評論
打印
The problem is what it leaves out. These days, the value of a firm lies as much in its reputation, its processes,
問題是它遺漏了什么。如今，一家公司的價值取決于其公司名譽、進程、
the know-how of staff and relationships with customers and suppliers as in tangible assets.
員工的專業(yè)技能以及客戶和供應(yīng)商之間的關(guān)系以及其有形資產(chǎn)。
Putting an accounting value on these intangibles is notoriously tricky. By their nature, they have unclear boundaries.
給這些無形資產(chǎn)定一個帳面價值很難。就其本質(zhì)而言，它們的界限并不明確。
Not every dollar of R&D or advertising spending can be ascribed to a well-defined asset, such as a brand or patent.
不是每一分花在調(diào)研或廣告上的錢都可以被歸為有明確定義的資產(chǎn)，如一個品牌或?qū)＠?/div>
That is in large part why, with a few exceptions, such spending is treated as a running cost, like rent or electricity.
這就是為什么（也有少數(shù)例外）這類開支被當做一種經(jīng)營成本，如房租或電費。
Increasingly price is detached from book value. The median price-to-book of S&P 500 stocks is 3.0.
價格逐漸被脫離賬面價值。S&P 500的中間股價與賬面價值是3.0。
But plenty of well-known companies, whose competitive edge rests on brands or patents, have much higher ratios or even negative book values.
但是很多競爭優(yōu)勢依賴于品牌或?qū)＠闹颈嚷矢撸踔临~面價值是負值。
McDonald's has considerable brand value, which is not on its balance-sheet. It also has property assets that have been fully depreciated.
麥當勞品牌價值巨大，但這種價值沒有體現(xiàn)在其資產(chǎn)負債表中。它也有已被完全折舊的不動產(chǎn)。
The effect of mergers is to make things murkier.
企業(yè)合并的效果是讓事情變得更加模糊。
If, say, one firm pays $100m for another that has $30m of tangible assets, the residual $70m is counted as an intangible asset—
如果假設(shè)一家公司出資一億美元收購另一家擁有3千萬美元有形資產(chǎn)的公司，剩余的7千萬將算作是無形資產(chǎn)—
either as brand value, if that can be gauged, or as "goodwill". That distorts comparisons.
要么是品牌價值（如果這個可以被測量的話），要么是“商譽”。這就扭曲了比較。
A firm that has acquired brands by merger will have those reflected in its book value, says Simon Harris, of GMO, a fund-management firm;
對于通過合并收購品牌的公司而言，這些將會反應(yīng)在其賬面價值上，基金管理公司GMO的西蒙·哈里斯說到；
a firm that has developed its own brands will not. Share buy-backs make things murkier still. For any firm with a price-to-book greater than one,
而發(fā)展自己品牌的公司則不會。股票回購還是會讓事情更加模糊。對于任何一家股價與賬面價值大于一的公司而言，
a buy-back will diminish book by proportionately more than it lowers the value of outstanding stock. So price-to-book rises further.
回購會減少賬面價值，其差值多于其降低的已發(fā)行股份的價值。所以股價與賬面價值會進一步增加。
Some have called for accounting rules to change. But the more leeway a company has to turn day-to-day costs into capital assets,
一些人呼吁改變會計規(guī)則。但是一家公司需要將日常成本轉(zhuǎn)化為固定資產(chǎn)的回旋余地越多，
the more scope there is to fiddle with reported earnings. Better to spur the disclosure of spending that adds to intangible value.
在收入報告中弄虛作假的范圍就越大。最好是鼓勵披露添加至無形資產(chǎn)中的開支。
Analysts can then make their own judgments. Mr Harris finds that adjusting book value to reflect past R&D
那么分析師就可以做出自己的判斷。哈里斯發(fā)現(xiàn)調(diào)整賬面價值以反映過去調(diào)研
and advertising spending makes for more useful comparisons across stocks.
和廣告開支有助于對股票進行更有效的比較。
It is not a perfect gauge. But no single measure—whether price-to-book or billions of customers served— can ever tell the whole story.
這并非是一種完美的測量方法。但是沒有一種單一方法—不論是賬面價值還是服務(wù)了數(shù)十億客戶—能夠講述整個故事。
譯文由可可原創(chuàng)，僅供學(xué)習(xí)交流使用，未經(jīng)許可請勿轉(zhuǎn)載。
