+Follow
Chantellex
No personal profile
27
Follow
1
Followers
0
Topic
0
Badge
Posts
Hot
Chantellex
2021-08-26
??
Apple Inc.: Jobs' Era Vs. Cook's Era
Chantellex
2021-08-26
Good
2 Growth Stocks Shaping the Future of Technology
Chantellex
2021-06-24
Nice
Sorry, the original content has been removed
Chantellex
2021-06-20
??
Largest Boeing 737 MAX model takes off on maiden flight
Go to Tiger App to see more news
{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3580365088561311","uuid":"3580365088561311","gmtCreate":1617273197279,"gmtModify":1617281033103,"name":"Chantellex","pinyin":"chantellex","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":27,"tweetSize":4,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.01.09","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.06.15","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":3,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":810578739,"gmtCreate":1629989025021,"gmtModify":1676530194888,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/810578739","repostId":"1168256001","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":376,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":810578056,"gmtCreate":1629988992275,"gmtModify":1676530194865,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/810578056","repostId":"2162096290","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":263,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128751710,"gmtCreate":1624533396330,"gmtModify":1703839588515,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/128751710","repostId":"1155529111","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1155529111","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624532659,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1155529111?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-24 19:04","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Bank of America says it's safe to buy Bed Bath & Beyond again after meme rally fades","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1155529111","media":"cnbc","summary":"Investors can feel comfortable buyingBed Bath & Beyondagain now that Reddit traders appear to have l","content":"<div>\n<p>Investors can feel comfortable buyingBed Bath & Beyondagain now that Reddit traders appear to have left the stock behind, according to Bank of America.\nThe stock was one of several caught up in the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/bank-of-america-says-its-safe-to-buy-bed-bath-beyond-again-after-meme-rally-fades.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>Bank of America says it's safe to buy Bed Bath & Beyond again after meme rally fades</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\">\nBank of America says it's safe to buy Bed Bath & Beyond again after meme rally fades\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-06-24 19:04 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/bank-of-america-says-its-safe-to-buy-bed-bath-beyond-again-after-meme-rally-fades.html><strong>cnbc</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Investors can feel comfortable buyingBed Bath & Beyondagain now that Reddit traders appear to have left the stock behind, according to Bank of America.\nThe stock was one of several caught up in the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/bank-of-america-says-its-safe-to-buy-bed-bath-beyond-again-after-meme-rally-fades.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BBBY":"3B家居"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/bank-of-america-says-its-safe-to-buy-bed-bath-beyond-again-after-meme-rally-fades.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1155529111","content_text":"Investors can feel comfortable buyingBed Bath & Beyondagain now that Reddit traders appear to have left the stock behind, according to Bank of America.\nThe stock was one of several caught up in the renewed meme stock rally earlier this month, seeing its share price and volatility increase dramatically. The stock has now dropped more than 33% since June 2.\nAnalyst Curtis Nagle reinstated a buy rating for the retail stock, saying that the meme rally appears to be over for Bed Bath & Beyond. Nagle hadmoved the stock to no rating three weeks ago, saying that shares were too disconnected from fundamentals.\n“BBBY shares are now trading much closer to levels pre-surge, and non-fundamentals drivers such as number of mentions on retail investor online message boards, trading volumes, and short interest have moderated,” the note said.\nThe brief spurt of volatility did not change the long-term story for the stock, Bank of America said.\n“We still see a solid LT turnaround in place,” the note said.\nBank of America reinstated its price target for Bed Bath & Beyond at $38 per share, which is nearly 20% above where stock closed on Wednesday.\nDuring the meme stock rally earlier this month, Bed Bath & Beyond rose as high as $44.51 per share.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":177,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":165434873,"gmtCreate":1624154623592,"gmtModify":1703829552205,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/165434873","repostId":"2144086770","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":229,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":810578739,"gmtCreate":1629989025021,"gmtModify":1676530194888,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/810578739","repostId":"1168256001","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1168256001","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629988691,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1168256001?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-26 22:38","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple Inc.: Jobs' Era Vs. Cook's Era","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1168256001","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nMy last article on Apple Inc. was performed under a framework that I call the Buffett’s 10x","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>My last article on Apple Inc. was performed under a framework that I call the Buffett’s 10x Pretax Rule, with a particular focus on its valuation and compounding power.</li>\n <li>And this article analyzes a different aspect: the timing. The analysis attempts to shed insights into the timing when Buffett pulled the trigger on his elephant gun.</li>\n <li>The results show the different profitability drivers of AAPL during Steve Jobs’ era and Tim Cook’s era and provide useful insights for value investors.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4a28673a5b20078b3787241b02c6c9d4\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Nikada/iStock Unreleased via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>The investment thesis</b></p>\n<p>If you are reading this, chances are that you already know that Apple Inc. (AAPL) is the largest position in Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway portfolio. My last article on AAPL was performed under a framework that I call Buffett's 10x Pretax Rule, with a particular focus on its valuation and compounding power.</p>\n<p>And this article analyzes a different aspect: the timing. Buffett bought the majority of his APPL shares during 2016 and 2017: a total of 661M shares, about 4% of the total shares currently outstanding. However, as to be seen in the remainder of this article, the profitability of the business was in rapid decline during 2016 and 2017 as measured by the return on capital employed (\"ROCE\"). So I was intrigued by the timing of Buffett's purchase.</p>\n<p>The analysis shares my attempts to answer my own question using a so-called DuPont analysis. The results show the different profitability drivers of AAPL during Steve Jobs' era and Tim Cook's era. As to be seen by the results later, as a person, I love and even idolize Steve Jobs for his vision and relentless innovation-first style. His vision and innovation - when worked - created an astronomical level of profitability, but is difficult to sustain. But as an investor, especially a long-term and value-driven investor, I feel more comfortable with Tim Cook with his focus on operation and existing products. As to be seen by the results, profitability seemed to be lower on the surface, but upon a closer look, the quality of the earnings is actually improved and became more sustainable. I hope these results provide useful insights not only for AAPL investors but also for investors interested in other stocks.