JasmineQ personal page - To The Moon

JasmineQ

JasmineQ

No personal profile

12Follow

2Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-05-08

Great ariticle, would you like to share it?

Apple Vs. Tesla Stock: Which Is A Buy Now

2021-05-02

Comment for Comment......................

U.S. labor costs accelerate in the first quarter

2021-05-02

Like and comment

Europe's antitrust crackdown on Apple hints at what's coming for the company in the U.S.

2021-04-27

Good to know that

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-04-27

Oh......................

Tesla posts record net income of $438 million, revenue surges by 74%

2021-03-21

Great

Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next

2021-03-21

Great

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-03-21

Good.

Apple Stock Is Going Down, One Analyst Says. Here’s Why

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3572480152290251","uuid":"3572480152290251","gmtCreate":1609386129420,"gmtModify":1616290577175,"name":"JasmineQ","pinyin":"jasmineq","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":2,"headSize":12,"tweetSize":8,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":0,"name":"","nameTw":"","represent":"","factor":"","iconColor":"","bgColor":""},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"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":"2023.09.30","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-1","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Elite Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 30","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ab0f87127c854ce3191a752d57b46edc","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9835ce48b8c8743566d344ac7a7ba8c","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76754b53ce7a90019f132c1d2fbc698f","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"60.67%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":3,"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":107166571,"gmtCreate":1620453576893,"gmtModify":1704343995072,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","listText":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","text":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/107166571","repostId":"1117135949","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1117135949","pubTimestamp":1620444564,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1117135949?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-05-08 11:29","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple Vs. Tesla Stock: Which Is A Buy Now","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1117135949","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"After Apple confirmed its EV ambitions, investors began to compare its valuation metrics with Tesla.Apple certainly looks cheap and, I believe, could be described as a screaming buy. However, in comparison, it doesn't necessarily follow that Tesla stock is expensive.The quant ratings for AAPL and TSLA reveal some interesting data which I will share in this article.Quarterly fluctuations could obfuscate the true potential of Tesla and make investors lose track of its long-term story.Apple Inc.  a","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><ul><li>After Apple confirmed its EV ambitions, investors began to compare its valuation metrics with Tesla.</li><li>Apple certainly looks cheap and, I believe, could be described as a screaming buy. However, in comparison, it doesn't necessarily follow that Tesla stock is expensive.</li><li>The quant ratings for AAPL and TSLA reveal some interesting data which I will share in this article.</li><li>Quarterly fluctuations&nbsp;could obfuscate the true potential of Tesla and make investors lose track of its long-term story.</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/49a4622a8f86f15edd3081862ef92746\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Photo by Radiomoscow/iStock via Getty ImagesArticle motivation</span></p><p>Apple Inc. (AAPL) and Tesla Inc. (TSLA) seem as contrasting as treacle and water whether we are comparing their business models or the stock. However, after Apple confirmed that it was indeed working tolaunch a carin three to six years, market players have begun to speak about the two tech titans in the same breath.</p><p>In this article, I will compare the valuations of Apple and Tesla as well as discuss their respective stock performance. I will also discuss the suitability of AAPL and TSLA to different types of long-term investors.</p><p><b>Valuation comparison of Apple and Tesla</b></p><p>From the trough in March 2020 following the market panic over the COVID-19 outbreak, Tesla stock climbed more than 1000 percent higher by January this year. After the swoon in March, TSLA is still up over 800 percent, far outperforming Apple stock which had<i>merely</i>doubled in the same period.</p><p>Judging by the percentage returns, TSLA is the undisputed champion over AAPL. However, it's important to note that more than $1 trillion in market capitalization was added to Apple since mid-March of last year, while Tesla scored a smaller increase of $582 million.</p><p>At its current market cap of $648.9 billion, Tesla, Inc. is less than one-third the size of Apple, Inc. Despite the massive media attention it receives and the outsized influence its chief executive officer Elon Musk has on the investing community, Tesla only has 72 percent of the market cap of social media giant Facebook (FB).</p><p>In other words, while Apple stock has broken the psychological market cap of both one trillion and two trillion dollars, Tesla stock is still some distance from being \"obstructed\" by the first trillion-barrier. Considering that TSLA had in January surpassed FB stock in terms of market cap, should that happen again, we could see it potentially breaching the one trillion dollars level for the first time.</p><p>Critics could argue that would bring Tesla's price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio to above a thousand times, a mind-boggling number in itself. In contrast, Apple's P/E ratio is currently at 28.7 times, a paltry number in comparison. However, for much of TSLA's trading history, the stock didn't even have a P/E ratio to speak of, as the company was not profitable for many years. Yet, the lack of a P/E ratio did not deter investors from piling in.</p><p>Based on the price-to-sales ratio, if Tesla Inc. reclaims the 30 times record achieved in January, its market cap would indeed be within reach of the one trillion dollar mark, coming at around $930 million. At the same time, comparing Apple with Tesla, the former certainly looks \"cheap\" and could be described as a \"screaming buy\". I have made the description in quotations as that can be said of many stocks when compared with Tesla.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0237824d55d08bcaac64f42aca9d9863\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"495\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Hence, it's more instructive to compare Apple Inc. with itself. In the past 10 years, its P/E ratio is an average of 17 times. The current P/E of 29 times is, thus, a leap over the historical average, even though it has come off the recent peaks of over 40 times in the past year.</p><p>For those who look beyond the income statements and into the cash flows, Apple's $90.5 billion free cash flow [FCF] outshines Tesla's $2.4 billion by an extremely wide margin. Putting the chasm in perspective, AAPL's price-to-FCF ratio at 24 times is ultra-low relative to TSLA's 310 times.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/960a9aac76fa63f1641c99e5f6552848\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"494\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><b>Should long-term investors go for AAPL or TSLA?</b></p><p>At first glance, it looks to me that Apple stock is a good value buy. However, looking at the quant grade for value, AAPL's score of D+ is not that much better than TSLA's F. Why is this so? The primary reason is that quant ratings are based on the individual stock's metrics relative to its industry. Apple, Inc. belongs to the Information Technology sector, while Tesla, Inc. falls under Consumer Discretionary.</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6387a75dbe764282d1160dac9c93e1c3\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"271\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span> Source: Seeking Alpha Premium</span></p><p>For growth, AAPL scored a poor grade of C- while TSLA has a stellar A+. While this is also judged according to their respective sectors, readers can see in the following table that TSLA's growth metrics are significantly superior to AAPL and consistently so.</p><p>For instance, Tesla's revenue on a 5-year CAGR basis is 53.2 percent, several times that of Apple's 7.4 percent. If Tesla's 50.8 percent EBITDA year-on-year growth is impressive, the 63.5 percent EBITDA growth on a forward basis would be incredible. In contrast, analysts are forecasting Apple's EBITDA growth on a forward basis to be more than halved. TSLA grew its tangible book value by 77.2 percent CAGR in the past three years while AAPL saw a contraction of 18.3 percent in the same period.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Growth Metrics</th><th>AAPL</th><th>TSLA</th></tr><tr><th>Revenue Growth (YoY)</th><td><p>21.43%</p></td><td><p>38.11%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Revenue Growth (FWD)</th><td><p>12.19%</p></td><td><p>39.54%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Revenue 3 Year [CAGR]</th><td><p>9.56%</p></td><td><p>42.31%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Revenue 5 Year [CAGR]</th><td><p>7.42%</p></td><td><p>53.24%</p></td></tr><tr><th>EBITDA Growth (YoY)</th><td><p>29.12%</p></td><td><p>50.80%</p></td></tr><tr><th>EBITDA Growth (FWD)</th><td><p>12.96%</p></td><td><p>63.49%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Tang Book Value 3 Year [CAGR]</th><td><p>-18.31%</p></td><td><p>77.24%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Total Assets 3 Year [CAGR]</th><td><p>-2.83%</p></td><td><p>24.77%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>The saving grace for Apple Inc., or its attraction, is its superior profitability metrics. Its gross profit margin is nearly double that of Tesla. Further down the income statement, Apple's net income margin at 23.5 percent is more than 7 times higher than Tesla's.</p><p>AAPL's Return on Equity is a staggering 103.4 percent as compared to TSLA's 7.2 percent. The disparity is expected to widen as Apple continues to execute its share buyback program, shrinking its equity, while Tesla issues new shares to fund its growth. Its Return on Assets at 16.9 percent is several times that of Tesla's 3.0 percent. Its Return on Total Capital at 28.6 percent is 6.7 times that of Tesla's 4.3 percent.</p><table><tbody><tr><th>Profitability Metrics</th><th>AAPL</th><th>TSLA</th></tr><tr><th>Gross Profit Margin</th><td><p>39.88%</p></td><td><p>21.18%</p></td></tr><tr><th>EBIT Margin</th><td><p>27.32%</p></td><td><p>6.01%</p></td></tr><tr><th>EBITDA Margin</th><td><p>30.68%</p></td><td><p>12.66%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Net Income Margin</th><td><p>23.45%</p></td><td><p>3.18%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Levered FCF Margin</th><td><p>24.62%</p></td><td><p>9.84%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Return on Equity</th><td><p>103.40%</p></td><td><p>7.16%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Return on Assets</th><td><p>16.90%</p></td><td><p>2.99%</p></td></tr><tr><th>Return on Total Capital</th><td><p>28.64%</p></td><td><p>4.30%</p></td></tr></tbody></table><p>With this underperformance, should long-term investors ignore Tesla? The answer depends on one's holding power and the ability to stay calm amid the volatility that TSLA stock has been known for. According to Wall Street analysts, Tesla's 2020's earnings per share [EPS] of $2.24 was just a small fraction of what the EV-maker could deliver in the next ten years.</p><p>By 2030, Tesla, Inc. is projected to mint $34.48 in EPS on a consensus basis, giving it a forward P/E ratio of 19.5 times. This will be a dramatic reduction from the current P/E ratio of over 300 times. Quarter-on-quarter, however, the picture might not be as clear as production hiccups from possible mishaps, shortage of components such as semiconductor chips, ramp-up challenges, etc. could obfuscate its true potential and make investors lose track of its long-term story.</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb752e67473741117767ed857451476\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"278\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Source: Seeking Alpha Premium</span></p><p>Of course, if you are looking for dividends, TSLA is one stock you can forget about investing in. On the contrary, AAPL offers dividend investors a fairly consistent dividend and an excellent \"dividend safety\", even if the dividend growth is barely a passing grade and the dividend yield is a disappointing D+ grade. A conservative investor wouldn't complain about Apple's dividend.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1e20422c2e173566aff6486316a750ef\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"227\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><b>How might Apple's introduction of an electric car affect Tesla?