Same facts, different interpretation
In Santangel's Review, Wilbur Ross says that Japan is a play on emerging markets, as it sells 72% of their exports there. In my previous post, I mentioned that Hugh Hendry thought that China was in a bubble, was too dangerous to short directly, and hence looked towards Japan as a shorting opportunity. It's the Japanese reliance on China that made it that way.
Ross points out that the Japanese market trades at one times book value - which looks pretty cheap.
Jim Chanos has recently expressed the view that he thinks that the property in China has started, and that the country "is on a bigger and faster treadmill to hell".
It's never a one-horse race, is it?