2013年6月3日 星期一
新聞翻譯 - TIME - The Importance of Pork in China
The
Importance of Pork in China
豬肉對中國的重要性
Chinese government statistics are a black box, but one economic indicator
you can always count on to reflect reality is demand for pork.Pork is so ubiquitous in the Middle Kingdom
that the word for it is the same as meat. And as the Chinese have gotten
richer, they’ve eaten a lot more of it – as exemplified by this week’s $7
billion offer from China ’s
largest meat processor, Shuanghui International, to acquire Smithfield Foods,
the world’s largest pork producer. The Chinese middle class is predicted to
triple in size to 630 million people by 2022, according to a new study released
by the China United States Exchange Foundation, and this new aspirational class
wants meat, cars, better housing, more elaborate white goods – in short, all
the things that the Western middle class wants.
中國政府的人口統計是個黑盒子,但豬肉需求是能反映現實且值得信賴的經濟指標。 豬肉在中國普便到所謂的肉字指的就是豬肉,隨著中國越來越富裕,他們越吃越多,一個例子便是這禮拜中國最大肉類製造商 – 雙匯國際花七十億併購了Smithfield Foods,全球最大的豬肉商。 根據海峽交流基金會公佈新研究指出,中國中產階級預計將在2022年翻三倍到達六億三千萬人, 而這股成長中的人潮想要肉、車、更好的房子、更多精緻的家電,簡單的說,那些西方中產階級想要的東西。
This presents some incredibly opportunities for direct investment into the
U.S. ,
as cash-rich Chinese firms look to ramp up acquisitions of Western companies.
At less than $2 billion a year, direct investment from China to the U.S. is miniscule relative to the
sizes of either economy. Part of that is due to the fact that a number of
recent Chinese acquisitions of U.S.
firms have been blocked due to national security or anti-trust concerns.
這代表了一個相當難得可以投資美國的機會,因此手上現金滿滿的中國公司購併西方公司的現象逐漸升溫,中國每年對美國投資不到二十億元,相較於兩國的經濟來說都是微乎其微的,部分原因是由於近來中國併購美國公司的數量被國家安全或反壟斷法阻擋的關係。
While it’s hard to argue that bacon is a strategic asset, the Smithfield ’s deal will
certainly be put through the regulatory paces. Yet as Joe Nocera and I
discussed on this week’s episode of WNYC’s Money Talking, it might also present
an opportunity for the U.S. to force the Chinese to open up their own markets,
in which state-owned firms have been playing a bigger role in recent years, and
also to do their part to protect the intellectual property of American firms
via a more robust legal system. These issues and many other economic challenges
will surely be on table when President Obama and Chinese premier Xi Jinping
meet next week in Los Angeles .
很難去爭論說培根到底是不是戰略性資產,不論如何,Smithfield併購案當然會經過監控的階段,Joe Nocera和我在這禮拜的WNYC’s Money Talking討論到,這也意味著一個美國逼迫中國打開其市場的機會,一個近年來國有企業佔據大多舞台的市場,也要透過更健壯的合法系統保護我們美國公司的人力資源。 這些議題與其他經濟挑戰將會在下禮拜美國總統歐巴馬與中國總書記習近平在洛杉磯會面時被搬上檯面。
2013年6月2日 星期日
新聞翻譯 - TIME - The ‘World’s Longest Labor Strike’ Ends in a Whimper
The ‘World’s Longest Labor Strike’ Ends in a Whimper
世上最長的勞工抗議在嗚咽中結束
On Fathers Day 2003, all of the 130 workers at the Congress Hotel in Chicago walked out on the job, protesting management’s decision to cut wages and bring in minimum-wage, subcontracted workers.
2003年的父親節,因管理層決定減薪並引進最低薪的外包員工,芝加哥國會酒店的130位員工罷工。
Ten years later, the union — United Here’s Local 1 — is giving up its fight, and not because management gave in to any of the union’s demands. It simply decided that the fight had gone on long enough, and that its resources and attention would be better spent elsewhere. “The decision to end the Congress strike was a hard one, but it is the right time for the Union and the strikers to move on,” said Local 1 President Henry Tamarin. “The boycott has effectively dramatically reduced the hotel’s business. The hotel treats their workers and customers equally poor and the community knows it. There is no more to do there.”
