全球最大IT公司IBM近期表示,將考慮在2021年年底剝離公司IT服務(wù)部門,使其為一家新上市公司。消息一出,華爾街為之一振。顯然,投資者們很喜歡這個(gè)方案,截至當(dāng)?shù)貢r(shí)間周四收盤,IBM的股價(jià)一番早前7%左右的跌幅,強(qiáng)勢上漲6%。
繼IBM去年以340億美元收購紅帽公司(Red Hat)以后,該公司首席執(zhí)行官阿文德·克里希納(Arvind Krishna)便開始專注于挖掘IBM的云端服務(wù)軟件業(yè)務(wù)??死锵<{告訴《財(cái)富》,IBM的老IT部門每年仍能給公司帶來近200億美元收入,但這并不是一個(gè)足夠樂觀的數(shù)字。
為表述清晰,以下采訪內(nèi)容有部分刪減:
《財(cái)富》:一旦分拆完成,IBM的主要業(yè)務(wù)將會較前幾年大幅縮減,你會考慮經(jīng)營新業(yè)務(wù)或者再次進(jìn)行一些收購來擴(kuò)大公司規(guī)模么?
克里希那:IBM會進(jìn)入新的領(lǐng)域嗎?答案是肯定的,我們可以將自己的技術(shù)和混合云端以及人工智能結(jié)合。
我們正在有機(jī)地、有選擇地進(jìn)行投資。我不會輕而易舉地并購,除非你給我一個(gè)足夠有料的概念。舉個(gè)例子——量子計(jì)算。大多數(shù)投資者可能還沒有意識到量子計(jì)算在未來的機(jī)遇,我認(rèn)為這是一個(gè)價(jià)值數(shù)千億美元的市場,但可能還要五年左右才能初具規(guī)模。
同時(shí),在如何將AI技術(shù)應(yīng)用于自動(dòng)化方面,我也覺得有很多機(jī)會。比如,各種各樣的資產(chǎn)交易,這個(gè)市場才剛剛浮現(xiàn)。
至于我們會不會通過企業(yè)并購來加固自己的技術(shù)平臺,毫無疑問,這是肯定會的。我們的態(tài)度是開放的、包容的,只要發(fā)現(xiàn)了合適的并購方,我們就會這么做。另外,把IBM分割成兩個(gè)公司,這將有利于公司擴(kuò)大商業(yè)空間,我們可以比以前做的更多,這也是我做這個(gè)決策的部分原因。
難道IBM的其他部門不再需要再與IT部門共同協(xié)作了嗎?或者說IBM新公司將不再提供基礎(chǔ)服務(wù)了嗎?
克里希那:我們都知道科技的更新迭代是飛速的。誠然,二十年前價(jià)值驚人的東西放在今天可能依然還有價(jià)值,但這也是有限的價(jià)值。二十年前,當(dāng)全世界的關(guān)注重心還聚焦在數(shù)據(jù)、客戶端、服務(wù)器、互聯(lián)網(wǎng)這些東西的時(shí)候,基礎(chǔ)設(shè)備服務(wù)就蘊(yùn)藏著巨大價(jià)值,因?yàn)閷δ菚r(shí)的人們而言,這些東西是陌生且復(fù)雜的。
二十年后,我們進(jìn)入云時(shí)代,各種各樣的應(yīng)用程序都在“去設(shè)備化”,隨著應(yīng)用程序不再受限于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)備。在這樣的情況下,基礎(chǔ)設(shè)備的更新就需要與應(yīng)用程序和平臺架構(gòu)決策相分離。換而言之,在當(dāng)今時(shí)代把這兩者給分拆開來會更好。
您知道,也許未來某天,當(dāng)我們正喝著啤酒的時(shí)候,就會討論哪些業(yè)務(wù)是屬公司內(nèi)部的,哪些是外部的。我不是經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家,而是一名徹頭徹尾的工程師,但我認(rèn)為,評判的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)應(yīng)如(羅納德·科斯)所說,“一家公司業(yè)務(wù)的邊界應(yīng)該在那些產(chǎn)生較多分歧的地方”。公司的各項(xiàng)業(yè)務(wù)之間總是存在協(xié)同作用的。至于各個(gè)部門究竟是單獨(dú)發(fā)展好,還是作為一個(gè)整體更好?這是領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者始終在思考的一個(gè)問題。
這種業(yè)務(wù)拆分有沒有可能在您收購紅帽公司之前就進(jìn)行呢?