</b></p><p>There are more similarities between Apple and Tesla than the duo being in the electric car business three-to-five years down the road. Both American firms are already entrenched in China for the manufacturing of products as well as an important market. That makes the two companies subjected to thegeopolitical tensions brewing intenselybetween the U.S. and China.</p><p>Perhaps cognizant of the risk of over-reliance on China, Apple's rumored partners were Koreans. Hyundai Motor (OTC:HYMLF)(OTCPK:HYMTF)(OTCPK:HYMPY) and its subsidiary Kia Motors (OTCPK:KIMTF) were first touted asprime candidates. Subsequently, Apple wasreportedto be on the verge of signing an agreement with a joint venture of South Korea's LG and Magna, a Canadian auto supplier.</p><p>If true, one of Apple's strengths over Tesla in the EV business would be its avoidance of China as a manufacturing base. I have argued previously that Tesla woulddouble down on producing cars in Chinafollowing its favorable Shanghai experience.</p><p>On the mechanics of EVs as a product, however, Tesla is expected to maintain its clear lead. Tesla has produced its cars in-house for more than a decade and accumulated a wealth of manufacturing techniques and experience along the way. Although critics charged that its profitability was largely derived from the sale of high-margin regulatory credits, the richness of data collected without charge from drivers who<i>paid</i>for the privilege to own Tesla cars is often brushed off.</p><p>It is this Big Data pool Tesla possesses that enables it to accelerate its autonomous ride-hailing ambitions. On the other hand, even though there are many more Apple users than owners of Tesla cars, Apple's self-driving project only has its own trials to guide its development. This hampers the progress of a rollout of ride-hailing services and diminishes its threat to Tesla.</p><p>Nevertheless, Apple can bank on its ecosystem where different products and accessories connect in a seamless fashion. On the other hand, however pleasant a driving experience it is for Tesla car owners, its in-car offerings are limited and mostly outsourced.</p><p><b>Apple vs Tesla stock: final thoughts</b></p><p>Both Apple and Tesla stocks are well covered by analysts. The consensus Wall Street rating is \"bullish\" for Apple and \"neutral\" for Tesla. What's telling is that AAPL has an upside of around 23.5 percent to its price target. In contrast, TSLA has a paltry upside of only 2.6 percent at the moment.</p><p>As presented in this article, Apple's valuation multiples are well deserved given the good profitability it enjoys. Nevertheless, I wish to reiterate that Apple stock seems good as a value buy based only on the comparison to Tesla. AAPL, as illustrated earlier, is trading at higher valuation metrics than in the past.</p><p>As the company releases some highly anticipated progress in its Apple Car project, investors could become excited and accord it with EV-like multiples. Meanwhile, its existing offerings continue to keep users within its ecosystem.</p><p>In contrast, Tesla's valuation is rather rich, especially so if the so-called rotation trade is indeed in full swing. Yet, its earnings potential over the next 10 years seems to suggest TSLA is in the early innings, provided it can overcome the gradual loss of its EV credit buyers, as we have realized from theannouncementof Stellantis (STLA) this week. Thus, it is hard to pick a winner here but readers can decide based on their risk profile and invest accordingly.</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>Apple Vs. Tesla Stock: Which Is A Buy Now</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\">\nApple Vs. Tesla Stock: Which Is A Buy Now\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-05-08 11:29 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4425472-apple-vs-tesla-stock-buy-now><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>SummaryAfter Apple confirmed its EV ambitions, investors began to compare its valuation metrics with Tesla.Apple certainly looks cheap and, I believe, could be described as a screaming buy. However, ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4425472-apple-vs-tesla-stock-buy-now\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4425472-apple-vs-tesla-stock-buy-now","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5a36db9d73b4222bc376d24ccc48c8a4","article_id":"1117135949","content_text":"SummaryAfter Apple confirmed its EV ambitions, investors began to compare its valuation metrics with Tesla.Apple certainly looks cheap and, I believe, could be described as a screaming buy. However, in comparison, it doesn't necessarily follow that Tesla stock is expensive.The quant ratings for AAPL and TSLA reveal some interesting data which I will share in this article.Quarterly fluctuations could obfuscate the true potential of Tesla and make investors lose track of its long-term story.Photo by Radiomoscow/iStock via Getty ImagesArticle motivationApple Inc. (AAPL) and Tesla Inc. (TSLA) seem as contrasting as treacle and water whether we are comparing their business models or the stock. However, after Apple confirmed that it was indeed working tolaunch a carin three to six years, market players have begun to speak about the two tech titans in the same breath.In this article, I will compare the valuations of Apple and Tesla as well as discuss their respective stock performance. I will also discuss the suitability of AAPL and TSLA to different types of long-term investors.Valuation comparison of Apple and TeslaFrom the trough in March 2020 following the market panic over the COVID-19 outbreak, Tesla stock climbed more than 1000 percent higher by January this year. After the swoon in March, TSLA is still up over 800 percent, far outperforming Apple stock which hadmerelydoubled in the same period.Judging by the percentage returns, TSLA is the undisputed champion over AAPL. However, it's important to note that more than $1 trillion in market capitalization was added to Apple since mid-March of last year, while Tesla scored a smaller increase of $582 million.At its current market cap of $648.9 billion, Tesla, Inc. is less than one-third the size of Apple, Inc. Despite the massive media attention it receives and the outsized influence its chief executive officer Elon Musk has on the investing community, Tesla only has 72 percent of the market cap of social media giant Facebook (FB).In other words, while Apple stock has broken the psychological market cap of both one trillion and two trillion dollars, Tesla stock is still some distance from being \"obstructed\" by the first trillion-barrier. Considering that TSLA had in January surpassed FB stock in terms of market cap, should that happen again, we could see it potentially breaching the one trillion dollars level for the first time.Critics could argue that would bring Tesla's price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio to above a thousand times, a mind-boggling number in itself. In contrast, Apple's P/E ratio is currently at 28.7 times, a paltry number in comparison. However, for much of TSLA's trading history, the stock didn't even have a P/E ratio to speak of, as the company was not profitable for many years. Yet, the lack of a P/E ratio did not deter investors from piling in.Based on the price-to-sales ratio, if Tesla Inc. reclaims the 30 times record achieved in January, its market cap would indeed be within reach of the one trillion dollar mark, coming at around $930 million. At the same time, comparing Apple with Tesla, the former certainly looks \"cheap\" and could be described as a \"screaming buy\". I have made the description in quotations as that can be said of many stocks when compared with Tesla.Hence, it's more instructive to compare Apple Inc. with itself. In the past 10 years, its P/E ratio is an average of 17 times. The current P/E of 29 times is, thus, a leap over the historical average, even though it has come off the recent peaks of over 40 times in the past year.For those who look beyond the income statements and into the cash flows, Apple's $90.5 billion free cash flow [FCF] outshines Tesla's $2.4 billion by an extremely wide margin. Putting the chasm in perspective, AAPL's price-to-FCF ratio at 24 times is ultra-low relative to TSLA's 310 times.Should long-term investors go for AAPL or TSLA?At first glance, it looks to me that Apple stock is a good value buy. However, looking at the quant grade for value, AAPL's score of D+ is not that much better than TSLA's F. Why is this so? The primary reason is that quant ratings are based on the individual stock's metrics relative to its industry. Apple, Inc. belongs to the Information Technology sector, while Tesla, Inc. falls under Consumer Discretionary. Source: Seeking Alpha PremiumFor growth, AAPL scored a poor grade of C- while TSLA has a stellar A+. While this is also judged according to their respective sectors, readers can see in the following table that TSLA's growth metrics are significantly superior to AAPL and consistently so.For instance, Tesla's revenue on a 5-year CAGR basis is 53.2 percent, several times that of Apple's 7.4 percent. If Tesla's 50.8 percent EBITDA year-on-year growth is impressive, the 63.5 percent EBITDA growth on a forward basis would be incredible. In contrast, analysts are forecasting Apple's EBITDA growth on a forward basis to be more than halved. TSLA grew its tangible book value by 77.2 percent CAGR in the past three years while AAPL saw a contraction of 18.3 percent in the same period.Growth MetricsAAPLTSLARevenue Growth (YoY)21.43%38.11%Revenue Growth (FWD)12.19%39.54%Revenue 3 Year [CAGR]9.56%42.31%Revenue 5 Year [CAGR]7.42%53.24%EBITDA Growth (YoY)29.12%50.80%EBITDA Growth (FWD)12.96%63.49%Tang Book Value 3 Year [CAGR]-18.31%77.24%Total Assets 3 Year [CAGR]-2.83%24.77%The saving grace for Apple Inc., or its attraction, is its superior profitability metrics. Its gross profit margin is nearly double that of Tesla. Further down the income statement, Apple's net income margin at 23.5 percent is more than 7 times higher than Tesla's.AAPL's Return on Equity is a staggering 103.4 percent as compared to TSLA's 7.2 percent. The disparity is expected to widen as Apple continues to execute its share buyback program, shrinking its equity, while Tesla issues new shares to fund its growth. Its Return on Assets at 16.9 percent is several times that of Tesla's 3.0 percent. Its Return on Total Capital at 28.6 percent is 6.7 times that of Tesla's 4.3 percent.Profitability MetricsAAPLTSLAGross Profit Margin39.88%21.18%EBIT Margin27.32%6.01%EBITDA Margin30.68%12.66%Net Income Margin23.45%3.18%Levered FCF Margin24.62%9.84%Return on Equity103.40%7.16%Return on Assets16.90%2.99%Return on Total Capital28.64%4.30%With this underperformance, should long-term investors ignore Tesla? The answer depends on one's holding power and the ability to stay calm amid the volatility that TSLA stock has been known for. According to Wall Street analysts, Tesla's 2020's earnings per share [EPS] of $2.24 was just a small fraction of what the EV-maker could deliver in the next ten years.By 2030, Tesla, Inc. is projected to mint $34.48 in EPS on a consensus basis, giving it a forward P/E ratio of 19.5 times. This will be a dramatic reduction from the current P/E ratio of over 300 times. Quarter-on-quarter, however, the picture might not be as clear as production hiccups from possible mishaps, shortage of components such as semiconductor chips, ramp-up challenges, etc. could obfuscate its true potential and make investors lose track of its long-term story.Source: Seeking Alpha PremiumOf course, if you are looking for dividends, TSLA is one stock you can forget about investing in. On the contrary, AAPL offers dividend investors a fairly consistent dividend and an excellent \"dividend safety\", even if the dividend growth is barely a passing grade and the dividend yield is a disappointing D+ grade. A conservative investor wouldn't complain about Apple's dividend.How might Apple's introduction of an electric car affect Tesla?There are more similarities between Apple and Tesla than the duo being in the electric car business three-to-five years down the road. Both American firms are already entrenched in China for the manufacturing of products as well as an important market. That makes the two companies subjected to thegeopolitical tensions brewing intenselybetween the U.S. and China.Perhaps cognizant of the risk of over-reliance on China, Apple's rumored partners were Koreans. Hyundai Motor (OTC:HYMLF)(OTCPK:HYMTF)(OTCPK:HYMPY) and its subsidiary Kia Motors (OTCPK:KIMTF) were first touted asprime candidates. Subsequently, Apple wasreportedto be on the verge of signing an agreement with a joint venture of South Korea's LG and Magna, a Canadian auto supplier.If true, one of Apple's strengths over Tesla in the EV business would be its avoidance of China as a manufacturing base. I have argued previously that Tesla woulddouble down on producing cars in Chinafollowing its favorable Shanghai experience.On the mechanics of EVs as a product, however, Tesla is expected to maintain its clear lead. Tesla has produced its cars in-house for more than a decade and accumulated a wealth of manufacturing techniques and experience along the way. Although critics charged that its profitability was largely derived from the sale of high-margin regulatory credits, the richness of data collected without charge from drivers whopaidfor the privilege to own Tesla cars is often brushed off.It is this Big Data pool Tesla possesses that enables it to accelerate its autonomous ride-hailing ambitions. On the other hand, even though there are many more Apple users than owners of Tesla cars, Apple's self-driving project only has its own trials to guide its development. This hampers the progress of a rollout of ride-hailing services and diminishes its threat to Tesla.Nevertheless, Apple can bank on its ecosystem where different products and accessories connect in a seamless fashion. On the other hand, however pleasant a driving experience it is for Tesla car owners, its in-car offerings are limited and mostly outsourced.Apple vs Tesla stock: final thoughtsBoth Apple and Tesla stocks are well covered by analysts. The consensus Wall Street rating is \"bullish\" for Apple and \"neutral\" for Tesla. What's telling is that AAPL has an upside of around 23.5 percent to its price target. In contrast, TSLA has a paltry upside of only 2.6 percent at the moment.As presented in this article, Apple's valuation multiples are well deserved given the good profitability it enjoys. Nevertheless, I wish to reiterate that Apple stock seems good as a value buy based only on the comparison to Tesla. AAPL, as illustrated earlier, is trading at higher valuation metrics than in the past.As the company releases some highly anticipated progress in its Apple Car project, investors could become excited and accord it with EV-like multiples. Meanwhile, its existing offerings continue to keep users within its ecosystem.In contrast, Tesla's valuation is rather rich, especially so if the so-called rotation trade is indeed in full swing. Yet, its earnings potential over the next 10 years seems to suggest TSLA is in the early innings, provided it can overcome the gradual loss of its EV credit buyers, as we have realized from theannouncementof Stellantis (STLA) this week. Thus, it is hard to pick a winner here but readers can decide based on their risk profile and invest accordingly.