利用这一技术，129年的《纽约时报》可以在不到两年内实现数字化。互联网上有些事人可以做好，而计算机却做不好，如何把人的这些资源利用起来，就是“人本计算”的研究内容

　　【《财经网》专稿/记者 何华峰】美国卡内基·梅隆大学28岁的计算机科学家路易斯·梵阿纳（Luis Von Ahn）最近摘得“麦克阿瑟天才奖”，并获得了50万美元奖金。尽管这个奖项并非如诺贝尔奖般具有盛名，但业内对于梵阿纳和他的发明早已耳熟能详。实际上，我们每个人也都在享受其发明带来的成果。
　　我们在登陆电子邮箱以及在网上银行付款或者注册一个网站时，都会碰到检验码（或识别码），即一些字母有些扭曲的字条，这就是梵阿纳的发明，叫做Captchas。
　　这项突破性的技术是梵阿纳与他的论文指导老师Manuel Blum在2000年开发的，现在已经被无数的网站采用。有数据显示，这项技术在推出后的短短五年内，每天就有2亿个检验码在被使用。
　　我们平时在使用检验码时，并不会去注意到它。实际上，这背后是一门新的学科，叫做“Human Computation”或者“Human-based Computation”。我们暂且称之为“人本计算”。
　　为什么扭曲的字母可以做为检验码？因为，这些扭曲的字母，人有能力识别，计算机却没有能力识别。在互联网中，恶意攻击都是通过机器来实现的，由于机器无法识别这些扭曲的字母，于是成为拦截恶意攻击的一堵Chinese Wall。
　　对于梵阿纳来说，这只是其早期比较重要的一个发明。此后，他又完成了许多发明，也都是基于“人本计算”原理。即在互联网上，有些事情人可以轻易做到，而计算机却无法做到。这门学科正是研究如何把人的这个优势发挥出来，与计算机互动，达到一个最佳结果。

《纽约时报》数字化
　　梵阿纳目前是卡内基·梅隆大学的助理教授。在发明检验码后，他的另一个发明，让从事新闻媒体的人备感亲切。
　　这就是把《纽约时报》数字化。《纽约时报》于1851年开始出版，至今已有156年。但目前实现上网的只是1981年以来的内容，即短短27年的内容。此前129年的资料都没有实现数字化。
　　而为了把过去27年的内容数字化，《纽约时报》雇佣了打字员，一个字一个字地敲到电脑中去，还经过了仔细的校对。这项工程耗费了长达10年的漫长光阴。
　　而梵阿纳的发明是要把《纽约时报》之前的129年的内容在不到24个月的时间里全部实现数字化，让大家可以在网站上读到完整的《纽约时报》。这个项目预计在2009年下半年左右完成。
　　这次，梵阿纳用的方法被称为reCaptchas，与前面的检验码技术一脉相承。
　　《纽约时报》已经把之前的129年的报纸完整扫描。扫描是相对容易的，但得到的只是图片。而图片的最大缺点就是占用内存大、下载困难且无法被搜索。所以，要真正实现数字化，还需要把图片变成文本这一过程。
　　梵阿纳在2005年就发现，当时每天有2亿个检验码被使用，虽然每个只要花10秒时间，但是加起来有20亿秒，相当于50万个小时。他想把这些时间利用起来。
　　现在，网络上用的检验码比2005年要多得多。对梵阿纳来说，这意味着更多的时间可资利用。
　　梵阿纳决定把这些时间用在《纽约时报》的数字化上。方法就是把《纽约时报》的扫描内容的一段拿过来，在人们填检验码时填写，用户输入的内容就是数字化的内容，把无数用户输入的内容整合起来，就是一个数字化的《纽约时报》。
　　但怎么保证用户输入的内容正确呢？
　　冯阿纳的做法是：一段文字，第一个用户读了后，假定他是正确的，然后，把这段文字给其他许多人读。如果大家读的结果是一样的，就可以确认其正确性。如果读的不一样，就重新验证。
　　据梵阿纳在他的网页中介绍，2007年时，除了《纽约时报》，他还致力于让Internet Archive（互联网档案计划）数字化。
　　Internet Archive（archive.org）成立于1996年，由Alexa创始人布鲁斯特·卡利（Brewster Kahle）创办，是一个公益性质的计划，非正式中文名有“网站时光倒流机器”“互联网档案馆”等。Internet Archive定期收录并永久保存全球网站可抓取信息，大网站，比如Google会每天备份一次，每次收录入十个左右网页，一些小网站每年只收录几次。用户可以通过Internet Archive的“Take Me Back”对网站的发展与历史资料进行研究。
　　梵阿纳在他的网页上挂出了reCaptchas的程序链接，鼓励各个网站去用。

有用的游戏
　　通过ReCaptchas，梵阿纳成功地利用了人远超于计算机的能力，做了很有用的事情。梵阿纳还在朝着这个方向前进。他现在最常用的手段是游戏，让人们在游戏中不知不觉地完成一些重要的事情。
　　在他的网站www.gwap.com上，你可以找到他发明的五六个游戏。2006年，梵阿纳推出了一个著名的游戏，叫ESP Game。这一游戏的玩法其实很简单：进入游戏，网站会给你随机配一个伙伴，两人同时看一张图，让你在两分钟内给图片写出关键词，如天空、鸟、足球、奔跑等等。如果你们两人写的关键词一样，就可以得分。
　　在这个游戏中，两个互不相识的人给出了相同的关键词，就意味着，他们给的关键词是正确的。这张图片遂有了属于自己的关键词。
　　为图片写出关键词，对人而言绝不是一件难事，但对于计算机来说，却是一件非常困难的事情。通过这个游戏，理论上来说，如果有足够多的人参加，就可以在不长的时间内，给互联网上所有的图片都写上正确的关键词，而这对于图片搜索至关重要，会大大提高图片搜索的精确性。
　　为了鼓励用户的参与，游戏采用积分制——你写的正确的关键词越多，得到的积分就越多。比如，如果一个图片的关键词是：天空（50分），鸟（60分），足球（120分），奔跑（60分）。这些分数会积累，网站上也将公布每天得分最高的人的名字。
　　这的确激发了很多人参与的热情。有人甚至每周花40小时玩这个游戏。今年1月，梵阿纳说，已经有20万人玩过这个游戏，并收集了5000万个关键词。
　　梵阿纳的这个发明，已经被Google采用了。Google推出的一个产品叫Google Image Labeler（谷歌图片关键词标注），就是一个内容与ESP Game一模一样的小游戏。
　　梵阿纳推出的其他游戏有点类似。一个叫歌曲关键词标注（Tag a tune），就是一个给音乐标上关键词的游戏：一首歌可以标上如“忧伤”“舞曲”“吉他”这样的关键词，目的是提高音乐搜索的精确度。梵阿纳说，这个游戏已经被6万人玩过，收集了1000万个数据。
　　一个叫Verbosity（唠叨）的游戏是收集常识用的：两个人玩，一个人说出一个常识，如果对方提供的答案与他给出的一致，就可以得分。而对游戏来说，就可以得到一个常识。
　　一个叫Squigl（涂鸦）的游戏，两人看同一幅画，然后比赛谁画的像，目的是为计算机积累视觉素材，提高识别物体的能力。
　　梵阿纳说，他即将推出一个游戏，帮助人们把语言从一种翻译到另一种。他预计，这会很有市场，因为几乎每个大公司都需要翻译服务，已经有很多公司对此感兴趣。不过，这个游戏还没有推出，因为梵阿纳认为游戏还不足够好。
　　梵阿纳的工作是在想方设法利用人擅长做而计算机不擅长的能力，把这方面的资源尽可能开发出来。实际上，我们今天熟知的百度知道、维基百科等产品，也有异曲同工之妙：充分有效聚合了大量的人力。
　　在这个领域，未来注定还有很多不可思议的发明会产生。■

 

魏文王问扁鹊：“你们家兄弟3人，都精于医术，哪一位最好？”扁鹊答：“我的大哥医术最好，二哥次之，我最差。”文王很惊讶：“那为什么是你最出名？”扁鹊答：“我大哥治病，是治病于病情发作之前的时候，一般人都不知道他已经铲除了病因，反而觉得他的治疗没什么明显效果，所以他的名气无法传出去，只有我们家的人才知道。我二哥治病，是治病于病情初起的时候，一般人看上去以为他只能治轻微的小病，所以他的名气只能在我们乡里流传。我治病是治病于病情已经严重的时候，一般人看到我在经脉上穿针放血，在皮肤上敷药，用麻药让人昏迷，做的都是些不可思议的大手术，自然以为我的医术高明，因此名气响遍全国，远远大于我的两位哥哥。”

这个寓言让我想到了品牌公关的三种路数，分别是战略公关、日常公关和危机公关。这“三兄弟”中，名气最大的叫危机公关，日常公关次之，战略公关最不为人知。在很多公司的高管看来，所谓的“公关”，就是在公司出现麻烦的时候，能够通过“搞定”媒体，将有关公司的负面消息消弭于无形，这种做法类似于“雪中送炭”。与之相比，平时经常在媒体上做做宣传，不过是“锦上添花”的事，“锦上添花”肯定不如“雪中送炭”让人印象深刻。至于将公关作为一个公司的战略，更是许多CEO想都没有想到的事情。如若不信，你看看有几家公司的公关总监能够参与公司重大决策呢？

危机公关的路数，和扁鹊的行医手段有点类似。在外行人看来，玩的都是不可思议的大手术，其效果也是立竿见影，“挽狂澜于即到”。其实分析危机公关的路数，看似眼花缭乱，其实也就这么“三板斧”——“釜底抽薪”、“防止扩散”和“海量稀释”。所谓“釜底抽薪”，就是在报道出来之前，通过各种关系和媒体“打招呼”，让媒体报道不要发出来。所谓“防止扩散”，就是一旦报纸报道出来之后，就通知各个网络媒体不要转载，或者让搜索引擎屏蔽掉这些信息；所谓“海量稀释”，就是前两个办法都行不通的时候，就组织大量的写手，发表大量正面信息，冲淡媒体的负面报道。这三个手段的目的，都在于让危机不要暴露，不要蔓延，不要发生负面影响。

公关界的从业人员都很熟悉这种路数，因为这几种路数很有中国特色，在国外反而很难行得通。国外的危机公关案例，无非是以尽快的速度，向媒体传达正确的信息，并迅速改进，以正本清源。但这种做法有个前提，是这个品牌本身没有任何问题，在中国，有多少企业能够做到这一点呢？于是，危机公关这种“速效止痛药”就派上了用场，虽然没有解决根本问题，但至少短时间之内不会疼痛了，企业也乐于买单。不过，虽然短时间不会痛了，问题依然存在，并在将来的某一天酿成更大的后果。要知道，三鹿奶粉中含有三聚氰胺的新闻可是两年前就被媒体披露过，后来通过危机公关解决了这个问题。在消除了负面影响的同时，三鹿奶粉也失去了一个改正错误的机会，导致了今天的万劫不复。

一些所谓的危机公关专家会说，危机公关会将坏事变成好事，并以强生胶囊的案例说明这一点。其实，一个品牌出现了丑闻，从来就是一件不折不扣的坏事，从来不是什么好事，良好的沟通和积极的行动，也不过是把坏的影响降到最低而已。以强生胶囊的经典案例为例，危机公关的作用，也不过是将坏影响降到最低而已。一个品牌的好与坏，从来不只是沟通的问题，而是这个品牌的系统问题。沟通的第一要诀是真实，只有当这个品牌自身没有问题，才能长久地塑造一个良好的品牌形象。一个再高明的公关专家，也很难将问题重重的品牌塑造成好品牌——就算短时间可以，这种效应也很难持久。

要纠正这种错误认识，就有必要将公关从传统的宣传层面转化为战略层面。宣传层面的公关，是一个类似于市场的职能部门，往往是公司高管制定好策略之后，让公关去从现行构架中发现可资宣传的故事，加以包装并对外沟通。战略层面的公关，则是指一个公司的CEO的做决策之前，就有必要将公关专家的意见考虑进去，考虑这个决策未来的社会影响，并将公司的品牌形象贯彻到公司运营的每一个细节之中。战略层面的公关，就是处理公司和各位利益相关者的关系，所以他贯彻与公司运营的每个细节之中。现在炙手可热的企业社会责任，因为它属于处理公司和社会之间的关系，也属于战略公关的一个重要范畴，

战略公关不仅提升了公关行业的战略意义，也提升了公关从业人员的重要性，他们将成为CEO最重要的智囊团成员。战略公关是公关行业未来的发展方向，也是公关的最高境界，因为无论什么事情，只有做到了战略层面的高度，才能解决根本问题。无论是营销管理、人力资源管理还是供应链管理，只有将企业的一部分职能和整个公司的战略结合起来，才能做到“既见森林，又见树木”，从而从根本上解决这些问题，而不是“头痛医头，脚痛医脚”。战略公关的意义在于，他将公关平时的琐碎工作，和公司的整体战略结合起来，从而提升公关工作的方向感和效率，也让公司的战略能够准确地对外传达出去。

战略公关何以实现？这就要求公关人员非常了解一个企业的战略，以及企业运营的各个方面。一个好的战略公关专家，应该具备CEO的战略视野，公关人员的专业知识，以及了解企业利益相关者的诉求。以声誉管理为例，一个声誉管理专家会首先在企业内部建立一套完整的内部声誉管理体系，让企业的每一个成员自觉遵守这个体系的规则，同时去发掘这个企业可资传播的故事，用媒体和公众喜闻乐见的语言，将这些故事传播出去。声誉管理一般不需要做危机公关经常要做的那些事情，因为它从一开始，就避免了危机的发生。声誉管理从根本上塑造一个品牌，与之相比，对这个品牌的传播不过是顺理成章的事情。

可惜的是，目前超过90%的公司和公关代理，都还没意识到战略公关的重要性，这在很大程度上是由于这些公司的短视造成的。回到文章开始的那段寓言，为什么战略公关的“技术含量”和效果要远远高于危机公关，但前者的生意没有后者的生意好做了。

 

