讲透段永平是如何思考苹果公司总结
Duan Yongping is a renowned value investor, and Apple Inc. is one of his favorite stocks that has generated the most substantial profits. He started buying Apple shares continuously since 2011 and has held them until today. On online platforms, Duan Yongping shared extensive thoughts about Apple, which can be regarded as a systematic case study of value investing.
段永平是一位著名的价值投资者，而苹果公司是他最喜欢，也是获利最丰厚的股票之一。他从2011年便开始持续买入苹果公司，并一直持有至今。在网络平台上，段永平曾分享过大量其关于苹果公司的思考，这些思考，堪称一个系统的价值投资案例。
# 1. Reasons for Liking $Apple (AAPL.US)$ (喜欢苹果的理由)
This is a list of reasons why I like Apple. These are not formal arguments—just thoughts as they come to mind, with no particular order or emphasis.
这是说我喜欢苹果的一些理由。这不是论文，想到就说，没有重点和先后次序。
Apple's products truly take user experience and consumer orientation to the extreme. Competitors are unlikely to surpass or even approach this level (from the perspective of Apple users) for a long time.
苹果的产品确实把用户体验或消费者导向做到极致了，对手在相当长的时间里难以超越甚至接近（对喜欢苹果的用户而言）。
Apple has built a platform—a business model and moat. Software alone now generates billions of dollars in annual revenue.
苹果的平台建立起来了，或者说生意模式或者说护城河已经形成了（光软件一年都几十亿的收入了）。
Apple's single-product model is actually the highest realm in our industry. I’ve only seen Nintendo achieve this before (Sony’s gaming products are similar). The single-product model has many advantages:
苹果单一产品的模式实际上是我们这个行业里的最高境界，以前我大概只见到任天堂做到过（索尼的游戏产品类似）。单一产品的模式有非常多的好处：
(1) It allows concentration of human and material resources to make the product better. Compare the iPhone series with Nokia's series (which plans to release 40 varieties this year). Apple's product development costs per unit are very low, but the development cost for each individual product is the highest.
(1)可以集中人力物力将产品做得更好。比较一下iPhone系列和诺基亚系列（今年要推出40个品种）。苹果产品的单位开发成本是非常低的，但单个产品的开发费却是最高的。
(2) Material costs are low with high quality, benefiting from economies of scale. Apple's cost control is also极致 (extreme). It's hard for anyone else to match Apple's cost efficiency for similar functionality.
(2)材料成本低且质量好，大规模带来的效益。苹果的成本控制也是做到极致的，同样功能的硬件恐怕没人能达到苹果的成本。
(3) Channel costs are low. Haha, those not in the industry might not understand how significant this is (even同行也未必明白). I learned this from Nintendo 20 years ago. Many companies in the gaming industry used to launch numerous product varieties, but most ended up poorly.
(3)渠道成本低。呵呵，不是同行的不一定能明白这话到底有什么分量（同行也未必明白），我是20年前从任天堂那里学会的。那时很多做游戏机的都喜欢做很多品种，最后下场都不太好。
Apple's marketing is极致 (extreme) as well. Even advertising costs are much lower than competitors, yet the products are sold at premium prices.
苹果的营销也是做到极致了，连广告费都比同行低很多，卖的价钱却往往很好。
Apple's products exist in a massive market with significant growth potential.
苹果的产品处在一个巨大并还有巨大成长的市场里。
(1) How big is the smartphone market? You know the answer.
(1)智能手机市场有多大？你懂的！
(2) How big is the tablet market? You’ll understand that too.
(2)平板市场有多大？你也会懂的。
In summary, I believe Apple is still in its early growth stages and has significant room to expand. (2011-01-22)
总而言之，我认为苹果现在其实还处在其成长的早期，应该还有很大的空间。（2011-01-22）
Ranking is not what we pursue. What we pursue is creating products loved by users. Perhaps one day we might also create a great product—I hope within 50 years. (2010-06-08)
实际上，排名不是我们要追求的东西。能做出用户喜欢的产品才是我们的追求。也许真有哪一天我们也能做出个伟大的产品，希望50年内。（2010-06-08）
The meaning of not caring about rankings is that we focus only on user experience. Rankings are merely a result, not the goal. (2010-06-09)
不在乎排名的意思是我们只在乎用户的感受，排名只是结果而已，不是追求的目标。（2010-06-09）
The above two statements were made before I bought Apple. Apple indeed achieved what I wanted to do. I realized this in January 2011 and started buying Apple shares then. (2024-09-12)
上面两句话是在买苹果之前说的。苹果确实做到了我想做的事情，2011年1月的时候我就是想通了这点才开始买苹果的。（2024-09-12）
A special aspect I deeply appreciate about Apple: it is extremely rare to find a company that can consistently focus on doing the right things over the long term.
说一点我特别喜欢苹果的地方：苹果是非常难见到的能够长期聚焦在做对的事情上的企业。
Most people investing habitually focus on whether things are being done correctly, which easily traps them in short-term performance. Even great companies may make mistakes while doing the right things, as getting things right often takes time. Long-term investing, in a sense, means believing that capable companies persisting in doing the right things will eventually succeed. (2013-02-13)
多数人在投资时很习惯去看有没有把事情做对这点，从而会很容易掉进短期表现当中。即使是伟大的企业，在做对的事情的过程当中，也是可能会犯错的，因为把事情做对往往需要一个过程。所谓长期投资，从某种角度上说，就是要能够相信坚持做对的事情的、有能力的公司，最后会把事情做对。（2013-02-13）
OPPO and Apple actually share many similar genes, which is one reason I could eventually understand Apple. (2011-08-07)
OPPO和苹果其实有很多相同的基因，这也是我最后能看懂苹果的原因之一。（2011-08-07）
User: Why did Buffett sell IBM and buy Apple? What fundamental insight did he see?
Answer: Cash flow—current and future cash flow. (2018-03-04)
网友：巴菲特卖IBM，买入苹果，到底是看到了什么本质？
现金流，现在的现金流和未来的现金流。（2018-03-04）
# 2. Apple's Most Powerful Strength: The Ecosystem (苹果最厉害的是生态系统)
Apple's most powerful strength is the ecosystem built under its corporate culture. This is a very robust business model, extremely difficult to disrupt. (2020-11-16)
苹果最厉害的就是在苹果的企业文化下建立的生态系统，这是个非常强大的商业模式，非常难以撼动。（2020-11-16）
User: After Steve Jobs returned to Apple but before the iPhone was launched, was Apple considered a strong company with a苦生意 (struggling business)?
Answer: Apple's business model improved significantly after the iPhone. The ecosystem was established. (2025-01-25)
网友：苹果公司在乔布斯回归之后，推出iPhone之前，是不是也算企业文化强大的苦生意？
至少iPhone出来后苹果的商业模式变得更好了，生态圈建成了。（2025-01-25）
Some things stop evolving significantly once they reach a certain level. For example, car engines from the 1930s-40s are not fundamentally different from today’s. Some countries (despite our disdain) could build aircraft carriers in the 1940s, proving time doesn’t always help.
有些东西进步到一定程度后其实后面的变化就不大了，比如20世纪30到40年代的汽车发动机和现在其实没本质差别。有些国家（虽然我们很多人很看不上）40年代就能造航空母舰，说明由于某些原因，时间有时候帮不上大忙。
Apple's current platform and business model are so strong that, to my understanding, no one can break them. Of course, many who think they are smarter than me claim otherwise. Some even say they can defeat Apple—do they look like they can?
苹果最厉害的是现在这个平台以及生意模式，以我的水平我看不出谁能打破它。当然有很多以为水平比我高的人非说别人可以，当然也有自己说自己可以打败苹果的，你看看他们像吗？
Perhaps the person who can defeat Apple is yet to be born, or wandering somewhere unknown. But it certainly won’t be any of the known players today. This is a story we can watch unfold for decades. (2012-01-28)
也许，能打败苹果的人快出生了，也许正在某个地方徘徊，但怎么看都不是现在大家知道的这些，这是个大家可以看很多年的故事。（2012-01-28）
# 3. Creating the Best Products (做最好的产品)
Yesterday at Apple's shareholder meeting, Tim Cook mentioned something similar: Although we could have a button to produce the most products, our culture is to create the best products, not the most. He also added that building a strong ecosystem requires a certain scale. Thus, Apple balances the relationship between creating the best products and achieving sufficient market share.
昨天去苹果的股东大会，听到库克讲了类似的话，大意是：虽然我们可以有个按钮，可以随时做最多的产品，但我们的文化是做最好的产品而不是最多的。不过，他也顺便提了一下，认为要建立一个强大的生态系统，必须要有一定的量。所以苹果是会兼顾最好的产品和足够的份额之间的关系的。
Cook also noted that the concept of "scale" isn’t just about how many units are sold but how intensively people use the products after purchase. Those interested can check the active Weibo users on Sina—perhaps they’ll discover that the proportion of Apple users far exceeds the perceived market share.
另外，库克也提到量的概念其实不仅仅是卖了多少，而是人们买了以后用多少。有兴趣的可以查下新浪上微博的活跃用户都在用啥，也许大家会发现用苹果的人的比例其实远远超过印象中的市场占有率。
Reference method for statistics: Check what devices are used to post on the Top 100 Weibo posts, comments, or replies under micro-topics.
参考的统计办法：可以看热门微博Top100里发帖人是用什么发的帖，还可以看评论人用什么写的评论，也可以看微话题下面评论人是用什么评论的。
User: I just counted the Top 100 Weibo posts: 20 from iPhone, 5 from iPad, 3 from Android, 1 from "other phones," and the rest show as "Weibo" or specific apps/websites.
