A thought for my fellow CEOs: Of course, the immediate future is uncertain; America has faced the unknown since 1776. It’s just that sometimes people focus on the myriad of uncertainties that always exist while at other times they ignore them (usually because the recent past has been uneventful).
给我的CEO伙伴们的一点想法：毫无疑问，未来永远是充满不确定性的，美国从1776年开始就一直面对各种不确定性。只不过有时候人们非常在意无以计数的、一直存在的各种不确定性，而另外一些时候，他们却无视不确定性（通常是因为那段时间太平无事）。
American business will do fine over time. And stocks will do well just as certainly, since their fate is tied to business performance. Periodic setbacks will occur, yes, but investors and managers are in a game that is heavily stacked in their favor. (The Dow Jones Industrials advanced from 66 to 11,497 in the 20th Century, a staggering 17,320% increase that materialized despite four costly wars, a Great Depression and many recessions. And don’t forget that shareholders received substantial dividends throughout the century as well.)
美国公司前景光明。股票也一定会会表现良好，因为它们的命运是和公司的业绩联系在一起的。周期性的困难在所难免，但是投资者和经理人处在一个由他们的喜好所影响的游戏中。（道琼斯工业指数在20世纪里从66涨到了11,497，期间经历了四次损失惨重的战争，一次大萧条和多次的衰退，最终依然蹒跚上升了17,320%。而且不要忘了，投资者还收到了不少的分红。)
Since the basic game is so favorable, Charlie and I believe it’s a terrible mistake to try to dance in and out of it based upon the turn of tarot cards, the predictions of “experts,” or the ebb and flow of business activity. The risks of being out of the game are huge compared to the risks of being in it.
因为这个游戏是如此的诱人，查理和我认为尝试依据塔罗牌的排列，“专家”的预测，或者商业周期进进出出是一个巨大的错误。错过这个游戏的风险比呆在里面要大得多。(注1：别听专家预测，也甭想利用周期性趋势操作）（注2：塔罗牌由22张主牌（大阿卡那）与56张副牌（小阿卡那）组成，共计78张牌。塔罗的占卜方法是以某种形式将牌排列好（即展开），然后再查看牌所再的位置及牌的象征内容来做判断。可以针对恋爱、健康、财运、事业、婚姻等不同的需求进行占卜，尤其是再不知道下一阶段应该采取什么行动的时候，它是一种非常好的提示路标。由牌面传达出的信息，只要我们仔细玩味，就会有相当高的准确度。）
*******************************
More than 50 years ago, Charlie told me that it was far better to buy a wonderful business at a fair price than to buy a fair business at a wonderful price. Despite the compelling logic of his position, I have sometimes reverted to my old habit of bargain-hunting, with results ranging from tolerable to terrible. Fortunately, my mistakes have usually occurred when I made smaller purchases. Our large acquisitions have generally worked out well and, in a few cases, more than well.
50多年前，查理就告诉我，以合理的价格买入一家优秀的公司比以一个便宜的价格买入一家平庸的公司划算。尽管这个道理背后的逻辑非常清楚，我还是时不时地犯廉价收购的毛病，其结果有些难以接受，有些则极其糟糕。幸运的是，我只在进行小笔收购的时候犯毛病。我们的大笔收购通常结果都不错，有部分可不仅仅是不错。
Of course, a business with terrific economics can be a bad investment if the price paid is excessive. We have paid substantial premiums to net tangible assets for most of our businesses, a cost that is reflected in the large figure we show for intangible assets. Overall, however, we are getting a decent return on the capital we have deployed in this sector. Furthermore, the intrinsic value of the businesses, in aggregate, exceeds their carrying value by a good margin. Even so, the difference between intrinsic value and carrying value in the insurance and regulated-industry segments is far greater. It is there that the huge winners reside.
当然，如果出价过高，买入一些具有良好经济特性的公司也可能成为一笔糟糕的投资。(注1：误导，严重误导···老巴对以“合理价格买入优秀公司”之阐述是相当全面的。只是，大多数人都断章取义，忽略第二段表述；在我看来，买贵了=严重糟糕的投资，就是仙女都不成。）
我们大多数的收购里都支付了远超有形净资产的溢价，这些成本反映在财报巨额的无形资产数据中。不过总体来说，我们收获了与投资额相称的回报。而且，这些公司的内在价值，远超它们的账面价值。需要说明的是，在保险板块和受管制的行业板块，内在价值和账面价值之间的差距更加巨大。那里才是真正的大赢家所在之处。
**********************
But never forget: In repurchase decisions, price is all-important. Value is destroyed when purchases are made above intrinsic value. The directors and I believe that continuing shareholders are benefitted in a meaningful way by purchases up to our 120% limit.
不要忘了：在回购决策里，价格是最重要的。如果回购价格高于内在价值那就是在毁灭价值。董事们和我都认为，继续以低于账面价值120%的价格回购股票对股东是有利的。
Above all, dividend policy should always be clear, consistent and rational. A capricious policy willconfuse owners and drive away would-be investors. Phil Fisher put it wonderfully 54 years ago in Chapter 7 of his Common Stocks and Uncommon Profits, a book that ranks behind only The Intelligent Investor and the 1940 edition of Security Analysis in the all-time-best list for the serious investor. Phil explained that you can successfully run a restaurant that serves hamburgers or, alternatively, one that features Chinese food. But you can’t switch capriciously between the two and retain the fans of either.
总而言之，分红策略必须一致保持清晰、稳定并且理性。反复无常的策略会把股东弄糊涂，也会排斥潜在的投资者。(注1：小心，某年度突然大比例分红将是“价值陷阱”。）Phil Fisher 54年前在他的《普通股和不普通的利润》一书的第7章非常经典地解释了这件事情，对认真的投资者而言，这本书在经典书目上仅次于《聪明的投资者》以及1940年版的《证券分析》。Phil说你可以成功地运营一家卖汉堡的餐馆，或者一家以中国菜为主打的餐馆，但是你不可能不停地转换还同时留住两类顾客。
Most companies pay consistent dividends, generally trying to increase them annually and
cutting them very reluctantly. Our “Big Four” portfolio companies follow this sensible and understandable approach and, in certain cases, also repurchase shares quite aggressively.
大多数公司奉行稳定的分红策略，一般逐步增加分红，削减分红通常是非常不情愿的。我们的“四大”投资组合就遵循类似的、可理解的模式。有时候，它们还非常积极地回购股票。
We applaud their actions and hope they continue on their present paths. We like increased dividends, and we love repurchases at appropriate prices.
我们拍手称赞它们现行的策略，并希望它们继续保持。我们喜欢增加分红，我们也喜欢以合理的价格回购股票。(注1：恩，必须认真核对股息率，检查股票回购记录。）
At Berkshire, however, we have consistently followed a different approach that we know has been sensible and that we hope has been made understandable by the paragraphs you have just read. We will stick with this policy as long as we believe our assumptions about the book-value buildup and the market-price premium seem reasonable. If the prospects for either factor change materially for the worse, we will reexamine our actions.
当然在伯克希尔，我们一直采取了另外一条不同的分红策略，(注1：误解，千万别理解为“不分红是好事”，谁能有老巴红利再投资的能力？）我们深知这样做的合理性，我们也希望上述的段落能帮助大家理解这一策略。只要我们认为关于账面价值增长和市场价格的假设依然合理，我们就会一直坚持上述策略。如果将来某项因素变化导致了实质性的改变，我们将会重新审视我们的策略。
