一週工作四小時不是夢,自由工作者的福音

If anyone gets the entrepreneur's plight, it's Tim Ferriss. The East Hampton, N.Y.-raised, Princeton-educated author once worked in sales at a data storage company before starting a sports nutrition supplement company and penning The 4-Hour Workweek in 2007. The controversial New York Times bestseller inculcated readers to Ferriss's "lifestyle design" principle, serving up ways to optimize the work day and increase quality of life. Its success established him as a self-help guru and paved the way for a follow-up in 2010. Last fall, he created a stir as the first major author to sign with Amazon (AMZN) Publishing to distribute The 4-Hour Chef. At the same time, Ferriss also kept his eye on the tech scene. To date, he has invested in and advises over 30 tech companies, from Facebook (FB) and Twitter to Uber and TaskRabbit.

如果說有誰能瞭解創業的艱辛，這個人非蒂姆?菲利斯莫屬。這位成長於紐約東漢普頓區，畢業於普林斯頓大學（Princeton）的作家曾是一家數據存儲公司的銷售人員，之後還開過一家運動營養品公司。2007年，他出版了《每週工作四小時》（The 4-Hour Workweek）。這本書成爲《紐約時報》（New York Times）的最暢銷著作，但也引起了很大爭議。它極力向讀者推薦菲利斯的“生活方式設計”原則，還提出了優化工作時間，提高生活質量的方法。這本書的成功讓菲利斯成了自助大師，還爲他在2010年出版後續作品鋪平了道路。去年秋天，菲利斯和亞馬遜圖書出版部門Amazon Publishing簽定合同，由後者發行他的新書《每週下廚四小時》（The 4-Hour Chef），成爲知名作家中第一個吃螃蟹的人，轟動一時。同時，菲利斯還把注意力放在了科技領域。截至目前，他所投資或擔任顧問的科技公司已經超過30家，其中包括Facebook、Twitter、租車網站Uber和網上勞務市場TaskRabbit。

Fortune caught up with Ferris at the launch of the digital lifestyle brand InsideHook in San Francisco, where the former national Chinese kickboxing champion (yes, really) reflected upon his Amazon flirtation, why he's on hiatus from investing, and why another book isn't coming any time soon.

本刊記者借數字時尚品牌InsideHook在舊金山舉行發佈會的機會和菲利斯共進了午餐。這位曾經的全美散打冠軍（沒錯，他真的是散打冠軍）談到了他和亞馬遜結緣的過程，解釋了他爲什麼暫停投資活動以及他近期不會推出新書的原因。

Fortune: You told me earlier that 250 pages were cut from the 4-Hour Chef. Feel free to disagree, but I'd heard you weren't happy with Amazon. Is that true?

《財富》：你之前曾經告訴過我，《每週下廚四小時》這本書被砍掉了250頁。請恕我直言，我聽說你對亞馬遜不是很滿意。是真的嗎？

Ferriss: There were many things I was more than happy with, but I think everyone underestimated the irrational backlash from big box retailers that would come of Amazon Publishing. That wasn't the fault of Amazon, and I don't blame Amazon for that. We understood the risks going in. So as the opportunity presented itself, I made the decision to pull the trigger. I take responsibility for that. On the digital side, Amazon executed fantastically. We anticipated that Barnes &Noble (BKS) would boycott. We did not anticipate that Target (TGT), Costco (COST), Wal-Mart (WMT), and so on would boycott.

菲利斯： 有很多事情都讓我滿意的不得了，但我想大家都低估了大型零售商對Amazon Publishing做出的非理性激烈反應。這不是亞馬遜的錯，在這一點上我不怪亞馬遜。當時我們知道有哪些風險。所以當機會出現時，我決定放手一搏，責任也由我來承擔。亞馬遜在數字領域執行的非常好。我們預計會遭到圖書零售商Barnes &Noble的抵制。但我們沒想到塔吉特（Target）、好市多（Costco）和沃爾瑪（Wal-Mart）這些零售商也會抵制我們。

The landscape is changing so quickly, but the experiment itself taught me a lot. It was like [getting an] MBA in the next wave of publishing. With the next book, would I do Amazon? Would I do traditional? Would I do a mixture? Would I do self-publishing? I don't know.

