Unraveling7 personal page - To The Moon

Unraveling7

Unraveling7

No personal profile

1Follow

5Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-08-27

Read

Toplines Before US Market Open on Friday

2021-08-18

Interesting

3 Stocks I'm Never Selling

2021-08-15

Elon musk needs to get a grip on earth/reality… literally

Chasing Tesla: Here are the current electric vehicle plans of every major car maker

2021-08-29

Read

This Unloved Tech Stock Could Make You Rich One Day

2023-04-11

Frustration Easter egg game

2021-07-21

Goid

Apple’s Earnings Are Next Week. Analysts Are Expecting More.

2021-07-28

Jeff Bezos should treat his Amazon workers better

Jeff Bezos, Fresh From Space, Offers to Waive $2 Billion for NASA Moon Contract

2021-08-23

Read

Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means

2021-08-03

Interesting

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-05-28

Good

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-08-01

Interesting

Infrastructure Spending Is on Its Way. Here’s a Cheap Way to Play It

2021-07-28

Interesting

General Electric's Revival Hangs on Nascent, But Tricky, Aerospace Business

2021-07-24

Interesting

Here are Wall Street's favorite big tech stocks as the Nasdaq closes in on another milestone

2021-07-23

Challenging

Airline Earnings Show Signs of Life. But New Challenges Are Emerging.

2021-07-04

Probably

Can Biden really protect Americans from the next crippling cyber attack?

2021-05-28

Interesting

Here's how some traders are playing retail investing and fintech

2021-08-17

Like my post

Oat milk shortage about to end? Oatly CEO weighs in

2021-08-01

Hu Hu

Home prices could cool when the Fed tapers its bond-buying program. But a crisis? Unlikely.

