TIP847：Alphabet（GOOGL）——仍可能被低估的巨无霸，嘉宾 Kyle Grieve 与 Shawn O’Malley

现在很难确切知道谷歌云积压订单的结构是什么样的。

Now it's impossible to say exactly what the structure of Google Cloud's backlog looks like.

考虑到他们刚和Anthropic签了一个五年2000亿美元的合同，用谷歌云，所以很可能非常集中。

It's likely very concentrated given that they just announced a five year $200,000,000,000 deal with Anthropic to use Google Cloud.

这意味着Anthropic大概占那个积压订单的40%左右。

So that implies that Anthropic makes up somewhere around 40% of that backlog.

所以，别误会我的意思。

So, you know, don't get me wrong.

云积压订单的增长确实惊人，但这也带来了客户集中的风险，比如说，万一Anthropic出了什么事。

The cloud backlog growth is incredible, but it comes with this trade off in customer concentration where, you know, let's say something were to happen to Anthropic.

比如说他们的业务下滑了，毕竟AI作为一个新兴行业，他们还处于非常早期的阶段。

Let's say their business falls off since, you know, after all, they're still in the very early innings of AI as an emerging industry.

如果真发生这种事，那很多积压订单的增长就看起来有点虚了，借用《华尔街之狼》里马修·麦康纳的话说，就是“Fugazi”。

And so if an event like that were to happen, well then a lot of that backlog growth would just appear to be kind of Fugazi to quote Matthew McConaughey from The Wolf of Wall Street.

那部电影很棒，那句台词也很经典。

It's a great movie and a great quote.

继续用之前的烘焙比喻，如果一个客户占了婚礼蛋糕预订价值的四成，那确实很让人担心，对吧？

And to keep using that bakery metaphor from before, if one customer made up 40 of the value of your wedding cake back locking, that would be very concerning, right?

不过这是个比较极端的例子，因为Anthropic现在正朝着数万亿美元的IPO迈进，还会筹集大量新资金。

So it's a sort of extreme example because Anthropic is right now on path to do a multi trillion dollar IPO and will be raising lots of fresh capital.

所以他们短期内不会消失，但理想情况下，你最大的客户不应该一边烧着几十亿现金，一边占你积压订单这么大的比例。

So it's not like they're going anywhere anytime soon, but ideally your biggest customer would not be burning billions in cash while making up such a hefty percentage of your backlog.

不过我们可以换个话题，聊聊公司里另一个我觉得也很有潜力的部分，虽然不像云业务那么惊艳，那就是谷歌的订阅业务。

But if we can pivot to highlighting a part of the company that I have found to also be very promising, even if it's not as breathtaking as a cloud business, that would be the Google subscription segment.

基本上，谷歌除了Google One这类付费订阅之外，还收取各种许可和广告费用。比如订阅Google One后，你可以增加Google Drive和Gmail的存储空间。

And so basically Google has a bunch of different licensing and advertising fees that it earns on top of paid subscriptions like Google One that allow you to, for example, increase your storage space on Google Drive and in Gmail?

我觉得大多数人想到平台时，可能会想到苹果这样的公司，它可以说是全球最优秀的平台公司之一。

So I think when most people think of a platform, they might think of a business like Apple, which is arguably one of the best platform companies on the entire planet.

但谷歌的订阅业务其实非常强劲，我个人也经常使用。

But Google subscriptions are a very, very strong segment, and I use it very heavily personally.

比如你用Drive或Gmail时，文件和邮件越积越多，某天你可能会收到通知说，你的存储空间快用完了。

So when you're using something like drive or Gmail and your files and emails accumulate, one day you might get a notification saying, okay, well you're running out of space.

所以你有几个选择。

So you have a couple of options here.

你可以删除一些东西，这当然可以，我以前也这么干过。

You can delete things, which you can certainly do, but I've done it before.

相信我，那很费时间，而且挺麻烦的。

And believe me, it's time consuming and offers a lot of friction.

或者你可以走简单路线，就是多付点钱给谷歌，买更多空间，以后还能继续用。

Or you could just take the simple route, which is to just pay Google a little more money for that space that you can fill up again into the future.

再比如YouTube。

Know, another example would be YouTube.

如果你不想看广告，那就可以买YouTube Premium，去掉广告，还能离线下载和后台播放。

You know, if you're sick of watching ads, well then you can purchase YouTube premium and just do away with ads while also being able to do offline downloads and background playback.

我个人挺喜欢后台播放的，比如我可以一边看视频一边回短信。

I personally like the background playback a bit as it allows me to watch content while answering text messages for instance.

订阅业务的好处是，这些服务价格都不算高。

And the cool part about the subscription business is that they're all relatively low priced.

所以当你想到切换成本时，它们通常低到让你在考虑取消或更换时根本不会太在意。

So when you think of switching costs, they're generally low enough where you just don't really give it that much thought when you think about canceling or switching.

然而，这项业务在2026年上半年为Alphabet带来了超过250亿美元的收入？

And yet this business generated over $25,000,000,000 in revenue for Alphabet in the first half of twenty twenty six?

多年来我一直抵制付费使用YouTube，因为我已经习惯了它总是免费可用，丹尼尔最终说服了我，让我觉得为高级版付费和为其他流媒体服务（比如Netflix）付费没什么太大区别。

After years of resisting paying for YouTube because I had just gotten accustomed to it, always being available for free, Daniel actually finally convinced me to see paying for premium as not being so different from maybe paying for any other streaming service like Netflix.

所以我现在是YouTube高级版的骄傲用户，而且我选择了稍微便宜一点的套餐，不含YouTube Music。

So I'm now a proud YouTube premium user and actually opted for the slightly cheaper plan that doesn't include YouTube Music.

我不知道大多数人是否知道有这个选项，但我们在几个月前的Spotify那期节目里聊过，我用的是Spotify。

I don't know if most people know whether that's available, but we talked about that in our Spotify episode from a few months ago, but I use Spotify instead.

所以我不需要为音乐流媒体付两次钱。

So I don't need to pay for music streaming twice.

而YouTube现在实际上已经是全球最大的流媒体服务，他们为平台上最热门的内容支付的费用远低于Netflix，后者要么自己制作热门节目，要么支付高额授权费。

And YouTube is now effectively the largest streaming service on the planet, where they also pay much less for the most popular content on their platform than say maybe Netflix, where they either have to make the hit shows themselves, produce it themselves, or pay a premium to license them.

所以YouTube规模更大，而且可能本质上更赚钱，因为它的变现方式同时包括广告和付费订阅。

And so YouTube is bigger and probably more profitable inherently with monetization being split across ads and paid subscriptions.

所以YouTube广告的增长远没有其他业务那么爆炸性，但我觉得要发展这部分业务也不需要花太多钱。

And so YouTube ads are seeing nowhere near the explosive growth that other areas of the business are, but I don't think it requires much spending to grow this part of the business either.

所以只要YouTube吸引更多内容创作者，进而吸引更多用户，就会源源不断地有人来投放广告。

So as long as YouTube attracts more content creators, that in turn attracts more users, there'll be a steady stream of people to advertise to.

这就是YouTube商业模式背后飞轮效应的真正美妙之处。

And so that's really the beauty of the flywheel behind that YouTube business model.

相信我，我们可没拿Alphabet的钱来推销他们的产品，但我确实注意到他们在让PowerPoint制作更快更简洁方面的能力，这真的帮了大忙，让演示文稿更出色，准备起来也更高效。

Now believe me, we aren't being paid by Alphabet to push any of their products here, but I've even noticed their ability in making things like PowerPoints faster and cleaner, and that's really, really helped with just giving better presentations and preparing them in a quicker manner.

所以你看，我能轻松创建模板、编辑内容、放上图片，听起来很简单，但真的帮我省了很多时间，优化了我的工作流程。

So you know, the fact that I could just create a template and edit it easily and just get some images up sounds simple, but it really saves me a lot of time and helps me just to optimize my work processes.

然后说到你刚才提到的YouTube，我喜欢YouTube的地方就在于它的商业模式。

And then kind of touching to your point on YouTube there, The thing I love about YouTube is just how the business model works.

你知道，它不像Netflix或Disney Plus那样，花几十亿美元去制作内容。

You know, it's not like Netflix or Disney Plus, which, you know, they're spending billions of dollars to create that content.

YouTube基本上是让内容创作者自己搞定几乎所有内容制作。

YouTube has basically empowered its own content creators to handle almost all of that on their own.

然后，是的，他们确实会分给创作者大约55%的广告收入。

And then yes, okay, they do pay them about a 55% spread on that advertising revenue.

但我觉得这真的是一个非常精简高效的商业模式。

But I think it's just a really, really good lean business model.

就像你说的，YouTube不需要电影制片厂这类东西。

And as you said, YouTube doesn't need things like movie studios.

他们不需要找资金来融资。

They don't need to find capital to finance.

他们不需要自己制作内容。

They don't need to produce.

他们不需要购买电影或剧集的版权。

They don't need to license movies or series.

这真的很酷。

It's pretty cool.

而且，如果你把YouTube和像Netflix这样的公开市场可比公司相比，Netflix的估值大约是销售额的七倍，这样算下来YouTube的价值大概在三千亿美元左右。

And if you look at YouTube versus public market comps like Netflix, which trades at somewhere around seven times sales, makes YouTube worth something like $300,000,000,000.

说实话，可能还要多得多，也许高达5000亿美元。

And honestly, probably a lot more, maybe as much as 500,000,000,000.

所以把这些都放在一起看，对于最初17亿美元的投资来说，这已经很不错了。

So when you put that all into context, that's not too bad for an initial $1,700,000,000 investment.

确实不错。

Not bad at all.

而且YouTube现在还在测试一个新功能，叫“Ask YouTube”。

And YouTube is now also testing out a new feature called Ask YouTube.

它利用谷歌的Gemini模型，让人们可以针对单个视频提问。

And so it uses Google's Gemini models to let people ask questions about individual videos.

