2011年3月31日

巴菲特爱将索科尔其人 Who Is David Sokol?

周
三在一份广受关注的公告中，巴菲特（Warren Buffett）说他的得力干将之一──大卫•索科尔（David Sokol）已经从伯克希尔哈撒韦公司辞职。在一封信和一份书面声明中，巴菲特说索科尔在向他说明收购特种化学品公司路博润（Lubrizol）的种种好处之前已经购买了该公司的股票。伯克希尔哈撒韦公司本月初宣布将斥资90亿美元收购路博润。

Reuters
巴菲特说索科尔的辞职和他购买路博润的股票没有任何关系，但这枚重磅炸弹还是可能给伯克希尔和巴菲特这位全球最知名的投资者蒙上了一层阴影。

到底谁是索科尔？以下是巴菲特这位最出名的前雇员的介绍：

履历：

身为伯克希尔旗下公用事业公司中美能源控股公司（MidAmerican Energy Holdings）的主席，索科尔经常作为“空降兵”为巴菲特“灭火”。他曾帮助陷入低迷的屋顶和保温材料公司佳斯迈威（Johns Manville）扭亏为盈；他也曾代表巴菲特对中国的电池厂商比亚迪做过尽职调查，巴菲特后来投资了这家公司。

五十多岁的索科尔也曾被引入伯克希尔旗下饱受亏损困扰的飞机租赁公司NetJets进行大刀阔斧的改革。索科尔大幅削减了债务和成本，减少了明星或雇员亲友免费搭乘公司飞机的次数。在最近一次致伯克希尔股东的年度信中，当提到索科尔在NetJets的作用时，巴菲特说，索科尔在NetJets取得的成就的广度和重要性怎么说都不为过。

来自巴菲特的正面评价：

巴菲特在2009年致投资者的信中将索科尔称为“中美能源公司才华横溢的建造者和运营者”。谈及索科尔时，巴菲特是这样评价他的：“他的领导力一直给公司带来变化，债务已经减少至14亿美元。在2009年遭受了令人吃惊的7.11亿美元的损失以后，该公司目前正在稳步实现盈利。”

巴菲特告诉《财富》（Fortune）杂志：索科尔一天之内做的事比我一周还多，我不是在跟你开玩笑。

值得拍成电影的幕后故事：

索科尔的成长故事同巴菲特类似：在内布拉斯加州的奥马哈（Omaha）长大。孩童时代曾帮人送过报纸，也曾在一家小杂货店帮工。第一次看到尸体晕厥过去之后，他放弃了成为一名医生的想法。上世纪90年代初期，索科尔帮助收购了一家地热企业，并成功将其转变为一家庞大的公用事业公司。中美能源公司去年创造了113亿美元的收入，相比2009年略有下滑，约占伯克希尔公司2010年总收入的8%。

管理风格：

他分给公司高管一本自己出版的129页的小书──《满意但不满足》（Pleased but Not Satisfied），书名道出了他的管理理念。在书中他说自己是按照被迫裁员时裁人的顺序给手下的每一位员工排列等第的。索科尔每天五点不到就起床，跑上八公里，一周有五天要练习举重。

Shira Ovide

（本文版权归道琼斯公司所有，未经许可不得翻译或转载。）


In a blockbuster announcement Wednesday, Warren Buffett said one of his key executives--David Sokol--has resigned from Berkshire Hathaway. In a letter and news release, Buffett said that Sokol had purchased shares of specialty chemicals company Lubrizol, before Sokol convinced Buffett on the merits of an acquisition. Berkshire Hathaway earlier this month announced it is buying Lubrizol for $9 billion.

The resignation doesn't have anything to do with Sokol's stock purchases, Buffett said, but the bombshell threatens to cast a pall over Berkshire and Buffett, perhaps the world's most famous investor.

So who is David Sokol? Here's a rundown on Buffett's most famous former employee:

Resume:

The chairman of Berkshire-owned utility MidAmerican Energy Holdings, Sokol often parachutes in to battle Buffett's fires. He was tapped to turn around Johns Manville, a sagging roofing and insulation company, and did due diligence for Berkshire on BYD, a Chinese battery company in which Berkshire made an investment.

Sokol, who is in his 50s, also was brought in to shake up Berkshire's loss-plagued NetJets. Sokol slashed debt and costs and dropped free uses of airplanes for celebrities or employees' friends. 'I can't overstate the breadth and importance of Dave Sokol's achievements at this company,' Buffett said in his most recent annual letter to Berkshire shareholders, referring to Sokol's role at NetJets.

Kind words from Buffett:

In Buffett's 2009 letter to investors, he referred to Sokol as 'the enormously talented builder and operator of MidAmerican Energy.' Buffett said of Sokol: 'His leadership has been transforming: Debt has already been reduced to $1.4 billion, and, after suffering a staggering loss of $711 million in 2009, the company is now solidly profitable.'

'He gets more done in a day,' Buffett told Fortune, 'than probably I get done in a week, and I'm not kidding.'

Movie-worthy backstory:

In a story line that mirrors Buffett's, Sokol grew up in Omaha, Neb., delivered newspapers as a child and worked at a small grocery store. Sokol dropped plans to become a doctor after he fainted when he first saw a cadaver. Sokol in the early 1990s helped buy a geothermal business and turned it into a sprawling utility company. MidAmerican last year generated revenue of $11.3 billion, a slight decline from 2009. The figure was about 8% of Berkshire's total revenue for 2010.

Management Style:

He gives executives copies of his 129-page, self published book, 'Pleased but Not Satisfied,' that spells out his management philosophy. He also says in the book that he ranks each of his employees by the order in which he would fire them if forced to do so. He is out of bed before 5 a.m., runs five miles and lifts weights five days a week.

Shira Ovide

Posted by at 没有评论:

索科尔辞职 巴菲特有麻烦 Aide's Trades Pressure Buffett

与
一位高管做了简短的电话交谈后，富豪投资家沃伦•巴菲特(Warren Buffett)陷入60年职业生涯当中最敏感的境地。

曾经是接替巴菲特担任伯克希尔•哈撒韦公司(Berkshire Hathaway Inc.)首席执行长热门人选的大卫•索科尔(David Sokol)，1月中旬给巴菲特打了电话，建议由伯克希尔收购化学公司路博润(Lubrizol Corp.)，并对巴菲特说，他个人持有该公司的股份。

伯克希尔后来同意收购路博润，让索科尔的交易仓位增值300万美元。伯克希尔直到本周索科尔辞职才批露他的股票仓位。索科尔说，他希望集中精力用家族资金做投资。

路博润被收购之前，证券交易委员会(Securities and Exchange Commission)已经在调查。据一位知情人士说，证交会有可能着手调查与索科尔股票交易和伯克希尔收购路博润有关的情况。

伯克希尔B类股周四下跌1.83美元至83.63美元，跌幅2.1%。

巴菲特周三发表声明说，他和索科尔当时都认为收购路博润“不存在任何不合法的情况”，索科尔辞职与此无关。巴菲特拒绝进一步置评。

但此事到头来还是有可能让巴菲特恼火。他有一句名言说，树立声誉要20年，败坏声誉只要五分钟。他在周三的声明里面说，此事第一次提及的时候，他没有要求索科尔提供更多相关信息。

索科尔辞职前担任伯克希尔旗下中美能源控股公司(MidAmerican Energy Holdings)董事长。他在周四现身CNBC电视台说，我认为我没有做过任何错误的或不道德的事。他还说，以后他还会这样做。

索科尔说，伯克希尔旗下公司的高管应当可以投资伯克希尔不知晓的公司。他举例说，伯克希尔几年前投资中国汽车生产商比亚迪(BYD Co. Ltd.)之前，副董事长查理•芒格(Charlie Munger)就已经购买了该公司股份。

索科尔1月中旬第一次向巴菲特提出收购路博润的想法。一位知情人士说，索科尔对巴菲特讲，这家公司估值偏低，对于伯克希尔来说或许是绝配。

在简短的通话中，索科尔告诉巴菲特他持有路博润的股票。巴菲特没有问他是什么时候买进的，也没有问他花了多少钱。

此人说，巴菲特打电话给芒格，给他讲了此事，并提到索科尔持有路博润的股票。据一位知情人士透露，巴菲特和芒格对此都没有在意。

巴菲特不能肯定路博润的利润率是否能维持下去。他没有采纳收购该公司的想法。

不过，后来索科尔与路博润首席执行长汉布里克(James Hambrick)见了面，获得了该公司利润率的乐观情况，之后巴菲特对收购变得更加感兴趣。他与汉布里克会面，有关收购的讨论开始升温。

3月13日，伯克希尔董事会批准了斥资90亿美元收购路博润的交易。几天后，伯克希尔首席财务长汉堡(Marc Hamburg)打电话给索科尔。据一位知情人士透露，汉堡说，沃伦告诉我你持有一些路博润股票，你能详细说说吗？

索科尔在电话中向他讲了买股票的事，并向伯克希尔的一个外部律师提供了同样的信息。汉堡走到巴菲特的办公室，向他进行了转述。

据一位知情人士透露，巴菲特打电话给芒格，说他们两人现在有个新的问题要解决。

此人说，巴菲特对芒格说，他想考虑一下该如何处理这种情况，表示索科尔在路博润的持股可能会给伯克希尔的面子带来问题。

巴菲特说，他会在原定3月19日开始的长达一周的韩国和印度之行期间考虑此事。巴菲特是和微软联合创始人盖茨(Bill Gates)一起去的印度。

巴菲特返美之后，他收到了索科尔的辞呈。两天后，巴菲特宣布了索科尔辞职的消息，同时披露了令人震惊的路博润交易。

SERENA NG / SUSAN PULLIAM
（本文版权归道琼斯公司所有，未经许可不得翻译或转载。）


A brief phone call with a top executive has landed billionaire investor Warren Buffett in one of the most sensitive positions in his 60-year business career.

