總部位于舊金山的收購集團(tuán)Francisco Partners最近發(fā)表了一份精辟的分析,,它對于任何揣測科技股未來的人都很重要,。在這份分析中,,悲觀者和樂觀者都能找到希望,,它為那些對科技公司當(dāng)前估值感到納悶的人提供了一個有幫助的視角,。
首先是壞消息。2000年市值最高的15家科技公司已嚴(yán)重萎縮,,市值損失約1.35萬億美元,,約占它們總市值的60%。只有微軟(Microsoft)一家的市值高于2000年水平,。市值滑坡的一個不尋常之處在于,,它沒有像一些人可能猜測的那樣,發(fā)生在當(dāng)年被大肆炒作的網(wǎng)絡(luò)奇跡公司身上,。相反,,這種不幸落在了多數(shù)曾經(jīng)被視為藍(lán)籌科技股的公司身上。2000年,,北電網(wǎng)絡(luò)(Nortel)市值高達(dá)2090億美元,,與同業(yè)一樣,該公司的市值因為當(dāng)年的市場熱情而膨脹,;后來該公司破產(chǎn),。盡管其他科技巨擘避免了這種不光彩結(jié)局,但它們的長期股價圖表慘不忍睹,。思科(Cisco)市值已從4030億美元降至1440億美元,;英特爾(Intel)市值已從2880億美元降至1610億美元;EMC的市值從2180億美元降至510億美元,。
對于2000年的知名公司而言,,最大跌幅出現(xiàn)在系統(tǒng)、硬件和半導(dǎo)體等表現(xiàn)日益惡化的業(yè)務(wù)領(lǐng)域,。這是因為計算成本持續(xù)下滑、開放源軟件崛起,、轉(zhuǎn)向“云計算”的趨勢,,以及大規(guī)模數(shù)據(jù)中心的興起,在數(shù)據(jù)中心領(lǐng)域,,亞馬遜(Amazon),、谷歌(Google)和Facebook等公司都在設(shè)計自己的策略。
現(xiàn)在說點讓人比較愉快的事情吧,。2000年總市值不到100億美元的15家公司,,如今就市值而言已躋身全球科技公司50強,它們的總市值高達(dá)2.1萬億美元。(如果加上亞馬遜(而不是將其列為一家零售商),,這個數(shù)字會再增加2500億美元),。即使在2000年,蘋果(Apple)仍只是被視為一家奇特的公司,,如今其市值已從60億美元飆升至6590億美元,。這份名單體現(xiàn)出這樣幾個主題:新穎性的威力、重心轉(zhuǎn)向中國的趨勢,、耐心的好處以及資本效率的重要性,。
如今市值最高的幾家科技公司在2000年甚至還未問世。Facebook,、linkedIn和Twitter三家公司的歷史加起來也就33年,。2000年,就連谷歌和Salesforce也還只是地平線上的小點,。這些公司現(xiàn)在的總市值約為8500億美元,。除了它們在各自的數(shù)據(jù)中心運行的一些定制系統(tǒng)以及(就谷歌而言)像Nexus手機和Chrome筆記本等副業(yè)以外,這些公司都沒有費神染指棘手的硬件業(yè)務(wù),。它們的成功來自于巧妙的軟件部署,,特別是“基于云”的軟件,以及(就Facebook,、 linkedIn,、Twitter以及谷歌的YouTube服務(wù)而言)組織和整理用戶生成的內(nèi)容。
目前在市值排行榜上位居第四,、第五和第六位的公司是阿里巴巴(Alibaba),、騰訊(Tencent)和百度(Baidu)。這三家公司目前的總市值為4090億美元,,這不僅證明了中國在15年里取得了巨大進(jìn)步,,還預(yù)示著未來幾十年的格局。中國正越來越注重發(fā)展自主技術(shù),。低估中國的大批新興競爭對手將會帶來的挑戰(zhàn),,將給西方科技公司管理層帶來厄運。驅(qū)使中國競爭對手的雄心和工作文化是歐美難以匹敵的,。
最后說一下這份名單體現(xiàn)出的另外兩個主題:耐心和利潤,。
科技公司的多數(shù)投資者會浪費巨額資金,因為他們對短期恐慌或全球動蕩做出條件反射式的反應(yīng),,而不是專注于符合歷史潮流的新興企業(yè)的持久力,。
對于當(dāng)前所有10億美元級的“獨角獸”企業(yè)的創(chuàng)始人和首席執(zhí)行官而言,還有一條永恒的信息,。在2008年左右之前創(chuàng)建的幾乎所有科技巨擘,,當(dāng)初都需要很少的資金投入,。例如,谷歌在實現(xiàn)盈利之前僅消耗了800萬美元,。這或許意味著,,新一類的公司遲早會流行:它們將是被稱為“盈利獨角獸”的珍稀物種。
The San Francisco-based buyout firm Francisco Partners recently published a delicious analysis relevant to anyone wondering about what the future holds for technology stocks. It is a bulletin in which both pessimists and optimists can find hope and it offers a helpful perspective for those wondering about the current valuations of technology companies.
