|
????美國數(shù)據(jù)調(diào)查機構(gòu)Asymco的分析師賀拉斯?德迪烏近日奔赴倫敦會見了幾十位買方分析師,?？蓜e弄混了，我們說的可不是賣方分析師,。這些人掌控著數(shù)萬億美元的投資款項,，平時莫測高深，從不在致客戶函中透露他們的想法或投資策略,。 ????這些基金持有蘋果公司（Apple）70%的股票,。德迪烏見過這些分析師后得出的結(jié)論是：它們對該蘋果股票的估值即蘋果現(xiàn)有產(chǎn)品的估值加總，僅此而已,。 ????2005年iPod熱賣時,，蘋果股價上漲；2006年銷售下滑時,，蘋果股價出現(xiàn)下跌,。2007年受iPhone前景激勵，蘋果股價再度上漲,；2008年和2009年又出現(xiàn)大跌,。 ????“盡管股價起起落落，”周一德迪烏在《創(chuàng)新有沒有價值,？》（Is Innovation Valuable）一文中寫道,，“但市場的投資理念卻一直相當(dāng)連貫：蘋果旗下只有很小的一個產(chǎn)品陣營。持有蘋果股票,，即意味著要依托于iPod,、iPhone或iPad的銷售增長。只要其中某一款產(chǎn)品的銷售增長顯現(xiàn)疲態(tài),，投資者就會說：蘋果完了,。” ????“我對這個投資理念感到好奇的地方,，”他寫道,，“不在于它對蘋果公司增長跡象的解讀是否正確，而在于2006年的時候,，投資者將蘋果視為一家iPod 公司,，而今又將其視為一家iPhone公司，兩種判斷都被視為完全理性,。為什么對蘋果的判斷變了,，人們還會繼續(xù)買入蘋果？當(dāng)然,，沒有證據(jù)顯示蘋果還會使人作出別的判斷,。任何基金管理公司如果敢于提出其他不同的觀點,，肯定會損害自身的信譽?！?/p> ????德迪烏說,，以這種方式看待蘋果，就如同僅僅根據(jù)皮克斯動畫（Pixar）最新影片的票房來對這家制作公司進行估值,，就好像皮克斯根本不是一部專門打造熱門影片的商業(yè)機器,。 ????“除非能說服大多數(shù)人相信，蘋果就像皮克斯一樣,，都是熱門產(chǎn)品的批量制造者,，”德迪烏總結(jié)說?！胺駝t，離開了這些具體的產(chǎn)品,，市場對蘋果其內(nèi)在價值的估值依然為零,。” ????蘋果是全球最具創(chuàng)新能力的公司之一,，然而這些舉足輕重的投資者對它的看法真是讓人大開眼界,。 |
????Asymco's Horace Dediu spent much a recent trip to London talking to dozens of buy-side analysts. Not to be confused with sell-side analysts, these are people who control trillions of investment dollars and never share their thoughts or strategies in notes to clients. ????He came out of those meetings convinced that the investment thesis of the funds that control 70% of Apple's (AAPL) shares is that the company is a sum of its current product line and nothing more. ????The stock went up in 2005 when the iPod was hot and fell in 2006 when it looked like sales were fading. It rose in 2007 on the promise of the iPhone and collapsed in 2008 and 2009. ????"Throughout this volatile period," Dediu wrote Monday in a post entitled Is Innovation Valuable, "the investment thesis remained fairly constant: Apple is a rather small collection of product bets. Owning Apple meant riding the iPod or the iPhone or the iPad as waves of growth. As soon as one growth wave was seen to start to fade, investors would say the same thing: Apple is done." ????"What intrigues me about this investment thesis," he writes, "is not whether the signals of growth are interpreted correctly or not, but rather that an investor in Apple in 2006 was considered perfectly rational valuing Apple as an iPod company as much as an investor today is perfectly rational valuing Apple as an iPhone company. Why would anyone buy Apple for any other reason? There is no evidence that Apple can be anything more. Any fund manager positing a different point of view would surely be limiting her credibility." ????Looking at Apple this way, he says, is like valuing Pixar on the box office sales of its current movie -- as if the studio weren't a hit-making machine. ????"Until and unless an explanation is available that persuades a majority that Apple is as much a hit factory as Pixar," Dediu concludes, "then Apple without the products will intrinsically be valued at zero." ????It's an eye-opening look at how powerful investors see one of the world's most innovative companies. |
最新文章