</p>\n<p><b>Overview and recap</b></p>\n<p>Here, I will first provide a brief recap of my last article to facilitate the new discussion today. If you're a devout Buffett cultist like this author, you must have noticed or heard that the grandmaster paid ~10x pretax earnings for many of his largest and best deals. The list is a really long one, ranging from Coca-Cola, American Express, Wells Fargo, Walmart, Burlington Northern, and of course the more recent AAPL purchase and his recent $25B repurchases of BRK shares as analyzed in my earlier article.</p>\n<p>The following chart shows the price history of AAPL and its 10x pretax earnings since 2010. Pretax earnings are also referred to as \"EBT\", Earnings Before Taxes, in this article. As seen, Buffett made his purchases during 2016-2017 when the price is below or near 10x EBT. I was lucky enough to have made the AAPL purchases at that time myself too.</p>\n<p>And the thesis was that if we paid 10x pretax and bought a business that stagnates forever, it is an investment that offers a 10% pretax return already, equivalent to a 10% bond. Not the best investment ever, but not that bad either. If we get a business that offers<i>any</i>growth like AAPL, then we will be buying an above-average business at an average price. It is now equivalent to buying a 10% yield bond with a built-in growth of coupon payments. And we will have a large chance of a double-digit return compounding for a long time (if you hold onto it long enough like Buffett).</p>\n<p>And AAPL is a business that is very like to keep growing as to be elaborated next.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9eec812a3eda60f950a1890eebc7dd34\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"359\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author based on Seeking Alpha data</span></p>\n<p>So are there any reasons fundamental to this 10x pretax rule, or is it only a bunch of pure coincidences? I think it is the former and there are indeed many good reasons for this rule, as listed below.</p>\n<p><b>ROCE and perpetual autonomous growth potential</b></p>\n<p>When we think like a long-term business owner, not a stock trader, a key metric (the most important metric in my opinion) is the return on capital employed (ROCE). ROCE measures the return of capital<i>actually</i>employed in a business. And it, therefore, provides fundamental insights into profitability. ROCE is fundamentally important in many ways. A consistent and high ROCE is the hallmark of a business with a sustainable moat. A consistent and high ROCE also shows how effectively the reinvested income can be used to fuel further earnings growth because, in the long term, the growth rate is given by:</p>\n<p>Long term growth rate = ROCE * Reinvestment Rate</p>\n<p>Thus a higher ROCE allows a business to reinvest less of its earnings and grow more at the same time. A key combination for a long-term compounder. To estimate the ROCE of businesses like AAPL, I consider the following items capital actually employed:</p>\n<p>1. Working capital, including payables, receivables, inventory. These are the capitals required for the daily operation of their businesses.</p>\n<p>2. Gross Property, Plant, and Equipment. These are the capitals required to actually conduct business and manufacture their products.</p>\n<p>3. Research and development expenses (an essential expense for a business like AAPL).</p>\n<p>Based on the above considerations, the ROCE of AAPL over the past decade is shown below. As seen, it was able to maintain an astronomical level of ROCE at the beginning of the decade, when Steve Jobs left the CEO position. The average ROCE between 2010 to 2012 was near a level of around 443%. Every $1 reinvested in the business can generate more than $4 of additional earning! Since Tim Cook took over, the profitability gradually lowered to the current level of 183%.</p>\n<p>To help put things under perspective, the next chart shows the ROCE of a few other Buffett-style stocks. The ROCE data are directly pulled from my previous analyses. And in case you want to see the details of how I got these numbers, you can look up my recent articles under these tickers.</p>\n<p>As seen, the profitability during Jobs' era was truly astronomical, thanks to all the innovations that profoundly changed the world. And the current level of 183%, the \"declined\" level, is still very competitive relative to other high-quality businesses.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cb073458b1726a64be72be41af90a7b6\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"360\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author and Seeking Alpha.</span></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/773b42d84964aa81732fe7e60ce2e815\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"311\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author and Seeking Alpha.</span></p>\n<p><b>Why Buffett bought at a time with rapidly declining profitability?</b></p>\n<p>With the above results, the question that puzzled me was why Buffett bought at a time with rapidly declining profitability? As seen from the results above, the profitability of the business was in rapid decline during 2016 and 2017, when Buffett bought the majority of his shares. The following analysis shares my attempts to answer this question using a so-called DuPont framework. The results show the different profitability drivers of AAPL during Steve Jobs' era and Tim Cook's era.</p>\n<p>The DuPont framework is a tool for analyzing profitability at a fundamental level. It was a general tool and by no means specific to the DuPont business. However, it was popularized by the DuPont Corporation and the name stuck. The DuPont was originally developed to pinpoint issues to improve return on equity (\"ROE\"). In the application here, I made a few modifications to suit the unique situation of AAPL (and modern corporations in general). I will detail the modifications as we go.</p>\n<p>The first modification is that I will use the framework to analyze ROCE instead of ROE. The reasons are aforementioned. And to recap, the first main reason is that ROCE is more fundamentally important than ROE. And secondly, the ROE concept is not even applicable at all to many modern corporations where their share equity is very small or even negative, because more and more corporations have decided to return all share equity to shareholders as they rely more and more on their intangible assets to make a profit.</p>\n<p>Under the DuPont framework, there are three knobs that management can turn to drive up ROCE: profit margin (\"PM\"), asset turnover ratio (\"ATR\"), and leverage. Through simple math, we can show that ROCE is just the product of these three things, i.e.,</p>\n<p>ROCE = PM x ATR x leverage.</p>\n<p>Where PM here is defined as operating income divided by total revenue, ATR is defined as total revenue divided by total asset, and leverage is defined as total asset divided by total capital employed. And here is the second modification that I made to the original DuPont method. I defined leverage as the ratio between total asset divided and total capital employed, instead of the total asset divided by share equity. And again, the reason is that the original definition is not even applicable at all to many modern corporations where their share equity is very small or even negative. The new definition could be understood as effective leverage. It's leverage against the business' working capital (payables, receivables, and inventory), gross property, plant, equipment, et al. If these things represent the share equity in an accounting sense, then the effective leverage will be the same as the original definition. If not, then the effective leverage makes more sense to me. No matter what is the share equity in the accounting sense, a corporation always requires capital to make a profit.</p>\n<p><b>AAPL's profitability drivers</b></p>\n<p>Based on the above discussions, the following three charts show the three knobs for AAPL over the past decade. As can be seen from the first chart, the profit margin has declined from about 32.9% at the beginning of the decade to the current level of 26.7% - a 20.9% decrease. On average, the profit margin for the overall economy fluctuates around 8% and rarely goes above 10%. Of course, this is an average across all business sectors. Nonetheless, as a rule of thumb, 10% is a very healthy profit margin and 20% is a very high margin. AAPL's 32.9% margin at the beginning of the decade was due to the innovations that profoundly changed the world and their near-monopoly status. It is difficult to sustain. You cannot expect to invent a new earthshaking product like the iPhone before 2011 every a few years. And the current level of 26.7% is still very high.