浑水抓住二级原始数据问题攻击网秦

    市场研究机构浑水（Muddy Waters）继续对在美国上市的中国公司穷追猛打，这次遭到攻击的是移动互联网企业网秦移动（attack on NQ Mobile）。正如典型的做空方那样，浑水在网秦身上挑了一堆毛病，以便发动攻势。我在电子邮件里看到的这个问题则和网秦披露的现金和短期投资信息有关。

    下面是网秦年报中的一张表格，也是引起众人关注的原因。在所有的财务报告中你们都能看到类似的表格。

    Muddy Waters continued its assault on U.S. listed Chinese companies with an attack on NQ Mobile. As is typical of short seller attacks, Muddy Waters has made a number of allegations, but the one that has been filing up my inbox relates to a disclosure of cash and short-term investments.

    This is the table from NQ Mobile’s 20F that has everyone worked up. You will find a similar one in every financial statement.

    （注：Cash and cahs equivalents – 现金和现金等价物，Term deposits – 定期存款，Short-term investment – 短期投资）

    用这张表格和网秦上年年报中的同一表格进行对比后，浑水一下子来了精神。

    What got Muddy Waters worked up was a comparison of this table to the prior year’s table.

    大家可以看到，网秦将现金和现金等价物的公允价值等级从第一级调整为第二级，但没有解释原因。这是网秦自己的失误，因为如果做了解释，就能化解浑水就此发动的攻击。但现在的实际情况却正好相反，浑水指出，这项调整表明现金已经转移，而且已经消失。

    在资产负债表中，现金和短期投资等金融性资产的价值是公允价值，而非初始成本。每次公布资产负债表时都会这样估值，同时按市场价格进行调整，以体现这些资产的当前价值。由于操作方法不同，2008年金融危机期间这个问题引发了极大的混乱。美国财务会计标准委员会（FASB）和国际会计准则委员会（IASB）于2011年确认，双方统一了美国通用会计准则（GAAP）和国际会计准则（IFRS）。相关改革措施包括将信息披露范围扩大到投资的定价方法，而目前在中国成为焦点问题的正是这些以前不需要披露的信息。

    对于按照公允价值衡量的资产和负债，公司必须披露估值方法和估值所用的原始数据。上述引起争议的表格对现金和投资的分类依据是原始数据。这些数据分为三类，有最可靠的，也有最不可靠的。

    一级原始数据是最可靠的定价数据，它们是估值当天公布财报的公司所能得到的同类资产和负债的报价。流通证券有买入价和卖出价，这是一级原始数据。虽然这些价格可能出现波动，但它们是某个时点上价值水平的可靠依据。可能有人会说，就连银行活期存款都不能按一级原始数据定价，原因是不存在有报价的“同类资产”（虽然现金是定价的基础）。

    As you can see, NQ Mobile has moved its cash and cash equivalents from Level 1 to Level 2 in 2012 and did not tell us why. That is a self-inflicted wound since an explanation probably would have headed off this part of the Muddy Waters attack. Instead, Muddy Waters suggests that the change implies the cash might have been diverted and is not there.

    Financial assets like cash and short-term investments are reported at fair market value on the balance sheet, rather than at their original cost. This valuation is done at every balance sheet date, and the assets are “marked to market” to reflect the current valuation. Differing approaches to doing this led to great confusion during the financial crisis of 2008, and the FASB and IASB conformed US GAAP and IFRS in 2011 to get consistency. Included in those reforms were expanded disclosures about how investments were priced, and it is those expanded disclosures that are getting all the attention in China today.

    For assets and liabilities that are measured at fair market value, companies have to disclose the valuation techniques and inputs to valuation. The table in question categorizes cash and investments by category of input. There are three categories of inputs, ranging from the most reliable to the least reliable.

    Level 1 inputs are the most reliable pricing data. They are quoted prices for identical assets and liabilities that the reporting entity can access at the measurement date. Traded securities have bid/ask prices and are level 1 inputs. While these prices may be volatile, they are reliable evidence of values at a particular point. Some would argue that even current account bank deposits couldn’t be priced with level 1 inputs, since there are no “identical assets” that have quoted prices (although cash is the basic unit of pricing).