AARONNKJ的个人主页 - 老虎社区

AARONNKJ

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

4关注

0粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-06-23

Amd up!

Got $1,000? Buy These Hot Growth Stocks Before They Take Off<blockquote>有1000美元吗？在这些热门成长股起飞之前买入它们</blockquote>

2021-06-23

Loki

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

Telsa

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

TO THE MOON

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-22

Holiday

Qatar Airways set on launching new Airbus or Boeing cargo jet<blockquote>卡塔尔航空准备推出新型空客或波音货机</blockquote>

2021-06-22

Btc

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-22

Elon

EV stocks fell in morning trading. Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes<blockquote>电动汽车股早盘下跌。中国电动汽车股在近期上涨和计划加息后已完全定价</blockquote>

2021-06-22

Markz

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Singapore

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Test

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Comment

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Like

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-18

Amd number 1!

1 Big Reason to Dump AMD and Buy NVIDIA<blockquote>抛弃AMD并购买NVIDIA的1大理由</blockquote>

2021-06-18

💪💪

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-18

Diamond hands!!

AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>

2021-06-18

Amc!

AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>

2021-06-18

Rocket!!

AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3574898582688380","uuid":"3574898582688380","gmtCreate":1611808842251,"gmtModify":1706620608854,"name":"AARONNKJ","pinyin":"aaronnkj","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":4,"tweetSize":17,"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":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.06.15","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","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":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":123234156,"gmtCreate":1624424198475,"gmtModify":1634006298578,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Amd up!","listText":"Amd up!","text":"Amd up!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123234156","repostId":"1125623159","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1125623159","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624416292,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1125623159?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Got $1,000? Buy These Hot Growth Stocks Before They Take Off<blockquote>有1000美元吗？在这些热门成长股起飞之前买入它们</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1125623159","media":"fool","summary":"The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of Cirrus Logic(NASDAQ:CRUS) and Advanced","content":"<p>The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of&nbsp;<b>Cirrus Logic</b>(NASDAQ:CRUS)&nbsp;and&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD). Share prices of both companies have headed south so far in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>今年上半年对于像<b>卷云逻辑</b>（纳斯达克：CRUS）及<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）。2021年迄今为止，两家公司的股价均下跌。</blockquote></p><p> But that may not be the case forever as Cirrus Logic and AMD are sitting on a bunch of terrific growth drivers that could turn their stock price fortunes around in the second half of the year.</p><p><blockquote>但情况可能不会永远如此，因为Cirrus Logic和AMD拥有一系列出色的增长动力，可能会在今年下半年扭转其股价走势。</blockquote></p><p> Let's look at the reasons why investors might be wise to put down $1,000 on these two stocks right now.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么投资者现在明智地投资1,000美元购买这两只股票。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a4bfea08060592f98ee04ba258f5c724\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>AAPLDATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AAPL数据来自YCHARTS</span></p></blockquote></p><p> 1. Cirrus Logic</p><p><blockquote>1.Cirrus Logic</blockquote></p><p> It is no secret that&nbsp;<b>Apple</b>'s(NASDAQ:AAPL)5G-enabled iPhone 12 models have beena huge hitamong customers, sending the smartphone giant's revenue and earnings north ina spectacular manner. Cirrus Logic hasreaped the benefitsof the same as Apple is the chipmaker's largest source of revenue, accounting for 76%&nbsp;of the top line last quarter. The iPhone maker had produced 83% of Cirrus' total revenue in fiscal 2021 that ended in March.</p><p><blockquote>这不是什么秘密<b>苹果</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）支持5G的iPhone 12机型拥有庞大的黑塔蒙客户，使这家智能手机巨头的收入和盈利以惊人的方式大幅增长。Cirrus Logic也从中受益，因为苹果是该芯片制造商最大的收入来源，占上季度营收的76%。截至3月份的2021财年，这家iPhone制造商的收入占Cirrus总收入的83%。</blockquote></p><p> Not surprisingly, Cirrus' top and bottom lines stepped on the gas in the second half of 2020 after showing signs of plateauing earlier last year. The company delivered $780 million&nbsp;in revenue in the second half of fiscal 2021 that ended in March this year, up 19% year over year.</p><p><blockquote>毫不奇怪，西锐的营收和利润在去年早些时候出现稳定迹象后，在2020年下半年加速增长。截至今年3月的2021财年下半年，该公司实现收入7.8亿美元，同比增长19%。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fae0db2babaa80985a84ec5d66b3fb9\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>CRUS REVENUE (TTM)DATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>YCHARTS提供的CRUS收入(TTM)数据</span></p></blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus investors were in for a scare after the company's guidance for the first quarter of fiscal 2022, which ends this month,failed to meet expectations. The chipmaker blamed supply chain issues for its failure to meet expectations as it was unable to meet the robust end-market demand. Additionally, Apple may have rolled back orders for the iPhone 12 series as the supply chain is already in motion&nbsp;to roll out this year's models.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在该公司本月结束的2022财年第一季度指引未能达到预期后，Cirrus投资者感到恐慌。这家芯片制造商将其未能达到预期归咎于供应链问题，因为它无法满足强劲的终端市场需求。此外，苹果可能已经取消了iPhone 12系列的订单，因为供应链已经开始推出今年的机型。</blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus did provide a hint that its business will pick up the pace in the second half of the year. CEO John Forsyth said on the Aprilearnings conference call:</p><p><blockquote>不过，西锐确实暗示其业务将在下半年加快步伐。首席执行官John Forsyth在Aprilearnings电话会议上表示：</blockquote></p><p>   In the coming months, we will begin shipping new technologies to our customers across a range of end devices, including important new content in the high-performance mixed-signal category. And based on these factors, we expect to accelerate revenue growth in FY 2022.  Cirrus' confidence isn't misplaced as its largest customer is expected to witness a big boom in sales. Reports suggest that Apple's suppliers have already started making components&nbsp;for this year's iPhones. What's more, the company is expected to bump its initial production of the 2021 iPhone lineup by 25% to 100 million&nbsp;units as compared to the iPhone 12's initial order size of 80 million units, according to Dan Ives of Wedbush. He also adds that Apple could finish 2021 with nearly 250 million units in sales, which would be its highest since 231 million sold in 2015.</p><p><blockquote>在接下来的几个月里，我们将开始向客户提供一系列终端设备的新技术，包括高性能混合信号类别中的重要新内容。基于这些因素，我们预计2022财年的收入将加速增长。西锐的信心并非错位，因为其最大的客户预计将见证销售的大幅繁荣。有报道称，苹果的供应商已经开始为今年的iPhone制造零部件。此外，Wedbush的Dan Ives表示，与iPhone 12的初始订单规模8000万部相比，该公司预计2021年iPhone系列的初始产量将增加25%，达到1亿部。他还补充说，苹果到2021年的销量可能会接近2.5亿辆，这将是自2015年销量2.31亿辆以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> The iPhone's terrific momentum is expected to continue in 2022. Juniper Research estimates&nbsp;that Apple could sell $200 billion worth of iPhones next year, which doesn't look like a very ambitious target as the company has generated&nbsp;over $113 billion in iPhone revenue over the past six months.</p><p><blockquote>iPhone的惊人势头预计将在2022年继续。Juniper Research估计，苹果明年可能销售价值2000亿美元的iPhone，这看起来不是一个非常雄心勃勃的目标，因为该公司在过去六个月的iPhone收入已超过1130亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> These tailwinds should help Cirrus shares break out from their mediocrity and set the market on fire in the future. So, investors looking to add agrowth stockto their portfolio should seriously consider Cirrus Logic as it trades at an attractive forward earnings multiple&nbsp;of just 15.</p><p><blockquote>这些顺风应该会帮助西锐股票摆脱平庸的局面，并在未来点燃市场。因此，希望将成长型股票添加到其投资组合中的投资者应该认真考虑Cirrus Logic，因为它的预期市盈率仅为15倍，颇具吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> 2. AMD</p><p><blockquote>2.AMD</blockquote></p><p> It is startling to see AMD stock taking a beating in 2021 considering the pace at which the chipmaker has been growing. The companydelivered outstanding resultsin 2020 and it has continued in the same vein in 2021, with revenue increasing a whopping 93% in the first quarter to $3.45 billion.</p><p><blockquote>考虑到AMD的增长速度，AMD股价在2021年遭受重创令人震惊。该公司在2020年取得了出色的业绩，并在2021年继续保持同样的势头，第一季度收入增长了93%，达到34.5亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD aims to clock 50% revenue growth this year, which would be better than its 2020 revenue increase of 45%. However, AMD can exceed its own expectations. The company had given investors a glimpse of the same when it reported its first-quarter results in April and raised its full-year revenue guidance. It was originally anticipating&nbsp;a 37% year-over-year increase in 2021 revenue, but a robust demand environment has encouraged AMD to raise guidance substantially.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的目标是今年实现50%的收入增长，这将好于2020年45%的收入增长。然而，AMD能够超出自己的预期。该公司在4月份公布第一季度业绩并上调全年收入指引时，已经让投资者看到了同样的情况。AMD最初预计2021年收入将同比增长37%，但强劲的需求环境促使AMD大幅提高指引。</blockquote></p><p> There are three reasons why AMD can turn in better-than-expected results: a short supply of graphics cards leading to a sharp spike in prices, market share gains against<b>Intel</b>(NASDAQ:INTC)in the server and PC processor markets, and the rapidly growing sales of the latest gaming consoles.</p><p><blockquote>AMD能够交出好于预期的业绩有三个原因：显卡供应短缺导致价格大幅飙升、市场份额增长<b>英特尔</b>（纳斯达克：INTC）在服务器和PC处理器市场，以及快速增长的最新游戏机销售。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMD's computing and graphics segment, which recorded 46% year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter to $2.1 billion and accounted for nearly 61% of the total revenue, is poised to benefit from two of those tailwinds. According to AMD, a mix of higher sales volumes and stronger average selling prices (ASPs) of the Ryzen CPU (central processing unit) and Radeon GPU (graphics processing unit) products drove the segment's impressive growth.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的计算和图形部门第一季度收入同比增长46%，达到21亿美元，占总收入的近61%，预计将受益于其中两个有利因素。AMD表示，锐龙CPU（中央处理器）和镭龙GPU（图形处理单元）产品的销量增加和平均售价(ASP)走强推动了该细分市场令人印象深刻的增长。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, sales of AMD's Radeon 6000 series high-end GPUs doubled&nbsp;quarter over quarter. AMD says that this is just the beginning as the Radeon 6000 seriessales could\"grow significantly over the coming quarters as we ramp production,\" indicating that the company is trying to address the problem of short supply. Even better, the GPU market is poised for long-term growth. Jon Peddie Research forecasts&nbsp;sales of discrete graphics cards to hit $54 billion in 2025 from $23.6 billion last year.</p><p><blockquote>例如，AMD镭龙6000系列高端GPU的销量环比翻了一番。AMD表示，这只是一个开始，因为Radeon 6000系列的销量可能“随着我们提高产量，在未来几个季度大幅增长”，这表明该公司正在努力解决供应短缺的问题。更好的是，GPU市场有望长期增长。Jon Peddie Research预测，2025年独立显卡的销售额将从去年的236亿美元达到540亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD is one of the two major players in this space, holding a market share of nearly&nbsp;20%. It is trying to make a bigger dent in the market with new technologies, so don't be surprised to see it win big from GPUs in the future. Meanwhile, AMD's improving market share in the PC processor market thanks to the success of its Ryzen CPUs is turning out to be another catalyst.</p><p><blockquote>AMD是该领域的两大参与者之一，占据近20%的市场份额。它正试图通过新技术在市场上取得更大的进展，所以不要惊讶地看到它在未来从GPU中大获全胜。与此同时，由于锐龙CPU的成功，AMD在PC处理器市场的市场份额不断提高，这被证明是另一个催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> According to a survey carried out by popular video game distribution service Steam, AMD now has just over&nbsp;30% of the CPU market under its control, with Intel commanding the rest. It is worth noting that AMD's market share was less than 20% in 2017. But AMD'stechnological advantageover Intel has helped it take away share from its bigger rival. The trend may not change anytime soon thanks to AMD'ssuperior manufacturing process.</p><p><blockquote>根据流行的视频游戏发行服务Steam进行的一项调查，AMD现在控制着超过30%的CPU市场，英特尔控制着其余的市场。值得注意的是，AMD在2017年的市场份额还不到20%。但AMD相对于英特尔的技术优势帮助它从更大的竞争对手手中夺走了份额。由于AMD卓越的制造工艺，这一趋势可能不会很快改变。</blockquote></p><p> Finally, AMD's enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom (EESC) business is riding on two solid catalysts. One of them is AMD's market share gains against Intel in the server market. AMD's superior manufacturing process has allowed it to increase its market share to nearly 9% at the end of the first quarter of 2021 from almost nothing at the end of 2017, according&nbsp;to Mercury Research.</p><p><blockquote>最后，AMD的企业、嵌入式和半定制(EESC)业务依赖于两个坚实的催化剂。其中之一是AMD在服务器市场上相对于英特尔的市场份额增长。根据Mercury Research的数据，AMD卓越的制造工艺使其市场份额从2017年底的几乎为零增加到2021年第一季度末的近9%。</blockquote></p><p> AMD investors can expect the company totake more market shareaway from Intel in the server space thanks to the former's Milan processors that are reportedly more powerful&nbsp;than Chipzilla's offerings. Throw in the terrific momentum of the new console cycle that has given AMD abig shot in the arm, and investors have another solid reason to buy thistop tech stockthat is trading&nbsp;at just 34 times trailing earnings as compared to the five-year average multiple of 124.</p><p><blockquote>AMD投资者预计该公司将在服务器领域从英特尔手中夺走更多市场份额，这要归功于英特尔的Milan处理器，据报道该处理器比Chipzilla的产品更强大。再加上新游戏机周期的强劲势头给AMD注入了一剂强心针，投资者还有另一个充分的理由购买这只顶级科技股，该股的市盈率仅为34倍，而五年平均市盈率为124倍。</blockquote></p><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>Got $1,000? Buy These Hot Growth Stocks Before They Take Off<blockquote>有1000美元吗？在这些热门成长股起飞之前买入它们</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nGot $1,000? Buy These Hot Growth Stocks Before They Take Off<blockquote>有1000美元吗？在这些热门成长股起飞之前买入它们</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">fool</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-23 10:44</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of&nbsp;<b>Cirrus Logic</b>(NASDAQ:CRUS)&nbsp;and&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD). Share prices of both companies have headed south so far in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>今年上半年对于像<b>卷云逻辑</b>（纳斯达克：CRUS）及<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）。2021年迄今为止，两家公司的股价均下跌。</blockquote></p><p> But that may not be the case forever as Cirrus Logic and AMD are sitting on a bunch of terrific growth drivers that could turn their stock price fortunes around in the second half of the year.</p><p><blockquote>但情况可能不会永远如此，因为Cirrus Logic和AMD拥有一系列出色的增长动力，可能会在今年下半年扭转其股价走势。</blockquote></p><p> Let's look at the reasons why investors might be wise to put down $1,000 on these two stocks right now.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么投资者现在明智地投资1,000美元购买这两只股票。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a4bfea08060592f98ee04ba258f5c724\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>AAPLDATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AAPL数据来自YCHARTS</span></p></blockquote></p><p> 1. Cirrus Logic</p><p><blockquote>1.Cirrus Logic</blockquote></p><p> It is no secret that&nbsp;<b>Apple</b>'s(NASDAQ:AAPL)5G-enabled iPhone 12 models have beena huge hitamong customers, sending the smartphone giant's revenue and earnings north ina spectacular manner. Cirrus Logic hasreaped the benefitsof the same as Apple is the chipmaker's largest source of revenue, accounting for 76%&nbsp;of the top line last quarter. The iPhone maker had produced 83% of Cirrus' total revenue in fiscal 2021 that ended in March.</p><p><blockquote>这不是什么秘密<b>苹果</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）支持5G的iPhone 12机型拥有庞大的黑塔蒙客户，使这家智能手机巨头的收入和盈利以惊人的方式大幅增长。Cirrus Logic也从中受益，因为苹果是该芯片制造商最大的收入来源，占上季度营收的76%。截至3月份的2021财年，这家iPhone制造商的收入占Cirrus总收入的83%。</blockquote></p><p> Not surprisingly, Cirrus' top and bottom lines stepped on the gas in the second half of 2020 after showing signs of plateauing earlier last year. The company delivered $780 million&nbsp;in revenue in the second half of fiscal 2021 that ended in March this year, up 19% year over year.</p><p><blockquote>毫不奇怪，西锐的营收和利润在去年早些时候出现稳定迹象后，在2020年下半年加速增长。截至今年3月的2021财年下半年，该公司实现收入7.8亿美元，同比增长19%。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fae0db2babaa80985a84ec5d66b3fb9\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>CRUS REVENUE (TTM)DATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>YCHARTS提供的CRUS收入(TTM)数据</span></p></blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus investors were in for a scare after the company's guidance for the first quarter of fiscal 2022, which ends this month,failed to meet expectations. The chipmaker blamed supply chain issues for its failure to meet expectations as it was unable to meet the robust end-market demand. Additionally, Apple may have rolled back orders for the iPhone 12 series as the supply chain is already in motion&nbsp;to roll out this year's models.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在该公司本月结束的2022财年第一季度指引未能达到预期后，Cirrus投资者感到恐慌。这家芯片制造商将其未能达到预期归咎于供应链问题，因为它无法满足强劲的终端市场需求。此外，苹果可能已经取消了iPhone 12系列的订单，因为供应链已经开始推出今年的机型。</blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus did provide a hint that its business will pick up the pace in the second half of the year. CEO John Forsyth said on the Aprilearnings conference call:</p><p><blockquote>不过，西锐确实暗示其业务将在下半年加快步伐。首席执行官John Forsyth在Aprilearnings电话会议上表示：</blockquote></p><p>   In the coming months, we will begin shipping new technologies to our customers across a range of end devices, including important new content in the high-performance mixed-signal category. And based on these factors, we expect to accelerate revenue growth in FY 2022.  Cirrus' confidence isn't misplaced as its largest customer is expected to witness a big boom in sales. Reports suggest that Apple's suppliers have already started making components&nbsp;for this year's iPhones. What's more, the company is expected to bump its initial production of the 2021 iPhone lineup by 25% to 100 million&nbsp;units as compared to the iPhone 12's initial order size of 80 million units, according to Dan Ives of Wedbush. He also adds that Apple could finish 2021 with nearly 250 million units in sales, which would be its highest since 231 million sold in 2015.</p><p><blockquote>在接下来的几个月里，我们将开始向客户提供一系列终端设备的新技术，包括高性能混合信号类别中的重要新内容。基于这些因素，我们预计2022财年的收入将加速增长。西锐的信心并非错位，因为其最大的客户预计将见证销售的大幅繁荣。有报道称，苹果的供应商已经开始为今年的iPhone制造零部件。此外，Wedbush的Dan Ives表示，与iPhone 12的初始订单规模8000万部相比，该公司预计2021年iPhone系列的初始产量将增加25%，达到1亿部。他还补充说，苹果到2021年的销量可能会接近2.5亿辆，这将是自2015年销量2.31亿辆以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> The iPhone's terrific momentum is expected to continue in 2022. Juniper Research estimates&nbsp;that Apple could sell $200 billion worth of iPhones next year, which doesn't look like a very ambitious target as the company has generated&nbsp;over $113 billion in iPhone revenue over the past six months.</p><p><blockquote>iPhone的惊人势头预计将在2022年继续。Juniper Research估计，苹果明年可能销售价值2000亿美元的iPhone，这看起来不是一个非常雄心勃勃的目标，因为该公司在过去六个月的iPhone收入已超过1130亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> These tailwinds should help Cirrus shares break out from their mediocrity and set the market on fire in the future. So, investors looking to add agrowth stockto their portfolio should seriously consider Cirrus Logic as it trades at an attractive forward earnings multiple&nbsp;of just 15.</p><p><blockquote>这些顺风应该会帮助西锐股票摆脱平庸的局面，并在未来点燃市场。因此，希望将成长型股票添加到其投资组合中的投资者应该认真考虑Cirrus Logic，因为它的预期市盈率仅为15倍，颇具吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> 2. AMD</p><p><blockquote>2.AMD</blockquote></p><p> It is startling to see AMD stock taking a beating in 2021 considering the pace at which the chipmaker has been growing. The companydelivered outstanding resultsin 2020 and it has continued in the same vein in 2021, with revenue increasing a whopping 93% in the first quarter to $3.45 billion.</p><p><blockquote>考虑到AMD的增长速度，AMD股价在2021年遭受重创令人震惊。该公司在2020年取得了出色的业绩，并在2021年继续保持同样的势头，第一季度收入增长了93%，达到34.5亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD aims to clock 50% revenue growth this year, which would be better than its 2020 revenue increase of 45%. However, AMD can exceed its own expectations. The company had given investors a glimpse of the same when it reported its first-quarter results in April and raised its full-year revenue guidance. It was originally anticipating&nbsp;a 37% year-over-year increase in 2021 revenue, but a robust demand environment has encouraged AMD to raise guidance substantially.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的目标是今年实现50%的收入增长，这将好于2020年45%的收入增长。然而，AMD能够超出自己的预期。该公司在4月份公布第一季度业绩并上调全年收入指引时，已经让投资者看到了同样的情况。AMD最初预计2021年收入将同比增长37%，但强劲的需求环境促使AMD大幅提高指引。</blockquote></p><p> There are three reasons why AMD can turn in better-than-expected results: a short supply of graphics cards leading to a sharp spike in prices, market share gains against<b>Intel</b>(NASDAQ:INTC)in the server and PC processor markets, and the rapidly growing sales of the latest gaming consoles.</p><p><blockquote>AMD能够交出好于预期的业绩有三个原因：显卡供应短缺导致价格大幅飙升、市场份额增长<b>英特尔</b>（纳斯达克：INTC）在服务器和PC处理器市场，以及快速增长的最新游戏机销售。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMD's computing and graphics segment, which recorded 46% year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter to $2.1 billion and accounted for nearly 61% of the total revenue, is poised to benefit from two of those tailwinds. According to AMD, a mix of higher sales volumes and stronger average selling prices (ASPs) of the Ryzen CPU (central processing unit) and Radeon GPU (graphics processing unit) products drove the segment's impressive growth.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的计算和图形部门第一季度收入同比增长46%，达到21亿美元，占总收入的近61%，预计将受益于其中两个有利因素。AMD表示，锐龙CPU（中央处理器）和镭龙GPU（图形处理单元）产品的销量增加和平均售价(ASP)走强推动了该细分市场令人印象深刻的增长。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, sales of AMD's Radeon 6000 series high-end GPUs doubled&nbsp;quarter over quarter. AMD says that this is just the beginning as the Radeon 6000 seriessales could\"grow significantly over the coming quarters as we ramp production,\" indicating that the company is trying to address the problem of short supply. Even better, the GPU market is poised for long-term growth. Jon Peddie Research forecasts&nbsp;sales of discrete graphics cards to hit $54 billion in 2025 from $23.6 billion last year.</p><p><blockquote>例如，AMD镭龙6000系列高端GPU的销量环比翻了一番。AMD表示，这只是一个开始，因为Radeon 6000系列的销量可能“随着我们提高产量，在未来几个季度大幅增长”，这表明该公司正在努力解决供应短缺的问题。更好的是，GPU市场有望长期增长。Jon Peddie Research预测，2025年独立显卡的销售额将从去年的236亿美元达到540亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD is one of the two major players in this space, holding a market share of nearly&nbsp;20%. It is trying to make a bigger dent in the market with new technologies, so don't be surprised to see it win big from GPUs in the future. Meanwhile, AMD's improving market share in the PC processor market thanks to the success of its Ryzen CPUs is turning out to be another catalyst.</p><p><blockquote>AMD是该领域的两大参与者之一，占据近20%的市场份额。它正试图通过新技术在市场上取得更大的进展，所以不要惊讶地看到它在未来从GPU中大获全胜。与此同时，由于锐龙CPU的成功，AMD在PC处理器市场的市场份额不断提高，这被证明是另一个催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> According to a survey carried out by popular video game distribution service Steam, AMD now has just over&nbsp;30% of the CPU market under its control, with Intel commanding the rest. It is worth noting that AMD's market share was less than 20% in 2017. But AMD'stechnological advantageover Intel has helped it take away share from its bigger rival. The trend may not change anytime soon thanks to AMD'ssuperior manufacturing process.</p><p><blockquote>根据流行的视频游戏发行服务Steam进行的一项调查，AMD现在控制着超过30%的CPU市场，英特尔控制着其余的市场。值得注意的是，AMD在2017年的市场份额还不到20%。但AMD相对于英特尔的技术优势帮助它从更大的竞争对手手中夺走了份额。由于AMD卓越的制造工艺，这一趋势可能不会很快改变。</blockquote></p><p> Finally, AMD's enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom (EESC) business is riding on two solid catalysts. One of them is AMD's market share gains against Intel in the server market. AMD's superior manufacturing process has allowed it to increase its market share to nearly 9% at the end of the first quarter of 2021 from almost nothing at the end of 2017, according&nbsp;to Mercury Research.</p><p><blockquote>最后，AMD的企业、嵌入式和半定制(EESC)业务依赖于两个坚实的催化剂。其中之一是AMD在服务器市场上相对于英特尔的市场份额增长。根据Mercury Research的数据，AMD卓越的制造工艺使其市场份额从2017年底的几乎为零增加到2021年第一季度末的近9%。</blockquote></p><p> AMD investors can expect the company totake more market shareaway from Intel in the server space thanks to the former's Milan processors that are reportedly more powerful&nbsp;than Chipzilla's offerings. Throw in the terrific momentum of the new console cycle that has given AMD abig shot in the arm, and investors have another solid reason to buy thistop tech stockthat is trading&nbsp;at just 34 times trailing earnings as compared to the five-year average multiple of 124.</p><p><blockquote>AMD投资者预计该公司将在服务器领域从英特尔手中夺走更多市场份额，这要归功于英特尔的Milan处理器，据报道该处理器比Chipzilla的产品更强大。再加上新游戏机周期的强劲势头给AMD注入了一剂强心针，投资者还有另一个充分的理由购买这只顶级科技股，该股的市盈率仅为34倍，而五年平均市盈率为124倍。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/22/got-1000-buy-hot-growth-stocks-before-take-off/\">fool</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"CRUS":"凌云半导体","AMD":"美国超微公司"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/22/got-1000-buy-hot-growth-stocks-before-take-off/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1125623159","content_text":"The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of Cirrus Logic(NASDAQ:CRUS) and Advanced Micro Devices(NASDAQ:AMD). Share prices of both companies have headed south so far in 2021.\nBut that may not be the case forever as Cirrus Logic and AMD are sitting on a bunch of terrific growth drivers that could turn their stock price fortunes around in the second half of the year.\nLet's look at the reasons why investors might be wise to put down $1,000 on these two stocks right now.\nAAPLDATA BY YCHARTS\n1. Cirrus Logic\nIt is no secret that Apple's(NASDAQ:AAPL)5G-enabled iPhone 12 models have beena huge hitamong customers, sending the smartphone giant's revenue and earnings north ina spectacular manner. Cirrus Logic hasreaped the benefitsof the same as Apple is the chipmaker's largest source of revenue, accounting for 76% of the top line last quarter. The iPhone maker had produced 83% of Cirrus' total revenue in fiscal 2021 that ended in March.\nNot surprisingly, Cirrus' top and bottom lines stepped on the gas in the second half of 2020 after showing signs of plateauing earlier last year. The company delivered $780 million in revenue in the second half of fiscal 2021 that ended in March this year, up 19% year over year.\nCRUS REVENUE (TTM)DATA BY YCHARTS\nHowever, Cirrus investors were in for a scare after the company's guidance for the first quarter of fiscal 2022, which ends this month,failed to meet expectations. The chipmaker blamed supply chain issues for its failure to meet expectations as it was unable to meet the robust end-market demand. Additionally, Apple may have rolled back orders for the iPhone 12 series as the supply chain is already in motion to roll out this year's models.\nHowever, Cirrus did provide a hint that its business will pick up the pace in the second half of the year. CEO John Forsyth said on the Aprilearnings conference call:\n\n In the coming months, we will begin shipping new technologies to our customers across a range of end devices, including important new content in the high-performance mixed-signal category. And based on these factors, we expect to accelerate revenue growth in FY 2022.\n\nCirrus' confidence isn't misplaced as its largest customer is expected to witness a big boom in sales. Reports suggest that Apple's suppliers have already started making components for this year's iPhones. What's more, the company is expected to bump its initial production of the 2021 iPhone lineup by 25% to 100 million units as compared to the iPhone 12's initial order size of 80 million units, according to Dan Ives of Wedbush. He also adds that Apple could finish 2021 with nearly 250 million units in sales, which would be its highest since 231 million sold in 2015.\nThe iPhone's terrific momentum is expected to continue in 2022. Juniper Research estimates that Apple could sell $200 billion worth of iPhones next year, which doesn't look like a very ambitious target as the company has generated over $113 billion in iPhone revenue over the past six months.\nThese tailwinds should help Cirrus shares break out from their mediocrity and set the market on fire in the future. So, investors looking to add agrowth stockto their portfolio should seriously consider Cirrus Logic as it trades at an attractive forward earnings multiple of just 15.\n2. AMD\nIt is startling to see AMD stock taking a beating in 2021 considering the pace at which the chipmaker has been growing. The companydelivered outstanding resultsin 2020 and it has continued in the same vein in 2021, with revenue increasing a whopping 93% in the first quarter to $3.45 billion.\nAMD aims to clock 50% revenue growth this year, which would be better than its 2020 revenue increase of 45%. However, AMD can exceed its own expectations. The company had given investors a glimpse of the same when it reported its first-quarter results in April and raised its full-year revenue guidance. It was originally anticipating a 37% year-over-year increase in 2021 revenue, but a robust demand environment has encouraged AMD to raise guidance substantially.\nThere are three reasons why AMD can turn in better-than-expected results: a short supply of graphics cards leading to a sharp spike in prices, market share gains againstIntel(NASDAQ:INTC)in the server and PC processor markets, and the rapidly growing sales of the latest gaming consoles.\nAMD's computing and graphics segment, which recorded 46% year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter to $2.1 billion and accounted for nearly 61% of the total revenue, is poised to benefit from two of those tailwinds. According to AMD, a mix of higher sales volumes and stronger average selling prices (ASPs) of the Ryzen CPU (central processing unit) and Radeon GPU (graphics processing unit) products drove the segment's impressive growth.\nFor instance, sales of AMD's Radeon 6000 series high-end GPUs doubled quarter over quarter. AMD says that this is just the beginning as the Radeon 6000 seriessales could\"grow significantly over the coming quarters as we ramp production,\" indicating that the company is trying to address the problem of short supply. Even better, the GPU market is poised for long-term growth. Jon Peddie Research forecasts sales of discrete graphics cards to hit $54 billion in 2025 from $23.6 billion last year.\nAMD is one of the two major players in this space, holding a market share of nearly 20%. It is trying to make a bigger dent in the market with new technologies, so don't be surprised to see it win big from GPUs in the future. Meanwhile, AMD's improving market share in the PC processor market thanks to the success of its Ryzen CPUs is turning out to be another catalyst.