网友：刚才数了一下，Top100微博：来自iPhone 20 个；来自iPad 5个；来自Android 3个；来自“其他手机”1个；其他的是显示来自微博，或某个应用某个网站之类。
Looking at the entertainment section would be even more interesting. This ratio shows Apple's usage rate significantly higher than others—seemingly no other metric better identifies product quality. In micro-topic comments, Apple’s share is close to 50%, while all other mobile devices account for slightly over 50%. These are ordinary internet users.
看一下娱乐版的会更有趣些。这个比例说明苹果产品的使用率明显高于其他产品，好像没有别的指标可以更好地鉴别一个产品的好坏了。在微话题下，苹果的使用量大概接近50%，其他的所有移动设备占到50%多一点，这些都是普通上网者。
Cook also said: Our focus is on creating the best products. Profit will naturally follow. (2013-02-23)
记得库克还说：我们最重要的是聚焦在做最好的产品上，利润会随之而来的。（2013-02-23）
User: In the PC era, closed Apple lost to open Microsoft+IBM. Today’s Apple remains closed—can it definitely defeat Google+Samsung?
Answer: It’s different. You’ll understand once you use the products. (2011-01-23)
网友：当年做PC时，封闭的苹果输给开放的微软+IBM，今天的苹果一样封闭，难道它一定能赢谷歌+三星吗？
我觉得不一样。你用一用产品就明白了，不是一回事。（2011-01-23）
I’m not an "Apple fanboy." At my age and with my rationality, I’m not a fan of anyone or anything—I’m not even a Buffett fan. In fact, I used to dislike Apple somewhat, having used PCs and Nokia for years. But the iPhone and iPad truly changed my perception of Apple. As an ordinary person, I can’t technically evaluate these products, so I’ll just share how I use them.
我不是所谓的“果粉”，像我这个年纪和这么理性的人，不大会是任何人或东西的粉丝，我甚至不是巴菲特的粉丝。实际上我以前一直多少有点不太喜欢苹果，毕竟用了PC和诺基亚这么多年，但iPhone和iPad的出现确实彻底改变了我对苹果的认识。作为一个普通人，我没能力从技术上去说这些产品，所以只说说我都用iPhone和iPad干什么。
- First, both iPhone and iPad are extremely user-friendly. Years ago with Motorola, the interface was so frustrating. Later with Nokia smartphones, I had the same feeling as with Motorola. In my opinion, Android’s interface still lags far behind iPhone (maybe ours will change this someday? Looking forward). Last month, I considered buying an Android phone. After 30 minutes in the store and a 10-minute explanation from the clerk, I couldn’t decide between HTC, Samsung, and Motorola. Finally, I gave up to avoid trouble.
1.首先，iPhone和iPad都非常容易上手。早年用摩托罗拉的时候，心里那个烦啊，用户界面太难用了。后来用诺基亚的智能手机时又找到了当年用摩托罗拉的感觉。以我个人的水平而言，安卓的界面水平还远远比不上iPhone（也许我们自己的出来后会改变一点这个局面？期待中）。上个月我曾经想买个安卓手机试试的，在商店里转了半个多小时，店员给我介绍了10来分钟，在3个牌子（HTC、三星、摩托罗拉）间挑来挑去，晕晕乎乎中最后还是决定不给自己添麻烦了。
iPhone? Haha, I almost knew how to use it the moment I held it. The clerk just told me where the power button was and explained the icons—it took about 15 seconds. Selling Apple products is easy—last time I recommended an iPad2 in the store within minutes.
iPhone？呵呵，我几乎拿到手里时就会用了。店员只是告诉我开关在哪里，那些图标是什么，前后花了大概15秒钟。当苹果的销售员可真容易啊，我自己前段时间在苹果店里只花了几分钟就推销了一台iPad2。
- What do I use iPhone for? I download fewer apps than most people, as I don’t spend much time on them. Phone calls, messages, emails, web browsing, world time, weather, photos, maps, notes, YouTube, camera, voice recorder, video recorder, dictionary, photo albums, library, iPod, FaceTime, movies, TV shows, stock tracking/trading, newspapers, compass, calendar (notes), games, etc. I often overlook but frequently use the flashlight. These features are just a fraction of what iPhone offers. What matters most is that all functions are intuitive—learn once, master instantly!
2.我用iPhone干什么？我的iPhone上下载的软件其实比大多数人都少，毕竟不太花时间玩这个东西。电话、短信、E-mail、上网、世界时间、天气、图片、地图、记事本、YouTube、相机、录音、录像、字典、相册、图书馆、iPod、FaceTime、电影、电视、股票查询及交易、报纸、指南针、日历（记事本）、游戏，等等，不太注意但特别常用的是手电筒。这些功能可能只是iPhone的沧海一粟。其实我想说的不是iPhone有多少功能，最重要的是所有这些功能都非常容易上手。一学就会，无师自通！
- Many say iPad is just a bigger iPhone. Before using iPad, I agreed, but after trying it, the size difference makes perfect sense. Now I rarely use my laptop—iPad suffices for travel, while iPhone sometimes feels too small.
3.很多人说iPad其实就是个大号的iPhone。在用iPad之前我同意这个说法，但用了一段时间后觉得这个大确实大得非常有道理。我现在基本上已经不太用我的手提电脑了，旅行的时候带上iPad就绝对够了，iPhone有时候还是觉得有点小。
For me, iPad2’s strongest feature is its powerful network function—it browses the web quickly without the hassle of booting up a laptop. It’s delightful to use and ultra-portable. Another powerful feature is photo management, including browsing online images. My iPad2 holds about 10,000 photos capturing life moments. Browsing them makes me appreciate life—what’s this worth? FaceTime is also great—under Wi-Fi, it’s more convenient than phone calls.
iPad2最强大的地方就是网络功能很强大，上网非常快，又没有手提电脑开机的麻烦，用起来真是很爽，携带起来又轻便。还有一个特别强大的功能就是图片，包括上网看图片。我的iPad2里有大概1万张照片，记录着我们生活中的很多瞬间，没事看看真的觉得生活很美好，这个玩意儿该值多少钱呢？FaceTime也是一个很好的功能，在有Wi-Fi的前提下用起来那个叫方便，比打电话还容易。
I bought an iPad2 for my mom. Recently, when someone brought it back, I loaded our family photos into it. Now video calls are easy (previously tried with laptops, but too cumbersome). She can flip through photos anytime—so convenient!
我给我妈妈也买了个iPad2，最近能让人带回去，里面也装上我们的照片。以后视频通话就非常方便了（以前曾经想过用电脑视频，实在是有点麻烦），没事老人家还可以翻翻照片，真是好啊。
I’ll stop here—others can experience it themselves. Overall, if financially manageable, iPhone and iPad2 are absolutely worth owning. Life truly becomes different. (2011-03-31)
别的就不说了，有机会大家自己体会吧。总的来讲，如果经济上不是个太大的负担的话，iPhone和iPad2是绝对值得拥有的产品，生活确实因此变得不同了。（2011-03-31）
User: Has anyone experienced losing a phone? How to deal with it?
网友：不知道大家有没有丢电话的经历？丢了以后怎么办？
Recently, I lost a suitcase (with iPad) during travel. Initially thought it was left at the airport, but suddenly remembered Apple’s "Find my iPhone" feature. Checked via iPhone (any iOS device works), and found the iPad was still at the hotel. (Isn’t that valuable?) Called the hotel—they mailed the suitcase back days later. Another time, my iPhone fell into a sofa gap. Again, "Find my iPhone" located it. (How much would you pay for this?)
前段时间我在旅行中丢了一件行李（iPad在里面），当时以为是丢在机场了，后来突然想起苹果的Find my iPhone的功能，结果用iPhone一查（可以用任何别的IOS设备），发现我的iPad还在酒店里。（值钱吧？）马上打电话给酒店告诉了他们，结果几天后酒店就把行李寄回来了。还有一次把iPhone掉在沙发的缝里了，一时半会找不到，结果还是靠Find my iPhone找到的。（这个功能你愿意付多少？）
Of course, what if the finder refuses to return it? "Find my iPhone" allows instant data deletion. When replacing a new iPhone/iPad, simply log in with your Apple ID to restore all data. (How much is this worth?)
当然，就算找到在哪里，万一捡到的人不肯归还怎么办？Find my iPhone上还有一个功能，那就是可以立刻消除你丢失的iPhone或iPad上的所有资料。另外就是，在补一个新的iPhone或iPad时，只要用自己的Apple ID，几乎所有的资料就又都回来了。（这个功能值多少钱？）
A friend recently lost his phone and all contacts. For iPhone users, this never happens again. (Isn’t this valuable?)
有个朋友前几天说丢了电话所以丢了所有电话号码，对于iPhone使用者来说，这个事情不会再发生了。（这个值钱不？）
As long as you remember your Apple ID, you can recover your iPhone/iPad by enabling this feature from the start. (This is actually valuable, as people often realize its importance only after losing their phone.)
好像只要记得自己的Apple ID就可以用这个办法找到自己的iPhone或iPad，只要开始用的时候把ID开通了就行。（这个其实也很有价值，因为人们往往是丢了以后才知道这个功能的。）
People complain iPhone is expensive—imagine how much you’d pay to recover lost data and prevent leaks when your phone is stolen. If this matters to you, then…
都说iPhone贵，想想丢电话时自己愿意付多少钱把丢掉的资料找回来并且不失密吧。如果觉得这个重要的话，那就……
iCloud is indeed powerful, otherwise Samsung people wouldn’t use iPhones/iPads at home. (2012-12-13)
iCloud确实强大，不然三星的人不会回家后用iPhone和iPad的。（2012-12-13）
User: Can anyone talk about the iWatch?
