StefanieChua personal page - To The Moon

StefanieChua

StefanieChua

No personal profile

249Follow

67Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2022-05-08

OkUr

Tesla: Overvalued By 85.26% And Not A Technology Company

2022-05-02

$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Share liao

2022-05-02

$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Ok

2022-05-02

Likes

U.S. Stocks To Watch: Global Payments, Moody, Mosaic and More

2022-05-02

2022-05-01

$Apple(AAPL)$Ok

2022-05-01

$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Ok

2022-04-30

$Gem Co.,Ltd.(002340)$Ok

2022-04-30

$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Ok

2022-04-30

Likes

Berkshire Hathaway Earnings Fall on Investment Losses

2022-04-17

$Apple(AAPL)$Ok

2022-04-17

Ok

Is Tesla a Safe Stock to Buy Now?

2022-04-13

Best opinion?! This

2022-04-05

$VANGUARD S&P 500 UCITS ETF(VUSD.UK)$Ok

2022-04-05

$Grab Holdings(GRAB)$lol

2022-04-05

Likes

3 High-Yield Dividend Stocks to Buy in a Market Rebound

2022-03-08

in short companies/ppl are abusing the situation

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2022-03-02

nice

Netflix to Acquire Finnish Mobile Game Developer Next Games

2022-03-01

Likes

Stocks fall on first day of March as Russia bears down on Ukraine capital, oil hits 7-year high

