YangXH的个人主页 - 老虎社区

YangXH

YangXH

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

427关注

8粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2022-01-02

[Like]

抱歉，原内容已删除

2022-01-01

Like

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-12-22

Like

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-12-12

又是一个坑。看谁往里跳。

Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading<blockquote>Grab股价早盘再下跌9%</blockquote>

2021-12-09

Thanks for sharing

昨夜今晨：疫苗利好再度传来！苹果续刷历史新高

2021-12-09

[强]

Apple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high<blockquote>苹果股价上涨近2%，创新高</blockquote>

2021-11-14

Good news

Pfizer Shows Its R&D Is Strong. It’s a Good Sign for the Stock.<blockquote>辉瑞显示其研发实力雄厚。这对该股来说是一个好兆头。</blockquote>

2021-11-14

Like

Apple: The Bear Argument, And Why It's Wrong<blockquote>苹果：熊市论点及其错误的原因</blockquote>

2021-10-28

👍

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-10-17

Like

5 Stocks To Watch For October 15, 2021<blockquote>2021年10月15日值得关注的5只股票</blockquote>

2021-10-15

Like $Apple(AAPL)$

Apple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading<blockquote>苹果股价在盘前交易中上涨0.8%</blockquote>

2021-10-12

👍

Apple iPhone Wait Times Are at Multiyear Highs. What It Means for Sales.<blockquote>苹果iPhone等待时间创多年新高。这对销售意味着什么。</blockquote>

2021-10-09

Thanks for sharing.

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-10-05

👍

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-09-28

Thanks for sharing

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-09-14

Like

Apple App Store: The Tide Is Turning<blockquote>苹果应用商店：潮流正在转向</blockquote>

2021-09-13

Like

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-09-12

Buy the dip

Buy or Sell Apple Stock Ahead of iPhone Event?<blockquote>在iPhone活动之前买入或卖出苹果股票？</blockquote>