2021-07-28

Interesting

China state-owned daily urges calm after market rout

2021-07-28

Interesting

Wall St snaps five-day up streak as caution rises before tech earnings, Fed

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3585225313870167","uuid":"3585225313870167","gmtCreate":1622133113558,"gmtModify":1622168532711,"name":"Unraveling7","pinyin":"unraveling7","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":5,"headSize":1,"tweetSize":46,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-2","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":"Senior Tiger","description":"Join the tiger community for 1000 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.02.24","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":9942853205,"gmtCreate":1681188680607,"gmtModify":1681188684733,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Frustration Easter egg game","listText":"Frustration Easter egg game","text":"Frustration Easter egg game","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":1,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9942853205","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":231,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[{"author":{"id":"3581908317501470","authorId":"3581908317501470","name":"Wilson29","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f2cd80d04a53f5e69b345c5f352290c1","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581908317501470","authorIdStr":"3581908317501470"},"content":"Seems cannot win the tiger share since only 2 redemption chance!","text":"Seems cannot win the tiger share since only 2 redemption chance!","html":"Seems cannot win the tiger share since only 2 redemption chance!"}],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9942962457,"gmtCreate":1681108908979,"gmtModify":1681108912711,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great game and amazing rewards&nbsp;","listText":"Great game and amazing rewards&nbsp;","text":"Great game and amazing rewards","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9942962457","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":120,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9942962250,"gmtCreate":1681108883171,"gmtModify":1681108886857,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","listText":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","text":"Great ariticle, would you like to share it?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9942962250","repostId":"9943960936","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":9943960936,"gmtCreate":1679046534725,"gmtModify":1680580626622,"author":{"id":"3527667667103859","authorId":"3527667667103859","name":"TigerEvents","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/c266ef25181ace18bec1262357bbe1a8","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3527667667103859","authorIdStr":"3527667667103859"},"themes":[],"title":"【Game】Easter Egg Hunting with Tiger, Win Disney Shares and USD 120 Voucher","htmlText":"🐰🌷 Hop into the Easter spirit and join our \"Tiger's Egg Hunting\" game! 🎉Stand to win free Disney stocks and a USD 120 cash voucher!🎁🌟Our interactive Easter game is open to Tigers, and it's so easy to play! Simply jump and catch the egg, and you could be a lucky winner. 🐇That's not all. You can also invite your friends to join in the fun to earn more points. Plus, you can challenge your friends for a race up the leaderboard. Let's fly to the moon together!Don't miss out on this egg-citing opportunity to win BIG! Join the game now and hop on your way to victory. 🥳🐣<a href=\"https://www.tigerbrokers.com.sg/activity/market/2023/easter/?adcode=20230316162207#/\" target=\"_blank\">Join our Easter campaign now</a>","listText":"🐰🌷 Hop into the Easter spirit and join our \"Tiger's Egg Hunting\" game! 🎉Stand to win free Disney stocks and a USD 120 cash voucher!🎁🌟Our interactive Easter game is open to Tigers, and it's so easy to play! Simply jump and catch the egg, and you could be a lucky winner. 🐇That's not all. You can also invite your friends to join in the fun to earn more points. Plus, you can challenge your friends for a race up the leaderboard. Let's fly to the moon together!Don't miss out on this egg-citing opportunity to win BIG! Join the game now and hop on your way to victory. 🥳🐣<a href=\"https://www.tigerbrokers.com.sg/activity/market/2023/easter/?adcode=20230316162207#/\" target=\"_blank\">Join our Easter campaign now</a>","text":"🐰🌷 Hop into the Easter spirit and join our \"Tiger's Egg Hunting\" game! 🎉Stand to win free Disney stocks and a USD 120 cash voucher!🎁🌟Our interactive Easter game is open to Tigers, and it's so easy to play! Simply jump and catch the egg, and you could be a lucky winner. 🐇That's not all. You can also invite your friends to join in the fun to earn more points. Plus, you can challenge your friends for a race up the leaderboard. Let's fly to the moon together!Don't miss out on this egg-citing opportunity to win BIG! Join the game now and hop on your way to victory. 🥳🐣Join our Easter campaign now","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/c90a7371a3bcd1e6c552d2aa23f72c33","width":"1200","height":"630"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":2,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9943960936","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":291,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9009008693,"gmtCreate":1640337768796,"gmtModify":1676533517210,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Mobility","listText":"Mobility","text":"Mobility","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9009008693","repostId":"691814591","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":691814591,"gmtCreate":1640164646947,"gmtModify":1676532416117,"author":{"id":"3527667602250954","authorId":"3527667602250954","name":"TigerTalks","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6d0224a45a40df8a325c03820c17dd2a","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3527667602250954","authorIdStr":"3527667602250954"},"themes":[],"title":"NikkoAM-StraitsTrading MSCI China Electric Vehicles and Future Mobility ETF","htmlText":"Exchange traded funds (ETFs) allow investors to easily gain portfolio exposure to specific sectors, industries, or countries due to its trading flexibility as well as its low operating expenses. China electric vehicles and future mobility (EVFM) are one of the hottest topics in the current investment world. How are investors able to gain exposure in this space without having the need to buy into all the individual counters? Tiger Brokers (Singapore) will be participating in the upcoming Initial Offering Period (IOP) of NikkoAM-StraitsTrading MSCI China Electric Vehicles and Future Mobility ETF. This ETF tracks the MSCI China All Shares IMI Future Mobility Top 50 Index. Clients will be able to apply via the Tiger Trade App during the subscription period from 3 January 2022, 10am to 12 Janua","listText":"Exchange traded funds (ETFs) allow investors to easily gain portfolio exposure to specific sectors, industries, or countries due to its trading flexibility as well as its low operating expenses. China electric vehicles and future mobility (EVFM) are one of the hottest topics in the current investment world. How are investors able to gain exposure in this space without having the need to buy into all the individual counters? Tiger Brokers (Singapore) will be participating in the upcoming Initial Offering Period (IOP) of NikkoAM-StraitsTrading MSCI China Electric Vehicles and Future Mobility ETF. This ETF tracks the MSCI China All Shares IMI Future Mobility Top 50 Index. Clients will be able to apply via the Tiger Trade App during the subscription period from 3 January 2022, 10am to 12 Janua","text":"Exchange traded funds (ETFs) allow investors to easily gain portfolio exposure to specific sectors, industries, or countries due to its trading flexibility as well as its low operating expenses. China electric vehicles and future mobility (EVFM) are one of the hottest topics in the current investment world. How are investors able to gain exposure in this space without having the need to buy into all the individual counters? Tiger Brokers (Singapore) will be participating in the upcoming Initial Offering Period (IOP) of NikkoAM-StraitsTrading MSCI China Electric Vehicles and Future Mobility ETF. This ETF tracks the MSCI China All Shares IMI Future Mobility Top 50 Index. Clients will be able to apply via the Tiger Trade App during the subscription period from 3 January 2022, 10am to 12 Janua","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/adb11eb3d3eaa5394b23a3aacba304ab","width":"1280","height":"800"}],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":1,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/691814591","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":6,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":518,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9000071250,"gmtCreate":1639661637384,"gmtModify":1676533491999,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Dump","listText":"Dump","text":"Dump","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9000071250","repostId":"602722910","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":602722910,"gmtCreate":1639075863423,"gmtModify":1676532230515,"author":{"id":"3567892239745204","authorId":"3567892239745204","name":"oldwen","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8efe576d361dec1e1adef581ef6cb38","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567892239745204","authorIdStr":"3567892239745204"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PLTR\">$Palantir Technologies Inc.(PLTR)$</a>Palantir is down in the dumps after the tech selloff. But i do feel that its potential is great and will continue to become greater as the world becomes more data focused. Continue to buy the dip in this down turnand hodl for the next 10 years","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PLTR\">$Palantir Technologies Inc.(PLTR)$</a>Palantir is down in the dumps after the tech selloff. But i do feel that its potential is great and will continue to become greater as the world becomes more data focused. Continue to buy the dip in this down turnand hodl for the next 10 years","text":"$Palantir Technologies Inc.(PLTR)$Palantir is down in the dumps after the tech selloff. But i do feel that its potential is great and will continue to become greater as the world becomes more data focused. Continue to buy the dip in this down turnand hodl for the next 10 years","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bdb54b8855d7f3060f164fa44594895f","width":"1242","height":"1968"}],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/602722910","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":695,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":813482845,"gmtCreate":1630230514587,"gmtModify":1676530247979,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read&nbsp;","listText":"Read&nbsp;","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/813482845","repostId":"1129129956","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129129956","pubTimestamp":1630201285,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129129956?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-29 09:41","market":"us","language":"en","title":"This Unloved Tech Stock Could Make You Rich One Day","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129129956","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.The company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.The market is bearish on virtually all SPACs, making Opendoor a bargain that could eventually bring huge returns.Real estate iBuying company Opendoor Technologieshas been executing at a high level in the three quarters since coming public via a special purpose acquisition company  merger. In a race to disrupt residential ","content":"<p>Key Points</p>\n<ul>\n <li>The iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.</li>\n <li>The company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.</li>\n <li>The market is bearish on virtually all SPACs, making Opendoor a bargain that could eventually bring huge returns.</li>\n</ul>\n<p></p>\n<p>Real estate iBuying company&nbsp;<b>Opendoor Technologies</b>(NASDAQ:OPEN)has been executing at a high level in the three quarters since coming public via a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) merger. In a race to disrupt residential real estate, one of the largest markets in the world, Opendoor's long-term potential could bring big returns for patient investors.</p>\n<p>Despite the upside, the market hasn't yet appreciated Opendoor's accomplishments; the stock is down more than 50% from its highs. There are three important clues that Opendoor could be a compelling investment idea for bold investors.</p>\n<h3>1. Opendoor is winning the iBuying battle</h3>\n<p>The traditional home-buying process in the United States is slow and handled by multiple parties, including agents, lawyers, inspectors, and bankers. This creates a lot of back and forth paperwork and drags the process out to more than 30 days, on average.</p>\n<p>Opendoor pioneered the concept of \"iBuying,\" where the buying and selling of a house are digitized, and a company like Opendoor works directly with sellers to provide them with a cash offer and a digital closing process. The company then resells the house on the market. The iBuying process cuts out agents and some of the fees associated with traditional closings, such as agent commissions. Opendoor then resells the house on the market and charges a service fee of up to 5% on the transaction.</p>\n<p>After seeing Opendoor steadily grow with its iBuying concept, competitors have also begun to offer iBuying services, including&nbsp;<b>Zillow Group</b>&nbsp;and Offerpad. Because of how capital intensive the business is (a lot of money is needed to buy and sell thousands of houses) and how price competitive the housing market is, these companies are racing to get as big as possible. As the companies buy and sell more homes, they have the ability to become more profitable by leveraging outsourced contractors to save money, and its pricing algorithm improves as it sees more transactions.</p>\n<p>According to iBuyerStats, a website dedicated to tracking the competitors found in iBuying, Opendoor has consistently had the most housing inventory available for sale. It currently has roughly 3,300 houses for sale, 53% more than Zillow and more than four times as many as Offerpad.</p>\n<h3>2. Revenue growth is ahead of schedule</h3>\n<p>When companies go public viaSPACmerger, they lay out a public presentation of their business, often including long-term growth projections. Opendoor laid out its pre-merger investor presentation about a year ago, in September 2020.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to the company's recent 2021 Q2 earnings call. CEO and founder Eric Wu said on the earnings call, \"... based on our current progress, our second half revenue run rate is on track to exceed our 2023 target, a full two years ahead of plan.\"</p>\n<p>In other words, if Opendoor were to operate for 12 months at the level the business currently is, it would surpass the $9.8 billion in revenue it projected for 2023. This is an underlooked point because if Opendoor is already two years ahead of its original growth curve, where will it be by 2023? Sure, a dip in the housing market or other events could disrupt the company's speed of growth, but Opendoor is showing the world that the business is operating at a high level.</p>\n<h3>3. SPACs are out of favor with the market... opportunity?</h3>\n<p>Investors have overlooked this strong performance, focusing instead on the fact that Opendoor joined the public market via SPAC merger. It has hardly mattered what operating results or earnings have looked like for former SPACs; the stock market has been selling off virtually all SPAC-based stocks for several months now.</p>\n<p>Investors have been spooked by a handful of \"bad apple\" companies turning up fraudulent, and other companies have wildly missed on the projections they made before going public. These instances have burned those involved, and investors have taken a much more cautious attitude toward SPACs as a whole.</p>\n<p>But if companies like Opendoor keep blowing away estimates, the market is likely to come around eventually. When it does, the stock price could move aggressively. If we take Eric Wu's comments about revenue and assume that Opendoor does sales of $10 billion in 2022 (in other words, Opendoor stops growing and maintains its current pace over the following year), the stock currently trades at aprice-to-sales(P/S) ratio of just 1.0. That's a bargain-bin valuation.</p>\n<p>Competitor Zillow Group trades at a P/S ratio of more than 3, reflecting Opendoor's discount as a former SPAC.</p>\n<h3>Here's the bottom line</h3>\n<p>Real estate is a huge market, and it's a complicated industry because of the clash between traditional agents and the \"new kids\" on the block trying to bring technology into homebuying. It's too early to say that Opendoor will become the \"<b>Amazon</b>\" of home buying, but what seems certain is that the company is&nbsp;poised to be a big player&nbsp;in real estate's future if it keeps performing like this.</p>\n<p></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>This Unloved Tech Stock Could Make You Rich One Day</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\">\nThis Unloved Tech Stock Could Make You Rich One Day\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-29 09:41 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/28/this-unloved-tech-stock-may-make-you-rich-one-day/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Key Points\n\nThe iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.\nThe company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.\nThe ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/28/this-unloved-tech-stock-may-make-you-rich-one-day/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"OPEN":"Opendoor Technologies Inc"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/28/this-unloved-tech-stock-may-make-you-rich-one-day/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129129956","content_text":"Key Points\n\nThe iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.\nThe company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.\nThe market is bearish on virtually all SPACs, making Opendoor a bargain that could eventually bring huge returns.\n\n\nReal estate iBuying company Opendoor Technologies(NASDAQ:OPEN)has been executing at a high level in the three quarters since coming public via a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) merger. In a race to disrupt residential real estate, one of the largest markets in the world, Opendoor's long-term potential could bring big returns for patient investors.\nDespite the upside, the market hasn't yet appreciated Opendoor's accomplishments; the stock is down more than 50% from its highs. There are three important clues that Opendoor could be a compelling investment idea for bold investors.\n1. Opendoor is winning the iBuying battle\nThe traditional home-buying process in the United States is slow and handled by multiple parties, including agents, lawyers, inspectors, and bankers. This creates a lot of back and forth paperwork and drags the process out to more than 30 days, on average.\nOpendoor pioneered the concept of \"iBuying,\" where the buying and selling of a house are digitized, and a company like Opendoor works directly with sellers to provide them with a cash offer and a digital closing process. The company then resells the house on the market. The iBuying process cuts out agents and some of the fees associated with traditional closings, such as agent commissions. Opendoor then resells the house on the market and charges a service fee of up to 5% on the transaction.\nAfter seeing Opendoor steadily grow with its iBuying concept, competitors have also begun to offer iBuying services, including Zillow Group and Offerpad. Because of how capital intensive the business is (a lot of money is needed to buy and sell thousands of houses) and how price competitive the housing market is, these companies are racing to get as big as possible. As the companies buy and sell more homes, they have the ability to become more profitable by leveraging outsourced contractors to save money, and its pricing algorithm improves as it sees more transactions.\nAccording to iBuyerStats, a website dedicated to tracking the competitors found in iBuying, Opendoor has consistently had the most housing inventory available for sale. It currently has roughly 3,300 houses for sale, 53% more than Zillow and more than four times as many as Offerpad.\n2. Revenue growth is ahead of schedule\nWhen companies go public viaSPACmerger, they lay out a public presentation of their business, often including long-term growth projections. Opendoor laid out its pre-merger investor presentation about a year ago, in September 2020.\nFast forward to the company's recent 2021 Q2 earnings call. CEO and founder Eric Wu said on the earnings call, \"... based on our current progress, our second half revenue run rate is on track to exceed our 2023 target, a full two years ahead of plan.\"\nIn other words, if Opendoor were to operate for 12 months at the level the business currently is, it would surpass the $9.8 billion in revenue it projected for 2023. This is an underlooked point because if Opendoor is already two years ahead of its original growth curve, where will it be by 2023? Sure, a dip in the housing market or other events could disrupt the company's speed of growth, but Opendoor is showing the world that the business is operating at a high level.\n3. SPACs are out of favor with the market... opportunity?\nInvestors have overlooked this strong performance, focusing instead on the fact that Opendoor joined the public market via SPAC merger. It has hardly mattered what operating results or earnings have looked like for former SPACs; the stock market has been selling off virtually all SPAC-based stocks for several months now.\nInvestors have been spooked by a handful of \"bad apple\" companies turning up fraudulent, and other companies have wildly missed on the projections they made before going public. These instances have burned those involved, and investors have taken a much more cautious attitude toward SPACs as a whole.\nBut if companies like Opendoor keep blowing away estimates, the market is likely to come around eventually. When it does, the stock price could move aggressively. If we take Eric Wu's comments about revenue and assume that Opendoor does sales of $10 billion in 2022 (in other words, Opendoor stops growing and maintains its current pace over the following year), the stock currently trades at aprice-to-sales(P/S) ratio of just 1.0. That's a bargain-bin valuation.\nCompetitor Zillow Group trades at a P/S ratio of more than 3, reflecting Opendoor's discount as a former SPAC.\nHere's the bottom line\nReal estate is a huge market, and it's a complicated industry because of the clash between traditional agents and the \"new kids\" on the block trying to bring technology into homebuying. It's too early to say that Opendoor will become the \"Amazon\" of home buying, but what seems certain is that the company is poised to be a big player in real estate's future if it keeps performing like this.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":699,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":819621264,"gmtCreate":1630067418458,"gmtModify":1676530215015,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read","listText":"Read","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":10,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/819621264","repostId":"1164159102","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1164159102","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":1630066005,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1164159102?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-27 20:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Toplines Before US Market Open on Friday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1164159102","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's spee","content":"<p>U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's speech that could offer clues on when the central bank will start winding down its stimulus.</p>\n<p>At 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow e-minis were up 67 points, or 0.19%, S&amp;P 500 e-minis were up 10.75 points, or 0.24%, and Nasdaq 100 e-minis were up 45.25 points, or 0.30%.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5b1720df6d9ea9018f57c24b6d490c85\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"409\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Mega-cap technology stocks Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Amazon.com, Google-owner Alphabet Inc, and Tesla Inc&nbsp;edged higher before the opening bell.</p>\n<p>Oil majors Exxon Mobil, Chevron Corp&nbsp;and Schlumberger NV&nbsp;rose between 0.6% and 1.4%, tracking crude prices, while big banks, including JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co, were up about 0.3%.</p>\n<p>U.S.&nbsp;consumer spending grew 0.3% in July and income rose 1.1%. The lower spending growth suggests the recovery has lost momentum amid Delta variant uncertainty;U.S. trade deficit in goods drop 6.2% in July to $86.4 billion.</p>\n<p>Powell, who is due to speak via webcast at 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) at the annual Jackson Hole economic conference, may acknowledge the economy's progress toward full employment, and likely provide new hints about slowing the $120 billion in monthly asset purchases, with an announcement expected before the end of 2021, possibly as early as next month.</p>\n<p><b>Stocks making the biggest moves premarket:</b></p>\n<p><b>Big Lots(BIG)</b> – The discount retailer’s shares tumbled 10.3% in premarket trading after it missed top and bottom-line estimates for its latest quarter. Big Lots earned $1.09 per share, 3 cents shy of analyst forecasts, and its comparable store sales slid a greater-than-expected 13.2%. The company also said it was hit by supply chain issues and inflation pressures.</p>\n<p><b>Hibbett Sports(HIBB) </b>– The athletic apparel retailer jumped 3.1% in the premarket after reporting better-than-expected sales and profit for its latest quarter, and raising its full-year forecast. Hibbett earned $2.86 per share, almost double the $1.44 consensus estimate.</p>\n<p><b>Peloton(PTON)</b> – Peloton slid 7.5% in the premarket, after reporting a wider-than-expected loss. The fitness equipment maker lost $1.05 per share for its latest quarter, compared with estimates of a 45-cent loss. Paid digital subscriptions fell short of estimates as well. Additionally, Peloton said in an SEC filing that it has been subpoenaed by the government for documents on injuries related to its products.</p>\n<p><b>Gap(GPS)</b> – Gap reported adjusted quarterly earnings of 70 cents per share, beating the 46 cents consensus estimate, and the apparel retailer’s revenue was also above Wall Street forecasts. Gap also raised its full-year guidance, largely on the strength of its Old Navy and Athleta brands. The stock rallied 7.4% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Apple(AAPL)</b> – Apple struck a deal with smaller developers that extends a commission cut for three years and allows them to alert consumers about alternate payment systems to Apple’s app store.</p>\n<p><b>HP Inc.(HPQ)</b> – HP Inc. beat estimates by 16 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.00 per share, though revenue fell below analyst forecasts. The personal computer and printer maker saw the worldwide chip shortage hurt its ability to meet demand, with the company saying it is selling everything it can produce. HP lost 5.3% in premarket action.</p>\n<p><b>Dell Technologies(DELL) </b>– Dell reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $2.24 per share, 21 cents above estimates, with revenue also topping analyst projections. Dell benefited from the ongoing boom in demand for personal computers and said it is dealing successfully with supply chain challenges. However, the stock fell 1.9% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Workday(WDAY)</b> – Workday earned an adjusted $1.23 per share for its latest quarter, with the provider of cloud-based human resources and financial software also reporting better-than-expected revenue. Subscription revenue jumped more than 23% from a year earlier. Workday shares surged 7.8% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Marvell Technology(MRVL)</b> – Marvell came in 3 cents above estimates with an adjusted quarterly profit of 34 cents per share. However, the chip maker’s revenue merely matched Street forecasts, and its cost of goods sold jumped from a year earlier. Shares slid 4.7% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Ollie’s Bargain Outlet(OLLI)</b> – Ollie’s plunged 14.4% in premarket trading after it fell 3 cents short of Wall Street forecasts with adjusted quarterly earnings of 52 cents per share. The discount retailer’s revenue fell short as well, with comparable store sales falling 28% from a year earlier.</p>\n<p><b>Johnson &amp; Johnson(JNJ)</b> – J&amp;J will be allowed to separate its talc-related liabilities from the rest of its business after a judge declined to prohibit the company from doing so. Personal injury lawyers had sought to prevent the move, fearing that it could put thousands of claims into bankruptcy.</p>\n<p><b>VMWare(VMW)</b> – VMWare reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.75 per share, beating the $1.64 consensus estimate, while the enterprise software company’s revenue was slightly above Wall Street forecasts. However, cloud business revenue did fall short of some analyst forecasts, and shares slid 6.9% in the premarket.</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>Toplines Before US Market Open on Friday</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 Friday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-08-27 20:06</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's speech that could offer clues on when the central bank will start winding down its stimulus.</p>\n<p>At 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow e-minis were up 67 points, or 0.19%, S&amp;P 500 e-minis were up 10.75 points, or 0.24%, and Nasdaq 100 e-minis were up 45.25 points, or 0.30%.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5b1720df6d9ea9018f57c24b6d490c85\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"409\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Mega-cap technology stocks Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Amazon.com, Google-owner Alphabet Inc, and Tesla Inc&nbsp;edged higher before the opening bell.</p>\n<p>Oil majors Exxon Mobil, Chevron Corp&nbsp;and Schlumberger NV&nbsp;rose between 0.6% and 1.4%, tracking crude prices, while big banks, including JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co, were up about 0.3%.</p>\n<p>U.S.&nbsp;consumer spending grew 0.3% in July and income rose 1.1%. The lower spending growth suggests the recovery has lost momentum amid Delta variant uncertainty;U.S. trade deficit in goods drop 6.2% in July to $86.4 billion.</p>\n<p>Powell, who is due to speak via webcast at 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) at the annual Jackson Hole economic conference, may acknowledge the economy's progress toward full employment, and likely provide new hints about slowing the $120 billion in monthly asset purchases, with an announcement expected before the end of 2021, possibly as early as next month.</p>\n<p><b>Stocks making the biggest moves premarket:</b></p>\n<p><b>Big Lots(BIG)</b> – The discount retailer’s shares tumbled 10.3% in premarket trading after it missed top and bottom-line estimates for its latest quarter. Big Lots earned $1.09 per share, 3 cents shy of analyst forecasts, and its comparable store sales slid a greater-than-expected 13.2%. The company also said it was hit by supply chain issues and inflation pressures.</p>\n<p><b>Hibbett Sports(HIBB) </b>– The athletic apparel retailer jumped 3.1% in the premarket after reporting better-than-expected sales and profit for its latest quarter, and raising its full-year forecast. Hibbett earned $2.86 per share, almost double the $1.44 consensus estimate.</p>\n<p><b>Peloton(PTON)</b> – Peloton slid 7.5% in the premarket, after reporting a wider-than-expected loss. The fitness equipment maker lost $1.05 per share for its latest quarter, compared with estimates of a 45-cent loss. Paid digital subscriptions fell short of estimates as well. Additionally, Peloton said in an SEC filing that it has been subpoenaed by the government for documents on injuries related to its products.</p>\n<p><b>Gap(GPS)</b> – Gap reported adjusted quarterly earnings of 70 cents per share, beating the 46 cents consensus estimate, and the apparel retailer’s revenue was also above Wall Street forecasts. Gap also raised its full-year guidance, largely on the strength of its Old Navy and Athleta brands. The stock rallied 7.4% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Apple(AAPL)</b> – Apple struck a deal with smaller developers that extends a commission cut for three years and allows them to alert consumers about alternate payment systems to Apple’s app store.</p>\n<p><b>HP Inc.(HPQ)</b> – HP Inc. beat estimates by 16 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.00 per share, though revenue fell below analyst forecasts. The personal computer and printer maker saw the worldwide chip shortage hurt its ability to meet demand, with the company saying it is selling everything it can produce. HP lost 5.3% in premarket action.</p>\n<p><b>Dell Technologies(DELL) </b>– Dell reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $2.24 per share, 21 cents above estimates, with revenue also topping analyst projections. Dell benefited from the ongoing boom in demand for personal computers and said it is dealing successfully with supply chain challenges. However, the stock fell 1.9% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Workday(WDAY)</b> – Workday earned an adjusted $1.23 per share for its latest quarter, with the provider of cloud-based human resources and financial software also reporting better-than-expected revenue. Subscription revenue jumped more than 23% from a year earlier. Workday shares surged 7.8% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Marvell Technology(MRVL)</b> – Marvell came in 3 cents above estimates with an adjusted quarterly profit of 34 cents per share. However, the chip maker’s revenue merely matched Street forecasts, and its cost of goods sold jumped from a year earlier. Shares slid 4.7% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Ollie’s Bargain Outlet(OLLI)</b> – Ollie’s plunged 14.4% in premarket trading after it fell 3 cents short of Wall Street forecasts with adjusted quarterly earnings of 52 cents per share. The discount retailer’s revenue fell short as well, with comparable store sales falling 28% from a year earlier.</p>\n<p><b>Johnson &amp; Johnson(JNJ)</b> – J&amp;J will be allowed to separate its talc-related liabilities from the rest of its business after a judge declined to prohibit the company from doing so. Personal injury lawyers had sought to prevent the move, fearing that it could put thousands of claims into bankruptcy.</p>\n<p><b>VMWare(VMW)</b> – VMWare reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.75 per share, beating the $1.64 consensus estimate, while the enterprise software company’s revenue was slightly above Wall Street forecasts. However, cloud business revenue did fall short of some analyst forecasts, and shares slid 6.9% in the premarket.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"JNJ":"强生","SLB":"斯伦贝谢","HPQ":"惠普","BIG":"必乐透","XOM":"埃克森美孚","AAPL":"苹果",".DJI":"道琼斯","OLLI":"Ollie's Bargain Outlet Holdings, Inc.",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","MRVL":"迈威尔科技","HIBB":"希贝特体育",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","PTON":"Peloton Interactive, Inc.","DELL":"戴尔","CVX":"雪佛龙","VMW":"威睿","WDAY":"Workday"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1164159102","content_text":"U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's speech that could offer clues on when the central bank will start winding down its stimulus.\nAt 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow e-minis were up 67 points, or 0.19%, S&P 500 e-minis were up 10.75 points, or 0.24%, and Nasdaq 100 e-minis were up 45.25 points, or 0.30%.\n\nMega-cap technology stocks Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Amazon.com, Google-owner Alphabet Inc, and Tesla Inc edged higher before the opening bell.\nOil majors Exxon Mobil, Chevron Corp and Schlumberger NV rose between 0.6% and 1.4%, tracking crude prices, while big banks, including JPMorgan Chase & Co, were up about 0.3%.\nU.S. consumer spending grew 0.3% in July and income rose 1.1%. The lower spending growth suggests the recovery has lost momentum amid Delta variant uncertainty;U.S. trade deficit in goods drop 6.2% in July to $86.4 billion.\nPowell, who is due to speak via webcast at 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) at the annual Jackson Hole economic conference, may acknowledge the economy's progress toward full employment, and likely provide new hints about slowing the $120 billion in monthly asset purchases, with an announcement expected before the end of 2021, possibly as early as next month.\nStocks making the biggest moves premarket:\nBig Lots(BIG) – The discount retailer’s shares tumbled 10.3% in premarket trading after it missed top and bottom-line estimates for its latest quarter. Big Lots earned $1.09 per share, 3 cents shy of analyst forecasts, and its comparable store sales slid a greater-than-expected 13.2%. The company also said it was hit by supply chain issues and inflation pressures.\nHibbett Sports(HIBB) – The athletic apparel retailer jumped 3.1% in the premarket after reporting better-than-expected sales and profit for its latest quarter, and raising its full-year forecast. Hibbett earned $2.86 per share, almost double the $1.44 consensus estimate.\nPeloton(PTON) – Peloton slid 7.5% in the premarket, after reporting a wider-than-expected loss. The fitness equipment maker lost $1.05 per share for its latest quarter, compared with estimates of a 45-cent loss. Paid digital subscriptions fell short of estimates as well. Additionally, Peloton said in an SEC filing that it has been subpoenaed by the government for documents on injuries related to its products.\nGap(GPS) – Gap reported adjusted quarterly earnings of 70 cents per share, beating the 46 cents consensus estimate, and the apparel retailer’s revenue was also above Wall Street forecasts. Gap also raised its full-year guidance, largely on the strength of its Old Navy and Athleta brands. The stock rallied 7.4% in premarket trading.\nApple(AAPL) – Apple struck a deal with smaller developers that extends a commission cut for three years and allows them to alert consumers about alternate payment systems to Apple’s app store.\nHP Inc.(HPQ) – HP Inc. beat estimates by 16 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.00 per share, though revenue fell below analyst forecasts. The personal computer and printer maker saw the worldwide chip shortage hurt its ability to meet demand, with the company saying it is selling everything it can produce. HP lost 5.3% in premarket action.\nDell Technologies(DELL) – Dell reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $2.24 per share, 21 cents above estimates, with revenue also topping analyst projections. Dell benefited from the ongoing boom in demand for personal computers and said it is dealing successfully with supply chain challenges. However, the stock fell 1.9% in the premarket.\nWorkday(WDAY) – Workday earned an adjusted $1.23 per share for its latest quarter, with the provider of cloud-based human resources and financial software also reporting better-than-expected revenue. Subscription revenue jumped more than 23% from a year earlier. Workday shares surged 7.8% in premarket trading.\nMarvell Technology(MRVL) – Marvell came in 3 cents above estimates with an adjusted quarterly profit of 34 cents per share. However, the chip maker’s revenue merely matched Street forecasts, and its cost of goods sold jumped from a year earlier. Shares slid 4.7% in the premarket.\nOllie’s Bargain Outlet(OLLI) – Ollie’s plunged 14.4% in premarket trading after it fell 3 cents short of Wall Street forecasts with adjusted quarterly earnings of 52 cents per share. The discount retailer’s revenue fell short as well, with comparable store sales falling 28% from a year earlier.\nJohnson & Johnson(JNJ) – J&J will be allowed to separate its talc-related liabilities from the rest of its business after a judge declined to prohibit the company from doing so. Personal injury lawyers had sought to prevent the move, fearing that it could put thousands of claims into bankruptcy.\nVMWare(VMW) – VMWare reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.75 per share, beating the $1.64 consensus estimate, while the enterprise software company’s revenue was slightly above Wall Street forecasts. However, cloud business revenue did fall short of some analyst forecasts, and shares slid 6.9% in the premarket.