展博研究所恭祝各位蛇年大吉，龍馬精神，心想成事，身體健康 ^^

展博研究所恭祝各位蛇年大吉，龍馬精神，心想成事，身體健康 ^^

展博天下 之 拜過早年

從廿四節氣來說， 今天已經係立春， 係新一年既開始！本研究所一馬當先提早同大家拜過早年:

祝各位讀者新的一年身體健康！萬事勝意！工作順利！好運常伴！出入平安！ 蛇年行大運！

炒股心得

炒股心得：“炒股有三個境界，先見自己，再見天地，最後才見眾生….”

2012完結

展望未來，累積財富~


每次投資經驗均是累積智慧的良機，2012年即將完結， 在這個年終的時刻回顧、細心檢討，不斷累積財富，與展博研究邁向更康莊投資大道。

新浪財經訊

今日兩市呈現沖高回落態勢。早盤雖有受益國家降低流通費用的物流板塊和受益中國重大型號無人攻擊機樣機即將首飛的航太航空板塊領漲，但之前助推指數上攻的銀行、券商、地產以及水泥板塊今日盡皆弱勢，導致指數沒有權重股的護盤情況下下探震盪。午後雖有鋼鐵、釀酒等板塊拉起促滬指一度翻紅，但尾盤地產股領跌兩市小幅跳水，滬指退守2200點，年內陰陽存疑。

　　截止收盤，滬指報2205.90點，下跌13.23點，跌幅為0.60%，成交1004億元；深成指報8939.85點，下跌0.83點，跌幅為0.01%，成交987.9億元。

　　信達證券認為，隨著指數上漲，減持行為大幅上升，上行阻力加大，指數在年線位置將出現震盪，但考慮節日即將來臨，短期市場情緒仍在高位，在年線附近，將出現實業資本與散戶的籌碼換手行為，投資者仍可保持相對積極的態度，盡可能持有漲幅不大的個股，對暴漲個股適當減持。

　　但銀河證券認為，本輪中級牛市行情已經確認，估計明年上半年大盤會處於上漲狀態，上漲幅度暫時看到20%～30%。但有兩個方面需要投資者保持警惕和理性：第一、中級牛市行情雖然確認，但長期牛市行情目前並未確認，還要觀察股市的進一步演變；第二、股市今年的12月在投資者心態普遍看空狀態中進入牛市，但其後一旦投資者心態由熊轉牛並開始逐步入市時，則可能在下一階段時間的交易中，大盤出現震盪波動，再次考驗市場做多信心。



後市展望

　　從板塊表現分析，新浪名博占豪認為，金融指數和地產指數沖高回落，資源股也處於震盪格局，這些大板塊向上動能也在階段性枯竭，距離調整應也不遠，它們整體的節奏與大盤基本一致，現在的唯一的疑問還是資源股是否還要頂上一頂。今天最大的熱點是ST股，ST股的炒作主要還是所謂摘帽預期，但是事實上能夠摘帽的企業還是少數，投資者要注意風險。

　　對年K線懸念，新浪名博圖銳認為，最後兩個交易日主板難有大漲大跌，上證指數圍繞年線反復震盪整理的可能性較大，既複製了之前的橫盤節奏，也把“年線懸念”留到了最後一刻。筆者認為這個懸念下週一最後時刻才見分曉的可能性極大，而能否達成收陽夙願？仍然得看量能水準和權重走勢這兩大因素。

　　對於尾盤跳水，新浪名博巫山喜雨認為，通過市場尾盤的表現可以看出來隨著指數的調整，資金也在改變他們的操作策略，尤其今日創業板而出現一定調整，主要便是短線漲幅過大，短時間內多數都有了30%的漲幅，從未來年報以及高送轉的預期看，這一板塊還有機會。同時午後包括鋼鐵、釀酒以及傳媒股的表現都在傳遞一個信號，那就是補漲行情依舊沒有結束，尤其是對於低價題材來講更是如此。

A股估值 已見吸引

A股出現令人振奮走勢，上證綜合指數一度失守2000點，最後大幅反彈收市，筆者認為沒有新的利淡因素下，A股是愈跌愈抵買，預測PE不足10倍，可憧憬A股及H股十年前升市歷史重演，要留意保險股和A股ETF。


上證綜合指數昨日中段跌穿2000點，低見1995點及創四十五個月低位，午後拗腰反彈及倒升1.1%，收2030點，三日內兩度守1995點。而國企指數走勢亦被A股牽着走，最後升170點或1.7%，收10397點，成交額107億元；紅籌指數升21點或0.6%，收4213點，成交額78億元。

