+Follow
Landis
No personal profile
1
Follow
0
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
Landis
2021-08-24
Tesla to Pluto !
Why Tesla Stock Jumped on Monday
Landis
2021-08-23
Well said， Elon
Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means
Landis
2021-07-01
Very well said
2 Myths Setting You Up For Failure
Landis
2021-02-24
Excellent time to add position now
4 reasons Tesla's stock is tumbling
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":3568773955697119,"uuid":"3568773955697119","gmtCreate":1605680037279,"gmtModify":1614156590023,"name":"Landis","pinyin":"landis","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":1,"tweetSize":4,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-2","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"Executive Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $300,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d20b23f1b6335407f882bc5c2ad12c0","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ada3b4533518ace8404a3f6dd192bd29","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/177f283ba21d1c077054dac07f88f3bd","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"80.18%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-1","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Debut Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.05.18","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-1","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Elite Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 30","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ab0f87127c854ce3191a752d57b46edc","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9835ce48b8c8743566d344ac7a7ba8c","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76754b53ce7a90019f132c1d2fbc698f","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"60.95%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":834609498,"gmtCreate":1629793832414,"gmtModify":1676530133087,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Tesla to Pluto !","listText":"Tesla to Pluto !","text":"Tesla to Pluto !","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/834609498","repostId":"1129412673","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129412673","pubTimestamp":1629792196,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129412673?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-24 16:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Tesla Stock Jumped on Monday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129412673","media":"The Motley Fool","summary":"Key Points\n\nNew Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for year","content":"<p><b>Key Points</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>New Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for years to come.</li>\n <li>Analysts are modeling for huge earnings growth from the electric car maker over the next five years.</li>\n <li>Tesla stock is up 9% over the past 30 days.</li>\n</ul>\n<h3><b>What happened</b></h3>\n<p>Shares of electric vehicle company <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">Tesla Motors</a> (NASDAQ:TSLA) jumped sharply on Monday, climbing as much as 4.5%. As of 12:30 p.m. EDT today, the stock was up 4%.</p>\n<p>The stock's gain was likely fueled primarily by bullish commentary from New Street analyst Pierre Ferragu.</p>\n<h3><b>So what</b></h3>\n<p>Following Tesla's AI Day last week, Ferragu is more confident about the company's artificial intelligence product development, noting that the presentation made New Street more comfortable with its bullish view. More specifically, he believes the growth stock will deserve a price-to-earnings multiple of 50 to 100 in the years to come thanks to the company's advanced technology.</p>\n<p>Though Tesla has a P/E multiple of 373 today, analysts expect the automaker's earnings per share to grow at an average annual compound rate of about 52% over the next five years.</p>\n<p>The analyst has a $900 12-month price target on the stock.</p>\n<h3><b>Now what</b></h3>\n<p>Tesla has guided for an average annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries of about 50% in the upcoming years, without specifying when it expects growth to slow. And management says it expects significant operating margin expansion. These two factors would easily lead to 50%-plus EPS growth.</p>\n<p>If Tesla is right about its optimistic outlook and Ferragu is right about Tesla being able to command P/E ratios of 50 to 100 five to 10 years from now, then today's prices for Tesla stock could be a good buying opportunity. But investors should keep in mind that there's a lot that could go wrong with such bullish assumptions, from competitive challenges to potential production and supply issues and other unforeseen detours.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why Tesla Stock Jumped on Monday</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy Tesla Stock Jumped on Monday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-24 16:03 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/23/why-tesla-stock-jumped-on-monday/><strong>The Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Key Points\n\nNew Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for years to come.\nAnalysts are modeling for huge earnings growth from the electric car maker over the next ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/23/why-tesla-stock-jumped-on-monday/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/23/why-tesla-stock-jumped-on-monday/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129412673","content_text":"Key Points\n\nNew Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for years to come.\nAnalysts are modeling for huge earnings growth from the electric car maker over the next five years.\nTesla stock is up 9% over the past 30 days.\n\nWhat happened\nShares of electric vehicle company Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) jumped sharply on Monday, climbing as much as 4.5%. As of 12:30 p.m. EDT today, the stock was up 4%.\nThe stock's gain was likely fueled primarily by bullish commentary from New Street analyst Pierre Ferragu.\nSo what\nFollowing Tesla's AI Day last week, Ferragu is more confident about the company's artificial intelligence product development, noting that the presentation made New Street more comfortable with its bullish view. More specifically, he believes the growth stock will deserve a price-to-earnings multiple of 50 to 100 in the years to come thanks to the company's advanced technology.\nThough Tesla has a P/E multiple of 373 today, analysts expect the automaker's earnings per share to grow at an average annual compound rate of about 52% over the next five years.\nThe analyst has a $900 12-month price target on the stock.\nNow what\nTesla has guided for an average annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries of about 50% in the upcoming years, without specifying when it expects growth to slow. And management says it expects significant operating margin expansion. These two factors would easily lead to 50%-plus EPS growth.\nIf Tesla is right about its optimistic outlook and Ferragu is right about Tesla being able to command P/E ratios of 50 to 100 five to 10 years from now, then today's prices for Tesla stock could be a good buying opportunity. But investors should keep in mind that there's a lot that could go wrong with such bullish assumptions, from competitive challenges to potential production and supply issues and other unforeseen detours.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":267,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835120405,"gmtCreate":1629695277007,"gmtModify":1676530102535,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Well said， Elon","listText":"Well said， Elon","text":"Well said， Elon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835120405","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, & HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8 <a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉","AMZN":"亚马逊"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":135,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158053703,"gmtCreate":1625115553702,"gmtModify":1703736478008,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Very well said","listText":"Very well said","text":"Very well said","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/158053703","repostId":"1198389317","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1198389317","pubTimestamp":1625106905,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1198389317?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-01 10:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"2 Myths Setting You Up For Failure","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1198389317","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nMyths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.\nThey sound convincing, but r","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Myths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.