David Sokol, once a leading contender to succeed Mr. Buffett as chief executive of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., called Mr. Buffett in mid-January, suggesting that Berkshire buy chemicals company Lubrizol Corp., and told Mr. Buffett that he personally owned shares of the company.

Berkshire later agreed to buy Lubrizol, triggering a $3 million gain in Mr. Sokol's trading position. Berkshire didn't disclose Mr. Sokol's stock position until he quit this week, saying he wanted to focus on investing his family's money.

Now, the Securities and Exchange Commission─which already had been examining trading ahead of the Lubrizol deal─is likely to launch an inquiry into the events surrounding Mr. Sokol's stock trading and the Lubrizol deal, a person familiar with the matter says.

Berkshire's Class B shares fell $1.83, or 2.1%, to $83.63 on Thursday.

In a statement Wednesday, Mr. Buffett said that he and Mr. Sokol didn't believe the Lubrizol purchases were 'in any way unlawful' and that his resignation was unrelated to that issue. Mr. Buffett has declined further comment.

The incident nonetheless could prove nettlesome for Mr. Buffett. Among his most-famous sayings is: 'It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it.' He said in his statement Wednesday that he didn't ask Mr. Sokol for more information on the trades when the issue first came up.

Mr. Sokol, who had been chairman of Berskshire unit MidAmerican Energy Holdings, said in a CNBC-TV appearance Thursday: 'I don't believe I did anything wrong or unethical,' adding that he would 'do it again tomorrow.'

He added that executives of Berkshire units ought to be able to invest in 'companies Berkshire has no knowledge of,' pointing to the purchase by Berkshire Vice Chairman Charlie Munger of shares of Chinese automaker BYD Co. Ltd. before Berkshire invested in the company several years ago.

Mr. Sokol first pitched Mr. Buffett on the idea of buying Lubrizol in mid-January. Mr. Sokol told him Lubrizol was undervalued and might be a good match for Berkshire, a person familiar with the matter says.

In the brief call, Mr. Sokol told Mr. Buffett he owned Lubrizol shares. Mr. Buffett didn't ask when he purchased the stock or how much he had spent.

Mr. Buffett called Mr. Munger and told him of the pitch, and mentioned that Mr. Sokol held Lubrizol stock, the person says. Neither Mr. Buffett nor Mr. Munger was concerned, a person familiar with the matter says.

Mr. Buffett was uncertain that Lubrizol's profit margins could be sustained. He didn't bite on the idea of buying the company.

But after Mr. Sokol met with James Hambrick, Lubrizol's CEO ,and received bullish information about the company's profit margins, Mr. Buffett became more interested. He met with Mr. Hambrick and discussions picked up.

On March 13, Berkshire's board approved a $9 billion deal to buy Lubrizol. A couple of days later, Berkshire's Chief Financial Officer Marc Hamburg called Mr. Sokol. 'Warren told me you own some shares of Lubrizol. Can you give me the details?' Mr. Hamburg said, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Mr. Sokol recounted the trades to him over the phone and gave the same information to an outside attorney for Berkshire. Mr. Hamburg walked over to Mr. Buffett's office and relayed it to him.

Mr. Buffett called Mr. Munger, saying the two now had a new issue to address, according to a person familiar with the matter.

Mr. Buffett told Mr. Munger he wanted to think about what to do about the situation, figuring that Mr. Sokol's Lubrizol stake could pose an appearance problem for Berkshire, the person said.

Mr. Buffett said he would consider it while he was on a scheduled weeklong trip starting March 19 to Korea and then India, the latter with Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates.

After he returned, he received a resignation letter from Mr. Sokol. Mr. Buffett announced the resignation-with the startling disclosures about Lubrizol-two days later.

SERENA NG / SUSAN PULLIAM

Posted by at 没有评论:

巴菲特头号接班人索科尔辞职 Berkshire's Sokol Quits After Lubrizol Purchases

一
直被外界认为是巴菲特(Warren Buffett)头号接班人的大卫•索科尔(David Sokol)从伯克希尔哈撒韦公司(Berkshire Hathaway Inc.)辞职，此前索科尔买了他建议巴菲特收购的一家公司的股票。

伯克希尔首席执行长兼董事长巴菲特周三发表声明说，今年1月他们最开始讨论收购交易时，索科尔曾对巴菲特说他自己持有化学公司Lubrizol Corp.的股票。巴菲特说，大卫和我都没觉得他买Lubrizol股票有任何违法的地方，这不是他决定辞职的原因。

Bloomberg News
2010年5月1日，大卫•索科尔(David Sokol)在伯克希尔哈撒韦公司(Berkshire Hathaway Inc.)年会上向股东讲话。
相反，巴菲特说，索科尔在3月28日的辞呈中说，他希望用家族资源进行投资的方式能够创造持久的股权价值并创建一家企业，这家企业能够给他的后代提供机会，并为他的慈善事业提供资金。

巴菲特说，去年12月14日，索科尔买了2,300股Lubrizol股票，接着在12月21日卖掉了。之后，索科尔又在今年1月初买了96,060股，买盘价格不到每股104美元。

伯克希尔3月14日说，已经同意斥资90亿美元收购Lubrizol，相当于每股135美元。

巴菲特在声明中说，大卫买入Lubrizol股票是在他和我讨论收购事宜之前，他当时并不知道我对他的建议可能有什么反应。巴菲特说，他是在3月19日亚洲之行前不久得知买进股票的规模的。

Bloomberg News
3月24日，巴菲特(Warren Buffett)在印度新德里的一个新闻发布会上听取提问。
这一披露令巴菲特精心制定的接班计划陷入不确定。巴菲特的接班计划是美国最受关注的戏剧性公司事件之一。伯克希尔一直说，在公司内部确定了四位有望接替巴菲特的高管。索科尔一直被视为是四人之中极有希望的人选。

此事对现年80岁的巴菲特也可能是沉重一击。巴菲特在选择管理人士时强调人品和正直。他本人就以极高的操守而知名。美国最大的公司之一伯克希尔的股价在盘后交易中大幅下跌。

一份上周提交给监管机构的备案文件详细叙述了收购Lubrizol的交易。文件显示，索科尔确定Lubrizol是一个可能的收购目标，并牵头初步收购谈判。据备案文件说，索科尔从一份包括18家化学公司的名单中选中了Lubrizol，这份名单是花旗环球金融有限公司(Citigroup Global Markets)的银行家们在2010年12月按照索科尔的要求编制的一份潜在收购项目名单。

今年1月，索科尔与Lubrizol首席执行长汉布里克(James Hambrick)会面讨论了两家公司的公司文化，并告诉他伯克希尔提出的收购要约将视他是否同意继续留任首席执行长而定。备案文件说，在汉布里克及Lubrizol董事会同意进行收购谈判之后，巴菲特才开始牵头。

巴菲特在声明中说，索科尔知道一旦他提出收购建议，自己就左右不了伯克希尔的决定了，我和（伯克希尔副董事长）芒格(Charlie Munger)将说了算，并且需获得伯克希尔董事会的批准，而大卫不是董事。

巴菲特说，1月14日，我还给大卫发了一张便条，说明我对收购Lubrizol的质疑，以及我更倾向于收购另外一家有价值的公司，MidAmerican已经对该公司提出了收购要约。在听取了大卫有关1月25日他与汉布里克晚餐谈话的汇报后，我才对收购Lubrizol产生了兴趣。

巴菲特说，近年来，索科尔还有两次曾经试图辞职。

索科尔辞职前担任伯克希尔旗下公共事业公司MidAmerican董事长，并且是提供部分所有权飞机的NetJets公司的董事长兼首席执行长。

巴菲特在周三的声明中说，索科尔做出了非凡的贡献，并以他在MidAmerican 和 NetJets的工作为例，巴菲特说如果没有伯克希尔雄厚资金的支持，NetJets曾注定要破产。

巴菲特说，MidAmerican首席执行长亚伯(Greg Abel)将兼任董事长。NetJets总裁汉塞尔(Jordan Hansell)将担任董事长兼首席执行长。

伯克希尔哈撒韦公司B股股价在消息宣布后的盘后交易中大跌。

ERIK HOLM


（本文版权归道琼斯公司所有，未经许可不得翻译或转载。）


David Sokol, long considered by outsiders to be the most likely candidate to succeed Warren Buffett, resigned from Berkshire Hathaway Inc. after purchasing shares of a company he suggested Mr. Buffett buy.

