CSU 是一个糟糕的投资选择，因为其有机增长率低（3%）且并购策略风险高；应等待其市值降至 300-400 亿加元。
逐段跳播
Constellation Software 的股价略有反弹，但仍远低于之前的高点。我已将其放入我的象限中的“押注”一侧，我明天会更新，但 Constellation 在这种情况下值得单独做一个视频。
Constellation Software stock has rebounded a little bit, but is still significantly down from the previous highs. I have put it on my bets side of the quadrant, which I'm going to update tomorrow, but Constellation in this case deserves a specific video.
如果你看收入增长，数字很好，增长 17%。你会说，“Sven，增长 17%，这家公司怎么会跌这么多？一切看起来都很好，现金流增长 10%，股东自由现金流增长 57%。”所有这些数字看起来都非常非常好。
If you look at revenue growth, great numbers, 17% growth. You're saying, "Sven, 17% growth, how can that business be down so much? Everything looks great, cash flows up 10%, free cash flows to shareholders 57%." All those numbers look really, really good.
然而，如果你去看有机增长，即仅靠自身增长的业务，那么情况就大不相同了。与去年同期相比，我们增长 3%，而截至 6 个月的期间增长 4%，这意味着最近一个季度放缓更多。
However, if you go to look at organic growth, just the businesses growing by themselves, then the story changes significantly. We have 3% growth compared to the same quarter For the 6 months ended 4%, which means there is more of a slowdown in the recent quarter.
当你只有 3% 的有机增长时，这立即改变了投资的整个面貌，因为那样的话，整个增长故事就变成了并购故事。
And when you have such an organic 3% growth, that immediately changes the whole aspect of the investment, because then the whole growth story is an M&A story.
然后我稍微看一下现金流，经营活动提供的现金流很好。过去 6 个月我们有 13.4 亿。然而，如果我将这些数字与用于收购业务的现金相比，那更多。因此，他们用于收购的支出超过了经营现金流。
And then I look a little bit at the cash flows, great provided by operating activities. We have a billion point three four the last 6 months. However, if I compare those numbers with the cash used in acquisition of businesses, that is more. Thus, they are spending more than the operating cash flows for acquisitions.
当他们收购所有这些业务时，这些业务如何在负营运资本的情况下运营？因此，在提供相关服务之前就提前收取维护费和其他收入。
As they're acquiring all these businesses, how are those businesses operating with negative working capital? So, collection of maintenance payments and other revenues in advance of the performance to the related services.
然后他们说，战略是这些业务在没有额外资金的情况下继续有机增长。但我们刚刚看到 3% 的增长，这可能意味着一半的业务以 6% 的速度增长，这可能是标准的通胀增长，而另一半则在下降。因此，这里并没有人们可能期望的那种有机增长。
Then they say that the strategy is that these businesses continue to grow organically without any additional funding. But we have just seen that 3% growth, that can mean that half of the businesses are growing at 6%, which could be a standard inflation growth, and half are declining. So there is not really that organic growth that one could expect there.
是的，人们说这些是垂直市场软件业务，有护城河，但 3% 并不那么值得护城河。而且他们不断收购。所以有些业务在增长，有些没有，但他们花费的超过了自由现金流。
Yes, and people say those are vertical market software businesses moats, but 3% is not that moat-worthy. And they just keep acquiring. So some businesses are growing, some are not, but they are spending more than the free cash flow.
我在这里遇到的另一个问题是，在这种激进的并购策略下，你简单地将所有现金流甚至更多用于购买其他业务，这意味着你的收购策略也不关心购买价格。那就是我买什么，我什么都买。所有卖家都乐于卖给你。
所以从商业角度来看，从价值投资的角度来看，这也是一个难以接受的事情。
Another issue I have here, when it comes to this aggressive M&A strategy, where you simply spend all the cash flow and more on buying other businesses, that means that also your acquisition strategy doesn't care about the purchase price. That's what I'm buying, I'm buying everything. All the sellers are happy to sell to you. So that's also an difficult thing to accept as a business perspective, from a value investing perspective.
