dumb money" and Atlantic Yards

In other words, many Chinese investors have what Slate's Daniel Gross described, in another context, as "dumb money."

It's dumb money susceptible to ambiguous messages from New York officials, the exotic presence of Chocolate Thunder, the hollow pageantry of official honors to Chinese partners, questionable collateral, photos of NBA players in action, and marketing material that places an already funded arena front and center.

It's a magical moment of international arbitrage, as slick marketing and basketball fever aim to sell investors on their green card dreams, perhaps distracting them from due diligence.


Popular posts from this blog

Forest City acknowledges unspecified delays in Pacific Park, cites $300 million "impairment" in project value; what about affordable housing pledge?

Updated Monday Nov. 7 am: Note follow-up coverage of stock price drop and investor conference call and pending questions.

Pacific Park Brooklyn is seriously delayed, Forest City Realty Trust said yesterday in a news release, which further acknowledged that the project has caused a $300 million impairment, or write-down of the asset, as the expected revenues no longer exceed the carrying cost.

The Cleveland-based developer, parent of Brooklyn-based Forest City Ratner, which is a 30% investor in Pacific Park along with 70% partner/overseer Greenland USA, blamed the "significant impairment" on an oversupply of market-rate apartments, the uncertain fate of the 421-a tax break, and a continued increase in construction costs.

While the delay essentially confirms the obvious, given that two major buildings have not launched despite plans to do so, it raises significant questions about the future of the project, including:
if market-rate construction is delayed, will the affordable h…

Revising official figures, new report reveals Nets averaged just 11,622 home fans last season, Islanders drew 11,200 (and have option to leave in 2018)

The Brooklyn Nets drew an average of only 11,622 fans per home game in their most recent (and lousy) season, more than 23% below the announced official attendance figure, and little more than 65% of the Barclays Center's capacity.

The New York Islanders also drew some 19.4% below announced attendance, or 11,200 fans per home game.

The surprising numbers were disclosed in a consultant's report attached to the Preliminary Official Statement for the refinancing of some $462 million in tax-exempt bonds for the Barclays Center (plus another $20 million in taxable bonds). The refinancing should lower costs to Mikhail Prokhorov, owner of the arena operating company, by and average of $3.4 million a year through 2044 in paying off arena construction.

According to official figures, the Brooklyn Nets attendance averaged 17,187 in the debut season, 2012-13, 17,251 in 2013-14, 17,037 in 2014-15, and 15,125 in the most recent season, 2015-16. For hoops, the arena holds 17,732.

But official…

At 550 Vanderbilt, big chunk of apartments pitched to Chinese buyers as "international units"

One key to sales at the 550 Vanderbilt condo is the connection to China, thanks to Shanghai-based developer Greenland Holdings.

It's the parent of Greenland USA, which as part of Greenland Forest City Partners owns 70% of Pacific Park (except 461 Dean and the arena).

And sales in China may help explain how the developer was able to claim early momentum.
"Since 550 Vanderbilt launched pre-sales in June [2015], more than 80 residences have gone into contract, representing over 30% of the building’s 278 total residences," the developer said in a 9/25/15 press release announcing the opening of a sales gallery in Brooklyn. "The strong response from the marketplace indicates the high level of demand for well-designed new luxury homes in Brooklyn..."

Maybe. Or maybe it just meant a decent initial pipeline to Chinese buyers.

As lawyer Jay Neveloff, who represents Forest City, told the Real Deal in 2015, a project involving a Chinese firm "creates a huge market for…

Is Barclays Center dumping the Islanders, or are they renegotiating? Evidence varies (bond doc, cash receipts); NHL attendance biggest variable

The Internet has been abuzz since Bloomberg's Scott Soshnick reported 1/30/17, using an overly conclusory headline, that Brooklyn’s Barclays Center Is Dumping the Islanders.

That would end an unusual arrangement in which the arena agrees to pay the team a fixed sum (minus certain expenses), in exchange for keeping tickets, suite, and sponsorship revenue.

The arena would earn more without the hockey team, according to Bloomberg, which cited “a financial projection shared with potential investors showed the Islanders won’t contribute any revenue after the 2018-19 season--a clear signal that the team won’t play there, the people said."

That "signal," however, is hardly definitive, as are the media leaks about a prospective new arena in Queens, as shown in the screenshot below from Newsday. Both sides are surely pushing for advantage, if not bluffing.

Consider: the arena and the Islanders can't even formally begin their opt-out talks until after this season. The disc…

Skanska says it "expected to assemble a properly designed modular building, not engage in an iterative R&D experiment"

On 12/10/16, I noted that FastCo.Design's Prefab's Moment of Reckoning article dialed back the gush on the 461 Dean modular tower compared to the publication's previous coverage.

Still, I noted that the article relied on developer Forest City Ratner and architect SHoP to put the best possible spin on what was clearly a failure. From the article: At the project's outset, it took the factory (managed by Skanska at the time) two to three weeks to build a module. By the end, under FCRC's management, the builders cut that down to six days. "The project took a little longer than expected and cost a little bit more than expected because we started the project with the wrong contractor," [Forest City's Adam] Greene says.Skanska jabs back
Well, Forest City's estranged partner Skanska later weighed in--not sure whether they weren't asked or just missed a deadline--and their article was updated 12/13/16. Here's Skanska's statement, which shows th…

Not just logistics: bypassing Brooklyn for DNC 2016 also saved on optics (role of Russian oligarch, Shanghai government)

Surely the logistical challenges of holding a national presidential nominating convention in Brooklyn were the main (and stated) reasons for the Democratic National Committee's choice of Philadelphia.

And, as I wrote in NY Slant, the huge security cordon in Philadelphia would have been impossible in Brooklyn.

But consider also the optics. As I wrote in my 1/21/15 op-ed in the Times arguing that the choice of Brooklyn was a bad idea:
The arena also raises ethically sticky questions for the Democrats. While the Barclays Center is owned primarily by Forest City Ratner, 45 percent of it is owned by the Russian billionaire Mikhail D. Prokhorov (who also owns 80 percent of the Brooklyn Nets). Mr. Prokhorov has a necessarily cordial relationship with Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin — though he has been critical of Mr. Putin in the past, last year, at the Russian president’s request, he tried to transfer ownership of the Nets to one of his Moscow-based companies. An oligarch-owned a…