Jollyjes personal page - To The Moon

Jollyjes

Jollyjes

No personal profile

10Follow

4Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-05-21

Boom

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-02-25

Boooms

Tesla Temporarily Halts Production at Model 3 Line in California

2021-02-23

Urgh

Why Tesla Took Off Standard Range Model Y From Its Offerings

2021-02-21

$Torchlight Energy Resources(TRCH)$. Fly fly fly

2021-02-19

Yes

VW’s Potential Porsche Listing Signals Auto Upheaval Just Starting

2021-02-17

Nice

Nestle to sell N.American water brands to buyout firm One Rock for $4.3 bln

2021-02-16

Take note

Walmart Lined Up for Q4 Earnings: Key Things to Note

2021-02-13

Cause they got capital?

Not Just Tesla: Why Big Companies are Buying into Crypto-Mania

2021-02-12

Good

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-02-10

???

How Tesla Options Can Hedge Against A Market Meltdown

2021-02-07

Come on!

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-02-06

Up up up

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-02-04

Jiayou

2021-02-04

$Naked Brand(NAKD)$up up up

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":3572356556252042,"uuid":"3572356556252042","gmtCreate":1609262897396,"gmtModify":1706620738367,"name":"Jollyjes","pinyin":"jollyjes","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":4,"headSize":10,"tweetSize":17,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":2,"name":"无畏虎","nameTw":"無畏虎","represent":"初生牛犊","factor":"发布3条非转发主帖,1条获得他人回复或点赞","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"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":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.11.18","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"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":"80.27%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":"93.75%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"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}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":2,"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":139871702,"gmtCreate":1621609238606,"gmtModify":1704360549823,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Boom","listText":"Boom","text":"Boom","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/139871702","repostId":"2137876902","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":97,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":361453595,"gmtCreate":1614256898517,"gmtModify":1704769713107,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;Boooms","listText":"&nbsp;Boooms","text":"Boooms","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/361453595","repostId":"2114131201","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2114131201","pubTimestamp":1614247264,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2114131201?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-25 18:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla Temporarily Halts Production at Model 3 Line in California","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2114131201","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"Tesla Inc. has told workers it will temporarily halt some production at its car assembly plant in California, according to a person familiar with the matter.Workers on a Model 3 production line in Fremont were told their line would be down from Feb. 22 until March 7, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the information is private. Impacted staff were told they would be paid for Feb. 22 and Feb. 23 and not paid for Feb. 28, March 1, 2 and 3. They were advised to take vacation t","content":"<p>Tesla Inc.&nbsp;has told workers it will temporarily halt some production at its car assembly plant in California, according to a person familiar with the matter.</p>\n<p>Workers on a Model 3 production line in Fremont were told their line would be down from Feb. 22 until March 7, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the information is private. Impacted staff were told they would be paid for Feb. 22 and Feb. 23 and not paid for Feb. 28, March 1, 2 and 3. They were advised to take vacation time, if they had it.</p>\n<p>Representatives for the Palo Alto, California-based electric carmaker didn’t immediately respond to messages seeking comment.</p>\n<p>While production-line outages aren’t unusual for automakers, they cost the companies revenue. Tesla said last month that it’strying to mitigatethe effects of a global semiconductor shortage on its operations and that it expects to increase global vehicle deliveries by more than 50% this year.</p>\n<p>Hitting maximum deliveries is crucial for Tesla in order for Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk to meet his ambitious goal of selling 20 million cars a year by 2030. Tesla has cut the price of its various models 14 times in markets from China to Japan and France this year, spurring concern it isn’t seeing the volumes desired.</p>\n<p>“When considering Tesla had excess inventory in the fourth quarter of 2020, and has never been able to sell-out its production capacity, we see the company as currently demand constrained, rather than production constrained,” GLJ Research LLC founder Gordon Johnson wrote in a note earlier this week.</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>Tesla Temporarily Halts Production at Model 3 Line in California</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\">\nTesla Temporarily Halts Production at Model 3 Line in California\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-25 18:01 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-25/tesla-temporarily-halts-production-at-model-3-line-in-california?srnd=premium-asia><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Tesla Inc. has told workers it will temporarily halt some production at its car assembly plant in California, according to a person familiar with the matter.\nWorkers on a Model 3 production line in ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-25/tesla-temporarily-halts-production-at-model-3-line-in-california?srnd=premium-asia\">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.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-02-25/tesla-temporarily-halts-production-at-model-3-line-in-california?srnd=premium-asia","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2114131201","content_text":"Tesla Inc. has told workers it will temporarily halt some production at its car assembly plant in California, according to a person familiar with the matter.\nWorkers on a Model 3 production line in Fremont were told their line would be down from Feb. 22 until March 7, said the person, who asked not to be identified because the information is private. Impacted staff were told they would be paid for Feb. 22 and Feb. 23 and not paid for Feb. 28, March 1, 2 and 3. They were advised to take vacation time, if they had it.\nRepresentatives for the Palo Alto, California-based electric carmaker didn’t immediately respond to messages seeking comment.\nWhile production-line outages aren’t unusual for automakers, they cost the companies revenue. Tesla said last month that it’strying to mitigatethe effects of a global semiconductor shortage on its operations and that it expects to increase global vehicle deliveries by more than 50% this year.\nHitting maximum deliveries is crucial for Tesla in order for Chief Executive Officer Elon Musk to meet his ambitious goal of selling 20 million cars a year by 2030. Tesla has cut the price of its various models 14 times in markets from China to Japan and France this year, spurring concern it isn’t seeing the volumes desired.\n“When considering Tesla had excess inventory in the fourth quarter of 2020, and has never been able to sell-out its production capacity, we see the company as currently demand constrained, rather than production constrained,” GLJ Research LLC founder Gordon Johnson wrote in a note earlier this week.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":24,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":363021612,"gmtCreate":1614084847936,"gmtModify":1704887873223,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Urgh","listText":"Urgh","text":"Urgh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/363021612","repostId":"1178144401","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1178144401","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Stock Market Quotes, Business News, Financial News, Trading Ideas, and Stock Research by Professionals","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Benzinga","id":"1052270027","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa"},"pubTimestamp":1614077941,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1178144401?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-23 18:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Tesla Took Off Standard Range Model Y From Its Offerings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1178144401","media":"Benzinga","summary":"Tesla Inc. is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elo","content":"<p><b>Tesla Inc.</b>&nbsp;is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elon Musk said Monday.</p>\n<p><b>What Happened</b>: The electric vehicle maker made the move apparently due to the sport utility vehicle’s low range.</p>\n<p>“It is still available off menu, but I don’t think the range, in many drive conditions, yet meets the Tesla standard of excellence,” Musk said on Twitter.</p>\n<p><b>Why It Matters:</b>As part of efforts to make some of its vehicles more affordable, Tesla had&nbsp;slashed the price of the base models&nbsp;of its Model 3 and Model Y vehicles last week. The company cut the price of the Model Y Standard Range by $2,000 to $39,990.</p>\n<p>However, Electrek reported Sunday that the Palo Alto-based company has&nbsp;stopped taking&nbsp;orders for the vehicle and also removed the model from its online configurator.</p>\n<p>The confusing moves on Tesla’s part come just over a month after it launched the Model Y Standard Range.</p>\n<p>Tesla had originally announced the cheapest version of the Model Y in 2019, but Musk said at that time the company would not produce the Standard Range due to its “unacceptably low” range of less than 250 miles.</p>\n<p><b>Price Action</b>: Tesla shares closed more than 8% lower at $714.50 on Monday.</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 Took Off Standard Range Model Y From Its Offerings</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 Took Off Standard Range Model Y From Its Offerings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Benzinga </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-02-23 18:59</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Tesla Inc.</b>&nbsp;is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elon Musk said Monday.</p>\n<p><b>What Happened</b>: The electric vehicle maker made the move apparently due to the sport utility vehicle’s low range.</p>\n<p>“It is still available off menu, but I don’t think the range, in many drive conditions, yet meets the Tesla standard of excellence,” Musk said on Twitter.</p>\n<p><b>Why It Matters:</b>As part of efforts to make some of its vehicles more affordable, Tesla had&nbsp;slashed the price of the base models&nbsp;of its Model 3 and Model Y vehicles last week. The company cut the price of the Model Y Standard Range by $2,000 to $39,990.</p>\n<p>However, Electrek reported Sunday that the Palo Alto-based company has&nbsp;stopped taking&nbsp;orders for the vehicle and also removed the model from its online configurator.</p>\n<p>The confusing moves on Tesla’s part come just over a month after it launched the Model Y Standard Range.</p>\n<p>Tesla had originally announced the cheapest version of the Model Y in 2019, but Musk said at that time the company would not produce the Standard Range due to its “unacceptably low” range of less than 250 miles.</p>\n<p><b>Price Action</b>: Tesla shares closed more than 8% lower at $714.50 on Monday.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1178144401","content_text":"Tesla Inc. is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elon Musk said Monday.\nWhat Happened: The electric vehicle maker made the move apparently due to the sport utility vehicle’s low range.\n“It is still available off menu, but I don’t think the range, in many drive conditions, yet meets the Tesla standard of excellence,” Musk said on Twitter.\nWhy It Matters:As part of efforts to make some of its vehicles more affordable, Tesla had slashed the price of the base models of its Model 3 and Model Y vehicles last week. The company cut the price of the Model Y Standard Range by $2,000 to $39,990.\nHowever, Electrek reported Sunday that the Palo Alto-based company has stopped taking orders for the vehicle and also removed the model from its online configurator.\nThe confusing moves on Tesla’s part come just over a month after it launched the Model Y Standard Range.\nTesla had originally announced the cheapest version of the Model Y in 2019, but Musk said at that time the company would not produce the Standard Range due to its “unacceptably low” range of less than 250 miles.\nPrice Action: Tesla shares closed more than 8% lower at $714.50 on Monday.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":53,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":360674992,"gmtCreate":1613915466716,"gmtModify":1704885900841,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TRCH\">$Torchlight Energy Resources(TRCH)$</a>. Fly fly fly","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TRCH\">$Torchlight Energy Resources(TRCH)$</a>. Fly fly fly","text":"$Torchlight Energy Resources(TRCH)$. Fly fly fly","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/360674992","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":78,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":387147150,"gmtCreate":1613731618670,"gmtModify":1704884266171,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/387147150","repostId":"1131795735","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1131795735","pubTimestamp":1613719726,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131795735?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-19 15:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"VW’s Potential Porsche Listing Signals Auto Upheaval Just Starting","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131795735","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment an","content":"<p>(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment and indicate the unprecedented upheaval of the auto industry may only just be beginning.</p>\n<p>The German industrial giant and other incumbents have navigated a global pandemic far better than initially feared, posting robust profits and ample amounts of cash flow. Even still, their valuations are stubbornly low compared to Tesla Inc.</p>\n<p>No automotive CEO has lamented this as openly and frequently as Herbert Diess, who routinely makes headlines by emphasizing the urgency with which VW must move to transform itself. Exploring a Porsche listing is a nod to that need and will be a litmus test of sorts for its future.</p>\n<p>“There’s a loss of power due to the low valuation, which Diess has complained about in the past, and that’s a significant disadvantage,” said Bankhaus Metzler analyst Juergen Pieper. “An IPO of Porsche would be the silver bullet.”</p>\n<p>Porsche’s appeal is obvious to investors. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Michael Dean reckons the 911 maker could stand up a 110 billion-euro ($133 billion) valuation in an initial public offering, roughly 20 billion euros more than investors value VW at now.</p>\n<p>But getting such a deal done won’t be simple because of the institutional hurdles that have stood in the way of other attempts Diess, 62, has made to shake up VW since he became CEO in 2018. Major decisions must be approved by the company’s dominant and oft-at-odds shareholders led by the Porsche and Piech family and German state of Lower Saxony, which tends to side with powerful labor unions.</p>\n<p><b>‘Old-Auto’</b></p>\n<p>What Tesla’s meteoric rise has done, however, is send a clear signal to Diess that extreme measures must be taken to get the capital markets to come around to “old-auto” companies. VW’s review of options for Porsche comes on the heels of Daimler AG deciding to spin off its truck unit after years of management opposition to such a move. Its shares have advanced 13% since then and are hovering around a three-year high.</p>\n<p>Even after the spinoff boost, Daimler is worth about $86 billion, almost matching the valuation of NIO Inc., which brought in roughly one-tenth the revenue last year.</p>\n<p>Investors have taken a dim view of carmakers’ ability to keep up with new entrants unencumbered by sprawling production networks centered around combustion engines. Ford Motor Co. put this reality in stark relief this week when it announced plans to go from selling zero electric vehicles last year in Europe to only offering all-electric passenger cars by the end of the decade.</p>\n<p>It’s clear VW will spare no expense in its efforts to catch up to Tesla, having budgeted a bigger slice of its 150 billion-euro spending budget for investment in electric cars and software in the next five years. As strong as earnings are now, they’ll be strained by all the costs associated with retiring some operations.</p>\n<p>“VW’s balance sheet may not be fit to ensure both accelerated investments in electric and autonomous vehicles and finance an accelerated downsizing of legacy issues,” Jefferies analyst Philippe Houchois said in a note.</p>\n<p><b>Ferrari-Like</b></p>\n<p>Proceeds from listing Porsche could go a long way, since its brand power and luxury cachet are on par with Ferrari NV, one of the rare recent success stories among traditional auto companies. Fiat Chrysler spun off the supercar maker in 2015, and the shares have soared 282% since the IPO.</p>\n<p>The Porsche 911 alone probably exceeds Ferrari’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, according to Dean, the Bloomberg Intelligence analyst. It also has a strong electric story to tell, with the Taycan model that debuted in 2019 portending a shift to about half of sales being battery-powered by 2025.</p>\n<p>Porsche will add a more spacious version of the Taycan to the lineup later this year, then roll out a battery-powered version of the Macan crossover in 2022 that will be based on a new dedicated EV platform being co-developed with Audi.</p>\n<p><b>Nothing New</b></p>\n<p>The idea of a separate listing for Porsche isn’t new as such. Three years ago, Lutz Meschke, chief financial officer of the sports-car maker, pointed out the value potential during an informal briefing at a research-and-development center outside Stuttgart, only to be reprimanded by VW headquarters.</p>\n<p>The opposition inside VW’s boardroom appears to have eased in the wake of an industry transformation many predicted for years but is now is gaining traction at an unprecedented pace. Roughly 10% of passenger vehicles purchased in Europe in the fourth quarter were battery-electric. In December, the share was about 14%.</p>\n<p>Still, a Porsche listing is anything but certain. VW embarked on an asset review half a decade ago, aiming for more decentralized and agile reporting lines and simplify its unwieldy conglomerate structure. Results of the reform efforts have been modest so far, with attempts to separate niche brands such as Ducati and Lamborghini undermined by key stakeholders. The downsized 2019 IPO of trucks unit Traton SE was almost derailed by internal wrangling.</p>\n<p>“You’d think that the Italian business would have been an easier sell internally, and the fact that that didn’t happen begs the question why Porsche would happen,” RBC Capital analyst Tom Narayan said by phone. “It is frustrating for traditional car companies. Tesla can use equity currency to finance growth and grow into their backyard.”</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>VW’s Potential Porsche Listing Signals Auto Upheaval Just Starting</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\">\nVW’s Potential Porsche Listing Signals Auto Upheaval Just Starting\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-19 15:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-potential-porsche-listing-signals-050000564.html><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment and indicate the unprecedented upheaval of the auto industry may only just be beginning.\nThe German ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-potential-porsche-listing-signals-050000564.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"VLKAY":"大众汽车"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-potential-porsche-listing-signals-050000564.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131795735","content_text":"(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment and indicate the unprecedented upheaval of the auto industry may only just be beginning.\nThe German industrial giant and other incumbents have navigated a global pandemic far better than initially feared, posting robust profits and ample amounts of cash flow. Even still, their valuations are stubbornly low compared to Tesla Inc.\nNo automotive CEO has lamented this as openly and frequently as Herbert Diess, who routinely makes headlines by emphasizing the urgency with which VW must move to transform itself. Exploring a Porsche listing is a nod to that need and will be a litmus test of sorts for its future.\n“There’s a loss of power due to the low valuation, which Diess has complained about in the past, and that’s a significant disadvantage,” said Bankhaus Metzler analyst Juergen Pieper. “An IPO of Porsche would be the silver bullet.”\nPorsche’s appeal is obvious to investors. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Michael Dean reckons the 911 maker could stand up a 110 billion-euro ($133 billion) valuation in an initial public offering, roughly 20 billion euros more than investors value VW at now.\nBut getting such a deal done won’t be simple because of the institutional hurdles that have stood in the way of other attempts Diess, 62, has made to shake up VW since he became CEO in 2018. Major decisions must be approved by the company’s dominant and oft-at-odds shareholders led by the Porsche and Piech family and German state of Lower Saxony, which tends to side with powerful labor unions.\n‘Old-Auto’\nWhat Tesla’s meteoric rise has done, however, is send a clear signal to Diess that extreme measures must be taken to get the capital markets to come around to “old-auto” companies. VW’s review of options for Porsche comes on the heels of Daimler AG deciding to spin off its truck unit after years of management opposition to such a move. Its shares have advanced 13% since then and are hovering around a three-year high.\nEven after the spinoff boost, Daimler is worth about $86 billion, almost matching the valuation of NIO Inc., which brought in roughly one-tenth the revenue last year.\nInvestors have taken a dim view of carmakers’ ability to keep up with new entrants unencumbered by sprawling production networks centered around combustion engines. Ford Motor Co. put this reality in stark relief this week when it announced plans to go from selling zero electric vehicles last year in Europe to only offering all-electric passenger cars by the end of the decade.\nIt’s clear VW will spare no expense in its efforts to catch up to Tesla, having budgeted a bigger slice of its 150 billion-euro spending budget for investment in electric cars and software in the next five years. As strong as earnings are now, they’ll be strained by all the costs associated with retiring some operations.\n“VW’s balance sheet may not be fit to ensure both accelerated investments in electric and autonomous vehicles and finance an accelerated downsizing of legacy issues,” Jefferies analyst Philippe Houchois said in a note.\nFerrari-Like\nProceeds from listing Porsche could go a long way, since its brand power and luxury cachet are on par with Ferrari NV, one of the rare recent success stories among traditional auto companies. Fiat Chrysler spun off the supercar maker in 2015, and the shares have soared 282% since the IPO.\nThe Porsche 911 alone probably exceeds Ferrari’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, according to Dean, the Bloomberg Intelligence analyst. It also has a strong electric story to tell, with the Taycan model that debuted in 2019 portending a shift to about half of sales being battery-powered by 2025.\nPorsche will add a more spacious version of the Taycan to the lineup later this year, then roll out a battery-powered version of the Macan crossover in 2022 that will be based on a new dedicated EV platform being co-developed with Audi.\nNothing New\nThe idea of a separate listing for Porsche isn’t new as such. Three years ago, Lutz Meschke, chief financial officer of the sports-car maker, pointed out the value potential during an informal briefing at a research-and-development center outside Stuttgart, only to be reprimanded by VW headquarters.\nThe opposition inside VW’s boardroom appears to have eased in the wake of an industry transformation many predicted for years but is now is gaining traction at an unprecedented pace. Roughly 10% of passenger vehicles purchased in Europe in the fourth quarter were battery-electric. In December, the share was about 14%.\nStill, a Porsche listing is anything but certain. VW embarked on an asset review half a decade ago, aiming for more decentralized and agile reporting lines and simplify its unwieldy conglomerate structure. Results of the reform efforts have been modest so far, with attempts to separate niche brands such as Ducati and Lamborghini undermined by key stakeholders. The downsized 2019 IPO of trucks unit Traton SE was almost derailed by internal wrangling.\n“You’d think that the Italian business would have been an easier sell internally, and the fact that that didn’t happen begs the question why Porsche would happen,” RBC Capital analyst Tom Narayan said by phone. “It is frustrating for traditional car companies. Tesla can use equity currency to finance growth and grow into their backyard.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":30,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":385638569,"gmtCreate":1613540399851,"gmtModify":1704881791716,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/385638569","repostId":"2112988835","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2112988835","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1613530772,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2112988835?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-17 10:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Nestle to sell N.American water brands to buyout firm One Rock for $4.3 bln","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2112988835","media":"Reuters","summary":"Feb 16 (Reuters) - Nestle SA said on Wednesday it will sell its North American water brands includin","content":"<p>Feb 16 (Reuters) - Nestle SA said on Wednesday it will sell its North American water brands including Pure Life and Poland Spring to private equity firm One Rock Capital Partners and Metropoulos &amp; Co for $4.3 billion.