2021-09-11

Ok

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-09-08

buy$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$

@Buy_Sell:🚀【9月7日】美股昨夜休市，港股今日高开，今天买什么？

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3586332417338594","uuid":"3586332417338594","gmtCreate":1623238393493,"gmtModify":1627745419718,"name":"YangXH","pinyin":"yangxh","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":8,"headSize":427,"tweetSize":83,"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":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-2","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"宗师交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到100次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ad22cfbe2d05aa393b18e9226e4b0307","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/36702e6ff3ffe46acafee66cc85273ca","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d52eb88fa385cf5abe2616ed63781765","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.10.05","exceedPercentage":"80.86%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"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":"2022.10.23","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37-1","templateUuid":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37","name":"博闻投资者","description":"累计交易超过10只正股","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"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":4,"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":692567591,"gmtCreate":1641078490941,"gmtModify":1641078491110,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[Like]&nbsp;","listText":"[Like]&nbsp;","text":"[Like]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/692567591","repostId":"2200412074","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3112,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":692229908,"gmtCreate":1641000710901,"gmtModify":1641000711026,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like&nbsp;","listText":"Like&nbsp;","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/692229908","repostId":"1158843518","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3767,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":691300396,"gmtCreate":1640132342748,"gmtModify":1640132342906,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like&nbsp;","listText":"Like&nbsp;","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/691300396","repostId":"1179885314","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3942,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":605785199,"gmtCreate":1639265033810,"gmtModify":1639265033928,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"又是一个坑。看谁往里跳。","listText":"又是一个坑。看谁往里跳。","text":"又是一个坑。看谁往里跳。","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/605785199","repostId":"1134450838","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1134450838","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":1639148939,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1134450838?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-10 23:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading<blockquote>Grab股价早盘再下跌9%</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1134450838","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.","content":"<p>Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.</p><p><blockquote>Grab股价继昨天下跌超过9%后，早盘又下跌9%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/963eb8dd73ce8daa0d852d63f0bcc276\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></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>Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading<blockquote>Grab股价早盘再下跌9%</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\">\nGrab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading<blockquote>Grab股价早盘再下跌9%</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\">2021-12-10 23:08</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.</p><p><blockquote>Grab股价继昨天下跌超过9%后，早盘又下跌9%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/963eb8dd73ce8daa0d852d63f0bcc276\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GRAB":"Grab Holdings"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1134450838","content_text":"Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"GRAB":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2668,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":602827948,"gmtCreate":1639008697068,"gmtModify":1639008697193,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","listText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","text":"Thanks for sharing","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/602827948","repostId":"1137331022","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1137331022","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1639005672,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1137331022?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-09 07:21","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"昨夜今晨：疫苗利好再度传来！