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":325,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":101574391,"gmtCreate":1619927108513,"gmtModify":1704336466720,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Comment for Comment......................","listText":"Comment for Comment......................","text":"Comment for Comment......................","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/101574391","repostId":"1109543008","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1109543008","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":1619787054,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1109543008?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-30 20:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"U.S. labor costs accelerate in the first quarter","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1109543008","media":"Reuters","summary":"U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further","content":"<p>U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further evidence that inflation will push higher this year as the economy reopens.</p>\n<p>The Employment Cost Index, the broadest measure of labor costs, jumped 0.9% last quarter after gaining 0.7% in the October-December quarter. That lifted the year-on-year rate of increase to 2.6% from 2.5% in the fourth quarter.</p>\n<p>The ECI is widely viewed by policymakers and economists as one of the better measures of labor market slack and a predictor of core inflation as it adjusts for composition and job quality changes. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the ECI rising 0.7% in the first quarter.</p>\n<p>Wages and salaries shot up 1.0% after advancing 0.8% in the fourth quarter. They were up 2.7% year-on-year. Economists expect wages will increase further in the second quarter as companies compete for scarce workers.</p>\n<p>Despite employment being 8.4 million jobs below its peak in February 2020, businesses are struggling to find suitable workers as they rush to meet robust domestic demand.</p>\n<p>Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday acknowledged the worker shortage saying “one big factor would be schools aren’t open yet, so there’s still people who are at home taking care of their children, and would like to be back in the workforce, but can’t be yet.”</p>\n<p>Higher wages, if the worker scarcity persists, could contribute to boosting inflation this year, though many economists and Powell believe the anticipated surge in price pressures as the broader economy reopens will be transitory.</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>U.S. labor costs accelerate in the first quarter</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\">\nU.S. labor costs accelerate in the first quarter\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\">2021-04-30 20:50</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further evidence that inflation will push higher this year as the economy reopens.</p>\n<p>The Employment Cost Index, the broadest measure of labor costs, jumped 0.9% last quarter after gaining 0.7% in the October-December quarter. That lifted the year-on-year rate of increase to 2.6% from 2.5% in the fourth quarter.</p>\n<p>The ECI is widely viewed by policymakers and economists as one of the better measures of labor market slack and a predictor of core inflation as it adjusts for composition and job quality changes. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the ECI rising 0.7% in the first quarter.</p>\n<p>Wages and salaries shot up 1.0% after advancing 0.8% in the fourth quarter. They were up 2.7% year-on-year. Economists expect wages will increase further in the second quarter as companies compete for scarce workers.</p>\n<p>Despite employment being 8.4 million jobs below its peak in February 2020, businesses are struggling to find suitable workers as they rush to meet robust domestic demand.</p>\n<p>Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday acknowledged the worker shortage saying “one big factor would be schools aren’t open yet, so there’s still people who are at home taking care of their children, and would like to be back in the workforce, but can’t be yet.”</p>\n<p>Higher wages, if the worker scarcity persists, could contribute to boosting inflation this year, though many economists and Powell believe the anticipated surge in price pressures as the broader economy reopens will be transitory.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1109543008","content_text":"U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further evidence that inflation will push higher this year as the economy reopens.\nThe Employment Cost Index, the broadest measure of labor costs, jumped 0.9% last quarter after gaining 0.7% in the October-December quarter. That lifted the year-on-year rate of increase to 2.6% from 2.5% in the fourth quarter.\nThe ECI is widely viewed by policymakers and economists as one of the better measures of labor market slack and a predictor of core inflation as it adjusts for composition and job quality changes. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the ECI rising 0.7% in the first quarter.\nWages and salaries shot up 1.0% after advancing 0.8% in the fourth quarter. They were up 2.7% year-on-year. Economists expect wages will increase further in the second quarter as companies compete for scarce workers.\nDespite employment being 8.4 million jobs below its peak in February 2020, businesses are struggling to find suitable workers as they rush to meet robust domestic demand.\nFederal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday acknowledged the worker shortage saying “one big factor would be schools aren’t open yet, so there’s still people who are at home taking care of their children, and would like to be back in the workforce, but can’t be yet.”\nHigher wages, if the worker scarcity persists, could contribute to boosting inflation this year, though many economists and Powell believe the anticipated surge in price pressures as the broader economy reopens will be transitory.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":680,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":101576543,"gmtCreate":1619926861882,"gmtModify":1704336462102,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like and comment&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/101576543","repostId":"1142063705","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1142063705","pubTimestamp":1619796118,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1142063705?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-30 23:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Europe's antitrust crackdown on Apple hints at what's coming for the company in the U.S.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1142063705","media":"CNBC","summary":"For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection Regulation.“The Commission’s argument onSpotify’sbehalf is the opposite of fair competition,” Apple said in a statement following Vestager’s announcement, referring to the music streaming company that raised the competition complaint. Apple said Spotify wants “all the benefits of the App Store but don’t t","content":"<div>\n<p>For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"cnbc_highlight","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>Europe's antitrust crackdown on Apple hints at what's coming for the company in the U.S.</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\">\nEurope's antitrust crackdown on Apple hints at what's coming for the company in the U.S.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-30 23:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html><strong>CNBC</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1142063705","content_text":"For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection Regulation.\nBut when the EU competition policy chief Margrethe Vestagerannounced Friday a preliminary findingthatApplehas abused its dominant power in the distribution of streaming music apps, the U.S. finally seems poised to move in a similar direction.\n“The Commission’s argument onSpotify’sbehalf is the opposite of fair competition,” Apple said in a statement following Vestager’s announcement, referring to the music streaming company that raised the competition complaint. Apple said Spotify wants “all the benefits of the App Store but don’t think they should have to pay anything for that,” by choosing to object to its 15-30% commission on in-app payments for streaming apps.\nApple isn’t currently facing any antitrust charges from government officials in the U.S. and such a lawsuit may never materialize, though the Department of Justice wasreportedly granted oversight of the company’s competitive practices in 2019. But even if the government declines to press charges, recent actions in Congress, state legislatures and in private lawsuits demonstrate a significant shift in the American public’s sentiment toward Apple and the tech industry at large.\nWhen the commissionslapped its first record competition fineagainstGooglein 2017, it wasn’t yet clear that the U.S. might be ready to move on from its once-cozy relationship with its booming tech industry. But in 2018, on the heels of the revelations of howFacebookuser data was used by analytics company Cambridge Analytica during the 2016 election, and increasing questions about how tech platforms can impact American democracy, that seemed to change.\nNow, as Europe continues to move forward with its probe into Apple, the U.S. no longer seems to be so far behind.\nHere’s where Apple stands to face risk of antitrust action or regulation in the U.S.:\nDOJ\nThe DOJ has already moved forward with a massive lawsuit against Google, so it could take some time if it decides to ramp up a probe into Apple. Though the DOJ’s Antitrust Division took on oversight authority of Apple in a 2019 agreement with the FTC, according to aWall Street Journal report, the Google investigation has seemed to take priority.\nStill, then-Attorney General Bill Barr announced later that year that the DOJ wouldconduct a broad antitrust review of Big Tech companies.\nAny action from the DOJ or state enforcers would take the form of a settlement or lawsuit, which would put Apple’s fate in the hands of the courts.\nPrivate lawsuits\nApple’s most immediate challenge in the U.S. has come from private companies bringing antitrust charges against its business in court.\nThe most notable of these lawsuits isfrom Fortnite-maker Epic Games, which is set to begin its trial on Monday. Epic filed its lawsuit with a PR blitz afterchallenging Apple’s in-app payment feeby advertising in its app an alternative, cheaper way to buy character outfits from Epic directly, violating Apple’s rules. That prompted Apple to remove Fortnite from its App Store. Epic filed the suit shortly after and Applefiled counterclaimsagainst Epic for allegedly breaching its contract.\n“Although Epic portrays itself as a modern corporate Robin Hood, in reality it is a multi-billion dollar enterprise that simply wants to pay nothing for the tremendous value it derives from the App Store,” Apple said in a filing with the District Court for the Northern District of California in September.\nCongress\nJust last week,several app-makers testified before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust about the alleged anti-competitive harms they’ve facedfrom restrictions on both Apple and Google’s app stores.\nRepresentatives from Apple and Google told lawmakers they simply charge for the technology and the work they put into running the app stores, which have significantly lowered distribution costs for app developers over the years.\nBut witnesses from Tinder-ownerMatch Group, item-tracking device-maker Tile and Spotify painted a different picture.