摘抄：巴菲特致股东信2020
Contents
本文为阅读《巴菲特致股东信》系列 2020 年部分，摘录 2020 年致股东信中个人认为比较重要内容。关于为什么要阅读致股东信，可以参考本系列的第一篇文章：摘抄：巴菲特致股东信2021。
2020年，巴菲特在致股东的信中详细介绍了伯克希尔哈撒韦的盈利情况，包括运营盈利和未实现资本收益等数据。他对新会计准则持保留态度，表明对未来盈利数据波动的担忧，并强调投资者应专注于公司的长期价值，而非短期收益。
此外，巴菲特强调了保留盈利并进行再投资对企业增长的重要性，展示了对企业持续发展的信心。讨论重点还包括伯克希尔的投资策略和收购经验，预计公司的股票投资将获得可观回报，而收购则被描述为一种风险未知且有时令人失望的过程。
巴菲特还强调了企业治理和个人继任计划的关键性，以及股票回购条件和社会责任的履行。关于年会信息，提到了股东参与度和经营管理者参与程度的变化，表明伯克希尔非常重视经营管理和社会责任。
保留盈利的力量
In 1924, Edgar Lawrence Smith, an obscure economist and financial advisor, wrote Common Stocks as Long Term Investments, a slim book that changed the investment world. Indeed, writing the book changed Smith himself, forcing him to reassess his own investment beliefs.
Going in, he planned to argue that stocks would perform better than bonds during inflationary periods and that bonds would deliver superior returns during deflationary times. That seemed sensible enough. But Smith was in for a shock.
His book began, therefore, with a confession: “These studies are the record of a failure – the failure of facts to sustain a preconceived theory.” Luckily for investors, that failure led Smith to think more deeply about how stocks should be evaluated.
For the crux of Smith’s insight, I will quote an early reviewer of his book, none other than John Maynard Keynes: “I have kept until last what is perhaps Mr. Smith’s most important, and is certainly his most novel, point. Well-managed industrial companies do not, as a rule, distribute to the shareholders the whole of their earned profits. In good years, if not in all years, they retain a part of their profits and put them back into the business. Thus there is an element of compound interest (Keynes’ italics) operating in favour of a sound industrial investment. Over a period of years, the real value of the property of a sound industrial is increasing at compound interest, quite apart from the dividends paid out to the shareholders.”
And with that sprinkling of holy water, Smith was no longer obscure.
It’s difficult to understand why retained earnings were unappreciated by investors before Smith’s book was published. After all, it was no secret that mind-boggling wealth had earlier been amassed by such titans as Carnegie, Rockefeller and Ford, all of whom had retained a huge portion of their business earnings to fund growth and produce ever-greater profits. Throughout America, also, there had long been small-time capitalists who became rich following the same playbook.
Nevertheless, when business ownership was sliced into small pieces – “stocks” – buyers in the pre-Smith years usually thought of their shares as a short-term gamble on market movements. Even at their best, stocks were considered speculations. Gentlemen preferred bonds.
Though investors were slow to wise up, the math of retaining and reinvesting earnings is now well understood. Today, school children learn what Keynes termed “novel”: combining savings with compound interest works wonders.
At Berkshire, Charlie and I have long focused on using retained earnings advantageously. Sometimes this job has been easy – at other times, more than difficult, particularly when we began working with huge and ever- growing sums of money.
In our deployment of the funds we retain, we first seek to invest in the many and diverse businesses we already own. During the past decade, Berkshire’s depreciation charges have aggregated $65 billion whereas the company’s internal investments in property, plant and equipment have totaled 121 billion. Reinvestment in productive operational assets will forever remain our top priority.