2022-02-27

Likes

Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":3580381506485046,"uuid":"3580381506485046","gmtCreate":1617288502017,"gmtModify":1628746863481,"name":"StefanieChua","pinyin":"stefaniechua","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":67,"headSize":249,"tweetSize":97,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":3,"name":"书生虎","nameTw":"書生虎","represent":"努力向上","factor":"发布10条非转发主帖,其中5条获得他人回复或点赞","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":2,"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":"2023.12.28","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03-1","templateUuid":"44212b71d0be4ec88898348dbe882e03","name":"Boss Tiger","description":"The transaction amount of the securities account reaches $100,000","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c8dfc27c1ee0e25db1c93e9d0b641101","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f43908c142f8a33c78f5bdf0e2897488","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/82165ff19cb8a786e8919f92acee5213","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"60.82%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.05.11","exceedPercentage":"93.47%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789-1","templateUuid":"7a9f168ff73447fe856ed6c938b61789","name":"Knowledgeable Investor","description":"Traded more than 10 stocks","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":{"badgeId":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be-3","templateUuid":"972123088c9646f7b6091ae0662215be","name":"Legendary Trader","description":"Total number of securities or futures transactions reached 300","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":1,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.05.11","exceedPercentage":"93.55%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":9062391921,"gmtCreate":1651998148264,"gmtModify":1676535011663,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"OkUr","listText":"OkUr","text":"OkUr","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9062391921","repostId":"1131831539","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1131831539","pubTimestamp":1651980653,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131831539?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-05-08 11:30","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla: Overvalued By 85.26% And Not A Technology Company","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131831539","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"SummaryMake no mistake, Tesla is a phenomenal company that has accomplished the unthinkable as it broke through extreme barriers of entry to disrupt the auto industry.Just because Tesla is a successfu","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Summary</p><ul><li>Make no mistake, Tesla is a phenomenal company that has accomplished the unthinkable as it broke through extreme barriers of entry to disrupt the auto industry.</li><li>Just because Tesla is a successful company that is causing automotive titans to change from combustible engines to EVs doesn&#39;t mean Tesla&#39;s stock is a good investment today.</li><li>100% of gross profit and net income is generated from the automotive sector as Tesla&#39;s other businesses lose money, making them an automobile manufacturing company, not a technology company.</li><li>I compared Tesla&#39;s metrics to the auto industry and big tech and the results are the same, Tesla&#39;s valuation is egregious.</li></ul><p>It&#39;s rare to find companies that have cult-like followings with loyalists willing to pay any price for its stock. The debate regarding Tesla, Inc.&#39;s (NASDAQ:TSLA) valuation continues to be a topic of conversation between the bulls and the bears. Oneside argues that TSLA&#39;s financial growth and future prospects, including FSD, insurance, and robotaxis, justify the current $902.12 billion valuations, while others argue that the current financials and cult-like following have led to a massive overvaluation in TSLA&#39;s stock.</p><p>I tip my hat to Elon Musk, as his accomplishments are second to none. When others called him crazy, Mr. Musk chose one of the hardest industries to compete in, started TSLA from the ground up, went to battle against the auto manufacturers, and succeeded. TSLA is one of the rare success stories that has truly shaped an industry, and the barriers of entry that were overcome are astonishing. TSLA didn&#39;t have the capital, manufacturing, credibility, or the infrastructure that its competitors did, yet they found a way to succeed. If the odds weren&#39;t enough which TSLA faced, they accomplished their goals without a combustible engine and pioneered an entirely new sector within the automotive industry.</p><p>Just because TSLA is a great company, it doesn&#39;t mean TSLA has a great stock, or it isn&#39;t overvalued. I am not bearish on TSLA the company because I believe they still have a long runway of growth ahead of them, but I am bearish on the valuation. Prior to leaving a comment on why I am wrong, please read the article and think about the metrics I am citing; then, I will happily discuss any viewpoints about the analysis.</p><p><b>Tesla Vs. The World In The Automotive Sector</b></p><p>It feels like TSLA vs. the world whenever TSLA is discussed. Discussing who makes a better automobile is a matter of opinion, and everyone is correct because it&#39;s their opinion. If person A thinks TSLA makes the best car and person B thinks Mercedes Benz makes the best car, they are both correct. Debating over this is pointless, so let&#39;s look at the raw numbers.</p><p>TSLA has a larger market cap than the combination ofToyota(TM),Volkswagen(OTCPK:VWAGY),Daimler(OTCPK:DDAIF),BMW(OTCPK:BMWYY),General Motors(GM),Ford(F),Honda(HMC),Ferrari(RACE),Nissan(OTCPK:NSANY),Subaru(OTCPK:FUJHY),Volvo(OTCPK:VOLAF), andMazda(OTCPK:MZDAY). TSLA&#39;s market cap is currently $986.92 billion, while the combination of these 12 companies is $777.41 billion.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ff930d2442bf282c1bd880cca408eb94\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"327\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Steven Fiorillo</p><p>The P/S ratio is often cited to justify the valuation. The combination of TM, VWAGY, DDAIF, BMWYY, GM, F, HMC, RACE, NSANY, FUJHY, VOLAF, and MZDAY has generated $1.38 trillion in revenue over the TTM, putting their P/S at 0.56, while TSLA has generated $62.19 billion in revenue and has a 15.87 P/S.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9b9661fde232925a758c38fd2e93f36\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"330\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Steven Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha</p><p>As a combined entity, these 12 companies have generated $118.29 billion in net income, while TSLA has produced $8.4 billion.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d25806eb839eb9ca2b4ef3c24218048c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"330\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Steven Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha</p><p>TSLA is a great company, but its current valuation has become overly inflated. TSLA&#39;s market cap is $209.52 billion larger than these 12 auto manufacturers, yet the combination of the 12 auto manufacturers generates $1.32 trillion more in revenue and $109.89 billion more in net income.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a1b686de4009ca733ff9651ce0d9fcaf\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"348\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Steven Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha</p><p>Looking at the market caps, one would assume that TSLA has a dominant majority over its competitors in auto sales within the U.S. According to the2021 data, TSLA sold 2.02% of all vehicles in the U.S. TSLA&#39;s market cap reflects a level of dominance that is non-existent.</p><p>Realistically, TSLA will have a hard time disrupting the sector further due to the price point of their vehicles. The reality is that, unless TSLA can sell a car that rivals a Honda or Toyota, doubling its market share is going to be a daunting task. It&#39;s just math. TSLA doesn&#39;t have a product for the masses, and while it may continue to grow in the luxury segment, the amount of growth that can be achieved is limited due to the pricing power of the consumer.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/442ffe151dd83bc524785857925f9797\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"227\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>www.goodcarbadcar.net</p><p><b>Tesla Isn&#39;t A Technology Company And Shouldn&#39;t Be Valued As One</b></p><p>The valuation rebuttal has always been that TSLA isn&#39;t an automobile company, rather, it&#39;s a technology company.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bbc9ccb2cb8a0e7d40804db24e183214\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"341\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Tesla</p><p>Page 23 ofTSLA&#39;s Q1 2022 slide deck from their earnings call is their statement of operations. Once again, 100% of TSLA&#39;s gross profit and net income are derived from automobiles. Energy generation and storage lose money as it generates $616 million in revenue while the cost of this revenue is $688 million. The same goes for Services and others, as this segment generates $1.279 billion in revenue while the cost of this revenue is $1.286 billion. This doesn&#39;t even factor in operating expenses.</p><p>TSLA manufacturers state of the art automobiles, but this doesn&#39;t classify them as a technology company, nor should they be classified as one. Since this is always the rebuttal and technology companies trade at larger earnings multiples, I will compare TSLA to Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Amazon (AMZN), Alphabet (GOOG) (GOOGL), and Meta Platforms (FB) and illustrate why TSLA is still drastically overvalued if the market was still to provide it with a tech multiple.</p><p>Prior to the comparisons, I want to frame the analysis by providing each company&#39;s market cap:</p><ul><li>AAPL $2.69 Trillion</li><li>MSFT $2.17 Trillion</li><li>GOOGL $1.62 Trillion</li><li>AMZN $1.28 Trillion</li><li>TSLA $986.92 Billion</li><li>FB $604.62 Billion</li></ul><p>I am going to start with growth because this is always the key metric bulls point out. Since the close of 2018, which is 3.25 fiscal years, TSLA has grown its revenue from $21.46 billion to $62.19 billion.</p><p>This is absolutely remarkable, but it doesn&#39;t place TSLA in the upper epsilon of technology companies. Over the same period, FB grew its revenue by $63.83 billion, which is more than what TSLA produced in the TTM. FB grew its revenue by more than what TSLA produces and generates just about double the revenue ($119.67 billion), yet TSLA has a larger market cap. For everyone who has used growth as their investment premise, FB having a market cap that&#39;s $382.30 less than TSLA nullifies that aspect of the bull thesis. AMZN&#39;s market cap is only $294.33 billion larger than TSLA, yet they generated $477.75 billion in revenue and grew their revenue by $341.76 billion in this period. Using revenue growth for TSLA doesn&#39;t support the valuation.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c0fbd4eb93f026c4575ee8f77f53e4b\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Steven Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha</p><p>Next, I will turn to profits because, at the end of the day, businesses are in the business of making money. Once again, TSLA has done a fantastic job of monetizing its business and, in 3.25 short years, has gone from losing -$976 million to make $8.4 billion in the TTM for an increase of $9.38 billion. FB has produced $37.34 billion in profit in the TTM, and its net income grew by $15.23 billion over this period. Using growth doesn&#39;t support the valuation when FB has a market cap that&#39;s $382.30 less than TSLA and grew its profits in this period by almost double what TSLA has generated in the TTM.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c9716477607711ee0b6d4f77eb24c890\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"382\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Steven Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha</p><p>The new metric bulls are using in their thesis is TSLA&#39;s free cash flow (FCF). Once again, TSLA has done an excellent job, going from -$221 million of FCF in 2018 to $6.93 billion of FCF in the TTM. Many companies would love to grow their annual FCF by $7.15 billion over a 3.25-year period, and this should be applauded.</p><p>Let&#39;s look at FB once again, since TSLA&#39;s valuation isn&#39;t based on its core segment as an automobile manufacturer. FB has grown its FCF over the previous 3.25 years by $23.45 billion, more than 3x TSLA&#39;s growth, and has generated $39.81 billion of FCF in the TTM. FB generated roughly 5.75x more FCF than TSLA and grew its FCF by more than 3x what TSLA produces, yet FB has a market cap that&#39;s almost $400 billion less than TSLA. Growth within the financials does not support TSLA&#39;s valuation, which is a breath away from $1 trillion.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/902a7074eda9e8f2f2765e0833423d2c\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"373\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Steven Fiorillo, Seeking Alpha</p><p>Today you&#39;re paying a 113.81 P/E for TSLA. Paying a larger multiple for a company that&#39;s growing its earnings quickly is normal, but TSLA isn&#39;t growing by larger amounts than FB, and FB trades at a 16.66 P/E. I have seen TSLA bulls justify the P/E because of TSLA&#39;s growth factor, but this doesn&#39;t hold up when FB has grown by larger amounts from larger starting positions and has a P/E that&#39;s a fraction of TSLA. Look at AAPL, which is the largest company in the world. AAPL has grown its net income by $56.25 billion and its FCF by $52.3 billion over the past 3.25 years, and its P/E is 26.78. People are blindly paying any multiple the market places on TSLA.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/75168f6e39ced721cf0c53d78481a983\" tg-width=\"614\" tg-height=\"335\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>TSLA is trading at a 15.38 P/S. The justification for this multiple is difficult to defend while AMZN trades at a P/S of 11.31. AMZN&#39;s revenue grew by $341.76 billion over the past 3.25 years while TSLA grew their revenue by $40.73 billion. Instead of an absolute basis, looking at this from a percentage aspect, TSLA grew its revenue by 189.78%, while AMZN&#39;s grew by 251.32%. The P/S ratio is not a supporting valuation metric as TSLA is trading at a larger multiple than AMZN yet produced $301.03 billion less in revenue growth compared to AMZN. At the very least, TSLA should trade at a lower P/S multiple than AMZN considering their revenue growth was a fraction of AMZN&#39;s.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/aad00a6c490808962705a1a2dae45cfe\" tg-width=\"608\" tg-height=\"338\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>TSLA has done an excellent job monetizing its revenue, delivering exceptional margins, and generating FCF. Now that TSLA is generating billions in FCF, it&#39;s been inserted into the bull thesis. FCF is a measure of profitability that excludes the non-cash expenses of the income statement and includes spending on equipment and assets as well as changes in working capital from the balance sheet. FCF could be the most underrated and most important financial metric to look at, as this is the pool of capital that companies can utilize to repay debt, pay dividends, buy back shares, make acquisitions, or reinvest in the business.</p><p>Every investment is the present value of all future cash flow. This is why investors look at the price to FCF valuation. Investors want to pay the cheapest multiple for a company&#39;s FCF. Today, you&#39;re paying 142.52x TSLA&#39;s FCF. Going back to the FCF section, TSLA grew its FCF by $7.15 billion over the past 3.25 years. FB generated $23.45 billion of FCF in this period, which is 3x the amount TSLA grew, yet FB is trading at a 15.19x multiple on price to FCF.</p><p>Why on earth would you want to pay 142.52x for TSLA&#39;s FCF when you could pay 15.19x for FB, which is growing their FCF by more than 3x the amount that TSLA is growing by? How about AAPL? AAPL grew its FCF by $52.3 billion and trades at a 25.4x price to FCF. If I exclude FB for a moment, should TSLA trade at a larger FCF multiple than GOOGL, which has grown its FCF by $46.15 billion over the past 3.25 years? My answer is no because there is no guarantee that TSLA will ever generate $46.15 billion in annual FCF, let alone the $68.99 billion in FCF that GOOGL generates.</p><p>So what is a fair price to FCF multiple for TSLA? I don&#39;t believe TSLA has earned the right to trade at the same multiples as the rest of big tech considering the levels of FCF they produce. If I stick with the methodology that FB is egregiously undervalued, then TSLA should trade above 15.19x its FCF but lower than the 23.42x multiple GOOGL trades at.</p><p>I don&#39;t want to be overly bearish, so I will place a 21x multiple on TSLA&#39;s FCF, which is more than fair considering big tech metrics. A 21x multiple on TSLA&#39;s FCF puts its market cap at $145.43 billion, which is -85.26% from its current market cap of $986.92 billion. It&#39;s just math, and if TSLA is going to be valued as a technology company, it needs to be compared to the technology companies with similar market caps.</p><p>At the very least, there isn&#39;t a single reason why TSLA&#39;s market cap is larger than FB&#39;s. There isn&#39;t a single metric that TSLA beats FB in. Based on FB&#39;s valuation, if TSLA traded at the same FCF multiple, it would have a market cap of $105.19 billion.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b81a61d60d9ec098276569cc4a501da0\" tg-width=\"627\" tg-height=\"341\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>TSLA has a gross profit margin of 27.1% ($16.85b / $62.19b) and a profit margin of 13.51% ($8.4b / $62.19b). FB has a gross profit margin of 80.34% ($96.14b / $119.67b) and a profit margin of 31.2% ($37.34b / $119.67b). FB has much wider margins and is growing its revenue by larger amounts. This reinforces my methodology as to why TSLA is grossly overvalued. GOOGL has a gross profit margin of 56.93% ($153.9b / $270.33b) and a profit margin of 27.57% ($74.54b / $270.33b).</p><p>The chances are incredibly slim that TSLA can double its profit margin to be within striking distance of GOOGL&#39;s. TSLA should not trade at a larger FCF, P/E, or P/S multiple than FB or GOOGL. While the market would indicate that I am wrong today, eventually, the hype will wear off, and TSLA will trade at a realistic valuation.</p><p><b>TSLA&#39;s Future Catalysts Have A Long Way To Go Before Impacting Its Bottom Line</b></p><p>There are three main catalysts people discuss, which include insurance, robotaxis, and FSD.TSLA offers insurance using real-time driving behavior. This is currently available to all Model S, Model 3, Model X, and Model Y owners. The catch is that it&#39;s only available in Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia as of now.</p><p>TSLA uses a safety rating score to determine the monthly premium for its vehicles. At the largest premium of $130/mo, this would be $1,560 per year. If TSLA converted 100% of their U.S sales in 2021 as an insurance customer, which I think could be possible if TSLA insurance was available in every state, it would have generated $471.12 million in revenue.</p><p>We have no idea what the margins would have been, but if the margin was 50%, it would have been an additional $235.56 million in net income in 2021. While this is nothing to sneeze at, an additional $235.56 million in net income hardly moves the needle. This could be a $1 billion top-line revenue segment in the future, but with availability in only 7 states, insurance&#39;s $1 billion revenue mark is a long way away.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e86de6232b9abf7cee46a9607eb09741\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"326\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Tesla</p><p>Next,FSD, for which TSLA has created two subscription models, a $99/mo price point and a $199/mo price point. The problem with FSD is that it doesn&#39;t make the vehicle fully autonomous, and you still need a driver to be attentive and alert. While I am not arguing that TSLA&#39;s FSD isn&#39;t leaps and bounds ahead of the competition, the problem is that it&#39;s not exactly a self-driving car.</p><p>The questions around legality and where you can use it pop into my head, and how many of TSLA&#39;s drivers opt for this upgrade. Until there is clear legislation and the technology advances to where vehicles can fully drive a person from point A to B while that person takes a nap or reads, I have a hard time believing enough TSLA owners will spend the extra $199/mo on FSD. If there is somewhere where TSLA produces the numbers about how many owners opt for this package, please let me know, and I will crunch the numbers.</p><p>Which Features Come With My Subscription?</p><blockquote>The FSD capability features you receive are based on your configuration and location. Not all features are available in all markets, and features are subject to change.Learn more about Autopilot and Full Self-Driving capability features.</blockquote><blockquote><i>Note: These features are designed to become more capable over time; however the currently enabled features do not make the vehicle autonomous. The currently enabled features require a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment.</i></blockquote><p>The last catalyst is Robotaxis which many have commented on in my articles before. We&#39;re so far off on Robotaxis that this can&#39;t be considered in TSLA&#39;s upcoming revenue. I would think major legislation would be needed for Robotaxis to exist, and there is no telling how many years away we are from this.</p><p>Also, what is the percentage of TSLA owners that would actually allow their vehicle to be used as a Robotaxi? Depending on what the profitability is, I can see people buying TSLAs to enroll them in this program, but, once again, we need to see the economics behind it. I know I am just one opinion, but I would never enroll one of my cars into a robotaxi program because I don&#39;t want other people that I don&#39;t know in my car. I would think there are many others that have similar viewpoints.</p><p>The real upcoming catalysts are future revenue growth and entering the Chinese market. In 2021 TSLA grew its YoY revenue by 70.67%, and their off to a great start after Q1 2022. Only time will tell what type of growth rate TSLA can maintain, but too many people are assuming that TSLA will obliterate the competition. Over the next several years, we could see TSLA&#39;s growth rate become significantly reduced as more luxury operators put EVs on the road.</p><p>At TSLA&#39;s current margins, they would need to increase their revenue by 444.55% to $276.47 billion to produce the same amount of net income ($37.34b) that FB produces today at their current 13.51% profit margin. Maybe TSLA can get there in the future, but why should TSLA be valued at almost $1 trillion today, considering not a single metric of theirs is similar to FB or GOOGL, and TSLA&#39;s growth across any of the sectors isn&#39;t larger than FB or GOOGL?</p><p><b>Tesla Continues To Dilute Shareholders, And Almost No Shareholders Care</b></p><p>Dilution kills shareholder value. Look, I am a shareholder of TSLA, and I hate that my shares continue to be diluted. These numbers are split-adjusted that I am using. Over the past decade,TSLA has diluted its shares by 80.93%. This is horrible compared to big tech, yet investors can&#39;t buy enough TSLA shares. TSLA finished 2012 with 572.6 million shares and, as of its last filing, had increased its outstanding shares to 1.036 billion shares.</p><p>This is the equivalent of me taking a pizza, and instead of giving you a slice, cutting another 6.5 slices, then giving you one. The pizza represents TSLA, the company, and they basically turned an 8-slice pie into a 14.5-slice pie, reducing shareholder&#39;s ownership and the amount of equity, revenue, and EPS our shares represent.</p><p>If you want to see what a true shepherd of shareholder value looks like, turn to AAPL. In 2012 AAPL had 26.3 billion shares outstanding. Over the past decade, AAPL has repurchased 10.09 billion shares, reducing its outstanding shares by 38.37%. Every quarter, AAPL is buying back shares and increasing the ownership its shares represent. TSLA, on the other hand, continues to dilute shareholders by increasing shares YOY.</p><p><b>I Could Be Completely Wrong, And Tesla Could Continue Growing At These Rates</b></p><p>TSLA&#39;s vehicle deliveries continue to outpace its growing production. YoY TSLA&#39;s deliveries increased by 68% in Q1, adding 125,171 delivered vehicles to its customers. TSLA just began Model Y deliveries from the Austin facility, and production at the Gigafactory in Berlin started in March of 2022. TSLA&#39;s Shanghai facility had strong production rates prior to the spike in COVID that resulted in temporary shutdowns. TSLA isn&#39;t just focusing on the U.S, they have Europe and China in their sights.</p><p>EVs accounted for 488,000 sales in the U.S for 2021, and the previous projection was that EVs would account for 670,000 units sold in 2022. Oil has hovered around $100 per barrel and could render the previous projections of 37% increased EV sales domestically for 2022 conservative. TSLA is in a prime position to capitalize on this trend. In 2021 TSLA vehicles accounted for 61.89% of EVs sold in the U.S (301,998 / 488,000).</p><p>Hypothetically, if the previous projection of 670,000 EV sales for 2022 is accurate and TSLA maintains its current margin, they would sell 414,628 vehicles throughout the U.S in 2022. If gas prices do alter the decision-making process when deciding between a combustible engine or an EV, then TSLA could continue surprising the market with QoQ earnings beats.</p><p>The U.S has a national goal of reaching 50% of domestic auto sales coming from EVs. In 2021, EVs accounted for 3.26% of total sales in the U.S auto market. Based on U.S auto sales in 2021, annual EV sales would need to grow by 6,989,403 to reach a 50% EV to combustible engine ratio. Hypothetically if U.S auto sales stayed flat but EVs reached 50% of the market in 2030 they would sell 7,477,403 vehicles. If TSLA&#39;s dominance in the EV sector was to drop from 61.89% to 15% due to increased competition, they would generate 1,121,610 in sales compared to 301,998 in 2021. When you add in Europe and China, TSLA certainly has the ability to become a top auto manufacturer by sales next decade.</p><p>Bulls aren&#39;t incorrect to be excited about TSLA. The world is moving toward EVs, and TSLA is the crème de la crème. As I said in the beginning, I am bullish about TSLA&#39;s future prospects, but I think the valuation today is overinflated. Nobody can predict the future, but I have no doubt that TSLA will continue to grow its sales YoY.</p><p>The question becomes, how much growth will they be able to achieve YoY? In 2021, TM generated $226.48 billion of revenue and, based on the future of EVs, TSLA certainly could achieve this level of revenue in the future. Based on TSLA&#39;s current 13.51% profit margin, if they achieved TM&#39;s level of revenue, they would generate $30.59 billion of net income, which would definitely make today&#39;s valuation look more realistic.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/93c9176fa9bebc2c940e038cafd23229\" tg-width=\"603\" tg-height=\"631\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Tesla</p><p><b>Conclusion</b></p><p>You&#39;re probably wondering how I can be a shareholder and be a bear on TSLA&#39;s valuation at the same time. It&#39;s simple; my wife bought shares of TSLA, which makes me a shareholder. My stance has always been bullish on the company and bearish on the valuation. What Elon Musk and the team at TSLA has accomplished is astonishing, and they deserve nothing but respect.</p><p>Keep in mind a company and a company&#39;s stock are two separate things. TSLA continues to dilute shareholders, and they and the market are valuing TSLA as if it&#39;s FB or GOOGL. TSLA is not a technology company; it&#39;s an automobile company, as the automotive segments drive 100% of its gross revenue and net income.</p><p>TSLA is trading at a P/E of 113.81, a P/S of 15.38, and a 142.52x multiple on its FCF. The numbers are drastically inflated as TSLA has no business trading at a larger P/S multiple than AMZN, which trades at 11.31 P/S when it has grown its revenue by $341.76 billion over the previous 3.25 years compared to TSLA&#39;s $40.73 billion of revenue growth. TSLA has generated $6.93 billion in FCF over the TTM, while Mr. Market has placed a 142.52x multiple on TSLA due to $7.15 billion FCF growth over the past 3.25 years. FB trades at a 15.19x FCF multiple while growing FCF by $23.45 billion over this period which is more than 3x what TSLA has generated in the TTM.</p><p>With FB trading at 15.19x FCF, GOOGL at 23.42x FCF, and AAPL at 25.4x FCF, it&#39;s hard to justify any number above 20x for TSLA. I think a 21x FCF multiple is generous and that places TSLA at a market cap of $145.43 billion, which is -85.26% from its current market cap of $986.92 billion.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Tesla: Overvalued By 85.26% And Not A Technology Company</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: Overvalued By 85.26% And Not A Technology Company\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-05-08 11:30 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4507535-tesla-overvalued-by-85-26-percent-and-not-a-technology-company><strong>Seeking Alpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>SummaryMake no mistake, Tesla is a phenomenal company that has accomplished the unthinkable as it broke through extreme barriers of entry to disrupt the auto industry.Just because Tesla is a ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4507535-tesla-overvalued-by-85-26-percent-and-not-a-technology-company\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4507535-tesla-overvalued-by-85-26-percent-and-not-a-technology-company","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131831539","content_text":"SummaryMake no mistake, Tesla is a phenomenal company that has accomplished the unthinkable as it broke through extreme barriers of entry to disrupt the auto industry.Just because Tesla is a successful company that is causing automotive titans to change from combustible engines to EVs doesn't mean Tesla's stock is a good investment today.100% of gross profit and net income is generated from the automotive sector as Tesla's other businesses lose money, making them an automobile manufacturing company, not a technology company.I compared Tesla's metrics to the auto industry and big tech and the results are the same, Tesla's valuation is egregious.It's rare to find companies that have cult-like followings with loyalists willing to pay any price for its stock. The debate regarding Tesla, Inc.'s (NASDAQ:TSLA) valuation continues to be a topic of conversation between the bulls and the bears. Oneside argues that TSLA's financial growth and future prospects, including FSD, insurance, and robotaxis, justify the current $902.12 billion valuations, while others argue that the current financials and cult-like following have led to a massive overvaluation in TSLA's stock.I tip my hat to Elon Musk, as his accomplishments are second to none. When others called him crazy, Mr. Musk chose one of the hardest industries to compete in, started TSLA from the ground up, went to battle against the auto manufacturers, and succeeded. TSLA is one of the rare success stories that has truly shaped an industry, and the barriers of entry that were overcome are astonishing. TSLA didn't have the capital, manufacturing, credibility, or the infrastructure that its competitors did, yet they found a way to succeed. If the odds weren't enough which TSLA faced, they accomplished their goals without a combustible engine and pioneered an entirely new sector within the automotive industry.Just because TSLA is a great company, it doesn't mean TSLA has a great stock, or it isn't overvalued. I am not bearish on TSLA the company because I believe they still have a long runway of growth ahead of them, but I am bearish on the valuation. Prior to leaving a comment on why I am wrong, please read the article and think about the metrics I am citing; then, I will happily discuss any viewpoints about the analysis.Tesla Vs. The World In The Automotive SectorIt feels like TSLA vs. the world whenever TSLA is discussed. Discussing who makes a better automobile is a matter of opinion, and everyone is correct because it's their opinion. If person A thinks TSLA makes the best car and person B thinks Mercedes Benz makes the best car, they are both correct. Debating over this is pointless, so let's look at the raw numbers.TSLA has a larger market cap than the combination ofToyota(TM),Volkswagen(OTCPK:VWAGY),Daimler(OTCPK:DDAIF),BMW(OTCPK:BMWYY),General Motors(GM),Ford(F),Honda(HMC),Ferrari(RACE),Nissan(OTCPK:NSANY),Subaru(OTCPK:FUJHY),Volvo(OTCPK:VOLAF), andMazda(OTCPK:MZDAY). TSLA's market cap is currently $986.92 billion, while the combination of these 12 companies is $777.41 billion.Steven FiorilloThe P/S ratio is often cited to justify the valuation. The combination of TM, VWAGY, DDAIF, BMWYY, GM, F, HMC, RACE, NSANY, FUJHY, VOLAF, and MZDAY has generated $1.38 trillion in revenue over the TTM, putting their P/S at 0.56, while TSLA has generated $62.19 billion in revenue and has a 15.87 P/S.Steven Fiorillo, Seeking AlphaAs a combined entity, these 12 companies have generated $118.29 billion in net income, while TSLA has produced $8.4 billion.Steven Fiorillo, Seeking AlphaTSLA is a great company, but its current valuation has become overly inflated. TSLA's market cap is $209.52 billion larger than these 12 auto manufacturers, yet the combination of the 12 auto manufacturers generates $1.32 trillion more in revenue and $109.89 billion more in net income.Steven Fiorillo, Seeking AlphaLooking at the market caps, one would assume that TSLA has a dominant majority over its competitors in auto sales within the U.S. According to the2021 data, TSLA sold 2.02% of all vehicles in the U.S. TSLA's market cap reflects a level of dominance that is non-existent.Realistically, TSLA will have a hard time disrupting the sector further due to the price point of their vehicles. The reality is that, unless TSLA can sell a car that rivals a Honda or Toyota, doubling its market share is going to be a daunting task. It's just math. TSLA doesn't have a product for the masses, and while it may continue to grow in the luxury segment, the amount of growth that can be achieved is limited due to the pricing power of the consumer.www.goodcarbadcar.netTesla Isn't A Technology Company And Shouldn't Be Valued As OneThe valuation rebuttal has always been that TSLA isn't an automobile company, rather, it's a technology company.TeslaPage 23 ofTSLA's Q1 2022 slide deck from their earnings call is their statement of operations. Once again, 100% of TSLA's gross profit and net income are derived from automobiles. Energy generation and storage lose money as it generates $616 million in revenue while the cost of this revenue is $688 million. The same goes for Services and others, as this segment generates $1.279 billion in revenue while the cost of this revenue is $1.286 billion. This doesn't even factor in operating expenses.TSLA manufacturers state of the art