對(duì)于很多想出國(guó)留學(xué)的同學(xué)們來(lái)說(shuō)，考托福可能是必須的，那么今天就和出國(guó)留學(xué)網(wǎng)的小編一起來(lái)了解一下托福閱讀素材：科技產(chǎn)業(yè)是否身處泡沫之中？
IS THE technology industry in La La Land？ There are alarming signs. House prices in San Francisco have risen by 66% more than in New York over the past five years. Even at the height of the dotcom bubble in 2001， the gap was lower， at 58%. Shares of technology firms trade on their highest ratio to sales since the turn of the century. Four of the world’s most valuable firms are tech companies： Apple， Alphabet， Microsoft and Amazon. Snap， a tiddler with 400mofsalesand400mofsalesand700m of cash losses in 2016， listed shares on March 2nd that gave it a valuation of over $20bn.
科技產(chǎn)業(yè)是否正處在虛幻之國(guó)？這不乏警示信號(hào)。過(guò)去五年舊金山房?jī)r(jià)的漲幅超出紐約66%。即使在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)泡沫最大的2001年，這一差距也只有58%?？萍脊竟善笔袖N(xiāo)率已升至世紀(jì)之交以來(lái)的新高。全球市值最大的四家公司均為科技公司：蘋(píng)果、Alphabet、微軟、亞馬遜。在2016年銷(xiāo)售額為四億美元而現(xiàn)金損失達(dá)七億美元的小公司Snap在3月2日上市，估值超過(guò)200億美元。
For companies and investors in any industry， it is hard to work out if you are living in a bubble. To help， Schumpeter has created three sanity tests for global tech firms. These examine their cashflow， whether investors differentiate between companies， and whether forecasts of their future earnings suffer from a fallacy of composition. The exercise suggests that tech valuations are frothy， but not bubbling.
任何行業(yè)的公司和投資者都很難搞清自己是否處于泡沫之中。為此，熊彼特為全球科技公司設(shè)計(jì)了三個(gè)心智測(cè)試來(lái)幫助判斷。這些測(cè)試審視公司的現(xiàn)金流狀況，看投資者對(duì)各公司有無(wú)加以區(qū)分，并檢驗(yàn)這些公司未來(lái)收益預(yù)測(cè)是否存在合成謬誤。測(cè)試顯示，科技公司的估值正在起沫，但還沒(méi)有構(gòu)成虛高。
The first test is cashflow， and the industry passes it with flying colours. In 2001 about half of all listed tech firms were unable to convert their sales into hard dollars. Times have changed. In the past 12 months the biggest 150 technology companies generated a mighty $350bn of cashflow after capital expenditures—higher than the total cashflow over the same period of all the non-financial companies listed in Japan， for instance.
第一個(gè)測(cè)試針對(duì)現(xiàn)金流，科技行業(yè)在這方面表現(xiàn)出色。2001年，約半數(shù)上市科技公司無(wú)法將銷(xiāo)售轉(zhuǎn)化為真金白銀。時(shí)移勢(shì)易。在過(guò)去一年，最大的150家科技公司在扣除資本支出后現(xiàn)金流達(dá)3500億美元之巨，比同期在日本上市的所有非金融公司的總現(xiàn)金流還高。
In a bubble， investors bid up the value of assets regardless of their quality. The prices of good and bad tulips soared alike in 17th-century Holland， and in 2008 subprime debt was almost as valuable as Treasury bonds. So the second test is whether buyers are differentiating clearly between tech firms， of which there are three broad types. Some， such as Samsung and Apple， are mature and profitable. At other firms， including Alibaba， Tencent， Facebook and Alphabet， sales are growing at an annual rate of over 20%， with high margins. Then there are “blue-sky” firms that are unprofitable but have explosive sales growth. Uber and Snap are examples.