\nAccording to a survey carried out by popular video game distribution service Steam, AMD now has just over 30% of the CPU market under its control, with Intel commanding the rest. It is worth noting that AMD's market share was less than 20% in 2017. But AMD'stechnological advantageover Intel has helped it take away share from its bigger rival. The trend may not change anytime soon thanks to AMD'ssuperior manufacturing process.\nFinally, AMD's enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom (EESC) business is riding on two solid catalysts. One of them is AMD's market share gains against Intel in the server market. AMD's superior manufacturing process has allowed it to increase its market share to nearly 9% at the end of the first quarter of 2021 from almost nothing at the end of 2017, according to Mercury Research.\nAMD investors can expect the company totake more market shareaway from Intel in the server space thanks to the former's Milan processors that are reportedly more powerful than Chipzilla's offerings. Throw in the terrific momentum of the new console cycle that has given AMD abig shot in the arm, and investors have another solid reason to buy thistop tech stockthat is trading at just 34 times trailing earnings as compared to the five-year average multiple of 124.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CRUS":0.9,"AMD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1079,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123235273,"gmtCreate":1624424173092,"gmtModify":1634006299144,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Loki","listText":"Loki","text":"Loki","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123235273","repostId":"2145679050","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1240,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123235151,"gmtCreate":1624424161673,"gmtModify":1634006299265,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Telsa","listText":"Telsa","text":"Telsa","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123235151","repostId":"2145067282","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1321,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123232322,"gmtCreate":1624424098466,"gmtModify":1634006300050,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"TO THE MOON","listText":"TO THE MOON","text":"TO THE MOON","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123232322","repostId":"2145520610","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2807,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129671069,"gmtCreate":1624372356951,"gmtModify":1634007090491,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Holiday","listText":"Holiday","text":"Holiday","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129671069","repostId":"2145105017","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2145105017","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1624371025,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2145105017?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 22:10","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"Qatar Airways set on launching new Airbus or Boeing cargo jet<blockquote>卡塔尔航空准备推出新型空客或波音货机</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145105017","media":"Reuters","summary":"DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing fr","content":"<p><html><body>DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing freighter, the Gulf carrier's chief executive said on Tuesday as it considers a multi-billion dollar cargo jet order.</p><p><blockquote><html><body>迪拜，6月22日（路透社）-海湾航空公司首席执行官周二表示，卡塔尔航空希望成为新空客或波音货机的首发客户，因为该公司正在考虑一个数十亿美元的货机订单。</body></html></blockquote></p><p>   Both planemakers are reportedly considering producing a new freighter, although neither has so far committed to it publicly.</p><p><blockquote>据报道，两家飞机制造商都在考虑生产一种新的货机，尽管迄今为止都没有公开承诺。</blockquote></p><p>   Reuters reported in March that Airbus was gauging interest in a freighter version of its A350 jetliner and Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker told Reuters on June 4 that Boeing was offering a freighter version of its future 777X passenger jet.</p><p><blockquote>路透社3月份报道称，空客正在评估对其A350喷气式客机货机版本的兴趣，卡塔尔航空首席执行官Akbar Al Baker 6月4日告诉路透社，波音公司正在提供其未来777X客机的货机版本。</blockquote></p><p>   But Boeing said its board was yet to approve such a program.</p><p><blockquote>但波音公司表示，其董事会尚未批准这样的计划。</blockquote></p><p>   \"We are very keen to be a launch customer be it for the A350F or the 777X freighters,\" Al Baker said during a forum organised by Bloomberg on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>“我们非常渴望成为A350F还是777X货机的首发客户，”阿尔·贝克周二在彭博社组织的论坛上表示。</blockquote></p><p>   The major Airbus and Boeing customer has publicly expressed interest in a new cargo jet since at least April and is interested in a large order, potentially for 30 or more new freighters. Its current cargo fleet is 30 Boeing freighters.</p><p><blockquote>至少自4月份以来，空客和波音的主要客户就公开表达了对新型货机的兴趣，并对一笔大订单感兴趣，可能是30架或更多新货机。其目前的货运机队为30架波音货机。</blockquote></p><p>   Speaking on a panel alongside Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun, Al Baker also said the airline was \"hungry\" for more but that the U.S. planemaker could not produce them fast enough. </p><p><blockquote>阿尔·贝克与波音首席执行官戴夫·卡尔霍恩一起在一个小组上发表讲话时还表示，该航空公司“渴望”更多，但这家美国飞机制造商生产速度不够快。</blockquote></p><p>   Calhoun did not address these remarks.</p><p><blockquote>卡尔霍恩没有回应这些言论。</blockquote></p><p>   Qatar Airways is in a contractual dispute with Airbus over a quality issue regarding some of its passenger jets.  </p><p><blockquote>卡塔尔航空因部分客机的质量问题与空中客车公司发生合同纠纷。</blockquote></p><p> (Writing by Alexander Cornwell; Editing by Alexander Smith)</p><p><blockquote>（亚历山大·康威尔撰稿；亚历山大·史密斯编辑）</blockquote></p><p>((Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com;))</p><p><blockquote>（（Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com；））</blockquote></p><p></body></html></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><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>Qatar Airways set on launching new Airbus or Boeing cargo jet<blockquote>卡塔尔航空准备推出新型空客或波音货机</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nQatar Airways set on launching new Airbus or Boeing cargo jet<blockquote>卡塔尔航空准备推出新型空客或波音货机</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\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 smaller\">2021-06-22 22:10</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><body>DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing freighter, the Gulf carrier's chief executive said on Tuesday as it considers a multi-billion dollar cargo jet order.</p><p><blockquote><html><body>迪拜，6月22日（路透社）-海湾航空公司首席执行官周二表示，卡塔尔航空希望成为新空客或波音货机的首发客户，因为该公司正在考虑一个数十亿美元的货机订单。</body></html></blockquote></p><p>   Both planemakers are reportedly considering producing a new freighter, although neither has so far committed to it publicly.</p><p><blockquote>据报道，两家飞机制造商都在考虑生产一种新的货机，尽管迄今为止都没有公开承诺。</blockquote></p><p>   Reuters reported in March that Airbus was gauging interest in a freighter version of its A350 jetliner and Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker told Reuters on June 4 that Boeing was offering a freighter version of its future 777X passenger jet.</p><p><blockquote>路透社3月份报道称，空客正在评估对其A350喷气式客机货机版本的兴趣，卡塔尔航空首席执行官Akbar Al Baker 6月4日告诉路透社，波音公司正在提供其未来777X客机的货机版本。</blockquote></p><p>   But Boeing said its board was yet to approve such a program.</p><p><blockquote>但波音公司表示，其董事会尚未批准这样的计划。</blockquote></p><p>   \"We are very keen to be a launch customer be it for the A350F or the 777X freighters,\" Al Baker said during a forum organised by Bloomberg on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>“我们非常渴望成为A350F还是777X货机的首发客户，”阿尔·贝克周二在彭博社组织的论坛上表示。</blockquote></p><p>   The major Airbus and Boeing customer has publicly expressed interest in a new cargo jet since at least April and is interested in a large order, potentially for 30 or more new freighters. Its current cargo fleet is 30 Boeing freighters.</p><p><blockquote>至少自4月份以来，空客和波音的主要客户就公开表达了对新型货机的兴趣，并对一笔大订单感兴趣，可能是30架或更多新货机。其目前的货运机队为30架波音货机。</blockquote></p><p>   Speaking on a panel alongside Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun, Al Baker also said the airline was \"hungry\" for more but that the U.S. planemaker could not produce them fast enough. </p><p><blockquote>阿尔·贝克与波音首席执行官戴夫·卡尔霍恩一起在一个小组上发表讲话时还表示，该航空公司“渴望”更多，但这家美国飞机制造商生产速度不够快。</blockquote></p><p>   Calhoun did not address these remarks.</p><p><blockquote>卡尔霍恩没有回应这些言论。</blockquote></p><p>   Qatar Airways is in a contractual dispute with Airbus over a quality issue regarding some of its passenger jets.  </p><p><blockquote>卡塔尔航空因部分客机的质量问题与空中客车公司发生合同纠纷。</blockquote></p><p> (Writing by Alexander Cornwell; Editing by Alexander Smith)</p><p><blockquote>（亚历山大·康威尔撰稿；亚历山大·史密斯编辑）</blockquote></p><p>((Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com;))</p><p><blockquote>（（Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com；））</blockquote></p><p></body></html></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BA":"波音"},"source_url":"http://api.rkd.refinitiv.com/api/News/News.svc/REST/News_1/RetrieveStoryML_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145105017","content_text":"DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing freighter, the Gulf carrier's chief executive said on Tuesday as it considers a multi-billion dollar cargo jet order.   Both planemakers are reportedly considering producing a new freighter, although neither has so far committed to it publicly.   Reuters reported in March that Airbus was gauging interest in a freighter version of its A350 jetliner and Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker told Reuters on June 4 that Boeing was offering a freighter version of its future 777X passenger jet.   But Boeing said its board was yet to approve such a program.   \"We are very keen to be a launch customer be it for the A350F or the 777X freighters,\" Al Baker said during a forum organised by Bloomberg on Tuesday.   The major Airbus and Boeing customer has publicly expressed interest in a new cargo jet since at least April and is interested in a large order, potentially for 30 or more new freighters. Its current cargo fleet is 30 Boeing freighters.   Speaking on a panel alongside Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun, Al Baker also said the airline was \"hungry\" for more but that the U.S. planemaker could not produce them fast enough.    Calhoun did not address these remarks.   Qatar Airways is in a contractual dispute with Airbus over a quality issue regarding some of its passenger jets.   (Writing by Alexander Cornwell; Editing by Alexander Smith)((Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com;))","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BA":1}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1315,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129679718,"gmtCreate":1624372320834,"gmtModify":1634007091324,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Btc","listText":"Btc","text":"Btc","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129679718","repostId":"2145501030","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1154,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129679090,"gmtCreate":1624372299910,"gmtModify":1634007092265,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Elon","listText":"Elon","text":"Elon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129679090","repostId":"1143759096","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1143759096","kind":"news","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":1624371721,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1143759096?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 22:22","market":"us","language":"en","title":"EV stocks fell in morning trading. Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes<blockquote>电动汽车股早盘下跌。中国电动汽车股在近期上涨和计划加息后已完全定价</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143759096","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(June 22) EV stocks fell in morning trading. Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%,","content":"<p>(June 22)&nbsp;EV stocks fell in morning trading.&nbsp;Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%,&nbsp;LI&nbsp;fell&nbsp;about&nbsp;2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月22日）EV股早盘走低，特斯拉跌0.33%，小鹏跌超5%，蔚来跌超3%，理想跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a423484cc524b2f71e91b83e759455a9\" tg-width=\"289\" tg-height=\"211\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>Li Auto, Nio, Xpeng: Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes,</b>&nbsp;<b>According&nbsp;To&nbsp;Forbes.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏汽车：中国电动汽车股票在近期上涨、计划加息后已完全定价，</b> <b>据福布斯报道。</b></blockquote></p><p> The stocks of Chinese EV players have surged over the last month, largely reversing the effects of the sell-off seen earlier this year.Nio stock(NYSE: NIO) has rallied by almost 38% over the last month, Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) gained 45%, and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) surged by almost 58%. Now although the three companies posted mixed delivery figures for the month of May, with Nio and Li Auto both posting declines in their deliveries versus April, and Xpeng growing sales marginally, the sales numbers likely weren’t as bad as expected, considering the semiconductor shortage that has roiled the auto industry. In contrast, major auto players such as GM and Ford had to temporarily idle or scale back production at several plants.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车企业的股价在上个月飙升，很大程度上扭转了今年早些时候抛售的影响。蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）的股价在上个月上涨了近38%，理想汽车（纳斯达克：LI）上涨45%，小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）飙升近58%。现在，尽管这三家公司公布的5月份交付数据好坏参半，蔚来和理想汽车的交付量均较4月份有所下降，而小鹏汽车的销量略有增长，但考虑到半导体的情况，销售数据可能并不像预期的那么糟糕。扰乱汽车行业的短缺。相比之下，通用汽车和福特等主要汽车制造商不得不暂时闲置或缩减几家工厂的生产。</blockquote></p><p> The outlook provided by the three companies was also stronger than expected, giving investors confidence that the worst of the semiconductor shortage is likely over. Li Auto has guided to 14,500 to 15,500 deliveries for the second quarter, a sequential increase of 22% on the upper end. The company says that it is optimistic that actual numbers will exceed guidance, given that it is seeing stronger than expected orders for the upgraded version of its Li One SUV. Nio also reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver a record 8,200 vehicles in June.</p><p><blockquote>这三家公司提供的前景也强于预期，让投资者相信半导体短缺最糟糕的时期可能已经过去。理想汽车预计第二季度交付量为14,500至15,500辆，环比增长22%。该公司表示，鉴于升级版Li One SUV的订单强于预期，因此对实际数字将超过指引持乐观态度。蔚来还重申了2021年Q2交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付创纪录的8,200辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Now are the stocks a buy at current levels? While the growth outlook is certainly strong, the stocks don’t exactly appear cheap at current valuations. Nio trades at 14x forward revenue, while Li Auto trades at 9x, and Xpeng trades at about 16x. Near-term threats to EV valuations include higher inflation and recent commentary by the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is now apparently looking at two interest rate hikes in 2023, instead of 2024. This could put pressure on high-multiple, high-growth stocks, including EV names. In our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;we compare the financial performance and valuations of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>现在这些股票在当前水平值得买入吗？虽然增长前景肯定强劲，但以目前的估值来看，这些股票看起来并不便宜。蔚来的预期收入为14倍，理想汽车的预期收入为9倍，小鹏汽车的预期收入约为16倍。电动汽车估值面临的近期威胁包括通胀上升和美联储最近的评论，美联储目前显然正在考虑在2023年而不是2024年加息两次。这可能会给包括电动汽车在内的高市盈率、高增长股票带来压力。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[6/2/2021] Is The Worst Of The Semiconductor Crunch Over For Chinese EVs?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[6/2/2021]中国电动汽车半导体紧缩最糟糕的时期结束了吗？</b></blockquote></p><p> Chinese electric vehicle majorsNio (NYSE: NIO)and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) provided mixed delivery figures for the month of May, as they continued to be impacted by the current shortage of semiconductors. While Nio delivered a total of 6,711 vehicles in May, down 5.5% from April, Xpeng was able to grow deliveries by about 10% over the last month to 5,686 units, although the number is below peak monthly sales of 6,015 vehicles witnessed in January. Although both companies reported robust year-over-year growth numbers (2x to 6x), the sequential figures are more closely tracked for fast-growing companies.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车巨头蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）和小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）提供的5月份交付数据好坏参半，因为它们继续受到当前半导体短缺的影响。虽然蔚来5月份共交付6,711辆汽车，较4月份下降5.5%，但小鹏汽车上个月的交付量增长了约10%，达到5,686辆，尽管这一数字低于1月份6,015辆的月销量峰值。尽管两家公司都报告了强劲的同比增长数据（2倍至6倍），但对于快速增长的公司来说，环比数据受到更密切的跟踪。</blockquote></p><p> However, things are probably going to get better from here. Nio, for instance, reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver as many as 8,200 vehicles in June, a monthly record. This is likely an indicator that the global automotive semiconductor shortage is easing off, and also a sign that Nio is holding its own in the Chinese EV market, despite mounting competition. Nio stock rallied by almost 10% in Tuesday’s trading, while Xpeng’s stock was up by about 8% following the report.</p><p><blockquote>然而，事情可能会从这里变得更好。例如，蔚来重申了2021年第二季度21,000至22,000辆汽车的交付指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付多达8,200辆汽车，创下月度纪录。这可能表明全球汽车半导体短缺正在缓解，也表明尽管竞争日益激烈，蔚来仍在中国电动汽车市场保持着自己的地位。蔚来股价在周二交易中上涨了近10%，而小鹏汽车的股价在报告发布后上涨了约8%。</blockquote></p><p> Despite the recent rally, the stocks might still be worth considering at current levels. Nio stock remains down by about 20% year-to-date while Xpeng is down by about 22%. See our analysis on&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>for an overview of the financial and valuation metrics of the three U.S. listed Chinese EV players.</p><p><blockquote>尽管最近有所上涨，但在目前的水平上，这些股票可能仍然值得考虑。蔚来股价今年迄今仍下跌约20%，而小鹏汽车则下跌约22%。请参阅我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>了解三家在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司的财务和估值指标概览。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[5/21/2021] How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[5/21/2021]中国电动汽车股票相比如何？</b></blockquote></p><p> U.S. listed Chinese EV players Nio (NYSE: NIO), Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) have underperformed this year, with their stocks down by roughly 30% each, since early January. So how do these stocks compare post the correction? While Nio and Xpeng remain pricier compared to Li Auto, they probably justify their higher valuation for a couple of reasons. Here is a bit more about these companies.</p><p><blockquote>在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司蔚来（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克股票代码：LI）今年表现不佳，自1月初以来，其股价均下跌了约30%。那么这些股票在调整后的比较如何呢？虽然与理想汽车相比，蔚来和小鹏汽车的价格仍然较高，但它们的较高估值可能有几个原因。这里有更多关于这些公司的信息。</blockquote></p><p> Our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;compares the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio remains the most richly valued of the three companies, trading at about 10.5x forward revenue. Revenues are likely to grow by over 110% this year, per consensus estimates. Longer-term growth is also likely to remain strong, given the company’s wide product portfolio (it already has three models on the market), its unique innovations such as battery swapping, its global expansion plans, and investments into autonomous driving. Nio brand also has a lot more buzz, with the company viewed as the most direct rival to Tesla in China. Gross margins stood at 19.5% in Q1 2021, up from a negative 12% a year ago.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来仍然是这三家公司中估值最高的公司，其交易价格约为预期收入的10.5倍。根据普遍预测，今年收入可能增长110%以上。鉴于该公司广泛的产品组合（市场上已经有三款车型）、电池更换等独特创新、全球扩张计划以及对自动驾驶的投资，长期增长也可能保持强劲。蔚来品牌也受到更多关注，该公司被视为特斯拉在华最直接的竞争对手。2021年第一季度的毛利率为19.5%，高于一年前的负12%。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng trades at about 10x projected 2021 revenues. Sales growth is projected to be the strongest among the three companies, rising by over 150% this year, per consensus estimates. Besides its higher projected growth, investors have been assigning a premium to the company due to its progress in the autonomous driving space. Xpeng currently sells the G3 SUV and the P7 sedan and its new P5 compact sedan is likely to hit the roads later this year. Although Xpeng’s gross margins have improved, rising to about 11% over Q1, versus negative levels a year ago, they are still below Nio’s margins.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车的交易价格约为2021年预计收入的10倍。据普遍估计，今年的销售额增长预计将是三家公司中最强劲的，将增长超过150%。除了较高的预期增长外，由于该公司在自动驾驶领域的进展，投资者一直对该公司给予溢价。小鹏汽车目前销售G3 SUV和P7轿车，其新款P5紧凑型轿车可能会在今年晚些时候上路。尽管小鹏汽车的毛利率有所改善，较第一季度升至11%左右，而一年前为负值，但仍低于蔚来的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto trades at just 6x projected 2021 revenues, the lowest of the three companies. Revenues are likely to roughly double this year, with gross margins standing at 17.5% as of Q4 2020 (the company has yet to report Q1 results). The lower valuation is likely due to the company’s focus on a single product - the Li Xiang ONE, an electric SUV that also has a small gasoline engine and also due to the fact that Li Auto is behind rivals in terms of autonomous driving tech.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车的交易价格仅为2021年预计收入的6倍，是三家公司中最低的。今年的收入可能会大约翻一番，截至2020年第四季度，毛利率为17.5%（该公司尚未报告第一季度业绩）。估值较低可能是由于该公司专注于单一产品——李想ONE，这是一款同样配备小型汽油发动机的电动SUV，也是由于理想汽车在自动驾驶技术方面落后于竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[10/30/2020] How Do Nio, Xpeng, and Li Auto Compare</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[10/30/2020]蔚来、小鹏、理想汽车对比如何</b></blockquote></p><p> The Chinese electric vehicle space is booming, with China-based manufacturers accounting for over 50% of global EV deliveries. Demand for EVs in China is likely to remain robust as the Chinese government wants about 25% of all new cars sold in the country to be electric by 2025, up from roughly 5% at present.[1]While Tesla is a leader in the Chinese luxury EV market driven by production at its new Shanghai facility, Nio, Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) - three relatively young U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players, have also been gaining traction. In our analysis<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>we compare the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players. Parts of the analysis are summarized below.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车领域正在蓬勃发展，中国制造商占全球电动汽车交付量的50%以上。中国对电动汽车的需求可能会保持强劲，因为中国政府希望到2025年，中国销售的所有新车中约有25%是电动汽车，高于目前的约5%。[1]虽然特斯拉在上海新工厂的生产推动下是中国豪华电动汽车市场的领导者，但蔚来、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克代码：LI）这三家相对年轻的在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司也获得了关注。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。部分分析总结如下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overview Of Nio, Li Auto &amp; Xpeng’s Business</b></p><p><blockquote><b>蔚来、理想汽车和小鹏汽车业务概述</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio, which was founded in 2014, currently offers three premium electric SUVs, ES8, ES6, and EC6, which are priced starting at about $50k. The company is working on developing self-driving technology and also offers other unique innovations such as Battery as a Service (BaaS) - which allows customers to subscribe for car batteries, rather than paying for them upfront. While the company has scaled up production, it hasn’t come without challenges, as it recalled about 5,000 vehicles last year after reports of multiple fires.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来成立于2014年，目前提供ES8、ES6和EC6三款高端电动SUV，起价约为5万美元。该公司正在致力于开发自动驾驶技术，并提供其他独特的创新，例如电池即服务（BaaS）——允许客户订阅汽车电池，而不是预先付费。尽管该公司扩大了生产规模，但也并非没有挑战，去年在接到多起火灾报告后，该公司召回了约5,000辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto sells Extended-Range Electric Vehicles, which are essentially EVs that also have a small gasoline engine that can generate additional electric power for the battery. This reduces the need for EV-charging infrastructure, which is currently limited in China. The company’s hybrid strategy appears to be paying off - with its Li ONE SUV, which is priced at about $46,000 - ranking as the top-selling SUV in the new energy vehicle segment in China in September 2020. The new energy segment includes fuel cell, electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车销售增程电动汽车，本质上是电动汽车，也有一个小型汽油发动机，可以为电池产生额外的电力。这减少了对电动汽车充电基础设施的需求，而电动汽车充电基础设施目前在中国是有限的。该公司的混合动力战略似乎正在取得成效——其售价约为46,000美元的Li ONE SUV在2020年9月成为中国新能源汽车领域最畅销的SUV。新能源领域包括燃料电池、电动和插电式混合动力汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng produces and sells premium electric vehicles including the G3 SUV and the P7 four-door sedan, which are roughly positioned as rivals to Tesla’s Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan, although they are more affordable, with the basic version of the G3 starting at about $22,000 post subsidies. The G3 SUV was among the top 3 Electric SUVs in terms of sales in China in 2019. While the company began production in late 2018, initially via a deal with an established automaker, it has started production at its own factory in the Guangdong province.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车生产和销售包括G3 SUV和P7四门轿车在内的高端电动汽车，这些汽车大致定位为特斯拉Model Y SUV和Model 3轿车的竞争对手，尽管它们的价格更实惠，G3的基本版起售价约为22,000美元补贴后。G3 SUV是2019年中国电动SUV销量前三名之一。虽然该公司于2018年底开始生产，最初是通过与一家老牌汽车制造商达成协议，但它已在广东省自己的工厂开始生产。</blockquote></p><p> <b>How Have The Deliveries, Revenues &amp; Margins Trended</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交付量、收入和利润率的趋势如何</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio delivered about 21k vehicles in 2019, up from about 11k vehicles in 2018. This compares to Xpeng which delivered about 13k vehicles in 2019 and Li Auto which delivered about 1k vehicles, considering that it began production only late last year. While Nio’s deliveries this year could approach about 40k units, Li Auto and Xpeng are likely to deliver around 25k vehicles with Li Auto seeing the highest growth. Over 2019, Nio’s Revenues stood at $1.1 billion, compared to about $40 million for Li Auto and $330 million for Xpeng. Nio’s Revenues are likely to grow 95% this year, while Xpeng’s Revenues are likely to grow by about 120%. All three companies remain deeply lossmaking as costs related to R&amp;D and SG&amp;A remain high relative to Revenues. Nio’s Net Margins stood at -195% in 2019, Li Auto’s margins stood at about -860% while Xpeng’s margins stood at -160%. However, margins are likely to improve sharply in 2020, as volumes pick up.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来2019年交付了约2.1万辆汽车，高于2018年的约1.1万辆。相比之下，小鹏汽车在2019年交付了约1.3万辆汽车，理想汽车汽车在去年年底才开始生产，交付了约1000辆汽车。虽然蔚来今年的交付量可能接近4万辆左右，但理想汽车和小鹏汽车可能会交付约2.5万辆汽车，其中理想汽车的增幅最高。2019年，蔚来的收入为11亿美元，而理想汽车约为4000万美元，小鹏汽车约为3.3亿美元。蔚来今年的收入可能增长95%，而小鹏汽车的收入可能增长约120%。由于与研发和SG&amp;A相关的成本相对于收入仍然很高，这三家公司仍然严重亏损。2019年，蔚来的净利润率为-195%，理想汽车的利润率约为-860%，而小鹏汽车的利润率为-160%。然而，随着销量的回升，利润率可能会在2020年大幅提高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>估值</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio’s Market Cap stood at about $37 billion as of October 28, 2020, with its stock price rising by about 7x year-to-date due to surging investor interest in EV stocks. Li Auto and Xpeng, which were both listed in the U.S. around August as they looked to capitalize on surging valuations, have a market cap of about $15 billion and $14 billion, respectively. On a relative basis, Nio trades at about 15x projected 2020 Revenues, Li Auto trades at about 12x, while Xpeng trades at about 20x.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年10月28日，蔚来的市值约为370亿美元，由于投资者对电动汽车股票的兴趣激增，其股价今年迄今上涨了约7倍。理想汽车和小鹏汽车均于8月左右在美国上市，希望利用估值飙升的机会，市值分别约为150亿美元和140亿美元。相对而言，蔚来的交易价格约为2020年预计收入的15倍，理想汽车的交易价格约为12倍，而小鹏汽车的交易价格约为20倍。</blockquote></p><p> While valuations are certainly high, investors are likely betting that these companies will continue to grow in the domestic market, while eventually playing a larger role in the global EV space leveraging China’s relatively low-cost manufacturing, and the country’s ecosystem of battery and auto parts suppliers. Of the three companies, Nio might be the safer bet, considering its slightly longer track record, higher Revenues, and investments in technology such as battery swaps and self-driving. Li Auto also looks attractive considering its rapid growth - driven by the uptake of its hybrid powertrains - and relatively attractive valuation of about 12x 2020 Revenues.</p><p><blockquote>虽然估值肯定很高，但投资者可能押注这些公司将继续在国内市场增长，同时最终利用中国相对低成本的制造业以及该国的电池和汽车生态系统在全球电动汽车领域发挥更大的作用零部件供应商。在这三家公司中，考虑到蔚来稍长的业绩记录、较高的收入以及对电池更换和自动驾驶等技术的投资，它可能是更安全的选择。考虑到其快速增长（由混合动力系统的采用推动）以及相对有吸引力的估值（约为2020年收入的12倍），理想汽车看起来也很有吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> Electric vehicles are the future of transportation, but picking the right EV stocks can be tricky. Investing in<b>Electric Vehicle Component Supplier Stocks</b>can be a good alternative to play the growth in the EV market.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车是交通的未来，但选择正确的电动汽车股票可能很棘手。投资于<b>电动汽车零部件供应商库存</b>可以成为电动汽车市场增长的一个很好的选择。</blockquote></p><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>EV stocks fell in morning trading. Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes<blockquote>电动汽车股早盘下跌。中国电动汽车股在近期上涨和计划加息后已完全定价</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nEV stocks fell in morning trading. Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes<blockquote>电动汽车股早盘下跌。中国电动汽车股在近期上涨和计划加息后已完全定价</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\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 smaller\">2021-06-22 22:22</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(June 22)&nbsp;EV stocks fell in morning trading.&nbsp;Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%,&nbsp;LI&nbsp;fell&nbsp;about&nbsp;2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月22日）EV股早盘走低，特斯拉跌0.33%，小鹏跌超5%，蔚来跌超3%，理想跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a423484cc524b2f71e91b83e759455a9\" tg-width=\"289\" tg-height=\"211\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>Li Auto, Nio, Xpeng: Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes,</b>&nbsp;<b>According&nbsp;To&nbsp;Forbes.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏汽车：中国电动汽车股票在近期上涨、计划加息后已完全定价，</b> <b>据福布斯报道。</b></blockquote></p><p> The stocks of Chinese EV players have surged over the last month, largely reversing the effects of the sell-off seen earlier this year.Nio stock(NYSE: NIO) has rallied by almost 38% over the last month, Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) gained 45%, and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) surged by almost 58%. Now although the three companies posted mixed delivery figures for the month of May, with Nio and Li Auto both posting declines in their deliveries versus April, and Xpeng growing sales marginally, the sales numbers likely weren’t as bad as expected, considering the semiconductor shortage that has roiled the auto industry. In contrast, major auto players such as GM and Ford had to temporarily idle or scale back production at several plants.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车企业的股价在上个月飙升，很大程度上扭转了今年早些时候抛售的影响。蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）的股价在上个月上涨了近38%，理想汽车（纳斯达克：LI）上涨45%，小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）飙升近58%。