苹果续刷历史新高","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1137331022","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"摘要：美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；辉瑞公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%>>>\n\n海外市场\n美股三大指","content":"<blockquote>\n <b>摘要：</b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">苹果</a>续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PFE\">辉瑞</a>公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GME\">游戏驿站</a>Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%&gt;&gt;&gt;\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>海外市场</b></p>\n<p><b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创收盘历史新高</b></p>\n<p>美国股市周三小幅上涨，许多投资者已经预期到，奥密克戎的威胁将是可控的，这种预期推动了本周股市的连续反弹。截至收盘，道琼斯指数涨0.1%，报35754.75点；标普500指数涨0.31%，报4701.21点；纳斯达克指数涨0.64%，报15786.99点。</p>\n<p><b>热门中概股收盘大多走高，雾芯科技涨超21%</b></p>\n<p>中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TAL\">好未来</a>涨超13%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEKE\">贝壳</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOTU\">高途</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LUCKIN\">瑞幸咖啡</a>涨超9%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EDU\">新东方</a>涨超8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZTO\">中通快递</a>涨近6%；中概新能源汽车中，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NIO\">蔚来</a>涨超5.8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LI\">理想汽车</a>涨2.1%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">小鹏汽车</a>涨超1%。</p>\n<p><b>美油收高0.4%，布油上涨0.5%</b></p>\n<p>美国原油期货价格周三创两周来的最高收盘价。关于奥密克戎变异毒株可能不会像人们担心的那样严重破坏经济的消息接踵而至，令油价持续获得支持。纽约商品交易所1月交割的西德克萨斯中质原油（WTI）期货价格上涨31美分，涨幅0.4%，收于每桶72.36美元，创11月24日以来的最高收盘价；欧洲<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ICE\">洲际交易所</a>2月交割的布伦特原油期货价格上涨38美分，涨幅0.5%，收于每桶75.82美元，创11月25日以来的最高收盘价。</p>\n<p><b>黄金期货收高0.1%，并创一周来盘中最高价</b></p>\n<p>黄金期货周三小幅收高，盘中一度创一周以来新高。投资者关注奥密克戎变异毒株的发展，并等待本周即将公布的美国通胀数据。纽约商品交易所最活跃的2月黄金合约上涨80美分，涨幅不到0.1%，收于每盎司1785.50美元。盘中最高为1794.30美元，创12月1日以来的最高价格。</p>\n<p><b>欧股主要指数收跌，德国DAX30指数跌0.79%</b></p>\n<p>德国DAX30指数周三收跌0.79%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VUKE.UK\">英国富时100</a>跌0.08%，法国CAC40跌0.7%，欧洲斯托克50指数跌0.99%。</p>\n<p><b>国际宏观</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞CEO：因omicron的出现 可能要比预期更早接种第四针疫苗</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞首席执行官Albert Bourla周三表示，在初步研究表明omicron变体会破坏新冠疫苗产生的保护性抗体后，人们可能需要比预期更早地接种第四针新冠疫苗。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>摩根大通：2022年全球经济将全面复苏</b></a></p>\n<p>美国投行摩根大通周三预测，2022年将标志着新冠疫情的结束，全球经济将全面复苏。该行在2022年的展望报告中称，新的疫苗和疗法将引发“强劲的周期性复苏、全球流动性的回归以及消费者被压抑需求的释放”。</p>\n<p><b>世卫组织：奥密克戎毒株将显著影响全球疫情</b></p>\n<p>世卫组织总干事谭德塞表示，已有57个国家和地区出现奥密克戎毒株，预计还将继续扩散，该毒株将对全球疫情产生显著影响，但目前还难以预估具体情况。南非感染奥密克戎毒株的病例数量正在迅速增加，谭德塞呼吁各国加强监测和病毒基因测序，以了解奥密克戎毒株是否能超越德尔塔毒株成为新的主要流行毒株。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190693181\" target=\"_blank\"><b>全球芯片短缺问题未有起色，交付等待时长再创历史新高</b></a></p>\n<p>芯片的交付时间再度延长，这项关键产品的短缺让许多行业希望再次破灭。根据Susquehanna金融集团的最新研究结果，11月芯片的交货时长（从订购到交付）比10月的21.9周增加了4天，达到约22.3周，再创该数据有史以来最长的等待时间。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190869550\" target=\"_blank\"><b>美国职位空缺接近历史高位，“大辞职潮”近半年来首次放缓</b></a><b></b></p>\n<p>美国10月职位空缺数跃升至有纪录以来的次高水平，凸显出雇主在填补岗位空缺方面所面临的挑战。美国劳工部周三发布的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查报告显示，职位空缺数升至1100万，前月数据意外上修至1060万。辞职率降至2.8%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英国首相恢复居家工作建议 以遏制omicron传播</b></a></p>\n<p>英国首相鲍里斯·约翰逊收紧防疫规定以遏制变异毒株omicron的传播，建议人们在家工作，并强制要求在大型公共场所使用“疫苗护照”。“越来越明显的是，omicron增长速度远快于德尔塔，”约翰逊在周三电视新闻发布会上宣布了英格兰地区的新防疫措施。他表示，“实施B计划是合适而负责任的做法”。</p>\n<p><b>公司新闻</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190931896\" target=\"_blank\"><b>苹果股价续刷历史新高，市值逼近3万亿美元</b></a></p>\n<p>周三苹果股价再度刷新历史高位，市值也逐步接近3万亿美元。而就在一年多前，苹果市值才刚刚突破2万亿美元大关。据悉美国法院批准苹果推迟修改应用商店规则最后期限的动议，暂停执行Epic Games反垄断诉讼中针对苹果公司的应用商店禁令，该消息推动苹果股价短线拉升。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1141082394\" target=\"_blank\"><b>飙涨近22%！电子烟龙头豪掷超30亿回购股票</b></a></p>\n<p>电子烟龙头雾芯科技12月8日晚间发布公告称，董事会授权一项股票回购计划，根据该计划，公司可在截至2023年12月31日的一段时间内回购至多5亿美元（折合人民币31.7亿元）的股票。受此消息影响，雾芯科技股价高开高走，截至收盘，涨近22%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1124189543\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞：加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞和BioNTech公司宣布，加强针新冠疫苗能中和奥密克戎变异毒株。初步试验数据显示，尽管两剂疫苗阻断奥密克戎的效果明显较差，但接种第三剂疫苗后，针对该毒株的抗体水平提高了25倍，足以和两剂疫苗对原始毒株的效果相媲美。</p>\n<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AZN\">阿斯利康</a>Evusheld疫苗获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权</b></p>\n<p>周三阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权。FDA表示，此前针对阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld发布的紧急使用授权，是为了帮助特定的成人和儿童抵御新冠病毒。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189667417\" target=\"_blank\"><b>谷歌和Roku达成新协议 确保YouTube和YouTube TV继续发行</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，ROKU和谷歌今日达成了一项新的多年合作协议，使得YouTube和YouTube TV得以在Roku平台上继续存在。两家公司并未披露新协议的条款。