\n“We’re all afraid,” Match Group chief legal officer Jared Sine testified of the platforms’ broad power over their businesses.\nThe witnesses discussed the seemingly arbitrary nature by which Apple allegedly enforces its App Store rules. Spotify’s legal chief claimed Apple has threatened retaliation on numerous occasions and Tile’s top lawyer said Apple denied access to a key feature that wouldimprove their object-tracking product, before utilizing it for Apple’s own rival gadget,called AirTag.\nTile said that while Apple now makes the feature available for third-party developers to incorporate, accessing it would mean handing over a significant amount of data and control to Apple. Apple’s representative said its product is different from Tile’s and opening the feature in question will encourage further competition in the space.\nSenators at the hearing seemed receptive to the app developers’ complaints, which build on earlier claims made before House lawmakers. The House Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust found in a more than year-long probe thatAmazon, Apple, Facebook and Googleall hold monopoly power, and lawmakers are currently crafting bills to enable stronger antitrust enforcement of digital markets.\nState Legislatures\nSeveral state legislatures have beenconsidering bills that would require platforms like Apple and Google to allow app-makers to use their own payment processing systems. While the bills have so far hadvarying degrees of successin the early stages of lawmaking, passage in one state could raise a host of questions about how it should be enforced given the ambiguous nature of digital borders.\nThe bills have been supported by the Coalition for App Fairness, a group of companies that have complained about app store fees, including Epic Games, Match Group and Spotify.\nApple has often argued that it maintains features like payments within its own ecosystem in order to protect consumers and secure their data, though app developers and lawmakers have expressed skepticism about that reasoning.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":479,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":377196085,"gmtCreate":1619502632947,"gmtModify":1704725031591,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good to know that","listText":"Good to know that","text":"Good to know that","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/377196085","repostId":"2130423473","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":303,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":377190383,"gmtCreate":1619502340242,"gmtModify":1704725024780,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh......................","listText":"Oh......................","text":"Oh......................","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/377190383","repostId":"1190086074","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1190086074","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1619480390,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1190086074?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-27 07:39","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla posts record net income of $438 million, revenue surges by 74%","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1190086074","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Tesla reported record net income of $438 million during the quarter, as well as earnings of 93 cents per share on $10.39 billion in revenue.In its earnings release, the company said it has weathered chip shortages that have plagued the auto industry in part by “pivoting extremely quickly to new microcontrollers, while simultaneously developing firmware for new chips made by new suppliers.”On an earnings call, CEO Elon Musk said the delayed new version of the company’s Model S sedan will be deliv","content":"<p><b>KEY POINTS</b></p><ul><li>Tesla reported record net income of $438 million during the quarter, as well as earnings of 93 cents per share on $10.39 billion in revenue.</li><li>In its earnings release, the company said it has weathered chip shortages that have plagued the auto industry in part by “pivoting extremely quickly to new microcontrollers, while simultaneously developing firmware for new chips made by new suppliers.”</li><li>On an earnings call, CEO Elon Musk said the delayed new version of the company’s Model S sedan will be delivered starting in May 2021, and Model X deliveries will begin in the third quarter of the year.</li></ul><p>Tesla&nbsp;reported first-quarter results after the bell on Monday. The company beat expectations handily, buoyed by sales of bitcoin and regulatory credits, but the stock dipped as much as 2.5% after hours as investors digested the numbers.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fec5c52f391c1077b749edc13b7b3417\" tg-width=\"1302\" tg-height=\"833\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Here’s how the company fared in the quarter, compared with analyst estimates compiled by Refinitiv:</p><ul><li><b>Earnings:</b>93 cents per share vs. 79 cents per share expected</li><li><b>Revenue:</b>$10.39 billion vs. $10.29 billion expected, up 74% from a year ago</li></ul><p>Net profit reached a quarterly record of $438 million on a GAAP basis, and the company recorded $518 million in revenue from sales of regulatory credits during the period. It also recorded a $101 million positive impact from&nbsp;sales of bitcoin&nbsp;during the quarter.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/107ab1e725bed375ea106bdf3024ec6a\" tg-width=\"1910\" tg-height=\"1097\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>CEO Elon Musk’s electric vehicle business reported in the first quarter&nbsp;vehicle deliveries of 184,800&nbsp;Model 3 and Model Y cars, beating expectations and setting a record for Tesla. However, the company also said it produced none of its higher-end Model S sedans or Model X SUVs for the period ending March. It delivered2,020 older Model S sedans and Model X SUVs from inventory.</p><p>On Monday’s earnings call, Musk said the new version of the company’s Model S sedans will finally be delivered to customers starting in May 2021, with Model X deliveries to begin in the third quarter of the year. Musk and CFO Zachary Kirkhorn both said supply chain issues are likely to remain a challenge for Tesla this year.</p><p>In January 2021 (during a fourth-quarter 2020 earnings update) Musk had said that the Model S Plaid was already in production would be delivered starting in February 2021. But he admitted on Monday, “There were more challenges than expected,” in producing the refreshed version of these vehicles. He did not elaborate.</p><p>Tesla is now aiming to produce 2,000 Model S and X vehicles per week later this year.</p><p>The company said Monday it expects more than 50% vehicle delivery growth in 2021 overall, which implies minimum deliveries around 750,000 vehicles this year.</p><p>The fact Tesla grew vehicle unit sales by more than 100% year over year but grew service centers by only 28% and its mobile service fleet by only 22% explains why some Tesla customers face frustratingly long wait times for repairs. Service expansion is not keeping pace with the volume of vehicles sold.</p><p>Tesla said it has weathered chip shortages that have plagued the auto industry in part by “pivoting extremely quickly to new microcontrollers, while simultaneously developing firmware for new chips made by new suppliers.” It did not disclose the names of its new suppliers.</p><p>It also reiterated Musk’s frequent claim that cameras, not radar, are a better path toward autonomous vehicles. “Our AI-based software architecture has been increasingly reliant on cameras, to the point where radar is becoming unnecessary earlier than expected. As a result, our FSD [Full Self-Driving] team is fully focused on evolving to a vision-based autonomous system and we are nearly ready to switch the US market to Tesla Vision,” the company said in its earnings release.</p><p>Revenue for its energy generation and storage business nearly doubled for Tesla versus the same period in 2020, when Musk said Covid, then an emerging pandemic, had slowed its energy business to a crawl. But energy revenue declined from $787 million in the fourth quarter to $595 million in the first quarter of 2021.</p><p>Recently, Tesla increased prices for its solar rooftops by 50%, and now requires anyone ordering solar photovoltaics (including Tesla solar roof tiles) to also order the Powerwall, Tesla’s home energy storage system. The sudden price change applied retroactively to some&nbsp;vexed customers.</p><p>Musk said on the Q1 2021 call that he is aiming for homes with solar rooftops and batteries from Tesla to function as a “giant distributed utility” that can help incumbent electrical utilities supply customers with all the electricity they need as demand and extreme weather events increase.</p><p>Executives did not say how they would change their production or mix of battery cells from suppliers in order to make a higher volume of vehicles and energy storage products in 2021.</p><p>Musk said the company’s 4680 cells, which it developed independently and makes at a pilot plant in Fremont, California, are not yet reliable enough to be shipped in Tesla vehicles. He said Tesla would probably “achieve volume production” of these cells in 12 to 18 months.</p><p>The company revealed in February it purchased&nbsp;$1.5 billion in bitcoin&nbsp;and would potentially invest in other cryptocurrencies in the future. By April, bitcoin rose to record levels before pulling back. In its statement of cash flows, Tesla revealed that it had sold $272 million worth of “digital assets,” presumably bitcoin, during the quarter.</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>Tesla posts record net income of $438 million, revenue surges by 74%</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 posts record net income of $438 million, revenue surges by 74%\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-04-27 07:39</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>KEY POINTS</b></p><ul><li>Tesla reported record net income of $438 million during the quarter, as well as earnings of 93 cents per share on $10.39 billion in revenue.</li><li>In its earnings release, the company said it has weathered chip shortages that have plagued the auto industry in part by “pivoting extremely quickly to new microcontrollers, while simultaneously developing firmware for new chips made by new suppliers.”</li><li>On an earnings call, CEO Elon Musk said the delayed new version of the company’s Model S sedan will be delivered starting in May 2021, and Model X deliveries will begin in the third quarter of the year.</li></ul><p>Tesla&nbsp;reported first-quarter results after the bell on Monday. The company beat expectations handily, buoyed by sales of bitcoin and regulatory credits, but the stock dipped as much as 2.5% after hours as investors digested the numbers.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fec5c52f391c1077b749edc13b7b3417\" tg-width=\"1302\" tg-height=\"833\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>Here’s how the company fared in the quarter, compared with analyst estimates compiled by Refinitiv:</p><ul><li><b>Earnings:</b>93 cents per share vs. 79 cents per share expected</li><li><b>Revenue:</b>$10.39 billion vs. $10.29 billion expected, up 74% from a year ago</li></ul><p>Net profit reached a quarterly record of $438 million on a GAAP basis, and the company recorded $518 million in revenue from sales of regulatory credits during the period. It also recorded a $101 million positive impact from&nbsp;sales of bitcoin&nbsp;during the quarter.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/107ab1e725bed375ea106bdf3024ec6a\" tg-width=\"1910\" tg-height=\"1097\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p>CEO Elon Musk’s electric vehicle business reported in the first quarter&nbsp;vehicle deliveries of 184,800&nbsp;Model 3 and Model Y cars, beating expectations and setting a record for Tesla. However, the company also said it produced none of its higher-end Model S sedans or Model X SUVs for the period ending March. It delivered2,020 older Model S sedans and Model X SUVs from inventory.</p><p>On Monday’s earnings call, Musk said the new version of the company’s Model S sedans will finally be delivered to customers starting in May 2021, with Model X deliveries to begin in the third quarter of the year. Musk and CFO Zachary Kirkhorn both said supply chain issues are likely to remain a challenge for Tesla this year.</p><p>In January 2021 (during a fourth-quarter 2020 earnings update) Musk had said that the Model S Plaid was already in production would be delivered starting in February 2021. But he admitted on Monday, “There were more challenges than expected,” in producing the refreshed version of these vehicles. He did not elaborate.</p><p>Tesla is now aiming to produce 2,000 Model S and X vehicles per week later this year.</p><p>The company said Monday it expects more than 50% vehicle delivery growth in 2021 overall, which implies minimum deliveries around 750,000 vehicles this year.</p><p>The fact Tesla grew vehicle unit sales by more than 100% year over year but grew service centers by only 28% and its mobile service fleet by only 22% explains why some Tesla customers face frustratingly long wait times for repairs. Service expansion is not keeping pace with the volume of vehicles sold.