automobiles, but this doesn't classify them as a technology company, nor should they be classified as one. Since this is always the rebuttal and technology companies trade at larger earnings multiples, I will compare TSLA to Apple (AAPL), Microsoft (MSFT), Amazon (AMZN), Alphabet (GOOG) (GOOGL), and Meta Platforms (FB) and illustrate why TSLA is still drastically overvalued if the market was still to provide it with a tech multiple.Prior to the comparisons, I want to frame the analysis by providing each company's market cap:AAPL $2.69 TrillionMSFT $2.17 TrillionGOOGL $1.62 TrillionAMZN $1.28 TrillionTSLA $986.92 BillionFB $604.62 BillionI am going to start with growth because this is always the key metric bulls point out. Since the close of 2018, which is 3.25 fiscal years, TSLA has grown its revenue from $21.46 billion to $62.19 billion.This is absolutely remarkable, but it doesn't place TSLA in the upper epsilon of technology companies. Over the same period, FB grew its revenue by $63.83 billion, which is more than what TSLA produced in the TTM. FB grew its revenue by more than what TSLA produces and generates just about double the revenue ($119.67 billion), yet TSLA has a larger market cap. For everyone who has used growth as their investment premise, FB having a market cap that's $382.30 less than TSLA nullifies that aspect of the bull thesis. AMZN's market cap is only $294.33 billion larger than TSLA, yet they generated $477.75 billion in revenue and grew their revenue by $341.76 billion in this period. Using revenue growth for TSLA doesn't support the valuation.Steven Fiorillo, Seeking AlphaNext, I will turn to profits because, at the end of the day, businesses are in the business of making money. Once again, TSLA has done a fantastic job of monetizing its business and, in 3.25 short years, has gone from losing -$976 million to make $8.4 billion in the TTM for an increase of $9.38 billion. FB has produced $37.34 billion in profit in the TTM, and its net income grew by $15.23 billion over this period. Using growth doesn't support the valuation when FB has a market cap that's $382.30 less than TSLA and grew its profits in this period by almost double what TSLA has generated in the TTM.Steven Fiorillo, Seeking AlphaThe new metric bulls are using in their thesis is TSLA's free cash flow (FCF). Once again, TSLA has done an excellent job, going from -$221 million of FCF in 2018 to $6.93 billion of FCF in the TTM. Many companies would love to grow their annual FCF by $7.15 billion over a 3.25-year period, and this should be applauded.Let's look at FB once again, since TSLA's valuation isn't based on its core segment as an automobile manufacturer. FB has grown its FCF over the previous 3.25 years by $23.45 billion, more than 3x TSLA's growth, and has generated $39.81 billion of FCF in the TTM. FB generated roughly 5.75x more FCF than TSLA and grew its FCF by more than 3x what TSLA produces, yet FB has a market cap that's almost $400 billion less than TSLA. Growth within the financials does not support TSLA's valuation, which is a breath away from $1 trillion.Steven Fiorillo, Seeking AlphaToday you're paying a 113.81 P/E for TSLA. Paying a larger multiple for a company that's growing its earnings quickly is normal, but TSLA isn't growing by larger amounts than FB, and FB trades at a 16.66 P/E. I have seen TSLA bulls justify the P/E because of TSLA's growth factor, but this doesn't hold up when FB has grown by larger amounts from larger starting positions and has a P/E that's a fraction of TSLA. Look at AAPL, which is the largest company in the world. AAPL has grown its net income by $56.25 billion and its FCF by $52.3 billion over the past 3.25 years, and its P/E is 26.78. People are blindly paying any multiple the market places on TSLA.TSLA is trading at a 15.38 P/S. The justification for this multiple is difficult to defend while AMZN trades at a P/S of 11.31. AMZN's revenue grew by $341.76 billion over the past 3.25 years while TSLA grew their revenue by $40.73 billion. Instead of an absolute basis, looking at this from a percentage aspect, TSLA grew its revenue by 189.78%, while AMZN's grew by 251.32%. The P/S ratio is not a supporting valuation metric as TSLA is trading at a larger multiple than AMZN yet produced $301.03 billion less in revenue growth compared to AMZN. At the very least, TSLA should trade at a lower P/S multiple than AMZN considering their revenue growth was a fraction of AMZN's.TSLA has done an excellent job monetizing its revenue, delivering exceptional margins, and generating FCF. Now that TSLA is generating billions in FCF, it's been inserted into the bull thesis. FCF is a measure of profitability that excludes the non-cash expenses of the income statement and includes spending on equipment and assets as well as changes in working capital from the balance sheet. FCF could be the most underrated and most important financial metric to look at, as this is the pool of capital that companies can utilize to repay debt, pay dividends, buy back shares, make acquisitions, or reinvest in the business.Every investment is the present value of all future cash flow. This is why investors look at the price to FCF valuation. Investors want to pay the cheapest multiple for a company's FCF. Today, you're paying 142.52x TSLA's FCF. Going back to the FCF section, TSLA grew its FCF by $7.15 billion over the past 3.25 years. FB generated $23.45 billion of FCF in this period, which is 3x the amount TSLA grew, yet FB is trading at a 15.19x multiple on price to FCF.Why on earth would you want to pay 142.52x for TSLA's FCF when you could pay 15.19x for FB, which is growing their FCF by more than 3x the amount that TSLA is growing by? How about AAPL? AAPL grew its FCF by $52.3 billion and trades at a 25.4x price to FCF. If I exclude FB for a moment, should TSLA trade at a larger FCF multiple than GOOGL, which has grown its FCF by $46.15 billion over the past 3.25 years? My answer is no because there is no guarantee that TSLA will ever generate $46.15 billion in annual FCF, let alone the $68.99 billion in FCF that GOOGL generates.So what is a fair price to FCF multiple for TSLA? I don't believe TSLA has earned the right to trade at the same multiples as the rest of big tech considering the levels of FCF they produce. If I stick with the methodology that FB is egregiously undervalued, then TSLA should trade above 15.19x its FCF but lower than the 23.42x multiple GOOGL trades at.I don't want to be overly bearish, so I will place a 21x multiple on TSLA's FCF, which is more than fair considering big tech metrics. A 21x multiple on TSLA's FCF puts its market cap at $145.43 billion, which is -85.26% from its current market cap of $986.92 billion. It's just math, and if TSLA is going to be valued as a technology company, it needs to be compared to the technology companies with similar market caps.At the very least, there isn't a single reason why TSLA's market cap is larger than FB's. There isn't a single metric that TSLA beats FB in. Based on FB's valuation, if TSLA traded at the same FCF multiple, it would have a market cap of $105.19 billion.TSLA has a gross profit margin of 27.1% ($16.85b / $62.19b) and a profit margin of 13.51% ($8.4b / $62.19b). FB has a gross profit margin of 80.34% ($96.14b / $119.67b) and a profit margin of 31.2% ($37.34b / $119.67b). FB has much wider margins and is growing its revenue by larger amounts. This reinforces my methodology as to why TSLA is grossly overvalued. GOOGL has a gross profit margin of 56.93% ($153.9b / $270.33b) and a profit margin of 27.57% ($74.54b / $270.33b).The chances are incredibly slim that TSLA can double its profit margin to be within striking distance of GOOGL's. TSLA should not trade at a larger FCF, P/E, or P/S multiple than FB or GOOGL. While the market would indicate that I am wrong today, eventually, the hype will wear off, and TSLA will trade at a realistic valuation.TSLA's Future Catalysts Have A Long Way To Go Before Impacting Its Bottom LineThere are three main catalysts people discuss, which include insurance, robotaxis, and FSD.TSLA offers insurance using real-time driving behavior. This is currently available to all Model S, Model 3, Model X, and Model Y owners. The catch is that it's only available in Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Ohio, Oregon, Texas, and Virginia as of now.TSLA uses a safety rating score to determine the monthly premium for its vehicles. At the largest premium of $130/mo, this would be $1,560 per year. If TSLA converted 100% of their U.S sales in 2021 as an insurance customer, which I think could be possible if TSLA insurance was available in every state, it would have generated $471.12 million in revenue.We have no idea what the margins would have been, but if the margin was 50%, it would have been an additional $235.56 million in net income in 2021. While this is nothing to sneeze at, an additional $235.56 million in net income hardly moves the needle. This could be a $1 billion top-line revenue segment in the future, but with availability in only 7 states, insurance's $1 billion revenue mark is a long way away.TeslaNext,FSD, for which TSLA has created two subscription models, a $99/mo price point and a $199/mo price point. The problem with FSD is that it doesn't make the vehicle fully autonomous, and you still need a driver to be attentive and alert. While I am not arguing that TSLA's FSD isn't leaps and bounds ahead of the competition, the problem is that it's not exactly a self-driving car.The questions around legality and where you can use it pop into my head, and how many of TSLA's drivers opt for this upgrade. Until there is clear legislation and the technology advances to where vehicles can fully drive a person from point A to B while that person takes a nap or reads, I have a hard time believing enough TSLA owners will spend the extra $199/mo on FSD. If there is somewhere where TSLA produces the numbers about how many owners opt for this package, please let me know, and I will crunch the numbers.Which Features Come With My Subscription?The FSD capability features you receive are based on your configuration and location. Not all features are available in all markets, and features are subject to change.Learn more about Autopilot and Full Self-Driving capability features.Note: These features are designed to become more capable over time; however the currently enabled features do not make the vehicle autonomous. The currently enabled features require a fully attentive driver, who has their hands on the wheel and is prepared to take over at any moment.The last catalyst is Robotaxis which many have commented on in my articles before. We're so far off on Robotaxis that this can't be considered in TSLA's upcoming revenue. I would think major legislation would be needed for Robotaxis to exist, and there is no telling how many years away we are from this.Also, what is the percentage of TSLA owners that would actually allow their vehicle to be used as a Robotaxi? Depending on what the profitability is, I can see people buying TSLAs to enroll them in this program, but, once again, we need to see the economics behind it. I know I am just one opinion, but I would never enroll one of my cars into a robotaxi program because I don't want other people that I don't know in my car. I would think there are many others that have similar viewpoints.The real upcoming catalysts are future revenue growth and entering the Chinese market. In 2021 TSLA grew its YoY revenue by 70.67%, and their off to a great start after Q1 2022. Only time will tell what type of growth rate TSLA can maintain, but too many people are assuming that TSLA will obliterate the competition. Over the next several years, we could see TSLA's growth rate become significantly reduced as more luxury operators put EVs on the road.At TSLA's current margins, they would need to increase their revenue by 444.55% to $276.47 billion to produce the same amount of net income ($37.34b) that FB produces today at their current 13.51% profit margin. Maybe TSLA can get there in the future, but why should TSLA be valued at almost $1 trillion today, considering not a single metric of theirs is similar to FB or GOOGL, and TSLA's growth across any of the sectors isn't larger than FB or GOOGL?Tesla Continues To Dilute Shareholders, And Almost No Shareholders CareDilution kills shareholder value. Look, I am a shareholder of TSLA, and I hate that my shares continue to be diluted. These numbers are split-adjusted that I am using. Over the past decade,TSLA has diluted its shares by 80.93%. This is horrible compared to big tech, yet investors can't buy enough TSLA shares. TSLA finished 2012 with 572.6 million shares and, as of its last filing, had increased its outstanding shares to 1.036 billion shares.This is the equivalent of me taking a pizza, and instead of giving you a slice, cutting another 6.5 slices, then giving you one. The pizza represents TSLA, the company, and they basically turned an 8-slice pie into a 14.5-slice pie, reducing shareholder's ownership and the amount of equity, revenue, and EPS our shares represent.If you want to see what a true shepherd of shareholder value looks like, turn to AAPL. In 2012 AAPL had 26.3 billion shares outstanding. Over the past decade, AAPL has repurchased 10.09 billion shares, reducing its outstanding shares by 38.37%. Every quarter, AAPL is buying back shares and increasing the ownership its shares represent. TSLA, on the other hand, continues to dilute shareholders by increasing shares YOY.I Could Be Completely Wrong, And Tesla Could Continue Growing At These RatesTSLA's vehicle deliveries continue to outpace its growing production. YoY TSLA's deliveries increased by 68% in Q1, adding 125,171 delivered vehicles to its customers. TSLA just began Model Y deliveries from the Austin facility, and production at the Gigafactory in Berlin started in March of 2022. TSLA's Shanghai facility had strong production rates prior to the spike in COVID that resulted in temporary shutdowns. TSLA isn't just focusing on the U.S, they have Europe and China in their sights.EVs accounted for 488,000 sales in the U.S for 2021, and the previous projection was that EVs would account for 670,000 units sold in 2022. Oil has hovered around $100 per barrel and could render the previous projections of 37% increased EV sales domestically for 2022 conservative. TSLA is in a prime position to capitalize on this trend. In 2021 TSLA vehicles accounted for 61.89% of EVs sold in the U.S (301,998 / 488,000).Hypothetically, if the previous projection of 670,000 EV sales for 2022 is accurate and TSLA maintains its current margin, they would sell 414,628 vehicles throughout the U.S in 2022. If gas prices do alter the decision-making process when deciding between a combustible engine or an EV, then TSLA could continue surprising the market with QoQ earnings beats.The U.S has a national goal of reaching 50% of domestic auto sales coming from EVs. In 2021, EVs accounted for 3.26% of total sales in the U.S auto market. Based on U.S auto sales in 2021, annual EV sales would need to grow by 6,989,403 to reach a 50% EV to combustible engine ratio. Hypothetically if U.S auto sales stayed flat but EVs reached 50% of the market in 2030 they would sell 7,477,403 vehicles. If TSLA's dominance in the EV sector was to drop from 61.89% to 15% due to increased competition, they would generate 1,121,610 in sales compared to 301,998 in 2021. When you add in Europe and China, TSLA certainly has the ability to become a top auto manufacturer by sales next decade.Bulls aren't incorrect to be excited about TSLA. The world is moving toward EVs, and TSLA is the crème de la crème. As I said in the beginning, I am bullish about TSLA's future prospects, but I think the valuation today is overinflated. Nobody can predict the future, but I have no doubt that TSLA will continue to grow its sales YoY.The question becomes, how much growth will they be able to achieve YoY? In 2021, TM generated $226.48 billion of revenue and, based on the future of EVs, TSLA certainly could achieve this level of revenue in the future. Based on TSLA's current 13.51% profit margin, if they achieved TM's level of revenue, they would generate $30.59 billion of net income, which would definitely make today's valuation look more realistic.TeslaConclusionYou're probably wondering how I can be a shareholder and be a bear on TSLA's valuation at the same time. It's simple; my wife bought shares of TSLA, which makes me a shareholder. My stance has always been bullish on the company and bearish on the valuation. What Elon Musk and the team at TSLA has accomplished is astonishing, and they deserve nothing but respect.Keep in mind a company and a company's stock are two separate things. TSLA continues to dilute shareholders, and they and the market are valuing TSLA as if it's FB or GOOGL. TSLA is not a technology company; it's an automobile company, as the automotive segments drive 100% of its gross revenue and net income.TSLA is trading at a P/E of 113.81, a P/S of 15.38, and a 142.52x multiple on its FCF. The numbers are drastically inflated as TSLA has no business trading at a larger P/S multiple than AMZN, which trades at 11.31 P/S when it has grown its revenue by $341.76 billion over the previous 3.25 years compared to TSLA's $40.73 billion of revenue growth. TSLA has generated $6.93 billion in FCF over the TTM, while Mr. Market has placed a 142.52x multiple on TSLA due to $7.15 billion FCF growth over the past 3.25 years. FB trades at a 15.19x FCF multiple while growing FCF by $23.45 billion over this period which is more than 3x what TSLA has generated in the TTM.With FB trading at 15.19x FCF, GOOGL at 23.42x FCF, and AAPL at 25.4x FCF, it's hard to justify any number above 20x for TSLA. I think a 21x FCF multiple is generous and that places TSLA at a market cap of $145.43 billion, which is -85.26% from its current market cap of $986.92 billion.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":362,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063273756,"gmtCreate":1651483035968,"gmtModify":1676534914374,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Share liao&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Share liao&nbsp;","text":"$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Share liao","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/e77faebec32ef0ea63c3360bbd02c3e5","width":"1170","height":"2292"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063273756","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":339,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063273193,"gmtCreate":1651482997990,"gmtModify":1676534914367,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","text":"$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/45d86b14e5ffa5ce928fc18dc5625395","width":"1125","height":"3163"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063273193","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":93,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063279673,"gmtCreate":1651482931321,"gmtModify":1676534914352,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063279673","repostId":"1155154275","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1155154275","pubTimestamp":1651482539,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1155154275?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-05-02 17:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"U.S. Stocks To Watch: Global Payments, Moody, Mosaic and More","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1155154275","media":"benzinga","summary":"Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:•Wall Street expects  Global Payments Inc.","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:</p><p>•Wall Street expects  Global Payments Inc.  GPN to report quarterly earnings at $2.04 per share on revenue of $1.96 billion before the opening bell. Global Payments shares gained 0.4% to $137.55 in after-hours trading.</p><p>•Analysts expect  The Mosaic Company MOS to post quarterly earnings at $2.41 per share on revenue of $4.08 billion after the closing bell. Mosaic shares dropped 4.4% to close at $62.42 on Friday.</p><p>•Middlesex Water Company  MSEX said its Q1 consolidated operating revenues increased $3.7 million to $36.2 million from the year-ago period. Diluted EPS came in at $0.68 per share, up from $0.39 per share in the year-ago period. Middlesex Water shares gained 0.8% to $89.70 in the after-hours trading session.</p><p>•Before the opening bell,  Moody&#39;s Corporation MCO is projected to report quarterly earnings at $2.90 per share on revenue of $1.51 billion. Moody&#39;s shares gained 2.1% to $323.00 in pre-market trading.</p><p>•Analysts are expecting  The Williams Companies, Inc.  WMB to have earned $0.35 per share on revenue of $2.93 billion for the latest quarter. The company will release earnings after the markets close. Williams Companies shares gained 1.7% to $34.87 in pre-market trading.</p><p></p></body></html>","source":"lsy1606299360108","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. Stocks To Watch: Global Payments, Moody, Mosaic and More</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. Stocks To Watch: Global Payments, Moody, Mosaic and More\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-05-02 17:08 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.benzinga.com/news/earnings/22/05/26923284/5-stocks-to-watch-for-may-2-2022><strong>benzinga</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:•Wall Street expects  Global Payments Inc.  GPN to report quarterly earnings at $2.04 per share on revenue of $1.96 billion before the opening...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.benzinga.com/news/earnings/22/05/26923284/5-stocks-to-watch-for-may-2-2022\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"MCO":"穆迪","WMB":"威廉姆斯","GPN":"环汇有限公司","MSEX":"米德尔赛克斯水务公司","MOS":"美国美盛"},"source_url":"https://www.benzinga.com/news/earnings/22/05/26923284/5-stocks-to-watch-for-may-2-2022","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1155154275","content_text":"Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:•Wall Street expects  Global Payments Inc.  GPN to report quarterly earnings at $2.04 per share on revenue of $1.96 billion before the opening bell. Global Payments shares gained 0.4% to $137.55 in after-hours trading.•Analysts expect  The Mosaic Company MOS to post quarterly earnings at $2.41 per share on revenue of $4.08 billion after the closing bell. Mosaic shares dropped 4.4% to close at $62.42 on Friday.•Middlesex Water Company  MSEX said its Q1 consolidated operating revenues increased $3.7 million to $36.2 million from the year-ago period. Diluted EPS came in at $0.68 per share, up from $0.39 per share in the year-ago period. Middlesex Water shares gained 0.8% to $89.70 in the after-hours trading session.•Before the opening bell,  Moody's Corporation MCO is projected to report quarterly earnings at $2.90 per share on revenue of $1.51 billion. Moody's shares gained 2.1% to $323.00 in pre-market trading.•Analysts are expecting  The Williams Companies, Inc.  WMB to have earned $0.35 per share on revenue of $2.93 billion for the latest quarter. The company will release earnings after the markets close. Williams Companies shares gained 1.7% to $34.87 in pre-market trading.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":286,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063279855,"gmtCreate":1651482918754,"gmtModify":1676534914344,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/.DJI\">$DJIA(.DJI)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/.DJI\">$DJIA(.DJI)$</a>Ok","text":"$DJIA(.DJI)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/2b952f6a5cc40d938b3f412813c5b534","width":"1125","height":"2393"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063279855","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":105,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063918447,"gmtCreate":1651383744946,"gmtModify":1676534899487,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>Ok","text":"$Apple(AAPL)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/6bbb75050bac9ff2d5a1ebd842794f85","width":"1125","height":"4276"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063918447","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":152,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063918657,"gmtCreate":1651383722908,"gmtModify":1676534899478,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","text":"$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/e77faebec32ef0ea63c3360bbd02c3e5","width":"1170","height":"2292"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063918657","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":460,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9069556844,"gmtCreate":1651322344432,"gmtModify":1676534889895,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/002340\">$Gem Co.,Ltd.(002340)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/002340\">$Gem Co.,Ltd.(002340)$</a>Ok","text":"$Gem Co.,Ltd.(002340)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/cfbf4203e68a00d4a556ec7ca86eaecc","width":"1125","height":"2929"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9069556844","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":250,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9069556139,"gmtCreate":1651322325339,"gmtModify":1676534889871,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","text":"$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/e77faebec32ef0ea63c3360bbd02c3e5","width":"1170","height":"2292"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9069556139","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":206,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9069558797,"gmtCreate":1651322292136,"gmtModify":1676534889863,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes&nbsp;","listText":"Likes&nbsp;","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9069558797","repostId":"1124633130","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1124633130","pubTimestamp":1651321393,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1124633130?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-04-30 20:23","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Berkshire Hathaway Earnings Fall on Investment Losses","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1124633130","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Warren Buffett will speak later Saturday at the conglomerate’s first in-person annual meeting since 2019","content":"<html><head></head><body><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BRK.A\">Berkshire Hathaway Inc.</a>&#39;s first-quarter earnings fell, hurt by investment losses and weaker results in its insurance-underwriting business.</p><p>Warren Buffett’s company reported net income of $5.46 billion, or $3,702 a Class A share equivalent. That was down from $11.71 billion, or $7,638 a share, a year earlier. Operating earnings, which exclude some investment results, edged up to $7.04 billion from $7.02 billion last year.</p><p>Berkshire’s insurance-underwriting business reported a decrease in operating profits, while its railroad; utilities and energy; and manufacturing, service and retailing businesses posted growth.</p><p>Berkshire’s net income can be volatile from quarter to quarter because the company has large stock investments, and it is required to include unrealized investment gains or losses in the figure. Mr. Buffett, who is Berkshire’s chief executive and chairman, has said he thinks operating earnings are a better measure of how the company is performing.</p><p>Investors curious to hear what Berkshire will do next will get a chance to hear from Mr. Buffett himself later Saturday. The 91-year-old investor—alongside right-hand man Charlie Munger and Vice Chairmen Greg Abel and Ajit Jain—will speak at Berkshire’s first in-person annual shareholder meeting since 2019.</p><p>Based in Omaha, Neb., Berkshire runs a large insurance operation, as well as a railroad, utilities, manufacturers and retailers. Many of its holdings are household names, such as Fruit of the Loom, Geico, Dairy Queen and Benjamin Moore &amp; Co.</p><p>Berkshire also has a massive equity portfolio, which was worth $331 billion at the end of 2021. The company uses billions of dollars of float, or upfront premiums that its insurance customers pay, to make investments for its own gain.</p><p>While most shareholder meetings pass by without much notice, Berkshire’s has been lovingly dubbed the “Woodstock for Capitalists” given its unusually high turnout, festival-like atmosphere and plethora of memorabilia celebrating Mr. Buffett and his investments. In the past, attendees have taken home souvenirs such as Fruit of the Loom boxers with images of Mr. Buffett printed on them and Oriental Trading rubber ducks created in the likeness of Mr. Buffett and Mr. Munger.</p><p>The highlight of the weekend will be an hourslong question-and-answer session during which the executives will field inquiries from randomly selected audience members and CNBC reporter Becky Quick.</p><p>Mr. Buffett has said he won’t discuss what Berkshire is buying or selling, how Berkshire arrived at an investment decision, or politics.</p><p>“Any other subjects are fair game,” he wrote in a program for the event.</p><p>While the company made no major acquisitions in 2021, with Mr. Buffett citing a lack of attractive long-term investment opportunities, it has put more cash to work again this year.</p><p>In March, Berkshire said it had reached a deal to acquire insurer <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/Y\">Alleghany Corp.</a> for $11.6 billion. The deal is set to be Berkshire’s biggest in years. The company also unveiled it had built a 14.6% stake in <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Occidental Petroleum</a> in March and disclosed an 11% stake in <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/HPQ\">HP Inc.</a> in April.</p><p>Shares of <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/OXY\">Occidental</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/HPQ\">HP</a> soared following news of Berkshire’s investments.</p><p>Shareholders will pay close attention to Mr. Buffett’s views on the markets and the economy, given his decades of investing experience and the vast scale of Berkshire’s businesses.</p><p>They may also look to hear Mr. Buffett share his views on various Berkshire shareholder proposals. In April, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the nation’s largest pension fund, said it was planning to support a proposal that would remove Mr. Buffett as the chairman of Berkshire.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Berkshire Hathaway Earnings Fall on Investment Losses</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\">\nBerkshire Hathaway Earnings Fall on Investment Losses\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-30 20:23 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/berkshire-hathaway-earnings-fall-on-investment-losses-11651321042?mod=hp_lead_pos1><strong>The Wall Street Journal</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Berkshire Hathaway Inc.'s first-quarter earnings fell, hurt by investment losses and weaker results in its insurance-underwriting business.Warren Buffett’s company reported net income of $5.46 billion...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/berkshire-hathaway-earnings-fall-on-investment-losses-11651321042?mod=hp_lead_pos1\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.B":"伯克希尔B","BRK.A":"伯克希尔"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/berkshire-hathaway-earnings-fall-on-investment-losses-11651321042?mod=hp_lead_pos1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1124633130","content_text":"Berkshire Hathaway Inc.'s first-quarter earnings fell, hurt by investment losses and weaker results in its insurance-underwriting business.Warren Buffett’s company reported net income of $5.46 billion, or $3,702 a Class A share equivalent. That was down from $11.71 billion, or $7,638 a share, a year earlier. Operating earnings, which exclude some investment results, edged up to $7.04 billion from $7.02 billion last year.Berkshire’s insurance-underwriting business reported a decrease in operating profits, while its railroad; utilities and energy; and manufacturing, service and retailing businesses posted growth.Berkshire’s net income can be volatile from quarter to quarter because the company has large stock investments, and it is required to include unrealized investment gains or losses in the figure. Mr. Buffett, who is Berkshire’s chief executive and chairman, has said he thinks operating earnings are a better measure of how the company is performing.Investors curious to hear what Berkshire will do next will get a chance to hear from Mr. Buffett himself later Saturday. The 91-year-old investor—alongside right-hand man Charlie Munger and Vice Chairmen Greg Abel and Ajit Jain—will speak at Berkshire’s first in-person annual shareholder meeting since 2019.Based in Omaha, Neb., Berkshire runs a large insurance operation, as well as a railroad, utilities, manufacturers and retailers. Many of its holdings are household names, such as Fruit of the Loom, Geico, Dairy Queen and Benjamin Moore & Co.Berkshire also has a massive equity portfolio, which was worth $331 billion at the end of 2021. The company uses billions of dollars of float, or upfront premiums that its insurance customers pay, to make investments for its own gain.While most shareholder meetings pass by without much notice, Berkshire’s has been lovingly dubbed the “Woodstock for Capitalists” given its unusually high turnout, festival-like atmosphere and plethora of memorabilia celebrating Mr. Buffett and his investments. In the past, attendees have taken home souvenirs such as Fruit of the Loom boxers with images of Mr. Buffett printed on them and Oriental Trading rubber ducks created in the likeness of Mr. Buffett and Mr. Munger.The highlight of the weekend will be an hourslong question-and-answer session during which the executives will field inquiries from randomly selected audience members and CNBC reporter Becky Quick.Mr. Buffett has said he won’t discuss what Berkshire is buying or selling, how Berkshire arrived at an investment decision, or politics.“Any other subjects are fair game,” he wrote in a program for the event.While the company made no major acquisitions in 2021, with Mr. Buffett citing a lack of attractive long-term investment opportunities, it has put more cash to work again this year.In March, Berkshire said it had reached a deal to acquire insurer Alleghany Corp. for $11.6 billion. The deal is set to be Berkshire’s biggest in years. The company also unveiled it had built a 14.6% stake in Occidental Petroleum in March and disclosed an 11% stake in HP Inc. in April.Shares of Occidental and HP soared following news of Berkshire’s investments.Shareholders will pay close attention to Mr. Buffett’s views on the markets and the economy, given his decades of investing experience and the vast scale of Berkshire’s businesses.They may also look to hear Mr. Buffett share his views on various Berkshire shareholder proposals. In April, the California Public Employees’ Retirement System, the nation’s largest pension fund, said it was planning to support a proposal that would remove Mr. Buffett as the chairman of Berkshire.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":282,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9081053165,"gmtCreate":1650171437701,"gmtModify":1676534662884,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>Ok","text":"$Apple(AAPL)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/cf995e50594cacb82095d46f04ebb786","width":"1125","height":"4276"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9081053165","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":115,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9081059137,"gmtCreate":1650171365735,"gmtModify":1676534662891,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9081059137","repostId":"2227986491","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2227986491","pubTimestamp":1650153489,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2227986491?