????Facebook的價值被高估了嗎？這家社交網(wǎng)絡巨頭2012年年中上市以來，股東們的收益其實相當不錯。過去六個月，這只股票的價格一直在穩(wěn)步攀升，當前股價較IPO價格上漲了80%以上。但就在兩周前，一則消息讓投資者不由得心里一頓：Facebook創(chuàng)始人馬克?扎克伯格在他的主頁上宣布，他的公司即將收購WhatsApp，一家年輕但人氣急升的社交網(wǎng)絡。收購價高達190億美元，令人震驚。

????這不只是一個消化這則消息的問題。這家公司的股價已經(jīng)體現(xiàn)出了投資者對其增長前景的豪邁預期。正如收購WhatsApp所示，在某種程度上，F(xiàn)acebook正在通過收購努力證明這些設想的合理性——它這樣做有很充分的理由。至少從一個尺度來看，投資者預期的一個小波動就有可能撇去近十分之一的股價。

????就很多方面而言，收購WhatsApp都合情合理。規(guī)模對社交網(wǎng)絡至關(guān)重要。把WhatsApp收入囊中只會讓Facebook的市場地位變得更加難以撼動?！褒嫶笄已杆僭鲩L的用戶群有助于吸引新的廣告商和零售商，” 尼德漢姆投資公司(Needham)分析師勞拉?馬丁最近在一份報告中寫道?！拔覀兿嘈牛現(xiàn)acebook的網(wǎng)絡規(guī)模代表著一項顯著的競爭優(yōu)勢，形成了一道難以跨越的市場壁壘。”

????然而，依靠天價收購來實現(xiàn)規(guī)模的增長有可能形成一個危險的循環(huán)?！斑@就像一只小狗不斷地追逐自己的尾巴，”賓夕法尼亞大學(University of Pennsylvania)沃頓商學院(The Wharton School)名譽教授勞倫斯?賀比尼亞克這樣評價。如果更有趣的社交網(wǎng)絡突然出現(xiàn)在這個不斷增長的全家福之中，F(xiàn)acebook就不得不繼續(xù)收購其他公司，以跟上市場趨勢。

????尼克斯基金公司(Kynikos)掌門人、著名的做空投資者吉姆?查諾斯一直懷疑規(guī)模的重要性。他說，他擔心“這些企業(yè)無法‘依靠擴大規(guī)?！瘜崿F(xiàn)盈利。”“每個人都把亞馬遜( Amazon)看成自己估值框架的安全港，惘然不顧那些互聯(lián)網(wǎng)明日黃花的最終命運?！保ú橹Z斯目前與Facebook或類似公司沒有關(guān)聯(lián)。）

????投資者目前還不一定要選擇站在哪一邊。但鑒于投資者對Facebook增長前景抱有巨大的預期，認真考慮一下這家公司股價實際上有多么脆弱有好處。評估Facebook收購WhatsApp這宗交易時，分析師使用了一個不同于以往的衡量尺度。他們并沒有采用收入倍數(shù)法為WhatsApp估值，而是計算出Facebook究竟為收購每一個WhatsApp用戶支付了多少錢。這個神奇的數(shù)字是42美元（用收購價190億美元除以4.5億用戶）。

????鑒于WhatsApp的運營狀況（每位用戶注冊一年后，只能為該公司貢獻99美分的收入），這個數(shù)字似乎太高了。但根據(jù)Facebook目前1,670億美元的估值，我們可以計算出，每位Facebook用戶價值122美元，前提是假設這家公司的用戶人數(shù)如Evercore公司所預測的那樣，在今年年底增長至14億左右。

????但愿扎克伯格能夠給WhatsApp用戶抹上一層魔力醬，從而使Facebook公司也能夠抬高他們的價值。但要做到這一點恐怕沒有那么簡單。首先，F(xiàn)acebook用戶更有價值的原因在于，他們能夠為公司帶來更多收入。每位Facebook用戶目前能夠為公司營收貢獻6.73美元。Evercore公司預計，至今年年底，這個數(shù)字有望增長25%，達到8.44美元。屆時，每位Facebook用戶的價值將是他們營收貢獻值的14.5倍左右。

????此外，根據(jù)Evercore公司的預測，F(xiàn)acebook的用戶人數(shù)將增長16%。投資者肯定希望這些數(shù)字無止境地增長下去。