</li>\n <li>They sound convincing, but really don't make sense.</li>\n <li>Today we knock the shine off two of them for your benefit.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Have you ever had a moment where your expectations didn't meet reality? Perhaps you went to see a movie in theaters, and it didn't live up to the hype of the trailers or your friends rave reviews. Or, perhaps the Michelin Star restaurant was not nearly as good as you thought it would be.</p>\n<p>When we have high expectations, and those expectations are not reached, it leads to discouragement and disillusionment.</p>\n<p>Having proper expectations can allow us to enjoy more in life. It can also enable us to see the path we are walking more clearly. Little in life is as amazing or horrible as others describe.</p>\n<p>When it comes to investing and saving for retirement, we need to have proper expectations. Otherwise, we may get disillusioned and lost along the way. False expectations or beliefs regarding investing hold us back from succeeding. False expectations can cause us to be overconfident in some investments, or to pass up on great opportunities.</p>\n<p>There are numerous myths that many simply accept without question. These myths could be costing you money! So let's hit head-on two myths that continue to circulate in investing and retirement circles!</p>\n<p><b>Just Buy Dividend Aristocrats!</b></p>\n<p>I hear this a lot, especially in dividend investment circles. Many are looking for a low-effort low-risk approach to getting income from the market. Dividend Aristocrats have extremely long histories of raising their dividends, through all sorts of market conditions.</p>\n<p>Yet just because a yield is low, or has a strong history of being raised, does not mean it will survive long term. Through the Great Financial Crisis, starting in 2008, 36% of all Dividend Aristocrats were removed from the list within two years. Within five years, about 50% ended up being removed from the list. This was due to cutting, suspending, or not raising their dividend. That's a lot of pain for investors focused solely on investing in this \"safe haven.\"</p>\n<p>This myth is founded on the incorrect belief that low yields that are growing are inherently less risky. Time and again, this belief has fallen flat in the face of reality. 50% of Dividend Aristocrats lost their 25-year streaks of dividend raises. For a Dividend Aristocrat, where many investors buy primarily because of their flawless history, a cut or even just the lack of a raise can have an outsized impact.</p>\n<p>The reality is that at times, great companies will cut their dividend to ensure long-term benefit for shareholders. Income investors might hate dividend cuts, but sometimes a cut is what is best for the future of the company. Dividend Aristocrats are not immune from that reality. Yet you will pay a huge premium for most aristocrats, when you can invest in a company that might have cut one, but will still grow its dividend over time.</p>\n<p>Take Global Partners LP (GLP), which sports a 9% yield, as an example. When COVID-19 hit, management cut the distribution to protect the company and benefit unitholders in the long term. Since then, GLP has rapidly raised its distribution to levels above what was paid pre-COVID.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/eb2de5e63c647b292429f7aa2964c02d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"371\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Data byYCharts</span></p>\n<p>One should never blindly trust a company's dividend raising streak or its low yield as the sole safety indicators. GLP had a high yield before COVID, and did have to cut the dividend during the crisis. However, its strong business model allowed it to recover quickly and a year later the dividend is higher than ever.</p>\n<p>This myth causes many investors or retirees to hold low yield, low growth names with long track records of raises, all while missing out on vastly higher income levels.</p>\n<p>Cuts happen for various reasons, especially during periods of economic turmoil like the Great Financial Crisis or COVID. You can protect yourself by having a higher degree of diversification in your portfolio and avoid panic if a company you hold takes proactive measures to benefit you long term!</p>\n<p><b>SWAN Stocks Don't Need Attention</b></p>\n<p>The moniker SWAN, standing for Sleep Well At Night, is highly misleading. It seems everything under the sun gets described as a SWAN, or SUPER SWAN, or MEGA AWESOME ONCE A DECADE SWAN! Yet investors, especially those who just survived 2020's volatility, know that even so-called SWAN stocks require monitoring.</p>\n<p>The High Dividend Opportunities Model Portfolio is actively managed. We adjust our portfolio for risks on the horizon. No single stock is immune to every market condition or economic/political risk. The illusion that the stock is a SWAN because a trusted advisor or internet guru told you so leads many to losses from being too hands-off with their portfolio.</p>\n<p>Some of the most famous melt-downs were stocks that were once considered \"SWANs\" like Enron, WorldCom, GE, and others. The \"SWANs\" today are not the same as SWANs were 30 years ago.</p>\n<p>Retirees need a low-maintenance portfolio, but that does not mean you can be asleep at the wheel!</p>\n<p>Half of the battle when it comes to investing is keeping an eye on the horizon—watching market movements, geopolitical actions, and government plans. I provide weekly updates to HDO members regarding the risks on the horizon, and we make moves to adjust for them coming.</p>\n<p>Likewise, while retirees may hold SWAN stocks, they must still be engaged with the world around them to be positioned to survive and thrive in the coming environments.</p>\n<p>When a bad storm is raging at sea, a strong ship can withstand the storm, but an unexpected wave can capsize even a strong ship. These waves are called rogue waves, often twice the size of normal storm waves and often moving in a direction different from the prevailing winds. These rogue waves have the ability to capsize strong, able vessels if they catch them off-guard.</p>\n<p>We must have protections to watch for rogue waves when the storms of life and the market rise. We cannot simply believe our SWANs will keep us safe in all conditions.</p>\n<p>Shedding these incorrect expectations, you can approach the market with the right mindset. By slaying these myths, you can ensure you are ready to craft and maintain your retirement portfolio.</p>\n<p>We must move beyond the desire to be lazy and simply buy from a specific dividend payer list. These payers may have outstanding payment histories, but this does not guarantee future success.</p>\n<p>Furthermore, we must remain active in our portfolio, or at the very least to keep an eye to safeguard it. Stocks that are \"SWANs\" today will always be at risk of not being a \"SWAN\" tomorrow.</p>\n<p>Worse, restricting ourselves to lists like this removes a vast array of excellent income-producing opportunities that do not trade at such large premiums.</p>\n<p>Retirement is supposed to the capstone to our lifetimes. A time we spend in ease and relaxation. We have toiled hard and worked diligently to earn the last years of our life in leisure and enjoyment. The last thing we want is to derail our progress towards this goal with faulty thinking and misplaced expectations.</p>\n<p>You can slay these myths and unlock more value from your portfolio than ever before! I believe in you. You got this.</p>","source":"seekingalpha","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>2 Myths Setting You Up For Failure</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n2 Myths Setting You Up For Failure\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-01 10:35 GMT+8 <a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4437048-2-myths-setting-you-up-for-failure><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nMyths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.\nThey sound convincing, but really don't make sense.\nToday we knock the shine off two of them for your benefit.\n\nHave you ever ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4437048-2-myths-setting-you-up-for-failure\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GE":"GE航空航天","IRIDQ":"Iridium World Communications Ltd.",".DJI":"道琼斯","GLP":"全球合伙"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4437048-2-myths-setting-you-up-for-failure","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1198389317","content_text":"Summary\n\nMyths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.\nThey sound convincing, but really don't make sense.\nToday we knock the shine off two of them for your benefit.\n\nHave you ever had a moment where your expectations didn't meet reality? Perhaps you went to see a movie in theaters, and it didn't live up to the hype of the trailers or your friends rave reviews. Or, perhaps the Michelin Star restaurant was not nearly as good as you thought it would be.\nWhen we have high expectations, and those expectations are not reached, it leads to discouragement and disillusionment.