评论
打印
This week America’s corporate world passed a milestone. The value of deals in US-bound mergers and acquisitions amounted to $243bn in May, according to Dealogic — a monthly record. The previous monthly peaks were in May 2007 and January 2000, when deals worth respectively $226bn and $213bn were struck.
美国企业上周跨越了一座里程碑。Dealogic的数据显示，美国并购交易价值在今年5月达到2430亿美元，创下单月最高纪录。上两次的单月最高纪录分别出现在2007年5月和2000年1月，签署的协议价值分别为2260亿美元和2130亿美元。
Meanwhile, so far this year, $1.85tn deals have been done globally; if this continues 2015’s total could top the annual record of $4.6tn deals s in 2007.
与此同时，今年以来全球签署的并购协议价值达到1.85万亿美元，如果持续这种趋势的话，2015年全年并购交易价值将超过2007年创造的4.6万亿美元的最高年度纪录。
What should policy makers and investors conclude? If you want to be optimistic, you might see this as a welcome return of animal spirits. In the immediate aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, corporate executives were so scarred — and scared — that their priority was to cut corporate debt and costs. But now the C-suite feels more ambitious. And what is particularly striking is that the current M&A frenzy is affecting not just one industry, as during the tech boom, but a wide range, including retail, oil, pharma and tech.
政策制定者和投资者应该据此得出什么结论？如果你想乐观一点，你可以将此视为动物精神值得欢迎的回归。2008年金融危机爆发后最初那段时间，企业高管受到了如此大创伤，也感到如此恐慌，因此他们把削减企业债务和成本放在第一位。但现在那些头衔里挂着“首席”两个字的企业高管(C-suite)更乐于进取了。尤其引人瞩目的是，当前的并购热潮不是像科技热时期那样，仅席卷了一个行业，而是席卷了包括零售、石油、制药和科技在内的众多行业。
But there is a second, darker interpretation of this trend: namely that the western financial system is drowning in excess cash and credit. History suggests such a scenario rarely ends well. After all, the crucial point about the two previous M&A peaks is that they coincided with equity and credit bubbles. Shortly afterwards, those bubbles burst — with painful consequences.
但对这种趋势的另一种较为悲观的解读是：西方金融体系正淹没在过多的现金和信贷当中。历史经验显示，此类境况很少会有好的结果。毕竟，关于前两次并购交易高潮的一个关键事实是，它们正好与股票和信贷出现泡沫的时间重合。在前两次并购交易创出最高纪录后不久，那些泡沫都破裂了，并带来了令人痛苦的后果。
Moreover, the backdrop to the current M&A flurry is unnerving. Since the 2008 crisis American corporate profits have surged to record levels: Goldman Sachs, for example, calculates that margins for the S&P 500 (excluding financials and utilities) are about 9 per cent. In normal circumstances, that should have sparked a corporate investment boom; indeed, this is what policy makers have been desperately hoping to see.
此外，当前并购热潮的背景令人不安。自2008年金融危机以来，美国企业利润飙升至创纪录的水平：例如，高盛(Goldman Sachs)估计，（不包括金融和公用事业企业在内的）标普500成分股企业的利润率大约为9%。在正常情况下，这理应引发企业投资热潮，实际上，这也是政策制定者一直渴望看到的。
But that has not occurred. On the contrary, investment as a proportion of operating cash flow has actually fallen from 29 per cent to 23 per cent in the past five years, Goldman says, apparently because companies are gloomy about the growth outlook.
但投资热潮并未出现。相反，高盛表示，投资占营业现金流的比例在过去5年里实际上已从29%下降至23%，这显然是因为企业对增长前景感到悲观。
This means they need to find other uses for their cash. Many have poured money into share buybacks: S&P 500 companies spent a record $133bn on buybacks in April this year, BlackRock says. They are paying hefty dividends, too. Indeed, analysts project that combined outlays on dividends and buybacks will exceed $1,000bn this year in America, more than expected spending on operations and research.