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":526,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835365531,"gmtCreate":1629688118723,"gmtModify":1676530100082,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read","listText":"Read","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835365531","repostId":"836041683","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":836041683,"gmtCreate":1629441367042,"gmtModify":1676530042343,"author":{"id":"3563421686188310","authorId":"3563421686188310","name":"Hopehope赋予希望","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/46495f44529967f5d3b4d03a47167f5b","crmLevel":9,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3563421686188310","authorIdStr":"3563421686188310"},"themes":[],"title":"20 August 2021: Been adding in small volume even if Chinese market falls another 5%","htmlText":"<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/HSI\">$恆生指數(HSI)$</a>&nbsp;Hang Seng spot started the day with 200 points below yesterday close and struggled around 25,000 points this morning before plunging and breaking past the next support of 24,700 points strongly and hit around 24,580 before retracing to around 24,800. It would be important to watch if Hang Seng spot can regain and close above 25,000 points now. Readers should recall that I have cautioned on this Monday and in fact over the last 1 to 2 weeks that small bites were to be taken by me rather than to be aggressively acquiring shares at level around 25,700 to 26,000 points for Hang Seng index. Nevertheless, I saw readers commenting on my articles and said I was wrong and that long term investment in good companies should be a","listText":"<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/HSI\">$恆生指數(HSI)$</a>&nbsp;Hang Seng spot started the day with 200 points below yesterday close and struggled around 25,000 points this morning before plunging and breaking past the next support of 24,700 points strongly and hit around 24,580 before retracing to around 24,800. It would be important to watch if Hang Seng spot can regain and close above 25,000 points now. Readers should recall that I have cautioned on this Monday and in fact over the last 1 to 2 weeks that small bites were to be taken by me rather than to be aggressively acquiring shares at level around 25,700 to 26,000 points for Hang Seng index. Nevertheless, I saw readers commenting on my articles and said I was wrong and that long term investment in good companies should be a","text":"$恆生指數(HSI)$ Hang Seng spot started the day with 200 points below yesterday close and struggled around 25,000 points this morning before plunging and breaking past the next support of 24,700 points strongly and hit around 24,580 before retracing to around 24,800. It would be important to watch if Hang Seng spot can regain and close above 25,000 points now. Readers should recall that I have cautioned on this Monday and in fact over the last 1 to 2 weeks that small bites were to be taken by me rather than to be aggressively acquiring shares at level around 25,700 to 26,000 points for Hang Seng index. Nevertheless, I saw readers commenting on my articles and said I was wrong and that long term investment in good companies should be a","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1418e9d82b6caafac99d0ed6fab9d53"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0789ccc5f29bad4e304ee3baf1905eb4"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c63c0868de18d20ae27b4930ceaf047"}],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":2,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/836041683","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":14,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":578,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835366295,"gmtCreate":1629688010417,"gmtModify":1676530100042,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read","listText":"Read","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835366295","repostId":"836041683","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":836041683,"gmtCreate":1629441367042,"gmtModify":1676530042343,"author":{"id":"3563421686188310","authorId":"3563421686188310","name":"Hopehope赋予希望","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/46495f44529967f5d3b4d03a47167f5b","crmLevel":9,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3563421686188310","authorIdStr":"3563421686188310"},"themes":[],"title":"20 August 2021: Been adding in small volume even if Chinese market falls another 5%","htmlText":"<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/HSI\">$恆生指數(HSI)$</a>&nbsp;Hang Seng spot started the day with 200 points below yesterday close and struggled around 25,000 points this morning before plunging and breaking past the next support of 24,700 points strongly and hit around 24,580 before retracing to around 24,800. It would be important to watch if Hang Seng spot can regain and close above 25,000 points now. Readers should recall that I have cautioned on this Monday and in fact over the last 1 to 2 weeks that small bites were to be taken by me rather than to be aggressively acquiring shares at level around 25,700 to 26,000 points for Hang Seng index. Nevertheless, I saw readers commenting on my articles and said I was wrong and that long term investment in good companies should be a","listText":"<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/HSI\">$恆生指數(HSI)$</a>&nbsp;Hang Seng spot started the day with 200 points below yesterday close and struggled around 25,000 points this morning before plunging and breaking past the next support of 24,700 points strongly and hit around 24,580 before retracing to around 24,800. It would be important to watch if Hang Seng spot can regain and close above 25,000 points now. Readers should recall that I have cautioned on this Monday and in fact over the last 1 to 2 weeks that small bites were to be taken by me rather than to be aggressively acquiring shares at level around 25,700 to 26,000 points for Hang Seng index. Nevertheless, I saw readers commenting on my articles and said I was wrong and that long term investment in good companies should be a","text":"$恆生指數(HSI)$ Hang Seng spot started the day with 200 points below yesterday close and struggled around 25,000 points this morning before plunging and breaking past the next support of 24,700 points strongly and hit around 24,580 before retracing to around 24,800. It would be important to watch if Hang Seng spot can regain and close above 25,000 points now. Readers should recall that I have cautioned on this Monday and in fact over the last 1 to 2 weeks that small bites were to be taken by me rather than to be aggressively acquiring shares at level around 25,700 to 26,000 points for Hang Seng index. Nevertheless, I saw readers commenting on my articles and said I was wrong and that long term investment in good companies should be a","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1418e9d82b6caafac99d0ed6fab9d53"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0789ccc5f29bad4e304ee3baf1905eb4"},{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c63c0868de18d20ae27b4930ceaf047"}],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":2,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/836041683","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":14,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":373,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835368406,"gmtCreate":1629687989005,"gmtModify":1676530100034,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read","listText":"Read","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835368406","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":121,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835361424,"gmtCreate":1629687959568,"gmtModify":1676530099992,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","listText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","text":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835361424","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":143,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835361851,"gmtCreate":1629687947473,"gmtModify":1676530099993,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","listText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","text":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835361851","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":49,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835363522,"gmtCreate":1629687917966,"gmtModify":1676530099968,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","listText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","text":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835363522","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":161,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835369646,"gmtCreate":1629687878585,"gmtModify":1676530099846,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","listText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","text":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835369646","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":143,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835360706,"gmtCreate":1629687857105,"gmtModify":1676530099830,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","listText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","text":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835360706","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":214,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835360898,"gmtCreate":1629687844214,"gmtModify":1676530099839,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","listText":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","text":"Just pay your employees better Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835360898","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":71,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":833744366,"gmtCreate":1629268192255,"gmtModify":1676529985060,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/833744366","repostId":"1114320591","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1114320591","pubTimestamp":1629255336,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1114320591?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-18 10:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"3 Stocks I'm Never Selling","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1114320591","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The best investors in the world swear by holding high-quality companies for decades on end. These stocks fit that bill.","content":"<p><b>Key Points</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Time plus patience adds up to wealth-building results in the stock market.</li>\n <li>These three business titans are leaders in their fields.</li>\n <li>They are also built to last for a very long time.</li>\n</ul>\n<p></p>\n<p>I'm about to show you my favorite stocks. Sometimes I invest with an eye to strong returns over the next few years. These are the ones that I expect to keep beating the market for the years and decades to come. It will take a lot to pry them out of my portfolio.</p>\n<p>Let me show you why I intend to hold&nbsp;<b>Netflix</b>(NASDAQ:NFLX),<b>Alphabet</b>(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL), and&nbsp;<b>Walt Disney</b>(NYSE:DIS)for the long haul. These stocks may not be slam-dunk forever holdings for every investor, but you should absolutely take a close look at these top-notch investments.</p>\n<p><b>1. Netflix</b></p>\n<p>First, you knew Netflix as the sender of red mail-order DVD rentals. The company introduced digital video streams as a free add-on for DVD customers in&nbsp;2007, then separated the streaming business into a separate subscription service in 2011. The Qwikster event was a big marketing mess and could certainly have been handled better, but it was absolutely the right idea in the long run.</p>\n<p>Going all-in on the all-digital streaming service allowed Netflix to roll out its paid subscription plans on a global scale, supplemented by an ambitious focus on original content. The subscriber count has skyrocketed from 26 million in the summer of 2011 to 209 million today. That fantastic trend has worked wonders for the company's top and bottom lines:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/646be4c2a73d68810e962c19efe82476\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"449\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>NFLX REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.</span></p>\n<p>Netflix saw an opportunity to lead the charge into a brand-new market, with low infrastructure costs compared to the DVD-mailing business and buckets of worldwide growth potential. So the DVD business that had come to dominate the video rental sector in America was unceremoniously tossed aside in favor of better ideas.</p>\n<p>These days, Netflix is an award-winning content producer with an unmatched distribution network in every market that matters (except forChina, where the company must operate through local partnerships). The stock has delivered a 2,240% return since the Qwikster event, which works out to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 35.8%.</p>\n<p><b>2. Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>Alphabet is the parent company of online services giant Google. What started as a student project at Stanford quickly evolved into the world's leading online search tool. Paired with the moneymaking muscle of Google's digital advertising tools, the company generated strong cash flows early on. The cash profits were reinvested in more business ideas. Google eventually built or bought services with matchless market shares in important sectors such as web browsers, online video, email, and smartphone software.</p>\n<p>By 2015, co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page had concluded that Google's meat-and-potatoes search and advertising businesses eventually had to fade away, overtaken by mobile alternatives and other innovations. So the company made some big changes. Google hired CFO Ruth Porat, a banking executive with decades of experience in large-scale corporate finance. Later the same year, the company changed its name to Alphabet and reorganized itself into a loose conglomerate of different operations.</p>\n<p>Google is still the backbone of Alphabet, accounting for 99.6% of the holding company's total sales in 2020. The non-Google operations are still losing money on a regular basis, despite some progress in the fields of self-driving vehicles and fiber-optic internet connections. At the same time, the company is preparing for an uncertain future by developing a plethora of online and offline business projects with massive long-term growth prospects and equally large development risks.</p>\n<p>If the self-driving cars don't work out in the long run, Alphabet might find a cash machine in medical research or novel wind energy generators. We may never even have heard of the next big winner in Alphabet's sprawling portfolio. If and when Alphabet starts to make serious money from artificial intelligence tools or cancer drugs, most consumers probably won't think of that stuff as a Google business at all.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bb97b6814df65240bd8f0b4a0690e77e\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"449\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>GOOGL REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet continues to ride its Google heritage as far as it will go, but there is no shortage of completely unrelated operations that can take over when the browser-based search and advertising business starts to falter. Until then, the traditional search business is booming and Alphabet has rewarded investors with a 912% return in 10 years. That's an annual growth rate of 23.3%.</p>\n<p><b>3. Walt Disney</b></p>\n<p>And then there's the near-centennial entertainment giant. The House of Mouse was founded in 1923 by two cartoon-making brothers with a vision. The company has survived a world war, several terrible recessions, 10 decades of progress in distribution and production technologies, and much more.</p>\n<p>The leisure and entertainment conglomerate you see today is a far cry from the original business, which was a pure-play cartoon production studio. Disney World and Disneyland are cultural touchstones. The company is a leading provider of hotel and resort services, including a cruise line. I can't think of another company that has mastered the art of monetizing its intellectual property as effectively as Disney has. And that intellectual property -- characters, fictional worlds, and storylines that most Americans know by heart -- will always be the lifeblood of Disney's business.</p>\n<p>Times are tough right now, as the coronavirus pandemic closed down movie theaters, theme parks, resorts, and cruise ships around the world. So Disney took a good, hard look at the drastic changes in the entertainment industry and decided to put its full weight behind media-streaming platforms.</p>\n<p>The company has been reorganized from the top down to support Disney's streaming platforms. The Disney+, Hulu, Hotstar, and ESPN+ streaming services are poised to challenge Netflix for the global media-streaming market, adding up to 174 million subscribers in the third quarter of 2021. Disney took on some extra debt in the darkest days of the health crisis and will most likely use some of that spare cash to accelerate its streaming operations.</p>\n<p>The coronavirus caught Disney unprepared, but management didn't hesitate to turn on a dime. The whole behemoth is heading in a different direction now, supported by the same treasure trove of storytelling assets that took the company this far. This supremely well-managed company is also beating the market in the long run, with a 439% 10-year gain that works out to a CAGR of 13%.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/110cd288830d0e354767349fe36259e6\" tg-width=\"2000\" tg-height=\"1333\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.</span></p>\n<p><b>The common denominator</b></p>\n<p>These three companies are very different, but they still have one all-important quality in common. I'm looking for flexibility in the face of good times and bad. If your company stands ready to make drastic changes to its operating plan when the business environment around it changes, you know you have an organization that will stand the test of time.</p>\n<p>Lots of&nbsp;time in the market equals wealth-building returns. That's the main lesson you can learn from the writings of Benjamin Graham and the stellar results of his star student, Warren Buffett. Building life-changing wealth does not require a couple of years of fantastic returns. All you need is generally solid gains for several decades.</p>\n<p>For example, an annual return of 10% -- in line with&nbsp;the long-term market average-- adds up to a 673% profit over 20 years. Beating the Street by a small margin makes a big difference on this long time scale. Boost your average gains to just 11%, and you'll see 806% returns over those 20 years. Larger increases bring even greater total long-haul returns. The three stocks discussed above are set up to do better than that, and their very survival in the long run is just about guaranteed by that willingness to change when market conditions require it.</p>\n<p></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>3 Stocks I'm Never Selling</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 Stocks I'm Never Selling\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-18 10:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/17/3-stocks-im-never-selling/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Key Points\n\nTime plus patience adds up to wealth-building results in the stock market.\nThese three business titans are leaders in their fields.\nThey are also built to last for a very long time.\n\n\nI'm ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/17/3-stocks-im-never-selling/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GOOG":"谷歌","NFLX":"奈飞","GOOGL":"谷歌A","DIS":"迪士尼"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/17/3-stocks-im-never-selling/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1114320591","content_text":"Key Points\n\nTime plus patience adds up to wealth-building results in the stock market.\nThese three business titans are leaders in their fields.\nThey are also built to last for a very long time.\n\n\nI'm about to show you my favorite stocks. Sometimes I invest with an eye to strong returns over the next few years. These are the ones that I expect to keep beating the market for the years and decades to come. It will take a lot to pry them out of my portfolio.\nLet me show you why I intend to hold Netflix(NASDAQ:NFLX),Alphabet(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL), and Walt Disney(NYSE:DIS)for the long haul. These stocks may not be slam-dunk forever holdings for every investor, but you should absolutely take a close look at these top-notch investments.\n1. Netflix\nFirst, you knew Netflix as the sender of red mail-order DVD rentals. The company introduced digital video streams as a free add-on for DVD customers in 2007, then separated the streaming business into a separate subscription service in 2011. The Qwikster event was a big marketing mess and could certainly have been handled better, but it was absolutely the right idea in the long run.\nGoing all-in on the all-digital streaming service allowed Netflix to roll out its paid subscription plans on a global scale, supplemented by an ambitious focus on original content. The subscriber count has skyrocketed from 26 million in the summer of 2011 to 209 million today. That fantastic trend has worked wonders for the company's top and bottom lines:\nNFLX REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.\nNetflix saw an opportunity to lead the charge into a brand-new market, with low infrastructure costs compared to the DVD-mailing business and buckets of worldwide growth potential. So the DVD business that had come to dominate the video rental sector in America was unceremoniously tossed aside in favor of better ideas.\nThese days, Netflix is an award-winning content producer with an unmatched distribution network in every market that matters (except forChina, where the company must operate through local partnerships). The stock has delivered a 2,240% return since the Qwikster event, which works out to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 35.8%.\n2. Alphabet\nAlphabet is the parent company of online services giant Google. What started as a student project at Stanford quickly evolved into the world's leading online search tool. Paired with the moneymaking muscle of Google's digital advertising tools, the company generated strong cash flows early on. The cash profits were reinvested in more business ideas. Google eventually built or bought services with matchless market shares in important sectors such as web browsers, online video, email, and smartphone software.\nBy 2015, co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page had concluded that Google's meat-and-potatoes search and advertising businesses eventually had to fade away, overtaken by mobile alternatives and other innovations. So the company made some big changes. Google hired CFO Ruth Porat, a banking executive with decades of experience in large-scale corporate finance. Later the same year, the company changed its name to Alphabet and reorganized itself into a loose conglomerate of different operations.\nGoogle is still the backbone of Alphabet, accounting for 99.6% of the holding company's total sales in 2020. The non-Google operations are still losing money on a regular basis, despite some progress in the fields of self-driving vehicles and fiber-optic internet connections. At the same time, the company is preparing for an uncertain future by developing a plethora of online and offline business projects with massive long-term growth prospects and equally large development risks.\nIf the self-driving cars don't work out in the long run, Alphabet might find a cash machine in medical research or novel wind energy generators. We may never even have heard of the next big winner in Alphabet's sprawling portfolio. If and when Alphabet starts to make serious money from artificial intelligence tools or cancer drugs, most consumers probably won't think of that stuff as a Google business at all.\nGOOGL REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.\nAlphabet continues to ride its Google heritage as far as it will go, but there is no shortage of completely unrelated operations that can take over when the browser-based search and advertising business starts to falter. Until then, the traditional search business is booming and Alphabet has rewarded investors with a 912% return in 10 years. That's an annual growth rate of 23.3%.\n3. Walt Disney\nAnd then there's the near-centennial entertainment giant. The House of Mouse was founded in 1923 by two cartoon-making brothers with a vision. The company has survived a world war, several terrible recessions, 10 decades of progress in distribution and production technologies, and much more.\nThe leisure and entertainment conglomerate you see today is a far cry from the original business, which was a pure-play cartoon production studio. Disney World and Disneyland are cultural touchstones. The company is a leading provider of hotel and resort services, including a cruise line. I can't think of another company that has mastered the art of monetizing its intellectual property as effectively as Disney has. And that intellectual property -- characters, fictional worlds, and storylines that most Americans know by heart -- will always be the lifeblood of Disney's business.\nTimes are tough right now, as the coronavirus pandemic closed down movie theaters, theme parks, resorts, and cruise ships around the world. So Disney took a good, hard look at the drastic changes in the entertainment industry and decided to put its full weight behind media-streaming platforms.\nThe company has been reorganized from the top down to support Disney's streaming platforms. The Disney+, Hulu, Hotstar, and ESPN+ streaming services are poised to challenge Netflix for the global media-streaming market, adding up to 174 million subscribers in the third quarter of 2021. Disney took on some extra debt in the darkest days of the health crisis and will most likely use some of that spare cash to accelerate its streaming operations.\nThe coronavirus caught Disney unprepared, but management didn't hesitate to turn on a dime. The whole behemoth is heading in a different direction now, supported by the same treasure trove of storytelling assets that took the company this far. This supremely well-managed company is also beating the market in the long run, with a 439% 10-year gain that works out to a CAGR of 13%.\nIMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.\nThe common denominator\nThese three companies are very different, but they still have one all-important quality in common. I'm looking for flexibility in the face of good times and bad. If your company stands ready to make drastic changes to its operating plan when the business environment around it changes, you know you have an organization that will stand the test of time.\nLots of time in the market equals wealth-building returns. That's the main lesson you can learn from the writings of Benjamin Graham and the stellar results of his star student, Warren Buffett. Building life-changing wealth does not require a couple of years of fantastic returns. All you need is generally solid gains for several decades.\nFor example, an annual return of 10% -- in line with the long-term market average-- adds up to a 673% profit over 20 years. Beating the Street by a small margin makes a big difference on this long time scale. Boost your average gains to just 11%, and you'll see 806% returns over those 20 years. Larger increases bring even greater total long-haul returns. The three stocks discussed above are set up to do better than that, and their very survival in the long run is just about guaranteed by that willingness to change when market conditions require it.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":150,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":833015064,"gmtCreate":1629189045658,"gmtModify":1676529959325,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like my post","listText":"Like my post","text":"Like my post","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/833015064","repostId":"2160227298","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2160227298","pubTimestamp":1629186610,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2160227298?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-17 15:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Oat milk shortage about to end? Oatly CEO weighs in","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2160227298","media":"Yahoo Finance","summary":"Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk s","content":"<p>Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk shortage that has existed during the pandemic due to significantly more at-home consumption of packaged foods.</p>\n<p>\"No,\" Petersson responded when asked by Yahoo Finance if the shortage would continue into 2022. \"It's going to improve. It has improved since March. It's going to continue to increase [product availability] every single month here.\"</p>\n<p>To help improve demand, Oatly said it will increase production capacity at its Ogden, Utah, facility and in facilities in Asia and Europe. The company expects to increase production by 200% by the end of 2022, compared to 2020.</p>\n<p>Persistent supply constraints weighed on Oatly's second quarter performance. Sales rose 53.3% year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) loss came in at $31.9 million compared to a loss of $1.2 million a year ago.</p>\n<p>Here is how Oatly performed compared to Wall Street analyst estimates for the second quarter:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><p><b>Net Sales:</b> $146.2 million vs. $147 million</p></li>\n <li><p><b>Loss per Share:</b> $0.11 vs. $0.10</p></li>\n</ul>\n<p>The company reiterated its long-term targets for a gross margin of 40% and EBITDA margin approaching 20%.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2021-05/04bbd330-b981-11eb-be6b-cd751c23d5d4\" tg-width=\"4032\" tg-height=\"3024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Oatly containers are displayed at a grocery store, Tuesday, May 18, 2021, in North Miami, Fla. Oatly, the world’s largest oat milk company, will raise $1.4 billion in an initial public offering Thursday, May 20 on the Nasdaq stock exchange. (AP Photo/Marta Lavandier)ASSOCIATED PRESS</span></p>\n<p>Oatly shares rose 1% to $17 in Monday trading, putting the stock price in line with the IPO's pricing in mid-May. The stock had reached a high of $28 in mid-June amid optimism on the outlook for oat milk demand and Oatly's leading market share position in the market. But shares came under pressure in mid-July following an attack on the company's financial reporting by short-seller Spruce Point.</p>\n<p>Oatly was quick to rebuff Spruce Point's claims.</p>\n<p>When asked by Yahoo Finance if he has a message for investors following the short-seller report, Petersson said Oatly remains a growth company.</p>\n<p>\"There are a lot of things we want to say. But we are positioned to take a global leading role in driving the plant-based revolution forward. We haven't even started to scratch the surface yet and the runway is massive,\" Petersson said.</p>\n<p>To that point, Oatly has recently begun selling soft-serve ice cream. The surface is being scratch, so it seems.</p>","source":"yahoofinance_sg","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>Oat milk shortage about to end? Oatly CEO weighs in</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\">\nOat milk shortage about to end? Oatly CEO weighs in\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-17 15:50 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oat-milk-shortage-about-to-end-oatly-ceo-weighs-in-173820828.html><strong>Yahoo Finance</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk shortage that has existed during the pandemic due to significantly more at-home consumption of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oat-milk-shortage-about-to-end-oatly-ceo-weighs-in-173820828.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f2dfac8b367cf26a99a7470fe4e042d5","relate_stocks":{"CPB":"金宝汤","PEP":"百事可乐","DNUT":"Krispy Kreme, Inc.","SBUX":"星巴克","ACI":"艾伯森","KO":"可口可乐","WMT":"沃尔玛","OTLY":"Oatly Group AB","QSR":"餐饮品牌国际","MCD":"麦当劳","BYND":"Beyond Meat, Inc.","TGT":"塔吉特","KR":"克罗格","WEN":"温蒂汉堡"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oat-milk-shortage-about-to-end-oatly-ceo-weighs-in-173820828.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2160227298","content_text":"Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk shortage that has existed during the pandemic due to significantly more at-home consumption of packaged foods.\n\"No,\" Petersson responded when asked by Yahoo Finance if the shortage would continue into 2022. \"It's going to improve. It has improved since March. It's going to continue to increase [product availability] every single month here.\"\nTo help improve demand, Oatly said it will increase production capacity at its Ogden, Utah, facility and in facilities in Asia and Europe. The company expects to increase production by 200% by the end of 2022, compared to 2020.\nPersistent supply constraints weighed on Oatly's second quarter performance. Sales rose 53.3% year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) loss came in at $31.9 million compared to a loss of $1.2 million a year ago.\nHere is how Oatly performed compared to Wall Street analyst estimates for the second quarter:\n\nNet Sales: $146.2 million vs. $147 million\nLoss per Share: $0.11 vs. $0.10\n\nThe company reiterated its long-term targets for a gross margin of 40% and EBITDA margin approaching 20%.\nOatly containers are displayed at a grocery store, Tuesday, May 18, 2021, in North Miami, Fla. Oatly, the world’s largest oat milk company, will raise $1.4 billion in an initial public offering Thursday, May 20 on the Nasdaq stock exchange. (AP Photo/Marta Lavandier)ASSOCIATED PRESS\nOatly shares rose 1% to $17 in Monday trading, putting the stock price in line with the IPO's pricing in mid-May. The stock had reached a high of $28 in mid-June amid optimism on the outlook for oat milk demand and Oatly's leading market share position in the market. But shares came under pressure in mid-July following an attack on the company's financial reporting by short-seller Spruce Point.\nOatly was quick to rebuff Spruce Point's claims.\nWhen asked by Yahoo Finance if he has a message for investors following the short-seller report, Petersson said Oatly remains a growth company.\n\"There are a lot of things we want to say. But we are positioned to take a global leading role in driving the plant-based revolution forward. We haven't even started to scratch the surface yet and the runway is massive,\" Petersson said.\nTo that point, Oatly has recently begun selling soft-serve ice cream. The surface is being scratch, so it seems.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":67,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897469667,"gmtCreate":1628960421359,"gmtModify":1676529900362,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Elon musk needs to get a grip on earth/reality… literally","listText":"Elon musk needs to get a grip on earth/reality… literally","text":"Elon musk needs to get a grip on earth/reality… literally","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/897469667","repostId":"2159521376","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2159521376","pubTimestamp":1628906786,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2159521376?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-14 10:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chasing Tesla: Here are the current electric vehicle plans of every major car maker","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2159521376","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles ","content":"<p>At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles to the point that they account for about half of total U.S. sales by 2030, a plan that raises hopes that EVs can shift from niche to normal.</p>\n<p>EVs accounted for 2.4% of U.S. cars sold in 2020, up from 0.7% five years ago, according to BloombergNEF. The research provider expects that share to increase to 11% in 2025; by 2030, it expects that slightly over a third of vehicles sold in the U.S. will be electric.</p>\n<p>Several auto makers had already announced bigger EV ambitions even before the White House call.</p>\n<p>Here are each major car maker's stated plans for EVs, including, when available, investment amounts and the range of models they hope to bring to market.</p>\n<p>This information was collated from company sites, previous reports, and BloombergNEF projections, and will be updated regularly.</p>\n<p><b>Audi</b></p>\n<p>Audi, a brand known for its luxury cars and owned by Germany's Volkswagen AG , has promised to have battery-electric vehicles comprise 35% of its sales by 2025. By that time, Audi buyers will choose from about 20 EV models.</p>\n<p><b>BMW</b></p>\n<p>BMW AG , a luxury-car maker from Germany, was among the first EV innovators. It launched its i3 compact EV eight years ago, then as $one of the few serious competitors to Tesla Inc.'s vehicles.</p>\n<p>BMW's EV pipeline has slowed, but the auto maker has promised that 25% of its European sales will be all-electric and hybrid vehicles this year, and that all sales of its Mini brand will be battery electric by 2030. It expects to launch more than 10 battery EVs models in the next couple of years.</p>\n<p><b>Daimler/Mercedes-Benz</b></p>\n<p>Mercedes-Benz, owned by Daimler AG , expects that between 15% and 25% of its sales will be comprised of EV sales by 2025; by 2030, that percentage is expected to grow to 50%. Mercedes-Benz is slated to end 2021 offering three new electric passenger car models and more to come in 2022.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ec4b2abd59e5b19c9eec0034342af25e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"413\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>SOURCE: MERCEDES</span></p>\n<p><b>Ford</b></p>\n<p>Ford Motor Co. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">$(F)$</a> has said that 40% of its global sales by 2030 will be sales of EVs . Ford is aiming to have dozens of electrified models by 2022, the year that will also mark the debut of its much-awaited all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3a44fec36dac046911679a2ba769cb2b\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"450\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>The Ford F-150 Lightning o JEFF KOWALSKY/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES</span></p>\n<p>Ford has called the Lightning the \"pillar\" of its more than $22 billion bet on EVs, which includes EV models for other best-selling vehicles such as the Mustang and its Transit van.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/87df52ddef1af1d1342d685897e83652\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"392\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>SOURCE: FORD</span></p>\n<p><b>GM</b></p>\n<p>General Motors Co. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">$(GM)$</a> surprised Wall Street in January by saying it aims to phase out all of its internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035 and only sell zero-emission vehicles by then. The auto maker also promises to be carbon-neutral by 2040.</p>\n<p>GM has said that it will offer 30 all-electric models globally by mid-decade, and that 40% percent of the company's U.S. models will be battery electric vehicles by the end of 2025. Its Hummer electric is expected for next year, with production starting this fall.</p>\n<p><b>Honda</b></p>\n<p>The Japanese maker (7267.TO), which owns the namesake Honda brand and also the luxury-car brand Acura, is projected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and fuel-cell electric cars by 2030. In April 2020, Honda and GM announced a partnership to develop Honda electric cars using GM's Ultium batteries.</p>\n<p><b>Hyundai</b></p>\n<p>The Korean car maker , which also owns Kia, is aiming to have 40% of its Kia and Hyundai brands sales to be of EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2025. Its Hyundai brand plans on more than 30 electric passenger vehicles by then.</p>\n<p><b>Mazda</b></p>\n<p>Mazda plans to offer 5% of its vehicles as battery electric by 2030, but EV sales targets as a percentage of total sales are unknown at the moment. Mazda does not offer EVs in the U.S., but sells a few EV and hybrid models elsewhere.</p>\n<p><b>Nissan</b></p>\n<p>Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. was among the first auto makers to offer an all-electric vehicle, and its the Nissan Leaf for years was one of the few options available for those without the deep pockets needed for a Tesla Inc. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">$(TSLA)$</a> Model S.</p>\n<p>Nissan plans to offer 20 EV models in China by next year, and for the U.S. the company recently said it plans that more than 40% of its U.S. vehicle sales by 2030 will be fully electric.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5cbdfabce43725b3d966cf5db5b820f6\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>The Nissan Leaf NISSAN</span></p>\n<p><b>Porsche</b></p>\n<p>The car maker and almost synonym of sports cars is aiming to have half of its sales be of EV vehicles by 2025.</p>\n<p><b>Stellantis</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/STLA\">Stellantis NV</a> (STLA.MI), the global auto maker formed earlier this year through the merger of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV and France's PSA Group, said in July it was investing $35 billion in EVs and adjacent technologies through 2025.</p>\n<p>By that year, Stellantis is expected to derive 31% of its U.S. sales and 38% of its European sales from EVs, percentages that are seen growing to 35% of U.S. sales and 70% of European sales by 2030.</p>\n<p><b>Subaru</b></p>\n<p>The Japanese maker is expected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and hybrid electric vehicles by 2030.</p>\n<p><b>Toyota</b></p>\n<p>Some 70% of sales for the world's No. 1 car maker (7203.TO) are expected to come from EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2030. Toyota plans to offer 15 battery EV models by 2025. The car maker, of course, broke ground with its hybrid Toyota Prius two decades ago.</p>\n<p><b>Volkswagen</b></p>\n<p>The car maker is expected to derive 70% of its European sales from EVs and 50% of its U.S. sales from EVs by 2030. Volkswagen has pledged to spend about $40 billion through 2025 on EVs.</p>","source":"lsy1603348471595","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>Chasing Tesla: Here are the current electric vehicle plans of every major car maker</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\">\nChasing Tesla: Here are the current electric vehicle plans of every major car maker\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-14 10:06 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chasing-tesla-here-are-the-current-electric-vehicle-plans-of-every-major-car-maker-11628876816?mod=home-page><strong>MarketWatch</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles to the point that they account for about half of total U.S. sales by 2030, a plan that raises hopes ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chasing-tesla-here-are-the-current-electric-vehicle-plans-of-every-major-car-maker-11628876816?mod=home-page\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"DDAIF":"戴姆勒汽车","GM":"通用汽车","HMC":"本田汽车","FUJHF":"Subaru Corporation ","VLKAF":"Volkswagen AG","STLA":"Stellantis NV","F":"福特汽车","TSLA":"特斯拉","TM":"丰田汽车","HYEVF":"Hyundai Elevator Co Ltd.","NSANY":"日产汽车"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chasing-tesla-here-are-the-current-electric-vehicle-plans-of-every-major-car-maker-11628876816?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2159521376","content_text":"At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles to the point that they account for about half of total U.S. sales by 2030, a plan that raises hopes that EVs can shift from niche to normal.\nEVs accounted for 2.4% of U.S. cars sold in 2020, up from 0.7% five years ago, according to BloombergNEF. The research provider expects that share to increase to 11% in 2025; by 2030, it expects that slightly over a third of vehicles sold in the U.S. will be electric.\nSeveral auto makers had already announced bigger EV ambitions even before the White House call.\nHere are each major car maker's stated plans for EVs, including, when available, investment amounts and the range of models they hope to bring to market.\nThis information was collated from company sites, previous reports, and BloombergNEF projections, and will be updated regularly.\nAudi\nAudi, a brand known for its luxury cars and owned by Germany's Volkswagen AG , has promised to have battery-electric vehicles comprise 35% of its sales by 2025. By that time, Audi buyers will choose from about 20 EV models.