近期見到不少評論睇淡大市和A股，尤其A股過去十年走勢急升急跌，十年後差不多打回原形，又如內地媒體引述國際投資者兼量子基金創始人羅杰斯近日表示，希望在股票方面能夠更多關注中國，未來通過購買中國的股票可以為自己帶來收益，但現在不會買中國A股，只有當中國股票持續下跌、崩盤的時候，才會下手去買，然後留給孩子。

上證預測PE8.5倍

專家們都好似在睇淡A股目前市況，實際上筆者在中共十八大前指出，十年前「胡溫」組合上場後，上證表現是反覆向上，十六大後的上證由1500點跌至年底至翌年1月的1300點，下跌超過一成。然後炒作全國人大會議確認新領導人，上證由1300點升至1650點水平，升幅達27%，但4月過後又急跌，跌到年底打回原形，惟隨後由1300點升至2004年4月高位1783點，升幅達37%，所以筆者並不看淡A股。

至於國指當時表現更強於A股，國指十六大後在1800點橫行一個月才開始逐步攀升，一直升至2004年1月高位5440點，升幅達2倍。而上證和國指目前市況表現跟當年有點相似，也是筆者憧憬十年前歷史重演的原因之一。

此外，國指由9000點升至現水平，今年預測PE只有8.6倍，明年預測PE降至7.8倍，上證明年預測PE會降至8.5倍，滬深300指數明年預測PE約8.9倍，數字反映A股以及國指有一定吸引力。

若然上證在年底前再跌超過一成，即跌至1800點，筆者並不會感到奇怪，反而會是追捧A股相關股份或ETF的機會，除非內地經濟崩潰，但領導人明確預期內地經濟未來是增長，2020年GDP目標較2010年翻一番，即達80萬億元人民幣，以及將人均可支配收入同樣翻一番，故A股會否出現羅杰斯所希望的崩盤而執平貨，筆者存疑。

A股若復甦選內險

若然A股復甦，A股的ETF和保險股都會受惠，尤其保險股的投資回報主要來自股票市場，故中國人壽（02628）、中國平保（02318）、中國太保（02601）、新華保險（01336）、中國財險（02328）等股份始終值得留意。

人類的突破: 哲學

王陽翎: 到了現在，當初質疑喬布斯的說法，終於得到真正的平反，Apple 沒有了他，皇朝衰亡得太快，坦白說，可能看過他傳記的人，仍不時會想念他。

有人說身為科技界的他，不是由他個人去突破技術，

但是，我想說，

人類的突破，通常，是始於：

哲學

這也是喬布斯帶給科技界的東西。

“THINK. THEN DO.”

Thomas J. Watson Sr., the founder of IBM, was a master at taking a complex task and simplifying it so that everyone in the organization could understand and implement the objectives. He crafted IBM’s famous (and ubiquitous) motto from a single word: “THINK.” The motto epitomized Watson’s devout rationalism. “All the problems of the world,” he told his employees “could be solved easily if men were only willing to think.”

Watson was a man of action and it probably didn't occur to him that thinkers, having thought, sometimes failed to recognize that there is a time to quit thinking and take action. Since Watson’s time, the global economy has undergone a tectonic shift, and the leaders at IBM have realized that the old motto was a little out of sync and changed its official slogan to “THINK. THEN DO.” Still simple, easily understood, and implementable.

120928信報社評: QE3控制預期 信者自會得救

2012年9月28日

社評
QE3控制預期 信者自會得救

港股昨天期指期權結算，早段追隨外圍上日跌勢低開，恒指最低見二○四八七點，與上日低位二○四八五點形成雙底後即反覆回穩，下午受內地股市大幅造好飆升，恒指最高見二○八五○點，升幅逾三百點，最後報收二○七六二點，上升二百三十四點，回升至二○六○○點水平和十天平均線之上。

自歐洲央行宣布無限買債和聯儲局推出無限期和無限量購買MBS的QE3後，港股即追隨外圍歐美股市裂口上升，但升近二○九○○點水平已見乏力，成交動力減弱，說明QE3並未如過去兩次量寬措施一樣發揮巨大威力，刺激資產價格上升。「回春藥」式的亢奮過後，金融市場只能維持膠着狀態，不升不跌、不生不死、沒完沒了。