Mr. Buffett, Berkshire's chief executive and chairman, said in a statement Wednesday that Mr. Sokol had told him he owned shares in the chemical company, Lubrizol Corp., when they first discussed the deal in January. Mr. Buffett said 'neither Dave nor I feel his Lubrizol purchases were in any way unlawful' and weren't a factor in his decision to resign.

Instead, Mr. Buffett said Mr. Sokol wrote in a letter of resignation on March 28 that he wanted to 'invest my family's resources in such a way as to create enduring equity value and hopefully an enterprise which will provide opportunity for my descendents and funding for my philanthropic interests.'

Mr. Sokol purchased 2,300 shares of Lubrizol on Dec. 14, which he then sold on Dec. 21, Mr. Buffett said. He then bought 96,060 shares in early January with an order to pay no more than $104 a share.

Berkshire said March 14 that it had agreed to acquire Lubrizol for $9 billion, or $135 a share.

'Dave's purchases were made before he had discussed Lubrizol with me and with no knowledge of how I might react to his idea,' Mr. Buffett wrote in the statement. Mr. Buffett said he learned of the extent of the stock purchases shortly before beginning a trip to Asia on March 19.
***
The revelations throw into question Mr. Buffett's carefully crafted succession plan, one of America's most widely watched boardroom dramas. Berkshire has said it has identified four executives at the company who could replace him. Mr. Sokol has long been considered high on that short list.

The incident is also a potential black eye for Mr. Buffett, 80, who emphasizes character and integrity in his manager choices and who himself is known for his ethics. Shares of the conglomerate, one of the nation's biggest companies, declined in after-hours trading.
****
A regulatory filing detailing the Lubrizol purchase indicated last week that Mr. Sokol identified Lubrizol as a potential acquisition and took the lead in early negotiations to buy the company. Mr. Sokol plucked Lubrizol from a list of 18 chemical companies that bankers at Citigroup Global Markets had compiled in December 2010 as possible acquisitions at Mr. Sokol's request, according to the filing.

Mr. Sokol met with Lubrizol's chief executive, James Hambrick, in January to discuss the corporate culture at the two companies, and told him a Berkshire takeover offer would be contingent on Mr. Hambrick's agreeing to stay on as CEO. It was after Mr. Hambrick and his board had agreed to move forward with takeover talks that Mr. Buffett took the lead, the filing said.

Mr. Sokol 'knew he would have no voice in Berkshire's decision once he suggested the idea; it would be up to me and [Berkshire Vice Chairman] Charlie Munger, subject to ratification by the Berkshire Board of which Dave is not a member,' Mr. Buffett said in the statement.

'As late as January 24, I sent Dave a short note indicating my skepticism about making an offer for Lubrizol and my preference for another substantial acquisition for which MidAmerican had made a bid. Only after Dave reported on the January 25 dinner conversation with James Hambrick did I get interested in the acquisition of Lubrizol,' Mr. Buffett wrote.

Mr. Buffett said Mr. Sokol had tried two other times in recent years to resign.

Mr. Sokol had been chairman of Berkshire's MidAmerican utility operations and chairman and CEO of its NetJets fractional plane business.

In his statement Wednesday, Mr. Buffett said Mr. Sokol's 'contributions have been extraordinary,' citing his work at MidAmerican and NetJets, which he described as 'an operation that was destined for bankruptcy, absent Berkshire's deep pockets.'

Greg Abel, the chief executive of MidAmerican Holding Co., will become its chairman, Mr. Buffett said. Jordan Hansell, president of NetJets, will become its chairman and CEO.

Berkshire Hathaway Class B shares fell sharply in after-hours trade after the announcement.

ERIK HOLM

Posted by at 没有评论:

微软联合创始人出书攻击盖茨 Microsoft Co-Founder Allen Throws Barbs At Gates In Memoir

微
软公司联合创始人保罗•艾伦（Paul Allen）新出版的回忆录揭示，在微软公司成立初期，艾伦治疗癌症期间，比尔•盖茨（Bill Gates）曾处心积虑地想从艾伦手中夺取微软公司的股份。

Doug Wilson/Corbis
图集：盖茨与艾伦一同走过的岁月
这项指控是书中对盖茨关键描绘的组成部分。艾伦和盖茨在小学结下的友谊最终发展成美国商界一个标志性的合作伙伴关系。本书定于4月17日发售，书名叫做《有想法的人：微软联合创始人的回忆录》（Idea Man: A Memoir by the Co-founder of Microsoft）。《华尔街日报》提前看到了这本回忆录的草稿。周三早些时候《名利场》（Vanity Fair）杂志的网站刊登了本书的节录。

本书重新审视了微软发展历史上的一些细节，以及盖茨和前任合伙人之间的关系。一直以来外界就认为这两人即使不算至交也是非常亲密的朋友。据认识盖茨和艾伦的知情人士透露，本书在两人间制造了裂痕。在回忆录的致谢章节，艾伦感谢盖茨和其他17位朋友给予的“总体和物力上的协助”。

艾伦的发言人大卫•波茨曼（David Postman）说，本书对两人关系的描述非常地平衡。他又说很显然艾伦非常重视盖茨的想法、精力和对公司的投入。

盖茨在一份书面声明中说，虽然我对许多事件的回忆可能与艾伦不同，但我珍视和他的友谊，以及他对科技界和微软做出的重要贡献。

艾伦在书中对盖茨直言不讳的描述已经在那些早期曾在微软工作过的人结成的小圈子里引起了波澜。好几位认识盖茨和艾伦的人私底下都对艾伦批评曾经的商业伙伴的动机表达了困惑，并质疑艾伦对某些事件的解释的准确性。比如在书中艾伦说自己曾参加了某些会议，但熟悉情况的人说艾伦从未参加过那些会议。再比如艾伦说为了争取一位可能成为微软最重要程序员的计算机专家，他曾造访加州的帕洛阿尔托（Palo Alto）。但知情人士说去的人是盖茨。波茨曼说他对书中的任何错误都不知情。

Getty Images 2, Corbis, Associated Press
在书中，艾伦把自己描绘成是引发微软许多最重要思想的火花，并在某些情况下刻意淡化盖茨的作用。贯穿全书的是艾伦表达的一丝苦涩，因为他既没能因自己在微软的工作获得更多的赞扬，也没能获得微软更多的股份。

由于盖茨领导有方，艾伦从微软的成功中获益颇丰，成为了全球最富有的一个人。他的大多数财富是在他离开微软以后的几年中建立起来的。

1981年，卡尔•斯托克（Carl Stork）到微软担任盖茨的技术助理，在公司一干就是二十年。他说，“我觉得很惊讶，保罗竟然会觉得，对他所获得的微软股份表示不满会有助于他的名声。以前我们都当保罗是朋友，也很看重他对公司的贡献，不过，毫无疑问，比尔对微软的增长和成功所起的作用要比保罗大得多。”

上世纪八十年代初，艾伦离开了微软公司，只保留了一个高管职位。这本书用大量篇幅讲述了他在此之后的慈善义举和创业努力。他早年取得的微软公司权益不光衍生出了名列世界前茅的一笔巨额财富──他在《福布斯》杂志（Forbes）的富豪榜上排名第57，身家据估计达130亿美元──还为他此后的一切活动提供了资金，不管是收购几支职业运动队，还是成功研发一艘可回收利用的太空船并凭此获奖。

纵观科技产业的全部历史，那些取得成功的公司往往会拥有一个贡献尤其突出的联合创始人。盖茨、苹果公司（Apple Inc.）的斯蒂夫•乔布斯（Steve Jobs）和Facebook公司的马克•扎克伯格（Mark Zuckerberg）都在公司真正腾飞之前送走了自己的联合创始人。另一方面，哈佛商学院（Harvard Business School）教授大卫•尤菲（David Yoffie）指出，早期伙伴关系的重要意义同样不容忽视。

尤菲提到了艾伦鼓励盖茨退学创办微软公司的事情，他说，“要我看，如果没有保罗的话，比尔还不一定会从哈佛辍学呢。我也不知道，要是缺了沃兹尼亚克（Wozniak）这个帮手，斯蒂夫•乔布斯还能不能把苹果公司办起来。”

