BRITAIN'S private schools are one of its most successful exports. The children of the well-heeled flock to them, whether from China, Nigeria or Russia: the number of foreign pupils rose by 1.4% in the last year alone. One headmaster recently asked a room full of pupils whether they flew business class to Britain. Only a few hands went up, suggesting they were not quite as cosseted as he had thought. Then a boy explained: many of the pupils fly first class instead.
英国的私立学校可以说是英国最成功的“出口商品”之一。在这些学校里，无论 是来自中国、尼日利亚或是俄罗斯，富有的学生比比皆是:仅去年一年，留学生 的数量就增长了1.4%。最近有一位校长查访了一间满寝的宿舍，并询问他们是 否乘坐商务客舱飞到英国。寥寥无几的人举起了手，以表明实际上他们并不像他 所想的那样娇生惯养。随后一名男孩解释道:许多学生都没有乘坐头等舱。
Yet foreign students, whether educated in British private schools or elsewhere, are decreasingly likely to go to English universities. According to the Higher Education Funding Council for England, 307,200 overseas students began their studies in the country in 2012-13, down from 312,000 two years earlier and the first drop in 29 years. Student numbers from the rest of the EU fell—probably a result of the increase in annual tuition fees in England from 6,000 (10,000) a year to 9,000. But arrivals from India and Pakistan declined most sharply.
然而这些留学生，无论是在英国的私立学校还是在别的教育机构接受教育的，进 入英国的大学求学的可能性都在不断减小。根据英国高等教育拨款局的调查，相 较于上一学年的 31.2 万人，在 2012-13 学年选择在英格兰大学求学的留学生只 有 30.72 万人，这是 29 年来人数首降。而且欧盟中其他国家的留学生人数也在 下降，极有可能是受到了英国每年的学费从 6,000 (10,000)增加到 9,000 的影 响。特别是来自印度和巴基斯坦的人数在急剧下降。
In contrast to the visa regime for private schools, which is extremely lax (the Home Office counts private schools as favoured sponsors) student visas have been tightened. Foreign students used to be allowed to work for up to two years after graduating. They now have only four months to find a job paying upwards of 20,600 if they want to stay in Britain.
相比于私立学校那相当宽松的签证制度(因为私立学校是内务部的友好赞助商)， 学生签证就严格很多。以往，外国学生被允许在毕业之后可工作时间长达两年。 而如今，若他们想留在英国，就必须在仅仅四个月的时间内找到一份薪资高于 20,600 的工作。
This change was intended to deal with sham colleges that were in effect offering two-year work visas. But it seems to have put off serious students too. Nick Hillman of the Higher Education Policy Institute says the government has sent unclear messages about the sort of immigration it wants to restrict. An emphasis on holding down net immigration deters young Indians and Pakistanis in particular. Australia and America, which have more relaxed entry criteria for students, are becoming more favoured destinations. Colin Riordan, Cardiff University's vice-chancellor, adds that Britain's student-visa regime has become more onerous and fiddly overall.
这样的改变是为了应对那些所谓提供两年工作签的假冒院校。但是这样的做法似 乎也影响到了真正求学的学生。来自高等教育政策研究所的尼克·希尔曼表示， 政府的做法向大众传递了一个限制留学移民的模糊信息。英国着重于控制移民的 政策对来自印度和巴基斯坦学生的影响最为严重。同时，澳大利亚和美国，因其 对学生宽松的准入标准而变得倍受青睐。卡蒂夫大学副校长克林·里奥丹补充道， 英国的学生签证制度变得越来越严格复杂。
As a result, Britain is losing out to other countries in the contest for talent—an oddity, given how often the prime minister bangs on about the “global race”. Its unwelcoming stance will harm its long-term prospects. And the drift of foreign students from leading British private schools to American colleges may have another, somewhat happier, consequence: America might become rather better at cricket.