三年前，在《蓝海战略》刚刚开始火起来，《长尾理论》这本书还没有出版的时候，就有一个学术达人向我推荐了长尾理论：蓝海战略算个屁，长尾理论才算得上是颠覆未来竞争策略的伟大洞见！这两本书我都很喜欢，因为都非常富有洞见，但过要说到可操作性，我得说一句话，从长尾理论获利的可能性要远低于从蓝海战略获利的可能。三年前我是这个观点，现在依然如此！恰逢哈佛《商业评论》请我推荐他们八月刊中的一篇文章，我就选这篇文章，好好分析一下吧。
　　
　　先说长尾理论的洞见吧。我很喜欢《连线》杂志，对其主编安德森自然也很欣赏，他的《长尾理论》确实可以称得上是互联网时代经济学的典范之作——这一点类似于《维基经济学》这本书。长尾理论最大的贡献在于，他颠覆了传统意义上的赢者通吃的竞争理论，说在物质非常丰富的今天，我们可以通过个性化的生产来盈利，因为人们的需求总是非常多元化的。他用了网络音像店、亚马逊书店等例子来证明这一点，也就是说，即便是非常冷门的音乐和书籍，也会有人买，只要你提供的成本足够低，就会有盈利，因此传统的80/20法则在这中领域似乎失效了。
　　
　　我说了，长尾理论很有洞见，但却不便推广，因为他有一个重要的前提，那些非常冷门的产品的获取成本非常低。这在网络音像和网上书籍等为数不多的市场中是适用的，但对于99%的市场领域，这一个理论是不适用的，原因就在于任何实体产品的生产和存储都是需要成本的，音乐的边际成本很低，但大多数实物的边际成本并不低，因此导致长尾理论无法运行。在99%的市场领域里面，依然遵从着80/20法则，也就是20%种类的产品贡献80%的销售额和近乎100%的利润，也就是说，80%的产品注定是要亏本的。所以大多数行业依然会从中大热门的概念，这一点在短时间不会有变化。
　　
　　有人说《蓝海战略》不管用，郎咸平教授甚至写了一本书——《蓝海大溃败》，不过从理论上来说，蓝海战略更具可操作性。他的思想精髓非常简单——通过挖掘客户需求来增加价值，通过减少非相关需求节省成本，从而达到价值增加和成本减少的统一，这一点在传统的迈克尔.波特的竞争理论上甚至是矛盾的。《长尾理论》也许能够够给人一些启发，但目前为止还稍有成功的先例，我的朋友李骥曾经经营过一个“就要红”的明星选秀网站，大概也就是挖掘明星的长尾，不过事实证明，那个实践并不成功，对于99%的人来说，刘德华这样的明星永远比自己选出的明星更有明星的范儿，而且刘德华的出场费更是要远远高于那些另类的明星，这就是长尾理论的局限性。
　　
　　下面是那篇文章的摘要，大家有空去找来看看吧，算是支持一下哈佛《商业评论》。经常支持他们，他们就会免费送你杂志的，70块钱一本，很有腔调的，摆在书柜上很好看，我见过很多老板的书柜上都有一套，就是认真看过的人不多.......
　　
　　《长尾理论》出版不久之后，《商业周刊》就宣布克里斯•安德森的理论是当年最重要的创见。该书广为流传，其议题也成为管理圈子的热点。安德森通过演讲，向众多管理听众阐述长尾理论的内在涵义。所有这些都对商业实践产生了影响：长尾理论越来越多地影响着业务模式的开发和评估，特别是在媒体和娱乐行业。
　　
　　必须承认，在线商业极大地丰富了消费者的选择，使他们可以接触到最冷门的产品。但我的研究表明，假如公司彻底颠覆传统模式而将重心放在冷门产品上，这将是极为轻率的举动。数据显示，从“尾部”产品中获利是一件非常困难的事。那么，我的研究对商业实践有哪些启示？对于媒体和娱乐产品生产商，我有四个建议；对于想从长尾需求中获利的在线零售商和内容整合商，我也有四个建议。尽管我的研究以媒体内容和信息产品为主，这些建议也适用于实体产品。实际上，这些建议可能为实体产品制造商和零售商带来更大回报，因为实体产品的生产成本更高。
　　
　　给生产商的建议
　　
　　1．不要从根本上改变热门产品的资源分配或原来的产品组合管理战略。不多的几个热门产品仍然大有前途——或许会比以前更加出色。
　　
　　我的研究表明，销售曲线的尾部长而扁平，因此内容提供商很难从中赚取丰厚利润。新媒体时代是否真的会令以前无利可图的缝隙产品变成“摇钱树”？这还有待观察。在线渠道降低了缝隙产品的市场准入门槛，因此带来了提高销售的可能性；但与此同时，潮水般涌入的缝隙产品也引发了一场争夺消费者注意力的竞争。在最近我与Nielsen SoundScan经理人员的邮件来往中，我了解到：在2007年售出的390万首歌曲中（其中绝大部分歌曲通过苹果公司的iTunes音乐下载软件以每首99美分的价格出售），24%的歌曲竟然只售出了可怜的一次，而91%——也就是360万首歌曲——的下载次数不足100次。在销售集中度愈演愈烈的今天，凭借拳头产品一炮打响的战略也越来越艰难。但是，目前我们也找不到其他有效的替代战略。
　　
　　2．在生产“长尾产品”时，应尽可能降低成本。要知道，长尾产品的成功几率并不比主流产品高，而且可能更低。
　　
　　在销售曲线的尾部分布着大量的产品，而与此相对应的是极低的需求，这意味着生产商能否收回产品的成本都将是一项挑战。与热门产品相比，冷门产品总是显得“曲高和寡”，如果考虑到这一点，你就知道从冷门产品身上获取溢价有多么困难了。
　　
　　3．在拓展在线销售渠道时，应重点营销你最畅销的产品。
　　
　　顾名思义，最畅销的产品能够吸引到最多的消费者，也拥有更好的用户体验。对于那些争夺广告市场的内容提供商，这一点可能尤为重要。如果广告客户希望在日新月异的媒体世界中吸引各种各样的消费者，那么它们最好围绕流行产品打广告。这样做不仅使它们的信息能够被更频繁地看到，而且由于这些产品更受欢迎，宣传效果也更佳。因此，热门产品可能具有更高的价值。这样看来，大型媒体公司不断加强对其最热门产品的定价和捆绑决策的控制权，也就不足为奇了。最近美国NBC电视台不惜与苹果公司的iTunes业务部翻脸就是最好的例证。
　　
　　4．利用你的规模优势提高在线曝光率，并尽量刺激你的产品组合中各种产品的需求。同样的，热门产品在这里也发挥着关键作用。
　　
　　长尾由各种真正的缝隙产品和过时的热门产品组成（根据安德森的定义，真正的缝隙产品是指那些无法满足传统分销标准的产品）。有了在线销售渠道，即使以上两类产品已从实体货架上消失，它们也可以永远在线销售；因此过时的热门产品仍然存在东山再起的机会。大型制作公司的优势在于，它们可以通过新产品来刺激人们对旧产品的需求。例如，某位大片中的演员以前参演过的电影，或者是一名崭露头角的艺人的早期唱片。这些公司可以定期将他们拥有版权的旧产品重新推向市场销售，或是将旧产品与新产品捆绑销售，并从中获利。需要提醒的是，这样做的成本有时可能会超过收益。例如，唱片公司常常拒绝为在线音乐下载提供旧的歌曲，因为版权许可的手续太过繁琐。同样的，尽管渠道合作伙伴经常采取措施防止大公司利用其规模优势（例如，苹果公司旗下的iTunes给予独立唱片公司的艺人的宣传空间比大唱片公司的艺人更大），但大公司也能凭借其热门产品与渠道合作伙伴商谈更好的条件。因此，随着在线产品的需求不断增加，规模更大、名头更响、渠道更强的公司比小公司更可能获益。
　　
　　给零售商的建议
　　
　　1．如果你的目标是迎合核心消费者的需求，那么你就应当提供更多的缝隙产品来扩展产品品类。
　　
　　我的研究表明，即使在线视频和音乐产品的品类极大丰富，即使最热门的十大产品能够轻松满足大多数常客的需求，这些消费者对尾部产品的消费仍然是相当活跃的。消费者总是想要更多选择，为了吸引并留住他们，商家就应该尽可能满足他们的要求，无论他们是购买单件产品还是包月订购多种产品。通常而言，常客热衷于价钱更贵的订购计划。
　　
　　2．严格控制冷门产品的成本。如有可能，使用在线网络来建立一种新颖的商业模式——除非消费者产生实际交易，否则你不会有任何成本。
　　
　　对于大量很少成交或从未卖出的产品来说，管理中很容易出现问题。的确，长尾产品可能比热门产品给零售商带来更具吸引力的毛利率——部分原因是热门产品常被当作“赔本赚吆喝”的营销工具。但长尾产品极低的需求量以及相关的营销成本，给长尾模式的成功实施带来诸多困难。
　　
　　要使那些偶尔卖出一两次的产品有利可图，可能需要砍掉任何相关成本，因此，为长尾产品开发一种创新型的解决方案很值得一试。亚马逊网站（Amazon）的Marketplace项目就是一个典型的例子，在这个项目中，第三方必须付钱来宣传某个书目，而网站仅在消费者实际下单购买时才会产生成本。另一种方式是让志愿者创建、修改和管理网络业务的信息。想象一下，假如维基百科（Wikipedia）为它的作者创建的每一个页面支付费用，哪怕只是象征性的小数目，维基百科也就需要为访问量最少的页面支付一大笔费用。
　　
　　3．利用你最热卖的产品来赢得消费者并管理消费者。
　　
　　正因为热卖产品能够接触到大量消费者且最受欢迎，它们在传统渠道中作为“削价出售的招徕性商品”（loss leader）的价值将延伸至数字领域。比如，儿童图书出版商学乐（Scholastic）以34.99美元的建议零售价将《哈利•波特》第七部引进美国，但是为了刺激消费者对其他产品的购买，它在Barnes & Noble网上书店和亚马逊网站的售价都大大低于这个建议零售价，分别为20.99美元（6折）和17.99美元（5折）。显然，在这个事例中，《哈利•波特》第七部就是通过削价出售来招徕顾客的热卖产品。
　　
　　像生产商一样，在线零售商可以将冷门产品或旧产品（这类产品的采购价比较低廉）与热卖产品在一起捆绑销售而获益。另一种更普遍的做法是，通过推荐引擎来引导消费者转向尾部产品。第三个值得考虑的方法是对网页流量进行设计，使消费者，包括那些本来意图搜索热门产品的消费者，自然地被引向尾部产品。公司可以即时操控推荐目录（所费成本也不高），从而突出那些有较高利润的冷门产品，同时也可以平衡一下对热卖书目的需求。
　　
　　4．即使冷门产品可能具有更高的利润空间，也应适度克制自己，避免太过频繁地引导消费者转向尾部产品，否则你可能会招致他们的反感。
　　
　　在冷门产品和热门产品之间寻求良性的营销平衡至关重要。在线零售商不能指望消费者更偏爱长尾产品而非热门产品——现实的情况恰恰相反，消费者对热门产品的满意度更高。在管理消费者的期望值和满意度时，商家应考虑到这一点，毕竟，让消费者满意是确保长期赢利的主要因素。热卖产品的主导地位以及需求的自然曲线暗示着，通过拓展各种缝隙产品的消费来增肥长尾很可能是竹篮打水一场空。
　　
　　谁将取得成功？
　　
　　毫无疑问，现在的消费者拥有比他们上一代更大的优势。在线商务打破了实体商店的局限性。消费者如今的产品选择浩如烟海，信息也是铺天盖地。一位喜欢说唱歌手Jay-Z的Hip-hop乐迷不仅能够买到他的最新专辑，还可以找到他的第一张销量不佳的专辑《合理的怀疑》（Reasonable Doubt，1996年发行）；在网络上，这位消费者还可以很容易地找到塔利布•奎利（Talib Kweli）和其他一些不知名的同时代歌手，他们中的一些人可能只发行了数字格式的歌曲。
　　
　　对于长尾理论的提出者克里斯•安德森来说，数字化时代的战略意义很清楚。他断言：“成功属于那些摒弃了‘最小公分母’商业模式、领会到如何关注缝隙产品的公司。”而我的研究结论则相反。的确，现在越来越多的冷门产品随时都可买得到，尾部正在变长——这一点没人怀疑。但是尾部可能会极其扁平，里面充斥着各种冷门产品，而这些产品不过是消费者偶尔的消遣，事实上，消费者对热门产品的热情总是有增无减。因此，从尾部产品中获取高额利润的说法，还有待商榷。从视频和音乐产品（应当说，在许多方面它们都是测试长尾理论的最理想产品）的销售中，我们看到热门产品仍然会继续保持主导地位。这是零售商必须了解的现实。为了满足消费者的各种需求，零售商会努力扩大产品品类，但同时他们也必须要使所投入的成本产生效益。这是任何生产商都无法回避的一个挑战。成功最终将属于那些能最大程度地利用热卖产品的公司。
　　
　　从大量的管理著作中，我们也可以找到这一观点的有力证据。2006年，经贸类图书出版商Hyperion Books向市场推出了几十本原创精装书，其中几本书是它花了大钱买下版权并投入巨资进行营销的，期望获得畅销书的轰动效果和丰厚利润。在这几本书中，有米奇•阿尔博姆（Mitch Albom）的小说《一日重生》（For One More Day），它成为2006年最畅销的一本精装书。另一本是引起了激烈竞价大战的商业著作，Hyperion出版社则下定决心要拿到它；《纽约》杂志引述了一位业内人士的话说：“Hyperion的出价让所有人大跌眼镜。”所有人都认为这是一次高风险的豪赌。但结果证明，Hyperion赚了个盆满钵满。当然了，现在大家知道了，这本书就是——《长尾》。

 

WASHINGTON — Federal officials say they are preparing to propose a series of regulatory changes to enhance American competitiveness overseas, attract foreign investment and give American investors a broader selection of foreign stocks.

But critics say the changes appear to be a last-ditch push by appointees of President Bush to dilute securities rules passed after the collapse of Enron and other large companies — measures that were meant to forestall accounting gimmicks and corrupt practices that led to those corporate failures.

Legal experts, some regulators and Democratic lawmakers are concerned that the changes would put American investors at the mercy of overseas regulators who enforce weaker rules and may treat investment losses as a low priority.

Foreign regulators are beyond the reach of Congress, which oversees American securities regulation through confirmation proceedings, enforcement hearings and approval of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s budget.

The commission is preparing a timetable that will permit American companies to shift to the international rules, which are set by a foreign organization and give companies greater latitude in reporting earnings. Companies that have used both domestic and overseas rules have, on average, been able to report revenues and earnings that were 6 percent to 8 percent higher under the international standards, according to accounting experts.

Though foreign accounting standards are stronger in some ways than American accounting principles, they are weaker in some important areas. They enable companies, for example, to provide fewer details about mortgage-backed securities, derivatives and other financial instruments at the center of today’s housing crisis and that have troubled many Wall Street firms, including Bear Stearns.

The shift to international standards could also wind up eliminating the conflict-of-interest rules, adopted after the collapse of Arthur Andersen and Enron, that have limited auditors from performing both accounting work and consulting for the same client.

James D. Cox, a securities law expert at Duke Law School who returned this week from teaching corporate law in Europe, said the shift to international rules amounted to “outsourcing safety standards.”

“We would not for a moment tolerate having American auto safety standards set by China or India,” he said. “Why should we do it for financial safety standards? There has to be some accountability.”

The S.E.C. also plans to announce details of a pilot program that would enable foreign brokers to deal directly with American investors, while continuing to be largely regulated by the foreign country. The first country in the program will be Australia, although officials hope to eventually include other countries. In a third move, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, which works under the supervision of the S.E.C., is preparing a rule that would allow it to defer to foreign regulators for inspections of some of the 800 foreign auditors of overseas companies that sell stock in the United States.

The oversight board was created by the Sarbanes-Oxley law of 2002 in response to the accounting scandals at Enron and other large companies. The law requires the board to inspect regularly all accounting firms that certify the financial results of companies whose shares are sold in the United States.

Officials say the proposed changes reflect the decades-long push toward global markets. They say the changes are necessary to attract capital from abroad and will protect Americans as they increasingly look to invest overseas. In the decade ending last November, American holdings of foreign stock increased to $4.3 trillion from $1.2 trillion.

“You are seeing a world now where everything is mobile,” Ethiopis Tafara, director of international affairs at the S.E.C., said in an interview. “You have securities issuers that are mobile. Broker dealers can provide services from anywhere. Exchanges are mobile, and electronic trading platforms don’t need a physical location. You have capital that is mobile, it travels almost anywhere around the world.”

“When you have everything that is mobile, the way we think about our mandate — investor protection and enforcement — has to take this into account,” Mr. Tafara said.

Mr. Tafara said that the mutual recognition agreement with Australia would continue to protect American investors because the S.E.C. would continue to have the authority to prosecute foreign companies under antifraud provisions of the law for what he called “lying, stealing and cheating.” The S.E.C. would continue to investigate accusations of illegal insider trading, for example, an area where the commission has been more vigorous than many foreign jurisdictions.

But the S.E.C. would not enforce many investor-protection laws involving issues ranging from the quiet period before a stock offering to market manipulation, financial disclosures and abusive trading tactics. Nor would foreign officials apply a panoply of American securities rules that are unique in that they are intended to protect minority shareholders. Instead, the commission would rely on its Australian counterpart to enforce its securities regulations, which often involve different standards.

In a speech earlier this year, Christopher Cox, the agency’s chairman, said that working on the transition to international accounting standards and reaching enforcement agreements with foreign countries like the Australians were two of the most important items on his agenda as his term comes to a close.

“It is no longer possible for the S.E.C. to do its work in the United States without a truly global strategy — because, in large measure due to today’s instant communications and technology, what goes on in other markets and jurisdictions is now intimately bound up with what happens here,” he said.

But critics say that the move toward harmonizing rules and enforcement practices is fraught with problems and would dilute American securities laws, generally considered to be the most protective of investors in the world.

“The impetus for these changes has been a generalized concern about competitiveness but the results could very well be a weakening of rules,” said Senator Jack Reed, the Rhode Island Democrat who heads the Senate banking subcommittee on securities and investment, which has jurisdiction over the S.E.C. “The notion that we’re becoming rapidly globalized is clear. There is a need for harmonized rules. But the real question is, are the foreign rules any good?”

“We’ve heard this argument about competitiveness for the last two years,” Mr. Reed added. “But guess what? There are a lot of lost jobs on Wall Street not because of competitiveness issues but because our regulators have actually not been up to the task.”

Senator Carl Levin, Democrat of Michigan, said the proposals would “weaken the pressure for credible oversight” of the markets and their regulators.

“This is a very, very serious problem,” Mr. Levin said. “We’ve had so many losses to investors based on inadequate oversight. We can’t proceed to give control of regulation — to delegate or cede control — to bodies that are not accountable. If this is delegated to regulators overseas, it weakens our ability to put pressure on the regulators to do what the law requires them to do.”

Although the staff of the S.E.C. has been working on the changes for many months, the agency has been hampered by vacancies at the top. Those vacancies were filled last week, when the Senate confirmed three new commissioners, including two Democrats, to the five-member commission. To adopt the changes, Christopher Cox, the agency’s chairman, will need to get the support of at least two commissioners.

Industry groups have pushed for many of the changes. Large international accounting firms, for example, have complained that the emergence of a new generation of American and foreign regulators inspecting them has led to onerous duplication.

Jeff Willemain, global managing partner for regulatory and risk at Deloitte, said at a roundtable discussion in Washington last week that the emerging system of “multiple and duplicative” inspections of audit firms by different countries has created “inefficiencies” that do not result in greater investor protection.

But the track record of foreign enforcement authorities indicates that they are generally less aggressive than their counterparts in the United States, and that even the most vigorous ones bring fewer cases and impose significantly lower penalties.

“Few if any countries spend as much on — or devote as much intensity of effort to — enforcement of financial reporting and auditing as the U.S. does,” said Charles D. Niemeier, a member of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, who has dissented from its proposal to let foreign authorities inspect auditors. Referring to the fact that foreign investigations are often not wide-ranging, he added, “Even the most robust of those other regulators have faced scope limitations and other challenges that we would not countenance.”

