兩個(gè)大相徑庭的億萬富翁樣本
菲利浦•格林爵士(Sir Philip Green)與沃倫•巴菲特(WarrenBuffett)在各方面可謂都大相徑庭——一位是皮膚黝黑、愛炫耀的成衣貿(mào)易企業(yè)家，另一位是溫和、節(jié)儉的“奧馬哈圣人(Sage of Omaha)”。
Yet they share a fierce desire to protect theirreputations and bear the scars of having held on tocertain investments for too long.
然而，兩人都有維護(hù)自己聲譽(yù)的強(qiáng)烈欲望，也都帶著持有某些投資過久的傷痕。
When Mr Buffett took control of Berkshire Hathaway in 1965 it was an ailing owner of textilemills in New Bedford, Massachusetts. Now, it is best known as a highly successful listed holdingcompany. For two decades, though, the declining mills were a thorn in his side that herefused to excise.
巴菲特1965年接管伯克希爾哈撒韋公司(Berkshire Hathaway)時(shí)，后者只擁有馬薩諸塞州新貝德福德幾家陷入困境的紡織廠。如今，伯克希爾哈撒韋公司以一家極為成功的上市控股公司聞名于世。然而在長達(dá)20年期間，這幾家瀕臨破產(chǎn)的紡織廠曾一直是巴菲特不愿丟掉的包袱。
Sir Philip’s purchase and turnround of BHS in 2000 confirmed his talent as an entrepreneurand owner, but as he told me and my colleague Andrea Felsted last year, a few months afterfinally offloading the BHS stores to a consortium of little-known buyers for ￡1: “I wish I’d havesold it a long, long time back … I should have sold it, but didn’t.”
格林爵士2000年收購了零售集團(tuán)BHS，使之扭虧為盈，這證明了他作為一名企業(yè)家和老板的天賦，但他在去年接受我與同事安德烈•費(fèi)爾斯特德(Andrea Felsted)采訪時(shí)——那是在他以1英鎊的價(jià)格最終將BHS連鎖店轉(zhuǎn)給一個(gè)由幾家不知名買家組成的財(cái)團(tuán)幾個(gè)月后——表示：“我希望本可以早就把它賣掉……我本應(yīng)賣掉，但是我沒有。”
Reputational risk motivated both investors. Sir Philip’s words may ring hollow for BHS’s11,000 staff now it is tumbling into administration, but he told us he had been reluctant tocut his longstanding ties to the business: “At the end of the day, I’ve got people here who havebeen with me from the beginning … I don’t want to just close the door. You do your best toensure that the people there are OK.”
聲譽(yù)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)是激勵(lì)這兩位投資者的動(dòng)力。對(duì)正在進(jìn)入破產(chǎn)管理程序的BHS連鎖店的1.1萬名員工而言，格林爵士的話聽起來或許有些空洞，但他告訴我們，他本不愿切斷與BHS之間的長期紐帶：“歸根結(jié)底，我身邊有從一開始就跟著我的人……我不想只是把門關(guān)上。我要盡全力確保大家過得不錯(cuò)。”
Mr Buffett, who had been appalled by the adverse reaction when he quit an earlier investmentin a Nebraska windmill manufacturer, was afraid of the local backlash that might occur if heclosed Berkshire down with the loss of jobs. Justifying his continued ownership of the textilemills to his partners in 1969, he wrote: “I have no desire to trade severe human dislocationsfor a few percentage points [of] additional return per annum.”
當(dāng)年，對(duì)之前退出內(nèi)布拉斯加一家風(fēng)車制造商所引發(fā)的負(fù)面反應(yīng)感到驚愕的巴菲特，擔(dān)心關(guān)閉伯克希爾的紡織廠會(huì)造成工人失業(yè)，引發(fā)當(dāng)?shù)胤磸棥?969年，為了向合伙人證明繼續(xù)持有這些紡織廠的合理性，他寫道：“我不想用嚴(yán)重的社會(huì)混亂換取每年幾個(gè)百分點(diǎn)的額外回報(bào)。”
Nevertheless, in 1985, he finally had to close the last remnants of the original Berkshire,granting the 400 workers he laid off only “a couple of months’ extra pay”, according to TheSnowball, Alice Schroeder’s biography. Spending 20 years trying to revive the business wasone of his biggest mistakes, he admitted in 2001, even though by the time he sold it, it was, inMs Schroeder’s words, “a flyspeck” on the holding company.
然而，根據(jù)愛麗絲•施羅德(Alice Schroeder)所著的巴菲特傳記《滾雪球》(The Snowball)一書，1985年，他最終不得不關(guān)閉了原伯克希爾公司旗下最后幾家工廠，并且只給被裁員的400名工人“兩個(gè)月的額外報(bào)酬”。他在2001年承認(rèn)，用20年時(shí)間試圖重振紡織業(yè)務(wù)是他最大的錯(cuò)誤之一，盡管在施羅德的筆下，在他最終將其出售時(shí)，這些紡織廠只是這家控股公司的“一個(gè)小不點(diǎn)”。
Since those early days, Mr Buffett’s fear of public opprobrium has led him on the whole, tochoose discretion over publicity, and to promote an avuncular niceness. The policy hasturned him into an acceptable face of capitalism.
從早期開始，巴菲特對(duì)公眾指責(zé)的恐懼讓他總體而言選擇謹(jǐn)慎(而不是曝光)，并展現(xiàn)自己慈祥美好的一面。這一策略將他打造成了一位受到社會(huì)認(rèn)同的資本主義代言人。
Sir Philip’s well-publicised tabloid lifestyle and belligerent relationship with the press haveinstead made him a high-profile hate figure. Mr Buffett is probably not as angelic as he isportrayed; Sir Philip is probably not as diabolical. But there are lessons there for would-bebillionaires everywhere.
格林爵士經(jīng)常見諸小報(bào)的張揚(yáng)生活方式及其與媒體間劍拔弩張的關(guān)系，使他成為一個(gè)引人注目的憎恨對(duì)象。巴菲特或許并不像其被描繪得那般善良;格林爵士也并非媒體宣稱得那么道德敗壞。但世界各地的準(zhǔn)億萬富翁們都可以從他們身上吸取經(jīng)驗(yàn)。