十年後,工會放棄了,不是因為管理層給予了工會的要求,而是因為實在鬥爭的太久了,資源與關注若放在其他地方會更有用。 「結束國會抗議是個困難的決定,但是時候工會與抗議者向前看了。」,本地一號總裁Henry Tamarin說:「聯合抵制已經有效且戲劇化地削弱了飯店的營運。」 飯店對待員工跟客人一樣差,而社會已經知道了,已經沒有什麼我們能做的了。
Of course, the point of a strike isn’t just to hurt the employer’s business, it’s to improve pay and working conditions for employees. And after a staggeringly long strike, which United Here claims is the “worlds longest,” they came up empty handed. The significance of this particular loss for labor is probably not all that great in the grand scheme of things. These are just 130 workers, and sometimes management will resist demands even if strikers are able to hurt business significantly.
當然了,抗議的目的並不是為了傷害雇主的企業,而是為了增進薪水與工作條件,經過了這工會聲稱是他們徒手興起,世上最長的抗議後,其工人損失的意涵在這宏偉計畫中恐怕不是好事。 他們只是130個工人,而且有些時候就算罷工能夠對企業造成值得注目的傷害,管理層還是會拒絕其要求。
But the United Here’s loss in this battle is symbolic of more than just one unsuccessful strike. During the 2008 primary, when organized labor split its support between Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama, United Here was the first union to back Obama. As a Senator in 2007, Obama even picketed with Strike First outside the Congress Hotel, in solidarity with striking workers. And when President Obama was first elected in 2008, the labor movement was optimistic that it would finally have the support it needed in Washington to reverse decades of decline in the power of private sector unions. According to Randy Shaw, an attorney and labor activist, President Obama’s background as a community organizer and large Democratic majorities in Congress made the labor movement giddy that things would finally begin to reverse course.
但工會在這場鬥爭中的損失,更是其他更多失敗抗議的象徵。 在2008年選舉,當工人組織分成兩邊各支持Hilary Clinton與 Barack Obama,工會是第一個支持Obama的;當2007年,Obama還是參議員時,他甚至護衛了在國會酒店外的抗議人潮,與抗議勞工團結一致,而當Obama總統第一次於2008年參選時,勞工方是樂觀的,因為終於在華盛頓有了需要的力量去逆轉私營部門工會力量的衰弱。 根據勞工活動家同時也是律師的Randy Shaw所言,總統Obama身為社群組織者和國會多數民主黨,讓勞工運動對事情會展開逆轉感到頭暈。
But that optimism turned out to be unfounded. The signature piece of legislation, the so-called Employee Free Choice Act, that Democrats pushed in one form or another from 2006 through 2010 would have required businesses to recognize a union immediately once 50% or more workers had signed a card saying they supported it. (Under current law, businesses often have many months to mount an anti-unionization campaign after a majority of workers have declared they want a union, and before a secret ballot of workers has the final say.) The bill would also have established a binding arbitration process for unions and businesses that can’t agree on a contract, and it would have increased penalties for businesses that violate labor law.
那樂觀最後證明是毫無根據的,民主黨從2006年到2010年再數個改革中所提出”雇員自由選擇法案”,將要求企業一旦超過50%的勞工在卡上簽名表明支持時,必須馬上承認一個工會。(現在的法律,在多數員工宣稱他們想要一個工會或員工的不記名投票做出抉擇前。,企業常常有許多個月可以進行反工會活動,) 該法案也對不同意合約的工會與企業創建了具約束力的仲裁程序,且會增加違反勞工法的企業懲處。
But fierce Republican opposition and the twin priorities of passing stimulus and healthcare legislation sank the reform effort before it could get off the ground. “I don’t think the movement anticipated how difficult it would be to pass labor law reform,” Shaw says. “There was a general overconfidence, and there was never a move to get something passed short of the ideal, so in the end, nothing got passed.”