Roku的一名代表在一份声明中称，“这项协议对我们的共同客户来说是一个积极的进展，使Roku平台上的所有流媒体用户都可以使用YouTube和YouTube TV。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189663059\" target=\"_blank\"><b>福特首款电动皮卡需求火爆，预订量接近20万辆</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特汽车</a>证实，首款电动皮卡F150 Lightning目前零售预订量已经接近20万辆。F-150 Lightning自今年9月以来一直处于试生产阶段，根据计划，将于2022年春季正式上市，预计在2022年下半年交付。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189527726\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英特尔CEO：供应链问题将持续至2023年</b></a></p>\n<p>英特尔和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ACN\">埃森哲</a>CEO表示，对一些公司来说，波及整个美国经济的供应链问题正在改善，但长期修复可能需要更多时间。芯片业巨头英特尔身处全球半导体短缺的风暴中心，该公司CEO基辛格预计供应链问题将持续到2023年，部分是因为建造一家新厂需要三年时间。基辛格说：“我们认为当前正是最糟糕的阶段。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1131202578\" target=\"_blank\"><b>游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收12.97亿美元，市场预期11.89亿美元，去年同期10.05亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.054亿美元，市场预期净亏损3213.3万美元，去年同期1880万美元；第三季度每股亏损1.39美元，市场预期亏损0.4美元，去年同期亏损0.29美元。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1177663836\" target=\"_blank\"><b>UiPath&nbsp;2022财年第三季度净亏损同比扩大</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收2.21亿美元，市场预期2.09亿美元，去年同期1.47亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.23亿美元，市场预期净亏损6258.2万美元，去年同期净亏损7079.6万美元；第三季度每股亏损0.23美元，市场预期亏损0.14美元，去年同期亏损0.41美元。</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>昨夜今晨：疫苗利好再度传来！苹果续刷历史新高</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n昨夜今晨：疫苗利好再度传来！苹果续刷历史新高\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-12-09 07:21</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<blockquote>\n <b>摘要：</b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">苹果</a>续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PFE\">辉瑞</a>公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GME\">游戏驿站</a>Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%&gt;&gt;&gt;\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>海外市场</b></p>\n<p><b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创收盘历史新高</b></p>\n<p>美国股市周三小幅上涨，许多投资者已经预期到，奥密克戎的威胁将是可控的，这种预期推动了本周股市的连续反弹。截至收盘，道琼斯指数涨0.1%，报35754.75点；标普500指数涨0.31%，报4701.21点；纳斯达克指数涨0.64%，报15786.99点。</p>\n<p><b>热门中概股收盘大多走高，雾芯科技涨超21%</b></p>\n<p>中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TAL\">好未来</a>涨超13%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEKE\">贝壳</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOTU\">高途</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LUCKIN\">瑞幸咖啡</a>涨超9%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EDU\">新东方</a>涨超8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZTO\">中通快递</a>涨近6%；中概新能源汽车中，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NIO\">蔚来</a>涨超5.8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LI\">理想汽车</a>涨2.1%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">小鹏汽车</a>涨超1%。</p>\n<p><b>美油收高0.4%，布油上涨0.5%</b></p>\n<p>美国原油期货价格周三创两周来的最高收盘价。关于奥密克戎变异毒株可能不会像人们担心的那样严重破坏经济的消息接踵而至，令油价持续获得支持。纽约商品交易所1月交割的西德克萨斯中质原油（WTI）期货价格上涨31美分，涨幅0.4%，收于每桶72.36美元，创11月24日以来的最高收盘价；欧洲<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ICE\">洲际交易所</a>2月交割的布伦特原油期货价格上涨38美分，涨幅0.5%，收于每桶75.82美元，创11月25日以来的最高收盘价。</p>\n<p><b>黄金期货收高0.1%，并创一周来盘中最高价</b></p>\n<p>黄金期货周三小幅收高，盘中一度创一周以来新高。投资者关注奥密克戎变异毒株的发展，并等待本周即将公布的美国通胀数据。纽约商品交易所最活跃的2月黄金合约上涨80美分，涨幅不到0.1%，收于每盎司1785.50美元。盘中最高为1794.30美元，创12月1日以来的最高价格。</p>\n<p><b>欧股主要指数收跌，德国DAX30指数跌0.79%</b></p>\n<p>德国DAX30指数周三收跌0.79%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VUKE.UK\">英国富时100</a>跌0.08%，法国CAC40跌0.7%，欧洲斯托克50指数跌0.99%。</p>\n<p><b>国际宏观</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞CEO：因omicron的出现 可能要比预期更早接种第四针疫苗</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞首席执行官Albert Bourla周三表示，在初步研究表明omicron变体会破坏新冠疫苗产生的保护性抗体后，人们可能需要比预期更早地接种第四针新冠疫苗。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>摩根大通：2022年全球经济将全面复苏</b></a></p>\n<p>美国投行摩根大通周三预测，2022年将标志着新冠疫情的结束，全球经济将全面复苏。该行在2022年的展望报告中称，新的疫苗和疗法将引发“强劲的周期性复苏、全球流动性的回归以及消费者被压抑需求的释放”。</p>\n<p><b>世卫组织：奥密克戎毒株将显著影响全球疫情</b></p>\n<p>世卫组织总干事谭德塞表示，已有57个国家和地区出现奥密克戎毒株，预计还将继续扩散，该毒株将对全球疫情产生显著影响，但目前还难以预估具体情况。南非感染奥密克戎毒株的病例数量正在迅速增加，谭德塞呼吁各国加强监测和病毒基因测序，以了解奥密克戎毒株是否能超越德尔塔毒株成为新的主要流行毒株。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190693181\" target=\"_blank\"><b>全球芯片短缺问题未有起色，交付等待时长再创历史新高</b></a></p>\n<p>芯片的交付时间再度延长，这项关键产品的短缺让许多行业希望再次破灭。根据Susquehanna金融集团的最新研究结果，11月芯片的交货时长（从订购到交付）比10月的21.9周增加了4天，达到约22.3周，再创该数据有史以来最长的等待时间。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190869550\" target=\"_blank\"><b>美国职位空缺接近历史高位，“大辞职潮”近半年来首次放缓</b></a><b></b></p>\n<p>美国10月职位空缺数跃升至有纪录以来的次高水平，凸显出雇主在填补岗位空缺方面所面临的挑战。美国劳工部周三发布的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查报告显示，职位空缺数升至1100万，前月数据意外上修至1060万。辞职率降至2.8%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英国首相恢复居家工作建议 以遏制omicron传播</b></a></p>\n<p>英国首相鲍里斯·约翰逊收紧防疫规定以遏制变异毒株omicron的传播，建议人们在家工作，并强制要求在大型公共场所使用“疫苗护照”。“越来越明显的是，omicron增长速度远快于德尔塔，”约翰逊在周三电视新闻发布会上宣布了英格兰地区的新防疫措施。他表示，“实施B计划是合适而负责任的做法”。</p>\n<p><b>公司新闻</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190931896\" target=\"_blank\"><b>苹果股价续刷历史新高，市值逼近3万亿美元</b></a></p>\n<p>周三苹果股价再度刷新历史高位，市值也逐步接近3万亿美元。