歷史不會簡單重複，QE1、QE2和QE3推出後期望和實際發揮的效應，也不盡相同。QE1推出的目的旨在挽救雷曼倒閉後瀕臨崩潰的歐美金融系統，因為金融衍生工具締造的金融資產泡沫爆破釀成的信心危機，禍連實體經濟，不得不大量輸入流動性，穩定金融系統。

金融海嘯後，實體經濟元氣大傷，樓市崩潰，投資萎縮，百業蕭條。QE2的推出，旨在製造和長期維持低息環境，企圖驅使銀行增加商業信貸，刺激經濟復蘇，結果卻形成通脹預期，引發資金追逐資產價格，但因此而形成的財富效應，只有利金融資本和持有資產最富有的階層，對社會整體消費和實體經濟刺激有限，所以美國經濟增長緩慢，實質失業率仍然高企不下。

貝南奇在萬眾期待下再度推出QE3，還要是無限期和無限量的QE3，明顯是要破釜沉舟，不成功便成仁，因此理論上根本不存在QE4的可能性。如果QE3只是舊瓶新酒，純屬QE2的翻版，在市場預期之內，肯定不會有顯著效用。倘若大家以為QE3等於無限印鈔，勢必導致超級通脹，也捉錯用神，因為倘如是，資產價格和資源價格定必一如以往，大幅飆升，然而目下的實情卻非如此。

熟悉貨幣主義理論和對三十年代大蕭條有詳盡研究的貝南奇不是省油的燈，其實亦深知量寬措施只能解決短暫性的融資問題，卻不能改變長遠經濟和生產力的回報，最終亦不可能改變資產價格。如果短期利息達致零息階段，銀行存款在央行的機會成本亦等於零，除非市場出現需求或投資環境改善，否則只會形成流動性陷阱，也不肯輕率放貸，結果M1規模擴大不等於自動增加M2規模，實際經濟依然受惠有限。

要實體經濟受惠，必須配合政府增加開支的財政政策，才可實際增加就業。但面對「財政懸崖」的困境，美國一定要在政治上有所突破，才可以凱恩斯主義的財政政策，配合貨幣量寬措施，刺激經濟，創造就業。

QE3真正的目的，其實旨在控制預期，以通脹創造名義GDP增長，只要市場愈早相信QE3有效，QE3便可真正發揮效用。

但弔詭的是，倘若人人相信QE3，量寬措施真正發揮效用，財富效應刺激消費增加，帶動企業投資，改善實體經濟，通脹真的重臨，低息環境亦會提早終結，到頭來進取的投資者便會受到損害。

正是這種兩難局面，解釋了股市和投資市場何以踟躕不前，升不了也跌不下，因為大升只有利人家高位沽貨套現，造淡又會遭受無限量寬挾倉。面對前所未見的奇局，投資者若要「焗賭」，只能炒股不炒市，並且應該速戰速決，有利獲利。

展博天下 之 話工作~

記得《22世紀殺人網絡》裏面，反對派領袖莫非是（Morpheus）向男主角李奧（Neo）講過一番說話，大意是Matrix是一個系統，這個系統是我們的敵人，但當你置身其中，並環顧四周，你會看見什麼？


商人、教師、律師、木匠......我們竭力拯救他們逃出思想牢獄，但在我們成功做到之前，這些人仍是這個系統的一部分，而這會令到他們成為我們的敵人。

你必須明白，他們大部分都未準備好「拔插蘇」（unplugged），未準備好脫離這個系統，其中不少更由於惰性，以至絕望地倚賴這個系統，而不惜為了保衛它而戰鬥！

《一份不能失去的工作》，就是這個系統，或者至少是這個系統的重要組成部分吧？

展博天下 之 展博玄學立場

“玄學是知識，生活是智慧。玄學是由知識與智慧演變而來，古時觀察星體運行對人的影響再運用於生活。像中國地貌西北高而東南低，古時要選擇門窗向南的房子，春夏能納東南吹來的涼風，阻隔秋冬從西北方吹來的寒流。命理，掌面相是門統計學，是把歷年經驗所得結合起來。故與宗教絕無關係。”

民峰教室-玄學家-蘇民峰

展博天下 之 展博金句

企業需要勇於承擔的人。當老是在開會，通常就是因為負責做決定的人，不願意或沒能力負責。「民主」或「多聽聽意見」，只是這種人常用的藉口。(IKEA創辦人Ingvar Kamprad - 一位家具商的誓約)

Can Hong Kong trust this man ?