\nHaving proper expectations can allow us to enjoy more in life. It can also enable us to see the path we are walking more clearly. Little in life is as amazing or horrible as others describe.\nWhen it comes to investing and saving for retirement, we need to have proper expectations. Otherwise, we may get disillusioned and lost along the way. False expectations or beliefs regarding investing hold us back from succeeding. False expectations can cause us to be overconfident in some investments, or to pass up on great opportunities.\nThere are numerous myths that many simply accept without question. These myths could be costing you money! So let's hit head-on two myths that continue to circulate in investing and retirement circles!\nJust Buy Dividend Aristocrats!\nI hear this a lot, especially in dividend investment circles. Many are looking for a low-effort low-risk approach to getting income from the market. Dividend Aristocrats have extremely long histories of raising their dividends, through all sorts of market conditions.\nYet just because a yield is low, or has a strong history of being raised, does not mean it will survive long term. Through the Great Financial Crisis, starting in 2008, 36% of all Dividend Aristocrats were removed from the list within two years. Within five years, about 50% ended up being removed from the list. This was due to cutting, suspending, or not raising their dividend. That's a lot of pain for investors focused solely on investing in this \"safe haven.\"\nThis myth is founded on the incorrect belief that low yields that are growing are inherently less risky. Time and again, this belief has fallen flat in the face of reality. 50% of Dividend Aristocrats lost their 25-year streaks of dividend raises. For a Dividend Aristocrat, where many investors buy primarily because of their flawless history, a cut or even just the lack of a raise can have an outsized impact.\nThe reality is that at times, great companies will cut their dividend to ensure long-term benefit for shareholders. Income investors might hate dividend cuts, but sometimes a cut is what is best for the future of the company. Dividend Aristocrats are not immune from that reality. Yet you will pay a huge premium for most aristocrats, when you can invest in a company that might have cut one, but will still grow its dividend over time.\nTake Global Partners LP (GLP), which sports a 9% yield, as an example. When COVID-19 hit, management cut the distribution to protect the company and benefit unitholders in the long term. Since then, GLP has rapidly raised its distribution to levels above what was paid pre-COVID.\nData byYCharts\nOne should never blindly trust a company's dividend raising streak or its low yield as the sole safety indicators. GLP had a high yield before COVID, and did have to cut the dividend during the crisis. However, its strong business model allowed it to recover quickly and a year later the dividend is higher than ever.\nThis myth causes many investors or retirees to hold low yield, low growth names with long track records of raises, all while missing out on vastly higher income levels.\nCuts happen for various reasons, especially during periods of economic turmoil like the Great Financial Crisis or COVID. You can protect yourself by having a higher degree of diversification in your portfolio and avoid panic if a company you hold takes proactive measures to benefit you long term!\nSWAN Stocks Don't Need Attention\nThe moniker SWAN, standing for Sleep Well At Night, is highly misleading. It seems everything under the sun gets described as a SWAN, or SUPER SWAN, or MEGA AWESOME ONCE A DECADE SWAN! Yet investors, especially those who just survived 2020's volatility, know that even so-called SWAN stocks require monitoring.\nThe High Dividend Opportunities Model Portfolio is actively managed. We adjust our portfolio for risks on the horizon. No single stock is immune to every market condition or economic/political risk. The illusion that the stock is a SWAN because a trusted advisor or internet guru told you so leads many to losses from being too hands-off with their portfolio.\nSome of the most famous melt-downs were stocks that were once considered \"SWANs\" like Enron, WorldCom, GE, and others. The \"SWANs\" today are not the same as SWANs were 30 years ago.\nRetirees need a low-maintenance portfolio, but that does not mean you can be asleep at the wheel!\nHalf of the battle when it comes to investing is keeping an eye on the horizon—watching market movements, geopolitical actions, and government plans. I provide weekly updates to HDO members regarding the risks on the horizon, and we make moves to adjust for them coming.\nLikewise, while retirees may hold SWAN stocks, they must still be engaged with the world around them to be positioned to survive and thrive in the coming environments.\nWhen a bad storm is raging at sea, a strong ship can withstand the storm, but an unexpected wave can capsize even a strong ship. These waves are called rogue waves, often twice the size of normal storm waves and often moving in a direction different from the prevailing winds. These rogue waves have the ability to capsize strong, able vessels if they catch them off-guard.\nWe must have protections to watch for rogue waves when the storms of life and the market rise. We cannot simply believe our SWANs will keep us safe in all conditions.\nShedding these incorrect expectations, you can approach the market with the right mindset. By slaying these myths, you can ensure you are ready to craft and maintain your retirement portfolio.\nWe must move beyond the desire to be lazy and simply buy from a specific dividend payer list. These payers may have outstanding payment histories, but this does not guarantee future success.\nFurthermore, we must remain active in our portfolio, or at the very least to keep an eye to safeguard it. Stocks that are \"SWANs\" today will always be at risk of not being a \"SWAN\" tomorrow.\nWorse, restricting ourselves to lists like this removes a vast array of excellent income-producing opportunities that do not trade at such large premiums.\nRetirement is supposed to the capstone to our lifetimes. A time we spend in ease and relaxation. We have toiled hard and worked diligently to earn the last years of our life in leisure and enjoyment. The last thing we want is to derail our progress towards this goal with faulty thinking and misplaced expectations.\nYou can slay these myths and unlock more value from your portfolio than ever before! I believe in you. You got this.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":129,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":363517147,"gmtCreate":1614153485189,"gmtModify":1704888791456,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Excellent time to add position now","listText":"Excellent time to add position now","text":"Excellent time to add position now","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/363517147","repostId":"1106446066","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1106446066","pubTimestamp":1614133758,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1106446066?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-24 10:29","market":"us","language":"en","title":"4 reasons Tesla's stock is tumbling","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1106446066","media":"CNN Business","summary":"New York (CNN Business) - Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into","content":"<p><b>New York (CNN Business) - </b>Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into bear market territory.</p>\n<p>Shares of Tesla fell 6% Tuesday after closing down 8.5% Monday, wiping out its gains for the year. The stock closed at a record just above $883 on January 26 and has tumbled since. It fell low as $619 Tuesday, the first time Tesla shares have fallen below $700 since December 31.</p>\n<p>The steep decline has taken Tesla shares below their level when the company entered the S&P 500 on December 21. It also knocked CEO Elon Musk into the No. 2 position in the richest person on the planet list, behind Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. The two have been swapping positions repeatedly this year.</p>\n<p>Tesla's stock is selling off for several reasons:</p>\n<p><b>Bitcoin</b></p>\n<p>Tesla announced earlier this month that it had invested $1.5 billion in bitcoin. That helped feed the recent rally in bitcoin and by some estimates earned Tesla a quick $1 billion profit — more than it has ever made from selling cars in a single year.</p>\n<p>But on Saturday, in response to a critic of Tesla's bitcoin investment, Musk tweeted that the prices of both bitcoin and another cryptocurrency called Ether \"do seem high.\" That helped to send the price of bitcoin down 9.3% in trading Monday, which may have helped to drag down Tesla shares.</p>\n<p>\"Bitcoin is the smart move at the right time for Tesla in our opinion, but on the downside its playing with firecrackers and risks and volatility are added to the Tesla story,\" said Daniel Ives, tech analyst for Wedbush Securities, who remains bullish on Tesla shares.