沃伦·巴菲特是在正确的时间买入。Constellation Software 一直在买入。有时可能便宜，但不可能总是合适的价格。
Warren Buffett is about buying at the right time. Constellation Software buys all the time. Sometimes it can be cheap, but it can't be the right price all the time.
然后你说，但这些都是有护城河的利基关键软件。好吧。AI 的情况，有人说软件会受到影响，有人说不会。但也许这可能不仅仅是 AI 的问题。
Then you say, but these are niche critical software with moats. Okay. AI situation, some say software will be impacted, some say not. But perhaps it might not be just an AI issue.
他们收购了 Sabre Corporation 的 12% 股份，这是另一个预订酒店旅游软件平台，看起来非常糟糕，但好吧，那里一切都很稳定。
They have acquired 12% of Sabre Corporation, another booking hotels travel software platform that looks very ugly, but okay, everything is stable there.
然后，如果你进行这些更大的收购，竞争会更激烈。然后，我们又回到了价格问题。然后我说，这不是 AI 恐慌。这是规模恐慌。这是以任何价格买入情况的恐慌。
Then, if you go to make these bigger acquisitions, there is more competition. Then, we are back to the price story. And then I'm saying, this is not an AI scare. This is a size scare. This is a buying at whatever price situation scare.
没有护城河，因为如果你有护城河，你只需与经济体和通胀同步增长，即 5-6%，而不是 3%。即使 AI 只扰乱其中的 10%，你的有机增长就没了，然后它就变成了一个只是转轮子的并购机器，而没有为股东带来切实的价值。
There is no moat because if you have a moat, you can simply grow in line with the economy and inflation, which is 5-6% not 3%. Even if AI disrupts just 10% of that, there goes your organic growth, which then becomes an M&A machine just circling the wheel, but without delivering tangible value to shareholders.
所以，我不是说这会破产。我没有看到这些评论。这是一家伟大的企业。我只是说，这种商业模式有一个固有的风险，没有人愿意讨论，因为你不被允许。这家伙是个天才，之前的创始人和 CEO，都很棒。但是，我在看业务。
So, I'm not saying this will go bankrupt. I don't see the comments. It's a great business. I'm just saying that the business model has an inherent risk that nobody wants to discuss because you're not allowed. This guy is a genius, the previous founder and CEO, all great. But, I'm looking at the business.
好吧，它已经大幅复利增长。有时人们会过度兴奋，有时会恐慌。但是，当我看到这些数字时，净利润在增长。好吧。但然后，如果我看有机增长，如果我看一切，那么我说，净利润不包括减值。
Okay, it has compounded greatly. Sometimes people get overexcited, sometimes get panic. But, when I look at the numbers, net income is growing. Okay. But then, if I look at the organic growth, if I look at everything, then I say, net income doesn't include impairments.
如果购买价格预计在这些方面有某种收益，但该收益没有实现，那么你就必须减值。而且他们从不减值任何东西，因为他们是购买天才。值得怀疑。我们不知道他们在买什么。我们不知道细节。这些没有披露。
What if the buy price projects a certain gain on those, but that gain doesn't happen, then you have to impair. And they never impair anything because they are geniuses at buying. Questionable. We don't know what they are buying. We don't know the details. That's not disclosed.
好吧，他们有资产减记和重组成本，只有 4000 万。那不算什么。摊销和折旧，好吧，随着他们购买而增长。他们摊销无形资产。好吧，但该摊销是对还是错？这些是长期估计。
Okay, they have the asset write-downs and restructuring costs, just 40 million. That's nothing. Amortization and depreciation, okay, that grows as they buy. They amortize it, the intangible assets. Okay, but is that amortization right or wrong? Those are long-term estimations.