But foreign regulators say it is absurd to think that the United States has the ability to police markets alone.

“Let’s be clear — no single jurisdiction can resolve all the problems of globalization,” said Pierre Delsaux, a senior markets regulator at the European Commission. “We are all doing the same thing. No country has a monopoly on protecting investors.”

 

The U.S. GAAP is an unsustainable Tower of Babel

By David Tweedie
It was with much interest that I read the article by Al Rosen in the Financial Post (“IFRS raises some concerns,” May 17). Mr. Rosen stitches together a number of quotes from myself to substantiate his viewpoint. I therefore feel that I have a duty to set the record straight.
Mr. Rosen would appear to make two main points. First, that Canada should be wary of adopting what he refers to as vague and open accounting standards because, in his estimation, using them will never achieve real international comparability. That is not a broadly held view. Second, that as a result of Canada’s unique regulatory environment it should resist the urge to follow almost all of the world’s leading economies and instead should continue setting its own financial reporting standards.
I will deal with each of these points individually.
It is logical to ask how principle-based standards can offer comparability on the same scale as that provided by many volumes of detailed rules. But this misses the point. U.S. GAAP also is principle-based — it’s just that over the years, more and more guidance has been piled on top to address every conceivable situation, to the point where a whole team of experts is now required to conduct a single audit. As a result of Canada’s previous strategy of harmonizing with U.S. GAAP, much of this guidance has been imported into Canadian GAAP. 
In time, additional guidance in the U.S. would achieve Tower of Babel proportions — a situation that both Bob Herz, chairman of the U.S. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) and I believe is wholly unsustainable. The International Accounting Standards Board (IASB) through its interpretations committee will continue to resist calls to provide further guidance to its standards where professional judgment will suffice, and in doing so hope to return accountancy to the practitioner.
Accounting is not rocket science.  There is a choice. The standard-setter could answer every single question put to it, thereby constructing a mountain of rules, or it could craft standards that state the broad principles to be followed.
Unless the Canadian accounting profession is not what I have always considered it to be, it will welcome firm principles coupled with good judgment based on practical experience and sound training, rather than the ability to utilize a search engine to find and select from a myriad of rules.
So what does this mean for comparability?
Well, on Jan. 1, 2005, all 27 member states of the European Union simultaneously switched almost 7,000 listed businesses reporting under 25 different accounting frameworks to International Financial Reporting Standards (IFRS) — a remarkable achievement.
Earlier this year, at the request of the European Commission, the Institute of Chartered Accountants in England and Wales published an assessment of this transition and first-year adoption of IFRSs in Europe. Among its findings, the report concludes that “there was widespread agreement that IFRS has made financial statements easier to compare across countries, across competitors within the same industry sector and across industry sectors.”
The report went on to state that “IFRS implementation had been challenging but successful; there was an absence of any general loss of confidence in financial reporting and IFRS implementation was generally seen as a positive development for EU financial reporting.”
Europe overcame significantly larger challenges in adopting IFRSs than Canada will face. Canada will move from its GAAP to a fundamentally similar set of standards that has been used for some time in many jurisdictions, and it will also be able to draw on international experience in converting to and using IFRSs. This should provide comfort that Mr. Rosen’s protestations of large voids in the accounting standards are generally unfounded.
The second point relates to Canada’s decision to embrace IFRSs by 2011 and the “unique” regulatory environment that exists. We have seen over 100 countries now permitting or requiring IFRSs, with many of Canada’s largest trading partners now considering adoption or convergence in the next few years. It would be surprising if at least some of these countries didn’t face their own unique challenges, and our experience is that the international standard-setting community has worked well in supporting countries making the transition to IFRSs to solve such challenges.
It is also incorrect to say that adoption of IFRSs will require deleting current accounting standards in order to start again from scratch. The IASB and the U.S. FASB have spent the past five years seeking to achieve convergence of IFRSs and U.S. GAAP, and by the time Canada switches over in 2011 the principles of the two sets of standards will be even more similar than they already are. That is not to underestimate the task of undertaking a national switchover to IFRSs, but the task should be less painful thanks to these convergence efforts.
Canada is in good company by adopting IFRSs, with India, Japan and Korea following a similar path in 2011. The IASB and IFRSs also will benefit from Canada’s continuing involvement in the standard-setting process. Global markets require global solutions and I commend the Accounting Standards Board of Canada for its leadership of Canadian interests in this important area.

Financial Post
Sir David Tweedie is chairman of the International Accounting Standards Board. 

 

Recent statistics show that accountants may be the fastest professionals on the road. Daytona, a leading member of the National Karting Association, has examined seven years’ worth of race data from its Manchester track and found that by vocation, accountants hold the fastest average lap time.

Here are Daytona’s top 10 speediest drivers, by job, with their average lap times:

Accountants, 26.017s
Sales professionals, 26.021s
Solicitors, 26.121s
Marketing professionals, 26.234s
HR professionals, 26.301s
Surveyors, 26.313s
Local councillors, 27.015s
Estate agents, 27.476s
Management consultants, 28.512s
Customer service professionals, 29.660s

So is this a statistical blip, or is there something more to it? Well, a study last year by www.moneysupermarket.com revealed which were the most accident-prone professions when it comes to putting pedal to the metal. No, accountants didn’t top the list (lifeguards, tobacconists and most of the medical world, it seems, are worse) but they’re not far off. Accountants are the twelfth most dangerous drivers when it comes to the employed. Long commutes, heavy workloads, mobile phone usage and fatigue must all play a part, but even so, does the profession suffer from a need for speed?

In April the Coventry Evening Telegraph reported on a Bristol accountant who had been clocked at 145mph in his BMW 330, and facing the possibility of jail, had asked for sentencing to be delayed until after his holiday. He got four months suspended and 200 hours’ community service. In the motorcycling community, lifelong bikers have been complaining for years about the arrival of middle-aged “Hell’s Accountants” in their counter-cultural midst.

A quick look at the world of professional racing shows a few accountants have made a positive mark on the track, however. AccountingWeb is informed that one of Italy’s greatest all-time race drivers, Luigi Fagioli, left behind accountancy to enter the sport full-time at the age of 27. He’s one of the oldest drivers to have won an F1 championship, in 1951 at the age of 53. Believe it or not, he needed a cane to get into the car. Scots-born Leslie Thorne was another 50s Formula One driver, albeit one that failed to win anything. More recently accountant and economist Marc Gené Guerrero was F1Williams’ occasional replacement for Ralf Schumacher, and is now a test driver for Ferrari.

Closer to home, Fraser Smart, an actuary for Buck Consultants, currently leads the 2008 Formula Renault BARC Championship for single seat racing cars (you can keep tabs on his progress here). Given that he deals with the financial impact of risk and uncertainty on a daily basis, it is maybe not such a leap to his chosen pastime, only his desk does not corner at 95mph.

“My professional background does make a difference,” says Smart. “I am a lot older than most of the other drivers and consequently don't have quite the same fearless approach. I compensate for that by analysing the handling of my car to optimise performance. It is a thorough, methodical approach consistent with my professional training. On the track I probably spend more time than others analysing the competition to identify their weak points. Although all of that does go out of the window sometimes.”

Smart declined to make any generalisation about the driving skills of accountants and actuaries generally. But other race drivers have been known to express an opinion.

“How can you settle for a safe third or something, because it’s four points?” French-Canadian F1 driver Gilles Villeneuve once said. “Jesus, people like that should be accountants, not racing drivers.”

Yet the gifted and mercurial Villeneuve died in a tragic and fatal crash qualifying for the 1982 Belgian Grand Prix shortly afterwards. So perhaps a little accountancy isn’t entirely unhelpful when it comes to steering a steady course - it’s just a shame the profession is so frustrating that accountants sometimes feel compelled to take it out on public roads.

原帖“中国会计视野社区——CPA之声”
http://club.esnai.com/club/bbs/showannounce.asp?id=4104719

 

“生活可以如此复杂”是《资本市场的混沌与秩序》一书中引言的题目，作者埃德加·E·彼得斯认为不管我们怎样力图使世界变得秩序井然，世界却并不是秩序井然的，被称为机构的人类创造物也不是秩序井然的，经济和资本市场就特别缺乏秩序。为了使资本市场更有条理，人们创造了模型试图去解释它们，这些模型不可避免的是现实的简化。彼得斯对“分形几何学”和“混沌”理论在资本市场上的应用感兴趣，在他看来，许多学者和数量分析者以为线性模型要比非线性模型容易处理得多，简单的线性模型的好处比其局限性所带来的潜在弊害要大，然而混沌理论和复杂科学告诉我们情况并非如此。
资本市场复杂，财务分析同样如此。以比率分析为例，传统的教科书会告诉我们一些财务比率，如流动比率、速动比率、资产负债率等，流动比率小于2会被认为短期偿债能力不佳。然而，财务分析真的如此简单么？近来，有关房价是否出现拐点的争论颇为热闹，而房价如果真的出现了拐点，甚至只是价格盘整而成交量萎缩也会对房地产开发企业的财务状况造成不利影响。在这种情况下，我们通过财务分析简单的比率或者模型是否能准确判断一家房地产开发企业有没有能力应对这场可能的危机呢？答案是否定的。

流动比率

先从最简单的流动比率开始。流动比率=流动资产÷流动负债，它表明企业每一元流动负债有多少流动资产作为偿还的保证，反映企业用可在短期内转变为现金的流动资产偿还到期流动负债的能力。
对房地产开发企业来说，使用流动比率最大的缺点在于如何对存货的流动性进行判断，某些存货可能难以在短期内变现。在A股上市公司的报表中，“开发成本”和“开发产品”均作为存货列于流动资产中，但开发成本能否在短期内变现却很难说。万科（000002.SZ）董事长王石先生前不久称万科从获得土地到供应房子只要九到十二个月时间，比行业平均水平差不多快一倍。这就是说，国内开发商存货中的土地平均要在一年以上才能变现（由于允许预售，实现销售可能比房屋竣工要快）。此外，还可能存在比较极端的情况。招商地产（000024.SZ）总经理林少斌日前对投资者解释，公司这几年项目建设速度偏慢有客观原因，比如广州的项目，当初招拍挂拍的地块，由于政府更改规划而不得不更改原先的规划，导致项目规划长达三年时间批不下来。重庆、北京项目搞拆迁就花了三年多的时间。由此可见，与制造业相比，房地产开发行业存货变现的时间更长，速度差异也更大。那么，漠视这种现实显然是不应该的。
香港会计准则考虑了房地产行业的上述情况，我们可以发现在香港上市的内地房企对存货均分为两类，分别列入流动资产和非流动资产。以北辰实业（601588.SH，0588.HK）为例，在香港披露的2007年半年报中有9.23亿元的“开发中物业”被列入非流动资产，而列入流动资产的为“待出售已落成物业”和“待出售开发中物业”，分别为8.47亿元和62.40亿元。这样在中国和香港不同的会计准则下，北辰实业的流动比率就有所不同，2007年6月30日分别为2.95和2.66。当然，如果以流动比率是否大于2为标准，不同准则下的数据对判断北辰实业的短期偿债能力影响不大，然而并非所有的公司该指标都这么乐观。根据Wind资讯统计，2007年9月30日沪深两市91家房地产开发企业（不包括园区开发企业）中只有30家流动比率大于等于2，不到总数的三分之一。而在这30家公司中，如果将一年内无法变现的存货列入非流动资产，还将淘汰出多少家就难说了。
在会计准则没有很好地区分房地产开发企业存货流动性的情况下，我们可以通过分析企业的战略来作一些补救。不同的房地产开发企业有不同的发展战略，由此也产生存货周转速度上的差异。一些企业如万科、保利地产（600048.SH）、栖霞建设（600533.SH）等追求资产的高周转，以此取得较高的净资产收益率和防范风险；而众所周知也有很多企业在囤地和捂盘，追求高销售利润率。万科类企业显然会努力提高企业的周转速度，如标准化设计，如工业化生产，而一般企业则缺乏这样的动力和能力。不过，显然这样的补救措施很难给出定量的结果。
流动比率的第二个缺点是没有考虑到一些房地产企业的部分收入来自非流动资产，如投资性房地产。这样如果某家企业出租收入较多，单纯根据流动比率来判断其短期偿债能力就有失公平。对其他行业的企业来讲，忽略这一因素倒也无妨，然而对房地产企业来说，由于有不少企业将持有开发性房地产作为防范行业风险的重要手段，实在是忽略不得。以浦东金桥（600639.SH）为例，2007年上半年其房地产租赁收入为3.23亿元，而房地产销售收入只有1.23亿元。浦东金桥2007年6月30日的流动比率只有0.50，看上去很危险，然而如果我们以上半年的收入乘以2来简单地估计其全年的房地产租赁收入，则为6.46亿元，能够偿还37.73%的流动负债。如果考虑房地产租赁收入，则浦东金桥的流动比率为0.80。
流动比率第三个缺点是没有考虑企业存货的质量或者说真实价值。制造业企业的毛利率普遍不高，但某些房地产企业的毛利率却是高得异常，如陆家嘴（600663.SH），2006年上半年土地批租业务的毛利率高达88.37%，这意味着账面成本为1元的存货可以转化为8.60元的收入；2007年上半年陆家嘴的土地批租业务毛利率下降，但仍有53.14%，即1元钱的存货可以转化为2.13元收入。显然，如果一家企业的毛利率高，则表明其存货的真实价值远远高于其账面价值，这样按账面价值计算的流动比率稍低也不必担忧。反之，一些房地产开发企业前不久拿了不少“面粉贵过面包”的高价地，恐怕危机来时这些高价地的变现价值还将低于账面价值，按账面价值计算的流动比率就高估了其短期偿债能力。

短期风险头寸

有学者提出了“短期风险头寸”的概念，其定义为：
短期风险头寸=存量资产周转率-（流动负债-货币资金）/总资产
其中存量资产周转率为本年销售销售额（疑为收入，下面按收入分析）与上年末总资产之比。
如果我们将上述公式右边的分母（总资产）去掉，那么可以发现影响“短期风险头寸”大小（尤其是正负）的主要因素是“销售收入+货币资金-流动负债”，以此指标来衡量房地产开发企业的抗短期风险的能力，其实是在关注企业除了现有货币资金外，未来一个时期内是否有足够的收入偿还短期债务。
与流动比率相比，短期风险头寸更为合理，在于它考虑了房地产开发企业存货的流动性。短期风险头寸巧妙地以总资产与存量资产周转率的乘积来预测未来的销售收入，这样企业历史上开发速度的快慢成为预测的依据，而流动比率根本没有考虑这方面的因素。与此同时，按照短期风险头寸的思考方式，企业的开发性房地产租赁收入以及其它非房地产开发收入也被考虑在内，从而有效地弥补了流动比率的两大缺点。
不过，短期风险头寸依然没有考虑企业的盈利能力，这不能不说是一个遗憾。房地产开发企业在取得收入的同时，必然要发生一定的成本和费用（包括各种税赋）。因此，假设未来一段时期的收入全部被用来偿还负债，其实颇为勉强。此外，即使发生了危机，房地产开发企业也可以保留一定的流动负债，不需全部偿还。如果考虑上述因素，则短期风险头寸的决定性因素可以由“销售收入+货币资金-流动负债”改为
货币资金+销售收入-成本-费用-（流动负债-可保留的流动负债）
=货币资金+（销售收入-成本-费用）+可保留的流动负债-流动负债
以常理论，销售利润率高的企业容易受银行及投资者的青睐，可保留的流动负债相对会多一些，而销售利润率低的企业则未必有这个待遇。因此，如果不考虑企业的盈利能力，按短期风险头寸的概念会高估低销售利润率企业的抗风险能力。
短期风险头寸的另一缺点在于未考虑国内房地产开发企业预收账款较多的事实。以万科为例，2007年9月30日预收账款为287.99亿元，占流动负债的比例高达63.79%。按相关法规要求，房地产企业只有在开发的楼盘封顶后才能对外预售，从实现销售到楼盘竣工可以确认收入这一段时间，企业实际需要支付的成本、费用占总体成本、费用的比例其实并不高。这也就是说，房地产开发企业“消灭”账面上的预收账款负债并不需要多少现金，这是预收账款与其它负债的本质区别，如果不考虑这一因素则会低估企业的抗风险能力。
举一个假设的例子进一步阐述这个问题。我们假设一家房地产开发企业A2007年9月30日的流动资产为100亿元，流动负债为50亿元，其流动比率为2。2007年4季度A开发的一处楼盘已经封顶，并实现销售20亿元，但该楼盘预计在2008年才能竣工。忽略其他因素，则A企业的现金增加20亿元，预收账款增加20亿元。无论如何，A在实现了20亿元销售并取得现金后抗风险能力是增强了，但我们可以看一下其流动比率和短期风险头寸的变化情况。
流动比率=流动资产/流动负债
        =（100+20）/（50+20）
        =1.71
流动比率反而下降了。而在短期风险头寸方面，货币资金增加了20亿元，流动负债增加了20亿元，货币资金-流动负债的结果不发生任何变化。但由于现金增加，企业的总资产也增加，这样计算公式中“（流动负债-货币资金）/总资产”分子不变，分母变大，短期风险头寸仍会略有改善，但我怀疑改善的幅度不能充分反映企业财务状况的好转。通过这个例子，我们可以看到流动比率和短期风险头寸不考虑房地产开发企业预收账款这一特殊因素会出现何等的谬误。
当然，如果考虑预收账款，则对房地产开发企业短期风险的衡量重点就应该从收入和流动负债转变到销售额（包括未确认收入的预售部分）和扣除预收账款后的流动负债上来，但企业的销售额并非会计报表中的一项，因此数据的取得并非易事。
即使忽略销售额与收入的不同，在使用短期风险头寸指标时还需注意企业发展战略不同带来的影响。前面讲过短期风险头寸与流动比率相比考虑了企业开发性房地产的存在，但是，实施不同发展战略的企业其收入来源与资产结构也不同，正如前面提到的某些企业投资性房地产收入较多，而房地产租赁收入与开发收入受行业危机影响的程度不同。如果我们假设未来可能发生危机，企业的资产周转率将下降，但其收入构成不同，资产周转率下降的幅度也将迥异。因此，假设危机来临后所有房地产开发企业资产周转率将下降百分之多少，在此基础上比较企业的抗风险能力不能说是严谨。

