周末有报道称，彭博资讯（Bloomberg LP）正在考虑收购金融时报集团（Financial Times Group），包括其旗下的《金融时报》（FT），以及其持有的《经济学人》杂志（The Economist）的大笔股份。实际上，报道中并没有明确提到彭博资讯，而是一直在说其实际所有人，即现任纽约市市长迈克尔•布隆伯格。他在十月份参观了FT的伦敦总部，并有意参与此项重要决策。

    笔者不由得疑惑，如果布隆伯格市长参与彭博资讯的业务，必须要遵守哪些规定。他在就任纽约市长期间，为了避嫌，已经放弃了参与公司的日常运营，但依然保留了对公司的所有权。因此，他不得不向纽约市利益冲突委员会（Conflicts of Interests Board）征求意见。

    以下是利益冲突委员会给出的相关建议：

    “我们进一步建议布隆伯格先生，凡是发生在纽约市、任何涉及、或正在接洽涉及彭博资讯，而且可能对其所有权利益造成重大影响的的业务（如大规模收购、出售或借款），布隆伯格先生在实际参与之前应该对确定相关业务的范围以及就此向委员会咨询获得进一步指导的必要性保持敏感。”

    换言之，如果布隆伯格想要积极参与对《金融时报》的尽职调查，必须征求利益冲突委员会的意见。虽然笔者并不认为这家报纸与纽约市有任何重大业务关系，但FT在纽约市肯定存在一些业务。例如，FT肯定还设有街边的报刊箱，它在纽约肯定还有广告业务（纽约市的自主阅览广告等），还有这家报纸在纽约的采访活动。

    关键在于：布隆伯格是否向委员会征求意见将被严格保密。所以，我们无从知晓他是否会遵从委员会的意见。当然，除非交易发生后，委员会收到投诉，然后发现他违反了利益冲突规定。或者，布隆伯格自己透露了参与公司业务的请求。为此，我曾致电布隆伯格的新闻办公室，但到目前为止，对方仍然拒绝发表评论。

    我能理解对此事保密的理由，因为这样可以鼓励可能存在利益冲突的公共官员向委员会征求意见。但这也是像迈克尔•布隆伯格这些人，担任较高选举职务时应该撤出其在公司的股份，或者辞职的另外一个原因。想象一下如果罗姆尼仍参与贝恩资本（Bain）的决策，会引发怎样的混乱？

    对了，FT的东家培生出版集团（Pearson PLC）仍坚称，它没有出售这款橙色报纸的打算。可是，似乎没有人相信他们的话。

    译者：刘进龙/汪皓

    There was a weekend report that Bloomberg LP is thinking about making an offer for the Financial Times Group, which includes both the FT and a sizable stake in The Economist.

    Actually, the story never explicitly refers to Bloomberg LP. Instead, it keeps talking about the company's namesake, current New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg. Seems he visited FT's London headquarters back in October, and would be involved in any decision of this magnitude.

    So it got me to wondering about the rules that Mayor Bloomberg must follow, when it comes to participating in Bloomberg LP business. He recused himself from day-to-day operations upon taking office, but retained his ownership stake -- thus prompting him to seek an opinion from the NYC Conflicts of Interests Board.

    Here was the relevant part:

    "Mr. Bloomberg is further advised to be sensitive to the need to ascertain the extent of any City business dealings involving entities engaged in, or negotiating to become engaged in, Bloomberg L.P. matters that may significantly affect the value of his ownership interest (e.g., major purchases, sales, or borrowings) and to consult the Board for further guidance before becoming involved in such Bloomberg L.P. matters."

    In other words, Bloomberg should consult the Conflicts of Interest Board if he's actively involved in FT due diligence. I don't imagine the newspaper has any major business with the City, but there could be some. For example, I'm pretty sure the FT still has some sidewalk boxes, there could be advertising relationships (City taking out ads, etc.) and the paper's journalistic activities (read: access)

    But here's the catch: Whether or not Bloomberg actually consults the board is confidential. So there is no way to know if he's following the opinion – unless, of course, a deal occurs, the board later receives a complaint and later finds him in violation. Or if Bloomberg himself were to divulge the request. So I called up his press office, but it so far has declined to comment.

    I understand the reason for such confidentiality, since it helps encourage potentially-conflicted public officials to seek advice. But it's yet another reason why folks like Michael Bloomberg probably should divest/resign/etc. when reaching high elective office (not just promising to do so later). Just imagine the uproar if Romney had still been involved in Bain decision-making...

    For the record, FT owner Pearson PLC continues to insist that it isn't seeking to sell the salmon-tinged newspaper. And, also for the record, almost nobody seems to believe them.