1924年，一位名声并不是那么显赫的经济学家、理财顾问埃德加·劳伦斯·史密斯（Edgar Lawrence Smith）完成了一本《普通股的长期投资》（Common Stocks as Long Term Investments），这虽然只是一本薄薄的册子，但是却改变了整个投资世界的面貌。事实上，撰写这本书的经历也改变了史密斯本人，迫使他开始重新评估自己的投资信条。
刚开始写作的时候，他最初想要说明的观点是，在通货膨胀周期当中，股票的表现要好于债券，而在通货紧缩周期当中，债券的回报则好过股票。看上去，这样的观点是合情合理的。可是接下来，史密斯自己都吃了一惊。
事实上，在这本书的最开头，史密斯就承认：“这些研究本身就是对失败的记录——事实并不能支持预设的观点。”然而，这却是投资者的幸事，因为失败迫使史密斯更加深入地思考，去探索到底该如何评估股票的价值。
要把握住史密斯到底洞见了些什么，我想最好还是引述一段关于他著作的最早期评论，来自约翰·梅纳德·凯恩斯（John Maynard Keynes）：“我一直读完全书，才大致搞清楚了史密斯先生最新奇的，当然也是最重要的观点到底是什么。那些真正优秀的工业企业管理层是不会将他们每年所获的利润都全部派发给股东的，这是一个基本原则。哪怕不是所有年景，至少在好的年景下，这些企业都会留下一部分利润，将其重新投入到其业务本身。这样就创造出一种有利于可靠的工业投资的复利运营模式。经年累月，这笔可靠的工业财富的真实价值就会以复利速度增长，更不必说股东们还得到了源源不断的股息。”
得到了这位经济学大家的加持，史密斯一夜成名。
在史密斯的这本著作出版之前，保留盈利的做法居然会让股东们都感到不满，这样的逻辑，今人已经很难理解了。毕竟，我们现在都知道，当年的卡耐基、洛克菲勒和福特等大家族之所以能够积累起令人瞠目结舌的巨大财富，靠的就是保留住很大一部分企业盈利，将其投入未来的成长，创造出更大的利润。事实上，不光是这些巨头们，在全美的范围内，真不知有多少具体而微的资本家们是靠着重复同样的剧本而发家致富的。
然而，事实就是，在史密斯之前的年代当中，当企业所有权被分割成无数小片——“股票”，后者的购买者们通常都将自己的投资视作是针对市场行情变动的短期赌博，往最好听里说也不过就是投机而已——真正的绅士们青睐的是债券。
不管投资者们变聪明的速度有多么迟缓，到今天，保留盈利用于再投资的数学公式都已经被大家充分理解了。曾经被凯恩斯评为“新奇”的观念，对于现在的高中生都已经是常识了——将储蓄和复利结合，就可以创造奇迹。
在伯克希尔，查理和我一直以来都高度重视有效地运用保留盈利。有些时候，这份工作其实是很轻松的，可是在另外一些时候，这份工作用“困难”来形容都嫌不足——尤其是我们面对着体量巨大，而且还在持续膨胀的现金的时候。
我们想要将自己所保留的这些资金投入使用，首选的目标就是投资于我们业已拥有的数量众多、种类繁杂的生意当中。单单在过去十年时间里，伯克希尔的折旧支出就累计达到650亿美元，而内部的地皮、厂房和设备投资累计更达到1210亿美元。再投资于运营资产永远都是我们的优先考虑对象。
购买新企业的标准
In addition, we constantly seek to buy new businesses that meet three criteria：
- First, they must earn good returns on the net tangible capital required in their operation.
- Second, they must be run by able and honest managers.
- Finally, they must be available at a sensible price.
此外，我们还在持续寻求买进新的企业的机会，只要后者能够符合三个标准：
- 首先，他们运营的净有形资本必须能够创造得体的回报。
- 其次，经理人必须是德才兼备，既有能力又诚实。
- 最后，买进价格必须合理。
收购的现实与教训
Tom Murphy, a valued director of Berkshire and an all-time great among business managers, long ago gave me some important advice about acquisitions: “To achieve a reputation as a good manager, just be sure you buy good businesses.”
Over the years Berkshire has acquired many dozens of companies, all of which I initially regarded as “good businesses.” Some, however, proved disappointing; more than a few were outright disasters. A reasonable number, on the other hand, have exceeded my hopes.
In reviewing my uneven record, I’ve concluded that acquisitions are similar to marriage: They start, of course, with a joyful wedding – but then reality tends to diverge from pre-nuptial expectations. Sometimes, wonderfully, the new union delivers bliss beyond either party’s hopes. In other cases, disillusionment is swift. Applying those images to corporate acquisitions, I’d have to say it is usually the buyer who encounters unpleasant surprises. It’s easy to get dreamy-eyed during corporate courtships.