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-04-17 07:58","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Is Tesla a Safe Stock to Buy Now?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2227986491","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"Tesla as a company has good prospects, but owning the stock comes with some risks.","content":"<html><head></head><body><p><b>Tesla</b> ( TSLA -3.65% ) is a company not easily ignored. Customers seem to love the company&#39;s well-designed electric vehicles (EVs) while the bulls seem quite pleased with the 33% stock price rise in the last 12 months. On the other end, the bears are very skeptical of the sustainability of its outsized stock price run. After all, Tesla stock delivered more than a 15-fold return in the last five years.</p><p>But for potential investors thinking about buying the stock now, it is crucial to consider whether it is safe to invest in Tesla today. While that is not going to be an easy exercise, investors should at least consider these two questions about the company and its stock.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/42bdaade247c7cea04b918d57eb73d34\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/></p><p>Image source: Getty Images.</p><h2><b>1. Is Tesla a durable business?</b></h2><p>Tesla has reported some solid financials lately. After delivering its first profitable year in 2020, Tesla exceeded that performance in 2021. It delivered a record 936,222 EVs to customers, grew revenue and net profit by 73% and 665%, respectively, and expanded free cash flow by 80% to $5 billion.</p><p>But note that the last paragraph started out by using the word &#34;lately.&#34; It&#39;s useful to also be aware that Tesla had never delivered a profitable year until 2020. It has been on the brink of bankruptcy a few times, most recently from 2017 to 2019. But as the worldwide transition from combustion engines into electric engines gained steam, Tesla was favorably positioned to capture the pent-up demand. And it did, as is evident by its solid numbers.</p><p>While the 2021 result was remarkable, it is still an outlier more than a norm. The biggest issue is that two profitable years provide little assurance that Tesla can sustain that in the coming years. As the car industry is highly cyclical, an economic downturn (such as a recession) will cause consumers to tighten their belts. When that happens, average folks tend to delay their purchase of high-value items like a car, which could reduce industry volume. We still do not know how Tesla will perform in such an environment.</p><p>On top of that, the EV race has intensified in recent years. While Tesla is still the dominant player -- with a 21% global market share in 2021, according to Autocar -- incumbents like <b>General Motors</b> and <b>Ford Motor Company</b> have big plans to ramp up their production. Tesla also faces competition from Chinese car companies like <b>BYD</b> and <b>Nio</b>. The former, backed by Warren Buffett, sold 593,745 EVs in 2021. BYD also announced that it would stop producing combustion engine vehicles to focus on EVs and plug-in hybrids.</p><p>In short, Tesla must execute flawlessly in the coming years to maintain its market share and stay profitable. While we do not know whether the company can sustain its strong execution, there is <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> thing we do know for sure: Gone are the days when Tesla had the whole EV market to itself.</p><h2><b>2. Does Tesla stock offer a margin of safety?</b></h2><p>Ask any investor how to make money in the stock market, and the usual reply will be to buy a stock when the price is low and sell when the price is high. However, this argument is incomplete since an investor should also consider the intrinsic value of the stock. The key is to buy when the stock price is lower than the intrinsic value (and sell when it is above).</p><p>But estimating intrinsic value is not a simple task. Not only are there many methods to calculate the intrinsic value of a company, but every investor will use different variables to compute. It is fair to say that every investor will arrive at a different intrinsic value for the same company.</p><p>Enter: margin of safety. The idea is that when investors buy a stock at a price materially lower than its intrinsic value, they have room for errors in their estimation of its value. Even if they make mistakes, they generally lose little money since they buy the stock cheaply.</p><p>So is Tesla&#39;s stock cheap enough today to offer a margin of safety to investors? Let us consider a few simple metrics. As of writing, Tesla has a price-to-sales (P/S), price-to-book (P/B), and price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 21, 35, and 209. Comparatively, General Motors&#39; P/S, P/B, and P/E ratios are 0.5, 1, and 5.9, respectively.</p><p>Tesla bulls will immediately cry foul, claiming that Tesla is fundamentally a different company from GM. While I agree with them that Tesla is not an average company, my argument is this: Is it worth 30 to 40 times more than GM? Or put it differently, is one Tesla equivalent to 30 to 40 GMs? To me, the answer is probably not.</p><h2><b>Back to the original question: Is Tesla stock safe to buy?</b></h2><p>There is no doubt that Tesla is a company with promising prospects. It is a leader in the EV industry and has significant investments in potentially major industries like autonomous vehicles, renewable energy, and others.</p><p>Still, I don&#39;t think it&#39;s safe to buy Tesla stock now with your hard-earned money. One reason is the company just turned profitable in 2020. It would need a few more profitable years before investors can safely assume the turnaround is permanent. Besides, its valuation is not cheap, which offers a very little margin of safety for investors.</p><p>So unless investors are looking for some adrenaline rush, they will be better off staying from the stock. And even if they are looking for such excitement, they can consider buying a Tesla car instead.</p></body></html>","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>Is Tesla a Safe Stock to 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\">\nIs Tesla a Safe Stock to Buy Now?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-17 07:58 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/04/16/is-tesla-a-safe-stock-to-buy-now/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Tesla ( TSLA -3.65% ) is a company not easily ignored. Customers seem to love the company's well-designed electric vehicles (EVs) while the bulls seem quite pleased with the 33% stock price rise in ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/04/16/is-tesla-a-safe-stock-to-buy-now/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4099":"汽车制造商","BK4511":"特斯拉概念","BK4548":"巴美列捷福持仓","BK4574":"无人驾驶","TSLA":"特斯拉","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BK4555":"新能源车","BK4527":"明星科技股","BK4581":"高盛持仓"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/04/16/is-tesla-a-safe-stock-to-buy-now/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2227986491","content_text":"Tesla ( TSLA -3.65% ) is a company not easily ignored. Customers seem to love the company's well-designed electric vehicles (EVs) while the bulls seem quite pleased with the 33% stock price rise in the last 12 months. On the other end, the bears are very skeptical of the sustainability of its outsized stock price run. After all, Tesla stock delivered more than a 15-fold return in the last five years.But for potential investors thinking about buying the stock now, it is crucial to consider whether it is safe to invest in Tesla today. While that is not going to be an easy exercise, investors should at least consider these two questions about the company and its stock.Image source: Getty Images.1. Is Tesla a durable business?Tesla has reported some solid financials lately. After delivering its first profitable year in 2020, Tesla exceeded that performance in 2021. It delivered a record 936,222 EVs to customers, grew revenue and net profit by 73% and 665%, respectively, and expanded free cash flow by 80% to $5 billion.But note that the last paragraph started out by using the word \"lately.\" It's useful to also be aware that Tesla had never delivered a profitable year until 2020. It has been on the brink of bankruptcy a few times, most recently from 2017 to 2019. But as the worldwide transition from combustion engines into electric engines gained steam, Tesla was favorably positioned to capture the pent-up demand. And it did, as is evident by its solid numbers.While the 2021 result was remarkable, it is still an outlier more than a norm. The biggest issue is that two profitable years provide little assurance that Tesla can sustain that in the coming years. As the car industry is highly cyclical, an economic downturn (such as a recession) will cause consumers to tighten their belts. When that happens, average folks tend to delay their purchase of high-value items like a car, which could reduce industry volume. We still do not know how Tesla will perform in such an environment.On top of that, the EV race has intensified in recent years. While Tesla is still the dominant player -- with a 21% global market share in 2021, according to Autocar -- incumbents like General Motors and Ford Motor Company have big plans to ramp up their production. Tesla also faces competition from Chinese car companies like BYD and Nio. The former, backed by Warren Buffett, sold 593,745 EVs in 2021. BYD also announced that it would stop producing combustion engine vehicles to focus on EVs and plug-in hybrids.In short, Tesla must execute flawlessly in the coming years to maintain its market share and stay profitable. While we do not know whether the company can sustain its strong execution, there is one thing we do know for sure: Gone are the days when Tesla had the whole EV market to itself.2. Does Tesla stock offer a margin of safety?Ask any investor how to make money in the stock market, and the usual reply will be to buy a stock when the price is low and sell when the price is high. However, this argument is incomplete since an investor should also consider the intrinsic value of the stock. The key is to buy when the stock price is lower than the intrinsic value (and sell when it is above).But estimating intrinsic value is not a simple task. Not only are there many methods to calculate the intrinsic value of a company, but every investor will use different variables to compute. It is fair to say that every investor will arrive at a different intrinsic value for the same company.Enter: margin of safety. The idea is that when investors buy a stock at a price materially lower than its intrinsic value, they have room for errors in their estimation of its value. Even if they make mistakes, they generally lose little money since they buy the stock cheaply.So is Tesla's stock cheap enough today to offer a margin of safety to investors? Let us consider a few simple metrics. As of writing, Tesla has a price-to-sales (P/S), price-to-book (P/B), and price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 21, 35, and 209. Comparatively, General Motors' P/S, P/B, and P/E ratios are 0.5, 1, and 5.9, respectively.Tesla bulls will immediately cry foul, claiming that Tesla is fundamentally a different company from GM. While I agree with them that Tesla is not an average company, my argument is this: Is it worth 30 to 40 times more than GM? Or put it differently, is one Tesla equivalent to 30 to 40 GMs? To me, the answer is probably not.Back to the original question: Is Tesla stock safe to buy?There is no doubt that Tesla is a company with promising prospects. It is a leader in the EV industry and has significant investments in potentially major industries like autonomous vehicles, renewable energy, and others.Still, I don't think it's safe to buy Tesla stock now with your hard-earned money. One reason is the company just turned profitable in 2020. It would need a few more profitable years before investors can safely assume the turnaround is permanent. Besides, its valuation is not cheap, which offers a very little margin of safety for investors.So unless investors are looking for some adrenaline rush, they will be better off staying from the stock. And even if they are looking for such excitement, they can consider buying a Tesla car instead.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":93,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9080387393,"gmtCreate":1649847138628,"gmtModify":1676534588803,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Best opinion?! This&nbsp;","listText":"Best opinion?! This&nbsp;","text":"Best opinion?! This","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9080387393","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":128,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9016135746,"gmtCreate":1649143364449,"gmtModify":1676534458859,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/VUSD.UK\">$VANGUARD S&amp;P 500 UCITS ETF(VUSD.UK)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/VUSD.UK\">$VANGUARD S&amp;P 500 UCITS ETF(VUSD.UK)$</a>Ok","text":"$VANGUARD S&P 500 UCITS ETF(VUSD.UK)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/aa58f504de77d7a76eccf8691b7fd0e9","width":"1125","height":"3656"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9016135746","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":166,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9016135903,"gmtCreate":1649143295315,"gmtModify":1676534458850,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/GRAB\">$Grab Holdings(GRAB)$</a>lol","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/GRAB\">$Grab Holdings(GRAB)$</a>lol","text":"$Grab Holdings(GRAB)$lol","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/b79026df49bbc57d216fd411c03ff9a5","width":"1170","height":"2292"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9016135903","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":40,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9016132882,"gmtCreate":1649143156431,"gmtModify":1676534458666,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9016132882","repostId":"2224132370","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2224132370","pubTimestamp":1649120728,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2224132370?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-04-05 09:05","market":"us","language":"en","title":"3 High-Yield Dividend Stocks to Buy in a Market Rebound","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2224132370","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"It could be a good time to lock in these high yields.","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Bad news tends to overshadow good news. That&#39;s especially the case when there has been a lot of bad news in recent weeks as we have experienced. However, there&#39;s now good news as well. The major stock market indices have been rising. None of them are in a bear market now -- and the <b>S&amp;P 500</b> is no longer in correction territory.</p><p>Income investors could especially have a great opportunity to lock in attractive dividend yields right now. Here are three high-yield dividend stocks to buy in a market rebound.</p><h2>1. Enterprise Products Partners</h2><p><b>Enterprise Products Partners</b> didn&#39;t sink as most stocks have in recent months. The major midstream energy company&#39;s shares are up close to 18% year to date.</p><p>This solid gain makes sense considering the current overall dynamics of the oil and gas industry. Prices have risen in part due to worries about the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, the demand for oil and gas has also increased as the global economy recovers from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.</p><p>Enterprise has been a key beneficiary of these tailwinds with its pipelines, natural gas processing facilities, and storage facilities. It should also profit further if the stock market continues to rebound and economic uncertainties fade. But even if not, Enterprise is a stock that should hold up well no matter what the market does.</p><p>The company offers a juicy dividend yield of 7.2%. Enterprise has also increased its distribution for 23 consecutive years. There aren&#39;t too many high-yield dividend stocks with such an impressive track record.</p><h2>2. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MPW\">Medical Properties Trust</a></h2><p><b>Medical Properties Trust</b> stock hasn&#39;t fared quite so well. Its shares are still down around 9% year to date after beginning to bounce back in mid-March. However, the company&#39;s underlying business hasn&#39;t skipped a beat.</p><p>That underlying business is owning and leasing hospitals. Medical Properties Trust is a real estate investment trust (REIT) with around 440 facilities in its portfolio. Roughly 60% of these properties are in the U.S. with the remaining hospitals in eight other countries -- primarily in Europe.</p><p>As you might expect, Medical Properties Trust&#39;s lease revenue doesn&#39;t rise or fall based on stock market gyrations. Higher inflation rates shouldn&#39;t be a big problem, either. The REIT has rent escalators based on the Consumer Price Index built into more than 99% of its leases.</p><p>REITs are known for their dividends. Medical Properties Trust is no slouch on that front. Its dividend yield currently stands at nearly 5.5%. The company has increased its dividend for eight consecutive years.</p><h2>3. Verizon Communications</h2><p><b>Verizon Communications</b> claims a distinction that very few high-yield dividend stocks have: It&#39;s <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> of Warren Buffett&#39;s favorites. The telecom giant ranks as the eighth-largest holding in <b>Berkshire Hathaway</b>&#39;s portfolio.</p><p>Should you buy Verizon just because Buffett likes it? Of course not. However, it&#39;s a good idea to at least consider what an investor such as the Oracle of Omaha might find attractive about Verizon.</p><p>The dividend certainly stands out. Verizon&#39;s dividend yield tops 5%. The company has increased its dividend for 15 consecutive years. Verizon should easily be able to keep that streak going with a payout ratio of less than 48%.</p><p>Sure, Verizon probably won&#39;t deliver sizzling growth. However, the company could have better growth opportunities than you might think with its high-speed 5G network, especially in expanding further in the home internet market. There&#39;s more good news for Verizon than there is bad news.</p></body></html>","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>3 High-Yield Dividend Stocks to Buy in a Market Rebound</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\">\n3 High-Yield Dividend Stocks to Buy in a Market Rebound\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-04-05 09:05 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/04/04/3-high-yield-dividend-stocks-to-buy-in-a-market-re/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Bad news tends to overshadow good news. That's especially the case when there has been a lot of bad news in recent weeks as we have experienced. However, there's now good news as well. The major stock...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/04/04/3-high-yield-dividend-stocks-to-buy-in-a-market-re/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","REIT":"ALPS Active REIT ETF","BK4176":"多领域控股","BK4581":"高盛持仓","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/04/04/3-high-yield-dividend-stocks-to-buy-in-a-market-re/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2224132370","content_text":"Bad news tends to overshadow good news. That's especially the case when there has been a lot of bad news in recent weeks as we have experienced. However, there's now good news as well. The major stock market indices have been rising. None of them are in a bear market now -- and the S&P 500 is no longer in correction territory.Income investors could especially have a great opportunity to lock in attractive dividend yields right now. Here are three high-yield dividend stocks to buy in a market rebound.1. Enterprise Products PartnersEnterprise Products Partners didn't sink as most stocks have in recent months. The major midstream energy company's shares are up close to 18% year to date.This solid gain makes sense considering the current overall dynamics of the oil and gas industry. Prices have risen in part due to worries about the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, the demand for oil and gas has also increased as the global economy recovers from the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic.Enterprise has been a key beneficiary of these tailwinds with its pipelines, natural gas processing facilities, and storage facilities. It should also profit further if the stock market continues to rebound and economic uncertainties fade. But even if not, Enterprise is a stock that should hold up well no matter what the market does.The company offers a juicy dividend yield of 7.2%. Enterprise has also increased its distribution for 23 consecutive years. There aren't too many high-yield dividend stocks with such an impressive track record.2. Medical Properties TrustMedical Properties Trust stock hasn't fared quite so well. Its shares are still down around 9% year to date after beginning to bounce back in mid-March. However, the company's underlying business hasn't skipped a beat.That underlying business is owning and leasing hospitals. Medical Properties Trust is a real estate investment trust (REIT) with around 440 facilities in its portfolio. Roughly 60% of these properties are in the U.S. with the remaining hospitals in eight other countries -- primarily in Europe.As you might expect, Medical Properties Trust's lease revenue doesn't rise or fall based on stock market gyrations. Higher inflation rates shouldn't be a big problem, either. The REIT has rent escalators based on the Consumer Price Index built into more than 99% of its leases.REITs are known for their dividends. Medical Properties Trust is no slouch on that front. Its dividend yield currently stands at nearly 5.5%. The company has increased its dividend for eight consecutive years.3. Verizon CommunicationsVerizon Communications claims a distinction that very few high-yield dividend stocks have: It's one of Warren Buffett's favorites. The telecom giant ranks as the eighth-largest holding in Berkshire Hathaway's portfolio.Should you buy Verizon just because Buffett likes it? Of course not. However, it's a good idea to at least consider what an investor such as the Oracle of Omaha might find attractive about Verizon.The dividend certainly stands out. Verizon's dividend yield tops 5%. The company has increased its dividend for 15 consecutive years. Verizon should easily be able to keep that streak going with a payout ratio of less than 48%.Sure, Verizon probably won't deliver sizzling growth. However, the company could have better growth opportunities than you might think with its high-speed 5G network, especially in expanding further in the home internet market. There's more good news for Verizon than there is bad news.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":54,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9038344270,"gmtCreate":1646751662643,"gmtModify":1676534158203,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"in short companies/ppl are abusing the situation","listText":"in short companies/ppl are abusing the situation","text":"in short companies/ppl are abusing the situation","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":9,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9038344270","repostId":"1134638354","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":119,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9033193942,"gmtCreate":1646207053376,"gmtModify":1676534103968,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"nice","listText":"nice","text":"nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9033193942","repostId":"1161866731","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1161866731","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":1646206416,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1161866731?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-03-02 15:33","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Netflix to Acquire Finnish Mobile Game Developer Next Games","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1161866731","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Netflix, Inc. (NASDAQ: NFLX) today announced that it has entered into a combination agreement to acq","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Netflix, Inc. (NASDAQ: NFLX) today announced that it has entered into a combination agreement to acquire Next Games (NXTGMS). Under the terms of the agreement, Netflix will commence a tender offer to acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of Next Games. Pursuant to the offer, Next Games shareholders will receive €2.1 in cash per share of Next Games, for a total equity value of approximately €65 million. The Board of Directors of Next Games has unanimously decided to recommend that the shareholders accept the tender offer.</p><p>&#34;Next Games has a seasoned management team, strong track record with mobile games based on entertainment franchises, and solid operational capabilities,&#34; said Michael Verdu, Vice President of Games, Netflix. &#34;We are excited for Next Games to join Netflix as a core studio in a strategic region and key talent market, expanding our internal game studio capabilities. While we&#39;re just getting started in games, I am confident that together with Next Games we will be able to build a portfolio of world class games that will delight our members around the world.&#34;</p><p>Founded in 2013 and led by Teemu Huuhtanen, Next Games creates and operates engaging mobile games with global appeal and an authentic and social fan experience at its core. The company&#39;s strategy is to develop games based on popular entertainment IP, such as<i>Stranger Things: Puzzle Tales,</i>a story-driven puzzle role playing game (RPG) inspired by one of Netflix&#39;s most watched series. The company had approximately 120 employees at the end of 2021 and reported sales of approximately €27.2 million in 2020, with 95% of revenues generated from in-game purchases.</p><p>&#34;We have had an unwavering focus to execute on our vision: to become the partner of choice for global entertainment businesses and craft authentic and long-lasting interactive entertainment based on the world&#39;s most beloved franchises,&#34; said Teemu Huuhtanen, Chief Executive Officer, Next Games. &#34;Joining forces with the world&#39;s largest streaming service, Netflix, presents an opportunity for a logical and exciting continuation of our strategy to craft interactive experiences for the world to enjoy. Our close collaboration with Netflix on<i>Stranger Things: Puzzle Tales</i>has already proven that together we create a strong partnership. This is a unique opportunity to level-up the studio on all fronts and continue on our mission together.&#34;</p><p>The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2022, subject to customary closing conditions.</p><p><b>About Netflix</b></p><p>Netflix is the world&#39;s leading streaming entertainment service with 222 million paid memberships in over 190 countries enjoying TV series, documentaries, feature films and mobile games across a wide variety of genres and languages. Members can watch as much as they want, anytime, anywhere, on any Internet-connected screen. Members can play, pause and resume watching, all without commercials or commitments.</p><p><b>About Next Games</b></p><p>Next Games is the first publicly listed mobile game developer and publisher in Finland, specializing in games based on entertainment franchises, such as movies, TV series or books. The developers of the critically acclaimed The Walking Dead games redefine the way franchise entertainment transforms into highly engaging service-based mobile games. Next Games works on multiple new games based on beloved global IP&#39;s. The company&#39;s latest game,<i>Stranger Things: Puzzle Tales</i>, is based on Netflix&#39;s hit 80s horror drama series.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Netflix to Acquire Finnish Mobile Game Developer Next Games</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\">\nNetflix to Acquire Finnish Mobile Game Developer Next Games\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\">2022-03-02 15:33</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Netflix, Inc. (NASDAQ: NFLX) today announced that it has entered into a combination agreement to acquire Next Games (NXTGMS). Under the terms of the agreement, Netflix will commence a tender offer to acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of Next Games. Pursuant to the offer, Next Games shareholders will receive €2.1 in cash per share of Next Games, for a total equity value of approximately €65 million. The Board of Directors of Next Games has unanimously decided to recommend that the shareholders accept the tender offer.</p><p>&#34;Next Games has a seasoned management team, strong track record with mobile games based on entertainment franchises, and solid operational capabilities,&#34; said Michael Verdu, Vice President of Games, Netflix. &#34;We are excited for Next Games to join Netflix as a core studio in a strategic region and key talent market, expanding our internal game studio capabilities. While we&#39;re just getting started in games, I am confident that together with Next Games we will be able to build a portfolio of world class games that will delight our members around the world.&#34;</p><p>Founded in 2013 and led by Teemu Huuhtanen, Next Games creates and operates engaging mobile games with global appeal and an authentic and social fan experience at its core. The company&#39;s strategy is to develop games based on popular entertainment IP, such as<i>Stranger Things: Puzzle Tales,</i>a story-driven puzzle role playing game (RPG) inspired by one of Netflix&#39;s most watched series. The company had approximately 120 employees at the end of 2021 and reported sales of approximately €27.2 million in 2020, with 95% of revenues generated from in-game purchases.</p><p>&#34;We have had an unwavering focus to execute on our vision: to become the partner of choice for global entertainment businesses and craft authentic and long-lasting interactive entertainment based on the world&#39;s most beloved franchises,&#34; said Teemu Huuhtanen, Chief Executive Officer, Next Games. &#34;Joining forces with the world&#39;s largest streaming service, Netflix, presents an opportunity for a logical and exciting continuation of our strategy to craft interactive experiences for the world to enjoy. Our close collaboration with Netflix on<i>Stranger Things: Puzzle Tales</i>has already proven that together we create a strong partnership. This is a unique opportunity to level-up the studio on all fronts and continue on our mission together.&#34;</p><p>The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2022, subject to customary closing conditions.</p><p><b>About Netflix</b></p><p>Netflix is the world&#39;s leading streaming entertainment service with 222 million paid memberships in over 190 countries enjoying TV series, documentaries, feature films and mobile games across a wide variety of genres and languages. Members can watch as much as they want, anytime, anywhere, on any Internet-connected screen. Members can play, pause and resume watching, all without commercials or commitments.</p><p><b>About Next Games</b></p><p>Next Games is the first publicly listed mobile game developer and publisher in Finland, specializing in games based on entertainment franchises, such as movies, TV series or books. The developers of the critically acclaimed The Walking Dead games redefine the way franchise entertainment transforms into highly engaging service-based mobile games. Next Games works on multiple new games based on beloved global IP&#39;s. The company&#39;s latest game,<i>Stranger Things: Puzzle Tales</i>, is based on Netflix&#39;s hit 80s horror drama series.</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NFLX":"奈飞"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1161866731","content_text":"Netflix, Inc. (NASDAQ: NFLX) today announced that it has entered into a combination agreement to acquire Next Games (NXTGMS). Under the terms of the agreement, Netflix will commence a tender offer to acquire all of the issued and outstanding shares of Next Games. Pursuant to the offer, Next Games shareholders will receive €2.1 in cash per share of Next Games, for a total equity value of approximately €65 million. The Board of Directors of Next Games has unanimously decided to recommend that the shareholders accept the tender offer.\"Next Games has a seasoned management team, strong track record with mobile games based on entertainment franchises, and solid operational capabilities,\" said Michael Verdu, Vice President of Games, Netflix. \"We are excited for Next Games to join Netflix as a core studio in a strategic region and key talent market, expanding our internal game studio capabilities. While we're just getting started in games, I am confident that together with Next Games we will be able to build a portfolio of world class games that will delight our members around the world.\"Founded in 2013 and led by Teemu Huuhtanen, Next Games creates and operates engaging mobile games with global appeal and an authentic and social fan experience at its core. The company's strategy is to develop games based on popular entertainment IP, such asStranger Things: Puzzle Tales,a story-driven puzzle role playing game (RPG) inspired by one of Netflix's most watched series. The company had approximately 120 employees at the end of 2021 and reported sales of approximately €27.2 million in 2020, with 95% of revenues generated from in-game purchases.\"We have had an unwavering focus to execute on our vision: to become the partner of choice for global entertainment businesses and craft authentic and long-lasting interactive entertainment based on the world's most beloved franchises,\" said Teemu Huuhtanen, Chief Executive Officer, Next Games. \"Joining forces with the world's largest streaming service, Netflix, presents an opportunity for a logical and exciting continuation of our strategy to craft interactive experiences for the world to enjoy. Our close collaboration with Netflix onStranger Things: Puzzle Taleshas already proven that together we create a strong partnership. This is a unique opportunity to level-up the studio on all fronts and continue on our mission together.\"The transaction is expected to close in the second quarter of 2022, subject to customary closing conditions.About NetflixNetflix is the world's leading streaming entertainment service with 222 million paid memberships in over 190 countries enjoying TV series, documentaries, feature films and mobile games across a wide variety of genres and languages. Members can watch as much as they want, anytime, anywhere, on any Internet-connected screen. Members can play, pause and resume watching, all without commercials or commitments.About Next GamesNext Games is the first publicly listed mobile game developer and publisher in Finland, specializing in games based on entertainment franchises, such as movies, TV series or books. The developers of the critically acclaimed The Walking Dead games redefine the way franchise entertainment transforms into highly engaging service-based mobile games. Next Games works on multiple new games based on beloved global IP's. The company's latest game,Stranger Things: Puzzle Tales, is based on Netflix's hit 80s horror drama series.