当涉及到长期估计时，正确或错误的微小变化都会对未来减值以及这里未披露的真正所有者收益产生重大影响。如果更深入地看，经营现金流很好。但所有经营现金流都用于增长。哪里？我们不知道这些收购、所有这些花费的数十亿资金，如果内生增长现在是3%，意味着两年前收购的业务已经在衰退，或者两年前收购的业务仍在以10%增长，但四年前收购的业务以20%衰退，因为现在的收购规模更大。
这显然是不一致的。我觉得很难在脑海中找到解决方案。
And when it comes to long-term estimations, just small changes in wrong or right has big impact on future impairments and the true owners' earnings that are simply not disclosed here. If I look deeper, okay, cash from operations, great. But all the cash from operations is used for growth. Where? We don't know whether the buys here, all the money spent, the billions here, if organic growth is now 3% means that the business bought 2 years ago is already declining or the business bought 2 years ago is still growing at 10%, but that 4 years is declining at 20% because now the buys are bigger. And that's simply an inconsistency. I find it very hard to find a solution in my mind.
自由现金流看起来很好，但这些自由现金流无论价格如何都需要再投资。我在这里看不到真正的价值复利。好吧，向我展示这个引擎正在创造如此多的价值，并且未来会创造更多价值。这缺失了。
Free cash flows look great, but those free cash flows need to be reinvested no matter the price. I'm missing here true value compounding. Okay, show me this engine is creating so much value and is creating more value in the future. That's missing.
他们购买的价值随时间下降，这意味着他们支付的价格极其重要，但这并未披露。这全是增长故事。净利润和摊销基于他们的估计，这是一个投资风险很高的商业模式。
The value of what they are buying is declining over time, which means the price they are paying is extremely important, but that's not disclosed. It's all a growth story. The net income and amortization is based on their estimations, which is a very risky business model to invest in.
并购本身就有风险，当被迫花费所有自由现金流时，无论价格如何。我的观点是，也许这很好，但很难知道真相，即这项业务背后的价值，因为它没有披露。
M&A okay, is risky by itself, and when forced we need to spend all the free cash flow, no matter the price. My point is, okay, maybe it's great, but it's hard to know the truth, the value behind this business because it's not disclosed.
当一切增长时，很好。当增长停止时，所有问题可能都会暴露。好故事，好说辞。也许他是对的。我不是说这是欺诈或什么。我只是说，它并非如其所呈现的风险太高了。
When everything grows, great. When it stops growing, then all the skeletons might come out. Great story, great spiel. Perhaps he's right. I'm not saying this is a fraud or something. I'm just saying the risk of not being exactly what it presents itself as is too high.
因此，作为价值投资者，我只会把它归入太难的一堆。此外，从估值角度看，一家内生增长3%的企业，不是他们通过并购实现的17%增长。3%的增长只是通胀。公平交易应该是10倍自由现金流。
如果是30亿加元，那就是300亿市值，是现在的一半。
Therefore, as a value investor, I'm just putting it into the too hard pile. Further, from a valuation perspective, a business organically growing at 3%, not growth 17% that they are engineering through M&A. 3% growth, that's just inflation. Fair trade would be at 10 times free cash flows. If it is 3 billion CAD, that's 30 billion market cap, that's half of where it is.
另一个需要考虑的风险。对我来说，这是一个糟糕的赌注。在300-400亿加元时叫醒我，然后我们再看看。
Another risk to think about. For me, it's a bad bet. Wake me up at 30-40 billion CAD, and then we'll see.
对于这些赌注，我将其排除。如果它涨跌，好吧。如果从这里下跌50%，我们可以再讨论。期待评论，那里会很激烈。我只是说商业模式的风险比AI恐慌更大。
When it comes to the bets, I'm canceling it out. If it goes up and down, okay. If it goes down 50% from here, we can discuss it again. Looking forward to the comments, it will be spicy there. I'm just saying the risk of the business model is bigger than the AI scare.
他说在等什么
这个频道对 $CSU 的历次判断
Value Investing with Sven Carlin, Ph.D. 在这只股票上只有这一条判断。