Z值

Z值是美国学者Altman 发明的一种衡量企业破产风险的方法，被人们广泛应用。这一模型预测企业的Z值小于1.20时将破产，Z值介于1.20和2.90之间为“灰色区域”，Z大于2.90则企业没有破产风险。计算方法如下。
Z=0.717(X₁)+0.847(X₂)+3.11(X₃)+0.420(X₄)+0.998(X₅)
其中：X₁=营运资本/总资产
      X₂=留存收益/总资产
      X₃=息前税前利润/总资产
      X₄=股东权益/负债
      X₅=销售收入/总资产
可以发现，Z值不但象流动比率一样考虑了企业流动资产与流动负债，还象短期风险头寸一样考虑了资产周转的速度，此外，Z值还考虑了企业的盈利能力、长期资产和负债的匹配甚至所面对的股东分红压力，更加全面。根据国外学者的研究，房地产泡末一旦发生破灭，很有可能要持续三到五年的时间，因此，衡量地产企业抗风险能力只考虑短期偿债能力也还是不够的。当然，国内房地产行业长期前景看好，因此可能恢复的时间不需要那么长。但即便如此，我们相信在危机来临后，银行或者投资者还是愿意融资给资产负债率更低的企业，这样高资产负债率的企业的短期借款或者短期融资券也将受到影响。当然，X₁到X₅各项指标的权重以及破产风险大小的临界点是否适用国内企业有待观察，但根据Z值作一个相对的排名分析还是可行的。其合理在于如果企业的抗风险能力处于行业前列，那么无论其Z值（或其它指标）的绝对值如何可能都会生存下来，因为政府不可能让所有的地产企业都破产，我们也应该相信政府有这个能力。
美中不足的是由于中美国情的不同，Z值同样未考虑预收账款因素。此外，房地产开发企业往往有巨额的表外负债。以北辰实业为例，这家公司2007年7月24日与北京城市开发集团组成联合体竞买长沙新河三角洲地块成功，其报价为人民币92亿元，其中北辰实业占为此成立的项目公司80%的股权。然而在北辰实业的资产负债表上，2007年3季度末的存货与一个季度前相比只是从67.50亿元增加到85.99亿元，而公司3季度的收入只有10.16亿元，也就是说即使考虑到销售（并确认收入）使得存货减少的因素，其存货的增加也远远不够，相应地天价买地带来的付款压力也就未充分体现在会计报表中。之所以会出现这种现象，或许与国内土地可以分期开发、分期支付价款有关。仍以万科为例，2007年半年报披露约定资本支出为151亿元，为已签合同（主要为建安与土地合同）未付的约定资本项目支出及投资款，需在合同他方履行合同规定的责任与义务同时，若干年内支付。
如果不只考虑财务数字，则房地产企业是否在全国范围内开发项目？是否能获得“东方不亮西方亮”的效果？开发的主要区域房价走势如何？企业在开发区域的竞争能力、口碑如何？现有楼盘的开发进度如何？甚至公司管理层对风险的态度都将影响房地产开发企业的抗风险能力，当然，还有手中土地取得的价格。
复杂也有复杂的不好。流动比率固然有这样那样的弊端，但可以根据季报数字马上计算出来。而无论是计算短期风险头寸还是Z值，如何根据季报数据进行调整尚有待研究。毕竟，房地产开发、销售有很强的季节性，简单地认为收入在四个季度内平均取得只能说是地产行业的门外汉。
不过，下棋尚且“多算胜，少算不胜”，而投资是远比下棋更需要慎重的事情，因此全面、深刻地思考不但是必要的，也是值得的。对投资者来说，投资风险不仅体现在所投资企业的破产风险上，被投资企业业绩下降的风险也不容忽视。由此看来，做一个真正的投资者相当不容易。

 

SHANGHAI — Factories here churn out iPhones that are exported to the United States and Europe. Then thousands of them are smuggled right back into China.

The strange journey of Apple’s popular iPhone, to nearly every corner of the world, shows what happens when the world’s hottest consumer product defies a company’s attempt to slowly introduce it in new markets.

The iPhone has been swept up in a frenzy of global smuggling and word-of-mouth marketing that leads friends to ask friends, “While you’re in the U.S., would you mind picking up an iPhone for me?”

These unofficial distribution networks help explain a mystery that analysts who follow Apple have been pondering: why is there a large gap between the number of iPhones that Apple says it sold last year, about 3.7 million, and the 2.3 million that are actually registered on the networks of its wireless partners in the United States and Europe?

The answer now seems clear. For months, tourists, small entrepreneurs and smugglers of electronic goods have been buying iPhones in the United States and then shipping them overseas.

There the phones’ digital locks are broken so they can work on local cellular networks, and they are outfitted with localized software, essentially undermining Apple’s effort to introduce the phone with exclusive partnership deals, similar to its primary partnership agreement with AT&T in the United States.

“There’s no question many of them are ending up abroad,” said Charles R. Wolf, an analyst who follows Apple for Needham & Company.

For Apple, the booming overseas market for iPhones is both a sign of its marketing prowess and a blow to a business model that could be coming undone, costing the company as much as $1 billion over the next three years, according to some analysts.

But those economic realities do not play into the mind of Daniel Pan, a 22-year-old Web site designer in Shanghai who says a friend recently bought an iPhone for him in the United States.

He and other people here often pay $450 to $600 to get a phone that sells for $400 in the United States. But they are happy.

“This is even better than I thought it would be,” he said, toying with his iPhone at an upscale coffee shop. “This is definitely one of the great inventions of this century.”

Mr. Pan is among the new breed of young professionals in China who can afford to buy the latest gadgets and the coolest Western brands. IPhones are widely available at electronic stores in big cities, and many stores offer unlocking services for imported phones.

Chinese sellers of iPhones say they typically get the phones from suppliers who buy them in the United States, then have them shipped or brought to China by airline passengers.

Often, they say, the phones are given to members of Chinese tourist groups or Chinese airline flight attendants, who are typically paid a commission of about $30 for every phone they deliver.

Although unlocking the phone violates Apple’s purchase agreement, it does not appear to violate any laws here, though many stores may be avoiding import duties.

Considering China’s penchant for smuggling and counterfeiting high-quality goods, the huge number of iPhones being sold here is not surprising, particularly given the popularity of the Apple brand in China.

Indeed, within months of the release of the iPhone in the United States last June, iPhone knockoffs, or iClones as some have called them, were selling here for as little as $125. But most people opt for the real thing.

“A lot of people here want to get an iPhone,” says Conlyn Chan, 31, a lawyer who was born in Taiwan and now lives in Shanghai. “I know a guy who went back to the States and bought 20 iPhones. He even gave one to his driver.”

Negotiations between Apple and China Mobile, the world’s biggest mobile-phone service operator with more than 350 million subscribers, broke down last month, stalling the official release of the iPhone in China. Long before that, however, there was a thriving gray market.

“I love all of Apple’s products,” said a 27-year-old Beijing engineer named Chen Chen who found his iPhone through a bulletin board Web site. “I bought mine for $625 last October, and the seller helped me unlock it. Reading and sending Chinese messages is no problem.”

An iPhone purchased in Shanghai or Beijing typically costs about $555. To unlock the phone and add Chinese language software costs an additional $25.

For Apple, the sale of iPhones to people who ship them to China is a source of revenue. But the company is still losing out, because its exclusive deals with phone service providers bring in revenue after the phone is sold. If the phones were activated in the United States, Apple would receive as much as $120 a year per user from AT&T, analysts say.

But there are forces working against that. Programmers around the world collaborate on and share programs that unlock the iPhone, racing to put out new versions when Apple updates its defenses.

While Apple has not strongly condemned unlocking, it has warned consumers that this violates the purchase agreement and can cause problems with software updates.

Some analysts say abandoning the locked phone system and allowing buyers to sign up with any carrier they choose, in any country, could spur sales.

“The model is threatened,” Mr. Wolf, the analyst, said. But “if they sold the phone unlocked with no exclusive carrier, demand could be much higher.”

An Apple spokeswoman declined to comment on the proliferation of iPhones in China. When asked about the number of unlocked iPhones during a conference call with analysts last month, Timothy D. Cook, Apple’s chief operating officer, said it was “significant in the quarter, but we’re unsure how to reliably estimate the number.”

The copycat models are another possible threat to Apple. Not long after the iPhone was released, research and development teams in China were taking it apart, trying to copy or steal the design and software for use in knockoffs.

Some people who have used the clones say they are sophisticated and have many functions that mimic the iPhone.

In Shanghai, television advertisements market the Ai Feng, a phone with a name that sounds like iPhone but in Chinese translates roughly as the Crazy Love. That phone sells for about $125.

Some of the sellers of the copycats admit the phones are a scam.

“It’s a fake iPhone, but it looks nearly the same,” said a man who answered the phone last week at the Shenzhen Sunshine Trade Company, in southern China’s biggest electronics manufacturing area. “We manufacture it by ourselves. We have our own R. &D. group and manufacturing plant. Most of our products are for export.”

Most people here seem to want the glory that comes with showing off a real iPhone to friends.

“My friends envy me a lot,” says Mr. Pan, the Web designer. “They say, “Wow, you can get an iPhone.’ ”

平衡膳食、合理营养、促进健康

——《中国居民膳食指南（2007）》发布

 

近年来我国城乡居民的膳食状况明显改善，儿童青少年平均身高增加，营养不良患病率下降。但在贫困农村，仍存在着营养不足的问题。同时，我国居民膳食结构及生活方式也发生了重要变化，与之相关的慢性非传染性疾病，如肥胖、高血压、糖尿病、血脂异常等患病率增加，已成为威胁国民健康的突出问题。

为给居民提供最根本、准确的健康膳食信息，指导居民合理营养、保持健康，中国营养学会受卫生部委托于2006年成立了《中国居民膳食指南》修订专家委员会，对中国营养学会1997年发布的《中国居民膳食指南》进行修订。经过多次论证、修改，并广泛征求相关领域专家、机构和企业的意见，最终形成了《中国居民膳食指南（2007）》（以下简称“指南”），于2007年9月由中国营养学会理事会扩大会议通过。

《指南》以最新的科学证据为基础，论述了当前我国居民的营养需要及膳食中存在的主要问题，建议了实践平衡膳食获取合理营养的行动方案，对广大居民具有普遍指导意义。

一、《指南》主体框架

《指南》由一般人群膳食指南、特定人群膳食指南和平衡膳食宝塔三部分组成。

一般人群膳食指南共有10条，适合于6岁以上的正常人群。这十条是：

1.    食物多样，谷类为主，粗细搭配

2.    多吃蔬菜水果和薯类

3.    每天吃奶类、大豆或其制品

4.    常吃适量的鱼、禽、蛋和瘦肉

5.    减少烹调油用量，吃清淡少盐膳食

6.    食不过量，天天运动，保持健康体重

7.    三餐分配要合理，零食要适当

8.    每天足量饮水，合理选择饮料

9.    如饮酒应限量

10.           吃新鲜卫生的食物

每个条目下均设有对条目中心内容进行阐述的提要和对条目涉及的有关名词、概念以及常见问题进行科学解释的说明。部分条目还附有参考资料。

特定人群膳食指南是根据各人群的生理特点及其对膳食营养需要而制定的。特定人群包括孕妇、乳母、婴幼儿、学龄前儿童、儿童青少年和老年人群。其中6岁以上各特定人群的膳食指南是在一般人群膳食指南10条的基础上进行增补形成的。

为了帮助一般人群在日常生活中实践《指南》的主要内容，专家委员会对1997年的《中国居民平衡膳食宝塔》（以下简称“膳食宝塔”）进行了修订，直观展示了每日应摄入的食物种类、合理数量及适宜的身体活动量。膳食宝塔的使用说明中还增加了食物同类互换的品种以及各类食物量化的图片，为居民合理调配膳食提供了可操作性指导。

膳食宝塔共分五层，包含每天应摄入的主要食物种类。膳食宝塔利用各层位置和面积的不同反映了各类食物在膳食中的地位和应占的比重。谷类食物位居底层，每人每天应摄入250g~400g；蔬菜和水果居第二层，每天应摄入300g~500g和200g~400g；鱼、禽、肉、蛋等动物性食物位于第三层，每天应摄入125g~225g（鱼虾类50g~100g，畜、禽肉50g~75g，蛋类25g~50g）；奶类和豆类食物合居第四层，每天应吃相当于鲜奶300g的奶类及奶制品和相当于干豆30g~50g的大豆及制品。第五层塔顶是烹调油和食盐，每天烹调油不超过25g或30g，食盐不超过6g。由于我国居民现在平均糖摄入量不多，对健康的影响不大，故膳食宝塔没有建议食糖的摄入量，但多吃糖有增加龋齿的危险，儿童、青少年不应吃太多的糖和含糖高的食品及饮料。饮酒的问题在《指南》中也有说明。

新膳食宝塔增加了水和身体活动的形象，强调足量饮水和增加身体活动的重要性。水是膳食的重要组成部分，是一切生命必需的物质，其需要量主要受年龄、环境温度、身体活动等因素影响。在温和气候条件下生活的轻体力活动成年人每日至少饮水1200mL（约6杯）；在高温或强体力劳动条件下应适当增加。饮水不足或过多都会对人体健康带来危害。饮水应少量多次，要主动，不应感到口渴时再喝水。目前我国大多数成年人身体活动不足或缺乏体育锻炼，应改变久坐少动的不良生活方式，养成天天运动的习惯，坚持每天多做一些消耗体力的活动。建议成年人每天进行累计相当于步行6000步以上的身体活动，如果身体条件允许，最好进行30分钟中等强度的运动。

二、《指南》的特色

《指南》是根据营养学原理，紧密结合我国居民膳食消费和营养状况的实际情况，特别是最近的全国居民营养与健康调查的数据及资料而制定的，是指导广大居民实践平衡膳食，获得合理营养的科学文件。其目的是帮助我国居民合理选择食物，并进行适量的身体活动，以改善人们的营养和健康状况，减少或预防慢性疾病的发生，提高国民的健康素质。《中国居民膳食指南（2007）》继承和发展了《中国居民膳食指南（1997）》的主要内容，并进一步完善和发展了一般人群膳食指南和特定人群膳食指南的内容，理顺了条目顺序，在坚持以科学为依据的基础上，突出了针对性和实用性；内容更加丰富通俗，表现形式不拘一格，科学诠释当前居民在合理膳食上的误区和难题，主要特色有以下6点：

1．新增加了“三餐分配要合理，零食要适当”和“每天足量饮水，合理选择饮料”两个条目，将饮水、零食及饮料这些与健康密切相关的膳食内容引入到中国居民膳食指南中，使内涵更加丰富全面。

2．在“食不过量，天天运动，保持健康体重”条目下和膳食宝塔中明确提出“建议成年人每天进行累计相当于步行6000步以上的身体活动”，为指导居民天天运动提供了参照标准。

3．提出更具体的量化指标。如在“粗细搭配”的内容中“建议每天最好能吃50g以上的粗粮”；在“如饮酒应限量”的内容中明确“建议成年男性一天饮用酒的酒精量不超过25g，成年女性一天饮用酒的酒精量不超过15g。”

4．在坚持“合理营养，平衡膳食”的理念下，注重慢性病的预防。在一般人群膳食指南中有2条是针对慢性病的预防的，即“减少烹调油用量，吃清淡少盐膳食”和“食不过量，天天运动，保持健康体重”。其他8条的内容中也都有相关慢性病预防的内容。

5．表现形式不拘一格，科学诠释居民对膳食认识的误区和难题。《指南》在形式上增加了说明和参考资料，对条目涉及的有关名词、概念以及常见问题进行科学的解释，有助于对条目的深入理解和实践；采用问答形式，解答膳食中常见问题和居民对营养认识的误区；有更多提供丰富科学信息的图表；对专业术语予以通俗解释，对于营养学界前沿新观念和新发现，给出了参考资料作为佐证，既满足了专业人士对指南理解，又能满足广大居民在生活中实践《指南》。

