@thepupil - I was trying to make parallels between early democracies in the SE/HK relative to the robber barons in the US. The early robber barons definitely used a lot of political clout to defend their markets and access new ones. Yet, I think one could have made money aligning themselves with JP Morgan and Rockerfeller companies and do well. It doesn't seem to be the case in certain SE countries. I have family in HK and I knew there was corruption and "special" deals via preferred land sales... but, never put into context that it was this bad. The glass ceiling is that thick.
I'm still trying to reconcile his stance on Singapore and the Lee Kuan Yew family. I've been watching videos of "Harry" since Munger highlighted the Singapore marvel. Now this book is making me re-think some of the angles and motives there. Again.... I am surprised at the marketing of HK and Singapore as global money centers, but Joe's stance on how they came to be -- is very dark and murky. It's interesting to get a counter-argument.
Again, I would love to see/hear that these bear traps are getting resolved, but I wonder since there's not enough transparency and enforcement/teeth in those markets.... is it really turning for good?
Generally, you get that from activist investors and P/Es.. but, Japan (which is not included in the book), HK, Singapore are markets that are very insider base to prevent the spotlight on inefficiencies. It's not even like early Ben Graham investments where they can get 10-20% and vote out the board. The rule of law and their SEC is weak. There's still a huge disadvantage to outside investors. The only markets that Joe mentioned might be investable are S. Korea and Taiwan possibly. Again, I think both have protected markets. But, Coupang's failure in Japan, Singapore, yet success in Taiwan seem to support that point... but, SE asian investment are really put into a too hard pile me... based on this book.