我認(rèn)為,收購紅帽以及我們現(xiàn)在決心大力發(fā)展混合云平臺,都是業(yè)務(wù)拆分的關(guān)鍵所在。收購之前,我也不確定這到底有沒有意義。因?yàn)槟闶召徚艘患彝耆煌墓?,在此前我不會告訴您我們本可以只關(guān)注混合云,但現(xiàn)在可以了。
對于新公司NewCo而言,您覺得它在哪些方面有成長的空間?您好像正在擺脫那些發(fā)展不佳的業(yè)務(wù),而這對IBM來說也是有利的。
目前,在IBM投入了大量資金的業(yè)務(wù)中,這一部分的投資排在第三位。排名第一的是混合云,排名第二的可能是那些應(yīng)用程序類的服務(wù),NewCo將排第三。但現(xiàn)在前兩名都不再參與這場競爭,NewCo就將位居首位。我想我們都同意,這將對我們的業(yè)務(wù)發(fā)展大有作為。
第二,兩家公司的業(yè)務(wù)市場差異很大。拆分后,他們就都能負(fù)擔(dān)得起各自業(yè)務(wù)范圍內(nèi)的交易。再或者,由于現(xiàn)在同屬IBM,他們可能無法達(dá)成某些交易,而實(shí)際上,這些交易對他們各自的發(fā)展可能大有裨益。但在他們各自為營后,就可以做到。
第三,在和合作伙伴關(guān)系方面,將來會有很多人愿意與拆分后的新公司NewCo合作。而在當(dāng)下,由于IBM業(yè)務(wù)龐雜,他們可能會因?yàn)樽约汗九cIBM的其他某些部門之間存在競爭關(guān)系而有所顧慮,因此不愿意合作。所以,我認(rèn)為在這三點(diǎn)上,業(yè)務(wù)拆分后的NewCo可能有很大的增長空間。
您覺得“沃森”超級電腦能在哪里發(fā)揮作用? NewCo是否仍會像今天一樣,用沃森作為其AI平臺?
要明確的是,技術(shù)知識產(chǎn)權(quán)、研發(fā)和產(chǎn)品所有權(quán)等問題,最終還是由IBM決定。但話雖如此,當(dāng)下來看,我還是要推行一些激勵(lì)措施——就像對待其他任何一個(gè)合作伙伴一樣。因此現(xiàn)在我們是要說服NewCo,沃森是其開展AI業(yè)務(wù)的最佳選擇。
所以,新公司也可能會使用沃森以外的其他AI平臺?
直到拆分完成,我們還都是一家公司,所以他們不會使用別家的產(chǎn)品。但是拆分之后,他們就將成為獨(dú)立的上市公司。我要澄清的是,我們屆時(shí)將無法再控制它們的決策了。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
編譯:陳怡軒 陳聰聰
全球最大IT公司IBM近期表示,將考慮在2021年年底剝離公司IT服務(wù)部門,使其為一家新上市公司。消息一出,華爾街為之一振。顯然,投資者們很喜歡這個(gè)方案,截至當(dāng)?shù)貢r(shí)間周四收盤,IBM的股價(jià)一番早前7%左右的跌幅,強(qiáng)勢上漲6%。
繼IBM去年以340億美元收購紅帽公司(Red Hat)以后,該公司首席執(zhí)行官阿文德·克里希納(Arvind Krishna)便開始專注于挖掘IBM的云端服務(wù)軟件業(yè)務(wù)??死锵<{告訴《財(cái)富》,IBM的老IT部門每年仍能給公司帶來近200億美元收入,但這并不是一個(gè)足夠樂觀的數(shù)字。
為表述清晰,以下采訪內(nèi)容有部分刪減:
《財(cái)富》:一旦分拆完成,IBM的主要業(yè)務(wù)將會較前幾年大幅縮減,你會考慮經(jīng)營新業(yè)務(wù)或者再次進(jìn)行一些收購來擴(kuò)大公司規(guī)模么?
克里希那:IBM會進(jìn)入新的領(lǐng)域嗎?答案是肯定的,我們可以將自己的技術(shù)和混合云端以及人工智能結(jié)合。
我們正在有機(jī)地、有選擇地進(jìn)行投資。我不會輕而易舉地并購,除非你給我一個(gè)足夠有料的概念。舉個(gè)例子——量子計(jì)算。大多數(shù)投資者可能還沒有意識到量子計(jì)算在未來的機(jī)遇,我認(rèn)為這是一個(gè)價(jià)值數(shù)千億美元的市場,但可能還要五年左右才能初具規(guī)模。
同時(shí),在如何將AI技術(shù)應(yīng)用于自動(dòng)化方面,我也覺得有很多機(jī)會。比如,各種各樣的資產(chǎn)交易,這個(gè)市場才剛剛浮現(xiàn)。
至于我們會不會通過企業(yè)并購來加固自己的技術(shù)平臺,毫無疑問,這是肯定會的。我們的態(tài)度是開放的、包容的,只要發(fā)現(xiàn)了合適的并購方,我們就會這么做。另外,把IBM分割成兩個(gè)公司,這將有利于公司擴(kuò)大商業(yè)空間,我們可以比以前做的更多,這也是我做這個(gè)決策的部分原因。
難道IBM的其他部門不再需要再與IT部門共同協(xié)作了嗎?或者說IBM新公司將不再提供基礎(chǔ)服務(wù)了嗎?