网友：哪位朋友能谈谈iWatch？
It’s still a rumor—who can discuss it? The funniest Apple rumor is the "cheap iPhone." Once this rumor spread, debates arose about whether Apple should sell such a product. But those discussing this likely don’t understand Apple, as such debates wouldn’t exist in Apple’s culture. (2013-02-15)
那还是一个传说，从何谈起？不过，关于苹果的传说最搞笑的就是廉价iPhone。有了这个传说后，接着就有了苹果该不该这样做的争论。其实讨论苹果该不该卖廉价iPhone的人大概都是不太懂苹果的，因为苹果的文化里根本就不会有这个争论。（2013-02-15）
User: Any insights on Apple’s AR glasses or cars?
网友：关于苹果AR眼镜和汽车有什么可以分享的么？
I don’t know what Apple is developing, but I believe Apple products will ultimately be premium. (2020-12-06)
我不知道苹果在搞什么，但确实相信苹果产品最终都会是精品。（2020-12-06）
Vision Pro is a "nice-to-have" for its users, while iPhone is a "need-have." I guess Vision Pro becoming a "need-have" might take 10 years.
Vision Pro对喜欢它的用户而言是个“NICE to have”的产品，而iPhone则是“need have”。Vision Pro要上升到“need have”我猜可能需要10年。
By saying "10 years," I mean it’ll take a very long time—short-term probability is extremely low. (2024-06-29)
我说10年的意思是需要很长的时间，就是短时间里概率很低的意思。（2024-06-29）
User: I see Apple this way: It’s no longer beatable by a single new product, due to its strong corporate culture (user experience) and ecosystem (App Store, shared platforms across computers, phones, tablets).
网友：我这样理解苹果，现在苹果已经不是靠一种新产品就可以打败的了，因为它有良好的企业文化（用户体验）、生态链（App应用商店、电脑和手机、平板共享平台），等等。
Revolutionary products don’t come with labels. iPad mini is absolutely revolutionary—you’ll see. Also, Apple’s products are extremely detailed. Samsung recently plans to launch an 8-inch tablet, slightly larger than Apple’s 7.9-inch. Without saying more, one aspect might be interesting. iPad mini fits my pants pocket perfectly, but 8-inch likely won’t. (2013-03-01)
其实革命性的产品并不会贴个标签在上面。iPad mini绝对是个革命性的产品，大家会看到的。另外，苹果的产品是非常细致的。三星最近据说要推8寸的平板，比苹果7.9寸的大一点。别的不说，有一点可能就会很有趣。iPad mini我是可以放进裤子口袋的，但只是刚刚好放进去，个人觉得iPad mini可能是测过的，8寸的很可能放不下。（2013-03-01）
User: Which Apple practices indicate high possibility of releasing large-screen phones next year?
网友：从苹果的哪些做法中能看出下一年推大屏的可能性很大？
I know the market size for large screens, and so does Apple! As long as it aligns with Apple’s principles and capabilities, there’s no reason not to release. Two years ago, I said Apple would definitely launch large screens, though I didn’t expect the delay. After iPhone 5s, Apple could focus on large screens—I believe it’ll happen within a year. (2013-09-16)
我知道大屏市场有多大，苹果当然也知道！只要在苹果的原则范围内和能力圈内，苹果没道理不推。不过，我可能快两年前就说过苹果必推大屏，没想到等了这么久。5s出来后，苹果大概就可以抽出手来推大屏了，所以我认为苹果一年内就会推的。（2013-09-16）
User: What did Jobs mean by "Think different"?
网友：乔布斯说的Think different是什么意思？
"Think different" means not following the crowd. But the correct approach is consumer orientation. Apple’s delay in large-screen phones exemplifies this. Consumers wanted big screens, but Apple’s "think different" delayed entry by over three years. (2020-11-26)
Think different是不从众的意思。这个说法并不完全对。正确的说法是消费者导向。当年苹果一直不出大屏手机就是个例子。消费者需要大屏，但苹果Think different，结果晚了3年多。（2020-11-26）
Large-screen phones also highlight Apple’s strength. Perhaps due to Jobs’ opposition, Apple hesitated. But consumer demand prevailed, so they eventually found a different solution. Fang Sanwen and I once made a small bet (no stakes). He asked: Will Apple definitely release large-screen phones? I said: Definitely! And they did, three years later. The delay gave me time to reflect on Apple and buy more shares—otherwise, I’d have bought far fewer. (2020-11-27)
其实大屏手机也从另外一个角度说明了苹果厉害的地方。可能因为乔布斯说过不要大屏，所以苹果犹豫了一下，但消费者的需求摆在那里，所以最后他们还是用不同的办法想通了。我和方三文曾经打过一个小赌（没赌任何东西）。方三文问：你觉得苹果一定会出大屏手机吗？我说：他们一定会的！果然3年后他们就出了。苹果大屏手机出得晚给了我很多时间去思考苹果和买苹果，不然我可能要少买很多苹果哈。（2020-11-27）
User: Today I saw Apple’s official resale of used iPhones, including price comparisons. What’s your view?
网友：今天看到苹果官方出售二手iPhone的消息，包括各型号的回收价与售价对比，段总怎么看？
My view: Only Apple can do this. Others can’t. (2015-04-14)
我的看法是，只有苹果能够做这件事情，别人其实做不了。（2015-04-14）
High residual value of Apple products proves their quality. (2013-12-13)
苹果产品的残值高也说明苹果的东西确实好。（2013-12-13）
User: What’s your view on Meta Orion—will it be the next hit after smartphones?
网友：大道怎么看Meta Orion，会是手机之后的下一代爆品吗？
They’re completely no match for Apple. I’ve used their past products—they’re not in the same league. (2024-09-28)
他们完全不是苹果的对手。我用过他们以前的产品，确实不是一个级别的。（2024-09-28）
User: What’s your outlook for Android? Is there potential for high-end models? Also, will Apple target the cheap phone market? Would that benefit or harm Apple?
网友：您对安卓的前景怎么看呢？安卓做高端有前途吗？另外您觉得苹果会不会着力占领廉价手机市场？这样做的话对他们好处多还是坏处多？
For a long time, Android’s volume will remain large. It’s possible for a brand to launch expensive Android phones, which users might perceive as premium. Android also has high-end and low-end distinctions.
在相当长的时间里，安卓的量依然会是大的。不能说安卓做高端如何，但某个品牌用安卓做个很贵的手机出来是很可能的，会买的人当然要叫那个高端了。另外，在安卓里也有高低端之分。
Apple will likely never target the so-called cheap phone market. Your question surprises me—it shows your understanding aligns with mainstream views. Apple’s strategy has always been clear: create the best products, letting older models serve as entry-level and mid-tier options. Around 3 years later, when iPhone 7 launches, iPhone 5c will become entry-level, selling for around 2,000 RMB. That’ll be interesting.
苹果大概永远都不会专门做所谓的廉价手机市场，对你提出这个问题感到有点意外，说明你对企业的理解已经和大众很接近了。苹果的策略一直都在那里摆着呢，做最好的产品，让前面的产品做入门级以及提高级的产品。大约3年内，当iPhone 7出来的时候，iPhone 5c就会变成入门级的产品，大概会卖到2000出头，那个时候会有点好看哈。
Also, iPhone 5s is absolutely groundbreaking—why do so many overlook this? I’m certain many at Samsung will now face sleepless nights and stress. (2013-09-15)
另外，iPhone 5s绝对是划时代的，不知道为什么那么多人会视而不见？我可以肯定的是，三星里很多人要开始“熬夜多压力大”了。（2013-09-15）
# 4. iPhone is Likely the Cheapest Phone (iPhone很可能是最便宜的手机)
I’ve always believed iPhone is likely the cheapest phone in the long run, because over a period (e.g., 10–20 years), the total cost of buying phones is likely the lowest if you want to save money. (2023-11-03)
我一直觉得iPhone很可能是最便宜的手机，因为单位时间里（比如10年20年）需要花在买手机上的钱的总额很可能是最少的，如果你想省钱的话。（2023-11-03）
User: How long will the popularity of iPhone last as a mainstream product? Will iPhones still appeal to wealthy people if they no longer symbolize status?
网友：成为街机的iPhone的热度会持续多久？已经无法成为身份象征的iPhone是否还会得到富裕人群的青睐？
37 million rich people buying iPhones in one quarter? People buy iPhones simply because they are user-friendly. Only those who don’t use iPhones think they symbolize status. (2012-01-31)
一个季度3700万富人买iPhone？买iPhone只是因为iPhone好用，只有不用iPhone的人才可能认为iPhone是身份象征。（2012-01-31）
User: For me, iPad, iPhone, and iPad mini are the most cost-effective products I’ve ever owned. All the features I love are perfectly realized. Without Apple, I’d spend more time and money but achieve less. Over the past two years, I’ve easily recommended over a dozen units—none of the buyers complained about regrets.
网友：我是果粉，家里用苹果和其他品牌的产品。就产品而言，无论技术、外观、感觉和吸引的手段，苹果打100分，其他品牌打85分。苹果公司在品牌上有很强的优势，很高的忠诚度，这些是其他品牌难以追赶的。
Yes, free things are often the most expensive, and seemingly cheap things can be costly. This applies to both shopping and investing. I also think the i-series is the cheapest option—not just for superior user experience (which is worth a lot), but also for saving replacement costs. (2013-02-28)
对于价格不那么敏感的用户而言，谁愿意买85分的东西而不是100分的东西，尤其是每天都要拿在手上用的手机呢？（2012-02-03）
User: Free things are often not cheap, while expensive things can sometimes be cheap. For example, a good book costs only tens of dollars, yet its value might far exceed hundreds of times the price. Or when you dine with Buffett, he says the most important thing is business model—you’ll gain far more than the cost of the meal. I now understand this better: it’s both a great investment and a charitable act.