尽管英国首相多次强调“全球竞争”，可英国却在人才竞争上输给了其他国家， 多么令人诧异的结果。它不通人情的态度将会有损它未来的前景。留学生放弃英 国私立学校而转向美国的大学可能带来另外一个多少让人欣喜的结果:英国的板 球都有可能被美国超越(板球起源于英国)。
THIS WAS supposed to be the quarter that Kraft Heinz showed America's huge, struggling food companies a new model for success. A merger in 2015 had joined two of the world's most iconic food makers. Backed by 3G Capital, a private-equity firm, the new group slashed costs at a pace that made rivals shudder and investors swoon. After a failed bid in 2017 for Unilever, an Anglo-Dutch giant, Kraft Heinz set out to prove it could not just cut fat but boost sales on its own. Bernardo Hees, the company's boss, pointed cheerfully to new products, including Heinz Mayochup and something called Just Crack an Egg. The company was on the path to "sustainable, profitable growth", he declared in November. Unfortunately, it wasn't.
On February 21st Kraft Heinz announced a staggering $15bn impairment, a dividend cut of more than 3o% and an inquiry into its procurement by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). Earnings calls are often sleepy affairs. This one was a nightmare. Some of 3G's long-time critics are now clucking with satisfaction. Others fear 3G is tarnishing American treasures such as Kraft Macaroni and Cheese and Warren Buffett, who partnered with 3G to combine Heinz and Kraft and last year lost nearly $3bn on the deal. Yet dramatic as Kraft Heinz's decline may seem, 3G's impact and the food industry's problems extend far beyond it.
While its founders are Brazilian, 3G's buyout business is based in Manhattan.(Its most famous founder, Jorge Paulo Lemann, lives in Switzerland.) Unlike many big private-equity firms, 3G's main investors are not pension funds but family offices and individuals, including its partners. It does not have a wide portfolio, but backs just two companies: Kraft Heinz and Restaurant Brands International (RBI). Blackstone, a private-equity firm based a few blocks away, has nearly 2,5oo staff.3G's New York office has fewer than two dozen. Yet 3G's leaders have rocked the consumer industry like few investors in history.
All buyout firms are thirsty for deals, but 3G is uniquely parched. Before starting 3G, the firm's founders went on a beer-buying spree that culminated in 2o16 with Anheuser-Busch InBev's purchase of SAB Miller for more than $100bn. AB InBev, in which 3G's partners have a large stake, now brews more than one in four of the world's beers. Kraft Heinz counts Kraft cheese, Heinz Ketchup, Jell-0, Philadelphia Cream Cheese and Oscar Mayer among its holdings. RBI includes Burger King, Popeyes, a fried-chicken restaurant, and Tim Hortons, a popular Canadian chain.
The way 3G runs companies is as notable as its appetite for buying them. In a practice called zero-based budgeting, managers must justify their expenses anew each year. The idea is to expand margins continuously. Overseeing this are managers chosen for their talent and work ethic, rather than mere experience. Daniel Schwartz, a 3G partner, became the chief executive of Burger King at 32. Mr Hees, a 3G partner who spent more than a decade working for a Latin American railroad, became Kraft Heinz's boss at 45. David Knopf, its chief financial officer, assumed his position in 2017 at 29.
To 3G's detractors, this all seems a bit mad. The company's strategy can be caricatured as follows: buy a big business, cut costs, repeat. This is not entirely fair. RBI has invested in marketing Burger King, winning prizes for its ads. AB InBev is working to boost its sales, for instance by pushing higher-priced beers and deploying best practices across its vast geography.
But buying big companies and slashing costs remain 3G's speciality. The risks of that strategy have become clear. RBI struggled to integrate franchisees at Tim Hortons. AB InBev last year said it would slash its dividend by half.
Nowhere has 3G's approach played out more tumultuously than at Kraft Heinz. America's food industry seemed the perfect target, with flabby companies and powerful brands. Rare is the American who has not slurped Kool-Aid or downed an Oscar Mayer hot dog smothered in Heinz Ketchup.3G reckoned the brands were strong enough to withstand large cuts. As it turns out, they were not.