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/62fc5d093753a57ae672d3726f14afec\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"343\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author and Seeking Alpha data.</span></p>\n<p>The second chart shows the ATR driver. The ATR measures how efficiently a company uses its assets to generate revenue. The higher the ATR, the better the company is performing, since higher ratios imply that the company is generating more revenue per dollar of assets. As seen, AAPL's ATR started around 0.88 at the beginning of the decade, declined to about 0.6 in the mid, and bounced back to the current level of 0.94. Overall, the ATR has improved 6.4% over the decade. Unlike innovations, ATR is a knob that management can consistently tweak and improve. And Tim Cook, with his tremendous experiences and insights as the former Chief Operating Officer, certainly has done an excellent job. A notable example was his decision to replace Apple's own factories and warehouses with contractors, a decision that led to a reduction of the company's inventory from months to days.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ccbba3d838ca6ffb8b0e4574e2908eed\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"345\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author and Seeking Alpha data.</span></p>\n<p>This third and last chart shows the biggest driver for the profitability change. It shows that Tim Cook reduced the effective leverage from an average level of ~15x at the beginning of the decade, to the current level of 7.3, a 74% decrease. So the ROCE declined from 443% in the Jobs' era to the current level of 183% was largely due to the decrease in leverage. As a result, the decline of ROCE is not as bad as it seemed on the surface. The quality of the profit has been improved and became more sustainable.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d1c7f2ce039418c7258342046a887042\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"331\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author and Seeking Alpha data.</span></p>\n<p><b>Putting it all together</b></p>\n<p>The following table summarizes the above profitability drivers. And for more visual-oriented readers, the chart below it visualizes the numbers in a waterfall plot. Note that all the changes quoted here are the so-called logarithm changes. For readers who are not familiar with logarithm changes, it is the \"more scientific\" way of measuring changes when there are multiple factors involved - more scientific than the simple arithmetic changes we routinely quote.</p>\n<p>Let's use a simple example to illustrate. Let's consider the calculation of dividend yield for a stock. The dividend yield depends on two things - the dividend and the price, so it will illustrate why the logarithm change is the \"more scientific\" way of measuring change when multiple factors are involved. Consider an example when a stock's dividend increases by 10% and price drops by 10% - in the arithmetic sense we talked about. The dividend yield would increase, but it will<i>not</i>increase by 20%. It would actually increase by 22.22%. In other words, the dividend yield change is not equal to the sum of the arithmetic change in the dividend and the price.</p>\n<p>Now in logarithm terms, things become simpler and more intuitive in a certain way. The logarithm changes involved in this example are: 9.52% for the dividend (logarithm of 110% = 9.52%), -10.54% for the price (logarithm of 90% = -10.54%), and 20.06% for the dividend yield (logarithm of 122.22% = 20.06%). So as you can see, the change of dividend yield is now equal to the sum of the changes in the dividend and the price (20.06% = 9.52% + 10.54%).</p>\n<p>With this digression, now the summary of the profitability drivers for AAPL. As seen from the table and the chart, the ROCE has decreased by 88.4% over the decade (again we are talking in the logarithm terms here and hereafter). It seems pretty bad until we look at the knobs that Cook turned. Out of the 88.4% decrease, 74% of it came from the decreased leverage, which is actually a good thing to me. The next biggest contributor came from the decrease in PM, a 20.9% decrease. It is unfortunate, never a good thing to see profit margin decrease. But I would like to argue the level of PM enjoyed by AAPL (or any business) during a period of technological monopoly is not really sustainable. And lastly, the ATR has contributed a positive 6.4% to the change. As aforementioned, unlike technological innovations, ATR is a knob that management can consistently tweak and improve. And Tim Cook certainly is an operation master (not implying that he is not fantastic in other ways).</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c8ab37ef43d6df7e215214aaf8e33eb\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"303\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author and Seeking Alpha data.</span></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03243108e67063bf027112a201a0cac9\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"300\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author and Seeking Alpha data.</span></p>\n<p><b>Conclusion and final thought</b></p>\n<p>Mylast articleon AAPL was performed under a framework that I call Buffett's 10x Pretax Rule, with a particular focus on its valuation and compounding power. The thesis was that when Buffett bought AAPL during 2016~2017 at a price around 10x pretax earnings, it was equivalent to buying a 10% yield bond even if the business stagnates forever. If he gets ANY growth, then he will be buying a 10% yield bond with a built-in growth of coupon payments. And as shown in my last article, AAPL is a business that is very like to keep growing due to its high ROCE and capital allocation flexibility.</p>\n<p>This article analyzes a different aspect: the timing. Buffett bought the majority of his APPL shares during 2016 and 2017. However, as seen in this article, the profitability of the business was in rapid decline during 2016 and 2017 as measured by the return on capital employed (\"ROCE\"). So I was intrigued by the timing of Buffett's purchase.</p>\n<p>Using the so-called DuPont analysis (with some modifications), the results show that the profitability drivers of AAPL have changed substantially from Steve Jobs' era and Tim Cook's era. The ROCE has decreased by 88.4% over the decade, which seems pretty bad until we look closer at the knobs that Cook turned. Out of the 88.4% decrease, 74% of it came from the decreased leverage, which is actually a good thing to me. Tim Cook also stabilized (slightly improved) the asset turnover rate, which contributed a positive 6.4% to the change of ROCE. Unlike technological innovations, ATR is a knob that management can consistently tweak and improve. The decreased leverage and improved ATR have actually improved ROCE in a way and made it more sustainable. I think this is in line with Buffett's philosophy of buying businesses that can be run by a fool one day - or at least buying business that does not require a once-in-a-generation genius to run.</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>Apple Inc.: Jobs' Era Vs. Cook's Era</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 Inc.: Jobs' Era Vs. Cook's Era\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-26 22:38 GMT+8 <a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4451809-apple-inc-jobs-era-vs-cooks-era><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nMy last article on Apple Inc. was performed under a framework that I call the Buffett’s 10x Pretax Rule, with a particular focus on its valuation and compounding power.\nAnd this article ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4451809-apple-inc-jobs-era-vs-cooks-era\">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://seekingalpha.com/article/4451809-apple-inc-jobs-era-vs-cooks-era","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1168256001","content_text":"Summary\n\nMy last article on Apple Inc. was performed under a framework that I call the Buffett’s 10x Pretax Rule, with a particular focus on its valuation and compounding power.