</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>Nestle to sell N.American water brands to buyout firm One Rock for $4.3 bln</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\">\nNestle to sell N.American water brands to buyout firm One Rock for $4.3 bln\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-02-17 10:59</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Feb 16 (Reuters) - Nestle SA said on Wednesday it will sell its North American water brands including Pure Life and Poland Spring to private equity firm One Rock Capital Partners and Metropoulos &amp; Co for $4.3 billion.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NSRGY":"雀巢"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2112988835","content_text":"Feb 16 (Reuters) - Nestle SA said on Wednesday it will sell its North American water brands including Pure Life and Poland Spring to private equity firm One Rock Capital Partners and Metropoulos & Co for $4.3 billion.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":103,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":382468140,"gmtCreate":1613476554280,"gmtModify":1704880897618,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Take note","listText":"Take note","text":"Take note","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/382468140","repostId":"1131743000","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1131743000","pubTimestamp":1613466841,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131743000?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-16 17:14","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Walmart Lined Up for Q4 Earnings: Key Things to Note","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131743000","media":"Zacks","summary":"Walmart Inc. is likely to continue with its solid trend and witness a rise in the top and bottom lin","content":"<p><b>Walmart Inc.</b>&nbsp;is likely to continue with its solid trend and witness a rise in the top and bottom lines when it reports fourth-quarter fiscal 2021 numbers on Feb 18, before market open. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings has increased 2% in the past 30 days to $1.50 per share, which also indicates growth of 8.7% rise from the figure reported in the prior-year period. Markedly, Walmart delivered an earnings surprise of 12.6% in the last reported quarter. Further, the supermarket giant has a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 11.1%, on average.</p><p>The Zacks Consensus Estimate for revenues is pegged at $146.4 billion, suggesting an increase of 3.4% from the prior-year quarter’s reported figure. However, it looks like the rate of sales growth will decelerate on a sequential basis. The company had witnessed an increase of 5.2% in the last reported quarter.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/eb3ea555b99d5d59d69e6ac464f3e786\" tg-width=\"876\" tg-height=\"522\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><b>Key Factors to Note</b></p><p>Walmart has been benefiting from burgeoning demand amid coronavirus-led elevated at-home consumption as well as stock hoarding. Further, higher stay-at-home trends are boosting the company’s e-commerce sales. The company, on its third-quarter earnings call, said that it has doubled the U.S. store associate count this year, supporting the company’s digital and omnichannel efforts. Certainly, Walmart’s combination of a robust store network and growing digital capacity bodes well.</p><p>Incidentally, Walmart has been taking robust strides to strengthen its delivery arm, especially amid the pandemic-led increased demand. This is evident from the company’s launch of the Walmart+ membership program; drone delivery pilots in the United States with Flytrex, Zipline and DroneUp; and a pilot with Cruise to test grocery delivery through self-driven all-electric cars. Walmart also unveiled an alliance with Door Dash in the third quarter to deliver prescriptions from pharmacies of Sam’s Club, alongside expanding Scan &amp; Go to all fuel stations at U.S. Sam’s Clubs. Prior to this, Walmart unveiled Express Delivery during the first quarter at several stores, which helps it deliver orders to customers in less than two hours. As of the fiscal third quarter, Walmart U.S. had 3,600 pickup locations and 2,900 same-day delivery locations.</p><p>These factors have been boosting Walmart’s e-commerce business, which along with its solid efforts to bolster store sales helped its U.S. comp sales to increase for the 25th straight time in the last reported quarter. We note that the big-box retailer has been undertaking several efforts to enhance merchandise assortments and it has also been focused on store remodeling, to upgrade them with advanced in-store and digital innovation. Apart from these, the company’s unique deals and saving events, along with other initiatives to make the most of consumers’ evolving shopping needs and the holiday season are likely to have yielded results.</p><p>That being said, we cannot ignore the impact of the company’s pricing investments on margins. Also, the company has been seeing high costs related to COVID-19, like higher wages and benefits along with costs associated with sanitization and other safety measures. The company incurred roughly $600 million as additional costs related to COVID-19 in the third quarter of fiscal 2021. Management in its last earnings call said that it expects pandemic-related costs to prevail for a while, alongside some general uncertainties globally.</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>Walmart Lined Up for Q4 Earnings: Key Things to Note</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\">\nWalmart Lined Up for Q4 Earnings: Key Things to Note\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-16 17:14 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/1263335/walmart-wmt-lined-up-for-q4-earnings-key-things-to-note><strong>Zacks</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Walmart Inc. is likely to continue with its solid trend and witness a rise in the top and bottom lines when it reports fourth-quarter fiscal 2021 numbers on Feb 18, before market open. The Zacks ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/1263335/walmart-wmt-lined-up-for-q4-earnings-key-things-to-note\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"WMT":"沃尔玛"},"source_url":"https://www.zacks.com/stock/news/1263335/walmart-wmt-lined-up-for-q4-earnings-key-things-to-note","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131743000","content_text":"Walmart Inc. is likely to continue with its solid trend and witness a rise in the top and bottom lines when it reports fourth-quarter fiscal 2021 numbers on Feb 18, before market open. The Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings has increased 2% in the past 30 days to $1.50 per share, which also indicates growth of 8.7% rise from the figure reported in the prior-year period. Markedly, Walmart delivered an earnings surprise of 12.6% in the last reported quarter. Further, the supermarket giant has a trailing four-quarter earnings surprise of 11.1%, on average.The Zacks Consensus Estimate for revenues is pegged at $146.4 billion, suggesting an increase of 3.4% from the prior-year quarter’s reported figure. However, it looks like the rate of sales growth will decelerate on a sequential basis. The company had witnessed an increase of 5.2% in the last reported quarter.Key Factors to NoteWalmart has been benefiting from burgeoning demand amid coronavirus-led elevated at-home consumption as well as stock hoarding. Further, higher stay-at-home trends are boosting the company’s e-commerce sales. The company, on its third-quarter earnings call, said that it has doubled the U.S. store associate count this year, supporting the company’s digital and omnichannel efforts. Certainly, Walmart’s combination of a robust store network and growing digital capacity bodes well.Incidentally, Walmart has been taking robust strides to strengthen its delivery arm, especially amid the pandemic-led increased demand. This is evident from the company’s launch of the Walmart+ membership program; drone delivery pilots in the United States with Flytrex, Zipline and DroneUp; and a pilot with Cruise to test grocery delivery through self-driven all-electric cars. Walmart also unveiled an alliance with Door Dash in the third quarter to deliver prescriptions from pharmacies of Sam’s Club, alongside expanding Scan & Go to all fuel stations at U.S. Sam’s Clubs. Prior to this, Walmart unveiled Express Delivery during the first quarter at several stores, which helps it deliver orders to customers in less than two hours. As of the fiscal third quarter, Walmart U.S. had 3,600 pickup locations and 2,900 same-day delivery locations.These factors have been boosting Walmart’s e-commerce business, which along with its solid efforts to bolster store sales helped its U.S. comp sales to increase for the 25th straight time in the last reported quarter. We note that the big-box retailer has been undertaking several efforts to enhance merchandise assortments and it has also been focused on store remodeling, to upgrade them with advanced in-store and digital innovation. Apart from these, the company’s unique deals and saving events, along with other initiatives to make the most of consumers’ evolving shopping needs and the holiday season are likely to have yielded results.That being said, we cannot ignore the impact of the company’s pricing investments on margins. Also, the company has been seeing high costs related to COVID-19, like higher wages and benefits along with costs associated with sanitization and other safety measures. The company incurred roughly $600 million as additional costs related to COVID-19 in the third quarter of fiscal 2021. Management in its last earnings call said that it expects pandemic-related costs to prevail for a while, alongside some general uncertainties globally.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":54,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386888815,"gmtCreate":1613149688437,"gmtModify":1704879032403,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cause they got capital?&nbsp;","listText":"Cause they got capital?&nbsp;","text":"Cause they got capital?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/386888815","repostId":"1179092967","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1179092967","pubTimestamp":1613100617,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1179092967?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-12 11:30","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Not Just Tesla: Why Big Companies are Buying into Crypto-Mania","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1179092967","media":"barrons","summary":"For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of Bitcoin to a record of $48,297 on Thursday.The most buzzworthy move came from Tesla , which disclosed on Monday that it hasbought $1.5 billion worth of Bitcointo hold on its balance sheet. The company plans to let consumers use the currency to pay for cars.Mastercard  said on Wednesday that it will let m","content":"<p>For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of Bitcoin to a record of $48,297 on Thursday.</p><p>The most buzzworthy move came from Tesla (ticker: TSLA), which disclosed on Monday that it hasbought $1.5 billion worth of Bitcointo hold on its balance sheet. The company plans to let consumers use the currency to pay for cars.</p><p>But Tesla isn’t the only one. On Thursday, BNY Mellon (BK), the oldest bank in the U.S.,said it will hold and transfer cryptocurrencies for customers. “Growing client demand for digital assets, maturity of advanced solutions, and improving regulatory clarity present a tremendous opportunity for us to extend our current service offerings to this emerging field,” said Roman Regelman, the bank’s CEO of asset servicing and head of digital.</p><p>Mastercard (MA) said on Wednesday that it will let merchants accept some cryptocurrencies through its network later this year. The payments will be converted to traditional money before it enters the companies’ systems.Twitter(TWTR) is also considering a Bitcoin investment. And Square (SQ) has already put some on its balance sheet, as well as given users of its Cash App access to buy the cryptocurrency.</p><p>Why is this happening now? Cryptocurrencies are still not particularly useful outside of a very few cases, such as cross-border transactions. Even there, they haven’t fully taken hold.</p><p>There are at least four big reasons corporations are diving in.</p><p>One is that some company founders believe in Bitcoin. Their excitement about the asset has convinced them that their companies need to be involved, or have cryptocurrency investments, even if Bitcoin isn’t really the core of their operations. That appears to be the case for Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk, and for a software company calledMicrostrategyand its CEO, Michael Saylor.</p><p>Microstrategy, whose entire market capitalization was below $1 billion early last year, now owns more than $2 billion of Bitcoin, and its market cap is now just under $10 billion. Saylor told<i>Barron’s</i>&nbsp;in an interview last yearthat he sees Bitcoin as a hedge against monetary debasement and inflation.</p><p>Square CEO Jack Dorsey ‘s fascination with Bitcoin also likely sped Square’s adoption. He has spoken about his interest in the currency for years.</p><p>Tesla’s purchase of Bitcoin is strong marketing for the company and the currency, said Dan Morehead, founder of the crypto hedge fund Pantera Capital. But it won’t likely change the way Bitcoin is used. “Tesla sells a half a million cars a year,” he said. “If they sold 4% in Bitcoin, I’d be surprised.” Morehead thinks Bitoin’s growing use for cross-border payments is much more exciting from a practical perspective.</p><p>Other companies are getting into Bitcoin because of customer demand. That appears to be the case for BNY Mellon, which is not known for making risky bets on new technologies. It could stay out of the industry altogether, but more institutional investors are buying Bitcoin and need somewhere to put it.</p><p>And the infrastructure around Bitcoin has grown, so that it now more closely resembles the systems used in the rest of the world of finance.. Big companies now insure cryptocurrencies or—as in the case ofJPMorgan Chase(JPM)—offer services to cryptocurrency businesses, even if most still don’t hold Bitcoin on their own balance sheets.</p><p>A third reason is increasing government acceptance of the trend. BNY cited greater regulatory clarity around Bitcoin as one reason it is diving in. The U.S. government has taken a mostly laissez-faire approach to regulating digital assets even as many of the illegal activities that cryptocurrency has been associated with in the past have continued. Without at least the tacit approval of regulators, crypto couldn’t have landed on the balance sheets of so many companies.</p><p>A fourth reason cryptocurrencies are gaining hold in corporate boardrooms is that they serve multiple purposes. That gives corporations several different rationales to hold the coins, or offer related services. Cryptocurrencies have the potential to go well beyond Bitcoin’s initial premise as a way to send money without financial intermediaries. So-called stablecoins, whose value is meant to track fiat currencies, could allow for faster transactions for some kinds of financial services, for instance.</p><p>Visa(V) andMasterCardseem like the last places in the world that Bitcoin would take hold given that Bitcoin was created to eliminate the middlemen in finance. Few companies fill the role of middleman as perfectly as the credit-card processors. Visa, however, thinks that cryptocurrencies are useful for many other purposes, and its trusted brand makes it an important player, according to Cuy Sheffield, head of crypto at the company.</p><p>“We’ve seen growing demand from clients across the world that want to be able to plug in and use these networks, but they want a global, neutral, trusted brand, to help them be able to do that,” Sheffield said in an interview. Visa said last week it has created software that allows bank customers to buy and hold cryptocurrencies through lenders’ websites.</p><p>Will old-line financial companies be the biggest beneficiaries of the crypto “revolution”? Michael Venuto, the chief investment officer of Toroso Investments, doesn’t think it will be easy for them to dominate this new world. Toroso created theAmplify Transformational Data SharingETF (ticker: BLOK), which invests in public companies involved in the technology behind Bitcoin.</p><p>“In terms of the self-referenced paradox of the old economy accepting the blockchain, it is simply inevitable,” Venuto wrote in an email to<i>Barron’s</i>. “If they don’t explore the blockchain they will be extinct. They understand that, but they are not aware of how big the changes will be or how fast they will happen. They have to evolve, but evolution can be messy.”</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","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>Not Just Tesla: Why Big Companies are Buying into Crypto-Mania</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\">\nNot Just Tesla: Why Big Companies are Buying into Crypto-Mania\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-12 11:30 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/not-just-tesla-why-big-companies-are-buying-into-crypto-mania-51613069805?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_1><strong>barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/not-just-tesla-why-big-companies-are-buying-into-crypto-mania-51613069805?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/414360f2ef7b5c785cb936b4a9b53a44","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉","GBTC":"Grayscale Bitcoin Trust"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/not-just-tesla-why-big-companies-are-buying-into-crypto-mania-51613069805?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1179092967","content_text":"For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of Bitcoin to a record of $48,297 on Thursday.The most buzzworthy move came from Tesla (ticker: TSLA), which disclosed on Monday that it hasbought $1.5 billion worth of Bitcointo hold on its balance sheet. The company plans to let consumers use the currency to pay for cars.But Tesla isn’t the only one. On Thursday, BNY Mellon (BK), the oldest bank in the U.S.,said it will hold and transfer cryptocurrencies for customers. “Growing client demand for digital assets, maturity of advanced solutions, and improving regulatory clarity present a tremendous opportunity for us to extend our current service offerings to this emerging field,” said Roman Regelman, the bank’s CEO of asset servicing and head of digital.Mastercard (MA) said on Wednesday that it will let merchants accept some cryptocurrencies through its network later this year. The payments will be converted to traditional money before it enters the companies’ systems.Twitter(TWTR) is also considering a Bitcoin investment. And Square (SQ) has already put some on its balance sheet, as well as given users of its Cash App access to buy the cryptocurrency.Why is this happening now? Cryptocurrencies are still not particularly useful outside of a very few cases, such as cross-border transactions. Even there, they haven’t fully taken hold.There are at least four big reasons corporations are diving in.One is that some company founders believe in Bitcoin. Their excitement about the asset has convinced them that their companies need to be involved, or have cryptocurrency investments, even if Bitcoin isn’t really the core of their operations. That appears to be the case for Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk, and for a software company calledMicrostrategyand its CEO, Michael Saylor.Microstrategy, whose entire market capitalization was below $1 billion early last year, now owns more than $2 billion of Bitcoin, and its market cap is now just under $10 billion. Saylor toldBarron’s in an interview last yearthat he sees Bitcoin as a hedge against monetary debasement and inflation.Square CEO Jack Dorsey ‘s fascination with Bitcoin also likely sped Square’s adoption. He has spoken about his interest in the currency for years.Tesla’s purchase of Bitcoin is strong marketing for the company and the currency, said Dan Morehead, founder of the crypto hedge fund Pantera Capital. But it won’t likely change the way Bitcoin is used. “Tesla sells a half a million cars a year,” he said. “If they sold 4% in Bitcoin, I’d be surprised.” Morehead thinks Bitoin’s growing use for cross-border payments is much more exciting from a practical perspective.Other companies are getting into Bitcoin because of customer demand. That appears to be the case for BNY Mellon, which is not known for making risky bets on new technologies. It could stay out of the industry altogether, but more institutional investors are buying Bitcoin and need somewhere to put it.And the infrastructure around Bitcoin has grown, so that it now more closely resembles the systems used in the rest of the world of finance.. Big companies now insure cryptocurrencies or—as in the case ofJPMorgan Chase(JPM)—offer services to cryptocurrency businesses, even if most still don’t hold Bitcoin on their own balance sheets.A third reason is increasing government acceptance of the trend. BNY cited greater regulatory clarity around Bitcoin as one reason it is diving in. The U.S. government has taken a mostly laissez-faire approach to regulating digital assets even as many of the illegal activities that cryptocurrency has been associated with in the past have continued. Without at least the tacit approval of regulators, crypto couldn’t have landed on the balance sheets of so many companies.A fourth reason cryptocurrencies are gaining hold in corporate boardrooms is that they serve multiple purposes. That gives corporations several different rationales to hold the coins, or offer related services. Cryptocurrencies have the potential to go well beyond Bitcoin’s initial premise as a way to send money without financial intermediaries. So-called stablecoins, whose value is meant to track fiat currencies, could allow for faster transactions for some kinds of financial services, for instance.Visa(V) andMasterCardseem like the last places in the world that Bitcoin would take hold given that Bitcoin was created to eliminate the middlemen in finance. Few companies fill the role of middleman as perfectly as the credit-card processors. Visa, however, thinks that cryptocurrencies are useful for many other purposes, and its trusted brand makes it an important player, according to Cuy Sheffield, head of crypto at the company.“We’ve seen growing demand from clients across the world that want to be able to plug in and use these networks, but they want a global, neutral, trusted brand, to help them be able to do that,” Sheffield said in an interview. Visa said last week it has created software that allows bank customers to buy and hold cryptocurrencies through lenders’ websites.Will old-line financial companies be the biggest beneficiaries of the crypto “revolution”? Michael Venuto, the chief investment officer of Toroso Investments, doesn’t think it will be easy for them to dominate this new world. Toroso created theAmplify Transformational Data SharingETF (ticker: BLOK), which invests in public companies involved in the technology behind Bitcoin.“In terms of the self-referenced paradox of the old economy accepting the blockchain, it is simply inevitable,” Venuto wrote in an email toBarron’s. “If they don’t explore the blockchain they will be extinct. They understand that, but they are not aware of how big the changes will be or how fast they will happen. They have to evolve, but evolution can be messy.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":36,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388513027,"gmtCreate":1613062020669,"gmtModify":1704878103891,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/388513027","repostId":"2110041062","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":64,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":381151562,"gmtCreate":1612948441756,"gmtModify":1704876339956,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"???","listText":"???","text":"???","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/381151562","repostId":"1113849351","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1113849351","pubTimestamp":1612948278,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1113849351?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-10 17:11","market":"us","language":"en","title":"How Tesla Options Can Hedge Against A Market Meltdown","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1113849351","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nTesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through finan","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Tesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through financial markets.</li>\n <li>The bulls argue Tesla is a \"tech company\", but objective reality says Tesla is a structurally unprofitable car company.</li>\n <li>Even assuming flawless execution from here, Tesla shares face over 90% downside.</li>\n <li>This extreme downside risk makes Tesla an excellent candidate for hedging against today's mania.</li>\n <li>I detail an options trade on Tesla designed to hedge against a broader bear market.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>If you had any doubts before, thememe stock frenzyof the last few weeks should make one thing abundantly clear...</p>\n<p>Yes, it's a mania.</p>\n<p>In late December, I wrote about thespeculative excessesbubbling up in the financial markets. Things have only accelerated so far this year, with coordinated short squeezes sending the stocks of distressed businesses like GameStop (GME) and AMC (AMC) into the stratosphere,new record highs in margin debt,or my personal favorite - the relentless buying spree in speculative options among retail traders:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3ed1ad33fcdca94e8598947008f34056\" tg-width=\"785\" tg-height=\"586\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Of course, no one knows when this ends... but we all know how it ends. The recent U-turn in meme stocks thatwiped out $167 billion in a matter of daysis a preview for what awaits the broader financial markets. That's why it's never been more important to have a plan in place for hedging the downside. Some investors prefer cash or government bonds - both fine options. But for those willing to get a little more exotic, buying put options on overvalued stocks provides another alternative.</p>\n<p>First, we must identify a company with enough downside to make the bet worthwhile. And for my money, no better stock meets that criteria than electric vehicle maker Tesla (TSLA). From 2014 through mid-2019, Tesla shares traded in a range between $30 - $80 (split-adjusted). Then, starting in the fourth quarter of 2019, Tesla shares entered ludicrous mode - rallying 1,700% from $50 to a recent price of around $850.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a9b909a9b8f4b39d30a319177076aeab\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"354\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>In today's article, I'll show that virtually nothing changed in Tesla's core business to justify this 17-fold increase in value since Q4 2019. I'll then make the case for why Tesla shares risk revisiting $50, even assuming an aggressive bull case in its future earnings trajectory.