????而面對全新的行業(yè)態(tài)勢，漢堡王卻無動于衷，結果陷入了舉步維艱的境地。隨著消費者的消費標準日益提高，漢堡王必須在未來幾年內投資數十億美元，才有可能獲得理想的品牌認知度。

????當然，事情總有積極的一面，比如比爾?阿克曼肯定會從此次交易中獲利。但作為獨立觀察員，我們不得不考慮，在他獲利之后可能會發(fā)生的事情。我們需要考慮促使Justice Holdings公司進行此次交易的動機所在。作為一家上市一年多的專項收購公司，它必須在2014年2月之前完成一筆交易。筆者認為，Justice Holdings公司與之前的那些私募股權投資者一樣，也看到了漢堡王的特質：它就像是屢試不爽的自動提款機，恰好符合Justice Holdings的要求。

????看看那些真正位列“頂級品牌”同行們的估值水平，我們就能理解為何要在現在進行交易了。筆者認為，唐恩都樂（Dunkin' Donuts）去年夏天首次公開募股，對于其內部人員和從交易中獲益的投資者來說，無疑都是一個成功，而這應該是此次漢堡王交易時機的最大決定因素。

????但目前公司的策略似乎并不關注品牌投入。餐館改建計劃并未得到特許加盟店層面的贊許。問題是，如果當前的策略失敗，是不是就等于敲響了漢堡王品牌的喪鐘？對此，筆者認為并沒有這么悲觀。目前，最合理的猜測是，為了實現增長，漢堡王最好收縮陣線。按照公司的現狀，扭轉頹勢仍然是非常艱巨的任務。關閉效益不佳的店鋪，提高平均單位銷量，或許才是公司實現重新崛起的第一步。

????根據阿克曼《Justice公司與漢堡王的完美聯姻》（Justice is Best Served Flame Broiled）一文，筆者總結出漢堡王（從某種意義上而言）需要解決現有問題的十大理由：

????1. 資金流失：2011年4月，漢堡王發(fā)行了價值6.85億美元的債券，收益達到4.015億美元，其中有2.94億美元以股息的形式流進了3G資本的賬戶。

????2. 人才流失：去年，公司管理層在行政管理上的開支達到1.07億美元，而且裁員40%，雖然這一舉措使公司的折舊攤銷前利潤提高了50%，但為了實現這一目標，必須在各方面進行一次性調整。

????3. 專利權轉讓/改建計劃：公司的餐廳擁有量減少了3%，進而減少了資本支出。然而，到目前為止，（按店面估算）仍有85%的特許經營店沒有接受改建計劃。

????4. 新菜單方案：漢堡王采取防守策略，推出了一款新菜單，其中的產品與麥當勞似乎大同小異。

????5 同店銷售額正向增長：從2月份某個額外交易日開始，再加上史上罕見的暖冬，其同店銷售額在連續(xù)3年下降之后，經歷了長達四個月的正增長。

????Burger King has done none of that and is facing a difficult reality in this new world. As consumers demand higher standards, Burger King is going to have to invest billions of dollars in capital over a period of years to get its brand perception to where it needs to be.

????We have to give credit where it is due – Bill Ackman is going to make money on this deal. But as independent observers, we have to wonder what happens after his payday. It's worth bearing in mind the factors driving the decision of Justice Holdings to make this transaction. Having been public for over a year, the company – as a SPAC – was compelled to complete a transaction by February 2014. We think Justice Holdings saw in Burger King the same attributes that many PE investors have seen in the past: BK is a tried and tested cash machine and it fits the bill perfectly for Justice Holdings.

????Looking at valuation levels of peer companies that could accurately be labeled as "brand royalty", it makes sense for a deal to be done now. We believe that the success of the Dunkin' Donuts (DNKN) IPO last summer – for the insiders and others that got a piece of the deal – is the biggest driver behind the timing of the Burger King deal.

????But the current strategy does not seem to be focused on investing in the brand. The program to remodel restaurants is not yet being embraced by the franchisee base. If the current strategy fails, the question is whether that could be a death knell for the Burger King brand? We don't think that's as dramatic as some might believe. Our best guess at this point is that Burger King may be better off shrinking in order to grow. As it currently exists, the turnaround may be too great a task. Closing underperforming stores and bringing the average unit volume higher may be a good first step on the road to recovery.

????Below are our top 10 ten reasons why, according to the Ackman's "Justice is Best Served Flame Broiled" slide deck, Burger King is fixed (so to speak):

????1. CAPITAL DRAIN: In April 2011, BK issued $685 million of notes, yielding $401.5 million of proceeds, of which $294 million was returned to 3G in the form of a dividend.

????2. BRAIN DRAIN: Last year, management gutted the company of $107 million in administrative expenses and cut head count by 40%, taking EBITDA up 50% but various one-time adjustments have to be made to get there.

????3. ROYALTY STREAM/REMODEL PROGRAM: The company has reduced store ownership by 3%, reducing the need for capital spending. Unfortunately, 85% of the franchisee-base (measured in stores) has not bought into the remodel program thus far.

????4. NEW MENU INITIATIVES: BK is introducing a new menu that is defensive and looks just like products that McDonald's is selling.

????5. POSITIVE SAME-STORE SALES: On the back of an extra trading day in February and the warmest winter in generations, the chain is seeing four months of positive SSS after three years of declines.