FT社評 IPO對科技公司吸引力下降

The company that is changing driving owns no cars; the one that has the hotel industry on the run owns no rooms.

一家沒有汽車的公司正在改變駕駛；一家沒有客房的公司打得酒店業潰不成軍。

Such are the standard tributes to the radical business models of Uber and Airbnb.

這些是對優步(Uber)、Airbnb的全新商業模式的標準稱頌之詞。

Something else they lack, despite putative valuations of $68bn and $30bn respectively, is public listings.

還有一樣東西是這兩家公司沒有的——儘管公認的估值分別爲680億美元和300億美元，兩家公司都沒有公開上市。

For good or ill, this is innovation too, and part of a trend that reaches beyond the technology sector.

無論好壞，這也是創新，是不僅限於科技行業的一種趨勢的一部分。

Private investors flush with cash have provided these companies and others with billions in funding.

現金充裕的私人投資者已經爲此類公司提供了數十億美元融資。

Tech company initial public offerings in 2016 are at the lowest level since the 2009 crisis.

2016年，科技公司首次公開發行(IPO)處於自2009年金融危機以來的最低水平。

Might a new tech bubble be inflating where only insiders — all with an interest in more pumping-up — can see it? And is the wider public the loser when more and more assets are owned by an investment elite?

新的科技泡沫是不是正在只有局內人能看到的地方被吹起——這些局內人全都受益於泡沫被吹得更大？而當越來越多的資產由投資精英所有時，廣大民衆是否成了輸家？

News that Snapchat’s parent company Snap has filed for a $20bn-$25bn public offering has raised hope that the status quo is returning.

Snapchat的母公司Snap已經提交了規模達200億至250億美元的公開上市申請，這一消息讓人燃起了情況正在迴歸常態的希望。

And pressure from employees and investors will, in time, push some tech companies into the IPO market.

來自員工和股東的壓力也早晚會迫使一些科技公司進入IPO市場。

But the general trend towards a greater private ownership of equity is likely to last.

但越來越多股份由私人所有的整體趨勢可能會持久存在。

The availability of private capital of all sorts persists.

各種私人資金依然充足。

Dramatic evidence of this was the recent decision of SoftBank and Saudi Arabia to set up a $100bn tech buyout fund.

這方面明顯的例證是，軟銀(SoftBank)與沙特阿拉伯最近決定成立一家規模1000億美元的科技企業收購基金。

It would have twice the firepower of the entire US venture industry.

該基金的資金實力將相當於整個美國風險投資行業的兩倍。

At the same time, being public is hard work, in terms of reporting and pleasing restless markets.

與此同時，做一家上市公司並不輕鬆，需要披露各種信息、取悅不停波動的市場。

There are more than 170 private tech companies with valuation in excess of $1bn.

估值超過10億美元的非上市科技公司有170多家。

These unicorns are worth over $660bn in total, more than Apple, the largest public company in the world.

這些獨角獸公司的總估值超過6600億美元，比全球最大上市公司蘋果(Apple)的市值還高。

Anyone given pause by the decline of public markets has more than Silicon Valley to worry about.

任何被公開市場的不景氣嚇呆的人，都不止需要擔心硅谷。

Assets owned by private equity houses have gone from $465bn to $2.4tn globally in the decade to 2015.

在截至2015年的十年間，全球私人股本機構擁有的資產已經從4650億美元增至2.4萬億美元。

The big private equity groups, through their portfolio companies, are among the largest private employers.

大型私人股本集團（通過它們投資的公司）已躋身最大私營僱主之列。

There is a positive side to all this.

所有這一切也有積極的一面。

There is evidence to suggest that private companies invest more than publicly held ones, which can by hypnotised by the need to hit quarterly targets.

有證據表明，非上市公司比上市公司投資更多——後者可能把全部心思都放在瞭如何達到季度業績目標上。

The lack of productivity growth in the US and Europe suggests that more investment is welcome.

美歐生產率增長乏力意味着更多投資值得歡迎。

And highly concentrated private ownership is, if anything, more likely to keep a closer eye on corporate governance than highly diffuse public ownership.

相比高度分散的公衆持股，高度集中的私人持股只會更有可能對公司治理實施更密切的監督。

That said, in the venture capital world, all participants have reason to put off the pain of a down fundraising round, which dilutes older shareholders and employees who have been paid largely in restricted stock.

儘管如此，在風險資本的世界裏，所有的參與者都有理由阻止一輪估值下調的融資(down round)帶來的痛苦，這種融資會讓老股東和主要以限制性股票爲酬勞的員工所持股份價值縮水。

In public markets, short sellers and other sceptics have the motive and information to take the negative side of the valuation argument.

在公開市場，賣空者及其他持懷疑態度的人有動機和必要信息對估值持看空立場。

This is healthy.

這是健康的。

Of course, a decade and a half ago, public market transparency brought reason to tech valuations only very belatedly, and in a single destructive spasm.

當然，15年前，公開市場的透明性太晚才戳破科技公司估值的泡沫，並且一下子讓科技公司估值跌入萬丈深淵。

But then the trend was in the other direction: companies were going public before they had given evidence of their viability.

但當時的趨勢是反過來的：企業在拿出證明自身存活能力的證據之前就上市了。

The information that deep, liquid and diverse public markets provides is not only of value to investors.

大容量、流動性好且多樣化的公開市場提供的信息不僅對投資者有價值。

It helps policymakers, corporate managers and entrepreneurs understand the economy.

它還可以幫助政策制定者、企業管理者和創業者瞭解經濟。

There is therefore a collective interest in seeing that public markets remain robust.

因此，公開市場保持強勁符合所有市場參與者的共同利益。

So it is worth considering what can be done to ease the regulatory burden on public companies without harming investors.

所以，值得考慮的是如何做才能在不損害投資者的情況下減輕上市公司的監管負擔。

Eliminating the US requirement for publishing quarterly rather than semi-annual accounts is a place to start.

可以從消除美國對上市公司發佈季度（而非半年）財報的要求開始。

Public markets are messy and demanding but worth cultivating all the same.

公開市場混亂又不好管理，但依然值得好好培育。