\nBMW\nBMW AG , a luxury-car maker from Germany, was among the first EV innovators. It launched its i3 compact EV eight years ago, then as $one of the few serious competitors to Tesla Inc.'s vehicles.\nBMW's EV pipeline has slowed, but the auto maker has promised that 25% of its European sales will be all-electric and hybrid vehicles this year, and that all sales of its Mini brand will be battery electric by 2030. It expects to launch more than 10 battery EVs models in the next couple of years.\nDaimler/Mercedes-Benz\nMercedes-Benz, owned by Daimler AG , expects that between 15% and 25% of its sales will be comprised of EV sales by 2025; by 2030, that percentage is expected to grow to 50%. Mercedes-Benz is slated to end 2021 offering three new electric passenger car models and more to come in 2022.\nSOURCE: MERCEDES\nFord\nFord Motor Co. $(F)$ has said that 40% of its global sales by 2030 will be sales of EVs . Ford is aiming to have dozens of electrified models by 2022, the year that will also mark the debut of its much-awaited all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck.\nThe Ford F-150 Lightning o JEFF KOWALSKY/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES\nFord has called the Lightning the \"pillar\" of its more than $22 billion bet on EVs, which includes EV models for other best-selling vehicles such as the Mustang and its Transit van.\nSOURCE: FORD\nGM\nGeneral Motors Co. $(GM)$ surprised Wall Street in January by saying it aims to phase out all of its internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035 and only sell zero-emission vehicles by then. The auto maker also promises to be carbon-neutral by 2040.\nGM has said that it will offer 30 all-electric models globally by mid-decade, and that 40% percent of the company's U.S. models will be battery electric vehicles by the end of 2025. Its Hummer electric is expected for next year, with production starting this fall.\nHonda\nThe Japanese maker (7267.TO), which owns the namesake Honda brand and also the luxury-car brand Acura, is projected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and fuel-cell electric cars by 2030. In April 2020, Honda and GM announced a partnership to develop Honda electric cars using GM's Ultium batteries.\nHyundai\nThe Korean car maker , which also owns Kia, is aiming to have 40% of its Kia and Hyundai brands sales to be of EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2025. Its Hyundai brand plans on more than 30 electric passenger vehicles by then.\nMazda\nMazda plans to offer 5% of its vehicles as battery electric by 2030, but EV sales targets as a percentage of total sales are unknown at the moment. Mazda does not offer EVs in the U.S., but sells a few EV and hybrid models elsewhere.\nNissan\nNissan Motor Co. Ltd. was among the first auto makers to offer an all-electric vehicle, and its the Nissan Leaf for years was one of the few options available for those without the deep pockets needed for a Tesla Inc. $(TSLA)$ Model S.\nNissan plans to offer 20 EV models in China by next year, and for the U.S. the company recently said it plans that more than 40% of its U.S. vehicle sales by 2030 will be fully electric.\nThe Nissan Leaf NISSAN\nPorsche\nThe car maker and almost synonym of sports cars is aiming to have half of its sales be of EV vehicles by 2025.\nStellantis\nStellantis NV (STLA.MI), the global auto maker formed earlier this year through the merger of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV and France's PSA Group, said in July it was investing $35 billion in EVs and adjacent technologies through 2025.\nBy that year, Stellantis is expected to derive 31% of its U.S. sales and 38% of its European sales from EVs, percentages that are seen growing to 35% of U.S. sales and 70% of European sales by 2030.\nSubaru\nThe Japanese maker is expected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and hybrid electric vehicles by 2030.\nToyota\nSome 70% of sales for the world's No. 1 car maker (7203.TO) are expected to come from EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2030. Toyota plans to offer 15 battery EV models by 2025. The car maker, of course, broke ground with its hybrid Toyota Prius two decades ago.\nVolkswagen\nThe car maker is expected to derive 70% of its European sales from EVs and 50% of its U.S. sales from EVs by 2030. Volkswagen has pledged to spend about $40 billion through 2025 on EVs.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":166,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":804792686,"gmtCreate":1627978574245,"gmtModify":1703498983081,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/804792686","repostId":"1172747257","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":118,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":819621264,"gmtCreate":1630067418458,"gmtModify":1676530215015,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read","listText":"Read","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":10,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/819621264","repostId":"1164159102","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1164159102","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":1630066005,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1164159102?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-27 20:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Toplines Before US Market Open on Friday","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1164159102","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's spee","content":"<p>U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's speech that could offer clues on when the central bank will start winding down its stimulus.</p>\n<p>At 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow e-minis were up 67 points, or 0.19%, S&amp;P 500 e-minis were up 10.75 points, or 0.24%, and Nasdaq 100 e-minis were up 45.25 points, or 0.30%.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5b1720df6d9ea9018f57c24b6d490c85\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"409\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Mega-cap technology stocks Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Amazon.com, Google-owner Alphabet Inc, and Tesla Inc&nbsp;edged higher before the opening bell.</p>\n<p>Oil majors Exxon Mobil, Chevron Corp&nbsp;and Schlumberger NV&nbsp;rose between 0.6% and 1.4%, tracking crude prices, while big banks, including JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co, were up about 0.3%.</p>\n<p>U.S.&nbsp;consumer spending grew 0.3% in July and income rose 1.1%. The lower spending growth suggests the recovery has lost momentum amid Delta variant uncertainty;U.S. trade deficit in goods drop 6.2% in July to $86.4 billion.</p>\n<p>Powell, who is due to speak via webcast at 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) at the annual Jackson Hole economic conference, may acknowledge the economy's progress toward full employment, and likely provide new hints about slowing the $120 billion in monthly asset purchases, with an announcement expected before the end of 2021, possibly as early as next month.</p>\n<p><b>Stocks making the biggest moves premarket:</b></p>\n<p><b>Big Lots(BIG)</b> – The discount retailer’s shares tumbled 10.3% in premarket trading after it missed top and bottom-line estimates for its latest quarter. Big Lots earned $1.09 per share, 3 cents shy of analyst forecasts, and its comparable store sales slid a greater-than-expected 13.2%. The company also said it was hit by supply chain issues and inflation pressures.</p>\n<p><b>Hibbett Sports(HIBB) </b>– The athletic apparel retailer jumped 3.1% in the premarket after reporting better-than-expected sales and profit for its latest quarter, and raising its full-year forecast. Hibbett earned $2.86 per share, almost double the $1.44 consensus estimate.</p>\n<p><b>Peloton(PTON)</b> – Peloton slid 7.5% in the premarket, after reporting a wider-than-expected loss. The fitness equipment maker lost $1.05 per share for its latest quarter, compared with estimates of a 45-cent loss. Paid digital subscriptions fell short of estimates as well. Additionally, Peloton said in an SEC filing that it has been subpoenaed by the government for documents on injuries related to its products.</p>\n<p><b>Gap(GPS)</b> – Gap reported adjusted quarterly earnings of 70 cents per share, beating the 46 cents consensus estimate, and the apparel retailer’s revenue was also above Wall Street forecasts. Gap also raised its full-year guidance, largely on the strength of its Old Navy and Athleta brands. The stock rallied 7.4% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Apple(AAPL)</b> – Apple struck a deal with smaller developers that extends a commission cut for three years and allows them to alert consumers about alternate payment systems to Apple’s app store.</p>\n<p><b>HP Inc.(HPQ)</b> – HP Inc. beat estimates by 16 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.00 per share, though revenue fell below analyst forecasts. The personal computer and printer maker saw the worldwide chip shortage hurt its ability to meet demand, with the company saying it is selling everything it can produce. HP lost 5.3% in premarket action.</p>\n<p><b>Dell Technologies(DELL) </b>– Dell reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $2.24 per share, 21 cents above estimates, with revenue also topping analyst projections. Dell benefited from the ongoing boom in demand for personal computers and said it is dealing successfully with supply chain challenges. However, the stock fell 1.9% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Workday(WDAY)</b> – Workday earned an adjusted $1.23 per share for its latest quarter, with the provider of cloud-based human resources and financial software also reporting better-than-expected revenue. Subscription revenue jumped more than 23% from a year earlier. Workday shares surged 7.8% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Marvell Technology(MRVL)</b> – Marvell came in 3 cents above estimates with an adjusted quarterly profit of 34 cents per share. However, the chip maker’s revenue merely matched Street forecasts, and its cost of goods sold jumped from a year earlier. Shares slid 4.7% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Ollie’s Bargain Outlet(OLLI)</b> – Ollie’s plunged 14.4% in premarket trading after it fell 3 cents short of Wall Street forecasts with adjusted quarterly earnings of 52 cents per share. The discount retailer’s revenue fell short as well, with comparable store sales falling 28% from a year earlier.</p>\n<p><b>Johnson &amp; Johnson(JNJ)</b> – J&amp;J will be allowed to separate its talc-related liabilities from the rest of its business after a judge declined to prohibit the company from doing so. Personal injury lawyers had sought to prevent the move, fearing that it could put thousands of claims into bankruptcy.</p>\n<p><b>VMWare(VMW)</b> – VMWare reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.75 per share, beating the $1.64 consensus estimate, while the enterprise software company’s revenue was slightly above Wall Street forecasts. However, cloud business revenue did fall short of some analyst forecasts, and shares slid 6.9% in the premarket.</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>Toplines Before US Market Open on Friday</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 Friday\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-08-27 20:06</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's speech that could offer clues on when the central bank will start winding down its stimulus.</p>\n<p>At 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow e-minis were up 67 points, or 0.19%, S&amp;P 500 e-minis were up 10.75 points, or 0.24%, and Nasdaq 100 e-minis were up 45.25 points, or 0.30%.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5b1720df6d9ea9018f57c24b6d490c85\" tg-width=\"1080\" tg-height=\"409\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Mega-cap technology stocks Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Amazon.com, Google-owner Alphabet Inc, and Tesla Inc&nbsp;edged higher before the opening bell.</p>\n<p>Oil majors Exxon Mobil, Chevron Corp&nbsp;and Schlumberger NV&nbsp;rose between 0.6% and 1.4%, tracking crude prices, while big banks, including JPMorgan Chase &amp; Co, were up about 0.3%.</p>\n<p>U.S.&nbsp;consumer spending grew 0.3% in July and income rose 1.1%. The lower spending growth suggests the recovery has lost momentum amid Delta variant uncertainty;U.S. trade deficit in goods drop 6.2% in July to $86.4 billion.</p>\n<p>Powell, who is due to speak via webcast at 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) at the annual Jackson Hole economic conference, may acknowledge the economy's progress toward full employment, and likely provide new hints about slowing the $120 billion in monthly asset purchases, with an announcement expected before the end of 2021, possibly as early as next month.</p>\n<p><b>Stocks making the biggest moves premarket:</b></p>\n<p><b>Big Lots(BIG)</b> – The discount retailer’s shares tumbled 10.3% in premarket trading after it missed top and bottom-line estimates for its latest quarter. Big Lots earned $1.09 per share, 3 cents shy of analyst forecasts, and its comparable store sales slid a greater-than-expected 13.2%. The company also said it was hit by supply chain issues and inflation pressures.</p>\n<p><b>Hibbett Sports(HIBB) </b>– The athletic apparel retailer jumped 3.1% in the premarket after reporting better-than-expected sales and profit for its latest quarter, and raising its full-year forecast. Hibbett earned $2.86 per share, almost double the $1.44 consensus estimate.</p>\n<p><b>Peloton(PTON)</b> – Peloton slid 7.5% in the premarket, after reporting a wider-than-expected loss. The fitness equipment maker lost $1.05 per share for its latest quarter, compared with estimates of a 45-cent loss. Paid digital subscriptions fell short of estimates as well. Additionally, Peloton said in an SEC filing that it has been subpoenaed by the government for documents on injuries related to its products.</p>\n<p><b>Gap(GPS)</b> – Gap reported adjusted quarterly earnings of 70 cents per share, beating the 46 cents consensus estimate, and the apparel retailer’s revenue was also above Wall Street forecasts. Gap also raised its full-year guidance, largely on the strength of its Old Navy and Athleta brands. The stock rallied 7.4% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Apple(AAPL)</b> – Apple struck a deal with smaller developers that extends a commission cut for three years and allows them to alert consumers about alternate payment systems to Apple’s app store.</p>\n<p><b>HP Inc.(HPQ)</b> – HP Inc. beat estimates by 16 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.00 per share, though revenue fell below analyst forecasts. The personal computer and printer maker saw the worldwide chip shortage hurt its ability to meet demand, with the company saying it is selling everything it can produce. HP lost 5.3% in premarket action.</p>\n<p><b>Dell Technologies(DELL) </b>– Dell reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $2.24 per share, 21 cents above estimates, with revenue also topping analyst projections. Dell benefited from the ongoing boom in demand for personal computers and said it is dealing successfully with supply chain challenges. However, the stock fell 1.9% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Workday(WDAY)</b> – Workday earned an adjusted $1.23 per share for its latest quarter, with the provider of cloud-based human resources and financial software also reporting better-than-expected revenue. Subscription revenue jumped more than 23% from a year earlier. Workday shares surged 7.8% in premarket trading.</p>\n<p><b>Marvell Technology(MRVL)</b> – Marvell came in 3 cents above estimates with an adjusted quarterly profit of 34 cents per share. However, the chip maker’s revenue merely matched Street forecasts, and its cost of goods sold jumped from a year earlier. Shares slid 4.7% in the premarket.</p>\n<p><b>Ollie’s Bargain Outlet(OLLI)</b> – Ollie’s plunged 14.4% in premarket trading after it fell 3 cents short of Wall Street forecasts with adjusted quarterly earnings of 52 cents per share. The discount retailer’s revenue fell short as well, with comparable store sales falling 28% from a year earlier.</p>\n<p><b>Johnson &amp; Johnson(JNJ)</b> – J&amp;J will be allowed to separate its talc-related liabilities from the rest of its business after a judge declined to prohibit the company from doing so. Personal injury lawyers had sought to prevent the move, fearing that it could put thousands of claims into bankruptcy.</p>\n<p><b>VMWare(VMW)</b> – VMWare reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.75 per share, beating the $1.64 consensus estimate, while the enterprise software company’s revenue was slightly above Wall Street forecasts. However, cloud business revenue did fall short of some analyst forecasts, and shares slid 6.9% in the premarket.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"JNJ":"强生","SLB":"斯伦贝谢","HPQ":"惠普","BIG":"必乐透","XOM":"埃克森美孚","AAPL":"苹果",".DJI":"道琼斯","OLLI":"Ollie's Bargain Outlet Holdings, Inc.",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","MRVL":"迈威尔科技","HIBB":"希贝特体育",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","PTON":"Peloton Interactive, Inc.","DELL":"戴尔","CVX":"雪佛龙","VMW":"威睿","WDAY":"Workday"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1164159102","content_text":"U.S. stock index futures inched higher on Friday ahead of Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell's speech that could offer clues on when the central bank will start winding down its stimulus.\nAt 8:00 a.m. ET, Dow e-minis were up 67 points, or 0.19%, S&P 500 e-minis were up 10.75 points, or 0.24%, and Nasdaq 100 e-minis were up 45.25 points, or 0.30%.\n\nMega-cap technology stocks Apple Inc, Facebook Inc, Amazon.com, Google-owner Alphabet Inc, and Tesla Inc edged higher before the opening bell.\nOil majors Exxon Mobil, Chevron Corp and Schlumberger NV rose between 0.6% and 1.4%, tracking crude prices, while big banks, including JPMorgan Chase & Co, were up about 0.3%.\nU.S. consumer spending grew 0.3% in July and income rose 1.1%. The lower spending growth suggests the recovery has lost momentum amid Delta variant uncertainty;U.S. trade deficit in goods drop 6.2% in July to $86.4 billion.\nPowell, who is due to speak via webcast at 10 a.m. ET (1400 GMT) at the annual Jackson Hole economic conference, may acknowledge the economy's progress toward full employment, and likely provide new hints about slowing the $120 billion in monthly asset purchases, with an announcement expected before the end of 2021, possibly as early as next month.\nStocks making the biggest moves premarket:\nBig Lots(BIG) – The discount retailer’s shares tumbled 10.3% in premarket trading after it missed top and bottom-line estimates for its latest quarter. Big Lots earned $1.09 per share, 3 cents shy of analyst forecasts, and its comparable store sales slid a greater-than-expected 13.2%. The company also said it was hit by supply chain issues and inflation pressures.\nHibbett Sports(HIBB) – The athletic apparel retailer jumped 3.1% in the premarket after reporting better-than-expected sales and profit for its latest quarter, and raising its full-year forecast. Hibbett earned $2.86 per share, almost double the $1.44 consensus estimate.\nPeloton(PTON) – Peloton slid 7.5% in the premarket, after reporting a wider-than-expected loss. The fitness equipment maker lost $1.05 per share for its latest quarter, compared with estimates of a 45-cent loss. Paid digital subscriptions fell short of estimates as well. Additionally, Peloton said in an SEC filing that it has been subpoenaed by the government for documents on injuries related to its products.\nGap(GPS) – Gap reported adjusted quarterly earnings of 70 cents per share, beating the 46 cents consensus estimate, and the apparel retailer’s revenue was also above Wall Street forecasts. Gap also raised its full-year guidance, largely on the strength of its Old Navy and Athleta brands. The stock rallied 7.4% in premarket trading.\nApple(AAPL) – Apple struck a deal with smaller developers that extends a commission cut for three years and allows them to alert consumers about alternate payment systems to Apple’s app store.\nHP Inc.(HPQ) – HP Inc. beat estimates by 16 cents with adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.00 per share, though revenue fell below analyst forecasts. The personal computer and printer maker saw the worldwide chip shortage hurt its ability to meet demand, with the company saying it is selling everything it can produce. HP lost 5.3% in premarket action.\nDell Technologies(DELL) – Dell reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $2.24 per share, 21 cents above estimates, with revenue also topping analyst projections. Dell benefited from the ongoing boom in demand for personal computers and said it is dealing successfully with supply chain challenges. However, the stock fell 1.9% in the premarket.\nWorkday(WDAY) – Workday earned an adjusted $1.23 per share for its latest quarter, with the provider of cloud-based human resources and financial software also reporting better-than-expected revenue. Subscription revenue jumped more than 23% from a year earlier. Workday shares surged 7.8% in premarket trading.\nMarvell Technology(MRVL) – Marvell came in 3 cents above estimates with an adjusted quarterly profit of 34 cents per share. However, the chip maker’s revenue merely matched Street forecasts, and its cost of goods sold jumped from a year earlier. Shares slid 4.7% in the premarket.\nOllie’s Bargain Outlet(OLLI) – Ollie’s plunged 14.4% in premarket trading after it fell 3 cents short of Wall Street forecasts with adjusted quarterly earnings of 52 cents per share. The discount retailer’s revenue fell short as well, with comparable store sales falling 28% from a year earlier.\nJohnson & Johnson(JNJ) – J&J will be allowed to separate its talc-related liabilities from the rest of its business after a judge declined to prohibit the company from doing so. Personal injury lawyers had sought to prevent the move, fearing that it could put thousands of claims into bankruptcy.\nVMWare(VMW) – VMWare reported adjusted quarterly earnings of $1.75 per share, beating the $1.64 consensus estimate, while the enterprise software company’s revenue was slightly above Wall Street forecasts. However, cloud business revenue did fall short of some analyst forecasts, and shares slid 6.9% in the premarket.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":526,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":833744366,"gmtCreate":1629268192255,"gmtModify":1676529985060,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/833744366","repostId":"1114320591","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1114320591","pubTimestamp":1629255336,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1114320591?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-18 10:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"3 Stocks I'm Never Selling","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1114320591","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The best investors in the world swear by holding high-quality companies for decades on end. These stocks fit that bill.","content":"<p><b>Key Points</b></p>\n<ul>\n <li>Time plus patience adds up to wealth-building results in the stock market.</li>\n <li>These three business titans are leaders in their fields.</li>\n <li>They are also built to last for a very long time.</li>\n</ul>\n<p></p>\n<p>I'm about to show you my favorite stocks. Sometimes I invest with an eye to strong returns over the next few years. These are the ones that I expect to keep beating the market for the years and decades to come. It will take a lot to pry them out of my portfolio.</p>\n<p>Let me show you why I intend to hold&nbsp;<b>Netflix</b>(NASDAQ:NFLX),<b>Alphabet</b>(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL), and&nbsp;<b>Walt Disney</b>(NYSE:DIS)for the long haul. These stocks may not be slam-dunk forever holdings for every investor, but you should absolutely take a close look at these top-notch investments.</p>\n<p><b>1. Netflix</b></p>\n<p>First, you knew Netflix as the sender of red mail-order DVD rentals. The company introduced digital video streams as a free add-on for DVD customers in&nbsp;2007, then separated the streaming business into a separate subscription service in 2011. The Qwikster event was a big marketing mess and could certainly have been handled better, but it was absolutely the right idea in the long run.</p>\n<p>Going all-in on the all-digital streaming service allowed Netflix to roll out its paid subscription plans on a global scale, supplemented by an ambitious focus on original content. The subscriber count has skyrocketed from 26 million in the summer of 2011 to 209 million today. That fantastic trend has worked wonders for the company's top and bottom lines:</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/646be4c2a73d68810e962c19efe82476\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"449\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>NFLX REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.</span></p>\n<p>Netflix saw an opportunity to lead the charge into a brand-new market, with low infrastructure costs compared to the DVD-mailing business and buckets of worldwide growth potential. So the DVD business that had come to dominate the video rental sector in America was unceremoniously tossed aside in favor of better ideas.</p>\n<p>These days, Netflix is an award-winning content producer with an unmatched distribution network in every market that matters (except forChina, where the company must operate through local partnerships). The stock has delivered a 2,240% return since the Qwikster event, which works out to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 35.8%.</p>\n<p><b>2. Alphabet</b></p>\n<p>Alphabet is the parent company of online services giant Google. What started as a student project at Stanford quickly evolved into the world's leading online search tool. Paired with the moneymaking muscle of Google's digital advertising tools, the company generated strong cash flows early on. The cash profits were reinvested in more business ideas. Google eventually built or bought services with matchless market shares in important sectors such as web browsers, online video, email, and smartphone software.</p>\n<p>By 2015, co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page had concluded that Google's meat-and-potatoes search and advertising businesses eventually had to fade away, overtaken by mobile alternatives and other innovations. So the company made some big changes. Google hired CFO Ruth Porat, a banking executive with decades of experience in large-scale corporate finance. Later the same year, the company changed its name to Alphabet and reorganized itself into a loose conglomerate of different operations.</p>\n<p>Google is still the backbone of Alphabet, accounting for 99.6% of the holding company's total sales in 2020. The non-Google operations are still losing money on a regular basis, despite some progress in the fields of self-driving vehicles and fiber-optic internet connections. At the same time, the company is preparing for an uncertain future by developing a plethora of online and offline business projects with massive long-term growth prospects and equally large development risks.</p>\n<p>If the self-driving cars don't work out in the long run, Alphabet might find a cash machine in medical research or novel wind energy generators. We may never even have heard of the next big winner in Alphabet's sprawling portfolio. If and when Alphabet starts to make serious money from artificial intelligence tools or cancer drugs, most consumers probably won't think of that stuff as a Google business at all.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bb97b6814df65240bd8f0b4a0690e77e\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"449\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>GOOGL REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.</span></p>\n<p>Alphabet continues to ride its Google heritage as far as it will go, but there is no shortage of completely unrelated operations that can take over when the browser-based search and advertising business starts to falter. Until then, the traditional search business is booming and Alphabet has rewarded investors with a 912% return in 10 years. That's an annual growth rate of 23.3%.</p>\n<p><b>3. Walt Disney</b></p>\n<p>And then there's the near-centennial entertainment giant. The House of Mouse was founded in 1923 by two cartoon-making brothers with a vision. The company has survived a world war, several terrible recessions, 10 decades of progress in distribution and production technologies, and much more.</p>\n<p>The leisure and entertainment conglomerate you see today is a far cry from the original business, which was a pure-play cartoon production studio. Disney World and Disneyland are cultural touchstones. The company is a leading provider of hotel and resort services, including a cruise line. I can't think of another company that has mastered the art of monetizing its intellectual property as effectively as Disney has. And that intellectual property -- characters, fictional worlds, and storylines that most Americans know by heart -- will always be the lifeblood of Disney's business.</p>\n<p>Times are tough right now, as the coronavirus pandemic closed down movie theaters, theme parks, resorts, and cruise ships around the world. So Disney took a good, hard look at the drastic changes in the entertainment industry and decided to put its full weight behind media-streaming platforms.</p>\n<p>The company has been reorganized from the top down to support Disney's streaming platforms. The Disney+, Hulu, Hotstar, and ESPN+ streaming services are poised to challenge Netflix for the global media-streaming market, adding up to 174 million subscribers in the third quarter of 2021. Disney took on some extra debt in the darkest days of the health crisis and will most likely use some of that spare cash to accelerate its streaming operations.</p>\n<p>The coronavirus caught Disney unprepared, but management didn't hesitate to turn on a dime. The whole behemoth is heading in a different direction now, supported by the same treasure trove of storytelling assets that took the company this far. This supremely well-managed company is also beating the market in the long run, with a 439% 10-year gain that works out to a CAGR of 13%.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/110cd288830d0e354767349fe36259e6\" tg-width=\"2000\" tg-height=\"1333\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.</span></p>\n<p><b>The common denominator</b></p>\n<p>These three companies are very different, but they still have one all-important quality in common. I'm looking for flexibility in the face of good times and bad. If your company stands ready to make drastic changes to its operating plan when the business environment around it changes, you know you have an organization that will stand the test of time.</p>\n<p>Lots of&nbsp;time in the market equals wealth-building returns. That's the main lesson you can learn from the writings of Benjamin Graham and the stellar results of his star student, Warren Buffett. Building life-changing wealth does not require a couple of years of fantastic returns. All you need is generally solid gains for several decades.</p>\n<p>For example, an annual return of 10% -- in line with&nbsp;the long-term market average-- adds up to a 673% profit over 20 years. Beating the Street by a small margin makes a big difference on this long time scale. Boost your average gains to just 11%, and you'll see 806% returns over those 20 years. Larger increases bring even greater total long-haul returns. The three stocks discussed above are set up to do better than that, and their very survival in the long run is just about guaranteed by that willingness to change when market conditions require it.</p>\n<p></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>3 Stocks I'm Never Selling</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 Stocks I'm Never Selling\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-18 10:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/17/3-stocks-im-never-selling/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Key Points\n\nTime plus patience adds up to wealth-building results in the stock market.\nThese three business titans are leaders in their fields.\nThey are also built to last for a very long time.\n\n\nI'm ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/17/3-stocks-im-never-selling/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GOOG":"谷歌","NFLX":"奈飞","GOOGL":"谷歌A","DIS":"迪士尼"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/17/3-stocks-im-never-selling/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1114320591","content_text":"Key Points\n\nTime plus patience adds up to wealth-building results in the stock market.\nThese three business titans are leaders in their fields.\nThey are also built to last for a very long time.\n\n\nI'm about to show you my favorite stocks. Sometimes I invest with an eye to strong returns over the next few years. These are the ones that I expect to keep beating the market for the years and decades to come. It will take a lot to pry them out of my portfolio.\nLet me show you why I intend to hold Netflix(NASDAQ:NFLX),Alphabet(NASDAQ:GOOG)(NASDAQ:GOOGL), and Walt Disney(NYSE:DIS)for the long haul. These stocks may not be slam-dunk forever holdings for every investor, but you should absolutely take a close look at these top-notch investments.\n1. Netflix\nFirst, you knew Netflix as the sender of red mail-order DVD rentals. The company introduced digital video streams as a free add-on for DVD customers in 2007, then separated the streaming business into a separate subscription service in 2011. The Qwikster event was a big marketing mess and could certainly have been handled better, but it was absolutely the right idea in the long run.\nGoing all-in on the all-digital streaming service allowed Netflix to roll out its paid subscription plans on a global scale, supplemented by an ambitious focus on original content. The subscriber count has skyrocketed from 26 million in the summer of 2011 to 209 million today. That fantastic trend has worked wonders for the company's top and bottom lines:\nNFLX REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.\nNetflix saw an opportunity to lead the charge into a brand-new market, with low infrastructure costs compared to the DVD-mailing business and buckets of worldwide growth potential. So the DVD business that had come to dominate the video rental sector in America was unceremoniously tossed aside in favor of better ideas.\nThese days, Netflix is an award-winning content producer with an unmatched distribution network in every market that matters (except forChina, where the company must operate through local partnerships). The stock has delivered a 2,240% return since the Qwikster event, which works out to a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 35.8%.\n2. Alphabet\nAlphabet is the parent company of online services giant Google. What started as a student project at Stanford quickly evolved into the world's leading online search tool. Paired with the moneymaking muscle of Google's digital advertising tools, the company generated strong cash flows early on. The cash profits were reinvested in more business ideas. Google eventually built or bought services with matchless market shares in important sectors such as web browsers, online video, email, and smartphone software.\nBy 2015, co-founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page had concluded that Google's meat-and-potatoes search and advertising businesses eventually had to fade away, overtaken by mobile alternatives and other innovations. So the company made some big changes. Google hired CFO Ruth Porat, a banking executive with decades of experience in large-scale corporate finance. Later the same year, the company changed its name to Alphabet and reorganized itself into a loose conglomerate of different operations.\nGoogle is still the backbone of Alphabet, accounting for 99.6% of the holding company's total sales in 2020. The non-Google operations are still losing money on a regular basis, despite some progress in the fields of self-driving vehicles and fiber-optic internet connections. At the same time, the company is preparing for an uncertain future by developing a plethora of online and offline business projects with massive long-term growth prospects and equally large development risks.\nIf the self-driving cars don't work out in the long run, Alphabet might find a cash machine in medical research or novel wind energy generators. We may never even have heard of the next big winner in Alphabet's sprawling portfolio. If and when Alphabet starts to make serious money from artificial intelligence tools or cancer drugs, most consumers probably won't think of that stuff as a Google business at all.\nGOOGL REVENUE (TTM) DATA BY YCHARTS.\nAlphabet continues to ride its Google heritage as far as it will go, but there is no shortage of completely unrelated operations that can take over when the browser-based search and advertising business starts to falter. Until then, the traditional search business is booming and Alphabet has rewarded investors with a 912% return in 10 years. That's an annual growth rate of 23.3%.\n3. Walt Disney\nAnd then there's the near-centennial entertainment giant. The House of Mouse was founded in 1923 by two cartoon-making brothers with a vision. The company has survived a world war, several terrible recessions, 10 decades of progress in distribution and production technologies, and much more.\nThe leisure and entertainment conglomerate you see today is a far cry from the original business, which was a pure-play cartoon production studio. Disney World and Disneyland are cultural touchstones. The company is a leading provider of hotel and resort services, including a cruise line. I can't think of another company that has mastered the art of monetizing its intellectual property as effectively as Disney has. And that intellectual property -- characters, fictional worlds, and storylines that most Americans know by heart -- will always be the lifeblood of Disney's business.\nTimes are tough right now, as the coronavirus pandemic closed down movie theaters, theme parks, resorts, and cruise ships around the world. So Disney took a good, hard look at the drastic changes in the entertainment industry and decided to put its full weight behind media-streaming platforms.\nThe company has been reorganized from the top down to support Disney's streaming platforms. The Disney+, Hulu, Hotstar, and ESPN+ streaming services are poised to challenge Netflix for the global media-streaming market, adding up to 174 million subscribers in the third quarter of 2021. Disney took on some extra debt in the darkest days of the health crisis and will most likely use some of that spare cash to accelerate its streaming operations.\nThe coronavirus caught Disney unprepared, but management didn't hesitate to turn on a dime. The whole behemoth is heading in a different direction now, supported by the same treasure trove of storytelling assets that took the company this far. This supremely well-managed company is also beating the market in the long run, with a 439% 10-year gain that works out to a CAGR of 13%.\nIMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES.\nThe common denominator\nThese three companies are very different, but they still have one all-important quality in common. I'm looking for flexibility in the face of good times and bad. If your company stands ready to make drastic changes to its operating plan when the business environment around it changes, you know you have an organization that will stand the test of time.\nLots of time in the market equals wealth-building returns. That's the main lesson you can learn from the writings of Benjamin Graham and the stellar results of his star student, Warren Buffett. Building life-changing wealth does not require a couple of years of fantastic returns. All you need is generally solid gains for several decades.\nFor example, an annual return of 10% -- in line with the long-term market average-- adds up to a 673% profit over 20 years. Beating the Street by a small margin makes a big difference on this long time scale. Boost your average gains to just 11%, and you'll see 806% returns over those 20 years. Larger increases bring even greater total long-haul returns. The three stocks discussed above are set up to do better than that, and their very survival in the long run is just about guaranteed by that willingness to change when market conditions require it.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":150,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897469667,"gmtCreate":1628960421359,"gmtModify":1676529900362,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Elon musk needs to get a grip on earth/reality… literally","listText":"Elon musk needs to get a grip on earth/reality… literally","text":"Elon musk needs to get a grip on earth/reality… literally","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/897469667","repostId":"2159521376","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2159521376","pubTimestamp":1628906786,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2159521376?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-14 10:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chasing Tesla: Here are the current electric vehicle plans of every major car maker","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2159521376","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles ","content":"<p>At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles to the point that they account for about half of total U.S. sales by 2030, a plan that raises hopes that EVs can shift from niche to normal.</p>\n<p>EVs accounted for 2.4% of U.S. cars sold in 2020, up from 0.7% five years ago, according to BloombergNEF. The research provider expects that share to increase to 11% in 2025; by 2030, it expects that slightly over a third of vehicles sold in the U.S. will be electric.</p>\n<p>Several auto makers had already announced bigger EV ambitions even before the White House call.</p>\n<p>Here are each major car maker's stated plans for EVs, including, when available, investment amounts and the range of models they hope to bring to market.</p>\n<p>This information was collated from company sites, previous reports, and BloombergNEF projections, and will be updated regularly.</p>\n<p><b>Audi</b></p>\n<p>Audi, a brand known for its luxury cars and owned by Germany's Volkswagen AG , has promised to have battery-electric vehicles comprise 35% of its sales by 2025. By that time, Audi buyers will choose from about 20 EV models.</p>\n<p><b>BMW</b></p>\n<p>BMW AG , a luxury-car maker from Germany, was among the first EV innovators. It launched its i3 compact EV eight years ago, then as $one of the few serious competitors to Tesla Inc.'s vehicles.</p>\n<p>BMW's EV pipeline has slowed, but the auto maker has promised that 25% of its European sales will be all-electric and hybrid vehicles this year, and that all sales of its Mini brand will be battery electric by 2030. It expects to launch more than 10 battery EVs models in the next couple of years.