情況變化的非常快，這次經歷則教會了我很多東西。就好像下次出書時我就能（拿到一個）MBA學位。下一本書我會找亞馬遜嗎？我會採用傳統方式嗎？還是把二者結合起來？還是自己出版？我不知道。

Part of the reason I'm not doing a new book in the immediate, foreseeable future is that I think there's going to be a bloodbath or arms race over say, the next 24 months, and I want to wait until the dust settles. I wouldn't underestimate Amazon! [chuckles] And as a traditional publisher, I would also say, I wouldn't get myopically focused on Amazon when there are at least a dozen startups you should also be concerned with. If you're not going to innovate, I would do so while they're less expensive –

最近我不會出版新書，部分原因是我認爲在接下來的大概24個月裏會出現大屠殺或者軍備競賽那樣的場面，我想一直等到塵埃落定。我不會低估亞馬遜！（輕笑）而且作爲一名傳統出版人，我還要說，現在至少還有十幾家初創型企業值得關注，我不會目光短淺地把所有注意力都集中在亞馬遜身上。如果你不打算創新，我就會這麼做，趁成本還不那麼高……

-- and not Amazon.

……而且不是通過亞馬遜。

Exactly.

沒錯。

In other words, don't expect another Tim Ferriss book within the next one to two years.

換句話說，今後一、兩年都別指望再看到蒂姆?菲利斯的新作了。

I don't think so. I mean, never say never, but I would be exceptionally surprised if I were to have a book come out in the next year or two.

我不這麼想。我是說，凡事沒有絕對，但如果明年或後年能出書的話，我會感到格外驚訝。

So if you're not writing another book, what are you working on?

那麼，如果你不打算再寫本書，你會忙些什麼呢？

I can't give you a lot of detail, but I'm going to be executive producing and hosting my own TV show on primetime.

我不能告訴你太多細節，我只能說我將在自己的黃金時間段電視節目中擔任執行製片和主持人。

When can we expect that?

這個節目什麼時候開播？

It's coming very, very soon. There will be news probably within the next two months.

非常快。兩個月內可能就會有消息。

Books aside, you've also been a startup investor and advisor. What do you look for in a startup, and what's on the radar these days?

除了寫書，你還一直是初創型企業的投資人和顧問。你對初創型企業有哪些期望？目前又有哪些目標呢？

So I look for consumer-facing products addressing a problem I have that are already demonstrating traction of some type -- like user adoption -- that I can help dramatically. They need to be simple enough to understand, yet unique enough to pitch a trend piece to say, Fortune or the New York Times. Which means by default, I could pitch it not just to New York and San Francisco but the rest of the country. And ideally, but not a prerequisite, a product-focused studio and at least one person who's been with the startup from early inception to exit on the exec team.

我希望看到的是面向消費者的產品，它們能解決人們的問題，而且它們已經表現出了某種優勢，比如在用戶採用率方面，在這方面我可以提供很大的幫助。它們得簡單易懂，但又得獨特到能登上《財富》或《紐約時報》（ New York Times）這些媒體的潮流版塊。也就是說，我不光能在紐約和舊金山推廣這些產品，在國內其他地方也可以。理想情況下，要有一間以產品爲主的工作室，而且執行團隊中至少要有一名成員一直待在這家初創型企業，從建立之初一直到退出。但這不是先決條件。

So it's largely driven by the talent more so than the product?

所以人才的作用基本上要大於產品？

And a product I can use in its current state and derive value from. Evernote solved all my researching and paperless goals for creating books. TaskRabbit allows me to get rid of all the errands and busywork. Uber solves major problems in San Francisco that are parking-related, taxi-related, and so on. That's pretty much it.