现在，尽管这三家公司公布的5月份交付数据好坏参半，蔚来和理想汽车的交付量均较4月份有所下降，而小鹏汽车的销量略有增长，但考虑到半导体的情况，销售数据可能并不像预期的那么糟糕。扰乱汽车行业的短缺。相比之下，通用汽车和福特等主要汽车制造商不得不暂时闲置或缩减几家工厂的生产。</blockquote></p><p> The outlook provided by the three companies was also stronger than expected, giving investors confidence that the worst of the semiconductor shortage is likely over. Li Auto has guided to 14,500 to 15,500 deliveries for the second quarter, a sequential increase of 22% on the upper end. The company says that it is optimistic that actual numbers will exceed guidance, given that it is seeing stronger than expected orders for the upgraded version of its Li One SUV. Nio also reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver a record 8,200 vehicles in June.</p><p><blockquote>这三家公司提供的前景也强于预期，让投资者相信半导体短缺最糟糕的时期可能已经过去。理想汽车预计第二季度交付量为14,500至15,500辆，环比增长22%。该公司表示，鉴于升级版Li One SUV的订单强于预期，因此对实际数字将超过指引持乐观态度。蔚来还重申了2021年Q2交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付创纪录的8,200辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Now are the stocks a buy at current levels? While the growth outlook is certainly strong, the stocks don’t exactly appear cheap at current valuations. Nio trades at 14x forward revenue, while Li Auto trades at 9x, and Xpeng trades at about 16x. Near-term threats to EV valuations include higher inflation and recent commentary by the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is now apparently looking at two interest rate hikes in 2023, instead of 2024. This could put pressure on high-multiple, high-growth stocks, including EV names. In our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;we compare the financial performance and valuations of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>现在这些股票在当前水平值得买入吗？虽然增长前景肯定强劲，但以目前的估值来看，这些股票看起来并不便宜。蔚来的预期收入为14倍，理想汽车的预期收入为9倍，小鹏汽车的预期收入约为16倍。电动汽车估值面临的近期威胁包括通胀上升和美联储最近的评论，美联储目前显然正在考虑在2023年而不是2024年加息两次。这可能会给包括电动汽车在内的高市盈率、高增长股票带来压力。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[6/2/2021] Is The Worst Of The Semiconductor Crunch Over For Chinese EVs?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[6/2/2021]中国电动汽车半导体紧缩最糟糕的时期结束了吗？</b></blockquote></p><p> Chinese electric vehicle majorsNio (NYSE: NIO)and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) provided mixed delivery figures for the month of May, as they continued to be impacted by the current shortage of semiconductors. While Nio delivered a total of 6,711 vehicles in May, down 5.5% from April, Xpeng was able to grow deliveries by about 10% over the last month to 5,686 units, although the number is below peak monthly sales of 6,015 vehicles witnessed in January. Although both companies reported robust year-over-year growth numbers (2x to 6x), the sequential figures are more closely tracked for fast-growing companies.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车巨头蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）和小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）提供的5月份交付数据好坏参半，因为它们继续受到当前半导体短缺的影响。虽然蔚来5月份共交付6,711辆汽车，较4月份下降5.5%，但小鹏汽车上个月的交付量增长了约10%，达到5,686辆，尽管这一数字低于1月份6,015辆的月销量峰值。尽管两家公司都报告了强劲的同比增长数据（2倍至6倍），但对于快速增长的公司来说，环比数据受到更密切的跟踪。</blockquote></p><p> However, things are probably going to get better from here. Nio, for instance, reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver as many as 8,200 vehicles in June, a monthly record. This is likely an indicator that the global automotive semiconductor shortage is easing off, and also a sign that Nio is holding its own in the Chinese EV market, despite mounting competition. Nio stock rallied by almost 10% in Tuesday’s trading, while Xpeng’s stock was up by about 8% following the report.</p><p><blockquote>然而，事情可能会从这里变得更好。例如，蔚来重申了2021年第二季度21,000至22,000辆汽车的交付指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付多达8,200辆汽车，创下月度纪录。这可能表明全球汽车半导体短缺正在缓解，也表明尽管竞争日益激烈，蔚来仍在中国电动汽车市场保持着自己的地位。蔚来股价在周二交易中上涨了近10%，而小鹏汽车的股价在报告发布后上涨了约8%。</blockquote></p><p> Despite the recent rally, the stocks might still be worth considering at current levels. Nio stock remains down by about 20% year-to-date while Xpeng is down by about 22%. See our analysis on&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>for an overview of the financial and valuation metrics of the three U.S. listed Chinese EV players.</p><p><blockquote>尽管最近有所上涨，但在目前的水平上，这些股票可能仍然值得考虑。蔚来股价今年迄今仍下跌约20%，而小鹏汽车则下跌约22%。请参阅我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>了解三家在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司的财务和估值指标概览。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[5/21/2021] How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[5/21/2021]中国电动汽车股票相比如何？</b></blockquote></p><p> U.S. listed Chinese EV players Nio (NYSE: NIO), Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) have underperformed this year, with their stocks down by roughly 30% each, since early January. So how do these stocks compare post the correction? While Nio and Xpeng remain pricier compared to Li Auto, they probably justify their higher valuation for a couple of reasons. Here is a bit more about these companies.</p><p><blockquote>在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司蔚来（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克股票代码：LI）今年表现不佳，自1月初以来，其股价均下跌了约30%。那么这些股票在调整后的比较如何呢？虽然与理想汽车相比，蔚来和小鹏汽车的价格仍然较高，但它们的较高估值可能有几个原因。这里有更多关于这些公司的信息。</blockquote></p><p> Our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;compares the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio remains the most richly valued of the three companies, trading at about 10.5x forward revenue. Revenues are likely to grow by over 110% this year, per consensus estimates. Longer-term growth is also likely to remain strong, given the company’s wide product portfolio (it already has three models on the market), its unique innovations such as battery swapping, its global expansion plans, and investments into autonomous driving. Nio brand also has a lot more buzz, with the company viewed as the most direct rival to Tesla in China. Gross margins stood at 19.5% in Q1 2021, up from a negative 12% a year ago.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来仍然是这三家公司中估值最高的公司，其交易价格约为预期收入的10.5倍。根据普遍预测，今年收入可能增长110%以上。鉴于该公司广泛的产品组合（市场上已经有三款车型）、电池更换等独特创新、全球扩张计划以及对自动驾驶的投资，长期增长也可能保持强劲。蔚来品牌也受到更多关注，该公司被视为特斯拉在华最直接的竞争对手。2021年第一季度的毛利率为19.5%，高于一年前的负12%。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng trades at about 10x projected 2021 revenues. Sales growth is projected to be the strongest among the three companies, rising by over 150% this year, per consensus estimates. Besides its higher projected growth, investors have been assigning a premium to the company due to its progress in the autonomous driving space. Xpeng currently sells the G3 SUV and the P7 sedan and its new P5 compact sedan is likely to hit the roads later this year. Although Xpeng’s gross margins have improved, rising to about 11% over Q1, versus negative levels a year ago, they are still below Nio’s margins.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车的交易价格约为2021年预计收入的10倍。据普遍估计，今年的销售额增长预计将是三家公司中最强劲的，将增长超过150%。除了较高的预期增长外，由于该公司在自动驾驶领域的进展，投资者一直对该公司给予溢价。小鹏汽车目前销售G3 SUV和P7轿车，其新款P5紧凑型轿车可能会在今年晚些时候上路。尽管小鹏汽车的毛利率有所改善，较第一季度升至11%左右，而一年前为负值，但仍低于蔚来的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto trades at just 6x projected 2021 revenues, the lowest of the three companies. Revenues are likely to roughly double this year, with gross margins standing at 17.5% as of Q4 2020 (the company has yet to report Q1 results). The lower valuation is likely due to the company’s focus on a single product - the Li Xiang ONE, an electric SUV that also has a small gasoline engine and also due to the fact that Li Auto is behind rivals in terms of autonomous driving tech.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车的交易价格仅为2021年预计收入的6倍，是三家公司中最低的。今年的收入可能会大约翻一番，截至2020年第四季度，毛利率为17.5%（该公司尚未报告第一季度业绩）。估值较低可能是由于该公司专注于单一产品——李想ONE，这是一款同样配备小型汽油发动机的电动SUV，也是由于理想汽车在自动驾驶技术方面落后于竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[10/30/2020] How Do Nio, Xpeng, and Li Auto Compare</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[10/30/2020]蔚来、小鹏、理想汽车对比如何</b></blockquote></p><p> The Chinese electric vehicle space is booming, with China-based manufacturers accounting for over 50% of global EV deliveries. Demand for EVs in China is likely to remain robust as the Chinese government wants about 25% of all new cars sold in the country to be electric by 2025, up from roughly 5% at present.[1]While Tesla is a leader in the Chinese luxury EV market driven by production at its new Shanghai facility, Nio, Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) - three relatively young U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players, have also been gaining traction. In our analysis<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>we compare the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players. Parts of the analysis are summarized below.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车领域正在蓬勃发展，中国制造商占全球电动汽车交付量的50%以上。中国对电动汽车的需求可能会保持强劲，因为中国政府希望到2025年，中国销售的所有新车中约有25%是电动汽车，高于目前的约5%。[1]虽然特斯拉在上海新工厂的生产推动下是中国豪华电动汽车市场的领导者，但蔚来、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克代码：LI）这三家相对年轻的在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司也获得了关注。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。部分分析总结如下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overview Of Nio, Li Auto &amp; Xpeng’s Business</b></p><p><blockquote><b>蔚来、理想汽车和小鹏汽车业务概述</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio, which was founded in 2014, currently offers three premium electric SUVs, ES8, ES6, and EC6, which are priced starting at about $50k. The company is working on developing self-driving technology and also offers other unique innovations such as Battery as a Service (BaaS) - which allows customers to subscribe for car batteries, rather than paying for them upfront. While the company has scaled up production, it hasn’t come without challenges, as it recalled about 5,000 vehicles last year after reports of multiple fires.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来成立于2014年，目前提供ES8、ES6和EC6三款高端电动SUV，起价约为5万美元。该公司正在致力于开发自动驾驶技术，并提供其他独特的创新，例如电池即服务（BaaS）——允许客户订阅汽车电池，而不是预先付费。尽管该公司扩大了生产规模，但也并非没有挑战，去年在接到多起火灾报告后，该公司召回了约5,000辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto sells Extended-Range Electric Vehicles, which are essentially EVs that also have a small gasoline engine that can generate additional electric power for the battery. This reduces the need for EV-charging infrastructure, which is currently limited in China. The company’s hybrid strategy appears to be paying off - with its Li ONE SUV, which is priced at about $46,000 - ranking as the top-selling SUV in the new energy vehicle segment in China in September 2020. The new energy segment includes fuel cell, electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车销售增程电动汽车，本质上是电动汽车，也有一个小型汽油发动机，可以为电池产生额外的电力。这减少了对电动汽车充电基础设施的需求，而电动汽车充电基础设施目前在中国是有限的。该公司的混合动力战略似乎正在取得成效——其售价约为46,000美元的Li ONE SUV在2020年9月成为中国新能源汽车领域最畅销的SUV。新能源领域包括燃料电池、电动和插电式混合动力汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng produces and sells premium electric vehicles including the G3 SUV and the P7 four-door sedan, which are roughly positioned as rivals to Tesla’s Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan, although they are more affordable, with the basic version of the G3 starting at about $22,000 post subsidies. The G3 SUV was among the top 3 Electric SUVs in terms of sales in China in 2019. While the company began production in late 2018, initially via a deal with an established automaker, it has started production at its own factory in the Guangdong province.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车生产和销售包括G3 SUV和P7四门轿车在内的高端电动汽车，这些汽车大致定位为特斯拉Model Y SUV和Model 3轿车的竞争对手，尽管它们的价格更实惠，G3的基本版起售价约为22,000美元补贴后。G3 SUV是2019年中国电动SUV销量前三名之一。虽然该公司于2018年底开始生产，最初是通过与一家老牌汽车制造商达成协议，但它已在广东省自己的工厂开始生产。</blockquote></p><p> <b>How Have The Deliveries, Revenues &amp; Margins Trended</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交付量、收入和利润率的趋势如何</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio delivered about 21k vehicles in 2019, up from about 11k vehicles in 2018. This compares to Xpeng which delivered about 13k vehicles in 2019 and Li Auto which delivered about 1k vehicles, considering that it began production only late last year. While Nio’s deliveries this year could approach about 40k units, Li Auto and Xpeng are likely to deliver around 25k vehicles with Li Auto seeing the highest growth. Over 2019, Nio’s Revenues stood at $1.1 billion, compared to about $40 million for Li Auto and $330 million for Xpeng. Nio’s Revenues are likely to grow 95% this year, while Xpeng’s Revenues are likely to grow by about 120%. All three companies remain deeply lossmaking as costs related to R&amp;D and SG&amp;A remain high relative to Revenues. Nio’s Net Margins stood at -195% in 2019, Li Auto’s margins stood at about -860% while Xpeng’s margins stood at -160%. However, margins are likely to improve sharply in 2020, as volumes pick up.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来2019年交付了约2.1万辆汽车，高于2018年的约1.1万辆。相比之下，小鹏汽车在2019年交付了约1.3万辆汽车，理想汽车汽车在去年年底才开始生产，交付了约1000辆汽车。虽然蔚来今年的交付量可能接近4万辆左右，但理想汽车和小鹏汽车可能会交付约2.5万辆汽车，其中理想汽车的增幅最高。2019年，蔚来的收入为11亿美元，而理想汽车约为4000万美元，小鹏汽车约为3.3亿美元。蔚来今年的收入可能增长95%，而小鹏汽车的收入可能增长约120%。由于与研发和SG&amp;A相关的成本相对于收入仍然很高，这三家公司仍然严重亏损。2019年，蔚来的净利润率为-195%，理想汽车的利润率约为-860%，而小鹏汽车的利润率为-160%。然而，随着销量的回升，利润率可能会在2020年大幅提高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>估值</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio’s Market Cap stood at about $37 billion as of October 28, 2020, with its stock price rising by about 7x year-to-date due to surging investor interest in EV stocks. Li Auto and Xpeng, which were both listed in the U.S. around August as they looked to capitalize on surging valuations, have a market cap of about $15 billion and $14 billion, respectively. On a relative basis, Nio trades at about 15x projected 2020 Revenues, Li Auto trades at about 12x, while Xpeng trades at about 20x.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年10月28日，蔚来的市值约为370亿美元，由于投资者对电动汽车股票的兴趣激增，其股价今年迄今上涨了约7倍。理想汽车和小鹏汽车均于8月左右在美国上市，希望利用估值飙升的机会，市值分别约为150亿美元和140亿美元。相对而言，蔚来的交易价格约为2020年预计收入的15倍，理想汽车的交易价格约为12倍，而小鹏汽车的交易价格约为20倍。</blockquote></p><p> While valuations are certainly high, investors are likely betting that these companies will continue to grow in the domestic market, while eventually playing a larger role in the global EV space leveraging China’s relatively low-cost manufacturing, and the country’s ecosystem of battery and auto parts suppliers. Of the three companies, Nio might be the safer bet, considering its slightly longer track record, higher Revenues, and investments in technology such as battery swaps and self-driving. Li Auto also looks attractive considering its rapid growth - driven by the uptake of its hybrid powertrains - and relatively attractive valuation of about 12x 2020 Revenues.</p><p><blockquote>虽然估值肯定很高，但投资者可能押注这些公司将继续在国内市场增长，同时最终利用中国相对低成本的制造业以及该国的电池和汽车生态系统在全球电动汽车领域发挥更大的作用零部件供应商。在这三家公司中，考虑到蔚来稍长的业绩记录、较高的收入以及对电池更换和自动驾驶等技术的投资，它可能是更安全的选择。考虑到其快速增长（由混合动力系统的采用推动）以及相对有吸引力的估值（约为2020年收入的12倍），理想汽车看起来也很有吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> Electric vehicles are the future of transportation, but picking the right EV stocks can be tricky. Investing in<b>Electric Vehicle Component Supplier Stocks</b>can be a good alternative to play the growth in the EV market.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车是交通的未来，但选择正确的电动汽车股票可能很棘手。投资于<b>电动汽车零部件供应商库存</b>可以成为电动汽车市场增长的一个很好的选择。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LI":"理想汽车","XPEV":"小鹏汽车","TSLA":"特斯拉","NIO":"蔚来"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143759096","content_text":"(June 22) EV stocks fell in morning trading. Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%, LI fell about 2%.\n\nLi Auto, Nio, Xpeng: Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes, According To Forbes.\nThe stocks of Chinese EV players have surged over the last month, largely reversing the effects of the sell-off seen earlier this year.Nio stock(NYSE: NIO) has rallied by almost 38% over the last month, Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) gained 45%, and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) surged by almost 58%. Now although the three companies posted mixed delivery figures for the month of May, with Nio and Li Auto both posting declines in their deliveries versus April, and Xpeng growing sales marginally, the sales numbers likely weren’t as bad as expected, considering the semiconductor shortage that has roiled the auto industry. In contrast, major auto players such as GM and Ford had to temporarily idle or scale back production at several plants.\nThe outlook provided by the three companies was also stronger than expected, giving investors confidence that the worst of the semiconductor shortage is likely over. Li Auto has guided to 14,500 to 15,500 deliveries for the second quarter, a sequential increase of 22% on the upper end. The company says that it is optimistic that actual numbers will exceed guidance, given that it is seeing stronger than expected orders for the upgraded version of its Li One SUV. Nio also reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver a record 8,200 vehicles in June.\nNow are the stocks a buy at current levels? While the growth outlook is certainly strong, the stocks don’t exactly appear cheap at current valuations. Nio trades at 14x forward revenue, while Li Auto trades at 9x, and Xpeng trades at about 16x. Near-term threats to EV valuations include higher inflation and recent commentary by the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is now apparently looking at two interest rate hikes in 2023, instead of 2024. This could put pressure on high-multiple, high-growth stocks, including EV names. In our analysis Nio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare? we compare the financial performance and valuations of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.\n[6/2/2021] Is The Worst Of The Semiconductor Crunch Over For Chinese EVs?\nChinese electric vehicle majorsNio (NYSE: NIO)and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) provided mixed delivery figures for the month of May, as they continued to be impacted by the current shortage of semiconductors. While Nio delivered a total of 6,711 vehicles in May, down 5.5% from April, Xpeng was able to grow deliveries by about 10% over the last month to 5,686 units, although the number is below peak monthly sales of 6,015 vehicles witnessed in January. Although both companies reported robust year-over-year growth numbers (2x to 6x), the sequential figures are more closely tracked for fast-growing companies.\nHowever, things are probably going to get better from here. Nio, for instance, reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver as many as 8,200 vehicles in June, a monthly record. This is likely an indicator that the global automotive semiconductor shortage is easing off, and also a sign that Nio is holding its own in the Chinese EV market, despite mounting competition. Nio stock rallied by almost 10% in Tuesday’s trading, while Xpeng’s stock was up by about 8% following the report.\nDespite the recent rally, the stocks might still be worth considering at current levels. Nio stock remains down by about 20% year-to-date while Xpeng is down by about 22%. See our analysis on Nio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?for an overview of the financial and valuation metrics of the three U.S. listed Chinese EV players.\n[5/21/2021] How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?\nU.S. listed Chinese EV players Nio (NYSE: NIO), Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) have underperformed this year, with their stocks down by roughly 30% each, since early January. So how do these stocks compare post the correction? While Nio and Xpeng remain pricier compared to Li Auto, they probably justify their higher valuation for a couple of reasons. Here is a bit more about these companies.\nOur analysis Nio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare? compares the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.\nNio remains the most richly valued of the three companies, trading at about 10.5x forward revenue. Revenues are likely to grow by over 110% this year, per consensus estimates. Longer-term growth is also likely to remain strong, given the company’s wide product portfolio (it already has three models on the market), its unique innovations such as battery swapping, its global expansion plans, and investments into autonomous driving. Nio brand also has a lot more buzz, with the company viewed as the most direct rival to Tesla in China. Gross margins stood at 19.5% in Q1 2021, up from a negative 12% a year ago.\nXpeng trades at about 10x projected 2021 revenues. Sales growth is projected to be the strongest among the three companies, rising by over 150% this year, per consensus estimates. Besides its higher projected growth, investors have been assigning a premium to the company due to its progress in the autonomous driving space. Xpeng currently sells the G3 SUV and the P7 sedan and its new P5 compact sedan is likely to hit the roads later this year. Although Xpeng’s gross margins have improved, rising to about 11% over Q1, versus negative levels a year ago, they are still below Nio’s margins.\nLi Auto trades at just 6x projected 2021 revenues, the lowest of the three companies. Revenues are likely to roughly double this year, with gross margins standing at 17.5% as of Q4 2020 (the company has yet to report Q1 results). The lower valuation is likely due to the company’s focus on a single product - the Li Xiang ONE, an electric SUV that also has a small gasoline engine and also due to the fact that Li Auto is behind rivals in terms of autonomous driving tech.\n[10/30/2020] How Do Nio, Xpeng, and Li Auto Compare\nThe Chinese electric vehicle space is booming, with China-based manufacturers accounting for over 50% of global EV deliveries. Demand for EVs in China is likely to remain robust as the Chinese government wants about 25% of all new cars sold in the country to be electric by 2025, up from roughly 5% at present.[1]While Tesla is a leader in the Chinese luxury EV market driven by production at its new Shanghai facility, Nio, Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) - three relatively young U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players, have also been gaining traction. In our analysisNio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?we compare the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players. Parts of the analysis are summarized below.\nOverview Of Nio, Li Auto & Xpeng’s Business\nNio, which was founded in 2014, currently offers three premium electric SUVs, ES8, ES6, and EC6, which are priced starting at about $50k. The company is working on developing self-driving technology and also offers other unique innovations such as Battery as a Service (BaaS) - which allows customers to subscribe for car batteries, rather than paying for them upfront. While the company has scaled up production, it hasn’t come without challenges, as it recalled about 5,000 vehicles last year after reports of multiple fires.\nLi Auto sells Extended-Range Electric Vehicles, which are essentially EVs that also have a small gasoline engine that can generate additional electric power for the battery. This reduces the need for EV-charging infrastructure, which is currently limited in China. The company’s hybrid strategy appears to be paying off - with its Li ONE SUV, which is priced at about $46,000 - ranking as the top-selling SUV in the new energy vehicle segment in China in September 2020. The new energy segment includes fuel cell, electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.\nXpeng produces and sells premium electric vehicles including the G3 SUV and the P7 four-door sedan, which are roughly positioned as rivals to Tesla’s Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan, although they are more affordable, with the basic version of the G3 starting at about $22,000 post subsidies. The G3 SUV was among the top 3 Electric SUVs in terms of sales in China in 2019. While the company began production in late 2018, initially via a deal with an established automaker, it has started production at its own factory in the Guangdong province.\nHow Have The Deliveries, Revenues & Margins Trended\nNio delivered about 21k vehicles in 2019, up from about 11k vehicles in 2018. This compares to Xpeng which delivered about 13k vehicles in 2019 and Li Auto which delivered about 1k vehicles, considering that it began production only late last year. While Nio’s deliveries this year could approach about 40k units, Li Auto and Xpeng are likely to deliver around 25k vehicles with Li Auto seeing the highest growth. Over 2019, Nio’s Revenues stood at $1.1 billion, compared to about $40 million for Li Auto and $330 million for Xpeng. Nio’s Revenues are likely to grow 95% this year, while Xpeng’s Revenues are likely to grow by about 120%. All three companies remain deeply lossmaking as costs related to R&D and SG&A remain high relative to Revenues. Nio’s Net Margins stood at -195% in 2019, Li Auto’s margins stood at about -860% while Xpeng’s margins stood at -160%. However, margins are likely to improve sharply in 2020, as volumes pick up.\nValuation\nNio’s Market Cap stood at about $37 billion as of October 28, 2020, with its stock price rising by about 7x year-to-date due to surging investor interest in EV stocks. Li Auto and Xpeng, which were both listed in the U.S. around August as they looked to capitalize on surging valuations, have a market cap of about $15 billion and $14 billion, respectively. On a relative basis, Nio trades at about 15x projected 2020 Revenues, Li Auto trades at about 12x, while Xpeng trades at about 20x.\nWhile valuations are certainly high, investors are likely betting that these companies will continue to grow in the domestic market, while eventually playing a larger role in the global EV space leveraging China’s relatively low-cost manufacturing, and the country’s ecosystem of battery and auto parts suppliers. Of the three companies, Nio might be the safer bet, considering its slightly longer track record, higher Revenues, and investments in technology such as battery swaps and self-driving. Li Auto also looks attractive considering its rapid growth - driven by the uptake of its hybrid powertrains - and relatively attractive valuation of about 12x 2020 Revenues.\nElectric vehicles are the future of transportation, but picking the right EV stocks can be tricky. Investing inElectric Vehicle Component Supplier Stockscan be a good alternative to play the growth in the EV market.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9,"NIO":0.9,"XPEV":0.9,"LI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1219,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129670286,"gmtCreate":1624372287845,"gmtModify":1634007092510,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Markz","listText":"Markz","text":"Markz","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129670286","repostId":"2145050449","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":844,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167983075,"gmtCreate":1624242537197,"gmtModify":1634009009198,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Singapore","listText":"Singapore","text":"Singapore","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167983075","repostId":"1104038312","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2076,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167989628,"gmtCreate":1624242513264,"gmtModify":1634009009793,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Test","listText":"Test","text":"Test","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167989628","repostId":"2145594707","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1265,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167989370,"gmtCreate":1624242496390,"gmtModify":1634009010142,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Comment","listText":"Comment","text":"Comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167989370","repostId":"2145707918","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":139,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167980836,"gmtCreate":1624242477725,"gmtModify":1634009010739,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167980836","repostId":"1154249454","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":236,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166147554,"gmtCreate":1623999010078,"gmtModify":1634024336831,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Amd number 1!","listText":"Amd number 1!","text":"Amd number 1!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166147554","repostId":"1197160756","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1197160756","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623980251,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1197160756?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 09:37","market":"us","language":"en","title":"1 Big Reason to Dump AMD and Buy NVIDIA<blockquote>抛弃AMD并购买NVIDIA的1大理由</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1197160756","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The graphics specialist enjoys a huge advantage over its smaller rival in an important market.","content":"<p><b>NVIDIA</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:NVDA)&nbsp;has been ruling the roost in the discrete graphics processing unit (GPU) market, despite the best efforts of&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD)&nbsp;to gain share in this highly lucrative space. And NVIDIA is showing no signs of losing its grip over the graphics card market, according to the latest market share numbers provided&nbsp;by Jon Peddie Research.</p><p><blockquote><b>英伟达</b>（纳斯达克：NVDA）一直在独立图形处理单元（GPU）市场上占据主导地位，尽管<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）在这个利润丰厚的领域获得份额。根据Jon Peddie Research提供的最新市场份额数据，NVIDIA没有表现出失去对显卡市场控制的迹象。</blockquote></p><p> Let's see why that bodes well for NVIDIA, and makes it a better bet than arch-rival AMD.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么这对NVIDIA来说是个好兆头，并使其成为比主要竞争对手AMD更好的选择。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94007897775e469423cc8a3d1e55440d\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图片来源：盖蒂图片社</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA&nbsp;finished 2020 with&nbsp;82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达在2020年结束时控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余部分。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched the&nbsp;RTX 30 series cards&nbsp;toward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs were&nbsp;making a nice dent&nbsp;in NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达在2020年底推出RTX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU对NVIDIA的显卡霸主地位产生了很大的影响。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIAfinished 2020 with82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年，Nvidia控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余市场。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched theRTX 30 series cardstoward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs weremaking a nice dentin NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达于2020年底推出TX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU正在成为英伟达显卡霸主的一个很好的牙本质。