而就在一年多前，苹果市值才刚刚突破2万亿美元大关。据悉美国法院批准苹果推迟修改应用商店规则最后期限的动议，暂停执行Epic Games反垄断诉讼中针对苹果公司的应用商店禁令，该消息推动苹果股价短线拉升。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1141082394\" target=\"_blank\"><b>飙涨近22%！电子烟龙头豪掷超30亿回购股票</b></a></p>\n<p>电子烟龙头雾芯科技12月8日晚间发布公告称，董事会授权一项股票回购计划，根据该计划，公司可在截至2023年12月31日的一段时间内回购至多5亿美元（折合人民币31.7亿元）的股票。受此消息影响，雾芯科技股价高开高走，截至收盘，涨近22%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1124189543\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞：加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞和BioNTech公司宣布，加强针新冠疫苗能中和奥密克戎变异毒株。初步试验数据显示，尽管两剂疫苗阻断奥密克戎的效果明显较差，但接种第三剂疫苗后，针对该毒株的抗体水平提高了25倍，足以和两剂疫苗对原始毒株的效果相媲美。</p>\n<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AZN\">阿斯利康</a>Evusheld疫苗获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权</b></p>\n<p>周三阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权。FDA表示，此前针对阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld发布的紧急使用授权，是为了帮助特定的成人和儿童抵御新冠病毒。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189667417\" target=\"_blank\"><b>谷歌和Roku达成新协议 确保YouTube和YouTube TV继续发行</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，ROKU和谷歌今日达成了一项新的多年合作协议，使得YouTube和YouTube TV得以在Roku平台上继续存在。两家公司并未披露新协议的条款。Roku的一名代表在一份声明中称，“这项协议对我们的共同客户来说是一个积极的进展，使Roku平台上的所有流媒体用户都可以使用YouTube和YouTube TV。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189663059\" target=\"_blank\"><b>福特首款电动皮卡需求火爆，预订量接近20万辆</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特汽车</a>证实，首款电动皮卡F150 Lightning目前零售预订量已经接近20万辆。F-150 Lightning自今年9月以来一直处于试生产阶段，根据计划，将于2022年春季正式上市，预计在2022年下半年交付。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189527726\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英特尔CEO：供应链问题将持续至2023年</b></a></p>\n<p>英特尔和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ACN\">埃森哲</a>CEO表示，对一些公司来说，波及整个美国经济的供应链问题正在改善，但长期修复可能需要更多时间。芯片业巨头英特尔身处全球半导体短缺的风暴中心，该公司CEO基辛格预计供应链问题将持续到2023年，部分是因为建造一家新厂需要三年时间。基辛格说：“我们认为当前正是最糟糕的阶段。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1131202578\" target=\"_blank\"><b>游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收12.97亿美元，市场预期11.89亿美元，去年同期10.05亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.054亿美元，市场预期净亏损3213.3万美元，去年同期1880万美元；第三季度每股亏损1.39美元，市场预期亏损0.4美元，去年同期亏损0.29美元。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1177663836\" target=\"_blank\"><b>UiPath&nbsp;2022财年第三季度净亏损同比扩大</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收2.21亿美元，市场预期2.09亿美元，去年同期1.47亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.23亿美元，市场预期净亏损6258.2万美元，去年同期净亏损7079.6万美元；第三季度每股亏损0.23美元，市场预期亏损0.14美元，去年同期亏损0.41美元。</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b23574aac95526c9e5c62ebc8dd25130","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","BK4507":"流媒体概念","BK4505":"高瓴资本持仓","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓",".DJI":"道琼斯","BK4170":"电脑硬件、储存设备及电脑周边","BK4554":"元宇宙及AR概念",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","BK4515":"5G概念","BK4532":"文艺复兴科技持仓","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4559":"巴菲特持仓","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4553":"喜马拉雅资本持仓","BK4501":"段永平概念","BK4527":"明星科技股","BK4566":"资本集团","AAPL":"苹果"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1137331022","content_text":"摘要：美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；辉瑞公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%>>>\n\n海外市场\n美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创收盘历史新高\n美国股市周三小幅上涨，许多投资者已经预期到，奥密克戎的威胁将是可控的，这种预期推动了本周股市的连续反弹。截至收盘，道琼斯指数涨0.1%，报35754.75点；标普500指数涨0.31%，报4701.21点；纳斯达克指数涨0.64%，报15786.99点。\n热门中概股收盘大多走高，雾芯科技涨超21%\n中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%，好未来涨超13%，贝壳涨超11%，高途涨超11%，瑞幸咖啡涨超9%，新东方涨超8%，中通快递涨近6%；中概新能源汽车中，蔚来涨超5.8%，理想汽车涨2.1%，小鹏汽车涨超1%。\n美油收高0.4%，布油上涨0.5%\n美国原油期货价格周三创两周来的最高收盘价。关于奥密克戎变异毒株可能不会像人们担心的那样严重破坏经济的消息接踵而至，令油价持续获得支持。纽约商品交易所1月交割的西德克萨斯中质原油（WTI）期货价格上涨31美分，涨幅0.4%，收于每桶72.36美元，创11月24日以来的最高收盘价；欧洲洲际交易所2月交割的布伦特原油期货价格上涨38美分，涨幅0.5%，收于每桶75.82美元，创11月25日以来的最高收盘价。\n黄金期货收高0.1%，并创一周来盘中最高价\n黄金期货周三小幅收高，盘中一度创一周以来新高。投资者关注奥密克戎变异毒株的发展，并等待本周即将公布的美国通胀数据。纽约商品交易所最活跃的2月黄金合约上涨80美分，涨幅不到0.1%，收于每盎司1785.50美元。盘中最高为1794.30美元，创12月1日以来的最高价格。\n欧股主要指数收跌，德国DAX30指数跌0.79%\n德国DAX30指数周三收跌0.79%，英国富时100跌0.08%，法国CAC40跌0.7%，欧洲斯托克50指数跌0.99%。\n国际宏观\n辉瑞CEO：因omicron的出现 可能要比预期更早接种第四针疫苗\n辉瑞首席执行官Albert Bourla周三表示，在初步研究表明omicron变体会破坏新冠疫苗产生的保护性抗体后，人们可能需要比预期更早地接种第四针新冠疫苗。\n摩根大通：2022年全球经济将全面复苏\n美国投行摩根大通周三预测，2022年将标志着新冠疫情的结束，全球经济将全面复苏。该行在2022年的展望报告中称，新的疫苗和疗法将引发“强劲的周期性复苏、全球流动性的回归以及消费者被压抑需求的释放”。\n世卫组织：奥密克戎毒株将显著影响全球疫情\n世卫组织总干事谭德塞表示，已有57个国家和地区出现奥密克戎毒株，预计还将继续扩散，该毒株将对全球疫情产生显著影响，但目前还难以预估具体情况。南非感染奥密克戎毒株的病例数量正在迅速增加，谭德塞呼吁各国加强监测和病毒基因测序，以了解奥密克戎毒株是否能超越德尔塔毒株成为新的主要流行毒株。\n全球芯片短缺问题未有起色，交付等待时长再创历史新高\n芯片的交付时间再度延长，这项关键产品的短缺让许多行业希望再次破灭。根据Susquehanna金融集团的最新研究结果，11月芯片的交货时长（从订购到交付）比10月的21.9周增加了4天，达到约22.3周，再创该数据有史以来最长的等待时间。\n美国职位空缺接近历史高位，“大辞职潮”近半年来首次放缓\n美国10月职位空缺数跃升至有纪录以来的次高水平，凸显出雇主在填补岗位空缺方面所面临的挑战。美国劳工部周三发布的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查报告显示，职位空缺数升至1100万，前月数据意外上修至1060万。辞职率降至2.8%。