</p>\n<p>Given this 95% downside risk in Tesla's share price today, it makes for an excellent candidate to hedge a portfolio against the inevitable unwinding of today's mania. I'll detail a basic put option trade with more than 1,000% upside should this risk materialize going forward.</p>\n<p>Let's begin by first addressing the core thesis bulls use to justify Tesla's stratospheric valuation...</p>\n<p><b>Tesla, More than a Car Company?</b></p>\n<p>There's one simple reason why Tesla bulls need the stock narrative to reflect more just a car company: your average car company trades for less than 0.5x sales. Even Toyota, the world's most profitable mass market automaker, trades at just 0.7x sales. And then, there's Tesla...</p>\n<p>Based on a fully diluted 1.2 billion share count, Tesla currently commands a $1 trillion valuation at $850 per share. This valuation reflects a more than 30x sales multiple, or more expensive that many of the most dominant, and most profitable tech companies on the planet. The bulls argue that this valuation is justified, because Tesla is, in fact, a tech company. Why? Here's one explanation fromCleanTechnica:</p>\n<blockquote>\n What Makes Tesla a Tech Company?Tesla is creating software, a lot of software. Software is at the essence of Tesla’s unique infotainment system, user experience, and autonomous-driving features. Tesla has implemented over-the-air updates for years, while other automakers are just about to try this.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Of course, no one will deny that Tesla vehicles contain a lot of cool software and other technology (just like every other modern-day automobile). There's just one problem: each piece of software Tesla sells has a car attached to it. Examining Tesla's financials reveals no standalone software segment. In fact, 94% of Tesla’s revenue last year came from automotive sales, leasing and service. That, dear readers, makes it a car company:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a4d1d7eb8b41fba5e2fbeb67c89ec10f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"443\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>I'll save the analysis of Tesla's energy business for future articles, except to note that this battery/solar segment suffers even lower margins than Tesla's unprofitable car business. Back to the original point...</p>\n<p>The narrative of Tesla as a \"tech company\" is exactly that - an empty narrative, divorced from financial reality. Tesla is only a tech company in the same way that Toyota or Volkswagen are - they all produce vehicles that contain software and other advanced \"technology\". But this alone doesn’t magically transform the economics of manufacturing automobiles.</p>\n<p>And the truth is, the car business suffers from pretty dismal economics, especially compared with the software business. Perhaps more than any other single factor, it's this basic financial reality that explains why Tesla shares face 95% downside risk, even assuming perfect execution going forward. So let's explore this point in greater detail, by comparing the economics of making cars versus making software...</p>\n<p><b>Software vs Autos: A Tale of Two Industries</b></p>\n<p>The reason why dominant software companies trade at rich valuation multiples of 10-20x sales has nothing to do with so-called \"disruption\" or even innovation. Instead, it's all about the basic business fundamentals of margins, capital requirements and competitive dynamics. Let's consider the case of Microsoft, focusing on the simplified example of its Office software product (ignoring the growing cloud business and other segments for simplicity).</p>\n<p>For starters, a software product like Microsoft Office enjoys tremendous margins. After the upfront investment of developing the software code, the incremental costs of selling each additional unit are miniscule - especially in today's world of downloadable software. Compare this with producing an automobile, which comes with massive variable costs - including both input materials and labor. This critical difference in unit economics explains why software companies like Microsoft earn 30 - 40% net margins versus carmakers like Tesla that suffer from razor thin, single-digit profitability:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c083675b47070a5e8bd130702a838e4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"394\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Next, let's talk competition. Given the fat margins in a product like Microsoft Office, why has no competitor emerged to steal away any meaningful market share in the last 25 years? After all, we're not exactly talking rocket science to replicate the basic Office software code. The answer is all about network effects and switching costs. The world already runs on Office products, like Excel. So if you want to share your spreadsheets with the outside world, for example, you have no choice but to use Excel. Meanwhile, who wants the hassle of learning a new spreadsheet interface, and for what upside? To save maybe $20 per year?</p>\n<p>In short, Microsoft's profitability has nothing to do with narratives like innovation or disruption. It's all about excellent unit economics combined with a virtually impenetrable moat insulating the business against competitors. This moat means Microsoft doesn't need to constantly invest money reinventing the wheel - it merely needs to maintain the status quo functionality of the Office product. So instead of diverting a big chunk of profits back into new product development, those profits instead flow back to shareholders.</p>\n<p>The mass market car business operates on the exact opposite dynamics, where consumers constantly shop around for the latest vehicle features and designs, delivered at the lowest cost. There are no meaningful competitive moats that prevent consumers from switching brands, or from competitors replicating the latest vehicle designs and technology. That's why, instead of the monopoly-like powers enjoyed by the big tech companies, the car business trends towards commoditization over time. We see evidence of this in the brutally low margins, and in the fact that no single car company owns more than 15% of global market share.</p>\n<p>Many of the bulls mistakenly view Tesla's \"first mover\" status in the EV market as some kind of fundamental competitive advantage, but that ignores the basic competitive dynamics of the car business. First mover advantage doesn't really exist in the commoditized world of auto manufacturing, and Tesla is already providing a perfect case study for those who car to look. In the world's largest EV market - Europe - Tesla's market share has collapsed from undisputed leader as recently as 2019 to third place today, thanks to a flood of new EV competition from legacy auto makers:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c2ce6fbcf99c716e30ea76507893618\" tg-width=\"435\" tg-height=\"535\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>As the world's largest and most competitive EV market, Europe is a bellwether for the future competitive pressures Tesla will face in the U.S. and China. The success of the recently launchedFord Mustang Mach-Eshows that legacy automakers can and will produce compelling EVs on par with, or perhaps even better than Tesla's current offerings. The growing competition is showing up in another key metric:Tesla's relentless price cutsacross all vehicle models, including a$3,000 cut in the Model Y priceonly a few months after initial production.</p>\n<p>Clearly, Tesla does not enjoy any meaningful competitive moat, or else it wouldn't be surrendering market share and slashing prices across the board. That means Tesla will need to constantly invest huge sums of money just to keep its head above water earning razor thin margins, as it fights for market share in what is already becoming a highly commoditized EV industry.</p>\n<p>So to summarize...</p>\n<p><b>Tesla: It's a Car Company</b></p>\n<p>Despite the bullish narrative about the tremendous \"technology\" Tesla produces, the objective reality in the financial statements shows that Tesla is a car company which happens to produce software. It doesn't enjoy any of the economic benefits that a pure play software producer, like Microsoft enjoys - things like excellent unit economics and a monopoly-like competitive position.</p>\n<p>The reason companies like Microsoft command valuation premiums of 10x sales or more, is simply because of the high returns on invested capital the business generates. Conversely, even the most profitable car company on the planet - Toyota - trades at less than 1x sales. That's simply a reflection of the brutal economics of high operating costs and intense competitive pressures, which translate into fundamentally low returns on capital. Tesla is not immune from this basic economic reality. If you strip away the hype and just examine the numbers, Tesla looks exactly like your average car company:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/05782c8583b26edd51aeb769b32ced1d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"408\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>But here's the thing - Tesla actually suffers far worse unit economics than your average car company. The chart above reflects the financials of a one-time outlier year of profitability. Before 2020, Tesla lost money in every year of its existence:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07426fdf2d4f750a787924e8bc48775f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"416\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Tesla's 2020 financial results led many bulls to believe the company had finally turned the corner towards sustained profitability. But here again, the objective reality in the financials tell a different story.</p>\n<p><b>Tesla Still Loses Money Making Cars</b></p>\n<p>The truth is, Tesla lost money making cars in 2020 - just like every other year in its existence. Tesla only managed to manufacture a one-time profit thanks to a bonanza in government-mandated wealth transfers from the very legacy automakers Tesla seeks to \"disrupt\". Let me explain...</p>\n<p>Governments around the globe have established regulations designed to move the auto industry away from the internal combustion engine (ICE) towards zero emission vehicles. These regulations establish a maximum emissions threshold associated with ICE vehicle sales. So companies that sell too many ICE vehicles incur fines if they exceed the emission threshold. Conversely, companies that produce zero emission vehicles - like Tesla - earn regulatory credits, which they can then sell to other manufacturers to offset the emission tallies from ICE vehicle sales.</p>\n<p>The key point here is that Tesla incurs virtually zero costs when selling these regulatory credits. This 100% pure profit margin revenue provides a major boost to Tesla's otherwise dismal financials. Last year, Tesla earned a whopping $1.6 billion in regulatory credits, up more than 150% from the $600 million earned in 2019. Now here's the thing - Tesla only grew its vehicle sales by less than 40% last year. So how do we explain the pace of emission credits massively outpacing its vehicle sales growth?</p>\n<p>One potential answer lies in Tesla's mushrooming accounts receivables balance, which grew by about half a billion dollars last year. In Tesla's10Q filing from Q3 2020, the company describes a large transaction involving regulatory credit sales that contributed to its account receivables balance:</p>\n<blockquote>\n As of September 30, 2020, one entity represented 10% or more of our total accounts receivable balance, which was related to sales of regulatory credits. As of December 31, 2019, no entity represented 10% of our total accounts receivable balance.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Unfortunately, Tesla provides few additional details explaining what's going on with the accounts receivable balance - a subjectDavid Einhorn has publicly questioned Elon Musk about. But if I were to speculate, it looks like Tesla pulled forward a substantial sum of regulatory credit sales associated with future vehicle sales into the 2020 fiscal year, allowing it to print a one-time profit of $721 million. But if we take away these credit sales (including backing out the estimated taxes paid), Tesla's \"profit\" in 2020 transforms into a $568 million loss:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ac66da8f996eb6f7089a2c90e7dda12c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"428\"><span>(Source: Author, using Tesla filings)</span></p>\n<p>In other words, Tesla's core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable. 2020 was not a turning point, but merely an outlier driven by a $1.6 billion bonanza in regulatory emission credits. And the language in its SEC filings indicate that at least some portion of these regulatory credit sales were pulled forward from future years and booked into the accounts receivable balance.</p>\n<p>In any event, the bottom line is clear: instead of disrupting the legacy automakers, in my view Tesla essentially relies on wealth transfers from its profitable competitors to offset the endless red ink flowing from its own manufacturing operations. Of course, the bulls might argue that it doesn't where the money comes from - profit is profit, right? But here's the problem - Tesla's corporate welfare gravy train will soon hit a brick wall, with nearly every major automaker introducingdozens of new EV modelsthis year and next. And that's just the start. By 2025, hundreds of billions of dollars will have been deployed into new EV models by legacy automakers:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/05cf0587c2addcd549edab52ba39f82f\" tg-width=\"594\" tg-height=\"386\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>The coming tsunami of new EVs offerings means regulatory emission credit supply will soar and demand will plunge, and thus killing their value. Within a few short years, Tesla will no longer be able to paper over the losses from its core business with regulatory credit sales. That's not just my opinion - Tesla CFO Zach Kirkhorn confirmed the temporary nature of Tesla's credit sales during the company'sQ2 2020 earnings call:</p>\n<blockquote>\n ...we don't manage the business with the assumption that regulatory credits will contribute in a significant way to the future... eventually, the stream of regulatory credits will reduce.\n</blockquote>\n<p>That means no, not all profit is created equal. An ongoing profit stream from a viable business deserves a valuation multiple. Conversely, a temporary profit stream should be looked through when assessing the long-term value of a business. Since Tesla investors can not count on regulatory credits continuing beyond the next few years, it only makes sense to strip out their impact from the income statement. When you do that, you see that virtually nothing to justify Tesla's manic share price rally in 2020 - the core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35bc24f3b93c083529b291bfa499d17c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"404\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Meanwhile, it's not just the rearview financials in the core business that remain unchanged.Jim Chanos recently notedhow the forward analyst estimates for Tesla's 2022 - 2023 earnings are the same as in mid-2019, back when shares traded for $50:</p>\n<blockquote>\n That kind of tells you a little bit about what's happened in the marketplace in that valuations have just gone parabolic for basically a company that's still, in the eyes of analysts, earning at or below where they thought it would be earning two years ago. That's kind of incredible.\n</blockquote>\n<p>So if neither the trailing business fundamentals nor the forward earnings outlook changed, that leaves only one variable left to explain what sent Tesla shares from $50 to $850: investor psychology. More specifically, manic psychology, fueling a mad scramble for unprofitable companies across the board:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92ddc266e80382c1f5544c7bf8e51828\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"954\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Thus, Tesla's parabolic price appreciation is merely one of the countless cases of speculative excess playing out across the financial markets. Make no mistake, the coming unwind of this excess is a question of when, not if. When that day comes, the fallout will likely spread throughout financial markets, taking down the innocent bystanders as collateral damage. That's why I'm betting against Tesla as a hedge against this coming unwind. And the reason Tesla makes such a compelling candidate for a price re-rating is, well... how many other trillion dollar companies do you know of that don't make money in their core business?</p>\n<p>Take away the regulatory profit stream - which will start happening this year - and there's no reason why Tesla should trade for anything above the net cash on the balance sheet - which currently sits at around $7 billion, or about $6 per share on a fully diluted basis. Meanwhile, what's the upside case in the scenario where Tesla transforms itself into a profitable car company? Let's briefly consider that scenario...</p>\n<p>Tesla Shares Face 90% Downside, Even with Perfect Execution</p>\n<p>Let's suspend disbelief for a moment and give Tesla full credit for flawless execution on both top line growth and bottom line profitability going forward. For the top line growth assumption, let's simply use the forecast fromTesla's most recent earnings release, where the company guided for 50% annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries going forward. Before moving on, I'll simply note that this projection seems wildly optimistic given Tesla's depleted product pipeline. Both the Tesla Semi and Roadster have missed their original production deadlines by over a year, with no clear timeline yet on when production will begin. Meanwhile, the CyberTruck - Tesla's only mass market vehicle in the pipeline -also appears delayeduntil sometime between 2022 - 2023.</p>\n<p>But even if we give Tesla full credit for this growth, one thing is clear - it will require massive capital investment. That means significant future equity issuance. Meanwhile, Tesla pays a significant portion of its employee salary expense via stock compensation, including Elon Musk's record shattering$56 billion stock bonus plan(saving the planet ain't cheap, apparently). The bottom line: equity dilution is a real issue for Tesla shareholders. Over the last five years, Tesla shareholders have suffered more than 50% dilution. Given the healthy cash pile currently on the balance sheet, let's conservatively assume the dilution rate slows to 5% annually going forward, starting from today's 1.2 billion fully diluted share count.</p>\n<p>Next, let's talk earnings. Remember, this is our aggressive bull case... so let's hold nothing back. We'll assume that Tesla transforms from a structurally unprofitable automaker into one of the most profitable car companies on the planet - matching the 6% net margins earned by Toyota, the mass market industry leader in profitability.</p>\n<p>Finally, let's give Tesla a best-in-class 25x earnings multiple. That's a more than 300% valuation premium over the industry average of roughly 8x earnings, and more than twice the earnings multiple on Toyota. Putting it all together, the table below shows the key assumptions and annual price targets out to 2025:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/381ad84108e848b2bfe8fc2001b57800\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"158\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>In other words...</p>\n<p><i><b>Tesla shares face more than 90% downside risk through 2022, even in the aggressive bull case scenario.</b></i></p>\n<p>In future articles, I'll dive deeper into the weeds to show why there's very little chance of Tesla achieving anything close to the targets outlined above. For now, the key takeaway is that even these fantasy fundamentals barely justify a $50 price target.</p>\n<p>Before wrapping up this analysis and moving on to the trade idea, let me address the final key talking point bulls use to justify Tesla's trillion dollar valuation...</p>\n<p>What About the Robotaxis?</p>\n<p>Starting in late 2016,Elon Musk has promisedthe imminent release of Level 5 full self driving capability in all Tesla vehicles. The promise all along has been that, every Tesla rolling off the assembly line contained the necessary hardware for full self driving, and it was only a matter of developing the software to achieve Level 5 autonomy.</p>\n<p>As a brief bit of background, Level 5 is the highest of6 SAE-defined levels of vehicle autonomy(ranging from 0 to 5). A level 5 vehicle can fully navigate through all environments with zero human supervision. Over the last several years, Musk has made a series of autonomy promises to both consumers and investors which have so far failed to materialize. This includes a2019 capital raise, during which Musk promised a future \"robotaxi\" network that would include a million autonomous Tesla's on the road by 2020. Musk has even claimed that Tesla owners could lend their vehicles out to this future robotaxi network andearn as much as $30,000 per year.</p>\n<p>Those were the promises, but here's the reality... more than four years after making the original promise, Tesla is still stuck at Level 2 autonomy. As described in the graphic below, Level 2 autonomy is nothing more than a basic driver assistance feature, which many other automakers currently offer:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f7a572a2cdf3f9b0161fb7fef5abce9f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"415\"><span>Source (notations by author)</span></p>\n<p>Despite the endless string of autonomy promises that have gone unfulfilled for more than four years, Musk remains undeterred in continuing to make aggressive projections to investors. On the company's latest earnings, Musk talked up a forecast of $50 billion in future earnings from the non-existent robotaxi network,as CNBC reports:</p>\n<blockquote>\n On the company’s earnings call on Wednesday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the valuation makes sense if you assume that billions of dollars worth of cars become robotaxis.He said $50 billion in car sales could produce another $50 billion in “incremental profit” with software margins.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In other words - ignore the broken autonomy promises over the last four years, and just assume this non-existent robotaxi network will become one of the world's most profitable businesses in the future. I'll save the full autonomy analysis for the future, except to say - if you buy into this projection, then sure, a trillion dollar valuation for Tesla stock can make sense. I'll happily take the other side of that bet.</p>\n<p>And without a miracle windfall from robotaxis, there's nothing to stop Mr. Market from repricing Tesla as the unprofitable automaker that it is when today's mania unravels. Which brings us to the final point of this article - the Tesla options trade I'm using to hedge against the unraveling of speculative excess in today's market.</p>\n<p><b>A Tesla Hedging Trade with Over 10x Upside</b></p>\n<p>The full discussion of put option mechanics goes beyond the scope of today's article, but for a high level overview, think of put options as the stock market's version of an insurance policy. Just like your monthly car insurance premiums, most put options expire worthless... but during a crash, they can pay off in a big way.</p>\n<p>Put options achieve this pay off structure by providing short exposure to 100 shares of an underlying stock at the option strike price, up until the expiration date. You pay a premium for the privilege of gaining this short exposure, in the form of the upfront price of the option contract. The reason most options expire worthless is because the stock price must move far enough below the strike price to offset the cost of the option, within a limited time frame (i.e. before the expiration date).</p>\n<p>And that brings us to the two key elements of selecting a put option: a target price and a time frame. I just explained the fundamental case for a downside target of $50 in Tesla shares. And from a technical perspective, Tesla based at around $50 in the fourth quarter of 2019 before launching into a parabolic melt-up. The history of parabolic advances says that, when they end, the stock price often revisits the launch pad - which would bring Tesla back to around $50. Meanwhile, in order to give this trade plenty of time, I'm looking out to January 2022 as a rough time frame.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3ca705542b208fa6c8afca0795f80259\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"354\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>So this time frame gives a straight forward decision on the option expiration date of January 21, 2022. Meanwhile, in order to give the position plenty of room to be wrong and still pay off, I'll select a strike price of $300. There's a delicate balance when selecting strike prices - a lower strike would provide a higher return, but also come with a lower probability of pay off. As I'll show below, selecting a $300 strike price still provides the chance of earning a decent return even if my $50 downside target proves too aggressive.</p>\n<p>But before considering the return potential, we have to know the price of the option. At the close of trading on Monday, the $300 strike Tesla put option expiring on January 21, 2022 traded for around $15.75, as shown below:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f18b6b326a4fadbe5a0dae10c0355ac6\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"38\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Given the 100-share multiplier, the $15.75 quoted price translates into a total cost of $1,575 (plus fees/commissions). With this information, we can determine the return potential of the option for a range of scenarios. In the case where Tesla closes at or above $300 by the expiration date, the option expires worthless, resulting in a 100% loss. Alternatively, if Tesla closes below $300, then the option gains $100 in value for every $1 below the $300 strike price. The table below summarizes this range of scenarios:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33d0ec6d30e3088aad23b0bf644728ab\" tg-width=\"453\" tg-height=\"244\"><span>(Note: for simplicity, I assume the option is held until just before the expiration date, and then closed out without exercising the contract).</span></p>\n<p>So in the downside scenario outlined earlier, where Tesla trades down to $50 by the January 2022 expiration date, the option value grows from $1,650 to $25,000 - for a gain of about 1,400%. However, even if this downside target proves too aggressive, there's still scope to make a reasonable return. If shares only fall to, say $200, the option still returns roughly 500%.</p>\n<p>As you can see, it only take a small allocation within an overall portfolio to gain substantial hedging exposure with a trade like this. Of course, recency bias might make $50 or even $200 per share seem outlandish for a stock trading near $850 today. But let's not forget that Tesla was within“single digit weeks” of bankruptcyas recently as 2018. And in May of 2019, topTesla analyst Adam Jonasdescribed the company as “a distressed credit and restructuring story”, with a $10 downside price target (or $2 pre-split).