再更正

上篇啰嗦版里忘了在未来现金流后面加折现了。折现是非常重要的概念，不懂不行。有些公司拿着很多现金却无法有效利用的话，实际上这些现金是在贬值的。最好的状况是在不用分红的前提下可以维持资产回报率。 “另外上一篇我说的最小机会成本是无风险国债回报，后来想了想，觉得也有问题。实际的最小机会成本应该是通胀率。…

Source: http://nteswjq.blog.163.com/blog/static/1269981201231101821831/

Another correction

> By Duan Yongping · his NetEase blog (nteswjq.blog.163.com, now closed; read from web archives) · 2012-04-11 · [Original link](http://nteswjq.blog.163.com/blog/static/1269981201231101821831/) ([archived](https://web.archive.org/web/20120427013913/http://nteswjq.blog.163.com:80/blog/static/1269981201231101821831/))

In the long-winded version in my last post I forgot to add "discounted" after future cash flows. Discounting is a very important concept; you can't do without understanding it.

If some companies hold lots of cash but can't use it effectively, that cash is actually losing value. The best situation is being able to maintain the return on assets without needing to pay dividends.

"Also, in the last post I said the minimum opportunity cost is the risk-free Treasury return. Thinking it over afterwards, I feel there's a problem with that too. The real minimum opportunity cost should be the inflation rate. That is, if the return on the money in your hands can't keep up with inflation, you're actually losing money." I've changed this passage to the following meaning:

The inflation rate is actually not an opportunity cost but should be the "base rate of return." When investing you actually can't take the inflation rate into account, but you can compare interest rates. That is, the minimum opportunity cost is still the risk-free Treasury return.