From the FT's Lex blog

When UBS and Royal Bank of Scotland sold their stakes in Bank of China in the depths of the 2008/2009 crisis, there was talk from BoC of wounded feelings and “extract[ing] the firewood from under the cauldron.”

Now, judging by the unemotional part-exit of Bank of America from China Construction Bank, Chinese executives are a lot more grown up.

For CCB, BofA’s original investment in June, 2005, essentially served the same purpose as the British and Swiss purchases of BoC that year: giving the Chinese bank a stamp of credibility before an initial public offering in Hong Kong. Six years on, CCB seems to appreciate that an orderly off-market placement, even in the billions of dollars, need not wreak havoc on the share price, once disclosed. Chinese banks have required a lot of capital to keep up with state-directed lending sprees, so investor bases are subject to churn. Better to have a solvent “partner” with 5 per cent, than an insolvent one with 10 per cent.

Beyond that, both sides recognize that, with a few notable exceptions, such as BBVA’s productive relationship with China Citic Bank, these are financial holdings, first and foremost. The alleged long-term strategic benefits -- RBS, for example, said it was “excited” by the combination of BoC’s brand and customer base with its own product and operational strengths and experience -- were mostly so much hot air. That is why CCB’s clipped announcement of its revised working agreement with BofA, published on Monday, had none of the stirring stuff about “partnership” found in the US bank’s 2005 release.

In some respects, China’s listed banking sector is not maturing in ways the banks would like: its premium to the Hang Seng has all but vanished, despite some of the best operating metrics on earth. But it is maturing all the same.