汪翔: 解读美国今年的富豪图

Frank

读读美国今年的富豪图，看看财富四百强的名单和他们背后的故事，其所体现出来的有些参数，还真的是意味深长。

美国最富有的四百位，占据的财富是美国整个经济规模的八分之一！而且，他们所拥有的财富增长速度还远高于美国经济的成长步伐。也就是说，在未来的日子里，富者将更为富有，普通人占有的财富比例，将会越来越小，除非政府可以通过政治手段来剥夺这部分富有者的财富，成功实现财富的再分配。如果做到了后者，结果又可能是对懒惰的鼓励。同时，是不是也在说明，富豪们管理财富，让其增值的效率，还是比美国这个国家要高的多？！

在富豪的名单里面，四分之一的人是在金融相关行业的成功狩猎者。另外的那个四分之一，则更容易在科技、媒体和能源领域找到。从这里，我们可以看出，“入错行”的成本非常之大。所以，在选择打拼的行业时，还是智慧性的审时度势比较重要。战略上必须重视“敌人”，看来还是不错的一句话。

非常有意思的数据是：高达70%的巨富是靠自己白手起家打造出来的。

这说明了好几个问题：

其一，是美国赚钱的门道，在最近几十年发生了很大的变化，跟不上时代变化的富人的财富，也会被时代的脚步所淘汰；

其二，富不过三代的中国财富保持和被淘汰规律，在美国也成立；

其三，再次证明，美国确实是一个机会平等的国度，只要你敢于折腾，善于折腾，即使是白手起家，你也拥有不错的机会；

其四，美国不重视财富向下一代的转移，鼓励下一代自力更生的国民性，看来，也在这里体现了其生命力。

赌王和索罗斯排名的下降，也说明了一个有趣的问题：美国的经济不景气，外加各地赌场建设的大面积开放，给过去依靠垄断地位获得巨大利益的赌王的经营环境，带来了不小的负面影响。而在股市蒸蒸日上的时刻，靠在股市游玩致富的索罗斯，看来好像是错过了千载难逢的一次机会。廉颇老矣！机会还真的，只是留给了那些敢于面对和善于利用它的“投机者”了。所以，机会也并不是对所有人都是“平等”的。

细看索罗斯的投资对象，你会发现，在股市大幅反弹的时候，他选择了极其保守的投资策略，将投资主体放在企业债券上，赚取有较大把握的收益。风险和回报成比例的规则，在这里也体现了出来。

对于已经高达八十高龄的人来说，选择这样的投资策略似乎也没有什么错。所以，投资策略的选择，和投资收益的大小，应该不是衡量投资好坏的唯一标准。最重要的，你还得看，投资者最在乎的到底是什么？！

昙花一现的富豪和他们所拥有财富的快速缩水，也意味着一个非常有价值的忠告：“投机取巧”和靠“短平快”，也只能是昙花一现。

不过，从另一方面看，先声夺人，敢于创新，也是有机会大捞一笔的。Groupon的成功，就是得益于领先对手，而之所以昙花一现，却是因为，这个行业和它的做法，太没有业不可能形成垄断优势。没有垄断的行业，就容易被快速形成的竞争格局打败。

在用它做了两次广告之后，我就意识到，这是一个很难做好的行业，因为，它卖出太多带来的是卖者（做广告的像我们）的巨大付出和不开心，卖少了，也是同样的结果。一个很难让你的顾客开心的行业，当然是难以做好的。

昨天，该公司的股价在长期的巨跌之后，有了不错的反弹，原因则是因为，该公司的老总强调了它所拥有的数量巨大的与企业（做个广告的公司）和消费者（在那里买过折扣券的顾客）联系的潜在价值。

对于我，这种价值可大可小。作为企业，我对于这样的广告模式不再拥有兴趣，因为价值有限，代价高昂；作为消费者，我已经好久没有在那里购买折扣券了，即使在好几次收到了五美元的免费现金赠送的诱惑之后。

个人只是一个样品，但是，就是这样的样品，能够让我们读出很多有价值的信息来。

富豪榜上也有为数不少的女性。有些人是靠男人获得的，就像乔布斯的遗孀。而有的，则是靠自己的智慧打造出来的天地。所以，在造富这个领域，女性也同样拥有不错的生存空间和比较广阔的翱翔天空。

如果放眼未来，三十年之后的美国富豪榜，将会是一个什么样的图景？那时候的富豪主体，将来自哪个行业？

我觉得，有几点好像是比较有谱的：金融行业还会继续制造为数不少的巨富；盖茨的今天，可能也保持不了多久，巴菲特的造富模式估计也没有可以复制的机会；今天的媒体和昔日的媒体造富的巨大差异，在未来的日子里还会继续体现出来，同样的面孔很可能会拥有非常不同的内核。