现年58岁的艾伦离开微软之后的这些年中，同事们普遍认为他和盖茨关系不错。就连艾伦自己都说，两年前，他因罹患非霍奇金淋巴瘤而接受了化疗，康复期间，盖茨是他“来得最勤的访客”之一。这都不算，他还说盖茨“充满关爱，具备一个好朋友的所有特质”。

尽管如此，艾伦还是在书中透露，他离开微软的主要原因是他对盖茨的行为越来越不满意。按照艾伦的描述，盖茨是一个好斗的工头，跟态度温和的他格格不入。以往那些微软发展史当中的说法则是，艾伦之所以会在1982年选择离开公司，是因为他被诊断出了霍奇金氏病，第一次感受到了癌症的威胁。

艾伦说，就在那一年，他无意之中听到了盖茨和微软公司现任CEO斯蒂夫•鲍尔默（Steve Ballmer）之间的一次谈话。盖茨和鲍尔默的谈话发生在华盛顿州贝尔维（Bellevue）的微软公司办公室，说的是艾伦最近效率很低，他们应该给自己和其他股东派发一些认股权，以便摊薄艾伦所持有的公司股份。这时候，正在被他俩念叨的艾伦冲进房间，跟他俩发生了正面冲突。后来，两个人都向艾伦道了歉，并且放弃了原来的计划。

艾伦在书中写道，“我帮着他们办起了公司，这时也仍然是公司管理层的一个活跃成员，只不过受了疾病的影响而已。现在倒好，一个是我的合伙人，一个是我的同事，两个人竟然想合谋把我除掉。没什么好说的，这就是一种唯利是图的投机行为。”微软公司的一名发言人说，鲍尔默对此无可奉告。

不过，按照艾伦的说法，盖茨之前就尝试过削减他在微软公司的股权比例，而且取得了成功。艾伦说，上世纪七十年代中期，辍了学的两个人还在新墨西哥州打拼的时候，盖茨就要求得到合伙公司60%的股份，理由是他在编制软件的过程中功劳更大。那时候，他们是在为早期的MITS Altair 8800电脑编制软件，用的是BASIC编程语言。

艾伦说，他本来以为公司的股份应该一人一半，但还是答应了盖茨的要求。

七年之后，盖茨和艾伦创办了微软公司，建立了正式的合伙关系。当时，盖茨要求把两人的股份比例分别调整为64%和36%，艾伦再一次答应了他的要求。按照艾伦的记述，八十年代初，艾伦成功地开发了一款名为SoftCard的微软产品，于是要求增加自己的持股比例，盖茨却拒绝了艾伦的要求。

盖茨的回答让艾伦非常失望，因为他上十年级的时候就已经认识了上八年级的盖茨，他俩当时都在西雅图一所知名的私立学校就读。

艾伦写道，“那一刻，我的心一下子凉透了。我本来以为我俩的伙伴关系建立在平等的基础之上，现在却发现，比尔把他自己的利益看得比什么都重要。我的搭档打算抢夺尽可能多的份额，抢到之后就再也不会放手，这我可接受不了。”

按照书中的记述，艾伦当时没有再说什么，只是在心里嘀咕，“好吧……可我总有一天会离开这里。”

熟悉这对搭档的人说，盖茨之所以屡次尝试削减艾伦的持股比例，是因为他觉得艾伦工作不够努力，对公司的事业也不够忠诚。这些人还说，就是由于这个原因，盖茨才在两人的第一份合伙协议中加了一个条款，由此就有权在两人之间出现“不可调和的矛盾”的情况下买下艾伦的全部股份。

艾伦的书中也提到了这份协议，但没提及盖茨在协议中增加上述条款的事情。

微软公司越来越大，像盖茨这样一门心思想把公司做大的公司成员也越来越多。他们都愿意没日没夜地工作，愿意睡在办公室里，还愿意为公司的战略和技术决定相互争吵。按照这些人的说法，此时的艾伦越来越厌倦这样的生活，总是拖在其他团队成员的后面。就这样，他渐渐地丧失了在公司待下去的兴趣。艾伦则在自己的书里说，与盖茨的争执让他心力交瘁。他如是写道，“低落的情绪榨干了我对工作的热情，反过来又为盖茨的下一次攻击提供了口实。”他同时指出，盖茨也曾经做过一些努力，想让他留在公司里。

离开微软之后的几十年里，艾伦一直在用自己的财富为自己铺设一条多少有点儿怪异的人生道路。他在生意上的许多投资不是血本无归，就是收益微薄，诸如Charter Communications有线电视公司、Asymetrix软体公司和机上盒制造商Digeo公司之类的尝试都以失败告终。

艾伦还在书中讲到了其他的一些投资尝试，比如购买NBA的波特兰开拓者队（Portland Trailblazers）和美国橄榄球联盟（NFL）的西雅图海鹰队（Seattle Seahawks）。他投资创建了由建筑师弗兰克•盖瑞（Frank Gehry）设计的西雅图摇滚博物馆和科幻博物馆，还在2003年捐资1亿美元建立了非营利的艾伦脑科学研究所（Allen Institute for Brain Science），旨在探索大脑的运作机制。

早在艾伦通过微软致富之前，熟悉他的人就已经注意到，他的兴趣似乎不只是经营软件生意。上世纪七十年代，大卫•邦内尔（David Bunnell）曾经就职于新墨西哥的微仪系统家用电子公司（更广为人知的是公司名字的缩写MITS），与艾伦和盖茨一起工作。他说，艾伦对音乐和文化的兴趣要比盖茨大。

邦内尔说，“从一个更为宽泛的角度来说，他对这个世界更感兴趣。我觉得，跟他比起来，比尔有点儿一根筋。”

Nick Wingfield/Robert A. Guth


（本文版权归道琼斯公司所有，未经许可不得翻译或转载。）


Bill Gates schemed to take shares in Microsoft Corp. (MSFT) from his co-founder during the early days of the software company following his partner's treatment for cancer, according to a new memoir by the billionaire co-founder, Paul Allen.

The allegation is part of a critical portrait in the book of Mr. Gates, with whom Mr. Allen formed a friendship in grade-school that evolved into one of the iconic partnerships of American business. The book, 'Idea Man: A Memoir by the Co-founder of Microsoft,' is scheduled to go on sale on April 17. A draft of the memoir was viewed by The Wall Street Journal. An excerpt of the book appeared on Vanity Fair's Web site early Wednesday.

The book gives a revisionist take on some details of Microsoft's history and the relationship between Mr. Gates and his former partner, the two of whom have long been viewed as cordial if not close friends. The book has created a rift between Mr. Gates and Mr. Allen, say people who know both men. In the book's acknowledgements section, Mr. Allen thanks Mr. Gates along with 17 other people for 'general and logistical assistance.'

The book is 'a very balanced portrayal of their relationship,' said David Postman, a spokesman for Mr. Allen. 'Paul clearly values the input and the ideas and energy of Bill Gates.'

'While my recollection of many of these events may differ from Paul's, I value his friendship and the important contributions he made to the world of technology and at Microsoft,' Mr. Gates said in a written statement.

Mr. Allen's unflattering account of Mr. Gates in the book is already making waves within the tight circle of early Microsoft alumni, with several people who know both men privately expressing confusion about Mr. Allen's motivations for criticizing his old business partner and questioning the accuracy of Mr. Allen's interpretation of certain events. Mr. Allen, for instance, puts himself in meetings that people familiar with the meetings say he never attended. In one case, Mr. Allen visits Palo Alto, Calif. to help woo a computer scientist who would later become one of the Microsoft's most important programmers. People familiar with the meeting said it was Mr. Gates who made the visit. Mr. Postman said that he isn't aware of any errors in the book.

Mr. Allen in the book also positions himself as the spark of many of Microsoft's most important ideas, downplaying Mr. Gates's role in some cases. Woven throughout the book is a bitterness Mr. Allen expresses for not receiving more credit for his work throughout his career and more shares in Microsoft.

Mr. Allen became one of the world's richest people from the success of Microsoft under Mr. Gates' leadership, with the vast majority of his wealth created in the years after he left the company.

'I am surprised that Paul would have felt that it helps his legacy to express dissatisfaction with the share of Microsoft he received,' says Carl Stork, who joined Microsoft in 1981 as a technical assistant to Mr. Gates and worked there for two decades. 'While all of us considered Paul a friend and valued his contribution, there is no question that Bill had a far larger impact on the growth and success of Microsoft than did Paul.'

Much of the book focuses on the philanthropic and entrepreneurial efforts of Mr. Allen since he left Microsoft as an officer in the early 1980s. His early stake in the company created one of the world's greatest fortunes - he ranks 57th on the Forbes magazine list of billionaires, with an estimated $13 billion fortune - and funded everything from his acquisition of multiple professional sports teams to a successful quest to win a prize for building a reusable spacecraft.

Throughout the history of the technology industry, one co-founder often plays an outsized role in the success of their companies. Mr. Gates, Apple Inc.'s Steve Jobs and Facebook Inc.'s Mark Zuckerberg all saw their co-founders leave before their companies truly took off. Yet the importance of those early partnerships can't be overlooked, says David Yoffie, a professor at Harvard Business School.