This was not the same for AB InBev, which despite abysmal results in America, has little beer competition from in-store brands, is rarely sold online and faces ample growth abroad. Kraft Heinz's business, by comparison, is concentrated in America, where the food industry is being turned on its head. Its brands may be familiar, but that does not make them popular. Small firms are offering healthier options, taking advantage of cheap digital marketing and nimble contract manufacturers. The smallest 20,000 packaged goods players account for about half the industry's growth, according to Nielsen, a research firm.
Meanwhile, the rise of e-commerce and European discount grocers has put pressure on food retailers, which are in turn squeezing food companies. Stores led by Walmart are using extensive data to launch their own, increasingly sophisticated, low-cost private label goods, all the while pushing companies to lower their prices.
Things started well for Kraft Heinz. Its operating profit margin surged from 15% in 2014 to 24% in 2017. The first big setback came that year when Paul Polman, then Unilever's boss, rebuffed the company's $143bn courtship.(Unilever, wisely, has devoted growing attention not to food but to beauty and household products.) Without his megadeal, Mr Hees turned to the basic work of lifting sales by pouring more money into advertising, product innovation and Kraft Heinz's sales force, but that ate into profits.
Equally striking is the company's new $15bn impairment, a recognition that the value of giant brands has shrivelled. Mr Buffett says that he misjudged the worth of Kraft's stable of products. "The management team entered into this merger with the assumption they could cut the spending needed to maintain brands, let alone help them grow," says Robert Moskow of Credit Suisse, a bank. "The world changed on them-retailers changed and consumers changed."
Flawed though 3G's approach may seem, few food companies offer a successful alternative. Companies have tried to evolve by buying smaller firms, often at lofty prices and with mixed results. For instance Campbell Soup bought Bolthouse Farms, a maker of fruity drinks, in 2o12, but is now trying to sell it. Last year it bought Snyder's-Lance, a pretzel and popcorn company, to boost its snacks business. Its debt level has risen accordingly. Indeed, shopping sprees at Campbell, ConAgra and General Mills have made those companies more levered than Kraft Heinz, according to Sanford C Bernstein, a research firm.
Kraft Heinz now wants to shrink to grow: it plans divestments over the next 18 months to improve its balance sheet so it can make other, big deals. But the SEC's subpoena suggests that some internal processes might be unravelling as managers struggle to meet bold goals. The notion that big deals will save American food firms looks increasingly dubious. In 2014, before Heinz bought Kraft, the combined gross operating profits of the companies were about $6.5bn. Now, due in part to some problems beyond its control, Kraft Heinz expects its 2019 profits to be about the same.