Pursuing that analogy, I would say that our marital record remains largely acceptable, with all parties happy with the decisions they made long ago. Some of our tie-ups have been positively idyllic. A meaningful number, however, have caused me all too quickly to wonder what I was thinking when I proposed.
Fortunately, the fallout from many of my errors has been reduced by a characteristic shared by most businesses that disappoint: As the years pass, the “poor” business tends to stagnate, thereupon entering a state in which its operations require an ever-smaller percentage of Berkshire’s capital. Meanwhile, our “good” businesses often tend to grow and find opportunities for investing additional capital at attractive rates. Because of these contrasting trajectories, the assets employed at Berkshire’s winners gradually become an expanding portion of our total capital.
汤姆·墨菲（Tom Murphy）是伯克希尔的重要董事，他是史上伟大的经理人之一。很早之前，他就给过我一些有关收购的重要建议：“要获得优秀经理人的美誉，只需确保你收购的是好企业即可。”
多年来，伯克希尔收购了许多公司，最初我全部将它们视为“好生意”。” 但是，最后有些公司却令人失望，有不少简直是彻底的灾难。另一方面，有不少公司却超出了我的期望。
回顾我时好时坏的投资记录时，我得出的结论是，收购就好比婚姻：当然，一开始婚姻是令人开心的，但随后，现实开始偏离婚前的期望。美妙的是，有些时候，新婚夫妇为双方带来了超出预期的幸福。而在另外一些情况下，幻灭也来得很快。将这些画面放到公司收购上面，我不得不说，一般是收购者遇到不愉快的意外情况。在追求收购的阶段，我们总是容易满眼乐观 。
这里讲到的是收购购，而在致股东信2022中，巴菲特对企业合并提到类似的观点：“在乐队停止演奏和银行家回家之后，股东们获得了一场灾难！” I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.
当伯克希尔公司和哈撒韦公司合并时，无疑是佛尔河（伯克希尔）和纽贝德（哈瑟韦）两地的欢乐日。然而，在乐队停止演奏和银行家回家之后，股东们获得了一场灾难。
按照这种类比，我想说我们的“婚姻”记录大部分还算差强人意，各方皆大欢喜，都很满意很久之前所做的决定。我们的一些合作关系如同田园般惬意。但是，有不少情况，事后很快会使我很纳闷我在“求婚”时到底在想什么，才会做出当时的决定。
幸运的是，我的许多错误导致的后果因大多数令人失望的业务所具有的特点而有所减小：随着时间的流逝，“表现不佳”的公司趋于停滞，随即进入一种状态：即它们的业务对伯克希尔资本的需要占比越来越小。与此同时，“表现良好”的公司往往会继续增长，并以有吸引力的速度找到投资更多资本的机会。由于这两种截然相反的轨迹，伯克希尔的投资胜出者使用的资产逐渐成为我们总资本的一部分。
长期投资的智慧
Returns of that order by large, established and understandable businesses are remarkable under any circumstances. They are truly mind-blowing when compared to the returns that many investors have accepted on bonds over the last decade – 21⁄2% or even less on 30-year U.S. Treasury bonds, for example.
Forecasting interest rates has never been our game, and Charlie and I have no idea what rates will average over the next year, or ten or thirty years. Our perhaps jaundiced view is that the pundits who opine on these subjects reveal, by that very behavior, far more about themselves than they reveal about the future.
What we can say is that if something close to current rates should prevail over the coming decades and if corporate tax rates also remain near the low level businesses now enjoy, it is almost certain that equities will over time perform far better than long-term, fixed-rate debt instruments.
That rosy prediction comes with a warning: Anything can happen to stock prices tomorrow. Occasionally, there will be major drops in the market, perhaps of 50% magnitude or even greater. But the combination of The American Tailwind, about which I wrote last year, and the compounding wonders described by Mr. Smith, will make equities the much better long-term choice for the individual who does not use borrowed money and who can control his or her emotions. Others? Beware!
