評論
打印
Kleiner Perkins partner Mary Meeker today published her annual Internet Trends report, and included a section on whether or not current tech valuations are excessive. She acknowledged some artificial inflation, but then cautioned that current conditions are nowhere near as frothy as they were in the dotcom peak of 2000.
凱鵬華盈（Kleiner Perkins）合伙人瑪麗·米克爾日前發布了年度互聯網趨勢報告，其中有一部分談的是當前科技估值是否過高的問題。她承認，確實存在一些人為的虛增，但警告稱，當前的狀況還遠遠沒有達到2000年互聯網巔峰時的程度，當時高達40倍。
To help prove her point, Meeker provided the following data on venture capital investments:
為了證明自己的觀點，米克爾提供了以下風險資本投資數據：
No doubt, there is much less venture capital investment today than there was in 2000. But deal volume only tells part of the story.
毫無疑問，當前的風險資本投資與2000年相比要少很多。但交易量只是說明了一方面問題。
Using the same data source, Meeker would have found that later-stage deal sizes in 2014 only were 16.5% lower than they were in 2000. Moreover, later-stage deal sizes in the first quarter of 2014 actually were higher than the 2000 figure.
利用同樣的數據資源，米克爾本應當得出，2014年的后期交易規模僅僅比2000年的規模小16.5%。而且，2014年一季度后交易規模實際上高于2000年的數據。
One could argue that the less-robust IPO market means that these late-stage companies are more mature than their 2000 counterparts and thus are actually being more efficient with their money. But it also is worth noting that the ratio of IPO pre-money valuations to the amount of VC investment fell markedly in 2013 to just 5.5x. That is much closer to the 6.3x in 2000 than to the double-digit marks we saw between 2008 and 2012 (including a whopping 18.2x in 2010).
大家可以這么想，不那么強勁的IPO市場意味著，這些后期投資階段公司比2000年的同類公司更加成熟。因此，它們實際上可以更有效地使用自己的資金。而且，還值得注意的一點是，IPO交易前估值相對于風險投資的比率在2013年顯著下降，只有5.5倍。這個數字更接近2000年的6.3倍，而不是2008年至2012年期間的10多倍（其中2010年曾達到驚人的18.2倍）。
More importantly, Meeker completely omits any mention of broader VC valuation trends. We know that 2013 valuations were at a 10-year high across the board in 2013 (thanks to Pitchbook), but finding adequate market data doing back further has proved elusive. But Kleiner Perkins should have outstanding historical data on such things -- even if just within its own portfolio -- and Meeker would have plenty of anecdotal evidence for her three-plus years as a venture capitalist. So not including it here is both disappointing and curious.
更為重要的是，米克爾完全遺漏了更為廣泛的風險投資估值趨勢。我們知道，2013年估值在2013年各個領域都處于10年來的高點（感謝Pitchbook的數據），但要找到更早之前的充足市場數據很難。不過，凱鵬華盈應當擁有大量這類歷史數據——即便只是從這家公司自己的投資組合中尋找都沒問題——而且，米克爾作為一名擁有3年多經驗的風險投資人，她本應當擁有大量業界軼聞來佐證。因此，報告沒有包括這些內容實在令人既失望，又好奇。
To be clear, I'm not arguing that we're in 2000 redux. But I'm also cognizant that Meeker has a dog in this fight, since her day job is to make later-stage investments for a Silicon Valley venture capital firm. Moreover, that firm is in the midst of raising a new fund out of which she'll invest. So if she's going to use venture capital data to argue for today's relative moderation, it would best best to not cherry-pick.
先明確一點，我并不認為，我們現在身處與2000年等同的狀況。但我也能覺察到，米克爾在這其中有自己的意圖，因為她每天的工作就是為一家硅谷的風險投資公司進行后期投資。而且，這家公司正在募集新的基金，而她將使用募得資金中的一部分進行投資。因此，如果她要用風險投資數據來證明當前估值相對適度，那最好別挑那些估值最好的案例。