</p>\n<p><b>Daimler/Mercedes-Benz</b></p>\n<p>Mercedes-Benz, owned by Daimler AG , expects that between 15% and 25% of its sales will be comprised of EV sales by 2025; by 2030, that percentage is expected to grow to 50%. Mercedes-Benz is slated to end 2021 offering three new electric passenger car models and more to come in 2022.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ec4b2abd59e5b19c9eec0034342af25e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"413\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>SOURCE: MERCEDES</span></p>\n<p><b>Ford</b></p>\n<p>Ford Motor Co. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">$(F)$</a> has said that 40% of its global sales by 2030 will be sales of EVs . Ford is aiming to have dozens of electrified models by 2022, the year that will also mark the debut of its much-awaited all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3a44fec36dac046911679a2ba769cb2b\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"450\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>The Ford F-150 Lightning o JEFF KOWALSKY/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES</span></p>\n<p>Ford has called the Lightning the \"pillar\" of its more than $22 billion bet on EVs, which includes EV models for other best-selling vehicles such as the Mustang and its Transit van.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/87df52ddef1af1d1342d685897e83652\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"392\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>SOURCE: FORD</span></p>\n<p><b>GM</b></p>\n<p>General Motors Co. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">$(GM)$</a> surprised Wall Street in January by saying it aims to phase out all of its internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035 and only sell zero-emission vehicles by then. The auto maker also promises to be carbon-neutral by 2040.</p>\n<p>GM has said that it will offer 30 all-electric models globally by mid-decade, and that 40% percent of the company's U.S. models will be battery electric vehicles by the end of 2025. Its Hummer electric is expected for next year, with production starting this fall.</p>\n<p><b>Honda</b></p>\n<p>The Japanese maker (7267.TO), which owns the namesake Honda brand and also the luxury-car brand Acura, is projected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and fuel-cell electric cars by 2030. In April 2020, Honda and GM announced a partnership to develop Honda electric cars using GM's Ultium batteries.</p>\n<p><b>Hyundai</b></p>\n<p>The Korean car maker , which also owns Kia, is aiming to have 40% of its Kia and Hyundai brands sales to be of EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2025. Its Hyundai brand plans on more than 30 electric passenger vehicles by then.</p>\n<p><b>Mazda</b></p>\n<p>Mazda plans to offer 5% of its vehicles as battery electric by 2030, but EV sales targets as a percentage of total sales are unknown at the moment. Mazda does not offer EVs in the U.S., but sells a few EV and hybrid models elsewhere.</p>\n<p><b>Nissan</b></p>\n<p>Nissan Motor Co. Ltd. was among the first auto makers to offer an all-electric vehicle, and its the Nissan Leaf for years was one of the few options available for those without the deep pockets needed for a Tesla Inc. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">$(TSLA)$</a> Model S.</p>\n<p>Nissan plans to offer 20 EV models in China by next year, and for the U.S. the company recently said it plans that more than 40% of its U.S. vehicle sales by 2030 will be fully electric.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5cbdfabce43725b3d966cf5db5b820f6\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>The Nissan Leaf NISSAN</span></p>\n<p><b>Porsche</b></p>\n<p>The car maker and almost synonym of sports cars is aiming to have half of its sales be of EV vehicles by 2025.</p>\n<p><b>Stellantis</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/STLA\">Stellantis NV</a> (STLA.MI), the global auto maker formed earlier this year through the merger of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV and France's PSA Group, said in July it was investing $35 billion in EVs and adjacent technologies through 2025.</p>\n<p>By that year, Stellantis is expected to derive 31% of its U.S. sales and 38% of its European sales from EVs, percentages that are seen growing to 35% of U.S. sales and 70% of European sales by 2030.</p>\n<p><b>Subaru</b></p>\n<p>The Japanese maker is expected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and hybrid electric vehicles by 2030.</p>\n<p><b>Toyota</b></p>\n<p>Some 70% of sales for the world's No. 1 car maker (7203.TO) are expected to come from EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2030. Toyota plans to offer 15 battery EV models by 2025. The car maker, of course, broke ground with its hybrid Toyota Prius two decades ago.</p>\n<p><b>Volkswagen</b></p>\n<p>The car maker is expected to derive 70% of its European sales from EVs and 50% of its U.S. sales from EVs by 2030. Volkswagen has pledged to spend about $40 billion through 2025 on EVs.</p>","source":"lsy1603348471595","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>Chasing Tesla: Here are the current electric vehicle plans of every major car maker</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\">\nChasing Tesla: Here are the current electric vehicle plans of every major car maker\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-14 10:06 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chasing-tesla-here-are-the-current-electric-vehicle-plans-of-every-major-car-maker-11628876816?mod=home-page><strong>MarketWatch</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles to the point that they account for about half of total U.S. sales by 2030, a plan that raises hopes ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chasing-tesla-here-are-the-current-electric-vehicle-plans-of-every-major-car-maker-11628876816?mod=home-page\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"DDAIF":"戴姆勒汽车","GM":"通用汽车","HMC":"本田汽车","FUJHF":"Subaru Corporation ","VLKAF":"Volkswagen AG","STLA":"Stellantis NV","F":"福特汽车","TSLA":"特斯拉","TM":"丰田汽车","HYEVF":"Hyundai Elevator Co Ltd.","NSANY":"日产汽车"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/chasing-tesla-here-are-the-current-electric-vehicle-plans-of-every-major-car-maker-11628876816?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2159521376","content_text":"At President Joe Biden's urging, the auto industry pledged to boost production of electric vehicles to the point that they account for about half of total U.S. sales by 2030, a plan that raises hopes that EVs can shift from niche to normal.\nEVs accounted for 2.4% of U.S. cars sold in 2020, up from 0.7% five years ago, according to BloombergNEF. The research provider expects that share to increase to 11% in 2025; by 2030, it expects that slightly over a third of vehicles sold in the U.S. will be electric.\nSeveral auto makers had already announced bigger EV ambitions even before the White House call.\nHere are each major car maker's stated plans for EVs, including, when available, investment amounts and the range of models they hope to bring to market.\nThis information was collated from company sites, previous reports, and BloombergNEF projections, and will be updated regularly.\nAudi\nAudi, a brand known for its luxury cars and owned by Germany's Volkswagen AG , has promised to have battery-electric vehicles comprise 35% of its sales by 2025. By that time, Audi buyers will choose from about 20 EV models.\nBMW\nBMW AG , a luxury-car maker from Germany, was among the first EV innovators. It launched its i3 compact EV eight years ago, then as $one of the few serious competitors to Tesla Inc.'s vehicles.\nBMW's EV pipeline has slowed, but the auto maker has promised that 25% of its European sales will be all-electric and hybrid vehicles this year, and that all sales of its Mini brand will be battery electric by 2030. It expects to launch more than 10 battery EVs models in the next couple of years.\nDaimler/Mercedes-Benz\nMercedes-Benz, owned by Daimler AG , expects that between 15% and 25% of its sales will be comprised of EV sales by 2025; by 2030, that percentage is expected to grow to 50%. Mercedes-Benz is slated to end 2021 offering three new electric passenger car models and more to come in 2022.\nSOURCE: MERCEDES\nFord\nFord Motor Co. $(F)$ has said that 40% of its global sales by 2030 will be sales of EVs . Ford is aiming to have dozens of electrified models by 2022, the year that will also mark the debut of its much-awaited all-electric F-150 Lightning pickup truck.\nThe Ford F-150 Lightning o JEFF KOWALSKY/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE/GETTY IMAGES\nFord has called the Lightning the \"pillar\" of its more than $22 billion bet on EVs, which includes EV models for other best-selling vehicles such as the Mustang and its Transit van.\nSOURCE: FORD\nGM\nGeneral Motors Co. $(GM)$ surprised Wall Street in January by saying it aims to phase out all of its internal combustion engine vehicles by 2035 and only sell zero-emission vehicles by then. The auto maker also promises to be carbon-neutral by 2040.\nGM has said that it will offer 30 all-electric models globally by mid-decade, and that 40% percent of the company's U.S. models will be battery electric vehicles by the end of 2025. Its Hummer electric is expected for next year, with production starting this fall.\nHonda\nThe Japanese maker (7267.TO), which owns the namesake Honda brand and also the luxury-car brand Acura, is projected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and fuel-cell electric cars by 2030. In April 2020, Honda and GM announced a partnership to develop Honda electric cars using GM's Ultium batteries.\nHyundai\nThe Korean car maker , which also owns Kia, is aiming to have 40% of its Kia and Hyundai brands sales to be of EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2025. Its Hyundai brand plans on more than 30 electric passenger vehicles by then.\nMazda\nMazda plans to offer 5% of its vehicles as battery electric by 2030, but EV sales targets as a percentage of total sales are unknown at the moment. Mazda does not offer EVs in the U.S., but sells a few EV and hybrid models elsewhere.\nNissan\nNissan Motor Co. Ltd. was among the first auto makers to offer an all-electric vehicle, and its the Nissan Leaf for years was one of the few options available for those without the deep pockets needed for a Tesla Inc. $(TSLA)$ Model S.\nNissan plans to offer 20 EV models in China by next year, and for the U.S. the company recently said it plans that more than 40% of its U.S. vehicle sales by 2030 will be fully electric.\nThe Nissan Leaf NISSAN\nPorsche\nThe car maker and almost synonym of sports cars is aiming to have half of its sales be of EV vehicles by 2025.\nStellantis\nStellantis NV (STLA.MI), the global auto maker formed earlier this year through the merger of Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV and France's PSA Group, said in July it was investing $35 billion in EVs and adjacent technologies through 2025.\nBy that year, Stellantis is expected to derive 31% of its U.S. sales and 38% of its European sales from EVs, percentages that are seen growing to 35% of U.S. sales and 70% of European sales by 2030.\nSubaru\nThe Japanese maker is expected to derive 40% of its sales from EVs and hybrid electric vehicles by 2030.\nToyota\nSome 70% of sales for the world's No. 1 car maker (7203.TO) are expected to come from EVs and fuel-cell electric vehicles by 2030. Toyota plans to offer 15 battery EV models by 2025. The car maker, of course, broke ground with its hybrid Toyota Prius two decades ago.\nVolkswagen\nThe car maker is expected to derive 70% of its European sales from EVs and 50% of its U.S. sales from EVs by 2030. Volkswagen has pledged to spend about $40 billion through 2025 on EVs.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":166,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":813482845,"gmtCreate":1630230514587,"gmtModify":1676530247979,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read&nbsp;","listText":"Read&nbsp;","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/813482845","repostId":"1129129956","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129129956","pubTimestamp":1630201285,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1129129956?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-29 09:41","market":"us","language":"en","title":"This Unloved Tech Stock Could Make You Rich One Day","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129129956","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.The company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.The market is bearish on virtually all SPACs, making Opendoor a bargain that could eventually bring huge returns.Real estate iBuying company Opendoor Technologieshas been executing at a high level in the three quarters since coming public via a special purpose acquisition company  merger. In a race to disrupt residential ","content":"<p>Key Points</p>\n<ul>\n <li>The iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.</li>\n <li>The company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.</li>\n <li>The market is bearish on virtually all SPACs, making Opendoor a bargain that could eventually bring huge returns.</li>\n</ul>\n<p></p>\n<p>Real estate iBuying company&nbsp;<b>Opendoor Technologies</b>(NASDAQ:OPEN)has been executing at a high level in the three quarters since coming public via a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) merger. In a race to disrupt residential real estate, one of the largest markets in the world, Opendoor's long-term potential could bring big returns for patient investors.</p>\n<p>Despite the upside, the market hasn't yet appreciated Opendoor's accomplishments; the stock is down more than 50% from its highs. There are three important clues that Opendoor could be a compelling investment idea for bold investors.</p>\n<h3>1. Opendoor is winning the iBuying battle</h3>\n<p>The traditional home-buying process in the United States is slow and handled by multiple parties, including agents, lawyers, inspectors, and bankers. This creates a lot of back and forth paperwork and drags the process out to more than 30 days, on average.</p>\n<p>Opendoor pioneered the concept of \"iBuying,\" where the buying and selling of a house are digitized, and a company like Opendoor works directly with sellers to provide them with a cash offer and a digital closing process. The company then resells the house on the market. The iBuying process cuts out agents and some of the fees associated with traditional closings, such as agent commissions. Opendoor then resells the house on the market and charges a service fee of up to 5% on the transaction.</p>\n<p>After seeing Opendoor steadily grow with its iBuying concept, competitors have also begun to offer iBuying services, including&nbsp;<b>Zillow Group</b>&nbsp;and Offerpad. Because of how capital intensive the business is (a lot of money is needed to buy and sell thousands of houses) and how price competitive the housing market is, these companies are racing to get as big as possible. As the companies buy and sell more homes, they have the ability to become more profitable by leveraging outsourced contractors to save money, and its pricing algorithm improves as it sees more transactions.</p>\n<p>According to iBuyerStats, a website dedicated to tracking the competitors found in iBuying, Opendoor has consistently had the most housing inventory available for sale. It currently has roughly 3,300 houses for sale, 53% more than Zillow and more than four times as many as Offerpad.</p>\n<h3>2. Revenue growth is ahead of schedule</h3>\n<p>When companies go public viaSPACmerger, they lay out a public presentation of their business, often including long-term growth projections. Opendoor laid out its pre-merger investor presentation about a year ago, in September 2020.</p>\n<p>Fast forward to the company's recent 2021 Q2 earnings call. CEO and founder Eric Wu said on the earnings call, \"... based on our current progress, our second half revenue run rate is on track to exceed our 2023 target, a full two years ahead of plan.\"</p>\n<p>In other words, if Opendoor were to operate for 12 months at the level the business currently is, it would surpass the $9.8 billion in revenue it projected for 2023. This is an underlooked point because if Opendoor is already two years ahead of its original growth curve, where will it be by 2023? Sure, a dip in the housing market or other events could disrupt the company's speed of growth, but Opendoor is showing the world that the business is operating at a high level.</p>\n<h3>3. SPACs are out of favor with the market... opportunity?</h3>\n<p>Investors have overlooked this strong performance, focusing instead on the fact that Opendoor joined the public market via SPAC merger. It has hardly mattered what operating results or earnings have looked like for former SPACs; the stock market has been selling off virtually all SPAC-based stocks for several months now.</p>\n<p>Investors have been spooked by a handful of \"bad apple\" companies turning up fraudulent, and other companies have wildly missed on the projections they made before going public. These instances have burned those involved, and investors have taken a much more cautious attitude toward SPACs as a whole.</p>\n<p>But if companies like Opendoor keep blowing away estimates, the market is likely to come around eventually. When it does, the stock price could move aggressively. If we take Eric Wu's comments about revenue and assume that Opendoor does sales of $10 billion in 2022 (in other words, Opendoor stops growing and maintains its current pace over the following year), the stock currently trades at aprice-to-sales(P/S) ratio of just 1.0. That's a bargain-bin valuation.</p>\n<p>Competitor Zillow Group trades at a P/S ratio of more than 3, reflecting Opendoor's discount as a former SPAC.</p>\n<h3>Here's the bottom line</h3>\n<p>Real estate is a huge market, and it's a complicated industry because of the clash between traditional agents and the \"new kids\" on the block trying to bring technology into homebuying. It's too early to say that Opendoor will become the \"<b>Amazon</b>\" of home buying, but what seems certain is that the company is&nbsp;poised to be a big player&nbsp;in real estate's future if it keeps performing like this.</p>\n<p></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>This Unloved Tech Stock Could Make You Rich One Day</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\">\nThis Unloved Tech Stock Could Make You Rich One Day\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-29 09:41 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/28/this-unloved-tech-stock-may-make-you-rich-one-day/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Key Points\n\nThe iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.\nThe company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.\nThe ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/28/this-unloved-tech-stock-may-make-you-rich-one-day/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"OPEN":"Opendoor Technologies Inc"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/08/28/this-unloved-tech-stock-may-make-you-rich-one-day/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129129956","content_text":"Key Points\n\nThe iBuying business is a race to grow larger, and Opendoor is winning.\nThe company is growing at a rate that is two years ahead of what management projected just a year earlier.\nThe market is bearish on virtually all SPACs, making Opendoor a bargain that could eventually bring huge returns.\n\n\nReal estate iBuying company Opendoor Technologies(NASDAQ:OPEN)has been executing at a high level in the three quarters since coming public via a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) merger. In a race to disrupt residential real estate, one of the largest markets in the world, Opendoor's long-term potential could bring big returns for patient investors.\nDespite the upside, the market hasn't yet appreciated Opendoor's accomplishments; the stock is down more than 50% from its highs. There are three important clues that Opendoor could be a compelling investment idea for bold investors.\n1. Opendoor is winning the iBuying battle\nThe traditional home-buying process in the United States is slow and handled by multiple parties, including agents, lawyers, inspectors, and bankers. This creates a lot of back and forth paperwork and drags the process out to more than 30 days, on average.\nOpendoor pioneered the concept of \"iBuying,\" where the buying and selling of a house are digitized, and a company like Opendoor works directly with sellers to provide them with a cash offer and a digital closing process. The company then resells the house on the market. The iBuying process cuts out agents and some of the fees associated with traditional closings, such as agent commissions. Opendoor then resells the house on the market and charges a service fee of up to 5% on the transaction.\nAfter seeing Opendoor steadily grow with its iBuying concept, competitors have also begun to offer iBuying services, including Zillow Group and Offerpad. Because of how capital intensive the business is (a lot of money is needed to buy and sell thousands of houses) and how price competitive the housing market is, these companies are racing to get as big as possible. As the companies buy and sell more homes, they have the ability to become more profitable by leveraging outsourced contractors to save money, and its pricing algorithm improves as it sees more transactions.\nAccording to iBuyerStats, a website dedicated to tracking the competitors found in iBuying, Opendoor has consistently had the most housing inventory available for sale. It currently has roughly 3,300 houses for sale, 53% more than Zillow and more than four times as many as Offerpad.\n2. Revenue growth is ahead of schedule\nWhen companies go public viaSPACmerger, they lay out a public presentation of their business, often including long-term growth projections. Opendoor laid out its pre-merger investor presentation about a year ago, in September 2020.\nFast forward to the company's recent 2021 Q2 earnings call. CEO and founder Eric Wu said on the earnings call, \"... based on our current progress, our second half revenue run rate is on track to exceed our 2023 target, a full two years ahead of plan.\"\nIn other words, if Opendoor were to operate for 12 months at the level the business currently is, it would surpass the $9.8 billion in revenue it projected for 2023. This is an underlooked point because if Opendoor is already two years ahead of its original growth curve, where will it be by 2023? Sure, a dip in the housing market or other events could disrupt the company's speed of growth, but Opendoor is showing the world that the business is operating at a high level.\n3. SPACs are out of favor with the market... opportunity?\nInvestors have overlooked this strong performance, focusing instead on the fact that Opendoor joined the public market via SPAC merger. It has hardly mattered what operating results or earnings have looked like for former SPACs; the stock market has been selling off virtually all SPAC-based stocks for several months now.\nInvestors have been spooked by a handful of \"bad apple\" companies turning up fraudulent, and other companies have wildly missed on the projections they made before going public. These instances have burned those involved, and investors have taken a much more cautious attitude toward SPACs as a whole.\nBut if companies like Opendoor keep blowing away estimates, the market is likely to come around eventually. When it does, the stock price could move aggressively. If we take Eric Wu's comments about revenue and assume that Opendoor does sales of $10 billion in 2022 (in other words, Opendoor stops growing and maintains its current pace over the following year), the stock currently trades at aprice-to-sales(P/S) ratio of just 1.0. That's a bargain-bin valuation.\nCompetitor Zillow Group trades at a P/S ratio of more than 3, reflecting Opendoor's discount as a former SPAC.\nHere's the bottom line\nReal estate is a huge market, and it's a complicated industry because of the clash between traditional agents and the \"new kids\" on the block trying to bring technology into homebuying. It's too early to say that Opendoor will become the \"Amazon\" of home buying, but what seems certain is that the company is poised to be a big player in real estate's future if it keeps performing like this.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":699,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9942853205,"gmtCreate":1681188680607,"gmtModify":1681188684733,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Frustration Easter egg game","listText":"Frustration Easter egg game","text":"Frustration Easter egg game","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":1,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9942853205","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":231,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[{"author":{"id":"3581908317501470","authorId":"3581908317501470","name":"Wilson29","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f2cd80d04a53f5e69b345c5f352290c1","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3581908317501470","authorIdStr":"3581908317501470"},"content":"Seems cannot win the tiger share since only 2 redemption chance!","text":"Seems cannot win the tiger share since only 2 redemption chance!","html":"Seems cannot win the tiger share since only 2 redemption chance!"}],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":176016020,"gmtCreate":1626844944260,"gmtModify":1703766289894,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Goid","listText":"Goid","text":"Goid","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/176016020","repostId":"1110746736","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1110746736","pubTimestamp":1626838936,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1110746736?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-21 11:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple’s Earnings Are Next Week. Analysts Are Expecting More.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1110746736","media":"Barrons","summary":"Apple shares are trading higher Tuesday as the Street continues to ratchet up expectations for the company’s June quarter earnings report, now a week away.The Wall Street consensus view is that Apple  will post revenue of $72.9 billion, up 22% from a year earlier, with profits of $1 a share. When it reported its March quarter results, Apple didn’t issue specific financial forecasts for the June quarter, but said it expects “strong double digit” revenue growth on a year-over-year basis. Managemen","content":"<p>Apple shares are trading higher Tuesday as the Street continues to ratchet up expectations for the company’s June quarter earnings report, now a week away.</p>\n<p>The Wall Street consensus view is that Apple (ticker: AAPL) will post revenue of $72.9 billion, up 22% from a year earlier, with profits of $1 a share. When it reported its March quarter results, Apple didn’t issue specific financial forecasts for the June quarter, but said it expects “strong double digit” revenue growth on a year-over-year basis. Management also predicted a bigger quarter-over-quarter decline than in prior years, due to the later launch last year of the iPhone 12 and continuing component shortages.</p>\n<p>Apple has said gross margin for the quarter will be between 41.5% and 42.5%, and that supply constraints affecting Macs and iPads will trim top-line revenue by as much as $4 billion.</p>\n<p>In a research note Tuesday, UBS analyst David Vogt lifted his outlook for the quarter, citing strong demand for both iPhones and Macs. His forecast for the quarter went to $74.7 billion in revenue and profits of $1.01 a share, from $71.3 billion and 95 cents a share. Vogt repeated his Buy rating, and raised his target for the stock price to $160, from $155. He said revenue would be higher still were it not for supply constraints.</p>\n<p>Apple shares on Tuesday were up 2.6%, to $146.15, while the S&amp;P 500 had gained 1.6%.</p>\n<p>Vogt now sees iPhone unit shipments for the September 2021 fiscal year of 227 million, up from 225 million. For fiscal 2022, he now expects shipments of 225 million phones, up from 220 million. He boosted his Mac forecast for the quarter to 6 million units, from 5.5 million.</p>\n<p>Monness Crespi Hardt analyst Brian White repeated a Buy rating and $180 stock-price target, saying that the Street consensus for the quarter is far too conservative. He expects revenue of $80.33 billion, which would be up 35% year over year, with profits of $1.16 a share. That would still be a 10% sequential decline, and slightly steeper than the average 8% dip over the past four June quarters, he noted.</p>\n<p>White’s forecasts for June quarter revenue are $39.1 billion for the iPhone (the Street consensus is $33.9 billion); $9.6 billion for Macs (way above the Street at $7.8 billion); $6.9 billion for iPads (the Street’s call is $7.2 billion); $7.5 billion for wearables, home, and accessories (consensus is $7.8 billion); and $17.2 billion for services (vs. the consensus call of $16.2 billion).</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Apple’s Earnings Are Next Week. Analysts Are Expecting 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\">\nApple’s Earnings Are Next Week. Analysts Are Expecting More.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-21 11:42 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/apples-earnings-outlook-upgrades-revenue-sales-51626805089?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_2_2><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Apple shares are trading higher Tuesday as the Street continues to ratchet up expectations for the company’s June quarter earnings report, now a week away.\nThe Wall Street consensus view is that Apple...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/apples-earnings-outlook-upgrades-revenue-sales-51626805089?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_2_2\">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.barrons.com/articles/apples-earnings-outlook-upgrades-revenue-sales-51626805089?mod=hp_DAY_Theme_2_2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1110746736","content_text":"Apple shares are trading higher Tuesday as the Street continues to ratchet up expectations for the company’s June quarter earnings report, now a week away.\nThe Wall Street consensus view is that Apple (ticker: AAPL) will post revenue of $72.9 billion, up 22% from a year earlier, with profits of $1 a share. When it reported its March quarter results, Apple didn’t issue specific financial forecasts for the June quarter, but said it expects “strong double digit” revenue growth on a year-over-year basis. Management also predicted a bigger quarter-over-quarter decline than in prior years, due to the later launch last year of the iPhone 12 and continuing component shortages.\nApple has said gross margin for the quarter will be between 41.5% and 42.5%, and that supply constraints affecting Macs and iPads will trim top-line revenue by as much as $4 billion.\nIn a research note Tuesday, UBS analyst David Vogt lifted his outlook for the quarter, citing strong demand for both iPhones and Macs. His forecast for the quarter went to $74.7 billion in revenue and profits of $1.01 a share, from $71.3 billion and 95 cents a share. Vogt repeated his Buy rating, and raised his target for the stock price to $160, from $155. He said revenue would be higher still were it not for supply constraints.\nApple shares on Tuesday were up 2.6%, to $146.15, while the S&P 500 had gained 1.6%.\nVogt now sees iPhone unit shipments for the September 2021 fiscal year of 227 million, up from 225 million. For fiscal 2022, he now expects shipments of 225 million phones, up from 220 million. He boosted his Mac forecast for the quarter to 6 million units, from 5.5 million.\nMonness Crespi Hardt analyst Brian White repeated a Buy rating and $180 stock-price target, saying that the Street consensus for the quarter is far too conservative. He expects revenue of $80.33 billion, which would be up 35% year over year, with profits of $1.16 a share. That would still be a 10% sequential decline, and slightly steeper than the average 8% dip over the past four June quarters, he noted.\nWhite’s forecasts for June quarter revenue are $39.1 billion for the iPhone (the Street consensus is $33.9 billion); $9.6 billion for Macs (way above the Street at $7.8 billion); $6.9 billion for iPads (the Street’s call is $7.2 billion); $7.5 billion for wearables, home, and accessories (consensus is $7.8 billion); and $17.2 billion for services (vs. the consensus call of $16.2 billion).","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":53,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":803507811,"gmtCreate":1627445888033,"gmtModify":1703490128169,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Jeff Bezos should treat his Amazon workers&nbsp;better&nbsp;","listText":"Jeff Bezos should treat his Amazon workers&nbsp;better&nbsp;","text":"Jeff Bezos should treat his Amazon workers better","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/803507811","repostId":"1191373683","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1191373683","pubTimestamp":1627442907,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1191373683?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-28 11:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jeff Bezos, Fresh From Space, Offers to Waive $2 Billion for NASA Moon Contract","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1191373683","media":"WSJ","summary":"Jeff Bezos offered to waive up to $2 billion in fees to NASA in an effort to help his Blue Origin LL","content":"<p>Jeff Bezos&nbsp;offered to waive up to $2 billion in fees to NASA in an effort to help his Blue Origin LLC space company become part of a lunar-lander contract that the agency awarded solely toElon Musk’s SpaceX.</p>\n<p>The billionaire founder of&nbsp;Amazon.com&nbsp;Inc.said the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should return to an original plan to dually source its Artemis program that aims to return U.S. astronauts to the moon’s surface this decade. The agency&nbsp;awarded SpaceX a contract for the first mission&nbsp;back to the moon after opting to go with a single supplier amid budget constraints.</p>\n<p>Inan open letter&nbsp;Monday to Bill Nelson, NASA’s administrator, Mr. Bezos said his fee-waiving offer over roughly the next two years would remove those constraints.</p>\n<p>“I believe this mission is important. I am honored to offer these contributions and am grateful to be in a financial position to be able to do so,” Mr. Bezos said.</p>\n<p>SpaceX won the $2.9 billion Artemis contract in April, beating out bids by both Blue Origin and a unit of Virginia-basedLeidos HoldingsInc.,which provides scientific and technological services. The arrangement expanded SpaceX’s relationship with NASA, which already is contracting its Falcon 9 rockets to ferry astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station.</p>\n<p>A spokesman for Space Exploration Technologies Corp., as the company is formally known, didn’t respond to a request for comment.</p>\n<p>Both Blue Origin and Dynetics filed protests of the contract award to SpaceX with the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which is due to rule on them by next week. NASA said it wouldn’t comment on Mr. Bezos’ letter because of those efforts.</p>\n<p>NASA determined that Blue Origin’s bid price for the lander contract amounted to $5.99 billion, according to the company’s protest with the GAO. The gap between Blue Origin’s higher bid and SpaceX’s would narrow, according to Mr. Bezos’ letter to NASA, but it might not close completely.</p>\n<p>In addition to the offer to waive $2 billion in payments, Blue Origin promised to fund an additional mission of the lander to low-Earth orbit, the letter said. It didn’t estimate how much that effort would cost. A Blue Origin spokeswoman declined to comment.</p>\n<p>NASA has said its decision to award SpaceX the lander contract was a first step, and not the final one, in the agency’s plans to tap outside companies to provide moon-landing services.</p>\n<p>Mr. Nelson said previously at a congressional hearing that NASA would seek $5 billion in additional government funding to support future bids for its lunar lander system.</p>\n<p>Greg Autry, who was nominated by the Trump administration to serve as NASA’s finance chief but never received a Senate confirmation vote, said the agency has successfully hired multiple contractors for important space programs. He said NASA should take advantage of what Blue Origin proposed.</p>\n<p>“Nothing is more important than having a backup system,” Mr. Autry said.</p>\n<p>Mr. Bezos’ appeal came a week afterhe traveled into spacein a flight that highlighted Blue Origin’s interest in the nascent space-tourism market. The company has beentrying to develop a business beyond that sector, however.</p>\n<p>In addition to competing for the moon lander, Blue Origin has beendeveloping a rocket called the New Glennthat is designed to take large payloads into orbit but hasn’t yet flown. The company is behind in its plans to launch the New Glenn and said in February that it was targeting a maiden flight for late next year.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin also struck a deal to develop a new rocket engine for United Launch Alliance, which launches satellites for the Pentagon and U.S. spy agencies, but that effort has also experienced delays.</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>Jeff Bezos, Fresh From Space, Offers to Waive $2 Billion for NASA Moon Contract</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\">\nJeff Bezos, Fresh From Space, Offers to Waive $2 Billion for NASA Moon Contract\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-28 11:28 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-bezos-fresh-from-space-offers-to-waive-2-billion-for-nasa-moon-contract-11627379891?mod=business_lead_pos7><strong>WSJ</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Jeff Bezos offered to waive up to $2 billion in fees to NASA in an effort to help his Blue Origin LLC space company become part of a lunar-lander contract that the agency awarded solely toElon Musk’s ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-bezos-fresh-from-space-offers-to-waive-2-billion-for-nasa-moon-contract-11627379891?mod=business_lead_pos7\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","SPCE":"维珍银河"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/jeff-bezos-fresh-from-space-offers-to-waive-2-billion-for-nasa-moon-contract-11627379891?mod=business_lead_pos7","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1191373683","content_text":"Jeff Bezos offered to waive up to $2 billion in fees to NASA in an effort to help his Blue Origin LLC space company become part of a lunar-lander contract that the agency awarded solely toElon Musk’s SpaceX.\nThe billionaire founder of Amazon.com Inc.said the National Aeronautics and Space Administration should return to an original plan to dually source its Artemis program that aims to return U.S. astronauts to the moon’s surface this decade. The agency awarded SpaceX a contract for the first mission back to the moon after opting to go with a single supplier amid budget constraints.\nInan open letter Monday to Bill Nelson, NASA’s administrator, Mr. Bezos said his fee-waiving offer over roughly the next two years would remove those constraints.\n“I believe this mission is important. I am honored to offer these contributions and am grateful to be in a financial position to be able to do so,” Mr. Bezos said.\nSpaceX won the $2.9 billion Artemis contract in April, beating out bids by both Blue Origin and a unit of Virginia-basedLeidos HoldingsInc.,which provides scientific and technological services. The arrangement expanded SpaceX’s relationship with NASA, which already is contracting its Falcon 9 rockets to ferry astronauts and cargo to the International Space Station.\nA spokesman for Space Exploration Technologies Corp., as the company is formally known, didn’t respond to a request for comment.\nBoth Blue Origin and Dynetics filed protests of the contract award to SpaceX with the U.S. Government Accountability Office, which is due to rule on them by next week. NASA said it wouldn’t comment on Mr. Bezos’ letter because of those efforts.\nNASA determined that Blue Origin’s bid price for the lander contract amounted to $5.99 billion, according to the company’s protest with the GAO. The gap between Blue Origin’s higher bid and SpaceX’s would narrow, according to Mr. Bezos’ letter to NASA, but it might not close completely.\nIn addition to the offer to waive $2 billion in payments, Blue Origin promised to fund an additional mission of the lander to low-Earth orbit, the letter said. It didn’t estimate how much that effort would cost. A Blue Origin spokeswoman declined to comment.\nNASA has said its decision to award SpaceX the lander contract was a first step, and not the final one, in the agency’s plans to tap outside companies to provide moon-landing services.\nMr. Nelson said previously at a congressional hearing that NASA would seek $5 billion in additional government funding to support future bids for its lunar lander system.\nGreg Autry, who was nominated by the Trump administration to serve as NASA’s finance chief but never received a Senate confirmation vote, said the agency has successfully hired multiple contractors for important space programs. He said NASA should take advantage of what Blue Origin proposed.\n“Nothing is more important than having a backup system,” Mr. Autry said.\nMr. Bezos’ appeal came a week afterhe traveled into spacein a flight that highlighted Blue Origin’s interest in the nascent space-tourism market. The company has beentrying to develop a business beyond that sector, however.\nIn addition to competing for the moon lander, Blue Origin has beendeveloping a rocket called the New Glennthat is designed to take large payloads into orbit but hasn’t yet flown. The company is behind in its plans to launch the New Glenn and said in February that it was targeting a maiden flight for late next year.\nBlue Origin also struck a deal to develop a new rocket engine for United Launch Alliance, which launches satellites for the Pentagon and U.S. spy agencies, but that effort has also experienced delays.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":88,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835368406,"gmtCreate":1629687989005,"gmtModify":1676530100034,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Read","listText":"Read","text":"Read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/835368406","repostId":"1107254712","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1107254712","pubTimestamp":1629686681,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1107254712?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1107254712","media":"CNN","summary":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want","content":"<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.</p>\n<p>Both of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.