\nAnd this article analyzes a different aspect: the timing. The analysis attempts to shed insights into the timing when Buffett pulled the trigger on his elephant gun.\nThe results show the different profitability drivers of AAPL during Steve Jobs’ era and Tim Cook’s era and provide useful insights for value investors.\n\nNikada/iStock Unreleased via Getty Images\nThe investment thesis\nIf you are reading this, chances are that you already know that Apple Inc. (AAPL) is the largest position in Warren Buffett's Berkshire Hathaway portfolio. My last article on AAPL was performed under a framework that I call Buffett's 10x Pretax Rule, with a particular focus on its valuation and compounding power.\nAnd this article analyzes a different aspect: the timing. Buffett bought the majority of his APPL shares during 2016 and 2017: a total of 661M shares, about 4% of the total shares currently outstanding. However, as to be seen in the remainder of this article, the profitability of the business was in rapid decline during 2016 and 2017 as measured by the return on capital employed (\"ROCE\"). So I was intrigued by the timing of Buffett's purchase.\nThe analysis shares my attempts to answer my own question using a so-called DuPont analysis. The results show the different profitability drivers of AAPL during Steve Jobs' era and Tim Cook's era. As to be seen by the results later, as a person, I love and even idolize Steve Jobs for his vision and relentless innovation-first style. His vision and innovation - when worked - created an astronomical level of profitability, but is difficult to sustain. But as an investor, especially a long-term and value-driven investor, I feel more comfortable with Tim Cook with his focus on operation and existing products. As to be seen by the results, profitability seemed to be lower on the surface, but upon a closer look, the quality of the earnings is actually improved and became more sustainable. I hope these results provide useful insights not only for AAPL investors but also for investors interested in other stocks.\nOverview and recap\nHere, I will first provide a brief recap of my last article to facilitate the new discussion today. If you're a devout Buffett cultist like this author, you must have noticed or heard that the grandmaster paid ~10x pretax earnings for many of his largest and best deals. The list is a really long one, ranging from Coca-Cola, American Express, Wells Fargo, Walmart, Burlington Northern, and of course the more recent AAPL purchase and his recent $25B repurchases of BRK shares as analyzed in my earlier article.\nThe following chart shows the price history of AAPL and its 10x pretax earnings since 2010. Pretax earnings are also referred to as \"EBT\", Earnings Before Taxes, in this article. As seen, Buffett made his purchases during 2016-2017 when the price is below or near 10x EBT. I was lucky enough to have made the AAPL purchases at that time myself too.\nAnd the thesis was that if we paid 10x pretax and bought a business that stagnates forever, it is an investment that offers a 10% pretax return already, equivalent to a 10% bond. Not the best investment ever, but not that bad either. If we get a business that offersanygrowth like AAPL, then we will be buying an above-average business at an average price. It is now equivalent to buying a 10% yield bond with a built-in growth of coupon payments. And we will have a large chance of a double-digit return compounding for a long time (if you hold onto it long enough like Buffett).\nAnd AAPL is a business that is very like to keep growing as to be elaborated next.\nSource: Author based on Seeking Alpha data\nSo are there any reasons fundamental to this 10x pretax rule, or is it only a bunch of pure coincidences? I think it is the former and there are indeed many good reasons for this rule, as listed below.\nROCE and perpetual autonomous growth potential\nWhen we think like a long-term business owner, not a stock trader, a key metric (the most important metric in my opinion) is the return on capital employed (ROCE). ROCE measures the return of capitalactuallyemployed in a business. And it, therefore, provides fundamental insights into profitability. ROCE is fundamentally important in many ways. A consistent and high ROCE is the hallmark of a business with a sustainable moat. A consistent and high ROCE also shows how effectively the reinvested income can be used to fuel further earnings growth because, in the long term, the growth rate is given by:\nLong term growth rate = ROCE * Reinvestment Rate\nThus a higher ROCE allows a business to reinvest less of its earnings and grow more at the same time. A key combination for a long-term compounder. To estimate the ROCE of businesses like AAPL, I consider the following items capital actually employed:\n1. Working capital, including payables, receivables, inventory. These are the capitals required for the daily operation of their businesses.\n2. Gross Property, Plant, and Equipment. These are the capitals required to actually conduct business and manufacture their products.\n3. Research and development expenses (an essential expense for a business like AAPL).\nBased on the above considerations, the ROCE of AAPL over the past decade is shown below. As seen, it was able to maintain an astronomical level of ROCE at the beginning of the decade, when Steve Jobs left the CEO position. The average ROCE between 2010 to 2012 was near a level of around 443%. Every $1 reinvested in the business can generate more than $4 of additional earning! Since Tim Cook took over, the profitability gradually lowered to the current level of 183%.\nTo help put things under perspective, the next chart shows the ROCE of a few other Buffett-style stocks. The ROCE data are directly pulled from my previous analyses. And in case you want to see the details of how I got these numbers, you can look up my recent articles under these tickers.\nAs seen, the profitability during Jobs' era was truly astronomical, thanks to all the innovations that profoundly changed the world. And the current level of 183%, the \"declined\" level, is still very competitive relative to other high-quality businesses.\nSource: Author and Seeking Alpha.\nSource: Author and Seeking Alpha.\nWhy Buffett bought at a time with rapidly declining profitability?\nWith the above results, the question that puzzled me was why Buffett bought at a time with rapidly declining profitability? As seen from the results above, the profitability of the business was in rapid decline during 2016 and 2017, when Buffett bought the majority of his shares. The following analysis shares my attempts to answer this question using a so-called DuPont framework. The results show the different profitability drivers of AAPL during Steve Jobs' era and Tim Cook's era.\nThe DuPont framework is a tool for analyzing profitability at a fundamental level. It was a general tool and by no means specific to the DuPont business. However, it was popularized by the DuPont Corporation and the name stuck. The DuPont was originally developed to pinpoint issues to improve return on equity (\"ROE\"). In the application here, I made a few modifications to suit the unique situation of AAPL (and modern corporations in general). I will detail the modifications as we go.\nThe first modification is that I will use the framework to analyze ROCE instead of ROE. The reasons are aforementioned. And to recap, the first main reason is that ROCE is more fundamentally important than ROE. And secondly, the ROE concept is not even applicable at all to many modern corporations where their share equity is very small or even negative, because more and more corporations have decided to return all share equity to shareholders as they rely more and more on their intangible assets to make a profit.\nUnder the DuPont framework, there are three knobs that management can turn to drive up ROCE: profit margin (\"PM\"), asset turnover ratio (\"ATR\"), and leverage. Through simple math, we can show that ROCE is just the product of these three things, i.e.,\nROCE = PM x ATR x leverage.