克里希那:我們都知道科技的更新迭代是飛速的。誠然,二十年前價(jià)值驚人的東西放在今天可能依然還有價(jià)值,但這也是有限的價(jià)值。二十年前,當(dāng)全世界的關(guān)注重心還聚焦在數(shù)據(jù)、客戶端、服務(wù)器、互聯(lián)網(wǎng)這些東西的時(shí)候,基礎(chǔ)設(shè)備服務(wù)就蘊(yùn)藏著巨大價(jià)值,因?yàn)閷δ菚r(shí)的人們而言,這些東西是陌生且復(fù)雜的。
二十年后,我們進(jìn)入云時(shí)代,各種各樣的應(yīng)用程序都在“去設(shè)備化”,隨著應(yīng)用程序不再受限于基礎(chǔ)設(shè)備。在這樣的情況下,基礎(chǔ)設(shè)備的更新就需要與應(yīng)用程序和平臺架構(gòu)決策相分離。換而言之,在當(dāng)今時(shí)代把這兩者給分拆開來會更好。
您知道,也許未來某天,當(dāng)我們正喝著啤酒的時(shí)候,就會討論哪些業(yè)務(wù)是屬公司內(nèi)部的,哪些是外部的。我不是經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家,而是一名徹頭徹尾的工程師,但我認(rèn)為,評判的標(biāo)準(zhǔn)應(yīng)如(羅納德·科斯)所說,“一家公司業(yè)務(wù)的邊界應(yīng)該在那些產(chǎn)生較多分歧的地方”。公司的各項(xiàng)業(yè)務(wù)之間總是存在協(xié)同作用的。至于各個(gè)部門究竟是單獨(dú)發(fā)展好,還是作為一個(gè)整體更好?這是領(lǐng)導(dǎo)者始終在思考的一個(gè)問題。
這種業(yè)務(wù)拆分有沒有可能在您收購紅帽公司之前就進(jìn)行呢?
我認(rèn)為,收購紅帽以及我們現(xiàn)在決心大力發(fā)展混合云平臺,都是業(yè)務(wù)拆分的關(guān)鍵所在。收購之前,我也不確定這到底有沒有意義。因?yàn)槟闶召徚艘患彝耆煌墓?,在此前我不會告訴您我們本可以只關(guān)注混合云,但現(xiàn)在可以了。
對于新公司NewCo而言,您覺得它在哪些方面有成長的空間?您好像正在擺脫那些發(fā)展不佳的業(yè)務(wù),而這對IBM來說也是有利的。
目前,在IBM投入了大量資金的業(yè)務(wù)中,這一部分的投資排在第三位。排名第一的是混合云,排名第二的可能是那些應(yīng)用程序類的服務(wù),NewCo將排第三。但現(xiàn)在前兩名都不再參與這場競爭,NewCo就將位居首位。我想我們都同意,這將對我們的業(yè)務(wù)發(fā)展大有作為。
第二,兩家公司的業(yè)務(wù)市場差異很大。拆分后,他們就都能負(fù)擔(dān)得起各自業(yè)務(wù)范圍內(nèi)的交易。再或者,由于現(xiàn)在同屬IBM,他們可能無法達(dá)成某些交易,而實(shí)際上,這些交易對他們各自的發(fā)展可能大有裨益。但在他們各自為營后,就可以做到。
第三,在和合作伙伴關(guān)系方面,將來會有很多人愿意與拆分后的新公司NewCo合作。而在當(dāng)下,由于IBM業(yè)務(wù)龐雜,他們可能會因?yàn)樽约汗九cIBM的其他某些部門之間存在競爭關(guān)系而有所顧慮,因此不愿意合作。所以,我認(rèn)為在這三點(diǎn)上,業(yè)務(wù)拆分后的NewCo可能有很大的增長空間。
您覺得“沃森”超級電腦能在哪里發(fā)揮作用? NewCo是否仍會像今天一樣,用沃森作為其AI平臺?