Q&A: Hong Kong’s New Leader Is a Divisive Figure, but Aims to Build Bridges

Leung Chun-ying, often referred to as C.Y. Leung, is Hong Kong’s incoming Chief Executive. It’s a pressure cooker of a role that puts him at the helm of the freest and most international city of the world’s most populous nation, during times of economic uncertainty to boot. The 57-year-old former surveyor faces a daunting task. Immense income inequality, ruinously high property prices, an entrenched business oligarchy and a sophisticated population that aspires to greater political participation than the present system allows for: these are just some of the issues and stumbling blocks that could thwart his stated aim of bringing greater prosperity, equality and social cohesion to a feisty, semiautonomous region of 7 million. And he must do it under the scrutiny of both Beijing’s unblinking gaze and Hong Kong’s notoriously cutthroat press.

Leung’s humble beginnings — he is a police constable’s son — have endeared him to large sections of the Hong Kong community, but there are many who resent his close ties to Beijing and he has even been accused of being a crypto-communist. He is also embroiled in a scandal over unauthorized alterations to his luxury home on Victoria Peak, reports of which first surfaced in local press on June 19. Residential refurbishments may not sound like the stuff of political controversy, but when Leung’s poll rival Henry Tang confessed, at the height of his campaign, to illegal modifications to his home, it cost him the trust of a public that demands its leaders abide by the same onerous red tape as everyone else. Although Leung’s renovations were not as substantial as Tang’s, their existence is seen as a baffling lapse of judgment on Leung’s part, and critics are already calling for his resignation.

In an exclusive interview with TIME’s Zoher Abdoolcarim, Liam Fitzpatrick, Joe Jackson and Vanessa Ko, which took place on June 5, this often divisive figure reveals his plans for greater harmony.

What are the three things Hong Kong needs most?

Community building, a broader outlook on the future and a slightly more proactive role of government in economic development. I want to build the community across the various social strata, and also across the various ethnic groups. That would be the first thing. Secondly, we must put short-termism behind us. We have never looked long term — never in the history of Hong Kong. We must ask ourselves [for future generations], What should the coastline and topography of Hong Kong look like? Reclamation, opening up the countryside, infrastructural projects, community facilities, so on. We should start doing that kind of planning. Thirdly, my government will adopt a progrowth policy, to the extent of investing in enterprises. We should use a small part of our fiscal reserves to kick-start certain industries. We also need to make social investments. We need to plan for Hong Kong as an aging society in 10 or 20 years time. Another form of social investment would be cleaning up the environment.

You talk about building a community, but surely Hong Kong already has a sense of community?

Unlike other British colonies — ex-colonies — we did not become a new nation. And therefore there wasn’t a new national identity. There wasn’t a new citizenship. But I think Hong Kong needs to pull everyone together so that we do have this community spirit and that we share in a common fate, a common destiny.

Big business is concerned about interventionist government. What would you say to them to reassure them?

My policies are aimed at facilitating growth of Hong Kong’s overall economy for the benefit of both big and small to medium-size enterprises. I’m not trying to tip the playing field in favor of any group.

Does more affordable housing play a role in your vision of a more equitable society?

More affordable and more comfortable. The average unit size is too small to match Hong Kong’s state of economic development, and people are crying out for more elbow room. It applies not just to our housing stock. It applies to our workplaces. It applies to our hospitals, schools and so on. We have a very low standard of space per capita. Everywhere you look, people are crying out for more space.

There is a sense among some sectors of society that under you freedoms are going to be curbed in Hong Kong — that you are a stalking horse for China. Tell us what your response is.

I’d like to prove people who are apprehensive about me and my government wrong again, much in the same way as they have been proved wrong in the last 15 years. Before 1997, some people were publicly claiming that they would be put behind bars [after the resumption of Chinese sovereignty], or not be allowed to return if they left. Some people even feared that certain books or magazines would not be read in Hong Kong and that the Chinese government would somehow monitor the Internet. They’ve been proved wrong, and I can prove them wrong again.

Under Article 23 of the Basic Law, Hong Kong is required to enact antisubversion legislation, which critics say will curb freedoms. Do you intend to see this legislation through?

We need general acceptance in Hong Kong before any law enacted in accordance with Article 23 has any meaning. It’s not on my agenda.

How do you make the bridge between Hong Kong and China stronger?

I coined a phrase some 16 or 17 years ago, nei jiao. It means internal diplomacy. If we were a country, which we are not, China would be the single most important element in our foreign policy architecture. It would be even more important than Malaysia is to Singapore. But we are not an independent country, and therefore this is not foreign relations; it is internal diplomacy. In our interface with the mainland, many things are conducted like they are conducted in foreign relations. The relationship must be a managed relationship. [At present] we are not doing this internal diplomacy properly. We need to start with the [mainland Chinese] people to explain Hong Kong’s case to them, and Hong Kong’s role in the country.