</p>\n<p><b>Model Y pricing</b></p>\n<p>Last Thursday, Tesla cut the price of the cheapest version of its Model Y and its best-selling Model 3 cars by $2,000 each. That brought the price for the \"standard range\" Model Y, one that can travel 244 miles on a charge, to $38,490 -- and the standard range Model 3 to $34,590.</p>\n<p>But over the weekend, the cheapest \"standard range\" version of the Model Y disappeared from Tesla's sales site, leaving only the more expensive long-range and performance versions of the SUV. Tesla did not explain its decision.</p>\n<p>\"We see the plausible reasons as either: the mix was skewed too much to the cheaper variant, and thus it was going to kill their margins, or more likely there just wasn't much demand for the lower variant,\" said Gordon Johnson of GLJ Research, one of the more bearish critics on Tesla shares. He said the recent price cuts and other price cuts show that Tesla vehicles do not have the demand that its fans claim.</p>\n<p>\"Tesla can't keep its current factories running at capacity without ... price cuts,\" said Johnson in note on Monday.</p>\n<p><b>Increased competition</b></p>\n<p>Established automakers have recently set ambitious targets for their own EV sales.</p>\n<p>General Motors rolled out an SUV version of its Chevrolet Bolt a week ago, priced well below the Model Y, and announced it intends to sell only emissions-free cars after 2035.Ford set an even more ambitious EV target for its European sales, saying all of the car models it sells there will be EVs by 2030.</p>\n<p>Apple is also considering partnering with an automaker toget into the car business, according to several news reports.</p>\n<p>Those efforts are making some Tesla investors nervous, said Ives, although he believes there will be enough of a shift to EVs for multiple winners among global automakers.</p>\n<p><b>Investors got ahead of themselves</b></p>\n<p>Tesla shares peaked one day before a disappointing earnings report on January 27 that fell short of forecasts from Wall Street analysts.</p>\n<p>The earnings showed that the money Tesla made from the sale of regulatory credits to other automakers outpaced its overall net income. Critics, like Johnson, said it's proof Tesla isn't able to make money building and selling cars (although by some other profit measures Tesla is profitable).</p>\n<p>During the earnings conference call on January 27, Musk also spoke about a shortage of batteries needed to power electric vehicles. He said that even with Tesla's own in-house supply of batteries and its planned expansion of battery production, the company is scrambling to find the batteries it wants to build more vehicles.</p>\n<p>\"The fundamental limit on electric vehicles right now, in general, is total availability of [battery] cells,\" he said. For example, Musk said Tesla would have already started producing a semi-tractor if it had the batteries available to do so.</p>\n<p><b>Shares are still way up</b></p>\n<p>Tesla shares rose a market-leading 743% in 2020, as investors embraced the idea that the future of the auto industry would be electric. Tesla remains by far the most valuable automaker in the world, with a market value well above that of the eight largest automakers combined.</p>\n<p>Even with the recent decline. Tesla shares are up about 1,300% since October 2019, when it reported a third-quarter profit that surprised investors, sending shares on a tear.</p>\n<p>Some investors believe Tesla's stock flew too high. Yet many analysts believe Tesla will bounce back. Ives has a 12-month target price of $950.</p>\n<p>Even so, he has a warning: \"It's 'buckle up the seat belt time' again for Tesla's stock with more volatility on the horizon,\" Ives said.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>4 reasons Tesla's stock is tumbling</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n4 reasons Tesla's stock is tumbling\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-24 10:29 GMT+8 <a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/23/investing/tesla-shares-bear-market/index.html><strong>CNN Business</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business) - Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into bear market territory.\nShares of Tesla fell 6% Tuesday after closing down 8.5% Monday, wiping out ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/23/investing/tesla-shares-bear-market/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/23/investing/tesla-shares-bear-market/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1106446066","content_text":"New York (CNN Business) - Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into bear market territory.\nShares of Tesla fell 6% Tuesday after closing down 8.5% Monday, wiping out its gains for the year. The stock closed at a record just above $883 on January 26 and has tumbled since. It fell low as $619 Tuesday, the first time Tesla shares have fallen below $700 since December 31.\nThe steep decline has taken Tesla shares below their level when the company entered the S&P 500 on December 21. It also knocked CEO Elon Musk into the No. 2 position in the richest person on the planet list, behind Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. The two have been swapping positions repeatedly this year.\nTesla's stock is selling off for several reasons:\nBitcoin\nTesla announced earlier this month that it had invested $1.5 billion in bitcoin. That helped feed the recent rally in bitcoin and by some estimates earned Tesla a quick $1 billion profit — more than it has ever made from selling cars in a single year.\nBut on Saturday, in response to a critic of Tesla's bitcoin investment, Musk tweeted that the prices of both bitcoin and another cryptocurrency called Ether \"do seem high.\" That helped to send the price of bitcoin down 9.3% in trading Monday, which may have helped to drag down Tesla shares.\n\"Bitcoin is the smart move at the right time for Tesla in our opinion, but on the downside its playing with firecrackers and risks and volatility are added to the Tesla story,\" said Daniel Ives, tech analyst for Wedbush Securities, who remains bullish on Tesla shares.\nModel Y pricing\nLast Thursday, Tesla cut the price of the cheapest version of its Model Y and its best-selling Model 3 cars by $2,000 each. That brought the price for the \"standard range\" Model Y, one that can travel 244 miles on a charge, to $38,490 -- and the standard range Model 3 to $34,590.\nBut over the weekend, the cheapest \"standard range\" version of the Model Y disappeared from Tesla's sales site, leaving only the more expensive long-range and performance versions of the SUV. Tesla did not explain its decision.\n\"We see the plausible reasons as either: the mix was skewed too much to the cheaper variant, and thus it was going to kill their margins, or more likely there just wasn't much demand for the lower variant,\" said Gordon Johnson of GLJ Research, one of the more bearish critics on Tesla shares. He said the recent price cuts and other price cuts show that Tesla vehicles do not have the demand that its fans claim.\n\"Tesla can't keep its current factories running at capacity without ... price cuts,\" said Johnson in note on Monday.\nIncreased competition\nEstablished automakers have recently set ambitious targets for their own EV sales.\nGeneral Motors rolled out an SUV version of its Chevrolet Bolt a week ago, priced well below the Model Y, and announced it intends to sell only emissions-free cars after 2035.Ford set an even more ambitious EV target for its European sales, saying all of the car models it sells there will be EVs by 2030.\nApple is also considering partnering with an automaker toget into the car business, according to several news reports.\nThose efforts are making some Tesla investors nervous, said Ives, although he believes there will be enough of a shift to EVs for multiple winners among global automakers.\nInvestors got ahead of themselves\nTesla shares peaked one day before a disappointing earnings report on January 27 that fell short of forecasts from Wall Street analysts.\nThe earnings showed that the money Tesla made from the sale of regulatory credits to other automakers outpaced its overall net income. Critics, like Johnson, said it's proof Tesla isn't able to make money building and selling cars (although by some other profit measures Tesla is profitable).\nDuring the earnings conference call on January 27, Musk also spoke about a shortage of batteries needed to power electric vehicles. He said that even with Tesla's own in-house supply of batteries and its planned expansion of battery production, the company is scrambling to find the batteries it wants to build more vehicles.\n\"The fundamental limit on electric vehicles right now, in general, is total availability of [battery] cells,\" he said. For example, Musk said Tesla would have already started producing a semi-tractor if it had the batteries available to do so.