????假如這些估計有點過頭：每位用戶的收入貢獻值實際上增長了20%，至8.08美元。這個數(shù)字依然很高，但并沒有達到投資者目前設想的水平。再假如用戶數(shù)量實際上增長了10%，而不是15%。使用相同的倍數(shù)（14.5倍）來計算，每位Facebook用戶價值117美元?？紤]到用戶總數(shù)（13億）也低于預期，那么這家公司的估值就在1.51億美元左右。再加上Facebook持有的70億美元現(xiàn)金，這家公司的市值就是1.58億美元左右，幾乎比目前的價格低10%。

????一個需要不斷擴大規(guī)模的商業(yè)模式一旦出現(xiàn)微調(diào)，那就可能帶來危險的后果，尤其是當投資者抱著宏大的增長預期，以最高價購買股票的時候。（財富中文網(wǎng)）

????譯者：葉寒

????

????Is Facebook overvalued? The social network's shareholders have fared well since the company went public in mid-2012. Shares are up more than 80% since its IPO and have climbed steadily over the last six months. But investors have passed since Mark Zuckerberg, Facebook's founder, announced on his page two weeks ago that his company was buying WhatsApp, a young but popular social network. The price tag: a shocking $19 billion.

????It's not just a matter of digesting the news. Investors already have lofty growth expectations built into the company's stock price. And as the WhatsApp acquisition shows, Facebook (FB) is working hard to justify those assumptions partly with acquisitions -- and it has good reason to do that. Based on at least one metric, a small blip to investors' forecasts could skim nearly a tenth off the stock price.

????In many ways, the WhatsApp acquisition makes sense. Scale is important to social networking. Bringing WhatsApp into the fold only makes Facebook that much harder to touch. "The large and rapidly growing user base attracts new advertisers and retailers," Laura Martin of Needham recently said in a report. "We believe the scale of Facebook's network represents a significant competitive advantage and a significant barrier to entry."

????However, paying top dollar to grow can turn into a dangerous cycle. "It can be like a dog chasing its tail," said Lawrence Hrebiniak, emeritus professor at The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. If more interesting social networks photo-bomb this growing family portrait, Facebook will have to continue to purchase other companies to keep up.

????Jim Chanos, the prominent bearish investor who runs hedge fund Kynikos, is skeptical that scale matters in general. He says he is worried "about the inability of these businesses to 'scale' profitability." "Everyone points to Amazon as their valuation framework safe-harbor, not the scores of Internet road kill." (Chanos is not currently involved with Facebook or similar companies.)

????Investors don't necessarily have to choose a side just yet. But it helps to consider how delicate Facebook's stock price actually is, considering the outsize growth expectations for the company. Following Facebook's acquisition of WhatsApp, analysts started to kick around a metric different than one that's often used. Rather than value WhatsApp based on a revenue multiple, analysts showed how much Facebook was paying to acquire each individual WhatsApp user. That magic number was $42 per user ($19 billion for 450 million users).

????It seems like a lot considering WhatsApp's business: It takes in 99 cents per user one year after they have signed on. But Facebook's users are worth $122 apiece at its current enterprise value of $167 billion, assuming the company hits Evercore's expectations of around 1.4 billion users by the end of this year.

????The hope is that Zuckerberg will add some kind of magic sauce to WhatsApp users so Facebook can jack up their value too. But it may not be that simple. First, Facebook's users are worth more because they bring in more money for the company. Each Facebook user currently adds $6.73 to the top line. Evercore assumes this number will grow a quarter by the end of this year to $8.44, making each Facebook user worth some 14.5 times the revenue they contribute.

????Add that to the 16% more people Evercore assumes will join Facebook, and investors have to hope things continue on the up and up.

????Say those estimates are a bit off: Revenue per user grows 20% to $8.08. It is still a lot, but not what investors currently assume. And say that users grow a tenth rather than 15%. Each Facebook user at the same multiple (14.5 times) is worth $117, and there are fewer to boot (1.3 billion users), valuing the company at about $151 billion. Add back Facebook's $7 billion of cash, and the market cap of the company is about $158 billion, nearly 10% below its current price.

????Small tweaks to a business model that needs to be scaled can be dangerous, especially when investors are paying top prices based on lofty growth assumptions.