精译求精系列之七：优步的主要竞争对手Lyft有什么独特之处（下）？

The VC Pricing

风投定价

I took at look the mostrecent VC investments in ride sharing companies and what prices they translateinto.

我看了一下风投集团最近投资的拼车服务公司，并整理如下。

*Sources: Public News Reports, 

来源：Public News Reports, 
The danger in extrapolating VC investments to overall value, which is what thepress stories that report the overall prices do, is that the only time that aVC investment can be scaled up directly to overall value is if it comes with nostrings attached. Adding protections (ratchets) or sweeteners can very quicklyalter the relationship, as I noted . 

根据媒体新闻报道的定来推断风投公司对于拼车公司的总体估值是有一定风险的，风险就在于只有当风投公司感到完全无拘无束时他们才会扩投。正如我在Unicorns那篇文章里提到的一样，只要给点甜头他们的关系就不一样了。

The Drivers of Price 

Notwithstandingthat concern, is there a logic to this pricing? In other words, what makes Ubermore than three times more valuable than Didi Kuaidi and Didi Kuaidi six timesmore valuable than Lyft? To answer these questions, I pulled up the statisticsthat I could find for each of these companies:

司机的定价

尽管我们现在有这种担心，但是这个定价是否有其逻辑呢？换句话说，为什么优步的估值是滴滴快滴的三倍而滴滴快的又是Lyft的六倍呢？为了回答这些问题，我把收集到的各公司的数据整理如下：

* The revenues are estimated using the revenueslice that these companies report, but with customer give aways and othermarketing costs, the actual revenues were probably lower.
表中的收入是根据各公司上报的收入分成推测的，但是考虑到用户的流失和其他的市场成本，实际收入可能会低一点。
Note that almost all of these numbers come from leaks, guesses or judgmentcalls, and that there are many items where the data is just not available. Forinstance, while we know that Ola, GrabTaxi and BlaBlaCar are all losing money,we do not know how much. At the risk of pushing my data to breaking point, Icomputed every possible pricing multiple that I could for these companies:

本文大部分数据是通过泄露，推测和个人判断得出的，同时欠缺很多项目的数据。比如，虽然我们知道Ola，GrabTaxi和BlaBlaCar都在亏本，但是具体如何我们是不得而知的。冒着把我的数据推向破发点的风险，我为以下这些公司计算出了每一项可能的定价：

On apure pricing basis, Lyft looks cheap on every pricing multiple, and Uber looksexpensive on each one, perhaps providing some perspective on why Carl Icahnfound Lyft to be a bargain, relative to Uber. Didi Kuaidi looks expensive onany measure other than gross billing and GrabTaxi looks cheap on some measuresand expensive on others.  It is worth noting that these companies havedifferent revenue models, with Lyft and Uber hewing to the 20% slice model,established in the US and Ola (which has more of a taxi aggregating model), atleast according to the reports I read, follows the same policy. BlaBla ismostly long-distance rides and gets about 10-12% of the gross billing asrevenue, GrabTaxi gets only 5-10% of gross billings, Didi Kuaidi, which had itsorigins in a taxi hailing app, gets no share of a big chunk of its revenues andBlaBlaCar derives its revenues more from long distance city-to-city trafficthan from within city car service. Given how small the sample is and how fewtransactions have actually occurred, I will not attempt to over analyze thesenumbers, other than wondering, based on my post on corporate names, how muchmore an umlaut would have added to Über's hefty price.

在纯定价的基础上，Lyft看上去在每一项的价格上都很便宜，而优步每一项都很贵，这也可能解释了为什么Carl Icahn认为相对于优步来说，Lyft这个公司更划算。滴滴快滴除了在所谓毛收入这一项上有价格优势在其他别的方面都很贵，而Grabtaxi则贵贱不等。值得注意的是这些公司都有其不同的收益模式，从美国发展起来的Lyft和优步坚持20%分成模式；而Ola（这个公司和出租车的模式相类似），至少根据我从新闻上所读到的来看，是遵循着相同的政策的。BlaBla主要运营长途车业务，从所谓毛收入中获利10%-12%，Grabtaxi只获利5%-10%，而前身为出租车呼叫软件的滴滴快的根本就不获利；比起市内专车业务，BlaBlaCar从城际专车业务获利更多。考虑到目前样本规模很小同时交易数量也不多，我不会去过度解读这些数据，但我真正好奇的是，根据我那篇关于公司名称的文章，如果公司改名叫Über的话，那么加上的这个元音能给到底公司的估值加价多少呢？

With all of these companies, the prices paid have risen dramatically in thelast year and a half and I believe that this pricing ladder is driven by Uber'ssuccess at raising capital. In fact, as Uber's estimated price has risen from$10 billion early in 2014 to $17 billion last June to $40 billion at the startof 2015 to $51 billion this summer, it has ratcheted up the values for all ofthe other companies in this space. That should not be surprising, since thepricing game almost always is played out this way, with investors watching eachother rather than the numbers. As with all pricing games, the danger is that adrop in Uber's pricing will ratchet down the ladder, causing a mark down ineveryone's prices.