网友：免费的东西往往不便宜，贵的东西有时其实很便宜。比如，买好书才几十块钱，收获可能远超几百倍书的价钱。再比如您请巴菲特吃饭，巴菲特说最重要的是生意模式，您说收获远超饭局的价钱。我现在也更看得懂了，既是很好的投资，又顺带做了慈善。
Understanding the relationship between "expensive" and "cheap" is extremely difficult. Most people may never grasp it in their lifetime. (2013-03-29)
能明白贵与便宜的关系非常不容易啊，绝大部分人大概一辈子都很难明白的。（2013-03-29）
Tesla looks cool but feels expensive, not easily affordable. iPhone, though relatively pricier, has a minimal absolute price gap. (2013-05-14)
$特斯拉 (TSLA.US)$看起来很酷，但有点贵，不是那么容易买得起。iPhone虽然相对贵不少，但绝对值差别非常小。（2013-05-14）
User: What’s unclear about "relatively expensive" vs. "absolute value"?
网友：看不懂“相对贵”和“绝对值”？
You’ll understand after using both for some time. The absolute difference between 1000 and 800 RMB is 200 RMB. If the 1000 RMB product is slightly better, the return far exceeds 200 RMB. Most people think 800 RMB is cheaper, but it’s often the opposite. (2013-05-23)
你两个都多用一段时间就明白了。1000块和800块的绝对值差异是200块。如果1000块的东西好用那么一点点，带来的回报会远超过200块。大多数人会觉得800块的东西便宜，实际上往往相反。（2013-05-23）
User: My observation: Most people buy Apple not for cost-performance. They use Apple mainly for ease of use, reliability, and prestige. Cost-performance is secondary. Of course, many avoid buying due to high prices, but not necessarily due to poor cost-performance. I agree Apple products are high cost-performance. High cost-performance doesn’t mean cheap—those who understand eventually realize this. A good car is often a cost-effective car, and these cars are often expensive. Once you understand this, you’ll grasp Apple’s cost-performance. For those who switched to iPhone after frequent phone changes, this isn’t even an issue. (2014-08-28)
网友：我的观察，买苹果的人大部分不是因为性价比高。人们用苹果主要是因为好用、放心用、有面子。性价比其次。当然，有很多人因为售价高而不舍得买的。但这部分人也不是因为性价比不够高而不买的。我同意苹果产品是高性价比的。高性价比的东西不等于便宜，该知道的人最后都会知道的。好的车往往也是性价比高的车，而且这些车往往比较贵，想通这个就明白苹果的性价比问题了。当然，对于那些整天换手机， 最后换到iPhone的人们而言，这个问题就不是问题。（2014-08-28）
Everyone cares about cost-performance, but sensitivity to price varies. People also perceive money differently. For example, some buy unsafe cars for lower prices. (2013-02-27)
每个人都是会看性价比的，但每个人对价格的敏感度不同。还有就是每个人对钱的看法不一样。比如有人会为了便宜去买不安全的车，等等。（2013-02-27）
# 5. The Single-Product Model (单一产品模式)
Simplicity makes focus easier, increasing the probability of doing things right while reducing errors.
单一比较容易聚焦，这意味着把事情做对的概率高同时犯错误的概率低。
Achieving singularity is extremely difficult because market demands are diverse. iPad and iPhone share a magical trait: users of all ages feel these products were designed specifically for them.
要做到单一是非常难的一件事，因为市场的需求是多样化的。iPad和iPhone有一样神奇的东西，那就是不管什么年龄段的用户都觉得这是个专门为自己设计的产品。
My "famous" friend Li Lu is filial—he bought an iPad for his 70+ father. The elder spent all day holding it, telling Li Lu: "This thing feels like it was made just for me." (2011-04-09)
我那个“著名”朋友李录是个孝子，给70多的老爸买了个iPad，结果老爸一天到晚地捧着iPad，还跟李录说：这东东简直就是专门为我设计的嘛。（2011-04-09）
User: The old Xiaobawang Learning Machine was also a single-product model. The 486B model sold well and stocked up before peak seasons.
网友：当年的小霸王学习机也差不多是单一产品模式，记得当时单一款486B卖得很好，而且在旺季来临前就备足了货源。
Haha, this is one reason I could understand Apple. Without that experience, I might not have realized how powerful Apple is. (2012-02-01)
呵呵，这是我能看懂苹果的重要原因之一，没有那段经历，不一定会知道苹果有多厉害。（2012-02-01）
User: Why does the single-product model reduce channel costs?
网友：为什么单一产品模式可以降低渠道成本？
Think inversely. For example, 20 years ago, we sold Xiaobawang game consoles (not yet learning machines). We had only two models: red-white and blue-white (similar to iPhone’s black and white), while competitors often had dozens. Our sales team was frequently criticized for too few models. Eventually, most competitors with excessive varieties disappeared—this was likely a surface-level issue. (2013-02-16)
你倒过来想也许就明白了。举个例子，20多年前我们卖小霸王游戏机（还没到学习机）时，小霸王游戏机只有两款：红白机和蓝白机（有点像iPhone的黑色和白色），对手们经常都是有好几十款的。当时我们的销售部门被质疑最多的问题就是款式太少。好像最后款式多的那些对手绝大多数都消失了，原因大概就是品种太多最后导致的问题（其实是表象）。（2013-02-16）
Channel costs here refer to the geometric increase in inventory caused by multiple varieties. (2011-04-09)
这里说的渠道成本的意思就是品种越多，占用的渠道库存越大，是几何级数的关系。（2011-04-09）
Generally, due to rapid technological progress, electronics depreciate significantly if unsold within a certain period. Once a brand’s product variety exceeds a threshold, inventory becomes harder to manage, and processing costs skyrocket. (2020-10-29)
一般来说，因为技术进步非常快，电子产品一旦一定时间内卖不出去贬值就会非常高。同一品牌的产品的品类在超过一定数量后，库存会比较难管理，处理成本会非常高。（2020-10-29）
User: Does more varieties burden dealers with higher inventory?
网友：品种越多，占用的渠道库存越大，是不是说会给经销商增加负担？
Isn’t dealers’ burden your own burden? No wonder some pushed inventory to dealers just to become No.1 in 2015. (2011-04-09)
经销商的负担难道不是自己的负担？怪不得有人为了2015年成第一而向经销商压货呢。（2011-04-09）
User: How did you control inventory back then?
网友：您当年是怎么控制库存的？
Safety first principle. Move in small steps,宁愿少赚些，不要出大问题。(2011-12-15)
安全第一的原则。小步快跑，宁愿少赚些，不要出大问题。（2011-12-15）
“Issue with iPhone 4s headset: Users report intermittent faults, inability to hear during calls. Apple’s forum shows nearly 30 pages of discussions. Many users say the problem temporarily resolves via rebooting or unplugging the headset.” (News)
“iPhone 4s再出问题，有用户反映耳机出现间歇性故障，向外打电话时无法听见声音。据苹果官网显示，关于耳机失灵的讨论已经多达近30页，不少用户表示这次故障能够通过重新开机或者拔掉耳机后恢复，但是这仅是暂时解决问题。”（新闻）
One benefit of fewer varieties: faster issue detection and resolution.
品种少的好处之一，有问题反应快，解决也快。
User: Great point!
网友：好观点！
It’s not an opinion. It is a fact. (2011-11-07)
It’s not an opinion. It is a fact.（这不是一个观点，而是一个事实。）（2011-11-07）
I understood this over a decade ago, learning from Nintendo. Surprisingly, few people grasp it even today. (2011-11-08)
我十多年前就明白这个道理，从任天堂那里学的。这些年来很惊奇地发现，很少有人能看懂。（2011-11-08）
User: Apple and Windows offer very different user experiences. My friends and I summarize that both are powerful (UNIX systems too), but Apple lets users access powerful functions in a near-idiot-proof way, while Windows requires near-professional skills (UNIX systems demand near-genius expertise).
网友：苹果和Windows的用户体验很不一样，我和朋友们的归纳就是两者都很强大（当然还有UNIX系统也很强大），但是苹果让人用近乎白痴的方式使用强大的功能，而Windows让人用近乎专业人士的方式使用强大的功能（UNIX平台的系统是让人用近乎天才的方式使用强大的功能）。
Your analogy is vivid—this is exactly Apple’s strength. Apple has many other advantages: single variety improves efficiency, quality consistency, cost control, and inventory management. I pursued single variety since Xiaobawang days and know its benefits and challenges. Few in this industry truly understand or actively pursue it—we still can’t achieve it today. Compare with Nokia, and you’ll immediately grasp the difficulty and value of singularity.