6．各特定人群膳食指南内容更加丰富和具体。在1997年的膳食指南中，针对婴儿的条目只有“鼓励母乳喂养”和“母乳喂养4个月后逐步添加辅助食品”及不足900字的描述。在新《指南》中，婴儿又细分为0～6月龄婴儿和6月龄～12月龄婴儿。0～6月龄婴儿膳食指南条目增加到6条，有近7千字的描述，并提供了身长和体重增长参考曲线。

合理营养是健康的物质基础，而平衡膳食又是合理营养的根本途径。根据《指南》的条目并参照膳食宝塔的内容来安排日常饮食和身体活动是通往健康的光明之路。

随着我国社会经济的快速发展，我国城市化速度将逐步加快，与膳食营养相关的慢性疾病对我国居民健康的威胁将更加突出。在改善我国居民营养健康的关键时期，适时干预会起到事半功倍的效果。希望广大营养专业工作者全力投入，希望社会各界广泛参与，共同努力掀起宣传膳食指南、推广膳食指南和实践膳食指南的新高潮，达到改善全民营养与健康状况，控制和减少慢性病的目的，为全面建设小康社会奠定坚实的人口素质基础。

 

 

卫生部新闻办公室

二〇〇八年一月十五日

     满城尽待年终奖，弄弄才是喇叭腔

　　春天我把老公种下去，秋天我就有很多个老公了

　　日照香炉生紫烟，疑是熊猫在烧香

　　我依旧站在这古老的战场上，糊了一把乱风向

　　我假装认真地工作，老板假装认真地付薪水

　　每天早上起床都要看一遍《福布斯》富翁排行榜，如果上面没有我的名字，我就去上班……

　　一山不能容二虎，除非一公和一母！

　　读10年语文，不如聊半年QQ

　　拍脑袋决策，拍胸脯保证，拍屁股走人

　　我一个不久前结婚的男同学叫——常在厨房混，那能不切手

　　钻石恒久远，一颗就破产！

　　学问之美，在于使人一头雾水；诗歌之美，在于煽动男女出轨；女人之美，在于蠢得无怨无悔；男人之美，在于说谎说得白日见鬼。

　　长个包子样，就别怨狗跟着

　　水能载舟，亦能煮粥！

　　时间和乳沟一样，挤一挤还是有的。

　　男人感叹女人：漂亮的不会下厨房，能下厨房的不温柔，温柔的沒主见，有主见的沒女人味，有女人味的乱花钱，不乱花钱的不时尚，时尚的不放心，放心的没法看！

　　我希望有一天我能用鼠标双击我的钱包，然后选中一张100元，按住"Ctrl+C"接着不停地"Ctrl+V"呀！

　　我和刘翔都是上海的代表，刘翔代表速度，我代表港度（哈哈，这个搞笑）

　　水至清则无鱼，人至贱则无敌

　　我不是你想象中的那样完美那样坚强，金钱和美女就足以把我征服！

　　见到我以后你会突然发现，原来帅也可以这样具体呀！

　　床前明月光，低头吃便当！

　　不怕虎一样的敌人，就怕猪一样的队友 ！

　　钱不是问题，问题是没钱！

　　没有医保和寿险的，天黑后请不要见义勇为……

　　上帝欲使人灭亡，必先使其疯狂；上帝欲使人疯狂，必先使其买房。 结论是：现在不能买房！

一说到购物，女人们首先想到的会是诺德斯特隆百货公司（Nordstrom's），男人们首选去处则是西尔斯（Sears）。

女人们喜欢流连于服装和配饰的海洋，或者顺便绕道鞋类专柜观摩一番。她们喜欢置身于透明电梯中从大钢琴旁滑过的感觉，或在买东西的路上停下来试用某种香水样品。而对男人来说，购物是一种使命，他们来商店购买事先想好的物品，买到后便尽可能快地逃之夭夭，这是沃顿商学院一项新研究所发现的现象。

在一项名为“男人买，女人逛”（Men Buy, Women Shop）的研究中，沃顿商学院“杰伊·贝克零售计划”（Jay H. Baker Retail Initiative）与加拿大咨询公司维德集团（Verde Group）的研究人员发现，女人们对与售货员进行个人互动的反应比男人们更加强烈。男人们更可能对购物经历的功利性方面做出反应——如是否有停车位，他们想买的东西是否有货，以及收银台排队的长短。

“在许多层面上，女人们购物时往往更加投入”，美国连锁药店CVS Caremark首席营销官及贝克零售计划顾问委员会成员罗伯特·普莱斯（Robert Price）说。“男人们则想的是，要到西尔斯，买下某个特定工具便迅即离开。”

一名年龄介于18岁和35岁的女性购物者这样告诉研究人员：“我喜欢购物，这将至死不变，我就是爱购物。”相比之下，一名相同年龄段的男性购物者这样描述男人们如看待零售业：“我们来到这家商店，买到了东西就走人，因为我们还有别的事情要做。”

普莱斯说，即便女性担负的职业责任加大，女性仍然扮演着照顾者的角色。他推测，这种照顾者的责任有助于女性养成更加尖锐的购物意识和更高的期望值。另一方面，在几代人都是依靠女性来有效地履行购物职责后，男性的购物兴趣已经减弱。

沃顿商学院市场营销学教授斯蒂芬·霍奇（Stephen J. Hoch）认为，购物行为反映了两性在生活中许多方面的差异。“女性从人际交往的角度来看待购物，而男性更多地将购物当作一种手段，一件必须完成的工作，”他说，对于有意设计一个更加细化的方法来建立和保持男女顾客忠诚度的零售商来说，这些研究资料应可给予他们一些启发。

感到受重视 vs. 快速通过收银台

“男人买，女人逛”研究还发现，女性比男性更可能在购物时遇到问题——两者比例分别为53%和48%，其中40岁以上女性购物者比同年龄段男性购物者报称遇到了更多的问题。

对于女性购物者，“需要时得不到帮助”乃她们碰到的首要问题（29%），这也是商店发生女性购物者流失的最可能原因。确实，对研究数据进行分析后显示，缺乏销售帮助可能导致商店约6%的女性顾客流失。对于男性购物者，头号问题则是“难以找到靠近商店入口的停车位”（亦为29%）；最可能造成男性购物者流失的原因是他们想买的产品缺货，产品缺货可能导致商店约5%的男性顾客流失。

男性和女性购物者对商店售货员也有着不同的反应。对于男性购物者，售货员乐于帮助他们找到某样物品是他们最看重的，其次是售货员能让他们快速通过收银台。对于女性购物者，商店忠诚度与售货员对商店产品的熟悉程度及其确定哪些产品最适合顾客的能力有关。根据调查，女性购物者还在乎售货员是否让她们感到受重视。

在接受研究人员采访时，一名18至35岁年龄段的女子描述了她最喜爱商店的员工。“商店的售货员一直很棒，他们总是给我看不同的款式，如果店里进了新货，他们就会向我介绍。”同时，一名处于相同年龄段的男子说：“我与大多数售货员都没怎么打交道，我并不需要他们——只要收银台有人就行了。”

维德集团总裁保拉·科特尼（Paula Courtney）认为，上述两位受访者对商店售货员表明的态度反映了男女之间细微但重要的差别。在受访者被问到他们会因何种问题而气愤到再也不光顾某家商店时，女性举出的是商店员工“表现得像是你正打扰他们的时光或擅自干涉他们自己的交谈。”男性最恼火的则是商店员工“很懒惰，如货架没货也不去查看有没有多余的库存，或懒得将你带到你正在寻找的产品跟前。”

科特尼指出，女性在这个问题上表现出更多感情色彩；对于男性，售货员存在的问题仍与找到他们需要的物品直接相关。“女性更容易被售货员不理不睬的行为所激怒；而对于男性，虽然有交流仍然是重要的，但不如产品有货和快速进出商店来得重要。”

零售商可以利用研究发现来改善服务，以促进销售，她说。“在一个高度竞争的市场中，人们对价格很敏感，并有着大把的选择，如果你比别人在策略上多个心眼就能获得竞争优势，那么为什么不呢？”她问道。“如果我们将男性和女性顾客区别对待，将可望取得更大的成果。”贝克零售计划董事总经理埃尔琳·亚蒙丁泽（Erin Armendinger）指出：“男性和女性根本就不同，”她说。“零售商应谨记，男性和女性购物者的差异不仅体现在购买的物品上，他们购物的方式也不一样。”

普莱斯建议，那些希望提高基于顾客性别来投其所好这方面能力的零售商可以采取一些具体步骤。不过首先它们必须确保其业务运作保持尽可能流畅，以避免引起不爽，如商品缺货或缺少促销小册子等情形将影响到男性和女性购物体验。他还表示，向女性购物者伸出援助之手不能只流于做表面文章，如只是简单地设置标志，或改变制服的颜色。

沟通对于接待女性购物者是关键，普莱斯补充说。商店售货员需要了解购物者是否正寻找某种日常用品，如化妆品，还是某种更重要和难以理解的东西——如某种非处方药或急救治疗物品。为顾客在购买这两种不同类别商品上提供帮助，需要不同风格的沟通。售货员必须经过培训，以善于捕捉顾客的意图并做出反应。

希望吸引女性顾客的零售商还需要注意对物品进行分类，普莱斯说。商店经理可能倾向于提供宽泛的产品，但研究显示，必须应付许多责任的女性更偏好产品选择有限的商店，如女包及女性配饰店蔻奇（Coach）、美食店乔氏超市（Trader Joe's）和化妆品零售店丝芙兰（Sephora）。

最后，他说，在各个组织层次雇用女性将令零售商更能把握到女性购物者的需求。在他的公司中，女性占售货员的大多数，并掌握营销部门很大的话语权。他指出，在某位女性思索某个构想可能会如何影响她自己的生活之前，该构想是成不了气候的。

售货员的多副面孔

据总部设在佛罗里达州的女性消费者权益保护及零售培训组织WomenCertified数据显示，美国女性每年花销达4万亿美元，占美国消费开支的83%，而消费开支占到美国国民生产总值的三分之二。WomenCertified也参与了本项研究。

“男人买，女人逛”研究于2007年10月20日至11月4日期间进行，通过电话采访的方式，随机调查了全美1,250购物者，受访者被问及他们最近一次的购物经历。受访者样本以女性为主，男女比例为1比2。

尽管许多研究发现并不会令零售商感到惊讶，但研究获得的硬数据可以帮助企业更好地把注意力放在男性和女性购物者所列举的一些问题，WomenCertified创始人迪莉娅·帕西（Delia Passi）称。她说，零售商早已感受到了男女顾客之间的差别。“这可以追溯到两者最早担当的采集者和狩猎者角色，女性是采集者，男性是狩猎者；女性走进一家商店，浏览打量商品，男性则直接寻找产品所在的特定过道。”她指出，科学研究显示女性比男性拥有更好的周边视觉，这有利于她们进行采集。

帕西说，决定各自购物体验的男性和女性对购物的基本态度——女性更侧重于体验，而男性更多把它当作使命——并非一定会导向女性更情绪化更软弱的性别刻板印象。“当谈到购物经历，男人和女人都是去商店买东西，只是女人期望较高。她希望有更多的人际互动，希望有更多的目光接触；他想要速战速决，而她要寻找购买过程中的支持和协助。”帕西承认，调查揭示的许多看法仍然只是泛泛的反映，并且许多女性和男性受访者并不代表普遍的行为模式。的确，如果她拥有自己的事业，为时间所迫，她在购物时往往表现得更像是调查中的男性受访者。

霍奇认为，最近的研究以及贝克零售计划的其他研究表明，商店售货员对零售业务起着至关重要的作用，因为雇员是竞争者们能彼此区分从而赢得市场份额的一个方面。“零售商对停车问题或商场过于拥挤基本无能为力，但它们可以在售货员一环上下功夫，”他指出。“我所感兴趣的是，为何女性顾客往往把更多注意力放在人身上，而男性顾客却表现得几乎像是和一台自动柜员机打交道似的。事实上，他们更希望面对自动柜员机，而实在不想与一个人打交道。”

科特尼承认，从研究结果来看，那些在零售店已经时常变换许多不同侧重点的售货员需要增加另一项责任。“不管怎样，一位售货员必须具有多面性，”她说。“他们必须是一名参与者（engager），一位畅通保证员（expediter）和教育者（educator）。他们必须表现得真诚可靠，但这项研究还告诉我们，视乎你正在与男性还是女性顾客打交道，那些按钮必须打开或关闭——或者开大或开小。”

她说，零售商要加强和提供更完善和细化的服务，不仅要考虑性别因素，还要考虑年龄、种族和地区差异。“不存在顾客同质性这种东西。我们根本不是同质的一群人，但作为组织，我们要将顾客当作一个美满的大家庭来对待，你必须有效地运用各种各样的人口统计和心理统计手段。”

    性别，她指出，从策略角度而言是一个较容易处理的顾客属性。真正老练的营销人员可以尝试按性别和年龄或在职业女性和家庭全职主妇之间对服务进行区分。“在某个层面上，这是进行实用而理想的区分的开始，但我也认为区别对待不同性别的顾客也是一件相对简单的事情。”

原址：http://www.knowledgeatwharton.com.cn/index.cfm?fa=viewfeature&languageid=4&articleid=1746

正当美国国家篮球协会（NBA）四处物色其中国机构的将才之时，多家跨国企业的中国公司高管成了他们的猎头对象。

其中有一位最终胜出，他就是陈永正先生（Tim Chen），这位前任微软大中华区首席执行官于今年秋天离任，转而出任美国篮球协会的中国公司首席执行官。当微软公司为陈永正的继任人选一事左右斟酌之时，该公司也正为一个低调但却持久的人力资源问题而费尽心思：面对一心想招聘绩优人士的竞争对手，该如何保护公司免遭挖角厄运？

“我们确实面临挑战，” 微软亚洲工程院的人力资源经理康兆宁（Joe Hoskin）承认，“比如有一家名叫Google的公司。”

康兆宁和来自各行各业的50多位人力资源高管在11月6日云集上海，参加了为期一天的研讨会，主题是“不仅仅是金钱！开动‘创造性思维’吸引员工，帮助企业在中国获得成功”（More Than Just Money! ‘Outside the Box’ Thinking in Engaging Employees for Business Success in China）。该会由全球人力资源咨询公司翰威特咨询公司（Hewitt Associates）主办。研讨会突显出一个共同的信息：要留住员工，仅仅凭借丰厚的薪酬是不够的。

翰威特的组织和人才咨询分析亚洲业务总监尼什查·苏里（Nishchae Suri ）对此评论说，“亚洲的员工流动率相当高，因此企业应当制订如何留住员工的战略计划。”

谷歌当然不是觊觎中国资深IT人才的唯一公司。Alibaba.com，这家全国最大的电子商务公司本月在香港证交所成功上市，该公司每年都吸引全国高校的优秀人才前来就业，以满足公司的快速发展要求。印度软件巨头Infosys制订了一份雄心勃勃的中国招聘计划：到2010年，要为设在上海和杭州的两家新研发中心招聘6000名员工。摩根士丹利（Morgan Stanley）正在为公司位于上海的IT部招兵买马，计划从去年的30人扩展至明年的200多人，为公司的全球金融事业部门提供技术服务。

人才争夺战的战场并不局限于信息技术行业。据翰威特公司2006年亚太地区人才损耗与留存研究显示，依赖稳健的经济与日益增长的市场，银行业与金融服务业目前正在经历前所未有的发展，2005年，金融行业的员工流动率达到25%之多。

猎头行动也不仅仅局限于跨国公司。华信惠悦咨询公司（Watson Wyatt）北京分公司总经理林杰文先生（Jim Leininger）在今年四月份的报告中指出，“中国国内的一流公司正在加紧业务转型，以便获得国际市场的竞争力，他们对人才的期望也逐渐与外国公司接轨。”

物色不到合格人员将成为行业发展的桎梏。美国猎头公司光辉国际（KORN FERRY）在今年公布的一份报告中指出，中国的生命科学市场正是面临着如此挑战。报告称，“阻碍中国的生命科学行业发展的最大障碍在于，如何设法吸引、甚至更为重要的是，留住那些掌握合适技能的管理团队”，从而能够保持长久的发展。报告还指出，对于生命科学行业的销售与制造部门而言，30-40%的员工流动率是很普通的。

员工流动率如此之高，数字的背后究竟是什么？薪酬条件当然是主导因素。著名国际人力资源咨询公司合益集团（Hay Group）在2007年3月的报告中，对中国今年的基本工资涨幅进行了预测。他们预测行政人员的基本工资涨幅将达7.9%、专业人员为7.8%、高管人员为8.9%。而美国今年的平均增长率为1.4%。

针对中国劳动力市场日益增加的压力，除了提供更为丰厚的薪酬福利之外，公司该如何留住员工、保持他们的敬业度呢？研讨会期间，发言者与座谈小组成员就此问题相互交换了各自的观点与经验。