我觉得这个想法是，你可以快速得到一些要点，或者用它帮你找到视频中最相关的片段，更快地浏览视频。

I guess the idea being you get some fast maybe takeaways or you can use it to help you find the most relevant moments in a video, be able to filter through the video more quickly.

我确实觉得这是一个挺有意思的增值点。

I actually think that is a pretty interesting value add.

桑达尔·皮查伊提到，仅今年6月，就有超过1.4亿人使用了这项服务。

And so Sundar Pichai noted that more than a 140,000,000 people have used that service in June of this year alone.

所以这显然不会直接带来收入，但理论上，它能让用户体验变得更好。

And so that doesn't obviously drive revenue directly, but in theory, it makes the user experience better.

所以也许人们会在YouTube平台上花更多时间，这样就能通过播放更多广告来提高变现能力，而且这确实说明了这些AI投资背后的逻辑，它们能改善整个业务，而不仅仅是那些直接归因于AI的部分，比如有人每月花几十美元订阅Gemini。

And so maybe people spend more time on the YouTube platform and so that increases monetization by allowing them to run more ads and, really just illustrates the rationale behind how some of these AI investments can improve the entire business beyond what's just obviously directly attributable to AI where somebody's paying, you know, x dollars a month for a Gemini subscription.

好的。

Alright.

那我们聊聊Alphabet最大的押注之一，Waymo，我知道肖恩对它很有看法。

Well, let's talk here about one of Alphabet's biggest moonshot bets, Waymo, which I know Shawn has pretty strong feelings of.

在你最初的节目里，你提到Waymo刚以大约500亿美元的估值融资，这实际上比之前估计的2000亿美元低了不少。但看起来Waymo的价值在上升，因为它在今年二月的最近一轮融资中估值接近1300亿美元。

So in your original episode, you noted that Waymo just raised money at an evaluation of about $50,000,000,000 which was actually down considerably from an earlier estimate about $200,000,000,000 But it actually appears Waymo is increasing in value as it was valued at nearly 130,000,000,000 in its last funding round in February of this year.

所以Alphabet的这个部分，曾经可能被视为一个四舍五入的误差，尽管有很多潜在选择权，但在一年半内价值几乎翻了三倍。

So this piece of Alphabet, which at one point could have been seen as, you know, just a rounding error, albeit with a lot of optionality, has nearly tripled in value over a year and a half.

我知道你更喜欢Uber而不是Waymo，至少在商业模式上是这样，但Waymo确实有一些相当扎实的基本面。

Now, I know that you prefer Uber to Waymo, at least in terms of business models, but Waymo definitely has some pretty strong fundamentals.

他们已经行驶了1.27亿英里的完全自动驾驶里程，并且报告称，在同样的里程下，严重受伤相关事故比人类司机减少了90%。

They've now driven 127,000,000 fully autonomous miles and are reporting 90% fewer serious injury related crashes versus human drivers on that exact same mileage.

他们在2025年完成了5000万次出行，是2024年的三倍，目前每周大约有50万次出行，目标是到年底达到每周100万次。

They did 50,000,000 rides in 2025, three times as in 2024, and they're currently running about 500,000 rides a week with a target of a million rides by the end of the year.

所以，如果有谁错过了，我和丹尼尔前几天刚做了一期节目，重新聊了聊优步。

So for anybody who missed it, Daniel and I just did an episode the other day revisiting Uber.

我记得我说过，Waymo和优步估值一样，这挺离谱的。

And I think I said that it was pretty obscene for Waymo to have the same valuation as Uber.

我的意思是，优步每天有数千万次出行，利润数十亿美元，商业模式非常成熟，而且正在快速扩张。

I mean, Uber is doing tens of millions of rides per day and generating billions of dollars in profits with a very proven and quickly scaling business model.

而Waymo还在烧钱阶段，亏损严重，商业模式是否可行还没有得到验证。

While Waymo is still in the cash burn phase, it's losing a ton of money and its viability as a business model has not been proven.

这完全是投机性的。

It's entirely speculative.

而且，在一定程度上，这也取决于竞争对手能否在自动驾驶技术上取得突破，从而抵消Waymo可能拥有的一些先发优势。

And then to some extent, it's also dependent on whether competitors are able to make breakthroughs in AV tech that offset some of the first mover benefits that Waymo may have.

所以，作为Alphabet的股东，如果他们能通过未来Waymo的IPO部分或全部变现他们的股份，从而利用Waymo的价值，我觉得这对我们来说都是额外的收益。

So as an Alphabet shareholder, to the extent that they can capitalize on Waymo by maybe monetizing their stake partially or fully from a Waymo IPO down the road, I think that's sort of all gravy for us.

作为优步的股东，我得说我对Waymo能否撑起这个估值相当怀疑。

As an Uber shareholder, I would say I'm pretty skeptical of Waymo being able to grow into this valuation.

但客观来说，这技术确实很酷。

But objectively, the technology is really cool.

我在德克萨斯州的奥斯汀亲眼见过。

I saw it for myself in Austin, Texas.

那种感觉就像你活在未来了。

It makes you feel like you live in the future.

确实如此。

It does.

我还没机会去体验一下。

I haven't gotten a chance to use it yet.

不过Alphabet在2015年还下了另一个大赌注，投了大约9亿美元给一家正在成长中的太空公司。

But Alphabet made another big bet in 2015 for about $900,000,000 in a growing space company.

我敢打赌你能猜到是哪家公司。

Now, I bet you can guess what that company was.

我觉得也是。

I think so.

对，我想大多数人都会知道。

Yeah, I think most people will know that

它刚刚上市了。

it just IPO ed.

SpaceX。

SpaceX.

就是它。

That's the one.

所以今天，Alphabet持有的5%股份价值950亿美元。所以在Waymo和SpaceX这样的业务之间，Alphabet在其他投资领域有一些巨大的赢家。

So today, Alphabet's 5% stake is worth $95,000,000,000 So between businesses like Waymo and SpaceX, Alphabet has some monster winners in its other bet segment.

但是，你知道，我也完全同意你原始研究中的观点，尤其是你提到的，评估Alphabet一些更投机性的技术投资确实非常困难。

But, you know, I also totally agree with your points from the original research, especially your point that it's just really difficult to evaluate some of Alphabet's more speculative technology bets.

但是，你知道，至少对于像SpaceX这样的业务，我们可以了解市场的一些看法，这或许能为其其他投资（比如Waymo）提供更多清晰度。

But, you know, at least with a business like SpaceX, we can get some idea of what the market thinks, which can maybe provide a little more clarity on some of its other bets such as Waymo.

Alphabet 有一个部分我觉得自己还没完全想明白，而且到现在还是觉得特别有意思。

There is one part of Alphabet that I don't think I fully wrapped my head around and that I still find fascinating.

说实话，我觉得市场也没真正搞明白这一点。

And to be fair, don't think the market has really wrapped its head around this either.

那就是他们在数据中心投入的资金能带来多少回报。

And that's what the ROI from their data center commitments is going be.

这也是今天这期节目里反复出现的问题。

That is the recurring question in today's episode.

所以，如果 Alphabet 打算直接或间接投入数千亿美元到数据中心，我觉得现在非常有必要去搞清楚这些支出大概能带来什么样的回报，尤其是因为每季度这个预计支出的规模似乎都在往上调。

And so if Alphabet is going to part ways with hundreds of billions of dollars to directly and indirectly invest in data centers, I think it's very timely to try and figure out what kind of returns this spending is likely to generate, especially since the magnitude of this estimated spending seems to just get revised higher every quarter.

所以我会说，这更像是一个试图把握大致方向的练习。

And so I will say maybe it's more of an exercise of trying to be directionally correct.

要理清这个有点复杂，因为数据中心不仅仅是利润中心——从 Google Cloud 的积压订单就能看出来——它们也是 Alphabet 内部的一项重大投资，帮助提升整个公司几乎所有业务的效率。

It's a little complicated to disentangle because the data centers are not only profit centers when we look at Google Cloud's backlog, but they also are a big internal investment inside of Alphabet, helping to power nearly every aspect of the businesses overall productivity.

所以我不确定我们能不能得到一个特别清晰的答案，甚至不确定有没有可能得到，但我真的很期待你能试着去算一算。

So I'm not sure that we're gonna get a perfectly clear answer or that it's even possible to get one, but I am really excited for you to kind of take a shot at doing so.

好，那我试试看。

Yeah, let me take a swing.

我先强调一下肖恩刚才的提醒，我的回答只是基于经验的猜测，希望是个靠谱的猜测。

So I'll double down on Shawn's warning here that my answer is just an educated guess and hopefully it's a decent guess.

所以，首先我想让你闭上眼睛，想象一下正在建设的东西。

So the first thing I want you to do, close your eyes for a second and imagine what is actually being built.

想象一个没有窗户的盒子，大小相当于50个美式足球场。

Imagine a windowless box, size of about 50 American football fields.

有趣的是，这个数据中心实际上是世界第三大的，而且它归谷歌所有，位于爱荷华州的康瑟尔布拉夫斯。巧的是，那里离我去年参加伯克希尔·哈撒韦年会时住的酒店只有几英里远。

Now the interesting thing about this data center is that it's actually the third largest in the world, and it's actually owned by Google, and it's actually located in Council Bluffs, Iowa, which funny enough is actually just a few miles away from the hotel that I stayed at in last year's Berkshire Hathaway's annual general meeting.

虽然这个设施的规模显然非常非常大，但这还不是最重要的部分。

While the size of this facility is clearly very, very large, that's not even the most important part.

最近的热门话题是数据中心的电力消耗。

What has been a hot topic of late is the electricity usage of data centers.

2024年，谷歌数据中心的用电量几乎相当于整个爱尔兰的用电量，而如今谷歌的数据量比那时还要大得多。

Back in 2024, Google data centers power use nearly equaled the entire country of Ireland, And Google's data is much more bigger than that today.