\nShares are still way up\nTesla shares rose a market-leading 743% in 2020, as investors embraced the idea that the future of the auto industry would be electric. Tesla remains by far the most valuable automaker in the world, with a market value well above that of the eight largest automakers combined.\nEven with the recent decline. Tesla shares are up about 1,300% since October 2019, when it reported a third-quarter profit that surprised investors, sending shares on a tear.\nSome investors believe Tesla's stock flew too high. Yet many analysts believe Tesla will bounce back. Ives has a 12-month target price of $950.\nEven so, he has a warning: \"It's 'buckle up the seat belt time' again for Tesla's stock with more volatility on the horizon,\" Ives said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":324,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":834609498,"gmtCreate":1629793832414,"gmtModify":1676530133087,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Tesla to Pluto !","listText":"Tesla to Pluto !","text":"Tesla to Pluto !","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/834609498","repostId":"1129412673","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129412673","pubTimestamp":1629792196,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129412673?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-24 16:03","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Tesla Stock Jumped on Monday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129412673","media":"The Motley Fool","summary":"Key Points\n\nNew Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for year","content":"<p><b>Key Points</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>New Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for years to come.</li>\n <li>Analysts are modeling for huge earnings growth from the electric car maker over the next five years.</li>\n <li>Tesla stock is up 9% over the past 30 days.</li>\n</ul>\n<h3><b>What happened</b></h3>\n<p>Shares of electric vehicle company <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">Tesla Motors</a> (NASDAQ:TSLA) jumped sharply on Monday, climbing as much as 4.5%. As of 12:30 p.m. EDT today, the stock was up 4%.</p>\n<p>The stock's gain was likely fueled primarily by bullish commentary from New Street analyst Pierre Ferragu.</p>\n<h3><b>So what</b></h3>\n<p>Following Tesla's AI Day last week, Ferragu is more confident about the company's artificial intelligence product development, noting that the presentation made New Street more comfortable with its bullish view. More specifically, he believes the growth stock will deserve a price-to-earnings multiple of 50 to 100 in the years to come thanks to the company's advanced technology.</p>\n<p>Though Tesla has a P/E multiple of 373 today, analysts expect the automaker's earnings per share to grow at an average annual compound rate of about 52% over the next five years.</p>\n<p>The analyst has a $900 12-month price target on the stock.</p>\n<h3><b>Now what</b></h3>\n<p>Tesla has guided for an average annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries of about 50% in the upcoming years, without specifying when it expects growth to slow. And management says it expects significant operating margin expansion. These two factors would easily lead to 50%-plus EPS growth.</p>\n<p>If Tesla is right about its optimistic outlook and Ferragu is right about Tesla being able to command P/E ratios of 50 to 100 five to 10 years from now, then today's prices for Tesla stock could be a good buying opportunity. But investors should keep in mind that there's a lot that could go wrong with such bullish assumptions, from competitive challenges to potential production and supply issues and other unforeseen detours.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why Tesla Stock Jumped on Monday</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy Tesla Stock Jumped on Monday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-24 16:03 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/23/why-tesla-stock-jumped-on-monday/><strong>The Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Key Points\n\nNew Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for years to come.\nAnalysts are modeling for huge earnings growth from the electric car maker over the next ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/23/why-tesla-stock-jumped-on-monday/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/23/why-tesla-stock-jumped-on-monday/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129412673","content_text":"Key Points\n\nNew Street analyst Pierre Ferragu thinks Tesla will command a premium valuation for years to come.\nAnalysts are modeling for huge earnings growth from the electric car maker over the next five years.\nTesla stock is up 9% over the past 30 days.\n\nWhat happened\nShares of electric vehicle company Tesla Motors (NASDAQ:TSLA) jumped sharply on Monday, climbing as much as 4.5%. As of 12:30 p.m. EDT today, the stock was up 4%.\nThe stock's gain was likely fueled primarily by bullish commentary from New Street analyst Pierre Ferragu.\nSo what\nFollowing Tesla's AI Day last week, Ferragu is more confident about the company's artificial intelligence product development, noting that the presentation made New Street more comfortable with its bullish view. More specifically, he believes the growth stock will deserve a price-to-earnings multiple of 50 to 100 in the years to come thanks to the company's advanced technology.\nThough Tesla has a P/E multiple of 373 today, analysts expect the automaker's earnings per share to grow at an average annual compound rate of about 52% over the next five years.\nThe analyst has a $900 12-month price target on the stock.\nNow what\nTesla has guided for an average annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries of about 50% in the upcoming years, without specifying when it expects growth to slow. And management says it expects significant operating margin expansion. These two factors would easily lead to 50%-plus EPS growth.\nIf Tesla is right about its optimistic outlook and Ferragu is right about Tesla being able to command P/E ratios of 50 to 100 five to 10 years from now, then today's prices for Tesla stock could be a good buying opportunity. But investors should keep in mind that there's a lot that could go wrong with such bullish assumptions, from competitive challenges to potential production and supply issues and other unforeseen detours.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":267,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835120405,"gmtCreate":1629695277007,"gmtModify":1676530102535,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Well said， Elon","listText":"Well said， Elon","text":"Well said， Elon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835120405","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, & HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8 <a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉","AMZN":"亚马逊"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":135,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158053703,"gmtCreate":1625115553702,"gmtModify":1703736478008,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Very well said","listText":"Very well said","text":"Very well said","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/158053703","repostId":"1198389317","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1198389317","pubTimestamp":1625106905,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1198389317?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-01 10:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"2 Myths Setting You Up For Failure","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1198389317","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nMyths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.\nThey sound convincing, but r","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Myths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.</li>\n <li>They sound convincing, but really don't make sense.</li>\n <li>Today we knock the shine off two of them for your benefit.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Have you ever had a moment where your expectations didn't meet reality? Perhaps you went to see a movie in theaters, and it didn't live up to the hype of the trailers or your friends rave reviews. Or, perhaps the Michelin Star restaurant was not nearly as good as you thought it would be.</p>\n<p>When we have high expectations, and those expectations are not reached, it leads to discouragement and disillusionment.</p>\n<p>Having proper expectations can allow us to enjoy more in life. It can also enable us to see the path we are walking more clearly. Little in life is as amazing or horrible as others describe.</p>\n<p>When it comes to investing and saving for retirement, we need to have proper expectations. Otherwise, we may get disillusioned and lost along the way. False expectations or beliefs regarding investing hold us back from succeeding. False expectations can cause us to be overconfident in some investments, or to pass up on great opportunities.