飞索（中国）的成功之鉴

飞索（中国）有限公司（Spansion China）作为飞索半导体的独资子公司，是全球最大的闪存产品和服务供应商。公司荣膺翰威特“2007年度亚洲最佳雇主”的称号，这是一项由翰威特对亚洲750家组织开展的调查研究。飞索（中国）拥有1,200名员工，总部设在江苏省苏州市。公司的人力资源总监陆解明（Benjamin Lu）与其他三位部门经理在小组讨论中互相交流了成功经验。

陆先生在回答听众提问时说，“本公司去年的人员流动率是12.3%，而整个电子行业的人员流动率是24%。”然而，陆补充说，他也经历了劳动力市场的剧烈动荡时期。2002年11月，他加盟飞索（中国）之后的第三个月，有53名员工集体跳槽去了马路对面那家竞争对手的公司。

当被问及公司如何激励员工时，陆先生回答道，“飞索中国的独特之处在于公司上下的联合协作。我们说员工是公司的核心资产，这是我们的肺腑之言，并非冠冕之辞。我们将其转化为实际行动。关键是要尊重员工。在公司副总裁兼总经理PC Loh的带领下，公司高层创建了许多与员工交流的渠道，方便管理层与员工进行对话。例如，我们召开双周例会、每周的圆桌讨论会以及季度碰头会，籍此鼓励所有人直接提出他们的想法、在工作中碰到的问题及相应的解决方案。”

“许多其它公司也建立起某种体制，但是仅限于案头工作，然后就不闻不问了，”他说道，“但在我们公司，我们真正地鼓励员工，让他们表现出主人翁的精神，他们可以对任何问题提出改进方案。我们称飞索公司是一个大家庭。所以，通过所有这些实际行动，员工们切实感受到高层对他们的关心与尊重。另一方面，我们当然也力图打造一个学习型组织并且……并且将所有必需的硬件设施，基础设施落实到位。”

飞索（中国）公司的测试部制造经理应少军认为，“在其它公司，有人说员工发展计划是人力资源部的问题。但是在飞索（中国）公司，所有员工与人力资源部的工作人员密切合作、我们对人力资源部的同事有充分的信任和非常坦诚的交流。”

万科集团的经验

万科集团是中国最大的上市房地产公司，1988年由富有传奇色彩的企业家王石先生创办，王石还是一位著名的登山者。

万科集团副总裁解冻先生表示，“万科集团的事业蒸蒸日上，其中很重要的一个原因，是因为集团总裁王石先生于1999年卸任总经理一职之前，他在人才发展和培训方面投入了大量的时间与心血。

“他求贤若渴、对人才的执着追求和严格要求是他获得成功的动力。同时，一旦把人才放在合适的岗位上，他就会充分授权。他为什么要去登山？用他的话来说，‘是为了控制我想去干预的冲动’。”

万科集团的总部设在中国南部的深圳，拥有员工13,000名。本月，万科集团荣膺翰威特颁发的2007年大中华“最具领导力公司”的美誉。解先生介绍说，“万科拥有网上培训学校和若干员工培养项目供各级员工学习，即岗位发展项目、经理发展项目及领袖发展项目（point promotion project, manager promotion project and leader promotion project），借此来建设公司的全面人才培训体系。此外，我们的岗位轮换制也能让员工得到培养。”

“我们发自内心地尊重员工，但我们也对他们进行严格的要求，”他补充道，“我在万科的15年职业生涯中，让我最引以为傲的就是，我的团队和我本人都做了我们爱做的事情，而公司也为我们提供了发展的平台与资源。万科的文化是倡导对人的尊重，对此我深感荣耀。”

谈及中国日益增长的劳动力成本的压力问题时，解冻表示，在房地产行业中，万科提供的薪酬待遇并不是最高的，只在近两年有所提高。“作为人力资源总监，我并不认为薪水越高越好，合理的报酬才是重要的。当有人说想辞职去薪水更高的公司干活，我会对他说，‘除非他们付你双倍的工资，否则你还是别去了。因为我相信，在三到五年之后，万科能为你提供更好的职业发展道路。其它公司或许会给你更多的薪水，但是未来发展的机会又在哪里呢？’”

在研讨会间歇，翰威特公司华南区总经理许峰（Belcome Xu）就为什么有的公司比其它公司在人力资源方面表现出色的问题提出了他的真知灼见：“首先，公司高层管理团队必须团结一致，并且重视人力资源工作；其次，人力资源总监必须精明强干，并且有能力与公司首席执行官开展有效的互动与沟通。”

学习总结

翰威特公司全球咨询业务总监安德鲁·贝尔（Andrew Bell）对最佳雇主评选进行了总结，根据最佳雇主研究的数据显示，最佳公司的员工对组织的目标具有清楚的认识。最佳公司在组织的各个层级设立了积极目标，近乎实现积极目标的员工与超过不太积极的目标要求的员工相比，前者获得的奖励更多。最佳公司的经理与员工充分开展关于业绩的谈话，帮助他们实施改进。此外，这类公司能够充分肯定优秀员工、对表现不佳的员工做出处理，同时由人力资源部门提供有效的工具和培训，确保绩效管理的成功实施。

据翰威特的2006年亚太地区人才损耗与留存研究显示，接受调查的公司采用最多的三种人才留存措施分别为：高于市场水平的薪酬、提供学习新技能的机会、鼓励生活与工作之间的良性平衡。

正如IBM亚太区人力资源副总裁汤姆·韦恩斯（Tom Vines）所指出的，“员工的敬业度非常重要，否则员工就不会为顾客提供优良的服务。但问题在于如何改进。”

    或者，如飞索（中国）公司的总经理PC Loh在前次接受翰威特采访时所说，“作为一个经验丰富的观察者，当你走进办公场所，你一眼就能看出员工是高兴的、还是一副茫然呆板的样子……如果你的手下心情愉快，他们就会更加敬业、更加愿意在工作中做出贡献。”

原地址：http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/15/business/15merrill.html?ex=1352782800&en=7f08eefa1c2c209b&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

John A. Thain won plaudits as Wall Street’s Mr. Fix-It by revitalizing the embattled New York Stock Exchange. Now, he faces what could be a more formidable challenge: turning around Merrill Lynch, the once-proud Wall Street firm battered by losses from the mortgage debacle.

Yesterday, Mr. Thain, who had risen to co-president of Goldman Sachs but left for the stock exchange, was named chairman and chief executive of Merrill, where he will compete against his former colleagues.

Repairing the reputation of Merrill, one of the biggest casualties of the recent turmoil in the financial markets, will test the financial and political mettle of Mr. Thain, 52. Merrill’s former chief executive, E. Stanley O’Neal, was forced to resign two weeks ago after announcing an $8.4 billion write-down and approaching a rival bank to discuss a merger.

Although Mr. Thain’s name was on a short list of candidates from the start, his hiring still took Wall Street by surprise. Many top-level executives had expected that the job would be offered to Laurence D. Fink, the founder of BlackRock, a large investment firm partly owned by Merrill.

But according to people briefed on Merrill’s decision, Mr. Thain was selected, not just because of his success at the exchange but also because of his understanding of risk management systems at Goldman, which has largely avoided the problems plaguing its rivals.

Merrill directors personally wooed Mr. Thain at his home in Rye, N.Y. At 5 p.m. Sunday, Ann N. Reese, a Merrill director who lives nearby, stopped by his house for a cup of English tea.

For two hours, she and Alberto Cribiore, the firm’s interim nonexecutive chairman, encouraged Mr. Thain to join the firm. Mr. Thain had also met with members of a search committee seeking to fill the top job at Citigroup, whose chief executive, Charles O. Prince III, resigned in the wake of multibillion-dollar write-downs related to subprime mortgages.

Fixing Merrill’s problems will take some time, Mr. Thain said yesterday, because the issues troubling the overall mortgage market are likely to continue for another 6 to 12 months. “We have not seen the bottom,” he said.

Mr. Thain went to the NYSE in 2004 and is widely credited with modernizing and expanding the 215-year-old exchange. He stepped into turmoil there, including a scandal over the $187.5 million pay package of Richard A. Grasso, the former chairman, and a federal investigation into trading practices.

Slightly more than a year after he arrived, he executed a deal to merge with Archipelago, an all-electronic platform, converting the nonprofit institution into a public one. He then took on the Deutsche Börse to win Euronext, a pan-European exchange, which ultimately merged with the New York Exchange.

“The exchange was in flux and he resuscitated the place with the acquisition of Archipelago and the merger with Euronext,” said John R. Jakobson, a former member and a current shareholder. “It was on life support then, and it’s in first-rate condition today.”

The exchange went public in March 2006 at $67 a share; it closed yesterday at $78.69.

While Mr. Thain boasts an impressive résumé, he is known more as an analytical technocrat. While he was not popular on the exchange’s floor, analysts say he was respected. For example, the Archipelago deal was criticized when announced, but he ultimately got traders to vote for it.

“He’s articulate and can consensus-build,” Richard H. Repetto, an analyst at Sandler O’Neill, said. “He had to deal with members as they saw their jobs become extinct.”

Mr. Thain started his career at Goldman as an investment banker and went on to work in mortgage securities, ultimately running the desk in the late 1980s.

In 1994 he was promoted to chief financial officer and head of operations, technology and finance. In 2003, he became co-president and co-chief operating officer with John Thornton. He was considered a candidate to run Goldman Sachs after Henry M. Paulson Jr., now the Treasury secretary.

But Mr. Thornton left Goldman and Lloyd C. Blankfein, then the head of the firm’s powerful fixed- income group, was on the ascent. Mr. Thain, when he was contacted by John S. Reed, opted for the chance to run the exchange. (Mr. Blankfein now runs Goldman.)

Mr. Thain now faces a formidable task at Merrill. Under Mr. O’Neal, the bank aggressively entered into new and riskier businesses, including underwriting collateralized debt obligations, originating subprime loans and expanding its proprietary trading operations.

Mr. O’Neal also reached out to G. Kennedy Thompson, the chief executive of Wachovia to explore a merger, an approach that might have been acceptable if the board had not been reeling from the magnitude of the loss. After the merger approach became known, Mr. O’Neal was forced to resign.

Although Merrill did not disclose what Mr. Thain would be paid, it is expected to be more than what Mr. O’Neal received. Mr. O’Neal earned $70 million in the last five years, and took home an additional $161.5 million in stock he had deferred and in retirement benefits.

Mr. Thain took a pay cut to go to the exchange in early 2004: he made more than $20 million at Goldman in 2003 but agreed to a starting salary and bonus of $4 million at the exchange. He will leave with $820,000 of deferred compensation, $3.6 million in restricted stock and options on top of the $14.9 million he made at the exchange, according to Equilar and James F. Reda & Associates.

Some challenges that Mr. Thain will face will seem familiar: rebuilding risk management and continuing to build the investment bank. But managing a huge brokerage business — Merrill’s is the largest in the United States — will be new. And he will have to learn that portion of the business at a time when the subprime mortgage crisis continues to cause Wall Street to reel.

When asked if he was nervous about joining a company whose board oversaw the mess it is in, he said: “It was a very important question for me to understand, and I got comfortable with their answer.”

Perhaps most important, he will have to focus on Merrill’s culture, one that has been through iterations of “Mother Merrill” — the happy, back-slapping but bloated days of the past and the highly political, aggressive reign of Mr. O’Neal.

The decision to pick Mr. Thain came as a surprise to many. While the search committee, led by Mr. Cribiore, made it clear to Mr. Fink that he was a top, if not leading candidate, the board, from the outset saw Mr. Thain as the best choice, people briefed on the board’s deliberations said. While that decision had much to do with Mr. Thain’s mix of risk experience at Goldman and his time at the exchange, it was also influenced by a sense that the board wanted to keep Mr. Fink at BlackRock.

Merrill has a 49 percent stake in the firm, and BlackRock under Mr. Fink has presided over a sharp revival in the performance of Merrill’s equity funds, which BlackRock now manages.

Mr. Fink has an outgoing, garrulous personality and a network of personal relationships that reaches into virtually every corner of Wall Street. And as the board’s courtship of him continued, he talked freely about the pros of leading Merrill compared with the cons of leaving BlackRock. At a BlackRock board meeting last week, Mr. Fink told directors that the Merrill search committee had expressed an interest in him and while he was intrigued about the possibility, the thought of leaving BlackRock, was giving him pause.

But, while the logic of his coming to Merrill might have looked good on paper, no board likes to be pushed into picking a chief executive. And the public presumption that Mr. Fink would simply be offered the job rubbed directors the wrong way, according to a person briefed on the board’s deliberations.

“None of the media speculation weighed into the board’s decision-making,” a Merrill spokesman, Jason Wright, said.

Despite a week of intense discussions, Mr. Fink had little sense that the board’s top choice was Mr. Thain, according to people briefed on the talks. And when the news broke early yesterday afternoon that Mr. Thain had taken the job, Mr. Fink was as surprised as anyone, having not received a call ahead of time, people who were briefed on the talks said.

Mr. Fink declined to comment.

Merrill directors voted unanimously yesterday morning to offer Mr. Thain the job. While he does not start until Dec. 3, he came over to meet members of the operating committee and even stopped by an event on the 33rd floor with private clients last night.

Mr. Thain will now compete against Goldman Sachs, his alma mater, and a firm he praises. “I love Goldman Sachs and I love the people, but I think Merrill will be a great competitor.”

原贴地址：华尔街日报中文站

国主要石油和天然气生产商中国石油天然气股份有限公司(Petrochina Co., 简称：中国石油)在周一几个小时的交易时间内成为了全球最大的公司。但是，它真的名副其实吗？

中国石油在上海证券交易所首日上市令人震惊的表现再次显示了中国牛市的力量，今年以来中国股市已经上涨了一倍多。中国石油A股在首个交易日就上涨了一倍多，此前它在中国大陆共筹得89亿美元。按一些标准来衡量，中国石油的估值超过了1万亿美元，使它成为全球市值最大的公司。中国石油还分别在香港及纽约证交所上市交易。

不过，中国石油及其他在中国上市的公司估值的飙升似乎更多体现的是中国股市的问题和特征，而非上市公司本身的表现。

事实上，很难对像中国石油和中国工商银行(Industrial & Commercial Bank of China Ltd.)这种由中国政府控股的公司进行准确的估值。这些企业拥有复杂的公司架构，它们大部分的股份控制在政府手中，少数公开交易的股份散落在不同的市场中。这种股份的稀缺性也会推高股价。中国对资本的控制使这个问题更加突出，因为这种做法导致中国上市公司的股价在国内市场与其他市场之间产生了巨大差距。按某些标准计算，中国工商银行是全球市值最大的金融机构。

以中国石油为例，该公司在上海的首次公开募股(IPO)仅向国内投资者出售了2.2%的股份。在周一首个交易日中，中国石油A股股价开盘大幅走高，最终收于每股人民币43.96元（约合5.90美元），其IPO价格为16.70元。

如果中国石油全部已发行股都按这一价格计算，那么它的市值将达到1.08万亿美元，几乎是行业巨头埃克森美孚(Exxon Mobil Corp.)的两倍。至少在上个交易日，埃克森美孚仍以4,880亿美元的市值坐在全球市值最大公司的宝座上。如果中国石油全部已发行股用H股价格（周一收于18港元）计算，它的市值接近4,240亿美元。中国石油的美国存托股票估值与H股接近。然而，中国石油大约86%股份仍在其国有母公司的手中，且不公开交易。一旦有一天真的全部公开交易，也很难预知它们的定价。

长江商学院(Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business)金融学教授周春生表示，这并不意味着中国石油比埃克森美孚大。由于两家公司的股价来自不同的市场，因此不应该用股价来对两家公司进行简单比较。根据中国的法律，中国国内投资者对外投资选择非常有限，而外国投资者也只能对少量A股进行投资。这也就意味着中国股市价格反映的是中国国内投资者在投资渠道有限的情况下高涨的投资需求。

鉴于这种不确定因素，或许可以采用另一个方法来对其估值：仅计算投资者能够买卖的股份──也就是所谓的流通股。中国石油公开交易股份的总价值为725亿美元。虽然这个数字也很大，但不过是埃克森美孚市值的一个零头。

中国石油的业务是否有理由获得比其美国竞争对手更高的估价也很不好说。中国石油A股基于今年预期收益的本益比约为50倍，而中国石油H股的本益比约为20倍。而在国际股市交易的大型石油公司基于预期收益的本益比平均为10倍。

埃克森美孚实际规模也比中国石油要大很多。去年中国石油的产量为10.6亿桶油当量，而埃克森美孚为15.6亿桶油当量。2006年，埃克森美孚的收入为3,655亿美元，净利润为395亿美元；中国石油2006年收入为919亿美元，净利润为190亿美元。

当然，股市更多地是根据未来的业绩、而不是过去的表现来对公司进行估值的，中国石油的确拥有良好的增长前景。该公司预计今后的年产量增幅将达到4%至6%，而其它多数石油巨头预计都难以实现增长。

这是因为，即便是在其石油产量不断增加的情况下，中国石油也能通过收购和提高勘探开发技术获得足够的新油气资源，从而保持储量的继续增长。里昂证券亚太区市场(CLSA Asia-Pacific Markets)中国能源研究部主管关荣乐(Gordon Kwan)仍看好该股。他认为中国石油从油价持续上涨中获得的好处要多于其海外竞争对手。

不管前景如何，中国投资者目前的高涨热情无疑让中国石油受益匪浅，他们源源不断将资金投入到股市中的做法已经让政府部门越来越感到担忧。中国股市无休止的上涨让人们担心上世纪80年代日本和台湾牛市以及美国科技股泡沫破裂的一幕可能会重演。

中国银河证券有限公司(China Galaxy Securities Co.)首席经济学家左小蕾表示，预测泡沫非常困难，几乎是不可能的。但我们可以说，根据历史情况看，这种奇迹从来都是不可持续的。海外投资者是否相信这点取决于他们自身。

原帖地址：http://club.esnai.com/club/bbs/bbsView.aspx?essenceID=74565

为风险生；为清贫死；要实现资产最大值；

与职称拼；和考试争；为数字奔波这一生；

吃企业亏；上领导当，最后死在审计上！      

满腔热血把财务学会，当了会计吃苦受罪，

一天到晚必须就位，办公桌前终日疲惫，

从早到晚比牛还累，屁大点帐不敢不对，

逢年过节加班应对，一时一刻不敢离位，

周末不休还要开会，税务检查让人崩溃，

天天干活不懂社会，工资不高还要缴税，

脊椎增生天天受罪，抛家舍业愧对长辈，

回到家里还要惧内，囊中羞涩见人惭愧，

百姓还说我们受贿，青春年华如此狼狈，

此般生活实在无畏！

原帖地址：http://www.nytimes.com/2007/10/13/technology/13google.html?ex=1349928000&en=fb4eec073de36e33&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Can anything stop the ascent of Google’s stock?