这个重新定义问题的角度挺有意思的。

It's a pretty interesting way of reframing things.

而且，与其把这些数据中心看作纯粹的技术设施，我觉得你描述的是它们更像是一种公用事业。

And instead of looking at these data centers as just being a pure technology outlet, I think what you're describing is that they're almost like a utility.

显然，作为公用事业的AI数据中心，其能源消耗数字相当惊人。

And clearly AI data centers as a utility has some pretty massive energy consumption numbers.

确实如此。

They really do.

而且，你知道，我本人对这些投资整体上持相当怀疑的态度。

And, you know, I'm naturally pretty skeptical of these investments overall.

所以，也许我们先从反对谷歌建设AI数据中心的角度说起，稍后再回到能源消耗这个话题。

So maybe let's start here with the case against Google's AI data center build out, and we'll back to that energy consumption part shortly here.

我认为毫无疑问，这项投资会给谷歌带来回报，因为谷歌运营业务本身就需要不断增长的算力。

So I think there is no doubt that the investment will bear fruit for Google as it requires this kind of growing amount of compute power just to operate the business of Google.

更不用说，他们租给其他企业的所有产能显然也在产生回报。

Not to mention that, you know, all the capacity that they're leasing out to other businesses is obviously bearing fruit as well.

但问题在于，要弄清楚，谷歌从这些投资中到底能获得什么样的经济回报，而且是在所有这些投资都完成之后。

But the problem is understanding, okay, well, what kind of economics is Google getting from these investments and once they're all complete.

所以如果我看Alphabet的投入资本回报率，这个数字有点在往错误的方向走。

So if I'm looking at Alphabet's return on invested capital, that number is kind of trending in the wrong direction.

如果我们看看fiscal.ai，我们非常非常喜欢用的那个平台，在过去的十二个月里，他们的投入资本回报率现在是公司上市以来的第二低点。

So if we look here at fiscal.ai, which we like to use very, very often in their last twelve months, their returns on invested capital is now the second lowest that it's been since the business went public.

但有趣的是，Alphabet仍然在赚很多钱。

But the interesting part about this equation is that Alphabet is still making a ton of money.

你知道，他们的营业利润率实际上还上升了，但他们的资本效率数字之所以往下走，实际上是因为投入资本增加了。

You know, their operating profit margin has actually gone up, but the reason their capital efficiency numbers are trending downwards is actually this increase in invested capital.

考虑到谷歌今年的资本支出估计是2023年的六倍，我想那些资本带来的增量回报还没有显现出来，或者明显高于过去，也就不那么令人惊讶了。

Given that Google's CapEx this year is estimated to be six times more than what they spent in 2023, I guess it's not all that surprising that the incremental returns on some of that capital are not yet manifesting or clearly higher than in the past.

但不管怎样，我们现在还是不太清楚。

But for better or worse, we still really don't know yet.

所以Alphabet正在从一家围绕数字世界、以软件为核心的公司，逐渐在一定程度上转向以实体世界为重心。

And so Alphabet is going from a company built around the digital world with its software to increasingly being anchored in the physical world to an extent.

所以，与其说公司的价值主要是由算法和软件创造的，或者说由那些开发这些技术的人类知识工作者创造的，不如说他们越来越多的业务就是实实在在地跟物理世界挂钩，比如电脑芯片、电力消耗、数据中心建设和维护。

So rather than just purely being algorithms and software are creating most of the company's value and maybe the human knowledge workers that produce those technologies, more and more of what they do is just simply tied tangibly to the physical world, computer chips, electricity consumption, data center construction and maintenance.

所以，这带来的影响是相当深远的，对吧？

And so the implications of that are pretty profound, right?

软件已经推动市场回报二十年了，而现在那些最大的软件公司的经济模式正在发生变化。

Software has driven the market's returns for two decades now and the economics of the biggest software companies are changing.

我这么说不是因为担心SaaS的末日，尽管这确实是目前市场的一个话题。

And I'm not saying that because of SaaS apocalypse concerns, even though that is a narrative in markets right now.

但真的就是，这些业务正在变得不那么数字化了。

But really just simply that the businesses are becoming a whole lot less digital.

所以我觉得在这个时刻保持谦逊非常重要，要认识到这是一个范式转变，而且没有人能很有把握地知道这未来意味着什么。

So I think it's really important to be humble at this moment and recognize that this is a paradigm shift, and no one knows with much confidence what that is gonna mean going forward.

完全正确。

Exactly.

还有一点，Alphabet的财务数据，尤其是云业务，可能没有完全反映出来的，就是Alphabet的资产负债表上还有一些资产尚未折旧。

And another thing that kind of off escapes Alphabet's numbers and Cloud in particular, is that Alphabet is carrying some of its assets on the balance sheets that are yet to depreciate in value.

所以这实际上会抬高谷歌云的利润率。

So this actually serves to inflate Google Cloud's margins.

根据他们最新的季度报告，Alphabet账面上有尚未投入使用的资产，价值大约1220亿美元。我不是说他们想做什么不合规的事，但我觉得如果你真的想深入研究他们的财务状况，你肯定得在一定程度上考虑到这一点。

And as of their latest quarter, Alphabet carries assets not yet in service valued at about $122,000,000,000 Now, I'm not saying that they're trying to do anything that's not above board, but I think if you really want to dig into their financials in-depth, you definitely have to account for this to some extent.

你知道，你可以说这些资产将来某个时候会投入使用，到那时，一旦投入使用，它们就会被加入折旧计划。

You know, you can make the argument that these assets will be in service at some point, And then at that point, once they're in service, they'll be added to the depreciation schedule.

也许这意味着谷歌云目前的利润率长期来看并不是真的可持续。

And perhaps that means that Google Cloud's margins at the current levels are not really sustainable over the long term.

我们快速休息一下，听听今天赞助商的广告。

Let's take a quick break and hear from today's sponsors.

作为投资者，有一个方面我觉得没有得到足够的关注，那就是作为投资研究员，持续进步有多难。

One part of being an investor that I don't think gets enough attention is how hard it can be to continue to improve as an investment researcher.

对我自己来说，我经常发现，当我跟某个行业专家或基金经理进行了一场很棒的对话后，脑子里全是想法。

And for myself, I often find that when I finish a great conversation with some industry expert or fund manager, my head is full of ideas.

但等我坐下来把这些写下来的时候，一半的想法已经没了。

But by the time I sit down to write it all up, half of them are already gone.

所以我一直在用Plaud Note Pro。

That's why I've been using Plaud Note Pro.

这个小设备贴在手机背面，能录下对话，然后给我一份干净、可搜索的摘要。

It's a small device that sticks to the back of my phone and captures the conversation and hands me back a clean searchable recap.

关键点、后续事项、还有我通常想跟进的事情，它全都整理好了。

And so the key points, the follow ups, the things I usually want to act on, it has all of that.

这样我就能专心待在现场，不用忙着记笔记，反正回头也看不懂自己写了什么。

And that allows me to stay present in the room instead of scribbling notes that I won't be able to read back later.

而且我出了名的字写得特别烂。

And I notoriously have very bad handwriting.

所以它彻底改变了我的准备方式和跟投资人的后续沟通。

And so it's changed how I prep and how I follow-up with investors.

它也是为那些认真对待对话的人设计的。

It's also built for people who take conversations seriously.

企业级安全保障。

Enterprise grade security.

所以如果你要录和客户或行业联系人的通话，那也没问题。

So if you're recording calls with clients or industry contacts, that's covered too.

所以如果你经常开会、打电话、做访谈，那你可以看看这个。

So if you live in meetings, calls, and interviews, we'll give it a look.

去 plaud.ai/wsb，用优惠码 wsb 可以打九折。

Go to plaud.ai/wsb, and use code w s b for 10% off.

网址是 plaud.ai/wsb，优惠码是 WSB。

That's plaud.ai slash WSB code WSB.

还有，录任何对话之前一定要先征得对方同意。

And always get consent before you record a conversation.

对在线交易感兴趣，但还没迈出第一步？

Curious about online trading, but haven't taken the first step yet?

你不是一个人。

You're not alone.

而 Plus500 期货是一个很好的起点。

And Plus500 futures is a great place to start.

期货市场瞬息万变，通过Plus500，你可以探索石油、黄金、标普500、比特币等热门资产。

The futures markets are moving fast and with Plus500, you can explore popular assets like oil, gold, S and P 500, Bitcoin, and more.

从加密货币到大宗商品，总有新鲜事发生。

From crypto to commodities, there's always something happening.

这个平台操作非常简单，你可以直接在手机上随时交易。

The platform is super easy to use, so you can trade on the go right from your phone.

只需100美元就能开始，马上参与其中。

You can get started with just $100 and jump into the action.

看到感兴趣的了？

See something interesting?

账户开通后，只需点击几下就能完成交易。

Once your account is open, you can trade it in just a couple of clicks.

如果你还没准备好，可以用免费模拟账户练练手。

And if you're not quite ready yet, you can practice with a free demo account.

没有风险，也没有压力。

No risk, no pressure.

凭借二十年的经验，Plus500让交易变得比以往任何时候都更容易。

With twenty years of experience, Plus500 makes trading more accessible than ever.

去plus500.com看看吧。

Check it out at plus500.com.

期货交易涉及亏损风险，并非适合所有人，也不是所有申请者都能通过审核。

Trading in futures involves risks of loss and is not suitable for everyone, not all applicants will qualify.

Plus500，让交易更上一层楼。

Plus500, it's trading with a plus.

每周我们都会在节目中分析一些公司，并问同样的问题：管理层真的在高效运营这家公司吗？

Every week we analyze companies on this show and ask the same question, is management actually running this business efficiently?

这是目前大多数公司最诚实的答案。

Here's the honest answer for most companies right now.

