——本文2024年10月25日发布于FT中文网，英文原题为 Will TikTok campaigns help win the US presidential election?

A tragedy is in the making for EU economic policy if a misleading conclusion drawn from Mario Draghi’s recent productivity report is cemented. This is the paralysing belief that Europe will fall hopelessly behind the US in innovation unless it finds hundreds of billions in additional public subsidies — which politicians who pride themselves on their realism rush to dismiss as impossible.

如果从马里奥•德拉吉(Mario Draghi)近期撰写的生产力报告中得出的一个误导性结论被广为接受，欧盟经济政策将迎来一场灾难。这是一种导致人心焕散的观念：欧洲在创新方面将无望地落后于美国，除非拿出数千亿美元用于增加公共补贴——以具备务实精神为傲的政治家连忙声称，这是不可能的。

Draghi’s analysis is of course a lot more sophisticated than that. But where do the sources of the EU’s innovation gap really lie? A good place to start is a recent study of “how to escape the middle technology trap” by the European Policy Analysis Group.

德拉吉的分析当然比这复杂得多。但欧盟在创新上的差距究竟源自哪里？欧洲政策分析集团(European Policy Analysis Group)近期的一篇研究报告《如何脱离中等技术陷阱》(how to escape the middle technology trap)提供了一个很好的出发点。

It starts with the important fact that the EU subsidises innovation as much as the US. In both, public spending on research and development is about 0.7 per cent of their GDP. So this can’t explain America’s innovation advantage. R&D spending by private businesses, however, is almost twice as high in the US as it is in the EU (2.3 versus 1.2 per cent of GDP).

该报告首先提到一个重要事实：欧盟的创新补贴不比美国少。二者在研发上的公共支出都约为国内生产总值(GDP)的0.7%。所以这不能解释美国在创新上的优势。然而，以私营企业研发支出占GDP的比例计算，美国是欧盟的近两倍（分别为2.3%和1.2%）。

——本文2024年10月25日发布于FT中文网，英文原题为 Europe should take a digital leap across its innovation gap

Wealth creation benefits everyone. But when those who have do better than those who do not, luxury stocks — you would think — should outperform. Investors, however, should be focusing on a different sort of inequality. In the context of slowing luxury spending globally, the sector’s companies are increasingly divided between the haves and the have-nots. 

创造财富使每个人受益。但是，当富人比穷人过得更好时，奢侈品股——你会认为——应该表现出色。不过，投资者应该关注另一种不平等。在全球奢侈品消费放缓的背景下，该行业的公司越来越分为富人和穷人。

Hermès and Kering are a case in point. In a sector that has so far posted an organic revenue decline of 2 per cent, according to Luca Solca at Bernstein, Hermès defied the slowdown with an 11.3 per cent rise in third-quarter sales. Kering’s were down 16 per cent, with the flagship Gucci brand down a quarter. Following multiple profit warnings, the group led by François-Henri Pinault now expects full-year operating profits of €2.5bn — down almost half compared with last year. Such diverging fortunes are reflected in stock market valuations, with Hermes trading at almost three times Kering’s forward price/earnings multiple.

爱马仕(Hermès)和开云(Kering)就是一对很好的例子。根据伯恩斯坦的卢卡•索尔卡(Luca Solca)的说法，该行业迄今为止的有机收入下降了2%，而爱马仕第三季度销售额却增长了11.3%，逆势上涨。开云的销售额下降了16%，旗舰品牌古驰(Gucci)下降了四分之一。在多次发布盈利预警之后，这个由弗朗索瓦-亨利•皮诺(François-Henri Pinault)领导的集团现在预计全年运营利润为25亿欧元，几乎比去年下降了一半。这种不同的命运反映在股市估值中，爱马仕的市盈率几乎是开云的三倍。

In part, this highlights the two companies’ different customer bases. With handbags costing tens of thousands of pounds, Hermès caters to the really wealthy, rather than the merely very well-off. These tend to fare better in a slowdown. Gucci’s streetwear phase, meanwhile, attracted a whole host of younger and potentially less affluent customers. Gucci’s troubles may also reflect a more complex brand DNA. Known for its over-the-top designs, it is more prone to fashion risk when the zeitgeist turns against it. 

这在一定程度上凸显了两家公司不同的顾客群。爱马仕的手袋价格高达数万英镑，主要面向真正的富裕阶层，而不仅仅是非常富有的人。在经济放缓的情况下，这些人的日子往往会好过一些。而古驰的街头服饰则吸引了大批年轻的但可能不太富裕的顾客。古驰的困境也可能反映了更复杂的品牌基因。古驰以夸张的设计著称，当潮流与它背道而驰时，它更容易面临时尚风险。

——本文2024年10月25日发布于FT中文网，英文原题为Kering and Hermès tell tale of luxury inequality

Tesla’s rising profitability sets it apart among carmakers. Rivals such as Volkswagen and Stellantis have warned of a squeeze from weaker demand and rising costs. General Motors’ electric vehicles are still lossmaking. But there is another thing that sets Tesla apart: against its peers, it is barely a carmaker at all.

特斯拉(Tesla)不断上升的盈利能力，使其在汽车制造商中脱颖而出。大众汽车(Volkswagen)和斯特兰蒂斯(Stellantis)等竞争对手近期纷纷警告称，需求减弱和成本上升对其造成挤压。通用汽车(General Motors)的电动汽车业务仍处于亏损状态。但还有一点让特斯拉与众不同：与同行相比，它几乎算不上一家汽车制造商。

True, Elon Musk’s company reported $20bn of vehicle sales in the third quarter. In a pleasant surprise for investors, the cost of making them fell to an all-time low. Tesla remains a long way from the 20mn car sales target it once set for 2030, but it is on course to meet the more modest 1.8mn analysts expect this year, according to Visible Alpha. Musk said his “best guess” was that output could expand by up to 30 per cent next year.

没错，埃隆•马斯克(Elon Musk)的这家公司报告在第三季度实现200亿美元的汽车销售额。令投资者感到惊喜的是，制造成本降至历史最低水平。特斯拉距离其曾经设定的2030年汽车销量达到2000万辆的目标还很遥远，但据Visible Alpha称，该公司今年有望达到较为适度的分析师预期：180万辆。马斯克表示，他“最好的猜测”是明年产量可能增长30%。

A rising share of Tesla’s revenue and profit, though, comes from other things. One is selling carbon credits to other carmakers. That brought in $2.5bn of revenue in the past year, equivalent to about a fifth of the company’s total operating cash flow. The other is Tesla’s blossoming battery and solar panel business, growing at 52 per cent year on year, and with higher gross margins than its cars.

不过，特斯拉营收和利润中越来越大的份额来自其他方面。其中一项是向其他汽车制造商出售碳信用额度。这在过去一年带来25亿美元的营收，相当于该公司总运营现金流的大约五分之一。另一项是特斯拉蓬勃发展的电池和太阳能电池板业务，同比增长52%，毛利率高于其汽车业务。

——本文2024年10月25日发布于FT中文网，英文原题为 Tesla is not a car company but it does a good impersonation