</p><p>Tesla said it has weathered chip shortages that have plagued the auto industry in part by “pivoting extremely quickly to new microcontrollers, while simultaneously developing firmware for new chips made by new suppliers.” It did not disclose the names of its new suppliers.</p><p>It also reiterated Musk’s frequent claim that cameras, not radar, are a better path toward autonomous vehicles. “Our AI-based software architecture has been increasingly reliant on cameras, to the point where radar is becoming unnecessary earlier than expected. As a result, our FSD [Full Self-Driving] team is fully focused on evolving to a vision-based autonomous system and we are nearly ready to switch the US market to Tesla Vision,” the company said in its earnings release.</p><p>Revenue for its energy generation and storage business nearly doubled for Tesla versus the same period in 2020, when Musk said Covid, then an emerging pandemic, had slowed its energy business to a crawl. But energy revenue declined from $787 million in the fourth quarter to $595 million in the first quarter of 2021.</p><p>Recently, Tesla increased prices for its solar rooftops by 50%, and now requires anyone ordering solar photovoltaics (including Tesla solar roof tiles) to also order the Powerwall, Tesla’s home energy storage system. The sudden price change applied retroactively to some&nbsp;vexed customers.</p><p>Musk said on the Q1 2021 call that he is aiming for homes with solar rooftops and batteries from Tesla to function as a “giant distributed utility” that can help incumbent electrical utilities supply customers with all the electricity they need as demand and extreme weather events increase.</p><p>Executives did not say how they would change their production or mix of battery cells from suppliers in order to make a higher volume of vehicles and energy storage products in 2021.</p><p>Musk said the company’s 4680 cells, which it developed independently and makes at a pilot plant in Fremont, California, are not yet reliable enough to be shipped in Tesla vehicles. He said Tesla would probably “achieve volume production” of these cells in 12 to 18 months.</p><p>The company revealed in February it purchased&nbsp;$1.5 billion in bitcoin&nbsp;and would potentially invest in other cryptocurrencies in the future. By April, bitcoin rose to record levels before pulling back. In its statement of cash flows, Tesla revealed that it had sold $272 million worth of “digital assets,” presumably bitcoin, during the quarter.</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":"1190086074","content_text":"KEY POINTSTesla reported record net income of $438 million during the quarter, as well as earnings of 93 cents per share on $10.39 billion in revenue.In its earnings release, the company said it has weathered chip shortages that have plagued the auto industry in part by “pivoting extremely quickly to new microcontrollers, while simultaneously developing firmware for new chips made by new suppliers.”On an earnings call, CEO Elon Musk said the delayed new version of the company’s Model S sedan will be delivered starting in May 2021, and Model X deliveries will begin in the third quarter of the year.Tesla reported first-quarter results after the bell on Monday. The company beat expectations handily, buoyed by sales of bitcoin and regulatory credits, but the stock dipped as much as 2.5% after hours as investors digested the numbers.Here’s how the company fared in the quarter, compared with analyst estimates compiled by Refinitiv:Earnings:93 cents per share vs. 79 cents per share expectedRevenue:$10.39 billion vs. $10.29 billion expected, up 74% from a year agoNet profit reached a quarterly record of $438 million on a GAAP basis, and the company recorded $518 million in revenue from sales of regulatory credits during the period. It also recorded a $101 million positive impact from sales of bitcoin during the quarter.CEO Elon Musk’s electric vehicle business reported in the first quarter vehicle deliveries of 184,800 Model 3 and Model Y cars, beating expectations and setting a record for Tesla. However, the company also said it produced none of its higher-end Model S sedans or Model X SUVs for the period ending March. It delivered2,020 older Model S sedans and Model X SUVs from inventory.On Monday’s earnings call, Musk said the new version of the company’s Model S sedans will finally be delivered to customers starting in May 2021, with Model X deliveries to begin in the third quarter of the year. Musk and CFO Zachary Kirkhorn both said supply chain issues are likely to remain a challenge for Tesla this year.In January 2021 (during a fourth-quarter 2020 earnings update) Musk had said that the Model S Plaid was already in production would be delivered starting in February 2021. But he admitted on Monday, “There were more challenges than expected,” in producing the refreshed version of these vehicles. He did not elaborate.Tesla is now aiming to produce 2,000 Model S and X vehicles per week later this year.The company said Monday it expects more than 50% vehicle delivery growth in 2021 overall, which implies minimum deliveries around 750,000 vehicles this year.The fact Tesla grew vehicle unit sales by more than 100% year over year but grew service centers by only 28% and its mobile service fleet by only 22% explains why some Tesla customers face frustratingly long wait times for repairs. Service expansion is not keeping pace with the volume of vehicles sold.Tesla said it has weathered chip shortages that have plagued the auto industry in part by “pivoting extremely quickly to new microcontrollers, while simultaneously developing firmware for new chips made by new suppliers.” It did not disclose the names of its new suppliers.It also reiterated Musk’s frequent claim that cameras, not radar, are a better path toward autonomous vehicles. “Our AI-based software architecture has been increasingly reliant on cameras, to the point where radar is becoming unnecessary earlier than expected. As a result, our FSD [Full Self-Driving] team is fully focused on evolving to a vision-based autonomous system and we are nearly ready to switch the US market to Tesla Vision,” the company said in its earnings release.Revenue for its energy generation and storage business nearly doubled for Tesla versus the same period in 2020, when Musk said Covid, then an emerging pandemic, had slowed its energy business to a crawl. But energy revenue declined from $787 million in the fourth quarter to $595 million in the first quarter of 2021.Recently, Tesla increased prices for its solar rooftops by 50%, and now requires anyone ordering solar photovoltaics (including Tesla solar roof tiles) to also order the Powerwall, Tesla’s home energy storage system. The sudden price change applied retroactively to some vexed customers.Musk said on the Q1 2021 call that he is aiming for homes with solar rooftops and batteries from Tesla to function as a “giant distributed utility” that can help incumbent electrical utilities supply customers with all the electricity they need as demand and extreme weather events increase.Executives did not say how they would change their production or mix of battery cells from suppliers in order to make a higher volume of vehicles and energy storage products in 2021.Musk said the company’s 4680 cells, which it developed independently and makes at a pilot plant in Fremont, California, are not yet reliable enough to be shipped in Tesla vehicles. He said Tesla would probably “achieve volume production” of these cells in 12 to 18 months.The company revealed in February it purchased $1.5 billion in bitcoin and would potentially invest in other cryptocurrencies in the future. By April, bitcoin rose to record levels before pulling back. In its statement of cash flows, Tesla revealed that it had sold $272 million worth of “digital assets,” presumably bitcoin, during the quarter.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":427,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350739134,"gmtCreate":1616287121228,"gmtModify":1704792594069,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great","listText":"Great","text":"Great","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350739134","repostId":"1199154789","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199154789","pubTimestamp":1616164372,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199154789?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-19 22:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199154789","media":"zerohedge","summary":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio  exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on ","content":"<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><blockquote>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.</blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><blockquote>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.</blockquote><p>The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><blockquote>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b></blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><blockquote>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b></blockquote><p>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><blockquote><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital &amp; de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b></blockquote><p>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><blockquote>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...</blockquote><p>While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p>* *&nbsp; *</p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</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>Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next</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\">\nFed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-19 22:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199154789","content_text":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption.\"Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...Bond yields spiked...... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")....... slumped.In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).So what happens next?Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market:The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates 4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever Impact on BanksRatesFront-End RatesGoing back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.\"More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.* *  *Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" asthe SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing.“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":337,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350730656,"gmtCreate":1616287013975,"gmtModify":1704792592922,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great","listText":"Great","text":"Great","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350730656","repostId":"1103756496","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":375,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350797848,"gmtCreate":1616286910984,"gmtModify":1704792591124,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good.&nbsp;","listText":"Good.&nbsp;","text":"Good.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350797848","repostId":"1103756496","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1103756496","pubTimestamp":1616163949,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1103756496?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-19 22:25","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple Stock Is Going Down, One Analyst Says. Here’s Why","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1103756496","media":"The Street","summary":"Recently, I laid out the arguments supporting Wall Street’s most bullish of theses on Apple stock. Some of the highlights included the doubling of services and wearables revenues in five years, the 5G super cycle, the greenfield Apple Car opportunity, and an acceleration in share repurchases.Now, I look at the flip side of the coin. How would one support the most bearish argument on Apple shares?At least one analyst has compiled a laundry list of items that makes him fear for a 35% drop in the s","content":"<p>Recently, I laid out the arguments supporting Wall Street’s most bullish of theses on Apple stock. Some of the highlights included the doubling of services and wearables revenues in five years, the 5G super cycle, the greenfield Apple Car opportunity, and an acceleration in share repurchases.</p>\n<p>Now, I look at the flip side of the coin. How would one support the most bearish argument on Apple shares? At least one analyst has compiled a laundry list of items that makes him fear for a 35% drop in the stock price from current levels.</p>\n<p><b>Apple might be too hyped</b></p>\n<p>Goldman Sach’s Rod Hall is one of those very rare Apple analysts that maintain a sell rating on the stock. While I have not come across research from him that is more recent thanlate January, most of his bearish points still seem relevant today.</p>\n<p>For starters, Goldman does not seem impressed with the near-term smartphone opportunity. According to the research shop, the iPhone 12 resembles a “redesign cycle” rather thana more meaningful “5G super cycle”. As a result, iPhone replacement rates should be low in 2021.</p>\n<p>Still on the same subject, Goldman projects ASP (average selling price) to come down this year, as buyers shift to cheaper models like the iPhone 12 mini and the iPhone 11. Here,recent data points have been suggesting the opposite: the mini seems to be the biggest loser within the product portfolio, while the Pro and Pro Max have been performing above expectations.