</p>\n<p>The core business remains virtually unchanged from 2018 and 2019 - when terms like \"bankruptcy\" and \"restructuring\" were on the table. The only key difference is that Tesla now enjoys a positive net cash balance, which takes an immediate bankruptcy scenario off the table. But with less than $10 per share in net cash, this should provide little consolation for the bulls as a valuation floor.</p>\n<p>All that really needs to happen is for Tesla to continue on its current path of losing money in its core business, and catastrophic downside is in store for the stock. And that's not just my opinion - Elon Musk himself fully recognizes this risk, as he noted in a recentemail to employees:</p>\n<blockquote>\n Investors are giving us a lot of credit for future profitability but if, at any point, they conclude that’s not going to happen, our stock will immediately get crushed like a souffle under a sledgehammer!\n</blockquote>\n<p>Going forward, my money's on the sledgehammer, not the soufflé.</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>How Tesla Options Can Hedge Against A Market Meltdown</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\">\nHow Tesla Options Can Hedge Against A Market Meltdown\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-10 17:11 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4404670-how-tesla-options-can-hedge-against-market-meltdown><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nTesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through financial markets.\nThe bulls argue Tesla is a \"tech company\", but objective reality says Tesla is a ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4404670-how-tesla-options-can-hedge-against-market-meltdown\">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://seekingalpha.com/article/4404670-how-tesla-options-can-hedge-against-market-meltdown","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1113849351","content_text":"Summary\n\nTesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through financial markets.\nThe bulls argue Tesla is a \"tech company\", but objective reality says Tesla is a structurally unprofitable car company.\nEven assuming flawless execution from here, Tesla shares face over 90% downside.\nThis extreme downside risk makes Tesla an excellent candidate for hedging against today's mania.\nI detail an options trade on Tesla designed to hedge against a broader bear market.\n\nIf you had any doubts before, thememe stock frenzyof the last few weeks should make one thing abundantly clear...\nYes, it's a mania.\nIn late December, I wrote about thespeculative excessesbubbling up in the financial markets. Things have only accelerated so far this year, with coordinated short squeezes sending the stocks of distressed businesses like GameStop (GME) and AMC (AMC) into the stratosphere,new record highs in margin debt,or my personal favorite - the relentless buying spree in speculative options among retail traders:\n\nOf course, no one knows when this ends... but we all know how it ends. The recent U-turn in meme stocks thatwiped out $167 billion in a matter of daysis a preview for what awaits the broader financial markets. That's why it's never been more important to have a plan in place for hedging the downside. Some investors prefer cash or government bonds - both fine options. But for those willing to get a little more exotic, buying put options on overvalued stocks provides another alternative.\nFirst, we must identify a company with enough downside to make the bet worthwhile. And for my money, no better stock meets that criteria than electric vehicle maker Tesla (TSLA). From 2014 through mid-2019, Tesla shares traded in a range between $30 - $80 (split-adjusted). Then, starting in the fourth quarter of 2019, Tesla shares entered ludicrous mode - rallying 1,700% from $50 to a recent price of around $850.\n\nIn today's article, I'll show that virtually nothing changed in Tesla's core business to justify this 17-fold increase in value since Q4 2019. I'll then make the case for why Tesla shares risk revisiting $50, even assuming an aggressive bull case in its future earnings trajectory.\nGiven this 95% downside risk in Tesla's share price today, it makes for an excellent candidate to hedge a portfolio against the inevitable unwinding of today's mania. I'll detail a basic put option trade with more than 1,000% upside should this risk materialize going forward.\nLet's begin by first addressing the core thesis bulls use to justify Tesla's stratospheric valuation...\nTesla, More than a Car Company?\nThere's one simple reason why Tesla bulls need the stock narrative to reflect more just a car company: your average car company trades for less than 0.5x sales. Even Toyota, the world's most profitable mass market automaker, trades at just 0.7x sales. And then, there's Tesla...\nBased on a fully diluted 1.2 billion share count, Tesla currently commands a $1 trillion valuation at $850 per share. This valuation reflects a more than 30x sales multiple, or more expensive that many of the most dominant, and most profitable tech companies on the planet. The bulls argue that this valuation is justified, because Tesla is, in fact, a tech company. Why? Here's one explanation fromCleanTechnica:\n\n What Makes Tesla a Tech Company?Tesla is creating software, a lot of software. Software is at the essence of Tesla’s unique infotainment system, user experience, and autonomous-driving features. Tesla has implemented over-the-air updates for years, while other automakers are just about to try this.\n\nOf course, no one will deny that Tesla vehicles contain a lot of cool software and other technology (just like every other modern-day automobile). There's just one problem: each piece of software Tesla sells has a car attached to it. Examining Tesla's financials reveals no standalone software segment. In fact, 94% of Tesla’s revenue last year came from automotive sales, leasing and service. That, dear readers, makes it a car company:\n\nI'll save the analysis of Tesla's energy business for future articles, except to note that this battery/solar segment suffers even lower margins than Tesla's unprofitable car business. Back to the original point...\nThe narrative of Tesla as a \"tech company\" is exactly that - an empty narrative, divorced from financial reality. Tesla is only a tech company in the same way that Toyota or Volkswagen are - they all produce vehicles that contain software and other advanced \"technology\". But this alone doesn’t magically transform the economics of manufacturing automobiles.\nAnd the truth is, the car business suffers from pretty dismal economics, especially compared with the software business. Perhaps more than any other single factor, it's this basic financial reality that explains why Tesla shares face 95% downside risk, even assuming perfect execution going forward. So let's explore this point in greater detail, by comparing the economics of making cars versus making software...\nSoftware vs Autos: A Tale of Two Industries\nThe reason why dominant software companies trade at rich valuation multiples of 10-20x sales has nothing to do with so-called \"disruption\" or even innovation. Instead, it's all about the basic business fundamentals of margins, capital requirements and competitive dynamics. Let's consider the case of Microsoft, focusing on the simplified example of its Office software product (ignoring the growing cloud business and other segments for simplicity).\nFor starters, a software product like Microsoft Office enjoys tremendous margins. After the upfront investment of developing the software code, the incremental costs of selling each additional unit are miniscule - especially in today's world of downloadable software. Compare this with producing an automobile, which comes with massive variable costs - including both input materials and labor. This critical difference in unit economics explains why software companies like Microsoft earn 30 - 40% net margins versus carmakers like Tesla that suffer from razor thin, single-digit profitability:\n\nNext, let's talk competition. Given the fat margins in a product like Microsoft Office, why has no competitor emerged to steal away any meaningful market share in the last 25 years? After all, we're not exactly talking rocket science to replicate the basic Office software code. The answer is all about network effects and switching costs. The world already runs on Office products, like Excel. So if you want to share your spreadsheets with the outside world, for example, you have no choice but to use Excel. Meanwhile, who wants the hassle of learning a new spreadsheet interface, and for what upside? To save maybe $20 per year?\nIn short, Microsoft's profitability has nothing to do with narratives like innovation or disruption. It's all about excellent unit economics combined with a virtually impenetrable moat insulating the business against competitors. This moat means Microsoft doesn't need to constantly invest money reinventing the wheel - it merely needs to maintain the status quo functionality of the Office product. So instead of diverting a big chunk of profits back into new product development, those profits instead flow back to shareholders.\nThe mass market car business operates on the exact opposite dynamics, where consumers constantly shop around for the latest vehicle features and designs, delivered at the lowest cost. There are no meaningful competitive moats that prevent consumers from switching brands, or from competitors replicating the latest vehicle designs and technology. That's why, instead of the monopoly-like powers enjoyed by the big tech companies, the car business trends towards commoditization over time. We see evidence of this in the brutally low margins, and in the fact that no single car company owns more than 15% of global market share.\nMany of the bulls mistakenly view Tesla's \"first mover\" status in the EV market as some kind of fundamental competitive advantage, but that ignores the basic competitive dynamics of the car business. First mover advantage doesn't really exist in the commoditized world of auto manufacturing, and Tesla is already providing a perfect case study for those who car to look. In the world's largest EV market - Europe - Tesla's market share has collapsed from undisputed leader as recently as 2019 to third place today, thanks to a flood of new EV competition from legacy auto makers:\n\nAs the world's largest and most competitive EV market, Europe is a bellwether for the future competitive pressures Tesla will face in the U.S. and China. The success of the recently launchedFord Mustang Mach-Eshows that legacy automakers can and will produce compelling EVs on par with, or perhaps even better than Tesla's current offerings. The growing competition is showing up in another key metric:Tesla's relentless price cutsacross all vehicle models, including a$3,000 cut in the Model Y priceonly a few months after initial production.\nClearly, Tesla does not enjoy any meaningful competitive moat, or else it wouldn't be surrendering market share and slashing prices across the board. That means Tesla will need to constantly invest huge sums of money just to keep its head above water earning razor thin margins, as it fights for market share in what is already becoming a highly commoditized EV industry.\nSo to summarize...\nTesla: It's a Car Company\nDespite the bullish narrative about the tremendous \"technology\" Tesla produces, the objective reality in the financial statements shows that Tesla is a car company which happens to produce software. It doesn't enjoy any of the economic benefits that a pure play software producer, like Microsoft enjoys - things like excellent unit economics and a monopoly-like competitive position.\nThe reason companies like Microsoft command valuation premiums of 10x sales or more, is simply because of the high returns on invested capital the business generates. Conversely, even the most profitable car company on the planet - Toyota - trades at less than 1x sales. That's simply a reflection of the brutal economics of high operating costs and intense competitive pressures, which translate into fundamentally low returns on capital. Tesla is not immune from this basic economic reality. If you strip away the hype and just examine the numbers, Tesla looks exactly like your average car company:\n\nBut here's the thing - Tesla actually suffers far worse unit economics than your average car company. The chart above reflects the financials of a one-time outlier year of profitability. Before 2020, Tesla lost money in every year of its existence:\nTesla's 2020 financial results led many bulls to believe the company had finally turned the corner towards sustained profitability. But here again, the objective reality in the financials tell a different story.\nTesla Still Loses Money Making Cars\nThe truth is, Tesla lost money making cars in 2020 - just like every other year in its existence. Tesla only managed to manufacture a one-time profit thanks to a bonanza in government-mandated wealth transfers from the very legacy automakers Tesla seeks to \"disrupt\". Let me explain...\nGovernments around the globe have established regulations designed to move the auto industry away from the internal combustion engine (ICE) towards zero emission vehicles. These regulations establish a maximum emissions threshold associated with ICE vehicle sales. So companies that sell too many ICE vehicles incur fines if they exceed the emission threshold. Conversely, companies that produce zero emission vehicles - like Tesla - earn regulatory credits, which they can then sell to other manufacturers to offset the emission tallies from ICE vehicle sales.\nThe key point here is that Tesla incurs virtually zero costs when selling these regulatory credits. This 100% pure profit margin revenue provides a major boost to Tesla's otherwise dismal financials. Last year, Tesla earned a whopping $1.6 billion in regulatory credits, up more than 150% from the $600 million earned in 2019. Now here's the thing - Tesla only grew its vehicle sales by less than 40% last year. So how do we explain the pace of emission credits massively outpacing its vehicle sales growth?\nOne potential answer lies in Tesla's mushrooming accounts receivables balance, which grew by about half a billion dollars last year. In Tesla's10Q filing from Q3 2020, the company describes a large transaction involving regulatory credit sales that contributed to its account receivables balance:\n\n As of September 30, 2020, one entity represented 10% or more of our total accounts receivable balance, which was related to sales of regulatory credits. As of December 31, 2019, no entity represented 10% of our total accounts receivable balance.\n\nUnfortunately, Tesla provides few additional details explaining what's going on with the accounts receivable balance - a subjectDavid Einhorn has publicly questioned Elon Musk about. But if I were to speculate, it looks like Tesla pulled forward a substantial sum of regulatory credit sales associated with future vehicle sales into the 2020 fiscal year, allowing it to print a one-time profit of $721 million. But if we take away these credit sales (including backing out the estimated taxes paid), Tesla's \"profit\" in 2020 transforms into a $568 million loss:\n(Source: Author, using Tesla filings)\nIn other words, Tesla's core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable. 2020 was not a turning point, but merely an outlier driven by a $1.6 billion bonanza in regulatory emission credits. And the language in its SEC filings indicate that at least some portion of these regulatory credit sales were pulled forward from future years and booked into the accounts receivable balance.\nIn any event, the bottom line is clear: instead of disrupting the legacy automakers, in my view Tesla essentially relies on wealth transfers from its profitable competitors to offset the endless red ink flowing from its own manufacturing operations. Of course, the bulls might argue that it doesn't where the money comes from - profit is profit, right? But here's the problem - Tesla's corporate welfare gravy train will soon hit a brick wall, with nearly every major automaker introducingdozens of new EV modelsthis year and next. And that's just the start. By 2025, hundreds of billions of dollars will have been deployed into new EV models by legacy automakers:\n\nThe coming tsunami of new EVs offerings means regulatory emission credit supply will soar and demand will plunge, and thus killing their value. Within a few short years, Tesla will no longer be able to paper over the losses from its core business with regulatory credit sales. That's not just my opinion - Tesla CFO Zach Kirkhorn confirmed the temporary nature of Tesla's credit sales during the company'sQ2 2020 earnings call:\n\n ...we don't manage the business with the assumption that regulatory credits will contribute in a significant way to the future... eventually, the stream of regulatory credits will reduce.\n\nThat means no, not all profit is created equal. An ongoing profit stream from a viable business deserves a valuation multiple. Conversely, a temporary profit stream should be looked through when assessing the long-term value of a business. Since Tesla investors can not count on regulatory credits continuing beyond the next few years, it only makes sense to strip out their impact from the income statement. When you do that, you see that virtually nothing to justify Tesla's manic share price rally in 2020 - the core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable:\n\nMeanwhile, it's not just the rearview financials in the core business that remain unchanged.Jim Chanos recently notedhow the forward analyst estimates for Tesla's 2022 - 2023 earnings are the same as in mid-2019, back when shares traded for $50:\n\n That kind of tells you a little bit about what's happened in the marketplace in that valuations have just gone parabolic for basically a company that's still, in the eyes of analysts, earning at or below where they thought it would be earning two years ago. That's kind of incredible.\n\nSo if neither the trailing business fundamentals nor the forward earnings outlook changed, that leaves only one variable left to explain what sent Tesla shares from $50 to $850: investor psychology. More specifically, manic psychology, fueling a mad scramble for unprofitable companies across the board:\n\nThus, Tesla's parabolic price appreciation is merely one of the countless cases of speculative excess playing out across the financial markets. Make no mistake, the coming unwind of this excess is a question of when, not if. When that day comes, the fallout will likely spread throughout financial markets, taking down the innocent bystanders as collateral damage. That's why I'm betting against Tesla as a hedge against this coming unwind. And the reason Tesla makes such a compelling candidate for a price re-rating is, well... how many other trillion dollar companies do you know of that don't make money in their core business?\nTake away the regulatory profit stream - which will start happening this year - and there's no reason why Tesla should trade for anything above the net cash on the balance sheet - which currently sits at around $7 billion, or about $6 per share on a fully diluted basis. Meanwhile, what's the upside case in the scenario where Tesla transforms itself into a profitable car company? Let's briefly consider that scenario...\nTesla Shares Face 90% Downside, Even with Perfect Execution\nLet's suspend disbelief for a moment and give Tesla full credit for flawless execution on both top line growth and bottom line profitability going forward. For the top line growth assumption, let's simply use the forecast fromTesla's most recent earnings release, where the company guided for 50% annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries going forward. Before moving on, I'll simply note that this projection seems wildly optimistic given Tesla's depleted product pipeline. Both the Tesla Semi and Roadster have missed their original production deadlines by over a year, with no clear timeline yet on when production will begin. Meanwhile, the CyberTruck - Tesla's only mass market vehicle in the pipeline -also appears delayeduntil sometime between 2022 - 2023.\nBut even if we give Tesla full credit for this growth, one thing is clear - it will require massive capital investment. That means significant future equity issuance. Meanwhile, Tesla pays a significant portion of its employee salary expense via stock compensation, including Elon Musk's record shattering$56 billion stock bonus plan(saving the planet ain't cheap, apparently). The bottom line: equity dilution is a real issue for Tesla shareholders. Over the last five years, Tesla shareholders have suffered more than 50% dilution. Given the healthy cash pile currently on the balance sheet, let's conservatively assume the dilution rate slows to 5% annually going forward, starting from today's 1.2 billion fully diluted share count.\nNext, let's talk earnings. Remember, this is our aggressive bull case... so let's hold nothing back. We'll assume that Tesla transforms from a structurally unprofitable automaker into one of the most profitable car companies on the planet - matching the 6% net margins earned by Toyota, the mass market industry leader in profitability.\nFinally, let's give Tesla a best-in-class 25x earnings multiple. That's a more than 300% valuation premium over the industry average of roughly 8x earnings, and more than twice the earnings multiple on Toyota. Putting it all together, the table below shows the key assumptions and annual price targets out to 2025:\n\nIn other words...\nTesla shares face more than 90% downside risk through 2022, even in the aggressive bull case scenario.\nIn future articles, I'll dive deeper into the weeds to show why there's very little chance of Tesla achieving anything close to the targets outlined above. For now, the key takeaway is that even these fantasy fundamentals barely justify a $50 price target.\nBefore wrapping up this analysis and moving on to the trade idea, let me address the final key talking point bulls use to justify Tesla's trillion dollar valuation...\nWhat About the Robotaxis?\nStarting in late 2016,Elon Musk has promisedthe imminent release of Level 5 full self driving capability in all Tesla vehicles. The promise all along has been that, every Tesla rolling off the assembly line contained the necessary hardware for full self driving, and it was only a matter of developing the software to achieve Level 5 autonomy.\nAs a brief bit of background, Level 5 is the highest of6 SAE-defined levels of vehicle autonomy(ranging from 0 to 5). A level 5 vehicle can fully navigate through all environments with zero human supervision. Over the last several years, Musk has made a series of autonomy promises to both consumers and investors which have so far failed to materialize. This includes a2019 capital raise, during which Musk promised a future \"robotaxi\" network that would include a million autonomous Tesla's on the road by 2020. Musk has even claimed that Tesla owners could lend their vehicles out to this future robotaxi network andearn as much as $30,000 per year.\nThose were the promises, but here's the reality... more than four years after making the original promise, Tesla is still stuck at Level 2 autonomy. As described in the graphic below, Level 2 autonomy is nothing more than a basic driver assistance feature, which many other automakers currently offer:\nSource (notations by author)\nDespite the endless string of autonomy promises that have gone unfulfilled for more than four years, Musk remains undeterred in continuing to make aggressive projections to investors. On the company's latest earnings, Musk talked up a forecast of $50 billion in future earnings from the non-existent robotaxi network,as CNBC reports:\n\n On the company’s earnings call on Wednesday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the valuation makes sense if you assume that billions of dollars worth of cars become robotaxis.He said $50 billion in car sales could produce another $50 billion in “incremental profit” with software margins.\n\nIn other words - ignore the broken autonomy promises over the last four years, and just assume this non-existent robotaxi network will become one of the world's most profitable businesses in the future. I'll save the full autonomy analysis for the future, except to say - if you buy into this projection, then sure, a trillion dollar valuation for Tesla stock can make sense. I'll happily take the other side of that bet.\nAnd without a miracle windfall from robotaxis, there's nothing to stop Mr. Market from repricing Tesla as the unprofitable automaker that it is when today's mania unravels. Which brings us to the final point of this article - the Tesla options trade I'm using to hedge against the unraveling of speculative excess in today's market.\nA Tesla Hedging Trade with Over 10x Upside\nThe full discussion of put option mechanics goes beyond the scope of today's article, but for a high level overview, think of put options as the stock market's version of an insurance policy. Just like your monthly car insurance premiums, most put options expire worthless... but during a crash, they can pay off in a big way.\nPut options achieve this pay off structure by providing short exposure to 100 shares of an underlying stock at the option strike price, up until the expiration date. You pay a premium for the privilege of gaining this short exposure, in the form of the upfront price of the option contract. The reason most options expire worthless is because the stock price must move far enough below the strike price to offset the cost of the option, within a limited time frame (i.e. before the expiration date).\nAnd that brings us to the two key elements of selecting a put option: a target price and a time frame. I just explained the fundamental case for a downside target of $50 in Tesla shares. And from a technical perspective, Tesla based at around $50 in the fourth quarter of 2019 before launching into a parabolic melt-up. The history of parabolic advances says that, when they end, the stock price often revisits the launch pad - which would bring Tesla back to around $50. Meanwhile, in order to give this trade plenty of time, I'm looking out to January 2022 as a rough time frame.\n\nSo this time frame gives a straight forward decision on the option expiration date of January 21, 2022. Meanwhile, in order to give the position plenty of room to be wrong and still pay off, I'll select a strike price of $300. There's a delicate balance when selecting strike prices - a lower strike would provide a higher return, but also come with a lower probability of pay off. As I'll show below, selecting a $300 strike price still provides the chance of earning a decent return even if my $50 downside target proves too aggressive.