在任何情况下，那些规模巨大、成熟且易于理解的企业的订单回报率都是引人瞩目的。与很多投资者在过去十年里所接受的债券回报率（比如说30年期美国国债的收益率是2.5％或更低）相比，这些公司的回报率的确令人感到兴奋。
查理和我从来不喜欢玩预测利率的游戏，因为我们不知道未来一年、十年或三十年里利率的平均值是多少。我们或许有些偏见地认为，在这个话题上发表意见的权威人士，恰恰是通过这种行为，透露出的更多的是和他们自己有关的信息，而不是关于未来的信息。
我们可以说的是，如果在未来几十年里和当前利率接近的利率占上风，公司税也维持在企业当下正在享受着的低水平，那么几乎可以肯定的是，随着时间的推移，股票的表现将远远好于长期固定利率债务工具。
在给出这一乐观预测的同时，我们也要发出一项警告：未来股价可能会发生任何变化。有时，股市会暴跌，幅度可能是50％，也可能会更大。但是，对于那些不用借钱来炒股、且能够控制自己情绪的人来说，去年我曾在文章中写过的“美国经济顺风车”，再加上史密斯所谓的“复利奇迹”，会助推股票成为更好的长期选择。其他人呢？当心！
伯克希尔未来的路
Charlie and I long ago entered the urgent zone. That’s not exactly great news for us. But Berkshire shareholders need not worry: Your company is 100% prepared for our departure.
The two of us base our optimism upon five factors. First, Berkshire’s assets are deployed in an extraordinary variety of wholly or partly-owned businesses that, averaged out, earn attractive returns on the capital they use. Second, Berkshire’s positioning of its “controlled” businesses within a single entity endows it with some important and enduring economic advantages. Third, Berkshire’s financial affairs will unfailingly be managed in a manner allowing the company to withstand external shocks of an extreme nature. Fourth, we possess skilled and devoted top managers for whom running Berkshire is far more than simply having a high-paying and/or prestigious job. Finally, Berkshire’s directors – your guardians – are constantly focused on both the welfare of owners and the nurturing of a culture that is rare among giant corporations. (The value of this culture is explored in Margin of Trust, a new book by Larry Cunningham and Stephanie Cuba that will be available at our annual meeting.)
Charlie and I have very pragmatic reasons for wanting to assure Berkshire’s prosperity in the years following our exit: The Mungers have Berkshire holdings that dwarf any of the family’s other investments, and I have a full 99% of my net worth lodged in Berkshire stock. I have never sold any shares and have no plans to do so. My only disposal of Berkshire shares, aside from charitable donations and minor personal gifts, took place in 1980, when I, along with other Berkshire stockholders who elected to participate, exchanged some of our Berkshire shares for the shares of an Illinois bank that Berkshire had purchased in 1969 and that, in 1980, needed to be offloaded because of changes in the bank holding company law.
查理和我很糟就已经进入了类似的“加急”阶段。对于我们来说，这显然不是什么喜讯。但是，伯克希尔的股东们不必焦虑：你的公司已经为我们的离开做好了百分百的准备。
我们之所以如此乐观，主要基于五大原因：
- 伯克希尔的资产部署在各种各样的全资或部分拥有的企业身上，这些企业的资本回报率很吸引人。
- 伯克希尔将旗下所控制业务定位在一个单一实体，这种现状赋予了该公司一些重要且持久的经济优势。
- 伯克希尔将一如既往地以一种可让本公司抵御极端外部冲击的方式来管理财务事务。
- 我们拥有经验丰富且忠心耿耿的顶尖经理人。对于他们来说，管理伯克希尔远远不止是一份高薪或有声望的工作。
- 伯克希尔的董事们——你们的监护人——一直专注于股东的福利，以及培育一种在超大型企业中很罕见的文化。（拉里-坎宁安和斯蒂芬妮-古巴在合著的新书《信任的边缘》中探讨了这种文化的价值。在我们的年会上，可以看到这本书。）
还有一些特别实际的原因促使查理和我想要确保伯克希尔在我们离开后的日子里继续繁荣昌盛：芒格家族持有的伯克希尔股票规模，远超过该家族的其他投资；我高达99％的净身价靠的是伯克希尔股票。我从来没有卖过伯克希尔股票，以后也不打算这么做。
除了慈善捐赠和送人小礼物之外，我唯一一次动过伯克希尔股票，是在1980年。当年，我和其他被选出的伯克希尔股东们，用伯克希尔的一些股票换了伊利诺斯州一家银行的股票。早在1969年，伯克希尔收购了这家银行。1980年，因为银行控股公司法的变化，我们必须卸载该行。
不要问理发师你是否需要理发
A venerable caution will forever be true when advice from Wall Street is contemplated: Don’t ask the barber whether you need a haircut.