\n英国首相恢复居家工作建议 以遏制omicron传播\n英国首相鲍里斯·约翰逊收紧防疫规定以遏制变异毒株omicron的传播，建议人们在家工作，并强制要求在大型公共场所使用“疫苗护照”。“越来越明显的是，omicron增长速度远快于德尔塔，”约翰逊在周三电视新闻发布会上宣布了英格兰地区的新防疫措施。他表示，“实施B计划是合适而负责任的做法”。\n公司新闻\n苹果股价续刷历史新高，市值逼近3万亿美元\n周三苹果股价再度刷新历史高位，市值也逐步接近3万亿美元。而就在一年多前，苹果市值才刚刚突破2万亿美元大关。据悉美国法院批准苹果推迟修改应用商店规则最后期限的动议，暂停执行Epic Games反垄断诉讼中针对苹果公司的应用商店禁令，该消息推动苹果股价短线拉升。\n飙涨近22%！电子烟龙头豪掷超30亿回购股票\n电子烟龙头雾芯科技12月8日晚间发布公告称，董事会授权一项股票回购计划，根据该计划，公司可在截至2023年12月31日的一段时间内回购至多5亿美元（折合人民币31.7亿元）的股票。受此消息影响，雾芯科技股价高开高走，截至收盘，涨近22%。\n辉瑞：加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株\n辉瑞和BioNTech公司宣布，加强针新冠疫苗能中和奥密克戎变异毒株。初步试验数据显示，尽管两剂疫苗阻断奥密克戎的效果明显较差，但接种第三剂疫苗后，针对该毒株的抗体水平提高了25倍，足以和两剂疫苗对原始毒株的效果相媲美。\n阿斯利康Evusheld疫苗获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权\n周三阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权。FDA表示，此前针对阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld发布的紧急使用授权，是为了帮助特定的成人和儿童抵御新冠病毒。\n谷歌和Roku达成新协议 确保YouTube和YouTube TV继续发行\n据报道，ROKU和谷歌今日达成了一项新的多年合作协议，使得YouTube和YouTube TV得以在Roku平台上继续存在。两家公司并未披露新协议的条款。Roku的一名代表在一份声明中称，“这项协议对我们的共同客户来说是一个积极的进展，使Roku平台上的所有流媒体用户都可以使用YouTube和YouTube TV。”\n福特首款电动皮卡需求火爆，预订量接近20万辆\n据报道，福特汽车证实，首款电动皮卡F150 Lightning目前零售预订量已经接近20万辆。F-150 Lightning自今年9月以来一直处于试生产阶段，根据计划，将于2022年春季正式上市，预计在2022年下半年交付。\n英特尔CEO：供应链问题将持续至2023年\n英特尔和埃森哲CEO表示，对一些公司来说，波及整个美国经济的供应链问题正在改善，但长期修复可能需要更多时间。芯片业巨头英特尔身处全球半导体短缺的风暴中心，该公司CEO基辛格预计供应链问题将持续到2023年，部分是因为建造一家新厂需要三年时间。基辛格说：“我们认为当前正是最糟糕的阶段。”\n游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%\n财报显示，第三季度营收12.97亿美元，市场预期11.89亿美元，去年同期10.05亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.054亿美元，市场预期净亏损3213.3万美元，去年同期1880万美元；第三季度每股亏损1.39美元，市场预期亏损0.4美元，去年同期亏损0.29美元。\nUiPath 2022财年第三季度净亏损同比扩大\n财报显示，第三季度营收2.21亿美元，市场预期2.09亿美元，去年同期1.47亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.23亿美元，市场预期净亏损6258.2万美元，去年同期净亏损7079.6万美元；第三季度每股亏损0.23美元，市场预期亏损0.14美元，去年同期亏损0.41美元。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,"AAPL":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2720,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":602800962,"gmtCreate":1639003612096,"gmtModify":1639003705577,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[强]&nbsp;","listText":"[强]&nbsp;","text":"[强]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/602800962","repostId":"1161444269","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1161444269","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":1638977215,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1161444269?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-08 23:26","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high<blockquote>苹果股价上涨近2%，创新高</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1161444269","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Apple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high in morning trading.","content":"<p>Apple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high&nbsp;in morning trading.</p><p><blockquote>苹果股价在早盘交易中上涨近2%，创下新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9a9f5fdc1cb0a898675c515a39de7611\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></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>Apple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high<blockquote>苹果股价上涨近2%，创新高</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\">\nApple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high<blockquote>苹果股价上涨近2%，创新高</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\">2021-12-08 23:26</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Apple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high&nbsp;in morning trading.</p><p><blockquote>苹果股价在早盘交易中上涨近2%，创下新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9a9f5fdc1cb0a898675c515a39de7611\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1161444269","content_text":"Apple shares rose nearly 2% to a new high in morning trading.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2719,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":873988440,"gmtCreate":1636843830814,"gmtModify":1636843830928,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good news&nbsp;","listText":"Good news&nbsp;","text":"Good news","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/873988440","repostId":"1102251183","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1102251183","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1636772424,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1102251183?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-11-13 11:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Pfizer Shows Its R&D Is Strong. It’s a Good Sign for the Stock.<blockquote>辉瑞显示其研发实力雄厚。这对该股来说是一个好兆头。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1102251183","media":"Barrons","summary":"Pfizer’s chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Mo","content":"<p>Pfizer’s&nbsp;chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Monday morning. It was just days after his company knocked the socks off the market with the news that its Covid-19 antiviral had cut the risk of hospitalization by 89% in high-risk adults.