共享經(jīng)濟(jì)時(shí)代的贏家和輸家

Who remembers the sound of unwrapping a new record album, the smell of a new car or the thrill of opening the front door to a newly purchased home? At different points in my life, each one stood for the joy of possession, and the sense of having really arrived.

誰還記得拆開一張新唱片的窸窣聲、一輛新車的味道或者打開一套新居的大門時(shí)的激動(dòng)之情?在我人生的不同時(shí)刻，每一個(gè)都代表著擁有的喜悅，那種擁有的感覺是實(shí)實(shí)在在的。

My teenaged children and their peers do not see things the same way. They would rather pay for Spotify and Netflix subscriptions that let them play selections from huge online music and video catalogues than purchase DVDs or permanent downloads of a smaller selection of titles.

我十幾歲的孩子和他們的同齡人對(duì)待物品的態(tài)度卻與我不同。他們更愿意成為Spotify和Netflix的付費(fèi)會(huì)員，他們可以從浩大的在線音樂和視頻目錄中任意選擇播放，而不是購買DVD或永久下載數(shù)量較少的曲目或視頻。

Streaming is at the forefront of a trend that threatens to upend a much wider range of industries. Technology-based groups are encouraging consumers to rethink their approach to everything from textbooks and party dresses to housing and transportation. The changes come in several categories. Platform apps are linking owners of goods and services — bicycles, spare bedrooms, even solar energy — to a host of potential users. And companies that traditionally focused on selling their wares, including clothing retailers and carmakers, are now exploring subscription and rental options.

流播放處于一種趨勢(shì)的前沿，這種趨勢(shì)將顛覆更多行業(yè)?？萍技瘓F(tuán)正鼓勵(lì)消費(fèi)者重新思考他們對(duì)一切事物的態(tài)度，從教科書和禮服、到住房和交通。這些變化出現(xiàn)在多個(gè)領(lǐng)域。平臺(tái)應(yīng)用正把商品和服務(wù)(單車、閑置臥室甚至太陽能)的所有者與大量潛在用戶連接在一起。傳統(tǒng)上關(guān)注于銷售商品的公司(包括服裝零售商和汽車制造商)現(xiàn)在正探索會(huì)員制和租賃選項(xiàng)。

Taken together, the growth of these services suggests that we are entering an era in which consumers will value access over ownership and experiences over assets. The new US tax reform law may well help push the process along because it shrinks the two biggest tax breaks that encourage Americans to own their homes — homebuyers will only be able to deduct the interest on the first $750,000 of the mortgage on their houses and the deduction for state and local property taxes is capped at $10,000. Without those benefits, people who live in high-cost, high-tax areas may well decide to keep on renting. The cresting of British house prices at levels that are not affordable for most ordinary people is likely to have a similar effect in parts of the UK.

總而言之，這些服務(wù)的增多表明，我們正進(jìn)入一個(gè)新時(shí)代：消費(fèi)者更重視使用而非擁有，更重視體驗(yàn)而非資產(chǎn)。美國新出臺(tái)的稅改法案將極大地推動(dòng)這一進(jìn)程，因?yàn)樗s減了鼓勵(lì)美國人擁有房屋的兩項(xiàng)最大稅收優(yōu)惠，購房者只有頭75萬美元房貸的利息能夠享受稅收扣除，州和地方的房產(chǎn)稅抵扣最多不超過1萬美元。如果沒有了這兩項(xiàng)優(yōu)惠，居住在高房?jī)r(jià)、高稅收地區(qū)的人很有可能決定繼續(xù)租房。英國房?jī)r(jià)升至多數(shù)普通人無法承受的峰值水平，可能也會(huì)對(duì)英國部分地區(qū)產(chǎn)生類似影響。

This transformation has a precedent. Many companies shifted to an asset-light model years ago — supermarkets and professional services firms sold and leased back their stores and offices, airlines started leasing rather than buying aircraft, and big tech groups such as Apple hired other companies, most notably Foxconn, to make iPhones.

這種變革是有先例的。多年前，很多公司就轉(zhuǎn)向了輕資產(chǎn)模式：超市和專業(yè)服務(wù)機(jī)構(gòu)將其門店和辦公室出售然后回租;航空公司開始租借、而不是購買飛機(jī);蘋果(Apple)等大型科技公司雇其他公司生產(chǎn)iPhone，最引人注目的是富士康(Foxconn)。

For the most successful companies, the decision to focus on intangible assets, such as intellectual property, has been a huge boon. The move allows them to grow rapidly without having to invest in building factories or hire enormous amounts of staff. But for those at the other end of the scale, the lack of real property leaves them with little to borrow against or sell when they run short of cash. When British budget airline Monarch collapsed in October, its main asset turned out to be its UK landing slots.

對(duì)于最成功的公司而言，聚焦無形資產(chǎn)(例如知識(shí)產(chǎn)權(quán))的決定是件好事。此舉讓它們得以在無需投資興建工廠或聘用大量員工的情況下快速壯大。但對(duì)于那些小公司而言，缺乏實(shí)體資產(chǎn)讓它們幾乎無法在現(xiàn)金匱乏時(shí)以資產(chǎn)為抵押獲取貸款，或通過出售資產(chǎn)籌措資金。當(dāng)英國廉價(jià)航空公司君主航空(Monarch)去年10月破產(chǎn)時(shí)，人們發(fā)現(xiàn)它的主要資產(chǎn)竟然是它在英國的降落時(shí)段。

“Once companies go asset light they can scale up tremendously. But I don’t think people have really thought through the implications of consumers being asset light,” says Jonathan Haskel, professor of economics at Imperial College, who has co-written a book on the subject, Capitalism without Capital: The Rise of the Intangible Economy. “Consumers will be able to be more flexible but they will also have to change their lifestyle.”