</p>\n<p>And the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.</p>\n<p>The current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.</p>\n<p>Blue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.</p>\n<p>Here's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.</p>\n<p>The billionaires, Artemis, &amp; HLS</p>\n<p>The United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.</p>\n<p>And, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.</p>\n<p>Last April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.</p>\n<p>But, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.</p>\n<p>The drama</p>\n<p>When it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.</p>\n<p>But Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.</p>\n<p>Such protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.</p>\n<p>Bezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.</p>\n<p>\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"</p>\n<p>Those pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.</p>\n<p>Musk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying &amp; lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"</p>\n<p>What's next</p>\n<p>A federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.</p>\n<p>So far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"</p>\n<p>Many space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.</p>\n<p>And as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.</p>\n<p>During the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"</p>\n<p>\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"</p>\n<p>Many experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.</p>\n<p>Lori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.</p>\n<p>\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.</p>\n<p>(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)</p>\n<p>Garver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"</p>\n<p>Looking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.</p>\n<p>\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Elon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nElon Musk and Jeff Bezos are arguing over the moon already. Here's what it all means\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 10:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html><strong>CNN</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMZN":"亚马逊","TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/08/19/tech/spacex-blue-origin-nasa-hls-explainer-scn/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1107254712","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)Jeff Bezos and Elon Musk, the two wealthiest people on this planet, both want to be center stage when NASA returns astronauts to the moon. But NASA only has enough money for one of them, and it went with Musk's SpaceX. That means Bezos' Blue Origin is mad.\nBoth of the billionaires' space companies are working to develop lunar landers, vehicles capable of making a gentle touch down on the moon's rocky surface.\nAnd the companies gave NASA two wildly different proposals for getting boots on the moon. SpaceX plans to use Starship, a gargantuan rocket and spacecraft system currently in development that Musk hopes will go on to colonize Mars one day. And Blue Origin gave a more straightforward plan to develop a lunar lander much like those used for the mid-20th century NASA Apollo missions, which remain the only missions that have ever put humans on the moon.\nThe current drama was kicked off when Congress allotted NASA about two billion dollars less than it requested, and the space agency chose to go with only one contractor for its Human Landing System (HLS) at least for the first moon landing the agency has planned.\nBlue Origin has been fighting that decision ever since, creating a public and occasionally petty battle between the companies.\nHere's what went down, why it matters, and what to expect.\nThe billionaires, Artemis, & HLS\nThe United States' approach to exploring outer space is at a turning point. NASA's Artemis Program aims to put two people, including the first woman and person of color, on the moon by 2024. Then the goal is to establish a permanent lunar settlement.\nAnd, as is the case with the Artemis HLS contracts, Artemis is also the stage for a truly spectacular example of the current American zeitgeist — pitting the two richest men in the world against each other and finding out what, if any, new technologies emerge.\nLast April, NASA handed out three contracts to SpaceX, Blue Origin and Alabama-based Dynetics, which were intended to kickstart development of their lunar landers and were worth about $100 million to $600 million each. NASA then planned to select up to two companies to get the final contracts.\nBut, despite months of the agency's lobbying, Congress ultimately gave NASA less than a billion of the $3.2 billion the agency had requested for HLS development.\nThe drama\nWhen it came time to bid for the NASA contract, Dynetics put up a $9 billion offer and Blue Origin gave a $6 billion bid, both of which were cast aside in favor of SpaceX's $3 billion offer. And, citing budget constraints, NASA announced plans to move forward with SpaceX as its sole HLS partner.\nBut Blue Origin immediately shot back by filing a protest with the Government Accountability Office, Congress' watchdog and auditing group, arguing that NASA should've revamped the contracting competition after it became clear that it didn't have enough money to fund multiple contracts. And, the protest alleged, NASA gave unfair leeway and, potentially, preferential treatment to SpaceX.\nSuch protests are far from uncommon in the world of government contracting, and the GAO swiftly denied Blue Origin's claim in July. The GAO said that NASA did not do anything inappropriate during its evaluation of the proposals, and public records from those proceedings reaffirm that NASA considered SpaceX's proposal not only cheaper than the other two, but also the most advanced in terms of the company's technology and program management plans.\nBezos also personally intervened at one point by sending an open letter to NASA Administrator Bill Nelson in which he pledged to waive $2 billion of development cost if it would get Blue Origin's hat back in the ring.\n\"Without competition, a short time into the contract, NASA will find itself with limited options as it attempts to negotiate missed deadlines, design changes, and cost overruns,\" Bezos' lettter reads. \"Without competition, NASA's short-term and long-term lunar ambitions will be delayed, will ultimately cost more, and won't serve the national interest.\"\nThose pleas went unanswered. Then Blue Origin escalated the standoff again this week by filing a lawsuit in federal claims court.\nMeanwhile, the PR offensives began. Blue Origin put out an infographic that attempts to paint SpaceX's plans — which involve using multiple launches to get Starship vehicles and tankers full of fuel into orbit — as an outlandish, straying too far from technology that has already been proven. \"Immensely complex and high risk,\" the infographic's headline blared.\nMusk personally shot back on Twitter, posting that if \"lobbying & lawyers could get u to orbit, Bezos would be on Pluto [right now.]\"\nWhat's next\nA federal judge has an October 12 deadline to give Blue Origin an answer on its last-ditch effort to get back in the HLS program.\nSo far, NASA has said only that it's \"reviewing details of the case\" and will provide an update on the Artemis Program \"soon.\"\nMany space enthusiasts have meanwhile been dragging Bezos and Blue Origin through the mud. Industry onlookers and insiders have warned a baseless lawsuit could slow SpaceX down and ultimately delay the moon landing.\nAnd as others noted, Blue Origin's protests over this contract run counter to comments Bezos himself made in 2019 about how contract protests can hamstring the space industry.\nDuring the Apollo era, Bezos claimed, NASA would hand out contracts without issue. \"Today, there would be three protests and the losers would sue the federal government because they didn't win.\"\n\"It's become the bigger bottleneck than the technology,\" Bezos said of NASA's procurement processes. \"Which I know for a fact, for all the well-meaning people at NASA, is frustrating.\"\nMany experts already doubt that NASA can put boots on the moon by its 2024 deadline whether or not Blue Origin's protest bid is successful. And there may be larger market forces at work that make a single-source contractor for HLS sensible.\nLori Garver, a former deputy NASA administrator and a key figure in the push for commercial contracting methods at NASA, told CNN Business that she doesn't agree with Blue Origin's argument that handing a sole-source contract to SpaceX makes the HLS program anti-competitive.\n\"I'm not sure there will be a market for a lunar lander anytime soon,\" Garver said, adding that NASA is the only obvious customer for such missions at the moment. So, the companies don't even have the lure of a potential commercial market to bolster their competition, she said.\n(SpaceX does already have at least one customer who has promised to fork over the money to take Starship on a joy ride around the moon.)\nGarver is also confident SpaceX's Starship can succeed, adding \"a lot of people bet against Elon and SpaceX — but they usually don't win.\"\nLooking at the big picture, Garver added, the whole Blue Origin vs. SpaceX standoff is a sign of the unusual and exciting times that the space industry is entering.\n\"You don't have a customer beyond NASA for this service, but we happen to have two billionaires interested in paying for it. And I wouldn't have foreseen that, and I count NASA lucky.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":121,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":804792686,"gmtCreate":1627978574245,"gmtModify":1703498983081,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/804792686","repostId":"1172747257","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":118,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":134920405,"gmtCreate":1622201891107,"gmtModify":1704181368935,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/134920405","repostId":"1123515893","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":238,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802445174,"gmtCreate":1627799895998,"gmtModify":1703496080839,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802445174","repostId":"1186334150","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1186334150","pubTimestamp":1627713845,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1186334150?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-31 14:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Infrastructure Spending Is on Its Way. Here’s a Cheap Way to Play It","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1186334150","media":"Barron's","summary":"U.S. lawmakers appear to be on the cusp of passing a massive and long-awaitedinfrastructure-investme","content":"<p>U.S. lawmakers appear to be on the cusp of passing a massive and long-awaitedinfrastructure-investment bill, totaling some $1 trillion.</p>\n<p>The legislation should be a boost to businesses like<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VMC\">Vulcan Materials</a>(ticker: VMC) and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MLM\">Martin Marietta Materials</a>(MLM), which make concrete and asphalt;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CAT\">Caterpillar</a>(CAT) and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TEX\">Terex</a>(TEX), which make construction equipment; and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/URI\">United Rentals</a>(URI), which rents the machinery. Most of their stocks have already jumped on theprospect of infrastructure spending.</p>\n<p>But <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> infrastructure play has been overlooked:<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AFH\">Atlas</a> Technical Consultants(ATCX) provides engineering and design services, inspection and certification of buildings and public works, and other construction-related services. More construction means more plans and designs for Atlas to review. These eventually become finished projects that need annual inspections, paying dividends for years.</p>\n<p>And yet Atlas shares have stalled. At a recent $9, the stock trades for just eight times enterprise value to estimated 2022 earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, or Ebitda. That multiple is a significant discount to companies in related inspection businesses, such asMontrose Environmental Group(MEG) andTetra Tech(TTEK), which trade for more than 22 times EV/2022 Ebitda.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/19ad62f427fb70a25aa96068bc5d1756\" tg-width=\"442\" tg-height=\"364\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">“Right now, part of the valuation discount is due to the debt, but I would say there are companies like Atlas where the debt is appropriate,” says Kevin Silverman, chief investment officer and portfolio manager at small-cap–focused <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/STL\">Sterling</a> Partners <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EQR\">Equity</a> Advisors, which owns more than $2 million worth of Atlas stock, accounting for about 2% of its assets under management. “The debt helps equity holders if you have steady profit margins and can use it for growth.”</p>\n<p>And Atlas has substantial opportunities for growth. Beyond the infrastructure-bill boost, Atlas has a long-term strategy of consolidating the fragmented U.S. inspection-services market while reducing its debt levels. Both should increase its appeal to investors and earn it a higher valuation multiple.</p>\n<p>The Austin, Texas–headquartered company went public inearly 2020via a merger with a special-purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. The deal saddled the company with a convoluted capital structure, including multiple share classes, outstanding warrants, and other complications. That complexity has probably kept some investors away, as has Atlas’ relatively high debt load, which comes to 5.5 times net debt to 2021 Ebitda.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/99bb73a7c212bfed6d0890b8b14fbc15\" tg-width=\"607\" tg-height=\"396\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Atlas has reduced that complexity—redeeming its preferred equity, buying out warrants, and increasing the stock’s publicly traded float—and is focused on bringing its net debt below three times Ebitda.</p>\n<p>Atlas is forecast to grow sales 13% this year, to $530 million, with Ebitda up 21%, to $76 million.</p>\n<p>Its customers include state departments of transportation, private building owners, electric and water utilities, airports, schools, hospitals, and more. Its national presence and leading scale helps win and retain marquee projects and big clients, including the U.S. Postal <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SCI\">Service</a>, the Environmental Protection Agency, the <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NWY\">New York</a> <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CHCO\">City</a> Housing Authority, Stanford University,Walmart(WMT), and<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">Apple</a>(AAPL).</p>\n<p>Atlas earned $64 million in adjusted Ebitda over the past four reported quarters, while it had a net loss of $18 million. As of the end of the first quarter, the company had a backlog of $689 million, or more than 140% of its last 12 months’ revenue of $482 million. “I’ve been in this business for 30 years, and it’s by far the highest I’ve seen,” Atlas CEO Joe Boyer tells<i>Barron’s</i>.</p>\n<p>About 70% of the company’s revenue comes from work on existing buildings, pipes, roads, and bridges. Those jobs are nondiscretionary: As we’ve tragically learned at times, infrastructure needs to be inspected and brought up to code at regular intervals, no matter what the economic or pandemic situation is.</p>\n<p>The remaining 30% of Atlas’ sales are tied to new construction, which dipped during the pandemic but is nearly back to pre-Covid-19 levels, according to Boyer.</p>\n<p>A long-term trend toward outsourcing services by cities and states, stricter environmental standards, and aging infrastructure in the U.S. have been drivers of Atlas’ organic growth in recent years.</p>\n<p>That trend has been responsible for about half of Atlas’ 20% compound annual growth in sales since 2016, when it was owned by private-equity firm Bernhard Capital Partners. The other avenue for growth has been Atlas’ acquisition strategy.</p>\n<p>“The idea is to find a company in a geography or a service that we don’t dominate in, bring it onto our platform, and cross-sell across our network,” Boyer says.</p>\n<p>Atlas’ sweet spot for acquisition targets is about $5 million to $20 million in Ebitda, The company typically pays four to six times Ebitda in a mix of cash and stock. That makes each deal immediately accretive to earnings.</p>\n<p>As a small and relatively young public company, Atlas gets minimal coverage from Wall Street, but the three analysts who cover the firm are bullish. “We think the company is in end markets that are strong or recovering; they’ve been winning large contracts, and its backlog has been growing,” says <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SF\">Stifel</a> analyst Noelle Dilts. “So, we feel good about the fundamental revenue outlook.”</p>\n<p>She rates Atlas a Buy, with a $14.50 price target, or 11 times her estimate of 2022 Ebitda, which doesn’t include any upside from a potential infrastructure bill. Using a 15 times Ebitda multiple, Sterling’s Silverman sees shares going to $43 three years from now, as debt paydown continues and earnings rise.</p>\n<p>Atlas’ balance sheet remains a fixer-upper, but the company has the right foundation.</p>\n<p></p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","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>Infrastructure Spending Is on Its Way. Here’s a Cheap Way to Play 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\">\nInfrastructure Spending Is on Its Way. Here’s a Cheap Way to Play It\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-31 14:44 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/infrastructure-buy-atlas-technical-consultants-stock-51627684191?mod=hp_LEAD_2><strong>Barron's</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>U.S. lawmakers appear to be on the cusp of passing a massive and long-awaitedinfrastructure-investment bill, totaling some $1 trillion.\nThe legislation should be a boost to businesses likeVulcan ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/infrastructure-buy-atlas-technical-consultants-stock-51627684191?mod=hp_LEAD_2\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/infrastructure-buy-atlas-technical-consultants-stock-51627684191?mod=hp_LEAD_2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1186334150","content_text":"U.S. lawmakers appear to be on the cusp of passing a massive and long-awaitedinfrastructure-investment bill, totaling some $1 trillion.\nThe legislation should be a boost to businesses likeVulcan Materials(ticker: VMC) andMartin Marietta Materials(MLM), which make concrete and asphalt;Caterpillar(CAT) andTerex(TEX), which make construction equipment; andUnited Rentals(URI), which rents the machinery. Most of their stocks have already jumped on theprospect of infrastructure spending.\nBut one infrastructure play has been overlooked:Atlas Technical Consultants(ATCX) provides engineering and design services, inspection and certification of buildings and public works, and other construction-related services. More construction means more plans and designs for Atlas to review. These eventually become finished projects that need annual inspections, paying dividends for years.\nAnd yet Atlas shares have stalled. At a recent $9, the stock trades for just eight times enterprise value to estimated 2022 earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, or Ebitda. That multiple is a significant discount to companies in related inspection businesses, such asMontrose Environmental Group(MEG) andTetra Tech(TTEK), which trade for more than 22 times EV/2022 Ebitda.\n“Right now, part of the valuation discount is due to the debt, but I would say there are companies like Atlas where the debt is appropriate,” says Kevin Silverman, chief investment officer and portfolio manager at small-cap–focused Sterling Partners Equity Advisors, which owns more than $2 million worth of Atlas stock, accounting for about 2% of its assets under management. “The debt helps equity holders if you have steady profit margins and can use it for growth.”\nAnd Atlas has substantial opportunities for growth. Beyond the infrastructure-bill boost, Atlas has a long-term strategy of consolidating the fragmented U.S. inspection-services market while reducing its debt levels. Both should increase its appeal to investors and earn it a higher valuation multiple.\nThe Austin, Texas–headquartered company went public inearly 2020via a merger with a special-purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. The deal saddled the company with a convoluted capital structure, including multiple share classes, outstanding warrants, and other complications. That complexity has probably kept some investors away, as has Atlas’ relatively high debt load, which comes to 5.5 times net debt to 2021 Ebitda.\n\nAtlas has reduced that complexity—redeeming its preferred equity, buying out warrants, and increasing the stock’s publicly traded float—and is focused on bringing its net debt below three times Ebitda.\nAtlas is forecast to grow sales 13% this year, to $530 million, with Ebitda up 21%, to $76 million.\nIts customers include state departments of transportation, private building owners, electric and water utilities, airports, schools, hospitals, and more. Its national presence and leading scale helps win and retain marquee projects and big clients, including the U.S. Postal Service, the Environmental Protection Agency, the New York City Housing Authority, Stanford University,Walmart(WMT), andApple(AAPL).\nAtlas earned $64 million in adjusted Ebitda over the past four reported quarters, while it had a net loss of $18 million. As of the end of the first quarter, the company had a backlog of $689 million, or more than 140% of its last 12 months’ revenue of $482 million. “I’ve been in this business for 30 years, and it’s by far the highest I’ve seen,” Atlas CEO Joe Boyer tellsBarron’s.\nAbout 70% of the company’s revenue comes from work on existing buildings, pipes, roads, and bridges. Those jobs are nondiscretionary: As we’ve tragically learned at times, infrastructure needs to be inspected and brought up to code at regular intervals, no matter what the economic or pandemic situation is.\nThe remaining 30% of Atlas’ sales are tied to new construction, which dipped during the pandemic but is nearly back to pre-Covid-19 levels, according to Boyer.\nA long-term trend toward outsourcing services by cities and states, stricter environmental standards, and aging infrastructure in the U.S. have been drivers of Atlas’ organic growth in recent years.\nThat trend has been responsible for about half of Atlas’ 20% compound annual growth in sales since 2016, when it was owned by private-equity firm Bernhard Capital Partners. The other avenue for growth has been Atlas’ acquisition strategy.\n“The idea is to find a company in a geography or a service that we don’t dominate in, bring it onto our platform, and cross-sell across our network,” Boyer says.\nAtlas’ sweet spot for acquisition targets is about $5 million to $20 million in Ebitda, The company typically pays four to six times Ebitda in a mix of cash and stock. That makes each deal immediately accretive to earnings.\nAs a small and relatively young public company, Atlas gets minimal coverage from Wall Street, but the three analysts who cover the firm are bullish. “We think the company is in end markets that are strong or recovering; they’ve been winning large contracts, and its backlog has been growing,” says Stifel analyst Noelle Dilts. “So, we feel good about the fundamental revenue outlook.”\nShe rates Atlas a Buy, with a $14.50 price target, or 11 times her estimate of 2022 Ebitda, which doesn’t include any upside from a potential infrastructure bill. Using a 15 times Ebitda multiple, Sterling’s Silverman sees shares going to $43 three years from now, as debt paydown continues and earnings rise.\nAtlas’ balance sheet remains a fixer-upper, but the company has the right foundation.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":107,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":803507940,"gmtCreate":1627445843780,"gmtModify":1703490127674,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/803507940","repostId":"1196686259","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1196686259","pubTimestamp":1627442048,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1196686259?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-28 11:14","market":"us","language":"en","title":"General Electric's Revival Hangs on Nascent, But Tricky, Aerospace Business","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1196686259","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"Jet engines are making a comeback, and just in time to propel General Electric out of the funk it's ","content":"<p>Jet engines are making a comeback, and just in time to propel General Electric out of the funk it's been stuck in since before the pandemic.</p>\n<p>The multinational giant, beleaguered for years by corporate missteps and now enduring a turnaround effort led by CEO Larry Culp, reported a rebound in its flagship aviation business Tuesday, with sales climbing 10% to $4.8 billion in the second quarter and orders climbing 47%. But there's also a curious catch: the aviation rebound could actually<i>hurt</i>areas of GE's business in the long run.</p>\n<p>Fairy Tale to Horror Story and Back</p>\n<p>To open the 21st century, General Electric was a vaunted icon of American ingenuity. Co-founded by Thomas Edison and J.P. Morgan (the man, not the bank), GE started the millennium with a market cap of $600 billion. Then came the 2008 financial crisis, a slew of poor acquisitions, and years of corporate turmoil. Now GE's market cap sits at $114 billion.</p>\n<p>Just before the pandemic, the company finally started to regain some footing: it cut debt, sold assets, and revamped operations, nurturing aviation as its bread-and-butter business. That strategy soured a bit when the pandemic put airlines into no-fly mode, but even the revival of air travel presents downsides for GE:</p>\n<ul>\n <li>Surging sales of new aircraft come at the expense of money GE rakes in maintaining older jets. A quarter of the world's 22,200 commercial planes remain out of use, according to Jefferies analysts, and 20% of those are out-of-production models that might never see the skies again.</li>\n <li>Jefferies analysts forecast that airlines will hang on to jets under 26 years old, which would lead to a 2023 global fleet that's 4% bigger than it was in 2019, accompanied by an 11% increase in income for servicing planes. But a scenario where airlines retire planes at a younger age could have severe negative implications for revenues in the aerospace aftermarket industry.</li>\n</ul>\n<p><b>Sky-High Hopes, For Now:</b>Things are looking up for GE in the near term. On Tuesday, the company announced $18.3 billion in second-quarter revenue, surpassing analysts' expectations.</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>General Electric's Revival Hangs on Nascent, But Tricky, Aerospace Business</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\">\nGeneral Electric's Revival Hangs on Nascent, But Tricky, Aerospace Business\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-28 11:14 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/07/27/general-electrics-revival-hangs-on-nascent-but-tri/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Jet engines are making a comeback, and just in time to propel General Electric out of the funk it's been stuck in since before the pandemic.\nThe multinational giant, beleaguered for years by corporate...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/07/27/general-electrics-revival-hangs-on-nascent-but-tri/\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GE":"GE航空航天"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/07/27/general-electrics-revival-hangs-on-nascent-but-tri/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1196686259","content_text":"Jet engines are making a comeback, and just in time to propel General Electric out of the funk it's been stuck in since before the pandemic.\nThe multinational giant, beleaguered for years by corporate missteps and now enduring a turnaround effort led by CEO Larry Culp, reported a rebound in its flagship aviation business Tuesday, with sales climbing 10% to $4.8 billion in the second quarter and orders climbing 47%. But there's also a curious catch: the aviation rebound could actuallyhurtareas of GE's business in the long run.\nFairy Tale to Horror Story and Back\nTo open the 21st century, General Electric was a vaunted icon of American ingenuity. Co-founded by Thomas Edison and J.P. Morgan (the man, not the bank), GE started the millennium with a market cap of $600 billion. Then came the 2008 financial crisis, a slew of poor acquisitions, and years of corporate turmoil. Now GE's market cap sits at $114 billion.\nJust before the pandemic, the company finally started to regain some footing: it cut debt, sold assets, and revamped operations, nurturing aviation as its bread-and-butter business. That strategy soured a bit when the pandemic put airlines into no-fly mode, but even the revival of air travel presents downsides for GE:\n\nSurging sales of new aircraft come at the expense of money GE rakes in maintaining older jets. A quarter of the world's 22,200 commercial planes remain out of use, according to Jefferies analysts, and 20% of those are out-of-production models that might never see the skies again.\nJefferies analysts forecast that airlines will hang on to jets under 26 years old, which would lead to a 2023 global fleet that's 4% bigger than it was in 2019, accompanied by an 11% increase in income for servicing planes. But a scenario where airlines retire planes at a younger age could have severe negative implications for revenues in the aerospace aftermarket industry.\n\nSky-High Hopes, For Now:Things are looking up for GE in the near term. On Tuesday, the company announced $18.3 billion in second-quarter revenue, surpassing analysts' expectations.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":97,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":174550503,"gmtCreate":1627114724902,"gmtModify":1703484485956,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/174550503","repostId":"2153388319","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2153388319","pubTimestamp":1627088419,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2153388319?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-24 09:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here are Wall Street's favorite big tech stocks as the Nasdaq closes in on another milestone","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2153388319","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"As the Nasdaq Composite Index nears 15,000, analysts see upside for Activision Blizzard, Netflix and","content":"<p>As the Nasdaq Composite Index nears 15,000, analysts see upside for Activision Blizzard, Netflix and Baidu, among others</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4c007522d36ee30fcaeab059a92a280e\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"485\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Some 88% of analysts rate Activision Blizzard \"buy,\" and their consensus price target is 27% above the stock's closing price July 23. (Getty Images)</span></p>\n<p>All three of the major U.S. stock indexes hit records Friday, and the Nasdaq Composite Index might reach its next milestone -- 15,000 -- next week.</p>\n<p>Below is a list of stocks whose gains have powered the Nasdaq Composite Index's gains this year, along with another list of analysts' favorite stocks among the Nasdaq-100 Index .</p>\n<p>Here's a summary of Friday's action:</p>\n<p>(Note: All price changes in this article exclude dividends.)</p>\n<p><b>Nasdaq-100 winners for 2021</b></p>\n<p>The Nasdaq-100 Index is made up of the 100 largest non-financial companies by market capitalization in the full Nasdaq Composite Index. It is reconstituted each year in December. Both indexes are weighted by market cap, and the Nasdaq-100's market cap of $17.21 trillion is about 73% of the full index. So most of the full Nasdaq's performance is represented by the Nasdaq-100, which is tracked by the Invesco QQQ Trust <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/QQQ\">$(QQQ)$</a>.</p>\n<p>Here are the 10 stocks among the Nasdaq-100 that have risen the most during 2021 through July 23:</p>\n<table>\n <tbody>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Company</td>\n   <td>Price change -- 2021</td>\n   <td>Price change -- July 23</td>\n   <td>52-week high</td>\n   <td>Date of 52-week high</td>\n   <td>Decline from 52-week high</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Moderna Inc. MRNA</td>\n   <td>233.9%</td>\n   <td>7.8%</td>\n   <td>$349.45</td>\n   <td>07/23/2021</td>\n   <td>-0.2%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Applied Materials Inc. AMAT</td>\n   <td>60.4%</td>\n   <td>0.9%</td>\n   <td>$146.00</td>\n   <td>04/05/2021</td>\n   <td>-5.2%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Alphabet Inc. Class C GOOG</td>\n   <td>57.3%</td>\n   <td>3.4%</td>\n   <td>$2,776.17</td>\n   <td>07/23/2021</td>\n   <td>-0.7%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>ASML Holding NV ADR ASML</td>\n   <td>53.4%</td>\n   <td>2.5%</td>\n   <td>$756.78</td>\n   <td>07/23/2021</td>\n   <td>-1.1%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Alphabet Inc. Class A GOOGL</td>\n   <td>51.8%</td>\n   <td>3.6%</td>\n   <td>$2,667.98</td>\n   <td>07/23/2021</td>\n   <td>-0.3%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Nvidia Corp.</td>\n   <td>49.8%</td>\n   <td>-0.2%</td>\n   <td>$208.75</td>\n   <td>07/07/2021</td>\n   <td>-6.3%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>EBay Inc. EBAY</td>\n   <td>46.3%</td>\n   <td>2.1%</td>\n   <td>$73.77</td>\n   <td>07/23/2021</td>\n   <td>-0.3%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Intuit Inc. INTU</td>\n   <td>39.1%</td>\n   <td>1.4%</td>\n   <td>$532.33</td>\n   <td>07/23/2021</td>\n   <td>-0.7%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Idexx Laboratories Inc. IDXX</td>\n   <td>38.8%</td>\n   <td>1.6%</td>\n   <td>$696.35</td>\n   <td>07/23/2021</td>\n   <td>-0.4%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>DocuSign Inc. DOCU</td>\n   <td>38.8%</td>\n   <td>0.2%</td>\n   <td>$310.51</td>\n   <td>07/22/2021</td>\n   <td>-0.6%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>CDW Corp. CDW</td>\n   <td>37.3%</td>\n   <td>2.0%</td>\n   <td>$184.58</td>\n   <td>04/16/2021</td>\n   <td>-2.0%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Source: FactSet</td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Actually, there are 11 stocks on the list because the index includes Alphabet Inc.'s Class C <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOOGL\">$(GOOGL)$</a> and Class A (GOOGL) shares.</p>\n<p>Seven of those stocks hit 52-week highs July 23.</p>\n<p><b>Wall Street's favorite stocks in the Nasdaq-100</b></p>\n<p>Here are the 10 stocks in the Nasdaq-100 with \"buy\" or equivalent ratings among at least 75% of analysts polled by FactSet, with the most 12-month upside potential implied by consensus price targets:</p>\n<table>\n <tbody>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Company</td>\n   <td>Share \"buy\" ratings</td>\n   <td>Closing price -- July 23</td>\n   <td>Consensus price target</td>\n   <td>Implied 12-month upside potential</td>\n   <td>Price change -- July 23</td>\n   <td>Price change -- 2021</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Baidu Inc. ADR Class A BIDU</td>\n   <td>86%</td>\n   <td>$172.66</td>\n   <td>$311.92</td>\n   <td>81%</td>\n   <td>-3.3%</td>\n   <td>-20.2%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Micron Technology Inc. MU</td>\n   <td>88%</td>\n   <td>$75.94</td>\n   <td>$121.25</td>\n   <td>60%</td>\n   <td>0.5%</td>\n   <td>1.0%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>JD.com Inc. ADR Class A JD</td>\n   <td>91%</td>\n   <td>$72.29</td>\n   <td>$98.15</td>\n   <td>36%</td>\n   <td>-4.8%</td>\n   <td>-17.8%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>NetEase Inc. ADR</td>\n   <td>86%</td>\n   <td>$103.53</td>\n   <td>$134.54</td>\n   <td>30%</td>\n   <td>-8.0%</td>\n   <td>8.1%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Vertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. VRTX</td>\n   <td>78%</td>\n   <td>$200.50</td>\n   <td>$259.71</td>\n   <td>30%</td>\n   <td>2.3%</td>\n   <td>-15.2%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Microchip Technology Inc. MCHP</td>\n   <td>76%</td>\n   <td>$139.22</td>\n   <td>$177.14</td>\n   <td>27%</td>\n   <td>0.6%</td>\n   <td>0.8%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Activision Blizzard Inc. ATVI</td>\n   <td>88%</td>\n   <td>$91.50</td>\n   <td>$116.09</td>\n   <td>27%</td>\n   <td>1.1%</td>\n   <td>-1.5%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Fiserv Inc. FISV</td>\n   <td>85%</td>\n   <td>$111.79</td>\n   <td>$141.27</td>\n   <td>26%</td>\n   <td>1.6%</td>\n   <td>-1.8%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MELI\">MercadoLibre</a> Inc. MELI</td>\n   <td>78%</td>\n   <td>$1,613.81</td>\n   <td>$2,021.37</td>\n   <td>25%</td>\n   <td>1.4%</td>\n   <td>-3.7%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Netflix Inc. NFLX</td>\n   <td>78%</td>\n   <td>$515.41</td>\n   <td>$619.67</td>\n   <td>20%</td>\n   <td>0.7%</td>\n   <td>-4.7%</td>\n  </tr>\n  <tr>\n   <td>Source: FactSet</td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n   <td></td>\n  </tr>\n </tbody>\n</table>\n<p>Chinese stocks listed in the U.S. took a beating Friday, and you can see from the three on this list (Baidu Inc. (K3SD.SG), JD.com Inc. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/JD\">$(JD)$</a> and NetEase Inc. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NTES\">$(NTES)$</a>) that this hasn't been a good year for the group. Therese Poletti explained why.</p>","source":"lsy1603348471595","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>Here are Wall Street's favorite big tech stocks as the Nasdaq closes in on another milestone</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\">\nHere are Wall Street's favorite big tech stocks as the Nasdaq closes in on another milestone\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-24 09:00 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.marketwatch.com/story/here-are-wall-streets-favorite-big-tech-stocks-as-the-nasdaq-closes-in-on-another-milestone-11627074982?mod=home-page><strong>MarketWatch</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>As the Nasdaq Composite Index nears 15,000, analysts see upside for Activision Blizzard, Netflix and Baidu, among others\nSome 88% of analysts rate Activision Blizzard \"buy,\" and their consensus price ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/here-are-wall-streets-favorite-big-tech-stocks-as-the-nasdaq-closes-in-on-another-milestone-11627074982?mod=home-page\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BIDU":"百度","PSQ":"纳指反向ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","NDAQ":"纳斯达克OMX交易所","QID":"纳指两倍做空ETF","QQQ":"纳指100ETF","MU":"美光科技","JD":"京东","SQQQ":"纳指三倍做空ETF","TQQQ":"纳指三倍做多ETF","NFLX":"奈飞","QLD":"纳指两倍做多ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/here-are-wall-streets-favorite-big-tech-stocks-as-the-nasdaq-closes-in-on-another-milestone-11627074982?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2153388319","content_text":"As the Nasdaq Composite Index nears 15,000, analysts see upside for Activision Blizzard, Netflix and Baidu, among others\nSome 88% of analysts rate Activision Blizzard \"buy,\" and their consensus price target is 27% above the stock's closing price July 23. (Getty Images)\nAll three of the major U.S. stock indexes hit records Friday, and the Nasdaq Composite Index might reach its next milestone -- 15,000 -- next week.\nBelow is a list of stocks whose gains have powered the Nasdaq Composite Index's gains this year, along with another list of analysts' favorite stocks among the Nasdaq-100 Index .\nHere's a summary of Friday's action:\n(Note: All price changes in this article exclude dividends.)\nNasdaq-100 winners for 2021\nThe Nasdaq-100 Index is made up of the 100 largest non-financial companies by market capitalization in the full Nasdaq Composite Index. It is reconstituted each year in December. Both indexes are weighted by market cap, and the Nasdaq-100's market cap of $17.21 trillion is about 73% of the full index. So most of the full Nasdaq's performance is represented by the Nasdaq-100, which is tracked by the Invesco QQQ Trust $(QQQ)$.\nHere are the 10 stocks among the Nasdaq-100 that have risen the most during 2021 through July 23:\n\n\n\nCompany\nPrice change -- 2021\nPrice change -- July 23\n52-week high\nDate of 52-week high\nDecline from 52-week high\n\n\nModerna Inc. MRNA\n233.9%\n7.8%\n$349.45\n07/23/2021\n-0.2%\n\n\nApplied Materials Inc. AMAT\n60.4%\n0.9%\n$146.00\n04/05/2021\n-5.2%\n\n\nAlphabet Inc. Class C GOOG\n57.3%\n3.4%\n$2,776.17\n07/23/2021\n-0.7%\n\n\nASML Holding NV ADR ASML\n53.4%\n2.5%\n$756.78\n07/23/2021\n-1.1%\n\n\nAlphabet Inc. Class A GOOGL\n51.8%\n3.6%\n$2,667.98\n07/23/2021\n-0.3%\n\n\nNvidia Corp.\n49.8%\n-0.2%\n$208.75\n07/07/2021\n-6.3%\n\n\nEBay Inc. EBAY\n46.3%\n2.1%\n$73.77\n07/23/2021\n-0.3%\n\n\nIntuit Inc. INTU\n39.1%\n1.4%\n$532.33\n07/23/2021\n-0.7%\n\n\nIdexx Laboratories Inc. IDXX\n38.8%\n1.6%\n$696.35\n07/23/2021\n-0.4%\n\n\nDocuSign Inc. DOCU\n38.8%\n0.2%\n$310.51\n07/22/2021\n-0.6%\n\n\nCDW Corp. CDW\n37.3%\n2.0%\n$184.58\n04/16/2021\n-2.0%\n\n\nSource: FactSet\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nActually, there are 11 stocks on the list because the index includes Alphabet Inc.'s Class C $(GOOGL)$ and Class A (GOOGL) shares.\nSeven of those stocks hit 52-week highs July 23.\nWall Street's favorite stocks in the Nasdaq-100\nHere are the 10 stocks in the Nasdaq-100 with \"buy\" or equivalent ratings among at least 75% of analysts polled by FactSet, with the most 12-month upside potential implied by consensus price targets:\n\n\n\nCompany\nShare \"buy\" ratings\nClosing price -- July 23\nConsensus price target\nImplied 12-month upside potential\nPrice change -- July 23\nPrice change -- 2021\n\n\nBaidu Inc. ADR Class A BIDU\n86%\n$172.66\n$311.92\n81%\n-3.3%\n-20.2%\n\n\nMicron Technology Inc. MU\n88%\n$75.94\n$121.25\n60%\n0.5%\n1.0%\n\n\nJD.com Inc. ADR Class A JD\n91%\n$72.29\n$98.15\n36%\n-4.8%\n-17.8%\n\n\nNetEase Inc. ADR\n86%\n$103.53\n$134.54\n30%\n-8.0%\n8.1%\n\n\nVertex Pharmaceuticals Inc. VRTX\n78%\n$200.50\n$259.71\n30%\n2.3%\n-15.2%\n\n\nMicrochip Technology Inc. MCHP\n76%\n$139.22\n$177.14\n27%\n0.6%\n0.8%\n\n\nActivision Blizzard Inc. ATVI\n88%\n$91.50\n$116.09\n27%\n1.1%\n-1.5%\n\n\nFiserv Inc. FISV\n85%\n$111.79\n$141.27\n26%\n1.6%\n-1.8%\n\n\nMercadoLibre Inc. MELI\n78%\n$1,613.81\n$2,021.37\n25%\n1.4%\n-3.7%\n\n\nNetflix Inc. NFLX\n78%\n$515.41\n$619.67\n20%\n0.7%\n-4.7%\n\n\nSource: FactSet\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\n\nChinese stocks listed in the U.S. took a beating Friday, and you can see from the three on this list (Baidu Inc. (K3SD.SG), JD.com Inc. $(JD)$ and NetEase Inc. $(NTES)$) that this hasn't been a good year for the group. Therese Poletti explained why.