M20:31
我以前也这么觉得。
I used to think so.
Apple 有一种非常了不起的消费产品，这一点你比我懂得多得多。
Apple has an incredible consumer product, which you understand a lot better than I do.
至于他们该不该回购股票，除非他们认为自家股票的交易价格低于内在价值，否则就根本不该回购。
Whether they should buy in their shares, they shouldn't buy in their shares at all unless they think that they're selling for less than they're worth.
如果股价低于内在价值，而且他们手里有钱，同时又看不到更有吸引力的收购标的，那他们就应该回购股票。
And if they are selling for less than they're worth and they have the money and they don't see an acquisition that's even more attractive, they should buy in their shares.
我觉得这一点非常——因为我认为，要找到那种对 Apple 真正有增益、而且规模还在五百亿、一千亿或者两千亿美元这个级别的收购，难度是极高的。
And I think that that's very— because I think it's extremely hard to find acquisitions that would be accretive to Apple that would be in the $50 or $100 billion or $200 billion range.
他们会做很多小型收购，而且，你知道，我很高兴看到他们在回购股票。
They do a lot of small acquisitions, and, you know, I'm delighted to see them repurchasing shares.
我们持有，大概就算两亿五千万股左右吧。
We own, let's say we own 250 million or so shares.
他们总股本，我想，大概是四十九亿两千三百万股左右，差不多这个数。
They have, I think, 4,923,000,000 or something like that.
所以你心里可以把它当成我们拥有其中的百分之五，但我觉得，随着时间过一点，我们可能什么都不做，就会变成拥有百分之六或者百分之七，因为他们在回购股票。
And mentally, you can say we own 5% of it, but I figure with, you know, with the passage of a little time, we may own 6 or 7% simply because they repurchase shares.
而我发现，如果你拥有的是一个非凡的产品和生态系统，而且未来还有很多事情可做，那我很喜欢这样一种情况：我们原本的百分之五，不管具体是多少，能在我们一分钱都不用再掏的情况下，增长到百分之六或者百分之七。
And I find that if you've got an extraordinary product and ecosystem and there's lots to be done, I love the idea of having our 5% or whatever it may be grow to 6% or 7% without us laying out a dime.
我的意思是，这在我们很多别的投资里都已经奏效过。
I mean, it's worked for us in many other situations.
但前提是，你得有一种非常、非常、非常特别的产品，拥有极其广泛的生态系统，而且这个产品还得非常稳定；同时，他们也找不到那种五百亿或一千亿美元规模、以稍微说得过去的价格就能买下来、并且真的能对现有业务形成增益的收购。
But you have to have some very, very, very special product, which has an enormously widespread ecosystem, and the product's extremely stable, and they're not going to find $50 or $100 billion acquisitions that they can make at remotely a sensible price that really become additive to that.
当然，他们也可能会找到，谁知道呢？
And they may find it, who knows?
但至少就我现在放眼去看，我看不到什么东西是对他们真正很有道理的——考虑到他们得付出的价格，以及他们能得到的东西。
But there's certainly, as I look around the horizon, I don't see anything that would make a lot of sense for them in terms of what they'd have to pay and what they would get.
相反，我倒是看得到一门他们了如指掌的生意，而在他们回购自己股票的时候，这门生意他们也许能、也许不能用一个有吸引力的价格买回来。
Whereas I do see a business that they know everything about and where they may or may not be able to buy it at an attractive price when they repurchase their shares.
这一点还有待观察。
That remains to be seen.
顺便说一句，这也是我一直觉得很有意思的一件事。
Incidentally, that's one thing that I always enjoy.
人们会说，哦，你这是在为自己持有的股票说话，或者类似这种意思。
People say, well, you're talking your book or something.
可如果从我们的立场来说，我们其实很乐意看到 Apple 的股价下跌。
If you talk from our standpoint, we would love to see Apple go down in price.
他们会——嗯，这么说吧。
And they're going to— well, just put it this way.
如果 Andrew、Charlie 和我是某家企业的合伙人，这家企业值三百万美元，那我们每个人就各自拥有一百万美元的权益；如果 Andrew 提出要以八十万美元卖掉他那三分之一的份额，而我们手头又有钱，那我们肯定会立刻抓住机会把他的份额买下来。
If Andrew and Charlie and I were partners in a business that was worth $3 million, so each of us had a million-dollar interest in it, if Andrew offered to sell out his one-third interest at $800,000, and we had the money around, we'd jump at the chance to buy him out.
我的意思是，这道理其实特别简单，但大家总是会把自己绕进去。
I mean, it's so simple, but people get all lost.
要是他们想要一百二十万美元，我们是不会付这个价钱给他们的。
And if you want $1.2 million for it, we wouldn't pay it to them.
这就是非常简单的算术，但在这些讨论里，大家往往会把这一点忽略掉。
It's very simple math, but it gets lost in all these discussions.
当然了，就像我说的，Tim Cook 会算这种简单的账，他大概也会算非常复杂的账。
And of course, like I say, Tim Cook can do simple math, and he'd probably do very complicated math too.
所以他们回购股票这件事，我们是非常赞同的。
So we very much approve of them repurchasing shares.