你这个形容很形象，这正是苹果厉害的地方。苹果还有不少特别厉害的地方，比如品种单一，所以效率高、质量一致性好、成本低、库存好管理等等。我从做小霸王时就追求品种单一，特别知道单一的好处和难度，这个行业里明白这一点并有意识去做的不多，我们现在也根本做不到这一点。比较一下诺基亚，你就马上能明白品种单一的好处和难度了。
Nokia needed many varieties to be consumer-oriented, while Apple achieved it with one. The difference in effort is massive. (2011-01-22)
诺基亚需要用很多品种才能做到消费者导向，而苹果用一个品种就做到了，这里面功夫差很多啊。（2011-01-22）
# 6. Truly Extreme Consumer Orientation (把用户导向真正做到了极致)
Apple has truly achieved extreme consumer orientation—it’s a role model for our manufacturing industry. (2011-01-08)
苹果把用户导向真正做到了极致，它绝对是我们制造业学习的榜样。（2011-01-08）
I queued up on the first day of iPhone 4s launch and bought one. On the way out, I bumped into a friend from a famous domestic company. After visiting their office, I accidentally dropped my iPhone and cracked the screen. Today, I went to the Apple Store to exchange it. Originally planned to buy one for my wife too, but iPhone 4s was already sold out. Now, buyers must order online at 9 PM and pick it up the next day—arrive late, wait another day. Interestingly, when I asked to buy one, they said none left. When I asked to exchange, they had stock. With this sales pace, this quarter’s financial report will set a record. (2011-10-20)
iPhone 4s发售第一天我就跑去排队买了一台，出来时碰上国内某著名公司的一个朋友，然后去他们公司看了一眼，回车上时居然把iPhone的面给摔裂了。今天有空去苹果店换了一台，本来还想给太太也买一台的，发现iPhone 4s已经卖空了。现在要买的人必须晚上9点上网订。第二天去拿，稍微晚点恐怕就要再等第二天了。有意思的是，我先说要买一台，苹果店的人告诉我今天没了，然后我说换一台行不，结果换一台有货。iPhone 4s这个卖法，这个季度的财报要创纪录了。（2011-10-20）
User: Why do buyers need to wait a day while exchange requests are fulfilled immediately? Is priority given to exchanges? I’d be grateful if Apple treated exchanges equally without making me wait. A priority would be a surprise!
网友：为什么要买的需要等一天，要换的却有货呢？是因为要优先保证退换的人可以及时拿到吗？看来我是被“教育”得很好的消费者，如果我要去换，人家告诉我和买的人享受同等待遇而不是要等货源宽松再给我，我就谢天谢地了，如果说我还有优先权，那真是惊喜啊！
You’re normal—most people or companies don’t understand this. (2011-10-23)
你不明白没关系，反正大多数人或公司也不明白，说明你很正常哦。（2011-10-23）
User: Are high-tech companies merely fulfilling consumer demands?
网友：是不是高科技公司也只是满足顾客的消费需求？
I don’t know what a "high-tech company" means. Consumers don’t perceive such distinctions. (2010-10-30)
不知道什么是高科技公司。在消费者眼里其实没有这个东西。（2010-10-30）
I often reflect on the Apple phenomenon. Jobs was an extraordinary consumer-oriented and marketing genius. Their product decisions are breathtaking—no peer dares to do what Apple does. (2010-05-25)
我也常常想苹果现象。乔布斯真是个绝顶聪明的消费者导向大师和市场营销大师。他们在产品上做的很多取舍是让人叹为观止的，同行其他人没人敢做他们做的一些事。（2010-05-25）
User: Apple 5th gen specs are poor. Apple says they don’t compete on hardware—do they compete on software?
网友：苹果5代出来了，配置不好。苹果说他们不拼硬件，那他们拼软件吗？
Experience. (2012-09-16)
体验。（2012-09-16）
User: I think Jobs’ brilliance lies in creating products for users rather than merely catering to demands.
网友：我觉得乔布斯比较牛的是帮用户创造适用的产品，而不是迎合用户的需求。
There’s no fundamental difference. Jobs put himself in users’ shoes—people perceived him as prescient. Isn’t this true for all game-changers? (2012-07-06)
这两者其实没本质区别。乔布斯是把自己当用户，所以别人以为他先知先觉而已。哪一个改变游戏规则的成功者不是这样呢？（2012-07-06）
User: Apple is the epitome of consumer orientation.
网友：苹果是消费者导向的典范。
Apple indeed prioritizes user experience. (2013-04-08)
苹果确实特别在意消费者体验。（2013-04-08）
User: Handling user letters personally isn’t hard, but at Apple’s scale, it’s challenging.
网友：亲自处理用户来信，这个非常不难，但在这个公司的这个位置上非常难。
Not hard? Apple has millions of users—daily emails must number in thousands. Issues flood to Cook’s inbox. Recently, my Apple Cash account had a problem—my assistant emailed Cook directly and received a call from Apple the next day.
非常不难？！苹果用户那么多，每天来信恐怕是数以千计吧？各种问题都会到库克那里的。前段时间我的Apple CASH账号出问题，我的助手就是直接发邮件给库克，然后第二天就接到苹果的人的电话了。
User: You don’t think the Mayor’s mailbox is handled by the mayor himself, right?
网友：您不会觉得市长信箱是市长在亲自处理吧？
You think you’re smart, huh? Here’s a data point: Cook spends ~3 hours daily handling user emails. (2022-09-21)
你肯定觉得自己很聪明是吧？顺便告诉大家一个数据：库克每天早上大概花3个小时处理用户来信。（2022-09-21）
User: Firsthand user feedback is critical. NetEase’s CEO Ding Lei once said their customer service must never be outsourced. Given Apple’s scale, Cook personally handling every email is surprising.
网友：一线用户的反馈真是非常重要，我记得丁磊就说过$网易 (NTES.US)$的客服绝对不能外包，苹果这个体量，库克亲自处理每一个用户来信，还是让我有点意外。
It’s just one feedback channel. Cook forwards most issues to relevant departments. This approach keeps leadership grounded and attuned to user needs. (2022-09-24)
那只是客户反映问题的渠道之一，库克大部分也是直接给相应的部门去处理。这样做非常接地气，比较容易感受到用户的需求。（2022-09-24）
Apple has always focused on user experience—that’s how great products emerge. Some claim Apple’s path will narrow—how amusing. (2013-02-18)
苹果一直聚焦的就是用户体验，所以这样的公司才能出伟大的产品。居然有些人会站在死胡同里说苹果的路会越走越窄，呵呵，有趣。（2013-02-18）
User: Good company cultures emphasize consumers, but shouldn’t we care about markets, Wall Street, or others’ opinions? Aren’t market opinions part of consumer views?
网友：常常提到好公司的企业文化是以消费者为导向，但是又常说我们不能太在意市场，太在意华尔街和别人的看法。别人和市场的看法也算消费者的看法吧？
"Not caring" refers to ignoring short-term behaviors or expectations. For example, not caring about Wall Street means not worrying about its short-term views. Short-term opinions are votes, long-term are weights. Wall Street wants Apple to release low-cost phones for market share, but Apple focuses on the best products—thus disappointing Wall Street short-term. (2013-03-07)
说不在意的是指应该不在意短期行为或期望。比如不在意华尔街的看法指的是不在意华尔街短期的看法。短期的看法是投票器，长期才是称重器。比如华尔街希望苹果出低价机多占领市场份额，而苹果想的是做最好的产品，所以短期就让华尔街失望了。（2013-03-07）
User: Does "Think Different" hinder Apple’s consumer orientation?
网友：Think different的理念是不是影响了苹果更好地做到消费者导向？
"Think Different" is extraordinary—its long-term power is immense. In fact, it inherently includes consumer orientation, as that’s the premise. (2020-11-27)
Think different其实非常了不起，长期而言力量是巨大的。Think different 其实是内含消费者导向的，因为那是前提。（2020-11-27）
Apple enters a product category not for timing but because it wasn’t ready or satisfied with its product. The core criterion is "What can I do for users?" Years ago, rumors spread about an Apple TV. I asked: What can Apple do with such a large TV? Apple didn’t release it. (2023-06-13)
苹果进入一个产品的时机往往不是因为苹果在择时，而是因为苹果在这之前还没准备好或者说苹果还不满意自己的产品。苹果推出产品的最重要的基点是“我到底能为用户做什么”。很多年前，网上疯传苹果会推苹果电视，我说那么大一台电视，苹果能做什么？结果苹果确实没推。（2023-06-13）
From Apple’s perspective, it focuses on what consumers gain, not business success. Based on this, I predicted Apple wouldn’t release an Apple TV. Years ago, I thought Apple Car wouldn’t emerge soon unless technical conditions met Apple’s standards. (2024-02-05)
苹果的角度一般是看能不能给消费者带来点什么，而不是生意上能不能成功。根据这个观点，我推断出苹果不会推苹果电视机，前些年我还认为苹果车大概率不会在近些年见到，除非技术条件达到了苹果的要求。（2024-02-05）
Apple indeed canceled its EV project! (2024-02-28)
苹果果然取消了电动车项目！（2024-02-28）
User: When rumors first spread about Apple’s EV, Duan said: "Apple is unlikely to make an EV." After years of research, Apple abandoned it. Apple is truly rational. Duan said, "The best way to stop something unsuitable long-term is to stop now!"
网友：记得一开始传苹果要做电动车的时候，大道说过：“苹果不太可能做电动车。”苹果花了那么多时间、人力、物力研究电动车，最终还是放弃了。苹果真是理性啊。大道说的，“长远看不合适的东西最合适的办法就是现在就停下来！”
Over a decade ago, rumors spread about Apple TVs. An industry veteran told me he saw prototypes. I said you might not understand Apple—prototypes prove nothing. Similarly, around the same time, someone asked if iPhone would go large-screen, I said yes. Though it took 3 years. (2024-03-02)
10多年前曾经盛传苹果要推电视机，有业内资深人士甚至告诉我他已经看到样机了。我说，你可能不太了解苹果，样机不说明任何问题。同理，差不多的时期，有人问我iPhone会不会出大屏，我说一定会的。尽管后来还是等了3年。（2024-03-02）
In the final chapter of Steve Jobs—"Legacy: An Illustrious Innovation Paradise"—I’ve reread his self-reflection many times. Between the lines, a soul shines brightly despite its dark sides.