但共和黨激烈反對且健保法規將會在起步時擊沉改革的付出。 「我不認為運動會預期到通過勞工法改革會有多困難」她說。 太多大眾自信可以,且從來沒有任何動作讓它更加完善,所以,到最後沒有什麼可以通過。
Following the election of Scott Brown in 2010, the Democrats lost their supermajority in the Senate, and their ability to pass much of anything at all — let alone anything as despised by Republicans as labor law reform. And unions have been public enemy number one for many on the right in recent years. Political figures like Wisconsin Governor Scott Walker have made major strides in curbing the power of public unions, and Republicans in Washington have done their best to hobble the National Labor Relations Board — which has been without five confirmed members since 2003.
來看Scott Brown於2010的競選,民主黨失去了在參議院的絕對多數權、簡直能通過大部份法案的權力、更不用說像被共和黨鄙視的勞工法改革,而工會更是近年來右派的頭號公敵。 像威斯康辛州長Scott Walker的政治人物在遏止工會力量上可說有重大進展,共和黨也在華盛頓盡全力拖延從2003年就缺少五位確定成員的國家勞工關係委員會。
All of this activity leaves the labor movement, and those pushing for the rights of workers and the poor, at a crossroads. In an effort to raise the living standards of the poor and middle class, the left has used both indirect government support (through laws that allow and even encourage unionization) and direct government support (through programs like Social Security and welfare). And for most of the 20th century, this two-pronged approach worked fairly well. Despite all the changes that occured in the U.S. economy, the share of company profits that go to workers (versus owners) remained steady at roughly 66%. But for the past decade, the ownership class has been taking more and more of the pie. This dynamic shows itself in stagnant wage growth, a problem that has been plaguing America since the 1980s.
全部的動作讓勞工活動與那些爭取勞工與窮人權力的人處於一個十字路口,左派為了提高窮人與中產階級的生活水準,他們使用了間接政府支持(藉由法律與提倡工會化)與直接政府支持(藉由社會福利保障),而在20世紀,這雙管齊下的方法出奇的好,雖然在美國經濟上發生了一些改變,但大約66%的公司獲利到員工身上。 但過去十年裡,有產階級不斷鯨吞獲利,這浮動數據本身表現了薪水成長的停滯,一個從1980年代便不斷困擾美國的問題。
Ironically, it may very well be the relative strength of today’s welfare programs that is undermining the urgency of a strong labor movement. The labor movement’s greatest successes have often come during very dire economic times. The height of the movement’s power was during the Great Depression, when it’s estimated that more than 25% of the labor force was out of work and, unlike today, there were no programs like food stamps or temporary federal welfare and very little in the way of unemployment insurance. For workers in the early part of the 20th century, the decision was either to organize or face dire poverty.
諷刺的是,這很可能助長了破壞勞工運動急迫性的現代福利制度。 勞工運動最偉大的成功總出現在悲慘的經濟體中,勞工運動的最強力量總在大衰退時,當時估計有25%的勞工罷工,不像現代,那時沒有糧票或臨時聯邦福利,且幾乎沒有失業保險,對二十世紀早期的勞工,那是組織對抗或面對悲慘貧困的抉擇。
Today, it’s a different story. Federal and state governments spend more than $1 trillion annually on welfare programs, from the earned income tax credit to food stamps, to improve the lives of the working poor. And so while the labor movement has been very eager to support a robust welfare state, it may one of the factors that has made joining a union less appealing for much of the working class.
現代則完全不一樣,聯邦與州政府每年在糧票上花超過一兆稅收,增進勞工與窮人的生活,且勞工運動熱切的支持有良好福利制度的洲,這或許是其中一個因素導致加入公會不怎麼吸引勞工。
新聞翻譯 - A Starbucks for Pot? National Chain of Marijuana Stores in the Works
A Starbucks for Pot? National Chain of Marijuana Stores in the Works
一個大麻界星巴克? 國際大麻連鎖店正進行中
一個大麻界星巴克? 國際大麻連鎖店正進行中
If
one newly converted pot-smoking visionary has his way, the Washington-based
company he created will become the Starbucks or Coca Cola of the cannabis
industry. He even has plans to import marijuana from south of the
border–currently illegal according to international law—and he’s apparently got
the former president of Mexico
on board.