\nBut before considering the return potential, we have to know the price of the option. At the close of trading on Monday, the $300 strike Tesla put option expiring on January 21, 2022 traded for around $15.75, as shown below:\n\nGiven the 100-share multiplier, the $15.75 quoted price translates into a total cost of $1,575 (plus fees/commissions). With this information, we can determine the return potential of the option for a range of scenarios. In the case where Tesla closes at or above $300 by the expiration date, the option expires worthless, resulting in a 100% loss. Alternatively, if Tesla closes below $300, then the option gains $100 in value for every $1 below the $300 strike price. The table below summarizes this range of scenarios:\n(Note: for simplicity, I assume the option is held until just before the expiration date, and then closed out without exercising the contract).\nSo in the downside scenario outlined earlier, where Tesla trades down to $50 by the January 2022 expiration date, the option value grows from $1,650 to $25,000 - for a gain of about 1,400%. However, even if this downside target proves too aggressive, there's still scope to make a reasonable return. If shares only fall to, say $200, the option still returns roughly 500%.\nAs you can see, it only take a small allocation within an overall portfolio to gain substantial hedging exposure with a trade like this. Of course, recency bias might make $50 or even $200 per share seem outlandish for a stock trading near $850 today. But let's not forget that Tesla was within“single digit weeks” of bankruptcyas recently as 2018. And in May of 2019, topTesla analyst Adam Jonasdescribed the company as “a distressed credit and restructuring story”, with a $10 downside price target (or $2 pre-split).\nThe core business remains virtually unchanged from 2018 and 2019 - when terms like \"bankruptcy\" and \"restructuring\" were on the table. The only key difference is that Tesla now enjoys a positive net cash balance, which takes an immediate bankruptcy scenario off the table. But with less than $10 per share in net cash, this should provide little consolation for the bulls as a valuation floor.\nAll that really needs to happen is for Tesla to continue on its current path of losing money in its core business, and catastrophic downside is in store for the stock. And that's not just my opinion - Elon Musk himself fully recognizes this risk, as he noted in a recentemail to employees:\n\n Investors are giving us a lot of credit for future profitability but if, at any point, they conclude that’s not going to happen, our stock will immediately get crushed like a souffle under a sledgehammer!\n\nGoing forward, my money's on the sledgehammer, not the soufflé.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":42,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":389930109,"gmtCreate":1612660379101,"gmtModify":1704873355761,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Come on!","listText":"Come on!","text":"Come on!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/389930109","repostId":"1132260998","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":29,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":389061201,"gmtCreate":1612624688903,"gmtModify":1704873268987,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Up up up","listText":"Up up up","text":"Up up up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/389061201","repostId":"2109727286","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":94,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":317991446,"gmtCreate":1612404053085,"gmtModify":1704870699610,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Jiayou","listText":"Jiayou","text":"Jiayou","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b202d8603e0dc0338341a96429201a49","width":"750","height":"1890"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/317991446","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":11,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":317041051,"gmtCreate":1612401580473,"gmtModify":1704870659105,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NAKD\">$Naked Brand(NAKD)$</a>up up up&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NAKD\">$Naked Brand(NAKD)$</a>up up up&nbsp;","text":"$Naked Brand(NAKD)$up up up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":9,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/317041051","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":694,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":317041051,"gmtCreate":1612401580473,"gmtModify":1704870659105,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NAKD\">$Naked Brand(NAKD)$</a>up up up&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NAKD\">$Naked Brand(NAKD)$</a>up up up&nbsp;","text":"$Naked Brand(NAKD)$up up up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":9,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/317041051","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":694,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":389930109,"gmtCreate":1612660379101,"gmtModify":1704873355761,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Come on!","listText":"Come on!","text":"Come on!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/389930109","repostId":"1132260998","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1132260998","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1612519255,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1132260998?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-05 18:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Performance of funds invested in GameStop in past two weeks","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1132260998","media":"Reuters","summary":"(Reuters) - The Morgan Stanley Institutional Small Co. Inception Portfolio fund was among the top ga","content":"<p>(Reuters) - The Morgan Stanley Institutional Small Co. Inception Portfolio fund was among the top gainers among mutual funds over the past two weeks having exposure to videogame retailer GameStop, data from Refinitiv Lipper showed.</p>\n<p>Crowds of retail punters sent shares in GameStop up by more than 2000% last month, causing some Wall Street hedge funds to lose billions of dollars on their short bets on the stock.</p>\n<p>The Morgan Stanley fund, which had 346,943 shares of GameStop as per the latest filing, gained 23% in the last two weeks, according to the data, which was based on the last two weeks’ price performance.</p>\n<p>The fund’s net assets rose 61% to $746.7 million in January, the data showed.</p>\n<p>Shares of iShares Micro-Cap ETF and Cambria Shareholder Yield ETF also gained about 7% each in the past two weeks.</p>\n<p>Graphic: Mutual fund gainers in the past two weeks</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bdf861b5fe2dd34bcafbc688c67e9075\" tg-width=\"962\" tg-height=\"515\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Shares of GameStop have fallen more than 83.5% in the first four days of this month as the retail frenzy faded.</p>\n<p>Graphic: Bottom performers in the past two weeks</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ee25f46afa762db3e988a73a7147042d\" tg-width=\"940\" tg-height=\"492\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></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>Performance of funds invested in GameStop in past two weeks</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\">\nPerformance of funds invested in GameStop in past two weeks\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-02-05 18:00</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(Reuters) - The Morgan Stanley Institutional Small Co. Inception Portfolio fund was among the top gainers among mutual funds over the past two weeks having exposure to videogame retailer GameStop, data from Refinitiv Lipper showed.</p>\n<p>Crowds of retail punters sent shares in GameStop up by more than 2000% last month, causing some Wall Street hedge funds to lose billions of dollars on their short bets on the stock.</p>\n<p>The Morgan Stanley fund, which had 346,943 shares of GameStop as per the latest filing, gained 23% in the last two weeks, according to the data, which was based on the last two weeks’ price performance.</p>\n<p>The fund’s net assets rose 61% to $746.7 million in January, the data showed.</p>\n<p>Shares of iShares Micro-Cap ETF and Cambria Shareholder Yield ETF also gained about 7% each in the past two weeks.</p>\n<p>Graphic: Mutual fund gainers in the past two weeks</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bdf861b5fe2dd34bcafbc688c67e9075\" tg-width=\"962\" tg-height=\"515\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Shares of GameStop have fallen more than 83.5% in the first four days of this month as the retail frenzy faded.</p>\n<p>Graphic: Bottom performers in the past two weeks</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ee25f46afa762db3e988a73a7147042d\" tg-width=\"940\" tg-height=\"492\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b72bab52a7d49e9d26088350ab4826c1","relate_stocks":{"GME":"游戏驿站"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1132260998","content_text":"(Reuters) - The Morgan Stanley Institutional Small Co. Inception Portfolio fund was among the top gainers among mutual funds over the past two weeks having exposure to videogame retailer GameStop, data from Refinitiv Lipper showed.\nCrowds of retail punters sent shares in GameStop up by more than 2000% last month, causing some Wall Street hedge funds to lose billions of dollars on their short bets on the stock.\nThe Morgan Stanley fund, which had 346,943 shares of GameStop as per the latest filing, gained 23% in the last two weeks, according to the data, which was based on the last two weeks’ price performance.\nThe fund’s net assets rose 61% to $746.7 million in January, the data showed.\nShares of iShares Micro-Cap ETF and Cambria Shareholder Yield ETF also gained about 7% each in the past two weeks.\nGraphic: Mutual fund gainers in the past two weeks\n\nShares of GameStop have fallen more than 83.5% in the first four days of this month as the retail frenzy faded.\nGraphic: Bottom performers in the past two weeks","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":29,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":360674992,"gmtCreate":1613915466716,"gmtModify":1704885900841,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TRCH\">$Torchlight Energy Resources(TRCH)$</a>. Fly fly fly","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TRCH\">$Torchlight Energy Resources(TRCH)$</a>. Fly fly fly","text":"$Torchlight Energy Resources(TRCH)$. Fly fly fly","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/360674992","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":78,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":386888815,"gmtCreate":1613149688437,"gmtModify":1704879032403,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cause they got capital?&nbsp;","listText":"Cause they got capital?&nbsp;","text":"Cause they got capital?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/386888815","repostId":"1179092967","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1179092967","pubTimestamp":1613100617,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1179092967?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-12 11:30","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Not Just Tesla: Why Big Companies are Buying into Crypto-Mania","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1179092967","media":"barrons","summary":"For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of Bitcoin to a record of $48,297 on Thursday.The most buzzworthy move came from Tesla , which disclosed on Monday that it hasbought $1.5 billion worth of Bitcointo hold on its balance sheet. The company plans to let consumers use the currency to pay for cars.Mastercard  said on Wednesday that it will let m","content":"<p>For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of Bitcoin to a record of $48,297 on Thursday.</p><p>The most buzzworthy move came from Tesla (ticker: TSLA), which disclosed on Monday that it hasbought $1.5 billion worth of Bitcointo hold on its balance sheet. The company plans to let consumers use the currency to pay for cars.</p><p>But Tesla isn’t the only one. On Thursday, BNY Mellon (BK), the oldest bank in the U.S.,said it will hold and transfer cryptocurrencies for customers. “Growing client demand for digital assets, maturity of advanced solutions, and improving regulatory clarity present a tremendous opportunity for us to extend our current service offerings to this emerging field,” said Roman Regelman, the bank’s CEO of asset servicing and head of digital.</p><p>Mastercard (MA) said on Wednesday that it will let merchants accept some cryptocurrencies through its network later this year. The payments will be converted to traditional money before it enters the companies’ systems.Twitter(TWTR) is also considering a Bitcoin investment. And Square (SQ) has already put some on its balance sheet, as well as given users of its Cash App access to buy the cryptocurrency.</p><p>Why is this happening now? Cryptocurrencies are still not particularly useful outside of a very few cases, such as cross-border transactions. Even there, they haven’t fully taken hold.</p><p>There are at least four big reasons corporations are diving in.</p><p>One is that some company founders believe in Bitcoin. Their excitement about the asset has convinced them that their companies need to be involved, or have cryptocurrency investments, even if Bitcoin isn’t really the core of their operations. That appears to be the case for Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk, and for a software company calledMicrostrategyand its CEO, Michael Saylor.</p><p>Microstrategy, whose entire market capitalization was below $1 billion early last year, now owns more than $2 billion of Bitcoin, and its market cap is now just under $10 billion. Saylor told<i>Barron’s</i>&nbsp;in an interview last yearthat he sees Bitcoin as a hedge against monetary debasement and inflation.</p><p>Square CEO Jack Dorsey ‘s fascination with Bitcoin also likely sped Square’s adoption. He has spoken about his interest in the currency for years.</p><p>Tesla’s purchase of Bitcoin is strong marketing for the company and the currency, said Dan Morehead, founder of the crypto hedge fund Pantera Capital. But it won’t likely change the way Bitcoin is used. “Tesla sells a half a million cars a year,” he said. “If they sold 4% in Bitcoin, I’d be surprised.” Morehead thinks Bitoin’s growing use for cross-border payments is much more exciting from a practical perspective.</p><p>Other companies are getting into Bitcoin because of customer demand. That appears to be the case for BNY Mellon, which is not known for making risky bets on new technologies. It could stay out of the industry altogether, but more institutional investors are buying Bitcoin and need somewhere to put it.</p><p>And the infrastructure around Bitcoin has grown, so that it now more closely resembles the systems used in the rest of the world of finance.. Big companies now insure cryptocurrencies or—as in the case ofJPMorgan Chase(JPM)—offer services to cryptocurrency businesses, even if most still don’t hold Bitcoin on their own balance sheets.</p><p>A third reason is increasing government acceptance of the trend. BNY cited greater regulatory clarity around Bitcoin as one reason it is diving in. The U.S. government has taken a mostly laissez-faire approach to regulating digital assets even as many of the illegal activities that cryptocurrency has been associated with in the past have continued. Without at least the tacit approval of regulators, crypto couldn’t have landed on the balance sheets of so many companies.</p><p>A fourth reason cryptocurrencies are gaining hold in corporate boardrooms is that they serve multiple purposes. That gives corporations several different rationales to hold the coins, or offer related services. Cryptocurrencies have the potential to go well beyond Bitcoin’s initial premise as a way to send money without financial intermediaries. So-called stablecoins, whose value is meant to track fiat currencies, could allow for faster transactions for some kinds of financial services, for instance.</p><p>Visa(V) andMasterCardseem like the last places in the world that Bitcoin would take hold given that Bitcoin was created to eliminate the middlemen in finance. Few companies fill the role of middleman as perfectly as the credit-card processors. Visa, however, thinks that cryptocurrencies are useful for many other purposes, and its trusted brand makes it an important player, according to Cuy Sheffield, head of crypto at the company.</p><p>“We’ve seen growing demand from clients across the world that want to be able to plug in and use these networks, but they want a global, neutral, trusted brand, to help them be able to do that,” Sheffield said in an interview. Visa said last week it has created software that allows bank customers to buy and hold cryptocurrencies through lenders’ websites.</p><p>Will old-line financial companies be the biggest beneficiaries of the crypto “revolution”? Michael Venuto, the chief investment officer of Toroso Investments, doesn’t think it will be easy for them to dominate this new world. Toroso created theAmplify Transformational Data SharingETF (ticker: BLOK), which invests in public companies involved in the technology behind Bitcoin.</p><p>“In terms of the self-referenced paradox of the old economy accepting the blockchain, it is simply inevitable,” Venuto wrote in an email to<i>Barron’s</i>. “If they don’t explore the blockchain they will be extinct. They understand that, but they are not aware of how big the changes will be or how fast they will happen. They have to evolve, but evolution can be messy.”</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","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>Not Just Tesla: Why Big Companies are Buying into Crypto-Mania</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\">\nNot Just Tesla: Why Big Companies are Buying into Crypto-Mania\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-12 11:30 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/not-just-tesla-why-big-companies-are-buying-into-crypto-mania-51613069805?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_1><strong>barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/not-just-tesla-why-big-companies-are-buying-into-crypto-mania-51613069805?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/414360f2ef7b5c785cb936b4a9b53a44","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉","GBTC":"Grayscale Bitcoin Trust"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/not-just-tesla-why-big-companies-are-buying-into-crypto-mania-51613069805?mod=hp_LEADSUPP_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1179092967","content_text":"For months, there has beena consistent trickle of newsabout mainstream businesses getting involved in cryptocurrencies. In the past week, it has turned into a flood, helping to push the price of Bitcoin to a record of $48,297 on Thursday.The most buzzworthy move came from Tesla (ticker: TSLA), which disclosed on Monday that it hasbought $1.5 billion worth of Bitcointo hold on its balance sheet. The company plans to let consumers use the currency to pay for cars.But Tesla isn’t the only one. On Thursday, BNY Mellon (BK), the oldest bank in the U.S.,said it will hold and transfer cryptocurrencies for customers. “Growing client demand for digital assets, maturity of advanced solutions, and improving regulatory clarity present a tremendous opportunity for us to extend our current service offerings to this emerging field,” said Roman Regelman, the bank’s CEO of asset servicing and head of digital.Mastercard (MA) said on Wednesday that it will let merchants accept some cryptocurrencies through its network later this year. The payments will be converted to traditional money before it enters the companies’ systems.Twitter(TWTR) is also considering a Bitcoin investment. And Square (SQ) has already put some on its balance sheet, as well as given users of its Cash App access to buy the cryptocurrency.Why is this happening now? Cryptocurrencies are still not particularly useful outside of a very few cases, such as cross-border transactions. Even there, they haven’t fully taken hold.There are at least four big reasons corporations are diving in.One is that some company founders believe in Bitcoin. Their excitement about the asset has convinced them that their companies need to be involved, or have cryptocurrency investments, even if Bitcoin isn’t really the core of their operations. That appears to be the case for Tesla and its CEO Elon Musk, and for a software company calledMicrostrategyand its CEO, Michael Saylor.Microstrategy, whose entire market capitalization was below $1 billion early last year, now owns more than $2 billion of Bitcoin, and its market cap is now just under $10 billion. Saylor toldBarron’s in an interview last yearthat he sees Bitcoin as a hedge against monetary debasement and inflation.Square CEO Jack Dorsey ‘s fascination with Bitcoin also likely sped Square’s adoption. He has spoken about his interest in the currency for years.Tesla’s purchase of Bitcoin is strong marketing for the company and the currency, said Dan Morehead, founder of the crypto hedge fund Pantera Capital. But it won’t likely change the way Bitcoin is used. “Tesla sells a half a million cars a year,” he said. “If they sold 4% in Bitcoin, I’d be surprised.” Morehead thinks Bitoin’s growing use for cross-border payments is much more exciting from a practical perspective.Other companies are getting into Bitcoin because of customer demand. That appears to be the case for BNY Mellon, which is not known for making risky bets on new technologies. It could stay out of the industry altogether, but more institutional investors are buying Bitcoin and need somewhere to put it.And the infrastructure around Bitcoin has grown, so that it now more closely resembles the systems used in the rest of the world of finance.. Big companies now insure cryptocurrencies or—as in the case ofJPMorgan Chase(JPM)—offer services to cryptocurrency businesses, even if most still don’t hold Bitcoin on their own balance sheets.A third reason is increasing government acceptance of the trend. BNY cited greater regulatory clarity around Bitcoin as one reason it is diving in. The U.S. government has taken a mostly laissez-faire approach to regulating digital assets even as many of the illegal activities that cryptocurrency has been associated with in the past have continued. Without at least the tacit approval of regulators, crypto couldn’t have landed on the balance sheets of so many companies.A fourth reason cryptocurrencies are gaining hold in corporate boardrooms is that they serve multiple purposes. That gives corporations several different rationales to hold the coins, or offer related services. Cryptocurrencies have the potential to go well beyond Bitcoin’s initial premise as a way to send money without financial intermediaries. So-called stablecoins, whose value is meant to track fiat currencies, could allow for faster transactions for some kinds of financial services, for instance.Visa(V) andMasterCardseem like the last places in the world that Bitcoin would take hold given that Bitcoin was created to eliminate the middlemen in finance. Few companies fill the role of middleman as perfectly as the credit-card processors. Visa, however, thinks that cryptocurrencies are useful for many other purposes, and its trusted brand makes it an important player, according to Cuy Sheffield, head of crypto at the company.“We’ve seen growing demand from clients across the world that want to be able to plug in and use these networks, but they want a global, neutral, trusted brand, to help them be able to do that,” Sheffield said in an interview. Visa said last week it has created software that allows bank customers to buy and hold cryptocurrencies through lenders’ websites.Will old-line financial companies be the biggest beneficiaries of the crypto “revolution”? Michael Venuto, the chief investment officer of Toroso Investments, doesn’t think it will be easy for them to dominate this new world. Toroso created theAmplify Transformational Data SharingETF (ticker: BLOK), which invests in public companies involved in the technology behind Bitcoin.“In terms of the self-referenced paradox of the old economy accepting the blockchain, it is simply inevitable,” Venuto wrote in an email toBarron’s. “If they don’t explore the blockchain they will be extinct. They understand that, but they are not aware of how big the changes will be or how fast they will happen. They have to evolve, but evolution can be messy.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":36,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":389061201,"gmtCreate":1612624688903,"gmtModify":1704873268987,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Up up up","listText":"Up up up","text":"Up up up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/389061201","repostId":"2109727286","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":94,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":317991446,"gmtCreate":1612404053085,"gmtModify":1704870699610,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Jiayou","listText":"Jiayou","text":"Jiayou","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b202d8603e0dc0338341a96429201a49","width":"750","height":"1890"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/317991446","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":11,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":139871702,"gmtCreate":1621609238606,"gmtModify":1704360549823,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Boom","listText":"Boom","text":"Boom","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/139871702","repostId":"2137876902","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2137876902","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1621603980,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2137876902?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-05-21 21:33","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Stocks open higher, with S&P 500 erasing weekly loss","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2137876902","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"MW Stocks open higher, with S&P 500 erasing weekly loss\n\n\n  U.S. stocks opened higher Friday, with t","content":"<html><body><font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW Stocks open higher, with S&amp;P 500 erasing weekly loss\n</p>\n<p>\n  U.S. stocks opened higher Friday, with the S&amp;P 500 turning higher for the week as inflation-inspired jitters appeared to subside. The Dow Jones Industrial Average  was up 157 points, or 0.5%, at 34,241, while the S&amp;P 500  rose 0.5% to 4,179. The Nasdaq Composite  gained 0.5% to trade at 13,606. The lift put the S&amp;P 500 up 0.1% for the week, while the Dow remained on track for a 0.4% weekly loss. The tech-heavy Nasdaq was up solidly for the week, up 1.3%. \n</p>\n<p>\n  -William Watts; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n  <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/END\">$(END)$</a> Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n  May 21, 2021 09:33 ET (13:33 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones &amp; Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font></body></html>","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>Stocks open higher, with S&P 500 erasing weekly loss</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\">\nStocks open higher, with S&P 500 erasing weekly loss\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-05-21 21:33</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><body><font class=\"NormalMinus1\" face=\"Arial\">\n<p>\nMW Stocks open higher, with S&amp;P 500 erasing weekly loss\n</p>\n<p>\n  U.S. stocks opened higher Friday, with the S&amp;P 500 turning higher for the week as inflation-inspired jitters appeared to subside. The Dow Jones Industrial Average  was up 157 points, or 0.5%, at 34,241, while the S&amp;P 500  rose 0.5% to 4,179. The Nasdaq Composite  gained 0.5% to trade at 13,606. The lift put the S&amp;P 500 up 0.1% for the week, while the Dow remained on track for a 0.4% weekly loss. The tech-heavy Nasdaq was up solidly for the week, up 1.3%. \n</p>\n<p>\n  -William Watts; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n</p>\n<pre>\n \n</pre>\n<p>\n  <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/END\">$(END)$</a> Dow Jones Newswires\n</p>\n<p>\n  May 21, 2021 09:33 ET (13:33 GMT)\n</p>\n<p>\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones &amp; Company, Inc.