\nWhere PM here is defined as operating income divided by total revenue, ATR is defined as total revenue divided by total asset, and leverage is defined as total asset divided by total capital employed. And here is the second modification that I made to the original DuPont method. I defined leverage as the ratio between total asset divided and total capital employed, instead of the total asset divided by share equity. And again, the reason is that the original definition is not even applicable at all to many modern corporations where their share equity is very small or even negative. The new definition could be understood as effective leverage. It's leverage against the business' working capital (payables, receivables, and inventory), gross property, plant, equipment, et al. If these things represent the share equity in an accounting sense, then the effective leverage will be the same as the original definition. If not, then the effective leverage makes more sense to me. No matter what is the share equity in the accounting sense, a corporation always requires capital to make a profit.\nAAPL's profitability drivers\nBased on the above discussions, the following three charts show the three knobs for AAPL over the past decade. As can be seen from the first chart, the profit margin has declined from about 32.9% at the beginning of the decade to the current level of 26.7% - a 20.9% decrease. On average, the profit margin for the overall economy fluctuates around 8% and rarely goes above 10%. Of course, this is an average across all business sectors. Nonetheless, as a rule of thumb, 10% is a very healthy profit margin and 20% is a very high margin. AAPL's 32.9% margin at the beginning of the decade was due to the innovations that profoundly changed the world and their near-monopoly status. It is difficult to sustain. You cannot expect to invent a new earthshaking product like the iPhone before 2011 every a few years. And the current level of 26.7% is still very high.\nSource: Author and Seeking Alpha data.\nThe second chart shows the ATR driver. The ATR measures how efficiently a company uses its assets to generate revenue. The higher the ATR, the better the company is performing, since higher ratios imply that the company is generating more revenue per dollar of assets. As seen, AAPL's ATR started around 0.88 at the beginning of the decade, declined to about 0.6 in the mid, and bounced back to the current level of 0.94. Overall, the ATR has improved 6.4% over the decade. Unlike innovations, ATR is a knob that management can consistently tweak and improve. And Tim Cook, with his tremendous experiences and insights as the former Chief Operating Officer, certainly has done an excellent job. A notable example was his decision to replace Apple's own factories and warehouses with contractors, a decision that led to a reduction of the company's inventory from months to days.\nSource: Author and Seeking Alpha data.\nThis third and last chart shows the biggest driver for the profitability change. It shows that Tim Cook reduced the effective leverage from an average level of ~15x at the beginning of the decade, to the current level of 7.3, a 74% decrease. So the ROCE declined from 443% in the Jobs' era to the current level of 183% was largely due to the decrease in leverage. As a result, the decline of ROCE is not as bad as it seemed on the surface. The quality of the profit has been improved and became more sustainable.\nSource: Author and Seeking Alpha data.\nPutting it all together\nThe following table summarizes the above profitability drivers. And for more visual-oriented readers, the chart below it visualizes the numbers in a waterfall plot. Note that all the changes quoted here are the so-called logarithm changes. For readers who are not familiar with logarithm changes, it is the \"more scientific\" way of measuring changes when there are multiple factors involved - more scientific than the simple arithmetic changes we routinely quote.\nLet's use a simple example to illustrate. Let's consider the calculation of dividend yield for a stock. The dividend yield depends on two things - the dividend and the price, so it will illustrate why the logarithm change is the \"more scientific\" way of measuring change when multiple factors are involved. Consider an example when a stock's dividend increases by 10% and price drops by 10% - in the arithmetic sense we talked about. The dividend yield would increase, but it willnotincrease by 20%. It would actually increase by 22.22%. In other words, the dividend yield change is not equal to the sum of the arithmetic change in the dividend and the price.\nNow in logarithm terms, things become simpler and more intuitive in a certain way. The logarithm changes involved in this example are: 9.52% for the dividend (logarithm of 110% = 9.52%), -10.54% for the price (logarithm of 90% = -10.54%), and 20.06% for the dividend yield (logarithm of 122.22% = 20.06%). So as you can see, the change of dividend yield is now equal to the sum of the changes in the dividend and the price (20.06% = 9.52% + 10.54%).\nWith this digression, now the summary of the profitability drivers for AAPL. As seen from the table and the chart, the ROCE has decreased by 88.4% over the decade (again we are talking in the logarithm terms here and hereafter). It seems pretty bad until we look at the knobs that Cook turned. Out of the 88.4% decrease, 74% of it came from the decreased leverage, which is actually a good thing to me. The next biggest contributor came from the decrease in PM, a 20.9% decrease. It is unfortunate, never a good thing to see profit margin decrease. But I would like to argue the level of PM enjoyed by AAPL (or any business) during a period of technological monopoly is not really sustainable. And lastly, the ATR has contributed a positive 6.4% to the change. As aforementioned, unlike technological innovations, ATR is a knob that management can consistently tweak and improve. And Tim Cook certainly is an operation master (not implying that he is not fantastic in other ways).\nSource: Author and Seeking Alpha data.\nSource: Author and Seeking Alpha data.\nConclusion and final thought\nMylast articleon AAPL was performed under a framework that I call Buffett's 10x Pretax Rule, with a particular focus on its valuation and compounding power. The thesis was that when Buffett bought AAPL during 2016~2017 at a price around 10x pretax earnings, it was equivalent to buying a 10% yield bond even if the business stagnates forever. If he gets ANY growth, then he will be buying a 10% yield bond with a built-in growth of coupon payments. And as shown in my last article, AAPL is a business that is very like to keep growing due to its high ROCE and capital allocation flexibility.\nThis article analyzes a different aspect: the timing. Buffett bought the majority of his APPL shares during 2016 and 2017. However, as seen in this article, the profitability of the business was in rapid decline during 2016 and 2017 as measured by the return on capital employed (\"ROCE\"). So I was intrigued by the timing of Buffett's purchase.\nUsing the so-called DuPont analysis (with some modifications), the results show that the profitability drivers of AAPL have changed substantially from Steve Jobs' era and Tim Cook's era. The ROCE has decreased by 88.4% over the decade, which seems pretty bad until we look closer at the knobs that Cook turned. Out of the 88.4% decrease, 74% of it came from the decreased leverage, which is actually a good thing to me. Tim Cook also stabilized (slightly improved) the asset turnover rate, which contributed a positive 6.4% to the change of ROCE. Unlike technological innovations, ATR is a knob that management can consistently tweak and improve. The decreased leverage and improved ATR have actually improved ROCE in a way and made it more sustainable. I think this is in line with Buffett's philosophy of buying businesses that can be run by a fool one day - or at least buying business that does not require a once-in-a-generation genius to run.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":376,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":810578056,"gmtCreate":1629988992275,"gmtModify":1676530194865,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/810578056","repostId":"2162096290","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2162096290","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1629988273,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2162096290?