玉林宫颈糜烂医生
时间:2017年12月13日 21:09:06

Business商业报道Reimagining Piramal重塑皮拉马尔Blood, sweat, but no tears流血,流汗,不流泪An old Indian business house still has fire in its belly作为印度一家老牌企业,皮拉马尔依然澎湃WHEN his brothers death in 1984 is mentioned, Ajay Piramal , a big, calm man, still looks sad.提起1984年他哥哥之死时,阿贾伊?皮拉马尔,这个高大冷静的汉子,仍然是面露悲伤。That tragedy propelled him at the age of 29 to the helm of one of Indias big, old and flagging business houses.那场悲剧将29岁的他推上了企业舵手的位子,执掌印度一家正在衰落的老资格大型企业。Since then he has run it with a stark lack of sentimentality and with outrageous success.从那时起,他在企业运营上没有半点多愁善感,取得了巨大的成功。Having sold the crown jewels—a generic-drugs outfit—in 2010, for .8 billion, he is now busy re-imagining the family firm for the third time.2010年他将企业上的珠宝非专利药部门以38亿美元售出,现在,他正忙于家族企业的第三次重整。Given his record, it is worth paying attention.以他过去的记录来看,此事值得关注。Piramals first reincarnation came in the 1980s.80年代,皮拉马尔经历了第一次重生。The main textiles business was dying. Its workers were striking; its mills were outdated and packed into central Mumbai.企业的主业纺织业正走向衰亡。企业的工人在罢工,陈旧的工厂拥挤在孟买市中心。皮拉马尔先生削减了员工,搬迁了工厂。Mr Piramal cut staff and moved out. Today the land he freed forms a new business district, where snazzy towers sprout from the ruins of old factories.今天,当年腾出来的地块形成了新的商业区,一座座时髦的高塔如雨后春笋般从老厂房的废墟上拔地而起。Some textiles clans have since lived off their property. Others began new adventures.一些纺织企业从此吃上老本,其他的转去开拓新的生意。A branch of the Wadia family, old Mumbai royalty, started an airline.孟买历史悠久的瓦蒂亚皇室家族4旗下一个分,开始经营航空业。Piramal began making generic drugs for Indians, buying in 1988 the local unit of a British firm and then picking up similar operations from other foreign pharmaceutical firms which had lost hope in India.皮拉马尔则开始为印度百姓生产非专利药,他于1988年收购了一家英国制药公司的本地部门,之后,又轻松地与其他几家对印度丧失信心的外国药企完成了多宗类似交易。Often multinationals move in a herd mentality, says Mr Piramal.通常,跨国公司的行动带有从众心理,皮拉马尔先生说道。By the late 2000s Piramal was Indias third-largest drugs firm.到本世纪头十年的末期,皮拉马尔成为了印度第三大制药公司。This second incarnation ended abruptly.皮拉马尔的第二次重整戛然而止。In 2004, with his brothers sons grown up, the clan split, apparently amicably, with Mr Piramals nephews and their mother taking the property and textile units.2004年,他哥哥的儿子们长大成人,家族也随之分裂,皮拉马尔的几个侄儿和他们的母亲分得房地产和纺织部门,表面上还是一团和气。In 2010 Abbott, an American drugs firm with a history of failing to crack India, bid a preposterous .8 billion for the Indian generic-drugs business, which had just 5m of sales.2010年,一直未能叩开印度市场大门的美国雅培制药,对皮拉马尔年销售额不过4.25亿美元的非专利药部门开出了高得离谱的38亿美元收购价格。It was a stiff price, says the diplomatic Mr Piramal, who had not expected the bid and says the negotiations over price took only a few hours.这是个高昂的报价,老练的皮拉马尔说,他没有料到这个出价,而且协商价格只用了几个小时。What now?现在是个什么情况?Mr Piramal has parked part of the proceeds by buying a stake in Vodafones Indian arm, an arrangement that looks temporary.皮拉马尔先生将部分交易收益投入对沃达丰印度公司的股权收购中,貌似这只是暂时的安排。He is a critic of crony capitalism in India, which limits his options.他总是批评印度的裙带资本主义,这使得他的选择有限。