M20:33
嗯，我是这么看的。
Well, I would say this.
按我个人的看法，最离谱的薪酬，不一定就是数字最大的那些。
In my own view, the most exorbitant are not necessarily the biggest numbers.
真正让我不舒服的是，公司花很多钱去买平庸的表现，而这种事发生得实在太频繁了。
What really bothers me is when companies pay a lot of money for mediocrity, and that happens all too often.
不过，比如说在我们的子公司里，如果是为卓越的业绩支付很高的报酬，我们是完全没有意见的。
But we have no quarrel in our subsidiaries, for example, for paying a lot of money for outstanding performance.
我的意思是，这笔钱我们能赚回来，回报能到一比十、二十，甚至五十。
I mean, we get it back 10 or 20 or 50 for 1.
同样，在上市公司里，我们也认为，过去有一些经理人，现在也有一些经理人，他们能把一家公司的市值带到比换成几乎任何其他人都高出很多很多很多个十亿美元的水平。
And similarly, in public companies, we think that there have been managers, and are managers, who have taken companies to many, many, many billions of market value more than would have happened with virtually anyone else.
而他们有时候也会因此拿很多钱。
And they sometimes take a lot of money for that.
有时候，像 Cap Cities 的 Tom Murphy 那样，你知道，这对他来说根本没什么影响。
Sometimes, as in the case of Tom Murphy at Cap Cities, you know, it just didn't make a difference to him.
我的意思是，他的表现完全配得上——本来完全配得上拿非常巨大的报酬，但那并不是——他自己会告诉你，他需要的钱已经够了，所以他根本不在乎去拿市场愿意给他的那么多钱。
I mean, he performed in a way that would justify— would have justified huge sums, but it wasn't— He would tell you that he had all the money he needed, and he just didn't care to take what the market might bear.
但让我不舒服的是那些不合理的薪酬制度，尤其让我反感的是，水平很一般的经理人却拿走特别大的一笔钱。
But I am bothered, I am bothered by irrational pay systems, and I'm particularly bothered when, when average managers take really large sums.
还有一种情况我也很反感，就是他们设计——或者让别人替他们设计——一些对公司来说成本非常高的制度，也许部分是为了让自己看起来更体面，因为他们自己想拿到巨额期权，所以他们就会觉得，应该把期权广泛发到整个公司。
I'm bothered when they design or have designed for them systems that are very costly to the company, maybe partly to make themselves look good because they want huge options themselves, so they feel that they give options widely throughout the company.
于是，他们就在全公司层面设计出一套不合逻辑的制度，原因只是他们想要一套对自己个人也同样不合逻辑、但有利可图的制度。
So they design a system that is illogical company-wide because they want one that's illogical for them personally.
但单纯是金额大这件事，本身并不会让我介意。
But large sums per se don't bother me.
我不是在说，某个具体的人到底该不该拿这么多钱，但我是——我并不介意为了业绩付出高额报酬。
I'm not saying, you know, whether any individual might want to take them or not, but I don't— I do not mind paying a lot of money for performance.
在体育界是这样，在娱乐业也是这样；但在商业领域里，那些打击率只有零点二零零的球员级别的人，还有那些根本吸引不来观众的表演者级别的人，却把这套机制运作成了——我的意思是，这个制度已经演变成了这样：他们当中的很多人也能拿走巨额报酬。我觉得这很荒唐，甚至可以说很下流，但我得告诉你，对这件事其实你也做不了太多。
It's done in athletics, it's done in entertainment, but in business the people who are the .200 hitters and the people who would not attract a crowd as an entertainer have worked it out so that— I mean, the system has evolved in such a way that many of them take huge sums, and I think that's obscene, but I can tell you there isn't much you can do about it.
这个制度会自我强化，而公司也确实会去看别的公司的——
The system feeds on itself, and companies do look at other companies'
proxy statements。
proxy statements.
每个 CEO 都会看，然后他们就会说，嗯，如果 Joe Smith 值 X，那我就至少应该更值钱。
Every CEO does, and they say, well, if Joe Smith is worth X, I have to be worth more.
他们还会对董事们说，你们肯定不会去雇一个低于平均水平的人吧，那你们怎么能给我发低于平均水平的薪酬呢？
And they tell the directors that certainly you wouldn't be hiring anybody that was below average, so how can you pay me below average?
然后顾问们再进来一层一层把薪酬往上抬，而这种事是不会自己消失的。
And the consultants come in and ratchet up the rewards, and it's not anything that's going to go away.
这就像我们之前谈到的竞选资金改革一样。
It's like we were talking about campaign finance reform earlier.
那些手握开关的人，也正是这个制度的受益者，他们从这套制度里拿到了巨大的好处，而且很可能是过度受益。
The people who are the— who have their hands on the switch are the beneficiaries of the system, benefiting enormously and perhaps disproportionately from that system.
Charlie？
Charlie?