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that discrete GPU shipments shot up 24.4% year-over-year. The market generated $12.5 billion in revenue in Q1, a 370% spike over the prior-year period, thanks to a&nbsp;jump in the average selling prices&nbsp;(ASPs) triggered by huge demand and short supply. NVIDIA's massive market share means that it has won big from this spike, which is reflected in its Q1 performance.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，独立GPU出货量同比猛增24.4%。由于巨大的需求和供应短缺引发的平均售价(ASP)上涨，该市场在第一季度创造了125亿美元的收入，比去年同期增长了370%。英伟达巨大的市场份额意味着它从这一飙升中受益匪浅，这反映在其第一季度的业绩中。</blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA's gaming revenue more than doubled&nbsp;year-over-year in the first quarter of fiscal 2022 to $2.76 billion. AMD's computing and graphics segment, which also includes the sales of its Ryzen desktop and notebook processors, grew at a relatively slower pace of 46% year-over-year to $2.1 billion in Q1.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达2022财年第一季度的游戏收入同比增长了一倍多，达到27.6亿美元。AMD的计算与显卡分部，其中还包括其锐龙台式机与笔记本电脑处理器的销售额，在Q1同比增长相对较慢，为46%，至21亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that the discrete GPU market could be worth $54 billion by 2025, compared to $23.6 billion last year. NVIDIA's dominant position should allow it to corner a substantial portion of that pie in the future, especially considering its moves to strengthen its position.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，到2025年，独立GPU市场价值可能达到540亿美元，而去年为236亿美元。英伟达的主导地位应该使其能够在未来垄断很大一部分蛋糕，特别是考虑到其加强地位的举措。</blockquote></p><p> <b>AMD's resistance may not be enough</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AMD的阻力可能还不够</b></blockquote></p><p> AMD has been trying to put up a fight against NVIDIA, and it did show some progress last quarter, registering a quarter-over-quarter market share gain of one percentage point. However, AMD is now looking to raise its game with a new technology, the FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). This will compete with NVIDIA's deep learning super sampling (DLSS) image upscaling technology, which helps games look better and run smoother.</p><p><blockquote>AMD一直在努力对抗NVIDIA，上个季度确实取得了一些进展，市场份额环比增长了一个百分点。然而，AMD现在正寻求通过一项新技术FidelityFX超分辨率（FSR）来提高其竞争力。这将与英伟达的深度学习超级采样（DLSS）图像升级技术竞争，该技术有助于游戏看起来更好，运行更流畅。</blockquote></p><p> AMD's internal tests claim that its new tech can help games run at 59% higher frame rates on ultra-quality settings. The chipmaker also claims that FSR could increase gaming performance by 2.5 times in certain titles using the performance setting. In addition, AMD says that FSR supports a wide range of hardware that includes more than 100 processors and graphics cards thanks to its open-source nature.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的内部测试声称，其新技术可以帮助游戏在超质量设置下以59%的帧率运行。该芯片制造商还声称，使用性能设置，FSR可以将某些游戏的游戏性能提高2.5倍。此外，AMD表示，由于其开源性质，FSR支持广泛的硬件，包括100多种处理器和显卡。</blockquote></p><p> FSR will launch on June 22, and it could give AMD a nice boost in the GPU market. However, only time will tell if the new technology will translate into sales for AMD, given that its rival's DLSS tech is already in its second&nbsp;generation.</p><p><blockquote>FSR将于6月22日推出，它可能会给AMD在GPU市场带来很好的推动。然而，只有时间才能证明这项新技术是否会转化为AMD的销售额，因为其竞争对手的DLSS技术已经进入第二代。</blockquote></p><p> However, it is worth noting that NVIDIA is trying to cover as much of the GPU market as possible with new launches. The company recently released the RTX 3080 Ti and the RTX 3070 Ti GPUs, priced at $1,199 and $599, respectively. NVIDIA is giving users of older graphics cards a solid reason to upgrade with these cards. It claims that the RTX 3080 Ti is twice as fast as the older GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 3070 Ti delivers 1.5x the performance of the RTX 2070 Super.</p><p><blockquote>然而，值得注意的是，英伟达正试图通过新产品的发布来覆盖尽可能多的GPU市场。该公司最近发布了RTX 3080 Ti和RTX 3070 Ti GPU，售价分别为1199美元和599美元。NVIDIA给了旧显卡的用户一个升级这些显卡的充分理由。它声称RTX 3080 Ti的速度是旧的GTX 1080 Ti的两倍，而RTX 3070 Ti的性能是RTX 2070 Super的1.5倍。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> NVIDIA is also&nbsp;stepping up its game&nbsp;in the laptop market with the launch of entry-level graphics cards. The company now offers more than 140 laptop models powered by the RTX 30 cards across a wide range of prices. This puts NVIDIA in a solid position in the fast-growing gaming laptop market, which is expected to hit $15.6 billion in revenue by 2027, compared to $9 billion in 2019.</p><p><blockquote>随着入门级显卡的推出，英伟达也在加强其在笔记本电脑市场的游戏。该公司现在提供140多种由RTX 30卡驱动的笔记本电脑型号，价格范围很广。这使得英伟达在快速增长的游戏笔记本电脑市场中占据了稳固的地位，预计到2027年，该市场的收入将达到156亿美元，而2019年为90亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> All of this indicates that NVIDIA's gaming business could sustain its terrific levels of growth for a long time to come, especially considering that a huge chunk of gamers have&nbsp;yet to upgrade&nbsp;to its latest cards.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些都表明，英伟达的游戏业务可能会在未来很长一段时间内保持其惊人的增长水平，特别是考虑到大量游戏玩家尚未升级到其最新的卡。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, the growth of AMD's gaming business is nowhere close to NVIDIA's, and the situation is unlikely to change given the latter's supremacy in this space. That's why investors looking to take advantage of the booming market for discrete graphics cards and add a&nbsp;top growth stock&nbsp;to their portfolios should choose NVIDIA. Gaming is its largest source of revenue, and this business could stay red-hot for a long time.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，AMD游戏业务的增长远不及英伟达，鉴于后者在该领域的霸主地位，这种情况不太可能改变。这就是为什么希望利用蓬勃发展的独立显卡市场并在其投资组合中添加顶级增长股票的投资者应该选择英伟达。游戏是其最大的收入来源，这项业务可能会在很长一段时间内保持火热。</blockquote></p><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>1 Big Reason to Dump AMD and Buy NVIDIA<blockquote>抛弃AMD并购买NVIDIA的1大理由</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\n1 Big Reason to Dump AMD and Buy NVIDIA<blockquote>抛弃AMD并购买NVIDIA的1大理由</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Motley Fool</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 09:37</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>NVIDIA</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:NVDA)&nbsp;has been ruling the roost in the discrete graphics processing unit (GPU) market, despite the best efforts of&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD)&nbsp;to gain share in this highly lucrative space. And NVIDIA is showing no signs of losing its grip over the graphics card market, according to the latest market share numbers provided&nbsp;by Jon Peddie Research.</p><p><blockquote><b>英伟达</b>（纳斯达克：NVDA）一直在独立图形处理单元（GPU）市场上占据主导地位，尽管<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）在这个利润丰厚的领域获得份额。根据Jon Peddie Research提供的最新市场份额数据，NVIDIA没有表现出失去对显卡市场控制的迹象。</blockquote></p><p> Let's see why that bodes well for NVIDIA, and makes it a better bet than arch-rival AMD.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么这对NVIDIA来说是个好兆头，并使其成为比主要竞争对手AMD更好的选择。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94007897775e469423cc8a3d1e55440d\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图片来源：盖蒂图片社</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA&nbsp;finished 2020 with&nbsp;82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达在2020年结束时控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余部分。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched the&nbsp;RTX 30 series cards&nbsp;toward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs were&nbsp;making a nice dent&nbsp;in NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达在2020年底推出RTX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU对NVIDIA的显卡霸主地位产生了很大的影响。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIAfinished 2020 with82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年，Nvidia控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余市场。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched theRTX 30 series cardstoward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs weremaking a nice dentin NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达于2020年底推出TX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU正在成为英伟达显卡霸主的一个很好的牙本质。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that discrete GPU shipments shot up 24.4% year-over-year. The market generated $12.5 billion in revenue in Q1, a 370% spike over the prior-year period, thanks to a&nbsp;jump in the average selling prices&nbsp;(ASPs) triggered by huge demand and short supply. NVIDIA's massive market share means that it has won big from this spike, which is reflected in its Q1 performance.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，独立GPU出货量同比猛增24.4%。由于巨大的需求和供应短缺引发的平均售价(ASP)上涨，该市场在第一季度创造了125亿美元的收入，比去年同期增长了370%。英伟达巨大的市场份额意味着它从这一飙升中受益匪浅，这反映在其第一季度的业绩中。</blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA's gaming revenue more than doubled&nbsp;year-over-year in the first quarter of fiscal 2022 to $2.76 billion. AMD's computing and graphics segment, which also includes the sales of its Ryzen desktop and notebook processors, grew at a relatively slower pace of 46% year-over-year to $2.1 billion in Q1.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达2022财年第一季度的游戏收入同比增长了一倍多，达到27.6亿美元。AMD的计算与显卡分部，其中还包括其锐龙台式机与笔记本电脑处理器的销售额，在Q1同比增长相对较慢，为46%，至21亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that the discrete GPU market could be worth $54 billion by 2025, compared to $23.6 billion last year. NVIDIA's dominant position should allow it to corner a substantial portion of that pie in the future, especially considering its moves to strengthen its position.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，到2025年，独立GPU市场价值可能达到540亿美元，而去年为236亿美元。英伟达的主导地位应该使其能够在未来垄断很大一部分蛋糕，特别是考虑到其加强地位的举措。</blockquote></p><p> <b>AMD's resistance may not be enough</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AMD的阻力可能还不够</b></blockquote></p><p> AMD has been trying to put up a fight against NVIDIA, and it did show some progress last quarter, registering a quarter-over-quarter market share gain of one percentage point. However, AMD is now looking to raise its game with a new technology, the FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). This will compete with NVIDIA's deep learning super sampling (DLSS) image upscaling technology, which helps games look better and run smoother.</p><p><blockquote>AMD一直在努力对抗NVIDIA，上个季度确实取得了一些进展，市场份额环比增长了一个百分点。然而，AMD现在正寻求通过一项新技术FidelityFX超分辨率（FSR）来提高其竞争力。这将与英伟达的深度学习超级采样（DLSS）图像升级技术竞争，该技术有助于游戏看起来更好，运行更流畅。</blockquote></p><p> AMD's internal tests claim that its new tech can help games run at 59% higher frame rates on ultra-quality settings. The chipmaker also claims that FSR could increase gaming performance by 2.5 times in certain titles using the performance setting. In addition, AMD says that FSR supports a wide range of hardware that includes more than 100 processors and graphics cards thanks to its open-source nature.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的内部测试声称，其新技术可以帮助游戏在超质量设置下以59%的帧率运行。该芯片制造商还声称，使用性能设置，FSR可以将某些游戏的游戏性能提高2.5倍。此外，AMD表示，由于其开源性质，FSR支持广泛的硬件，包括100多种处理器和显卡。</blockquote></p><p> FSR will launch on June 22, and it could give AMD a nice boost in the GPU market. However, only time will tell if the new technology will translate into sales for AMD, given that its rival's DLSS tech is already in its second&nbsp;generation.</p><p><blockquote>FSR将于6月22日推出，它可能会给AMD在GPU市场带来很好的推动。然而，只有时间才能证明这项新技术是否会转化为AMD的销售额，因为其竞争对手的DLSS技术已经进入第二代。</blockquote></p><p> However, it is worth noting that NVIDIA is trying to cover as much of the GPU market as possible with new launches. The company recently released the RTX 3080 Ti and the RTX 3070 Ti GPUs, priced at $1,199 and $599, respectively. NVIDIA is giving users of older graphics cards a solid reason to upgrade with these cards. It claims that the RTX 3080 Ti is twice as fast as the older GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 3070 Ti delivers 1.5x the performance of the RTX 2070 Super.</p><p><blockquote>然而，值得注意的是，英伟达正试图通过新产品的发布来覆盖尽可能多的GPU市场。该公司最近发布了RTX 3080 Ti和RTX 3070 Ti GPU，售价分别为1199美元和599美元。NVIDIA给了旧显卡的用户一个升级这些显卡的充分理由。它声称RTX 3080 Ti的速度是旧的GTX 1080 Ti的两倍，而RTX 3070 Ti的性能是RTX 2070 Super的1.5倍。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> NVIDIA is also&nbsp;stepping up its game&nbsp;in the laptop market with the launch of entry-level graphics cards. The company now offers more than 140 laptop models powered by the RTX 30 cards across a wide range of prices. This puts NVIDIA in a solid position in the fast-growing gaming laptop market, which is expected to hit $15.6 billion in revenue by 2027, compared to $9 billion in 2019.</p><p><blockquote>随着入门级显卡的推出，英伟达也在加强其在笔记本电脑市场的游戏。该公司现在提供140多种由RTX 30卡驱动的笔记本电脑型号，价格范围很广。这使得英伟达在快速增长的游戏笔记本电脑市场中占据了稳固的地位，预计到2027年，该市场的收入将达到156亿美元，而2019年为90亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> All of this indicates that NVIDIA's gaming business could sustain its terrific levels of growth for a long time to come, especially considering that a huge chunk of gamers have&nbsp;yet to upgrade&nbsp;to its latest cards.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些都表明，英伟达的游戏业务可能会在未来很长一段时间内保持其惊人的增长水平，特别是考虑到大量游戏玩家尚未升级到其最新的卡。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, the growth of AMD's gaming business is nowhere close to NVIDIA's, and the situation is unlikely to change given the latter's supremacy in this space. That's why investors looking to take advantage of the booming market for discrete graphics cards and add a&nbsp;top growth stock&nbsp;to their portfolios should choose NVIDIA. Gaming is its largest source of revenue, and this business could stay red-hot for a long time.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，AMD游戏业务的增长远不及英伟达，鉴于后者在该领域的霸主地位，这种情况不太可能改变。这就是为什么希望利用蓬勃发展的独立显卡市场并在其投资组合中添加顶级增长股票的投资者应该选择英伟达。游戏是其最大的收入来源，这项业务可能会在很长一段时间内保持火热。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/17/1-big-reason-to-dump-amd-and-buy-nvidia/\">Motley Fool</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","NVDA":"英伟达"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/17/1-big-reason-to-dump-amd-and-buy-nvidia/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1197160756","content_text":"NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) has been ruling the roost in the discrete graphics processing unit (GPU) market, despite the best efforts of Advanced Micro Devices(NASDAQ:AMD) to gain share in this highly lucrative space. And NVIDIA is showing no signs of losing its grip over the graphics card market, according to the latest market share numbers provided by Jon Peddie Research.\nLet's see why that bodes well for NVIDIA, and makes it a better bet than arch-rival AMD.\nIMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES\nNVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again\nNVIDIA finished 2020 with 82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.\nAMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been losing ground to NVIDIA since the latter launched the RTX 30 series cards toward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs were making a nice dent in NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.\nNVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again\nNVIDIAfinished 2020 with82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.\nAMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been losing ground to NVIDIA since the latter launched theRTX 30 series cardstoward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs weremaking a nice dentin NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.\nJon Peddie Research estimates that discrete GPU shipments shot up 24.4% year-over-year. The market generated $12.5 billion in revenue in Q1, a 370% spike over the prior-year period, thanks to a jump in the average selling prices (ASPs) triggered by huge demand and short supply. NVIDIA's massive market share means that it has won big from this spike, which is reflected in its Q1 performance.\nNVIDIA's gaming revenue more than doubled year-over-year in the first quarter of fiscal 2022 to $2.76 billion. AMD's computing and graphics segment, which also includes the sales of its Ryzen desktop and notebook processors, grew at a relatively slower pace of 46% year-over-year to $2.1 billion in Q1.\nJon Peddie Research estimates that the discrete GPU market could be worth $54 billion by 2025, compared to $23.6 billion last year. NVIDIA's dominant position should allow it to corner a substantial portion of that pie in the future, especially considering its moves to strengthen its position.\nAMD's resistance may not be enough\nAMD has been trying to put up a fight against NVIDIA, and it did show some progress last quarter, registering a quarter-over-quarter market share gain of one percentage point. However, AMD is now looking to raise its game with a new technology, the FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). This will compete with NVIDIA's deep learning super sampling (DLSS) image upscaling technology, which helps games look better and run smoother.\nAMD's internal tests claim that its new tech can help games run at 59% higher frame rates on ultra-quality settings. The chipmaker also claims that FSR could increase gaming performance by 2.5 times in certain titles using the performance setting. In addition, AMD says that FSR supports a wide range of hardware that includes more than 100 processors and graphics cards thanks to its open-source nature.\nFSR will launch on June 22, and it could give AMD a nice boost in the GPU market. However, only time will tell if the new technology will translate into sales for AMD, given that its rival's DLSS tech is already in its second generation.\nHowever, it is worth noting that NVIDIA is trying to cover as much of the GPU market as possible with new launches. The company recently released the RTX 3080 Ti and the RTX 3070 Ti GPUs, priced at $1,199 and $599, respectively. NVIDIA is giving users of older graphics cards a solid reason to upgrade with these cards. It claims that the RTX 3080 Ti is twice as fast as the older GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 3070 Ti delivers 1.5x the performance of the RTX 2070 Super.\nNVIDIA is also stepping up its game in the laptop market with the launch of entry-level graphics cards. The company now offers more than 140 laptop models powered by the RTX 30 cards across a wide range of prices. This puts NVIDIA in a solid position in the fast-growing gaming laptop market, which is expected to hit $15.6 billion in revenue by 2027, compared to $9 billion in 2019.\nAll of this indicates that NVIDIA's gaming business could sustain its terrific levels of growth for a long time to come, especially considering that a huge chunk of gamers have yet to upgrade to its latest cards.\nMeanwhile, the growth of AMD's gaming business is nowhere close to NVIDIA's, and the situation is unlikely to change given the latter's supremacy in this space. That's why investors looking to take advantage of the booming market for discrete graphics cards and add a top growth stock to their portfolios should choose NVIDIA. Gaming is its largest source of revenue, and this business could stay red-hot for a long time.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMD":0.9,"NVDA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":356,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166144375,"gmtCreate":1623998978997,"gmtModify":1634024338111,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"💪💪","listText":"💪💪","text":"💪💪","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166144375","repostId":"2144513725","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":484,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166142587,"gmtCreate":1623998926749,"gmtModify":1634024339240,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Diamond hands!!","listText":"Diamond hands!!","text":"Diamond hands!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166142587","repostId":"1131310015","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1131310015","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623987347,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131310015?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 11:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131310015","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pul","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><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>AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nAMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 11:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131310015","content_text":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.\nA century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.\nSell before the other speculators do.\n\nRgStudio/E+ via Getty Images\nWhat are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer forThe Wall Street Journal, and John Brooks, author of “Business Adventures”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.\nInvestor vs. trader vs. speculator\nJason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021Wall Street Journalcolumn:\n\n “\n Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”\n\nSo why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assetsnevercame up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.\nMr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.\nA 2022 AMC earnings forecast\nI start with the key assumptions:\n\nMy time frame for reference is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.\nThe national box officeis the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.\nAMC market share.I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.\nAdmissions gross margin.This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.\nFood expenses as a percent of sales.I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs andmultiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.\nFood and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.\nOperating expensesare the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.\nWe’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:\n\nThe ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:\n\nDepreciation/amortizationis a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.\nInterest expenseshould decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.\n\nThe gravitational pull of earnings\nWe arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.\nThe bottom line - no support for investors.AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words ofTrading Places, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”\nThe speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale\nMillennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The bookBusiness Adventuresby John Brooks,published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.\nShorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:\n\n “\n Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…”\n\nThe sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.\n\n “\n He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”\n\nToday we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.\n\n “\n One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.”\n\nSomething to think about. What was Saunders to do?\n\n “[\n Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments.”\n\nPretty clever, no? No:\n\n “\n At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”\n\nUh oh. What now?\n\n“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller & Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”\n\nOuch.\nBuyers beware\nAs Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?\nAMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":394,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166142321,"gmtCreate":1623998911163,"gmtModify":1634024339583,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Amc!","listText":"Amc!","text":"Amc!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166142321","repostId":"1131310015","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1131310015","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623987347,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131310015?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 11:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131310015","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pul","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><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>AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nAMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 11:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131310015","content_text":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.\nA century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.\nSell before the other speculators do.\n\nRgStudio/E+ via Getty Images\nWhat are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer forThe Wall Street Journal, and John Brooks, author of “Business Adventures”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.\nInvestor vs. trader vs. speculator\nJason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021Wall Street Journalcolumn:\n\n “\n Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”\n\nSo why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assetsnevercame up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.\nMr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.\nA 2022 AMC earnings forecast\nI start with the key assumptions:\n\nMy time frame for reference is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.\nThe national box officeis the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.\nAMC market share.I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.\nAdmissions gross margin.This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.\nFood expenses as a percent of sales.I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs andmultiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.\nFood and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.\nOperating expensesare the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.\nWe’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:\n\nThe ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:\n\nDepreciation/amortizationis a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.\nInterest expenseshould decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.\n\nThe gravitational pull of earnings\nWe arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.\nThe bottom line - no support for investors.AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words ofTrading Places, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”\nThe speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale\nMillennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The bookBusiness Adventuresby John Brooks,published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.\nShorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:\n\n “\n Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…”\n\nThe sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.\n\n “\n He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”\n\nToday we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.\n\n “\n One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.”\n\nSomething to think about. What was Saunders to do?\n\n “[\n Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments.”\n\nPretty clever, no? No:\n\n “\n At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”\n\nUh oh. What now?\n\n“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller & Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”\n\nOuch.\nBuyers beware\nAs Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?\nAMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":527,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166146410,"gmtCreate":1623998895630,"gmtModify":1634024339942,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3574898582688380","authorIdStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Rocket!!","listText":"Rocket!!","text":"Rocket!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166146410","repostId":"1131310015","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1131310015","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623987347,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131310015?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 11:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131310015","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pul","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><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>AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nAMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 11:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131310015","content_text":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.\nA century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.\nSell before the other speculators do.\n\nRgStudio/E+ via Getty Images\nWhat are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer forThe Wall Street Journal, and John Brooks, author of “Business Adventures”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.\nInvestor vs. trader vs. speculator\nJason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021Wall Street Journalcolumn:\n\n “\n Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”\n\nSo why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assetsnevercame up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.\nMr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.\nA 2022 AMC earnings forecast\nI start with the key assumptions:\n\nMy time frame for reference is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.\nThe national box officeis the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.\nAMC market share.I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.\nAdmissions gross margin.This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.\nFood expenses as a percent of sales.I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs andmultiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.\nFood and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.\nOperating expensesare the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.\nWe’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:\n\nThe ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:\n\nDepreciation/amortizationis a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.\nInterest expenseshould decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.\n\nThe gravitational pull of earnings\nWe arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.\nThe bottom line - no support for investors.AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words ofTrading Places, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”\nThe speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale\nMillennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The bookBusiness Adventuresby John Brooks,published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.\nShorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:\n\n “\n Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…”\n\nThe sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.\n\n “\n He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”\n\nToday we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.