那些领先的公司，正是那些把AI应用到日常工作中的公司。

The ones pulling ahead are the ones putting AI to work on the everyday stuff.

这正是Netsuite Next的初衷。

That's exactly what Netsuite Next was built for.

Netsuite Next 会在你最需要的时候给你提供关键信息。

Netsuite Next surfaces insights exactly when you need them.

它能把日常任务和问题交给智能代理处理，而且你可以用日常语言问复杂问题，就像跟一个懂行的同事聊天一样。

It puts agents to work on routine tasks and problems, and it lets you ask complex questions in plain language like talking to a knowledgeable colleague.

但技术只是其中一部分。

But technology is only part of the story.

AI 也在改变人们和团队协作的方式，而这种变化已经在发生。

AI is also reshaping how people and teams work together, and that shift is already underway.

今天你就能拿到专家制作的商业指南。

Expert created business guide in your hands today.

这本指南叫《对齐：AI 如何改变日常工作》，现在你可以免费获取。

It's called Aligning for the How AI is Changing Everyday Work, and right now it's yours absolutely free.

在里面，你会看到 AI 如何重塑整个组织的工作方式，以及如何让你的企业从中受益。

Inside, you'll discover how AI could reshape work across your entire organization, and how to position your business to prosper from it.

我在用这个，你也应该试试。

I use this and you should too.

如果你的收入至少达到七位数，就免费获取我们的商业指南《为智能体时代做好准备：AI如何改变日常工作》，网址是netsuite.com/tip。

If your revenues are at least in the 7 figures, get our free business guide aligning for the agentic era, how AI is changing everyday work at netsuite.com/tip.

这份指南在netsuite.com/tip免费提供给你。

The guide is free to you at netsuite.com/tip.

netsuite.com/tip。

Netsuite.com/tip.

好了，回到节目。

Alright, back to the show.

对我来说，这可能是Alphabet最大的黑箱。

To me, this is probably the biggest black box at Alphabet.

迈克尔·伯里，听众们肯定知道他是《大空头》里的那个人，他说过，尤其是计算机芯片的折旧会计处理，是21世纪最常见的欺诈形式，也可能是欺骗股东的方式。

Michael Burry, who listeners will, I'm sure, know from The Big Short, has said that depreciation accounting for computer chips in particular is the most common form of fraud and maybe shareholder deception in the twenty first century.

所以会计是基于假设的，比如资产的使用寿命有多长这样的假设。

So accounting is based on assumptions and assumptions like how long the useful life of an asset is.

所以，你的数据中心里的服务器是每三年还是每六年更换一次，这是一个非常重要的会计决策。

So whether you have to replace the servers in your data center every three or six years is a very consequential accounting decision to make.

所以，如果答案是它们需要每三年更换一次，因为三年就过时了，但你却按六年折旧，那你就会严重低估这些芯片的真实经济成本，短期内还会虚增利润。

And so if the answer is that they need to turn over every three years because that's how quickly they get outdated, but you depreciate those costs over six years, then you're going to be hugely underestimating the real economic costs of those chips and artificially inflating earnings on the short term.

我们前几天在YouTube直播里聊过这个，迈克尔·伯里说过，超大规模数据中心运营商未来几年集体少算的折旧金额可能高达1750亿美元。

So we talked about this in one of our YouTube live streams the other day, and Michael Burry has stated that hyperscalers are collectively understating depreciation by as much as $175,000,000,000 over the next few years.

不管我读多少相关资料，我对半导体的了解永远不够，没法自信地告诉你合理的折旧年限应该怎么定。

No matter how much reading I do on the topic, I will never know enough about semiconductors to tell you what the appropriate depreciation schedule is with any confidence.

但你现在做的其实是把很多信任放在管理层身上，而且显然有像迈克尔·伯里这样的聪明人在质疑这些假设。

But what you're doing is you're putting a lot of trust into management, and clearly you have some smart people like Michael Burry at least raising questions about those assumptions.

而且，说实话，如果我说我花了很多时间和精力去研究数据中心使用寿命的折旧表，那也是骗人的。

And you know, I'd also be lying if I said that I'd put that much time and effort into figuring out depreciation schedules for data center lives.

所以，我觉得这种争论还是留给比我更懂行的人吧。

So, you know, I think I'll probably leave that argument to people who are more knowledgeable in that area than I am.

不过我还是觉得你提这个挺好的。

But I still think it's great that you brought it up.

也许这意味着，你在给这个业务建模的时候，得在几种不同的折旧标准上做不同的假设，这可能会影响GAAP利润。

You know, perhaps it means when you're modeling this business, you have to make a few different assumptions on different depreciation scales, which could affect gap profits.

不过，我还想补充一些关于数据中心的担忧。

But you know, I would just add a few other concerns with the data center here as well.

我之前提到过，Anthropic 似乎占了谷歌积压订单的很大一部分，但这里的收入也有一种循环性质，这一点已经被广泛讨论了。

So I already discussed how Anthropic appears to be taking up a large share of Google's backlog, but there's also this kind of circular nature of the revenue here, have been widely widely shared.

举个例子，一个真实的例子就是 Anthropic 和 Alphabet 的交易。

So So just to give you an example here, a real example of Anthropoc's deal with Alphabet.

Alphabet 在这笔交易中承诺向 Anthropic 投入高达约 400 亿美元。

So Alphabet committed up to about 40,000,000,000 into Anthropic as part of the deal.

简单来说，就是谷歌投资客户，客户购买谷歌的计算服务，然后谷歌把订单记入积压订单。

So, you know, to put it simply Google invests in the customer, the customer buys Google compute, then Google then books the backlog.

所以，看 Alphabet 的时候，它历来是一家每股价值持续增长的公司。

So when looking at Alphabet, they've traditionally been a business that has compounded their per share value.

这部分是通过回购实现的，回购金额在 2023 年到 2025 年之间大约在 450 亿到 600 亿美元。

And part of this was completed through buybacks, which ran between say 45,000,000,000 to about $60,000,000,000 between the years of 2023 until 2025.

但到了 2026 年上半年，回购金额几乎为零。

But as of the first half of twenty twenty six, they're literally zero.

而且，资本支出几乎吃掉了Alphabet所有的自由现金流。

And additionally, CapEx has eaten up almost all of Alphabet's free cash flow.

在2026年第二季度，他们实际上出现了很长时间以来的首次负自由现金流季度。

And in Q2 of twenty twenty six, they actually had their first negative free cash flow quarter in a very, very long time.

现在我们有点在批评Alphabet，但我认为这样做是有益的，因为毕竟我们非常看好谷歌。

Now we're bashing Alphabet a little bit here, but I do think that it's a productive exercise to do that because after all, we're we're pretty bullish on Google.

否则，它也不会是我们投资组合中最大的持仓。

Otherwise, it wouldn't be the largest holding in our portfolio.

所以，批判性地看待你的业务非常重要。不过，为了提供更多关于AI支出构成的背景，Alphabet的首席财务官Anat Ashkenazi曾表示，他们进行的AI基础设施投资中，大约60%用于服务器，40%用于数据中心和网络设备。

And so it's very important to look at your businesses critically, but just as maybe some more context on the composition of this AI spending, Alphabet's CFO, Anat Ashkenazi, has said the mix of the AI infrastructure investments that they're undertaking is approximately 60% in servers and then about 40% into the data centers and networking equipment.

对，这个数字看起来挺吻合的，但我想回到电力消耗方面。

Yeah, and that number seems to track quite well, but I'd like to get back to the power consumption side of things.

我见过一个数据中心的重要指标，叫做电能使用效率，简称PUE。

So an important metric that I've seen mentioned for data centers is something called power usage effectiveness or PUE.

这是一个标准比率，通过比较整个设施的总能耗与IT设备专用的能耗，来衡量数据中心的能源效率。

It's a standard ratio that measures how energy efficient a data center is by comparing the total energy used by the whole facility to the energy used strictly by the IT equipment.

所以谷歌的PUE是1.09。

So in Google's case, it has a 1.09 PUE.

这据说远低于行业平均的1.3左右，也就是说谷歌基本上比普通数据中心运行效率高得多。

And this is supposedly much lower than the industry average of around 1.3, meaning that Google is just basically running much more efficiently than the average data center is.

谷歌在这方面更高效是件好事，这给他们带来了很多规模上的优势。

Now it's great that Google is more efficient here, which gives them a number of scale advantages.

这些优势包括节省成本、每兆瓦能提供更多计算能力，以及减少碳足迹。

You know, these are advantages, including cost savings, greater computing capacity per megawatt, and a reduced carbon footprint.

如果有人想知道兆瓦是什么，它大约相当于600户家庭的用电量。

And for anyone wondering what a megawatt is, it's enough electricity to power about 600 homes or so.

有趣的是，

And the interesting

尽管电力只占AI基础设施年成本的6%左右，但它是扩展规模的最大瓶颈。

thing is that even though power makes up only about 6% of the annual costs of this AI capacity, It is the largest bottleneck to scaling up.

所以Alphabet在电力、土地和供应链方面受到限制，但如果能源需求无法满足，其他一切都无关紧要。

And so Alphabet is supply constrained with power and land and supply chain, but everything else is irrelevant if the energy needs cannot be met.

所以，不管有多少数据中心，显然，它们都没法供电。

And so it does not matter how many data centers exist, obviously, they can't be powered.

没错。

Exactly.

所以我觉得，SpaceX和特斯拉的Balls对太空中的AI数据中心这么兴奋，也是有道理的，这个我们在聊SpaceX的提案时讨论过。

And that's why I think, you know, SpaceX and Tesla Balls are just so excited about these AI data centers in space, which we discussed on my SpaceX pitch.

所以，可再生能源显然是一个巨大的竞争优势，而且把数据中心放在太空里，也能解决很多必须非常小心管理的冷却问题。

So, you know, renewable energy is clearly a massive competitive advantage and having data centers in space also takes care of much of the cooling that must be very, very carefully managed.

