The Intrinsic Value Podcast 对 $TSM 的判断变化
所以如果我们从台积电开始,台湾半导体,那是你去年五月推荐的公司,它已经翻倍了。是的。乍一看,这很遗憾。我得说我们没有投资。这实际上只是我们这边的疏忽,因为我确实在节目结束时建议增加台积电的头寸,技术上你同意了,但显然我们忘了,这可能是因为你的同意还伴随着一段4分钟的风险独白,这可能也是我们最终没有跟进的原因。
So if we start with TSMC, Taiwan Semiconductor, that's a company you pitched in May of last year, and it's been a double. Yeah. At first glance, it is a bummer. I got to say that that we didn't invest in. It's actually just an oversight on our part because I did recommend adding a position in TSMC at the end of the episode and technically you agreed but apparently we just forgot about it which might be because your agreement also came with a 4-minute monologue of the risks which might be again why we didn't end up following up on it.
我本想在这里把它们都总结一下,但不如直接让你们听一听。这是大约一年前肖恩的发言。我就不卖关子了,先说我大概能抽出时间来做这件事,但为了把所有内容都摆出来,我可能会说一些我的担忧。
显然我们已经谈了很多关于中国的事情,在某种程度上,认识我的人可能会说,我在这里支持台湾、投资台湾在智识上有些不一致,因为我在不同场合说过我尽量避免投资中国公司,这不一定是因为我认为美中之间即将开战,而是因为那里似乎有一个更低的门槛,你可能会看到两国关系出现某种破裂,我可以想象一种情景,美中之间也许没有开战,但会有某种制裁被施加,即使这些中国公司至少从美国人的角度来看被低估了,你仍然可能受到惩罚,可能会有某种制裁,使你难以甚至非法持有——也许不是所有中国公司,而是特定的科技公司,比如如果你投资阿里巴巴和腾讯。
所以对我来说,对中国的真正担忧不是说这些公司有什么不好,甚至不是赌美中之间会开战,而只是说可能有一个更低的门槛,美国政府——作为美国人——让我投资这些公司变得痛苦。而对于台湾,我的看法不同,因为我不认为美国会制裁对台湾的投资。
所以那真的几乎必须是最坏的情况。所以我认为风险回报比有点不同,我认为风险实际上在中国公司那里更大一些,你面临战争的风险,但也有更低门槛的某种针对性制裁,可能影响你作为美国投资者的特定身份。
And I thought about summarizing them all here, but how about we just give you a listen. So, this is Sean from about a year ago. >> I'm not going to bury the lead. upfront I'll say I think I can get around to doing that but then just for the sake of of just putting everything out there. I will maybe say some of my concerns and obviously we've we've talked a lot about the China stuff and to some extent people who know me might say it's somewhat intellectually inconsistent for me to endorse Taiwan in investment in Taiwan here because at various points said that I tried to avoid Chinese companies and not necessarily because I think that they're going to you know there's imminently going to be a war between the US and China but there just seems like there's a lower threshold there where you know you could have some kind of fallout in relations where I could imagine a scenario where the US and China aren't maybe at war but there's some sort of sanctions being levied where even if these Chinese companies are undervalued at least from an American's perspective you could still be penalized and there could be some sort of sanctions that make it difficult if not illegal for you to own you know maybe not not even all Chinese companies but specific tech companies for example like if you're investing and Alibaba and Tenset. And so that for me is really the concern of China is not that there say anything bad about these companies or to even bet that there's going to be a war between the US and China, but just to say that there could be a lower threshold where the US government as for me as an American makes it painful for me to invest in these companies. And with Taiwan, I look at it differently because I don't think the US is going to sanction investing in Taiwan. And so truly it would have to almost be the worst case scenario. So I see the riskreward as a little bit different and where I see the risk is actually being a little bit greater with Chinese companies where you have the risk of a war but also you have the lower threshold of just some sort of like targeted sanctions that could impact you as specifically an American investor.
真正让我对这项投资感到困惑或犹豫的是,对于任何读过克莱顿·克里斯坦森《创新者的窘境》的人来说,我认为半导体行业正是他们用来作为变化最快行业例子的行业。而这也是巴菲特一直谈论的,当一个行业变化如此之快时,即使最宽的护城河也可能在相对较短的时间内消失。
如果你以50年的时间跨度投资一家公司,那么像半导体这样快速变化的行业,正是世界上最具活力的行业的教科书式例子,竞争优势可能最为短暂。这实际上比台积电的地缘政治局势更让我焦虑。
What really kind of puzzles me with this investment or gives me pause is to think about the fact that for anyone who's read the innovator's dilemma by Clayton Christensen, I think the semiconductor industry is literally the example that they use of the fastest changing industry. And this is something Buffett has always talked about of when an industry is so fast changing, you know, even the widest moes can disappear on relatively short time frames. If you're investing in a company on a 50-year time horizon, then you know a fast changing industry that like this like semiconductors is literally the textbook example of perhaps the most dynamic industry in the world where you know competitive advantages can be the most short-lived. That really gives me some almost more anxiety than the geopolitical situation with TSMC.
当时的估值相当有吸引力。你有一个业务,收入增长超过30%,利润率看起来像软件公司,而它只以20倍市盈率交易。
>> The valuation back then was quite attractive. You had a business basically grown revenue north of 30% margins that looked like a software company and it was trading at just 20 times earnings.
从商业角度来看,如果没有所有宏观风险,这是一门伟大的生意。也许我们真的应该简要介绍一下是什么让台积电在半导体领域如此特别。
>> From a business perspective without all the macro risks, it is a great business. And maybe we should actually give a brief pitch on what makes TSMC special in the semiconductor space.