在去年一年半的时间里，所有公司的价格都疯涨了不少，我坚信这样的阶梯价是由于优步大大提高了资金成本。实际上，因为优步的估值从14年初的100亿涨到了同年6月时的170亿，又从15年初的400亿涨到今年夏天的510亿，所以所有拼车服务公司的估值也相应水涨船高了。其实这也在意料之中，毕竟这种套路的价格战已经被玩烂了，而且投资者们更关注对方而不是枯燥的数字。在所有的价格战中，潜在风险就是一旦优步的阶梯价有所下跌就会导致各大公司纷纷减价。

Bigversus Small Narratives 

宏伟的发展规划和谨慎的发展规划的对决

If narrative drivesnumbers and value, which is the argument that I have made in valuing Uber andLyft in these last two posts, the contrast between the two is also in theirnarratives. Uber is a big narrative company, presenting itself as a sharingcompany that can succeed in different markets and across countries. Givingcredit where it is due, Travis Kalanick, Uber’s CEO, has been disciplined instaying true to this narrative, and acting consistently. Lyft, on the otherhand, seems to have consciously chosen a smaller, more focused narrative,staying with the story that it is a car service company and further narrowingits react, by restricting itself the US. 

正如我在这两篇估值报告里提到的一样，如果发展规划驱动了数字和估值，那么笔者也会在两家公司的发展规划方面作出对比。优步是一家可以将自己定位成在世界各个不同领域都能取得成功的大公司。TravisKalanick，优步的CEO，就坚信这一点，同时在策略上也始终如一的慢慢推进。而Lyft，似选择了一条小而专注的道路，专心只做拼车服务，同时未来也只专注于美国本土市场，不会扩大其影响力。

The advantage of a bignarrative is that, if you can convince investors that it is feasible andreachable, it will deliver a higher value for the company, as is evidenced bythe $23.4 billion value that I estimated for Uber. It is even more important inthe pricing game, especially when investors have very few concrete metrics toattach to the price. Thus, it is the two biggest market companies, Uber andDidi Kuaidi, which command the highest prices. Big narratives do come withcosts, and it those costs that may dissuade companies from going forthem. 

规划宏伟一点的优势在于，如果你能说服投资者你的计划是可行且务实的，那么公司的价值就会更高，就比如我之前就给优步估值到234亿，这一点是很重要的，尤其是当投资者对价格没什么具体指标的时候。因此，正是优步和滴滴快的这两家最大的公司，叫到了最高价。当然，规划过大的代价就是成本过高，正是这些过高的成本导致了很多公司对他们望而却步。

It can distract: Bignarratives will require companies to deliver on multiple measures and that maydistract management from more immediate needs. 

分散企业管理：规划宏大会要求公司实行多种措施，这就会使公司在管理方面无暇顾及最紧迫的需求。

It can be costly: Havingto grow faster and in multiple markets (different businesses and differentgeographies) at the same time will be more costly than focusing on a smallermarket and having more measured ambitions.

成本高：在维持公司快速增长的同时还要兼顾各个市场（多元业务和不同区域的业务），这样的话就会比专注做一个市场和相对谨慎的业务追求成本更高。

It can createdisappointments: The flip side of convincing investors that you can reach forthe heights is that if you don’t make it, you will disappoint them, no matterhow good your numbers may be. 

可能会动摇军心：不管你在当初说服投资者的时候是多么的雄心壮志，描绘的图景是多么的美好，一旦失利，不管数字多好看，他们都会很失望的。

With Uber, you see thepluses and minuses of a big narrative. It is possible that Uber Eats (Uber’sfood delivery service), UberCargo (moving) and UberRush (delivery) are allinvestments that Uber had to make now, to keep its narrative going, but it is alsopossible that these are distractions at a moment when the ride sharing market,which remains Uber’s heart and soul, is heating up. It is undoubtedly true thatUber, while growing at exponential rates, is also spending money at those samerates to keep its big growth going and it is not only likely, but a certainty,that Uber will disappoint their investors at some time, simply becauseexpectations have been set so high. 