'I'm not sure Bill would ever have dropped out of Harvard if it wasn't for Paul,' Mr. Yoffie said, referring to Mr. Allen's role in encouraging Mr. Gates to leave college to start Microsoft. 'I don't know whether Steve Jobs, without Wozniak, would have ever gotten things together.'

Messrs. Gates and Allen were widely thought by associates to have a warm relationship in the years since Mr. Allen, 58 years old, left Microsoft. Even Mr. Allen says Mr. Gates was one of his 'most regular visitors' when Mr. Allen was recovering from chemotherapy two years ago from non-Hodgkin's lymphoma, describing him as 'everything you'd want from a friend, caring and concerned.'

Yet, in the book, Mr. Allen also reveals that his decision to leave Microsoft was prompted largely by his growing disenchantment with the behavior of Mr. Gates, whom he portrays as a confrontational taskmaster who clashed with Mr. Allen's low-key style. Past histories of Microsoft have said Mr. Allen's departure from the company was sparked by his first brush with cancer in 1982, when he was diagnosed with Hodgkin's disease.

In that year, Mr. Allen says he eavesdropped on a discussion in the Microsoft offices in Bellevue, Wash., between Mr. Gates and Steve Ballmer, now the company's CEO, in which he heard the two men talking about Mr. Allen's recent lack of productivity and how they might dilute his equity in the company by issuing options to themselves and other shareholders. Mr. Allen said burst into the room and confronted Messrs. Gates and Ballmer, both of whom later apologized to him and backed down from their plan.

'I had helped start the company and was still an active member of management, though limited by my illness, and now my partner and my colleague were scheming to rip me off,' he says in the book. 'It was mercenary opportunism, plain and simple.' A spokesman for Microsoft said Mr. Ballmer had no comment.

Earlier efforts by Mr. Gates to whittle down his partner's stake in Microsoft were successful though, according to Mr. Allen. In the mid-1970s, when the two college drop-outs were based in New Mexico, Mr. Allen says Mr. Gates asked for 60% of their partnership because of his greater contributions to the creation of software for running the BASIC programming language on an early PC, the MITS Altair 8800.

Mr. Allen says he had assumed that their partnership was evenly split, but he agreed to Mr. Gates' request.

Several years later when Messrs. Gates and Allen established Microsoft as a formal partnership, Mr. Gates asked to change their respective shares in the business to a 64-36 split, a demand to which Mr. Allen again agreed. But in the early 1980s Mr. Gates rebuffed Mr. Allen after the latter man asked for an increase in his own Microsoft shares after his work on a successful Microsoft product called SoftCard, Mr. Allen writes.

Mr. Allen was deeply disappointed in the response from Mr. Gates, whom he had known since Mr. Allen was a tenth grader and Mr. Gates was an eighth grader at a prestigious private school in Seattle.

'In that moment, something died for me,' Mr. Allen writes. 'I'd thought that our partnership was based on fairness, but now I saw that Bill's self-interest overrode all other considerations. My partner was out to grab as much of the pie as possible and hold on to it, and that was something I could not accept.'

Mr. Allen said he sucked it up and thought, 'OK...but one day I'm out of here,' the book says.

Mr. Gates's attempts to lower Mr. Allen's stake in the company reflected concerns with Mr. Allen wasn't working hard enough and wasn't commitment to the company, say people familiar with the relationship. That was one reason, these people say, that Mr. Gates put a provision in their first partnership agreement that would allow him to buy out Mr. Allen if he thought there were 'irreconcilable differences' between the two men.

Mr. Allen mentions the agreement in the book, without saying why Mr. Gates inserted the clause.

As Microsoft grew, it attracted more people like Mr. Gates who were single-mindedly focused on building Microsoft. They were willing to work around the clock, sleep in the office and battle each other over strategy and technical decisions. Mr. Allen, these people say, grew increasingly tired of that life and lagged the rest of group, they said. He gradually lost interest in remaining at the company. In the book, Mr. Allen says that fights with Mr. Gates took a toll on him. 'My sinking morale sapped my enthusiasm for my work, which in turn could precipitate Bill's next attack,' he wrote. He noted that Mr. Gates tried to keep him at the company.

Mr. Allen has spent the decades since his departure from Microsoft using his wealth to carve a somewhat whimsical path for himself. Many of his business investments, like the cable company Charter Communications, software company Asymetrix Corp. and set-top box maker Digeo Inc., have either flopped or fared poorly for him.

Mr. Allen devotes portions of his book to investments like the Portland Trailblazers NBA franchise and the Seattle Seahawks NFL team. He finance the creation of rock n' roll and science fiction museums in Seattle designed by architect Frank Gehry, while he invested $100 million in 2003 to form a non-profit called the Allen Institute for Brain Science to study how brains work.

Even before Microsoft made him wealthy, it appeared to people who knew him that Mr. Allen had broader interests than running a software business. David Bunnell, who worked in New Mexico in the 1970s with Messrs. Allen and Gates at the pioneering PC maker Micro Instrumentation and Telemetry Systems, better known as MITS, said Mr. Allen was more passionate about music and culture than his business partner.

'He was more interested, in a broader sense, in the world,' Mr. Bunnell says. 'I think Bill is more single-minded.' -By Nick Wingfield and Robert A. Guth

Nick Wingfield/Robert A. Guth

Posted by at 没有评论:

G20南京会议关注人民币 Sarkozy urges G20 to hasten monetary reform

 

代表全球最大货币的国家之间的国际紧张周四仍处于高位，此前20国集团(G20)政府首脑和财政部长在中国举行的一个研讨会未能讨论出结果。

各国领导人、财政部长和学者汇聚南京，出席一个“高级别研讨会”，讨论国际货币体系的改革——这是2011年法国担任G20轮值主席国期间的中心主题。但是，各方的分歧仍十分明显，这些分歧曾阻碍了各国就全球贸易失衡拿出合作解决方案。

美国财长蒂姆•盖特纳(Tim Geithner)指出，国际货币体系的问题在于一种不对称：一方面是自由浮动的货币，另一方面是“某些新兴市场……受到严格管理的汇率制度和非常广泛的资本管制”——这显然是指中国。

他补充说：“汇率政策上的这种不对称，制造了许多紧张。它在那些汇率低估的新兴经济体加剧了通胀风险。最后，它产生了保护主义压力。”

尽管法国总统尼古拉•萨科齐(Nicolas Sarkozy)敦促G20国家不要“失去在危机期间积累起来的动力”以防范未来的危机，但作为东道主的中国方面并未呼应他的紧迫感。

中国副总理王岐山强调了中方的看法，即全球货币改革是一个“长期复杂的过程”，只能逐步探索和推进。主要国家之间这种令人局促的僵局，堪称2月份G20财长和央行行长会议的重演。

一些与会者私下形容这个会议是金融危机以来最缺乏建设性的G20会议之一。各方难以就衡量全球贸易失衡的正确方式达成一致，使会议无从讨论有望解决失衡的政策。

在南京，萨科齐开启了一场有关特别提款权（SDR，由美元、欧元、日元和英镑等一篮子货币组成的储备资产）是否应当包括人民币的讨论。

英国央行行长默文•金(Mervyn King)等许多人士警告称，各方不应被改变特别提款权篮子构成之类的问题分心。无论如何，各方对这个构想（作为一种继续推进更具实质性的全球讨论的手段）并不热心。

中国对过快走向在SDR篮子中包括人民币的构想已趋于冷淡。同时，在此类变动上拥有否决权的盖特纳设定了一些中方不可能接受的条件。

盖特纳表示，只有那些具有弹性汇率、独立央行，并且允许资本自由流动的国家，其货币才应当包括在SDR篮子中。中国不符合这些标准中的任何一项。

译者/和风


http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001037858


 

International tensions between countries representing the world’s largest currencies remained high on Thursday after an inconclusive seminar of G20 heads of government and finance ministers in China.

World leaders, finance ministers and academics had gathered at a “high-level seminar” in Nanjing to discuss reform of the international monetary system, central to France’s chairmanship of the G20 in 2011. But the divisions that have prevented a co-operative solution to global trade imbalances remained evident.

Tim Geithner, US Treasury secretary, identified the problem in the international monetary system to be the asymmetry between freely floating currencies and the “tightly managed exchange rate regimes and very extensive capital controls” of “some emerging markets” – a clear reference to China.

He added: “This asymmetry in exchange rate policies creates a lot of tension. It intensifies inflation risk in those emerging economies with undervalued exchange rates. And, finally, it generates protectionist pressures.”

While Nicolas Sarkozy, French president, urged the G20 countries not to “lose the impetus built up in the midst of the crisis” to prevent future crises, the Chinese hosts did not share his urgency.