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":178,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9033093488,"gmtCreate":1646145448339,"gmtModify":1676534095715,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":8,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9033093488","repostId":"1105937467","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1105937467","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":1646145114,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1105937467?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-03-01 22:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Stocks fall on first day of March as Russia bears down on Ukraine capital, oil hits 7-year high","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1105937467","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"U.S. stocks slid on the first day of March as oil prices surged and investors continue to monitor th","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>U.S. stocks slid on the first day of March as oil prices surged and investors continue to monitor the fighting between Russia and Ukraine.</p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 179 points, or 0.5%. The S&amp;P 500 was off by 0.3% and the Nasdaq slid 0.3%.</p><p>Sea shares fell nearly 9% as Q4&#39;s net loss expanded to $617 million year-on-year.</p><p>Zoom shares fell nearly 5%, and the performance guidelines for fiscal year 2023 were lower than expected. After the performance, many investment banks sharply reduced the target price.</p><p>Lucid shares fell more than 16%, the net loss in the fourth quarter expanded year-on-year, and the production forecast of electric vehicle lucid air in 2022 was significantly reduced.</p><p>Target&#39;s shares rose more than 13%, with a net profit of $1.544 billion in the fourth quarter and an all-time high in EPS.</p><p>As corporate earnings season winds down, cloud giant Salesforce reports results after the close.</p><p>On the economic front, February&#39;s Markit Manufacturing PMI will be released at 9:45 a.m. on Tuesday. ISM manufacturing PMI for February will be out at 10 a.m.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Stocks fall on first day of March as Russia bears down on Ukraine capital, oil hits 7-year high</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nStocks fall on first day of March as Russia bears down on Ukraine capital, oil hits 7-year high\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\">2022-03-01 22:31</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>U.S. stocks slid on the first day of March as oil prices surged and investors continue to monitor the fighting between Russia and Ukraine.</p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 179 points, or 0.5%. The S&amp;P 500 was off by 0.3% and the Nasdaq slid 0.3%.</p><p>Sea shares fell nearly 9% as Q4&#39;s net loss expanded to $617 million year-on-year.</p><p>Zoom shares fell nearly 5%, and the performance guidelines for fiscal year 2023 were lower than expected. After the performance, many investment banks sharply reduced the target price.</p><p>Lucid shares fell more than 16%, the net loss in the fourth quarter expanded year-on-year, and the production forecast of electric vehicle lucid air in 2022 was significantly reduced.</p><p>Target&#39;s shares rose more than 13%, with a net profit of $1.544 billion in the fourth quarter and an all-time high in EPS.</p><p>As corporate earnings season winds down, cloud giant Salesforce reports results after the close.</p><p>On the economic front, February&#39;s Markit Manufacturing PMI will be released at 9:45 a.m. on Tuesday. ISM manufacturing PMI for February will be out at 10 a.m.</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1105937467","content_text":"U.S. stocks slid on the first day of March as oil prices surged and investors continue to monitor the fighting between Russia and Ukraine.The Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 179 points, or 0.5%. The S&P 500 was off by 0.3% and the Nasdaq slid 0.3%.Sea shares fell nearly 9% as Q4's net loss expanded to $617 million year-on-year.Zoom shares fell nearly 5%, and the performance guidelines for fiscal year 2023 were lower than expected. After the performance, many investment banks sharply reduced the target price.Lucid shares fell more than 16%, the net loss in the fourth quarter expanded year-on-year, and the production forecast of electric vehicle lucid air in 2022 was significantly reduced.Target's shares rose more than 13%, with a net profit of $1.544 billion in the fourth quarter and an all-time high in EPS.As corporate earnings season winds down, cloud giant Salesforce reports results after the close.On the economic front, February's Markit Manufacturing PMI will be released at 9:45 a.m. on Tuesday. ISM manufacturing PMI for February will be out at 10 a.m.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":131,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9039349177,"gmtCreate":1645931568430,"gmtModify":1676534075887,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9039349177","repostId":"1125580913","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1125580913","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":1645926503,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1125580913?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-02-27 09:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1125580913","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-yea","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value</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\">\nBuffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value\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\">2022-02-27 09:48</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1125580913","content_text":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”Read the full letter here：To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.What You OwnBerkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.Surprise, SurpriseHere are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.Our Four GiantsThrough Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.InvestmentsNow let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.U.S. Treasury BillsBerkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.But $144 billion?That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.Share RepurchasesThere are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful BusinessLast year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.In all ways, Paul was a class act.* * * * * * * * * * * *Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.ThanksI taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction workingfor you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”The Annual MeetingClear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.February 26, 2022Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":185,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":9093658454,"gmtCreate":1643620309615,"gmtModify":1676533836756,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":10,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9093658454","repostId":"1116780735","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1116780735","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":1643620050,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1116780735?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-01-31 17:07","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Novavax shares rose more than 8% in premarket trading","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1116780735","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Novavax shares rose more than 8% in premarket trading.Israel's Ministry of Health has agreed to purc","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Novavax shares rose more than 8% in premarket trading.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8aa034a557999fa634e983bccdd3219e\" tg-width=\"709\" tg-height=\"605\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Israel&#39;s Ministry of Health has agreed to purchase <b>Novavax Inc&#39;s</b> (NASDAQ: NVAX) protein-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate, NVX-CoV2373.</p><ul><li>Novavax will provide an initial 5 million doses of its protein-based vaccine with an option for Israel to purchase an additional 5 million doses.</li><li>Novavax will work with the Ministry of Health to obtain the necessary authorizations and finalize plans for distribution in Israel pending regulatory approval.</li></ul></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Novavax shares rose more than 8% in premarket trading</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\">\nNovavax shares rose more than 8% in premarket trading\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\">2022-01-31 17:07</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Novavax shares rose more than 8% in premarket trading.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8aa034a557999fa634e983bccdd3219e\" tg-width=\"709\" tg-height=\"605\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/></p><p>Israel&#39;s Ministry of Health has agreed to purchase <b>Novavax Inc&#39;s</b> (NASDAQ: NVAX) protein-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate, NVX-CoV2373.</p><ul><li>Novavax will provide an initial 5 million doses of its protein-based vaccine with an option for Israel to purchase an additional 5 million doses.</li><li>Novavax will work with the Ministry of Health to obtain the necessary authorizations and finalize plans for distribution in Israel pending regulatory approval.</li></ul></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NVAX":"诺瓦瓦克斯医药"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1116780735","content_text":"Novavax shares rose more than 8% in premarket trading.Israel's Ministry of Health has agreed to purchase Novavax Inc's (NASDAQ: NVAX) protein-based COVID-19 vaccine candidate, NVX-CoV2373.Novavax will provide an initial 5 million doses of its protein-based vaccine with an option for Israel to purchase an additional 5 million doses.Novavax will work with the Ministry of Health to obtain the necessary authorizations and finalize plans for distribution in Israel pending regulatory approval.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":254,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9006423876,"gmtCreate":1641823738799,"gmtModify":1676533650987,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes&nbsp;","listText":"Likes&nbsp;","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":10,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9006423876","repostId":"1183350392","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1183350392","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":1641819664,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1183350392?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-01-10 21:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Toplines Before US Market Open on Monday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1183350392","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"U.S. stock index futures were subdued on Monday after posting losses for their first week of the new","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>U.S. stock index futures were subdued on Monday after posting losses for their first week of the new year, while big banks extended gains as U.S. Treasury yields climbed a new two-year high.</p><p>At 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow E-minis were down 63 points, or 0.17%, S&amp;P 500 E-minis were down 22 points, or 0.47% and Nasdaq 100 E-minis were down 151.25 points, or 0.97%.</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd2a3781d52dbfcfb386f04e8d1b75eb\" tg-width=\"818\" tg-height=\"259\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><span>*Source From Tiger Trade, EST 08:00</span></p><p>The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield hit 1.80% in early trading - a level last seen in early 2020, having shot up 25 basis points last week in its biggest move since late 2019.read more</p><p>Big banks like JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co(JPM.N), Goldman Sachs(GS.N), Bank of America Corp(BAC.N), Morgan Stanley(MS.N)and Citigroup Inc(C.N)gained between 0.3% and 0.8% in premarket trading.</p><p>Megacap growth companies including Apple Inc(AAPL.O), Amazon.com Inc , Microsoft Corp(MSFT.O), Meta Platforms Inc(FB.O)and Tesla Inc(TSLA.O)fell between 0.2% and 1.1%.</p><p>Goldman Sachs expects the Fed to raise rates four times in 2022, compared to its previous forecast of three.</p><p><b>Stocks making the biggest moves in the premarket:</b></p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZNGA\">Zynga</a> (ZYNG) – The online game maker’s shares soared 48.2% in the premarket after it agreed to be acquired by video game makerTake-Two Interactive(TTWO)for $9.86 per share in cash and stock, implying a total deal value of $12.7 billion. Take-Two tumbled 8.9%.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LULU\">Lululemon Athletica</a> (LULU) – The athletic apparel maker said it now expects fourth-quarter earnings and revenue to come inat the low end of its projected ranges, saying it had experienced a number of negative consequences from the spread of the Covid-19 omicron variant. Lululemon slid 6.5% in premarket action.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/APR\">Apria, Inc.</a> (APR) – The home health care services provider agreed to be acquired by health-care equipment and services companyOwens &amp; Minor(OMI) for about $1.45 billion in cash, or $37.50 per share. Apria had closed Friday at $29.72 per share, and its stock surged 24.5% in premarket trading. Owens &amp; Minor shares slumped 9.1%.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TLRY\">Tilray Inc.</a> (TLRY) – Tilray gained 3.6% in premarket trading after reporting an unexpected quarterly profit. Revenue increased by 20% from a year earlier on stronger demand for cannabis products, although its sales were below analysts’ forecasts.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEAM\">Beam Therapeutics, Inc.</a> (BEAM) – Beam shares jumped 5.3% in the premarket following the announcement of a new partnership withPfizer(PFE). Pfizer will collaborate with Beam – which specializes in gene editing – to develop therapies for rare genetic diseases.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VIAC\">Viacom CBS</a> (VIAC) – ViacomCBS rallied 3.2% in the premarket after Deutsche Bank upgraded the media company’s stock to “buy” from “hold,” based on upbeat prospects for its streaming business and the likelihood of continuing industry consolidation.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SBGI\">Sinclair Broadcast</a> (SBGI) – Sinclair is close to finalizing a deal to carry NBA games on its planned new streaming app, according to a Bloomberg report quoting people familiar with the matter. The deal could be announced as soon as this week. Sinclair gained 1.4% in premarket action.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SEDG\">SolarEdge</a> (SEDG) – SolarEdge was added to the “Conviction Buy” list at Goldman Sachs, which raised the price target for the solar equipment company’s stock to $448 per share from $420 a share. Goldman cites improvements in battery storage capacity as well as the company’s prospects for increasing profit margins. SolarEdge rose 2.4% in the premarket.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SWAV\">Shockwave Medical, Inc .</a> (SWAV) –Penumbra(PEN) is exploring a combination with its rival medical device maker, according to people with knowledge of the matter who spoke to Bloomberg. However, Penumbra told Bloomberg in an emailed statement that it is not in discussions with Shockwave to pursue a business combination or similar transaction. Shockwave jumped 6% in premarket trading.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DELL\">Dell Technologies Inc.</a> (DELL) – Bernstein upgraded Dell to “outperform” from “market perform,” noting Dell’s approximately six-week backlog in its PC business as well as a relatively high mix of commercial versus consumer business. Dell added 2.4% in the premarket.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Toplines Before US Market Open on Monday</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nToplines Before US Market Open on Monday\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\">2022-01-10 21:01</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>U.S. stock index futures were subdued on Monday after posting losses for their first week of the new year, while big banks extended gains as U.S. Treasury yields climbed a new two-year high.</p><p>At 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow E-minis were down 63 points, or 0.17%, S&amp;P 500 E-minis were down 22 points, or 0.47% and Nasdaq 100 E-minis were down 151.25 points, or 0.97%.</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dd2a3781d52dbfcfb386f04e8d1b75eb\" tg-width=\"818\" tg-height=\"259\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><span>*Source From Tiger Trade, EST 08:00</span></p><p>The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield hit 1.80% in early trading - a level last seen in early 2020, having shot up 25 basis points last week in its biggest move since late 2019.read more</p><p>Big banks like JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co(JPM.N), Goldman Sachs(GS.N), Bank of America Corp(BAC.N), Morgan Stanley(MS.N)and Citigroup Inc(C.N)gained between 0.3% and 0.8% in premarket trading.</p><p>Megacap growth companies including Apple Inc(AAPL.O), Amazon.com Inc , Microsoft Corp(MSFT.O), Meta Platforms Inc(FB.O)and Tesla Inc(TSLA.O)fell between 0.2% and 1.1%.</p><p>Goldman Sachs expects the Fed to raise rates four times in 2022, compared to its previous forecast of three.</p><p><b>Stocks making the biggest moves in the premarket:</b></p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZNGA\">Zynga</a> (ZYNG) – The online game maker’s shares soared 48.2% in the premarket after it agreed to be acquired by video game makerTake-Two Interactive(TTWO)for $9.86 per share in cash and stock, implying a total deal value of $12.7 billion. Take-Two tumbled 8.9%.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LULU\">Lululemon Athletica</a> (LULU) – The athletic apparel maker said it now expects fourth-quarter earnings and revenue to come inat the low end of its projected ranges, saying it had experienced a number of negative consequences from the spread of the Covid-19 omicron variant. Lululemon slid 6.5% in premarket action.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/APR\">Apria, Inc.</a> (APR) – The home health care services provider agreed to be acquired by health-care equipment and services companyOwens &amp; Minor(OMI) for about $1.45 billion in cash, or $37.50 per share. Apria had closed Friday at $29.72 per share, and its stock surged 24.5% in premarket trading. Owens &amp; Minor shares slumped 9.1%.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TLRY\">Tilray Inc.</a> (TLRY) – Tilray gained 3.6% in premarket trading after reporting an unexpected quarterly profit. Revenue increased by 20% from a year earlier on stronger demand for cannabis products, although its sales were below analysts’ forecasts.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEAM\">Beam Therapeutics, Inc.</a> (BEAM) – Beam shares jumped 5.3% in the premarket following the announcement of a new partnership withPfizer(PFE). Pfizer will collaborate with Beam – which specializes in gene editing – to develop therapies for rare genetic diseases.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VIAC\">Viacom CBS</a> (VIAC) – ViacomCBS rallied 3.2% in the premarket after Deutsche Bank upgraded the media company’s stock to “buy” from “hold,” based on upbeat prospects for its streaming business and the likelihood of continuing industry consolidation.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SBGI\">Sinclair Broadcast</a> (SBGI) – Sinclair is close to finalizing a deal to carry NBA games on its planned new streaming app, according to a Bloomberg report quoting people familiar with the matter. The deal could be announced as soon as this week. Sinclair gained 1.4% in premarket action.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SEDG\">SolarEdge</a> (SEDG) – SolarEdge was added to the “Conviction Buy” list at Goldman Sachs, which raised the price target for the solar equipment company’s stock to $448 per share from $420 a share. Goldman cites improvements in battery storage capacity as well as the company’s prospects for increasing profit margins. SolarEdge rose 2.4% in the premarket.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SWAV\">Shockwave Medical, Inc .</a> (SWAV) –Penumbra(PEN) is exploring a combination with its rival medical device maker, according to people with knowledge of the matter who spoke to Bloomberg. However, Penumbra told Bloomberg in an emailed statement that it is not in discussions with Shockwave to pursue a business combination or similar transaction. Shockwave jumped 6% in premarket trading.</p><p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DELL\">Dell Technologies Inc.</a> (DELL) – Bernstein upgraded Dell to “outperform” from “market perform,” noting Dell’s approximately six-week backlog in its PC business as well as a relatively high mix of commercial versus consumer business. Dell added 2.4% in the premarket.</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1183350392","content_text":"U.S. stock index futures were subdued on Monday after posting losses for their first week of the new year, while big banks extended gains as U.S. Treasury yields climbed a new two-year high.At 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow E-minis were down 63 points, or 0.17%, S&P 500 E-minis were down 22 points, or 0.47% and Nasdaq 100 E-minis were down 151.25 points, or 0.97%.*Source From Tiger Trade, EST 08:00The benchmark 10-year Treasury yield hit 1.80% in early trading - a level last seen in early 2020, having shot up 25 basis points last week in its biggest move since late 2019.read moreBig banks like JPMorgan Chase & Co(JPM.N), Goldman Sachs(GS.N), Bank of America Corp(BAC.N), Morgan Stanley(MS.N)and Citigroup Inc(C.N)gained between 0.3% and 0.8% in premarket trading.Megacap growth companies including Apple Inc(AAPL.O), Amazon.com Inc , Microsoft Corp(MSFT.O), Meta Platforms Inc(FB.O)and Tesla Inc(TSLA.O)fell between 0.2% and 1.1%.Goldman Sachs expects the Fed to raise rates four times in 2022, compared to its previous forecast of three.Stocks making the biggest moves in the premarket:Zynga (ZYNG) – The online game maker’s shares soared 48.2% in the premarket after it agreed to be acquired by video game makerTake-Two Interactive(TTWO)for $9.86 per share in cash and stock, implying a total deal value of $12.7 billion. Take-Two tumbled 8.9%.Lululemon Athletica (LULU) – The athletic apparel maker said it now expects fourth-quarter earnings and revenue to come inat the low end of its projected ranges, saying it had experienced a number of negative consequences from the spread of the Covid-19 omicron variant. Lululemon slid 6.5% in premarket action.Apria, Inc. (APR) – The home health care services provider agreed to be acquired by health-care equipment and services companyOwens & Minor(OMI) for about $1.45 billion in cash, or $37.50 per share. Apria had closed Friday at $29.72 per share, and its stock surged 24.5% in premarket trading. Owens & Minor shares slumped 9.1%.Tilray Inc. (TLRY) – Tilray gained 3.6% in premarket trading after reporting an unexpected quarterly profit. Revenue increased by 20% from a year earlier on stronger demand for cannabis products, although its sales were below analysts’ forecasts.Beam Therapeutics, Inc. (BEAM) – Beam shares jumped 5.3% in the premarket following the announcement of a new partnership withPfizer(PFE). Pfizer will collaborate with Beam – which specializes in gene editing – to develop therapies for rare genetic diseases.Viacom CBS (VIAC) – ViacomCBS rallied 3.2% in the premarket after Deutsche Bank upgraded the media company’s stock to “buy” from “hold,” based on upbeat prospects for its streaming business and the likelihood of continuing industry consolidation.Sinclair Broadcast (SBGI) – Sinclair is close to finalizing a deal to carry NBA games on its planned new streaming app, according to a Bloomberg report quoting people familiar with the matter. The deal could be announced as soon as this week. Sinclair gained 1.4% in premarket action.SolarEdge (SEDG) – SolarEdge was added to the “Conviction Buy” list at Goldman Sachs, which raised the price target for the solar equipment company’s stock to $448 per share from $420 a share. Goldman cites improvements in battery storage capacity as well as the company’s prospects for increasing profit margins. SolarEdge rose 2.4% in the premarket.Shockwave Medical, Inc . (SWAV) –Penumbra(PEN) is exploring a combination with its rival medical device maker, according to people with knowledge of the matter who spoke to Bloomberg. However, Penumbra told Bloomberg in an emailed statement that it is not in discussions with Shockwave to pursue a business combination or similar transaction. Shockwave jumped 6% in premarket trading.Dell Technologies Inc. (DELL) – Bernstein upgraded Dell to “outperform” from “market perform,” noting Dell’s approximately six-week backlog in its PC business as well as a relatively high mix of commercial versus consumer business. Dell added 2.4% in the premarket.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":206,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9038344270,"gmtCreate":1646751662643,"gmtModify":1676534158203,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"in short companies/ppl are abusing the situation","listText":"in short companies/ppl are abusing the situation","text":"in short companies/ppl are abusing the situation","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":9,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9038344270","repostId":"1134638354","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1134638354","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":1646751312,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1134638354?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-03-08 22:55","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"Nickel ETN Tumbled 14% After London Metals Exchange Cancels All Nickel Trades","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1134638354","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Nickel ETN tumbled 14% after London Metals Exchange cancels all nickel trades.The London Metals Exchange said it cancelled all nickel trades, after the contract surged as much as 111% before a trading halt. The cancellation applies to all trades made after midnight U.K. time on Tuesday. The LME said the trading was due to the situation in Russia and Ukraine, as well as the low-stock environment and high pricing volatility, as it said \"current events are unprecedented\" and that it was working to ","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Nickel ETN tumbled 14% after London Metals Exchange cancels all nickel trades.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fa56afcddbd1703e28553834deaedc5\" tg-width=\"1146\" tg-height=\"915\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>The London Metals Exchange said it cancelled all nickel trades, after the contract surged as much as 111% before a trading halt. </p><p>The cancellation applies to all trades made after midnight U.K. time on Tuesday. </p><p>The LME said the trading was due to the situation in Russia and Ukraine, as well as the low-stock environment and high pricing volatility, as it said &#34;current events are unprecedented&#34; and that it was working to ensure the orderly functioning of the market.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Nickel ETN Tumbled 14% After London Metals Exchange Cancels All Nickel Trades</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\">\nNickel ETN Tumbled 14% After London Metals Exchange Cancels All Nickel Trades\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\">2022-03-08 22:55</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Nickel ETN tumbled 14% after London Metals Exchange cancels all nickel trades.<img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8fa56afcddbd1703e28553834deaedc5\" tg-width=\"1146\" tg-height=\"915\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>The London Metals Exchange said it cancelled all nickel trades, after the contract surged as much as 111% before a trading halt. </p><p>The cancellation applies to all trades made after midnight U.K. time on Tuesday. </p><p>The LME said the trading was due to the situation in Russia and Ukraine, as well as the low-stock environment and high pricing volatility, as it said &#34;current events are unprecedented&#34; and that it was working to ensure the orderly functioning of the market.</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"JJN":"镍ETN-iPath","NICK.UK":"镍ETF"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1134638354","content_text":"Nickel ETN tumbled 14% after London Metals Exchange cancels all nickel trades.The London Metals Exchange said it cancelled all nickel trades, after the contract surged as much as 111% before a trading halt. The cancellation applies to all trades made after midnight U.K. time on Tuesday. The LME said the trading was due to the situation in Russia and Ukraine, as well as the low-stock environment and high pricing volatility, as it said \"current events are unprecedented\" and that it was working to ensure the orderly functioning of the market.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":119,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9099133836,"gmtCreate":1643315632052,"gmtModify":1676533802063,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":10,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9099133836","repostId":"2206838860","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2206838860","pubTimestamp":1643296934,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2206838860?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-01-27 23:22","market":"us","language":"en","title":"2 High-Risk Growth Stocks Down 68% to 84% That Could Soar","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2206838860","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"Stellar returns might be on the horizon if these two companies can turn around investor sentiment.","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Just to be clear upfront: Any company that loses 68% of its value (or more) comes with inherent risks, so investors should be cautious. But the broader tech market sell-off since November 2021 has been brutal to many high-growth stocks, and some now present an attractive risk-reward proposition.</p><p>Two stocks in particular are changing the face of their respective industries through innovation. It&#39;s an ambitious undertaking, and success is rarely without bumps in the road. But if they can turn around the sentiment regarding the true value of their stock, they could supercharge your portfolio over the long term.</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/131ac12e358c488f6e2cb8dd5d33bf85\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"467\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p><h2>1. Latch: Down 68%</h2><p>The security industry for new buildings probably isn&#39;t the first place you&#39;d look for a transformative tech stock. But <b>Latch </b>(NASDAQ:LTCH) is delivering innovative solutions that are changing the way high-rise builders think about guest management and access. Latch has become so popular, in fact, that 3 out of every 10 new apartments in the U.S. feature its security products.</p><p>The company&#39;s Smart Access technology allows users to unlock their doors using the Latch App, a key code, or even their <b>Apple </b>Watch. It offers multiple hardware configurations to serve new construction or to retrofit existing buildings. And the Latch Intercom allows new-age guest and delivery management, giving the users power to grant access to a visitor or a courier even if they&#39;re not home.</p><p>But unlike many security providers, which install systems and then move on, Latch is also a software-as-a-service company. Once its Intercom and Smart Home systems are implemented, it charges each landlord a subscription fee, creating a recurring revenue stream. As of the recent third quarter of 2021, it had booked $59.8 million of annual recurring revenue, a growing portion of its expected $360 million in total bookings for 2021.</p><p>Buildings take time to complete, and since Latch often makes deals with builders before projects begin construction, it reports bookings that are expected to eventually convert into revenue when finished. Once Latch officially reports its fourth-quarter 2021 results, the company expects it will have generated up to $42 million in revenue for the full year. In 2022, analysts expect that figure to soar 252% to $148 million, the natural result of a bookings backlog that is quickly being realized.</p><p>Latch is not a profitable company just yet, but its revenue growth over the next few years could pave the way to positive earnings per share. Its stock has traded in the public markets for less than a year, and while it offers promise, investors should make this bet a long-term <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a>.</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e725d3398d00ef3ae8c0997de73f5ab2\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"467\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p><h2>2. Lemonade: Down 84%</h2><p>Artificial intelligence (AI) is allowing companies to rapidly deliver products and solutions that used to require hours of human input. In this case, <b>Lemonade </b>(NYSE:LMND) is leveraging the advanced technology to sell insurance. It offers five different types including car insurance, a segment it only recently entered.</p><p>Lemonade&#39;s goal is to make the customer experience more pleasant, and its AI-powered bot, Maya, does this by delivering a quote in less than 90 seconds. There&#39;s no need for frustrating, lengthy phone calls or clunky online questionnaires. Filing a claim is quick, too, with processing times as short as three minutes. This is particularly appealing to younger buyers, with the majority of Lemonade&#39;s customers being under age 34.</p><p>When Lemonade developed its homeowners, renters, pet, and life insurance, its strategy was to allow its AI model to learn over time. The more data it ingests, the more accurate it becomes, and therefore reaching optimal performance can be a slow process. When it pivoted to car insurance, which is its largest market yet, it decided to bolt on an acquisition to speed up the process.</p><p>In November 2021, Lemonade acquired <b>Metromile </b>(NASDAQ:MILE), which also uses AI for insurance purposes. At the time, Metromile had collected over 3 billion miles&#39; worth of data and had a decade-long head start over Lemonade in car insurance. Additionally, Metromile brought its 49 state licenses to the deal, which is incredibly valuable to Lemonade as a new entrant to the market.</p><p>Lemonade already has 1.36 million customers, but car insurance could transform its business by helping it snatch market share from much larger industry players. In 2020, the company generated $94 million in revenue, but in 2022 analysts expect that figure to soar to $219 million. That&#39;s a 132% increase in just two years or a 52% compound annual growth rate.