\n\n “\n One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.”\n\nSomething to think about. What was Saunders to do?\n\n “[\n Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments.”\n\nPretty clever, no? No:\n\n “\n At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”\n\nUh oh. What now?\n\n“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller & Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”\n\nOuch.\nBuyers beware\nAs Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?\nAMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":345,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":123234156,"gmtCreate":1624424198475,"gmtModify":1634006298578,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Amd up!","listText":"Amd up!","text":"Amd up!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123234156","repostId":"1125623159","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1125623159","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624416292,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1125623159?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-23 10:44","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Got $1,000? Buy These Hot Growth Stocks Before They Take Off<blockquote>有1000美元吗？在这些热门成长股起飞之前买入它们</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1125623159","media":"fool","summary":"The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of Cirrus Logic(NASDAQ:CRUS) and Advanced","content":"<p>The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of&nbsp;<b>Cirrus Logic</b>(NASDAQ:CRUS)&nbsp;and&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD). Share prices of both companies have headed south so far in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>今年上半年对于像<b>卷云逻辑</b>（纳斯达克：CRUS）及<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）。2021年迄今为止，两家公司的股价均下跌。</blockquote></p><p> But that may not be the case forever as Cirrus Logic and AMD are sitting on a bunch of terrific growth drivers that could turn their stock price fortunes around in the second half of the year.</p><p><blockquote>但情况可能不会永远如此，因为Cirrus Logic和AMD拥有一系列出色的增长动力，可能会在今年下半年扭转其股价走势。</blockquote></p><p> Let's look at the reasons why investors might be wise to put down $1,000 on these two stocks right now.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么投资者现在明智地投资1,000美元购买这两只股票。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a4bfea08060592f98ee04ba258f5c724\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>AAPLDATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AAPL数据来自YCHARTS</span></p></blockquote></p><p> 1. Cirrus Logic</p><p><blockquote>1.Cirrus Logic</blockquote></p><p> It is no secret that&nbsp;<b>Apple</b>'s(NASDAQ:AAPL)5G-enabled iPhone 12 models have beena huge hitamong customers, sending the smartphone giant's revenue and earnings north ina spectacular manner. Cirrus Logic hasreaped the benefitsof the same as Apple is the chipmaker's largest source of revenue, accounting for 76%&nbsp;of the top line last quarter. The iPhone maker had produced 83% of Cirrus' total revenue in fiscal 2021 that ended in March.</p><p><blockquote>这不是什么秘密<b>苹果</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）支持5G的iPhone 12机型拥有庞大的黑塔蒙客户，使这家智能手机巨头的收入和盈利以惊人的方式大幅增长。Cirrus Logic也从中受益，因为苹果是该芯片制造商最大的收入来源，占上季度营收的76%。截至3月份的2021财年，这家iPhone制造商的收入占Cirrus总收入的83%。</blockquote></p><p> Not surprisingly, Cirrus' top and bottom lines stepped on the gas in the second half of 2020 after showing signs of plateauing earlier last year. The company delivered $780 million&nbsp;in revenue in the second half of fiscal 2021 that ended in March this year, up 19% year over year.</p><p><blockquote>毫不奇怪，西锐的营收和利润在去年早些时候出现稳定迹象后，在2020年下半年加速增长。截至今年3月的2021财年下半年，该公司实现收入7.8亿美元，同比增长19%。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fae0db2babaa80985a84ec5d66b3fb9\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>CRUS REVENUE (TTM)DATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>YCHARTS提供的CRUS收入(TTM)数据</span></p></blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus investors were in for a scare after the company's guidance for the first quarter of fiscal 2022, which ends this month,failed to meet expectations. The chipmaker blamed supply chain issues for its failure to meet expectations as it was unable to meet the robust end-market demand. Additionally, Apple may have rolled back orders for the iPhone 12 series as the supply chain is already in motion&nbsp;to roll out this year's models.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在该公司本月结束的2022财年第一季度指引未能达到预期后，Cirrus投资者感到恐慌。这家芯片制造商将其未能达到预期归咎于供应链问题，因为它无法满足强劲的终端市场需求。此外，苹果可能已经取消了iPhone 12系列的订单，因为供应链已经开始推出今年的机型。</blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus did provide a hint that its business will pick up the pace in the second half of the year. CEO John Forsyth said on the Aprilearnings conference call:</p><p><blockquote>不过，西锐确实暗示其业务将在下半年加快步伐。首席执行官John Forsyth在Aprilearnings电话会议上表示：</blockquote></p><p>   In the coming months, we will begin shipping new technologies to our customers across a range of end devices, including important new content in the high-performance mixed-signal category. And based on these factors, we expect to accelerate revenue growth in FY 2022.  Cirrus' confidence isn't misplaced as its largest customer is expected to witness a big boom in sales. Reports suggest that Apple's suppliers have already started making components&nbsp;for this year's iPhones. What's more, the company is expected to bump its initial production of the 2021 iPhone lineup by 25% to 100 million&nbsp;units as compared to the iPhone 12's initial order size of 80 million units, according to Dan Ives of Wedbush. He also adds that Apple could finish 2021 with nearly 250 million units in sales, which would be its highest since 231 million sold in 2015.</p><p><blockquote>在接下来的几个月里，我们将开始向客户提供一系列终端设备的新技术，包括高性能混合信号类别中的重要新内容。基于这些因素，我们预计2022财年的收入将加速增长。西锐的信心并非错位，因为其最大的客户预计将见证销售的大幅繁荣。有报道称，苹果的供应商已经开始为今年的iPhone制造零部件。此外，Wedbush的Dan Ives表示，与iPhone 12的初始订单规模8000万部相比，该公司预计2021年iPhone系列的初始产量将增加25%，达到1亿部。他还补充说，苹果到2021年的销量可能会接近2.5亿辆，这将是自2015年销量2.31亿辆以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> The iPhone's terrific momentum is expected to continue in 2022. Juniper Research estimates&nbsp;that Apple could sell $200 billion worth of iPhones next year, which doesn't look like a very ambitious target as the company has generated&nbsp;over $113 billion in iPhone revenue over the past six months.</p><p><blockquote>iPhone的惊人势头预计将在2022年继续。Juniper Research估计，苹果明年可能销售价值2000亿美元的iPhone，这看起来不是一个非常雄心勃勃的目标，因为该公司在过去六个月的iPhone收入已超过1130亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> These tailwinds should help Cirrus shares break out from their mediocrity and set the market on fire in the future. So, investors looking to add agrowth stockto their portfolio should seriously consider Cirrus Logic as it trades at an attractive forward earnings multiple&nbsp;of just 15.</p><p><blockquote>这些顺风应该会帮助西锐股票摆脱平庸的局面，并在未来点燃市场。因此，希望将成长型股票添加到其投资组合中的投资者应该认真考虑Cirrus Logic，因为它的预期市盈率仅为15倍，颇具吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> 2. AMD</p><p><blockquote>2.AMD</blockquote></p><p> It is startling to see AMD stock taking a beating in 2021 considering the pace at which the chipmaker has been growing. The companydelivered outstanding resultsin 2020 and it has continued in the same vein in 2021, with revenue increasing a whopping 93% in the first quarter to $3.45 billion.</p><p><blockquote>考虑到AMD的增长速度，AMD股价在2021年遭受重创令人震惊。该公司在2020年取得了出色的业绩，并在2021年继续保持同样的势头，第一季度收入增长了93%，达到34.5亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD aims to clock 50% revenue growth this year, which would be better than its 2020 revenue increase of 45%. However, AMD can exceed its own expectations. The company had given investors a glimpse of the same when it reported its first-quarter results in April and raised its full-year revenue guidance. It was originally anticipating&nbsp;a 37% year-over-year increase in 2021 revenue, but a robust demand environment has encouraged AMD to raise guidance substantially.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的目标是今年实现50%的收入增长，这将好于2020年45%的收入增长。然而，AMD能够超出自己的预期。该公司在4月份公布第一季度业绩并上调全年收入指引时，已经让投资者看到了同样的情况。AMD最初预计2021年收入将同比增长37%，但强劲的需求环境促使AMD大幅提高指引。</blockquote></p><p> There are three reasons why AMD can turn in better-than-expected results: a short supply of graphics cards leading to a sharp spike in prices, market share gains against<b>Intel</b>(NASDAQ:INTC)in the server and PC processor markets, and the rapidly growing sales of the latest gaming consoles.</p><p><blockquote>AMD能够交出好于预期的业绩有三个原因：显卡供应短缺导致价格大幅飙升、市场份额增长<b>英特尔</b>（纳斯达克：INTC）在服务器和PC处理器市场，以及快速增长的最新游戏机销售。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMD's computing and graphics segment, which recorded 46% year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter to $2.1 billion and accounted for nearly 61% of the total revenue, is poised to benefit from two of those tailwinds. According to AMD, a mix of higher sales volumes and stronger average selling prices (ASPs) of the Ryzen CPU (central processing unit) and Radeon GPU (graphics processing unit) products drove the segment's impressive growth.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的计算和图形部门第一季度收入同比增长46%，达到21亿美元，占总收入的近61%，预计将受益于其中两个有利因素。AMD表示，锐龙CPU（中央处理器）和镭龙GPU（图形处理单元）产品的销量增加和平均售价(ASP)走强推动了该细分市场令人印象深刻的增长。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, sales of AMD's Radeon 6000 series high-end GPUs doubled&nbsp;quarter over quarter. AMD says that this is just the beginning as the Radeon 6000 seriessales could\"grow significantly over the coming quarters as we ramp production,\" indicating that the company is trying to address the problem of short supply. Even better, the GPU market is poised for long-term growth. Jon Peddie Research forecasts&nbsp;sales of discrete graphics cards to hit $54 billion in 2025 from $23.6 billion last year.</p><p><blockquote>例如，AMD镭龙6000系列高端GPU的销量环比翻了一番。AMD表示，这只是一个开始，因为Radeon 6000系列的销量可能“随着我们提高产量，在未来几个季度大幅增长”，这表明该公司正在努力解决供应短缺的问题。更好的是，GPU市场有望长期增长。Jon Peddie Research预测，2025年独立显卡的销售额将从去年的236亿美元达到540亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD is one of the two major players in this space, holding a market share of nearly&nbsp;20%. It is trying to make a bigger dent in the market with new technologies, so don't be surprised to see it win big from GPUs in the future. Meanwhile, AMD's improving market share in the PC processor market thanks to the success of its Ryzen CPUs is turning out to be another catalyst.</p><p><blockquote>AMD是该领域的两大参与者之一，占据近20%的市场份额。它正试图通过新技术在市场上取得更大的进展，所以不要惊讶地看到它在未来从GPU中大获全胜。与此同时，由于锐龙CPU的成功，AMD在PC处理器市场的市场份额不断提高，这被证明是另一个催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> According to a survey carried out by popular video game distribution service Steam, AMD now has just over&nbsp;30% of the CPU market under its control, with Intel commanding the rest. It is worth noting that AMD's market share was less than 20% in 2017. But AMD'stechnological advantageover Intel has helped it take away share from its bigger rival. The trend may not change anytime soon thanks to AMD'ssuperior manufacturing process.</p><p><blockquote>根据流行的视频游戏发行服务Steam进行的一项调查，AMD现在控制着超过30%的CPU市场，英特尔控制着其余的市场。值得注意的是，AMD在2017年的市场份额还不到20%。但AMD相对于英特尔的技术优势帮助它从更大的竞争对手手中夺走了份额。由于AMD卓越的制造工艺，这一趋势可能不会很快改变。</blockquote></p><p> Finally, AMD's enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom (EESC) business is riding on two solid catalysts. One of them is AMD's market share gains against Intel in the server market. AMD's superior manufacturing process has allowed it to increase its market share to nearly 9% at the end of the first quarter of 2021 from almost nothing at the end of 2017, according&nbsp;to Mercury Research.</p><p><blockquote>最后，AMD的企业、嵌入式和半定制(EESC)业务依赖于两个坚实的催化剂。其中之一是AMD在服务器市场上相对于英特尔的市场份额增长。根据Mercury Research的数据，AMD卓越的制造工艺使其市场份额从2017年底的几乎为零增加到2021年第一季度末的近9%。</blockquote></p><p> AMD investors can expect the company totake more market shareaway from Intel in the server space thanks to the former's Milan processors that are reportedly more powerful&nbsp;than Chipzilla's offerings. Throw in the terrific momentum of the new console cycle that has given AMD abig shot in the arm, and investors have another solid reason to buy thistop tech stockthat is trading&nbsp;at just 34 times trailing earnings as compared to the five-year average multiple of 124.</p><p><blockquote>AMD投资者预计该公司将在服务器领域从英特尔手中夺走更多市场份额，这要归功于英特尔的Milan处理器，据报道该处理器比Chipzilla的产品更强大。再加上新游戏机周期的强劲势头给AMD注入了一剂强心针，投资者还有另一个充分的理由购买这只顶级科技股，该股的市盈率仅为34倍，而五年平均市盈率为124倍。</blockquote></p><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>Got $1,000? Buy These Hot Growth Stocks Before They Take Off<blockquote>有1000美元吗？在这些热门成长股起飞之前买入它们</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nGot $1,000? Buy These Hot Growth Stocks Before They Take Off<blockquote>有1000美元吗？在这些热门成长股起飞之前买入它们</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">fool</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-23 10:44</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of&nbsp;<b>Cirrus Logic</b>(NASDAQ:CRUS)&nbsp;and&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD). Share prices of both companies have headed south so far in 2021.</p><p><blockquote>今年上半年对于像<b>卷云逻辑</b>（纳斯达克：CRUS）及<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）。2021年迄今为止，两家公司的股价均下跌。</blockquote></p><p> But that may not be the case forever as Cirrus Logic and AMD are sitting on a bunch of terrific growth drivers that could turn their stock price fortunes around in the second half of the year.</p><p><blockquote>但情况可能不会永远如此，因为Cirrus Logic和AMD拥有一系列出色的增长动力，可能会在今年下半年扭转其股价走势。</blockquote></p><p> Let's look at the reasons why investors might be wise to put down $1,000 on these two stocks right now.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么投资者现在明智地投资1,000美元购买这两只股票。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a4bfea08060592f98ee04ba258f5c724\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>AAPLDATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AAPL数据来自YCHARTS</span></p></blockquote></p><p> 1. Cirrus Logic</p><p><blockquote>1.Cirrus Logic</blockquote></p><p> It is no secret that&nbsp;<b>Apple</b>'s(NASDAQ:AAPL)5G-enabled iPhone 12 models have beena huge hitamong customers, sending the smartphone giant's revenue and earnings north ina spectacular manner. Cirrus Logic hasreaped the benefitsof the same as Apple is the chipmaker's largest source of revenue, accounting for 76%&nbsp;of the top line last quarter. The iPhone maker had produced 83% of Cirrus' total revenue in fiscal 2021 that ended in March.</p><p><blockquote>这不是什么秘密<b>苹果</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）支持5G的iPhone 12机型拥有庞大的黑塔蒙客户，使这家智能手机巨头的收入和盈利以惊人的方式大幅增长。Cirrus Logic也从中受益，因为苹果是该芯片制造商最大的收入来源，占上季度营收的76%。截至3月份的2021财年，这家iPhone制造商的收入占Cirrus总收入的83%。</blockquote></p><p> Not surprisingly, Cirrus' top and bottom lines stepped on the gas in the second half of 2020 after showing signs of plateauing earlier last year. The company delivered $780 million&nbsp;in revenue in the second half of fiscal 2021 that ended in March this year, up 19% year over year.</p><p><blockquote>毫不奇怪，西锐的营收和利润在去年早些时候出现稳定迹象后，在2020年下半年加速增长。截至今年3月的2021财年下半年，该公司实现收入7.8亿美元，同比增长19%。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9fae0db2babaa80985a84ec5d66b3fb9\" tg-width=\"720\" tg-height=\"387\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>CRUS REVENUE (TTM)DATA BY YCHARTS</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>YCHARTS提供的CRUS收入(TTM)数据</span></p></blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus investors were in for a scare after the company's guidance for the first quarter of fiscal 2022, which ends this month,failed to meet expectations. The chipmaker blamed supply chain issues for its failure to meet expectations as it was unable to meet the robust end-market demand. Additionally, Apple may have rolled back orders for the iPhone 12 series as the supply chain is already in motion&nbsp;to roll out this year's models.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在该公司本月结束的2022财年第一季度指引未能达到预期后，Cirrus投资者感到恐慌。这家芯片制造商将其未能达到预期归咎于供应链问题，因为它无法满足强劲的终端市场需求。此外，苹果可能已经取消了iPhone 12系列的订单，因为供应链已经开始推出今年的机型。</blockquote></p><p> However, Cirrus did provide a hint that its business will pick up the pace in the second half of the year. CEO John Forsyth said on the Aprilearnings conference call:</p><p><blockquote>不过，西锐确实暗示其业务将在下半年加快步伐。首席执行官John Forsyth在Aprilearnings电话会议上表示：</blockquote></p><p>   In the coming months, we will begin shipping new technologies to our customers across a range of end devices, including important new content in the high-performance mixed-signal category. And based on these factors, we expect to accelerate revenue growth in FY 2022.  Cirrus' confidence isn't misplaced as its largest customer is expected to witness a big boom in sales. Reports suggest that Apple's suppliers have already started making components&nbsp;for this year's iPhones. What's more, the company is expected to bump its initial production of the 2021 iPhone lineup by 25% to 100 million&nbsp;units as compared to the iPhone 12's initial order size of 80 million units, according to Dan Ives of Wedbush. He also adds that Apple could finish 2021 with nearly 250 million units in sales, which would be its highest since 231 million sold in 2015.</p><p><blockquote>在接下来的几个月里，我们将开始向客户提供一系列终端设备的新技术，包括高性能混合信号类别中的重要新内容。基于这些因素，我们预计2022财年的收入将加速增长。西锐的信心并非错位，因为其最大的客户预计将见证销售的大幅繁荣。有报道称，苹果的供应商已经开始为今年的iPhone制造零部件。此外，Wedbush的Dan Ives表示，与iPhone 12的初始订单规模8000万部相比，该公司预计2021年iPhone系列的初始产量将增加25%，达到1亿部。他还补充说，苹果到2021年的销量可能会接近2.5亿辆，这将是自2015年销量2.31亿辆以来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> The iPhone's terrific momentum is expected to continue in 2022. Juniper Research estimates&nbsp;that Apple could sell $200 billion worth of iPhones next year, which doesn't look like a very ambitious target as the company has generated&nbsp;over $113 billion in iPhone revenue over the past six months.</p><p><blockquote>iPhone的惊人势头预计将在2022年继续。Juniper Research估计，苹果明年可能销售价值2000亿美元的iPhone，这看起来不是一个非常雄心勃勃的目标，因为该公司在过去六个月的iPhone收入已超过1130亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> These tailwinds should help Cirrus shares break out from their mediocrity and set the market on fire in the future. So, investors looking to add agrowth stockto their portfolio should seriously consider Cirrus Logic as it trades at an attractive forward earnings multiple&nbsp;of just 15.</p><p><blockquote>这些顺风应该会帮助西锐股票摆脱平庸的局面，并在未来点燃市场。因此，希望将成长型股票添加到其投资组合中的投资者应该认真考虑Cirrus Logic，因为它的预期市盈率仅为15倍，颇具吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> 2. AMD</p><p><blockquote>2.AMD</blockquote></p><p> It is startling to see AMD stock taking a beating in 2021 considering the pace at which the chipmaker has been growing. The companydelivered outstanding resultsin 2020 and it has continued in the same vein in 2021, with revenue increasing a whopping 93% in the first quarter to $3.45 billion.</p><p><blockquote>考虑到AMD的增长速度，AMD股价在2021年遭受重创令人震惊。该公司在2020年取得了出色的业绩，并在2021年继续保持同样的势头，第一季度收入增长了93%，达到34.5亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD aims to clock 50% revenue growth this year, which would be better than its 2020 revenue increase of 45%. However, AMD can exceed its own expectations. The company had given investors a glimpse of the same when it reported its first-quarter results in April and raised its full-year revenue guidance. It was originally anticipating&nbsp;a 37% year-over-year increase in 2021 revenue, but a robust demand environment has encouraged AMD to raise guidance substantially.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的目标是今年实现50%的收入增长，这将好于2020年45%的收入增长。然而，AMD能够超出自己的预期。该公司在4月份公布第一季度业绩并上调全年收入指引时，已经让投资者看到了同样的情况。AMD最初预计2021年收入将同比增长37%，但强劲的需求环境促使AMD大幅提高指引。</blockquote></p><p> There are three reasons why AMD can turn in better-than-expected results: a short supply of graphics cards leading to a sharp spike in prices, market share gains against<b>Intel</b>(NASDAQ:INTC)in the server and PC processor markets, and the rapidly growing sales of the latest gaming consoles.</p><p><blockquote>AMD能够交出好于预期的业绩有三个原因：显卡供应短缺导致价格大幅飙升、市场份额增长<b>英特尔</b>（纳斯达克：INTC）在服务器和PC处理器市场，以及快速增长的最新游戏机销售。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMD's computing and graphics segment, which recorded 46% year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter to $2.1 billion and accounted for nearly 61% of the total revenue, is poised to benefit from two of those tailwinds. According to AMD, a mix of higher sales volumes and stronger average selling prices (ASPs) of the Ryzen CPU (central processing unit) and Radeon GPU (graphics processing unit) products drove the segment's impressive growth.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的计算和图形部门第一季度收入同比增长46%，达到21亿美元，占总收入的近61%，预计将受益于其中两个有利因素。AMD表示，锐龙CPU（中央处理器）和镭龙GPU（图形处理单元）产品的销量增加和平均售价(ASP)走强推动了该细分市场令人印象深刻的增长。</blockquote></p><p> For instance, sales of AMD's Radeon 6000 series high-end GPUs doubled&nbsp;quarter over quarter. AMD says that this is just the beginning as the Radeon 6000 seriessales could\"grow significantly over the coming quarters as we ramp production,\" indicating that the company is trying to address the problem of short supply. Even better, the GPU market is poised for long-term growth. Jon Peddie Research forecasts&nbsp;sales of discrete graphics cards to hit $54 billion in 2025 from $23.6 billion last year.</p><p><blockquote>例如，AMD镭龙6000系列高端GPU的销量环比翻了一番。AMD表示，这只是一个开始，因为Radeon 6000系列的销量可能“随着我们提高产量，在未来几个季度大幅增长”，这表明该公司正在努力解决供应短缺的问题。更好的是，GPU市场有望长期增长。Jon Peddie Research预测，2025年独立显卡的销售额将从去年的236亿美元达到540亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> AMD is one of the two major players in this space, holding a market share of nearly&nbsp;20%. It is trying to make a bigger dent in the market with new technologies, so don't be surprised to see it win big from GPUs in the future. Meanwhile, AMD's improving market share in the PC processor market thanks to the success of its Ryzen CPUs is turning out to be another catalyst.</p><p><blockquote>AMD是该领域的两大参与者之一，占据近20%的市场份额。它正试图通过新技术在市场上取得更大的进展，所以不要惊讶地看到它在未来从GPU中大获全胜。与此同时，由于锐龙CPU的成功，AMD在PC处理器市场的市场份额不断提高，这被证明是另一个催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> According to a survey carried out by popular video game distribution service Steam, AMD now has just over&nbsp;30% of the CPU market under its control, with Intel commanding the rest. It is worth noting that AMD's market share was less than 20% in 2017. But AMD'stechnological advantageover Intel has helped it take away share from its bigger rival. The trend may not change anytime soon thanks to AMD'ssuperior manufacturing process.</p><p><blockquote>根据流行的视频游戏发行服务Steam进行的一项调查，AMD现在控制着超过30%的CPU市场，英特尔控制着其余的市场。值得注意的是，AMD在2017年的市场份额还不到20%。但AMD相对于英特尔的技术优势帮助它从更大的竞争对手手中夺走了份额。由于AMD卓越的制造工艺，这一趋势可能不会很快改变。</blockquote></p><p> Finally, AMD's enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom (EESC) business is riding on two solid catalysts. One of them is AMD's market share gains against Intel in the server market. AMD's superior manufacturing process has allowed it to increase its market share to nearly 9% at the end of the first quarter of 2021 from almost nothing at the end of 2017, according&nbsp;to Mercury Research.</p><p><blockquote>最后，AMD的企业、嵌入式和半定制(EESC)业务依赖于两个坚实的催化剂。其中之一是AMD在服务器市场上相对于英特尔的市场份额增长。根据Mercury Research的数据，AMD卓越的制造工艺使其市场份额从2017年底的几乎为零增加到2021年第一季度末的近9%。</blockquote></p><p> AMD investors can expect the company totake more market shareaway from Intel in the server space thanks to the former's Milan processors that are reportedly more powerful&nbsp;than Chipzilla's offerings. Throw in the terrific momentum of the new console cycle that has given AMD abig shot in the arm, and investors have another solid reason to buy thistop tech stockthat is trading&nbsp;at just 34 times trailing earnings as compared to the five-year average multiple of 124.</p><p><blockquote>AMD投资者预计该公司将在服务器领域从英特尔手中夺走更多市场份额，这要归功于英特尔的Milan处理器，据报道该处理器比Chipzilla的产品更强大。再加上新游戏机周期的强劲势头给AMD注入了一剂强心针，投资者还有另一个充分的理由购买这只顶级科技股，该股的市盈率仅为34倍，而五年平均市盈率为124倍。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/22/got-1000-buy-hot-growth-stocks-before-take-off/\">fool</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"CRUS":"凌云半导体","AMD":"美国超微公司"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/22/got-1000-buy-hot-growth-stocks-before-take-off/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1125623159","content_text":"The first half of the year hasn't been great for the likes of Cirrus Logic(NASDAQ:CRUS) and Advanced Micro Devices(NASDAQ:AMD). Share prices of both companies have headed south so far in 2021.\nBut that may not be the case forever as Cirrus Logic and AMD are sitting on a bunch of terrific growth drivers that could turn their stock price fortunes around in the second half of the year.\nLet's look at the reasons why investors might be wise to put down $1,000 on these two stocks right now.\nAAPLDATA BY YCHARTS\n1. Cirrus Logic\nIt is no secret that Apple's(NASDAQ:AAPL)5G-enabled iPhone 12 models have beena huge hitamong customers, sending the smartphone giant's revenue and earnings north ina spectacular manner. Cirrus Logic hasreaped the benefitsof the same as Apple is the chipmaker's largest source of revenue, accounting for 76% of the top line last quarter. The iPhone maker had produced 83% of Cirrus' total revenue in fiscal 2021 that ended in March.\nNot surprisingly, Cirrus' top and bottom lines stepped on the gas in the second half of 2020 after showing signs of plateauing earlier last year. The company delivered $780 million in revenue in the second half of fiscal 2021 that ended in March this year, up 19% year over year.\nCRUS REVENUE (TTM)DATA BY YCHARTS\nHowever, Cirrus investors were in for a scare after the company's guidance for the first quarter of fiscal 2022, which ends this month,failed to meet expectations. The chipmaker blamed supply chain issues for its failure to meet expectations as it was unable to meet the robust end-market demand. Additionally, Apple may have rolled back orders for the iPhone 12 series as the supply chain is already in motion to roll out this year's models.\nHowever, Cirrus did provide a hint that its business will pick up the pace in the second half of the year. CEO John Forsyth said on the Aprilearnings conference call:\n\n In the coming months, we will begin shipping new technologies to our customers across a range of end devices, including important new content in the high-performance mixed-signal category. And based on these factors, we expect to accelerate revenue growth in FY 2022.\n\nCirrus' confidence isn't misplaced as its largest customer is expected to witness a big boom in sales. Reports suggest that Apple's suppliers have already started making components for this year's iPhones. What's more, the company is expected to bump its initial production of the 2021 iPhone lineup by 25% to 100 million units as compared to the iPhone 12's initial order size of 80 million units, according to Dan Ives of Wedbush. He also adds that Apple could finish 2021 with nearly 250 million units in sales, which would be its highest since 231 million sold in 2015.\nThe iPhone's terrific momentum is expected to continue in 2022. Juniper Research estimates that Apple could sell $200 billion worth of iPhones next year, which doesn't look like a very ambitious target as the company has generated over $113 billion in iPhone revenue over the past six months.\nThese tailwinds should help Cirrus shares break out from their mediocrity and set the market on fire in the future. So, investors looking to add agrowth stockto their portfolio should seriously consider Cirrus Logic as it trades at an attractive forward earnings multiple of just 15.\n2. AMD\nIt is startling to see AMD stock taking a beating in 2021 considering the pace at which the chipmaker has been growing. The companydelivered outstanding resultsin 2020 and it has continued in the same vein in 2021, with revenue increasing a whopping 93% in the first quarter to $3.45 billion.\nAMD aims to clock 50% revenue growth this year, which would be better than its 2020 revenue increase of 45%. However, AMD can exceed its own expectations. The company had given investors a glimpse of the same when it reported its first-quarter results in April and raised its full-year revenue guidance. It was originally anticipating a 37% year-over-year increase in 2021 revenue, but a robust demand environment has encouraged AMD to raise guidance substantially.\nThere are three reasons why AMD can turn in better-than-expected results: a short supply of graphics cards leading to a sharp spike in prices, market share gains againstIntel(NASDAQ:INTC)in the server and PC processor markets, and the rapidly growing sales of the latest gaming consoles.\nAMD's computing and graphics segment, which recorded 46% year-over-year revenue growth in the first quarter to $2.1 billion and accounted for nearly 61% of the total revenue, is poised to benefit from two of those tailwinds. According to AMD, a mix of higher sales volumes and stronger average selling prices (ASPs) of the Ryzen CPU (central processing unit) and Radeon GPU (graphics processing unit) products drove the segment's impressive growth.\nFor instance, sales of AMD's Radeon 6000 series high-end GPUs doubled quarter over quarter. AMD says that this is just the beginning as the Radeon 6000 seriessales could\"grow significantly over the coming quarters as we ramp production,\" indicating that the company is trying to address the problem of short supply. Even better, the GPU market is poised for long-term growth. Jon Peddie Research forecasts sales of discrete graphics cards to hit $54 billion in 2025 from $23.6 billion last year.\nAMD is one of the two major players in this space, holding a market share of nearly 20%. It is trying to make a bigger dent in the market with new technologies, so don't be surprised to see it win big from GPUs in the future. Meanwhile, AMD's improving market share in the PC processor market thanks to the success of its Ryzen CPUs is turning out to be another catalyst.\nAccording to a survey carried out by popular video game distribution service Steam, AMD now has just over 30% of the CPU market under its control, with Intel commanding the rest. It is worth noting that AMD's market share was less than 20% in 2017. But AMD'stechnological advantageover Intel has helped it take away share from its bigger rival. The trend may not change anytime soon thanks to AMD'ssuperior manufacturing process.\nFinally, AMD's enterprise, embedded, and semi-custom (EESC) business is riding on two solid catalysts. One of them is AMD's market share gains against Intel in the server market. AMD's superior manufacturing process has allowed it to increase its market share to nearly 9% at the end of the first quarter of 2021 from almost nothing at the end of 2017, according to Mercury Research.\nAMD investors can expect the company totake more market shareaway from Intel in the server space thanks to the former's Milan processors that are reportedly more powerful than Chipzilla's offerings. Throw in the terrific momentum of the new console cycle that has given AMD abig shot in the arm, and investors have another solid reason to buy thistop tech stockthat is trading at just 34 times trailing earnings as compared to the five-year average multiple of 124.