\n</p>\n</font></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"161125":"标普500","513500":"标普500ETF","SH":"标普500反向ETF","SSO":"两倍做多标普500ETF","SDS":"两倍做空标普500ETF","OEF":"标普100指数ETF-iShares","IVV":"标普500指数ETF","OEX":"标普100","UPRO":"三倍做多标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF","SPXU":"三倍做空标普500ETF"},"source_url":"http://dowjonesnews.com/newdjn/logon.aspx?AL=N","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2137876902","content_text":"MW Stocks open higher, with S&P 500 erasing weekly loss\n\n\n  U.S. stocks opened higher Friday, with the S&P 500 turning higher for the week as inflation-inspired jitters appeared to subside. The Dow Jones Industrial Average  was up 157 points, or 0.5%, at 34,241, while the S&P 500  rose 0.5% to 4,179. The Nasdaq Composite  gained 0.5% to trade at 13,606. The lift put the S&P 500 up 0.1% for the week, while the Dow remained on track for a 0.4% weekly loss. The tech-heavy Nasdaq was up solidly for the week, up 1.3%. \n\n\n  -William Watts; 415-439-6400; AskNewswires@dowjones.com \n\n\n \n\n\n$(END)$ Dow Jones Newswires\n\n\n  May 21, 2021 09:33 ET (13:33 GMT)\n\n\n  Copyright (c) 2021 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":97,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":361453595,"gmtCreate":1614256898517,"gmtModify":1704769713107,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;Boooms","listText":"&nbsp;Boooms","text":"Boooms","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/361453595","repostId":"2114131201","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":24,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":363021612,"gmtCreate":1614084847936,"gmtModify":1704887873223,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Urgh","listText":"Urgh","text":"Urgh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/363021612","repostId":"1178144401","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1178144401","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Stock Market Quotes, Business News, Financial News, Trading Ideas, and Stock Research by Professionals","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Benzinga","id":"1052270027","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa"},"pubTimestamp":1614077941,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1178144401?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-23 18:59","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Tesla Took Off Standard Range Model Y From Its Offerings","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1178144401","media":"Benzinga","summary":"Tesla Inc. is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elo","content":"<p><b>Tesla Inc.</b>&nbsp;is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elon Musk said Monday.</p>\n<p><b>What Happened</b>: The electric vehicle maker made the move apparently due to the sport utility vehicle’s low range.</p>\n<p>“It is still available off menu, but I don’t think the range, in many drive conditions, yet meets the Tesla standard of excellence,” Musk said on Twitter.</p>\n<p><b>Why It Matters:</b>As part of efforts to make some of its vehicles more affordable, Tesla had&nbsp;slashed the price of the base models&nbsp;of its Model 3 and Model Y vehicles last week. The company cut the price of the Model Y Standard Range by $2,000 to $39,990.</p>\n<p>However, Electrek reported Sunday that the Palo Alto-based company has&nbsp;stopped taking&nbsp;orders for the vehicle and also removed the model from its online configurator.</p>\n<p>The confusing moves on Tesla’s part come just over a month after it launched the Model Y Standard Range.</p>\n<p>Tesla had originally announced the cheapest version of the Model Y in 2019, but Musk said at that time the company would not produce the Standard Range due to its “unacceptably low” range of less than 250 miles.</p>\n<p><b>Price Action</b>: Tesla shares closed more than 8% lower at $714.50 on Monday.</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 Took Off Standard Range Model Y From Its Offerings</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 Took Off Standard Range Model Y From Its Offerings\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Benzinga </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-02-23 18:59</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Tesla Inc.</b>&nbsp;is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elon Musk said Monday.</p>\n<p><b>What Happened</b>: The electric vehicle maker made the move apparently due to the sport utility vehicle’s low range.</p>\n<p>“It is still available off menu, but I don’t think the range, in many drive conditions, yet meets the Tesla standard of excellence,” Musk said on Twitter.</p>\n<p><b>Why It Matters:</b>As part of efforts to make some of its vehicles more affordable, Tesla had&nbsp;slashed the price of the base models&nbsp;of its Model 3 and Model Y vehicles last week. The company cut the price of the Model Y Standard Range by $2,000 to $39,990.</p>\n<p>However, Electrek reported Sunday that the Palo Alto-based company has&nbsp;stopped taking&nbsp;orders for the vehicle and also removed the model from its online configurator.</p>\n<p>The confusing moves on Tesla’s part come just over a month after it launched the Model Y Standard Range.</p>\n<p>Tesla had originally announced the cheapest version of the Model Y in 2019, but Musk said at that time the company would not produce the Standard Range due to its “unacceptably low” range of less than 250 miles.</p>\n<p><b>Price Action</b>: Tesla shares closed more than 8% lower at $714.50 on Monday.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1178144401","content_text":"Tesla Inc. is still offering the Model Y Standard Range, but only as an “off-the-menu” item, CEO Elon Musk said Monday.\nWhat Happened: The electric vehicle maker made the move apparently due to the sport utility vehicle’s low range.\n“It is still available off menu, but I don’t think the range, in many drive conditions, yet meets the Tesla standard of excellence,” Musk said on Twitter.\nWhy It Matters:As part of efforts to make some of its vehicles more affordable, Tesla had slashed the price of the base models of its Model 3 and Model Y vehicles last week. The company cut the price of the Model Y Standard Range by $2,000 to $39,990.\nHowever, Electrek reported Sunday that the Palo Alto-based company has stopped taking orders for the vehicle and also removed the model from its online configurator.\nThe confusing moves on Tesla’s part come just over a month after it launched the Model Y Standard Range.\nTesla had originally announced the cheapest version of the Model Y in 2019, but Musk said at that time the company would not produce the Standard Range due to its “unacceptably low” range of less than 250 miles.\nPrice Action: Tesla shares closed more than 8% lower at $714.50 on Monday.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":53,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":387147150,"gmtCreate":1613731618670,"gmtModify":1704884266171,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/387147150","repostId":"1131795735","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1131795735","pubTimestamp":1613719726,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131795735?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-19 15:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"VW’s Potential Porsche Listing Signals Auto Upheaval Just Starting","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131795735","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment an","content":"<p>(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment and indicate the unprecedented upheaval of the auto industry may only just be beginning.</p>\n<p>The German industrial giant and other incumbents have navigated a global pandemic far better than initially feared, posting robust profits and ample amounts of cash flow. Even still, their valuations are stubbornly low compared to Tesla Inc.</p>\n<p>No automotive CEO has lamented this as openly and frequently as Herbert Diess, who routinely makes headlines by emphasizing the urgency with which VW must move to transform itself. Exploring a Porsche listing is a nod to that need and will be a litmus test of sorts for its future.</p>\n<p>“There’s a loss of power due to the low valuation, which Diess has complained about in the past, and that’s a significant disadvantage,” said Bankhaus Metzler analyst Juergen Pieper. “An IPO of Porsche would be the silver bullet.”</p>\n<p>Porsche’s appeal is obvious to investors. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Michael Dean reckons the 911 maker could stand up a 110 billion-euro ($133 billion) valuation in an initial public offering, roughly 20 billion euros more than investors value VW at now.</p>\n<p>But getting such a deal done won’t be simple because of the institutional hurdles that have stood in the way of other attempts Diess, 62, has made to shake up VW since he became CEO in 2018. Major decisions must be approved by the company’s dominant and oft-at-odds shareholders led by the Porsche and Piech family and German state of Lower Saxony, which tends to side with powerful labor unions.</p>\n<p><b>‘Old-Auto’</b></p>\n<p>What Tesla’s meteoric rise has done, however, is send a clear signal to Diess that extreme measures must be taken to get the capital markets to come around to “old-auto” companies. VW’s review of options for Porsche comes on the heels of Daimler AG deciding to spin off its truck unit after years of management opposition to such a move. Its shares have advanced 13% since then and are hovering around a three-year high.</p>\n<p>Even after the spinoff boost, Daimler is worth about $86 billion, almost matching the valuation of NIO Inc., which brought in roughly one-tenth the revenue last year.</p>\n<p>Investors have taken a dim view of carmakers’ ability to keep up with new entrants unencumbered by sprawling production networks centered around combustion engines. Ford Motor Co. put this reality in stark relief this week when it announced plans to go from selling zero electric vehicles last year in Europe to only offering all-electric passenger cars by the end of the decade.</p>\n<p>It’s clear VW will spare no expense in its efforts to catch up to Tesla, having budgeted a bigger slice of its 150 billion-euro spending budget for investment in electric cars and software in the next five years. As strong as earnings are now, they’ll be strained by all the costs associated with retiring some operations.</p>\n<p>“VW’s balance sheet may not be fit to ensure both accelerated investments in electric and autonomous vehicles and finance an accelerated downsizing of legacy issues,” Jefferies analyst Philippe Houchois said in a note.</p>\n<p><b>Ferrari-Like</b></p>\n<p>Proceeds from listing Porsche could go a long way, since its brand power and luxury cachet are on par with Ferrari NV, one of the rare recent success stories among traditional auto companies. Fiat Chrysler spun off the supercar maker in 2015, and the shares have soared 282% since the IPO.</p>\n<p>The Porsche 911 alone probably exceeds Ferrari’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, according to Dean, the Bloomberg Intelligence analyst. It also has a strong electric story to tell, with the Taycan model that debuted in 2019 portending a shift to about half of sales being battery-powered by 2025.</p>\n<p>Porsche will add a more spacious version of the Taycan to the lineup later this year, then roll out a battery-powered version of the Macan crossover in 2022 that will be based on a new dedicated EV platform being co-developed with Audi.</p>\n<p><b>Nothing New</b></p>\n<p>The idea of a separate listing for Porsche isn’t new as such. Three years ago, Lutz Meschke, chief financial officer of the sports-car maker, pointed out the value potential during an informal briefing at a research-and-development center outside Stuttgart, only to be reprimanded by VW headquarters.</p>\n<p>The opposition inside VW’s boardroom appears to have eased in the wake of an industry transformation many predicted for years but is now is gaining traction at an unprecedented pace. Roughly 10% of passenger vehicles purchased in Europe in the fourth quarter were battery-electric. In December, the share was about 14%.</p>\n<p>Still, a Porsche listing is anything but certain. VW embarked on an asset review half a decade ago, aiming for more decentralized and agile reporting lines and simplify its unwieldy conglomerate structure. Results of the reform efforts have been modest so far, with attempts to separate niche brands such as Ducati and Lamborghini undermined by key stakeholders. The downsized 2019 IPO of trucks unit Traton SE was almost derailed by internal wrangling.</p>\n<p>“You’d think that the Italian business would have been an easier sell internally, and the fact that that didn’t happen begs the question why Porsche would happen,” RBC Capital analyst Tom Narayan said by phone. “It is frustrating for traditional car companies. Tesla can use equity currency to finance growth and grow into their backyard.”</p>","source":"lsy1584095487587","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>VW’s Potential Porsche Listing Signals Auto Upheaval Just Starting</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\">\nVW’s Potential Porsche Listing Signals Auto Upheaval Just Starting\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-19 15:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-potential-porsche-listing-signals-050000564.html><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment and indicate the unprecedented upheaval of the auto industry may only just be beginning.\nThe German ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-potential-porsche-listing-signals-050000564.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"VLKAY":"大众汽车"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/vw-potential-porsche-listing-signals-050000564.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131795735","content_text":"(Bloomberg) -- Volkswagen AG’s potential listing of Porsche would be a strategic watershed moment and indicate the unprecedented upheaval of the auto industry may only just be beginning.\nThe German industrial giant and other incumbents have navigated a global pandemic far better than initially feared, posting robust profits and ample amounts of cash flow. Even still, their valuations are stubbornly low compared to Tesla Inc.\nNo automotive CEO has lamented this as openly and frequently as Herbert Diess, who routinely makes headlines by emphasizing the urgency with which VW must move to transform itself. Exploring a Porsche listing is a nod to that need and will be a litmus test of sorts for its future.\n“There’s a loss of power due to the low valuation, which Diess has complained about in the past, and that’s a significant disadvantage,” said Bankhaus Metzler analyst Juergen Pieper. “An IPO of Porsche would be the silver bullet.”\nPorsche’s appeal is obvious to investors. Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Michael Dean reckons the 911 maker could stand up a 110 billion-euro ($133 billion) valuation in an initial public offering, roughly 20 billion euros more than investors value VW at now.\nBut getting such a deal done won’t be simple because of the institutional hurdles that have stood in the way of other attempts Diess, 62, has made to shake up VW since he became CEO in 2018. Major decisions must be approved by the company’s dominant and oft-at-odds shareholders led by the Porsche and Piech family and German state of Lower Saxony, which tends to side with powerful labor unions.\n‘Old-Auto’\nWhat Tesla’s meteoric rise has done, however, is send a clear signal to Diess that extreme measures must be taken to get the capital markets to come around to “old-auto” companies. VW’s review of options for Porsche comes on the heels of Daimler AG deciding to spin off its truck unit after years of management opposition to such a move. Its shares have advanced 13% since then and are hovering around a three-year high.\nEven after the spinoff boost, Daimler is worth about $86 billion, almost matching the valuation of NIO Inc., which brought in roughly one-tenth the revenue last year.\nInvestors have taken a dim view of carmakers’ ability to keep up with new entrants unencumbered by sprawling production networks centered around combustion engines. Ford Motor Co. put this reality in stark relief this week when it announced plans to go from selling zero electric vehicles last year in Europe to only offering all-electric passenger cars by the end of the decade.\nIt’s clear VW will spare no expense in its efforts to catch up to Tesla, having budgeted a bigger slice of its 150 billion-euro spending budget for investment in electric cars and software in the next five years. As strong as earnings are now, they’ll be strained by all the costs associated with retiring some operations.\n“VW’s balance sheet may not be fit to ensure both accelerated investments in electric and autonomous vehicles and finance an accelerated downsizing of legacy issues,” Jefferies analyst Philippe Houchois said in a note.\nFerrari-Like\nProceeds from listing Porsche could go a long way, since its brand power and luxury cachet are on par with Ferrari NV, one of the rare recent success stories among traditional auto companies. Fiat Chrysler spun off the supercar maker in 2015, and the shares have soared 282% since the IPO.\nThe Porsche 911 alone probably exceeds Ferrari’s earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization, according to Dean, the Bloomberg Intelligence analyst. It also has a strong electric story to tell, with the Taycan model that debuted in 2019 portending a shift to about half of sales being battery-powered by 2025.\nPorsche will add a more spacious version of the Taycan to the lineup later this year, then roll out a battery-powered version of the Macan crossover in 2022 that will be based on a new dedicated EV platform being co-developed with Audi.\nNothing New\nThe idea of a separate listing for Porsche isn’t new as such. Three years ago, Lutz Meschke, chief financial officer of the sports-car maker, pointed out the value potential during an informal briefing at a research-and-development center outside Stuttgart, only to be reprimanded by VW headquarters.\nThe opposition inside VW’s boardroom appears to have eased in the wake of an industry transformation many predicted for years but is now is gaining traction at an unprecedented pace. Roughly 10% of passenger vehicles purchased in Europe in the fourth quarter were battery-electric. In December, the share was about 14%.\nStill, a Porsche listing is anything but certain. VW embarked on an asset review half a decade ago, aiming for more decentralized and agile reporting lines and simplify its unwieldy conglomerate structure. Results of the reform efforts have been modest so far, with attempts to separate niche brands such as Ducati and Lamborghini undermined by key stakeholders. The downsized 2019 IPO of trucks unit Traton SE was almost derailed by internal wrangling.\n“You’d think that the Italian business would have been an easier sell internally, and the fact that that didn’t happen begs the question why Porsche would happen,” RBC Capital analyst Tom Narayan said by phone. “It is frustrating for traditional car companies. Tesla can use equity currency to finance growth and grow into their backyard.”","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":30,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":385638569,"gmtCreate":1613540399851,"gmtModify":1704881791716,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/385638569","repostId":"2112988835","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":103,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":382468140,"gmtCreate":1613476554280,"gmtModify":1704880897618,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Take note","listText":"Take note","text":"Take note","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/382468140","repostId":"1131743000","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":54,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":388513027,"gmtCreate":1613062020669,"gmtModify":1704878103891,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/388513027","repostId":"2110041062","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":64,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":381151562,"gmtCreate":1612948441756,"gmtModify":1704876339956,"author":{"id":"3572356556252042","authorId":"3572356556252042","name":"Jollyjes","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93dd48b063a749217d2948e2a7bda428","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"???","listText":"???","text":"???","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/381151562","repostId":"1113849351","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1113849351","pubTimestamp":1612948278,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1113849351?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-02-10 17:11","market":"us","language":"en","title":"How Tesla Options Can Hedge Against A Market Meltdown","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1113849351","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nTesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through finan","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Tesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through financial markets.</li>\n <li>The bulls argue Tesla is a \"tech company\", but objective reality says Tesla is a structurally unprofitable car company.</li>\n <li>Even assuming flawless execution from here, Tesla shares face over 90% downside.</li>\n <li>This extreme downside risk makes Tesla an excellent candidate for hedging against today's mania.</li>\n <li>I detail an options trade on Tesla designed to hedge against a broader bear market.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>If you had any doubts before, thememe stock frenzyof the last few weeks should make one thing abundantly clear...</p>\n<p>Yes, it's a mania.</p>\n<p>In late December, I wrote about thespeculative excessesbubbling up in the financial markets. Things have only accelerated so far this year, with coordinated short squeezes sending the stocks of distressed businesses like GameStop (GME) and AMC (AMC) into the stratosphere,new record highs in margin debt,or my personal favorite - the relentless buying spree in speculative options among retail traders:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3ed1ad33fcdca94e8598947008f34056\" tg-width=\"785\" tg-height=\"586\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Of course, no one knows when this ends... but we all know how it ends. The recent U-turn in meme stocks thatwiped out $167 billion in a matter of daysis a preview for what awaits the broader financial markets. That's why it's never been more important to have a plan in place for hedging the downside. Some investors prefer cash or government bonds - both fine options. But for those willing to get a little more exotic, buying put options on overvalued stocks provides another alternative.</p>\n<p>First, we must identify a company with enough downside to make the bet worthwhile. And for my money, no better stock meets that criteria than electric vehicle maker Tesla (TSLA). From 2014 through mid-2019, Tesla shares traded in a range between $30 - $80 (split-adjusted). Then, starting in the fourth quarter of 2019, Tesla shares entered ludicrous mode - rallying 1,700% from $50 to a recent price of around $850.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a9b909a9b8f4b39d30a319177076aeab\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"354\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>In today's article, I'll show that virtually nothing changed in Tesla's core business to justify this 17-fold increase in value since Q4 2019. I'll then make the case for why Tesla shares risk revisiting $50, even assuming an aggressive bull case in its future earnings trajectory.</p>\n<p>Given this 95% downside risk in Tesla's share price today, it makes for an excellent candidate to hedge a portfolio against the inevitable unwinding of today's mania. I'll detail a basic put option trade with more than 1,000% upside should this risk materialize going forward.</p>\n<p>Let's begin by first addressing the core thesis bulls use to justify Tesla's stratospheric valuation...</p>\n<p><b>Tesla, More than a Car Company?</b></p>\n<p>There's one simple reason why Tesla bulls need the stock narrative to reflect more just a car company: your average car company trades for less than 0.5x sales. Even Toyota, the world's most profitable mass market automaker, trades at just 0.7x sales. And then, there's Tesla...</p>\n<p>Based on a fully diluted 1.2 billion share count, Tesla currently commands a $1 trillion valuation at $850 per share. This valuation reflects a more than 30x sales multiple, or more expensive that many of the most dominant, and most profitable tech companies on the planet. The bulls argue that this valuation is justified, because Tesla is, in fact, a tech company. Why? Here's one explanation fromCleanTechnica:</p>\n<blockquote>\n What Makes Tesla a Tech Company?Tesla is creating software, a lot of software. Software is at the essence of Tesla’s unique infotainment system, user experience, and autonomous-driving features. Tesla has implemented over-the-air updates for years, while other automakers are just about to try this.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Of course, no one will deny that Tesla vehicles contain a lot of cool software and other technology (just like every other modern-day automobile). There's just one problem: each piece of software Tesla sells has a car attached to it. Examining Tesla's financials reveals no standalone software segment. In fact, 94% of Tesla’s revenue last year came from automotive sales, leasing and service. That, dear readers, makes it a car company:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a4d1d7eb8b41fba5e2fbeb67c89ec10f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"443\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>I'll save the analysis of Tesla's energy business for future articles, except to note that this battery/solar segment suffers even lower margins than Tesla's unprofitable car business. Back to the original point...