</p><p>And it could get even better. The U.S. car insurance market is estimated to be worth $316 billion in 2022, so while Lemonade&#39;s stock is down 84% from its all-time high of $182, it has an enormous addressable market to grow into. That makes it an exciting long-term bet for investors who are open to some risk.</p></body></html>","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 High-Risk Growth Stocks Down 68% to 84% That Could Soar</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 High-Risk Growth Stocks Down 68% to 84% That Could Soar\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-01-27 23:22 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/26/2-growth-stocks-down-68-to-84-that-could-soar/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Just to be clear upfront: Any company that loses 68% of its value (or more) comes with inherent risks, so investors should be cautious. But the broader tech market sell-off since November 2021 has ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/26/2-growth-stocks-down-68-to-84-that-could-soar/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BK4548":"巴美列捷福持仓","MILE":"Metromile, Inc","BK4535":"淡马锡持仓","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","LMND":"Lemonade, Inc.","BK4543":"AI","BK4107":"财产与意外伤害保险","LTCH":"Latch, Inc.","BK4528":"SaaS概念","BK4023":"应用软件","BK4549":"软银资本持仓","AI":"C3.ai, Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/26/2-growth-stocks-down-68-to-84-that-could-soar/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2206838860","content_text":"Just to be clear upfront: Any company that loses 68% of its value (or more) comes with inherent risks, so investors should be cautious. But the broader tech market sell-off since November 2021 has been brutal to many high-growth stocks, and some now present an attractive risk-reward proposition.Two stocks in particular are changing the face of their respective industries through innovation. It's an ambitious undertaking, and success is rarely without bumps in the road. But if they can turn around the sentiment regarding the true value of their stock, they could supercharge your portfolio over the long term.Image source: Getty Images.1. Latch: Down 68%The security industry for new buildings probably isn't the first place you'd look for a transformative tech stock. But Latch (NASDAQ:LTCH) is delivering innovative solutions that are changing the way high-rise builders think about guest management and access. Latch has become so popular, in fact, that 3 out of every 10 new apartments in the U.S. feature its security products.The company's Smart Access technology allows users to unlock their doors using the Latch App, a key code, or even their Apple Watch. It offers multiple hardware configurations to serve new construction or to retrofit existing buildings. And the Latch Intercom allows new-age guest and delivery management, giving the users power to grant access to a visitor or a courier even if they're not home.But unlike many security providers, which install systems and then move on, Latch is also a software-as-a-service company. Once its Intercom and Smart Home systems are implemented, it charges each landlord a subscription fee, creating a recurring revenue stream. As of the recent third quarter of 2021, it had booked $59.8 million of annual recurring revenue, a growing portion of its expected $360 million in total bookings for 2021.Buildings take time to complete, and since Latch often makes deals with builders before projects begin construction, it reports bookings that are expected to eventually convert into revenue when finished. Once Latch officially reports its fourth-quarter 2021 results, the company expects it will have generated up to $42 million in revenue for the full year. In 2022, analysts expect that figure to soar 252% to $148 million, the natural result of a bookings backlog that is quickly being realized.Latch is not a profitable company just yet, but its revenue growth over the next few years could pave the way to positive earnings per share. Its stock has traded in the public markets for less than a year, and while it offers promise, investors should make this bet a long-term one.Image source: Getty Images.2. Lemonade: Down 84%Artificial intelligence (AI) is allowing companies to rapidly deliver products and solutions that used to require hours of human input. In this case, Lemonade (NYSE:LMND) is leveraging the advanced technology to sell insurance. It offers five different types including car insurance, a segment it only recently entered.Lemonade's goal is to make the customer experience more pleasant, and its AI-powered bot, Maya, does this by delivering a quote in less than 90 seconds. There's no need for frustrating, lengthy phone calls or clunky online questionnaires. Filing a claim is quick, too, with processing times as short as three minutes. This is particularly appealing to younger buyers, with the majority of Lemonade's customers being under age 34.When Lemonade developed its homeowners, renters, pet, and life insurance, its strategy was to allow its AI model to learn over time. The more data it ingests, the more accurate it becomes, and therefore reaching optimal performance can be a slow process. When it pivoted to car insurance, which is its largest market yet, it decided to bolt on an acquisition to speed up the process.In November 2021, Lemonade acquired Metromile (NASDAQ:MILE), which also uses AI for insurance purposes. At the time, Metromile had collected over 3 billion miles' worth of data and had a decade-long head start over Lemonade in car insurance. Additionally, Metromile brought its 49 state licenses to the deal, which is incredibly valuable to Lemonade as a new entrant to the market.Lemonade already has 1.36 million customers, but car insurance could transform its business by helping it snatch market share from much larger industry players. In 2020, the company generated $94 million in revenue, but in 2022 analysts expect that figure to soar to $219 million. That's a 132% increase in just two years or a 52% compound annual growth rate.And it could get even better. The U.S. car insurance market is estimated to be worth $316 billion in 2022, so while Lemonade's stock is down 84% from its all-time high of $182, it has an enormous addressable market to grow into. That makes it an exciting long-term bet for investors who are open to some risk.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":72,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":885628088,"gmtCreate":1631788394344,"gmtModify":1676530635822,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes&nbsp;","listText":"Likes&nbsp;","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/885628088","repostId":"1126607843","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1126607843","pubTimestamp":1631785252,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1126607843?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-09-16 17:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple Vs. Microsoft: Who Is Inclined To Fall Harder In Case Of Correction","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1126607843","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nObjectively, the likelihood of a significant correction in the stock market now deserves at","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Objectively, the likelihood of a significant correction in the stock market now deserves attention.</li>\n <li>In the recent past, Apple and Microsoft have responded differently to a significant decline in the stock market.</li>\n <li>Apple and&nbsp;Microsoft tend to be undervalued in terms of future cash flow, and overvalued in terms of potential dividends.</li>\n <li>In the event of a hypothetical correction, Microsoft's potential for falling is lower than Apple's.</li>\n</ul>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a07b4e98bb726c0044932fc29b3089b3\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1208\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>vicnt/iStock via Getty Images</span></p>\n<p><b>As an introduction...</b></p>\n<p>Since the last major correction in the US stock market ended in March 2020, the Nasdaq index has risen nearly 170%:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/05a849f8e9ddf15f484770a5f0227fcd\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"371\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>For a year and a half, this is a very strong result, considering that the average annual total price return of the index over the past decade does not exceed 20%.<i>This fact alone makes us estimate the likelihood of a new significant correction in the stock market higher.</i></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/37eb0178d9d463c7419b99632a6ec614\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: VisualizedAnalytics</span></p>\n<p>In addition, there are other factors that make us wary of the current price level of the market.</p>\n<p>First, this year there is a record inflow of liquidity to the stock market. I'm not talking about the reasons now, they are obvious. But this fact alone makes the market extremely volatile:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/10623d7cecd8dec70bb229b809458b68\" tg-width=\"1242\" tg-height=\"918\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Bank of America</span></p>\n<p>Second, the relative size of the US stock market has exceeded 200% of nominal GDP. In principle, this is not a fundamental limit. But it was the ultra-soft monetary policy that allowed the US stock market to reach its current record level. And most likely, in this context, a reversal is&nbsp;already outlined.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f69cd6450737ddf3e5fcbd6406c793ba\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: VisualizedAnalytics</span></p>\n<p>And finally the third. The macrocycle also allows us to expect the market to enter a phase of increased volatility and tightening of monetary policy:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1d6a6a794dde6f4e1d3e6e9149b55060\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: VisualizedAnalytics</span></p>\n<p>So, objectively, the likelihood of the next correction of the stock market at least deserves attention. And in this context, I propose to answer the question:<i>in case of a correction, which company is inclined to fall harder - Apple (AAPL) or Microsoft (MSFT)?</i></p>\n<p><b>Why Apple vs. Microsoft?</b></p>\n<p>The decision to compare exactly these two companies was dictated by two factors.</p>\n<p>Firstly, these are the two largest companies in the tech sector, together accounting for more than 10% of the total capitalization of the US stock market. These companies are so large that, in principle, their dynamics alone can cause a new wave of correction:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/cf3ef401b67c298ecbd9d56d31fc6927\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31417d34d6eacb724c20b3a274068467\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: VisualizedAnalytics</span></p>\n<p>Secondly, both companies pay dividends. In matters of fundamental valuation, this factor plays a significant role.</p>\n<p><b>Some Statistics</b></p>\n<p>To begin with, let's take a look at what price dynamics both companies have shown during strong market fluctuations in the recent past.</p>\n<p>To do this, I have broken the three-year span into eight periods of market movement:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/edfd9dec91d94990cf5217aa649758ac\" tg-width=\"947\" tg-height=\"578\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: TradingView, Author</span></p>\n<p>Here are the results that companies have shown in each of the periods:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/868067f19c2251bfdb0658a251596fcc\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"214\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author</span></p>\n<p>At first glance, the statistics are unambiguous:<i>during periods of correction, the price of Microsoft tends to decrease less than that of Apple.</i>But on the other hand, Apple has consistently performed better during periods of market growth. And in this case, the result obtained can simply be explained by the technical factors of the market behavior.</p>\n<p>But in the current period of growth, both companies demonstrate approximately the same return. And therefore, here we do not find a clue to our question...</p>\n<p><b>Fundamentals</b></p>\n<p>Exclusively in an investment context, the price of a company's share can be viewed from two points of view.</p>\n<p>On the one hand, the price reflects the present value of the company's&nbsp;<b>future cash flow</b>. On the other hand, the price is the present value of the sum of&nbsp;<b>all potential dividends</b>that the company will pay in the future. Let's model these prices for Apple and Microsoft. And for this I will build, respectively, the Discounted Cash Flow Model and the Dividend Discount Model.</p>\n<p>In order for the models to be less subjective, I will take as a basis the average expectations of analysts regarding the revenue and EPS of the companies in the next decade.</p>\n<p>Let's start with&nbsp;<b>Apple</b>. Here is the calculation of the Weighted Average Cost of Capital:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2f8fc4e5dc7025dd1227ea5279073aa5\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author</span></p>\n<p>Notes:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>In order to calculate the market rate of return, I used values of equityriskpremium (4.72%) and the current yield of UST10 as a risk-free rate (1.33%).</li>\n <li>I used the current&nbsp;value&nbsp;of the three-year beta coefficient. For a terminal year, I used Beta equal to 1.</li>\n <li>To calculate the Cost of Debt, I used the interest expense for 2020 divided by the average debt in 2019 and 2018.</li>\n</ul>\n<p>Here is the DCF model:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9bfb45a9125bb1f465cd34a6a8a6d06a\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"520\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author</span></p>\n<p><b>The DCF-based target price for Apple's shares is about $181 (+22%).</b></p>\n<p>In the case of Apple, when building the Dividend Discount Model it is also necessary to take into account the fact that the company continues to actively buy back:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d84076d0fc1bb5dbec8c1e6e19434153\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"371\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>Continuing the current dynamics, the model assumes that by the terminal year the number of diluted shares will be reduced to 13.5 billion.</p>\n<p>Apple spends an average of 25% of its net income on dividends. I assume that the payout ratio will remain at this level.</p>\n<p>Here is the Dividend Discount Model itself:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b8990a8299cc0652d77815710f0ab427\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"292\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author</span></p>\n<p><b><i>The DDM-based target price for Apple's shares is $69 (-54%).</i></b></p>\n<p>Now let's take a look at Microsoft.</p>\n<p>Here is the calculation of the WACC:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/15889e90904c69497b749f28bd64190f\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"396\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author</span></p>\n<p>And here is the DCF model:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dca7339e43f534807bf043b1931e1db\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"506\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author</span></p>\n<p><b>The DCF-based target price for Microsoft's shares is about $353 (+18%).</b></p>\n<p>Microsoft is also actively buying back shares:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1deec463f584b5eb7913d72938d3e1ca\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"371\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p>\n<p>I proceed from the assumption that the dynamics of the last two years will continue, and by the terminal year, the number of diluted shares will be reduced to 7.2 billion.</p>\n<p>Here is the Dividend Discount Model:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/18c863b92e948f78e518d5619b44647d\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"283\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Author</span></p>\n<p><b><i>The DDM-based target price for Microsoft's shares is $203 (-32%).</i></b></p>\n<p>Let's summarize:</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/84b527d82270843e021a89a9ecdf68e6\" tg-width=\"906\" tg-height=\"212\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p>\n<p>It is worth noting that I have already been observing similar results in the case of these companies for a long time. I mean, Apple and Microsoft tend to be undervalued in terms of future cash flow, and overvalued in terms of potential dividends.</p>\n<p>This suggests that during periods of market growth, investors are not particularly inclined to pay attention to dividends. Moreover, most likely dividends are perceived simply as a bonus.</p>\n<p>But during periods of market correction, the present value of potential dividends is the minimum level below which it is difficult for the price to fall. And in this context, I think Microsoft is in a better position than Apple.</p>\n<p><b>Bottom line</b></p>\n<p>At the current stage of the market cycle, when the likelihood of a correction has gone beyond formal, in my opinion, investing in Microsoft is less risky compared to Apple.</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 Vs. Microsoft: Who Is Inclined To Fall Harder In Case Of Correction</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. Microsoft: Who Is Inclined To Fall Harder In Case Of Correction\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-09-16 17:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://seekingalpha.com/article/4455478-apple-stock-vs-microsoft-stock-who-is-inclined-to-fall-harder-in-case-of-correction><strong>seekingalpha</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Summary\n\nObjectively, the likelihood of a significant correction in the stock market now deserves attention.\nIn the recent past, Apple and Microsoft have responded differently to a significant decline...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4455478-apple-stock-vs-microsoft-stock-who-is-inclined-to-fall-harder-in-case-of-correction\">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","MSFT":"微软"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4455478-apple-stock-vs-microsoft-stock-who-is-inclined-to-fall-harder-in-case-of-correction","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1126607843","content_text":"Summary\n\nObjectively, the likelihood of a significant correction in the stock market now deserves attention.\nIn the recent past, Apple and Microsoft have responded differently to a significant decline in the stock market.\nApple and Microsoft tend to be undervalued in terms of future cash flow, and overvalued in terms of potential dividends.\nIn the event of a hypothetical correction, Microsoft's potential for falling is lower than Apple's.\n\nvicnt/iStock via Getty Images\nAs an introduction...\nSince the last major correction in the US stock market ended in March 2020, the Nasdaq index has risen nearly 170%:\nData by YCharts\nFor a year and a half, this is a very strong result, considering that the average annual total price return of the index over the past decade does not exceed 20%.This fact alone makes us estimate the likelihood of a new significant correction in the stock market higher.\nSource: VisualizedAnalytics\nIn addition, there are other factors that make us wary of the current price level of the market.\nFirst, this year there is a record inflow of liquidity to the stock market. I'm not talking about the reasons now, they are obvious. But this fact alone makes the market extremely volatile:\nSource: Bank of America\nSecond, the relative size of the US stock market has exceeded 200% of nominal GDP. In principle, this is not a fundamental limit. But it was the ultra-soft monetary policy that allowed the US stock market to reach its current record level. And most likely, in this context, a reversal is already outlined.\nSource: VisualizedAnalytics\nAnd finally the third. The macrocycle also allows us to expect the market to enter a phase of increased volatility and tightening of monetary policy:\nSource: VisualizedAnalytics\nSo, objectively, the likelihood of the next correction of the stock market at least deserves attention. And in this context, I propose to answer the question:in case of a correction, which company is inclined to fall harder - Apple (AAPL) or Microsoft (MSFT)?\nWhy Apple vs. Microsoft?\nThe decision to compare exactly these two companies was dictated by two factors.\nFirstly, these are the two largest companies in the tech sector, together accounting for more than 10% of the total capitalization of the US stock market. These companies are so large that, in principle, their dynamics alone can cause a new wave of correction:\n\nSource: VisualizedAnalytics\nSecondly, both companies pay dividends. In matters of fundamental valuation, this factor plays a significant role.\nSome Statistics\nTo begin with, let's take a look at what price dynamics both companies have shown during strong market fluctuations in the recent past.\nTo do this, I have broken the three-year span into eight periods of market movement:\nSource: TradingView, Author\nHere are the results that companies have shown in each of the periods:\nSource: Author\nAt first glance, the statistics are unambiguous:during periods of correction, the price of Microsoft tends to decrease less than that of Apple.But on the other hand, Apple has consistently performed better during periods of market growth. And in this case, the result obtained can simply be explained by the technical factors of the market behavior.\nBut in the current period of growth, both companies demonstrate approximately the same return. And therefore, here we do not find a clue to our question...\nFundamentals\nExclusively in an investment context, the price of a company's share can be viewed from two points of view.\nOn the one hand, the price reflects the present value of the company's future cash flow. On the other hand, the price is the present value of the sum of all potential dividendsthat the company will pay in the future. Let's model these prices for Apple and Microsoft. And for this I will build, respectively, the Discounted Cash Flow Model and the Dividend Discount Model.\nIn order for the models to be less subjective, I will take as a basis the average expectations of analysts regarding the revenue and EPS of the companies in the next decade.\nLet's start with Apple. Here is the calculation of the Weighted Average Cost of Capital:\nSource: Author\nNotes:\n\nIn order to calculate the market rate of return, I used values of equityriskpremium (4.72%) and the current yield of UST10 as a risk-free rate (1.33%).\nI used the current value of the three-year beta coefficient. For a terminal year, I used Beta equal to 1.\nTo calculate the Cost of Debt, I used the interest expense for 2020 divided by the average debt in 2019 and 2018.\n\nHere is the DCF model:\nSource: Author\nThe DCF-based target price for Apple's shares is about $181 (+22%).\nIn the case of Apple, when building the Dividend Discount Model it is also necessary to take into account the fact that the company continues to actively buy back:\nData by YCharts\nContinuing the current dynamics, the model assumes that by the terminal year the number of diluted shares will be reduced to 13.5 billion.\nApple spends an average of 25% of its net income on dividends. I assume that the payout ratio will remain at this level.\nHere is the Dividend Discount Model itself:\nSource: Author\nThe DDM-based target price for Apple's shares is $69 (-54%).\nNow let's take a look at Microsoft.\nHere is the calculation of the WACC:\nSource: Author\nAnd here is the DCF model:\nSource: Author\nThe DCF-based target price for Microsoft's shares is about $353 (+18%).\nMicrosoft is also actively buying back shares:\nData by YCharts\nI proceed from the assumption that the dynamics of the last two years will continue, and by the terminal year, the number of diluted shares will be reduced to 7.2 billion.\nHere is the Dividend Discount Model:\nSource: Author\nThe DDM-based target price for Microsoft's shares is $203 (-32%).\nLet's summarize:\n\nIt is worth noting that I have already been observing similar results in the case of these companies for a long time. I mean, Apple and Microsoft tend to be undervalued in terms of future cash flow, and overvalued in terms of potential dividends.\nThis suggests that during periods of market growth, investors are not particularly inclined to pay attention to dividends. Moreover, most likely dividends are perceived simply as a bonus.\nBut during periods of market correction, the present value of potential dividends is the minimum level below which it is difficult for the price to fall. And in this context, I think Microsoft is in a better position than Apple.\nBottom line\nAt the current stage of the market cycle, when the likelihood of a correction has gone beyond formal, in my opinion, investing in Microsoft is less risky compared to Apple.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":25,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9008365524,"gmtCreate":1641364566877,"gmtModify":1676533606463,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":9,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9008365524","repostId":"2201418283","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2201418283","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":1641336421,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2201418283?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-01-05 06:47","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Dow posts closing record high for 2nd day, boosted by banks","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2201418283","media":"Reuters","summary":"* Financial sector registers all-time closing high* Ford, GM shares rise as electric truck battle heats up* Indexes: Dow up 0.6%, S&P 500 down 0.06%, Nasdaq down 1.3%NEW YORK, Jan 4 (Reuters) - The Do","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>* Financial sector registers all-time closing high</p><p>* Ford, GM shares rise as electric truck battle heats up</p><p>* Indexes: Dow up 0.6%, S&amp;P 500 down 0.06%, Nasdaq down 1.3%</p><p>NEW YORK, Jan 4 (Reuters) - The Dow Jones Industrial Average reached a record closing high on Tuesday for a second straight day as financial and industrial shares rallied, while the Nasdaq fell.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 ended slightly weaker after hitting an intraday all-time high. Declines in shares of big growth names including Tesla Inc weighed on the index and the Nasdaq Composite, which ended down more than 1%.</p><p>Economically sensitive energy, financials and industrials were the leading sectors in the S&amp;P 500, with financials eking out an all-time closing high.</p><p>Helping sentiment, the World Health Organization cited increasing evidence that the coronavirus variant caused milder symptoms than previous variants.</p><p>Earlier, U.S. manufacturing data for December showed some cooling in demand for goods, but investors took solace in signs of supply constraints easing.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 bank index rose 3.5% in its biggest daily percentage gain in about a year.</p><p>Some strategists said financials and other value-oriented stocks could be near-term market leaders as investors gear up for interest rate hikes from the Federal Reserve by mid-year to curb high inflation. U.S. Treasury yields gained for a second trading day.</p><p>Investors are &#34;going to punish growth stocks with high valuations,&#34; said Robert Phipps, a director at Per Stirling Capital Management in Austin, Texas.</p><p>&#34;This is a time when defensive stocks and value stocks are likely to outperform.&#34;</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 value index jumped 1%, while the S&amp;P 500 growth index fell 1%.</p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 214.59 points, or 0.59%, to 36,799.65; the S&amp;P 500 lost 3.02 points, or 0.06%, at 4,793.54; and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 210.08 points, or 1.33%, to 15,622.72.</p><p>The U.S. central bank said last month it would end its pandemic-era bond buying in 2022, signaling at least three interest rate hikes for the year. Minutes from the meeting are expected to be released on Wednesday.</p><p>Daniel Morgan, portfolio manager at Synovus Trust in Atlanta, said he still favored technology and growth shares, and was optimistic that fourth-quarter earnings for tech and the chip sector in particular could be stronger than Wall Street expectations.</p><p>Tesla shares fell 4.2%, a day after jumping more than 13% on stronger-than-expected quarterly deliveries.</p><p>Ford Motor Co jumped 11.7% after the automaker said it would nearly double annual production capacity for its red-hot F-150 Lightning electric pickup to 150,000 vehicles.</p><p>General Motors Co shares rallied 7.5% a day ahead of its public debut of the Chevrolet Silverado electric pickup, which is slated to go on sale in early 2023.</p><p>Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.12-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.44-to-1 ratio favored decliners.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 70 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 104 new highs and 102 new lows.</p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.49 billion shares, compared with about 10.4 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Dow posts closing record high for 2nd day, boosted by banks</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\">\nDow posts closing record high for 2nd day, boosted by banks\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\">2022-01-05 06:47</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>* Financial sector registers all-time closing high</p><p>* Ford, GM shares rise as electric truck battle heats up</p><p>* Indexes: Dow up 0.6%, S&amp;P 500 down 0.06%, Nasdaq down 1.3%</p><p>NEW YORK, Jan 4 (Reuters) - The Dow Jones Industrial Average reached a record closing high on Tuesday for a second straight day as financial and industrial shares rallied, while the Nasdaq fell.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 ended slightly weaker after hitting an intraday all-time high. Declines in shares of big growth names including Tesla Inc weighed on the index and the Nasdaq Composite, which ended down more than 1%.</p><p>Economically sensitive energy, financials and industrials were the leading sectors in the S&amp;P 500, with financials eking out an all-time closing high.</p><p>Helping sentiment, the World Health Organization cited increasing evidence that the coronavirus variant caused milder symptoms than previous variants.</p><p>Earlier, U.S. manufacturing data for December showed some cooling in demand for goods, but investors took solace in signs of supply constraints easing.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 bank index rose 3.5% in its biggest daily percentage gain in about a year.</p><p>Some strategists said financials and other value-oriented stocks could be near-term market leaders as investors gear up for interest rate hikes from the Federal Reserve by mid-year to curb high inflation. U.S. Treasury yields gained for a second trading day.</p><p>Investors are &#34;going to punish growth stocks with high valuations,&#34; said Robert Phipps, a director at Per Stirling Capital Management in Austin, Texas.</p><p>&#34;This is a time when defensive stocks and value stocks are likely to outperform.&#34;</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 value index jumped 1%, while the S&amp;P 500 growth index fell 1%.</p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 214.59 points, or 0.59%, to 36,799.65; the S&amp;P 500 lost 3.02 points, or 0.06%, at 4,793.54; and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 210.08 points, or 1.33%, to 15,622.72.</p><p>The U.S. central bank said last month it would end its pandemic-era bond buying in 2022, signaling at least three interest rate hikes for the year. Minutes from the meeting are expected to be released on Wednesday.</p><p>Daniel Morgan, portfolio manager at Synovus Trust in Atlanta, said he still favored technology and growth shares, and was optimistic that fourth-quarter earnings for tech and the chip sector in particular could be stronger than Wall Street expectations.</p><p>Tesla shares fell 4.2%, a day after jumping more than 13% on stronger-than-expected quarterly deliveries.</p><p>Ford Motor Co jumped 11.7% after the automaker said it would nearly double annual production capacity for its red-hot F-150 Lightning electric pickup to 150,000 vehicles.</p><p>General Motors Co shares rallied 7.5% a day ahead of its public debut of the Chevrolet Silverado electric pickup, which is slated to go on sale in early 2023.</p><p>Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.12-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.44-to-1 ratio favored decliners.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 70 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 104 new highs and 102 new lows.</p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.49 billion shares, compared with about 10.4 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BK4555":"新能源车","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","F":"福特汽车","BK4099":"汽车制造商","TSLA":"特斯拉","BK4548":"巴美列捷福持仓","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","BK4527":"明星科技股","GM":"通用汽车"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2201418283","content_text":"* Financial sector registers all-time closing high* Ford, GM shares rise as electric truck battle heats up* Indexes: Dow up 0.6%, S&P 500 down 0.06%, Nasdaq down 1.3%NEW YORK, Jan 4 (Reuters) - The Dow Jones Industrial Average reached a record closing high on Tuesday for a second straight day as financial and industrial shares rallied, while the Nasdaq fell.The S&P 500 ended slightly weaker after hitting an intraday all-time high. Declines in shares of big growth names including Tesla Inc weighed on the index and the Nasdaq Composite, which ended down more than 1%.Economically sensitive energy, financials and industrials were the leading sectors in the S&P 500, with financials eking out an all-time closing high.Helping sentiment, the World Health Organization cited increasing evidence that the coronavirus variant caused milder symptoms than previous variants.Earlier, U.S. manufacturing data for December showed some cooling in demand for goods, but investors took solace in signs of supply constraints easing.The S&P 500 bank index rose 3.5% in its biggest daily percentage gain in about a year.Some strategists said financials and other value-oriented stocks could be near-term market leaders as investors gear up for interest rate hikes from the Federal Reserve by mid-year to curb high inflation. U.S. Treasury yields gained for a second trading day.Investors are \"going to punish growth stocks with high valuations,\" said Robert Phipps, a director at Per Stirling Capital Management in Austin, Texas.\"This is a time when defensive stocks and value stocks are likely to outperform.