Wang Qishan, Chinese vice-premier, emphasised his nation’s view that global monetary reform was a “long and complex process” that could only be explored and implemented gradually. The uneasy stand-off between the main players was a repetition of February’s meeting of G20 finance ministers and central bank governors.

Described privately by those taking part as one of the least constructive G20 gatherings since the crisis, the delegates found it difficult to agree on the right way to measure global trade imbalances, preventing the grouping from discussing policies that might lead to their resolution.

In Nanjing, Mr Sarkozy instigated a discussion on whether special drawing rights – a reserve asset comprised of a basket of dollars, euros, yen and sterling – should also include the renminbi.

Even though many figures including Mervyn King, Bank of England governor, have warned that “we should not get sidetracked by issues such as changing the composition of the SDR basket”, there was little enthusiasm for this idea as a means of keeping more substantive global discussions on track.

China has cooled to the idea of moving too quickly towards inclusion of the renminbi in the SDR basket and Mr Geithner, who holds a veto on any such move, laid out conditions that would be unacceptable to the Chinese.

Mr Geithner said currencies should only be included in the SDR basket if their countries had flexible exchange rates, independent central banks and allowed free movement of capital flows. China does not meet any of those criteria.


http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001037858/en

Posted by at 没有评论:

鲁尼高薪从何而来？Wayne Rooney and Ricardo forge the ultimate dream team

 

韦恩•鲁尼(Wayne Rooney)最近与曼联(Manchester United)签下了新合约。这份合同保证在4年的有效期内，鲁尼将获得5000万英镑，相当于周薪25万英镑。作为一名球员，鲁尼禀赋出众，但他没有什么其它明显的才能。如果不是干上了足球这一行，他的收入可能会很一般。职业球员的生活激动人心，他们是媒体关注的焦点，也是美女们倾心的对象。所以，即使拿的薪水少很多，鲁尼可能还是愿意当一名职业球员。

在许多人心目中，斯坦利•马修斯爵士(Sir Stanley Matthews)是英格兰最伟大的球员。他的自传中讲述了一种截然不同的生活。20世纪60年代早期，当他职业生涯结束时，他当时的最高周薪仅为20英镑。他踢过的最伟大的一场比赛，是1948年在汉普敦公园球场举行的战后庆典比赛，对阵双方是苏格兰和英格兰，现场共有15万名观众（结果英格兰获胜）。当时英格兰足球总会(Football Association)寄出的一封信中，附上了马修斯的出场费14英镑（按当前价格计算约合500英镑），以及从斯托克赶往格拉斯哥的火车票钱（二等车厢）。马修斯想要报销在卡莱尔车站餐厅喝茶所花的6便士（合今天的1英镑），这一请求却遭到了拒绝：此项花销不可报销。

鲁尼与马修斯之间的收入差额叫做经济租金(economic rent)。经济租金是指从事一项活动得到的实际收入，与获取从事这项活动所需资源的回报之间的差额。这个名称带有误导性，原因在于人们最初阐述这一概念时，农业还是经济活动的主要形式。一般认为，这个概念是英格兰经济学家大卫•李嘉图(David Ricardo)提出的，但其实苏格兰乡绅兼学者詹姆斯•安德森(James Anderson)比他早50年便提出了这个概念。在这一场较量中，获胜的是苏格兰。

"苏格兰西海岸谷物价格总是高于东海岸，我（安德森）想问，其原因何在？难道是因为洛锡安地主与克莱德谷地主相比，前者更加仁厚，而后者更为贪婪？"他解释道，其实不然。"并不是土地的租金决定了农产品价格，而是农产品价格决定了土地的租金。这似乎是一个需要加以解释的悖论。"

安德森随后对这一悖论的阐述，在250年后的今天仍经得起检验。对谷物的需求，决定了需要开垦多少土地：为满足这种需求而投入生产的最差的土地，只能赚回生产的成本，而好一点的土地则能赚回符合其优势价值的租金。谁从这些收入中获益是一个政治问题。鲁尼的收入水平，部分源自于足球运动的收入规模，另一部分则取决于他的经纪人的讨价还价能力。马修斯的二等车厢车票，并不是一个无足轻重的细节，而是展示了马修斯工作的社会背景——我们可以猜想英格兰足总官员前往格拉斯哥坐的不会是二等车厢。洛锡安地主的生活方式是由决定该地区谷物需求的经济力量，以及允许当地士绅抽取大部分收入的封建制度共同决定的。经济租金的数额和分配是政治经济相互作用的产物。

正如安德森率先提出的那样，要讨论经济租金的金额和分配，首先要理解经济租金产生的机制。他曾经问道"如果克莱德谷的绅士们，表现出异乎寻常的爱国心和鼓励制造业的热忱，下定决心要降低租金"，结果会如何？谷物价格会因此而下降吗？（提出这个问题时，他仿佛预见到了银行家高额奖金所引发的公愤。）绝对不会。"有洞察力的读者能够自己勾勒出完整的图景，"他这样总结道。当今的读者也必须这样做。

译者/何黎


http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001037844


 

Wayne Rooney recently signed a new contract with Manchester United. The agreement guaranteed him £50m over its four-year life, equivalent to £250,000 a week. Mr Rooney is an exceptionally gifted footballer, but has few other evident talents. If he were not employed as a footballer, his earnings would probably be modest. And the life of a professional footballer is an exciting one, which attracts media attention and glamorous women. So it is likely that Mr Rooney would be willing to play professional football even if he were paid much less.

Many think of Sir Stanley Matthews as England's greatest footballer. His autobiography describes a rather different lifestyle. At the end of his career, in the early 1960s, he was receiving the then maximum wage of £20 a week. One of his greatest matches was a postwar celebration in which Scotland met England in 1948 at Hampden Park before a crowd of 150,000 people (England won). A letter from the Football Association encloses Matthews's match fee of £14 (about £500 at current prices) and his (second-class) rail fare from Stoke to Glasgow. But his claim for 6d (about £1 today) spent on a cup of tea in the station buffet at Carlisle was rejected: not a reimbursable expense.

The difference between what Rooney is paid and Matthews was paid is economic rent. Economic rent is the difference between actual earnings in an activity and the returns necessary to attract resources to that activity. The name seems misleading. The explanation is that early elaboration of the idea dates back to when agriculture was a principal form of economic activity. The concept is generally attributed to the English economist David Ricardo, but the idea was set out 50 years earlier by a Scottish gentleman farmer and scholar, James Anderson. Scotland won this one.

"Whence comes it, I [Anderson] may ask, that the price of grain is always higher on the west than on the east coast of Scotland? Are the proprietors in the Lothians more tender-hearted and less avaricious than those of Clydesdale?" No, he explains, "it is not the rent of the land that determines the price of its produce, but it is the price of that produce which determines the rent of the land. This seems to be a paradox that deserves to be explained".

Mr Anderson's subsequent account of that paradox stands up well 250 years later. The demand for corn determined how much land had to be cultivated: the worst land that needed to be brought into production to satisfy that demand would earn only the cost of production, and better land would earn rents that measured the value of their superiority. Who benefited from these earnings was a political issue. Rooney's earnings are partly the result of the scale of revenues that football generates, and partly a result of the ability of his agent to bargain for them. Matthews' second-class ticket is not an unimportant detail – we can assume that the officers of the Football Association did not travel second class to Glasgow – but a demonstration of the social milieu within which Matthews worked. The lifestyle of the proprietors of Lothian was the result of a combination of the economic forces that determined the regional demand for corn and a feudal regime that enabled the local gentry to extract a substantial fraction of the benefits. The amount and distribution of economic rent is the product of the interplay of politics and economics.