The boom in infrastructure in 2007-10, when well connected entrepreneurs milked government links, did not feel right, he says. Many are now in financial trouble and a few are under investigation.2007年至2010年,基础设施建设蓬勃发展,人脉广泛的企业家们与政府勾结而自肥,皮拉马尔对此感觉不对劲。很多这类企业现在深陷财务危机,有一些正被调查。Instead, Piramal has three new areas of emphasis.相反,皮拉马尔将重点放在三个新的领域。One is a limited re-entry into property.一个是有限地再次进军房地产业。Land prices have dropped as some Mumbai developers have become overstretched.由于孟买一些开发商扩张过度,地价有所下跌。And there has been a recent crackdown on the corrupt nexus between developers and officials.近期政府又打击了一起官商勾结的腐败问题。People like us were at a disadvantage, he says.像我们一样的人吃了亏,他说到。Now, at least for a while, they are not.现在,至少暂时,他们没有吃亏了。The second new area is health-care services in America.第二个新的领域是美国的医疗务业。On May 16th Piramal spent 5m on Decision Resources, a Massachusetts firm that analyses and crunches data on drugs and treatments.五月十六日,皮拉马尔向马萨诸塞州一家名为决策资源的公司投资6.35亿美元,该公司从事药物与疾病治疗的数据分析与处理业务。He is betting that treatments will become ever more specialised and that the buyers of drugs in America—state bodies and insurance firms—will become even more finicky and cost-conscious.他的判断是,疾病治疗将会更加专业化,而美国的药品买家将会更加挑剔、更加注重节省成本。Drug firms are outsourcing this kind of activity.制药公司将此类业务进行外包。That logic seems to embody a conventionally gloomy view of the pharmaceuticals industry, which seems unable to discover enough new drugs or to protect its patents on old ones.这种逻辑似乎体现了对于制药业习以为常的悲观看法,即人们认为制药业无法开发出足够多的新药,并且也无法保护已研制出的药品专利。Piramals third area of expansion is thus a surprise:因此,皮拉马尔的第三个扩张领域出人意料:Mr Piramal wants to invent new blockbuster drugs.皮拉马尔先生想要创造出有巨大影响的新药。Surely that is a business model as obsolete as inner-city textile mills?这不是和在城中心建纺织厂同样过时的商业模式吗?Mr Piramal thinks not, especially if research and clinical trials can be shifted to India, where costs could be as little as a tenth of those in the rich world.皮拉马尔先生并不这么认为,尤其是考虑到如果能将药物研发与临床试验从发达国家迁移到印度进行,成本将会降至十分之一。Were hopeful that well discover new drugs and make breakthroughs, he says.我们对发现新药并取得突破充满信心,他说。We take a contrarian view.我们的观点是逆势而为。 点击此处下载本期经济学人讲解PDF与音频字幕 /201307/246064

Corporate governance企业管治Nasty medicine一剂苦药The return of the poison-pill defence毒丸防御重出江湖POISON pills are again being dispensed by corporate America with all the enthusiasm of an exterminator in a rat-infested basement. The metaphorical rodents nowadays are not just hostile bidders—the pests that the poison-pill defence was designed to exterminate, back in the 1980s—but in some cases shareholders simply trying to change the way companies are run.在束手无策的鼠患下,美国公司再次祭出了“毒丸”这项的杀招。在上世纪80年代,“老鼠”仅表示资本市场上的恶意收购者,而这也是毒丸防御系统最初的针对目标。但在如今的某些情况下,“毒丸”所对付的对象也转向了一些试图改变公司营运方针的股东。