</p><p><blockquote>周一早上，辉瑞公司首席科学官米凯尔·多尔斯滕(Mikael Dolsten)接到电话时，听起来很头晕。就在几天前，他的公司宣布其Covid-19抗病毒药物将高危成年人的住院风险降低了89%。</blockquote></p><p> “It can’t be just a random thing, that you’re able to beat this type of world record and get a grand slam at the same time by chance,” Dolsten said, scrambling sports metaphors as he sought to illustrate the magnitude of Pfizer’s twin wins: the development of a stunningly effective Covid-19 vaccine in just 10 months, followed a year later by the development of a similarly stunning Covid-19 antiviral.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕说：“你能够打破这种类型的世界纪录，同时偶然获得大满贯，这不可能只是一件随机的事情。”他在试图说明辉瑞的双重胜利：在短短10个月内开发出了一种效果惊人的Covid-19疫苗，一年后又开发出了一种同样令人惊叹的Covid-19抗病毒药物。</blockquote></p><p> Two years ago, Pfizer (ticker: PFE) CEO Albert Bourla asked investors to take a big gamble on the research-and-development operation that Dolsten has rebuilt over the course of more than a decade. That bet is looking smarter than ever.</p><p><blockquote>两年前，辉瑞（股票代码：PFE）首席执行官阿尔伯特·布尔拉（Albert Bourla）要求投资者对多尔斯滕十多年来重建的研发业务进行豪赌。这个赌注看起来比以往任何时候都更聪明。</blockquote></p><p> Bourla has gotten rid of Pfizer’s off-patent drugs division and the last of its consumer health products, leaving behind a pure-play biopharma company that will live or die on the strength of Dolsten’s science.</p><p><blockquote>Bourla已经摆脱了辉瑞的非专利药物部门及其最后的消费者健康产品，留下了一家纯粹的生物制药公司，该公司的生死存亡都取决于Dolsten的科学实力。</blockquote></p><p> In a cover story in November 2019, <i>Barron’s</i> argued that Bourla and Dolsten could pull it off.</p><p><blockquote>在2019年11月的一篇封面报道中，<i>巴伦周刊</i>认为布尔拉和多尔斯滕可以成功。</blockquote></p><p> The new antiviral data reaffirms the case for Pfizer that <i>Barron’s</i> made two years ago. Continuing to profit off the pandemic, however, brings new risks, as criticism grows over the global inequity in vaccine distribution. Low-income nations account for less than 1% of the more than seven billion doses administered worldwide. If distribution of Pfizer’s antiviral continues to favor wealthy nations, the company’s stock could ultimately suffer.</p><p><blockquote>新的抗病毒数据再次证实了辉瑞的理由<i>巴伦周刊</i>两年前做的。然而，随着对全球疫苗分配不平等的批评越来越多，继续从大流行中获利会带来新的风险。在全球超过70亿剂疫苗中，低收入国家仅占不到1%。如果辉瑞抗病毒药物的分销继续有利于富裕国家，该公司的股票最终可能会受到影响。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer’s shares surged 10.9% the day the data came out, their best daily showing in at least 20 years. Still, with the stock now changing hands at around $50, investors continue to undervalue the company. Investors are pricing Pfizer at 12 times next year’s expected earnings, cheaper than peers like&nbsp;Johnson &amp; Johnson&nbsp;(JNJ) and&nbsp;Eli Lilly&nbsp;(LLY).</p><p><blockquote>数据公布当天，辉瑞股价飙升10.9%，创下至少20年来的最佳单日表现。尽管如此，由于该股目前易手价格约为50美元，投资者继续低估该公司的价值。投资者对辉瑞的定价是明年预期收益的12倍，低于强生(JNJ)和礼来(LLY)等同行。</blockquote></p><p> The Pfizer discount can be attributed to concerns over the patent cliff the drugmaker faces at the end of the decade. The company stands to lose exclusivity over a handful of drugs that bring in billions in annual revenue.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞的折扣可归因于对该制药商在本世纪末面临专利悬崖的担忧。该公司将失去对少数年收入数十亿美元的药物的独家经营权。</blockquote></p><p> The worries are legitimate, but Pfizer’s scientific coup should give investors confidence that the company’s science can carry it safely over that cliff. It may take time for the market to catch up, but for long-term investors, it’s a promising opportunity.</p><p><blockquote>这些担忧是合理的，但辉瑞的科学政变应该让投资者相信该公司的科学能够安全地越过悬崖。市场可能需要时间才能赶上，但对于长期投资者来说，这是一个充满希望的机会。</blockquote></p><p> The success of the antiviral is the best illustration yet of Pfizer’s scientific prowess.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒药物的成功是辉瑞科学实力的最佳例证。</blockquote></p><p> While Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine came out of the labs of the German biotech&nbsp;BioNTech&nbsp;(BNTX), the new Covid-19 antiviral was whipped up by what Dolsten called a “dream team” of scientists at Pfizer’s own labs across the Northeast U.S.</p><p><blockquote>虽然辉瑞的新冠肺炎疫苗来自德国生物技术公司BioNTech(BNTX)的实验室，但新的新冠肺炎抗病毒药物是由多尔斯滕所说的辉瑞位于美国东北部实验室的科学家“梦之队”研制出来的。</blockquote></p><p> In the earliest days of the pandemic, Pfizer split its efforts between its collaboration with BioNTech on the vaccine and its quest for a Covid-19 pill. The vaccine effort operated on a huge scale; Dolsten called it a “mega team” that spanned the Atlantic.</p><p><blockquote>在大流行的早期，辉瑞公司将其努力分为与BioNTech在疫苗上的合作和对新冠肺炎药丸的探索。疫苗工作规模巨大；多尔斯滕称之为横跨大西洋的“巨型团队”。</blockquote></p><p> The antiviral project was a much smaller operation—a group of Pfizer experts operating with resources left over from the vaccine push.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒项目规模要小得多——一组辉瑞专家利用疫苗推广剩余的资源进行运营。</blockquote></p><p> “The small molecule was more like a nimble, laser-focused, high-end team, with rather moderate resources,” Dolsten said.</p><p><blockquote>“小分子更像是一个灵活、专注于激光的高端团队，拥有相当适中的资源，”多尔斯滕说。