“一旦企業(yè)實(shí)行輕資產(chǎn)模式，它們可以大大提高規(guī)模。但我認(rèn)為人們并沒有真正考慮清楚輕資產(chǎn)對(duì)于消費(fèi)者的含義，”倫敦帝國學(xué)院(Imperial College)經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)教授、《沒有資本的資本主義：無形經(jīng)濟(jì)的崛起》(Capitalism without Capital: The Rise of the Intangible Economy)一書作者之一喬納森•哈斯克爾(Jonathan Haskel)表示， “消費(fèi)者可以變得更靈活，但他們也不得不改變他們的生活方式。”

Those consequences are likely to be profound for both consumers and the companies that supply them.

無論是對(duì)于消費(fèi)者還是為消費(fèi)者服務(wù)的企業(yè)來說，這都可能帶來深遠(yuǎn)的影響。

First of all, when companies are supplying services rather than tangible goods, the relationship between consumers and the things that they use becomes infinitely more complex. If I have a record album on my shelf, my husband can clearly play it. But when I link our Amazon Echo speaker to my son’s Spotify account, I have no idea whether I am violating one of the thousands of terms and conditions he agreed to with his account. Furthermore, does that act give Amazon the right to send him advertisements based on the songs we play? “Consumers are going to have to deal with the contested nature of assets. They need to figure out their rights,” says Prof Haskel.

首先，當(dāng)企業(yè)提供的是服務(wù)而不是有形商品時(shí)，消費(fèi)者及其所用物品之間的關(guān)系會(huì)變得極其復(fù)雜。如果我的書架上有一張唱片，我的丈夫顯然可以播放這張唱片。但是當(dāng)我把我們的亞馬遜Echo音箱連接到我兒子的Spotify帳戶時(shí)，這樣做是否違反了他開通賬戶時(shí)同意過的數(shù)千項(xiàng)條款和條件中的某一條，我就不清楚了。此外，這一舉動(dòng)是否給了亞馬遜根據(jù)我們播放的歌曲向我兒子推送廣告的權(quán)力?“消費(fèi)者將不得不應(yīng)付資產(chǎn)的具有爭(zhēng)議的性質(zhì)。他們需要搞清自己的權(quán)利，”哈斯克爾教授表示。

In many cases, the shift to a sharing economy will also affect the nature of the goods that are being shared. Currently, most cars spend most of the time sitting idle. If drivers stop buying their own cars and instead sign up for a rental service or use Uber’s ride-hailing app, each individual vehicle will receive a lot more use. That means carmakers will face pressure to produce fewer, better-made cars that are able to withstand constant usage. The obvious parallel would be to supplying a laundromat versus a home: commercial machines must be faster, heavier and stronger.

在很多情況下，向共享經(jīng)濟(jì)轉(zhuǎn)變也會(huì)影響被共享的那件物品的性質(zhì)。目前，絕大多數(shù)汽車大部分時(shí)間都處于閑置狀態(tài)。如果司機(jī)不再購買汽車，而是注冊(cè)租賃服務(wù)或使用優(yōu)步(Uber)的叫車應(yīng)用，每輛汽車的使用率都將大大提高。這意味著汽車制造商將面臨如下壓力：生產(chǎn)更少、質(zhì)量更好的汽車，以承受這種持續(xù)的使用。一個(gè)明顯的類似例子是，供自助洗衣房使用的洗衣機(jī)和供家庭使用的洗衣機(jī)也是不同的：商用機(jī)器必須更快、更重、更結(jié)實(shí)。

Increasing the usage of durable goods such as washing machines, cars and bicycles would clearly be good for the environment and should also benefit consumers by bringing down their overall costs. It would also fundamentally reshape the broader employment market. In the sharing economy, the winners will be companies that can effectively match people and resources, rather than simply those that can sell the most goods. Jobs, meanwhile, will shift away from manufacturing and into tech and services.

提高洗衣機(jī)、汽車和自行車等耐用品的使用率，顯然更環(huán)保，也會(huì)通過降低整體成本使消費(fèi)者受益。這也將從根本上重塑整個(gè)就業(yè)市場(chǎng)。在共享經(jīng)濟(jì)中，贏家將是那些能將人和資源有效匹配起來的企業(yè)，而不是那些能銷售最多商品的公司。與此同時(shí)，就業(yè)機(jī)會(huì)將從制造業(yè)轉(zhuǎn)向技術(shù)和服務(wù)業(yè)。

No wonder carmakers Ford and General Motors have invested in Uber’s US rival Lyft, and Daimler last week snapped up French ride-booking app Chauffeur Privé. If they succeed, I may never inhale that new car odour again.

難怪福特(Ford)和通用汽車(General Motors)等汽車制造商投資了優(yōu)步在美國的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手Lyft，同時(shí)不久前戴姆勒(Daimler)收購了法國打車應(yīng)用Chauffeur Privé。如果這些企業(yè)成功了，我可能再也聞不到新車的味道了。