\"The S&P 500 value index jumped 1%, while the S&P 500 growth index fell 1%.The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 214.59 points, or 0.59%, to 36,799.65; the S&P 500 lost 3.02 points, or 0.06%, at 4,793.54; and the Nasdaq Composite dropped 210.08 points, or 1.33%, to 15,622.72.The U.S. central bank said last month it would end its pandemic-era bond buying in 2022, signaling at least three interest rate hikes for the year. Minutes from the meeting are expected to be released on Wednesday.Daniel Morgan, portfolio manager at Synovus Trust in Atlanta, said he still favored technology and growth shares, and was optimistic that fourth-quarter earnings for tech and the chip sector in particular could be stronger than Wall Street expectations.Tesla shares fell 4.2%, a day after jumping more than 13% on stronger-than-expected quarterly deliveries.Ford Motor Co jumped 11.7% after the automaker said it would nearly double annual production capacity for its red-hot F-150 Lightning electric pickup to 150,000 vehicles.General Motors Co shares rallied 7.5% a day ahead of its public debut of the Chevrolet Silverado electric pickup, which is slated to go on sale in early 2023.Advancing issues outnumbered decliners on the NYSE by a 1.12-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 1.44-to-1 ratio favored decliners.The S&P 500 posted 70 new 52-week highs and one new low; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 104 new highs and 102 new lows.Volume on U.S. exchanges was 11.49 billion shares, compared with about 10.4 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":167,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063279673,"gmtCreate":1651482931321,"gmtModify":1676534914352,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063279673","repostId":"1155154275","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":286,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9033093488,"gmtCreate":1646145448339,"gmtModify":1676534095715,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":8,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9033093488","repostId":"1105937467","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":131,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9001054374,"gmtCreate":1641117080348,"gmtModify":1676533573842,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":8,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9001054374","repostId":"2200444738","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2200444738","pubTimestamp":1641099600,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2200444738?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-01-02 13:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"If I Could Buy Only 1 Stock in 2022, This Would Be It","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2200444738","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"Our favorite stock picks for the coming year.","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>We&#39;re firm believers in the benefit of owning a diversified portfolio of stocks. However, we all have our favorite stocks.</p><p>We asked some of our Fool.com contributors to whittle their favorites down to their top choice to buy in 2022 if they could only pick <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a>. Here&#39;s why <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MMM\">3M</a></b> (NYSE:MMM), <b>Brookfield Asset Management </b>(NYSE:BAM), and <b>Brookfield Renewable</b> (NYSE:BEP)(NYSE:BEPC) topped their lists as the one stock they&#39;d buy this year. </p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a909bb3cfb7abaedc74cfef9296edc0a\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"423\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/><span>Image source: Getty Images.</span></p><h2>A diversified giant that&#39;s still on sale</h2><p><b>Reuben Gregg Brewer (3M):</b> Benjamin Graham, renowned value investor and mentor to Warren Buffet, explains that investors are partnered with &#34;Mr. Market,&#34; a mercurial fellow prone to fits of despair and jubilation. When he&#39;s overly excited, you should consider selling to him; when he&#39;s pessimistic, you should think about buying. Right now, Mr. Market is very downbeat on diversified international industrial giant 3M. One way to see this is that the company&#39;s dividend yield, at around 3.3%, is near the top end of its historical range.</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35404c30dd22bffd6cc4a1450aa485c9\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"433\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"/><span>MMM Dividend Yield data by YCharts</span></p><p>Graham had some other advice when it came to actually selecting stocks. Specifically, he argued that most investors would be wise sticking to large, financially strong companies, with strong dividend histories. 3M stacks up well on these measures. It has a market cap of $100 billion, which makes it a mega-cap stock. Its balance sheet is investment-grade rated by the major credit agencies, so it&#39;s financially strong. And it has increased its dividend annually for over 60 years, making it a very elite Dividend King.</p><p>So why is Mr. Market pessimistic? The answer is a mixture of slowing growth and some product and environmental lawsuits. These are notable problems, but they&#39;re not insurmountable. On the business front, the industrial giant&#39;s operations wax and wane over time just like any other company. Given its history and focus on innovation, it should eventually get back on a better track. As for the lawsuits, they could be costly, but it&#39;s likely that 3M will be able to handle the hit. In the end, this is an attractively priced name with a great history that is dealing with issues that seem transitory.</p><h2>A proven value creator</h2><p><b>Matt DiLallo (Brookfield Asset Management):</b> I like to invest. Because of that, I routinely purchase a variety of stocks. However, if I could only buy one in the coming year, Brookfield Asset Management would be my top choice.</p><p>For starters, I love the company&#39;s management. CEO Bruce Flatt is a personal favorite of mine. He&#39;s right up there with Warren Buffett in my book as one of the best value investors around. I enjoy reading his quarterly letter to shareholders, which Flatt fills with investing and economic insight. He&#39;s also a proven value creator. Since becoming CEO in 2002, he&#39;s helped Brookfield deliver a 15.7% total annualized return, pulverizing the <b>S&amp;P 500</b>&#39;s 10.6% total return during that time frame. </p><p>I also like the company&#39;s business model. Brookfield is a leading global alternative asset manager focused on real estate, infrastructure, and renewable energy -- three of my favorite investing themes. An investment in Brookfield provides broad exposure to those three asset classes and many more. Brookfield invests directly across those themes and manages private equity funds focused on those sectors.</p><p>Finally, Brookfield has enormous upside potential. It expects to double its fee-bearing assets under management over the next five years. Combine that with performance-based earnings on its funds and the compounding value of its balance sheet investments, and it has the potential of generating up to 25% annualized total returns over the next five years. That upside, along with all the other positives, is why I&#39;d buy Brookfield if it were the only stock I could purchase this year. </p><h2>Investors are overlooking the growth potential here</h2><p><b>Neha Chamaria</b> <b>(Brookfield Renewable)</b>: 2021 is turning out to be a record-setting year for global renewable electricity addition, but this could just be the beginning. Yet shares of one of the largest pure-play renewables companies that&#39;s growing at a steady pace have languished this year, which is why Brookfield Renewable would be at the top of my shopping list of stocks to buy in 2022.</p><p>Brookfield Renewable, in fact, generated record funds from operations (FFO) in its third quarter and believes it could grow FFO by nearly 20% per year through 2026 through a combination of organic and inorganic growth. 2021 was also a solid year in terms of growth initiatives, with Brookfield Renewable expanding its U.S. distributed-generation business by nearly five times, signing agreements to acquire multiple late-stage solar development projects in the U.S. and even making meaningful headway in the high-potential green hydrogen space.</p><p>Brookfield Renewable&#39;s current development pipeline is larger than ever, and the company is committed to growing dividends annually by 5% to 9%. That shouldn&#39;t be tough given the solid pace of growth in its FFO. That dividend growth, its dividend yield of 3.4%, and the humongous growth potential in renewable energy are the biggest reasons why I consider Brookfield Renewable a top stock for 2022.</p></body></html>","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>If I Could Buy Only 1 Stock in 2022, This Would Be It</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\">\nIf I Could Buy Only 1 Stock in 2022, This Would Be It\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-01-02 13:00 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/01/if-i-could-buy-only-1-stock-in-2022-this-would-be/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>We're firm believers in the benefit of owning a diversified portfolio of stocks. However, we all have our favorite stocks.We asked some of our Fool.com contributors to whittle their favorites down to ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/01/if-i-could-buy-only-1-stock-in-2022-this-would-be/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BK4512":"苹果概念","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4135":"资产管理与托管银行","BEP":"Brookfield Renewable Partners LP","BEPC":"Brookfield Renewable Corp.","BK4206":"工业集团企业","MMM":"3M","BK4133":"新能源发电业者","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BAM":"布鲁克菲尔德资产管理"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/01/if-i-could-buy-only-1-stock-in-2022-this-would-be/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2200444738","content_text":"We're firm believers in the benefit of owning a diversified portfolio of stocks. However, we all have our favorite stocks.We asked some of our Fool.com contributors to whittle their favorites down to their top choice to buy in 2022 if they could only pick one. Here's why 3M (NYSE:MMM), Brookfield Asset Management (NYSE:BAM), and Brookfield Renewable (NYSE:BEP)(NYSE:BEPC) topped their lists as the one stock they'd buy this year. Image source: Getty Images.A diversified giant that's still on saleReuben Gregg Brewer (3M): Benjamin Graham, renowned value investor and mentor to Warren Buffet, explains that investors are partnered with \"Mr. Market,\" a mercurial fellow prone to fits of despair and jubilation. When he's overly excited, you should consider selling to him; when he's pessimistic, you should think about buying. Right now, Mr. Market is very downbeat on diversified international industrial giant 3M. One way to see this is that the company's dividend yield, at around 3.3%, is near the top end of its historical range.MMM Dividend Yield data by YChartsGraham had some other advice when it came to actually selecting stocks. Specifically, he argued that most investors would be wise sticking to large, financially strong companies, with strong dividend histories. 3M stacks up well on these measures. It has a market cap of $100 billion, which makes it a mega-cap stock. Its balance sheet is investment-grade rated by the major credit agencies, so it's financially strong. And it has increased its dividend annually for over 60 years, making it a very elite Dividend King.So why is Mr. Market pessimistic? The answer is a mixture of slowing growth and some product and environmental lawsuits. These are notable problems, but they're not insurmountable. On the business front, the industrial giant's operations wax and wane over time just like any other company. Given its history and focus on innovation, it should eventually get back on a better track. As for the lawsuits, they could be costly, but it's likely that 3M will be able to handle the hit. In the end, this is an attractively priced name with a great history that is dealing with issues that seem transitory.A proven value creatorMatt DiLallo (Brookfield Asset Management): I like to invest. Because of that, I routinely purchase a variety of stocks. However, if I could only buy one in the coming year, Brookfield Asset Management would be my top choice.For starters, I love the company's management. CEO Bruce Flatt is a personal favorite of mine. He's right up there with Warren Buffett in my book as one of the best value investors around. I enjoy reading his quarterly letter to shareholders, which Flatt fills with investing and economic insight. He's also a proven value creator. Since becoming CEO in 2002, he's helped Brookfield deliver a 15.7% total annualized return, pulverizing the S&P 500's 10.6% total return during that time frame. I also like the company's business model. Brookfield is a leading global alternative asset manager focused on real estate, infrastructure, and renewable energy -- three of my favorite investing themes. An investment in Brookfield provides broad exposure to those three asset classes and many more. Brookfield invests directly across those themes and manages private equity funds focused on those sectors.Finally, Brookfield has enormous upside potential. It expects to double its fee-bearing assets under management over the next five years. Combine that with performance-based earnings on its funds and the compounding value of its balance sheet investments, and it has the potential of generating up to 25% annualized total returns over the next five years. That upside, along with all the other positives, is why I'd buy Brookfield if it were the only stock I could purchase this year. Investors are overlooking the growth potential hereNeha Chamaria (Brookfield Renewable): 2021 is turning out to be a record-setting year for global renewable electricity addition, but this could just be the beginning. Yet shares of one of the largest pure-play renewables companies that's growing at a steady pace have languished this year, which is why Brookfield Renewable would be at the top of my shopping list of stocks to buy in 2022.Brookfield Renewable, in fact, generated record funds from operations (FFO) in its third quarter and believes it could grow FFO by nearly 20% per year through 2026 through a combination of organic and inorganic growth. 2021 was also a solid year in terms of growth initiatives, with Brookfield Renewable expanding its U.S. distributed-generation business by nearly five times, signing agreements to acquire multiple late-stage solar development projects in the U.S. and even making meaningful headway in the high-potential green hydrogen space.Brookfield Renewable's current development pipeline is larger than ever, and the company is committed to growing dividends annually by 5% to 9%. That shouldn't be tough given the solid pace of growth in its FFO. That dividend growth, its dividend yield of 3.4%, and the humongous growth potential in renewable energy are the biggest reasons why I consider Brookfield Renewable a top stock for 2022.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":50,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895652584,"gmtCreate":1628741972748,"gmtModify":1676529839088,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"??","listText":"??","text":"??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/895652584","repostId":"1143445979","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":130,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9006662601,"gmtCreate":1641716327122,"gmtModify":1676533642506,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Leave a comment&nbsp;","listText":"Leave a comment&nbsp;","text":"Leave a comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9006662601","repostId":"1198290127","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1198290127","pubTimestamp":1641702682,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1198290127?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-01-09 12:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Can Apple Stock Reclaim $3 Trillion And Thrive In 2022?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1198290127","media":"TheStreet","summary":"A market cap of $3 trillion has, so far, proven to be a ceiling that Apple stock does not seem ready","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>A market cap of $3 trillion has, so far, proven to be a ceiling that Apple stock does not seem ready to break through yet. Can shares reclaim the milestone soon and head higher in 2022?</p><p>Recently, Apple stock flirted with $3 trillion in market cap, but quickly dipped below $2.9 trillion — as the broad market reacted to monetary tightening that should now happen more rapidly than previously expected.</p><p>Can shares of the Cupertino company finally find its way north in 2022 and meet the expectations of so many bulls on Wall Street? Or will bearishness take over during a year of rising interest rates and lingering inflation?</p><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1f77cd919bf55f9c7b79f631b0255910\" tg-width=\"1240\" tg-height=\"697\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/><span>Figure 1: Apple Park in Cupertino, CA.</span></p><p><b>AAPL: the bull case</b></p><p>As Apple stock climbed viciously between late November and early December, many Wall Street experts piled on in support of “AAPL $3T”. Wedbush’s Dan Ives, for example, has been talking about the market cap milestone since our conversation in Q3 of last year, at least.</p><p>But other analysts have also hopped on the bullish bandwagon recently. Morgan Stanley upped its price target to $200 per share in November, while the JPMorgan research team saw Apple stock heading to $3.5 trillion in market cap over the next 12 months.</p><p>One of the most vocal optimists came from the buy side. Loup’s Gene Munster thought that his previous price target had quickly become stale, and that $250 per share now seemed more reasonable. In his opinion, the multi-year opportunity in the metaverse will gain investor appreciation in the new year, which should reignite momentum that the stock had lost in the last few weeks of 2021.</p><p><b>AAPL: the bear case</b></p><p>Despite the upbeat expectations described above, mostly supported by company-specific factors, the market rolled into 2022 with its guard up. The boogieman of the moment seems to be the Federal Reserve’s anticipated reaction to near-full employment and sticky inflation, which should lead to higher interest rates in the next several months.</p><p>I have recently explained how tighter money supply can spell trouble for stocks that trade for relatively high multiples. While AAPL is no Tesla or Rivian, the stock’s forward P/E of nearly 30 times and only modest earnings growth expectations could be a drag for share price in 2022, as investors look for better deals in value and cyclical stocks.</p><p><b>The Apple Maven’s take</b></p><p>I continue to think that Apple is a great stock to buy and hold for the long term. Under the leadership of a CEO (and former COO) that is driven by operational excellence, the company seems to be in very good hands. Better yet, demand for Apple’s products and services, as well as consumer appreciation for the brand, seem to be at or near an all-time high.</p><p>That said, the setup for the first few weeks or months of 2022 looks challenging to me. Apple stock climbed relentlessly in 2020, and then again last year. Aided by a spike in pandemic-driven demand for tech devices and lavish liquidity in the system, AAPL recorded one of its best three years of returns ever between 2019 and 2021.</p><p>As much as the metaverse and autonomous vehicles can and likely will support the company’s financial results over the next many years, I think that AAPL stock is overdue for a breather. While shares will likely climb back above $3 trillion and head much higher from there eventually, I am not so confident that this rally will happen in the immediate future.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Can Apple Stock Reclaim $3 Trillion And Thrive In 2022?</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\">\nCan Apple Stock Reclaim $3 Trillion And Thrive In 2022?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-01-09 12:31 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.thestreet.com/apple/stock/can-apple-stock-reclaim-3-trillion-and-thrive-in-2022><strong>TheStreet</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>A market cap of $3 trillion has, so far, proven to be a ceiling that Apple stock does not seem ready to break through yet. Can shares reclaim the milestone soon and head higher in 2022?Recently, Apple...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/apple/stock/can-apple-stock-reclaim-3-trillion-and-thrive-in-2022\">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/stock/can-apple-stock-reclaim-3-trillion-and-thrive-in-2022","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1198290127","content_text":"A market cap of $3 trillion has, so far, proven to be a ceiling that Apple stock does not seem ready to break through yet. Can shares reclaim the milestone soon and head higher in 2022?Recently, Apple stock flirted with $3 trillion in market cap, but quickly dipped below $2.9 trillion — as the broad market reacted to monetary tightening that should now happen more rapidly than previously expected.Can shares of the Cupertino company finally find its way north in 2022 and meet the expectations of so many bulls on Wall Street? Or will bearishness take over during a year of rising interest rates and lingering inflation?Figure 1: Apple Park in Cupertino, CA.AAPL: the bull caseAs Apple stock climbed viciously between late November and early December, many Wall Street experts piled on in support of “AAPL $3T”. Wedbush’s Dan Ives, for example, has been talking about the market cap milestone since our conversation in Q3 of last year, at least.But other analysts have also hopped on the bullish bandwagon recently. Morgan Stanley upped its price target to $200 per share in November, while the JPMorgan research team saw Apple stock heading to $3.5 trillion in market cap over the next 12 months.One of the most vocal optimists came from the buy side. Loup’s Gene Munster thought that his previous price target had quickly become stale, and that $250 per share now seemed more reasonable. In his opinion, the multi-year opportunity in the metaverse will gain investor appreciation in the new year, which should reignite momentum that the stock had lost in the last few weeks of 2021.AAPL: the bear caseDespite the upbeat expectations described above, mostly supported by company-specific factors, the market rolled into 2022 with its guard up. The boogieman of the moment seems to be the Federal Reserve’s anticipated reaction to near-full employment and sticky inflation, which should lead to higher interest rates in the next several months.I have recently explained how tighter money supply can spell trouble for stocks that trade for relatively high multiples. While AAPL is no Tesla or Rivian, the stock’s forward P/E of nearly 30 times and only modest earnings growth expectations could be a drag for share price in 2022, as investors look for better deals in value and cyclical stocks.The Apple Maven’s takeI continue to think that Apple is a great stock to buy and hold for the long term. Under the leadership of a CEO (and former COO) that is driven by operational excellence, the company seems to be in very good hands. Better yet, demand for Apple’s products and services, as well as consumer appreciation for the brand, seem to be at or near an all-time high.That said, the setup for the first few weeks or months of 2022 looks challenging to me. Apple stock climbed relentlessly in 2020, and then again last year. Aided by a spike in pandemic-driven demand for tech devices and lavish liquidity in the system, AAPL recorded one of its best three years of returns ever between 2019 and 2021.As much as the metaverse and autonomous vehicles can and likely will support the company’s financial results over the next many years, I think that AAPL stock is overdue for a breather. While shares will likely climb back above $3 trillion and head much higher from there eventually, I am not so confident that this rally will happen in the immediate future.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":188,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063273756,"gmtCreate":1651483035968,"gmtModify":1676534914374,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Share liao&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Share liao&nbsp;","text":"$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Share liao","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/e77faebec32ef0ea63c3360bbd02c3e5","width":"1170","height":"2292"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063273756","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":339,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9039349177,"gmtCreate":1645931568430,"gmtModify":1676534075887,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9039349177","repostId":"1125580913","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1125580913","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":1645926503,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1125580913?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-02-27 09:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1125580913","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-yea","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value</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\">\nBuffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value\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\">2022-02-27 09:48</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1125580913","content_text":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”Read the full letter here：To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.What You OwnBerkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.Surprise, SurpriseHere are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.Our Four GiantsThrough Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.InvestmentsNow let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.U.S. Treasury BillsBerkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.But $144 billion?That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.Share RepurchasesThere are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful BusinessLast year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.In all ways, Paul was a class act.* * * * * * * * * * * *Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.ThanksI taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction workingfor you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”The Annual MeetingClear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.February 26, 2022Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":185,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9094566558,"gmtCreate":1645187267192,"gmtModify":1676534006820,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes&nbsp;","listText":"Likes&nbsp;","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":8,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9094566558","repostId":"2212694949","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2212694949","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1645174320,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2212694949?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-02-18 16:52","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk's $5.7 Billion Secret -- Why We May Never Find out Who Benefited from His Tesla Stock Donation","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2212694949","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"Publicly announcing multi-billion-dollar gifts is a 'fundamental matter of public interest,' says on","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Publicly announcing multi-billion-dollar gifts is a &#39;fundamental matter of public interest,&#39; says <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> observer.</p><p>Elon Musk will happily broadcast a few choice words about U.S. senators, but he&#39;s quieter when it comes to his philanthropy. There&#39;s a good chance the public may never know which charity or charities benefited from the approximately $5.7 billion in Tesla <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">$(TSLA)$</a> stock Musk donated in 2021.</p><p>While there are some public-disclosure laws in philanthropy, billionaire donors like Musk can easily keep the details of their giving under wraps, and it&#39;s legal for them to do so.</p><p>Musk -- who signed the Giving Pledge in 2012, promising to give away most of his wealth -- doesn&#39;t send out press releases announcing his donations, though he occasionally tweets about them. Tesla doesn&#39;t typically respond to press inquiries (it did not for this story), and there&#39;s no contact information listed on Musk&#39;s foundation&#39;s bare-bones website. The Tesla stock donation was revealed in an SEC filing Monday that described the donated shares as a gift &#34;to charity,&#34; but didn&#39;t specify which one.</p><p>One possible candidate is the United Nations World Food Program. Musk got into a public <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TWTR\">Twitter</a> spat with the WFP shortly before he donated the stock, and said he would donate $6 billion to the hunger relief agency if it could show how the money would &#34;solve world hunger.&#34; A WFP spokesman initially told MarketWatch this week that it doesn&#39;t disclose donors, but allows donors to publicize their gifts themselves. The WFP&#39;s executive director later said that the group had not received any funds yet from Musk, and added that &#34;I am excited to hear that Elon is engaged. This is an amazing and great first step.&#34;</p><p>At a time when billionaires are riding high and exerting growing influence over the public sphere, the lack of transparency around Musk&#39;s donation is the latest example of how elite philanthropists can evade scrutiny too easily, critics say.</p><p>&#34;Come on. There has to be a middle-ground [between] preening, self-congratulatory mega-giving &amp; complete non-disclosure,&#34; wrote philanthropy historian Ben Soskis on Twitter(TWTR) in response to the lack of information on Musk&#39;s stock donation. &#34;If not, we&#39;re gonna need a pretty radical overhaul of our [regulations] relating to individual giving &amp; anonymity.&#34;</p><p>Soskis, a senior research associate in the Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute, added, &#34;If you are giving a gift of over $5 [billion], you should publicly announce where the money is going to. As a fundamental matter of public interest.&#34;</p><p><b>How the public could find out where Musk&#39;s donation went</b></p><p>The recipients of Musk&#39;s donation could eventually come to light if Musk gave the stock to his private foundation and the foundation liquidated it and handed out the money as grants to nonprofits. In that case, the Musk Foundation would have to publicly list its major donors and the nonprofits that received the grants in a filing with the IRS. Foundations, which exist to hand out money for public benefit, are required to file that paperwork annually.</p><p>The most recent IRS filing for the Musk Foundation shows that Musk donated 11,000 Tesla shares to it in 2019. The foundation gave a $1 million grant to George Mason University &#34;for COVID-19 scientific research,&#34; made several other grants to schools and other recipients, and gave a $20.7 million donation to Fidelity Charitable, where Musk appears to keep a donor-advised fund.</p><p><b>Why the recipients of Musk stock donation could easily stay secret</b></p><p>There are several other scenarios where the recipients of Musk&#39;s largesse would never be revealed. Musk may have put the money into a donor-advised fund at Fidelity Charitable. DAFs, a type of charitable giving account, function as middlemen. They hold money the donor has earmarked for charity and then distribute it to nonprofits chosen by the donor. When the nonprofits receive the money, it comes from the DAF, not the donor, and there&#39;s no paper trail connecting the donor directly to the nonprofit.</p><p>DAFs have come under fire because account holders get a tax break when they put money into a DAF, but there&#39;s no deadline for when donors must distribute the money to charities. A bill recently introduced in Congress would change some of the laws around DAFs with the aim of moving money more quickly into the hands of charities.</p><p>&#34;The Musk donation serves as a reminder that current laws allow for donors to get a tax deduction up front without any requirement that $ ever gets to the community,&#34; wrote billionaire John Arnold, a supporter of the DAF reform legislation, on Twitter. &#34;Money can sit in DAF accounts forever.&#34;</p><p>DAF providers say those criticisms are wrong. Fidelity Charitable released its 2022 giving report Tuesday, which showed that in 2021, its DAF account holders recommended &#34;a record $10.3 billion in grants, 41% more dollars than pre-pandemic giving in 2019.&#34; The report also noted that &#34;donors are recommending grants at a more rapid pace -- an average of 12.4 grants per account in 2021, compared to 7.4 a decade ago.&#34;</p><p>A spokesman for Fidelity Charitable declined to comment on Musk.</p><p>Musk could also fly under the radar with his stock donation if he put it into a charitable limited liability company, a type of giving vehicle used by philanthropists such as Meta (formerly Facebook <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FB\">$(FB)$</a>) CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, and Melinda French Gates, the former wife of Microsoft <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">$(MSFT)$</a> founder Bill Gates. Charitable LLCs can make grants to nonprofits and invest in for-profit ventures, but they aren&#39;t required to publicly disclose their spending.</p><p>If Musk gave the stock directly to a nonprofit, the group wouldn&#39;t be required to publicly disclose him as the donor. Nonprofits must disclose their major donors to the IRS, but they are not required to identify those donors publicly, said Gene Takagi, a lawyer specializing in nonprofit law at NEO Law Group in San Francisco.</p><p>&#34;There are debates over the need for greater transparency, particularly with very large gifts that can shift public policy and possibly elections through permissible charity advocacy activities,&#34; Takagi siad. &#34; In my own personal opinion, the danger of less transparency, for example in the area of campaign finance, could seriously weaken our democracy.&#34;</p><p>Others say that donors should be allowed to preserve their privacy. Keeping donor information private &#34;enables potentially controversial or less popular causes to receive financial support from individuals without posing a public risk to donors,&#34; wrote Independent Sector, a coalition of nonprofits and foundations. Organizations shouldn&#39;t have to disclose their donors if they&#39;re involved in &#34;issues for which donor disclosure would create a substantial likelihood of personal harm to donors,&#34; the group said.</p><p><b>Other billionaires have been more public about recent giving</b></p><p>Billionaire philanthropist MacKenzie Scott, the former wife of Amazon <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMZN\">$(AMZN)$</a> founder Jeff Bezos, drew criticism in December when she announced that she had made a round of donations, but didn&#39;t want to reveal the amounts she gave or the recipients. She later changed her tune and said she&#39;ll be putting together a public database showing who&#39;s received the more than $8.5 billion she&#39;s handed out since her divorce from Bezos. Some of the organizations that have received money from Scott have also gone public.