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CRUS":0.9,"AMD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1079,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129670286,"gmtCreate":1624372287845,"gmtModify":1634007092510,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Markz","listText":"Markz","text":"Markz","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129670286","repostId":"2145050449","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":844,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166142587,"gmtCreate":1623998926749,"gmtModify":1634024339240,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Diamond hands!!","listText":"Diamond hands!!","text":"Diamond hands!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166142587","repostId":"1131310015","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1131310015","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623987347,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131310015?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 11:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131310015","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pul","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><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>AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nAMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 11:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131310015","content_text":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.\nA century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.\nSell before the other speculators do.\n\nRgStudio/E+ via Getty Images\nWhat are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer forThe Wall Street Journal, and John Brooks, author of “Business Adventures”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.\nInvestor vs. trader vs. speculator\nJason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021Wall Street Journalcolumn:\n\n “\n Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”\n\nSo why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assetsnevercame up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.\nMr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.\nA 2022 AMC earnings forecast\nI start with the key assumptions:\n\nMy time frame for reference is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.\nThe national box officeis the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.\nAMC market share.I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.\nAdmissions gross margin.This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.\nFood expenses as a percent of sales.I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs andmultiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.\nFood and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.\nOperating expensesare the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.\nWe’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:\n\nThe ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:\n\nDepreciation/amortizationis a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.\nInterest expenseshould decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.\n\nThe gravitational pull of earnings\nWe arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.\nThe bottom line - no support for investors.AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words ofTrading Places, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”\nThe speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale\nMillennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The bookBusiness Adventuresby John Brooks,published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.\nShorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:\n\n “\n Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…”\n\nThe sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.\n\n “\n He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”\n\nToday we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.\n\n “\n One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.”\n\nSomething to think about. What was Saunders to do?\n\n “[\n Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments.”\n\nPretty clever, no? No:\n\n “\n At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”\n\nUh oh. What now?\n\n“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller & Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”\n\nOuch.\nBuyers beware\nAs Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?\nAMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":394,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167980836,"gmtCreate":1624242477725,"gmtModify":1634009010739,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167980836","repostId":"1154249454","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":236,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123235273,"gmtCreate":1624424173092,"gmtModify":1634006299144,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Loki","listText":"Loki","text":"Loki","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123235273","repostId":"2145679050","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1240,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123232322,"gmtCreate":1624424098466,"gmtModify":1634006300050,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"TO THE MOON","listText":"TO THE MOON","text":"TO THE MOON","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123232322","repostId":"2145520610","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2807,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129679718,"gmtCreate":1624372320834,"gmtModify":1634007091324,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Btc","listText":"Btc","text":"Btc","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129679718","repostId":"2145501030","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1154,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129679090,"gmtCreate":1624372299910,"gmtModify":1634007092265,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Elon","listText":"Elon","text":"Elon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129679090","repostId":"1143759096","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1143759096","kind":"news","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":1624371721,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1143759096?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 22:22","market":"us","language":"en","title":"EV stocks fell in morning trading. Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes<blockquote>电动汽车股早盘下跌。中国电动汽车股在近期上涨和计划加息后已完全定价</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1143759096","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(June 22) EV stocks fell in morning trading. Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%,","content":"<p>(June 22)&nbsp;EV stocks fell in morning trading.&nbsp;Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%,&nbsp;LI&nbsp;fell&nbsp;about&nbsp;2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月22日）EV股早盘走低，特斯拉跌0.33%，小鹏跌超5%，蔚来跌超3%，理想跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a423484cc524b2f71e91b83e759455a9\" tg-width=\"289\" tg-height=\"211\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>Li Auto, Nio, Xpeng: Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes,</b>&nbsp;<b>According&nbsp;To&nbsp;Forbes.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏汽车：中国电动汽车股票在近期上涨、计划加息后已完全定价，</b> <b>据福布斯报道。</b></blockquote></p><p> The stocks of Chinese EV players have surged over the last month, largely reversing the effects of the sell-off seen earlier this year.Nio stock(NYSE: NIO) has rallied by almost 38% over the last month, Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) gained 45%, and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) surged by almost 58%. Now although the three companies posted mixed delivery figures for the month of May, with Nio and Li Auto both posting declines in their deliveries versus April, and Xpeng growing sales marginally, the sales numbers likely weren’t as bad as expected, considering the semiconductor shortage that has roiled the auto industry. In contrast, major auto players such as GM and Ford had to temporarily idle or scale back production at several plants.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车企业的股价在上个月飙升，很大程度上扭转了今年早些时候抛售的影响。蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）的股价在上个月上涨了近38%，理想汽车（纳斯达克：LI）上涨45%，小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）飙升近58%。现在，尽管这三家公司公布的5月份交付数据好坏参半，蔚来和理想汽车的交付量均较4月份有所下降，而小鹏汽车的销量略有增长，但考虑到半导体的情况，销售数据可能并不像预期的那么糟糕。扰乱汽车行业的短缺。相比之下，通用汽车和福特等主要汽车制造商不得不暂时闲置或缩减几家工厂的生产。</blockquote></p><p> The outlook provided by the three companies was also stronger than expected, giving investors confidence that the worst of the semiconductor shortage is likely over. Li Auto has guided to 14,500 to 15,500 deliveries for the second quarter, a sequential increase of 22% on the upper end. The company says that it is optimistic that actual numbers will exceed guidance, given that it is seeing stronger than expected orders for the upgraded version of its Li One SUV. Nio also reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver a record 8,200 vehicles in June.</p><p><blockquote>这三家公司提供的前景也强于预期，让投资者相信半导体短缺最糟糕的时期可能已经过去。理想汽车预计第二季度交付量为14,500至15,500辆，环比增长22%。该公司表示，鉴于升级版Li One SUV的订单强于预期，因此对实际数字将超过指引持乐观态度。蔚来还重申了2021年Q2交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付创纪录的8,200辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Now are the stocks a buy at current levels? While the growth outlook is certainly strong, the stocks don’t exactly appear cheap at current valuations. Nio trades at 14x forward revenue, while Li Auto trades at 9x, and Xpeng trades at about 16x. Near-term threats to EV valuations include higher inflation and recent commentary by the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is now apparently looking at two interest rate hikes in 2023, instead of 2024. This could put pressure on high-multiple, high-growth stocks, including EV names. In our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;we compare the financial performance and valuations of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>现在这些股票在当前水平值得买入吗？虽然增长前景肯定强劲，但以目前的估值来看，这些股票看起来并不便宜。蔚来的预期收入为14倍，理想汽车的预期收入为9倍，小鹏汽车的预期收入约为16倍。电动汽车估值面临的近期威胁包括通胀上升和美联储最近的评论，美联储目前显然正在考虑在2023年而不是2024年加息两次。这可能会给包括电动汽车在内的高市盈率、高增长股票带来压力。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[6/2/2021] Is The Worst Of The Semiconductor Crunch Over For Chinese EVs?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[6/2/2021]中国电动汽车半导体紧缩最糟糕的时期结束了吗？</b></blockquote></p><p> Chinese electric vehicle majorsNio (NYSE: NIO)and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) provided mixed delivery figures for the month of May, as they continued to be impacted by the current shortage of semiconductors. While Nio delivered a total of 6,711 vehicles in May, down 5.5% from April, Xpeng was able to grow deliveries by about 10% over the last month to 5,686 units, although the number is below peak monthly sales of 6,015 vehicles witnessed in January. Although both companies reported robust year-over-year growth numbers (2x to 6x), the sequential figures are more closely tracked for fast-growing companies.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车巨头蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）和小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）提供的5月份交付数据好坏参半，因为它们继续受到当前半导体短缺的影响。虽然蔚来5月份共交付6,711辆汽车，较4月份下降5.5%，但小鹏汽车上个月的交付量增长了约10%，达到5,686辆，尽管这一数字低于1月份6,015辆的月销量峰值。尽管两家公司都报告了强劲的同比增长数据（2倍至6倍），但对于快速增长的公司来说，环比数据受到更密切的跟踪。</blockquote></p><p> However, things are probably going to get better from here. Nio, for instance, reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver as many as 8,200 vehicles in June, a monthly record. This is likely an indicator that the global automotive semiconductor shortage is easing off, and also a sign that Nio is holding its own in the Chinese EV market, despite mounting competition. Nio stock rallied by almost 10% in Tuesday’s trading, while Xpeng’s stock was up by about 8% following the report.</p><p><blockquote>然而，事情可能会从这里变得更好。例如，蔚来重申了2021年第二季度21,000至22,000辆汽车的交付指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付多达8,200辆汽车，创下月度纪录。这可能表明全球汽车半导体短缺正在缓解，也表明尽管竞争日益激烈，蔚来仍在中国电动汽车市场保持着自己的地位。蔚来股价在周二交易中上涨了近10%，而小鹏汽车的股价在报告发布后上涨了约8%。</blockquote></p><p> Despite the recent rally, the stocks might still be worth considering at current levels. Nio stock remains down by about 20% year-to-date while Xpeng is down by about 22%. See our analysis on&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>for an overview of the financial and valuation metrics of the three U.S. listed Chinese EV players.</p><p><blockquote>尽管最近有所上涨，但在目前的水平上，这些股票可能仍然值得考虑。蔚来股价今年迄今仍下跌约20%，而小鹏汽车则下跌约22%。请参阅我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>了解三家在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司的财务和估值指标概览。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[5/21/2021] How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[5/21/2021]中国电动汽车股票相比如何？</b></blockquote></p><p> U.S. listed Chinese EV players Nio (NYSE: NIO), Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) have underperformed this year, with their stocks down by roughly 30% each, since early January. So how do these stocks compare post the correction? While Nio and Xpeng remain pricier compared to Li Auto, they probably justify their higher valuation for a couple of reasons. Here is a bit more about these companies.</p><p><blockquote>在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司蔚来（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克股票代码：LI）今年表现不佳，自1月初以来，其股价均下跌了约30%。那么这些股票在调整后的比较如何呢？虽然与理想汽车相比，蔚来和小鹏汽车的价格仍然较高，但它们的较高估值可能有几个原因。这里有更多关于这些公司的信息。</blockquote></p><p> Our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;compares the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio remains the most richly valued of the three companies, trading at about 10.5x forward revenue. Revenues are likely to grow by over 110% this year, per consensus estimates. Longer-term growth is also likely to remain strong, given the company’s wide product portfolio (it already has three models on the market), its unique innovations such as battery swapping, its global expansion plans, and investments into autonomous driving. Nio brand also has a lot more buzz, with the company viewed as the most direct rival to Tesla in China. Gross margins stood at 19.5% in Q1 2021, up from a negative 12% a year ago.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来仍然是这三家公司中估值最高的公司，其交易价格约为预期收入的10.5倍。根据普遍预测，今年收入可能增长110%以上。鉴于该公司广泛的产品组合（市场上已经有三款车型）、电池更换等独特创新、全球扩张计划以及对自动驾驶的投资，长期增长也可能保持强劲。蔚来品牌也受到更多关注，该公司被视为特斯拉在华最直接的竞争对手。2021年第一季度的毛利率为19.5%，高于一年前的负12%。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng trades at about 10x projected 2021 revenues. Sales growth is projected to be the strongest among the three companies, rising by over 150% this year, per consensus estimates. Besides its higher projected growth, investors have been assigning a premium to the company due to its progress in the autonomous driving space. Xpeng currently sells the G3 SUV and the P7 sedan and its new P5 compact sedan is likely to hit the roads later this year. Although Xpeng’s gross margins have improved, rising to about 11% over Q1, versus negative levels a year ago, they are still below Nio’s margins.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车的交易价格约为2021年预计收入的10倍。据普遍估计，今年的销售额增长预计将是三家公司中最强劲的，将增长超过150%。除了较高的预期增长外，由于该公司在自动驾驶领域的进展，投资者一直对该公司给予溢价。小鹏汽车目前销售G3 SUV和P7轿车，其新款P5紧凑型轿车可能会在今年晚些时候上路。尽管小鹏汽车的毛利率有所改善，较第一季度升至11%左右，而一年前为负值，但仍低于蔚来的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto trades at just 6x projected 2021 revenues, the lowest of the three companies. Revenues are likely to roughly double this year, with gross margins standing at 17.5% as of Q4 2020 (the company has yet to report Q1 results). The lower valuation is likely due to the company’s focus on a single product - the Li Xiang ONE, an electric SUV that also has a small gasoline engine and also due to the fact that Li Auto is behind rivals in terms of autonomous driving tech.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车的交易价格仅为2021年预计收入的6倍，是三家公司中最低的。今年的收入可能会大约翻一番，截至2020年第四季度，毛利率为17.5%（该公司尚未报告第一季度业绩）。估值较低可能是由于该公司专注于单一产品——李想ONE，这是一款同样配备小型汽油发动机的电动SUV，也是由于理想汽车在自动驾驶技术方面落后于竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[10/30/2020] How Do Nio, Xpeng, and Li Auto Compare</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[10/30/2020]蔚来、小鹏、理想汽车对比如何</b></blockquote></p><p> The Chinese electric vehicle space is booming, with China-based manufacturers accounting for over 50% of global EV deliveries. Demand for EVs in China is likely to remain robust as the Chinese government wants about 25% of all new cars sold in the country to be electric by 2025, up from roughly 5% at present.[1]While Tesla is a leader in the Chinese luxury EV market driven by production at its new Shanghai facility, Nio, Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) - three relatively young U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players, have also been gaining traction. In our analysis<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>we compare the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players. Parts of the analysis are summarized below.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车领域正在蓬勃发展，中国制造商占全球电动汽车交付量的50%以上。中国对电动汽车的需求可能会保持强劲，因为中国政府希望到2025年，中国销售的所有新车中约有25%是电动汽车，高于目前的约5%。[1]虽然特斯拉在上海新工厂的生产推动下是中国豪华电动汽车市场的领导者，但蔚来、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克代码：LI）这三家相对年轻的在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司也获得了关注。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。部分分析总结如下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overview Of Nio, Li Auto &amp; Xpeng’s Business</b></p><p><blockquote><b>蔚来、理想汽车和小鹏汽车业务概述</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio, which was founded in 2014, currently offers three premium electric SUVs, ES8, ES6, and EC6, which are priced starting at about $50k. The company is working on developing self-driving technology and also offers other unique innovations such as Battery as a Service (BaaS) - which allows customers to subscribe for car batteries, rather than paying for them upfront. While the company has scaled up production, it hasn’t come without challenges, as it recalled about 5,000 vehicles last year after reports of multiple fires.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来成立于2014年，目前提供ES8、ES6和EC6三款高端电动SUV，起价约为5万美元。该公司正在致力于开发自动驾驶技术，并提供其他独特的创新，例如电池即服务（BaaS）——允许客户订阅汽车电池，而不是预先付费。尽管该公司扩大了生产规模，但也并非没有挑战，去年在接到多起火灾报告后，该公司召回了约5,000辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto sells Extended-Range Electric Vehicles, which are essentially EVs that also have a small gasoline engine that can generate additional electric power for the battery. This reduces the need for EV-charging infrastructure, which is currently limited in China. The company’s hybrid strategy appears to be paying off - with its Li ONE SUV, which is priced at about $46,000 - ranking as the top-selling SUV in the new energy vehicle segment in China in September 2020. The new energy segment includes fuel cell, electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车销售增程电动汽车，本质上是电动汽车，也有一个小型汽油发动机，可以为电池产生额外的电力。这减少了对电动汽车充电基础设施的需求，而电动汽车充电基础设施目前在中国是有限的。该公司的混合动力战略似乎正在取得成效——其售价约为46,000美元的Li ONE SUV在2020年9月成为中国新能源汽车领域最畅销的SUV。新能源领域包括燃料电池、电动和插电式混合动力汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng produces and sells premium electric vehicles including the G3 SUV and the P7 four-door sedan, which are roughly positioned as rivals to Tesla’s Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan, although they are more affordable, with the basic version of the G3 starting at about $22,000 post subsidies. The G3 SUV was among the top 3 Electric SUVs in terms of sales in China in 2019. While the company began production in late 2018, initially via a deal with an established automaker, it has started production at its own factory in the Guangdong province.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车生产和销售包括G3 SUV和P7四门轿车在内的高端电动汽车，这些汽车大致定位为特斯拉Model Y SUV和Model 3轿车的竞争对手，尽管它们的价格更实惠，G3的基本版起售价约为22,000美元补贴后。G3 SUV是2019年中国电动SUV销量前三名之一。虽然该公司于2018年底开始生产，最初是通过与一家老牌汽车制造商达成协议，但它已在广东省自己的工厂开始生产。</blockquote></p><p> <b>How Have The Deliveries, Revenues &amp; Margins Trended</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交付量、收入和利润率的趋势如何</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio delivered about 21k vehicles in 2019, up from about 11k vehicles in 2018. This compares to Xpeng which delivered about 13k vehicles in 2019 and Li Auto which delivered about 1k vehicles, considering that it began production only late last year. While Nio’s deliveries this year could approach about 40k units, Li Auto and Xpeng are likely to deliver around 25k vehicles with Li Auto seeing the highest growth. Over 2019, Nio’s Revenues stood at $1.1 billion, compared to about $40 million for Li Auto and $330 million for Xpeng. Nio’s Revenues are likely to grow 95% this year, while Xpeng’s Revenues are likely to grow by about 120%. All three companies remain deeply lossmaking as costs related to R&amp;D and SG&amp;A remain high relative to Revenues. Nio’s Net Margins stood at -195% in 2019, Li Auto’s margins stood at about -860% while Xpeng’s margins stood at -160%. However, margins are likely to improve sharply in 2020, as volumes pick up.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来2019年交付了约2.1万辆汽车，高于2018年的约1.1万辆。相比之下，小鹏汽车在2019年交付了约1.3万辆汽车，理想汽车汽车在去年年底才开始生产，交付了约1000辆汽车。虽然蔚来今年的交付量可能接近4万辆左右，但理想汽车和小鹏汽车可能会交付约2.5万辆汽车，其中理想汽车的增幅最高。2019年，蔚来的收入为11亿美元，而理想汽车约为4000万美元，小鹏汽车约为3.3亿美元。蔚来今年的收入可能增长95%，而小鹏汽车的收入可能增长约120%。由于与研发和SG&amp;A相关的成本相对于收入仍然很高，这三家公司仍然严重亏损。2019年，蔚来的净利润率为-195%，理想汽车的利润率约为-860%，而小鹏汽车的利润率为-160%。然而，随着销量的回升，利润率可能会在2020年大幅提高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>估值</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio’s Market Cap stood at about $37 billion as of October 28, 2020, with its stock price rising by about 7x year-to-date due to surging investor interest in EV stocks. Li Auto and Xpeng, which were both listed in the U.S. around August as they looked to capitalize on surging valuations, have a market cap of about $15 billion and $14 billion, respectively. On a relative basis, Nio trades at about 15x projected 2020 Revenues, Li Auto trades at about 12x, while Xpeng trades at about 20x.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年10月28日，蔚来的市值约为370亿美元，由于投资者对电动汽车股票的兴趣激增，其股价今年迄今上涨了约7倍。理想汽车和小鹏汽车均于8月左右在美国上市，希望利用估值飙升的机会，市值分别约为150亿美元和140亿美元。相对而言，蔚来的交易价格约为2020年预计收入的15倍，理想汽车的交易价格约为12倍，而小鹏汽车的交易价格约为20倍。</blockquote></p><p> While valuations are certainly high, investors are likely betting that these companies will continue to grow in the domestic market, while eventually playing a larger role in the global EV space leveraging China’s relatively low-cost manufacturing, and the country’s ecosystem of battery and auto parts suppliers. Of the three companies, Nio might be the safer bet, considering its slightly longer track record, higher Revenues, and investments in technology such as battery swaps and self-driving. Li Auto also looks attractive considering its rapid growth - driven by the uptake of its hybrid powertrains - and relatively attractive valuation of about 12x 2020 Revenues.</p><p><blockquote>虽然估值肯定很高，但投资者可能押注这些公司将继续在国内市场增长，同时最终利用中国相对低成本的制造业以及该国的电池和汽车生态系统在全球电动汽车领域发挥更大的作用零部件供应商。在这三家公司中，考虑到蔚来稍长的业绩记录、较高的收入以及对电池更换和自动驾驶等技术的投资，它可能是更安全的选择。考虑到其快速增长（由混合动力系统的采用推动）以及相对有吸引力的估值（约为2020年收入的12倍），理想汽车看起来也很有吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> Electric vehicles are the future of transportation, but picking the right EV stocks can be tricky. Investing in<b>Electric Vehicle Component Supplier Stocks</b>can be a good alternative to play the growth in the EV market.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车是交通的未来，但选择正确的电动汽车股票可能很棘手。投资于<b>电动汽车零部件供应商库存</b>可以成为电动汽车市场增长的一个很好的选择。</blockquote></p><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>EV stocks fell in morning trading. Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes<blockquote>电动汽车股早盘下跌。中国电动汽车股在近期上涨和计划加息后已完全定价</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nEV stocks fell in morning trading. Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes<blockquote>电动汽车股早盘下跌。中国电动汽车股在近期上涨和计划加息后已完全定价</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\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 smaller\">2021-06-22 22:22</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(June 22)&nbsp;EV stocks fell in morning trading.&nbsp;Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%,&nbsp;LI&nbsp;fell&nbsp;about&nbsp;2%.</p><p><blockquote>（6月22日）EV股早盘走低，特斯拉跌0.33%，小鹏跌超5%，蔚来跌超3%，理想跌约2%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a423484cc524b2f71e91b83e759455a9\" tg-width=\"289\" tg-height=\"211\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>Li Auto, Nio, Xpeng: Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes,</b>&nbsp;<b>According&nbsp;To&nbsp;Forbes.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>理想汽车、蔚来、小鹏汽车：中国电动汽车股票在近期上涨、计划加息后已完全定价，</b> <b>据福布斯报道。</b></blockquote></p><p> The stocks of Chinese EV players have surged over the last month, largely reversing the effects of the sell-off seen earlier this year.Nio stock(NYSE: NIO) has rallied by almost 38% over the last month, Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) gained 45%, and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) surged by almost 58%. Now although the three companies posted mixed delivery figures for the month of May, with Nio and Li Auto both posting declines in their deliveries versus April, and Xpeng growing sales marginally, the sales numbers likely weren’t as bad as expected, considering the semiconductor shortage that has roiled the auto industry. In contrast, major auto players such as GM and Ford had to temporarily idle or scale back production at several plants.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车企业的股价在上个月飙升，很大程度上扭转了今年早些时候抛售的影响。蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）的股价在上个月上涨了近38%，理想汽车（纳斯达克：LI）上涨45%，小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）飙升近58%。现在，尽管这三家公司公布的5月份交付数据好坏参半，蔚来和理想汽车的交付量均较4月份有所下降，而小鹏汽车的销量略有增长，但考虑到半导体的情况，销售数据可能并不像预期的那么糟糕。扰乱汽车行业的短缺。相比之下，通用汽车和福特等主要汽车制造商不得不暂时闲置或缩减几家工厂的生产。</blockquote></p><p> The outlook provided by the three companies was also stronger than expected, giving investors confidence that the worst of the semiconductor shortage is likely over. Li Auto has guided to 14,500 to 15,500 deliveries for the second quarter, a sequential increase of 22% on the upper end. The company says that it is optimistic that actual numbers will exceed guidance, given that it is seeing stronger than expected orders for the upgraded version of its Li One SUV. Nio also reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver a record 8,200 vehicles in June.</p><p><blockquote>这三家公司提供的前景也强于预期，让投资者相信半导体短缺最糟糕的时期可能已经过去。理想汽车预计第二季度交付量为14,500至15,500辆，环比增长22%。该公司表示，鉴于升级版Li One SUV的订单强于预期，因此对实际数字将超过指引持乐观态度。蔚来还重申了2021年Q2交付量为21,000至22,000辆汽车的指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付创纪录的8,200辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Now are the stocks a buy at current levels? While the growth outlook is certainly strong, the stocks don’t exactly appear cheap at current valuations. Nio trades at 14x forward revenue, while Li Auto trades at 9x, and Xpeng trades at about 16x. Near-term threats to EV valuations include higher inflation and recent commentary by the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is now apparently looking at two interest rate hikes in 2023, instead of 2024. This could put pressure on high-multiple, high-growth stocks, including EV names. In our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;we compare the financial performance and valuations of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>现在这些股票在当前水平值得买入吗？虽然增长前景肯定强劲，但以目前的估值来看，这些股票看起来并不便宜。蔚来的预期收入为14倍，理想汽车的预期收入为9倍，小鹏汽车的预期收入约为16倍。电动汽车估值面临的近期威胁包括通胀上升和美联储最近的评论，美联储目前显然正在考虑在2023年而不是2024年加息两次。这可能会给包括电动汽车在内的高市盈率、高增长股票带来压力。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[6/2/2021] Is The Worst Of The Semiconductor Crunch Over For Chinese EVs?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[6/2/2021]中国电动汽车半导体紧缩最糟糕的时期结束了吗？</b></blockquote></p><p> Chinese electric vehicle majorsNio (NYSE: NIO)and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) provided mixed delivery figures for the month of May, as they continued to be impacted by the current shortage of semiconductors. While Nio delivered a total of 6,711 vehicles in May, down 5.5% from April, Xpeng was able to grow deliveries by about 10% over the last month to 5,686 units, although the number is below peak monthly sales of 6,015 vehicles witnessed in January. Although both companies reported robust year-over-year growth numbers (2x to 6x), the sequential figures are more closely tracked for fast-growing companies.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车巨头蔚来汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）和小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）提供的5月份交付数据好坏参半，因为它们继续受到当前半导体短缺的影响。虽然蔚来5月份共交付6,711辆汽车，较4月份下降5.5%，但小鹏汽车上个月的交付量增长了约10%，达到5,686辆，尽管这一数字低于1月份6,015辆的月销量峰值。尽管两家公司都报告了强劲的同比增长数据（2倍至6倍），但对于快速增长的公司来说，环比数据受到更密切的跟踪。</blockquote></p><p> However, things are probably going to get better from here. Nio, for instance, reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver as many as 8,200 vehicles in June, a monthly record. This is likely an indicator that the global automotive semiconductor shortage is easing off, and also a sign that Nio is holding its own in the Chinese EV market, despite mounting competition. Nio stock rallied by almost 10% in Tuesday’s trading, while Xpeng’s stock was up by about 8% following the report.</p><p><blockquote>然而，事情可能会从这里变得更好。例如，蔚来重申了2021年第二季度21,000至22,000辆汽车的交付指引，这意味着它可能在6月份交付多达8,200辆汽车，创下月度纪录。这可能表明全球汽车半导体短缺正在缓解，也表明尽管竞争日益激烈，蔚来仍在中国电动汽车市场保持着自己的地位。蔚来股价在周二交易中上涨了近10%，而小鹏汽车的股价在报告发布后上涨了约8%。</blockquote></p><p> Despite the recent rally, the stocks might still be worth considering at current levels. Nio stock remains down by about 20% year-to-date while Xpeng is down by about 22%. See our analysis on&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>for an overview of the financial and valuation metrics of the three U.S. listed Chinese EV players.</p><p><blockquote>尽管最近有所上涨，但在目前的水平上，这些股票可能仍然值得考虑。蔚来股价今年迄今仍下跌约20%，而小鹏汽车则下跌约22%。请参阅我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>了解三家在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司的财务和估值指标概览。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[5/21/2021] How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[5/21/2021]中国电动汽车股票相比如何？</b></blockquote></p><p> U.S. listed Chinese EV players Nio (NYSE: NIO), Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) have underperformed this year, with their stocks down by roughly 30% each, since early January. So how do these stocks compare post the correction? While Nio and Xpeng remain pricier compared to Li Auto, they probably justify their higher valuation for a couple of reasons. Here is a bit more about these companies.</p><p><blockquote>在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司蔚来（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克股票代码：LI）今年表现不佳，自1月初以来，其股价均下跌了约30%。那么这些股票在调整后的比较如何呢？虽然与理想汽车相比，蔚来和小鹏汽车的价格仍然较高，但它们的较高估值可能有几个原因。这里有更多关于这些公司的信息。</blockquote></p><p> Our analysis&nbsp;<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>&nbsp;compares the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.