</p>\n<p>There are numerous myths that many simply accept without question. These myths could be costing you money! So let's hit head-on two myths that continue to circulate in investing and retirement circles!</p>\n<p><b>Just Buy Dividend Aristocrats!</b></p>\n<p>I hear this a lot, especially in dividend investment circles. Many are looking for a low-effort low-risk approach to getting income from the market. Dividend Aristocrats have extremely long histories of raising their dividends, through all sorts of market conditions.</p>\n<p>Yet just because a yield is low, or has a strong history of being raised, does not mean it will survive long term. Through the Great Financial Crisis, starting in 2008, 36% of all Dividend Aristocrats were removed from the list within two years. Within five years, about 50% ended up being removed from the list. This was due to cutting, suspending, or not raising their dividend. That's a lot of pain for investors focused solely on investing in this \"safe haven.\"</p>\n<p>This myth is founded on the incorrect belief that low yields that are growing are inherently less risky. Time and again, this belief has fallen flat in the face of reality. 50% of Dividend Aristocrats lost their 25-year streaks of dividend raises. For a Dividend Aristocrat, where many investors buy primarily because of their flawless history, a cut or even just the lack of a raise can have an outsized impact.</p>\n<p>The reality is that at times, great companies will cut their dividend to ensure long-term benefit for shareholders. Income investors might hate dividend cuts, but sometimes a cut is what is best for the future of the company. Dividend Aristocrats are not immune from that reality. Yet you will pay a huge premium for most aristocrats, when you can invest in a company that might have cut one, but will still grow its dividend over time.</p>\n<p>Take Global Partners LP (GLP), which sports a 9% yield, as an example. When COVID-19 hit, management cut the distribution to protect the company and benefit unitholders in the long term. Since then, GLP has rapidly raised its distribution to levels above what was paid pre-COVID.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/eb2de5e63c647b292429f7aa2964c02d\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"371\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Data byYCharts</span></p>\n<p>One should never blindly trust a company's dividend raising streak or its low yield as the sole safety indicators. GLP had a high yield before COVID, and did have to cut the dividend during the crisis. However, its strong business model allowed it to recover quickly and a year later the dividend is higher than ever.</p>\n<p>This myth causes many investors or retirees to hold low yield, low growth names with long track records of raises, all while missing out on vastly higher income levels.</p>\n<p>Cuts happen for various reasons, especially during periods of economic turmoil like the Great Financial Crisis or COVID. You can protect yourself by having a higher degree of diversification in your portfolio and avoid panic if a company you hold takes proactive measures to benefit you long term!</p>\n<p><b>SWAN Stocks Don't Need Attention</b></p>\n<p>The moniker SWAN, standing for Sleep Well At Night, is highly misleading. It seems everything under the sun gets described as a SWAN, or SUPER SWAN, or MEGA AWESOME ONCE A DECADE SWAN! Yet investors, especially those who just survived 2020's volatility, know that even so-called SWAN stocks require monitoring.</p>\n<p>The High Dividend Opportunities Model Portfolio is actively managed. We adjust our portfolio for risks on the horizon. No single stock is immune to every market condition or economic/political risk. The illusion that the stock is a SWAN because a trusted advisor or internet guru told you so leads many to losses from being too hands-off with their portfolio.</p>\n<p>Some of the most famous melt-downs were stocks that were once considered \"SWANs\" like Enron, WorldCom, GE, and others. The \"SWANs\" today are not the same as SWANs were 30 years ago.</p>\n<p>Retirees need a low-maintenance portfolio, but that does not mean you can be asleep at the wheel!</p>\n<p>Half of the battle when it comes to investing is keeping an eye on the horizon—watching market movements, geopolitical actions, and government plans. I provide weekly updates to HDO members regarding the risks on the horizon, and we make moves to adjust for them coming.</p>\n<p>Likewise, while retirees may hold SWAN stocks, they must still be engaged with the world around them to be positioned to survive and thrive in the coming environments.</p>\n<p>When a bad storm is raging at sea, a strong ship can withstand the storm, but an unexpected wave can capsize even a strong ship. These waves are called rogue waves, often twice the size of normal storm waves and often moving in a direction different from the prevailing winds. These rogue waves have the ability to capsize strong, able vessels if they catch them off-guard.</p>\n<p>We must have protections to watch for rogue waves when the storms of life and the market rise. We cannot simply believe our SWANs will keep us safe in all conditions.</p>\n<p>Shedding these incorrect expectations, you can approach the market with the right mindset. By slaying these myths, you can ensure you are ready to craft and maintain your retirement portfolio.</p>\n<p>We must move beyond the desire to be lazy and simply buy from a specific dividend payer list. These payers may have outstanding payment histories, but this does not guarantee future success.</p>\n<p>Furthermore, we must remain active in our portfolio, or at the very least to keep an eye to safeguard it. Stocks that are \"SWANs\" today will always be at risk of not being a \"SWAN\" tomorrow.</p>\n<p>Worse, restricting ourselves to lists like this removes a vast array of excellent income-producing opportunities that do not trade at such large premiums.</p>\n<p>Retirement is supposed to the capstone to our lifetimes. A time we spend in ease and relaxation. We have toiled hard and worked diligently to earn the last years of our life in leisure and enjoyment. The last thing we want is to derail our progress towards this goal with faulty thinking and misplaced expectations.</p>\n<p>You can slay these myths and unlock more value from your portfolio than ever before! I believe in you. You got this.</p>","source":"seekingalpha","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>2 Myths Setting You Up For Failure</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n2 Myths Setting You Up For Failure\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-01 10:35 GMT+8 <a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4437048-2-myths-setting-you-up-for-failure><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nMyths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.\nThey sound convincing, but really don't make sense.\nToday we knock the shine off two of them for your benefit.\n\nHave you ever ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4437048-2-myths-setting-you-up-for-failure\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GE":"GE航空航天","IRIDQ":"Iridium World Communications Ltd.",".DJI":"道琼斯","GLP":"全球合伙"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4437048-2-myths-setting-you-up-for-failure","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1198389317","content_text":"Summary\n\nMyths are widely held beliefs that are not founded in reality.\nThey sound convincing, but really don't make sense.\nToday we knock the shine off two of them for your benefit.\n\nHave you ever had a moment where your expectations didn't meet reality? Perhaps you went to see a movie in theaters, and it didn't live up to the hype of the trailers or your friends rave reviews. Or, perhaps the Michelin Star restaurant was not nearly as good as you thought it would be.\nWhen we have high expectations, and those expectations are not reached, it leads to discouragement and disillusionment.\nHaving proper expectations can allow us to enjoy more in life. It can also enable us to see the path we are walking more clearly. Little in life is as amazing or horrible as others describe.\nWhen it comes to investing and saving for retirement, we need to have proper expectations. Otherwise, we may get disillusioned and lost along the way. False expectations or beliefs regarding investing hold us back from succeeding. False expectations can cause us to be overconfident in some investments, or to pass up on great opportunities.\nThere are numerous myths that many simply accept without question. These myths could be costing you money! So let's hit head-on two myths that continue to circulate in investing and retirement circles!\nJust Buy Dividend Aristocrats!\nI hear this a lot, especially in dividend investment circles. Many are looking for a low-effort low-risk approach to getting income from the market. Dividend Aristocrats have extremely long histories of raising their dividends, through all sorts of market conditions.