当我们考虑到华尔街的建议时，一个古老的警告永远是正确的：不要问理发师你是否需要理发。
更喜欢董事用自己的钱购买股票的公司
Despite the illogic of it all, the director for whom fees are important – indeed, craved – is almost universally classified as “independent” while many directors possessing fortunes very substantially linked to the welfare of the corporation are deemed lacking in independence. Not long ago, I looked at the proxy material of a large American company and found that eight directors had never purchased a share of the company’s stock using their own money. (They, of course, had received grants of stock as a supplement to their generous cash compensation.) This particular company had long been a laggard, but the directors were doing wonderfully.
Paid-with-my-own-money ownership, of course, does not create wisdom or ensure business smarts. Nevertheless, I feel better when directors of our portfolio companies have had the experience of purchasing shares with their savings, rather than simply having been the recipients of grants.
尽管不合逻辑，但如今几乎所有董事都被归类为“独立（董事）”，然而许多拥有与公司兴衰密切相关的董事又被认为缺乏这一独立性。不久前，我查看了一家美国大公司的委托书材料，发现有8名董事从未用自己的钱购买过该公司股票（当然，他们得到了股票奖励，作为自己丰厚现金薪酬的补充）。这家公司长期以来一直（表现）落后，但董事们待遇却非常好。
当然，用自己的钱购买所有权并不能创造智慧，也不能确保商业成功。然而，当我们投资组合内公司的董事有用他们自己钱购买股票的经验，而不是简单地获赠时，我会感觉更好。
从事自己擅长的
We are all duds at one thing or another. For most of us, the list is long. The important point to recognize is that if you are Bobby Fischer, you must play only chess for money.
我们总会在这件事或那件事上无所建树。对于我们大多数人来说，这个（无所建树的）清单很长。但需要认识到的重要一点是，如果你是鲍比·费舍尔（Bobby Fischer，美国国际象棋棋手），你必须为了钱而下棋。
伯克希尔青睐的董事
At Berkshire, we will continue to look for business-savvy directors who are owner-oriented and arrive with a strong specific interest in our company. Thought and principles, not robot-like “process,” will guide their actions. In representing your interests, they will, of course, seek managers whose goals include delighting their customers, cherishing their associates and acting as good citizens of both their communities and our country.
在伯克希尔，我们将继续寻找精通商业的董事，他们以主人翁精神为导向，并对我们的公司有强烈的特定兴趣。思想和原则，而不是机器人般的“流程”将指导他们的行动。当然，在代表你的利益（进行投资）时，他们会寻找用心取悦客户、珍惜自己同事、努力成为自己所在社区和国家好公民的经理人。
股票回购
In past reports, we’ve discussed both the sense and nonsense of stock repurchases. Our thinking, boiled down: Berkshire will buy back its stock only if a) Charlie and I believe that it is selling for less than it is worth and b) the company, upon completing the repurchase, is left with ample cash.
Over time, we want Berkshire’s share count to go down. If the price-to-value discount (as we estimate it) widens, we will likely become more aggressive in purchasing shares. We will not, however, prop the stock at any level.
在过去的报告中，我们已经讨论了股票回购的意义和无用性。我们的想法归结为：伯克希尔只有在以下情况下才会回购股票：
- 查理和我认为它的售价低于其价值。
- 公司在完成回购后，仍会拥有充足的现金。
随着时间的推移，我们希望伯克希尔的股票数量下降。如果股价低于实际价值的情况（正如我们估计的那样）继续发生，我们很可能会在回购股票上变得更加积极。然而，我们不会在任何水平支撑股价。