</p>\n<p>Also, Mr. Hall does not seethe Apple Car opportunityas a profitable initiative.Accordingto him:</p>\n<blockquote>\n “The auto industry has generally lower gross margins than Apple's own current businesses. Tesla's gross margins are about 20%, compared to Apple's 40%. Operating margins are even lower, typically in the high single digits. Even in optimistic scenarios, the release of a production Apple Car is likely to have only a minor impact on Apple's bottom line.”\n</blockquote>\n<p>Lastly, the analyst believes that the end of the COVID-19 crisis will trigger a discretionary spending shift from tech devices (iPhones, Macs) to away-from-home services (travel and leisure). This could be a negative catalyst for the stock in 2021.</p>\n<p><b>The Apple Maven’s take</b></p>\n<p>In my opinion, the market is not the place to cheer for or against a stock. This is what sports arenas are for (after the pandemic is over, of course). So, I think that even the most confident of Apple investors should pay attention to the bearish case on the stock, and think through the arguments critically.</p>\n<p>I think Goldman raises good points about the hype around the 5G super cycle and the Apple Car. Whether either can push Apple’s financial results significantly above current consensus remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the stockseems to have already priced some of the upside.</p>\n<p>I also understand the risk in discretionary spending migrating away from tech hardware, software and services. Just as an example,air travel bookings for the summer seasonhave already started to climb fast. Where will the money to cover these costs come from? A brand-new iPad could be one answer.</p>\n<p>Still, the Apple Maven sees more upside to investing in Apple at current levels than downside risk. In addition to the bullish points on the business fundamentals,the valuation floor and dip-buying opportunityincreases the probability that an investment in Apple today will pay off in the long term.</p>\n<p><b>Twitter speaks</b></p>\n<p>The most bullish analysts say that Apple could head to $225 per share, under the rosiest scenario. The most bearish of them says “not so fast”, and sees 35% downside risk. Who will be proven right?</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/416292f8a70685b7612b592d29c72df6\" tg-width=\"589\" tg-height=\"454\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4e715d243108042b76de007cc2748aed\" tg-width=\"678\" tg-height=\"520\"></p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","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>Apple Stock Is Going Down, One Analyst Says. Here’s Why</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\">\nApple Stock Is Going Down, One Analyst Says. Here’s Why\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-19 22:25 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.thestreet.com/apple/news/apple-stock-is-going-down-one-analyst-says-heres-why><strong>The Street</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Recently, I laid out the arguments supporting Wall Street’s most bullish of theses on Apple stock. Some of the highlights included the doubling of services and wearables revenues in five years, the 5G...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/apple/news/apple-stock-is-going-down-one-analyst-says-heres-why\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/apple/news/apple-stock-is-going-down-one-analyst-says-heres-why","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1103756496","content_text":"Recently, I laid out the arguments supporting Wall Street’s most bullish of theses on Apple stock. Some of the highlights included the doubling of services and wearables revenues in five years, the 5G super cycle, the greenfield Apple Car opportunity, and an acceleration in share repurchases.\nNow, I look at the flip side of the coin. How would one support the most bearish argument on Apple shares? At least one analyst has compiled a laundry list of items that makes him fear for a 35% drop in the stock price from current levels.\nApple might be too hyped\nGoldman Sach’s Rod Hall is one of those very rare Apple analysts that maintain a sell rating on the stock. While I have not come across research from him that is more recent thanlate January, most of his bearish points still seem relevant today.\nFor starters, Goldman does not seem impressed with the near-term smartphone opportunity. According to the research shop, the iPhone 12 resembles a “redesign cycle” rather thana more meaningful “5G super cycle”. As a result, iPhone replacement rates should be low in 2021.\nStill on the same subject, Goldman projects ASP (average selling price) to come down this year, as buyers shift to cheaper models like the iPhone 12 mini and the iPhone 11. Here,recent data points have been suggesting the opposite: the mini seems to be the biggest loser within the product portfolio, while the Pro and Pro Max have been performing above expectations.\nAlso, Mr. Hall does not seethe Apple Car opportunityas a profitable initiative.Accordingto him:\n\n “The auto industry has generally lower gross margins than Apple's own current businesses. Tesla's gross margins are about 20%, compared to Apple's 40%. Operating margins are even lower, typically in the high single digits. Even in optimistic scenarios, the release of a production Apple Car is likely to have only a minor impact on Apple's bottom line.”\n\nLastly, the analyst believes that the end of the COVID-19 crisis will trigger a discretionary spending shift from tech devices (iPhones, Macs) to away-from-home services (travel and leisure). This could be a negative catalyst for the stock in 2021.\nThe Apple Maven’s take\nIn my opinion, the market is not the place to cheer for or against a stock. This is what sports arenas are for (after the pandemic is over, of course). So, I think that even the most confident of Apple investors should pay attention to the bearish case on the stock, and think through the arguments critically.\nI think Goldman raises good points about the hype around the 5G super cycle and the Apple Car. Whether either can push Apple’s financial results significantly above current consensus remains to be seen. Meanwhile, the stockseems to have already priced some of the upside.\nI also understand the risk in discretionary spending migrating away from tech hardware, software and services. Just as an example,air travel bookings for the summer seasonhave already started to climb fast. Where will the money to cover these costs come from? A brand-new iPad could be one answer.\nStill, the Apple Maven sees more upside to investing in Apple at current levels than downside risk. In addition to the bullish points on the business fundamentals,the valuation floor and dip-buying opportunityincreases the probability that an investment in Apple today will pay off in the long term.\nTwitter speaks\nThe most bullish analysts say that Apple could head to $225 per share, under the rosiest scenario. The most bearish of them says “not so fast”, and sees 35% downside risk. Who will be proven right?","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":188,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":101576543,"gmtCreate":1619926861882,"gmtModify":1704336462102,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like and comment&nbsp;","listText":"Like and comment&nbsp;","text":"Like and comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/101576543","repostId":"1142063705","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1142063705","pubTimestamp":1619796118,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1142063705?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-30 23:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Europe's antitrust crackdown on Apple hints at what's coming for the company in the U.S.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1142063705","media":"CNBC","summary":"For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection Regulation.“The Commission’s argument onSpotify’sbehalf is the opposite of fair competition,” Apple said in a statement following Vestager’s announcement, referring to the music streaming company that raised the competition complaint. Apple said Spotify wants “all the benefits of the App Store but don’t t","content":"<div>\n<p>For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"cnbc_highlight","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>Europe's antitrust crackdown on Apple hints at what's coming for the company in the U.S.</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\">\nEurope's antitrust crackdown on Apple hints at what's coming for the company in the U.S.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-30 23:21 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html><strong>CNBC</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/04/30/eu-leads-tech-crackdown-but-the-us-isnt-far-behind.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1142063705","content_text":"For a long time, the European Commission seemed to stand apart from the U.S. in cracking down on tech giants with antitrust fines againstGoogleand privacy rules like the General Data Protection Regulation.\nBut when the EU competition policy chief Margrethe Vestagerannounced Friday a preliminary findingthatApplehas abused its dominant power in the distribution of streaming music apps, the U.S. finally seems poised to move in a similar direction.\n“The Commission’s argument onSpotify’sbehalf is the opposite of fair competition,” Apple said in a statement following Vestager’s announcement, referring to the music streaming company that raised the competition complaint. Apple said Spotify wants “all the benefits of the App Store but don’t think they should have to pay anything for that,” by choosing to object to its 15-30% commission on in-app payments for streaming apps.\nApple isn’t currently facing any antitrust charges from government officials in the U.S. and such a lawsuit may never materialize, though the Department of Justice wasreportedly granted oversight of the company’s competitive practices in 2019. But even if the government declines to press charges, recent actions in Congress, state legislatures and in private lawsuits demonstrate a significant shift in the American public’s sentiment toward Apple and the tech industry at large.\nWhen the commissionslapped its first record competition fineagainstGooglein 2017, it wasn’t yet clear that the U.S. might be ready to move on from its once-cozy relationship with its booming tech industry. But in 2018, on the heels of the revelations of howFacebookuser data was used by analytics company Cambridge Analytica during the 2016 election, and increasing questions about how tech platforms can impact American democracy, that seemed to change.\nNow, as Europe continues to move forward with its probe into Apple, the U.S. no longer seems to be so far behind.\nHere’s where Apple stands to face risk of antitrust action or regulation in the U.S.:\nDOJ\nThe DOJ has already moved forward with a massive lawsuit against Google, so it could take some time if it decides to ramp up a probe into Apple. Though the DOJ’s Antitrust Division took on oversight authority of Apple in a 2019 agreement with the FTC, according to aWall Street Journal report, the Google investigation has seemed to take priority.\nStill, then-Attorney General Bill Barr announced later that year that the DOJ wouldconduct a broad antitrust review of Big Tech companies.\nAny action from the DOJ or state enforcers would take the form of a settlement or lawsuit, which would put Apple’s fate in the hands of the courts.\nPrivate lawsuits\nApple’s most immediate challenge in the U.S. has come from private companies bringing antitrust charges against its business in court.\nThe most notable of these lawsuits isfrom Fortnite-maker Epic Games, which is set to begin its trial on Monday. Epic filed its lawsuit with a PR blitz afterchallenging Apple’s in-app payment feeby advertising in its app an alternative, cheaper way to buy character outfits from Epic directly, violating Apple’s rules. That prompted Apple to remove Fortnite from its App Store. Epic filed the suit shortly after and Applefiled counterclaimsagainst Epic for allegedly breaching its contract.\n“Although Epic portrays itself as a modern corporate Robin Hood, in reality it is a multi-billion dollar enterprise that simply wants to pay nothing for the tremendous value it derives from the App Store,” Apple said in a filing with the District Court for the Northern District of California in September.\nCongress\nJust last week,several app-makers testified before the Senate Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust about the alleged anti-competitive harms they’ve facedfrom restrictions on both Apple and Google’s app stores.\nRepresentatives from Apple and Google told lawmakers they simply charge for the technology and the work they put into running the app stores, which have significantly lowered distribution costs for app developers over the years.\nBut witnesses from Tinder-ownerMatch Group, item-tracking device-maker Tile and Spotify painted a different picture.\n“We’re all afraid,” Match Group chief legal officer Jared Sine testified of the platforms’ broad power over their businesses.