這還得是一種目前人們就能使用，而且能從中受益的產品。電子記事軟件印象筆記（Evernote）讓我在寫書時完成了所有的研究和無紙化工作。TaskRabbit讓我擺脫了奔波和忙碌。Uber幫我在舊金山解決了很多大問題，比如停車位、叫出租車等等。基本上就是這樣。

I've been criticized by some VCs who've said it's naive to only invest in companies whose services and products you would use yourself, but so far it's been a good rule for me not losing money!

一些風險投資公司說我天真，因爲我只投資我會親自使用其服務和產品的公司。但到目前爲止，這對我來說一直都是一條很好的原則，它不會讓我賠錢！

Is there a startup you'd call the "the one that got away," one you wished you'd backed?

有沒有什麼初創型企業是那種從你手邊溜掉的機會，讓你覺得你原本應該出手投資的？

Square is definitely one of them. There are many, but that's the first one that comes to mind. Operationally and from a product standpoint, I just have so much respect for what they've done and what they continue to do, and think they're just getting started.

移動支付平臺Square肯定是其中之一。這種公司有許多，但我首先想到的就是它。從經營和產品角度講，他們已經取得的成就和他們繼續進行的工作讓我深感敬佩，而且我認爲他們的事業纔剛剛開始。

I love the ones that look obvious in hindsight. People now look at Uber and go, "Oh, my god. Of course. So straightforward. How could it not do well?" The fact of the matter is, it didn't look obvious at all to people in the very beginning. (And I was a pre-seed advisor to Uber.) It wasn't obvious except for people looking into a crystal ball, trying to look 10 years down the field like [cofounders] Garrett Camp and Travis Kalanick.

我喜歡那些事後讓人覺得恍然大悟的公司。現在，人們談到Uber時都會說：“噢，天哪。當然。情況是這麼的簡單明瞭。它怎麼會不成功呢？”實際上，要點是在它剛剛起步的時候人們根本看不明白。（在構思期我就是Uber的顧問。）能看明白的只有那些有預見力，可以設法看到10年後這個領域情形到底如何的人，比如（Uber聯合創始人）加勒特?坎普和特拉維斯?克拉尼克。

Is there an area of tech you're currently eyeing?

目前你是否在關注着某個科技領域？

I hate to say it, but no. I'm actually considering dialing back my startup involvement.

我不想承認，但目前確實沒有。實際上我正在考慮降低對初創型企業的參與程度。

Why is that?

爲什麼？

I think there's way too much "dumb capital" floating around. You have people signing deals offering unbelievably insane terms to early stage companies that haven't validated their product at all. That's great for the entrepreneurs because even if 99 stupid ideas are funded, there should be one out of 100 that could change the world. For someone capital-constrained, it makes investing intelligently very difficult.

我覺得周圍有太多太多的“愚蠢資本”。有人和處於起步階段的公司簽訂了合同，其中有些條款離譜得難以置信，而且這些公司的產品根本還沒有經過檢驗。對創業者來說這非常好，因爲即使獲得投資的99種想法都是愚蠢的，100種想法裏總還會有一個可能改變這個世界。

When I invested in Uber or TaskRabbit, they were sort of ahead of the curve before these labels or themes were even available. I feel like by the time there's a theme that's easily understood, you're already behind the wave and you're investing in funds, so I really don't know. I just look for things where I go, "Holy shit! How do I live without this?"

我對Uber或TaskRabbit投資時，它們多少有些超前，因爲那時甚至還沒有這種類型或題材。當時我的感覺是這樣的題材比較容易理解，自己已經落在潮流之後，而且正在投入資金，所以我真的不是很清楚。我尋找的是那些讓我覺得“老天爺！沒有這個我可怎麼活！”的東西。