如果拉爾夫·勞倫公司沒有了拉爾夫
On Friday, U.S. retailer and clothing designer Ralph Lauren (RL) reported earnings for the fourth quarter. The results were better than Wall Street expected, although the company's tepid outlook has sent shares lower. As investors digest the news, here are three key questions for Ralph Lauren (the man, not the company) if we had five minutes with the CEO.
上週五，美國零售及時裝設計公司拉爾夫o勞倫（Ralph Lauren）公佈了第四季度業績。雖然平淡的前景造成公司股價下跌，但它的業績依然好於華爾街預期。如果投資者在消化業績數據時能和拉爾夫o勞倫（本人，而不是這家公司）待上五分鐘，他們就會向這位首席執行官提出三個關鍵問題。Here goes …
這些問題有：On licensing
關於授權經營
Ralph Lauren is a company that has successfully navigated through decade-long mega-cycles over the past 40 years, and it's starting a new one right now. Some cycles have been choppy, some were perfectly executed. But the most successful had to do with regaining control over designing and selling different labels and product classifications. The most favorable cycle -- by a country mile -- was the one that just ended. And though some might argue otherwise, there's no doubt in our mind that it did in fact end.
拉爾夫o勞倫公司在過去40年中經歷了幾個爲期十年的大週期，現在正要進入一個新的週期。有些週期起伏不定，有些則完成得很完美。但最成功的莫過於重新掌控各類品牌和產品的設計與銷售。最有利的週期（遠遠超過其他週期）剛剛結束。雖然有些人不這麼認爲，但在我們看來這個週期已經毫無疑問地結束了。The strongest cycles were when the retailer was taking back control of its content (as opposed to licensing it out). For example, taking back a handbag license when the licensee only generated $100 million in sales on what should have been a billion dollar business. Or taking back a $400 million label from Jones Apparel Group when Jones was generating a 28% margin and only paying Ralph Lauren 7%. There are over a dozen examples. But with Ralph Lauren taking back the Chaps label from PVH/Warnaco, there are officially no more meaningful licenses the retailer can pull back in house.
最強勁的週期是公司收回內容控制權（而非對外授權）的時候。例如，手提包業務的規模原本應該達到幾十億美元，如果被許可人的銷售額只有1億美元，公司就會收回授權。或者瓊斯服裝集團（Jones Apparel Group）的利潤率達到了28%，拉爾夫o勞倫卻只能獲得前者7%的利潤，它也會收回這個價值4億美元的品牌。還有很多這樣的例子。但從PVH/ Warnaco公司收回Chaps品牌之後，拉爾夫o勞倫已經沒有規模較大的授權可以收回了。This matters because these license acquisitions are some of the most accretive deals we've seen in retail -- and that's not just because the acquisition costs for Ralph Lauren have usually been zero. While the retailer regained control of its content, we saw return on net operating assets go from 13% to 26% -- making Ralph Lauren one of the highest return retailers in its segment of retail.
這一點很重要，因爲收購這些授權是我們在零售行業見到的增值能力最強的活動，而且這不只是因爲拉爾夫o勞倫的收購成本通常爲零。重新獲得內容控制權後，我們發現這家公司經營性資產的淨回報率從13%升至26%，從而使拉爾夫o勞倫成爲這個零售細分市場中回報率最高的零售商之一。Question:Ralph Lauren is starting off a new cycle where it has to invest significant capital to grow. The opportunities are there, we think. But there's a real capital cost that needs to be put against these ideas. Is it mathematically possible for these new initiatives to be higher return than the slam-dunk growth opportunities the retailer has had over the past 10 years? If not, how should we think about the trajectory of financial returns? If returns go down, the multiple probably is not going up.
問題：拉爾夫o勞倫正要進入一個新的週期，必須投入大量資金來實現增長。我們認爲機遇是存在的，但要考慮到實際的資本成本。從數學角度而言，這些新舉措的回報率有沒有希望超過10年來的高增長機遇爲拉爾夫o勞倫帶來的回報率？如果不能，我們對財務回報率應該有怎樣的預期？如果回報率下降，估值倍數就很可能不會上升。On succession planning
關於繼任計劃There are only seven CEOs in the 500 companies listed in the Standard & Poor's Index who are 74 or older. Ralph Lauren is one of them. Interestingly enough, this year with the pseudo-retirement of longtime second-in-command Roger Farrah (who has been critical to the retailer's growth trajectory), Lauren is taking a greater role in the organization as opposed to the diminishing role one might expect from a 74-year-old CEO. We're okay with that for one reason -- and that's the enhanced responsibilities given to chief financial officer Chris Peterson, who added chief accounting officer to his role this year. We think that Peterson is every bit the rock star that Farrah was.
標普500指數（S&P 500）的成分股公司中，只有七位首席執行官的年齡達到或超過了74歲，而拉爾夫o勞倫就是其中之一。有趣的是，隨着這家公司長期以來的二把手羅傑o法拉（一直是公司增長的關鍵人物）今年進入“假退休”狀態，人們或許會認爲，74歲的首席執行官勞倫的作用也會不斷下降。但實際情況正好相反，勞倫開始發揮更重要的作用。我們認爲這樣做沒問題，原因是首席財務官克里斯o彼得森將承擔更大的責任，而且會在今年兼任首席會計官。我們認爲彼得森與法拉如出一轍，都是“搖滾明星”式的管理者。But what we don't know is what the company will look like in a Ralph-less state. We understand why the company is unlikely to openly discuss succession. Few companies do. But we don't necessarily need to know its plan -- we just need to know that it has one. That's where we're unsure about Ralph Lauren.