</p><p><blockquote>我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio remains the most richly valued of the three companies, trading at about 10.5x forward revenue. Revenues are likely to grow by over 110% this year, per consensus estimates. Longer-term growth is also likely to remain strong, given the company’s wide product portfolio (it already has three models on the market), its unique innovations such as battery swapping, its global expansion plans, and investments into autonomous driving. Nio brand also has a lot more buzz, with the company viewed as the most direct rival to Tesla in China. Gross margins stood at 19.5% in Q1 2021, up from a negative 12% a year ago.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来仍然是这三家公司中估值最高的公司，其交易价格约为预期收入的10.5倍。根据普遍预测，今年收入可能增长110%以上。鉴于该公司广泛的产品组合（市场上已经有三款车型）、电池更换等独特创新、全球扩张计划以及对自动驾驶的投资，长期增长也可能保持强劲。蔚来品牌也受到更多关注，该公司被视为特斯拉在华最直接的竞争对手。2021年第一季度的毛利率为19.5%，高于一年前的负12%。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng trades at about 10x projected 2021 revenues. Sales growth is projected to be the strongest among the three companies, rising by over 150% this year, per consensus estimates. Besides its higher projected growth, investors have been assigning a premium to the company due to its progress in the autonomous driving space. Xpeng currently sells the G3 SUV and the P7 sedan and its new P5 compact sedan is likely to hit the roads later this year. Although Xpeng’s gross margins have improved, rising to about 11% over Q1, versus negative levels a year ago, they are still below Nio’s margins.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车的交易价格约为2021年预计收入的10倍。据普遍估计，今年的销售额增长预计将是三家公司中最强劲的，将增长超过150%。除了较高的预期增长外，由于该公司在自动驾驶领域的进展，投资者一直对该公司给予溢价。小鹏汽车目前销售G3 SUV和P7轿车，其新款P5紧凑型轿车可能会在今年晚些时候上路。尽管小鹏汽车的毛利率有所改善，较第一季度升至11%左右，而一年前为负值，但仍低于蔚来的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto trades at just 6x projected 2021 revenues, the lowest of the three companies. Revenues are likely to roughly double this year, with gross margins standing at 17.5% as of Q4 2020 (the company has yet to report Q1 results). The lower valuation is likely due to the company’s focus on a single product - the Li Xiang ONE, an electric SUV that also has a small gasoline engine and also due to the fact that Li Auto is behind rivals in terms of autonomous driving tech.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车的交易价格仅为2021年预计收入的6倍，是三家公司中最低的。今年的收入可能会大约翻一番，截至2020年第四季度，毛利率为17.5%（该公司尚未报告第一季度业绩）。估值较低可能是由于该公司专注于单一产品——李想ONE，这是一款同样配备小型汽油发动机的电动SUV，也是由于理想汽车在自动驾驶技术方面落后于竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> <b>[10/30/2020] How Do Nio, Xpeng, and Li Auto Compare</b></p><p><blockquote><b>[10/30/2020]蔚来、小鹏、理想汽车对比如何</b></blockquote></p><p> The Chinese electric vehicle space is booming, with China-based manufacturers accounting for over 50% of global EV deliveries. Demand for EVs in China is likely to remain robust as the Chinese government wants about 25% of all new cars sold in the country to be electric by 2025, up from roughly 5% at present.[1]While Tesla is a leader in the Chinese luxury EV market driven by production at its new Shanghai facility, Nio, Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) - three relatively young U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players, have also been gaining traction. In our analysis<b>Nio, Xpeng &amp; Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?</b>we compare the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players. Parts of the analysis are summarized below.</p><p><blockquote>中国电动汽车领域正在蓬勃发展，中国制造商占全球电动汽车交付量的50%以上。中国对电动汽车的需求可能会保持强劲，因为中国政府希望到2025年，中国销售的所有新车中约有25%是电动汽车，高于目前的约5%。[1]虽然特斯拉在上海新工厂的生产推动下是中国豪华电动汽车市场的领导者，但蔚来、小鹏汽车（纽约证券交易所代码：XPEV）和理想汽车（纳斯达克代码：LI）这三家相对年轻的在美国上市的中国电动汽车公司也获得了关注。根据我们的分析<b>蔚来、小鹏汽车和理想汽车：中国电动汽车股票比较如何？</b>我们比较了在美国上市的主要中国电动汽车公司的财务表现和估值。部分分析总结如下。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overview Of Nio, Li Auto &amp; Xpeng’s Business</b></p><p><blockquote><b>蔚来、理想汽车和小鹏汽车业务概述</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio, which was founded in 2014, currently offers three premium electric SUVs, ES8, ES6, and EC6, which are priced starting at about $50k. The company is working on developing self-driving technology and also offers other unique innovations such as Battery as a Service (BaaS) - which allows customers to subscribe for car batteries, rather than paying for them upfront. While the company has scaled up production, it hasn’t come without challenges, as it recalled about 5,000 vehicles last year after reports of multiple fires.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来成立于2014年，目前提供ES8、ES6和EC6三款高端电动SUV，起价约为5万美元。该公司正在致力于开发自动驾驶技术，并提供其他独特的创新，例如电池即服务（BaaS）——允许客户订阅汽车电池，而不是预先付费。尽管该公司扩大了生产规模，但也并非没有挑战，去年在接到多起火灾报告后，该公司召回了约5,000辆汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Li Auto sells Extended-Range Electric Vehicles, which are essentially EVs that also have a small gasoline engine that can generate additional electric power for the battery. This reduces the need for EV-charging infrastructure, which is currently limited in China. The company’s hybrid strategy appears to be paying off - with its Li ONE SUV, which is priced at about $46,000 - ranking as the top-selling SUV in the new energy vehicle segment in China in September 2020. The new energy segment includes fuel cell, electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.</p><p><blockquote>理想汽车销售增程电动汽车，本质上是电动汽车，也有一个小型汽油发动机，可以为电池产生额外的电力。这减少了对电动汽车充电基础设施的需求，而电动汽车充电基础设施目前在中国是有限的。该公司的混合动力战略似乎正在取得成效——其售价约为46,000美元的Li ONE SUV在2020年9月成为中国新能源汽车领域最畅销的SUV。新能源领域包括燃料电池、电动和插电式混合动力汽车。</blockquote></p><p> Xpeng produces and sells premium electric vehicles including the G3 SUV and the P7 four-door sedan, which are roughly positioned as rivals to Tesla’s Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan, although they are more affordable, with the basic version of the G3 starting at about $22,000 post subsidies. The G3 SUV was among the top 3 Electric SUVs in terms of sales in China in 2019. While the company began production in late 2018, initially via a deal with an established automaker, it has started production at its own factory in the Guangdong province.</p><p><blockquote>小鹏汽车生产和销售包括G3 SUV和P7四门轿车在内的高端电动汽车，这些汽车大致定位为特斯拉Model Y SUV和Model 3轿车的竞争对手，尽管它们的价格更实惠，G3的基本版起售价约为22,000美元补贴后。G3 SUV是2019年中国电动SUV销量前三名之一。虽然该公司于2018年底开始生产，最初是通过与一家老牌汽车制造商达成协议，但它已在广东省自己的工厂开始生产。</blockquote></p><p> <b>How Have The Deliveries, Revenues &amp; Margins Trended</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交付量、收入和利润率的趋势如何</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> Nio delivered about 21k vehicles in 2019, up from about 11k vehicles in 2018. This compares to Xpeng which delivered about 13k vehicles in 2019 and Li Auto which delivered about 1k vehicles, considering that it began production only late last year. While Nio’s deliveries this year could approach about 40k units, Li Auto and Xpeng are likely to deliver around 25k vehicles with Li Auto seeing the highest growth. Over 2019, Nio’s Revenues stood at $1.1 billion, compared to about $40 million for Li Auto and $330 million for Xpeng. Nio’s Revenues are likely to grow 95% this year, while Xpeng’s Revenues are likely to grow by about 120%. All three companies remain deeply lossmaking as costs related to R&amp;D and SG&amp;A remain high relative to Revenues. Nio’s Net Margins stood at -195% in 2019, Li Auto’s margins stood at about -860% while Xpeng’s margins stood at -160%. However, margins are likely to improve sharply in 2020, as volumes pick up.</p><p><blockquote>蔚来2019年交付了约2.1万辆汽车，高于2018年的约1.1万辆。相比之下，小鹏汽车在2019年交付了约1.3万辆汽车，理想汽车汽车在去年年底才开始生产，交付了约1000辆汽车。虽然蔚来今年的交付量可能接近4万辆左右，但理想汽车和小鹏汽车可能会交付约2.5万辆汽车，其中理想汽车的增幅最高。2019年，蔚来的收入为11亿美元，而理想汽车约为4000万美元，小鹏汽车约为3.3亿美元。蔚来今年的收入可能增长95%，而小鹏汽车的收入可能增长约120%。由于与研发和SG&amp;A相关的成本相对于收入仍然很高，这三家公司仍然严重亏损。2019年，蔚来的净利润率为-195%，理想汽车的利润率约为-860%，而小鹏汽车的利润率为-160%。然而，随着销量的回升，利润率可能会在2020年大幅提高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>估值</b></blockquote></p><p> Nio’s Market Cap stood at about $37 billion as of October 28, 2020, with its stock price rising by about 7x year-to-date due to surging investor interest in EV stocks. Li Auto and Xpeng, which were both listed in the U.S. around August as they looked to capitalize on surging valuations, have a market cap of about $15 billion and $14 billion, respectively. On a relative basis, Nio trades at about 15x projected 2020 Revenues, Li Auto trades at about 12x, while Xpeng trades at about 20x.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年10月28日，蔚来的市值约为370亿美元，由于投资者对电动汽车股票的兴趣激增，其股价今年迄今上涨了约7倍。理想汽车和小鹏汽车均于8月左右在美国上市，希望利用估值飙升的机会，市值分别约为150亿美元和140亿美元。相对而言，蔚来的交易价格约为2020年预计收入的15倍，理想汽车的交易价格约为12倍，而小鹏汽车的交易价格约为20倍。</blockquote></p><p> While valuations are certainly high, investors are likely betting that these companies will continue to grow in the domestic market, while eventually playing a larger role in the global EV space leveraging China’s relatively low-cost manufacturing, and the country’s ecosystem of battery and auto parts suppliers. Of the three companies, Nio might be the safer bet, considering its slightly longer track record, higher Revenues, and investments in technology such as battery swaps and self-driving. Li Auto also looks attractive considering its rapid growth - driven by the uptake of its hybrid powertrains - and relatively attractive valuation of about 12x 2020 Revenues.</p><p><blockquote>虽然估值肯定很高，但投资者可能押注这些公司将继续在国内市场增长，同时最终利用中国相对低成本的制造业以及该国的电池和汽车生态系统在全球电动汽车领域发挥更大的作用零部件供应商。在这三家公司中，考虑到蔚来稍长的业绩记录、较高的收入以及对电池更换和自动驾驶等技术的投资，它可能是更安全的选择。考虑到其快速增长（由混合动力系统的采用推动）以及相对有吸引力的估值（约为2020年收入的12倍），理想汽车看起来也很有吸引力。</blockquote></p><p> Electric vehicles are the future of transportation, but picking the right EV stocks can be tricky. Investing in<b>Electric Vehicle Component Supplier Stocks</b>can be a good alternative to play the growth in the EV market.</p><p><blockquote>电动汽车是交通的未来，但选择正确的电动汽车股票可能很棘手。投资于<b>电动汽车零部件供应商库存</b>可以成为电动汽车市场增长的一个很好的选择。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LI":"理想汽车","XPEV":"小鹏汽车","TSLA":"特斯拉","NIO":"蔚来"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1143759096","content_text":"(June 22) EV stocks fell in morning trading. Tesla fell 0.33%, XPeng fell over 5%, NIO fell over 3%, LI fell about 2%.\n\nLi Auto, Nio, Xpeng: Chinese EV Stocks Fully Priced Following Recent Rally, Planned Rate Hikes, According To Forbes.\nThe stocks of Chinese EV players have surged over the last month, largely reversing the effects of the sell-off seen earlier this year.Nio stock(NYSE: NIO) has rallied by almost 38% over the last month, Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) gained 45%, and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) surged by almost 58%. Now although the three companies posted mixed delivery figures for the month of May, with Nio and Li Auto both posting declines in their deliveries versus April, and Xpeng growing sales marginally, the sales numbers likely weren’t as bad as expected, considering the semiconductor shortage that has roiled the auto industry. In contrast, major auto players such as GM and Ford had to temporarily idle or scale back production at several plants.\nThe outlook provided by the three companies was also stronger than expected, giving investors confidence that the worst of the semiconductor shortage is likely over. Li Auto has guided to 14,500 to 15,500 deliveries for the second quarter, a sequential increase of 22% on the upper end. The company says that it is optimistic that actual numbers will exceed guidance, given that it is seeing stronger than expected orders for the upgraded version of its Li One SUV. Nio also reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver a record 8,200 vehicles in June.\nNow are the stocks a buy at current levels? While the growth outlook is certainly strong, the stocks don’t exactly appear cheap at current valuations. Nio trades at 14x forward revenue, while Li Auto trades at 9x, and Xpeng trades at about 16x. Near-term threats to EV valuations include higher inflation and recent commentary by the U.S. Federal Reserve, which is now apparently looking at two interest rate hikes in 2023, instead of 2024. This could put pressure on high-multiple, high-growth stocks, including EV names. In our analysis Nio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare? we compare the financial performance and valuations of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.\n[6/2/2021] Is The Worst Of The Semiconductor Crunch Over For Chinese EVs?\nChinese electric vehicle majorsNio (NYSE: NIO)and Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV) provided mixed delivery figures for the month of May, as they continued to be impacted by the current shortage of semiconductors. While Nio delivered a total of 6,711 vehicles in May, down 5.5% from April, Xpeng was able to grow deliveries by about 10% over the last month to 5,686 units, although the number is below peak monthly sales of 6,015 vehicles witnessed in January. Although both companies reported robust year-over-year growth numbers (2x to 6x), the sequential figures are more closely tracked for fast-growing companies.\nHowever, things are probably going to get better from here. Nio, for instance, reiterated its Q2 2021 delivery guidance of 21,000 to 22,000 vehicles, implying that it could deliver as many as 8,200 vehicles in June, a monthly record. This is likely an indicator that the global automotive semiconductor shortage is easing off, and also a sign that Nio is holding its own in the Chinese EV market, despite mounting competition. Nio stock rallied by almost 10% in Tuesday’s trading, while Xpeng’s stock was up by about 8% following the report.\nDespite the recent rally, the stocks might still be worth considering at current levels. Nio stock remains down by about 20% year-to-date while Xpeng is down by about 22%. See our analysis on Nio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?for an overview of the financial and valuation metrics of the three U.S. listed Chinese EV players.\n[5/21/2021] How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?\nU.S. listed Chinese EV players Nio (NYSE: NIO), Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) have underperformed this year, with their stocks down by roughly 30% each, since early January. So how do these stocks compare post the correction? While Nio and Xpeng remain pricier compared to Li Auto, they probably justify their higher valuation for a couple of reasons. Here is a bit more about these companies.\nOur analysis Nio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare? compares the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players.\nNio remains the most richly valued of the three companies, trading at about 10.5x forward revenue. Revenues are likely to grow by over 110% this year, per consensus estimates. Longer-term growth is also likely to remain strong, given the company’s wide product portfolio (it already has three models on the market), its unique innovations such as battery swapping, its global expansion plans, and investments into autonomous driving. Nio brand also has a lot more buzz, with the company viewed as the most direct rival to Tesla in China. Gross margins stood at 19.5% in Q1 2021, up from a negative 12% a year ago.\nXpeng trades at about 10x projected 2021 revenues. Sales growth is projected to be the strongest among the three companies, rising by over 150% this year, per consensus estimates. Besides its higher projected growth, investors have been assigning a premium to the company due to its progress in the autonomous driving space. Xpeng currently sells the G3 SUV and the P7 sedan and its new P5 compact sedan is likely to hit the roads later this year. Although Xpeng’s gross margins have improved, rising to about 11% over Q1, versus negative levels a year ago, they are still below Nio’s margins.\nLi Auto trades at just 6x projected 2021 revenues, the lowest of the three companies. Revenues are likely to roughly double this year, with gross margins standing at 17.5% as of Q4 2020 (the company has yet to report Q1 results). The lower valuation is likely due to the company’s focus on a single product - the Li Xiang ONE, an electric SUV that also has a small gasoline engine and also due to the fact that Li Auto is behind rivals in terms of autonomous driving tech.\n[10/30/2020] How Do Nio, Xpeng, and Li Auto Compare\nThe Chinese electric vehicle space is booming, with China-based manufacturers accounting for over 50% of global EV deliveries. Demand for EVs in China is likely to remain robust as the Chinese government wants about 25% of all new cars sold in the country to be electric by 2025, up from roughly 5% at present.[1]While Tesla is a leader in the Chinese luxury EV market driven by production at its new Shanghai facility, Nio, Xpeng (NYSE: XPEV), and Li Auto (NASDAQ: LI) - three relatively young U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players, have also been gaining traction. In our analysisNio, Xpeng & Li Auto: How Do Chinese EV Stocks Compare?we compare the financial performance and valuation of the major U.S. listed Chinese electric vehicle players. Parts of the analysis are summarized below.\nOverview Of Nio, Li Auto & Xpeng’s Business\nNio, which was founded in 2014, currently offers three premium electric SUVs, ES8, ES6, and EC6, which are priced starting at about $50k. The company is working on developing self-driving technology and also offers other unique innovations such as Battery as a Service (BaaS) - which allows customers to subscribe for car batteries, rather than paying for them upfront. While the company has scaled up production, it hasn’t come without challenges, as it recalled about 5,000 vehicles last year after reports of multiple fires.\nLi Auto sells Extended-Range Electric Vehicles, which are essentially EVs that also have a small gasoline engine that can generate additional electric power for the battery. This reduces the need for EV-charging infrastructure, which is currently limited in China. The company’s hybrid strategy appears to be paying off - with its Li ONE SUV, which is priced at about $46,000 - ranking as the top-selling SUV in the new energy vehicle segment in China in September 2020. The new energy segment includes fuel cell, electric, and plug-in hybrid vehicles.\nXpeng produces and sells premium electric vehicles including the G3 SUV and the P7 four-door sedan, which are roughly positioned as rivals to Tesla’s Model Y SUV and Model 3 sedan, although they are more affordable, with the basic version of the G3 starting at about $22,000 post subsidies. The G3 SUV was among the top 3 Electric SUVs in terms of sales in China in 2019. While the company began production in late 2018, initially via a deal with an established automaker, it has started production at its own factory in the Guangdong province.\nHow Have The Deliveries, Revenues & Margins Trended\nNio delivered about 21k vehicles in 2019, up from about 11k vehicles in 2018. This compares to Xpeng which delivered about 13k vehicles in 2019 and Li Auto which delivered about 1k vehicles, considering that it began production only late last year. While Nio’s deliveries this year could approach about 40k units, Li Auto and Xpeng are likely to deliver around 25k vehicles with Li Auto seeing the highest growth. Over 2019, Nio’s Revenues stood at $1.1 billion, compared to about $40 million for Li Auto and $330 million for Xpeng. Nio’s Revenues are likely to grow 95% this year, while Xpeng’s Revenues are likely to grow by about 120%. All three companies remain deeply lossmaking as costs related to R&D and SG&A remain high relative to Revenues. Nio’s Net Margins stood at -195% in 2019, Li Auto’s margins stood at about -860% while Xpeng’s margins stood at -160%. However, margins are likely to improve sharply in 2020, as volumes pick up.\nValuation\nNio’s Market Cap stood at about $37 billion as of October 28, 2020, with its stock price rising by about 7x year-to-date due to surging investor interest in EV stocks. Li Auto and Xpeng, which were both listed in the U.S. around August as they looked to capitalize on surging valuations, have a market cap of about $15 billion and $14 billion, respectively. On a relative basis, Nio trades at about 15x projected 2020 Revenues, Li Auto trades at about 12x, while Xpeng trades at about 20x.\nWhile valuations are certainly high, investors are likely betting that these companies will continue to grow in the domestic market, while eventually playing a larger role in the global EV space leveraging China’s relatively low-cost manufacturing, and the country’s ecosystem of battery and auto parts suppliers. Of the three companies, Nio might be the safer bet, considering its slightly longer track record, higher Revenues, and investments in technology such as battery swaps and self-driving. Li Auto also looks attractive considering its rapid growth - driven by the uptake of its hybrid powertrains - and relatively attractive valuation of about 12x 2020 Revenues.\nElectric vehicles are the future of transportation, but picking the right EV stocks can be tricky. Investing inElectric Vehicle Component Supplier Stockscan be a good alternative to play the growth in the EV market.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9,"NIO":0.9,"XPEV":0.9,"LI":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1219,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167989628,"gmtCreate":1624242513264,"gmtModify":1634009009793,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Test","listText":"Test","text":"Test","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167989628","repostId":"2145594707","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1265,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167989370,"gmtCreate":1624242496390,"gmtModify":1634009010142,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Comment","listText":"Comment","text":"Comment","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167989370","repostId":"2145707918","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":139,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166147554,"gmtCreate":1623999010078,"gmtModify":1634024336831,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Amd number 1!","listText":"Amd number 1!","text":"Amd number 1!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166147554","repostId":"1197160756","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1197160756","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623980251,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1197160756?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 09:37","market":"us","language":"en","title":"1 Big Reason to Dump AMD and Buy NVIDIA<blockquote>抛弃AMD并购买NVIDIA的1大理由</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1197160756","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The graphics specialist enjoys a huge advantage over its smaller rival in an important market.","content":"<p><b>NVIDIA</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:NVDA)&nbsp;has been ruling the roost in the discrete graphics processing unit (GPU) market, despite the best efforts of&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD)&nbsp;to gain share in this highly lucrative space. And NVIDIA is showing no signs of losing its grip over the graphics card market, according to the latest market share numbers provided&nbsp;by Jon Peddie Research.</p><p><blockquote><b>英伟达</b>（纳斯达克：NVDA）一直在独立图形处理单元（GPU）市场上占据主导地位，尽管<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）在这个利润丰厚的领域获得份额。根据Jon Peddie Research提供的最新市场份额数据，NVIDIA没有表现出失去对显卡市场控制的迹象。</blockquote></p><p> Let's see why that bodes well for NVIDIA, and makes it a better bet than arch-rival AMD.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么这对NVIDIA来说是个好兆头，并使其成为比主要竞争对手AMD更好的选择。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94007897775e469423cc8a3d1e55440d\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图片来源：盖蒂图片社</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA&nbsp;finished 2020 with&nbsp;82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达在2020年结束时控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余部分。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched the&nbsp;RTX 30 series cards&nbsp;toward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs were&nbsp;making a nice dent&nbsp;in NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达在2020年底推出RTX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU对NVIDIA的显卡霸主地位产生了很大的影响。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIAfinished 2020 with82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年，Nvidia控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余市场。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched theRTX 30 series cardstoward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs weremaking a nice dentin NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达于2020年底推出TX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU正在成为英伟达显卡霸主的一个很好的牙本质。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that discrete GPU shipments shot up 24.4% year-over-year. The market generated $12.5 billion in revenue in Q1, a 370% spike over the prior-year period, thanks to a&nbsp;jump in the average selling prices&nbsp;(ASPs) triggered by huge demand and short supply. NVIDIA's massive market share means that it has won big from this spike, which is reflected in its Q1 performance.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，独立GPU出货量同比猛增24.4%。由于巨大的需求和供应短缺引发的平均售价(ASP)上涨，该市场在第一季度创造了125亿美元的收入，比去年同期增长了370%。英伟达巨大的市场份额意味着它从这一飙升中受益匪浅，这反映在其第一季度的业绩中。</blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA's gaming revenue more than doubled&nbsp;year-over-year in the first quarter of fiscal 2022 to $2.76 billion. AMD's computing and graphics segment, which also includes the sales of its Ryzen desktop and notebook processors, grew at a relatively slower pace of 46% year-over-year to $2.1 billion in Q1.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达2022财年第一季度的游戏收入同比增长了一倍多，达到27.6亿美元。AMD的计算与显卡分部，其中还包括其锐龙台式机与笔记本电脑处理器的销售额，在Q1同比增长相对较慢，为46%，至21亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that the discrete GPU market could be worth $54 billion by 2025, compared to $23.6 billion last year. NVIDIA's dominant position should allow it to corner a substantial portion of that pie in the future, especially considering its moves to strengthen its position.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，到2025年，独立GPU市场价值可能达到540亿美元，而去年为236亿美元。英伟达的主导地位应该使其能够在未来垄断很大一部分蛋糕，特别是考虑到其加强地位的举措。</blockquote></p><p> <b>AMD's resistance may not be enough</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AMD的阻力可能还不够</b></blockquote></p><p> AMD has been trying to put up a fight against NVIDIA, and it did show some progress last quarter, registering a quarter-over-quarter market share gain of one percentage point. However, AMD is now looking to raise its game with a new technology, the FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). This will compete with NVIDIA's deep learning super sampling (DLSS) image upscaling technology, which helps games look better and run smoother.</p><p><blockquote>AMD一直在努力对抗NVIDIA，上个季度确实取得了一些进展，市场份额环比增长了一个百分点。然而，AMD现在正寻求通过一项新技术FidelityFX超分辨率（FSR）来提高其竞争力。这将与英伟达的深度学习超级采样（DLSS）图像升级技术竞争，该技术有助于游戏看起来更好，运行更流畅。</blockquote></p><p> AMD's internal tests claim that its new tech can help games run at 59% higher frame rates on ultra-quality settings. The chipmaker also claims that FSR could increase gaming performance by 2.5 times in certain titles using the performance setting. In addition, AMD says that FSR supports a wide range of hardware that includes more than 100 processors and graphics cards thanks to its open-source nature.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的内部测试声称，其新技术可以帮助游戏在超质量设置下以59%的帧率运行。该芯片制造商还声称，使用性能设置，FSR可以将某些游戏的游戏性能提高2.5倍。此外，AMD表示，由于其开源性质，FSR支持广泛的硬件，包括100多种处理器和显卡。</blockquote></p><p> FSR will launch on June 22, and it could give AMD a nice boost in the GPU market. However, only time will tell if the new technology will translate into sales for AMD, given that its rival's DLSS tech is already in its second&nbsp;generation.</p><p><blockquote>FSR将于6月22日推出，它可能会给AMD在GPU市场带来很好的推动。然而，只有时间才能证明这项新技术是否会转化为AMD的销售额，因为其竞争对手的DLSS技术已经进入第二代。</blockquote></p><p> However, it is worth noting that NVIDIA is trying to cover as much of the GPU market as possible with new launches. The company recently released the RTX 3080 Ti and the RTX 3070 Ti GPUs, priced at $1,199 and $599, respectively. NVIDIA is giving users of older graphics cards a solid reason to upgrade with these cards. It claims that the RTX 3080 Ti is twice as fast as the older GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 3070 Ti delivers 1.5x the performance of the RTX 2070 Super.</p><p><blockquote>然而，值得注意的是，英伟达正试图通过新产品的发布来覆盖尽可能多的GPU市场。该公司最近发布了RTX 3080 Ti和RTX 3070 Ti GPU，售价分别为1199美元和599美元。NVIDIA给了旧显卡的用户一个升级这些显卡的充分理由。它声称RTX 3080 Ti的速度是旧的GTX 1080 Ti的两倍，而RTX 3070 Ti的性能是RTX 2070 Super的1.5倍。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> NVIDIA is also&nbsp;stepping up its game&nbsp;in the laptop market with the launch of entry-level graphics cards. The company now offers more than 140 laptop models powered by the RTX 30 cards across a wide range of prices. This puts NVIDIA in a solid position in the fast-growing gaming laptop market, which is expected to hit $15.6 billion in revenue by 2027, compared to $9 billion in 2019.</p><p><blockquote>随着入门级显卡的推出，英伟达也在加强其在笔记本电脑市场的游戏。该公司现在提供140多种由RTX 30卡驱动的笔记本电脑型号，价格范围很广。这使得英伟达在快速增长的游戏笔记本电脑市场中占据了稳固的地位，预计到2027年，该市场的收入将达到156亿美元，而2019年为90亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> All of this indicates that NVIDIA's gaming business could sustain its terrific levels of growth for a long time to come, especially considering that a huge chunk of gamers have&nbsp;yet to upgrade&nbsp;to its latest cards.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些都表明，英伟达的游戏业务可能会在未来很长一段时间内保持其惊人的增长水平，特别是考虑到大量游戏玩家尚未升级到其最新的卡。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, the growth of AMD's gaming business is nowhere close to NVIDIA's, and the situation is unlikely to change given the latter's supremacy in this space. That's why investors looking to take advantage of the booming market for discrete graphics cards and add a&nbsp;top growth stock&nbsp;to their portfolios should choose NVIDIA. Gaming is its largest source of revenue, and this business could stay red-hot for a long time.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，AMD游戏业务的增长远不及英伟达，鉴于后者在该领域的霸主地位，这种情况不太可能改变。这就是为什么希望利用蓬勃发展的独立显卡市场并在其投资组合中添加顶级增长股票的投资者应该选择英伟达。游戏是其最大的收入来源，这项业务可能会在很长一段时间内保持火热。</blockquote></p><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>1 Big Reason to Dump AMD and Buy NVIDIA<blockquote>抛弃AMD并购买NVIDIA的1大理由</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\n1 Big Reason to Dump AMD and Buy NVIDIA<blockquote>抛弃AMD并购买NVIDIA的1大理由</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Motley Fool</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 09:37</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>NVIDIA</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:NVDA)&nbsp;has been ruling the roost in the discrete graphics processing unit (GPU) market, despite the best efforts of&nbsp;<b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD)&nbsp;to gain share in this highly lucrative space. And NVIDIA is showing no signs of losing its grip over the graphics card market, according to the latest market share numbers provided&nbsp;by Jon Peddie Research.