In a typical poison-pill scheme, the board of a company makes a rule that if anyone buys more than a certain percentage of its shares, it will issue lots of stock to all other shareholders, dramatically reducing the first investors stake. In Britain, which has long taken a more positive view of hostile bids, poison pills are all but banned. In America, the courts have repeatedly held them to be legal. But they had become scarcer in recent years, as takeovers dried up and shareholders got some schemes dismantled. Now, Mamp;A is booming, activist investors are back on the warpath and defences are being rebuilt.在一般的情况下,实施毒丸防御的公司,由公司董事会事先通过一项股权摊薄条款,一旦出现收购者收购公司一定比例的股份,即触发该条款生效,使公司原有股东可以较低的价格获得公司大量股份,从而稀释收购方的股份。在英国,人们对待恶意收购的行为是比较积极的,因此毒丸防御成为了明令禁止的条款。而在美国,法院则三番五次地站出来为毒丸防御的合法性背书。但由于近年来收购案的减少以及公司股东们对阴谋的沉着应对,使用“毒丸”的情况也愈发罕见。如今,随着企业并购案的迅猛增长,活跃的投资者重返战场,这也意味着股东们的防御计划也得随之重启。On June 28th the board of American Apparel, a clothing retailer, enacted a poison-pill scheme. It is seeking to avert a less-than-friendly takeover by its former boss, Dov Charney, whom the board had removed ten days earlier over some as-yet unspecified allegations of misconduct. Mr Charney has sealed a partnership with Standard General, a hedge fund, with the help of which he now controls a 43% stake.6月28日,装零售商美国饰的董事层实施了毒丸防御计划。美国饰正极力避免一场不太友好的收购,而其收购方正是该公司的前任老板多夫·查尼。正是在十天前,多夫·查尼由于一些至今仍未指明的不当行为被公司逐出了管理层。查尼先生已与基金公司Standard General达成了合作协议,而目前在后者的帮助下,他已经控制了美国饰43%的股权。The previous day a lawsuit over the poison pill adopted by Allergan, best known for its Botox anti-wrinkle treatment, was settled out of court. It had been brought by Pershing Square, a fund run by one of the most prominent shareholder activists, Bill Ackman. He won an agreement from Allergan that its defences would not be triggered by his collaboration with other shareholders to call a special meeting to elect new board members.先前的一宗与肉毒素生厂商美国爱力根(Allergan)有关的毒丸防御案件当中,矛盾最终在庭外得到了解决。由活跃投资人威廉·阿克曼执掌的资产管理公司潘兴广场对冲基金正是本案中的收购方。在与爱力根股东会面的特别会议中,阿克曼与其他股东的意见达成了一致,通过该会议选举出了新任的董事会成员,从而避免了一场毒丸防御战。Pershing Square, which has just less than the 10% stake at which the poison pill is triggered, has teamed up with Valeant, another medical company, to bid for Allergan. Its defences may prevent them from pursuing their bid in the conventional way, by continuing to buy shares. But the out-of-court agreement opens the way for them to achieve their objective by putting new people on the board who would be more open to a takeover.在潘兴广场的持股比例快到10%之际,爱力根的董事层便实施了毒药防御计划,而前者则随即与另一家医疗公司威朗合作,对后者进行收购。通过定向增发股份的传统方法或许能够阻止他们常规手段的收购,但对于利用庭外协议往董事会中插入新成员的方法,使得收购方能够在更开放的董事持下达成控制的目标。Earlier last month Family Dollar, a discount retailer, created a poison pill after Carl Icahn, another activist, bought just under 10% of its shares amid speculation that he was planning to engineer a merger with Dollar General, a competitor. And News Corporation renewed its poison-pill scheme, allowing Rupert Murdoch and his family, with their 39.4% stake, to fend off any attempt to take over the company now it has been split from 21st Century Fox, its former entertainment arm.在上月的早些时候,折扣零售商家庭美元在投资商卡尔·伊坎购入不到10%的股权的情况下,便实施了毒丸防御计划。据猜测,伊坎正准备推动家庭美元与另一家竞争对手达乐公司进行合并。