????美國在線公司（AOL）的首席執(zhí)行官蒂姆?阿姆斯特朗是個浪漫主義者。這本身就是件值得稱道的事，更不用提這樣的人在現(xiàn)代美國商界已屬鳳毛麟角。不幸的是，如果浪漫主義者不能將雄心壯志轉(zhuǎn)化為可觀的利潤，就不大可能得到當代美國投資者，尤其是公共投資者的青睞。

????私人投資者雖然也好不到哪兒去，但他們至少愿意給阿姆斯特朗一個機會，讓他實現(xiàn)自己的浪漫夢想：打造全球首家互聯(lián)網(wǎng)媒體帝國。2年前，阿姆斯特朗帶領(lǐng)美國在線脫離時代華納公司（Time Warner），他當時宣稱，要將該公司打造成21世紀的迪士尼（Disney）；對了，同時還要成為21世紀的美國有線電視新聞網(wǎng)（CNN）。不少傳奇性的老牌雜志一度紛紛裁員，人數(shù)以數(shù)百計；但他卻不吝投入，斥資發(fā)展嚴肅的新聞報道。真不愧是浪漫派。

????可悲的是，時代并未眷顧阿姆斯特朗的美好愿景。美國在線今年第二季度損失了1,180萬美元。盡管這家獨立不久的公司廣告營收額首次實現(xiàn)增長（5%），但與投資者的預(yù)期仍然相差十萬八千里。該公司的股票曾在2010年4月創(chuàng)下最高，達到28.45美元，如今的交易價卻只有15美元。上周三，有消息稱，美國在線已經(jīng)開始一系列洽談，欲轉(zhuǎn)為私有公司?！都~約郵報》（New York Post）對此進行了報道，稱有消息人士對該報透露：“即使現(xiàn)在作為上市公司開始贏利，也未必有用。因為這樣一來，他們有可能更膽大妄為，從而承受更大的風險?！?/p>

????事實上，阿姆斯特朗的夢想本身就是個巨大的風險，因而也就不可能贏得公共股東的支持。他試圖借助超本地化新聞網(wǎng)站Patch.com，建立一個涵蓋美國各地新聞?wù)军c的全國性網(wǎng)絡(luò)。這項事業(yè)耗資驚人，又充滿了變數(shù)，但阿姆斯特朗依然態(tài)度堅決，誓要將其打造為美國在線的戰(zhàn)略基石。公司第二季度財務(wù)數(shù)據(jù)低迷，8月初，阿姆斯特朗在發(fā)布該報告時稱，2013年，美國在線的業(yè)務(wù)將出現(xiàn)改觀。他同時還稱：“繼續(xù)保留上市公司的身份，同時又堅持我們既定的戰(zhàn)略，這條路在未來行不通?！泵绹诰€只能選擇其一，而不能魚與熊掌兼得。

????除了轉(zhuǎn)為私有公司或者將命運寄托在私募機構(gòu)KKR（據(jù)報道該機構(gòu)有興趣投資美國在線）的身上，美國在線還可以將自己全部或部分賣給雅虎（Yahoo）這樣的公司（這條路有可能奏效，也可能會亂上添亂），將公司化整為零然后分別出手，或者關(guān)閉Patch網(wǎng)站。此外，它還可選擇出售其撥號上網(wǎng)業(yè)務(wù)，這塊業(yè)務(wù)固然可以帶來現(xiàn)金流，但其贏利周期其實已近尾聲。菲利克斯?薩爾曼曾在路透社（Reuters）撰文稱，撥號上網(wǎng)業(yè)務(wù)是私募機構(gòu)的上佳選擇。迄今這塊業(yè)務(wù)依然在產(chǎn)生大量現(xiàn)金而且利潤豐厚?！俺鲎屵@塊業(yè)務(wù)的管理權(quán)的時機已然成熟，”薩爾曼寫道。

????Patch的運營范圍覆蓋美國的850個城市。如果關(guān)閉這塊業(yè)務(wù)，美國在線轉(zhuǎn)眼就能贏利。但是，那樣做就違背了阿姆斯特朗的夢想。他堅持認為，從長遠角度看，網(wǎng)絡(luò)是本地新聞的未來。同時，《赫芬頓郵報》（Huffington Post）一直干得有聲有色，自美國在線今年2月收購該網(wǎng)站以來，它的流量增加了12%。該網(wǎng)站長期依賴廉價內(nèi)容吸引流量，但是用于員工的開支也頗為高昂，這點與Patch如出一轍。

????迄今為止，網(wǎng)絡(luò)媒體的成功幾乎無一例外地是依靠低成本、雇傭少量員工的運營策略實現(xiàn)的。但是，阿姆斯特朗認為，為了提供優(yōu)質(zhì)內(nèi)容而支付高額成本，這種做法最終會得到回報。這種觀點不僅是其夢想中最為捉摸不定的一塊，同時也是最燒錢的一塊。

????譯者：大海

????Tim Armstrong, the CEO of AOL (AOL), is a romantic. That's laudable, not to mention rare in modern American business. Unfortunately, modern American investors don't look favorably on romantics if they can't bring profits along with their lofty ideals -- especially modern American public investors.

????Private investors aren't much better, but they'd probably at least give Armstrong a better chance of realizing his romantic dream: to build the first great Internet media empire. As he was shepherding AOL through its public spinoff from Time Warner (TWX) two years ago, Armstrong said he meant to turn the company into the 21st century's Disney (DIS). Oh, and also the 21st century's CNN. He invested in real reporting at a time when storied magazines were shedding jobs by the hundreds. Romantic.

????Sadly, times have not been hospitable to Armstrong's vision. AOL lost $11.8 million in its second quarter, and while ad revenues were up for the first time in the young spinoff's history (by 5%), they aren't anything close to what investors want or expect. The stock, which peaked in April 2010 at $28.45, is trading just north of $15 –- and that's up on the news Wednesday that AOL is in talks for a private takeover. The New York Post reported those talks, with one source telling the paper: "It doesn't help to be doing a turnaround in public. They could be more bold and take more risks."

????Armstrong's dream, indeed, is also a giant risk –- one that is unlikely to ever gain favor with public shareholders. With Patch, he's trying to build a national network of local news sites. It's an incredibly expensive, highly uncertain undertaking, but Armstrong still seems determined to make it a cornerstone of AOL's strategy. In reporting the company's dismal second-quarter numbers earlier this month, Armstrong said a turnaround would take until 2013. He might as well have said: "Sticking with our strategy while remaining a public company just isn't going to work." AOL can do one or the other, but not both.

????Besides going private and relying on the patience of, say, private-equity shop KKR (KKR) (which is reported to be interested), AOL could sell itself in whole or in part to a company like Yahoo (YHOO) (which could work, or could simply be adding trouble to trouble), break the company up and sell off the pieces, or close down Patch. It could also sell off its dialup business, which provides cash flow, but is nearing the end of its useful life. As Felix Salmon notes at Reuters, the dialup business is perfect for private equity. It's still generating lots of cash and margins are thick. It's "ripe for a managed decline," Salmon writes.

????Closing Patch, which operates in 850 towns around the country, would make AOL instantly profitable. But that wouldn't hew to Armstrong's dreams. He insists that in the long term, local news will work online. The Huffington Post, meanwhile, is doing well, with traffic up 12% since AOL acquired it in February. But that site, which long relied on inexpensive content to draw high volume, is spending big on staff now just like Patch.

????Web-media success stories up to now have nearly always involved low-cost, small-staff operations. Armstrong believes that spending for quality content will eventually pay off. It's the most uncertain aspect of his dream -- and also the most expensive.