</p>\n<p>The narrative of Tesla as a \"tech company\" is exactly that - an empty narrative, divorced from financial reality. Tesla is only a tech company in the same way that Toyota or Volkswagen are - they all produce vehicles that contain software and other advanced \"technology\". But this alone doesn’t magically transform the economics of manufacturing automobiles.</p>\n<p>And the truth is, the car business suffers from pretty dismal economics, especially compared with the software business. Perhaps more than any other single factor, it's this basic financial reality that explains why Tesla shares face 95% downside risk, even assuming perfect execution going forward. So let's explore this point in greater detail, by comparing the economics of making cars versus making software...</p>\n<p><b>Software vs Autos: A Tale of Two Industries</b></p>\n<p>The reason why dominant software companies trade at rich valuation multiples of 10-20x sales has nothing to do with so-called \"disruption\" or even innovation. Instead, it's all about the basic business fundamentals of margins, capital requirements and competitive dynamics. Let's consider the case of Microsoft, focusing on the simplified example of its Office software product (ignoring the growing cloud business and other segments for simplicity).</p>\n<p>For starters, a software product like Microsoft Office enjoys tremendous margins. After the upfront investment of developing the software code, the incremental costs of selling each additional unit are miniscule - especially in today's world of downloadable software. Compare this with producing an automobile, which comes with massive variable costs - including both input materials and labor. This critical difference in unit economics explains why software companies like Microsoft earn 30 - 40% net margins versus carmakers like Tesla that suffer from razor thin, single-digit profitability:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c083675b47070a5e8bd130702a838e4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"394\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Next, let's talk competition. Given the fat margins in a product like Microsoft Office, why has no competitor emerged to steal away any meaningful market share in the last 25 years? After all, we're not exactly talking rocket science to replicate the basic Office software code. The answer is all about network effects and switching costs. The world already runs on Office products, like Excel. So if you want to share your spreadsheets with the outside world, for example, you have no choice but to use Excel. Meanwhile, who wants the hassle of learning a new spreadsheet interface, and for what upside? To save maybe $20 per year?</p>\n<p>In short, Microsoft's profitability has nothing to do with narratives like innovation or disruption. It's all about excellent unit economics combined with a virtually impenetrable moat insulating the business against competitors. This moat means Microsoft doesn't need to constantly invest money reinventing the wheel - it merely needs to maintain the status quo functionality of the Office product. So instead of diverting a big chunk of profits back into new product development, those profits instead flow back to shareholders.</p>\n<p>The mass market car business operates on the exact opposite dynamics, where consumers constantly shop around for the latest vehicle features and designs, delivered at the lowest cost. There are no meaningful competitive moats that prevent consumers from switching brands, or from competitors replicating the latest vehicle designs and technology. That's why, instead of the monopoly-like powers enjoyed by the big tech companies, the car business trends towards commoditization over time. We see evidence of this in the brutally low margins, and in the fact that no single car company owns more than 15% of global market share.</p>\n<p>Many of the bulls mistakenly view Tesla's \"first mover\" status in the EV market as some kind of fundamental competitive advantage, but that ignores the basic competitive dynamics of the car business. First mover advantage doesn't really exist in the commoditized world of auto manufacturing, and Tesla is already providing a perfect case study for those who car to look. In the world's largest EV market - Europe - Tesla's market share has collapsed from undisputed leader as recently as 2019 to third place today, thanks to a flood of new EV competition from legacy auto makers:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c2ce6fbcf99c716e30ea76507893618\" tg-width=\"435\" tg-height=\"535\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>As the world's largest and most competitive EV market, Europe is a bellwether for the future competitive pressures Tesla will face in the U.S. and China. The success of the recently launchedFord Mustang Mach-Eshows that legacy automakers can and will produce compelling EVs on par with, or perhaps even better than Tesla's current offerings. The growing competition is showing up in another key metric:Tesla's relentless price cutsacross all vehicle models, including a$3,000 cut in the Model Y priceonly a few months after initial production.</p>\n<p>Clearly, Tesla does not enjoy any meaningful competitive moat, or else it wouldn't be surrendering market share and slashing prices across the board. That means Tesla will need to constantly invest huge sums of money just to keep its head above water earning razor thin margins, as it fights for market share in what is already becoming a highly commoditized EV industry.</p>\n<p>So to summarize...</p>\n<p><b>Tesla: It's a Car Company</b></p>\n<p>Despite the bullish narrative about the tremendous \"technology\" Tesla produces, the objective reality in the financial statements shows that Tesla is a car company which happens to produce software. It doesn't enjoy any of the economic benefits that a pure play software producer, like Microsoft enjoys - things like excellent unit economics and a monopoly-like competitive position.</p>\n<p>The reason companies like Microsoft command valuation premiums of 10x sales or more, is simply because of the high returns on invested capital the business generates. Conversely, even the most profitable car company on the planet - Toyota - trades at less than 1x sales. That's simply a reflection of the brutal economics of high operating costs and intense competitive pressures, which translate into fundamentally low returns on capital. Tesla is not immune from this basic economic reality. If you strip away the hype and just examine the numbers, Tesla looks exactly like your average car company:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/05782c8583b26edd51aeb769b32ced1d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"408\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>But here's the thing - Tesla actually suffers far worse unit economics than your average car company. The chart above reflects the financials of a one-time outlier year of profitability. Before 2020, Tesla lost money in every year of its existence:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/07426fdf2d4f750a787924e8bc48775f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"416\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Tesla's 2020 financial results led many bulls to believe the company had finally turned the corner towards sustained profitability. But here again, the objective reality in the financials tell a different story.</p>\n<p><b>Tesla Still Loses Money Making Cars</b></p>\n<p>The truth is, Tesla lost money making cars in 2020 - just like every other year in its existence. Tesla only managed to manufacture a one-time profit thanks to a bonanza in government-mandated wealth transfers from the very legacy automakers Tesla seeks to \"disrupt\". Let me explain...</p>\n<p>Governments around the globe have established regulations designed to move the auto industry away from the internal combustion engine (ICE) towards zero emission vehicles. These regulations establish a maximum emissions threshold associated with ICE vehicle sales. So companies that sell too many ICE vehicles incur fines if they exceed the emission threshold. Conversely, companies that produce zero emission vehicles - like Tesla - earn regulatory credits, which they can then sell to other manufacturers to offset the emission tallies from ICE vehicle sales.</p>\n<p>The key point here is that Tesla incurs virtually zero costs when selling these regulatory credits. This 100% pure profit margin revenue provides a major boost to Tesla's otherwise dismal financials. Last year, Tesla earned a whopping $1.6 billion in regulatory credits, up more than 150% from the $600 million earned in 2019. Now here's the thing - Tesla only grew its vehicle sales by less than 40% last year. So how do we explain the pace of emission credits massively outpacing its vehicle sales growth?</p>\n<p>One potential answer lies in Tesla's mushrooming accounts receivables balance, which grew by about half a billion dollars last year. In Tesla's10Q filing from Q3 2020, the company describes a large transaction involving regulatory credit sales that contributed to its account receivables balance:</p>\n<blockquote>\n As of September 30, 2020, one entity represented 10% or more of our total accounts receivable balance, which was related to sales of regulatory credits. As of December 31, 2019, no entity represented 10% of our total accounts receivable balance.\n</blockquote>\n<p>Unfortunately, Tesla provides few additional details explaining what's going on with the accounts receivable balance - a subjectDavid Einhorn has publicly questioned Elon Musk about. But if I were to speculate, it looks like Tesla pulled forward a substantial sum of regulatory credit sales associated with future vehicle sales into the 2020 fiscal year, allowing it to print a one-time profit of $721 million. But if we take away these credit sales (including backing out the estimated taxes paid), Tesla's \"profit\" in 2020 transforms into a $568 million loss:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ac66da8f996eb6f7089a2c90e7dda12c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"428\"><span>(Source: Author, using Tesla filings)</span></p>\n<p>In other words, Tesla's core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable. 2020 was not a turning point, but merely an outlier driven by a $1.6 billion bonanza in regulatory emission credits. And the language in its SEC filings indicate that at least some portion of these regulatory credit sales were pulled forward from future years and booked into the accounts receivable balance.</p>\n<p>In any event, the bottom line is clear: instead of disrupting the legacy automakers, in my view Tesla essentially relies on wealth transfers from its profitable competitors to offset the endless red ink flowing from its own manufacturing operations. Of course, the bulls might argue that it doesn't where the money comes from - profit is profit, right? But here's the problem - Tesla's corporate welfare gravy train will soon hit a brick wall, with nearly every major automaker introducingdozens of new EV modelsthis year and next. And that's just the start. By 2025, hundreds of billions of dollars will have been deployed into new EV models by legacy automakers:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/05cf0587c2addcd549edab52ba39f82f\" tg-width=\"594\" tg-height=\"386\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>The coming tsunami of new EVs offerings means regulatory emission credit supply will soar and demand will plunge, and thus killing their value. Within a few short years, Tesla will no longer be able to paper over the losses from its core business with regulatory credit sales. That's not just my opinion - Tesla CFO Zach Kirkhorn confirmed the temporary nature of Tesla's credit sales during the company'sQ2 2020 earnings call:</p>\n<blockquote>\n ...we don't manage the business with the assumption that regulatory credits will contribute in a significant way to the future... eventually, the stream of regulatory credits will reduce.\n</blockquote>\n<p>That means no, not all profit is created equal. An ongoing profit stream from a viable business deserves a valuation multiple. Conversely, a temporary profit stream should be looked through when assessing the long-term value of a business. Since Tesla investors can not count on regulatory credits continuing beyond the next few years, it only makes sense to strip out their impact from the income statement. When you do that, you see that virtually nothing to justify Tesla's manic share price rally in 2020 - the core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35bc24f3b93c083529b291bfa499d17c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"404\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Meanwhile, it's not just the rearview financials in the core business that remain unchanged.Jim Chanos recently notedhow the forward analyst estimates for Tesla's 2022 - 2023 earnings are the same as in mid-2019, back when shares traded for $50:</p>\n<blockquote>\n That kind of tells you a little bit about what's happened in the marketplace in that valuations have just gone parabolic for basically a company that's still, in the eyes of analysts, earning at or below where they thought it would be earning two years ago. That's kind of incredible.\n</blockquote>\n<p>So if neither the trailing business fundamentals nor the forward earnings outlook changed, that leaves only one variable left to explain what sent Tesla shares from $50 to $850: investor psychology. More specifically, manic psychology, fueling a mad scramble for unprofitable companies across the board:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/92ddc266e80382c1f5544c7bf8e51828\" tg-width=\"1280\" tg-height=\"954\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Thus, Tesla's parabolic price appreciation is merely one of the countless cases of speculative excess playing out across the financial markets. Make no mistake, the coming unwind of this excess is a question of when, not if. When that day comes, the fallout will likely spread throughout financial markets, taking down the innocent bystanders as collateral damage. That's why I'm betting against Tesla as a hedge against this coming unwind. And the reason Tesla makes such a compelling candidate for a price re-rating is, well... how many other trillion dollar companies do you know of that don't make money in their core business?</p>\n<p>Take away the regulatory profit stream - which will start happening this year - and there's no reason why Tesla should trade for anything above the net cash on the balance sheet - which currently sits at around $7 billion, or about $6 per share on a fully diluted basis. Meanwhile, what's the upside case in the scenario where Tesla transforms itself into a profitable car company? Let's briefly consider that scenario...</p>\n<p>Tesla Shares Face 90% Downside, Even with Perfect Execution</p>\n<p>Let's suspend disbelief for a moment and give Tesla full credit for flawless execution on both top line growth and bottom line profitability going forward. For the top line growth assumption, let's simply use the forecast fromTesla's most recent earnings release, where the company guided for 50% annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries going forward. Before moving on, I'll simply note that this projection seems wildly optimistic given Tesla's depleted product pipeline. Both the Tesla Semi and Roadster have missed their original production deadlines by over a year, with no clear timeline yet on when production will begin. Meanwhile, the CyberTruck - Tesla's only mass market vehicle in the pipeline -also appears delayeduntil sometime between 2022 - 2023.</p>\n<p>But even if we give Tesla full credit for this growth, one thing is clear - it will require massive capital investment. That means significant future equity issuance. Meanwhile, Tesla pays a significant portion of its employee salary expense via stock compensation, including Elon Musk's record shattering$56 billion stock bonus plan(saving the planet ain't cheap, apparently). The bottom line: equity dilution is a real issue for Tesla shareholders. Over the last five years, Tesla shareholders have suffered more than 50% dilution. Given the healthy cash pile currently on the balance sheet, let's conservatively assume the dilution rate slows to 5% annually going forward, starting from today's 1.2 billion fully diluted share count.</p>\n<p>Next, let's talk earnings. Remember, this is our aggressive bull case... so let's hold nothing back. We'll assume that Tesla transforms from a structurally unprofitable automaker into one of the most profitable car companies on the planet - matching the 6% net margins earned by Toyota, the mass market industry leader in profitability.</p>\n<p>Finally, let's give Tesla a best-in-class 25x earnings multiple. That's a more than 300% valuation premium over the industry average of roughly 8x earnings, and more than twice the earnings multiple on Toyota. Putting it all together, the table below shows the key assumptions and annual price targets out to 2025:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/381ad84108e848b2bfe8fc2001b57800\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"158\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>In other words...</p>\n<p><i><b>Tesla shares face more than 90% downside risk through 2022, even in the aggressive bull case scenario.</b></i></p>\n<p>In future articles, I'll dive deeper into the weeds to show why there's very little chance of Tesla achieving anything close to the targets outlined above. For now, the key takeaway is that even these fantasy fundamentals barely justify a $50 price target.</p>\n<p>Before wrapping up this analysis and moving on to the trade idea, let me address the final key talking point bulls use to justify Tesla's trillion dollar valuation...</p>\n<p>What About the Robotaxis?</p>\n<p>Starting in late 2016,Elon Musk has promisedthe imminent release of Level 5 full self driving capability in all Tesla vehicles. The promise all along has been that, every Tesla rolling off the assembly line contained the necessary hardware for full self driving, and it was only a matter of developing the software to achieve Level 5 autonomy.</p>\n<p>As a brief bit of background, Level 5 is the highest of6 SAE-defined levels of vehicle autonomy(ranging from 0 to 5). A level 5 vehicle can fully navigate through all environments with zero human supervision. Over the last several years, Musk has made a series of autonomy promises to both consumers and investors which have so far failed to materialize. This includes a2019 capital raise, during which Musk promised a future \"robotaxi\" network that would include a million autonomous Tesla's on the road by 2020. Musk has even claimed that Tesla owners could lend their vehicles out to this future robotaxi network andearn as much as $30,000 per year.</p>\n<p>Those were the promises, but here's the reality... more than four years after making the original promise, Tesla is still stuck at Level 2 autonomy. As described in the graphic below, Level 2 autonomy is nothing more than a basic driver assistance feature, which many other automakers currently offer:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f7a572a2cdf3f9b0161fb7fef5abce9f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"415\"><span>Source (notations by author)</span></p>\n<p>Despite the endless string of autonomy promises that have gone unfulfilled for more than four years, Musk remains undeterred in continuing to make aggressive projections to investors. On the company's latest earnings, Musk talked up a forecast of $50 billion in future earnings from the non-existent robotaxi network,as CNBC reports:</p>\n<blockquote>\n On the company’s earnings call on Wednesday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the valuation makes sense if you assume that billions of dollars worth of cars become robotaxis.He said $50 billion in car sales could produce another $50 billion in “incremental profit” with software margins.\n</blockquote>\n<p>In other words - ignore the broken autonomy promises over the last four years, and just assume this non-existent robotaxi network will become one of the world's most profitable businesses in the future. I'll save the full autonomy analysis for the future, except to say - if you buy into this projection, then sure, a trillion dollar valuation for Tesla stock can make sense. I'll happily take the other side of that bet.</p>\n<p>And without a miracle windfall from robotaxis, there's nothing to stop Mr. Market from repricing Tesla as the unprofitable automaker that it is when today's mania unravels. Which brings us to the final point of this article - the Tesla options trade I'm using to hedge against the unraveling of speculative excess in today's market.</p>\n<p><b>A Tesla Hedging Trade with Over 10x Upside</b></p>\n<p>The full discussion of put option mechanics goes beyond the scope of today's article, but for a high level overview, think of put options as the stock market's version of an insurance policy. Just like your monthly car insurance premiums, most put options expire worthless... but during a crash, they can pay off in a big way.</p>\n<p>Put options achieve this pay off structure by providing short exposure to 100 shares of an underlying stock at the option strike price, up until the expiration date. You pay a premium for the privilege of gaining this short exposure, in the form of the upfront price of the option contract. The reason most options expire worthless is because the stock price must move far enough below the strike price to offset the cost of the option, within a limited time frame (i.e. before the expiration date).</p>\n<p>And that brings us to the two key elements of selecting a put option: a target price and a time frame. I just explained the fundamental case for a downside target of $50 in Tesla shares. And from a technical perspective, Tesla based at around $50 in the fourth quarter of 2019 before launching into a parabolic melt-up. The history of parabolic advances says that, when they end, the stock price often revisits the launch pad - which would bring Tesla back to around $50. Meanwhile, in order to give this trade plenty of time, I'm looking out to January 2022 as a rough time frame.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3ca705542b208fa6c8afca0795f80259\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"354\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>So this time frame gives a straight forward decision on the option expiration date of January 21, 2022. Meanwhile, in order to give the position plenty of room to be wrong and still pay off, I'll select a strike price of $300. There's a delicate balance when selecting strike prices - a lower strike would provide a higher return, but also come with a lower probability of pay off. As I'll show below, selecting a $300 strike price still provides the chance of earning a decent return even if my $50 downside target proves too aggressive.</p>\n<p>But before considering the return potential, we have to know the price of the option. At the close of trading on Monday, the $300 strike Tesla put option expiring on January 21, 2022 traded for around $15.75, as shown below:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f18b6b326a4fadbe5a0dae10c0355ac6\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"38\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Given the 100-share multiplier, the $15.75 quoted price translates into a total cost of $1,575 (plus fees/commissions). With this information, we can determine the return potential of the option for a range of scenarios. In the case where Tesla closes at or above $300 by the expiration date, the option expires worthless, resulting in a 100% loss. Alternatively, if Tesla closes below $300, then the option gains $100 in value for every $1 below the $300 strike price. The table below summarizes this range of scenarios:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33d0ec6d30e3088aad23b0bf644728ab\" tg-width=\"453\" tg-height=\"244\"><span>(Note: for simplicity, I assume the option is held until just before the expiration date, and then closed out without exercising the contract).</span></p>\n<p>So in the downside scenario outlined earlier, where Tesla trades down to $50 by the January 2022 expiration date, the option value grows from $1,650 to $25,000 - for a gain of about 1,400%. However, even if this downside target proves too aggressive, there's still scope to make a reasonable return. If shares only fall to, say $200, the option still returns roughly 500%.</p>\n<p>As you can see, it only take a small allocation within an overall portfolio to gain substantial hedging exposure with a trade like this. Of course, recency bias might make $50 or even $200 per share seem outlandish for a stock trading near $850 today. But let's not forget that Tesla was within“single digit weeks” of bankruptcyas recently as 2018. And in May of 2019, topTesla analyst Adam Jonasdescribed the company as “a distressed credit and restructuring story”, with a $10 downside price target (or $2 pre-split).</p>\n<p>The core business remains virtually unchanged from 2018 and 2019 - when terms like \"bankruptcy\" and \"restructuring\" were on the table. The only key difference is that Tesla now enjoys a positive net cash balance, which takes an immediate bankruptcy scenario off the table. But with less than $10 per share in net cash, this should provide little consolation for the bulls as a valuation floor.</p>\n<p>All that really needs to happen is for Tesla to continue on its current path of losing money in its core business, and catastrophic downside is in store for the stock. And that's not just my opinion - Elon Musk himself fully recognizes this risk, as he noted in a recentemail to employees:</p>\n<blockquote>\n Investors are giving us a lot of credit for future profitability but if, at any point, they conclude that’s not going to happen, our stock will immediately get crushed like a souffle under a sledgehammer!\n</blockquote>\n<p>Going forward, my money's on the sledgehammer, not the soufflé.</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>How Tesla Options Can Hedge Against A Market Meltdown</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\">\nHow Tesla Options Can Hedge Against A Market Meltdown\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-02-10 17:11 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4404670-how-tesla-options-can-hedge-against-market-meltdown><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nTesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through financial markets.\nThe bulls argue Tesla is a \"tech company\", but objective reality says Tesla is a ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4404670-how-tesla-options-can-hedge-against-market-meltdown\">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://seekingalpha.com/article/4404670-how-tesla-options-can-hedge-against-market-meltdown","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1113849351","content_text":"Summary\n\nTesla's trillion dollar valuation reflects the irrational exuberance sweeping through financial markets.\nThe bulls argue Tesla is a \"tech company\", but objective reality says Tesla is a structurally unprofitable car company.\nEven assuming flawless execution from here, Tesla shares face over 90% downside.