这意味着他们需要为资金找到其他用途。许多公司拿出大量资金用于股份回购：贝莱德(BlackRock)表示，今年4月，标普500成分股公司用于股份回购上的资金达到创纪录的1330亿美元。他们也派发了丰厚的股息。实际上，分析师预计，今年美国企业用于红利派息和股份回购的资金总额将会超过1万亿美元，高于预计的营运和研发支出。
But, unsurprisingly, money is flooding into M&A deals, too, as executives seek eye-catching ways to show they are earning their salaries.
但不出所料的是，资金也在流入并购交易，因为企业高管寻求通过引人瞩目的方法来表明他们不白拿薪水。
Some bankers argue that this is not a bad tactic; or not compared to the other dismal options. “In our view, acquisitions — particularly in the form of stock deals — represent a more compelling strategic use of cash than buybacks given the current stretched valuation of US equities,” says David Kostin of Goldman Sachs in a note to clients.
一些银行家辩称，这种策略并不坏，至少不比其他一些糟糕选择更坏。高盛的戴维•科斯京(David Kostin)在一份写给客户的报告中表示：“在我们看来，鉴于美国股市当前估值过高，把资金用于收购——尤其是以股票协议的形式收购——比用于回购更具战略说服力。”
The problem for policy makers is that this burst of M&A enthusiasm is unlikely to deliver much of an economic boost. Nor will it offer much long-term value for shareholders, judging by what happened in 2000 and 2007. And what is doubly unnerving is that, while the M&A drive was initially funded by excess cash and stock, it now seems to be more debt-fuelled too. This week, for example, Dealogic also revealed that corporate bond issuance in 2015 has hit a record level of $543.4bn. That has pushed the investment grade debt-to-equity ratio to 85 per cent, compared with 72 per cent in 2010.
在政策制定者看来，问题在于，这股突然迸发的并购热潮不太可能大举推动经济增长。从2000年和2007年的情况来看，它也不会为股东带来多少长远价值。更令人不安的是，尽管并购最初是由多余的现金和股票提供的融资，但现在它似乎更多地也是通过举债融资。例如，上周Dealogic还披露称，2015年企业债券发行量达到了创纪录的5434亿美元。这让投资级企业的债务股本率达到了85%，而2010年的这一比例是72%。
The M&A bankers who are orchestrating this activity insist that 2015 will be different from 2000 or 2007. Chief executives have learnt the right lessons from history and are chasing only those acquisitions that make strategic sense — or so the argument goes. Separately, some policy observers argue that this M&A fever will naturally cool down later in the year as the prospect of a US interest rate rise draws closer. And who knows? If economic growth continues, companies may eventually start to embrace investment with the same gusto they currently embrace M&A or buybacks.
这一并购热潮的策略者、从事并购业务的银行业人士坚称，2015年将不同于2000年或者2007年，因为首席执行官们从过去发生的事情中汲取了应有的教训，只追逐那些具有战略价值的并购。至少，他们给出的理由是这样的。另外，一些政策观察人士辩称，随着美国加息那一天日趋临近，这种并购热潮将在今年晚些时候自然而然地冷却下来。谁知道呢？如果经济继续增长，公司可能最终拿出他们当前用于并购或者回购的劲头来投资。
But do not bet on that happening. The more likely outcome is that, when future historians look back to May 2015, this $243bn record will be viewed as a portent of an overinflated financial world. This is an era when quantitative easing is making the owners of assets rich — not to mention boosting the wealth of M&A advisers. But it has not convinced companies to believe in a vibrant economic outlook, or not enough to invest. And that is worrying indeed.
但是别抱指望。更可能的结果是，当未来的历史学家回首2015年5月的时候，这个2430亿美元的最高纪录将会被视为金融世界过度膨胀的先兆。这是一个量化宽松让资产所有者变得富裕（更别说让并购咨询顾问发大财）的时代。但它没有让公司相信经济前景欣欣向荣，也不足以说服它们投资。这确实令人担忧。