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":146,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":175138934,"gmtCreate":1627012305728,"gmtModify":1703482431868,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Challenging","listText":"Challenging","text":"Challenging","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/175138934","repostId":"1127402643","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1127402643","pubTimestamp":1627008952,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1127402643?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-23 10:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Airline Earnings Show Signs of Life. But New Challenges Are Emerging.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1127402643","media":"Barron's","summary":"Profits are inching back across the airline industry as leisure travel surges, while business and lo","content":"<p>Profits are inching back across the airline industry as leisure travel surges, while business and long-haul international show signs of life.</p>\n<p>But carriers face new challenges: Jet fuel prices have surged in the last few months, pressuring operating profits. And the fall travel season, typically weak for leisure, will likely have to see big gains in corporate for airlines to hit Wall Street’s targets.</p>\n<p>The other major variable: the Delta variant of the coronavirus. Travel momentum that has built for months may slow or stall if the variant prompts delays in border reopenings and a lifting of travel restrictions.</p>\n<p>While Europe has been reopening to U.S. citizens, the Biden administration isgoing slowin lifting restrictions on visitors from Europe and other regions, including China, India, and Brazil. And the U.S. recently issued a do-not-travelwarningto the U.K., citing a surge in Covid-19 cases.</p>\n<p>For now, airlines are largely meeting or beating forecasts, albeit with some hiccups.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAL\">American Airlines</a> topped estimates for revenue and earnings in the quarter. The carrier reported $7.5 billion in sales, 2.2% ahead of consensus forecasts, and posted an adjusted loss of $1.69 a share, beating forecasts for a loss of $2.03.</p>\n<p>Excluding a bevy of special items—including $1.4 billion of federal payroll support and tax credits—American said it earned a profit of $19 million or 3 cents a share.</p>\n<p>American is also getting back to prepandemic capacity, saying that it expects to fly more than 90% of its domestic seat capacity and 80% of international this summer. For the third quarter, typically weaker than the summer, the carrier expects capacity to be down 15% to 20%, largely matching Wall Street estimates.</p>\n<p>But American is likely to take longer to return to pretax profits than its legacy rivals&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/UAL\">United Continental</a> and&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DAL\">Delta Air Lines</a>, notes Raymond James analyst Savanthi Syth. American’s huge debt load is weighing on results. And while the carrier said that it planned to pay down debt quicker than it previously expected, it remains a burden on the balance sheet.</p>\n<p>Syth maintained a Market Perform rating on the stock.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/C\">Citigroup</a> ’s Stephen Trent was also skeptical of Americans’ plans to pay down $15 billion in debt over the next four years. The carrier’s “call to reduce financial leverage by $15 billion in four years is welcome,” he wrote, “but is certainly not an easy task.” That figure is larger than American’s total equity value of $13.7 billion, he notes, and the carrier’s debt repayment will give it less flexibility to invest in other areas.</p>\n<p>He also maintained a Neutral rating on the stock and $21.50 target.</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LUV\">Southwest Airlines</a>, on the other hand, has the strongest balance sheet of the major carriers, along with exposure to the strongest segment of air travel—domestic leisure—two factors that should help it post meaningful profits well ahead of other legacy carriers.</p>\n<p>Southwest’s second quarter was a mixed bag. The carrier reported slightly more revenue than forecast at $4 billion, beating consensus estimates by 1.8%. The airline posted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, or Ebitda, of $228 million, ahead of forecasts for $192 million.</p>\n<p>But Southwest missed forecasts for earnings per share, posting a loss of 35 cents, against estimates for a loss of 23 cents. Jet fuel prices weighed on the bottom line, increasing sharply from the first quarter, noted CEO Gary Kelly in a release. And the airline is predicting cost increases in the third quarter as it brings back most employees and fuel prices remain elevated.</p>\n<p>But Kelly also highlighted positive booking trends, noting that leisure traffic in&nbsp;June rebounded above&nbsp;2019&nbsp;levels at comparable fares. Leisure bookings and fares in July are trending higher than&nbsp;July 2019&nbsp;levels, he added, and while business continues to lag, he said the carrier is seeing “steady weekly improvements” in corporate bookings.</p>\n<p>The carrier’s third-quarter outlook was for capacity to be flat compared with 2019 levels. That came in ahead of some forecasts; Cowen’s Helane Becker had expected capacity to be down 11%, for instance.</p>\n<p>She maintained a Buy rating and $67 target on the stock while cautioning that monthly results “warrant monitoring.”</p>\n<p>Syth also liked the outlook, noting that “the revenue outlook appears encouraging.” She also maintained an Overweight and $68 target.</p>\n<p>Airline stocks aren’t doing great this year, however. The&nbsp;sector&nbsp;is underperforming the&nbsp;S&amp;P 500,&nbsp;gaining 11.5% against a return of 16% for the broader market. And while strong second-quarter results have sparked a mini-rally, the sector is still down 8.5% over the last month versus a 2.6% gain for the S&amp;P 500.</p>\n<p>The only carrier beating the market this year also happens to be the one with the most fragile finances: American Airlines. It’s up 36.6% on the year, more than triple the sector’s gains.</p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","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>Airline Earnings Show Signs of Life. But New Challenges Are Emerging.</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\">\nAirline Earnings Show Signs of Life. But New Challenges Are Emerging.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-07-23 10:55 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/airline-earnings-stocks-51626967412?mod=hp_LATEST><strong>Barron's</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Profits are inching back across the airline industry as leisure travel surges, while business and long-haul international show signs of life.\nBut carriers face new challenges: Jet fuel prices have ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/airline-earnings-stocks-51626967412?mod=hp_LATEST\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"C":"花旗","UAL":"联合大陆航空","LUV":"西南航空","DAL":"达美航空","AAL":"美国航空"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/airline-earnings-stocks-51626967412?mod=hp_LATEST","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1127402643","content_text":"Profits are inching back across the airline industry as leisure travel surges, while business and long-haul international show signs of life.\nBut carriers face new challenges: Jet fuel prices have surged in the last few months, pressuring operating profits. And the fall travel season, typically weak for leisure, will likely have to see big gains in corporate for airlines to hit Wall Street’s targets.\nThe other major variable: the Delta variant of the coronavirus. Travel momentum that has built for months may slow or stall if the variant prompts delays in border reopenings and a lifting of travel restrictions.\nWhile Europe has been reopening to U.S. citizens, the Biden administration isgoing slowin lifting restrictions on visitors from Europe and other regions, including China, India, and Brazil. And the U.S. recently issued a do-not-travelwarningto the U.K., citing a surge in Covid-19 cases.\nFor now, airlines are largely meeting or beating forecasts, albeit with some hiccups.\nAmerican Airlines topped estimates for revenue and earnings in the quarter. The carrier reported $7.5 billion in sales, 2.2% ahead of consensus forecasts, and posted an adjusted loss of $1.69 a share, beating forecasts for a loss of $2.03.\nExcluding a bevy of special items—including $1.4 billion of federal payroll support and tax credits—American said it earned a profit of $19 million or 3 cents a share.\nAmerican is also getting back to prepandemic capacity, saying that it expects to fly more than 90% of its domestic seat capacity and 80% of international this summer. For the third quarter, typically weaker than the summer, the carrier expects capacity to be down 15% to 20%, largely matching Wall Street estimates.\nBut American is likely to take longer to return to pretax profits than its legacy rivals United Continental and Delta Air Lines, notes Raymond James analyst Savanthi Syth. American’s huge debt load is weighing on results. And while the carrier said that it planned to pay down debt quicker than it previously expected, it remains a burden on the balance sheet.\nSyth maintained a Market Perform rating on the stock.\nCitigroup ’s Stephen Trent was also skeptical of Americans’ plans to pay down $15 billion in debt over the next four years. The carrier’s “call to reduce financial leverage by $15 billion in four years is welcome,” he wrote, “but is certainly not an easy task.” That figure is larger than American’s total equity value of $13.7 billion, he notes, and the carrier’s debt repayment will give it less flexibility to invest in other areas.\nHe also maintained a Neutral rating on the stock and $21.50 target.\nSouthwest Airlines, on the other hand, has the strongest balance sheet of the major carriers, along with exposure to the strongest segment of air travel—domestic leisure—two factors that should help it post meaningful profits well ahead of other legacy carriers.\nSouthwest’s second quarter was a mixed bag. The carrier reported slightly more revenue than forecast at $4 billion, beating consensus estimates by 1.8%. The airline posted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization, or Ebitda, of $228 million, ahead of forecasts for $192 million.\nBut Southwest missed forecasts for earnings per share, posting a loss of 35 cents, against estimates for a loss of 23 cents. Jet fuel prices weighed on the bottom line, increasing sharply from the first quarter, noted CEO Gary Kelly in a release. And the airline is predicting cost increases in the third quarter as it brings back most employees and fuel prices remain elevated.\nBut Kelly also highlighted positive booking trends, noting that leisure traffic in June rebounded above 2019 levels at comparable fares. Leisure bookings and fares in July are trending higher than July 2019 levels, he added, and while business continues to lag, he said the carrier is seeing “steady weekly improvements” in corporate bookings.\nThe carrier’s third-quarter outlook was for capacity to be flat compared with 2019 levels. That came in ahead of some forecasts; Cowen’s Helane Becker had expected capacity to be down 11%, for instance.\nShe maintained a Buy rating and $67 target on the stock while cautioning that monthly results “warrant monitoring.”\nSyth also liked the outlook, noting that “the revenue outlook appears encouraging.” She also maintained an Overweight and $68 target.\nAirline stocks aren’t doing great this year, however. The sector is underperforming the S&P 500, gaining 11.5% against a return of 16% for the broader market. And while strong second-quarter results have sparked a mini-rally, the sector is still down 8.5% over the last month versus a 2.6% gain for the S&P 500.\nThe only carrier beating the market this year also happens to be the one with the most fragile finances: American Airlines. It’s up 36.6% on the year, more than triple the sector’s gains.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":58,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":155638691,"gmtCreate":1625409886113,"gmtModify":1703741418878,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Probably","listText":"Probably","text":"Probably","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/155638691","repostId":"2148807114","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2148807114","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":1625367960,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2148807114?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-04 11:06","market":"hk","language":"en","title":"Can Biden really protect Americans from the next crippling cyber attack?","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2148807114","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"International rivals have little incentive to stop attacks against the U.S.\nAn epidemic of cyberatta","content":"<p>International rivals have little incentive to stop attacks against the U.S.</p>\n<p>An epidemic of cyberattacks against the American government, citizens and businesses has raged for years, but experts say the U.S. government has been slow to respond, while remaining skeptical that proposed solutions would be effective in stopping international cyberthreats.</p>\n<p>The only major cybersecurity law passed during the past decade was the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015, which created rules encouraging the private sector to share information about cyberattacks with the government, but did not make disclosure mandatory.</p>\n<p>Jim Lewis, director of the strategic technologies program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies told MarketWatch that congressional gridlock kept the Obama administration from passing a bipartisan law that would enable the federal government to require private companies to report cyberattacks.</p>\n<p>Read more: Colonial Pipeline CEO warns Congress that 'criminal gangs' are always 'sharpening their tactics' to target U.S. companies, government</p>\n<p>\"The idea of regulation used to be that you couldn't bring it up,\" he said. \"The Chamber of Commerce and and everyone else lined up to explain why it was bad. At the end of the day, Mitch McConnell decided that he didn't want to regulate,\" referring to the then Republican Senate majority leader from Kentucky. During the Trump administration, \"we pretty much sat out the last four years, it's painful to say that, but that's how it is,\" he added.</p>\n<p>President Joe Biden's administration, however, is attempting to make up for lost time with an executive order signed in May that would beef up U.S. government cyber security defenses and leverage the power of the federal procurement process to raise the security of software products.</p>\n<p>\"There's has really been a missed opportunity to use federal procurement to drive a secure market,\" Anne Neuberger, deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology at the White House said during a virtual conference at CSIS last month.</p>\n<p>She added that the government is developing software standards that private providers must meet in order to sell to the government under the theory that higher quality software would become the industry standard, given the vast amount of software the government purchases annually. Neuberger argued that it wouldn't be cost effective for software providers to offer two products: a superior <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a> to the government and a substandard <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> to the private sector.</p>\n<p>\"When you're building software in a world where you have sophisticated nation-state attackers constantly hunting for vulnerabilities in that software, build it in more secure ways,\" Neuberger said.</p>\n<p>Following last year's Solar Winds attack , which went unnoticed for months and threatened 18,000 companies and government agencies, and the Colonial Pipeline hack that led to widespread gasoline shortages in the U.S. Northeast, there finally seems to be an appetite for bipartisan legislation that would enable better oversight of critical infrastructure, according to Mark Gamis a senior vice president at Booz Allen Hamilton who advises federal clients on cyber operations.</p>\n<p>He pointed to reports of a proposal drafted by Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia and Republican senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Susan Collins of Maine that would require federal contractors and owners of critical infrastructure to report cyber incidents to federal authorities within 24 hours.</p>\n<p>\"That's important because the federal government has tremendous resources to bring to bear to help our with an incident, and in any sort of emergent situation, time is of the essence,\" he said, adding that the bipartisan nature of the bill indicates the GOP is now ready to get on board with mandatory reporting.</p>\n<p>Cybersecurity advocates have long argued that greater collaboration between government and business is essential to mitigate the effects of cybercrime.</p>\n<p>\"Governments and companies have different sources of information, insight and intelligence, wrote Paul Me, a lead partner for Cyber Risk at the consultancy Oliver Wyman in an op-ed for the World Economic Forum . \"Pooling them in a timely manner will create a clearer and more current picture of cyberthreats.\"</p>\n<p>CSIS' Jim Lewis, warned, however, that at its core the problem must be viewed through the lense of geopolitics, because the most sophisticated cyberattacks largely come from state actors or criminal groups in adversarial nations, including China, Iran and Russia. U.S. intelligence officials have said both the Solar Winds and Colonial Pipeline attack were done by Russian proxies.</p>\n<p>See also: Biden says he told Putin infrastructure should be 'off limits' to cyberattacks</p>\n<p>\"The Russians have a thriving cybercrime market and make billions of dollars a year,\" Lewis said. \"So why would they give that up, especially because the Kremlin enjoys the U.S. getting hit over the head?\"</p>\n<p>Lewis said that the Biden-Putin summit earlier this month was a success insofar as Biden set boundaries on acceptable behavior, with the president demanding that 16 critical infrastructure sectors , including energy and water, should be off-limits to cyberattacks. The question of how the U.S. would retaliate following a hack on one of these sectors, however, remains unanswered.</p>\n<p>\"The Russians have basically said that 'you have so many sanctions on us, one more won't make a difference,\" Lewis said, adding that the U.S. must get creative about an cyber-offensive approach to punish adversaries for their behavior, including shutting down cloud computing services that power the Russian internet.</p>\n<p>\"These are hard issues because the two things that the government needs to do is regulate U.S. companies while engaging with both allies and opponents on the international stage,\" Lewis added. \"Maybe that's too much for the government, but if it's too much in the government, we just need to get used to being whacked.\"</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>Can Biden really protect Americans from the next crippling cyber attack?</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 Biden really protect Americans from the next crippling cyber attack?\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-04 11:06</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>International rivals have little incentive to stop attacks against the U.S.</p>\n<p>An epidemic of cyberattacks against the American government, citizens and businesses has raged for years, but experts say the U.S. government has been slow to respond, while remaining skeptical that proposed solutions would be effective in stopping international cyberthreats.</p>\n<p>The only major cybersecurity law passed during the past decade was the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015, which created rules encouraging the private sector to share information about cyberattacks with the government, but did not make disclosure mandatory.</p>\n<p>Jim Lewis, director of the strategic technologies program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies told MarketWatch that congressional gridlock kept the Obama administration from passing a bipartisan law that would enable the federal government to require private companies to report cyberattacks.</p>\n<p>Read more: Colonial Pipeline CEO warns Congress that 'criminal gangs' are always 'sharpening their tactics' to target U.S. companies, government</p>\n<p>\"The idea of regulation used to be that you couldn't bring it up,\" he said. \"The Chamber of Commerce and and everyone else lined up to explain why it was bad. At the end of the day, Mitch McConnell decided that he didn't want to regulate,\" referring to the then Republican Senate majority leader from Kentucky. During the Trump administration, \"we pretty much sat out the last four years, it's painful to say that, but that's how it is,\" he added.</p>\n<p>President Joe Biden's administration, however, is attempting to make up for lost time with an executive order signed in May that would beef up U.S. government cyber security defenses and leverage the power of the federal procurement process to raise the security of software products.</p>\n<p>\"There's has really been a missed opportunity to use federal procurement to drive a secure market,\" Anne Neuberger, deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology at the White House said during a virtual conference at CSIS last month.</p>\n<p>She added that the government is developing software standards that private providers must meet in order to sell to the government under the theory that higher quality software would become the industry standard, given the vast amount of software the government purchases annually. Neuberger argued that it wouldn't be cost effective for software providers to offer two products: a superior <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE\">one</a> to the government and a substandard <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> to the private sector.</p>\n<p>\"When you're building software in a world where you have sophisticated nation-state attackers constantly hunting for vulnerabilities in that software, build it in more secure ways,\" Neuberger said.</p>\n<p>Following last year's Solar Winds attack , which went unnoticed for months and threatened 18,000 companies and government agencies, and the Colonial Pipeline hack that led to widespread gasoline shortages in the U.S. Northeast, there finally seems to be an appetite for bipartisan legislation that would enable better oversight of critical infrastructure, according to Mark Gamis a senior vice president at Booz Allen Hamilton who advises federal clients on cyber operations.</p>\n<p>He pointed to reports of a proposal drafted by Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia and Republican senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Susan Collins of Maine that would require federal contractors and owners of critical infrastructure to report cyber incidents to federal authorities within 24 hours.</p>\n<p>\"That's important because the federal government has tremendous resources to bring to bear to help our with an incident, and in any sort of emergent situation, time is of the essence,\" he said, adding that the bipartisan nature of the bill indicates the GOP is now ready to get on board with mandatory reporting.</p>\n<p>Cybersecurity advocates have long argued that greater collaboration between government and business is essential to mitigate the effects of cybercrime.</p>\n<p>\"Governments and companies have different sources of information, insight and intelligence, wrote Paul Me, a lead partner for Cyber Risk at the consultancy Oliver Wyman in an op-ed for the World Economic Forum . \"Pooling them in a timely manner will create a clearer and more current picture of cyberthreats.\"</p>\n<p>CSIS' Jim Lewis, warned, however, that at its core the problem must be viewed through the lense of geopolitics, because the most sophisticated cyberattacks largely come from state actors or criminal groups in adversarial nations, including China, Iran and Russia. U.S. intelligence officials have said both the Solar Winds and Colonial Pipeline attack were done by Russian proxies.</p>\n<p>See also: Biden says he told Putin infrastructure should be 'off limits' to cyberattacks</p>\n<p>\"The Russians have a thriving cybercrime market and make billions of dollars a year,\" Lewis said. \"So why would they give that up, especially because the Kremlin enjoys the U.S. getting hit over the head?\"</p>\n<p>Lewis said that the Biden-Putin summit earlier this month was a success insofar as Biden set boundaries on acceptable behavior, with the president demanding that 16 critical infrastructure sectors , including energy and water, should be off-limits to cyberattacks. The question of how the U.S. would retaliate following a hack on one of these sectors, however, remains unanswered.</p>\n<p>\"The Russians have basically said that 'you have so many sanctions on us, one more won't make a difference,\" Lewis said, adding that the U.S. must get creative about an cyber-offensive approach to punish adversaries for their behavior, including shutting down cloud computing services that power the Russian internet.</p>\n<p>\"These are hard issues because the two things that the government needs to do is regulate U.S. companies while engaging with both allies and opponents on the international stage,\" Lewis added. \"Maybe that's too much for the government, but if it's too much in the government, we just need to get used to being whacked.\"</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2148807114","content_text":"International rivals have little incentive to stop attacks against the U.S.\nAn epidemic of cyberattacks against the American government, citizens and businesses has raged for years, but experts say the U.S. government has been slow to respond, while remaining skeptical that proposed solutions would be effective in stopping international cyberthreats.\nThe only major cybersecurity law passed during the past decade was the Cybersecurity Information Sharing Act of 2015, which created rules encouraging the private sector to share information about cyberattacks with the government, but did not make disclosure mandatory.\nJim Lewis, director of the strategic technologies program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies told MarketWatch that congressional gridlock kept the Obama administration from passing a bipartisan law that would enable the federal government to require private companies to report cyberattacks.\nRead more: Colonial Pipeline CEO warns Congress that 'criminal gangs' are always 'sharpening their tactics' to target U.S. companies, government\n\"The idea of regulation used to be that you couldn't bring it up,\" he said. \"The Chamber of Commerce and and everyone else lined up to explain why it was bad. At the end of the day, Mitch McConnell decided that he didn't want to regulate,\" referring to the then Republican Senate majority leader from Kentucky. During the Trump administration, \"we pretty much sat out the last four years, it's painful to say that, but that's how it is,\" he added.\nPresident Joe Biden's administration, however, is attempting to make up for lost time with an executive order signed in May that would beef up U.S. government cyber security defenses and leverage the power of the federal procurement process to raise the security of software products.\n\"There's has really been a missed opportunity to use federal procurement to drive a secure market,\" Anne Neuberger, deputy national security adviser for cyber and emerging technology at the White House said during a virtual conference at CSIS last month.\nShe added that the government is developing software standards that private providers must meet in order to sell to the government under the theory that higher quality software would become the industry standard, given the vast amount of software the government purchases annually. Neuberger argued that it wouldn't be cost effective for software providers to offer two products: a superior one to the government and a substandard one to the private sector.\n\"When you're building software in a world where you have sophisticated nation-state attackers constantly hunting for vulnerabilities in that software, build it in more secure ways,\" Neuberger said.\nFollowing last year's Solar Winds attack , which went unnoticed for months and threatened 18,000 companies and government agencies, and the Colonial Pipeline hack that led to widespread gasoline shortages in the U.S. Northeast, there finally seems to be an appetite for bipartisan legislation that would enable better oversight of critical infrastructure, according to Mark Gamis a senior vice president at Booz Allen Hamilton who advises federal clients on cyber operations.\nHe pointed to reports of a proposal drafted by Democratic Sen. Mark Warner of Virginia and Republican senators Marco Rubio of Florida and Susan Collins of Maine that would require federal contractors and owners of critical infrastructure to report cyber incidents to federal authorities within 24 hours.\n\"That's important because the federal government has tremendous resources to bring to bear to help our with an incident, and in any sort of emergent situation, time is of the essence,\" he said, adding that the bipartisan nature of the bill indicates the GOP is now ready to get on board with mandatory reporting.\nCybersecurity advocates have long argued that greater collaboration between government and business is essential to mitigate the effects of cybercrime.\n\"Governments and companies have different sources of information, insight and intelligence, wrote Paul Me, a lead partner for Cyber Risk at the consultancy Oliver Wyman in an op-ed for the World Economic Forum . \"Pooling them in a timely manner will create a clearer and more current picture of cyberthreats.\"\nCSIS' Jim Lewis, warned, however, that at its core the problem must be viewed through the lense of geopolitics, because the most sophisticated cyberattacks largely come from state actors or criminal groups in adversarial nations, including China, Iran and Russia. U.S. intelligence officials have said both the Solar Winds and Colonial Pipeline attack were done by Russian proxies.\nSee also: Biden says he told Putin infrastructure should be 'off limits' to cyberattacks\n\"The Russians have a thriving cybercrime market and make billions of dollars a year,\" Lewis said. \"So why would they give that up, especially because the Kremlin enjoys the U.S. getting hit over the head?\"\nLewis said that the Biden-Putin summit earlier this month was a success insofar as Biden set boundaries on acceptable behavior, with the president demanding that 16 critical infrastructure sectors , including energy and water, should be off-limits to cyberattacks. The question of how the U.S. would retaliate following a hack on one of these sectors, however, remains unanswered.\n\"The Russians have basically said that 'you have so many sanctions on us, one more won't make a difference,\" Lewis said, adding that the U.S. must get creative about an cyber-offensive approach to punish adversaries for their behavior, including shutting down cloud computing services that power the Russian internet.\n\"These are hard issues because the two things that the government needs to do is regulate U.S. companies while engaging with both allies and opponents on the international stage,\" Lewis added. \"Maybe that's too much for the government, but if it's too much in the government, we just need to get used to being whacked.\"","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":32,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":134964927,"gmtCreate":1622201684869,"gmtModify":1704181364888,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/134964927","repostId":"1149102561","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1149102561","pubTimestamp":1622200152,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1149102561?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-05-28 19:09","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Here's how some traders are playing retail investing and fintech","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1149102561","media":"cnbc.","summary":"Retail investing appAcorns is going public.The company said Thursday it will make its market debut v","content":"<div>\n<p>Retail investing appAcorns is going public.The company said Thursday it will make its market debut via a special purpose acquisition company merger with Pioneer Merger Group.Acorns is in an ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/28/retail-investing-and-fintech-heres-what-some-traders-are-doing.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"cnbc_highlight","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's how some traders are playing retail investing and fintech</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\">\nHere's how some traders are playing retail investing and fintech\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-05-28 19:09 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/28/retail-investing-and-fintech-heres-what-some-traders-are-doing.html><strong>cnbc.</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Retail investing appAcorns is going public.The company said Thursday it will make its market debut via a special purpose acquisition company merger with Pioneer Merger Group.Acorns is in an ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/28/retail-investing-and-fintech-heres-what-some-traders-are-doing.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PACX":"Pioneer Merger Corp"},"source_url":"https://www.cnbc.com/2021/05/28/retail-investing-and-fintech-heres-what-some-traders-are-doing.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/72bb72e1b84c09fca865c6dcb1bbcd16","article_id":"1149102561","content_text":"Retail investing appAcorns is going public.The company said Thursday it will make its market debut via a special purpose acquisition company merger with Pioneer Merger Group.Acorns is in an increasingly crowded retail investing and finance field, alongside Robinhood, no- and low-fee brokers TD Ameritrade and E-Trade and fintech stocks such asSquareandPayPal.CNBC's \"Trading Nation\" asked its traders on Thursday for how they play the space.John Petrides, portfolio manager at Tocqueville Asset Management, is backing the fintech space. He says trends in an already-growing space were accelerated during the pandemic.\"We think this entire theme has a long way to run,\" he said. \"One way to play it is throughFINX, which is the GlobalX fintech ETF, which holds a whole basket of these stocks that will benefit from this trade. Also if you want to get exposure to the crypto network infrastructure play, a lot of these companies have exposure to that as well.\"The FINX ETF, whichholds Square and PayPal among its top components, has fallen more than 3% this year. It has risen 44% over the past 12 months, though, outpacing theS&P 500.Bill Baruch, president of Blue Line Capital, likes one fintech play in particular.\"I own PayPal and Square but PayPal has some really great technicals right now. It's wedging up. It's held really good support. If it gets out above $260, it could really start to run and we could be back looking at $300,\" Baruch said.PayPal closed Thursday below $260. A move to $300 implies nearly 16% upside.Baruch also highlightsAlly Financial, which specializes in home loans and auto financing among other services.\"The stock itself is actually pretty cheap. It's cheaper than some of the traditional bank stocks and nowhere near some of the valuations of those fintech companies, but the stock has melted higher. I think we get to $61 here in the near term,\" he said.Ally has outperformed this year, rallying nearly 54%. It is up 194% over the past 12 months.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":159,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":833015064,"gmtCreate":1629189045658,"gmtModify":1676529959325,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like my post","listText":"Like my post","text":"Like my post","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/833015064","repostId":"2160227298","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2160227298","pubTimestamp":1629186610,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2160227298?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-17 15:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Oat milk shortage about to end? Oatly CEO weighs in","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2160227298","media":"Yahoo Finance","summary":"Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk s","content":"<p>Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk shortage that has existed during the pandemic due to significantly more at-home consumption of packaged foods.</p>\n<p>\"No,\" Petersson responded when asked by Yahoo Finance if the shortage would continue into 2022. \"It's going to improve. It has improved since March. It's going to continue to increase [product availability] every single month here.\"</p>\n<p>To help improve demand, Oatly said it will increase production capacity at its Ogden, Utah, facility and in facilities in Asia and Europe. The company expects to increase production by 200% by the end of 2022, compared to 2020.</p>\n<p>Persistent supply constraints weighed on Oatly's second quarter performance. Sales rose 53.3% year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) loss came in at $31.9 million compared to a loss of $1.2 million a year ago.</p>\n<p>Here is how Oatly performed compared to Wall Street analyst estimates for the second quarter:</p>\n<ul>\n <li><p><b>Net Sales:</b> $146.2 million vs. $147 million</p></li>\n <li><p><b>Loss per Share:</b> $0.11 vs. $0.10</p></li>\n</ul>\n<p>The company reiterated its long-term targets for a gross margin of 40% and EBITDA margin approaching 20%.</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://s.yimg.com/os/creatr-uploaded-images/2021-05/04bbd330-b981-11eb-be6b-cd751c23d5d4\" tg-width=\"4032\" tg-height=\"3024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Oatly containers are displayed at a grocery store, Tuesday, May 18, 2021, in North Miami, Fla. Oatly, the world’s largest oat milk company, will raise $1.4 billion in an initial public offering Thursday, May 20 on the Nasdaq stock exchange. (AP Photo/Marta Lavandier)ASSOCIATED PRESS</span></p>\n<p>Oatly shares rose 1% to $17 in Monday trading, putting the stock price in line with the IPO's pricing in mid-May. The stock had reached a high of $28 in mid-June amid optimism on the outlook for oat milk demand and Oatly's leading market share position in the market. But shares came under pressure in mid-July following an attack on the company's financial reporting by short-seller Spruce Point.</p>\n<p>Oatly was quick to rebuff Spruce Point's claims.</p>\n<p>When asked by Yahoo Finance if he has a message for investors following the short-seller report, Petersson said Oatly remains a growth company.</p>\n<p>\"There are a lot of things we want to say. But we are positioned to take a global leading role in driving the plant-based revolution forward. We haven't even started to scratch the surface yet and the runway is massive,\" Petersson said.</p>\n<p>To that point, Oatly has recently begun selling soft-serve ice cream. The surface is being scratch, so it seems.</p>","source":"yahoofinance_sg","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>Oat milk shortage about to end? Oatly CEO weighs in</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\">\nOat milk shortage about to end? Oatly CEO weighs in\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-17 15:50 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oat-milk-shortage-about-to-end-oatly-ceo-weighs-in-173820828.html><strong>Yahoo Finance</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk shortage that has existed during the pandemic due to significantly more at-home consumption of ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oat-milk-shortage-about-to-end-oatly-ceo-weighs-in-173820828.html\">Web Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f2dfac8b367cf26a99a7470fe4e042d5","relate_stocks":{"CPB":"金宝汤","PEP":"百事可乐","DNUT":"Krispy Kreme, Inc.","SBUX":"星巴克","ACI":"艾伯森","KO":"可口可乐","WMT":"沃尔玛","OTLY":"Oatly Group AB","QSR":"餐饮品牌国际","MCD":"麦当劳","BYND":"Beyond Meat, Inc.","TGT":"塔吉特","KR":"克罗格","WEN":"温蒂汉堡"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/oat-milk-shortage-about-to-end-oatly-ceo-weighs-in-173820828.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2160227298","content_text":"Oatly CEO Toni Petersson said there is light at the end of the tunnel with respect to the oat milk shortage that has existed during the pandemic due to significantly more at-home consumption of packaged foods.\n\"No,\" Petersson responded when asked by Yahoo Finance if the shortage would continue into 2022. \"It's going to improve. It has improved since March. It's going to continue to increase [product availability] every single month here.\"\nTo help improve demand, Oatly said it will increase production capacity at its Ogden, Utah, facility and in facilities in Asia and Europe. The company expects to increase production by 200% by the end of 2022, compared to 2020.\nPersistent supply constraints weighed on Oatly's second quarter performance. Sales rose 53.3% year-over-year. Adjusted EBITDA (earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization) loss came in at $31.9 million compared to a loss of $1.2 million a year ago.\nHere is how Oatly performed compared to Wall Street analyst estimates for the second quarter:\n\nNet Sales: $146.2 million vs. $147 million\nLoss per Share: $0.11 vs. $0.10\n\nThe company reiterated its long-term targets for a gross margin of 40% and EBITDA margin approaching 20%.\nOatly containers are displayed at a grocery store, Tuesday, May 18, 2021, in North Miami, Fla. Oatly, the world’s largest oat milk company, will raise $1.4 billion in an initial public offering Thursday, May 20 on the Nasdaq stock exchange. (AP Photo/Marta Lavandier)ASSOCIATED PRESS\nOatly shares rose 1% to $17 in Monday trading, putting the stock price in line with the IPO's pricing in mid-May. The stock had reached a high of $28 in mid-June amid optimism on the outlook for oat milk demand and Oatly's leading market share position in the market. But shares came under pressure in mid-July following an attack on the company's financial reporting by short-seller Spruce Point.