As Mr Anderson was the first to argue, to comment on the amount and distribution of economic rent we must begin by understanding the mechanisms that gave rise to it. He might have been anticipating the furore on bankers' bonuses when he asked what might happen if "the gentlemen of Clydesdale, from an extraordinary exertion of patriotism and an inordinate desire to encourage manufactures, should resolve to lower the rents". Would the price of grain fall in consequence of this? By no means. "Readers of penetration will be able themselves to finish the sketch," he concluded. They must do so again today.


http://www.ftchinese.com/story/001037844/en

Posted by at 没有评论:

2011年3月30日

中美能源CEO索科尔辞职 巴菲特亲撰新闻稿

这个消息让我吃惊，我本来认为索科尔最有希望成为巴菲特的接班人。


巴菲特热门继任候选人大卫-索科尔离职声明

腾讯财经讯 北京时间3月31日早间，一直以来被认为是亿万富翁巴菲特热门继任人选的大卫-索科尔(David Sokol)突然宣布辞职，这让所有人都倍感震惊。以下是大卫-索科尔助手对其离职原因所作出的声明：

“正 如我过去向你们所提到的那样，我的目标是希望能在自己接下来的工作里，将更多的精力有效的投入到家族事业里，从而为我的后代创造出好的机会，并为我一直以 来所追求的慈善事业理念提供资金支持。除此之外，我没有其他更进一步的打算了，因为我在伯克希尔哈撒韦的首要使命就是专注我的工作，并将其当做第一要务来 抓。”（��）

索科尔辞职 巴菲特亲撰新闻稿

图为大卫-索科尔(David Sokol)和比亚迪总裁王传福图为大卫-索科尔(David Sokol)和比亚迪总裁王传福(专栏)

　　新浪财经讯 美国东部时间3月30日(北京时间3月31日)消息，股神巴菲特备受关注的接班人选大卫-索科尔(David Sokol)周三突然宣布辞职，原因是计划 投资家庭和创建慈善基金。对此，巴菲特亲自撰写新闻稿，除去对昔日爱将的肯定之外，也诚恳地澄清外界对索科尔拥有路博润股票是引发其辞职的猜测。

　　译文全文如下：

　　这是一篇不同寻常的新闻稿。首先，我会像写一封信那样写这篇稿件；其次，它包括两部分，都是关于伯克希尔子公司董事长大卫-索科尔。

　　3月28日当天晚些时候，我收到了由大卫的辞职信，由他的助理转交给我。大卫辞职的理由如下：“正如我在过去跟您提到过，我的目标是利用日后职 业生涯的时间去投资我的家庭，用这样的方式创造出不朽的权益价值，并希望通过一个企业，为我的后代和慈善基金投资创造机会。我没有比这更详细的计划，因为 伯克希尔-哈撒韦公司是我第一个也是唯一一个商业重点。”

　　我从来没有要求他辞职，这使我感到意外。大约两年前，大卫曾两次对我提出过辞职。每一次，他都对我说出的都是跟周一提交的那封辞职信同样的理由。那两次，我和其他董事会成员劝他留下来。伯克希尔今天能够更有价值，是因为我们过去努力所取得的成功。

　　大卫的贡献无以伦比。在中美能源公司，他和Greg Abel 已经展现了在公共事业领域管理者的最佳表现。在NetJets，大卫没有借助伯 克希尔，成功地恢复了这家临近破产的公司的经营。他一直为Johns Manville提供巨大帮助，几年前，大卫改善了新的管理和监督工作。

　　最后，在1月14日或15日的时候，大卫把收购路博润(Lubrizol)的想法告诉我。起初，我不以为然。但在1月25日，他提供给我与该公 司CEO詹姆斯-汉姆布瑞克(James Hambrick)洽谈报告，我的想法迅速升温。尽管收购要约完全是我的决定，并在3月13日得到伯克希尔董事 会的支持，但是没有大卫早期的努力就不会有这次收购。

　　这将我们带到第二部分的事实面前。在我们第一次谈论路博润时候，大卫提到他拥有该公司的股票。这是顺便讲的话，我没有询问他购买股票的日期或者控股程度。

　　在3月19日我出发去亚洲之前，我才知道大卫在12月14日第一次购买2300股路博润股票，并于12月21日卖出该股票。随后，在1月5日、6日和7日，他以每股104美元的价格下单购买10万股路博润股票，最终成交96,060股。

　　大卫在跟我讨论路博润之前已经购买该公司股票，他并不知道我会对收购路博润作出什么反应。此外，当然，他也不知道如果我有兴趣收购，路博润将会 有什么反应。并且，他知道尽管他提出这个建议，但他在伯克希尔没有决定权。这将是我和查理-芒格来决定，须经伯克希尔董事会批准。而大卫并不是其中的成 员。

　　直到1月24日，我发给大卫一个简短的说明，表示我对是否购买路博润仍表怀疑，并且表达出我对中美能源作出的另一个重大收购的偏好。在大卫向我汇报了1月25日他和詹姆斯-哈姆布里克的晚餐谈话之后，我才真正对收购路博润产生兴趣。

　　大卫和我都不觉得他的路博润股票是以任何非法的形式购买的。他告诉我，这不是他决定辞职的原因。

　　大卫的辞职信让我很吃惊，尽管在此之前，他曾经两次提出辞职。我在前一天跟他谈过各种运营事宜，那时并没有得到任何他打算辞职的暗示。这一次，我并没有试图劝说他放弃辞职决定，并接受了他的辞呈。

　　由于大卫的辞职生效，格雷格-阿贝尔(Greg Abel)，现任中美能源控股公司总裁兼首席执行官将成为公司主席；托德-拉巴 (Todd Raba)，Johns Manville公司总裁兼首席执行官将成功公司主席；约旦-汉塞尔 (Jordan Hansell)，NetJets公司总裁，将成为该公司董事长兼首席执行官。

　　我在这份声明中没有任何隐瞒。因此，如果这个问题在未来受到质疑，我将会简单地请质疑人来参考这个版本。(段皎宇(微博 专栏) 发自美国旧金山)

　　原文如下：

　　This press release will be unusual. First, I will write it almost as if it were a letter. Second, it will contain two sets of facts, both about Dave Sokol, Chairman of several Berkshire subsidiaries。

　　Late in the day on March 28, I received a letter of resignation from Dave,delivered by his assistant. His reasons were as follows:“As I have mentioned to you in the past, it is my goal to utilize the

　　time remaining in my career to invest my family’s resources in such a way as to create enduring equity value and hopefully an enterprise which will provide opportunity for my descendents and funding for my philanthropic interests. I have no more detailed plan than this because my obligations from Berkshire Hathaway have been my first and only business priority。”

　　I had not asked for his resignation, and it came as a surprise to me. Twice before, most recently two or so years ago, Dave had talked to me of resigning. In each case he had given me the same reasons that he laid out in his Monday letter. Both times, I and other Board members persuaded him to stay. Berkshire is far more valuable today because we were successful in those efforts。

　　Dave’s contributions have been extraordinary. At MidAmerican, he and Greg Abel have delivered the best performance of any managers in the public utility field. At NetJets, Dave resurrected an operation that was destined for bankruptcy, absent Berkshire’s deep pockets. He has been of enormous help in the operation of Johns Manville, where he installed new management some years ago and oversaw major change。

　　Finally, Dave brought the idea for purchasing Lubrizol to me on either January 14 or 15. Initially, I was unimpressed, but after his report of a January 25 talk with its CEO, James Hambrick, I quickly warmed to the idea. Though the offer to purchase was entirely my decision, supported by Berkshire’s Board on March 13, it would not have occurred without Dave’s early efforts。

　　That brings us to our second set of facts. In our first talk about Lubrizol, Dave mentioned that he owned stock in the company. It was a passing remark and I did not ask him about the date of his purchase or the extent of his holdings。

　　Shortly before I left for Asia on March 19, I learned that Dave first purchased 2,300 shares of Lubrizol on December 14, which he then sold on December 21. Subsequently, on January 5, 6 and 7, he bought 96,060 shares pursuant to a 100,000- share order he had placed with a $104 per share limit price。

　　Dave’s purchases were made before he had discussed Lubrizol with me and with no knowledge of how I might react to his idea. In addition, of course, he did not know what Lubrizol’s reaction would be if I developed an interest. Furthermore, he knew he would have no voice in Berkshire’s decision once he suggested the idea; it would be up to me and Charlie Munger, subject to ratification by the Berkshire Board of which Dave is not a member。

　　As late as January 24, I sent Dave a short note indicating my skepticism about making an offer for Lubrizol and my preference for another substantial acquisition for which MidAmerican had made a bid. Only after Dave reported on the January 25 dinner conversation with James Hambrick did I get interested in the acquisition of Lubrizol。

　　Neither Dave nor I feel his Lubrizol purchases were in any way unlawful. He has told me that they were not a factor in his decision to resign。

　　Dave’s letter was a total surprise to me, despite the two earlier resignation talks. I had spoken with him the previous day about various operating matters and received no hint of his intention to resign. This time, however, I did not attempt to talk him out of his decision and accepted his resignation。

　　Effective with Dave’s resignation, Greg Abel, presently President and CEO of MidAmerican Holding Company, will become its Chairman; Todd Raba, President and CEO of Johns Manville, will become its Chairman; and Jordan Hansell, President of NetJets, will become its Chairman and CEO。

　　I have held back nothing in this statement. Therefore, if questioned about this matter in the future, I will simply refer the questioner back to this release.  – End-


 

Buffett on Sokol

  • MARCH 30, 2011, wall street journal


[0330sokol4] David Yellen

David Sokol, left, and Warren Buffett.

Longtime Warren Buffett lieutenant and possible successor David Sokol resigned from his position at Berkshire Hathaway Wednesday. Take a look back at Mr. Buffett's comments about Mr. Sokol over the years.