卡夫亨氏《Kraft Heinz）本应在这个季度向美国规模巨大但陷入困境的食品公司展示一种通往成功的新模式。2015年，两家全球最具标志性的食品制造商合二为一。在私募股权公司G资本的支持下，新集团以令竞争对手战栗、令投资者狂喜的速度削减成本。2017年收购英荷巨头联合利华失败后，卡夫亨氏开始想办法证明自己不但会减肥，还能凭自身提高销焦额。公司老板贝尔纳多·希斯（Bernardo Hees）兴高采烈地搬出新产品作例证，包括亨氏的蛋黄番茄酱（Mayochup）和一种叫“打个蛋”（just Crack an Egg）的食品。去年11月他查布公司正走在遇往可持续、有盈利的增长“的道路上。遗憾的是，并没有。
上月21日，卡夫亨氏披露了150亿美元的巨额减记、削减超过30%的股息，以及美国证券交易委员会（SEC）调查其采购部门的事宜。财报电话会议通常让人昏昏欲题，这一次却是一场露梦。一些长期批评3G资本的人现在难掩得意之情。另一些人则担心，3G资本正在玷污像卡夫亨氏通心粉和巴菲特这样的美国瑰宝。之前正是巴非特与3G资本联手促成了亨氏和卡夫的合井，去年他因这笔交易亏损近30亿美元。不过，尽管卡夫亨氏的业绩下滑看起来很惊人，3G资本的影响和食品行业的问题却远不止于此。
3G资本的几位创始人都是巴西人，但收购业务的总部设在曼哈顿。（公司最知名的创始人豪尔赫·保罗·雷曼[Jorge Paulo Lemann]住在瑞士。）与许多大型私募股权公司不同，3G资本的主要投资者不是养老基金，而是家族办公空和个人，包括它的合伙人。它的投资组合并不广泛，只支持两家公司：卡夫亨氏和国际餐饮品牌公司（Restaurant Brands International，RBJ）。私募股权公司需石（Blackstone）的总卸离3G资本只有几个街区，有近2500名员工，而3G资本纽约办事处的员工还不到24人。不过，3G贸本的领导者却震憾了整个消费行业，极少有投资者曾做到这一点。
所有的投资收购公司都渴望达成交易，但3G资本在这方面的热望独一无二。在成立3G资本之前，该公司的创始人掀起了一场啤酒业收购狂湖，在2016年百威英博（Anheuser-Busch InBev）以逾1000亿美元收购SAB米勒（SAB Miller）时达到顶峰。如今，由G资本的合伙人大量持股的百威英博酿造了超过全球四分之一的啤酒。卡夫亨氏的产品包括卡夫奶酪、亨氏番茄、Jell-O果冻、菲力奶油奶酪和Oscar Mayer肉制品。RBI旗下有汉堡王、炸鸡店Popeyes和颇受欢迎的加拿大连锁店Tim Hortons。
3G资本运营所持有公司的方式和收购它们的劲头一样引人注目。它采用一种“零基预算法”的做法，经理们每年都要重新证明他们的支出是合理的。此举是为了持续扩大利润率。而监督这一操作的管理层是因他们的才能和职业道德而不仅仅是经验被选定的。3G资本的合伙人之一丹尼尔·施瓦茨（Daniel Schwartz）出任汉堡王的首席执行官时才32岁。另一位合伙人希斯在一家拉美铁路公司工作了十多年，45岁时成为卡夫亨氏的老板。首席财务官戴维·克诺夫（David Knopf）2017年上任时才29岁。
对于3G资本的抨击者来说，这一切似乎有点疯狂。夸张一点说，该公司的战略就是：收购一家大企业，削减成本，然后再重复。但这么说并不完全公平。RBI在汉堡王的营销上投资，赢得了广告大奖。百威英博正努力提振销售，比如推销价格更高的啤酒，并在公司广阔的版图上应用最佳实践。
但收购大公司和削减成本仍是3G资本的专长。这种策略的风险已经变得很明显。整合Tim Hortons的加盟商让RBI不堪重负。百威英博去年表示将把股息削减一半。
3G资本的这套做法用在卡夫亨氏上时表现得最为混乱。美国的食品产业看起来是个完美的目标，因为该行业里企业臃肿但品牌强大。很少有美国人没喝过速溶饮料Kool-Aid，或是没吃过涂满亨氏番茄酱的Oscar Mayer热狗。3G资本认为这些品牌足够强大，能承受大幅成本削减。事实证明它们并不能。