《乔布斯传》最后一章“遗产：无比辉煌的创新天堂”中的一段自述，我反复读了很多遍，字里行间跃然纸上的是一个虽有阴暗面却始终闪亮的灵魂。
Jim Collins summarized in Built to Last: Great companies pursue purposes beyond profit. Jobs and Apple exemplified this perfectly. (2014-01-31)
吉姆·柯林斯在《基业长青》中曾经总结过伟大企业的其中一项特质是利润之上的追求，乔布斯和他的苹果给予了这项特质以最完美的诠释。（2014-01-31）
User: Even the best companies decline without excellent management. Won’t great managers eventually leave, making the company unworthy of investment?
网友：是不是再好的公司如果没有优秀的管理人，迟早会衰落，就像苹果。可是优秀的管理人员迟早会离开公司，那这个公司是不是就不值得投资了？
Has Apple declined? Apple has never been stronger! This means: Without a strong culture, there can’t be a great company. Jobs aimed to build a strong culture—and succeeded! Only strong cultures attract and retain talent. Those who can’t grasp this will trade stocks forever. (2014-02-02)
苹果衰落了吗？苹果其实从没有像现在这么强大过！这段话的意思是，没有强大的文化，就不会有伟大的公司。乔布斯就是想建立强大的企业文化并且确实做到了！只有强大的企业文化才能不断吸引到好的人才并留住他们。不能理解这点的人们大概就只能炒一辈子股票了。（2014-02-02）
# 7. Tim Cook: One of Steve Jobs' Greatest Inventions (库克是乔布斯最伟大的发明之一)
User: Do you favor Apple’s culture or its CEO?
网友：您是看好苹果公司的文化，还是看好其CEO？
I used to think Jobs was a clockmaker, but recently realized Apple couldn’t have become what it is today under Jobs alone. Today, Jobs’ role isn’t as critical. Even if Jobs never returned, Apple would keep moving forward on its own inertia. Why did Apple’s board rehire Jobs after firing him? That’s no easy feat. (2011-01-23)
我曾经一直认为乔布斯是个造钟人，最近突然觉得只有乔布斯的苹果是不可能成为今天这个样子的。今天的苹果，乔布斯的作用已经不是那么大了。就算乔布斯不打算再回来，今天的苹果也会靠惯性向前的。还有就是，当年的苹果董事会为什么会在赶走乔布斯后又能请他回来呢？这可不是容易做到的事。（2011-01-23）
The Built to Last series called Jobs a "time-teller." So around 2002–2003, when Apple’s market cap was ~$5 billion (cash similar), I skipped it due to this book’s influence. Fortunately, in early 2011, I realized Jobs was actually a clockmaker who also told time, and Cook was a better CEO (more rational). After grasping these two points, I bought in… (2020-01-07)
《基业长青》这套书专门说过乔布斯是个“报时人”，所以大概2002、2003年第一次看苹果时（当时市值好像只有大约50亿美元，现金也是差不多这个数），我受这本书的影响，没太认真看就直接跳掉了。还好2011年初突然想明白了，觉得乔布斯实际上是个恰好也会报时的“造钟人”，而且库克是个更好的CEO（更理性）。想通这两点后，就开始下手买了……（2020-01-07）
User: What event made you realize Jobs was a great clockmaker?
网友：是什么事情让您突然悟到乔布斯还是一个很好的造钟人？
Because I saw the clock. (2012-03-29)
因为我看见那个钟了。（2012-03-29）
In fact, Cook is a better CEO than Jobs. Cook is more rational and deeply understands Jobs’ vision. When I met an investing veteran recently, I said Cook is actually a better CEO. He replied: “I think so too.” Built to Last called Jobs a time-teller, but Jobs was also a great clockmaker. Cook is essentially one of Jobs’ greatest inventions (discoveries). (2018-08-07)
其实，库克是个比乔布斯更好的CEO。库克更理性，同时骨子里对乔布斯的追求非常理解。前段时间见到一个投资界的老前辈时，我说我认为库克其实是个更好的CEO，他老人家说：“其实我也这么认为。”《基业长青》里说乔布斯是个报时人，其实乔布斯同时还是个非常好的造钟人，库克其实就是乔布斯最伟大的发明（发现）之一。（2018-08-07）
User: I understand Jobs well but have bias against Cook, possibly refusing to accept Apple’s CEO transition. I’ll review recent 10 years of product launches.
网友：我很了解乔布斯，但对库克有偏见，可能是我内心拒绝承认苹果的CEO已经变更为库克了。我会好好看近十年的发布会。
Jobs’ choice of Cook was absolutely logical—this is actually Jobs’ greatest contribution to Apple! Disrespect toward Cook stems from misunderstanding Jobs. In 2011, realizing this led me to invest in Apple—a decision I believe was correct. My ability to see Cook as a good CEO might relate to my own experience. Though less technical than Cook (far less), I built and managed a successful company. Having interacted with Cook, I deeply respect him as a trustworthy person. I’ll hold Apple for a long time—I believe in what I see and understand. (2022-10-19)
乔布斯选库克是绝对有道理的，这其实也是乔布斯对苹果的最大贡献！对库克的不敬其实是因为对乔布斯的不了解。2011年我就是想通了这个道理才决定开始投资苹果的，看起来我确实做了一件对的事情。我能理解库克能成为好的CEO可能跟我自己的经历有关。我本人不那么懂技术（远不如库克），但不影响我创立和经营一家好公司。我跟库克打过交道，我很喜欢他，觉得他是一个绝对值得信任的人。我认为我还会继续持有苹果很久很久的时间。我相信我看到和理解的东西。（2022-10-19）
User: After reading Steve Jobs, I finally understand why Apple is great. Jobs controlled everything from strategy to details with 100% focus—both strategy and execution were flawless.
网友：看了《乔布斯传》，终于明白苹果公司为什么伟大了。无论从战略到细节，乔布斯都100%全力掌控，战略和执行都到位。
Take novels with a grain of salt. For most people, reading this book is just entertainment, leading to片面 conclusions like Apple failing without Jobs. Interestingly, Microsoft shares my view: Apple is stronger without Jobs. (2012-01-25)
小说的东西不可全信。对多数人来讲，看这本书只是看了个热闹，很多人会得出很片面的结论，比如没有乔布斯的苹果会不行，等等。有趣的是微软得出的结论和我一样，就是没有乔布斯的苹果更厉害。（2012-01-25）
# 8. Maintaining Cash Neutrality (维持现金中性)
Apple’s strategy is clear: maintain cash neutrality—keep enough funds for operations and return excess via dividends or buybacks. Apple has no substantial debt, but repatriating overseas profits incurs high U.S. taxes. Thus, Apple uses overseas assets as collateral to issue bonds in the U.S. During low-interest periods, Apple issued long-term bonds to buy back shares—a great deal for shareholders. How overseas funds eventually return remains unclear to me, but governments occasionally offer favorable exchange rates for repatriation. Though I haven’t studied financial reports, I simply trust Cook’s logic. (2024-04-30)
苹果的策略非常清晰，就是维持现金中性，大致意思就是留够运营需要的资金后，多出来的钱都通过派息或者回购返还给股东。苹果应该是没有实质性债务的，但海外赚的钱回美国税比较高，所以苹果可以用美国海外的钱（或可流动资产）做抵押在美国发债。前几年利息低的时候苹果发了很多长债，然后用这些钱的一部分回购了股份，股东们赚大了哈。不过，海外的钱最后怎么回到公司我还没搞明白过，但看到过某些年政府会开个小口子让钱以比较优惠的汇率回美国。我没看过财报，有时间的人可以去研究，我就简单相信库克说的逻辑就好了。（2024-04-30）
User: If management can use cash well, better not to pay dividends. Dividends incur taxes. If management can’t, then pay dividends.
网友：如果管理层能用好现金最好是少分红不分红，分红还要交税的，如果管理层无法用好现金，那就应该分红。
Apple’s culture avoids reckless cash use—simple as that. (2012-01-27)
苹果的文化不会乱用现金的，就这么简单。（2012-01-27）
User: Do you prefer stock buybacks or dividends?
网友：您觉得回购股票好还是分红好？
I prefer dividends for simplicity and transparency. Buybacks depend on price judgment—harder to assess. (2012-02-24)
我觉得分红简单且透明。回购则总是和价格有关，公司需要花时间去判断股价是否够便宜，有点难。（2012-02-24）
“Apple pays $2.65 per share dividend and buys back $10 billion in stock.” (News)
“苹果每股派息2.65美元，回购100亿美元股票。”（新闻）
This spending approach only grows the value. Dividends could be higher, but overseas repatriation taxes make sense. Overall, Apple is starting to drizzle.
这个花钱法只会越花越多嘛。分红也许该再多些才好，不过由于海外钱回美国要打很多税，这样可能也有道理。总的来讲，开始下毛毛雨了。
Dividends and growth aren’t inherently linked—the logic connecting them is flawed. Today, Apple is rational: excess cash may go to dividends, but buybacks require price assessment. (2012-03-19)
分红和增长其实没有必然联系，把这两种联系在一起的逻辑不通。现在的苹果更理性，现金太多没用很可能会用于派息，但回购要麻烦些，因为需要判断股价高低。（2012-03-19）
User: As Duan said, Apple remains undervalued today. Should Apple prioritize buying back shares?