但让我们看看Alphabet在AI数据中心领域的竞争对手的一些经济情况。

But let's look at some of the economics of Alphabet's competitors in the AI data center space.

所以，在价值链上有几家公司参与竞争。

So there are a few businesses that compete in the value chain.

我找到的最好的两家是CoreWeave和Nebius，主要是因为它们是纯做这个的，不像Oracle、Amazon或Microsoft那样，财务数据被其他业务线搞得模糊不清。

The two best ones that I came over were CoreWeave and Nebius simply because they're kind of pure play and don't have financials that are obfuscated by other business lines such as, you know, an Oracle and Amazon or a Microsoft.

这两家公司的问题在于，它们目前都还没有盈利。

Now the problem with both businesses is that they just today remain unprofitable.

所以即使你觉得谷歌的估值被人为压低了，他们现在的盈利能力可能还是比Nebius或CoreWeave强得多。

So even if you are making a complaint about Google's appreciation being artificially low, they're still probably much more profitable than either Nebius or Core Web is today.

这些数据确实很有意思，但我个人还在思考的是，为什么Alphabet能在盈利能力上比那些竞争对手高出这么多？

Some really interesting data points there for sure, but it's something I'm still reflecting on personally is how come Alphabet does have this large profitability edge over some of those comps?

你觉得

How do you think

这是怎么回事，Kyle？

about that Kyle?

对，我觉得最大的原因可能是垂直整合。

Yeah, I think the biggest one is probably the vertical integration part.

肖恩，你之前提到过，Alphabet开发了很多自己的芯片，包括张量处理单元。

So you mentioned here earlier, Shawn, that Alphabet has developed many of its own chips, including the tensor processing units.

正因为如此，他们在某种程度上避免了其他公司几乎都要交的英伟达税。

Now, because of this, it skips to some degree, this kind of Nvidia tax that pretty much all of these other companies are forced to pay.

但要记住，英伟达是一家非常非常优秀的公司。

Now, keep in mind, Nvidia is a very, very good company.

它有65%的营业利润率，还有定价权。

It has 65% operating margins as well as pricing power.

所以，这对英伟达来说当然很好，但对它的客户来说显然就没那么好了。

So, you know, that's great for Nvidia, but obviously it's not so great for its customers.

不过谷歌不一定有同样的问题。

Now Google doesn't necessarily have that same issue.

谷歌的张量处理单元比英伟达的同类产品便宜大约40%。

So Google's tensor processing units come in at about a 40% discount to the Nvidia equivalent.

而且就像我们看到的Anthropic和谷歌的合作，很多AI公司直接租用谷歌的算力比自己搭建要划算得多。

And as we've seen with Anthropix deal with Google, it just makes more sense for many of these AI businesses just to rent CompuPower from Google rather than building it out on their own.

Alphabet还有一个简单的优势，就是他们有能力

Another simple advantage that Alphabet has as well is they have the ability to

自己把产能填满。

fill up their capacity themselves.

比如CoreWeave，他们是按小时租给客户的。

CoreWeave, for instance, rents by the hour to their customers.

而且Alphabet可以把计算能力分配给谷歌搜索、YouTube和Gemini，根据需求来调整，同时还有那些自然流入的客户作为基础。

And Alphabet can allocate compute capacity toward Google Search and YouTube and Gemini as needed on top of the baseline of customers that they they have just naturally coming in.

所以Alphabet真的很少浪费计算能力。

So Alphabet really has very little capacity being wasted.

他们有很大的灵活性，如果客户需求短暂下降，这些计算资源可以在内部重新调配。

They have a lot of flexibility and if there's a brief shortfall in customer demand, that compute can be redirected internally.

这就像一家酒店，没有空房，你知道的。

It's sort of like a hotel that doesn't have any room occupancies, you know.

所有房间都满了，这对酒店的边际利润影响巨大，这确实可能成为一种竞争优势。

All the rooms are filled and that makes a huge difference for the incremental profitability of the hotel and that really is something of a, perhaps a competitive advantage.

而且目前来看，对于像CoreWeave和Nebius这样的新云服务商来说，这可能还不是问题。

And as of now, it's probably is not a problem for Neo Clouds like CoreWeave and Nebius.

但如果Alphabet的优势继续扩大，总有一天这些企业可能会因为闲置产能太多而难以维持运营。

But if Alphabet's advantages continue to grow, there may come a time when these businesses find it difficult to keep the lights on with too much unused capacity.

但这只是我们的一个推测，也许要等到这轮AI周期或泡沫结束之后才能见分晓，随便你怎么称呼它。

But that is a speculative tangent for us to go on perhaps on the other side of this AI cycle or bubble or whatever you want to call it.

但回到数据中心及其对资本效率的影响这个话题，这一切其实都归结为我们今天整期节目一直在讨论的那个问题。

But just getting back to the angle of data centers and their impact on capital efficiency, it all really comes back down to this one question that we have been touching on throughout the entire course of today's episode.

那就是，这2000亿美元的投资需要赚多少钱，才能让这些投资在事后看来是合理的？

And that is, how much does that $200,000,000,000 need to earn for those investments who have made any sense in hindsight?

我的意思是，

I mean,

我觉得这确实就是问题的核心，我会尽力把它拆解得尽可能简单。

I think that's really all it boils down to, and I'm gonna do my best here to break it down as simply as possible.

所以，我们把这2000亿美元的投资想象成买一栋大型公寓楼。

So let's think of the $200,000,000,000 investment like buying a giant apartment building.

在你们争论这是否是一笔好买卖之前，显然需要先弄清楚几件事，比如每年持有它的成本是多少。

Before you guys argue about whether that's a good buy, you obviously have to work out a few things such as what it costs you to own it every year.

然后你还需要问，好吧，你需要收多少租金才能让这件事值得做？

And then you need to also ask, okay, well, what rent do you need to charge in order to make it worth doing?

现在，对于Alphabet来说，拥有一年运营的数据中心，一旦全部启用，大约需要300亿美元的支出。

Now for Alphabet owning one year's worth of data centers runs about $30,000,000,000 in expenses once it's all switched on.

这其中包括大约250亿美元的芯片，这些芯片在慢慢损耗，剩下的则是电力和维护费用。

And that composes of about 25,000,000,000 in chips that are slowly wearing out and the rest in power and upkeep.

但显然，仅仅覆盖成本并不是目标。

But just covering your costs obviously is not the goal.

你当然还想要可观的利润。

You also want a nice profit as well.

所以如果我们从合理的利润倒推，大概会得出这样的结论：每年的投入必须带来700亿到1000亿美元的全新销售额。

So if we work backwards from a decent profit, you land somewhere around here, which is one year spending has to bring in somewhere between 70 and $100,000,000,000 of brand new sales every single year.

简化一下，就是每投入1美元，需要产生大约40美分的新增年收入。

If you simplify that, the rule is about 40¢ of new annual revenue for every dollar spent.

这就是门槛所在。

That's kind of where the bar sits.

但接下来，你得知道这个门槛是高还是低，因为单看40美分本身说明不了太多问题。

But then, okay, you want to know whether that bar is high or low because, you know, 40¢ by itself just doesn't mean that much.

在这里我得说实话，因为我去找了一些还算合理的对比，但真的没找到合适的。

And here I have to be pretty honest because I went looking for a somewhat decent comparison and couldn't really find one.

显然，这类东西是有市场的。

Obviously, there's a marketplace for this stuff.

Nebius和CoreWeave，你知道，他们也在做相关的事情。

Nebius and Core Core Weave, you know, they do things.

他们都在购买AI算力，然后出租出去，并且会披露这些合同的金额。

They're both, they're buying AI compute, they're renting it out, then they're disclosing what those contracts are worth.

但这里有一个问题，让事情变得非常非常难以理解。

But there's one kind of flag here that makes it really, really hard to really understand.

麻烦在于，他们按每兆瓦来报价，像每兆瓦2000万美元这样的数字，可能意味着两种截然不同的情况。

The trouble is they quote it per megawatt and a figure like 20,000,000 per megawatt can mean two very, very different things.

如果这是客户每年支付的费用，那就是每年2000万美元。

If that's what the customer pays every year, it's $20,000,000 a year.

但如果这是整个合同的总价值，而这些交易不幸可能持续四五年，那就更像是每年四五百万美元。

But if that's the value of the entire contract, and these deals unfortunately can run four or five years, and it's more like four or five million dollars a year.

所以，你看到的是同样的头条数字，但实际上并没有获得多少清晰的信息。

So, know, you're getting the same kind of headline number, but you don't actually get too much clarity.

而且我确实不幸地发现，不同的来源对它的描述方式不一样。

And I actually unfortunately found it described in both ways by different sources.

所以这个比较我真的没法太当真。

So it's just not a comparison that I can really put any conviction into.

不过，我们还是可以从这两家公司获取一些信息，至少能得出一个方向大致正确的数字。

But, you know, we can still use some information from these two businesses to at least develop a number where we are hopefully directionally correct.

我们目前知道的是，Nebius的定价在过去六个月里差不多翻了一倍，而Core Weave在七月就单独提价了25%，而且他们自己说近期的产能实际上已经卖光了。

So what we do know is that Nebious' pricing has roughly doubled in the last six months, and Core we've raised prices by about 25 alone in July, and they actually said that their near term capacity is effectively sold out.

所以，投资回收期，也就是一笔交易需要多久才能回本，现在已经降到两年以内了。

So it's payback period or how long it takes until a deal repays, What it costs to build has actually dropped under two years.

另外，Nebius说，如果他们愿意的话，基本上现在就能把2027年的全部产能都卖出去。

On top of that nebius says that it could basically settle its entire twenty twenty seven capacity today if they wanted to.

要知道，在一个产能过剩的市场里，你是不可能这样大幅提价的。

Now, you know, you certainly don't get to raise prices this much into a market with spare capacity.