\nYet just because a yield is low, or has a strong history of being raised, does not mean it will survive long term. Through the Great Financial Crisis, starting in 2008, 36% of all Dividend Aristocrats were removed from the list within two years. Within five years, about 50% ended up being removed from the list. This was due to cutting, suspending, or not raising their dividend. That's a lot of pain for investors focused solely on investing in this \"safe haven.\"\nThis myth is founded on the incorrect belief that low yields that are growing are inherently less risky. Time and again, this belief has fallen flat in the face of reality. 50% of Dividend Aristocrats lost their 25-year streaks of dividend raises. For a Dividend Aristocrat, where many investors buy primarily because of their flawless history, a cut or even just the lack of a raise can have an outsized impact.\nThe reality is that at times, great companies will cut their dividend to ensure long-term benefit for shareholders. Income investors might hate dividend cuts, but sometimes a cut is what is best for the future of the company. Dividend Aristocrats are not immune from that reality. Yet you will pay a huge premium for most aristocrats, when you can invest in a company that might have cut one, but will still grow its dividend over time.\nTake Global Partners LP (GLP), which sports a 9% yield, as an example. When COVID-19 hit, management cut the distribution to protect the company and benefit unitholders in the long term. Since then, GLP has rapidly raised its distribution to levels above what was paid pre-COVID.\nData byYCharts\nOne should never blindly trust a company's dividend raising streak or its low yield as the sole safety indicators. GLP had a high yield before COVID, and did have to cut the dividend during the crisis. However, its strong business model allowed it to recover quickly and a year later the dividend is higher than ever.\nThis myth causes many investors or retirees to hold low yield, low growth names with long track records of raises, all while missing out on vastly higher income levels.\nCuts happen for various reasons, especially during periods of economic turmoil like the Great Financial Crisis or COVID. You can protect yourself by having a higher degree of diversification in your portfolio and avoid panic if a company you hold takes proactive measures to benefit you long term!\nSWAN Stocks Don't Need Attention\nThe moniker SWAN, standing for Sleep Well At Night, is highly misleading. It seems everything under the sun gets described as a SWAN, or SUPER SWAN, or MEGA AWESOME ONCE A DECADE SWAN! Yet investors, especially those who just survived 2020's volatility, know that even so-called SWAN stocks require monitoring.\nThe High Dividend Opportunities Model Portfolio is actively managed. We adjust our portfolio for risks on the horizon. No single stock is immune to every market condition or economic/political risk. The illusion that the stock is a SWAN because a trusted advisor or internet guru told you so leads many to losses from being too hands-off with their portfolio.\nSome of the most famous melt-downs were stocks that were once considered \"SWANs\" like Enron, WorldCom, GE, and others. The \"SWANs\" today are not the same as SWANs were 30 years ago.\nRetirees need a low-maintenance portfolio, but that does not mean you can be asleep at the wheel!\nHalf of the battle when it comes to investing is keeping an eye on the horizon—watching market movements, geopolitical actions, and government plans. I provide weekly updates to HDO members regarding the risks on the horizon, and we make moves to adjust for them coming.\nLikewise, while retirees may hold SWAN stocks, they must still be engaged with the world around them to be positioned to survive and thrive in the coming environments.\nWhen a bad storm is raging at sea, a strong ship can withstand the storm, but an unexpected wave can capsize even a strong ship. These waves are called rogue waves, often twice the size of normal storm waves and often moving in a direction different from the prevailing winds. These rogue waves have the ability to capsize strong, able vessels if they catch them off-guard.\nWe must have protections to watch for rogue waves when the storms of life and the market rise. We cannot simply believe our SWANs will keep us safe in all conditions.\nShedding these incorrect expectations, you can approach the market with the right mindset. By slaying these myths, you can ensure you are ready to craft and maintain your retirement portfolio.\nWe must move beyond the desire to be lazy and simply buy from a specific dividend payer list. These payers may have outstanding payment histories, but this does not guarantee future success.\nFurthermore, we must remain active in our portfolio, or at the very least to keep an eye to safeguard it. Stocks that are \"SWANs\" today will always be at risk of not being a \"SWAN\" tomorrow.\nWorse, restricting ourselves to lists like this removes a vast array of excellent income-producing opportunities that do not trade at such large premiums.\nRetirement is supposed to the capstone to our lifetimes. A time we spend in ease and relaxation. We have toiled hard and worked diligently to earn the last years of our life in leisure and enjoyment. The last thing we want is to derail our progress towards this goal with faulty thinking and misplaced expectations.\nYou can slay these myths and unlock more value from your portfolio than ever before! I believe in you. You got this.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":129,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":363517147,"gmtCreate":1614153485189,"gmtModify":1704888791456,"author":{"id":"3568773955697119","authorId":"3568773955697119","authorIdStr":"3568773955697119","name":"Landis","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b9e595f956a591167ae7690189c5ef6","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3568773955697119"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Excellent time to add position now","listText":"Excellent time to add position now","text":"Excellent time to add position now","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/363517147","repostId":"1106446066","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1106446066","pubTimestamp":1614133758,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1106446066?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-02-24 10:29","market":"us","language":"en","title":"4 reasons Tesla's stock is tumbling","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1106446066","media":"CNN Business","summary":"New York (CNN Business) - Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into","content":"<p><b>New York (CNN Business) - </b>Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into bear market territory.</p>\n<p>Shares of Tesla fell 6% Tuesday after closing down 8.5% Monday, wiping out its gains for the year. The stock closed at a record just above $883 on January 26 and has tumbled since. It fell low as $619 Tuesday, the first time Tesla shares have fallen below $700 since December 31.</p>\n<p>The steep decline has taken Tesla shares below their level when the company entered the S&P 500 on December 21. It also knocked CEO Elon Musk into the No. 2 position in the richest person on the planet list, behind Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. The two have been swapping positions repeatedly this year.</p>\n<p>Tesla's stock is selling off for several reasons:</p>\n<p><b>Bitcoin</b></p>\n<p>Tesla announced earlier this month that it had invested $1.5 billion in bitcoin. That helped feed the recent rally in bitcoin and by some estimates earned Tesla a quick $1 billion profit — more than it has ever made from selling cars in a single year.</p>\n<p>But on Saturday, in response to a critic of Tesla's bitcoin investment, Musk tweeted that the prices of both bitcoin and another cryptocurrency called Ether \"do seem high.\" That helped to send the price of bitcoin down 9.3% in trading Monday, which may have helped to drag down Tesla shares.</p>\n<p>\"Bitcoin is the smart move at the right time for Tesla in our opinion, but on the downside its playing with firecrackers and risks and volatility are added to the Tesla story,\" said Daniel Ives, tech analyst for Wedbush Securities, who remains bullish on Tesla shares.</p>\n<p><b>Model Y pricing</b></p>\n<p>Last Thursday, Tesla cut the price of the cheapest version of its Model Y and its best-selling Model 3 cars by $2,000 each. That brought the price for the \"standard range\" Model Y, one that can travel 244 miles on a charge, to $38,490 -- and the standard range Model 3 to $34,590.</p>\n<p>But over the weekend, the cheapest \"standard range\" version of the Model Y disappeared from Tesla's sales site, leaving only the more expensive long-range and performance versions of the SUV. Tesla did not explain its decision.