What is Hong Kong’s role within China?

We are still a model in ways economic and noneconomic. When I say things noneconomic, I would include governance — and rule of law is a key element. Many, I sincerely believe they tell the truth, say that they still look to Hong Kong for inspiration.

Why is it that there’s a certain section of society that, no matter what you do or say, does not trust you and even fears you? How are you going to win them over?

I shall do more reaching out, do more open communication. It is important. I can’t shake the hands of everyone in Hong Kong and I can’t speak face to face, eye to eye with everyone, but I shall try to do my very best. Why? Two things. Hong Kong people have always had, and for good historical reasons, a healthy dose of skepticism when it comes to their political leaders. Secondly, perhaps people see me as not a typical Hong Kong person. In my early days, as a young graduate, I spent most of my spare time running up and down the country giving lectures for free, paying for my own train fares, airfares to share what I had learned. [I’m] not a member of the Communist Party, but I’ve spoken at Communist Party cadre schools, talking to mayors and ministers about land and housing matters and how free-market forces allocate the use of land and housing. I’m also not typical in the way that I don’t have a foreign passport and never have. I never left Hong Kong — never emigrated, never looked to emigrate — and all my three children were born in Hong Kong. All these are not typical for someone of my background.

Low-income people tend to like you or at least want to give you a chance. Members of the elite seem to be more distrustful. Is it because you are the son of a policeman?

I hope not. Many people in the elite group still don’t believe in statistics. They don’t believe that we have abject poverty in Hong Kong. They don’t believe that half of the workforce in Hong Kong earns no more than 11,000 Hong Kong dollars a month [$1,400]. When I was supporting legislating for a minimum wage using facts and figures, many people in the elite said, “C.Y., the figures must be wrong because I don’t know anyone who earns less than $10,000.” The so-called elite in Hong Kong has what we call “Central District values,” and I think Hong Kong would do a lot better if everyone could just travel out a bit and see how, not just the other half, but probably the other 75%, lives.

If you had to name one single thing in your background that drives you, could you?

We were living in policemen’s married quarters in 1966. My father was turning 65, and a few years before that we came to realize that as soon as he retired, we would have to move out of the quarters. And public-housing policy at that time was such that retired officers were not allowed to apply for public housing. So there were two options. One was to hang on for as long as we could and protest against the eviction, which most of my neighbors did. And the other option was to fend for ourselves. My mother mobilized the entire family, and we worked around the clock at home piecing together plastic flowers and toys. I was 10 or 11 in those days, and I carried packs of materials back home from the factory — a 20- or 25-minute walk as a young boy. Nowadays it’s called child labor. But the family made as much as my father’s salary, which was 300 Hong Kong dollars a month [nearly $40 in today's exchange rate]. So by the time my father retired, we had enough money to pay for a small 450-sq.-ft. unit in [the once largely working-class district of] Kennedy Town. My father’s colleagues marched up to Government House to petition for their housing needs. We didn’t do that. [We were] self-reliant.

What would you be doing if you weren’t Chief Executive?

I’d probably be somewhere in England now, where my children are — we have three children, all at university, the eldest doing Ph.D. research in stem cells, two others doing their first degree. My wife’s in England, she goes there a lot because home is where the children are. She’s a lawyer by training. But two years ago, a junction suddenly appeared on the road. I was working at this professional consultancy looking after the Asia-Pacific region. And they said, “C.Y., we’d like you to take over and be the next chairman of the board of a global company.” Tempting. I would probably have a bachelor flat somewhere in London and I would buy a small working farm somewhere in the West Country, and I’d work Monday to Friday in London and spend time on the farm with the family on weekends. Heaven on earth. But if I turned into that junction, it would be — as far as my public service in Hong Kong is concerned — the point of no return. So I made the decision [to run for office]. It was the call of duty.

What is the most challenging issue facing the Hong Kong government?

Disengagement with the people. People are disenfranchised because they don’t vote, they are disengaged because we don’t talk to them, and we don’t listen, not directly. There is a sense of being disowned, and therefore, there’s a deep sense of distrust between the people and the government, or by the people of government. I want to bridge that gap and I want to re-engage with the people.

Isn’t it ironic that a sometimes divisive figure has been tasked with healing a divided city?

It’s a fair point. It’s a very good way of putting it. But we have to start somewhere.

