agency costs.
And there are two different kinds of agency costs. One, the guy favors himself at the expense of the shareholders, and the other is he’s — he does foolish things. Or he’s not trying to favor himself, he just is foolish by nature. Either way, it’s very costly to you, as the shareholder.
我们之前聊过代理成本。代理成本分两种截然不同的类型。
第一种，管理层牺牲股东利益来为自己谋私利；
第二种，即便他没想给自己捞好处，也会做出很多愚蠢的决策，纯粹是本性行事鲁莽、能力不足。
不管是哪一种，对股东来说都会造成巨大损失。
所以你必须从这两个人性维度去评判管理层，这一点至关重要。
2、五粮液管理层可能“坦诚”吗？
谈到管理层
巴菲特说
其实没那么复杂。总的来说，我们欣赏坦诚直率的人。
别人在刻意含糊其辞、回避问题的时候，我们通常都能看得出来；也能察觉出财报说辞里稍有不诚实、带有偏见之类的苗头。
和坦诚的人共事，一切都会简单得多。
But generally, we like people who are candid. We can usually tell when somebody’s dancing around something, or where their — when the reports are essentially a little dishonest, or biased, or something. And it’s just a lot easier to operate with people that are candid.
那么
未来
五粮液的管理层
能够做到candid吗？
3、五粮液可能开了一个“坏头”
60多万五粮液的股东
哭了
欲哭无泪
但是
如果
五粮液此番操作
安全过渡
那么
五粮液可能会
开了一个
“坏头”
巴菲特和芒格说他们很幸运
CHARLIE MUNGER: Averaged out, we’ve been very fortunate.
WARREN BUFFETT: Very lucky.
但是
五粮液的股东们
（大股东和中小股东）
都很不幸
45. “我们欣赏坦诚直率的人”
完整中英对照译文
巴菲特：哪边的问题？哦，后面那位。话筒好像没开，好了可以开始了。
听众：我是杰夫・约翰逊，来自俄克拉荷马州塔尔萨市，很荣幸来到现场。我有两个问题。第一，想请教二位怎么看：为什么财产意外险公司的投资者，历来愿意接受低于市场平均水平的回报率？第二个问题和您昨天的回答有关。您昨天说，直觉和主观预感完全不参与你们的投资决策。我想知道：您和芒格先生评判是否欣赏一个人时，会不会带有主观判断？你们又是如何判断，自己认不认可一家企业的掌舵人？
巴菲特：这个问题挺有意思。查理，第二部分你来回答吧？
芒格：我们之前聊过代理成本。代理成本分两类：一类是管理层损公肥私，牺牲股东利益为自己牟利；另一类是即便他没有私心，行事却十分愚蠢、能力平庸，属于本性糊涂。无论哪一种，对股东而言代价都极其高昂。所以你必须从这两个人性维度去审视管理层，这点至关重要。但反过来，有些生意的商业模式好到离谱，哪怕管理层荒唐胡闹，公司也完全扛得住。虽说我们都向往完美的管理者，但实际上我们投资过的公司，管理层也并非个个都完美无瑕。
巴菲特：确实是这样。总的来说，我们偏爱坦诚正直的人。有人刻意含糊其辞、避重就轻，或是财报说辞稍有不诚实、带有偏见，我们基本一眼就能看穿。和坦诚的人共事，做事会顺畅太多。其次我们喜欢头脑聪慧的人，倒不必是天才；还要专注主业、一心经营事业。道理一点都不复杂。市面上有一大群中间状态的管理者，我们对他们无感、不喜不恶；也有一类人，我们一眼就确定绝不愿与之合作；还有另一类人，我们打心底乐意和他们共事相交。
芒格：拉长整个生涯来看，我们一直都非常幸运。
巴菲特：说白了，就是运气太好了。
核心关键短语注释
1. property-casualty insurance 财产意外险（产险 + 责任险）
2. below-average type of returns 低于平均回报率
3. intuition / gut feeling 直觉、第六感、主观预感
4. lord of the castle 企业掌门人、核心管理层
5. agency costs 代理成本
6. favors himself at the expense of the shareholders 损股东而利己
7. foolish by nature 本性愚钝、行事糊涂
8. stand a lot of folly in the managerial suite 容忍管理层的诸多荒唐操作
9. candid 坦诚直率、正直敢言
10. dancing around something 含糊回避、绕圈子不直说
11. focused on the business 专注主业、深耕经营
12. a whole bunch of people in the middle 中间平庸的大多数人
13. don’t have any feeling on one way or the other 无好感也无恶感、态度中立
14. be associated with 合作、共事、打交道
15. Averaged out 长期综合来看、纵观一生平均而言
45. “We like people who are candid”
WARREN BUFFETT: Zone what? Oh, back there. I don’t think it’s on. OK.
AUDIENCE MEMBER: I’m Jeff Johnson (PH). I’m grateful to be here from Tulsa, Oklahoma. I have two questions. First, I was hoping you could explain, or offer an opinion as to why investors in property-casualty insurance companies are willing to accept traditionally belowaverage type of returns. Second question relates to an answer you gave me yesterday, that being that intuition or gut feeling has nothing to do in your — in making investment decisions. I was wondering if there is anything subjective in yours and Mr. Munger’s assessment of whether or not you like someone, and how it is that you determine whether or not you like the lord of the castle?
WARREN BUFFETT: Well. I don’t know. Charlie, do you want to answer that second part?
CHARLIE MUNGER: Well, we spoke about agency costs. And there are two different kinds of agency costs. One, the guy favors himself at the expense of the shareholders, and the other is he’s — he does foolish things. Or he’s not trying to favor himself, he just is foolish by nature. Either way, it’s very costly to you, as the shareholder. So, you have to judge those two aspects of human character, and they’re terribly important. And on the other hand, there are some businesses so good that they’ll easily stand a lot of folly in the managerial suite. And I — much as we like perfect people, I don’t think we’ve always invested with them.
WARREN BUFFETT: No. But generally, we like people who are candid. We can usually tell when somebody’s dancing around something, or where their — when the reports are essentially a little dishonest, or biased, or something. And it’s just a lot easier to operate with people that are candid. And we like people who are smart, you know. I don’t mean geniuses. But that — and we like people who are focused on the business. It’s not real complicated, but we generally — you know, there may be a whole bunch of people in the middle that we don’t really have any feeling on one way or the other, and then we see some that we know we don’t want to be associated with, and some that we know we very much enjoy being associated with.
CHARLIE MUNGER: Averaged out, we’ve been very fortunate.
WARREN BUFFETT: Very lucky.