百威英博的情况就不一样了。尽管在美国的业绩糟糕透顶，但百威英博几乎没有遇到过来自商店自有品牌啤酒的竞争，很少在网上销售，而且海外增长强劲。相比之下，卡夫亨氏的业务集中在美国，而美国的食品行业正在发生翻天覆地的变化。它的各个品牌可能为人熟知，但这并不能让它们大卖。小公司正利用便宜的数字营销和灵活的承包生产商带来的优势，提供给消费者更健康的选择。根据研究公司尼尔森的数据，规模最小的两万家包装食品公司占了整个行业增长的一半左右。
与此同时，电子商务和欧洲折扣杂货商的崛起给食品零售商带来了压力，它们继而又向食品公司施压。以沃尔玛为首的商店正在利用大量数据推出越来越精致且价格低廉的自有品牌商品，并始终在促使食品公司降价。
卡夫亨氏的开局不错。营业利润率从2014年的15%飙升至2017年的24%。2017年，卡夫亨氏遭遇了第一次重大挫折，时任联合利华老板的保罗.波尔曼（Paul Polman）拒绝了该公司1430亿美元的求购。（联合利华明智地将注意力越来越多地放在美容和家用品而非食品上。）巨额收购计划落空，希斯转而专注于提高销售额这项基础工作，将更多资金投在广告、产品创新和卡夫亨氏的销售队伍上，但这侵蚀了利润。
同样惹人注目的是该公司150亿美元的新一轮减记，这等于承认公司各大品牌价值缩水。巴菲特表示他错误地判断了卡夫众多产品的价值。“管理团队设想的是，合并之后他们可以削减品牌维护所必需的开支，更不用说帮助品牌成长了，”瑞信银行的罗伯特·莫斯可（Robert Moskow）说道，“世界在他们那里发生了变化——零售商变了，消费者也变了。”
3G资本的方法似乎存在缺陷，但极少有食品公司能拿出一个成功的替代方案。各大公司尝试通过收购规模较小的公司来自我进化，这些收购交易的价格往往很高，而收效不一。例如，金宝汤（Campbell Soup）于2012年收购了果汁饮料生产商Bolthouse Farms，但现在又想把它卖掉。去年它收购了一家椒盐脆饼和爆米花公司Snyder's-Lance，以扩大零食业务。它的债务水平也相应上升。研究公司盛博称，实际上，金宝汤、康尼格拉（ConAgra）和通用磨坊（General Mills）的疯狂收购使得这些公司的杠杆率比卡夫亨氏还高。
卡夫亨氏现在希望通过收缩规模来实现增长：它计划在未来18个月剥离资产以改善资产负债表，以便能实现其他大规模交易。但美国证交会的传票显示，由于管理层难以达到大胆的目标，一些内部流程可能正在瓦解。大型交易能拯救美国食品公司的想法看起来越来越不可靠了。2014年在亨氏收购卡夫之前，两家公司的总营业利润约为65亿美元。现在，一定程度上由于公司自身无法控制的一些问题，卡夫亨氏预计2019年的利润将与合并前大致相同。
翻译期刊：
《中国翻译》、《经济学人》、《中国科技翻译》、《外语界》、《上海翻译》等都不错
翻译门户：
沪江英语翻译版、EN8848翻译版、
大家论坛翻译版（）
全球500强企业及知名企业的多语种对照网站（这也是很好的学习资源，实战性很强！）
公共微信平台：
翻译教学与研究（ID：fanyiluntan)
沃领域翻译（ID：WOW-TRAN）
乐思福教育（ID：Isfirst2013）
中视天之聪（ID：kaosee_4008112230）
经典的译作（双语对照版）：
《唐诗三百首》- 许渊冲 译 出版社:中国对外翻译出版公司
《孙子兵法》- Lionel Giles 译
《散文佳作108篇》（汉英·英汉对照）
等等
--- 最后我想说，如果你真的喜欢翻译、真的想去学习和了解翻译，生活里到处是素材！翻译是很实际的东西，更讲究实战、更需要用所学去解决交流和沟通中语言障碍，不妨淡化下理论~
经济学人双语版、爱洋葱阅读、英语头条、每日双语播报、酷悠双语、双语新闻、BBC双语新闻、BBC有声双语新闻、有道e读、CNN双语新闻、滴答双语阅读、每日双语新闻、FT中文网双语阅读、new york times等，这些双语阅读器都是非常不错的。