在泡沫時(shí)期，投資者無(wú)視資產(chǎn)質(zhì)量而盲目推高其價(jià)值。在17世紀(jì)的荷蘭，郁金香不論優(yōu)劣，價(jià)格一律飆升。2008年，次級(jí)債成為幾乎同美國(guó)國(guó)債一樣搶手的香餑餑。所以，第二個(gè)測(cè)試是看買(mǎi)家對(duì)三大類(lèi)科技公司有否清楚區(qū)分。有一類(lèi)科技公司，如三星和蘋(píng)果，發(fā)展成熟，盈利可觀。而包括阿里巴巴、騰訊、Facebook、Alphabet在內(nèi)的其他一些科技公司則是年銷(xiāo)售增速超過(guò)20%，利潤(rùn)很高。還有一些是雖未盈利但銷(xiāo)售呈爆炸性增長(zhǎng)的“藍(lán)天”公司，優(yōu)步和Snap便是例子。
One way to gauge whether investors are sensibly valuing each category differently is to calculate companies’ duration， or how much of their current market worth is expected to be realised soon and how much relies on pots of gold being found far into the future （see chart）. Schumpeter has crunched the numbers for the world’s ten biggest tech firms and for three rising stars， splitting their market value into three parts： value which has already been realised in the form of net cash held， the present value of expected earnings in the next four years， and the value attributable to what happens after 2020. Samsung and Apple are not growing much but are low-risk： over 40% of their value can be explained by cash and near-term profits. The raciest firms， such as Tesla， are expected to generate over 90% of their value after 2020. These firms could well crash and burn. The good news is that investors are placing their most eye-watering valuations on a fringe of smallish companies that are growing very fast indeed.
衡量投資者是否明智地對(duì)各類(lèi)科技公司做區(qū)別性估值的一個(gè)辦法是計(jì)算這些公司的股票久期，即其市場(chǎng)估值有多少能于近期實(shí)現(xiàn)，多少要依靠在未來(lái)發(fā)掘的價(jià)值（見(jiàn)圖表）。熊彼特計(jì)算了全球最大的十家科技公司及三大后起科技公司的數(shù)據(jù)，將其市值分為三部分：已經(jīng)以留存凈現(xiàn)金的形式實(shí)現(xiàn)的價(jià)值、未來(lái)四年預(yù)期收益的現(xiàn)值、2020年后實(shí)現(xiàn)的價(jià)值。三星和蘋(píng)果的增長(zhǎng)不大，但風(fēng)險(xiǎn)低：其價(jià)值中超過(guò)40%為現(xiàn)金和近期利潤(rùn)。而特斯拉等最獨(dú)特而有活力的公司90%的估值要在2020年后才會(huì)實(shí)現(xiàn)。這些公司很可能撐不到那個(gè)時(shí)候。好消息是，投資者給出最大膽估值的那群小公司確實(shí)增長(zhǎng)迅猛。
The third test is whether there is a fallacy of composition. In a bubble the bullish claims of individual companies aren’t plausible once you add them all up. In the dotcom era the market-share targets of internet-service providers added up to well over 100%. In the subprime crisis every bank claimed that it had offloaded its risks onto other banks. The technology industry is less vulnerable to criticism on this front. The aggregate profits of the top five tech firms are expected to rise from 6% of American corporate earnings last year， to 10% by 2025： bold， but not implausible. Managers are not anticipating the same profit stream twice. For example， Facebook is not expected to become a force in search， while Google is not expected to conquer social media.
第三個(gè)測(cè)試檢查是否存在合成謬誤。存在泡沫時(shí)，只要把各家公司的豪言匯總，就會(huì)發(fā)現(xiàn)它們各自的說(shuō)辭并不合理。在互聯(lián)網(wǎng)泡沫時(shí)期，網(wǎng)絡(luò)服務(wù)供應(yīng)商的市場(chǎng)份額目標(biāo)加起來(lái)遠(yuǎn)超過(guò)100%。在次貸危機(jī)中，每家銀行都說(shuō)自己已把風(fēng)險(xiǎn)轉(zhuǎn)移到其他銀行身上。在這方面科技行業(yè)的可指摘之處較少。到2025年，前五大科技公司的總利潤(rùn)在美國(guó)企業(yè)盈利的占比預(yù)計(jì)將從去年的6%上升至10%——這是一個(gè)大膽的預(yù)測(cè)，但并不離譜。高管們沒(méi)有預(yù)期通過(guò)復(fù)制別人的業(yè)務(wù)帶來(lái)利潤(rùn)流，例如，他們并不期望Facebook成為搜索巨頭，也沒(méi)想讓谷歌稱(chēng)霸社交媒體。
Although the lunatics have not taken over the asylum， there are， however， pockets of excess. Even though their valuations are now starting to deflate， there are still too many privately held technology firms with stretched valuations of 1bn?dwide，suchcompanieshaveatotalworthof1bn?dwide，suchcompanieshaveatotalworthof350bn. When it comes to facing up to failure， too， the industry’s record is bad. Twitter’s sales may shrink by 14% this quarter compared with a year earlier， and it is losing money. Past company failures in the tech business suggest that once decline sets in， it takes only two years or so for a firm to lose a quarter or more of its sales. Yet Twitter is sticking to its line that rapid growth will soon return.
