一眾估值超10億美元的獨(dú)角獸公司現(xiàn)在都在比拼燒錢率，但它們最好還是“數(shù)著硬幣過日子”。要知道，蘋果公司之所以能夠生存下來，在很大程度上是因?yàn)閱滩妓沟葎?chuàng)始人，能夠非常有效，并節(jié)儉地利用他們募集到的少量外部資金。

最近幾個月，硅谷傳奇風(fēng)投家、紅杉資本董事長邁克爾?莫里茨一直在給估值直沖云霄的“獨(dú)角獸”初創(chuàng)公司敲警鐘。他甚至搬出了已故的蘋果公司創(chuàng)始人史蒂夫?喬布斯，來批評這些獨(dú)角獸企業(yè)。

莫里茨懇請這些估值超過10億美元的獨(dú)角獸要“數(shù)著硬幣過日子”。他說，這些公司如果想要模仿蘋果創(chuàng)始人的成功軌跡，就應(yīng)當(dāng)學(xué)習(xí)喬布斯對于成功的渴望。

“我們很容易忘記，這位給我們帶來Mac電腦、iPhone、iPad以及皮克斯動畫工作室的人物，曾在學(xué)生時代靠撿瓶蓋來維持生計(jì)。那些想要模仿史蒂夫?喬布斯的人，需要仔細(xì)研究他在這段時間的經(jīng)歷，而不是他在獲得成功之后的偉岸英姿。”

1976年4月，年僅21歲的喬布斯與好友史蒂夫?沃茲尼亞克在自家車庫內(nèi)成立了蘋果電腦公司。當(dāng)時，他們“賣掉了所有最值錢的東西”，喬布斯賣掉了大眾小巴，沃茲尼亞克則賣掉了惠普電腦，一共籌到了1300美元。

莫里茨表示，回想一下，蘋果在1980年上市時的估值為12億美元（按照如今的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)來看，大約是36億美元）。喬布斯與聯(lián)合創(chuàng)始人史蒂夫?沃茲尼亞克，以及當(dāng)時的首席執(zhí)行官邁克爾?斯科特，擁有公司大約40%的股份，“主要是因?yàn)樗麄兡苡行Р⑶夜?jié)儉地利用募集到的少量外部資金?！?/p>

初創(chuàng)者們應(yīng)當(dāng)更加努力，因?yàn)椤爸辽僭诠韫?，比?0世紀(jì)70年代末和80年代初，現(xiàn)在建立一家公司的難度和成本都會更高”。莫里茨一邊肯定喬布斯努力工作的價值，一邊警告如今的初創(chuàng)公司。

“如今的科技巨頭，比如亞馬遜、蘋果、谷歌、Facebook、微軟，比以往任何時候都要多，這讓初創(chuàng)公司的生存變得更加艱難。與其他許多發(fā)展迅速、盈利可觀的小型公司（還有幾家已經(jīng)在硅谷設(shè)立前哨站的中國公司）一樣，這些公司的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者都是一群渴望占領(lǐng)新前沿的企業(yè)家。這會對初創(chuàng)公司的勞動力成本產(chǎn)生驚人的影響?！蹦锎牧信e了一連串困難，例如激烈的人才競爭、高昂的租金等。

實(shí)際上，自2015年1月以來，又有59家新創(chuàng)企業(yè)獲得了獨(dú)角獸的那只角——即估值達(dá)到或新增數(shù)十億美元，其中只有三家公司掛牌上市，沒有一家企業(yè)被人并購。

我們并不是談?wù)擄L(fēng)投資本應(yīng)當(dāng)如何運(yùn)作。即便你假定10億美元的估值對于零營收的公司意義重大，但對其投資的目的依然是獲得回報(bào)。

此外，獨(dú)角獸公司等待上市的時間越長——這是由喬布斯法案（JOBS Act）以及像共同基金這樣的短期風(fēng)投旅游者所導(dǎo)致的—投資機(jī)構(gòu)所承擔(dān)的風(fēng)險就越多。到了某個節(jié)點(diǎn)上，風(fēng)投基金的投資人就會要求收回資金。

網(wǎng)上調(diào)查公司Qualtrics的首席執(zhí)行官瑞安?史密斯（Ryan Smith）在《財(cái)富》雜志舉辦的“科技頭腦風(fēng)暴大會”（Brainstorm Tech conference）上說，因?yàn)榕e行大規(guī)模集資活動而獲得稱譽(yù)就像“祝賀某人拿到了抵押一樣?！睕r且，我們都知道，簽署太多的抵押憑據(jù)，卻又不太關(guān)心它們?nèi)绾蔚玫絻斶€，其結(jié)果會怎樣。（財(cái)富中文網(wǎng)）

?

譯者：嚴(yán)匡正

審校：任文科

?

The legendary Silicon Valley venture capitalist Michael Moritz has been sounding the alarm about high valuations of “unicorn” startups for months, and this week he even invoked the late Apple CEO Steve Jobs to take those companies to task.

In a post on LinkedIn, which originally ran as an op-ed in the Financial Times, Sequoia Capital chairman Moritz implored the unicorns—private companies with valuations of $1 billion or more—to “count the nickels,” and to demonstrate the Apple AAPL -2.90% founder’s scrappy hunger for success if they hope to follow in his footsteps.

“It is easy to forget that, when he was a student, the man who brought us the Macintosh, iPhone and iPad (and, with his little finger, Pixar) collected bottle caps to make ends meet,” Moritz wrote. “It is on that spell, rather than the enormous public profile commanded by Steve Jobs in his later years, that would-be emulators should dwell.”

Consider, Moritz wrote, that Apple was valued at $1.2 billion when it went public in 1980 (or about $3.6 billion in today’s dollars). Jobs, along with his co-founder Steve Wozniak and then-CEO Michael Scott, owned roughly 40% of the company “l(fā)argely because they had been so efficient (and parsimonious) with the small amount of outside capital they had raised.”

While praising the value of hard work as illustrated by Jobs, Moritz also warned that today’s startups will have to work even harder, because “at least in Silicon Valley, it is also more difficult and expensive to build a company up than it was at the end of the 1970s and early 1980s.”

Moritz cited a slew of obstacles, from intense competition for talent to the high cost of rent. Here is an excerpt:

The fact that there are more technology behemoths—Amazon, Apple, Google, Facebook, Microsoft—than at any time in history makes life tougher for the start-ups. These companies, together with a raft of smaller, rapidly growing, profitable ones (and, increasingly, several Chinese businesses with Silicon Valley outposts) are run by people eager to conquer new frontiers. That has had a dramatic effect on the cost of start-up labour.

Since January, 59 new startups got their unicorn horns—with brand-new billion-dollar valuations. Only three went public, and none were acquired.

This isn’t how venture capital is supposed to work. Even if you assume that $1billion valuations for zerorevenue companies make sense, the purpose of funding them is still to generate a return.

And the longer unicorns wait to go public—enabled by both the JOBS Act and VC tourists like mutual funds—the more risk funds assume. At some point investors in VC funds are going to demand their money.

Qualtrics CEO Ryan Smith said at Fortune’s Brainstorm Tech conference this year that getting kudos for a large fundraise is “l(fā)ike congratulating someone for taking on their mortgage.” And we all know what happens when too many mortgages are written without paying enough attention to how they’re going to be paid off.