如果這位近來轉型的大麻夢想家有其能耐,那麼他創建於華盛頓的公司有可能變成菸草產業中的星巴克或可口可樂! 他甚至還計劃要從墨西哥進口有違國際法的菸草,而他顯然對前墨西哥總統有一套。
Jamen
Shively is probably not the kind of person you’d picture selling pot. He used
to be a manager at Microsoft,
and wears a suit and tie, a short preppy haircut, and nerdy glasses. He talks
like a nerd too. When asked by the Seattle Times if
he was worried about the federal government cracking down on his planned retail
cannabis operations, Shively quoted the famous words of Obi-Wan Kenobi in “Star Wars“:
“He said ‘Darth, if you strike me down I will become more powerful than you can
possibly imagine.’”
Jamen
Shively可能不是你想像中販賣大麻的那種人,他曾經是微軟的經理,穿西裝打領帶,雅痞的髮型戴著宅男眼鏡,而他談吐也像個宅男。
有次西雅圖時報問他對於聯邦政府調查他意圖大麻零售的操作是否會擔心時,他引述了星際大戰中Obi-Wan Kenobi所說的:「Darth,如果你擊敗我,我將變成你無法想像般的強大」。
Nonetheless,
Shively says
that cannabis is in his blood. He claims that his great grandfather, a
government official in the Phillipines in the late 1890s when it was a Spanish
colony, was the world’s largest grower of hemp at the time. Shively ’s planned chain of retail marijuana
stores is named after this great cannabis cultivator: Diego Pellicer (pronounced
“Payee-Sayr”).
但Shively說大麻早已流入他血液之中,他說他的曾祖父在1890年的菲律賓擔任政府官員,當時仍是西班牙的殖民地,是全世界最大的煙草種植者。Shively計畫中的煙草零售鏈便是以偉大的煙草栽種者 Diego Pellicer命名。(發音為Payee-Sayr)
At
a press conference in Seattle on Thursday, Shively announced plans for
Diego Pellicer to become the first national retail brand focused on selling
medical-use and adult-use (recreational) cannabis alike. “Ladies and gentlemen,
this is a unique moment in history,” Shively
said. “The Berlin Wall of
the prohibition cannabis is weak, and it is crumbling as we speak.”
一場位於西雅圖,禮拜二召開的記者會中,Shively宣佈Diego Pellicer將成為第一家醫療與成人使用相關的跨國大麻零售品牌。 「各位先生與小姐,這是一個在歷史上獨一無二的時刻」Shively
說道:「有如柏林之牆般大麻禁令已十分脆弱,我們說話的同時,它更在崩壞中。」
Despite
the fact that “the silence from our nation’s capital has been
deafening,” and tons of uncertainties concerning the
legality of his planned operations, Shively
said that the acquisition of several professional cannabis dispensaries are in
the works for Diego Pellicer, and that soon it will be a well-known retail
brand along the West Coast.
儘管國家首都的沉默早已震耳欲聾,且還有許多關於他計畫中的操作的合法不確定性,但Shively說數家權威診療所的大麻來源已與Diego Pellicer接洽,很快的,Diego Pellicerr將在西岸成為具有盛名的零售品牌。
The
biggest controversy is that there are also international plans for the brand. Mexico’s former President Vicente Fox appeared next
to Shively on Thursday, explaining that because
the black market for drugs has caused violence and crime throughout Latin
America, he was in favor of strictly regulated legal marijuana in the U.S.
最大的爭議在於該品牌有跨國計畫,墨西哥前總統Vicente Fox也在Shively之後於星期二露面,說明由於毒品黑市在拉丁美洲造成了暴力與犯罪,他贊同美國嚴格限制大麻合法性。
“In
Mexico ,
we welcome this initiative, because the cost of the war [on drugs] is becoming
unbearable,” Fox said. He noted how the illegal drug market has hurt tourism
and other Mexican businesses, and caused the deaths of thousands of people.