所以目前来看，我觉得Alphabet要想在这里获得好的回报，还远没有保证。

So as of now, I think Alphabet is far from guaranteed to making good returns here.

不过，从Nebius和CoreWeave给我们的这些数据来看，我觉得还是能说明一些问题的，那就是需求明显跑在了供给前面。

But you know, with all the numbers that we're getting here from nebius and core reeve, I think it's telling us something useful, which is that demand is definitely running well ahead of supply.

这显然也是谷歌觉得有必要花这么多钱的一个理由。

And that's obviously a condition that Google feels it makes sense for them to justify this amount of spending.

有道理。

It makes sense.

作为Alphabet的股东，看到这种情况当然很高兴。

And clearly as an Alphabet shareholder, it's great to see this.

但这里还有一件关键的事要注意，那就是这些涨价能不能持续。

But there's another crucial thing to be aware of here and we have to look at the durability of those price rises.

而且，我觉得这个产品最终可能会变得很同质化，所以不能简单地把现在的涨价趋势直接线性外推到未来。

And since this is a product that I think at the end of the day could be mostly commodified, it doesn't mean we can necessarily extrapolate it very far into the future in terms of just linearly drawing price hikes up into the right.

显然，现在这个时点，算力非常紧缺，需求远远超过供给，所以算力的拥有者可以多收钱，因为市场上有人愿意买单。

Clearly, we're at this moment in time now where capacity is very scarce and because demand exceeds supply so dramatically, the owners of compute power can charge more because there's a willing buyer out there.

但供需不会一直这么失衡，因为今天下午我们一直在聊数据中心投资，这些投资就是在增加供给端的产能。

But supply and demand won't remain this imbalanced forever because, well, we've been talking all afternoon here about the data center investments that are going into building out the supply side of this equation.

所以我也一直对你提到的Nebius那个四到五千万的数字感到不太踏实。

And so I've also been pretty uneasy, about that 40 to $50,000,000 number you mentioned from Nebius.

我们在那期节目里和Comfort Systems讨论过这种不确定性，就是关于我们在AI投资周期中所处的位置，这可能会导致人们对未来支出还会增加多少以及能有多赚钱产生过度的乐观。

So we talked about this uncertainty with Comfort Systems in that episode of of how where we sit in the AI investment cycle that may be leading to excess optimism about how much more spending will continue to increase by and and how profitable it'll be.

顺便说一下，那家公司专门负责数据中心的维护和服务。

And that is a company, for context, that specializes in the maintenance of servicing data centers.

所以它的股价一路直线飙升，但我们真的不知道当一切回归正常时，这项业务会有多好。

So the stock has gone off in a straight line, but we really don't know how good the business will be when things normalize.

在某种程度上，Alphabet也是如此。

And to a lesser extent, the same is true for Alphabet.

是的，而且随着Alphabet变得越来越资本密集，我真的很惊讶沃伦·巴菲特——他向来以偏好那些不需要太多资本就能产生现金流的业务而闻名——现在却选择投资Alphabet。

Yeah, and as Alphabet has become more capital intensive, it really actually surprises me that Warren Buffet, who's kind of known for preferring businesses that don't require much capital to generate these cash flows, has now chosen now to be the time to invest in Alphabet.

他大约二十年前在为GEICO投放搜索广告时第一次发现了这家公司。

After he first discovered the business, you know, twenty years or so ago while running search ads for GEICO.

现在，这可能是你最初报道时论点已经有所改变的另一个领域。

Now this is another area where the thesis may have changed a little bit since you first covered it.

我记得你在最初那期节目里提到，Alphabet当时现金多到都不知道该怎么花。

I remember you highlighting in the original episode how Alphabet just had so much cash that they didn't really know what to do with it.

他们现金太多了，只能通过回购股票把钱还给股东，我觉得这对当时那个资本过剩的公司来说是合理的做法。

They had so much cash that they were just returning it to shareholders through buybacks, which I think felt right for a company at that time with excess capital.

你说到巴菲特和伯克希尔，他们不仅动用了自己的现金储备，还越来越多地通过发债来融资，现在又开始卖股票来筹集足够的资金。

To your point on Buffett and Berkshire, they're not only have they used their own cash piles, but they've increasingly tapped the debt markets for more financing and now they're turning to selling equity to raise enough capital.

对，没错。

Yeah, that's right.

他们今年说要在AI数据中心上花大约2000亿美元。

So they said they were going to spend about 200,000,000,000 on AI data centers this year.

然后又说钱不够了。

Then they said we need more money.

于是他们又去筹集了数十亿美元。

So they went out and raised many, many billions of dollars.

我觉得这说明Alphabet不再只是专注于管理多余的现金，而是可能找到了值得投入所有这些现金甚至更多资金的地方。

And I think this shows that Alphabet isn't focused on just managing their excess cash anymore, but maybe they found something worth deploying all that excess cash into and even more.

不过，我觉得这件事最值得注意的地方是——

So here's what I find noteworthy about all this though.

因为刚才提到的那些回购，自2018年以来，股票数量一直在稳步下降。

So the share count has declined pretty steadily since 2018 because of those buybacks that I just discussed.

但截至2026年第二季度，他们流通在外的股票有123亿股，这实际上是自2024年以来的最高水平。

But as of Q two twenty twenty six, they have 12,300,000,000 shares outstanding, and that's actually the highest number since 2024.

这种转变说明他们有多重视数据中心方面的投入。

That kind of shift shows you how much they're prioritizing this data center spend.

你想想看，如果Alphabet还需要继续为AI数据中心筹集资金，那他们很可能会动用所有可用的途径，这很可能意味着会净增发股票，从而增加流通股的数量。

If you think about it, assuming Alphabet is going to continue to need funding for its AI data centers, there is a good chance that they'll use all avenues available to them, which likely means more net share issuance that increases the number of shares outstanding.

这在技术上是否算稀释，取决于通过增发股票筹集的资金是否被有效利用。

Whether that is technically dilutive depends on how effectively the capital raise from selling more shares is deployed.

但从最根本的层面来看，你是把企业的内在价值分摊到了更多的股票和股东身上。

But at a really simple level, you've spread the business's intrinsic value across more shares and shareholders.

这至少会在短期内给股价带来压力，因为你增加了市场上的股票供应，而且从长远来看，你还得证明这种融资方式是合理的。

And that is, at a minimum, going to put pressure on the stock in the short term because you're increasing the supply of shares to the market and then you have to be able to justify that raising of capital longer term.

所以，虽然伯克希尔直接向Alphabet投资了100亿美元，但Alphabet今年早些时候的总股权融资规模大约是850亿美元。显然，市场很乐意为此买单，但这是他们自IPO以来第一次大规模增发股票。

So while Berkshire invested $10,000,000,000 into Alphabet directly, Alphabet's total equity raise earlier this year was sort of $85,000,000,000 And so the market was happy to fund that evidently, but it's the first major equity raise we've seen from them since they IPO ed.

理论上讲，Alphabet已经发展到这个规模和成熟度，不应该再依赖卖股票来筹集资金了。

And in theory, Alphabet should be at a scale and a maturity where they don't need to rely on selling stock to raise money.

那是初创公司和不盈利的科技公司才会干的事，因为这种融资方式成本很高。

That's something you associate with startups and unprofitable tech companies because it's a very costly form of financing.

没错。

That's right.

而且，他们二十年来都没发行过新股，这本身就说明Alphabet的业务有多好，也充分体现了他们创造现金的能力。

And the fact they haven't had to issue equity for two decades, I think is a pretty obvious signal of just how good of a business Alphabet is and speaks volumes about their ability to generate cash.

但发行股票其实只是他们融资行动的开始。

But the share issuance is actually just the beginning of their capital raising efforts.

截至2026年第二季度，长期债务已经达到980亿美元，大约是2024财年结束时的九倍。

So as of Q2 twenty twenty six, long term debt is now $98,000,000,000 or about nine times since the fiscal twenty twenty four year ended.

是啊，Alphabet的财务一直很保守，但连我都有点惊讶这个数字涨了这么多。

Yeah, how conservatively financed Alphabet has been, even I was a little surprised at how much this figure has grown.

是的，债务增加的一部分原因是他们在国内和国际债券市场都筹集了资金。

Yeah, and part of the increase in debt has been from raising money in both domestic and global bond markets.

所以我想，如果国内筹不够，为什么不看看其他地方呢？

So I guess, you know, if you can't raise it all from home, why not look elsewhere?

而且这些债券的需求非常高。

And the appetite for these bonds is very, very high.

所以二月份，他们发行了大约200亿美元的美元计价债券，期限从三年到四十年不等，而且这比原计划的150亿美元有所增加。

So in February, they issued about 20,000,000,000 of US dollar denominated bonds ranging from three to forty years, and this was upsized from 15,000,000,000.

我读到这次发行吸引了超过1000亿美元的订单。

And I read the offer drew more than 100,000,000,000 in orders.

除此之外，他们也在全球范围内寻找机会。

And then outside of that, they've also just looked around the world.

他们通过英镑、瑞士法郎、欧元、加元、日元甚至澳元等其他货币筹集了超过500亿美元。

They've raised over $50,000,000,000 in other currencies such as the sterling, Swiss franc, euro, Canadian dollar, Japanese yen, and even Australian dollars.

那么在股权融资和所有这些债券发行之后，你能给听众讲讲他们现在的现金状况吗？

So between the equity raise and all the bond issuance that we're seeing, maybe you can paint some color for the audience where they sit with the cash position now.

所以他们目前有2420亿美元的现金及现金等价物。

So they currently have $242,000,000,000 in cash and cash equivalents.

所以即使有了这些新债务，显然仍然是净现金状态，但考虑到他们目前的支出速度，这2420亿美元很可能很快就会用完。

So even with all this new debt, there's still obviously net cash, but that 242,000,000,000 is probably gonna get depleted very quickly given their current spending rate.