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-26 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"2 Growth Stocks Shaping the Future of Technology","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2162096290","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"These tech companies help clients harness the power of big data.","content":"<p>In general, digital transformation is a good thing. Solutions like e-commerce, cloud computing, and software-as-a-service help enterprises operate more efficiently and scale with greater agility. But the explosion of new technologies also creates complexities.</p>\n<p>Specifically, enterprises rely on an ever-increasing number of applications, and many of these applications create troves of data across various infrastructures and systems. Of course, all that data can be a valuable resource -- but only if you have the tools to harness its power.</p>\n<p>With that in mind, <b>Palantir Technologies</b> (NYSE:PLTR) and <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SNOW\">Snowflake</a></b> (NYSE:SNOW) help enterprises manage and make sense of data. And in a larger sense, both companies are shaping the future of technology, allowing clients to make better decisions and build more powerful applications. Here's what investors should know about these growth stocks.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9e3f822bad2451c7ff22261dba91203d\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"471\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p>\n<h2>1. Palantir Technologies</h2>\n<p>Palantir started by building software for defense and intelligence agencies like the CIA and FBI. In fact, the company is best known for its Gotham platform, which played a critical role in helping the U.S. find Osama bin Laden. That reputation gives Palantir an advantage; the company's history with classified information underscores the security and utility of its platform.</p>\n<p>More recently, Palantir has expanded into the commercial sector with the release of its Foundry software. In both areas, the company's products serve as a central operating system, helping clients integrate, analyze, and govern data usage across their organizations. In turn, that allows data scientists to build models and applications, and it empowers executives to make data-driven decisions.</p>\n<p>That brings me to Palantir's second advantage. The company's third platform, Apollo, is a continuous delivery system that allows Gotham and Foundry to be deployed in environments where other software-as-a-service (SaaS) products can't operate. For instance, most SaaS vendors run their software from <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> or more public clouds, but Palantir can deploy its software across public clouds, private data centers, and classified networks. In fact, clients run Palantir's SaaS platforms on oil rigs in the middle of the ocean, on disconnected laptops in Humvees, and on airplanes flying at 30,000 feet.</p>\n<p>Over the past year, Palantir has posted solid top-line growth, though it still has relatively few customers.</p>\n<table>\n <thead>\n <tr>\n <th><p>Metric</p></th>\n <th><p>Q2 2020 (TTM)</p></th>\n <th><p>Q2 2021 (TTM)</p></th>\n <th><p>Change</p></th>\n </tr>\n </thead>\n <tbody>\n <tr>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>Customers</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>137</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>169</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>23%</p></td>\n </tr>\n <tr>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>Revenue</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>$901.1 million</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>$1.3 billion</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>47%</p></td>\n </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Palantir SEC filings, Ycharts. TTM = trailing-12-months.</p>\n<p>Going forward, Palantir is well positioned to gain momentum. The company puts its market opportunity at $119 billion, and management is forecasting revenue growth of at least 30% through 2025.</p>\n<p>With that in mind, investors should pay attention to Palantir's ability to add new customers, and its ability to expand in the commercial sector. Last quarter, commercial revenue rose just 28%, growing far slower than total sales. That figure needs to accelerate if Palantir hopes to scale its business.</p>\n<h2>2. Snowflake</h2>\n<p>According to Snowflake, nine out of 10 IT leaders report problems relating to data silos. Put another way, these companies have data spread across so many disparate systems that it's difficult to unify that information and draw insights.</p>\n<p>To solve that problem, Snowflake created the Data Cloud, a network that connects thousands of companies and their data. This comprehensive platform combines the functionality of legacy solutions, like data pipelines for mobility, data lakes for storage, and data warehouses for analytics. In short, this unified approach breaks down silos, allowing clients to make informed decisions, build data-driven applications, and securely share data.</p>\n<p>That last use case is particularly important. Snowflake's governance tools allow clients to create secure data hubs, helping them share data inside and outside of their organizations. More importantly, Snowflake launched its data marketplace in 2019, allowing clients to monetize and acquire data sets from other customers.</p>\n<p>This creates a network effect: As more enterprises adopt the Data Cloud, more data sets will be made available through Snowflake's marketplace, creating value for all clients. This virtuous cycle has already been a powerful growth driver, but it should continue to reinforce Snowflake's advantage over time.</p>\n<table>\n <thead>\n <tr>\n <th><p>Metric</p></th>\n <th><p>Q1 2020 (TTM)</p></th>\n <th><p>Q1 2022 (TTM)</p></th>\n <th><p>Change</p></th>\n </tr>\n </thead>\n <tbody>\n <tr>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>Customers</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>2,720</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>4,532</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>67%</p></td>\n </tr>\n <tr>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>Revenue</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>$329.9 million</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>$712.2 million</p></td>\n <td width=\"156\"><p>116%</p></td>\n </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Data source: Snowflake SEC filings, Ycharts. TTM = trailing-12-months. Note: Q2 2022 ended April 30, 2021.</p>\n<p>Looking ahead, Snowflake is well positioned to grow its business. The company puts its market opportunity at $90 billion, and management believes product revenue will reach $10 billion by fiscal 2029, representing 44% annualized growth.</p>\n<p>In particular, investors should pay attention to the size of Snowflake's customer base. This metric is crucial to the long-term success of its data marketplace, which surpassed 500 listings in June. However, if Snowflake maintains its current momentum, that figure should get bigger very quickly.</p>","source":"fool_stock","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>2 Growth Stocks Shaping the Future of Technology</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n2 Growth Stocks Shaping the Future of Technology\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-26 22:31 GMT+8 <a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/26/2-growth-stocks-shaping-the-future-of-technology/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>In general, digital transformation is a good thing. Solutions like e-commerce, cloud computing, and software-as-a-service help enterprises operate more efficiently and scale with greater agility. But ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/26/2-growth-stocks-shaping-the-future-of-technology/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLTR":"Palantir Technologies Inc.","SNOW":"Snowflake"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/26/2-growth-stocks-shaping-the-future-of-technology/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2162096290","content_text":"In general, digital transformation is a good thing. Solutions like e-commerce, cloud computing, and software-as-a-service help enterprises operate more efficiently and scale with greater agility. But the explosion of new technologies also creates complexities.