\nOatly was quick to rebuff Spruce Point's claims.\nWhen asked by Yahoo Finance if he has a message for investors following the short-seller report, Petersson said Oatly remains a growth company.\n\"There are a lot of things we want to say. But we are positioned to take a global leading role in driving the plant-based revolution forward. We haven't even started to scratch the surface yet and the runway is massive,\" Petersson said.\nTo that point, Oatly has recently begun selling soft-serve ice cream. The surface is being scratch, so it seems.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":67,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802445989,"gmtCreate":1627799878741,"gmtModify":1703496079543,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hu Hu&nbsp;","listText":"Hu Hu&nbsp;","text":"Hu Hu","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/802445989","repostId":"2156165727","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2156165727","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":1627771020,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2156165727?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-01 06:37","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Home prices could cool when the Fed tapers its bond-buying program. But a crisis? Unlikely.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2156165727","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"'I think the Fed will work very, very hard to create a soft landing in house prices,' says mortgage ","content":"<blockquote>\n 'I think the Fed will work very, very hard to create a soft landing in house prices,' says mortgage market veteran.\n</blockquote>\n<p>U.S. home prices have been rising at a record annual pace , the absence of properties for sale, and the scramble by households for more space as families have fled to the suburbs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Can the good times last when the Federal Reserve finally cuts back on buying mortgage and Treasury bonds? Here's how mortgage rates and a less gargantuan central bank footprint could impact the heated U.S. housing market.</p>\n<p>\"The Fed is certainly talking and thinking about it,\" said Kathy Jones, chief fixed income strategist at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, on the subject of how the Federal Reserve could scale back the central bank's $120 billion a month bond-buying program.</p>\n<p>But Jones also thinks tighter credit conditions, likely via higher borrowing rates as the Fed tapers its bond buying program, might end up being a saving grace for today's housing market.</p>\n<p>\"Housing prices could certainly pull back, after accelerating so fast,\" she said, pointing to households fighting over the few properties available to buy, while navigating work from home. \"At some point,\" she said, mortgage payments on high-priced homes \"become unsustainable with people's incomes.\"</p>\n<p>\"But I don't see a big housing debacle.\"</p>\n<p>How to pump the brakes on housing</p>\n<p>The central bank has maintained a large footprint in the mortgage market for more than a decade, but the worsening affordability crisis in the U.S. housing market led Fed officials to walk a tightrope recently when trying to explain its ongoing large-scale asset purchases during the pandemic recovery.</p>\n<p>Fed officials in recent weeks have expressed a fair bit of disagreement around the timing and pace of any scaling back of its large-scale asset purchases.</p>\n<p>St. Louis Fed President James Bullard said Friday the central bank should start to slow down its bond purchases this fall and finish by March , saying he thought financial markets \"are very well prepared\" for the reduction in purchases.</p>\n<p>During a midweek press briefing, Chairman Jerome Powell said tapering likely would start with agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and Treasury bonds at the same time, but also \"the idea of reducing\" mortgage exposure \"at a somewhat faster pace does have some traction with some people\".</p>\n<p>The blue line in the chart below traces the central bank's balance sheet</p>\n<p>As of July 29, the Fed was holding about 31% of the roughly $7.8 trillion agency MBS market, or housing bonds with government backing.</p>\n<p>\"You could make the case that the Fed owns almost <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a>-third of the agency mortgage bond market, and that it might make sense to loosen its grip,\" Jones said, particularly as Powell has played down a direct link between its MBS purchases and climbing home prices.</p>\n<p>It may now seem like a distant memory, but before the pandemic upheaval, that was precisely what the Fed was trying to do.</p>\n<p>\"Who would have thought,\" said Paul Jablansky, head of fixed income at Guardian Life Insurance, that the U.S. would be in the midst of \"one of the frothiest housing markets in history,\" following last year's extreme pandemic shutdowns that closed businesses, workplaces and national borders.</p>\n<p>\"Occasionally people ask, are we at the peak?\" said Jablansky, a 30-year veteran of the mortgage, and asset-backed and broader bond market. \"We are outside the balance of our experience, so it's very difficult to say we are at the peak,\" he told MarketWatch.</p>\n<p>\"I do think house price inflation will have to slow down dramatically. But maybe the biggest question is, can we see housing prices go negative? I think the Fed will work very, very hard to create a soft landing in house prices.\"</p>\n<p>Schwab's forecast has been for the Fed to kick things off by reducing its monthly asset purchases by $15 billion to $105 billion. That would mean cutting $10 billion from its current $80 billion monthly pace of Treasury purchases and $5 billion from its $40 billion monthly pace of MBS.</p>\n<p>\"So far, we haven't changed that,\" Jones told MarketWatch.</p>\n<p>While the Fed doesn't set long-term interest rates, its mass buying of Treasurys aims to keep a lid on borrowing costs. Treasury yields also inform the interest rate component of 30-year fixed-rate mortgages. So perhaps, scaling back both at once makes sense, Jones said.</p>\n<p>Misremembering the 2013 taper</p>\n<p>Fed Chair Powell said on Wednesday that the central bank's \"substantial further progress\" standard for unemployment and inflation in particular hasn't been met yet, while stressing that he'd like to see more progress in the jobs market before easing its monetary policy support for the economy.</p>\n<p>Powell also frequently has talked of lessons learned from the market upheaval of 2013, the so-called \"taper tantrum\" that rattled markets after the central bank began talking about taking away the punch bowl, as the economy healed from the Great Recession of 2008.</p>\n<p>\"What we need to remember,\" Jablansky said, is that markets sold off in anticipation of tapering, not the actual pull back in asset purchases. \"Later in the year, the period [former Fed Chair Ben] Bernanke was talking about, the Fed actually continued to buy assets, and the amount of accommodation it provided to the economy actually went up.\"</p>\n<p>Historically, the only stretch where the Fed has actively withdrawn its support occurred between 2017 and 2019, following its controversial, first foray into large-scale asset purchases to unfreeze credit markets post 2008.</p>\n<p>\"It's very difficult to draw a lot of conclusions from that real short period,\" Jablansky said. \"For us, the conclusion is that 2013 may be instructive, but the circumstances are really different.\"</p>\n<p>The message from Powell consistently has been about preserving \"maximum flexibility, but to go very slowly,\" said George Catrambone, head of Americas trading at asset manager <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DWS.AU\">DWS</a> Group.</p>\n<p>Catrambone thinks that may be the right strategy, given the uncertain outlook on inflation, evidenced by, the recent spike in the cost of living , but also because of how significantly many of our lives have changed because of the pandemic.</p>\n<p>\"We know that a used car won't cost more than a new car forever,\" Catrambone said. \"Do I think the housing market slows down? It could. But you really need the supply, demand imbalance to abate. That could take a while.\"</p>\n<p>Extreme wildfires, drought and other shocks of climate change have been tied to $30 billion in property losses in the first half of 2021, while putting more patches of land and U.S. homes in the path of danger. While these were less frequent housing market topics in 2013, the pandemic also changed the whole notion of \"what is safe\" for many families.</p>\n<p>\"Migratory patterns tend to be sticky,\" Catrambone said, of the flight out of urban centers to suburbia.</p>\n<p>What's more, the delta variant fueling a new wave of COVID-19 cases and others, but also delayed plans by many big companies to return staff to offices buildings.</p>\n<p>\"This probably doesn't help occupancy rates for commercial real estate, with more people likely staying closer to home,\" Catrambone said, but it likely adds to the already high \"psychological value placed on housing.\"</p>\n<p>After touching record highs, the S&amp;P 500 index , Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index closed Friday and the week lower, but booked monthly gains .</p>\n<p>On the U.S. economic data front, August kicks off with manufacturing and construction spending data, followed by motor vehicles sales, ADP employment and jobless claims, but the main focus of the week will be the monthly nonfarm payrolls report on Friday.</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>Home prices could cool when the Fed tapers its bond-buying program. But a crisis? Unlikely.</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\">\nHome prices could cool when the Fed tapers its bond-buying program. But a crisis? Unlikely.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-08-01 06:37</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<blockquote>\n 'I think the Fed will work very, very hard to create a soft landing in house prices,' says mortgage market veteran.\n</blockquote>\n<p>U.S. home prices have been rising at a record annual pace , the absence of properties for sale, and the scramble by households for more space as families have fled to the suburbs during the pandemic.</p>\n<p>Can the good times last when the Federal Reserve finally cuts back on buying mortgage and Treasury bonds? Here's how mortgage rates and a less gargantuan central bank footprint could impact the heated U.S. housing market.</p>\n<p>\"The Fed is certainly talking and thinking about it,\" said Kathy Jones, chief fixed income strategist at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, on the subject of how the Federal Reserve could scale back the central bank's $120 billion a month bond-buying program.</p>\n<p>But Jones also thinks tighter credit conditions, likely via higher borrowing rates as the Fed tapers its bond buying program, might end up being a saving grace for today's housing market.</p>\n<p>\"Housing prices could certainly pull back, after accelerating so fast,\" she said, pointing to households fighting over the few properties available to buy, while navigating work from home. \"At some point,\" she said, mortgage payments on high-priced homes \"become unsustainable with people's incomes.\"</p>\n<p>\"But I don't see a big housing debacle.\"</p>\n<p>How to pump the brakes on housing</p>\n<p>The central bank has maintained a large footprint in the mortgage market for more than a decade, but the worsening affordability crisis in the U.S. housing market led Fed officials to walk a tightrope recently when trying to explain its ongoing large-scale asset purchases during the pandemic recovery.</p>\n<p>Fed officials in recent weeks have expressed a fair bit of disagreement around the timing and pace of any scaling back of its large-scale asset purchases.</p>\n<p>St. Louis Fed President James Bullard said Friday the central bank should start to slow down its bond purchases this fall and finish by March , saying he thought financial markets \"are very well prepared\" for the reduction in purchases.</p>\n<p>During a midweek press briefing, Chairman Jerome Powell said tapering likely would start with agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and Treasury bonds at the same time, but also \"the idea of reducing\" mortgage exposure \"at a somewhat faster pace does have some traction with some people\".</p>\n<p>The blue line in the chart below traces the central bank's balance sheet</p>\n<p>As of July 29, the Fed was holding about 31% of the roughly $7.8 trillion agency MBS market, or housing bonds with government backing.</p>\n<p>\"You could make the case that the Fed owns almost <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a>-third of the agency mortgage bond market, and that it might make sense to loosen its grip,\" Jones said, particularly as Powell has played down a direct link between its MBS purchases and climbing home prices.</p>\n<p>It may now seem like a distant memory, but before the pandemic upheaval, that was precisely what the Fed was trying to do.</p>\n<p>\"Who would have thought,\" said Paul Jablansky, head of fixed income at Guardian Life Insurance, that the U.S. would be in the midst of \"one of the frothiest housing markets in history,\" following last year's extreme pandemic shutdowns that closed businesses, workplaces and national borders.</p>\n<p>\"Occasionally people ask, are we at the peak?\" said Jablansky, a 30-year veteran of the mortgage, and asset-backed and broader bond market. \"We are outside the balance of our experience, so it's very difficult to say we are at the peak,\" he told MarketWatch.</p>\n<p>\"I do think house price inflation will have to slow down dramatically. But maybe the biggest question is, can we see housing prices go negative? I think the Fed will work very, very hard to create a soft landing in house prices.\"</p>\n<p>Schwab's forecast has been for the Fed to kick things off by reducing its monthly asset purchases by $15 billion to $105 billion. That would mean cutting $10 billion from its current $80 billion monthly pace of Treasury purchases and $5 billion from its $40 billion monthly pace of MBS.</p>\n<p>\"So far, we haven't changed that,\" Jones told MarketWatch.</p>\n<p>While the Fed doesn't set long-term interest rates, its mass buying of Treasurys aims to keep a lid on borrowing costs. Treasury yields also inform the interest rate component of 30-year fixed-rate mortgages. So perhaps, scaling back both at once makes sense, Jones said.</p>\n<p>Misremembering the 2013 taper</p>\n<p>Fed Chair Powell said on Wednesday that the central bank's \"substantial further progress\" standard for unemployment and inflation in particular hasn't been met yet, while stressing that he'd like to see more progress in the jobs market before easing its monetary policy support for the economy.</p>\n<p>Powell also frequently has talked of lessons learned from the market upheaval of 2013, the so-called \"taper tantrum\" that rattled markets after the central bank began talking about taking away the punch bowl, as the economy healed from the Great Recession of 2008.</p>\n<p>\"What we need to remember,\" Jablansky said, is that markets sold off in anticipation of tapering, not the actual pull back in asset purchases. \"Later in the year, the period [former Fed Chair Ben] Bernanke was talking about, the Fed actually continued to buy assets, and the amount of accommodation it provided to the economy actually went up.\"</p>\n<p>Historically, the only stretch where the Fed has actively withdrawn its support occurred between 2017 and 2019, following its controversial, first foray into large-scale asset purchases to unfreeze credit markets post 2008.</p>\n<p>\"It's very difficult to draw a lot of conclusions from that real short period,\" Jablansky said. \"For us, the conclusion is that 2013 may be instructive, but the circumstances are really different.\"</p>\n<p>The message from Powell consistently has been about preserving \"maximum flexibility, but to go very slowly,\" said George Catrambone, head of Americas trading at asset manager <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DWS.AU\">DWS</a> Group.</p>\n<p>Catrambone thinks that may be the right strategy, given the uncertain outlook on inflation, evidenced by, the recent spike in the cost of living , but also because of how significantly many of our lives have changed because of the pandemic.</p>\n<p>\"We know that a used car won't cost more than a new car forever,\" Catrambone said. \"Do I think the housing market slows down? It could. But you really need the supply, demand imbalance to abate. That could take a while.\"</p>\n<p>Extreme wildfires, drought and other shocks of climate change have been tied to $30 billion in property losses in the first half of 2021, while putting more patches of land and U.S. homes in the path of danger. While these were less frequent housing market topics in 2013, the pandemic also changed the whole notion of \"what is safe\" for many families.</p>\n<p>\"Migratory patterns tend to be sticky,\" Catrambone said, of the flight out of urban centers to suburbia.</p>\n<p>What's more, the delta variant fueling a new wave of COVID-19 cases and others, but also delayed plans by many big companies to return staff to offices buildings.</p>\n<p>\"This probably doesn't help occupancy rates for commercial real estate, with more people likely staying closer to home,\" Catrambone said, but it likely adds to the already high \"psychological value placed on housing.\"</p>\n<p>After touching record highs, the S&amp;P 500 index , Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index closed Friday and the week lower, but booked monthly gains .</p>\n<p>On the U.S. economic data front, August kicks off with manufacturing and construction spending data, followed by motor vehicles sales, ADP employment and jobless claims, but the main focus of the week will be the monthly nonfarm payrolls report on Friday.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GOOGL":"谷歌A","GOOG":"谷歌","HBCP":"Home合众银行","MBB":"美国按揭抵押债券ETF-iShares"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2156165727","content_text":"'I think the Fed will work very, very hard to create a soft landing in house prices,' says mortgage market veteran.\n\nU.S. home prices have been rising at a record annual pace , the absence of properties for sale, and the scramble by households for more space as families have fled to the suburbs during the pandemic.\nCan the good times last when the Federal Reserve finally cuts back on buying mortgage and Treasury bonds? Here's how mortgage rates and a less gargantuan central bank footprint could impact the heated U.S. housing market.\n\"The Fed is certainly talking and thinking about it,\" said Kathy Jones, chief fixed income strategist at the Schwab Center for Financial Research, on the subject of how the Federal Reserve could scale back the central bank's $120 billion a month bond-buying program.\nBut Jones also thinks tighter credit conditions, likely via higher borrowing rates as the Fed tapers its bond buying program, might end up being a saving grace for today's housing market.\n\"Housing prices could certainly pull back, after accelerating so fast,\" she said, pointing to households fighting over the few properties available to buy, while navigating work from home. \"At some point,\" she said, mortgage payments on high-priced homes \"become unsustainable with people's incomes.\"\n\"But I don't see a big housing debacle.\"\nHow to pump the brakes on housing\nThe central bank has maintained a large footprint in the mortgage market for more than a decade, but the worsening affordability crisis in the U.S. housing market led Fed officials to walk a tightrope recently when trying to explain its ongoing large-scale asset purchases during the pandemic recovery.\nFed officials in recent weeks have expressed a fair bit of disagreement around the timing and pace of any scaling back of its large-scale asset purchases.\nSt. Louis Fed President James Bullard said Friday the central bank should start to slow down its bond purchases this fall and finish by March , saying he thought financial markets \"are very well prepared\" for the reduction in purchases.\nDuring a midweek press briefing, Chairman Jerome Powell said tapering likely would start with agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and Treasury bonds at the same time, but also \"the idea of reducing\" mortgage exposure \"at a somewhat faster pace does have some traction with some people\".\nThe blue line in the chart below traces the central bank's balance sheet\nAs of July 29, the Fed was holding about 31% of the roughly $7.8 trillion agency MBS market, or housing bonds with government backing.\n\"You could make the case that the Fed owns almost one-third of the agency mortgage bond market, and that it might make sense to loosen its grip,\" Jones said, particularly as Powell has played down a direct link between its MBS purchases and climbing home prices.\nIt may now seem like a distant memory, but before the pandemic upheaval, that was precisely what the Fed was trying to do.\n\"Who would have thought,\" said Paul Jablansky, head of fixed income at Guardian Life Insurance, that the U.S. would be in the midst of \"one of the frothiest housing markets in history,\" following last year's extreme pandemic shutdowns that closed businesses, workplaces and national borders.\n\"Occasionally people ask, are we at the peak?\" said Jablansky, a 30-year veteran of the mortgage, and asset-backed and broader bond market. \"We are outside the balance of our experience, so it's very difficult to say we are at the peak,\" he told MarketWatch.\n\"I do think house price inflation will have to slow down dramatically. But maybe the biggest question is, can we see housing prices go negative? I think the Fed will work very, very hard to create a soft landing in house prices.\"\nSchwab's forecast has been for the Fed to kick things off by reducing its monthly asset purchases by $15 billion to $105 billion. That would mean cutting $10 billion from its current $80 billion monthly pace of Treasury purchases and $5 billion from its $40 billion monthly pace of MBS.\n\"So far, we haven't changed that,\" Jones told MarketWatch.\nWhile the Fed doesn't set long-term interest rates, its mass buying of Treasurys aims to keep a lid on borrowing costs. Treasury yields also inform the interest rate component of 30-year fixed-rate mortgages. So perhaps, scaling back both at once makes sense, Jones said.\nMisremembering the 2013 taper\nFed Chair Powell said on Wednesday that the central bank's \"substantial further progress\" standard for unemployment and inflation in particular hasn't been met yet, while stressing that he'd like to see more progress in the jobs market before easing its monetary policy support for the economy.\nPowell also frequently has talked of lessons learned from the market upheaval of 2013, the so-called \"taper tantrum\" that rattled markets after the central bank began talking about taking away the punch bowl, as the economy healed from the Great Recession of 2008.\n\"What we need to remember,\" Jablansky said, is that markets sold off in anticipation of tapering, not the actual pull back in asset purchases. \"Later in the year, the period [former Fed Chair Ben] Bernanke was talking about, the Fed actually continued to buy assets, and the amount of accommodation it provided to the economy actually went up.\"\nHistorically, the only stretch where the Fed has actively withdrawn its support occurred between 2017 and 2019, following its controversial, first foray into large-scale asset purchases to unfreeze credit markets post 2008.\n\"It's very difficult to draw a lot of conclusions from that real short period,\" Jablansky said. \"For us, the conclusion is that 2013 may be instructive, but the circumstances are really different.\"\nThe message from Powell consistently has been about preserving \"maximum flexibility, but to go very slowly,\" said George Catrambone, head of Americas trading at asset manager DWS Group.\nCatrambone thinks that may be the right strategy, given the uncertain outlook on inflation, evidenced by, the recent spike in the cost of living , but also because of how significantly many of our lives have changed because of the pandemic.\n\"We know that a used car won't cost more than a new car forever,\" Catrambone said. \"Do I think the housing market slows down? It could. But you really need the supply, demand imbalance to abate. That could take a while.\"\nExtreme wildfires, drought and other shocks of climate change have been tied to $30 billion in property losses in the first half of 2021, while putting more patches of land and U.S. homes in the path of danger. While these were less frequent housing market topics in 2013, the pandemic also changed the whole notion of \"what is safe\" for many families.\n\"Migratory patterns tend to be sticky,\" Catrambone said, of the flight out of urban centers to suburbia.\nWhat's more, the delta variant fueling a new wave of COVID-19 cases and others, but also delayed plans by many big companies to return staff to offices buildings.\n\"This probably doesn't help occupancy rates for commercial real estate, with more people likely staying closer to home,\" Catrambone said, but it likely adds to the already high \"psychological value placed on housing.\"\nAfter touching record highs, the S&P 500 index , Dow Jones Industrial Average and Nasdaq Composite Index closed Friday and the week lower, but booked monthly gains .\nOn the U.S. economic data front, August kicks off with manufacturing and construction spending data, followed by motor vehicles sales, ADP employment and jobless claims, but the main focus of the week will be the monthly nonfarm payrolls report on Friday.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":8,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":803507351,"gmtCreate":1627445854773,"gmtModify":1703490128002,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/803507351","repostId":"2154943718","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2154943718","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":1627440754,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2154943718?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-28 10:52","market":"sh","language":"en","title":"China state-owned daily urges calm after market rout","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2154943718","media":"Reuters","summary":"SHANGHAI, July 28 (Reuters) - A Chinese state-owned securities newspaper urged calm on Wednesday aft","content":"<p>SHANGHAI, July 28 (Reuters) - A Chinese state-owned securities newspaper urged calm on Wednesday after investors dumped mainland shares for a second day on worries over the impact of tighter government regulations.</p>\n<p>Regulatory moves aimed at the education, property and technology sectors sparked heavy selling this week in Chinese markets, and have left global investors bruised and uncertain over the outlook for investments in Chinese firms.</p>\n<p>In a front page commentary on Wednesday, the state-owned Securities Times said that systemic risks \"do not exist in the A-share market overall.\"</p>\n<p>\"The macroeconomy is still in a steady rebound stage, and short-term fluctuations do not change the long-term positive outlook for A-shares,\" the commentary said.</p>\n<p>\"The recent market decline to some extent reflects misinterpretation of policies and a venting of emotion. Economic fundamentals have not changed and the market will stabilise at any moment.\"</p>\n<p>Other major securities dailies echoed the commentary in market reports.</p>\n<p>In a front page story citing domestic fund managers, the official China Securities Journal said the sell-off was a \"structural adjustment\", a sustained plunge is unlikely and the market does not face systemic risk.</p>\n<p>A story in the state-run Shanghai Securities News quoted domestic analysts as saying that the sell-off would not continue, and that the market will gradually stabilise.</p>\n<p>\"For institutions, the decline brings the opportunity for positioning in high-quality shares,\" it said.</p>\n<p>What started off as a sell-off in shares on Monday had spread into fixed income and foreign exchange markets by Tuesday afternoon, sending the yuan falling through psychologically significant levels and pushing Chinese sovereign bond yields, and the cost of insurance against a default in China's dollar debt, higher.</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>China state-owned daily urges calm after market rout</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\">\nChina state-owned daily urges calm after market rout\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-28 10:52</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>SHANGHAI, July 28 (Reuters) - A Chinese state-owned securities newspaper urged calm on Wednesday after investors dumped mainland shares for a second day on worries over the impact of tighter government regulations.</p>\n<p>Regulatory moves aimed at the education, property and technology sectors sparked heavy selling this week in Chinese markets, and have left global investors bruised and uncertain over the outlook for investments in Chinese firms.</p>\n<p>In a front page commentary on Wednesday, the state-owned Securities Times said that systemic risks \"do not exist in the A-share market overall.\"</p>\n<p>\"The macroeconomy is still in a steady rebound stage, and short-term fluctuations do not change the long-term positive outlook for A-shares,\" the commentary said.</p>\n<p>\"The recent market decline to some extent reflects misinterpretation of policies and a venting of emotion. Economic fundamentals have not changed and the market will stabilise at any moment.\"</p>\n<p>Other major securities dailies echoed the commentary in market reports.</p>\n<p>In a front page story citing domestic fund managers, the official China Securities Journal said the sell-off was a \"structural adjustment\", a sustained plunge is unlikely and the market does not face systemic risk.</p>\n<p>A story in the state-run Shanghai Securities News quoted domestic analysts as saying that the sell-off would not continue, and that the market will gradually stabilise.</p>\n<p>\"For institutions, the decline brings the opportunity for positioning in high-quality shares,\" it said.</p>\n<p>What started off as a sell-off in shares on Monday had spread into fixed income and foreign exchange markets by Tuesday afternoon, sending the yuan falling through psychologically significant levels and pushing Chinese sovereign bond yields, and the cost of insurance against a default in China's dollar debt, higher.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"CAAS":"中汽系统"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2154943718","content_text":"SHANGHAI, July 28 (Reuters) - A Chinese state-owned securities newspaper urged calm on Wednesday after investors dumped mainland shares for a second day on worries over the impact of tighter government regulations.\nRegulatory moves aimed at the education, property and technology sectors sparked heavy selling this week in Chinese markets, and have left global investors bruised and uncertain over the outlook for investments in Chinese firms.\nIn a front page commentary on Wednesday, the state-owned Securities Times said that systemic risks \"do not exist in the A-share market overall.\"\n\"The macroeconomy is still in a steady rebound stage, and short-term fluctuations do not change the long-term positive outlook for A-shares,\" the commentary said.\n\"The recent market decline to some extent reflects misinterpretation of policies and a venting of emotion. Economic fundamentals have not changed and the market will stabilise at any moment.\"\nOther major securities dailies echoed the commentary in market reports.\nIn a front page story citing domestic fund managers, the official China Securities Journal said the sell-off was a \"structural adjustment\", a sustained plunge is unlikely and the market does not face systemic risk.\nA story in the state-run Shanghai Securities News quoted domestic analysts as saying that the sell-off would not continue, and that the market will gradually stabilise.\n\"For institutions, the decline brings the opportunity for positioning in high-quality shares,\" it said.\nWhat started off as a sell-off in shares on Monday had spread into fixed income and foreign exchange markets by Tuesday afternoon, sending the yuan falling through psychologically significant levels and pushing Chinese sovereign bond yields, and the cost of insurance against a default in China's dollar debt, higher.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":130,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":803504717,"gmtCreate":1627445830039,"gmtModify":1703490127508,"author":{"id":"3585225313870167","authorId":"3585225313870167","name":"Unraveling7","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/20845cb3821f7f7f3d19a528cfdab692","crmLevel":3,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3585225313870167","authorIdStr":"3585225313870167"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting","listText":"Interesting","text":"Interesting","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/803504717","repostId":"2154991792","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2154991792","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":1627428087,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2154991792?lang=&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-07-28 07:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Wall St snaps five-day up streak as caution rises before tech earnings, Fed","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2154991792","media":"Reuters","summary":"NEW YORK, July 27 (Reuters) - U.S. stocks fell on Tuesday, ending a five-day winning streak in the t","content":"<p>NEW YORK, July 27 (Reuters) - U.S. stocks fell on Tuesday, ending a five-day winning streak in the three major indexes, as investors were cautious before results from top tech and internet names and Wednesday's Federal Reserve announcement.</p>\n<p>The Nasdaq led the day's declines, registering its biggest daily percentage drop since May 12, but the three indexes pared losses heading into the close and ended well off the lows of the session.</p>\n<p>Shares of Apple Inc, Microsoft Corp&nbsp;and Google parent Alphabet Inc , which all reported earnings after the bell, dropped and weighed the most on the Nasdaq and S&amp;P 500 along with Amazon.com Inc , which is expected to report results later this week.</p>\n<p>Also, electric-car maker Tesla Inc fell 2%, a day after it posted a bigger-than-expected second-quarter profit but said a global chip shortage that led to temporary factory shutdowns for the automaker remains serious.</p>\n<p>Shares of the heavily weighted tech and internet companies have run up recently and last week regained leadership in the market, putting their results even more in the spotlight.</p>\n<p>\"Expectations are so high. They're going to have good numbers ... but we are expecting much more or maybe they will talk down the second half of the year,\" said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Investment Management in Chicago.</p>\n<p>Adding to the cautious tone is the outlook for U.S.-listed Chinese stocks, he said. The shares including Baidu extended losses as fears over more regulations in the mainland persisted.</p>\n<p>\"There's a fair amount of (U.S.) investors in those companies,\" Nolte said.</p>\n<p>Uncertainty also rose as the Fed began its two-day meeting, with investors looking for signs on when it intends to begin reining in its massive stimulus program.</p>\n<p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average&nbsp;fell 85.79 points, or 0.24%, to 35,058.52, the S&amp;P 500&nbsp;lost 20.84 points, or 0.47%, to 4,401.46 and the Nasdaq Composite &nbsp;dropped 180.14 points, or 1.21%, to 14,660.58.</p>\n<p>Helping to support the Dow, shares of McDonald's Corp&nbsp;rose 1% ahead of its results due before the bell on Wednesday.</p>\n<p>In another sign that investors were in a risk-off mood, defensive sectors such as real estate&nbsp;and utilities&nbsp;were the two best-performing S&amp;P 500 categories for the day, and U.S. Treasuries prices rose.</p>\n<p>Intel Corp&nbsp;shares dropped 2.1% after it said its factories would start building Qualcomm chips and laid out a road map to expand its new foundry business.</p>\n<p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 10.36 billion shares, compared with the 9.86 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.</p>\n<p>Declining issues outnumbered advancing ones on the NYSE by a 1.87-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 2.65-to-1 ratio favored decliners.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 44 new 52-week highs and no new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 39 new highs and 235 new lows.</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>Wall St snaps five-day up streak as caution rises before tech earnings, Fed</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\">\nWall St snaps five-day up streak as caution rises before tech earnings, Fed\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-07-28 07:21</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>NEW YORK, July 27 (Reuters) - U.S. stocks fell on Tuesday, ending a five-day winning streak in the three major indexes, as investors were cautious before results from top tech and internet names and Wednesday's Federal Reserve announcement.</p>\n<p>The Nasdaq led the day's declines, registering its biggest daily percentage drop since May 12, but the three indexes pared losses heading into the close and ended well off the lows of the session.</p>\n<p>Shares of Apple Inc, Microsoft Corp&nbsp;and Google parent Alphabet Inc , which all reported earnings after the bell, dropped and weighed the most on the Nasdaq and S&amp;P 500 along with Amazon.com Inc , which is expected to report results later this week.</p>\n<p>Also, electric-car maker Tesla Inc fell 2%, a day after it posted a bigger-than-expected second-quarter profit but said a global chip shortage that led to temporary factory shutdowns for the automaker remains serious.</p>\n<p>Shares of the heavily weighted tech and internet companies have run up recently and last week regained leadership in the market, putting their results even more in the spotlight.</p>\n<p>\"Expectations are so high. They're going to have good numbers ... but we are expecting much more or maybe they will talk down the second half of the year,\" said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Investment Management in Chicago.</p>\n<p>Adding to the cautious tone is the outlook for U.S.-listed Chinese stocks, he said. The shares including Baidu extended losses as fears over more regulations in the mainland persisted.</p>\n<p>\"There's a fair amount of (U.S.) investors in those companies,\" Nolte said.</p>\n<p>Uncertainty also rose as the Fed began its two-day meeting, with investors looking for signs on when it intends to begin reining in its massive stimulus program.</p>\n<p>The Dow Jones Industrial Average&nbsp;fell 85.79 points, or 0.24%, to 35,058.52, the S&amp;P 500&nbsp;lost 20.84 points, or 0.47%, to 4,401.46 and the Nasdaq Composite &nbsp;dropped 180.14 points, or 1.21%, to 14,660.58.</p>\n<p>Helping to support the Dow, shares of McDonald's Corp&nbsp;rose 1% ahead of its results due before the bell on Wednesday.</p>\n<p>In another sign that investors were in a risk-off mood, defensive sectors such as real estate&nbsp;and utilities&nbsp;were the two best-performing S&amp;P 500 categories for the day, and U.S. Treasuries prices rose.</p>\n<p>Intel Corp&nbsp;shares dropped 2.1% after it said its factories would start building Qualcomm chips and laid out a road map to expand its new foundry business.</p>\n<p>Volume on U.S. exchanges was 10.36 billion shares, compared with the 9.86 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.</p>\n<p>Declining issues outnumbered advancing ones on the NYSE by a 1.87-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 2.65-to-1 ratio favored decliners.</p>\n<p>The S&amp;P 500 posted 44 new 52-week highs and no new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 39 new highs and 235 new lows.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2154991792","content_text":"NEW YORK, July 27 (Reuters) - U.S. stocks fell on Tuesday, ending a five-day winning streak in the three major indexes, as investors were cautious before results from top tech and internet names and Wednesday's Federal Reserve announcement.\nThe Nasdaq led the day's declines, registering its biggest daily percentage drop since May 12, but the three indexes pared losses heading into the close and ended well off the lows of the session.\nShares of Apple Inc, Microsoft Corp and Google parent Alphabet Inc , which all reported earnings after the bell, dropped and weighed the most on the Nasdaq and S&P 500 along with Amazon.com Inc , which is expected to report results later this week.\nAlso, electric-car maker Tesla Inc fell 2%, a day after it posted a bigger-than-expected second-quarter profit but said a global chip shortage that led to temporary factory shutdowns for the automaker remains serious.\nShares of the heavily weighted tech and internet companies have run up recently and last week regained leadership in the market, putting their results even more in the spotlight.\n\"Expectations are so high. They're going to have good numbers ... but we are expecting much more or maybe they will talk down the second half of the year,\" said Paul Nolte, portfolio manager at Kingsview Investment Management in Chicago.\nAdding to the cautious tone is the outlook for U.S.-listed Chinese stocks, he said. The shares including Baidu extended losses as fears over more regulations in the mainland persisted.\n\"There's a fair amount of (U.S.) investors in those companies,\" Nolte said.\nUncertainty also rose as the Fed began its two-day meeting, with investors looking for signs on when it intends to begin reining in its massive stimulus program.\nThe Dow Jones Industrial Average fell 85.79 points, or 0.24%, to 35,058.52, the S&P 500 lost 20.84 points, or 0.47%, to 4,401.46 and the Nasdaq Composite  dropped 180.14 points, or 1.21%, to 14,660.58.\nHelping to support the Dow, shares of McDonald's Corp rose 1% ahead of its results due before the bell on Wednesday.\nIn another sign that investors were in a risk-off mood, defensive sectors such as real estate and utilities were the two best-performing S&P 500 categories for the day, and U.S. Treasuries prices rose.\nIntel Corp shares dropped 2.1% after it said its factories would start building Qualcomm chips and laid out a road map to expand its new foundry business.\nVolume on U.S. exchanges was 10.36 billion shares, compared with the 9.86 billion average for the full session over the last 20 trading days.\nDeclining issues outnumbered advancing ones on the NYSE by a 1.87-to-1 ratio; on Nasdaq, a 2.65-to-1 ratio favored decliners.\nThe S&P 500 posted 44 new 52-week highs and no new lows; the Nasdaq Composite recorded 39 new highs and 235 new lows.","news_type":1},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":110,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}