通过优步，我们看到了规划宏伟的优缺点。优步接下来可能会进一步投资UberEats（优步的食品运输服务），UberCargo（移动商务）和UberRush（送货）来拓展业务，但是在拼车行业越来越热的情况下，优步可能会在这一核心产业丧失其部分影响力。毋庸置疑，优步公司在以一个惊人的速度成长着，但同时也付出了巨大的成本来维持公司运营，而且可以肯定的是，在未来的某一天，优步公司注定会使投资者后悔的，毕竟他们野心太大了。

It isperhaps to avoid these risks that Lyft has consciously pushed a smallernarrative to investors, focused on one business (ride sharing) and one market(the US). It is avoiding the distractions, the costs and the disappointments ofthe big narrative companies, but at a cost. Not only will it cede the limelightand excitement to Uber, but that may lead it to be both valued and priced lessthan Uber. Uber has used its large value and access to capital as a bludgeon togo after Lyft, in its strongest markets.

Lyft目前有意识的将其目标和野心控制在一个相对较小的水平来规避风险——专注一个业务（拼车服务）和一个市场（美国本土）。同时这也避免了分散企业管理，降低了资金成本，减少了使投资者失望的可能，但这些统统都是有代价的。不仅会被优步抢风头，在估值和定价方面也会远逊于优步。优步已经手持大棒（指优步大额估值和资本优势）在拼车服务市场的路上对Lyft穷追不舍了。

As an investor, there isnothing inherently good or bad about either big or small narratives, and acompany cannot become a good investment just because of its narrative choice.Thus, Uber, as a big narrative company, commands a higher valuation ($23.4billion) but it is priced even more highly ($51 billion). Lyft, as a smallnarrative company, has a much lower value ($3.1 billion) but is priced at alower number ($2.5 billion). At these prices, as I see it, Lyft is a betterinvestment than Uber. 

作为一个投资者，对于公司的前景规划的大小并没有优劣之分，同时一个公司也不可能仅仅因为他在前景规划方面的选择就瞬间身价暴涨。因此，优步作为一家有雄心壮志的公司，估值要求高达234亿，定价更是飙到510亿之多；而Lyft作为一家对于前景十分谨慎考量的公司，估值和定价仅仅只有31亿和25亿。对比这些价格来看，我认为Lyft比优步更值得投资。

Blockand Draft

阻挡和借力

It is clear that Uberand Lyft have very different corporate personas and visions for the future andthat some of the difference is for outside consumption. It serves Uber well, inits disruptive role, to be viewed as a bit of a bully who will not walk awayfrom a fight, just as it is Lyft’s best interests to portray itself as thegentler, more humane face of ride sharing. Some of the difference, though, ismanagement culture, with Uber drawing from a very different pool ofdecision-makers than Lyft does. If this were a bicycle race, Uber reminds me ofthe aggressive lead rider, intent on blocking the rest of the pack and gettingto the finish line first, and Lyft is the lower profile racer who rides justbehind the leader, using the draft to save energy for the final push. This isgoing to be a long race, and I have a feeling that its contours will change asthe finish line approaches, but whatever happens, it is going to be fun towatch!

我们明显可以看到优步和Lyft这两家公司的企业风格和对于未来的愿景是完全不同的，有些不同也体现在外部消费上。在“破坏分子”这个角色上，优步可谓是扮演得惟妙惟肖，作为市场上公认的“恶霸”，优步永远也逃不开强势抢占市场的黑历史；而Lyft则更喜欢把自己描述成一副更加绅士更加人道的面孔。有一些不同也体现在企业管理文化上，优步的决策来源跟Lyft可谓大相径庭。如果这是一场自行车比赛，优步就是那个非常高调激进的领头选手，想在前面挡住哦所有参赛者自己第一个到达终点；而Lyft呢，就要低调许多了，他默默的跟着领头羊后面，借助气流为最后一冲省力。这注定是一场漫长的较量，同时我有预感越临近终点比赛的路线就会越不同，但是不管最后是什么结果，在一旁观战都是很有意思的！

格隆汇声明：格隆汇作为免费、开放、共享的海外投资研究交流平台，并未持有任何关联公司股票。转载本文，请务必注明来源“港股那点事”及作者。

加入格隆汇

● 投稿给格隆汇。投稿邮箱：[e-mail]；

● 添加微服妹妹微信号：guruclub_011，参加格隆汇三大线下活动：汇说、汇路演、汇调研；

● 直接添加格隆个人微信公众号：guru-lama

● 广告投放：0755-86332133-823

● 商务合作：0755-86332133-802