而且根据管理层的说法，他们短期内并不打算放慢这个速度。

And based on what management has said, they're not planning on slowing that down anytime soon.

《华尔街日报》前几天有一篇很有意思的文章，讲的是大型科技公司的隐性负债，他们签了合同承诺要建数据中心、租数据中心或者购买一定数量的电脑芯片等等。

The Wall Street Journal had a really interesting article the other day about hidden liabilities for big tech companies, where they've made these contractual agreements to build data centers or lease data centers or buy XYZ number of computer chips and so on.

但这些承诺是到2028年、2029年、2030年以及更远的未来。

But these commitments are for 2028, 2029, 2030 and beyond.

所以我们知道这些承诺肯定会兑现，而且规模巨大，有点像积压的订单。

So we know they're coming and they're massive, sort of like the backlog.

光是Alphabet一家，未来几年就有超过8000亿美元的资产负债表外负债。

And with Alphabet alone, we're talking about more than $800,000,000,000 in off balance sheet liabilities over the next few years.

我这么说可不是在胡编乱造。

And I'm not misspeaking when I say that.

说实话，这几乎是近万亿美元的负债，目前还没反映在资产负债表上，而且几年前根本想都不敢想，对吧？

Literally almost a trillion dollars in liabilities that are not at present reflected on the balance sheet and weren't even conceivable a few years ago, right?

当时谁都没注意到这些。

They weren't on anybody's radar.

所以，现在的业务风险当然比过去几年要大。

So of course, the business is riskier today than it was in the recent past.

这些负债给公司及其未来的财务前景注入了巨大的不确定性，这是绕不开的事实。

There's just no way to get around the fact that a tremendous amount of financial uncertainty has been injected into the business and their future financial prospects because of these different liabilities.

但我也觉得，如果人工智能真的像硅谷想的那样具有革命性，那么Alphabet这么大规模的投资，可能会让它在未来几十年里继续保持主导地位，成为全球最大的科技公司之一。

But also I think you could argue that if AI is even remotely as revolutionary of a technology as Silicon Valley thinks it is, then Alphabet's ability to do all this spending is buying them maybe several more decades of dominance and being one of the world's biggest tech companies.

这大概就是超级乐观的看法了。

That would be sort of like the ultra bull narrative.

所以，简单看事实，风险确实增加了。

So just to kind of looking at the facts plain and simple, the risks have increased.

而且风险的性质也变了，对吧？

They've changed also, right?

监管和竞争方面的讨论少了一点，更多的是关于这些资本投入的回报会是什么样。

A little bit less of a regulatory discussion and a competitive discussion and more about how the returns on this capital will look like.

但另一方面，Alphabet的企业生命周期可能被彻底重置了，而且重置得非常戏剧性。

But on the flip side of that, Alphabet's corporate life cycle has potentially been reset pretty dramatically.

所以突然间，Alphabet看起来像是一家年轻得多的公司，未来有更大幅度的增长潜力，而不是那种正在慢慢僵化的停滞不前的巨型企业集团。

And so all of a sudden, Alphabet looks to be a much younger company with more dramatic growth possibilities ahead, instead of being some kind of stagnant mega conglomerate that was just slowly in the process of hardening.

对，这点说得很好。

Yeah, that's a great point.

而这些停滞不前的巨型企业集团的问题，正是你刚才说的那样。

And the problem with these stagnant mega conglomerates is what you just said.

有时候会到一个几乎找不到新增长点的地步，然后你就只能靠那个现金流机器，把百分之百的现金流都返还给股东。

Sometimes it gets to a point where it's nearly impossible to find a new growth lever and then you turn to basically this kind of cash flow generator that just returns 100% of its cash flow back to shareholders.

虽然这些公司作为投资标的可能还算不错，至少在我们寻找纳入内在价值投资组合的那些公司里，它们其实没那么吸引人。

While those can make a decent business in terms of an interesting investment case, at least those that we look for to put into our intrinsic value portfolio, it's just not that interesting.

我们希望找到那些有增长潜力的公司，因为你知道，我们都在寻找有不错上涨空间的企业，而不是那些只会跟GDP增速同步增长的公司。

We want businesses that have hopefully some sort of growth aspect to it because you know, we're all looking for businesses that have a decent upside and we're not really particularly concerned with businesses that are, you know, just gonna grow at the same rate as GDP growth.

不过我也想聊聊你刚才提到的那些风险点。

But I also kind of wanted to look at some of your points here on the risk angle that you just discussed here.

我觉得第一个想深入探讨的风险，就是现在不应该太把利润表当回事。

So I think the first risk that I'd want to dig a little more deeper into is probably that you shouldn't give the income statement too much credit right now.

Alphabet第二季度报告了1120亿美元的利润，但仔细一看，其中990亿是来自对SpaceX和Anthropic等私营公司股权按市值计价的非现金收益。

So Alphabet reported a 112,000,000,000 in profits in its second quarter, but when you dig in, 99,000,000,000 of that was a non cash gain from marking up its equity stake in private companies like SpaceX and Anthropic.

所以，你可以这么想。

So, you know, think of it this way.

如果我告诉你你能赚100美元，你可能会挺 impressed 的，肖恩。

If I told you you could make a $100 in profit, you'd probably pretty impressed, Shawn.

但如果我说这100美元里有99美元不是我能花的现金呢？

But then what if I said that $99 of that wasn't actual cash I could spend?

那只是我持有的一只股票上的未实现收益，也许将来某天能卖掉。

It was just unrealized gains on let's say a stock that I own that I might be able to sell someday.

你可能会说，那不算真正的利润。

You'd probably say, that's not really a profit.

而且这一项收益让每股收益增加了超过6美元，但实际上没有一分钱真正流入公司。

And that single gain added over $6 in EPS, but it's zero actual dollars coming into the business.

而且Anthropic计划在2026年某个时候进行IPO，我们可能还会继续在利润表上看到这些大额的非现金收益。

And with Anthropic planning to IPO at some point in 2026, we're probably going to continue to keep seeing these large non cash gains on the income statement.

这些都会让分析这家公司变得更加复杂。

It all just kind of serves to add complexity when analyzing this business.

所以我觉得这里的风险点很简单。

So I think the flag here is simple.

别被那些表面的数字冲昏头脑，评估Alphabet时要关注营业利润或现金流。

Don't get too excited by the headline numbers, focus on operating income or cash flows when you're evaluating Alphabet.

是的，CNBC的头条当然总是会拿净利润说事，但正如你所说，会计收益能让一家公司在纸面上看起来比实际表现好得多，这就是为什么我们要谈盈利质量。

Yeah, of course the headlines on CNBC are always gonna lead with that net income number, but as you said accounting gains can make a business look a lot better on paper than it's actually performing, and that's why we talk about quality of earnings.

这就是为什么这个概念对听众来说如此重要。

That's why that's such an important concept for listeners to know.

但除了利润表和折旧会计之外，我想回到一个现实，那就是云积压订单既体现了Alphabet的上行潜力，也体现了它面临的风险。

But beyond the income statement and depreciation accounting, I would come back to the reality that the cloud backlog sort of epitomizes both the upside here as well as the risk facing Alphabet.

所以，5000亿美元的收入承诺进入积压订单，这确实非常棒。

So $500,000,000,000 in revenue is being committed into the backlog is really great.

但Anthropic和OpenAI必须真的有能力用现金支付给Alphabet，不管他们今天承诺了什么。

But Anthropic and OpenAI have to actually be able to afford to pay that money in cash to Alphabet regardless of whatever they promise today.

所以现金必须来自某个地方。

And so cash has to come from somewhere.

我对这两家公司的乐观程度远不足以让我有把握地说，它们会在未来很多很多年里成为Alphabet的稳定客户。

And I'm nowhere near optimistic enough about either of those companies to say with conviction that they will be solid customers of Alphabet for many, many years to come.

我同意你的看法。

I agree with you.

而且你知道，我们并不是说这些公司快要破产了，绝对不是。

And you know, we're not here saying that these businesses are at the edge of bankruptcy by any means.

显然，这个领域有大量的投资者兴趣。

There's clearly a ton of investor interest in this space.

所以我的猜测是，它们在一段时间内还能找到融资。

So my guess is that they'll find financing for a while.

再加上其他那些超大规模云服务商也在里面，这其实就提高了承诺收入的质量底线。

And with some of these other hyperscalers in there too, it kind of just raises the floor for committed revenue quality.

接下来我要提的第二个风险是关于利润率的。

Now, the next risk that I raise here is on the margins.

现在利润率看起来确实非常非常好。

So the margins obviously look really, really good right now.

营业利润率在百分之三十出头，但我觉得很多人对这笔巨额资本开支的理解有偏差。

Operating margins is sitting in the low thirties, but here's where I think many people miss about this massive capex.

Alphabet今天花在数据中心上的每一块钱，明年或者很多年后都会变成折旧费用。

Every dollar that Alphabet spends on these data centers today is gonna become depreciation expenses next year or many years from now.

所以即使他们的收入保持不变，即使完全不增长，利润率也会因为新增的折旧费用而自动下降。

So even if their revenue stays flat, even if they don't grow at all, margins automatically will compress from that added depreciation expense.

而且当你每年花两千亿美元的时候，那个折旧的冲击会相当大。

And when you're spending $200,000,000,000 a year, well, that depreciation hit is gonna be quite substantial.

最后我要指出的一个风险是，在我看来，Alphabet的股票，而不是实际业务，似乎并没有体现出什么差异化认知。

Now, the final risk that I'd flag right now is that Alphabet doesn't really seem to me to have a variant perception as in the stock, not the actual business.

你知道，分析师们现在非常看好这只股票，纷纷给出强力买入评级，平均目标价在430美元左右，而当前股价大约是340美元。

You know, analysts currently love the stock and are issuing strong buy recommendations with an average target price around $430 versus the current price of about 340.