</p><p>Another SEC filing made public this week showed that Henrik Fisker, chief executive and chairman of electric-vehicle maker Fisker, Inc. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FSR\">$(FSR)$</a> donated $4 million in stock to establish a foundation in the name of him and his wife, and directed $1.9 million to a donor-advised fund. Fisker, Inc. also issued a news release outlining where the money was going.</p><p>In another recent SEC filing, Austin Russell, chief executive of self-driving software company Luminar Technologies <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LAZR\">$(LAZR)$</a> and considered the world&#39;s youngest self-made billionaire, disclosed that he donated 4,500,000 shares of Luminar to Central Florida Foundation, an Orlando-based community foundation. The foundation announced the $70 million gift in a press release, and the Orlando Sentinel covered the gift</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk's $5.7 Billion Secret -- Why We May Never Find out Who Benefited from His Tesla Stock Donation</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk's $5.7 Billion Secret -- Why We May Never Find out Who Benefited from His Tesla Stock Donation\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2022-02-18 16:52</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Publicly announcing multi-billion-dollar gifts is a &#39;fundamental matter of public interest,&#39; says <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> observer.</p><p>Elon Musk will happily broadcast a few choice words about U.S. senators, but he&#39;s quieter when it comes to his philanthropy. There&#39;s a good chance the public may never know which charity or charities benefited from the approximately $5.7 billion in Tesla <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">$(TSLA)$</a> stock Musk donated in 2021.</p><p>While there are some public-disclosure laws in philanthropy, billionaire donors like Musk can easily keep the details of their giving under wraps, and it&#39;s legal for them to do so.</p><p>Musk -- who signed the Giving Pledge in 2012, promising to give away most of his wealth -- doesn&#39;t send out press releases announcing his donations, though he occasionally tweets about them. Tesla doesn&#39;t typically respond to press inquiries (it did not for this story), and there&#39;s no contact information listed on Musk&#39;s foundation&#39;s bare-bones website. The Tesla stock donation was revealed in an SEC filing Monday that described the donated shares as a gift &#34;to charity,&#34; but didn&#39;t specify which one.</p><p>One possible candidate is the United Nations World Food Program. Musk got into a public <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TWTR\">Twitter</a> spat with the WFP shortly before he donated the stock, and said he would donate $6 billion to the hunger relief agency if it could show how the money would &#34;solve world hunger.&#34; A WFP spokesman initially told MarketWatch this week that it doesn&#39;t disclose donors, but allows donors to publicize their gifts themselves. The WFP&#39;s executive director later said that the group had not received any funds yet from Musk, and added that &#34;I am excited to hear that Elon is engaged. This is an amazing and great first step.&#34;</p><p>At a time when billionaires are riding high and exerting growing influence over the public sphere, the lack of transparency around Musk&#39;s donation is the latest example of how elite philanthropists can evade scrutiny too easily, critics say.</p><p>&#34;Come on. There has to be a middle-ground [between] preening, self-congratulatory mega-giving &amp; complete non-disclosure,&#34; wrote philanthropy historian Ben Soskis on Twitter(TWTR) in response to the lack of information on Musk&#39;s stock donation. &#34;If not, we&#39;re gonna need a pretty radical overhaul of our [regulations] relating to individual giving &amp; anonymity.&#34;</p><p>Soskis, a senior research associate in the Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute, added, &#34;If you are giving a gift of over $5 [billion], you should publicly announce where the money is going to. As a fundamental matter of public interest.&#34;</p><p><b>How the public could find out where Musk&#39;s donation went</b></p><p>The recipients of Musk&#39;s donation could eventually come to light if Musk gave the stock to his private foundation and the foundation liquidated it and handed out the money as grants to nonprofits. In that case, the Musk Foundation would have to publicly list its major donors and the nonprofits that received the grants in a filing with the IRS. Foundations, which exist to hand out money for public benefit, are required to file that paperwork annually.</p><p>The most recent IRS filing for the Musk Foundation shows that Musk donated 11,000 Tesla shares to it in 2019. The foundation gave a $1 million grant to George Mason University &#34;for COVID-19 scientific research,&#34; made several other grants to schools and other recipients, and gave a $20.7 million donation to Fidelity Charitable, where Musk appears to keep a donor-advised fund.</p><p><b>Why the recipients of Musk stock donation could easily stay secret</b></p><p>There are several other scenarios where the recipients of Musk&#39;s largesse would never be revealed. Musk may have put the money into a donor-advised fund at Fidelity Charitable. DAFs, a type of charitable giving account, function as middlemen. They hold money the donor has earmarked for charity and then distribute it to nonprofits chosen by the donor. When the nonprofits receive the money, it comes from the DAF, not the donor, and there&#39;s no paper trail connecting the donor directly to the nonprofit.</p><p>DAFs have come under fire because account holders get a tax break when they put money into a DAF, but there&#39;s no deadline for when donors must distribute the money to charities. A bill recently introduced in Congress would change some of the laws around DAFs with the aim of moving money more quickly into the hands of charities.</p><p>&#34;The Musk donation serves as a reminder that current laws allow for donors to get a tax deduction up front without any requirement that $ ever gets to the community,&#34; wrote billionaire John Arnold, a supporter of the DAF reform legislation, on Twitter. &#34;Money can sit in DAF accounts forever.&#34;</p><p>DAF providers say those criticisms are wrong. Fidelity Charitable released its 2022 giving report Tuesday, which showed that in 2021, its DAF account holders recommended &#34;a record $10.3 billion in grants, 41% more dollars than pre-pandemic giving in 2019.&#34; The report also noted that &#34;donors are recommending grants at a more rapid pace -- an average of 12.4 grants per account in 2021, compared to 7.4 a decade ago.&#34;</p><p>A spokesman for Fidelity Charitable declined to comment on Musk.</p><p>Musk could also fly under the radar with his stock donation if he put it into a charitable limited liability company, a type of giving vehicle used by philanthropists such as Meta (formerly Facebook <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FB\">$(FB)$</a>) CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, and Melinda French Gates, the former wife of Microsoft <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">$(MSFT)$</a> founder Bill Gates. Charitable LLCs can make grants to nonprofits and invest in for-profit ventures, but they aren&#39;t required to publicly disclose their spending.</p><p>If Musk gave the stock directly to a nonprofit, the group wouldn&#39;t be required to publicly disclose him as the donor. Nonprofits must disclose their major donors to the IRS, but they are not required to identify those donors publicly, said Gene Takagi, a lawyer specializing in nonprofit law at NEO Law Group in San Francisco.</p><p>&#34;There are debates over the need for greater transparency, particularly with very large gifts that can shift public policy and possibly elections through permissible charity advocacy activities,&#34; Takagi siad. &#34; In my own personal opinion, the danger of less transparency, for example in the area of campaign finance, could seriously weaken our democracy.&#34;</p><p>Others say that donors should be allowed to preserve their privacy. Keeping donor information private &#34;enables potentially controversial or less popular causes to receive financial support from individuals without posing a public risk to donors,&#34; wrote Independent Sector, a coalition of nonprofits and foundations. Organizations shouldn&#39;t have to disclose their donors if they&#39;re involved in &#34;issues for which donor disclosure would create a substantial likelihood of personal harm to donors,&#34; the group said.</p><p><b>Other billionaires have been more public about recent giving</b></p><p>Billionaire philanthropist MacKenzie Scott, the former wife of Amazon <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMZN\">$(AMZN)$</a> founder Jeff Bezos, drew criticism in December when she announced that she had made a round of donations, but didn&#39;t want to reveal the amounts she gave or the recipients. She later changed her tune and said she&#39;ll be putting together a public database showing who&#39;s received the more than $8.5 billion she&#39;s handed out since her divorce from Bezos. Some of the organizations that have received money from Scott have also gone public.</p><p>Another SEC filing made public this week showed that Henrik Fisker, chief executive and chairman of electric-vehicle maker Fisker, Inc. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FSR\">$(FSR)$</a> donated $4 million in stock to establish a foundation in the name of him and his wife, and directed $1.9 million to a donor-advised fund. Fisker, Inc. also issued a news release outlining where the money was going.</p><p>In another recent SEC filing, Austin Russell, chief executive of self-driving software company Luminar Technologies <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LAZR\">$(LAZR)$</a> and considered the world&#39;s youngest self-made billionaire, disclosed that he donated 4,500,000 shares of Luminar to Central Florida Foundation, an Orlando-based community foundation. The foundation announced the $70 million gift in a press release, and the Orlando Sentinel covered the gift</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BK4099":"汽车制造商","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4548":"巴美列捷福持仓","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4551":"寇图资本持仓","BK4527":"明星科技股","TSLA":"特斯拉","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓","BK4555":"新能源车"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2212694949","content_text":"Publicly announcing multi-billion-dollar gifts is a 'fundamental matter of public interest,' says one observer.Elon Musk will happily broadcast a few choice words about U.S. senators, but he's quieter when it comes to his philanthropy. There's a good chance the public may never know which charity or charities benefited from the approximately $5.7 billion in Tesla $(TSLA)$ stock Musk donated in 2021.While there are some public-disclosure laws in philanthropy, billionaire donors like Musk can easily keep the details of their giving under wraps, and it's legal for them to do so.Musk -- who signed the Giving Pledge in 2012, promising to give away most of his wealth -- doesn't send out press releases announcing his donations, though he occasionally tweets about them. Tesla doesn't typically respond to press inquiries (it did not for this story), and there's no contact information listed on Musk's foundation's bare-bones website. The Tesla stock donation was revealed in an SEC filing Monday that described the donated shares as a gift \"to charity,\" but didn't specify which one.One possible candidate is the United Nations World Food Program. Musk got into a public Twitter spat with the WFP shortly before he donated the stock, and said he would donate $6 billion to the hunger relief agency if it could show how the money would \"solve world hunger.\" A WFP spokesman initially told MarketWatch this week that it doesn't disclose donors, but allows donors to publicize their gifts themselves. The WFP's executive director later said that the group had not received any funds yet from Musk, and added that \"I am excited to hear that Elon is engaged. This is an amazing and great first step.\"At a time when billionaires are riding high and exerting growing influence over the public sphere, the lack of transparency around Musk's donation is the latest example of how elite philanthropists can evade scrutiny too easily, critics say.\"Come on. There has to be a middle-ground [between] preening, self-congratulatory mega-giving & complete non-disclosure,\" wrote philanthropy historian Ben Soskis on Twitter(TWTR) in response to the lack of information on Musk's stock donation. \"If not, we're gonna need a pretty radical overhaul of our [regulations] relating to individual giving & anonymity.\"Soskis, a senior research associate in the Center on Nonprofits and Philanthropy at the Urban Institute, added, \"If you are giving a gift of over $5 [billion], you should publicly announce where the money is going to. As a fundamental matter of public interest.\"How the public could find out where Musk's donation wentThe recipients of Musk's donation could eventually come to light if Musk gave the stock to his private foundation and the foundation liquidated it and handed out the money as grants to nonprofits. In that case, the Musk Foundation would have to publicly list its major donors and the nonprofits that received the grants in a filing with the IRS. Foundations, which exist to hand out money for public benefit, are required to file that paperwork annually.The most recent IRS filing for the Musk Foundation shows that Musk donated 11,000 Tesla shares to it in 2019. The foundation gave a $1 million grant to George Mason University \"for COVID-19 scientific research,\" made several other grants to schools and other recipients, and gave a $20.7 million donation to Fidelity Charitable, where Musk appears to keep a donor-advised fund.Why the recipients of Musk stock donation could easily stay secretThere are several other scenarios where the recipients of Musk's largesse would never be revealed. Musk may have put the money into a donor-advised fund at Fidelity Charitable. DAFs, a type of charitable giving account, function as middlemen. They hold money the donor has earmarked for charity and then distribute it to nonprofits chosen by the donor. When the nonprofits receive the money, it comes from the DAF, not the donor, and there's no paper trail connecting the donor directly to the nonprofit.DAFs have come under fire because account holders get a tax break when they put money into a DAF, but there's no deadline for when donors must distribute the money to charities. A bill recently introduced in Congress would change some of the laws around DAFs with the aim of moving money more quickly into the hands of charities.\"The Musk donation serves as a reminder that current laws allow for donors to get a tax deduction up front without any requirement that $ ever gets to the community,\" wrote billionaire John Arnold, a supporter of the DAF reform legislation, on Twitter. \"Money can sit in DAF accounts forever.\"DAF providers say those criticisms are wrong. Fidelity Charitable released its 2022 giving report Tuesday, which showed that in 2021, its DAF account holders recommended \"a record $10.3 billion in grants, 41% more dollars than pre-pandemic giving in 2019.\" The report also noted that \"donors are recommending grants at a more rapid pace -- an average of 12.4 grants per account in 2021, compared to 7.4 a decade ago.\"A spokesman for Fidelity Charitable declined to comment on Musk.Musk could also fly under the radar with his stock donation if he put it into a charitable limited liability company, a type of giving vehicle used by philanthropists such as Meta (formerly Facebook $(FB)$) CEO Mark Zuckerberg and his wife, Priscilla Chan, and Melinda French Gates, the former wife of Microsoft $(MSFT)$ founder Bill Gates. Charitable LLCs can make grants to nonprofits and invest in for-profit ventures, but they aren't required to publicly disclose their spending.If Musk gave the stock directly to a nonprofit, the group wouldn't be required to publicly disclose him as the donor. Nonprofits must disclose their major donors to the IRS, but they are not required to identify those donors publicly, said Gene Takagi, a lawyer specializing in nonprofit law at NEO Law Group in San Francisco.\"There are debates over the need for greater transparency, particularly with very large gifts that can shift public policy and possibly elections through permissible charity advocacy activities,\" Takagi siad. \" In my own personal opinion, the danger of less transparency, for example in the area of campaign finance, could seriously weaken our democracy.\"Others say that donors should be allowed to preserve their privacy. Keeping donor information private \"enables potentially controversial or less popular causes to receive financial support from individuals without posing a public risk to donors,\" wrote Independent Sector, a coalition of nonprofits and foundations. Organizations shouldn't have to disclose their donors if they're involved in \"issues for which donor disclosure would create a substantial likelihood of personal harm to donors,\" the group said.Other billionaires have been more public about recent givingBillionaire philanthropist MacKenzie Scott, the former wife of Amazon $(AMZN)$ founder Jeff Bezos, drew criticism in December when she announced that she had made a round of donations, but didn't want to reveal the amounts she gave or the recipients. She later changed her tune and said she'll be putting together a public database showing who's received the more than $8.5 billion she's handed out since her divorce from Bezos. Some of the organizations that have received money from Scott have also gone public.Another SEC filing made public this week showed that Henrik Fisker, chief executive and chairman of electric-vehicle maker Fisker, Inc. $(FSR)$ donated $4 million in stock to establish a foundation in the name of him and his wife, and directed $1.9 million to a donor-advised fund. Fisker, Inc. also issued a news release outlining where the money was going.In another recent SEC filing, Austin Russell, chief executive of self-driving software company Luminar Technologies $(LAZR)$ and considered the world's youngest self-made billionaire, disclosed that he donated 4,500,000 shares of Luminar to Central Florida Foundation, an Orlando-based community foundation. The foundation announced the $70 million gift in a press release, and the Orlando Sentinel covered the gift","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":57,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9002405647,"gmtCreate":1642055997006,"gmtModify":1676533676683,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9002405647","repostId":"1179041191","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":236,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9063918657,"gmtCreate":1651383722908,"gmtModify":1676534899478,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/C2PU.SI\">$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$</a>Ok","text":"$PARKWAYLIFE REIT(C2PU.SI)$Ok","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/e77faebec32ef0ea63c3360bbd02c3e5","width":"1170","height":"2292"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9063918657","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":460,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9091185088,"gmtCreate":1643805359363,"gmtModify":1676533858114,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes&nbsp;","listText":"Likes&nbsp;","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9091185088","repostId":"1178657302","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1178657302","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Stock Market Quotes, Business News, Financial News, Trading Ideas, and Stock Research by Professionals","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Benzinga","id":"1052270027","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa"},"pubTimestamp":1643804908,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1178657302?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-02-02 20:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"10 Biggest Price Target Changes For Wednesday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1178657302","media":"Benzinga","summary":"Keybanc lifted the price target for Alphabet Inc. from $3,090 to $3,400. Alphabet shares surged 11% ","content":"<html><head></head><body><ul><li>Keybanc lifted the price target for <b>Alphabet Inc.</b> from $3,090 to $3,400. Alphabet shares surged 11% to $3,055.00 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Wedbush cut the price target on <b>Starbucks Corporation</b> from $110 to $106. Starbucks shares fell 2.5% to $96.29 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Cowen &amp; Co. cut <b>Clover Health Investments, Corp.</b> price target from $7 to $3. Clover Health Investments shares rose 6.5% to $2.97 in pre-market trading.</li><li>UBS lowered <b>Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.</b> price target from $172 to $130. Zimmer Biomet shares fell 0.2% to $123.80 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Citigroup cut <b>loanDepot, Inc.</b> price target from $12 to $5. loanDepot shares fell 4.9% to close at $4.46 on Tuesday.</li></ul><ul><li>Raymond James boosted the price target for <b>NXP Semiconductors N.V.</b> from $250 to $260. NXP Semiconductors shares rose 1.4% to $211.10 in pre-market trading.</li><li>SVB Leerink raised the price target on <b>Bio-Techne Corporation</b> from $530 to $575. Bio-Techne shares rose 0.1% to $401.76 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Goldman Sachs lowered <b>2U, Inc.</b> price target from $42 to $25. 2U shares rose 6.7% to $17.79 in pre-market trading.</li><li>UBS cut the price target on <b>Etsy, Inc.</b> from $215 to $180. Etsy shares rose 2% to $155.16 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Keybanc cut <b>PayPal Holdings, Inc.</b> price target from $250 to $200. PayPal shares fell 16% to $148.00 in pre-market trading.</li></ul></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>10 Biggest Price Target Changes For Wednesday</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\">\n10 Biggest Price Target Changes For Wednesday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Benzinga </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2022-02-02 20:28</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><ul><li>Keybanc lifted the price target for <b>Alphabet Inc.</b> from $3,090 to $3,400. Alphabet shares surged 11% to $3,055.00 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Wedbush cut the price target on <b>Starbucks Corporation</b> from $110 to $106. Starbucks shares fell 2.5% to $96.29 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Cowen &amp; Co. cut <b>Clover Health Investments, Corp.</b> price target from $7 to $3. Clover Health Investments shares rose 6.5% to $2.97 in pre-market trading.</li><li>UBS lowered <b>Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc.</b> price target from $172 to $130. Zimmer Biomet shares fell 0.2% to $123.80 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Citigroup cut <b>loanDepot, Inc.</b> price target from $12 to $5. loanDepot shares fell 4.9% to close at $4.46 on Tuesday.</li></ul><ul><li>Raymond James boosted the price target for <b>NXP Semiconductors N.V.</b> from $250 to $260. NXP Semiconductors shares rose 1.4% to $211.10 in pre-market trading.</li><li>SVB Leerink raised the price target on <b>Bio-Techne Corporation</b> from $530 to $575. Bio-Techne shares rose 0.1% to $401.76 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Goldman Sachs lowered <b>2U, Inc.</b> price target from $42 to $25. 2U shares rose 6.7% to $17.79 in pre-market trading.</li><li>UBS cut the price target on <b>Etsy, Inc.</b> from $215 to $180. Etsy shares rose 2% to $155.16 in pre-market trading.</li><li>Keybanc cut <b>PayPal Holdings, Inc.</b> price target from $250 to $200. PayPal shares fell 16% to $148.00 in pre-market trading.</li></ul></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TECH":"Techne Corporation","NXPI":"恩智浦","PYPL":"PayPal","SBUX":"星巴克","LDI":"loanDepot, Inc.","TWOU":"2U Inc","ZBH":"齐默巴奥米特控股","GOOGL":"谷歌A","CLOV":"Clover Health Corp","ETSY":"Etsy, Inc."},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1178657302","content_text":"Keybanc lifted the price target for Alphabet Inc. from $3,090 to $3,400. Alphabet shares surged 11% to $3,055.00 in pre-market trading.Wedbush cut the price target on Starbucks Corporation from $110 to $106. Starbucks shares fell 2.5% to $96.29 in pre-market trading.Cowen & Co. cut Clover Health Investments, Corp. price target from $7 to $3. Clover Health Investments shares rose 6.5% to $2.97 in pre-market trading.UBS lowered Zimmer Biomet Holdings, Inc. price target from $172 to $130. Zimmer Biomet shares fell 0.2% to $123.80 in pre-market trading.Citigroup cut loanDepot, Inc. price target from $12 to $5. loanDepot shares fell 4.9% to close at $4.46 on Tuesday.Raymond James boosted the price target for NXP Semiconductors N.V. from $250 to $260. NXP Semiconductors shares rose 1.4% to $211.10 in pre-market trading.SVB Leerink raised the price target on Bio-Techne Corporation from $530 to $575. Bio-Techne shares rose 0.1% to $401.76 in pre-market trading.Goldman Sachs lowered 2U, Inc. price target from $42 to $25. 2U shares rose 6.7% to $17.79 in pre-market trading.UBS cut the price target on Etsy, Inc. from $215 to $180. Etsy shares rose 2% to $155.16 in pre-market trading.Keybanc cut PayPal Holdings, Inc. price target from $250 to $200. PayPal shares fell 16% to $148.00 in pre-market trading.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":79,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9093473106,"gmtCreate":1643694977082,"gmtModify":1676533845651,"author":{"id":"3580381506485046","authorId":"3580381506485046","name":"StefanieChua","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dc371f9bf0f837ccffbd4fb322be8ffc","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Likes","listText":"Likes","text":"Likes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9093473106","repostId":"2208335465","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2208335465","pubTimestamp":1643670433,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2208335465?lang=&edition=full","pubTime":"2022-02-01 07:07","market":"us","language":"en","title":"US STOCKS-Nasdaq Narrowly Misses Worst January Ever as Wall Street Gains","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2208335465","media":"Reuters","summary":"* Nasdaq posts worst January since 2008* S&P 500, Dow see worst month since March 2020* Citrix falls","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>* Nasdaq posts worst January since 2008</p><p>* S&amp;P 500, Dow see worst month since March 2020</p><p>* Citrix falls on $16.5 bln deal to take it private</p><p>* Indexes end up: Dow 1.17%, S&amp;P 1.89%, Nasdaq 3.41%</p><p>Jan 31 (Reuters) - U.S. stocks closed higher on Monday, at the end of a volatile month for Wall Street where the tech-heavy Nasdaq narrowly avoided its worst ever start to the year and the S&amp;P 500 recorded its weakest January performance since 2009.</p><p>Valuations of growth and technology stocks have come under increasing scrutiny, as investors fretted about companies trading at lofty valuations at a time when the U.S. Federal Reserve is set to begin raising interest rates to combat inflation and withdraw its pandemic stimulus measures.</p><p>In early Monday trading, the Nasdaq was on course to surpass its worst opening-month performance on record, when it fell 9.89% in 2008. However, after its best <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a>-day gain since March 2021, it closed out January down 8.99%.</p><p>&#34;At the end of the day, interest rates are going to have to move higher, and companies with high multiples will have to trade lower,&#34; said Decio Nascimento, chief investment officer of Norbury Partners.</p><p>He added that, with costs such as wages rising, there will be increased investor focus on sectors that can better handle those inflationary pressures, with less latitude for companies which promise future growth but which currently generate negative cash flow.</p><p>All of the 11 major S&amp;P sectors advanced, led by a 3.8% rise in consumer discretionary stocks. The gain was led by Tesla Inc, which jumped 10.7% after Credit Suisse raised the electric car maker&#39;s stock rating to &#34;outperform&#34;.</p><p>For January though, consumer discretionary was the worst performing sector, slipping 9.7%. In all, only the energy sector ended the month in positive territory, aided by oil prices hitting their highest level since October 2014 on Friday.</p><p>Overall, the bellwether S&amp;P 500 had its worst overall month since the pandemic-led crash in March 2020.</p><p>The U.S. Federal Reserve last week signaled it intends to combat the four-decade high inflation by hiking key interest rates more aggressively than many market participants expected.</p><p>Fed funds futures traders are pricing in almost five rate increases by year-end, with some banks, such as the Bank of America now eyeing seven hikes this year.</p><p>&#34;What the Fed did last week was to widen the spectrum of possibility of what rates could be in a year or two, so when you do that, you are going to create volatility in equities&#34; said Norbury Partners&#39; Nascimento.</p><p>Geopolitical tensions have added to market uncertainty, with the U.S. and its allies threatening Russia with new economic sanctions if it attacks Ukraine.</p><p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 406.39 points, or 1.17%, to 35,131.86, the S&amp;P 500 gained 83.7 points, or 1.89%, to 4,515.55 and the Nasdaq Composite added 469.31 points, or 3.41%, to 14,239.88.</p><p>Boeing Co rose 5.1%. The U.S. planemaker secured a launch order from Qatar Airways for a new freighter version of its 777X passenger jet and a provisional order for 737 MAX jets.</p><p>Citrix Systems Inc&#39;s shares fell 3.4% after the software company said it had agreed to be taken private for $16.5 billion including debt by affiliates of Elliott Management and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VGL.AU\">Vista</a> Equity Partners.</p><p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 12.67 billion shares, compared with the 12.37 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.</p><p>The S&amp;P 500 posted eight new 52-week highs and no new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 30 new highs and 45 new lows.</p></body></html>","source":"yahoofinance","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>US STOCKS-Nasdaq Narrowly Misses Worst January Ever as Wall Street Gains</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\">\nUS STOCKS-Nasdaq Narrowly Misses Worst January Ever as Wall Street Gains\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-02-01 07:07 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-stocks-nasdaq-narrowly-misses-214318546.html><strong>Reuters</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>* Nasdaq posts worst January since 2008* S&P 500, Dow see worst month since March 2020* Citrix falls on $16.5 bln deal to take it private* Indexes end up: Dow 1.17%, S&P 1.89%, Nasdaq 3.41%Jan 31 (...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-stocks-nasdaq-narrowly-misses-214318546.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BA":"波音","CTXS":"思杰系统","COMP":"Compass, Inc."},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/us-stocks-nasdaq-narrowly-misses-214318546.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/5f26f4a48f9cb3e29be4d71d3ba8c038","article_id":"2208335465","content_text":"* Nasdaq posts worst January since 2008* S&P 500, Dow see worst month since March 2020* Citrix falls on $16.5 bln deal to take it private* Indexes end up: Dow 1.17%, S&P 1.89%, Nasdaq 3.41%Jan 31 (Reuters) - U.S. stocks closed higher on Monday, at the end of a volatile month for Wall Street where the tech-heavy Nasdaq narrowly avoided its worst ever start to the year and the S&P 500 recorded its weakest January performance since 2009.Valuations of growth and technology stocks have come under increasing scrutiny, as investors fretted about companies trading at lofty valuations at a time when the U.S. Federal Reserve is set to begin raising interest rates to combat inflation and withdraw its pandemic stimulus measures.In early Monday trading, the Nasdaq was on course to surpass its worst opening-month performance on record, when it fell 9.89% in 2008. However, after its best one-day gain since March 2021, it closed out January down 8.99%.\"At the end of the day, interest rates are going to have to move higher, and companies with high multiples will have to trade lower,\" said Decio Nascimento, chief investment officer of Norbury Partners.He added that, with costs such as wages rising, there will be increased investor focus on sectors that can better handle those inflationary pressures, with less latitude for companies which promise future growth but which currently generate negative cash flow.All of the 11 major S&P sectors advanced, led by a 3.8% rise in consumer discretionary stocks. The gain was led by Tesla Inc, which jumped 10.7% after Credit Suisse raised the electric car maker's stock rating to \"outperform\".For January though, consumer discretionary was the worst performing sector, slipping 9.7%. In all, only the energy sector ended the month in positive territory, aided by oil prices hitting their highest level since October 2014 on Friday.Overall, the bellwether S&P 500 had its worst overall month since the pandemic-led crash in March 2020.The U.S. Federal Reserve last week signaled it intends to combat the four-decade high inflation by hiking key interest rates more aggressively than many market participants expected.Fed funds futures traders are pricing in almost five rate increases by year-end, with some banks, such as the Bank of America now eyeing seven hikes this year.\"What the Fed did last week was to widen the spectrum of possibility of what rates could be in a year or two, so when you do that, you are going to create volatility in equities\" said Norbury Partners' Nascimento.Geopolitical tensions have added to market uncertainty, with the U.S. and its allies threatening Russia with new economic sanctions if it attacks Ukraine.The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 406.39 points, or 1.17%, to 35,131.86, the S&P 500 gained 83.7 points, or 1.89%, to 4,515.55 and the Nasdaq Composite added 469.31 points, or 3.41%, to 14,239.88.Boeing Co rose 5.1%. The U.S. planemaker secured a launch order from Qatar Airways for a new freighter version of its 777X passenger jet and a provisional order for 737 MAX jets.Citrix Systems Inc's shares fell 3.4% after the software company said it had agreed to be taken private for $16.5 billion including debt by affiliates of Elliott Management and Vista Equity Partners.Volume on U.S. exchanges was 12.67 billion shares, compared with the 12.37 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.The S&P 500 posted eight new 52-week highs and no new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 30 new highs and 45 new lows.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":80,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}