而那些靠规模打造出垄断优势，并且在优势形成之后又很难被打破的领域，像能源，可能还会持续的保持一部分名单。即使是在新能源领域有巨大的突破，这部分人和他们的后代，还是拥有不错的机会。

那么，面对这个很不一样的世界变化格局，我们，我们的年轻一代和我们的下一代，应该如何应对呢？

守着既有的财富肯定不是什么好法子，你得跟着时代的变化脚步向前进。而对于下一代，则得鼓励他们去折腾，去思考，去创新，特别是在我们这些父辈还没有意识到的领域和行业。所以，在这里，“姜是老的辣”恐怕只是一个误人误己的谬论而已。

有点意思的是，与美国富豪平均13%的年度增长形成对照的是，中国巨富们在过去一年的财富，平均下降了三分之一！中国可怜的股民们在帮助富豪们挤泡沫中的水分，而美国人却在打造实实在在的财富。

  

附录：Richest Americans' net worth jumps to $1.7 trillion

By Dan Burns

NEW YORK | Wed Sep 19, 2012

(Reuters) - The net worth of the richest Americans grew by 13 percent in the past year to $1.7 trillion, Forbes magazine said on Wednesday, and a familiar cast populated the top of the annual list, including Bill Gates, Warren Buffett, Larry Ellison and the Koch brothers.

The average net worth of the 400 wealthiest Americans rose to a record $4.2 billion, up more than 10 percent from a year ago, while the lowest net worth came in at $1.1 billion versus $1.05 billion last year, the magazine said. Seven in ten of the list's members made their fortunes from scratch.

It was a bad year, however, for social media moguls, whose net worth fell by a combined $11 billion. On the heels of Facebook Inc's rocky IPO in May, the No. 1 social network's chief executive, Mark Zuckerberg, was the year's biggest dollar loser: his net worth fell by nearly half to $9.4 billion from $17.5 billion. He also slid to the No. 36 slot from No. 14 a year ago, Forbes said.

Facebook shares have fallen 40 percent from their IPO price of $38 a share in May.

Dismal performances by other social media stocks dropped some executives from the list altogether, including Groupon Inc Chairman Eric Lefkofsky, No. 293 on last year's list, and Zynga Inc Chairman and CEO Mark Pincus, No. 212 on the 2011 list.

"The gap between the very rich and merely rich increased and helped drive up the average net worth of The Forbes 400 members to an all-time record $4.2 billion," said Forbes Senior Wealth Editor Luisa Kroll.

Collectively, this group's net worth is the equivalent of one-eighth of the entire U.S. economy, which stood at $13.56 trillion in real terms according to the latest government data. But the 13 percent growth in the wealth of the richest Americans far outpaced that of the economy overall, helping widen the chasm between rich and poor.

Forbes attributed the growth in net worth in part to the performance of the stock market and a recovering real estate market.

But while their wealth grew faster than the economy as a whole, which expanded at an anemic 1.7 percent annual rate in the second quarter of 2012, the super rich generally failed to keep pace with the stock market. The benchmark Standard & Poor's 500 index rose nearly 20 percent over the 12 months ended August 24, the last date of market performance measured for this year's list.

FAMILIAR NAMES AT THE TOP

Gates, the chairman of Microsoft Corp., topped the list for the 19th year in a row, with $66 billion, up $7 billion from a year earlier.

Buffett, chairman and chief executive of insurance conglomerate Berkshire Hathaway Inc, stood second with $46 billion, followed by Ellison, head of software maker Oracle Corp, with $41 billion. Brothers Charles and David Koch, who run the energy and chemicals conglomerate Koch Industries Inc and who are active in conservative politics, were tied for fourth with $31 billion, Forbes said.

The ranks of the top five were unchanged from a year earlier.

Two notable names dropped from the top 10, however. Casino magnate Sheldon Adelson, also active in conservative political causes, fell to the 12 spot from No. 8 last year, and financier and liberal philanthropist George Soros dropped five spots to No. 12.

Michael Bloomberg, the billionaire founder of Bloomberg LP who is now in his third term as New York City mayor, rose to the No. 10 slot.

Newcomers to the elite club of 400 include Laurene Powell Jobs, the widow of Apple Inc cofounder Steve Jobs who is now the wealthiest woman in Silicon Valley, and Jack Dorsey, the co-founder of Twitter.

Just 45 women made the cut, up from 42 last year, Forbes said.

California has the largest share of Forbes 400 members, with 87, followed by New York, Texas, Florida and Illinois. Among cities, New York City topped the list, with 53. San Francisco, Dallas, Los Angeles and Houston rounded out the top-five cities.

One quarter of the Forbes 400 come from the finance and investment sector while another quarter come from either the technology, media or energy industries.