</p>\n<p>\"We see the plausible reasons as either: the mix was skewed too much to the cheaper variant, and thus it was going to kill their margins, or more likely there just wasn't much demand for the lower variant,\" said Gordon Johnson of GLJ Research, one of the more bearish critics on Tesla shares. He said the recent price cuts and other price cuts show that Tesla vehicles do not have the demand that its fans claim.</p>\n<p>\"Tesla can't keep its current factories running at capacity without ... price cuts,\" said Johnson in note on Monday.</p>\n<p><b>Increased competition</b></p>\n<p>Established automakers have recently set ambitious targets for their own EV sales.</p>\n<p>General Motors rolled out an SUV version of its Chevrolet Bolt a week ago, priced well below the Model Y, and announced it intends to sell only emissions-free cars after 2035.Ford set an even more ambitious EV target for its European sales, saying all of the car models it sells there will be EVs by 2030.</p>\n<p>Apple is also considering partnering with an automaker toget into the car business, according to several news reports.</p>\n<p>Those efforts are making some Tesla investors nervous, said Ives, although he believes there will be enough of a shift to EVs for multiple winners among global automakers.</p>\n<p><b>Investors got ahead of themselves</b></p>\n<p>Tesla shares peaked one day before a disappointing earnings report on January 27 that fell short of forecasts from Wall Street analysts.</p>\n<p>The earnings showed that the money Tesla made from the sale of regulatory credits to other automakers outpaced its overall net income. Critics, like Johnson, said it's proof Tesla isn't able to make money building and selling cars (although by some other profit measures Tesla is profitable).</p>\n<p>During the earnings conference call on January 27, Musk also spoke about a shortage of batteries needed to power electric vehicles. He said that even with Tesla's own in-house supply of batteries and its planned expansion of battery production, the company is scrambling to find the batteries it wants to build more vehicles.</p>\n<p>\"The fundamental limit on electric vehicles right now, in general, is total availability of [battery] cells,\" he said. For example, Musk said Tesla would have already started producing a semi-tractor if it had the batteries available to do so.</p>\n<p><b>Shares are still way up</b></p>\n<p>Tesla shares rose a market-leading 743% in 2020, as investors embraced the idea that the future of the auto industry would be electric. Tesla remains by far the most valuable automaker in the world, with a market value well above that of the eight largest automakers combined.</p>\n<p>Even with the recent decline. Tesla shares are up about 1,300% since October 2019, when it reported a third-quarter profit that surprised investors, sending shares on a tear.</p>\n<p>Some investors believe Tesla's stock flew too high. Yet many analysts believe Tesla will bounce back. Ives has a 12-month target price of $950.</p>\n<p>Even so, he has a warning: \"It's 'buckle up the seat belt time' again for Tesla's stock with more volatility on the horizon,\" Ives said.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>4 reasons Tesla's stock is tumbling</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n4 reasons Tesla's stock is tumbling\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-24 10:29 GMT+8 <a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/23/investing/tesla-shares-bear-market/index.html><strong>CNN Business</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business) - Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into bear market territory.\nShares of Tesla fell 6% Tuesday after closing down 8.5% Monday, wiping out ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/23/investing/tesla-shares-bear-market/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/02/23/investing/tesla-shares-bear-market/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1106446066","content_text":"New York (CNN Business) - Tesla, the hottest stock in the market for more than a year, has sunk into bear market territory.\nShares of Tesla fell 6% Tuesday after closing down 8.5% Monday, wiping out its gains for the year. The stock closed at a record just above $883 on January 26 and has tumbled since. It fell low as $619 Tuesday, the first time Tesla shares have fallen below $700 since December 31.\nThe steep decline has taken Tesla shares below their level when the company entered the S&P 500 on December 21. It also knocked CEO Elon Musk into the No. 2 position in the richest person on the planet list, behind Amazon founder Jeff Bezos. The two have been swapping positions repeatedly this year.\nTesla's stock is selling off for several reasons:\nBitcoin\nTesla announced earlier this month that it had invested $1.5 billion in bitcoin. That helped feed the recent rally in bitcoin and by some estimates earned Tesla a quick $1 billion profit — more than it has ever made from selling cars in a single year.\nBut on Saturday, in response to a critic of Tesla's bitcoin investment, Musk tweeted that the prices of both bitcoin and another cryptocurrency called Ether \"do seem high.\" That helped to send the price of bitcoin down 9.3% in trading Monday, which may have helped to drag down Tesla shares.\n\"Bitcoin is the smart move at the right time for Tesla in our opinion, but on the downside its playing with firecrackers and risks and volatility are added to the Tesla story,\" said Daniel Ives, tech analyst for Wedbush Securities, who remains bullish on Tesla shares.\nModel Y pricing\nLast Thursday, Tesla cut the price of the cheapest version of its Model Y and its best-selling Model 3 cars by $2,000 each. That brought the price for the \"standard range\" Model Y, one that can travel 244 miles on a charge, to $38,490 -- and the standard range Model 3 to $34,590.\nBut over the weekend, the cheapest \"standard range\" version of the Model Y disappeared from Tesla's sales site, leaving only the more expensive long-range and performance versions of the SUV. Tesla did not explain its decision.\n\"We see the plausible reasons as either: the mix was skewed too much to the cheaper variant, and thus it was going to kill their margins, or more likely there just wasn't much demand for the lower variant,\" said Gordon Johnson of GLJ Research, one of the more bearish critics on Tesla shares. He said the recent price cuts and other price cuts show that Tesla vehicles do not have the demand that its fans claim.\n\"Tesla can't keep its current factories running at capacity without ... price cuts,\" said Johnson in note on Monday.\nIncreased competition\nEstablished automakers have recently set ambitious targets for their own EV sales.\nGeneral Motors rolled out an SUV version of its Chevrolet Bolt a week ago, priced well below the Model Y, and announced it intends to sell only emissions-free cars after 2035.Ford set an even more ambitious EV target for its European sales, saying all of the car models it sells there will be EVs by 2030.\nApple is also considering partnering with an automaker toget into the car business, according to several news reports.\nThose efforts are making some Tesla investors nervous, said Ives, although he believes there will be enough of a shift to EVs for multiple winners among global automakers.\nInvestors got ahead of themselves\nTesla shares peaked one day before a disappointing earnings report on January 27 that fell short of forecasts from Wall Street analysts.\nThe earnings showed that the money Tesla made from the sale of regulatory credits to other automakers outpaced its overall net income. Critics, like Johnson, said it's proof Tesla isn't able to make money building and selling cars (although by some other profit measures Tesla is profitable).\nDuring the earnings conference call on January 27, Musk also spoke about a shortage of batteries needed to power electric vehicles. He said that even with Tesla's own in-house supply of batteries and its planned expansion of battery production, the company is scrambling to find the batteries it wants to build more vehicles.\n\"The fundamental limit on electric vehicles right now, in general, is total availability of [battery] cells,\" he said. For example, Musk said Tesla would have already started producing a semi-tractor if it had the batteries available to do so.\nShares are still way up\nTesla shares rose a market-leading 743% in 2020, as investors embraced the idea that the future of the auto industry would be electric. Tesla remains by far the most valuable automaker in the world, with a market value well above that of the eight largest automakers combined.\nEven with the recent decline. Tesla shares are up about 1,300% since October 2019, when it reported a third-quarter profit that surprised investors, sending shares on a tear.\nSome investors believe Tesla's stock flew too high. Yet many analysts believe Tesla will bounce back. Ives has a 12-month target price of $950.\nEven so, he has a warning: \"It's 'buckle up the seat belt time' again for Tesla's stock with more volatility on the horizon,\" Ives said.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":324,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}