</p><p><blockquote><b>英伟达</b>（纳斯达克：NVDA）一直在独立图形处理单元（GPU）市场上占据主导地位，尽管<b>先进微设备公司</b>（纳斯达克：AMD）在这个利润丰厚的领域获得份额。根据Jon Peddie Research提供的最新市场份额数据，NVIDIA没有表现出失去对显卡市场控制的迹象。</blockquote></p><p> Let's see why that bodes well for NVIDIA, and makes it a better bet than arch-rival AMD.</p><p><blockquote>让我们看看为什么这对NVIDIA来说是个好兆头，并使其成为比主要竞争对手AMD更好的选择。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94007897775e469423cc8a3d1e55440d\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"393\"><span>IMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图片来源：盖蒂图片社</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA&nbsp;finished 2020 with&nbsp;82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达在2020年结束时控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余部分。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched the&nbsp;RTX 30 series cards&nbsp;toward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs were&nbsp;making a nice dent&nbsp;in NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达在2020年底推出RTX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU对NVIDIA的显卡霸主地位产生了很大的影响。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> <b>NVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again</b></p><p><blockquote><b>NVIDIA再次在显卡上树立权威</b></blockquote></p><p> NVIDIAfinished 2020 with82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase&nbsp;over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.</p><p><blockquote>截至2020年，Nvidia控制了82%的独立显卡市场，而AMD则控制了其余市场。该公司令人印象深刻的势头已经蔓延到2021年，在第一季度占据了81%的市场份额。与去年同期75%的市场份额相比，这是一个不错的增长。</blockquote></p><p> AMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been&nbsp;losing ground&nbsp;to NVIDIA since the latter launched theRTX 30 series cardstoward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs weremaking a nice dentin NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.</p><p><blockquote>另一方面，AMD又失去了一个季度的市场份额。自英伟达于2020年底推出TX 30系列卡以来，该公司一直在输给英伟达。在RTX 30系列卡到来之前，AMD正处于复兴模式——一年前，它的Navi GPU正在成为英伟达显卡霸主的一个很好的牙本质。但现在已经不是这样了。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that discrete GPU shipments shot up 24.4% year-over-year. The market generated $12.5 billion in revenue in Q1, a 370% spike over the prior-year period, thanks to a&nbsp;jump in the average selling prices&nbsp;(ASPs) triggered by huge demand and short supply. NVIDIA's massive market share means that it has won big from this spike, which is reflected in its Q1 performance.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，独立GPU出货量同比猛增24.4%。由于巨大的需求和供应短缺引发的平均售价(ASP)上涨，该市场在第一季度创造了125亿美元的收入，比去年同期增长了370%。英伟达巨大的市场份额意味着它从这一飙升中受益匪浅，这反映在其第一季度的业绩中。</blockquote></p><p> NVIDIA's gaming revenue more than doubled&nbsp;year-over-year in the first quarter of fiscal 2022 to $2.76 billion. AMD's computing and graphics segment, which also includes the sales of its Ryzen desktop and notebook processors, grew at a relatively slower pace of 46% year-over-year to $2.1 billion in Q1.</p><p><blockquote>英伟达2022财年第一季度的游戏收入同比增长了一倍多，达到27.6亿美元。AMD的计算与显卡分部，其中还包括其锐龙台式机与笔记本电脑处理器的销售额，在Q1同比增长相对较慢，为46%，至21亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Jon Peddie Research estimates that the discrete GPU market could be worth $54 billion by 2025, compared to $23.6 billion last year. NVIDIA's dominant position should allow it to corner a substantial portion of that pie in the future, especially considering its moves to strengthen its position.</p><p><blockquote>Jon Peddie Research估计，到2025年，独立GPU市场价值可能达到540亿美元，而去年为236亿美元。英伟达的主导地位应该使其能够在未来垄断很大一部分蛋糕，特别是考虑到其加强地位的举措。</blockquote></p><p> <b>AMD's resistance may not be enough</b></p><p><blockquote><b>AMD的阻力可能还不够</b></blockquote></p><p> AMD has been trying to put up a fight against NVIDIA, and it did show some progress last quarter, registering a quarter-over-quarter market share gain of one percentage point. However, AMD is now looking to raise its game with a new technology, the FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). This will compete with NVIDIA's deep learning super sampling (DLSS) image upscaling technology, which helps games look better and run smoother.</p><p><blockquote>AMD一直在努力对抗NVIDIA，上个季度确实取得了一些进展，市场份额环比增长了一个百分点。然而，AMD现在正寻求通过一项新技术FidelityFX超分辨率（FSR）来提高其竞争力。这将与英伟达的深度学习超级采样（DLSS）图像升级技术竞争，该技术有助于游戏看起来更好，运行更流畅。</blockquote></p><p> AMD's internal tests claim that its new tech can help games run at 59% higher frame rates on ultra-quality settings. The chipmaker also claims that FSR could increase gaming performance by 2.5 times in certain titles using the performance setting. In addition, AMD says that FSR supports a wide range of hardware that includes more than 100 processors and graphics cards thanks to its open-source nature.</p><p><blockquote>AMD的内部测试声称，其新技术可以帮助游戏在超质量设置下以59%的帧率运行。该芯片制造商还声称，使用性能设置，FSR可以将某些游戏的游戏性能提高2.5倍。此外，AMD表示，由于其开源性质，FSR支持广泛的硬件，包括100多种处理器和显卡。</blockquote></p><p> FSR will launch on June 22, and it could give AMD a nice boost in the GPU market. However, only time will tell if the new technology will translate into sales for AMD, given that its rival's DLSS tech is already in its second&nbsp;generation.</p><p><blockquote>FSR将于6月22日推出，它可能会给AMD在GPU市场带来很好的推动。然而，只有时间才能证明这项新技术是否会转化为AMD的销售额，因为其竞争对手的DLSS技术已经进入第二代。</blockquote></p><p> However, it is worth noting that NVIDIA is trying to cover as much of the GPU market as possible with new launches. The company recently released the RTX 3080 Ti and the RTX 3070 Ti GPUs, priced at $1,199 and $599, respectively. NVIDIA is giving users of older graphics cards a solid reason to upgrade with these cards. It claims that the RTX 3080 Ti is twice as fast as the older GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 3070 Ti delivers 1.5x the performance of the RTX 2070 Super.</p><p><blockquote>然而，值得注意的是，英伟达正试图通过新产品的发布来覆盖尽可能多的GPU市场。该公司最近发布了RTX 3080 Ti和RTX 3070 Ti GPU，售价分别为1199美元和599美元。NVIDIA给了旧显卡的用户一个升级这些显卡的充分理由。它声称RTX 3080 Ti的速度是旧的GTX 1080 Ti的两倍，而RTX 3070 Ti的性能是RTX 2070 Super的1.5倍。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> NVIDIA is also&nbsp;stepping up its game&nbsp;in the laptop market with the launch of entry-level graphics cards. The company now offers more than 140 laptop models powered by the RTX 30 cards across a wide range of prices. This puts NVIDIA in a solid position in the fast-growing gaming laptop market, which is expected to hit $15.6 billion in revenue by 2027, compared to $9 billion in 2019.</p><p><blockquote>随着入门级显卡的推出，英伟达也在加强其在笔记本电脑市场的游戏。该公司现在提供140多种由RTX 30卡驱动的笔记本电脑型号，价格范围很广。这使得英伟达在快速增长的游戏笔记本电脑市场中占据了稳固的地位，预计到2027年，该市场的收入将达到156亿美元，而2019年为90亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> All of this indicates that NVIDIA's gaming business could sustain its terrific levels of growth for a long time to come, especially considering that a huge chunk of gamers have&nbsp;yet to upgrade&nbsp;to its latest cards.</p><p><blockquote>所有这些都表明，英伟达的游戏业务可能会在未来很长一段时间内保持其惊人的增长水平，特别是考虑到大量游戏玩家尚未升级到其最新的卡。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, the growth of AMD's gaming business is nowhere close to NVIDIA's, and the situation is unlikely to change given the latter's supremacy in this space. That's why investors looking to take advantage of the booming market for discrete graphics cards and add a&nbsp;top growth stock&nbsp;to their portfolios should choose NVIDIA. Gaming is its largest source of revenue, and this business could stay red-hot for a long time.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，AMD游戏业务的增长远不及英伟达，鉴于后者在该领域的霸主地位，这种情况不太可能改变。这就是为什么希望利用蓬勃发展的独立显卡市场并在其投资组合中添加顶级增长股票的投资者应该选择英伟达。游戏是其最大的收入来源，这项业务可能会在很长一段时间内保持火热。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/17/1-big-reason-to-dump-amd-and-buy-nvidia/\">Motley Fool</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","NVDA":"英伟达"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/17/1-big-reason-to-dump-amd-and-buy-nvidia/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1197160756","content_text":"NVIDIA (NASDAQ:NVDA) has been ruling the roost in the discrete graphics processing unit (GPU) market, despite the best efforts of Advanced Micro Devices(NASDAQ:AMD) to gain share in this highly lucrative space. And NVIDIA is showing no signs of losing its grip over the graphics card market, according to the latest market share numbers provided by Jon Peddie Research.\nLet's see why that bodes well for NVIDIA, and makes it a better bet than arch-rival AMD.\nIMAGE SOURCE: GETTY IMAGES\nNVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again\nNVIDIA finished 2020 with 82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.\nAMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been losing ground to NVIDIA since the latter launched the RTX 30 series cards toward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs were making a nice dent in NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.\nNVIDIA stamps its authority on graphics cards once again\nNVIDIAfinished 2020 with82% of the discrete graphics card market under its control, while AMD held the rest. The company's impressive momentum has spilled over into 2021, as it occupied 81% of the market in Q1. That was a nice increase over the year-ago period's market share of 75%.\nAMD, on the other hand, lost market share for yet another quarter. The company has been losing ground to NVIDIA since the latter launched theRTX 30 series cardstoward the end of 2020. AMD was in resurgent mode prior to the arrival of the RTX 30 series cards -- its Navi GPUs weremaking a nice dentin NVIDIA's graphics card supremacy a year ago. But that isn't the case anymore.\nJon Peddie Research estimates that discrete GPU shipments shot up 24.4% year-over-year. The market generated $12.5 billion in revenue in Q1, a 370% spike over the prior-year period, thanks to a jump in the average selling prices (ASPs) triggered by huge demand and short supply. NVIDIA's massive market share means that it has won big from this spike, which is reflected in its Q1 performance.\nNVIDIA's gaming revenue more than doubled year-over-year in the first quarter of fiscal 2022 to $2.76 billion. AMD's computing and graphics segment, which also includes the sales of its Ryzen desktop and notebook processors, grew at a relatively slower pace of 46% year-over-year to $2.1 billion in Q1.\nJon Peddie Research estimates that the discrete GPU market could be worth $54 billion by 2025, compared to $23.6 billion last year. NVIDIA's dominant position should allow it to corner a substantial portion of that pie in the future, especially considering its moves to strengthen its position.\nAMD's resistance may not be enough\nAMD has been trying to put up a fight against NVIDIA, and it did show some progress last quarter, registering a quarter-over-quarter market share gain of one percentage point. However, AMD is now looking to raise its game with a new technology, the FidelityFX Super Resolution (FSR). This will compete with NVIDIA's deep learning super sampling (DLSS) image upscaling technology, which helps games look better and run smoother.\nAMD's internal tests claim that its new tech can help games run at 59% higher frame rates on ultra-quality settings. The chipmaker also claims that FSR could increase gaming performance by 2.5 times in certain titles using the performance setting. In addition, AMD says that FSR supports a wide range of hardware that includes more than 100 processors and graphics cards thanks to its open-source nature.\nFSR will launch on June 22, and it could give AMD a nice boost in the GPU market. However, only time will tell if the new technology will translate into sales for AMD, given that its rival's DLSS tech is already in its second generation.\nHowever, it is worth noting that NVIDIA is trying to cover as much of the GPU market as possible with new launches. The company recently released the RTX 3080 Ti and the RTX 3070 Ti GPUs, priced at $1,199 and $599, respectively. NVIDIA is giving users of older graphics cards a solid reason to upgrade with these cards. It claims that the RTX 3080 Ti is twice as fast as the older GTX 1080 Ti, while the RTX 3070 Ti delivers 1.5x the performance of the RTX 2070 Super.\nNVIDIA is also stepping up its game in the laptop market with the launch of entry-level graphics cards. The company now offers more than 140 laptop models powered by the RTX 30 cards across a wide range of prices. This puts NVIDIA in a solid position in the fast-growing gaming laptop market, which is expected to hit $15.6 billion in revenue by 2027, compared to $9 billion in 2019.\nAll of this indicates that NVIDIA's gaming business could sustain its terrific levels of growth for a long time to come, especially considering that a huge chunk of gamers have yet to upgrade to its latest cards.\nMeanwhile, the growth of AMD's gaming business is nowhere close to NVIDIA's, and the situation is unlikely to change given the latter's supremacy in this space. That's why investors looking to take advantage of the booming market for discrete graphics cards and add a top growth stock to their portfolios should choose NVIDIA. Gaming is its largest source of revenue, and this business could stay red-hot for a long time.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMD":0.9,"NVDA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":356,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166142321,"gmtCreate":1623998911163,"gmtModify":1634024339583,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Amc!","listText":"Amc!","text":"Amc!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166142321","repostId":"1131310015","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1131310015","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623987347,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131310015?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 11:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131310015","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pul","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><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>AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nAMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 11:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131310015","content_text":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.\nA century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.\nSell before the other speculators do.\n\nRgStudio/E+ via Getty Images\nWhat are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer forThe Wall Street Journal, and John Brooks, author of “Business Adventures”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.\nInvestor vs. trader vs. speculator\nJason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021Wall Street Journalcolumn:\n\n “\n Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”\n\nSo why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assetsnevercame up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.\nMr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.\nA 2022 AMC earnings forecast\nI start with the key assumptions:\n\nMy time frame for reference is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.\nThe national box officeis the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.\nAMC market share.I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.\nAdmissions gross margin.This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.\nFood expenses as a percent of sales.I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs andmultiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.\nFood and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.\nOperating expensesare the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.\nWe’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:\n\nThe ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:\n\nDepreciation/amortizationis a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.\nInterest expenseshould decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.\n\nThe gravitational pull of earnings\nWe arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.\nThe bottom line - no support for investors.AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words ofTrading Places, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”\nThe speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale\nMillennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The bookBusiness Adventuresby John Brooks,published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.\nShorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:\n\n “\n Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…”\n\nThe sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.\n\n “\n He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”\n\nToday we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.\n\n “\n One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.”\n\nSomething to think about. What was Saunders to do?\n\n “[\n Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments.”\n\nPretty clever, no? No:\n\n “\n At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”\n\nUh oh. What now?\n\n“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller & Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”\n\nOuch.\nBuyers beware\nAs Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?\nAMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":527,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166146410,"gmtCreate":1623998895630,"gmtModify":1634024339942,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Rocket!!","listText":"Rocket!!","text":"Rocket!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166146410","repostId":"1131310015","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1131310015","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623987347,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131310015?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 11:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131310015","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pul","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><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>AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nAMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 11:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持其影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——Netflix、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131310015","content_text":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.\nA century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.\nSell before the other speculators do.\n\nRgStudio/E+ via Getty Images\nWhat are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer forThe Wall Street Journal, and John Brooks, author of “Business Adventures”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.\nInvestor vs. trader vs. speculator\nJason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021Wall Street Journalcolumn:\n\n “\n Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”\n\nSo why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assetsnevercame up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.\nMr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.\nA 2022 AMC earnings forecast\nI start with the key assumptions:\n\nMy time frame for reference is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.\nThe national box officeis the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.\nAMC market share.I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.\nAdmissions gross margin.This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.\nFood expenses as a percent of sales.I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs andmultiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.\nFood and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.\nOperating expensesare the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.\nWe’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:\n\nThe ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:\n\nDepreciation/amortizationis a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.\nInterest expenseshould decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.\n\nThe gravitational pull of earnings\nWe arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.\nThe bottom line - no support for investors.AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words ofTrading Places, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”\nThe speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale\nMillennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The bookBusiness Adventuresby John Brooks,published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.\nShorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:\n\n “\n Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…”\n\nThe sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.\n\n “\n He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”\n\nToday we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.\n\n “\n One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.”\n\nSomething to think about. What was Saunders to do?\n\n “[\n Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments.”\n\nPretty clever, no? No:\n\n “\n At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”\n\nUh oh. What now?\n\n“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller & Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”\n\nOuch.\nBuyers beware\nAs Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?\nAMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":345,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":123235151,"gmtCreate":1624424161673,"gmtModify":1634006299265,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Telsa","listText":"Telsa","text":"Telsa","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/123235151","repostId":"2145067282","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1321,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129671069,"gmtCreate":1624372356951,"gmtModify":1634007090491,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Holiday","listText":"Holiday","text":"Holiday","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129671069","repostId":"2145105017","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2145105017","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Reuters","id":"1036604489","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/443ce19704621c837795676028cec868"},"pubTimestamp":1624371025,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2145105017?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 22:10","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"Qatar Airways set on launching new Airbus or Boeing cargo jet<blockquote>卡塔尔航空准备推出新型空客或波音货机</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2145105017","media":"Reuters","summary":"DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing fr","content":"<p><html><body>DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing freighter, the Gulf carrier's chief executive said on Tuesday as it considers a multi-billion dollar cargo jet order.</p><p><blockquote><html><body>迪拜，6月22日（路透社）-海湾航空公司首席执行官周二表示，卡塔尔航空希望成为新空客或波音货机的首发客户，因为该公司正在考虑一个数十亿美元的货机订单。</body></html></blockquote></p><p>   Both planemakers are reportedly considering producing a new freighter, although neither has so far committed to it publicly.</p><p><blockquote>据报道，两家飞机制造商都在考虑生产一种新的货机，尽管迄今为止都没有公开承诺。</blockquote></p><p>   Reuters reported in March that Airbus was gauging interest in a freighter version of its A350 jetliner and Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker told Reuters on June 4 that Boeing was offering a freighter version of its future 777X passenger jet.</p><p><blockquote>路透社3月份报道称，空客正在评估对其A350喷气式客机货机版本的兴趣，卡塔尔航空首席执行官Akbar Al Baker 6月4日告诉路透社，波音公司正在提供其未来777X客机的货机版本。</blockquote></p><p>   But Boeing said its board was yet to approve such a program.</p><p><blockquote>但波音公司表示，其董事会尚未批准这样的计划。</blockquote></p><p>   \"We are very keen to be a launch customer be it for the A350F or the 777X freighters,\" Al Baker said during a forum organised by Bloomberg on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>“我们非常渴望成为A350F还是777X货机的首发客户，”阿尔·贝克周二在彭博社组织的论坛上表示。</blockquote></p><p>   The major Airbus and Boeing customer has publicly expressed interest in a new cargo jet since at least April and is interested in a large order, potentially for 30 or more new freighters. Its current cargo fleet is 30 Boeing freighters.</p><p><blockquote>至少自4月份以来，空客和波音的主要客户就公开表达了对新型货机的兴趣，并对一笔大订单感兴趣，可能是30架或更多新货机。其目前的货运机队为30架波音货机。</blockquote></p><p>   Speaking on a panel alongside Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun, Al Baker also said the airline was \"hungry\" for more but that the U.S. planemaker could not produce them fast enough. </p><p><blockquote>阿尔·贝克与波音首席执行官戴夫·卡尔霍恩一起在一个小组上发表讲话时还表示，该航空公司“渴望”更多，但这家美国飞机制造商生产速度不够快。</blockquote></p><p>   Calhoun did not address these remarks.</p><p><blockquote>卡尔霍恩没有回应这些言论。</blockquote></p><p>   Qatar Airways is in a contractual dispute with Airbus over a quality issue regarding some of its passenger jets.  </p><p><blockquote>卡塔尔航空因部分客机的质量问题与空中客车公司发生合同纠纷。</blockquote></p><p> (Writing by Alexander Cornwell; Editing by Alexander Smith)</p><p><blockquote>（亚历山大·康威尔撰稿；亚历山大·史密斯编辑）</blockquote></p><p>((Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com;))</p><p><blockquote>（（Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com；））</blockquote></p><p></body></html></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><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>Qatar Airways set on launching new Airbus or Boeing cargo jet<blockquote>卡塔尔航空准备推出新型空客或波音货机</blockquote></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: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\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\">\nQatar Airways set on launching new Airbus or Boeing cargo jet<blockquote>卡塔尔航空准备推出新型空客或波音货机</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1036604489\">\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 smaller\">2021-06-22 22:10</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><body>DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing freighter, the Gulf carrier's chief executive said on Tuesday as it considers a multi-billion dollar cargo jet order.</p><p><blockquote><html><body>迪拜，6月22日（路透社）-海湾航空公司首席执行官周二表示，卡塔尔航空希望成为新空客或波音货机的首发客户，因为该公司正在考虑一个数十亿美元的货机订单。</body></html></blockquote></p><p>   Both planemakers are reportedly considering producing a new freighter, although neither has so far committed to it publicly.</p><p><blockquote>据报道，两家飞机制造商都在考虑生产一种新的货机，尽管迄今为止都没有公开承诺。</blockquote></p><p>   Reuters reported in March that Airbus was gauging interest in a freighter version of its A350 jetliner and Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker told Reuters on June 4 that Boeing was offering a freighter version of its future 777X passenger jet.</p><p><blockquote>路透社3月份报道称，空客正在评估对其A350喷气式客机货机版本的兴趣，卡塔尔航空首席执行官Akbar Al Baker 6月4日告诉路透社，波音公司正在提供其未来777X客机的货机版本。</blockquote></p><p>   But Boeing said its board was yet to approve such a program.</p><p><blockquote>但波音公司表示，其董事会尚未批准这样的计划。</blockquote></p><p>   \"We are very keen to be a launch customer be it for the A350F or the 777X freighters,\" Al Baker said during a forum organised by Bloomberg on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>“我们非常渴望成为A350F还是777X货机的首发客户，”阿尔·贝克周二在彭博社组织的论坛上表示。</blockquote></p><p>   The major Airbus and Boeing customer has publicly expressed interest in a new cargo jet since at least April and is interested in a large order, potentially for 30 or more new freighters. Its current cargo fleet is 30 Boeing freighters.</p><p><blockquote>至少自4月份以来，空客和波音的主要客户就公开表达了对新型货机的兴趣，并对一笔大订单感兴趣，可能是30架或更多新货机。其目前的货运机队为30架波音货机。</blockquote></p><p>   Speaking on a panel alongside Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun, Al Baker also said the airline was \"hungry\" for more but that the U.S. planemaker could not produce them fast enough. </p><p><blockquote>阿尔·贝克与波音首席执行官戴夫·卡尔霍恩一起在一个小组上发表讲话时还表示，该航空公司“渴望”更多，但这家美国飞机制造商生产速度不够快。</blockquote></p><p>   Calhoun did not address these remarks.</p><p><blockquote>卡尔霍恩没有回应这些言论。</blockquote></p><p>   Qatar Airways is in a contractual dispute with Airbus over a quality issue regarding some of its passenger jets.  </p><p><blockquote>卡塔尔航空因部分客机的质量问题与空中客车公司发生合同纠纷。</blockquote></p><p> (Writing by Alexander Cornwell; Editing by Alexander Smith)</p><p><blockquote>（亚历山大·康威尔撰稿；亚历山大·史密斯编辑）</blockquote></p><p>((Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com;))</p><p><blockquote>（（Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com；））</blockquote></p><p></body></html></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BA":"波音"},"source_url":"http://api.rkd.refinitiv.com/api/News/News.svc/REST/News_1/RetrieveStoryML_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2145105017","content_text":"DUBAI, June 22 (Reuters) - Qatar Airways wants to be a launch customer for a new Airbus or Boeing freighter, the Gulf carrier's chief executive said on Tuesday as it considers a multi-billion dollar cargo jet order.   Both planemakers are reportedly considering producing a new freighter, although neither has so far committed to it publicly.   Reuters reported in March that Airbus was gauging interest in a freighter version of its A350 jetliner and Qatar Airways CEO Akbar Al Baker told Reuters on June 4 that Boeing was offering a freighter version of its future 777X passenger jet.   But Boeing said its board was yet to approve such a program.   \"We are very keen to be a launch customer be it for the A350F or the 777X freighters,\" Al Baker said during a forum organised by Bloomberg on Tuesday.   The major Airbus and Boeing customer has publicly expressed interest in a new cargo jet since at least April and is interested in a large order, potentially for 30 or more new freighters. Its current cargo fleet is 30 Boeing freighters.   Speaking on a panel alongside Boeing CEO Dave Calhoun, Al Baker also said the airline was \"hungry\" for more but that the U.S. planemaker could not produce them fast enough.    Calhoun did not address these remarks.   Qatar Airways is in a contractual dispute with Airbus over a quality issue regarding some of its passenger jets.   (Writing by Alexander Cornwell; Editing by Alexander Smith)((Alexander.Cornwell@thomsonreuters.com;))","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BA":1}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1315,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167983075,"gmtCreate":1624242537197,"gmtModify":1634009009198,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Singapore","listText":"Singapore","text":"Singapore","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167983075","repostId":"1104038312","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2076,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166144375,"gmtCreate":1623998978997,"gmtModify":1634024338111,"author":{"id":"3574898582688380","authorId":"3574898582688380","name":"AARONNKJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3574898582688380","idStr":"3574898582688380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"💪💪","listText":"💪💪","text":"💪💪","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166144375","repostId":"2144513725","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":484,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}