\nThis extreme downside risk makes Tesla an excellent candidate for hedging against today's mania.\nI detail an options trade on Tesla designed to hedge against a broader bear market.\n\nIf you had any doubts before, thememe stock frenzyof the last few weeks should make one thing abundantly clear...\nYes, it's a mania.\nIn late December, I wrote about thespeculative excessesbubbling up in the financial markets. Things have only accelerated so far this year, with coordinated short squeezes sending the stocks of distressed businesses like GameStop (GME) and AMC (AMC) into the stratosphere,new record highs in margin debt,or my personal favorite - the relentless buying spree in speculative options among retail traders:\n\nOf course, no one knows when this ends... but we all know how it ends. The recent U-turn in meme stocks thatwiped out $167 billion in a matter of daysis a preview for what awaits the broader financial markets. That's why it's never been more important to have a plan in place for hedging the downside. Some investors prefer cash or government bonds - both fine options. But for those willing to get a little more exotic, buying put options on overvalued stocks provides another alternative.\nFirst, we must identify a company with enough downside to make the bet worthwhile. And for my money, no better stock meets that criteria than electric vehicle maker Tesla (TSLA). From 2014 through mid-2019, Tesla shares traded in a range between $30 - $80 (split-adjusted). Then, starting in the fourth quarter of 2019, Tesla shares entered ludicrous mode - rallying 1,700% from $50 to a recent price of around $850.\n\nIn today's article, I'll show that virtually nothing changed in Tesla's core business to justify this 17-fold increase in value since Q4 2019. I'll then make the case for why Tesla shares risk revisiting $50, even assuming an aggressive bull case in its future earnings trajectory.\nGiven this 95% downside risk in Tesla's share price today, it makes for an excellent candidate to hedge a portfolio against the inevitable unwinding of today's mania. I'll detail a basic put option trade with more than 1,000% upside should this risk materialize going forward.\nLet's begin by first addressing the core thesis bulls use to justify Tesla's stratospheric valuation...\nTesla, More than a Car Company?\nThere's one simple reason why Tesla bulls need the stock narrative to reflect more just a car company: your average car company trades for less than 0.5x sales. Even Toyota, the world's most profitable mass market automaker, trades at just 0.7x sales. And then, there's Tesla...\nBased on a fully diluted 1.2 billion share count, Tesla currently commands a $1 trillion valuation at $850 per share. This valuation reflects a more than 30x sales multiple, or more expensive that many of the most dominant, and most profitable tech companies on the planet. The bulls argue that this valuation is justified, because Tesla is, in fact, a tech company. Why? Here's one explanation fromCleanTechnica:\n\n What Makes Tesla a Tech Company?Tesla is creating software, a lot of software. Software is at the essence of Tesla’s unique infotainment system, user experience, and autonomous-driving features. Tesla has implemented over-the-air updates for years, while other automakers are just about to try this.\n\nOf course, no one will deny that Tesla vehicles contain a lot of cool software and other technology (just like every other modern-day automobile). There's just one problem: each piece of software Tesla sells has a car attached to it. Examining Tesla's financials reveals no standalone software segment. In fact, 94% of Tesla’s revenue last year came from automotive sales, leasing and service. That, dear readers, makes it a car company:\n\nI'll save the analysis of Tesla's energy business for future articles, except to note that this battery/solar segment suffers even lower margins than Tesla's unprofitable car business. Back to the original point...\nThe narrative of Tesla as a \"tech company\" is exactly that - an empty narrative, divorced from financial reality. Tesla is only a tech company in the same way that Toyota or Volkswagen are - they all produce vehicles that contain software and other advanced \"technology\". But this alone doesn’t magically transform the economics of manufacturing automobiles.\nAnd the truth is, the car business suffers from pretty dismal economics, especially compared with the software business. Perhaps more than any other single factor, it's this basic financial reality that explains why Tesla shares face 95% downside risk, even assuming perfect execution going forward. So let's explore this point in greater detail, by comparing the economics of making cars versus making software...\nSoftware vs Autos: A Tale of Two Industries\nThe reason why dominant software companies trade at rich valuation multiples of 10-20x sales has nothing to do with so-called \"disruption\" or even innovation. Instead, it's all about the basic business fundamentals of margins, capital requirements and competitive dynamics. Let's consider the case of Microsoft, focusing on the simplified example of its Office software product (ignoring the growing cloud business and other segments for simplicity).\nFor starters, a software product like Microsoft Office enjoys tremendous margins. After the upfront investment of developing the software code, the incremental costs of selling each additional unit are miniscule - especially in today's world of downloadable software. Compare this with producing an automobile, which comes with massive variable costs - including both input materials and labor. This critical difference in unit economics explains why software companies like Microsoft earn 30 - 40% net margins versus carmakers like Tesla that suffer from razor thin, single-digit profitability:\n\nNext, let's talk competition. Given the fat margins in a product like Microsoft Office, why has no competitor emerged to steal away any meaningful market share in the last 25 years? After all, we're not exactly talking rocket science to replicate the basic Office software code. The answer is all about network effects and switching costs. The world already runs on Office products, like Excel. So if you want to share your spreadsheets with the outside world, for example, you have no choice but to use Excel. Meanwhile, who wants the hassle of learning a new spreadsheet interface, and for what upside? To save maybe $20 per year?\nIn short, Microsoft's profitability has nothing to do with narratives like innovation or disruption. It's all about excellent unit economics combined with a virtually impenetrable moat insulating the business against competitors. This moat means Microsoft doesn't need to constantly invest money reinventing the wheel - it merely needs to maintain the status quo functionality of the Office product. So instead of diverting a big chunk of profits back into new product development, those profits instead flow back to shareholders.\nThe mass market car business operates on the exact opposite dynamics, where consumers constantly shop around for the latest vehicle features and designs, delivered at the lowest cost. There are no meaningful competitive moats that prevent consumers from switching brands, or from competitors replicating the latest vehicle designs and technology. That's why, instead of the monopoly-like powers enjoyed by the big tech companies, the car business trends towards commoditization over time. We see evidence of this in the brutally low margins, and in the fact that no single car company owns more than 15% of global market share.\nMany of the bulls mistakenly view Tesla's \"first mover\" status in the EV market as some kind of fundamental competitive advantage, but that ignores the basic competitive dynamics of the car business. First mover advantage doesn't really exist in the commoditized world of auto manufacturing, and Tesla is already providing a perfect case study for those who car to look. In the world's largest EV market - Europe - Tesla's market share has collapsed from undisputed leader as recently as 2019 to third place today, thanks to a flood of new EV competition from legacy auto makers:\n\nAs the world's largest and most competitive EV market, Europe is a bellwether for the future competitive pressures Tesla will face in the U.S. and China. The success of the recently launchedFord Mustang Mach-Eshows that legacy automakers can and will produce compelling EVs on par with, or perhaps even better than Tesla's current offerings. The growing competition is showing up in another key metric:Tesla's relentless price cutsacross all vehicle models, including a$3,000 cut in the Model Y priceonly a few months after initial production.\nClearly, Tesla does not enjoy any meaningful competitive moat, or else it wouldn't be surrendering market share and slashing prices across the board. That means Tesla will need to constantly invest huge sums of money just to keep its head above water earning razor thin margins, as it fights for market share in what is already becoming a highly commoditized EV industry.\nSo to summarize...\nTesla: It's a Car Company\nDespite the bullish narrative about the tremendous \"technology\" Tesla produces, the objective reality in the financial statements shows that Tesla is a car company which happens to produce software. It doesn't enjoy any of the economic benefits that a pure play software producer, like Microsoft enjoys - things like excellent unit economics and a monopoly-like competitive position.\nThe reason companies like Microsoft command valuation premiums of 10x sales or more, is simply because of the high returns on invested capital the business generates. Conversely, even the most profitable car company on the planet - Toyota - trades at less than 1x sales. That's simply a reflection of the brutal economics of high operating costs and intense competitive pressures, which translate into fundamentally low returns on capital. Tesla is not immune from this basic economic reality. If you strip away the hype and just examine the numbers, Tesla looks exactly like your average car company:\n\nBut here's the thing - Tesla actually suffers far worse unit economics than your average car company. The chart above reflects the financials of a one-time outlier year of profitability. Before 2020, Tesla lost money in every year of its existence:\nTesla's 2020 financial results led many bulls to believe the company had finally turned the corner towards sustained profitability. But here again, the objective reality in the financials tell a different story.\nTesla Still Loses Money Making Cars\nThe truth is, Tesla lost money making cars in 2020 - just like every other year in its existence. Tesla only managed to manufacture a one-time profit thanks to a bonanza in government-mandated wealth transfers from the very legacy automakers Tesla seeks to \"disrupt\". Let me explain...\nGovernments around the globe have established regulations designed to move the auto industry away from the internal combustion engine (ICE) towards zero emission vehicles. These regulations establish a maximum emissions threshold associated with ICE vehicle sales. So companies that sell too many ICE vehicles incur fines if they exceed the emission threshold. Conversely, companies that produce zero emission vehicles - like Tesla - earn regulatory credits, which they can then sell to other manufacturers to offset the emission tallies from ICE vehicle sales.\nThe key point here is that Tesla incurs virtually zero costs when selling these regulatory credits. This 100% pure profit margin revenue provides a major boost to Tesla's otherwise dismal financials. Last year, Tesla earned a whopping $1.6 billion in regulatory credits, up more than 150% from the $600 million earned in 2019. Now here's the thing - Tesla only grew its vehicle sales by less than 40% last year. So how do we explain the pace of emission credits massively outpacing its vehicle sales growth?\nOne potential answer lies in Tesla's mushrooming accounts receivables balance, which grew by about half a billion dollars last year. In Tesla's10Q filing from Q3 2020, the company describes a large transaction involving regulatory credit sales that contributed to its account receivables balance:\n\n As of September 30, 2020, one entity represented 10% or more of our total accounts receivable balance, which was related to sales of regulatory credits. As of December 31, 2019, no entity represented 10% of our total accounts receivable balance.\n\nUnfortunately, Tesla provides few additional details explaining what's going on with the accounts receivable balance - a subjectDavid Einhorn has publicly questioned Elon Musk about. But if I were to speculate, it looks like Tesla pulled forward a substantial sum of regulatory credit sales associated with future vehicle sales into the 2020 fiscal year, allowing it to print a one-time profit of $721 million. But if we take away these credit sales (including backing out the estimated taxes paid), Tesla's \"profit\" in 2020 transforms into a $568 million loss:\n(Source: Author, using Tesla filings)\nIn other words, Tesla's core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable. 2020 was not a turning point, but merely an outlier driven by a $1.6 billion bonanza in regulatory emission credits. And the language in its SEC filings indicate that at least some portion of these regulatory credit sales were pulled forward from future years and booked into the accounts receivable balance.\nIn any event, the bottom line is clear: instead of disrupting the legacy automakers, in my view Tesla essentially relies on wealth transfers from its profitable competitors to offset the endless red ink flowing from its own manufacturing operations. Of course, the bulls might argue that it doesn't where the money comes from - profit is profit, right? But here's the problem - Tesla's corporate welfare gravy train will soon hit a brick wall, with nearly every major automaker introducingdozens of new EV modelsthis year and next. And that's just the start. By 2025, hundreds of billions of dollars will have been deployed into new EV models by legacy automakers:\n\nThe coming tsunami of new EVs offerings means regulatory emission credit supply will soar and demand will plunge, and thus killing their value. Within a few short years, Tesla will no longer be able to paper over the losses from its core business with regulatory credit sales. That's not just my opinion - Tesla CFO Zach Kirkhorn confirmed the temporary nature of Tesla's credit sales during the company'sQ2 2020 earnings call:\n\n ...we don't manage the business with the assumption that regulatory credits will contribute in a significant way to the future... eventually, the stream of regulatory credits will reduce.\n\nThat means no, not all profit is created equal. An ongoing profit stream from a viable business deserves a valuation multiple. Conversely, a temporary profit stream should be looked through when assessing the long-term value of a business. Since Tesla investors can not count on regulatory credits continuing beyond the next few years, it only makes sense to strip out their impact from the income statement. When you do that, you see that virtually nothing to justify Tesla's manic share price rally in 2020 - the core manufacturing business remains structurally unprofitable:\n\nMeanwhile, it's not just the rearview financials in the core business that remain unchanged.Jim Chanos recently notedhow the forward analyst estimates for Tesla's 2022 - 2023 earnings are the same as in mid-2019, back when shares traded for $50:\n\n That kind of tells you a little bit about what's happened in the marketplace in that valuations have just gone parabolic for basically a company that's still, in the eyes of analysts, earning at or below where they thought it would be earning two years ago. That's kind of incredible.\n\nSo if neither the trailing business fundamentals nor the forward earnings outlook changed, that leaves only one variable left to explain what sent Tesla shares from $50 to $850: investor psychology. More specifically, manic psychology, fueling a mad scramble for unprofitable companies across the board:\n\nThus, Tesla's parabolic price appreciation is merely one of the countless cases of speculative excess playing out across the financial markets. Make no mistake, the coming unwind of this excess is a question of when, not if. When that day comes, the fallout will likely spread throughout financial markets, taking down the innocent bystanders as collateral damage. That's why I'm betting against Tesla as a hedge against this coming unwind. And the reason Tesla makes such a compelling candidate for a price re-rating is, well... how many other trillion dollar companies do you know of that don't make money in their core business?\nTake away the regulatory profit stream - which will start happening this year - and there's no reason why Tesla should trade for anything above the net cash on the balance sheet - which currently sits at around $7 billion, or about $6 per share on a fully diluted basis. Meanwhile, what's the upside case in the scenario where Tesla transforms itself into a profitable car company? Let's briefly consider that scenario...\nTesla Shares Face 90% Downside, Even with Perfect Execution\nLet's suspend disbelief for a moment and give Tesla full credit for flawless execution on both top line growth and bottom line profitability going forward. For the top line growth assumption, let's simply use the forecast fromTesla's most recent earnings release, where the company guided for 50% annual growth rate in vehicle deliveries going forward. Before moving on, I'll simply note that this projection seems wildly optimistic given Tesla's depleted product pipeline. Both the Tesla Semi and Roadster have missed their original production deadlines by over a year, with no clear timeline yet on when production will begin. Meanwhile, the CyberTruck - Tesla's only mass market vehicle in the pipeline -also appears delayeduntil sometime between 2022 - 2023.\nBut even if we give Tesla full credit for this growth, one thing is clear - it will require massive capital investment. That means significant future equity issuance. Meanwhile, Tesla pays a significant portion of its employee salary expense via stock compensation, including Elon Musk's record shattering$56 billion stock bonus plan(saving the planet ain't cheap, apparently). The bottom line: equity dilution is a real issue for Tesla shareholders. Over the last five years, Tesla shareholders have suffered more than 50% dilution. Given the healthy cash pile currently on the balance sheet, let's conservatively assume the dilution rate slows to 5% annually going forward, starting from today's 1.2 billion fully diluted share count.\nNext, let's talk earnings. Remember, this is our aggressive bull case... so let's hold nothing back. We'll assume that Tesla transforms from a structurally unprofitable automaker into one of the most profitable car companies on the planet - matching the 6% net margins earned by Toyota, the mass market industry leader in profitability.\nFinally, let's give Tesla a best-in-class 25x earnings multiple. That's a more than 300% valuation premium over the industry average of roughly 8x earnings, and more than twice the earnings multiple on Toyota. Putting it all together, the table below shows the key assumptions and annual price targets out to 2025:\n\nIn other words...\nTesla shares face more than 90% downside risk through 2022, even in the aggressive bull case scenario.\nIn future articles, I'll dive deeper into the weeds to show why there's very little chance of Tesla achieving anything close to the targets outlined above. For now, the key takeaway is that even these fantasy fundamentals barely justify a $50 price target.\nBefore wrapping up this analysis and moving on to the trade idea, let me address the final key talking point bulls use to justify Tesla's trillion dollar valuation...\nWhat About the Robotaxis?\nStarting in late 2016,Elon Musk has promisedthe imminent release of Level 5 full self driving capability in all Tesla vehicles. The promise all along has been that, every Tesla rolling off the assembly line contained the necessary hardware for full self driving, and it was only a matter of developing the software to achieve Level 5 autonomy.\nAs a brief bit of background, Level 5 is the highest of6 SAE-defined levels of vehicle autonomy(ranging from 0 to 5). A level 5 vehicle can fully navigate through all environments with zero human supervision. Over the last several years, Musk has made a series of autonomy promises to both consumers and investors which have so far failed to materialize. This includes a2019 capital raise, during which Musk promised a future \"robotaxi\" network that would include a million autonomous Tesla's on the road by 2020. Musk has even claimed that Tesla owners could lend their vehicles out to this future robotaxi network andearn as much as $30,000 per year.\nThose were the promises, but here's the reality... more than four years after making the original promise, Tesla is still stuck at Level 2 autonomy. As described in the graphic below, Level 2 autonomy is nothing more than a basic driver assistance feature, which many other automakers currently offer:\nSource (notations by author)\nDespite the endless string of autonomy promises that have gone unfulfilled for more than four years, Musk remains undeterred in continuing to make aggressive projections to investors. On the company's latest earnings, Musk talked up a forecast of $50 billion in future earnings from the non-existent robotaxi network,as CNBC reports:\n\n On the company’s earnings call on Wednesday, Tesla CEO Elon Musk said the valuation makes sense if you assume that billions of dollars worth of cars become robotaxis.He said $50 billion in car sales could produce another $50 billion in “incremental profit” with software margins.\n\nIn other words - ignore the broken autonomy promises over the last four years, and just assume this non-existent robotaxi network will become one of the world's most profitable businesses in the future. I'll save the full autonomy analysis for the future, except to say - if you buy into this projection, then sure, a trillion dollar valuation for Tesla stock can make sense. I'll happily take the other side of that bet.\nAnd without a miracle windfall from robotaxis, there's nothing to stop Mr. Market from repricing Tesla as the unprofitable automaker that it is when today's mania unravels. Which brings us to the final point of this article - the Tesla options trade I'm using to hedge against the unraveling of speculative excess in today's market.\nA Tesla Hedging Trade with Over 10x Upside\nThe full discussion of put option mechanics goes beyond the scope of today's article, but for a high level overview, think of put options as the stock market's version of an insurance policy. Just like your monthly car insurance premiums, most put options expire worthless... but during a crash, they can pay off in a big way.\nPut options achieve this pay off structure by providing short exposure to 100 shares of an underlying stock at the option strike price, up until the expiration date. You pay a premium for the privilege of gaining this short exposure, in the form of the upfront price of the option contract. The reason most options expire worthless is because the stock price must move far enough below the strike price to offset the cost of the option, within a limited time frame (i.e. before the expiration date).\nAnd that brings us to the two key elements of selecting a put option: a target price and a time frame. I just explained the fundamental case for a downside target of $50 in Tesla shares. And from a technical perspective, Tesla based at around $50 in the fourth quarter of 2019 before launching into a parabolic melt-up. The history of parabolic advances says that, when they end, the stock price often revisits the launch pad - which would bring Tesla back to around $50. Meanwhile, in order to give this trade plenty of time, I'm looking out to January 2022 as a rough time frame.\n\nSo this time frame gives a straight forward decision on the option expiration date of January 21, 2022. Meanwhile, in order to give the position plenty of room to be wrong and still pay off, I'll select a strike price of $300. There's a delicate balance when selecting strike prices - a lower strike would provide a higher return, but also come with a lower probability of pay off. As I'll show below, selecting a $300 strike price still provides the chance of earning a decent return even if my $50 downside target proves too aggressive.\nBut before considering the return potential, we have to know the price of the option. At the close of trading on Monday, the $300 strike Tesla put option expiring on January 21, 2022 traded for around $15.75, as shown below:\n\nGiven the 100-share multiplier, the $15.75 quoted price translates into a total cost of $1,575 (plus fees/commissions). With this information, we can determine the return potential of the option for a range of scenarios. In the case where Tesla closes at or above $300 by the expiration date, the option expires worthless, resulting in a 100% loss. Alternatively, if Tesla closes below $300, then the option gains $100 in value for every $1 below the $300 strike price. The table below summarizes this range of scenarios:\n(Note: for simplicity, I assume the option is held until just before the expiration date, and then closed out without exercising the contract).\nSo in the downside scenario outlined earlier, where Tesla trades down to $50 by the January 2022 expiration date, the option value grows from $1,650 to $25,000 - for a gain of about 1,400%. However, even if this downside target proves too aggressive, there's still scope to make a reasonable return. If shares only fall to, say $200, the option still returns roughly 500%.\nAs you can see, it only take a small allocation within an overall portfolio to gain substantial hedging exposure with a trade like this. Of course, recency bias might make $50 or even $200 per share seem outlandish for a stock trading near $850 today. But let's not forget that Tesla was within“single digit weeks” of bankruptcyas recently as 2018. And in May of 2019, topTesla analyst Adam Jonasdescribed the company as “a distressed credit and restructuring story”, with a $10 downside price target (or $2 pre-split).\nThe core business remains virtually unchanged from 2018 and 2019 - when terms like \"bankruptcy\" and \"restructuring\" were on the table. The only key difference is that Tesla now enjoys a positive net cash balance, which takes an immediate bankruptcy scenario off the table. But with less than $10 per share in net cash, this should provide little consolation for the bulls as a valuation floor.\nAll that really needs to happen is for Tesla to continue on its current path of losing money in its core business, and catastrophic downside is in store for the stock. And that's not just my opinion - Elon Musk himself fully recognizes this risk, as he noted in a recentemail to employees:\n\n Investors are giving us a lot of credit for future profitability but if, at any point, they conclude that’s not going to happen, our stock will immediately get crushed like a souffle under a sledgehammer!\n\nGoing forward, my money's on the sledgehammer, not the soufflé.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":42,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}