First, the bad news. The 15 technology companies with the largest market capitalisations in 2000 have been decimated — losing about $1.35tn, or roughly 60 per cent, of their combined market value. only one, Microsoft, has a market capitalisation that is higher than in 2000. One extraordinary aspect of this meltdown is that it did not occur, as some might suspect, in the much ballyhooed dotcom wonder companies of yesteryear. Instead it was a blight that affected most of what were once considered blue-chip technology holdings. In 2000, Nortel sported a market value of $209bn that, like those of its classmates, had been bloated by the enthusiasm of the era; it has since gone bankrupt. While other members of this corporate bracket have avoided that ignominy, their long-term stock charts present bleak pictures. Cisco’s market value has faded from $403bn to $144bn; Intel’s from $288bn to $161bn; and EMC’s from $218bn to $51bn.
For the class of 2000, the sharpest property price declines have been in the deteriorating neighbourhoods of systems, hardware and semiconductors. This is because of the continuing decline in the cost of computing, the rise of open-source software, the move to the “cloud” and the emergence of huge datacentres where companies such as Amazon, Google and Facebook are designing their own approaches.
Now a word from sunnier climes. Fifteen companies that were together worth less than $10bn in 2000 are now among the world’s 50 top technology companies as measured by market capitalisation, with a combined worth of $2.1tn. (Had Amazon been included, rather than being classified as a retailer, this number would have swollen by another $250bn). Apple, which even in 2000 was viewed as little more than a curiosity, has risen in value from $6bn to $659bn. A few themes jump out of this listing: the power of novelty, the shift towards China, the benefits of patience and the virtues of capital efficiency.
Several of today’s most valuable technology companies did not even exist in 2000. Facebook, linkedIn and Twitter together have a collective corporate history of only 33 years. Even Google and Salesforce were barely smudges on the horizon in 2000. These companies now have a combined value of about $850bn. Beyond some of the customised systems they operate in their own datacentres, and in Google’s case, some sideline activities such as its Nexus phones and Chrome notebooks, none of these companies sully their hands with anything as taxing as hardware. They have thrived from the artful deployment of software, in particular the “cloud based” variant, and — for Facebook, linkedIn, Twitter (and Google’s YouTube service) — organising and collating the contributions of their users.
Perched in a clump as the fourth, fifth and sixth most valuable technology companies of the day are Alibaba, Tencent and Baidu. This threesome is now worth $409bn — testament not just to how much China has progressed in a decade and a half but a harbinger of the next several decades as the country places increasing emphasis on spawning its own technology. Woe betide the management of any western technology company that underestimates the challenge posed by the vast number of emerging Chinese competitors, fuelled by an ambition and work regimen that is hard to match in Europe and the US.
Finally, a note about two other themes that jump out of this listing: patience and profits.
Most investors in technology companies squander vast sums by reacting to short-term jitters or global jolts rather than concentrating on the staying power of those emerging enterprises on the right side of history.
And for the founders and chief executives of all of the current billion-dollar “unicorns” there is another abiding message. Almost all of today’s technology juggernauts formed before about 2008 required smallish amounts of capital. Google, for example, consumed only $8m before turning profitable. Maybe this means that sooner or later a new class of company will come into vogue — a rare species known as the profitable unicorn.