\nSpecifically, enterprises rely on an ever-increasing number of applications, and many of these applications create troves of data across various infrastructures and systems. Of course, all that data can be a valuable resource -- but only if you have the tools to harness its power.\nWith that in mind, Palantir Technologies (NYSE:PLTR) and Snowflake (NYSE:SNOW) help enterprises manage and make sense of data. And in a larger sense, both companies are shaping the future of technology, allowing clients to make better decisions and build more powerful applications. Here's what investors should know about these growth stocks.\nImage source: Getty Images.\n1. Palantir Technologies\nPalantir started by building software for defense and intelligence agencies like the CIA and FBI. In fact, the company is best known for its Gotham platform, which played a critical role in helping the U.S. find Osama bin Laden. That reputation gives Palantir an advantage; the company's history with classified information underscores the security and utility of its platform.\nMore recently, Palantir has expanded into the commercial sector with the release of its Foundry software. In both areas, the company's products serve as a central operating system, helping clients integrate, analyze, and govern data usage across their organizations. In turn, that allows data scientists to build models and applications, and it empowers executives to make data-driven decisions.\nThat brings me to Palantir's second advantage. The company's third platform, Apollo, is a continuous delivery system that allows Gotham and Foundry to be deployed in environments where other software-as-a-service (SaaS) products can't operate. For instance, most SaaS vendors run their software from one or more public clouds, but Palantir can deploy its software across public clouds, private data centers, and classified networks. In fact, clients run Palantir's SaaS platforms on oil rigs in the middle of the ocean, on disconnected laptops in Humvees, and on airplanes flying at 30,000 feet.\nOver the past year, Palantir has posted solid top-line growth, though it still has relatively few customers.\n\n\n\nMetric\nQ2 2020 (TTM)\nQ2 2021 (TTM)\nChange\n\n\n\n\nCustomers\n137\n169\n23%\n\n\nRevenue\n$901.1 million\n$1.3 billion\n47%\n\n\n\nData source: Palantir SEC filings, Ycharts. TTM = trailing-12-months.\nGoing forward, Palantir is well positioned to gain momentum. The company puts its market opportunity at $119 billion, and management is forecasting revenue growth of at least 30% through 2025.\nWith that in mind, investors should pay attention to Palantir's ability to add new customers, and its ability to expand in the commercial sector. Last quarter, commercial revenue rose just 28%, growing far slower than total sales. That figure needs to accelerate if Palantir hopes to scale its business.\n2. Snowflake\nAccording to Snowflake, nine out of 10 IT leaders report problems relating to data silos. Put another way, these companies have data spread across so many disparate systems that it's difficult to unify that information and draw insights.\nTo solve that problem, Snowflake created the Data Cloud, a network that connects thousands of companies and their data. This comprehensive platform combines the functionality of legacy solutions, like data pipelines for mobility, data lakes for storage, and data warehouses for analytics. In short, this unified approach breaks down silos, allowing clients to make informed decisions, build data-driven applications, and securely share data.\nThat last use case is particularly important. Snowflake's governance tools allow clients to create secure data hubs, helping them share data inside and outside of their organizations. More importantly, Snowflake launched its data marketplace in 2019, allowing clients to monetize and acquire data sets from other customers.\nThis creates a network effect: As more enterprises adopt the Data Cloud, more data sets will be made available through Snowflake's marketplace, creating value for all clients. This virtuous cycle has already been a powerful growth driver, but it should continue to reinforce Snowflake's advantage over time.\n\n\n\nMetric\nQ1 2020 (TTM)\nQ1 2022 (TTM)\nChange\n\n\n\n\nCustomers\n2,720\n4,532\n67%\n\n\nRevenue\n$329.9 million\n$712.2 million\n116%\n\n\n\nData source: Snowflake SEC filings, Ycharts. TTM = trailing-12-months. Note: Q2 2022 ended April 30, 2021.\nLooking ahead, Snowflake is well positioned to grow its business. The company puts its market opportunity at $90 billion, and management believes product revenue will reach $10 billion by fiscal 2029, representing 44% annualized growth.\nIn particular, investors should pay attention to the size of Snowflake's customer base. This metric is crucial to the long-term success of its data marketplace, which surpassed 500 listings in June. However, if Snowflake maintains its current momentum, that figure should get bigger very quickly.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":263,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":128751710,"gmtCreate":1624533396330,"gmtModify":1703839588515,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/128751710","repostId":"1155529111","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":177,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":165434873,"gmtCreate":1624154623592,"gmtModify":1703829552205,"author":{"id":"3580365088561311","authorId":"3580365088561311","name":"Chantellex","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/faa1bba09729e14e85931037c7d72b64","crmLevel":4,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3580365088561311","authorIdStr":"3580365088561311"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/165434873","repostId":"2144086770","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2144086770","kind":"highlight","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":1624062134,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2144086770?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-19 08:22","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Largest Boeing 737 MAX model takes off on maiden flight","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2144086770","media":"Reuters","summary":"RENTON, Wash., June 18 (Reuters) - Boeing Co's 737 MAX 10, the largest member of its best-selling si","content":"<p>RENTON, Wash., June 18 (Reuters) - Boeing Co's 737 MAX 10, the largest member of its best-selling single-aisle airplane family, took off on its maiden flight on Friday, in a further step toward recovering from the safety grounding of a smaller model.</p>\n<p>The plane completed a roughly 2-1/2-hour flight over Washington State, returning to Renton Municipal Airport near Seattle at 12:38 p.m.</p>\n<p>The first flight heralds months of testing and safety certification work before the jet is expected to enter service in 2023.</p>\n<p>In an unusual departure from the PR buzz surrounding first flights, the event was kept low-key as Boeing tries to navigate overlapping crises caused by a 20-month grounding in the wake of two crashes and the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>\n<p>Boeing's 230-seat 737-10 is designed to close the gap between its 178-to-220-seat 737-9, and Airbus's 185-to-240-seat A321neo, which dominates the top end of the narrowbody jet market, worth some $3.5 trillion over 20 years.</p>\n<p>However, the market opportunity for the 737 MAX 10 is constrained by the jet's range of about 3,300 nautical miles (6,100 km), which falls short of the A321neo's roughly 4,000 nm.</p>\n<p>Boeing must also complete safety certification of the plane under a tougher regulatory climate following two fatal crashes of a smaller 737 MAX version grounded the model for nearly two years - with a safety ban still in place in China.</p>\n<p>Boeing has carried out design and training changes on the MAX family, which returned to U.S. operations in December.</p>\n<p>Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Stan Deal said the company is producing about 16 737 MAX jets a month at its Renton factory.</p>\n<p>Boeing is working on safety enhancements for the 737 MAX 10, including for its air data indication system and adding a third cockpit indication requested by European regulators of the \"angle of attack,\" a parameter needed to avoid stalling or losing lift. Deal’s comments were provided to the media via a pool reporter inside a Boeing aircraft delivery center.