\nThe witnesses discussed the seemingly arbitrary nature by which Apple allegedly enforces its App Store rules. Spotify’s legal chief claimed Apple has threatened retaliation on numerous occasions and Tile’s top lawyer said Apple denied access to a key feature that wouldimprove their object-tracking product, before utilizing it for Apple’s own rival gadget,called AirTag.\nTile said that while Apple now makes the feature available for third-party developers to incorporate, accessing it would mean handing over a significant amount of data and control to Apple. Apple’s representative said its product is different from Tile’s and opening the feature in question will encourage further competition in the space.\nSenators at the hearing seemed receptive to the app developers’ complaints, which build on earlier claims made before House lawmakers. The House Judiciary subcommittee on antitrust found in a more than year-long probe thatAmazon, Apple, Facebook and Googleall hold monopoly power, and lawmakers are currently crafting bills to enable stronger antitrust enforcement of digital markets.\nState Legislatures\nSeveral state legislatures have beenconsidering bills that would require platforms like Apple and Google to allow app-makers to use their own payment processing systems. While the bills have so far hadvarying degrees of successin the early stages of lawmaking, passage in one state could raise a host of questions about how it should be enforced given the ambiguous nature of digital borders.\nThe bills have been supported by the Coalition for App Fairness, a group of companies that have complained about app store fees, including Epic Games, Match Group and Spotify.\nApple has often argued that it maintains features like payments within its own ecosystem in order to protect consumers and secure their data, though app developers and lawmakers have expressed skepticism about that reasoning.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":479,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":101574391,"gmtCreate":1619927108513,"gmtModify":1704336466720,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Comment for Comment......................","listText":"Comment for Comment......................","text":"Comment for Comment......................","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/101574391","repostId":"1109543008","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1109543008","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":1619787054,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1109543008?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-30 20:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"U.S. labor costs accelerate in the first quarter","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1109543008","media":"Reuters","summary":"U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further","content":"<p>U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further evidence that inflation will push higher this year as the economy reopens.</p>\n<p>The Employment Cost Index, the broadest measure of labor costs, jumped 0.9% last quarter after gaining 0.7% in the October-December quarter. That lifted the year-on-year rate of increase to 2.6% from 2.5% in the fourth quarter.</p>\n<p>The ECI is widely viewed by policymakers and economists as one of the better measures of labor market slack and a predictor of core inflation as it adjusts for composition and job quality changes. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the ECI rising 0.7% in the first quarter.</p>\n<p>Wages and salaries shot up 1.0% after advancing 0.8% in the fourth quarter. They were up 2.7% year-on-year. Economists expect wages will increase further in the second quarter as companies compete for scarce workers.</p>\n<p>Despite employment being 8.4 million jobs below its peak in February 2020, businesses are struggling to find suitable workers as they rush to meet robust domestic demand.</p>\n<p>Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday acknowledged the worker shortage saying “one big factor would be schools aren’t open yet, so there’s still people who are at home taking care of their children, and would like to be back in the workforce, but can’t be yet.”</p>\n<p>Higher wages, if the worker scarcity persists, could contribute to boosting inflation this year, though many economists and Powell believe the anticipated surge in price pressures as the broader economy reopens will be transitory.</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>U.S. labor costs accelerate in the first quarter</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\">\nU.S. labor costs accelerate in the first quarter\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\">2021-04-30 20:50</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further evidence that inflation will push higher this year as the economy reopens.</p>\n<p>The Employment Cost Index, the broadest measure of labor costs, jumped 0.9% last quarter after gaining 0.7% in the October-December quarter. That lifted the year-on-year rate of increase to 2.6% from 2.5% in the fourth quarter.</p>\n<p>The ECI is widely viewed by policymakers and economists as one of the better measures of labor market slack and a predictor of core inflation as it adjusts for composition and job quality changes. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the ECI rising 0.7% in the first quarter.</p>\n<p>Wages and salaries shot up 1.0% after advancing 0.8% in the fourth quarter. They were up 2.7% year-on-year. Economists expect wages will increase further in the second quarter as companies compete for scarce workers.</p>\n<p>Despite employment being 8.4 million jobs below its peak in February 2020, businesses are struggling to find suitable workers as they rush to meet robust domestic demand.</p>\n<p>Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday acknowledged the worker shortage saying “one big factor would be schools aren’t open yet, so there’s still people who are at home taking care of their children, and would like to be back in the workforce, but can’t be yet.”</p>\n<p>Higher wages, if the worker scarcity persists, could contribute to boosting inflation this year, though many economists and Powell believe the anticipated surge in price pressures as the broader economy reopens will be transitory.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1109543008","content_text":"U.S. labor costs increased more than expected in the first quarter as wage growth picked up, further evidence that inflation will push higher this year as the economy reopens.\nThe Employment Cost Index, the broadest measure of labor costs, jumped 0.9% last quarter after gaining 0.7% in the October-December quarter. That lifted the year-on-year rate of increase to 2.6% from 2.5% in the fourth quarter.\nThe ECI is widely viewed by policymakers and economists as one of the better measures of labor market slack and a predictor of core inflation as it adjusts for composition and job quality changes. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the ECI rising 0.7% in the first quarter.\nWages and salaries shot up 1.0% after advancing 0.8% in the fourth quarter. They were up 2.7% year-on-year. Economists expect wages will increase further in the second quarter as companies compete for scarce workers.\nDespite employment being 8.4 million jobs below its peak in February 2020, businesses are struggling to find suitable workers as they rush to meet robust domestic demand.\nFederal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell on Wednesday acknowledged the worker shortage saying “one big factor would be schools aren’t open yet, so there’s still people who are at home taking care of their children, and would like to be back in the workforce, but can’t be yet.”\nHigher wages, if the worker scarcity persists, could contribute to boosting inflation this year, though many economists and Powell believe the anticipated surge in price pressures as the broader economy reopens will be transitory.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":680,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":107166571,"gmtCreate":1620453576893,"gmtModify":1704343995072,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","listText":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","text":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/107166571","repostId":"1117135949","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":325,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350739134,"gmtCreate":1616287121228,"gmtModify":1704792594069,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great","listText":"Great","text":"Great","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350739134","repostId":"1199154789","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1199154789","pubTimestamp":1616164372,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1199154789?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-03-19 22:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1199154789","media":"zerohedge","summary":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio  exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on ","content":"<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.</p><blockquote>The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.</blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b822960da59d651f093b5113cd0c3fd0\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"319\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –<b>suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption</b>.\"</p><p>Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"<b>Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability</b>\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:</p><blockquote>The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. <b>Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.</b>To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. <b>However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.</b>The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.</blockquote><p>The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,<b>having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...</b></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c341c3843a5031cd1599c2c89e198050\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"305\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Bond yields spiked...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14173c1ce587fb45efe4c30ecc1dfbab\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"284\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")...</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/32811183fba3dbddf1c440836298c7f3\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"602\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">.... slumped.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fba41463f15e79d2b8436cdd6a526fc\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"306\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,<b>banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.</b></p><blockquote>The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. <b>The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.</b></blockquote><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/392342c2f3e1dd008b2276172a9b3ecf\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"253\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that<b>\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.</b></p><p>The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).</p><p><b>So what happens next?</b></p><p>Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"<i>the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market</i>:</p><blockquote>The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. <b>Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.</b></blockquote><p>In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...</p><p>Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:</p><blockquote><u><b>3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b> <u><b>4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital &amp; de-lever</b></u> <b>Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates</b></blockquote><p>Going back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,<b>and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.</b>\"</p><p>More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/caeeb2b1290e084832f29d61cea6a90b\" tg-width=\"500\" tg-height=\"534\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"</p><blockquote>FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...</blockquote><p>While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.</p><p>* *&nbsp; *</p><p>Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" as<b>the SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing</b>.</p><p>“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is<b>\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”</b></p><p>Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.