但我們還不知道，如果缺少拉爾夫，這家公司會陷入什麼樣的狀態。我們理解爲什麼這家公司不太可能公開討論繼任者問題。很少有公司這樣做。但我們不一定要知道這項計劃的內容，我們只需要知道公司存在這樣的計劃。在我們看來，這就是拉爾夫o勞倫公司的不確定之處。We can't imagine that the CEO starts off every board meeting saying, "Let's talk about who's going to take my job." Also, unlike other iconic majority holders in a dual-class structure company -- like Phil Knight at Nike (NKE), who exited gradually and gracefully -- Ralph remains critical to product design and the strategic direction of the brand.
身爲首席執行官，拉爾夫o勞倫不可能在每次董事會議開始時都說：“大家討論一下我的繼任者問題吧。”此外，與其他雙層股權結構公司中的標誌性大股東——比如逐步優雅地淡出耐克（Nike）的菲爾o奈特——不同的是，拉爾夫對產品設計和品牌戰略方向仍然發揮着至關重要的作用。So on one hand, we absolutely want him to remain in his current role. But on the other, we need to gain some confidence that the company will not miss a beat in the event that we wake up one day and Ralph Lauren is no longer a part of the company he built.
因此，一方面我們當然希望他繼續擔任CEO；而另一方面，我們需要在某種程度上相信，即使有一天拉爾夫o勞倫離開了，這家公司也不會亂套。Question:So the question for Ralph is whether he has given the board a mandate to go external for the next CEO, or if it will come from within? If the latter, will Ralph hand the keys over to David Lauren (EVP marketing) as his legacy? The question for Peterson, Nemerov, Farrah and the rest of the "Office of the Chairman" is whether or not they have confidence that a succession plan actually exists? This seems like a bogus question, but it's one we need to be crystal clear on for a company with $13 billion in equity value and has one holder who accounts for over 60% of the voting power.
問題：所以向拉爾夫提出的問題是，他是否已經授權董事會在外部尋找下一任首席執行官，還是會從內部選出接班人？如果是後一種情況，拉爾夫是否會選擇大衛o勞倫（營銷執行副總裁）作爲其繼任者？向彼得森、首席運營官內梅羅夫、法拉和“董事長辦公室”其他成員提出的問題是，他們是否相信確實存在繼任計劃？這似乎是個僞命題，但鑑於這家公司的權益價值爲130億美元，而且有一位投票權超過60％的股東，所以我們必須清楚地瞭解這個問題。On your pile of cash
關於手頭現金的堆壘Ralph Lauren today has never had this much cash before, which happens to come at a time when there are fewer acquisition opportunities than at any time in the past 20 years. Specifically, over the next five years, the company should generate nearly $7 billion in cash from operations, and maintenance capex of maybe $1.75 billion. Tack on another $850 million in dividends, another $1 billion in stock repurchases to offset the dilutive impact of options. That's about $3.6 billion, and leaves an extra $3.4 billion in cash -- on top of the $500 million in net cash you already have.
目前，拉爾夫o勞倫公司手中的現金規模前所未有，不巧的是，現在是20年來收購機會最少的時候。具體來說，在今後5年中，這家公司的經營活動應該會產生近70億美元的現金，而維持性資本支出可能爲17.5億美元，分紅可能需要8.5億美元，還有10億美元用於股票回購，以抵消期權的攤薄影響——共計36億美元左右。這樣，還剩下34億美元現金（而且它手頭已經有了5億美元淨現金）。Question:Will you push for the board (i.e. Ralph) to meaningfully step up stock repo activity? You'll get paid more for that than for building a war chest of cash. But the real question is how many high-return capital projects can you invest in to deploy that capital in a way that will accelerate top line growth and/or margin improvement?
問題：你會不會督促董事會（或者說拉爾夫）大力加強股票回購力度？這樣做的回報將超過持有越來越多的現金。但真正的問題是，有多少可供投資的高回報資本項目能讓你通過運用這些資金來提高收入增長率和/或利潤率？Bonus question on cyclical margin risk (knowing full well that we're already well over our theoretical 5-minute time limit)
關於週期性利潤率風險的附加問題（我們充分意識到，現在已經遠遠超過了假設的五分鐘時間限制）About 40% of your cash flow comes from U.S. department stores. While that is down materially from retail and international sales were both in their infancy, it's still a big pill to swallow. Your real estate and positioning within department stores is probably the most defendable of any major brand. But one fact remains -- the department store group as a whole just completed year five of a margin expansion cycle and is now sitting at peak margins. There has never been a margin expansion cycle that's lasted longer than ... you guessed it ... five years.
你們約40%的現金流來自美國的百貨公司業務。雖然這遠低於零售業務產生的現金流，而且國際銷售也處於起步階段，但這仍是一個大問題。雖然在所有大品牌中，貴公司的不動產和在百貨公司領域的定位很可能具有最強的防禦能力，但依然存在這樣一個事實，那就是百貨公司業務的整體利潤率剛剛度過了上升週期的第五個年頭，現在的利潤率正處於最高點；而且正如大家所想到的那樣，此前還沒有哪個利潤率上升週期能延續五年以上的時間。Question:If we see margins correct in your U.S. wholesale channel, do you think that the macro factors causing the decline would also hit your retail business? Do you think you can sustain margin even in the event of a broader industry margin correction? What levers do you have to pull to help you deliver?
問題：如果我們發現貴公司美國批發渠道的利潤率回落，你覺得導致它下降的宏觀因素是否也會影響你們的零售業務？你認爲在整個行業的利潤率出現滑坡的情況下，你們是否還能保持利潤率水平？需要通過哪些手段來幫助你們實現這個目標？（財富中文網）Brian McGough is Managing Director and Retail Sector Head at Hedgeye Risk Management.
作者是金融研究機構Hedgeye Risk Management董事總經理兼零售行業負責人。