网友：段哥说了，今天的苹果依然便宜。那么苹果的超额现金是否应该优先回购自家股票呢？
For management, buybacks require price judgment, while dividends are simpler. I estimate Apple will plan dividends and buybacks after reserving cash, with buybacks under certain conditions. If I were Apple’s CEO, I’d announce annual plans: 40% buybacks, 40% dividends, 20% retained. (2012-02-07)
对于管理层而言，回购的问题是需要判断股价是否便宜，但派息则更简单。我估计苹果在留够现金后会有个派息和回购的计划，回购只是在一定情况下实施。如果我是苹果的CEO，就简单宣布以后每年的获利拿40%出来回购，40%派息，20%留下。（2012-02-07）
User: Buffett said if he were Cook, he’d buy back shares during Apple’s stock slump.
网友：巴菲特谈苹果股价低迷时，说我若是库克就回购。
Apple has been buying back shares—new plans shouldn’t launch until the initial $100 billion is completed. Large-scale buybacks take time to plan. Long-term, low prices benefit Apple: buying cheap shares helps long-term shareholders. Extreme example: Assume Apple’s stock stays flat for 3 years, earning $45 billion annually. With ~$140 billion cash, retaining $40 billion for operations and $30 billion for dividends, Apple could invest $200 billion in buybacks. By then, Apple’s market cap would drop to ~$200 billion. If Apple earns $50–60 billion annually, sustaining a $200 billion valuation would be unlikely. (2013-03-05)
苹果其实一直在回购，在前面100个亿没回购完以前是不应该出新的回购计划的。另外，这么大的回购计划可能也需要时间去制定，不能有纰漏。长期来讲，股价低对苹果没任何坏处，回购到便宜的股票实际上对长期股东也非常好。举个极端的例子：假设苹果股价在这里不动3年，苹果每年赚450亿，3年后加上现在手里的现金资产近1400亿，手里留400亿周转，再去掉分红300亿，苹果可以投2000亿进去回购，那3年后苹果的市值就只有2000亿左右了。那个时候苹果可能一年可以赚500多亿或者600多亿（如果不是更多的话），很难再继续在2000亿市值上待着吧？（2013-03-05）
User: If Apple only raises dividends without large-scale buybacks ($20+ billion/year), does it signal poor outlook?
网友：假如苹果只宣布提高分红，而不大量回购股票（一年至少200亿美元以上），是否可以判断苹果对自己的前景不乐观？
Any stock has only one true buyer: the company itself.
其实任何股票都只有一个真正的买家，那就是公司自己。
Apple holds far more cash than needed for operations—it will return it to shareholders appropriately. Investors should assume this; otherwise, it’s speculation. Viewing buybacks as timely opportunities makes sense since many are stuck at current prices, and rebounds may be slow. If I were Apple, I’d borrow to buy back shares now, as dividends exceed interest costs. Repatriate overseas funds during future windows. (2013-04-19)
苹果现在拥有远多于运营需要的现金，所以苹果一定会用他们认为合适的办法还给股东，这是人们在投资苹果时应该认定的，不然就是投机。之所以认为这是个回购好机会的理由，因为这个价位以上套住的人很多，股价很可能不会反弹得太快，所以苹果有机会买到好价钱。我如果是苹果，现阶段宁愿贷款也要回购，因为分红都比利息高了。等将来有窗口时再将海外的钱汇回来就行。（2013-04-19）
User: With so much cash, how would you spend it as Cook?
网友：苹果那么多现金，您要是库克您会怎么花？
If I were Cook, I’d follow his approach: reserve needed funds and prioritize buybacks. This buyback ends by 2015—more will follow. Best if the stock stays flat, letting others sell to Apple. At this pace, in 10 years, I’d own Apple entirely and decide to delist it. (2013-04-26)
如果我是库克，用现金的办法和他一样，就是留够需要的尽量用来回购。这次的回购在2015年底以前结束，相信后面还会有很多类似的回购。最好股价别动，然后别人都把股票卖给苹果了，按这个速度，10年内我就是苹果唯一股东啦，然后我会决定下市的。（2013-04-26）
User: With such a great company, maybe Buffett is buying Apple, pushing it to $500.
网友：这么好的公司，也许巴菲特正在买入苹果股票，很快会到500美元的。
I don’t want Apple’s stock to rise. Stability ensures cheaper buybacks. (2013-04-28)
我不希望苹果股票涨。最好是几年都不涨，这样回购价钱就可以低一些。（2013-04-28）
Last year’s total shares: 5.964 billion → now 5.673 billion, down 290 million.
去年这时总股数是59.648亿，现在是56.735亿，少了2.9亿多股。
At this rate, in 20 years, Apple will be mine.
这样下去20年后苹果公司就是我的了。
User: Continued buybacks will make you hard to stay low-key—wealth rankings await.
网友：再回购下去，段总想要低调就很难了，要进各种财富排行榜了。
20 years is enough.
20年就可以了。
User: Don’t privatize it later!
网友：以后可不能把它给私有化了啊！
If current prices persist for 10 years, privatization will be inevitable. (2015-10-29)
如果目前这个价格能够持续10年的话，想不私有化也难啊。（2015-10-29）
User: Apple announced increased buybacks, and the market offered a discount—very cooperative.
网友：苹果刚宣布增大回购，市场就提供低价机会，感觉特配合。
Apple announces buybacks annually—unlike others, they act decisively. Hope the stock drops further, cash flow strengthens, buybacks continue. In 8–10 years, I might truly be Apple’s major shareholder. (2016-04-28)
反正每年苹果都是要宣布回购的。和有些企业宣布不一样的地方是，苹果是来真的。希望苹果的股价继续掉，现金流继续强悍，回购当然也是会继续的，10年8年后我可能就真是苹果大股东了哈？（2016-04-28）
User: Research shows: Apple completed 30% of its $100 billion buyback plan from 2012–2018, returning $275 billion via buybacks/dividends ($200 billion buybacks). Adding the new $100 billion, total buybacks reach $300 billion. Signals: undervalued Apple stock and shareholder-friendly policies.
网友：查了下资料：苹果公司目前已完成回购1000亿美元计划的30%，从2012年到2018年，苹果已通过股票回购和派息，向股东返现了2750亿美元，其中股票回购就达到了2000亿美元。再加上这1000亿，回购高达3000亿！我觉得这传递了两个信号：苹果认为自己股价不贵；苹果想更多地回馈股东。
I don’t fully grasp your signals, but one fact is clear: combining returned cash and buybacks, Apple’s market cap should’ve already hit $1 trillion. (2018-11-20)
没完全看出你说的信号，但至少可以看到一个事实，就是如果加上已经返还和回购的部分，现在的苹果市值确实早就到了1万亿了。（2018-11-20）
# 9. Valuing Companies You Understand Isn’t Hard (对自己懂的公司估值没那么难)
When I bought Apple in 2011, its market cap was ~$300 billion (stock price: ~$44 after splitting $310/7). With $100 billion net cash and ~$20 billion profit, I estimated 5-year profit growth to ~$50 billion (last year: $59.5 billion). The logic was simple: paying ~$200 billion for a company earning ~$20 billion/year, growing to ~$50 billion/year, with sustained excellence.
我在2011年买苹果的时候，苹果大概3000亿美元市值（当时股价310/7=44），手里有1000亿净现金，那时候利润大概不到200亿。以我对苹果的理解，我认为苹果未来5年左右盈利大概率会涨很多，所以我就猜个500亿（去年595亿）。所以当时想的东西非常简单，用2000亿左右市值买个目前赚接近200亿/年、未来5年左右会赚到500亿/年或以上的公司（而且往后还会继续很好）。
Reaching this conclusion is the hard part—20 years of work for me. Once understood, investing becomes simple arithmetic based on opportunity cost. Many fail to grasp this. A golf partner bought at ~$46 ($320/7) but sold at ~$44 ($310/7) after a dip (now worth over $200 including dividends), explaining why he sold. I stopped discussing investments with him. (2019-05-20)
如果有这个结论，买苹果不过是个简单算术题，你只要根据你自己的机会成本就可以决定了。但得到这个结论非常不容易，对我来说至少20年功夫吧。能得到这个结论，就叫懂了。不懂则千万千万别碰，我有个球友320/7=46买了一些，结果一个回调，310/7就卖了（现在苹果加上分红可能早就超过200了），还跟我讲为什么要卖的道理，从此我不再跟他说投资了。（2019-05-20）
User: Should all companies have valuations, or are some unvaluable?
网友：任何企业都应该有个合理的估值，还是某些企业根本就无法估值？
Most talk about valuations refers to market pricing—this concept is trivial. If you mean something else, you’ll understand.
大部分人说的估值都是指市场应该给什么价，这个概念的估值不说也罢。如果你不是这个意义上的估值，你自然会明白的。
Valuing companies you understand isn’t as hard as people say. The difficulty lies in finding investable businesses. My Apple valuation had two points:
其实对自己懂的公司估值没人们说的那么难，难是难在不容易找到自己想买的公司。我对苹果的估值就是个例子，只有两个方面，简单来说就几句话（大概）：
- Market cap: ~$300 billion, net cash: ~$100 billion, annual profit: ~$40 billion, future profit: ~$50 billion+ (Why care about Apple if you don’t grasp this?).
1.3000多亿市值，1000多亿净现金，一年净利润400亿，未来会到500 亿或更多（看不懂这个的为什么要对苹果感兴趣？）；
- Apple will return profits to shareholders appropriately.