</p>\n<p>\"We're going to take our time on this certification,\" Deal said.</p>\n<p>While the smaller MAX 8 is Boeing's fastest-selling jet, slow sales of the MAX 9 and 10 models have put Boeing at a disadvantage to the A321neo.</p>\n<p>Boeing has abandoned plans to tinker with the 737 MAX 10 design, but is weighing a bolder plan to replace the single-aisle 757, which overlaps with the top end of the MAX family.</p>\n<p>Even so, Boeing says it is confident in the MAX 10, and it is stepping up efforts to sell more of the jet, with key targets, including Ireland's Ryanair .</p>\n<p>Customers include United Airlines with 100 on order. Although sources say United is weighing a new order for at least 100 or even up to 200 MAX, its requirement for large single-aisles will be served by Airbus - reinforcing the market split.</p>\n<p>The flight, watched by dozens of employees but virtually no visitors as Boeing sought to downplay the event, showcased a revamped landing gear system illustrating an industry battle to squeeze as much mileage as possible out of the current generation of single-aisles.</p>\n<p>It raises the landing gear's height during take-off and landing, a design needed to compensate for the MAX 10's extra length and prevent the tail scraping the runway on take-off.</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>Largest Boeing 737 MAX model takes off on maiden flight</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\">\nLargest Boeing 737 MAX model takes off on maiden flight\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\">2021-06-19 08:22</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>RENTON, Wash., June 18 (Reuters) - Boeing Co's 737 MAX 10, the largest member of its best-selling single-aisle airplane family, took off on its maiden flight on Friday, in a further step toward recovering from the safety grounding of a smaller model.</p>\n<p>The plane completed a roughly 2-1/2-hour flight over Washington State, returning to Renton Municipal Airport near Seattle at 12:38 p.m.</p>\n<p>The first flight heralds months of testing and safety certification work before the jet is expected to enter service in 2023.</p>\n<p>In an unusual departure from the PR buzz surrounding first flights, the event was kept low-key as Boeing tries to navigate overlapping crises caused by a 20-month grounding in the wake of two crashes and the COVID-19 pandemic.</p>\n<p>Boeing's 230-seat 737-10 is designed to close the gap between its 178-to-220-seat 737-9, and Airbus's 185-to-240-seat A321neo, which dominates the top end of the narrowbody jet market, worth some $3.5 trillion over 20 years.</p>\n<p>However, the market opportunity for the 737 MAX 10 is constrained by the jet's range of about 3,300 nautical miles (6,100 km), which falls short of the A321neo's roughly 4,000 nm.</p>\n<p>Boeing must also complete safety certification of the plane under a tougher regulatory climate following two fatal crashes of a smaller 737 MAX version grounded the model for nearly two years - with a safety ban still in place in China.</p>\n<p>Boeing has carried out design and training changes on the MAX family, which returned to U.S. operations in December.</p>\n<p>Boeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Stan Deal said the company is producing about 16 737 MAX jets a month at its Renton factory.</p>\n<p>Boeing is working on safety enhancements for the 737 MAX 10, including for its air data indication system and adding a third cockpit indication requested by European regulators of the \"angle of attack,\" a parameter needed to avoid stalling or losing lift. Deal’s comments were provided to the media via a pool reporter inside a Boeing aircraft delivery center.</p>\n<p>\"We're going to take our time on this certification,\" Deal said.</p>\n<p>While the smaller MAX 8 is Boeing's fastest-selling jet, slow sales of the MAX 9 and 10 models have put Boeing at a disadvantage to the A321neo.</p>\n<p>Boeing has abandoned plans to tinker with the 737 MAX 10 design, but is weighing a bolder plan to replace the single-aisle 757, which overlaps with the top end of the MAX family.</p>\n<p>Even so, Boeing says it is confident in the MAX 10, and it is stepping up efforts to sell more of the jet, with key targets, including Ireland's Ryanair .</p>\n<p>Customers include United Airlines with 100 on order. Although sources say United is weighing a new order for at least 100 or even up to 200 MAX, its requirement for large single-aisles will be served by Airbus - reinforcing the market split.</p>\n<p>The flight, watched by dozens of employees but virtually no visitors as Boeing sought to downplay the event, showcased a revamped landing gear system illustrating an industry battle to squeeze as much mileage as possible out of the current generation of single-aisles.</p>\n<p>It raises the landing gear's height during take-off and landing, a design needed to compensate for the MAX 10's extra length and prevent the tail scraping the runway on take-off.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BA":"波音"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2144086770","content_text":"RENTON, Wash., June 18 (Reuters) - Boeing Co's 737 MAX 10, the largest member of its best-selling single-aisle airplane family, took off on its maiden flight on Friday, in a further step toward recovering from the safety grounding of a smaller model.\nThe plane completed a roughly 2-1/2-hour flight over Washington State, returning to Renton Municipal Airport near Seattle at 12:38 p.m.\nThe first flight heralds months of testing and safety certification work before the jet is expected to enter service in 2023.\nIn an unusual departure from the PR buzz surrounding first flights, the event was kept low-key as Boeing tries to navigate overlapping crises caused by a 20-month grounding in the wake of two crashes and the COVID-19 pandemic.\nBoeing's 230-seat 737-10 is designed to close the gap between its 178-to-220-seat 737-9, and Airbus's 185-to-240-seat A321neo, which dominates the top end of the narrowbody jet market, worth some $3.5 trillion over 20 years.\nHowever, the market opportunity for the 737 MAX 10 is constrained by the jet's range of about 3,300 nautical miles (6,100 km), which falls short of the A321neo's roughly 4,000 nm.\nBoeing must also complete safety certification of the plane under a tougher regulatory climate following two fatal crashes of a smaller 737 MAX version grounded the model for nearly two years - with a safety ban still in place in China.\nBoeing has carried out design and training changes on the MAX family, which returned to U.S. operations in December.\nBoeing Commercial Airplanes CEO Stan Deal said the company is producing about 16 737 MAX jets a month at its Renton factory.\nBoeing is working on safety enhancements for the 737 MAX 10, including for its air data indication system and adding a third cockpit indication requested by European regulators of the \"angle of attack,\" a parameter needed to avoid stalling or losing lift. Deal’s comments were provided to the media via a pool reporter inside a Boeing aircraft delivery center.\n\"We're going to take our time on this certification,\" Deal said.\nWhile the smaller MAX 8 is Boeing's fastest-selling jet, slow sales of the MAX 9 and 10 models have put Boeing at a disadvantage to the A321neo.\nBoeing has abandoned plans to tinker with the 737 MAX 10 design, but is weighing a bolder plan to replace the single-aisle 757, which overlaps with the top end of the MAX family.\nEven so, Boeing says it is confident in the MAX 10, and it is stepping up efforts to sell more of the jet, with key targets, including Ireland's Ryanair .\nCustomers include United Airlines with 100 on order. Although sources say United is weighing a new order for at least 100 or even up to 200 MAX, its requirement for large single-aisles will be served by Airbus - reinforcing the market split.\nThe flight, watched by dozens of employees but virtually no visitors as Boeing sought to downplay the event, showcased a revamped landing gear system illustrating an industry battle to squeeze as much mileage as possible out of the current generation of single-aisles.\nIt raises the landing gear's height during take-off and landing, a design needed to compensate for the MAX 10's extra length and prevent the tail scraping the runway on take-off.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":229,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}