而且真的没有其他人,没有竞争对手能在效率和产出上接近他们的水平。我记得你当时称他们拥有一个“Lola Palooa”护城河,竞争优势层层叠加。他们的工艺技术领先使他们基本上在每个新节点上都率先突破。
而他们在技术和工艺上的经验也带来了更高的良率,这在半导体中是很重要的。所以基本上就是制造芯片时更高的成功率。这就是它的意思。而因为这意味着台积电实际上能够交付进来的订单,整个科技行业都倾向于向他们下单。
And really nobody else, there's no competitors that come close to their level of efficiency and output. And I think you called what they have a Lola Palooa moat back then where competitive advantages stack on top of each other. And the process technology lead that they have caused them to basically be the first to every new node. And that experience with the tech and the process also leads to much higher yields which is an important thing in semiconductors. So basically a higher success rate when manufacturing chips. That's what that means. And because this implies that TSMC can actually deliver on the orders that come in, the entire tech industry favors ordering from them.
正如我们去年在推介中宣布的那样,台积电正在努力实现运营的国际化多元化。所以台积电已承诺,我想接近3000亿美元,用于在美国、日本和德国的工厂,其中绝大部分资金,我想大约2600亿美元,将投向美国,用于那些能够实际生产或制造那些新节点的工厂。
And just like announced in our pitch last year, TSMC is working on diversifying operations internationally. So TSMC has committed I think it's close to $300 billion for factories in the US, Japan and Germany with the vast majority of that money I think about 260 billion going to the US and towards factories that can actually generate or produce those new nodes.
但我的观点是,台积电翻倍的事实更多说明了当前的市场和人工智能的状态,而不是该公司的长期前景。而且我绝对不是看空它。我认为台积电是我个人研究过的最高质量的公司之一,我非常后悔没有在我的个人投资组合中至少建立一个仓位。
But my point is, the fact that TSMC doubled says more about the markets right now and the state of AI than about the long-term outlook for that company. And I'm definitely not bearish on it. I think TSMC was one of the highest quality companies that I personally looked at and I very much regret not at least building a position in my personal portfolio.
话虽如此,你之前的疑虑,我想说仍然都是有效的。不仅在政治方面,你还提到了半导体行业普遍的情况,以及历史上它并不是一个很好的投资领域。尽管你可以说台积电某种程度上改变了游戏规则。
That said, the doubts you had, I would say still are all valid. Not only on the political side, but you also brought up the semiconductor industry generally and how historically it has not been a great place to invest in. Although you could argue that TSMC sort of changed the game.
而且他们有其他架构,尤其是台积电的晶圆代工模式颠覆了行业。对于不了解晶圆代工模式的人,我不想在这里深入细节。再次,我们在节目说明中链接了今天讨论的所有公司推介,但看起来台积电短期内不会犯同样的错误。
它仍然生产较低端的节点。正如我在当时的推介中提到的,那些旧的、已完全折旧的晶圆厂相对于收入份额来说甚至比最前沿的节点更有利可图。所以,这里没有不设防的低地,让颠覆者可以借此进入。
And they had other architecture and especially TSMC's foundry model disrupted. And for everybody who doesn't know what the foundry model is, I don't want to go into the details here. Again, we link to all the company's pitches that we discussed today in the show notes, but it doesn't look like TSMC is making the same mistake anytime soon. It still produces the lower-end nodes. And as I mentioned in my pitch back then, those old fully depreciated FABs are even more profitable relative to the revenue share than the bleeding edge. So, there's no undefended low ground which a disruptor could use for an entry here.
而且只要基本面由为人工智能行业制造的芯片驱动,我认为通过低端市场被颠覆的风险似乎确实不太可能。对于像苹果或英伟达这样渴望顶级性能、愿意为前沿技术支付几乎任何价格的客户来说,没有“足够好”这一说。所以黄仁勋公开表示,台积电收多少他就付多少。
And as long as the fundamentals are driven by chips manufactured for the AI industry, I would say the risk of getting disrupted via the lower end does seem less likely. There's no good enough when it comes to customers like Apple or Nvidia who are desperate for top-end performance and are going to pay almost anything for the frontier. And so Jensen Hang publicly said he'll pay whatever TSMC charges.
对于像台积电这样的投资,情况有点不同,因为我们确实说过,让我们把它作为一个仓位。所以我可能会说,我们犯的错误是看待它有点过于二元化,即存在终极风险,但如果我们把它做成2%的仓位,如果真的发生最坏情况,我们能生存下来,而且如果它最终在比如说2到3年内涨了3倍,我们仍然能捕获足够的上涨空间。
除此之外,我的意思是,中国和台湾之间的最坏情况不仅会伤害台积电或中国股票,基本上所有美国大型科技股都会受到巨大打击,所有其他公司也是如此。
With investments like TSMC, it's a bit different because we literally said, let's make it a position. So I would probably argue that we made the mistake of looking at it a bit too binary as in there are terminal risks but if we make it a 2% position we would survive the worst case if it should actually come to that and we would still capture enough upside if it ends up being you know a 3x and let's say 2 or 3 years and beyond that I mean a worst case between China and Taiwan would not only hurt TSMC or Chinese equities but basically all US big tech would take a massive hit as well as all other companies.
也许像台积电这样的股票会随着时间推移而消化估值,而且在此期间不会出现重大下跌,但我不想今天押注于此。
Perhaps stocks like TSMC grow into the valuation over time and they won't see a major downturn in the meantime, but I wouldn't want to bet on that today.