展博天下 之 展博講波

一陣間有"歐債打比"  歐洲國家盃8強 德國 vs 希臘 23/6 2:45 

作為歐元區龍頭既德國, 應對靠借貸度日拖垮全球經濟及金融市場既歐豬國家逐一教訓,

德國已在分組賽教訓了葡萄牙, 依家八強要教訓希臘, 跟住四強意大利, 然後決賽教訓埋西班牙~

純粹個人意見, 不代表本研究部立場

展博天下 之 大市看法

重回萬九!

“大市看法~本研究部認為大市進入本年底部萬八點...反彈指日可待~” 2012/5/28

一如所料,大市由萬八回升至萬九,言而市況仍然未明朗,未來希臘大選,歐債,中國經濟增長放援等等...大把問題俾大戶震倉~不要緊; 暴雨過後總見陽光~

待續...

展博天下 之 大市看法

“滾滾長江東逝水，浪花淘盡英雄。

是非成敗轉頭空。

青山依舊在，幾度夕陽紅。

白髮漁樵江渚上，慣看秋月春風。

一壺濁酒喜相逢。

古今多少事，都付笑談中。”

明 楊慎《二十一史》彈詞第三章《說秦漢》

開場詞「滾滾長江東逝水」——調寄《臨江仙》

大市看法~本研究部認為大市進入本年底部萬八點…反彈指日可待~

點歌仔: 三國主題曲

Super 4 不枉

作曲：鄧智偉
填詞：張美賢
編曲：Johnny Yim
監製: 鄧智偉

水滔滔 天蒼蒼
一借東風頃到燒光
樹靜雲淡也是虛罔
撓起弓箭為著射穿怯慌
對酒當歌醉飲星光
相看一刻哪需多講
讓情義竭盡釋放 在那盡頭地方
活著是 生不辜負厚望
又或是 死得轟烈跌盪
用沉著對付兇悍
用血肉成就絕地的曙光
患難是 一起經歷碰撞
在烽火中受仰望
淚流 被遍地花葬 身再傷
不枉
水影酒色花香
雙鬢依稀蓋掩風霜
動盪時候會迷方向
以心攻佔不需劍起弩張
對酒當歌打開天窗
心照不宣各種悲傷
就贏盡漂亮一仗 萬世盛傳迴響
活著是 生不辜負厚望
又或是 死得轟烈跌盪
用沉著對付兇悍
用血肉成就絕地的曙光
患難是 一起經歷碰撞
在烽火中受仰望
淚流 被遍地花葬 身再傷
不枉
活著是 生不辜負厚望
又或是 死得轟烈跌盪
用沉著對付兇悍
用血肉成就絕地的曙光
患難是 一起經歷碰撞
在烽火中受仰望
淚流 被遍地花葬 身再傷
不枉

好書介紹："The Start-up of You" by Reid Hoffman (co-founder of LinkedIn) and Ben Casnocha

Our country faces enormous challenges. The path to the Hong Kong Dream has changed. We wanted to focus on what individual professionals can do to survive and thrive in a flat world. The premise of the book is that all of us are entrepreneurs of our own lives. We must act as CEO of our careers, take control of our professional future, and become globally competitive.

Not only can anyone be an entrepreneur, but they must be. Even you! Not everyone should start companies, but everyone must be the entrepreneur of his or her own life. The skills people need to manage their careers are akin to the skills of entrepreneurs when they start and grow companies.

For example, entrepreneurs can both be persistent on a plan and flexible when conditions change. They take intelligent risk. They build networks of allies and tap those networks for intelligence on what's happening in the world. Silicon Valley's most innovative entrepreneurs possess unique skills--you can learn them and apply them, no matter your profession.

Being an entrepreneur isn’t really about starting a business.  It’s a way of looking at the world: seeing opportunity where others see obstacles, taking risks when others take refuge. Whatever career you’re in or want to be in­ The Start-Up of You holds lessons for success.

後記: 這本書竟和本研究部的工作觀不謀宜合，每個人都須要成為自己的企業家，經營個人能力和事業，即使現在沒在開公司；也應該讓企業這個賺錢的系統，成為自己生活的一部分。 企業家精神不但求存---更要不斷進步；不斷適應挑戰，不斷尋找機會，要完全了解自己的「個人品牌」....同時要學懂善於與人合作，著眼建立“網絡”(Networking) 而非“關係”(Guanxi）,值得香港的打工仔思考，改變處世之道和心態～
註:本推介並不代表本研究部立場~