“All this because our neighbor to the north represents such a gigantic consumer
market” for marijuana. While he voiced many concerns about how marijuana laws
and regulations would be enforced, and he stressed that all sorts of details
would have to be negotiated to ensure safety and compliance, Fox’s appearance
alone at the press conference was basically an endorsement of some kind of
marijuana trade agreement between Mexico and the U.S.
「在墨西哥,我們很歡迎這主動的法案,因為毒品戰爭的花費已無法支撐」FOX說道,他提到毒品市場如何傷害到觀光與其他企業,並造成上千人的死亡。
這些都是因為我們在北方的鄰居代表一個巨大的大麻市場,他也提到許多關於大麻法與限制如何被強制執行的擔憂,他也強調全部的細節將需要再協商以保證其安全與承諾,Fox在記者會上的出現,基本上是某種美國與墨西哥大麻交易條約的背書。
Critics
point out that Shively ’s
bold vision has an extremely long way to go before he’s able to create a viable
business, let alone until his stores start producing millions in theoretical
profits. “He needs to attract backers, to intimidate competitors, and to
accustom people to the idea of mass marketing in the marijuana industry,” one
member of the Seattle Times editorial board pointed out. “National branded marijuana has
to go from being a farfetched idea to an ordinary idea, which means people have
to think about it for a while.” The international trade aspect only makes Shively ’s plans more
complicated.
有人批評說Shively大膽的設想在他能夠創造可行的企業、並開始產出百萬元理論上的利潤前,都是空談。
「它需要吸引支持者去恫赫競爭者,並讓人們習慣大麻的大眾行銷」,一位西雅圖時報的編輯指出。
國際大麻品必須從一個牽強的想法變成一個正常的點子,也就是說人們要多思考一下,國際交易方面只會讓Shively的計畫變的更複雜,
If
his dream does become reality, though, Shively
will have created something along the lines of a Starbucks for weed. The
company prefers another parallel: “We will offer a premium-quality,
hand-crafted product,” the Diego Pellicer website states. “Think of us as the
‘Davidoff of marijuana,’ with great attention given from genetics to the
finished product.” (For those, like me, who’d never heard of Davidoff, it’s a brand of high-end tobacco products.)
Taiwan-based Next Media Animation referred to Shively himself as the “Bill Gates of bud” in
a goofy “news” video.
如果他的夢想成真,Shively 將會創造類似大麻星巴克的東西,但公司更喜歡另一種-「我們提供優良、手工產品」,Diego Pellicer網站中說道;「想想我們是大麻裡的大衛杜夫(菸草中的高級品牌),拿著著從基因裡就引人注目的產品」。 台灣壹傳媒在冷笑話新聞中將Shively本身歸類於發芽比爾蓋茲。
Shively將Diego Pellicer核心市場設定於有年紀且富裕、願意為了高品質花大錢的熱愛者,而非年輕菸客。
「我們著重在嬰兒潮出生且富裕的人」,Shively告訴西雅圖電視台:「在品牌研究中,這可是個千億的產業,在資本主義歷史上從未出現過的。
忘了美國吧,在其他地方可是有巨大的空白市場存在呢。」
Despite
Shively ’s
supposed longstanding family ties to marijuana, smoking pot is fairly new to
the budding entrepreneur. He explained to the Puget Sound Business Journal that,
coming of age in the 1980s of “Just say no,” and “This is your brain on drugs,”
he steered clear of the drug. About a year and a half ago, however, a colleague
at Microsoft (and frequent pot smoker) convinced Shively to give it a try. Here’s how Shively described the
experience:
儘管Shively假設大戶人家對大麻、菸草的關聯,對這新進企業來說還相當的新,他對Puget Sound Business Journal解釋:「對於1980年代的”說不”與”這就是吸毒的影響,他遵循得是藥物的正面」。大約是一年半前,一個在微軟的同事說服Shively試試看,而這就是Shively如何形容他的體驗。
“I
tried it and I absolutely loved it. It’s like I was having the most amazing
creative brainstorms. And (I was) seeing life and situations and possibilities
in just a whole new light. It was like living in a whole new dimension. So I started
consuming it about once a month, and I started sharing with people the
experiences I was having, so I sort of became an amateur evangelist of
cannabis.”