我觉得肖恩做得对，在大家完全不看好这家公司的时候，大量加仓了这只股票。

Now I think Shawn did the right thing adding this business very, very heavily when it was completely out of favor.

你知道，现在这家公司可一点都不被冷落。

You know, this business right now is not out of favor at all at this time.

所以，不深入讨论估值细节的话，我想说，回顾你去年对Alphabet做的模型，稍微更新一下，然后思考市场是否真的给了我们一个很有吸引力的便宜价格，这对我来说是一次非常有用的练习。

So without getting into the weeds evaluation too much, I will say it was a really useful exercise for me to go through your model from last year on Alphabet, update a little bit, and think about whether the market is offering us a really attractive bargain with that stock.

简单来说，我想我们俩都会说，我们认为这是一家非常出色的公司，但现在的估值比一年前更接近合理水平了。

Well in short, think we'd both say that we see this as an exceptional business, but one that is much closer to being fairly valued today than probably was a year ago.

这部分是因为股价已经涨了不少，但也是因为公司面临的一些新变化和不确定性，这些我个人信心不足。

And that that's partly because of the the run up that the stock has had, but also because of the changes, these new uncertainties that are facing the company that personally I have less confidence in.

以前我更有底气说，我不同意市场认为ChatGPT会真正颠覆谷歌搜索的看法，但现在我真的不确定自己有没有一个与市场不同的强烈观点。

I felt more comfortable saying that I disagreed with the market about ChatGPT being a real disruptor of Google search, I'm really not sure that I have a strong opinion that differs from the market.

至于他们正在进行的这些大规模投资，最终会低于还是高于预期，我也没有特别强烈的看法。

Where I feel strongly one way or another about whether these massive investments that they're making are gonna underperform or outperform expectations.

所以如果你最后在网上搜索什么东西，你很有可能会用到谷歌的产品。

And so if you're searching for something on the internet at the end of the day, there is a very good chance that you're gonna touch one of Google's products.

我自己几乎每天都用YouTube，我真的想不出有什么替代品能让我把注意力转到别处去。

I use YouTube pretty much every day myself And I just can't think of any substitute that would turn my attention elsewhere.

所以Alphabet不会消失的。

And so Alphabet's not going anywhere.

这是一家了不起的公司。

This is an incredible company.

我们很乐意让我们的赢家继续跑下去。

We're very happy to kind of let our winners run here.

我不想把事情想得太复杂，但是，是的，我看不出有什么令人信服的理由让我真心认为Alphabet的股票像去年这个时候那样被低估了，尽管市盈率是一样的。

And I don't wanna overthink things, but yeah, I don't see as compelling of an argument that I can make in good faith that Alphabet stock is as undervalued as it was this time last year despite ironically having the same PE ratio.

是的，我真的没什么好反驳的。

Yeah, I really don't have any arguments here.

我觉得我对谷歌的立场很简单。

I think my stance on Google is quite simple.

我只是觉得现在不是加仓的好时机。

I just don't think it's the right time to add to the position.

如果完全理性地讲，其实卖出可能是正确的决定，因为我们已经差不多翻倍了。

If we were speaking strictly rationally, then selling is actually probably the right decision due to the fact that we already made nearly a double.

但你知道，我们是长期投资者。

But, know, we are long term investors.

所以有时候，表面上最理性的决定并不一定是对的。

So sometimes the most optically rational decision isn't actually the correct move.

再说可能减持的事，我们其实不太做市场择时。

And then speaking of maybe potentially trimming, well, we aren't really into market timing.

所以我觉得，卖掉一部分股份，指望以后能更便宜买回来，这真的没什么道理。

So I think selling pieces of the stake, assuming that we can buy more for later at an even cheaper price just doesn't really make that much sense.

所以在我看来，既然我们已经持有谷歌，最好的做法就是什么都不做，让仓位自然发展。

So in my view, I think the best move with Google given that we already own it is to just do nothing and let the position play out.

我完全同意你的看法。

I completely agree with you there.

对，你知道，这其实是个挺奇怪的概念。

And yeah, you know, it's sort of a weird concept.

我记得我第一次在节目里推荐Alphabet的时候，我的结论是它其实估值合理。

I remember when I first pitched Alphabet on the show, I concluded that it was about fairly valued actually.

我甚至没有说它被严重低估了。

I didn't even make the case for being super undervalued.

所以当我说它真的被低估时，那是事后诸葛亮的说法。

So when I say that it was really undervalued, I say that in hindsight.

有个听众写信问我，如果结论是估值合理，我们为什么还要决定投资Alphabet。

And we had a listener write to me and ask me why we would decide to invest in Alphabet if the conclusion was that it was fairly valued.

当时主要是因为，我说它估值合理的时候，我知道我在建模时已经非常非常保守了。

And back then, mostly it was because I knew I'd been like very, very conservative in the modeling when I said that it was fairly valued.

但这又回到了那个想法，就是想要拥有优秀的企业，因为它们通常会给你带来惊喜，然后就让它们随时间复利增长，你只需要坐着不动，什么都不做。

But again, it kind of goes into this idea of just wanting to own wonderful businesses because they will surprise you to the upside typically, and just letting them compound over time and just sitting on your hands and not doing anything about it.

所以我觉得，如果能以合理的价格买到一家优秀的企业，那已经是很棒的交易了。

So I felt like if I could get a wonderful business at a fair price, that was a great arrangement.

过去一年里，Alphabet 多次让我感到惊喜。

Alphabet has surprised me to the upside a number of times in the last year.

所以我对过去一年股价的上涨持一种温和甚至更平静的态度，我不想赌未来三十到六十天股价会怎么走。

And that's why I'm I'm sort of take this benign and maybe more like tranquil view on the run up in the stock in the last year, where I wouldn't want to bet on where the stock price is going to go in the next thirty to sixty days.

但如果用十年、二十年的眼光来看，如果你能想象那么远的话，我觉得这些波动回头看都是小问题。

But looking at this with a ten year, twenty year perspective, if you can even fathom thinking that far out, I think these are rounding errors in hindsight.

最简单的方法就是坐下来看着，因为如果你试图抓住市场的每一次波动，买进卖出、买进卖出，你会把自己逼疯的。

The simplest thing is to just sit back and watch because you'll drive yourself crazy if you're trying to time every single swing in the market and buy and sell and buy and sell.

这根本不是制胜之道。

It's just not a winning formula.

这不是成功的秘诀。

It's not a recipe for success.

没错。

Exactly.

这就是今天我们要分享的全部内容。

So that's all we have for you today.

但像往常一样，我想用一句名言来结束今天的节目。

But as usual, I think I'd like to leave you here with a quote.

这句话来自奥马哈先知本人，沃伦·巴菲特，2012年说的。

And this one's coming from the Oracle of Omaha himself, Warren Buffet back in 2012.

他说，在IBM上犯大错的可能性，至少对我们来说，比在谷歌或苹果上犯大错的可能性要小。

So he said the chances of being way wrong in IBM are probably less at least for us than being way wrong with Google or Apple.

但这并不意味着后面那两家公司不会表现得比IBM好得多。

But that doesn't mean that those, the latter two companies, aren't going to do say far better than IBM.

这句话真的很棒，因为我觉得它展示了巴菲特的思考过程。

Now, this is just such a great quote because I think it showcases Buffet's thinking process.

短短几句话，你就能看到他是怎么考虑机会成本的，以及为什么上行空间不是唯一重要的东西。

In just a few sentences, you can see how he thinks about opportunity cost and why upside isn't the only thing that matters.

当然，他完全说对了，那两家公司后来都带来了比IBM好得多的回报，只是当时他对苹果和谷歌的理解还不够深入，所以没有投资。

And of course, he was completely correct that both of those businesses provided much better returns than IBM, but he just didn't have the competence in his understanding of Apple and Google at that time to make an investment.

但现在他两家都投了。

But now he's invested in both.

也许你可以说，他觉得自己已经足够有能力了，或者你知道，在他买的时候，这些业务已经在某种程度上降低了风险，下行风险也得到了很好的保护。

And perhaps you can argue that maybe he feels like he's gotten competent enough or that, you know, at the time that he bought them, the businesses just had been de risked to some extent and that downside was well protected.

今天的内容就到这里，我们下次见。

That's all we have for you today, and see you next time.

感谢收听TIP。

Thanks for listening to TIP.

在你最喜欢的播客应用上关注The Investor's Podcast，并访问theinvestor'spodcast.com获取节目笔记和教育资源。

Follow The Investor's Podcast on your favorite podcast app, and visit theinvestor'spodcast.com for show notes and educational resources.

本播客仅供信息和娱乐之用，不提供财务、投资、税务或法律建议。

This podcast is for informational and entertainment purposes only and does not provide financial, investment, tax, legal advice.

内容不针对个人，不考虑你的目标、财务状况或需求。

The content is impersonal and does not consider your objectives, financial situation, or needs.

投资涉及风险，包括可能损失本金，过往表现并不保证未来结果。

Investing involves risk, including possible loss of principal, and past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

听众在做出任何财务决策前，应自行研究并咨询合格的专业人士。

Listeners should do their own research and consult a qualified professional before making any financial decisions.

本节目中的任何内容都不构成对买卖任何证券或其他金融产品的推荐或招揽。

Nothing on this show is a recommendation or solicitation to buy or sell any security or other financial product.

主持人、嘉宾以及投资者播客网络可能持有节目中讨论的证券头寸，并可能随时更改这些头寸，恕不另行通知。

Hosts, guests, and The Investor Podcast Network may hold positions in securities discussed and may change those positions at any time without notice.

对任何第三方产品、服务或广告商的提及均不构成背书，投资者播客网络对其所作的任何声明不承担责任。

References to any third party products, services, or advertisers do not constitute endorsements, and The Investor's Podcast Network is not responsible for any claims made by them.

版权所有：投资者播客网络。

Copyright by The Investor's Podcast Network.

保留所有权利。

All rights reserved.