5.29英译汉训练 ：双层股权结构的利弊

5.29英译汉训练 ：双层股权结构的利弊

Snap, the disappearing messaging app, caused uproar among investors last year after it sold $3.4bn of stock with no voting rights during its initial public offering.

阅后即焚消息应用Snapchat母公司Snap在去年首次公开发行(IPO)时发行了34亿美元的不带投票权的股票，引起投资者的轩然大波。

It was the latest sign for many investors that the long-held principle of “one share, one vote” was being eroded by companies, which readily accept fund managers and pension funds’ money but were, the investors believed, increasingly unwilling to give them sufficient say on how those businesses were run.

对许多投资者来说，这是最新的一个迹象，表明“一股一票”的长期原则正在被企业侵蚀，这些企业欣然接受基金经理和养老基金的资金，但投资者相信，它们越来越不愿意在企业运营方面给他们充分的话语权。

In the months since, a growing number of investors have stepped up their lobbying efforts against what they see as the watering down of governance standards globally, warning that shareholders need to be able to hold companies to account.

在此后的几个月里，越来越多的投资者加大游说努力，反对这种他们认为削弱全球治理标准的做法，并警告股东需要保持向企业问责的能力。

Deborah Gilshan, environmental, social and governance investment director at Standard Life Aberdeen, one of Europe’s largest-listed fund houses, says: “One share, one vote is the bedrock of corporate governance. It has always been the case that you should have a vote for every share you own.”

标准人寿阿伯丁(Standard Life Aberdeen)的环境、社会和治理(ESG)投资总监德博拉•吉尔山(Deborah Gilshan)说：“一股一票是公司治理的基石。 一直以来都是你拥有的每一股都应该有一份投票权。”标准人寿阿伯丁是欧洲规模最大的上市基金公司之一。

The focus on unequal voting rights comes as asset managers are under growing pressure to hold companies to account. Many pension funds and other clients are increasingly asking their fund managers to ensure companies behave responsibly.

在投资者关注不平等投票权之际，资产管理公司日益面临对企业问责的压力。许多养老基金和其他客户越来越多地要求其基金经理确保企业行为负责任。

Mary Leung, head of advocacy for Asia Pacific at the CFA Institute, the global body for investment professionals, says: “We are seeing increasing engagement between investors and companies and it would be sad to see that decline because investors have fewer rights.”

全球投资专业人士协会特许金融分析师协会(CFA Institute)亚太区行业标准倡导部负责人梁家恩(Mary Leung)表示：“我们看到投资者和企业之间的接触越来越多，如果因为投资者拥有的权利变少了而导致这种接触减少，那会很遗憾。”

Three decades ago, dual share classes were uncommon and typically found in family-controlled companies, such as South Korea’s Samsung, Switzerland-based healthcare company Roche and Sweden’s H&M, the retailer. But that changed when Google decided to list in 2004. Rather than follow the long-held practice of offering every shareholder a vote for each share they held, the technology group’s initial public offering featured dual-class shares — giving some shareholders more say than others.

30年前，双层股权结构并不常见，通常出现在家族控制的公司中，例如韩国的三星(Samsung)、瑞士的医疗保健公司罗氏(Roche)和瑞典的零售商H&M。但在2004年谷歌(Google)决定上市后，情况发生了变化。谷歌的IPO并没有遵从一股一票的长期惯例，而是实施了双层股权结构——让一些股东拥有比其他人更多的发言权。

As other west coast companies followed in the footsteps of Google, and the valuation of technology groups grew rapidly, companies with dual-class shares began to account for a bigger proportion of indices, the benchmarks investors used to measure performance. Businesses with unequal voting rights accounted for just 4 per cent of the MSCI World Index by weight in 2004, but the figure now stands at 10 per cent.

随着其他西海岸公司跟随谷歌的脚步，以及科技集团的估值快速增长，拥有双层股权结构的公司开始在指数中占据更大比例——投资者以指数为基准来衡量业绩。2004年，不平等投票权企业在MSCI全球指数(MSCI World index)中的权重仅为4%，但现在权重达到10%。