我試用了它而且我確實愛上它,好像我在進行有史以來最棒的腦力激盪。
僅在一道光中看了人生、狀況、各種可能性,就好像活在另一個全新的次元中。
所以我大約每個月用上一次,並且開始與人分享我的體驗,我成了一種業餘的大麻福音傳播者。
Shively對大麻的熱忱並未停住,隨著更多州允許使用藥用大麻,且華盛頓與科羅拉多選民同意娛樂大麻的立法,Shiveley 看到了巨大的商機,他常常說他得大麻零售將會比微軟印更多錢。
What’s
more, Shiveley isn’t satisfied simply with the idea that cannabis should be
legal because it’s harmless. He believes pot is genuinely good for you: “I’m
convinced that within five years, marijuana will come to be regarded as a
health food,” he said.
並且,Shiveley並不對大麻因無害合法而輕易滿足,他相信大麻對人們有真誠的好處。
「我將在五年內說服大家,並讓大麻被認為是健康的食物。」Shiveley說。
In
which case, Shiveley is hoping to run the world’s biggest chain of an all-new
breed of very special health food stores.
在這個例子裡,Shiveley希望營運一間世上最大且全新種類的特殊食品商店。
2013年5月26日 星期日
Advanced翻譯 - In Praise of krispy kreme - 2003/12
2003/12
Advanced - In Praise of krispy kreme
當Krispy Kreme Doughnuts在明尼阿波里斯市開第一間門市時,600百位忠誠的粉絲在店前排隊好成為第一個顧客。 發源於卡羅萊納州的連鎖甜甜圈在紐約、拉斯維加斯和達拉斯開店時,也都造成了當地的轟動。
這些關於甜甜圈的轟動是為了什麼? 真的是因為一個傑出的產品,還是不過只是個行銷成功的例子?
看來,兩者皆是。 1937年,這個富有進取心的企業發源於北卡羅萊納、溫斯頓 - 塞勒姆的一個精通製造品牌神話的小店。
他們深耕於熱情、好客的大眾文化、並強調源於西部小鎮的歷史,刻意不使用現代商業廣告,贏得了數百萬位粉絲;有趣的是,他們還很會使用網路作業。
該企業也相當吸引投資者,自從在2000年公開上市後,其股票分割了兩次。
「毫無疑問他們在創造非凡美味產品的想法上有相當大的付出」,行銷博士尼爾.摩根說:「他們開始創造品牌神話,而他們非常的成功」。
所以,他們是怎麼做到的?
他們的經典冰晶甜甜圈有其粉絲也其有厭惡的人,但粉絲熱愛它那大份量的糖衣,還有甜甜圈從輸送帶上熱騰騰地送出的體驗。
Krispy Kreme藉由E-mails與信件來追蹤其粉絲,並到處舉辦具慈善效果的推銷活動,並且在各個市場找出粉絲群中具有公信力的人物,例如:南方幽默作家Roy Blount
Jr. 在The New York
Times裡大大的讚美了他們。
「比起一般付費廣告,靠著口碑大大增加了其可信度」摩根說道,Krispy Kreme擁有不只是會說不錯,而是會大大讚美的粉絲。
如同摩根解釋的,Krispy Kreme藉由網站、聊天室、信件來鎖定目標,並讓他們成為所謂Krispy Kreme大使;在他們進入某個市場時,他們會送給人們帽子、T恤、帽子…等等的紀念品,塑造一個具忠誠度的基礎。
「我們在南邊總有很好的回應,我們也享受廣大媒體的支持」Admits Stan Parker行銷副總裁說:「當我們於1996年在紐約開店時,我們得到了全國的關注,因為那裡到處都是國際級的媒體。」
不意外地,Parker聲稱這一切全都是因為最高品質的產品,但他也承認公司的確有非凡的行銷手法。 「我們不做些傳統的事情,例如廣告。」他說:「我們想要的是融入當地社區裡。」
除了大量的贈品與用批發價義賣並捐給慈善團體,Krispy Kreme也是募款活動的常客。 「去年,我們總共在不同的活動捐出了兩千七百萬美金。」Parker說:「我們常收到幾年前藉由賣我們甜甜圈籌集棒球制服或旅行資金的小孩寄來的信。」
文化的象徵
公司用的是一種社群基礎的方式,與其去買廣告,不如用甜甜圈換廣告去振興昔日美國都還是本土企業的印象。 「毫無疑問的他們試著要讓他們的品牌成為一個文化的標誌。」摩根說道。
一位來自加州的顧問Larraine Segil說道:「Krispy Kreme還有一個優勢在於它相對的便宜,易於上癮,就像星巴克,它符合統計學上大多數人的胃口,也是艱困時刻時,人們可以負擔的小小放縱、消費的起的平凡奢侈」
新聞翻譯 - Time - Google Faces Fresh U.S. Scrutiny Over Market Power
Google Faces Fresh U.S. Scrutiny Over Market Power
Google商業手段再次遭受全美調查
Google just
can’t seem to keep “the man” off its back.