“If I only had two draft picks out of American business, Walter Scott and David Sokol are the ones I would choose for this industry.” Mr. Buffett on Mr. Sokol when announcing Berkshire Hathaway's plan to buy MidAmerican in October 1999

“His leadership has been transforming: Debt has already been reduced to $1.4 billion, and, after suffering a staggering loss of $711 million in 2009, the company is now solidly profitable.” Mr. Buffett on Mr. Sokol's role at MidAmerican, in his letter to shareholders on 2009 performance

“He gets more done in a day than probably I get done in a week, and I'm not kidding.”Mr. Buffett on Mr. Sokol in an interview with Fortune magazine in August 2010

“I don't think there's a record that comes close to that of David at MidAmerican [in the utility industry].” Mr. Buffett on Mr. Sokol in a February 2010 interview

“I am proud of what has been accomplished for our society by Matt Rose at BNSF and by David Sokol and Greg Abel at MidAmerican. I am also both proud and grateful for what they have accomplished for Berkshire shareholders.” Mr. Buffett on Mr. Sokol's role at MidAmerican, in his annual letter to shareholders, Feb. 26, 2011

“I can't overstate the breadth and importance of Dave Sokol's achievements at this company” Mr. Buffett on Mr. Sokol's work at NetJets, in his annual letter to shareholders, Feb. 26, 2011

“Neither Dave nor I feel his Lubrizol purchases were in any way unlawful. He has told me that they were not a factor in his decision to resign.” Mr. Buffett on Mr. Sokol's resignation decision March 30, 2011


http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_53c8e9ab0100px79.html
Posted by at 没有评论:

唐桥的一段采访(2)

2011年03月16日

去年年底，五粮液、茅台等高端白酒争相涨价，引发市场关注。近日，五粮液集团总裁、五粮液股份公司董事长唐桥接受记者专访时称，五粮液等高端白酒依然具有涨价的空间。他说涨价是一把"双刃剑"，不是企业说了算，而是由市场决定，今年是否涨价还要看条件。他还认为，白酒行业的整合时代已经来临，并购整合将会作为公司的战略来思考。

关于白酒涨价

衡量高端白酒的标准是价格

新京报：综合出厂价格和终端价格来看，五粮液去年到今年有三次提价，涨价的原因是什么？

唐桥：去年五粮液的原材料价格上涨了26%，我们的成本大幅度增加。但由于国务院出台"国十六条"，作为国企，当时决定五粮液不再提高出厂价格，由企业自己消化成本增加因素。

但另一方面，还要考虑高端消费人群的问题。比如，我邀请一位尊贵的客人吃饭，我希望喝酒的时候能够喝第一品牌的高端白酒。衡量高端和第一品牌的是价格，如果五粮液的价格低于其他品牌太多，人家势必要选择别的品牌。这对企业来说也是一种压力，所以市场上同类产品涨起来了，我们的终端价格也就提上去了，主要是为满足这部分高端人群。

涨价是一把"双刃剑"，不是企业说了算，而是由市场决定。涨价一方面增加了利润，消化了成本增加因素；另一方面，如果消费者不接受，则可能造成消费者接受的价格与商品实际价格的倒挂，这对企业不利。我们提价主要考虑市场空间有多大，消费者是否接受。

新京报：五粮液是否还有涨价的市场空间？

唐桥：肯定还是有一定上涨空间的，五粮液是一种稀缺的酒。

新京报：五粮液今年还会提价吗？

唐桥：这个要看情况，我今年的压力很大，国家出台"十二五"规划要求改善民生，提高劳动报酬在初次分配中的比重。中央提完要求，企业就要自己挖掘潜力去执行。因此我就要算账，首先五粮液是上市公司，我要保证投资者的利益；其次，职工的利益也要考虑，要让职工享受公司收入增长的成果，所以公司提出职工的收入增长15%；第三，政府要对我进行考核，五粮液税收占宜宾市的一半以上，政府下达的任务，公司要全力完成。

今年是否涨价还是要看条件，只要消费者能接受，五粮液就有提价的空间。但如果消费者不能接受，同时我们又能靠企业自身挖掘潜力将成本上涨因素消化掉，保证投资者、职工和政府的利益，那就没必要提价。

关于同业竞争

与茅台既有竞争又有合作

新京报：五粮液的市场定位是什么，奢侈品？

唐桥：五粮液从来都没有将自己定位成奢侈品，与三四万元一瓶的拉菲比起来，1000块钱以上不应该算作奢侈品，但五粮液面向的确实是高端消费者。五粮液的生产是精益求精，生产一吨酒，只有10%能做五粮液。我们一年产酒13万吨左右，五粮液只有1万多吨，剩下来的有五粮春和五粮醇等。因为我们国家已经有一部分人先富起来了，他们的要求、收入水平和消费水平不一样。这一万多吨五粮液主要面向他们。而其他类型的酒就根据价格做成不同的产品来满足不同的消费者。

新京报：目前高端市场竞争的主要对手是茅台。

唐桥：白酒行业中民族企业的两面大旗需要茅台和五粮液扛起来，五粮液跟茅台有竞争，但更多的应该是合作。茅台是酱香型白酒的老大，五粮液是浓香型白酒的龙头。现在白酒行业的第一品牌只有我们两个，我们如果互相诋毁、恶性竞争，则不利于整个行业。

茅台与五粮液的竞争主要是在争取高端消费群体方面，高端消费群体就这么多，不喝茅台就喝五粮液，作为企业来讲，我们比的是理念、售后服务和对市场的管理。

关于白酒出口

出口五粮液出厂价便宜百元

新京报：今年五粮液集团将加大在海外的投入，作为稀缺酒的五粮液在国内市场的流通岂不是更少了？

唐桥：是的。五粮液出口有两个原因。首先是政府要求出口，每年都会给我们下达出口任务；第二是企业自身原因，作为一家酒类龙头企业我们有责任走出去，我们每年出口的五粮液在1千吨以上。

出口海外市场的五粮液出厂价格比国内市场的出厂价格要便宜上百块钱。国外消费五粮液等白酒的几乎都是华人。白酒不是一个国家支持性的行业，我们企业出口还是单兵作战。酒与文化有关，白酒要打开海外市场，首先要推广中国文化，而文化的推广应该是政府的责任。

关于行业整合

每种香型只需留十个品牌

新京报：你如何看待目前的白酒行业和整个白酒市场？

唐桥：整个白酒市场呈现三个特点。首先是白酒企业多，据统计，我国白酒企业大约有37000多家；第二是品牌多，在3万多家企业中有将近10万个品牌；第三是白酒企业的门槛低，因此造成白酒企业非常离散，集中度不高。

在我看来，白酒行业的品牌不应该超过50个。五大香型中每种香型保留10个品牌就够了，然后按照价位的不同，对每种香型中的品牌从高端到低端进行排列。这样消费者对品牌的诉求就比较清楚，也容易有针对性地作出选择。

在发达国家的成熟行业中，几乎都是几个品牌就能支撑一个行业。而我国白酒行业的竞争已经无序化，同时很多白酒企业难以达到食品安全条件，造成粮食浪费和严重污染。目前规模以上白酒企业不足500家。在这种情况下，白酒行业的整合时代已经来临。

新京报：白酒行业的整合面临哪些难题？

唐桥：白酒行业只靠企业自己整合是很难的。首先在税收方面，现在财政是分灶吃饭。假如五粮液作为国有企业去外省兼并，兼并后税收是对方的。（四川政府）肯定对我们有意见。过去有些企业来找我们，希望五粮液兼并他们，但我们是国有企业，首先应得到地方政府的同意。

其次是不同地域在文化和口感方面存在差异。白酒跟啤酒不同，啤酒的口感基本一样，白酒的工艺和原料决定了它有不同香型。比如，四川白酒的香味远高于其他地域的白酒，因为四川菜属麻辣，需要靠白酒的香味将麻辣压下去。而华东地区的菜属清淡偏甜，该地区的白酒香味就淡些。白酒跟一个地域的文化和口感有很大关系。如果不考虑这些，兼并就会失败。

现在有些省希望将自己的白酒企业做大，不希望其他省的大企业去兼并。比如江苏省就有意成立苏酒集团，希望将双沟、洋河等几大名酒整合在一起。我的看法是每个省都可以先整合自己省内的白酒企业，将企业做大，如果有必要再跨省并购整合。

新京报：五粮液有并购整合的意向吗？

唐桥：五粮液今年还不会整合，但会把并购整合作为公司战略来思考。四川政府提出建设"白酒金三角"，如果要把四川的白酒产业做好，迟早要有整合的这一天，要靠政府下决心推动。

我在2007年就提出白酒行业要走整合的道路。目前四川白酒的"六朵金花"自相残杀，四川生产白酒具有得天独厚的条件，但白酒企业恶性竞争，将白酒资源以基酒的形式低价卖给外省的企业，而别的企业将品牌建立起来就可以高价卖出。如果四川的白酒企业不整合，将始终处于产业链的低端。四川的白酒要走出去必须靠"抱拳头"。

本报记者 李蕾唐桥的一段采访(2)


http://blog.sina.com.cn/s/blog_4ed5b6b90100r3ay.html
Posted by at 没有评论:
订阅： 博文 (Atom)