</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>Fed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next</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\">\nFed Disappoints Market, Lets SLR Relief Expire: What Happens Next\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-19 22:32 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire><strong>zerohedge</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/stocks-bopnds-tank-after-fed-lets-slr-relief-expire","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1199154789","content_text":"As washinted at, and discussed in depth here,the Fed decided - under political pressure from progressive Democrats such asElizabeth Warren and Sherrod Brown- to let the temporary Supplementary Leverage Ratio (SLR) exemption expire as scheduled on March 31, the one year anniversary of the rule change.The federal bank regulatory agencies today announced that the temporary change to the supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for depository institutions issued on May 15, 2020, will expire as scheduled on March 31, 2021.The temporary change was made to provide flexibility for depository institutions to provide credit to households and businesses in light of the COVID-19 event.This outcome is theone (again) correctly predictedby former NY Fed guru Zoltan Pozsar who following the FOMC said that \"the fact that the Fed made this adjustment practically preemptively – the o/n RRP facility is not being used at the moment, so there are no capacity constraints yet, while repo and bill yields aren’t trading negative yet –suggests that the Fed is “foaming the runway” for the end of SLR exemption.\"Knowing well this would be a very hot button issue for the market, the Fed published thefollowing statementto ease trader nerves, noting that while the SLR special treatment will expire on March 31, the Fed is \"inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications\" and furthermore, \"Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability\" - in short, if yields spike, the Fed will re-introduce the SLR without delay:The Federal Reserve Board on Friday announced that the temporary change to its supplementary leverage ratio, or SLR, for bank holding companies will expire as scheduled on March 31. Additionally, the Board will shortly seek comment on measures to adjust the SLR. The Board will take appropriate actions to assure that any changes to the SLR do not erode the overall strength of bank capital requirements.To ease strains in the Treasury market resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and to promote lending to households and businesses, the Board temporarily modified the SLR last year to exclude U.S. Treasury securities and central bank reserves. Since that time, the Treasury market has stabilized. However, because of recent growth in the supply of central bank reserves and the issuance of Treasury securities, the Board may need to address the current design and calibration of the SLR over time to prevent strains from developing that could both constrain economic growth and undermine financial stability.To ensure that the SLR—which was established in 2014 as an additional capital requirement—remains effective in an environment of higher reserves, the Board will soon be inviting public comment on several potential SLR modifications.The proposal and comments will contribute to ongoing discussions with the Department of the Treasury and other regulators on future work to ensure the resiliency of the Treasury market.The Fed's soothing wods notwithstanding,having been primed for a favorable outcome, the Fed's disappointing announcement was hardly the news traders were hoping for and stocks tumbled...Bond yields spiked...... while the stock of JPM, which is the most exposed bank to SLR relief (as noted yesterday in \"Facing Up To JP Morgan's Leverage Relief Threats\")....... slumped.In case you've been living under a rock, here's why you should care about the SLR decision: First, for those whomissed our primer on the issue, some background from JPM (ironically the one bank that has the most to lose from the Fed's decision) the bottom line is that without SLR relief,banks may have to delever, raise new capital, halt buybacks, sell preferred stock, turn down deposits and generally push back on reserves (not necessarily all of these, and not in that order) just as the Fed is injecting hundreds of billions of reserves into the market as the Treasury depletes its TGA account.The massive expansion of the Fed’s balance that has occurred implied an equally massive growth in bank reserves held at Federal Reserve banks. The expiration of the regulatory relief would add ~$2.1tn of leverage exposure across the 8 GSIBs. As well, TGA reduction and continued QE could add another ~$2.35tn of deposits to the system during 2021.While the expiry of the carve-out on March 31 would not have an immediate impact on GSIBs, the continued increase in leverage assets throughout the course of the year would increase long-term debt (LTD) and preferred requirements. Here, JPM takes an optimistic view and writes that\"even the “worst” case issuance scenario as very manageable, with LTD needs of $35bn for TLAC requirements and preferred needs of $15-$20bn to maintain the industry-wide SLR at 5.6%.The constraint is greater at the bank entity, where the capacity to grow leverage exposure to be ~$765bn at 6.2% SLR.\"Goldman's take was more troubling: the bank estimated that under the continued QE regime, there would be a shortfall of some $2 trillion in reserve capacity, mainly in the form of deposits which the banks would be unable to accept as part of ongoing QE (much more in Goldman'sfull take of the SLR quandary).So what happens next?Addressing this topic, yesterday Curvature's Scott Skyrm wrote that \"the largest banks are enjoying much larger balance sheets, but there are political factors in Washington that are against an extension of the exemption.... Here are a couple of scenarios and their implications on the Repo market:The exemption is extended 3 months or 6 months - No impact on the Repo market. It's already fully priced-in.The exemption is continued for reserves, but ended for Treasurys. Since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise. Volatility increases as Repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants.The exemption is ended for both reserves and Treasurys. Same as above.In other words, Skyrm has a relatively downbeat view, warning that \"since large banks are the largest cash providers in the Repo market, less cash is intermediated into the market and Repo rates rise.\" Additionally, volatility is likely to increase as repo assets move from the largest banks to the other Repo market participants...Perhaps a bit too draconian? Well, last week, JPMorgan laid out 5 scenarios for SLR, of which two predicted the end of SLR relief on March 31, as follow:3. Relief ends March 31, banks fully raise capital Impact on BanksRatesFront-End Rates 4. Relief ends March 31, banks raise capital & de-lever Impact on BanksRatesFront-End RatesGoing back to Zoltan, let's recallthat the repo gurualso cautioned that \"ending the exemption of reserves and Treasuries from the calculation of the SLR may mean that U.S. banks will turn away deposits and reserves on the margin (not Treasuries) to leave more room for market-making activities,and these flows will swell further money funds’ inflows coming from TGA drawdowns.\"More importantly, Zoltan does not expect broad chaos in repo or broader markets, and instead provides a more benign view on the negligible impact the SLR has had (and will be if it is eliminated), as he explained in a note from Tuesday.How to determine if Zoltan's benign view is correct? He concluded his note by writing that \"given that our call for a zero-to-negative FRA-OIS spread by the end of June was predicated on the end of SLR extension and an assumption that the Fed will try to fix a quantity problem with prices, not quantities, today’s adjustments mean that FRA-OIS won’t trade all the way down to zero or negative territory.\"FRA-OIS from here will be a function of how tight FX swaps will trade relative to OIS, but Treasury bills trading at deeply sub-zero rates is no longer a risk...While Bills have occasionally dipped into the negative territory on occasion, so far they have avoided a fullblown plunge into NIRP, which may be just the positive sign the market is waiting for to ease the nerves associated with the sudden and largely unexpected end of the SLR exemption.* *  *Finally, for those curious what the immediate market impact will be, NatWest strategist Blake Gwinn writes that the Fed announcement that they’re letting regulatory exemptions for banks expire at the end of the month \"really threads the needle and \"assuages concerns about the potential long-term impact on the markets\" asthe SLR \"ends it but defuses a lot of the knee-jerk market reaction” by pledging to address the current design and calibration of the supplementary leverage ratio to prevent strains from developing.“I was never worried about a day-one bank puke of Treasuries or drawdown in repo or anything like that on no renewal,” Gwinn said. “My concern was the longer run,” like as reserves continue to rise, would the SLR “become a nuisance and drag on Treasuries and spreads” Gwinn concludes that with the statement, the Fed is\"really speaking to those fears and basically saying, ‘don’t worry, we are on it’.”Well, with yields spiking to HOD in early quad-witch trading, the market sure seems quite skeptical that the Fed is on anything.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":337,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":377190383,"gmtCreate":1619502340242,"gmtModify":1704725024780,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Oh......................","listText":"Oh......................","text":"Oh......................","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/377190383","repostId":"1190086074","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":427,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350730656,"gmtCreate":1616287013975,"gmtModify":1704792592922,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great","listText":"Great","text":"Great","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350730656","repostId":"1103756496","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":375,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":377196085,"gmtCreate":1619502632947,"gmtModify":1704725031591,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good to know that","listText":"Good to know that","text":"Good to know that","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/377196085","repostId":"2130423473","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2130423473","pubTimestamp":1619497340,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2130423473?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-04-27 12:22","market":"us","language":"en","title":"HSBC beats expectations as pretax profit rises 79% on recovery from Covid-19 fallout","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2130423473","media":"The Straits Times","summary":"LONDON (REUTERS) - HSBC Holdings on Tuesday (April 27) reported a much better-than-expected 79 per c","content":"<div>\n<p>LONDON (REUTERS) - HSBC Holdings on Tuesday (April 27) reported a much better-than-expected 79 per cent rise in first-quarter profit, as the Asia-focused lender starts to recover from the economic ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/hsbc-beats-expectations-as-pretax-profit-rises-79-on-recovery-from-covid-19-fallout\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"straits_highlight","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>HSBC beats expectations as pretax profit rises 79% on recovery from Covid-19 fallout</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\">\nHSBC beats expectations as pretax profit rises 79% on recovery from Covid-19 fallout\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-04-27 12:22 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=http://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/hsbc-beats-expectations-as-pretax-profit-rises-79-on-recovery-from-covid-19-fallout><strong>The Straits Times</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>LONDON (REUTERS) - HSBC Holdings on Tuesday (April 27) reported a much better-than-expected 79 per cent rise in first-quarter profit, as the Asia-focused lender starts to recover from the economic ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/hsbc-beats-expectations-as-pretax-profit-rises-79-on-recovery-from-covid-19-fallout\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"03143":"华夏香港银行股","HSBC":"汇丰","00005":"汇丰控股","HSBA.UK":"汇丰控股有限公司"},"source_url":"http://www.straitstimes.com/business/banking/hsbc-beats-expectations-as-pretax-profit-rises-79-on-recovery-from-covid-19-fallout","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2130423473","content_text":"LONDON (REUTERS) - HSBC Holdings on Tuesday (April 27) reported a much better-than-expected 79 per cent rise in first-quarter profit, as the Asia-focused lender starts to recover from the economic damage caused by the coronavirus pandemic.Europe's biggest bank by assets reported profit before tax was US$5.78 billion (S$7.66 billion) for the three months ended on March 30, up from US$3.21 billion a year ago and above an average analyst forecast of US$3.35 billion compiled by the bank.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":303,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":350797848,"gmtCreate":1616286910984,"gmtModify":1704792591124,"author":{"id":"3572480152290251","authorId":"3572480152290251","name":"JasmineQ","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/59aed245306172f2b2d7270455bd638a","crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3572480152290251","idStr":"3572480152290251"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good.&nbsp;","listText":"Good.&nbsp;","text":"Good.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/350797848","repostId":"1103756496","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":188,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}