Google似乎就是無法擺脫”某人”的魔爪
It’s only been a few months since Google walked away from
a multi-year federal
antitrust investigation into its search
practices, with the legal equivalent of a slap on the
wrist. Now, Google is said to be facing another antitrust probe,
this time into its dominant position in the market for online display
advertising. The Federal Trade Commission has launched a preliminary inquiry
into whether Google is unfairly using its display ad market power to curb competition
and push companies toward using its other products and services, according to multiple reports.
幾個月前,Google多年來被反壟斷法調查其搜尋服務終告結束,在法律上這可是意味濃厚的警告。 現在Google表示他們將面臨另一波反壟斷法調查,這次則是Google佔據領導地位的網路廣告。
公委會以報告中所指出,初步針對Google是否不公平的利用其廣告力量壟斷競爭,並且促使其他公司使用自己旗下的產品做調查。
The new FTC inquiry, which is in its early stages and may not result in a
formal probe, is focused on Google’s giant DoubleClick unit, which the search
giant purchased in 2008 for $3.1 billion. DoubleClick offers marketers and
publishers tools to help them place and track display and video
ads. Google’s YouTube video service is also a major force in display
advertising. In the first quarter of 2013, Google accounted for 24.1% of the
display ad market, up three points from a
year earlier, according to
data from market reach firm IDC. Yahoo! and Facebook accounted for 9.9% and
9.2%, respectively.
這個公委會先前質疑但可能無法正式調查的是Gooogle在2008年以31億美金購併的DoubleClick公司,也是新調查的重點。 DoubleClick公司提供商人及出版商放置及追蹤網路與影片廣告的工具,而Google的Youtube影片服務也是廣告的主力之一。 在2013年第一季報告中,Google廣告市佔率達24.1%,較去年成長了3%,而根據市場調查公司IDC的資料,Yahoo!與Facebook市佔率則分別為9.9%與9.2%。
Google’s text-based search ads are well known to consumers because they
are present on most Google search result pages. But the company also has
number of advertising products that aren’t consumer-facing, but are designed
for online marketers and publishers. These include the DoubleClick Ad
Exchange, which is an advertising marketplace that generates revenue for
Google, as well as DoubleClick for Publishers, which allows websites to
track ad performance. If Google is using its market power to push companies to
use these or other company products — or is bundling its products together in a
practice known as “tying” — Google could run afoul of federal antirust laws.
Gooogle的關鍵字廣告因總出現在搜尋結果上而被消費者熟知。 同時也擁有非消費者面向的廣告產品,設計給網路行銷或出版商,像是為Google帶來廣告收益的DoubleClick Ad Exchange,而DoubleClick for Publisher則能讓網站追蹤廣告效果。 如果Google用其市場力量促使別人使用自己的產品或者包裝成套裝軟體搭售,則Google的作法將會與反壟斷法牴觸。
Google’s DoubleClick purchase was controversial, and was subject to a
lengthy FTC review that concluded in December
of 2007, paving the way
for the deal. Ultimately,
the FTC decided that “Google’s proposed acquisition of DoubleClick is unlikely
to substantially lessen competition.” However, the agency emphasized that it
planned to “closely watch these markets and, should Google engage in unlawful
tying or other anticompetitive conduct, the Commission intends to act quickly.” A Google representative declined to
comment on the reports of a new probe.
