저자: ChamathPalihapitiya · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 챔스는 주식 바이백·배당이 장기 자본 배분을 훼손하며 단기 투기 세력과 경영진에게만 이익을 준다고 비판하며, 기업 실패 시 손실은 투기꾼이 져야 한다고 주장한다. [앞선 논쟁 및 자기 해명] 진행자는 챔스가 헤지펀드·투기꾼을 비판하면서 같은 날 NYSE IPO로 투기 세력에게 자금을 모으는 모순을 지적함. 챔스는 헤지펀드도 다양하며, IPO 투자자는 장기적이고 사려 깊은 투자자로 직접 선별했다고 답함. [기업 파산 및 손실 배분] 좀비 기업 지원 논리(항공사 실패 허용 여부)에 대해, 파산 시 직원은 해고되지 않고 연기금 수혜자와 직원이 오히려 지분을 더 많이 갖게 된다고 주장. 손실은 무담보 채권 및 주주 등 투기적 투자자가 지는 것이 게임의 규칙이며, 이들이 '가장 정교한 투자자'라 자처하므로 손실을 감수해야 한다고 함. [S&P500 자사주 매입·배당 비판] 2009년 이후 S&P500 500개 기업이 약 7조 달러를 자사주 매입과 배당에 썼고, 이는 지난 11년여간 이익의 90% 이상에 해당한다고 제시. 연준과 재정 부양으로 약 7조 달러가 기업에 이전된 셈이며, 이런 행위가 처벌이 아닌 보상받고 있다고 불만. [CEO의 역할: 자원 배분] CEO의 핵심 역할은 인적 자본과 재무 자본을 잘 배분하는 것이라고 정의. 자사주 매입·배당은 '쓸 곳을 모르겠다'고 선언하는 것과 같다고 비판. [IBM 사례] IBM은 지난 10년간 1,400억 달러를 자사주 매입에 썼으나 24분기 연속 매출이 감소했고, 전 CEO는 주식보상으로 1억 달러를 받음. [결론적 비판] 인센티브 구조가 단기 차익과 경영진·헤지펀드 이익에 치우쳐 기업의 회복력을 약화시켰다고 주장. [출연자 전망] 구체적 가격·지수 방향 예측 발언은 없음.
다듬은 글
and we'll continue to follow this deal for certain I do at this point they'll want to revisit the comments that you made with me a couple of weeks ago comments that at least on Twitter went viral we mentioned more than 10 million views I think we're up to 10 and a half million right now I'd like to rewatch part of that exchange Chamath and then I want to react to it on the other side just you keep saying propping up zombie companies are you are you arguing to let Airlines for example fail yes why I mean how does that make sense in the broader scheme of the economy because it's not because when you look at what it means this is why I'm saying like this is a lie that's been purported by Wall Street when a company fails it does not fire their employees it goes through a package bankruptcy right if anything what happens is the people who have the pensions inside those companies the employees of these companies end up owning more of the company the people that get wiped out are the speculators that own the unsecured tranches of debt or the folks that own the equity and by the way those are the rules of the game that's right because these are the people that purport to be the most sophisticated investors in the world they deserve to get wiped out but the employees don't get wiped out the pensions don't typically get like why does anybody do that just understand why does anybody deserve using your word to get wiped out from a crisis created like like this how does anybody deserve to get wiped out but just be clear like who are we talking about we're talking about a hedge fund that serves a bunch of billionaire family offices who cares let them get wiped out who cares they don't get the summer in the Hamptons who cares all right so that was a couple weeks ago and there's a lot in there and I want to go through some of it but you use you know statements like the Ally purported by Wall Street you talked about the speculators and you go after hedge funds but here you are Chamath on a day where you're doing an IPO at the New York Stock Exchange raising hundreds of millions of dollars essentially selling this IPO and marketing it to the very speculators that you rail against and I'm wondering how you can square how you square that on a day like today and this is the perfect day to have that conversation well I mean the first thing I would say is that's not true you know there are all kinds of different kinds of hedge funds and investment vehicles and what I will tell you is that a lot of my time in IPO a and again an IPO C was curating the list of investors that you know I would work with and when I look at the list of people that I essentially allowed into the deal at the amount said that they did these are because these are folks that have proven to be long-dated thoughtful people who can take risk but understand businesses look let's shift the topic for one second and we can come back to this what I want to talk about is why I made the comments that I did and why it touched such a nerve there is an interesting facts thought that you should know which is that since 2009 the 500 companies in the S&P 500 so these are the 500 best companies in the world they bought back seven trillion dollars of stock and or issue dividends okay though that turned out to be ninety more than ninety cents of every single dollar of profit that they made over the last 11 plus years the federal government as well as the Fed between monetary and fiscal stimulus combined have essentially transferred around seven trillion dollars now back to those said companies as well as you know companies slightly smaller than them and I think why I was frustrated is that I just think that that kind of behavior makes no sense and instead of being punished it has been rewarded and if you ask me why here's how I would explain it the job of a CEO especially of a public for-profit company is to be a fabulous allocator of resources and there are only two kinds of resources that a CEO controls that matter the first is human capital right the people that work inside of your company and the ideas that they have and the products that they make second is financial capital the money that you take to invest in great ideas to protect for the future to prepare for whether it's a pandemic or a shock or a recession or a competitor and the best capital allocators become the best CEOs so if you take a company like Facebook or Google there are very capital asset like business so a lot of their skill is in picking great people so takes up he picked Sheryl Sandberg he picked me he put us in positions to build that business he's a fabulous human capital allocator on the other end of the spectrum take buffett he has no human capital inside a berkshire it's all financial capital but he's a fabulous Capital ality or you take Jeff Bezos the case in the middle where he has both of those two things in all cases great CEOs are great allocators of capital when you do things like buybacks and dividends what you are essentially saying is you're throwing your hands up in the air and declaring to the world I do not know what to do with this money and instead of deciding to save that money to try to do M&A to try to invest in R&D to pay your employees more these people have given it back in an open market purchase now let's look at that for a second why is that a stupid idea well it's a stupid idea for two reasons the first is that it disproportionately only benefits the executives and the CEO and the board because those are the ones that disproportionately get most of the stock inside of a company and it disproportionately benefits those specific hedge funds that were agitating for that behavior in activity who take a short term position and allow themselves to participate in short-term profits and now what happens is the people that believe least in the company ie the people that sell the stock get rewarded and then who's left holding the bag the people that believe in the business let's take a specific example Scott and you can see how bad this is IBM over the last you know decade has spent a hundred and forty billion dollars on buybacks this is a company with a hundred billion dollar market cap the last CEO found a way to oversee 24 consecutive orders of revenue decline and that was still able to compensate herself a hundred million dollars of stock-based cop now you look at all of this kind of behavior and you can say how is this supported why aren't all these companies trying to figure out how to be more resilient and it turns out that the incentives were so skewed away from being resilient it was only focused on short-term profiteering for the sake of the managerial plastic and the hedge funds around that's of nobody else you
Comments 0