要明確的是,技術(shù)知識產(chǎn)權(quán)、研發(fā)和產(chǎn)品所有權(quán)等問題,最終還是由IBM決定。但話雖如此,當(dāng)下來看,我還是要推行一些激勵(lì)措施——就像對待其他任何一個(gè)合作伙伴一樣。因此現(xiàn)在我們是要說服NewCo,沃森是其開展AI業(yè)務(wù)的最佳選擇。
所以,新公司也可能會使用沃森以外的其他AI平臺?
直到拆分完成,我們還都是一家公司,所以他們不會使用別家的產(chǎn)品。但是拆分之后,他們就將成為獨(dú)立的上市公司。我要澄清的是,我們屆時(shí)將無法再控制它們的決策了。(財(cái)富中文網(wǎng))
編譯:陳怡軒 陳聰聰
IBM shook up Wall Street on Thursday with a plan to spin off its information technology services unit as a separate company. Investors loved the idea, which could take until the end of 2021 to complete. IBM's stock price, which had previously lost 7% in 2020, gained 6% on Thursday.
After last year's purchase of Red Hat for $34 billion, IBM CEO Arvind Krishna is zeroing in on the opportunity to provide software tools for companies using cloud services. The old IT services unit, which still brings in almost $20 billion of revenue a year, isn't a good fit, as Krishna explained in the following interview with Fortune.
This interview has been condensed and edited for clarity.
Fortune: Once the split is done, the main part of IBM will be much smaller than it was years ago. But can you start going into new businesses and doing some acquisitions to bulk up again?
Krishna: Can we go into new areas? I would say yes. As long as they're aligned with hybrid cloud and A.I.
One example I'll tell you right away that we're investing in organically—I don't think through M&A unless you give me a name of something interesting—is quantum computing. It's probably beyond the view of most investors, but it has a lot of optionality. I think it's a market worth hundreds of billions but it will probably take five years to play out.
I also think there's so many elements inside of how A.I. will be applied to automate, for example, all kinds of property (transactions) from planes to loansand so forth. We're just at the beginning of that market.
Can we do M&A, or acquisitions, to bolster our technology platforms? An absolute yes, no qualifications. We're open for business. As we find things that are appropriate, we will go ahead and keep doing that. And part of the reasons of creating two companies, is it creates the space to be able to do more of that than we might have been able to do before.
Why is there no longer synergy between those parts of IBM and the IT services business? Or why does it no longer makes sense to keep the infrastructure services within IBM anymore?
We all acknowledge that the world of technology moves quite rapidly. What was of incredible value 20 years ago, still has value, but may not have value in terms of everything else. So when the world was looking at data centers, clients and servers, and adopting the Internet, I think managed infrastructure services had huge amounts of value because people were struggling with that heterogeneity and that complexity.
As we're going toward cloud, and as applications become more and more infrastructure agnostic, people are making application decisions separate from the target destination. If that's the case, then infrastructure modernization is a separate buying decision from the applications and the architectural platform decisions. That implies that these are better separate them together.
You know, maybe over a beer some day, we can debate what belongs inside a firm and what belongs outside a firm. I'm not an economist. I'm an outright engineer, but I think (Ronald Coase) said the boundaries of a firm should be determined by where there's more friction going out than in. And I think that's the criteria. You can always find some synergy. But is it better unlocked separately or better together? That's always the question that, as a leader like me, you're always thinking about.
Would this spin-out have been possible prior to your acquisition of Red Hat?
I think doing Red Hat and the confidence we have now gained for our hybrid-cloud platform is a big part of it. Prior to that, I'm not sure it would have made sense. Because you've got a different company, the company I wouldn't tell you that we could have stated our maniacal focus of hybrid cloud only—now we can.
Where do you see the "NewCo" services company growing? It seems like you’re getting rid of the business that's not going to be growing, which is good for IBM.
So today, that part of the business would be third in line for massive capital investment inside IBM. Number one will go to hybrid cloud, but number two would probably go into as elements of application services—[NewCo] will be third. Now that they won’t compete, they will be first. I think we'd all agree that makes a difference.
Two, the margin profiles of both the companies are quite different. So they can afford to do deals. Or they can do deals that actually [work] for them that we might not do today.
Three, when I look at partnerships, there are many people that will agree to partner with NewCo who today might be a little bit reluctant, given that they might compete with other parts of existing IBM. So those three, I think unlock a lot a lot of growth.
Where do you see Watson fitting in? Will the NewCo still use Watson as an A.I platform as it does today?
To be clear about where technology intellectual property, R&D, and the product ownership sits, that will be at IBM. However, that said, now, I have to create incentives just like I would with any other partner. So for Watson, it's now up to us to convince NewCo that's the best platform on which to do A.I.
So there’s a possibility that they could use a different A.I. platform other than Watson?
Well, until the spinout, we are one company and they will use no other. But look, they will be their own public company. We will have not control over them, let me be clear.