2007年12月在公委會冗長複審下決議的購併DoubleClick案確實有其爭議,最後,公委會認為Google購併DoubleClick,實質上不太可能造成壟斷,但是,公委會強調他們會嚴密監控市場,而至於Google是否非法搭售或者反競爭式經營,公委會將快速反應。 一位Google發言人對調查不做評論。
The FTC’s inquiry comes just months after Google agreed to make
voluntary changes to its search business in order to avoid a major federal
antitrust lawsuit into whether it uses its search market power to harm rivals.
Several of Google’s competitors, including Microsoft and Yelp, had argued that
Google unfairly demoted rivals in its search-engine results in order to
steer users toward Google’s own competing products.
公委會的調查恰巧在Google為了躲過壟斷訴訟而自願改變搜尋服務一個月後,當時Google涉嫌用其搜尋市場力量去損害競爭對手,數個Google的競爭者包含微軟、Yelp宣稱Google不公平的降低競爭對手在搜尋引擎中的結果,好讓Google產品成為使用者的唯一選擇。
But the FTC ruled unanimously that it lacked sufficient evidence to
charge Google with antitrust violations. Under the terms of the deal,
Google agreed to make relatively modest, voluntary changes to its search
engine. Compared with the prospect of a major federal lawsuit — which would
have been the most significant federal antitrust case against a tech company
since the U.S. went after Microsoft in the late 1990s — these voluntary changes
amounted to a slap on the wrist.
但公委會一致裁定沒有足夠的證據去起訴Google壟斷,根據協議,Google同意對其搜尋引擎做出具誠意、自願性質的改變。 相較於可能成為1990年微軟訴訟後最大宗的壟斷案,這些協議下的改變,就像是個警告。
但公委會一致裁定沒有足夠的證據去起訴Google壟斷,根據協議,Google同意對其搜尋引擎做出具誠意、自願性質的改變。 相較於可能成為1990年微軟訴訟後最大宗的壟斷案,這些協議下的改變,就像是個警告。
Google’s deal represented a bitter blow to the search giant’s rivals,
including Microsoft, which lashed out at the settlement. In a blog
post, Microsoft VP and deputy general counsel Dave Heiner wrote that
“2013 hopefully will be the year when antitrust enforcers display the resolve
that Google continues to lack.” Steve
Pociask, president of the American
Consumer Institute
Center for Citizen
Research, said in a sharply worded statement that federal regulators “failed to
use their authority for the betterment of the marketplace and to the advantage
of consumers.” He added: “Letting Google off with a letter promising not to do
it again is like believing Lindsay Lohan will stay out of trouble this time.”
Google的協議對競爭者可說是沉重打擊,尤其Microsoft更是大力抨擊該和解案。 微軟副總裁與副法律顧問Dave Heiner部落格中也寫到:希望2013年,執法者能夠拿出面對Google持續擺爛的解決之道。 美國消費者學會的市民調查部門主管Steve Pociask更嚴厲表示聯邦高層沒有使用他們該有的力道去改善市場與維護消費者的權益,他更說道:讓Google承諾不會再犯就像是相信琳賽·蘿涵不會在闖禍一樣。
Given that the latest probe into Google over its display ad practices is
reportedly still in the preliminary stages, it’s too early to tell whether the
inquiry could evolve into another multi-year investigation. There’s little doubt, however,
that that’s precisely what some of Google’s rivals would like to see. At this
point, given Google’s dominance in the Internet ad market, regulatory scrutiny
is to be expected. When you’re number one,
having a target on your back comes with the territory.
儘管針對Google廣告的調查據聞仍在準備階段,會不會發展成另一個長達數年的調查還很難說,但毫無疑問,這就是Google競爭者所想看到的。 在這個階段,任Google在網路廣告市場的地位,管理階層的調查還是可預見的。
當你是老大,在背後有個目標是理所當然的。
訂閱:
文章 (Atom)