When the company’s shares pierced $600 for the first time last Monday, Wall Street analysts scrambled to jack up their price targets, most to about $700. Jim Cramer, the high-decibel CNBC talk-show host, told his audience on Wednesday night “never to take financial advice from anyone who doesn’t recommend Google.”

Google closed the week at $637.39, more than 50 times its earnings, giving it a market capitalization that nearly equals the total value of the three largest traditional media companies: Time Warner, Walt Disney and the News Corporation. Even at Google’s current stock price, 34 of the 38 analysts following the company have buy recommendations, according to Thomson Financial.

Fred Hickey, editor of The High-Tech Strategist newsletter in Nashua, N.H., is one of the few willing to call Google’s stock surge “insanity.” But even he isn’t predicting when it might end. He has placed a tiny bet against Google, but no more. “You cannot short a mania,” he said.

What could reset expectations about Google? What are the risk factors — short term and longer range — that could dim the aura of inevitable success that surrounds the company? What could slow the Google juggernaut?

The potential threats, according to industry analysts, fall into three broad categories: those from inside the company, those from rivals, and public policy challenges that could bring regulatory controls and tarnish Google’s reputation and brand.

Any big, fast-growing company confronts the “law of large numbers” — that is, growth rates naturally tend to slow as a company gets bigger. That should not be a real issue for Google, analysts say, until it gets to be about twice its current size.

In 2007, the company’s revenue is projected to reach $11.5 billion, a 58 percent annual increase. Google, they say, is riding a tidal shift in advertising onto the Web that is just getting under way. Today, only 5 to 10 percent of advertising budgets are spent online, even though most Americans now spend as much time on the Web as watching television.

But in the short term, the number to really watch is Google’s spending. Last quarter, expenses that came in higher than anticipated surprised Wall Street and temporarily hit Google’s stock price. “The biggest challenge to Google’s stock is going to be if it gets the rap of being an overspender and not rewarding shareholders fully,” said Scott Cleland, an analyst at the Precursor Group.

Google is hiring at a torrid pace. The company keeps doubling the number of engineers it hires each year, adding 4,000 last year. “You simply can’t maintain the quality at 4,000 hires that you had at 250 or 500 or 1,000,” said Edward Lazowska, a professor of computer science at the University of Washington.

Larry Page, a Google co-founder, said at a conference last week that hiring was a big concern. “We never have enough people to do what we want,” he said. “We always need to hire. But there are limitations to how fast you can recruit people.”

Google is hiring so aggressively to support its ambitious strategy, which now extends well beyond its core business in search and online ads.

It has begun offering Web-based software like word processing and spreadsheets — areas where Microsoft is the dominant supplier. Its coming mobile phone software will put Google in competition with telecommunications companies. With YouTube, which it bought for $1.65 billion last year, Google has become a major distributor of entertainment, which could put it in conflict with cable TV companies.

These moves are assaults on huge businesses that have entrenched competitors. Google’s management style, geared to nurture individual innovation, may not be suited to the task, analysts say.

“Google needs to make sure that its management culture is in sync with the strategy,” said Thomas R. Eisenmann, an associate professor at the Harvard Business School. “I’m not sure the bottom-up approach will do it.”

Competitors

“The great risk to Google is that someday it will face real competition in search,” said Jordan Rohan, an analyst at RBC Capital Markets.

Google looks so strong today in part because of the stumbles of its principal rivals, Yahoo and Microsoft. Both have invested heavily to catch up in search and online ad auctions, but without success so far. In September, Google’s share of Web searches in the United States was 67 percent, up from 54 percent a year earlier, reports Compete.com, a Web analytics firm. The Yahoo share was 19 percent, compared with 29 percent a year earlier. And Microsoft had 9 percent, up slightly from a year ago.

The company’s market lead is so large that advertisers tailor their technology to work best on Google ad networks, and Web publishers design their sites to best pull in more Google users.

Jim Lanzone, chief executive of Ask.com, the fourth-largest search engine with about 4 percent share, sees no “silver bullet” that could greatly shift market share. Ask.com is acknowledged as an innovator in using graphics, audio and video in its results. The search market, he said, is so large that Ask.com can thrive by gradually inching forward.

Google, too, is apparently pursuing disruptive new search technologies. Narayanan Shivakumar, a computer scientist who heads Google’s Seattle office, is being given 100 engineers over the next three years to try to come up with search technology that beats its current offering, according to an industry consultant told of the project.

Google’s rising market power could also slow it. George F. Colony, chief executive of Forrester Research, was visiting corporate clients across Europe this week. “Nearly every company I meet here, as in the U.S., sees Google as an enemy or a potential enemy,” he said from Paris. “That could close doors for Google and make it harder to do deals with potential partners.”

Regulation

Not only Google’s market power, but also its reach and influence on how millions of people navigate their digital lives invite scrutiny. Privacy advocates say Google’s dominance and practice of keeping search histories of users raise many dangers. Google’s vast databases and search tracking, they say, raise the prospect of a corporate Big Brother.

Google’s motto is “Don’t be evil.” But Privacy International, a London-based organization, ranked Google last among Internet companies and called it “an endemic threat to privacy.”

Search engines like Google identify the searches done using a particular computer, rather than actually knowing who is at the keyboard. Yet privacy advocates say that unless rules are in place to limit what kinds of personal data can be collected and how long it can be stored, Google can effectively know who you are without knowing your name.

The privacy issue, they say, will only increase as Google grows and extends into new markets. “Google underestimates how strongly people care about privacy and underestimates governments’ willingness to take action,” said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, a privacy rights group.

That group and others have urged the Federal Trade Commission and European authorities to block Google’s planned $3.1 billion purchase of the online advertising company DoubleClick, or to make privacy protections a condition of the deal.

History’s Pull

In technology, dominant companies look invincible for years until they are unseated by the next wave of previously unforeseen innovation. I.B.M. ruled the mainframe era and Microsoft the personal computer boom. Google has emerged as a power of the Internet economy. Huge profits and market power are the rewards for being a keystone company in each era. It is no surprise, then, that I.B.M. and Microsoft were the targets of landmark federal antitrust suits.

What the next technology wave might be is anyone’s guess. But what Wall Street will be looking for is a turn, a shift in momentum. One such shift, analysts suggest, could be a combination of slowing growth and declining profit margins. Google’s ad revenue comes mainly from two sources: text ads from its own search results and ads it places on the Web sites of other companies. On the latter, it pays 80 cents or so of each dollar to the Web site and keeps the rest. Increased competition in ad networks, especially from Microsoft, will drive the payouts higher, nibbling away at Google’s profits.

原帖地址 ：http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/31/nyregion/31vacation.html?ex=1346212800&en=fe09df830d869478&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

SOMERS, N.Y. — It’s every worker’s dream: take as much vacation time as you want, on short notice, and don’t worry about your boss calling you on it. Cut out early, make it a long weekend, string two weeks together — as you like. No need to call in sick on a Friday so you can disappear for a fishing trip. Just go; nobody’s keeping track.

That is essentially what goes on at I.B.M., one of the cornerstones of corporate America, where each of the 355,000 workers is entitled to three or more weeks of vacation. The company does not keep track of who takes how much time or when, does not dole out choice vacation times by seniority and does not let people carry days off from year to year.

Instead, for the past few years, employees at all levels have made informal arrangements with their direct supervisors, guided mainly by their ability to get their work done on time. Many people post their vacation plans on electronic calendars that colleagues can view online, and they leave word about how they can be reached in a pinch.

“It’s like when you went to college and you didn’t have high school teachers nagging you anymore,” said Mark L. Hanny, I.B.M.’s vice president of independent software vendor alliances. “Employees like that we put more accountability on them.”

But the flip side of flexibility, at least at I.B.M., is peer pressure. Mr. Hanny and other I.B.M. employees, including his assistant, Shari Chiara, say that they frequently check their e-mail and voice mail messages while on vacation. Bosses sometimes ask subordinates to cancel days off to meet deadlines.

Some workplace experts say such continued blurring of the boundaries between work and play can overtax employees and lead to health problems, particularly at companies where there is an expectation that everyone is always on call.

“If leadership never takes time off, people will be skeptical whether they can,” said Kim Stattner of Hewitt Associates, a human resources consultant. “There is the potential for a domino effect.”

Frances Schneider, who retired from an I.B.M. sales division last year, after 34 years, said one thing never changed; there was not one year in which she took all her allotted time off.

“It wasn’t seven days a week, but people ended up putting in longer hours because of all the flexibility, without really thinking about it,” Ms. Schneider said. “Although you had this wonderful freedom to take days when you want, you really couldn’t. I.B.M. tends to be a group of workaholics.”

I.B.M. officials said they have no idea whether workers take more or fewer days off now than before, and have not studied the policy’s effect on efficiency.

But they point to employee surveys showing that the self-directed work and vacation policy is one of the top three reasons workers choose to stay there.

“Change is change,” said Richard Calo, vice president of global workforce relations. “We had some initial questioning of it. But at the end of the day, you remember how much time you spent. This wasn’t a difficult sell.”

Mr. Calo, the human resources chief, said that the open-ended vacation policy is “not a total license to do whatever you want to do,” and that workers are expected to produce quality work, even if the company is not paying attention to when or where they complete it.

The hands-off approach to vacation time, which gradually took hold over the past decade, has come amid I.B.M.’s shift from engineering and manufacturing into services like consulting and is part of a broader demise of old notions of eight hours’ pay for eight hours’ work at a fixed location.

Aided by broadband connections, cellphones and video conferencing software, 40 percent of I.B.M.’s employees have no dedicated offices, working instead at home, at a client’s site, or at one of the company’s hundreds of “e-mobility centers” around the world, where workers drop in to use phones, Internet connections and other resources.

Long a trendsetter in human resources — it began offering family leave in the 1950s — I.B.M. is probably the largest company to do away so completely with tracking vacation, although a number of newer, smaller firms have similar policies.

Best Buy has introduced a program called Results Oriented Work Environment for its 4,000 corporate employees, giving them freedom to do their jobs without regard to the hours they put in daily.

Motley Fool, the online investment adviser, has, since its founding 13 years ago, let employees take as many paid vacation or sick days as they need; the company’s director of human resources, Lee Burbage, said that most of its 180 workers take three to four weeks a year. Netflix, the online DVD distributor, no longer allots specific numbers of vacation days to its 400 salaried employees.

“When you have a work force of fully formed professionals who have been working for much of their life,” Patty McCord, the chief talent officer of Netflix, said, “you have a connection between the work you do and how long it takes to do it, so you don’t need to have the clock-in and clock-out mentality.”

I.B.M.’s vacations-without-boundaries system started in the early 1990s, when managers in the human resources, finance and technology departments questioned whether tracking days off helped the company grow — and some complained that it was an administrative burden.

So the company stopped counting days in a few departments, then gradually expanded the new policy. Since 2003, it has covered everyone in the company, from the chief executive, Samuel J. Palmisano, who has a vacation house in Kennebunkport, Me., to workers at I.B.M.’s chip and server factories in East Fishkill and Poughkeepsie, N.Y.

Luis H. Rodriguez, the director of market management in I.B.M.’s software group, said he visits his office here in Somers about once a week, working the rest of the time on the road or at his home in Ridgefield, Conn., where he sat one recent afternoon at the kitchen table with his laptop open.

He said that in six years at I.B.M. he can recall only one time when he asked a co-worker not to take a long weekend off — when their group was about to buy another company — and that calling colleagues or checking e-mail while visiting relatives in Texas or Illinois is a fair trade for being able to work from home so he can spend more time with his children, Alec, 5, and Evia, 2.

“I get an incredible amount of flexibility from the company, but it cuts both ways,” he said. “Because people’s schedules and needs are so structured, you need flexibility at work.”

For most companies, keeping track of time worked and time off remains a critical and transparent benchmark for workers and bosses. It is also a necessity in factories, call centers, restaurants and other workplaces where business would grind to a halt if managers were unable to predictably have enough employees on hand.

“If you look at the organizations that have done more radical things, they tend to be technology companies with salaried people,” where flexibility in job performance “is embedded into the culture of the place,” noted Max Caldwell, a managing principal in the work force effectiveness area at Towers Perrin, a human resources consultant.

Indeed, I.B.M.’s Mr. Calo said that the flexibility has helped the company compete with the more freewheeling atmosphere at start-up rivals in the technology world that have lured away some of its talent over the years.

“We have a reputation of not being as hip as a Google or a Netflix,” he said. “You don’t have to be the coolest guy on the block, but you don’t have to be the Big Blue nerd, either."

李若山语录

1。78界我们同学聚会，名单打印出来，很多人都是已故。为什么已故呢，都是枪毙 的。当然现在还有很多还在里面。干我们这一行的，出来都是两院院士，做得好进医院，做不好进法院……

2。我有个60岁的朋友，他估计能够活到90岁，是正常的直线折旧。但是后来，他请了一个小保姆，两年后就死了，这就是加速折旧。

3。和我一起毕业的许多同学大多数都成为了什么CEO,CFO,CIO,CCO啊之类的，总是一个C加上结尾一个O，什么？CCO不知道？Cheif Culture officer。我呢，是大学财务系的主任，也是个O，财务英文的第一个字母是什么？F。然后大学是University，所以呢……UFO

4.那个我们知道审计师的独立性受到干预的话是无法客观出具审计意见的，比如有个审计师到公司去审计，公司的CFO是个复旦毕业的小姑娘，审啊审啊审出感情来了 ，就结婚了，那怎么出具反对的审计意见报告，否则怎么回去和自己当老板的老婆交待太太负责制。在我家就是这样，家里大事听我的小事听她的。什么叫大事呢？打伊拉克 就是大事，其余的都是小事

5。中国第一代企业经理人是搞技术出身的，那个时候物资紧缺，生产出来不愁卖不掉。第二代经理人呢，是搞——我不知道中文怎么说——Marketing出身的。你们把marketing叫做什么啊？（我们：市场营销）不对，叫忽悠！你们知道他们系的祖师爷是谁么？赵本山！

6。加班不报OT有什么坏的后果呢？你不报加班时间以后安排time budget的时候就会更紧，然后别人不加班就没法按时完成，没法按时完成就没有奖金，没有奖金他就只好偷工减料，偷工减料审计报告的质量就会出问题，审计报告的质量出问题安达信就享年88岁了。这个都是环环相扣的，好比没有天哪有地没有地哪有你没有你哪有我……

7。我们知道广告费用这个东西有个滞后效应，就是说你今天投下去要以后才看得到效果的。这个就好像青橄榄，青橄榄你们吃过伐？就是咬下去的时候有点苦涩的.小时候妈妈给我吃青橄榄，咬了一口苦苦的怎么这么难吃的啦，就丢到屋顶上面去了。嚼了一会儿以后突然觉得有甜甜的味道了。哦原来这个东西这么好吃啊，马上拿了个梯子爬到屋顶上面去找，找了半天没找到，只看到一个黑黑的东西。我想么大概是晒黑了，拿起来就吃，结果还是苦苦的。我去给妈妈看，妈妈说那是猫屎……

8。什么叫法人？法人就是被绳之以法的人

9.我也发过一个adverse审计报告，那家公司的财务报表对使用者会产生重大的误道，但是由于高超的处理，没有任何地方违反准则和法律的。结果实在没有办法怎么办？就用了杀手锏，Substance over Form (实质重与形式原则)。这个叫什么？这个就叫做欲加之罪，何患无词！

10。苦不苦，想想萨达姆。累不累，想想CPA

11。现在10份验资报告9份是假的，哪里来这么多钱啊。出了事情法警上门，早上第一个来的把银行存款冻结，然后来了第二个，看看没有银行存款可以冻结了，就把电脑搬走查封。下午来了第三批，看看只好搬办公桌了。到后来来了第四批，就看到一个人坐在地上什么也没有了……

