萬豪國際集團首席執行官蘇安勵即將迎來職業生涯中一場重大考驗，接下來的幾周內，不知他將如何破解這一難題。實際上，我們已經見過許多類似情形：萬豪集團打算收購另一家公司——喜達屋酒店與度假村集團，后者已經同意萬豪的收購邀約，這筆收購原定今年年中就能達成。但中國安邦保險集團突然橫空殺出，向喜達屋拋出一個更高的收購價格。蘇安勵該怎么辦？

目前看來，喜達屋臨陣倒戈的風險是很高的。盡管無論是從客戶數量，還是從營收來看，萬豪都是目前全球最大的酒店公司，但即便對于財大氣粗的萬豪來說，這項收購也是一筆舉足輕重的大交易。2014年萬豪集團的年收益約為138美元，而萬豪收購喜達屋的要約價格也達到122億美元。

蘇安勵面臨的現實問題是：天價收購有可能無法給股東帶來價值，這可能出于多種原因，比如兩家企業整合不暢、文化沖突、戰略瑕疵等等，但最常見的原因也更加世俗。那就是收購方出價太高。倘若如此，這筆交易就無可救藥。而出價過高，恰恰是目前情勢創造的風險。

下面來說一下為什么。安邦已經顯露出一個非理性收購者的跡象，有可能以極高的價格競價。2014年，該公司同意以19.5億美元的價格收購曼哈頓“地王”華爾道夫－阿斯托利亞酒店。在這之前，另兩家中資公司剛剛收購了紐約另兩座地標性酒店——皇冠假日酒店和卡萊爾酒店。

就在上周，安邦集團剛剛同意斥資65億美元，收購百仕通集團幾個月前剛剛出資40億美金買下的多家豪華酒店資產。在收購喜達屋的問題上，安邦愿意全部以現金收購，而萬豪集團主要用股票。安邦之所以愿意高價收購喜達屋，還可能是因為它想在海外收購部分硬資產，以避免人民幣進一步貶值。另一種可能是，安邦CEO吳小輝試圖將一些個人財富轉移到海外，就像許多中國富豪現在正在做的那樣。而萬豪集團則沒有這些動力。

我們現在還不知道蘇安勵的出價底線是多少。不過，如果安邦集團成功競購喜達屋，相對于萬豪而言，喜達屋仍是一個規模較小的競爭對手，萬豪仍將保持世界最大酒店業公司的地位，同時還能獲得一筆高達4億美元的“分手費”。另外，美國或其他國家的監管部門也不一定批準安邦對喜達屋的收購案。

在安邦有意收購喜達屋的消息公開后，萬豪集團的股價反而有所上漲。或許是因為投資者們認為萬豪也能從這筆交易中有所斬獲，要么就是覺得萬豪的收購價已經太高了，放棄收購喜達屋或許是更好的選擇。

更有趣的是，根據現有協議，喜達屋與其他收購意向者接觸的期限在3月17日截止。喜達屋和萬豪的股東將于3月28日就這筆交易進行投票表決。

總之，蘇安勵正面臨著其CEO生涯中最大的一個難題。且看他如何破解。（財富中文網）

譯者：樸成奎

審校：任文科

It’s crunch time for Marriott CEO Arne Sorenson, and we’ll get a close-up view of high-stakes leadership over the coming weeks. In general terms his situation is one we’ve seen many times. He has a deal to buy another company, Starwood Hotels and Resorts, which was agreed to last fall and set to close mid-year. Now a surprising newcomer, China’s Anbang Insurance, has made a higher bid. What should Sorenson do?

The stakes are high. This would be a big deal even for Marriott MAR -0.73% , creating by far the world’s biggest hotel company by number of rooms and by revenue. The money is significant; Marriott would spend about $12.2 billion for Starwood HOT 0.29% , while its 2014 annual revenue was about $13.8 billion.

And here’s the real issue for Sorenson: Big mergers can fail to deliver value to shareholders for many reasons – botched integration of the two businesses, cultural wars, unwise strategy – but the most common reason is more mundane. The buyer pays too much. In that case, nothing can rescue the deal, and paying too much is precisely the danger the current situation creates.

Here’s why. Anbang shows signs of being a possibly irrational buyer that might be willing to bid way too high. In 2014, the company agreed to pay $1.95 billion for the Waldorf-Astoria in Manhattan, a trophy property, after other Chinese buyers had bought two other New York trophy hotels, the Plaza and the Carlyle. Just last week, Anbang agreed to pay $6.5 billion for a collection of luxury hotels that Blackstone Group had bought for $4 billion only four months earlier. And Anbang is offering all cash, while Marriott’s offer is largely stock. Other potential motivations for Anbang: It may want to buy hard assets outside of China before the yuan loses more value, and it may be a wish by CEO Wu Xiaohui, reportedly a billionaire, to move some personal wealth out of the country, as many wealthy Chinese are doing. Those motives wouldn’t apply to Marriott.

We can’t know the bottom line on Sorenson’s financial calculations. Among the factors: If Anbang buys Starwood, then Starwood remains a smaller competitor while Marriott remains the world’s largest hotel company, and Marriott would collect a $400 million breakup fee. There’s no assurance that regulators in the U.S. or elsewhere would approve an Anbang-Starwood deal. When Anbang’s bid became public on Monday, Marriott stock rose. Either investors think Marriott may also be in play, or they think Marriott was already paying too much and would be better off if the deal doesn’t happen.

And just to add some excitement, under the existing deal, Starwood has only until Thursday to talk to other bidders. Starwood and Marriott shareholders are scheduled to vote on the deal on March 28.

Sorenson faces some of the most important decisions of his CEO career. Watch and learn.