凯鹏华盈（Kleiner Perkins）合伙人玛丽•米克尔日前发布了年度互联网趋势报告，其中有一部分谈的是当前科技估值是否过高的问题。她承认，确实存在一些人为的虚增，但警告称，当前的状况还远远没有达到2000年互联网巅峰时的程度，当时高达40倍。

    为了证明自己的观点，米克尔提供了以下风险资本投资数据：

    Kleiner Perkins partner Mary Meeker today published her annual Internet Trends report, and included a section on whether or not current tech valuations are excessive. She acknowledged some artificial inflation, but then cautioned that current conditions are nowhere near as frothy as they were in the dotcom peak of 2000.

    To help prove her point, Meeker provided the following data on venture capital investments:

    毫无疑问，当前的风险资本投资与2000年相比要少很多。但交易量只是说明了一方面问题。

    利用同样的数据资源，米克尔本应当得出，2014年的后期交易规模仅仅比2000年的规模小16.5%。而且，2014年一季度后交易规模实际上高于2000年的数据。

    大家可以这么想，不那么强劲的IPO市场意味着，这些后期投资阶段公司比2000年的同类公司更加成熟。因此，它们实际上可以更有效地使用自己的资金。而且，还值得注意的一点是，IPO交易前估值相对于风险投资的比率在2013年显著下降，只有5.5倍。这个数字更接近2000年的6.3倍，而不是2008年至2012年期间的10多倍（其中2010年曾达到惊人的18.2倍）。

    更为重要的是，米克尔完全遗漏了更为广泛的风险投资估值趋势。我们知道，2013年估值在2013年各个领域都处于10年来的高点（感谢Pitchbook的数据），但要找到更早之前的充足市场数据很难。不过，凯鹏华盈应当拥有大量这类历史数据——即便只是从这家公司自己的投资组合中寻找都没问题——而且，米克尔作为一名拥有3年多经验的风险投资人，她本应当拥有大量业界轶闻来佐证。因此，报告没有包括这些内容实在令人既失望，又好奇。

    先明确一点，我并不认为，我们现在身处与2000年等同的状况。但我也能觉察到，米克尔在这其中有自己的意图，因为她每天的工作就是为一家硅谷的风险投资公司进行后期投资。而且，这家公司正在募集新的基金，而她将使用募得资金中的一部分进行投资。因此，如果她要用风险投资数据来证明当前估值相对适度，那最好别挑那些估值最好的案例。（财富中文网）

    No doubt, there is much less venture capital investment today than there was in 2000. But deal volume only tells part of the story.

    Using the same data source, Meeker would have found that later-stage deal sizes in 2014 only were 16.5% lower than they were in 2000. Moreover, later-stage deal sizes in the first quarter of 2014 actually were higher than the 2000 figure.

    One could argue that the less-robust IPO market means that these late-stage companies are more mature than their 2000 counterparts and thus are actually being more efficient with their money. But it also is worth noting that the ratio of IPO pre-money valuations to the amount of VC investment fell markedly in 2013 to just 5.5x. That is much closer to the 6.3x in 2000 than to the double-digit marks we saw between 2008 and 2012 (including a whopping 18.2x in 2010).

    More importantly, Meeker completely omits any mention of broader VC valuation trends. We know that 2013 valuations were at a 10-year high across the board in 2013 (thanks to Pitchbook), but finding adequate market data doing back further has proved elusive. But Kleiner Perkins should have outstanding historical data on such things -- even if just within its own portfolio -- and Meeker would have plenty of anecdotal evidence for her three-plus years as a venture capitalist. So not including it here is both disappointing and curious.

    To be clear, I'm not arguing that we're in 2000 redux. But I'm also cognizant that Meeker has a dog in this fight, since her day job is to make later-stage investments for a Silicon Valley venture capital firm. Moreover, that firm is in the midst of raising a new fund out of which she'll invest. So if she's going to use venture capital data to argue for today's relative moderation, it would best best to not cherry-pick.