2.苹果会将利润以合适的方式还给股东。
This is harder to grasp in A-shares, explaining why I chose Apple over Moutai. Two years ago, a friend lamented buying Apple at ~$600, as the stock fell. I replied: “You’ll think $600 was cheap in two years.” (2014-11-15)
第二条在A股比较难解，这也是当时博友问我会选苹果还是茅台时，我毫不犹豫选苹果的原因。记得两年前有个朋友在球场碰到我，很沮丧地说他600多买了苹果，那时苹果一路在往下掉。我当时只说了一句：也许两年后你会觉得600很便宜哈。（2014-11-15）
User: At $400–500, I saw Apple as cheap. Now near $1,000, is it expensive?
网友：以前400-500美元的时候，我是能看出便宜，现在近1000美元了，贵吗？
Now it’s not expensive, just less cheap. My options:
现在其实也不算贵，只是没有以前便宜了。就我自己而言，拿着苹果的选择如下：
- Hold, enjoy growth. Future compound returns should be ~8%+.
1.继续持有，享受苹果的成长和成就。现在拿着苹果，在可预见的未来复合回报应该还可以有8%或以上的（这里指的是企业获利）。
- Find better investments. I have none—understand few businesses.
2.找到比苹果更好回报的投资。我目前还没有任何目标，主要是自己能搞懂的生意太少。
- Sell for interest? Unwise. Some suggest selling now, waiting for dips. If they’ve held Apple, they’d be gray-haired by now. (2015-02-27)
3.卖了拿着现金吃利息？这个显然不是太靠谱。当然，有人会说现在卖了等回调再买回来，这么说的人如果有过苹果的话应该早就等得胡子都白了吧？（2015-02-27）
User: You said Apple’s market share would reach 40%, as fast-moving products rarely exceed 40%. Years later, Apple still hasn’t hit 40% (except Japan/U.S.).
网友：您曾经说过苹果的市场份额会到40%，是因为快消品超过40%都很罕见吗？这几年下来苹果确实还没到40%（日本、美国到了）。
40% was a rough estimate. iPhone’s premium vs. cheaper Androids (now far better than Nokia-era smartphones). In a diverse world, people choose differently. My 40% meant: if Apple reaches it, it’s an extraordinary investment. 40% is possible in developed markets, but 25%+ suffices. (2015-04-26)
40%只是毛估估的想法，理由是iPhone虽好，但安卓系统要便宜很多，而且现在的安卓比当年诺基亚的智能机已经好用太多了。这是个多元的世界，总有人会因为各种原因选择不同产品的。我的40%的意思是，如果苹果能有40%的份额的话，这个投资就是极好极好的投资了，而且40%是有可能达到的，因为在很多发达国家或地区目前已经达到40%或以上了。实际上，苹果只要有25%以上的份额就足够好了。（2015-04-26）
User: Is holding easy? Apple dropped 55% (2012–2013), 36% (2015–2016), 40% (2018), 36% (2020). Single-stock U.S. exposure. Friends sold despite knowing I held.
网友：持有容易吗？阿段2011年买了苹果公司后，2012-2013年出现了55%的下跌；2015-2016年出现了36%的下跌；2018年出现了40%的下跌；2020年出现了36%的下跌。美股，几乎单仓一只。甚至阿段身边的朋友知道阿段还持有苹果的情况下，都忍不住卖掉。
Yes, I added during every dip—and still do! Thinking ahead, how can a crash in a beloved stock upset me? Most who bought with me sold early. (2020-11-06)
是啊，苹果每次大跌的时候我都会加码，每一次！想到10年后的时候，自己喜欢的股票大跌怎么会心情不好呢？不过确实绝大部分早年跟我买苹果的都早卖掉了。（2020-11-06）
People often say: trees don’t grow to the sky. They’re right—but Apple keeps growing. (2021-12-08)
前些年一直有人在说，树不会长到天上去的。他们是对的，树确实不会长到天上去，但这不会影响苹果的成长。（2021-12-08）
Apple’s business model is powerful. Future compound returns will likely exceed long-term U.S. Treasuries. I treat Treasuries as the baseline—if a company’s returns can’t surpass them, I filter it out. Apple ranks second. Unless I find a better business, I won’t switch. (2022-01-27)
在我的理解里，苹果的商业模式非常强大，未来的复利回报大概率是会高过长期美国国债的。我总是习惯把美国长期国债作为第一机会成本（就是最低的意思，我如果看不到公司的长期盈利是能超过长期国债的，就会直接过滤掉），苹果第二。所以除非看到未来几十年会好过苹果的公司，不然我不愿意换的。（2022-01-27）
User: Why hold cash instead of buying Apple now?
网友：现在持有现金不急于买入苹果是怎么样的思考角度？
Buffett never fully clarified this. My dilemma: If I sell Apple, what to buy? Short-term bonds seem safest. Do you have better alternatives? Today, I bought 100,000 Apple shares at ~$176, paid upfront but delivery in a year (bought Apple and sold a $200 call option expiring in a year, receiving $21. Max profit: $25/share). I used option proceeds to buy Apple, but this isn’t a valid justification. My main question: Is Apple at $176 cheap? Would you buy the whole company at this price? Same for Alibaba ($180 billion): would you buy it? Tencent? Many answers take time. What factors matter? All of them. (2023-12-16)
这个问题巴菲特其实也没完全说清楚过。我是这么想的：我手里的苹果如果卖掉的话，买什么呢？目前看来只能买短期债券。我的现金目前买什么呢？苹果还是短期债券？当然，如果你有其他更好的投资标的就没有这个问题。我今天其实买了10万股苹果，价格是176美元多一点，钱已经付了，但要一年后交货（就是按现价买了苹果同时卖了一个一年后到期的200的看涨期权，收了21美元。最高收益是赚25美元/股）。今天我有很多期权到期，我把赚到的钱的一部分买了苹果，但这并不是这么花钱的理由。我想得最多的是176美元的苹果便宜吗？按这个价钱你愿意买下这个公司吗？其实对阿里我也是在想同样的问题，1800亿你愿意买下这个公司吗？腾讯我想的也是这个问题。很多问题不是马上能够得到结论的，好在我们有时间。需要考虑什么因素？当然是所有因素啦。（2023-12-16）
AI iPhones will likely trigger a replacement cycle, as iPhones are durable with long upgrade cycles. AI offers a compelling reason to upgrade. Post-cycle, upgrade cycles may stabilize or lengthen. Over 10 years, iPhone will sell ~2.5–3 billion units, active users rising from 1.3–1.4 billion to ~2 billion. Over 10 years, iPhone could generate over $1 trillion in Apple profits. A rough guess: Apple’s annual profit might near $200 billion in 10 years. (2024-07-22)
AI iPhone大概率会导致一波换机潮，主要是因为iPhone太耐用，平均换机周期比较长，很多人都没啥换机的动力。AI iPhone会给大家一个很好的换机理由。不过，换完一轮后大概又会进入相同的换机周期甚至更长的换机周期。估计未来十年内iPhone至少能卖个25亿台或者接近30亿，活跃用户估计也会从13-14亿增加到接近20亿。未来10年里iPhone这个产品大概率会给苹果带来一万亿以上的利润。毛估估乱猜苹果10年后的年利润可能会接近或达到2000亿美元。（2024-07-22）
I previously said Apple isn’t cheap, but Buffett shifting to oil is understandable. I still prefer Apple, as few businesses I understand. Recently, I’ve analyzed Occidental and Chevron for resource potential. Selling Apple calls and Occidental puts.
前段时间我就说过苹果确实不便宜，巴菲特换点到石油是非常容易理解的事情。但目前我也没有太强的意愿拿苹果去换别的公司，主要是我能理解的公司太少。不过，我最近确实花了一点时间去想$西方石油 (OXY.US)$和$雪佛龙 (CVX.US)$这两个石油公司。从占有资源的角度看，这两家公司似乎确实是蛮有价值的。所以我卖了不少苹果的call，同时也卖了不少OXY的put。
Generally, Buffett减持的公司会继续减持。 I won’t sell Apple but welcome Buffett’s reductions. (2024-02-15)
一般来说，巴菲特开始减持的公司是会继续减持的。我不会卖苹果，但很乐意看到巴菲特先生减持一些或更多。（2024-02-15）
User: Explain Occidental’s logic? Buffett keeps adding despite bearish crude markets.
网友：能详细讲讲西方石油的逻辑吗？巴菲特这么长时间频频加仓，可是市场上都是看空原油的。
He bought an oil field at a decent price. Oil scarcity is likely, just unknown when. (2025-03-04)
其实就是按不错的价钱买了个油田。石油资源大概率是会紧缺的，只是不知道什么时候而已。（2025-03-04）
The mountain remains, the ridge unchanged!
山也还是那座山，梁也还是那道梁！
Today, I bought/sold puts for $Apple (AAPL.US)$, $NVIDIA (NVDA.US)$, $Google-C (GOOG.US)$, $TSMC (TSM.US)$, and sold more $Tencent (00700.HK)$ puts.
今天开始买了一些（或者卖put） $苹果 (AAPL.US)$ 、$英伟达 (NVDA.US)$、 $谷歌-C (GOOG.US)$ 、$台积电 (TSM.US)$，一会儿再卖点 $腾讯控股 (00700.HK)$ 的put。
Selling puts feels like playful trading—just avoid margin. If put-in prices look cheap in 10 years, the investment is worthwhile. Flexibility is key. (2025-04-08)
感觉起码要折腾一阵子，卖点put来回一起折腾也许是个好玩的游戏。还是老话，千万别用margin。如果put进来的价格从10年后看回来是便宜的价格，那这个投资就值得做，长短皆宜。（2025-04-08）
User: Apple is heavily impacted by tariffs.
网友：苹果受关税影响挺大的。
In 10 years, the impact may fade. (2025-04-09)
10年后看也许没那么大。（2025-04-09）