12。法警上门，说要查一份验资报告，这个没办法的，只好拿出来给他们看，同时买好香蕉苹果桔子摆了满满一大桌。法警看了5分钟说你们的验资报告是假的，你们的银行存款已经被冻结了。事务所的一听就跳起来了，你现在还在吃我的香蕉诶！法警马上把香蕉放下来说那么我不吃了。你们还有一处房产两辆轿车，我们封条已经带来了这就下去贴掉……

13。验资报告都是拿一张发票。说上面这点都是我的资产。有哪些啊？毛巾面盆大脚桶，牙刷牙膏香肥皂，汤勺盆子压力锅，碗筷调羹切菜刀……(上海话)

21。（谈外资银行优势之后）中国有没有？尽管我们财政部在最短的时间内抛出一套中国所有会计人员都无法理解的会计准则，2007年1月1号要执行一套全新的会计准则，很不幸，所有的会计教授都看不懂，半年内马上要全面推广执行。用这套想来提高我们中国会计信息的透明度，我觉得差得非常远。

22。我们会计界有很多武林高手，这些家伙要不不出招，一出招的话，招招见血，一剑封喉。

23。我觉得要判断会计师事务所的好坏要看2点：1是发现假账的能力，2是揭露这一假账的能力。第一种能力，国内所比四大要强得多。为什么？国内所的CPA，都是在江湖中摸爬滚打几十年出来的武林高手，一看到假账，马上手一拍心想这就是我徒弟教出来的。

24。（超市无间道）最近发生在上海乐购，是英国投资的一家超市，用的ERP系统，我一直讲在中国搞ERP是灾难，要想死得快就搞ERP，要想死得早就找麦肯锡，搞了先进的ERP流程，而且通过制度上的安排收银的不能搞信息维护的，信息维护的不能去搞记帐的。做了很好的内部控制流程的安排，但是没想到在中国这个环境里面，只要有人振臂一呼，大家群起而拥之，43个人在半年的时间内就组织了一个非常严密的系统，他们号称"无间道"。然后通过修改ERP的流程制作一个不定程序，在半年内拿走了上市公司380多万，结果发生了乐购英国总部派无数人来查就是查不出来。每次查 就是叫贪污犯的首领去查，因为他是管信息咨询的，查不出来，43个人每次开会都非常有成就感，他们被逮捕时说，我们在非常适当的时候把握了一个非常适当的机会， 所以我们非常有成就感。

25。（某次讲座）谢谢主持人，在开幕式的时候我看到两位嘉宾讲话很严肃，把我吓得半死。特别是最后敲一个锣，我以为县太爷要出来了，过去县太爷要出来才敲锣。

26。辛辛苦苦十几年，一夜回到解放前。

27。现在股市已经到了非常高的高位拉，大家不要冲进去，把那杠铃举着，你一进去，他们就出来了，就剩你一个人在那里撑着，到时候台湾解放了你还没解放。

28。很多老总对财务不屑一顾，为什么？我们第一代老总都是搞生产搞技术，当时是短缺经济，什么东西只要你生产出来，就去卖，发大财。我们隔壁的邻居生产一个牛仔裤，拿出来也是万元户，卖牛仔裤卖出万元户，拿着产品到处吹，他说我这牛仔裤是高科技产品，一条牛仔裤就卖1万块钱，我说你这是什么高科技产品，他说你摸摸看，摸上去很柔软，象丝绸般的感觉，我说你也不能卖这么贵啊，他说我再给你演示一下，他把牛仔裤抖一抖往地上一放，那牛仔裤能站在地上。我说这个也没有高科技，怎么卖到1万块钱？"啪"把灯关掉，就看见两条腿闪闪发亮，有荧光的，呵呵。

29。你知道民营企业它靠什么占领市场？第一个是狂偷税，不是一般地偷，狂偷。它十几亿的销售额，记到帐上一个亿都不到，我说你靠什么东西？他说，李老师，很简单，"啪"一亮出来吓了一跳，开了31个银行户头，一个公司开了31个银行户头，他说，李老师，我这个销售收入象老鼠一样在帐里窜来窜去。这个资金乱转，税务局一看就头晕，谁都看不懂，31个银行户头，窜到最后，钱没了。我说，厉害厉害。结果后来搞出了个什么笑话，你知道吧？他把自己窜糊涂了。他说想来想去，我这个钱肯定不只这一点的，这个钱到哪里去了？因为这种家族是上阵父子兵，打仗亲兄弟，搞了一帮亲戚朋友过来，亲戚朋友时间长了也靠不住，他说，李老师，您帮我看看，看这个钱到哪里去了？第二，民营企业靠什么？靠极其低廉的劳动力成本，它不是一般的低廉，它只要能用临时工，它一定就用临时工，为什么？它四金不要交，3个月炒一次，3个月炒一次，劳动力成本是无比得低，你国营企业根本没办法跟它比，什么退休工资，什么都没有，极其低廉的劳动力成本。第三个，靠极其高的回扣和佣金，你们最近那个龙元建设看了没有？他那个女婿要和他女儿离婚，开价500万，女儿不同意，"啪"，事情就出来了。

30。CFO要四种能力：第一个要会资本运作。什么叫做资本运作？你看最近在处理一个事情，上海一家很大的医院，一年不到被人家骗了6.8个亿，现在还没有曝光，金融陷阱，一环跟一环地给你套住，先是跟你合作，然后是资本金到位，然后，这个钱放到银行里利润太低，那怎么办？买国债，委托理财，国债买了，又拿出来回购，等理解资本运作？他们的理解很简单，什么叫资本运作？很简单：拆东墙，补西墙，墙墙不倒；借新债，还老债，债债不还；横披，资本运作。10个坛子9个盖。

31。（案件：某国有企业财务经理助理陶华，在短短2年的时间里，贪污了公司9000 多万公款。）好了，我讲一下，陶华毕业于上海名牌大学，不是我们复旦大学，是我们复旦大学隔壁的一个大学，也不是上海财经大学，不然孙校长不高兴了，因为孙校长就是我隔壁的。也是我们隔壁，你们知道哪个大学。非常优秀，是大一的第一批party员，为什么出现这样的问题呢？肯定是保鲜没有保好，所以大家要保鲜，其实不是这样，我告诉你，在你们企业，只要条件具备，如果不舞弊不正常。如果我在陶华这个位置上，我要找6个女朋友，要拿1.8亿。

32。有一个温州商人，听说公共安全专家部要印第二代身份证，借了个样品一看，哦，第二代身份证是这么印的，把全温州的第二代身份证全部印好了，把麻袋一扛，扛到公共安全专家部，你看第二代身份证比你印得还漂亮，你能不能把这业务包给我？ 

原贴地址： http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/25/business/worldbusiness/25drive.html?ex=1345694400&en=23a1d8758d4b082a&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

Chinese Seek to Buy an American Maker of Disk Drives

SAN FRANCISCO, Aug. 24 — A Chinese technology company has expressed interest in buying a maker of computer disk drives in the United States, raising concerns among American government officials about the risks to national security in transferring high technology to China.

The overture, which was disclosed by the chief executive of one of the two remaining drive makers in the United States, William D. Watkins of Seagate Technology, has resurrected the issues of economic competitiveness and national security raised three years ago when Lenovo, a Chinese computer maker, bought I.B.M.’s personal computer business.

Tensions have been increasing lately between the countries over China’s ambitions in developing its military abilities and advanced technologies for industrial and consumer uses.

Although disk drives do not fall under a list of export-controlled technologies, the attempted purchase of an American disk drive company would require a security review by the federal government, according to several government officials.

In recent years, modern disk drives, used to store vast quantities of digital information securely, have become complex computing systems, complete with hundreds of thousands of lines of software that are used to ensure the integrity of data and to offer data encryption.

That could raise the prospect of secret tampering with hardware or software to make it possible to pilfer information via computer networks, intelligence officials have warned.

Seagate has recently begun selling drives with hardware encryption abilities.

Mr. Watkins did not identify the Chinese company. But he said that the possibility of an acquisition had sent alarm bells ringing at some government agencies.

“The U.S. government is freaking out,” Mr. Watkins said during an interview on Thursday.

Reached Friday night, Treasury officials declined to comment on possible Chinese overtures for an American maker.

While Mr. Watkins said that Seagate, which is the largest drive maker in the United States, was not for sale, he also said that if a high enough premium was offered to shareholders it would be difficult to stop.

Seagate’s shares rose 1.05 percent Friday to close at $24.96 and were up about 4 percent for the week after news that it might enter the flash memory market. There does not appear to have been any significant increase in trading of Seagate options.

With a booming economy and $1.33 trillion in foreign-exchange reserves, Chinese companies are in a position to acquire American companies, as Japanese and West European companies were several decades ago. While those earlier acquisitions were often opposed out of fears that they would damage American economic competitiveness, the acquisition of American companies by Chinese companies is regarded with more suspicion, particularly in the high-tech sector.

Since the Lenovo sale, the government has become increasingly concerned about technology security, according to members of federal advisory committees.

“Seagate would be extremely sensitive,” said an industry executive who participates in classified government advisory groups. “I do not think anyone in the U.S. wants the Chinese to have access to the controller chips for a disk drive. One never knows what the Chinese could do to instrument the drive.”

The transfer of advanced disk drive manufacturing technology would give the Chinese a major leg up in competing in information technologies. China, however, still lags in basic manufacturing skills like semiconductor design and manufacturing.

“This is clearly a critical component of a computer system and the purchase by the Chinese or other nations merits a full review to determine what our risks are,” said Michael R. Wessell, a commissioner of the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, a group that monitors the national security implications of trade with China for Congress.

I.B.M., which invented the disk drive in the 1950s and which dominated the industry through the 1990s, sold its disk drive business to the Japanese computer maker Hitachi in 2002, leaving just two American companies: Seagate, based in Scotts Valley, Calif., and Western Digital, based in Lake Forest, Calif.

Two other Japanese makers, Fujitsu and Toshiba, and a division of Samsung, a South Korean electronics conglomerate, are also major manufacturers of the storage devices.

Western Digital executives declined to comment.

Kenneth Lieberthal, the senior director for Asia at the National Security Council during the later years of the Clinton administration, expressed strong doubt that the Chinese government would allow a technology company to pursue an acquisition if the transaction were likely to draw criticism from the United States government, even if that criticism did not reach the level of an actual prohibition on a deal.

“The Chinese have been very concerned about how to invest in the United States without producing the kind of political firestorm they ran into when they tried to buy Unocal,” said Mr. Lieberthal, a professor of politics and business administration at the University of Michigan. “The government really does not want to confront the kind of situation it ran into with Unocal.”

The China National Offshore Oil Corporation, a state-owned company, abandoned its plan to buy Unocal in 2005 when it touched off opposition in Congress. Mr. Lieberthal said that the Chinese government had only been lukewarm about supporting Cnooc, and was likely to be even more cautious now. “If’ they’ve really decided to go after a high-end computer equipment manufacturer, they’ve really decided to test the waters,” he said.

If a Chinese company has made an advance to an American company in a technologically sensitive industry without obtaining prior support from the Chinese government, the Chinese company would be in serious trouble with Beijing officials, Mr. Lieberthal said. So it is unlikely that any serious approach would be made by a Chinese company without careful prior consultations in Beijing.

Yet the Chinese government also faces a quandary: how to improve yields on its foreign exchange reserves, more than two-thirds of it in dollars. Roughly $100 billion is believed to be in American mortgage-backed securities, an investment that has suffered during the recent financial turmoil.

A Chinese government investment fund spent $3 billion to buy nearly 10 percent of the Blackstone Group this summer, but made a point of taking nonvoting shares to reduce the risk of a political backlash. Stakes in financial services companies also tend to be less controversial than stakes in high-tech enterprises.

Beijing authorities are also starting to encourage companies and even individuals to invest more overseas, as a way to offset some of the foreign investment pouring into China. The inflow of money from investment and trade surpluses has been putting upward pressure on the value of China’s currency, threatening to erode some of the competitiveness of Chinese exports.

If a Chinese company does make an actual bid for an American high-tech company, a former government official said, and that bid is blocked for political reasons, then Chinese companies may become even warier of investing in American companies and the government in Beijing may begin to suspect that Washington so distrusts China that it is trying to throw roadblocks in the path of its economic development.

“If they are blocked, I would suspect this would at a minimum contribute to their being gun-shy of the U.S. government,” said Mr. Lieberthal, a Chinese speaker who stays in close touch with a range of Chinese government officials and American corporate leaders.

原帖地址：http://www.nytimes.com/2007/07/30/technology/30gates.html?ex=1343448000&en=d1f829ab11495691&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

REDMOND, Wash., July 27 — Microsoft is beset with competition from all sides, unlike any it has seen in decades, and Bill Gates, who co-founded the company 32 years ago, still intends to step away next year as planned. 

Ubiquitous broadband networks and high speed wireless networks have for the first time given rise to meaningful alternatives to bulky and costly personal computers. In their place are a proliferating collection of smart connected devices that are tied together by a vast array of Internet-based information services based in centralized data centers.

The industry is rushing to “software as a service” models ranging from Salesforce.com, a San Francisco company that sells business contact software delivered via Web browsers, to Apple’s iPhone, which is designed as a classic “thin client,” a computer that requires the Internet for many of its capabilities.

It is a vision that Microsoft itself has at least partially embraced. Microsoft, in contrast, is calling its strategy “software plus services,” an approach that is intended to protect the company’s existing installed base.

During the interview, all three executives indicated that Microsoft is now moving quickly to offer new Internet services for personal computer users. Centralized data storage will make it possible for PC users to gain access to most or all of their information from all of the different types of computers they use, whether they are desktops, laptops or smartphones, and wherever they are located.

During the transition, Mr. Gates has also stayed closely involved in shaping Microsoft’s strategy in the search market where it has been assiduously attempting to catch Google and Yahoo.

“We made all the structural changes we were going to make, and we rode in tandem last year,” said Mr. Mundie. “In the last few months Bill has transitioned to what I start to think of as special project mode.”

If he is stepping away from Microsoft, Mr. Gates has shed none of his trademark combativeness. He rejected the Silicon Valley view that Microsoft has begun to exhibit the same sclerotic signs of middle age that I.B.M. did when it dominated the computer industry, but failed to respond effectively to the challenge of the personal computer.

I.B.M. is no longer at the center of the computer industry, he asserted, for two reasons. First, the industry is now centered on personal computing. “As much as I.B.M. created the I.B.M. PC, it was never their culture, their excellence,” he said. “Their skill sets were never about personal computing.”

Second, the center of gravity in the computer industry has dramatically shifted toward software, he said. “Why do you like your iPod, your iPhone, your Xbox 360, your Google Search?” he said. “The real magic sauce is not the parts that we buy for the Xbox, or the parts that Apple buys for iPhones, it’s the software that goes into it.”

During the interview Mr. Gates rejected the notion that Google could become a successful competitor in the smartphone software market, where Microsoft has about 10 percent market share. The Silicon valley search engine provider has been widely reported to be preparing to enter the cellphone market with its own software and a host of services springing from that software.

Microsoft’s chairman said it was unlikely that Google would be able to make inroads into the Microsoft’s share of market for mobile phone software.

“How many products, of all the Google products that have been introduced, how many of them are profit-making products?” he asked. “They’ve introduced about 30 different products; they have one profit-making product. So, you’re now making a prediction without ever seeing the software that they’re going to have the world’s best phone and it’s going to be free?”

Again, the ability to create compelling software will determine the winners. “The phone is becoming way more software intensive,” he said. “And to be able to say that there’s some challenge for us in the phone market when its becoming software intensive, I don’t see that.”

The new, less central role for Mr. Gates was first formulated more than a year ago at a June 2006 meeting in which the three men worked out how they would divide responsibilities for guiding the technology direction of the $51 billion company, according to Mr. Ozzie, who was a longtime rival of Mr. Gates at companies like Lotus and I.B.M. before joining Microsoft two years ago.

They decided at that meeting that Mr. Mundie and Mr. Ozzie would divide Mr. Gates’s role at the company along three axes. Along one of these lines, Mr. Mundie, who has been described as Microsoft’s “secretary of state” and who is deeply involved in federal government and international policy issues, would take a more public-facing role, while Mr. Ozzie would focus more closely on internal company matters.

In another, Mr. Mundie has tackled the company’s long-range strategic decisions, while Mr. Ozzie has taken over the near-term challenges of weaving together the product development issues. Finally, Mr. Mundie has taken responsibility for software that sits closer to the computer hardware, like the Windows operating system, while Mr. Ozzie has shaped Microsoft’s response to the growing challenge of network software.

“There’s been a very natural shift in the past year where I will engage with a particular software team and Bill will disengage,” said Mr. Ozzie. Mr. Gates insists that his new world of philanthropy will be just as compelling as software has been. “I’ll have also malaria vaccine or tuberculosis vaccine or curriculum in American high schools, which are also things that, at least the way my mind works, I sit there and say, ‘Oh, God! This is so important; this is so solvable,’ ” he said, “You’ve just got to get the guy who understands this, and this new technology will bring these things together.”