雖然情況尚未失控，但確有虛浮之象。盡管這些科技公司的估值開(kāi)始下降，仍有太多私有科技公司估值過(guò)高（在10億至100億美元之間）。在全球，這些公司總值達(dá)3500億美元。而說(shuō)到應(yīng)對(duì)挫折，科技業(yè)過(guò)往的表現(xiàn)也不妙。推特本季度的銷(xiāo)售額可能比去年同期下降14%，而且正在虧損。業(yè)界記錄顯示，科技公司一旦遭遇衰退，只消兩年左右，其銷(xiāo)售額便會(huì)蒸發(fā)四分之一或更多。然而，推特仍堅(jiān)持既定路線，認(rèn)為快速增長(zhǎng)會(huì)很快恢復(fù)。
Truly amazing
Another worry is Amazon. It is one of the most optimistically valued firms， with 92% of its current worth justified by profits after 2020. Outside investors have a lot at stake because it is huge， with a market value of tathirdofthisvalueisjustifiedbyitsprofitablecloud?computingarm，herestofthefirm，whichstraddlese?commerce，televisionandfilms，aswellaslogistics，stifyitsvaluationyouneedtobelievethatitbecomesasortofgiantutilityfore?tathirdofthisvalueisjustifiedbyitsprofitablecloud?computingarm，herestofthefirm，whichstraddlese?commerce，televisionandfilms，aswellaslogistics，stifyitsvaluationyouneedtobelievethatitbecomesasortofgiantutilityfore?commercewhichby2025cranksoutprofitsofaround55bn a year， or probably more than any other firm in America.
確實(shí)驚人
另一個(gè)憂(yōu)慮的焦點(diǎn)是亞馬遜。作為估值最樂(lè)觀的公司之一，其當(dāng)前價(jià)值的92%需依賴(lài)2020年后實(shí)現(xiàn)的利潤(rùn)。外部投資者的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)很大，因?yàn)檫@是一個(gè)市值高達(dá)4100億美元的巨無(wú)霸。其中約三分之一的估值是基于它的一個(gè)盈利部門(mén)——AWS云計(jì)算服務(wù)平臺(tái)。而該公司橫跨電子商務(wù)、影視、物流領(lǐng)域的其余部門(mén)盡管銷(xiāo)售額巨大，卻盈利甚微。按科技行業(yè)的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來(lái)看，亞馬遜目前的增長(zhǎng)也不是非?？?。如果認(rèn)為其估值合理，你需要相信，到2025年，亞馬遜將成為年利潤(rùn)約達(dá)550億美元（很可能超越美國(guó)任何其他公司）的巨型電子商務(wù)平臺(tái)。
The final worry is that technology firms are flouting the laws of corporate finance， which hold that there is a relationship between a company’s market value， its profits and the sums it has invested. New entrants should be attracted by the fact that companies are winning huge valuations from tiny investments， in turn dragging profits and valuations back down. As a group， the biggest ten technology firms have napthefigureis36， and for Tencent it is $53. If new competitors do not， or cannot， emerge， then competition authorities are likely to intervene more than they do now. It sounds odd， but the main valuation risk for many of the world’s tech giants is that they rake in too much money.
最后的一個(gè)憂(yōu)慮是，科技公司無(wú)視企業(yè)融資的規(guī)律。這些規(guī)律認(rèn)定公司的市值、利潤(rùn)及投資總額之間要保持一定關(guān)系。新進(jìn)入者應(yīng)該會(huì)留意到，在位公司從微小的投資獲得巨大的估值，從而吸引它們進(jìn)入這一領(lǐng)域，如此一來(lái)就會(huì)把利潤(rùn)和估值都?jí)合聛?lái)。整體來(lái)說(shuō)，最大的十家科技公司每投入一美元到固定和無(wú)形凈資產(chǎn)，便可獲得八美元的市場(chǎng)價(jià)值。對(duì)Snap來(lái)說(shuō)，這一數(shù)字為36美元，騰訊則為53美元。假如新的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手沒(méi)有或無(wú)法出現(xiàn)，競(jìng)爭(zhēng)監(jiān)管機(jī)構(gòu)很可能比現(xiàn)在介入更多。聽(tīng)來(lái)奇怪，但對(duì)世界許多科技巨頭而言，估值的主要風(fēng)險(xiǎn)是它們斂財(cái)太過(guò)。