与此同时,和21世纪福克斯公司正式分家了的新闻集团正通过改变自身的毒丸防御计划,允许鲁伯特·默多克和他的家族成员以合计39.4%的股份,与外来收购方进行对抗。But these days some activists do not want to take over a firm, just to create a sort of “loyal opposition” to the board, leaving it largely intact while pressing it to change strategy. Earlier this year Sothebys, an auction house listed in New York, adopted a poison pill to fend off attempts by Dan Loeb, another activist, to win representation on the board and shake up the firm.但最近部分投资者并没有想要去控制一家公司,只是在董事会当中创造一种“少数反对”的因子,在保持管理层完整的情况下迫使公司改变自身的经营战略。而在今年的早些时候,纽约苏富比拍卖行接受了一项毒丸防御条款,以阻止激进投资者丹·罗卜赢得董事会的席位,从而动摇公司的根基。Mr Loebs fund, Third Point, went to court seeking a ruling that it was exempt from the 10% trigger, so it could buy more shares. In May a judge in Delaware rejected its request, arguing that a bigger stake would give the fund “negative control” over Sothebys, whatever that may mean, even though he acknowledged it would “not have an explicit veto power”. Nevertheless, Sothebys later agreed to give board seats to Mr Loeb and two colleagues.罗卜领军的避险基金第三点,向法院提起了诉讼,要求自身豁免10%的毒丸防御,进而购入更多的股份。在五月,一位特拉华州的法官回绝了该项请求。虽然法官明白罗卜并没有得到“明确的否决权”,但他认为更大份额的股权会令罗卜有能力对苏富比实施“负面影响的控制”,且不论这种控制的具体方式。尽管如此,罗卜最终还是为自己以及他的两位同事拿下了三个董事席位。Despite this and Mr Ackmans success in the Allergan legal settlement, the ruling over Sothebys suggests that poison pills may be used to hinder not just full takeovers but attempts by activists to force a change in strategy. Lucian Bebchuk, a Harvard law professor and campaigner for corporate-governance reforms, calls this “pernicious”: the board would be seeking to stifle legitimate debate among the owners of the company by making it hard to build a majority for change. Mr Bebchuk was an author of a study that examined the roughly 2,000 activist interventions at companies between 1994 and 2007, which found that they typically led to an improvement in the companies operating performance in the following five years.除了上述案例以及阿克曼先生成功在爱力根公司达成的合法协议外,股东们对苏富比公司的控制表明,毒丸防御不仅仅在对抗全面收购的收购方,同时也在阻碍着投资方对公司经营战略的影响。哈佛法学院教授卢西恩·拜伯切克,同时也是一位公司治理改革运动的倡导者,认为这样的情况是“有害的”:董事会通过对形成赞成改革群体的限制,从而扼杀了合法的公司内部改革争论。在拜伯切克先生之前的研究里,粗略地对大约2000位投资者在1994年至2007年间的公司事务干预进行统计,结果发现这些投资者显然都能带领公司在接下来的五年内实现运营表现的提升。No doubt delighted that the poison pill has made a comeback, Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen amp; Katz, the law firm that invented it, has also been seeking to make things harder still for activists by proposing a rule that anyone building a stake of 5% or more in a firm must disclose it within one day, not ten as now. So far the Securities and Exchange Commission is showing little interest. Indeed, its chairman, Mary Jo White, has argued that activists attempts to jog boards are not always a bad thing.毫无疑问地,毒丸防御强势回归,而发明了这一条款的Wachtell, Lipton, Rosen amp; Katz律师事务所也在持续地对外来投资者进行限制,该公司规定任何投资者只要持有股份达5%或者更多,那么这位投资者必须在一天内披露自己的身份,远比目前10%的行业标准要低。到目前为止,美国券交易委员会对这样条款反应冷淡。实际上,委员会主席玛丽·乔·怀特早已强调投资者积极想要跻身董事会的情况,并不总是一件坏事。 /201407/310874


文章编辑: 康典范
>>图片新闻