????當然，災難有可能發生，也的確會發生。眾所周知，網絡視頻租賃公司Netflix在公司股價居高不下之時，投了10多億美元用于股票回購，令公司在去年秋季陷入窘境，現金幾近用罄的Netflix不得不施行了每股70美元的攤薄性融資。即便情況沒那么糟糕，也不能確保在市場大幅震蕩之時股票回購仍能支撐股價。高盛指出，股票回購的長期效應至多也只是好壞不一。

????股息。雖然高盛的研究沒有指出，股息將有類似的大幅增長，但高盛分析師們確實預計返還給股東的現金水平將穩步增長——2011年有約14%的資本用于派息——與2002-2010年間的均值持平，高于2006-2008年間12%的水平。當時公司仍認為相比把現金返還給股東，他們能有更好的用途。問題是：如今固定收益投資的收益率仍低得可憐——10年期美國國債為2.04%，1年期只有區區0.11%。為自己找一只高派息股，就能占據先機。高盛列出了很多股息收益率具有吸引力且股息歷史增長率較高的公司，包括輝瑞（再次出現?。⑼ㄓ秒姎猓℅eneral Electric）、可口可樂（Coca-Cola）和波音公司（Boeing）。有些股息收益率更高的股票可能風險略高一些，包括Och-Ziff Capital Management資產管理公司（股息收益率10.7%?。?、通信公司威力眾（Verizon，5.2%）和杜科能源（Duke Energy）（4.7%）。

????并購。現金收購的步伐似乎也在加快。市場研究機構Capital IQ的數據顯示，過去12個月有很多美國大公司都打開了錢袋，進行大宗并購，包括米高梅集團（MGM Resorts，支付現金4.07億美元）、Liberty Interactive傳媒公司（1.85億美元）、Allscripts Healthcare保健公司（1.215億美元）和福特汽車（Ford Motor Company）（9,400萬美元）。不是每個首席執行官都愿意承擔這樣的風險，換言之，還是有很多錢沒花出去。

????那么，實體投資呢？如今這有更時髦的政治辭令“創造就業”。近期接受《財富》雜志（Fortune）采訪的公司高管中只有不到一半的人表示，2012年預計將擴大員工招聘。2011年企業有38%的現金用于資本支出，仍低于39%的長期均值，甚至也低于2009年的42%。麥肯錫公司（McKinsey & Company）2011年9月的一項研究指出，雖然很多高管感覺公司對業務投資不足，但各行各業都在越來越多地回避可能的損失——在他們眼里，潛在損失比潛在收益更重。換言之，他們就是沒有膽量做出大膽的決定。因此，他們可能會開始把現金返還給股東。

????因此，消息面是積極的，雖然利好也許有限?？磥砺L的現金儲藏期終于有望結束。如果公司想不出怎么投資或并購，他們就會把錢返還給股東。現在，需要有什么人讓蘋果公司的人知道在這個問題上（雖然這種情況很少見），他們并不比其他公司好多少，和其他公司也并沒有什么不同。這些錢不是他們的，是股東們的。如果這些錢他們沒有用，就該還給股東。

????Of course, disasters can—and do—happen. Netflix (NFLX) famously spent over $1 billion on share repurchases when its stock was flying high, leaving the company in a jam last fall that necessitated a dilutive financing at $70 a share because it had nearly run out of cash. Even in more benign circumstances, there's no guarantee that a buyback will offer any share price support in a volatile market. To its credit, Goldman points out that the long-term effect of buybacks on stock prices is mixed at best.

????Dividends. While Goldman's research doesn't point to a similar surge in dividends, its analysts do see a steady level of cash being returned to shareholders by such a route—some 14% of capital allocations in 2011—equal to the average from 2002 to 2010, and above the 12% levels of 2006 to 2008, when companies still thought they had better uses for their cash than just giving it back to shareholders. And here's the thing: fixed income investments remain at pathetic yields these days -- 2.04% for 10-year Treasuries or a paltry 0.11% for one-year notes. Find yourself a nice dividend-paying stock, and you're ahead of the game already. Goldman identifies a number of companies with both attractive yields plus historical dividend growth. They include Pfizer (again!), General Electric, Coca-Cola, and Boeing. Some higher-yielding stocks that might be a bit riskier include Och-Ziff Capital Management (a 10.7% yield!), Verizon (5.2%), and Duke Energy (4.7%).

????Mergers and acquisitions. The pace of cash acquisitions seems to be picking up as well. According to Capital IQ, a number of major U.S. companies opened their wallets for major M&A moves over the last 12 months, including MGM Resorts ($407 million in cash spent), Liberty Interactive ($185 million), Allscripts Healthcare ($121.5 million) and Ford Motor Company ($94 million). Not every CEO is trigger-shy, in other words, and there is big money out there waiting to be put to use.

????And what of actual corporate investment—now known by its trendy political moniker, "job creation?" Fewer than half of executives polled recently by Fortune said they expect to increase their headcount in 2012. Companies allocated 38% of their cash use on capital expenditures in 2011, which is still below the long-term average of 39% and even below 2009 levels of 42%. A September 2011 study by McKinsey & Company pointed out that while large numbers of executives felt their companies were underinvesting in their business, a rise in loss aversion—weighing potential losses significantly more than equivalent gains—has taken hold across all manner of industries. In other words, they're suffering from an inability to make bold decisions. So they might as well start giving it back to shareholders.

????So the news is positive, if only on the margins. And it seems as if the long night of cash hoarding might finally be coming to a close. If companies can't figure out how to invest their money or spend it on M&A, they're going to give it back to their shareholders. Now someone just needs to let the people at Apple know that in this one rare instance, they are not better or different than everyone around them. It's not their money—it's their shareholders'. If they've got no use for it, give it back.