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten gathered some of Pfizer’s most experienced scientists to work on the antiviral project, including its head of medicine design, Charlotte Allerton. The scientists started with work Pfizer had done years ago on a type of antiviral called a protease inhibitor.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕召集了辉瑞公司一些最有经验的科学家参与抗病毒项目，其中包括药物设计主管夏洛特·阿勒顿。科学家们从辉瑞公司多年前在一种叫做蛋白酶抑制剂的抗病毒药物上所做的工作开始。</blockquote></p><p> “[Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought.”</p><p><blockquote>“（辉瑞的）制药研发比人们想象的要好。”</blockquote></p><p> The protease inhibitors in the Pfizer library, however, had been administered intravenously, and had not worked well when delivered orally. The team had to figure out how to adapt the drugs to oral administration, a substantial undertaking.</p><p><blockquote>然而，辉瑞文库中的蛋白酶抑制剂已经静脉内施用，并且当口服递送时效果不佳。该团队必须弄清楚如何使药物适应口服给药，这是一项艰巨的任务。</blockquote></p><p> “They had to really create a lot of new chemistry,” Dolsten said. The scientists created 600 compounds to nail down the right drug, a process that might normally take years, and which they accomplished in a matter of months. “Four years turned into four months here,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“他们必须真正创造很多新的化学反应，”多尔斯滕说。科学家们创造了600种化合物来确定正确的药物，这个过程通常可能需要数年时间，但他们在几个月内就完成了。“在这里，四年变成了四个月，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer started testing the pill in humans in March. It is now running a number of Phase 2/3 trials of the drug, including one for patients who are high risk, one for patients not high risk, and one as a prophylaxis for patients who have been exposed to the virus but aren’t yet sick. In the first readout, the drug looked substantially more effective than the Covid treatment pill from&nbsp;Merck&nbsp;(MRK).</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞公司于三月份开始在人体中测试这种药物。该公司目前正在进行该药物的多项2/3期试验，包括一项针对高风险患者，一项针对非高风险患者，以及一项针对接触过病毒但尚未患病的患者的预防试验。在第一次读数中，该药物看起来比默克公司(MRK)的新冠治疗药物有效得多。</blockquote></p><p> “It definitely helps prove the point that [Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought,” says Louise Chen, an analyst at Cantor Fitzgerald, who has an Overweight rating and a $61 price target on the stock.</p><p><blockquote>Cantor Fitzgerald分析师Louise Chen表示：“这无疑有助于证明辉瑞的制药研发比人们想象的要好。”她对该股给予跑赢大盘评级，目标价为61美元。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Chen says that she doesn’t expect investors to come around to her way of thinking until there is more clarity on the durability of Covid-19 vaccine and pill sales, and the rest of the pipeline gets proved out.</p><p><blockquote>陈表示，在Covid-19疫苗和药丸销售的持久性更加明确以及其余产品得到证实之前，她预计投资者不会接受她的想法。</blockquote></p><p> “There is not one event that I think will trigger a re-rating of the stock at the next level,” she says. “Until those things play out, I don’t think that it necessarily will.”</p><p><blockquote>“我认为没有一个事件会引发该股下一个级别的重新评级，”她说。“在这些事情发生之前，我认为不一定会发生。”</blockquote></p><p> That makes a bet on Pfizer a long-term play. In the meantime, the experience of&nbsp;Moderna&nbsp;(MRNA) in recent weeks is highlighting the potential for the vaccine makers to come under scrutiny over unequal distribution of vaccines.</p><p><blockquote>这使得对辉瑞的押注成为一项长期投资。与此同时，Moderna(MRNA)最近几周的经历凸显了疫苗制造商因疫苗分配不平等而受到审查的可能性。</blockquote></p><p> Biden administration officials have been increasingly frustrated with Moderna, calling on the company to ramp up production so it can offer more doses at not-for-profit prices to low-income countries, with one top official calling on the company to “step up.”</p><p><blockquote>拜登政府官员对Moderna越来越失望，呼吁该公司提高产量，以便能够以非营利价格向低收入国家提供更多剂量，一位高级官员呼吁该公司“挺身而出”。</blockquote></p><p> Moderna shares are down more than 40% over the past three months.</p><p><blockquote>Moderna股价在过去三个月下跌了40%以上。</blockquote></p><p> As the pandemic persists, Pfizer risks eroding the enormous goodwill it earned roughly a year ago when it introduced its Covid-19 vaccine. Earlier this month, Pfizer CEO Bourla blamed low-income countries for unfair vaccine distribution, telling <i>Barron’s</i> that it was their fault for not placing orders. Pfizer has sold a billion vaccine doses to the U.S. at a not-for-profit price to donate to poor countries, and says that a total of at least two billion doses will be delivered to low- and middle-income nations by the end of next year.</p><p><blockquote>随着疫情的持续，辉瑞面临着侵蚀大约一年前推出Covid-19疫苗时赢得的巨大商誉的风险。本月早些时候，辉瑞首席执行官布尔拉指责低收入国家疫苗分配不公平，告诉<i>巴伦周刊</i>没有下订单是他们的错。辉瑞公司已以非营利价格向美国出售了10亿剂疫苗，捐赠给贫穷国家，并表示到明年年底将向中低收入国家提供总计至少20亿剂疫苗。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to antivirals, Pfizer has said only that it will offer tiered pricing for poorer nations, the same approach it has taken with its vaccine.</p><p><blockquote>在抗病毒药物方面，辉瑞仅表示将为较贫穷国家提供分级定价，与其疫苗采取的方法相同。</blockquote></p><p> That contrasts sharply with Merck’s plan to make its own Covid-19 pill available to poor countries. Merck has signed a deal with a United Nations-backed group that will allow its pill to be licensed globally, with no royalties paid to Merck.</p><p><blockquote>这与默克公司向贫穷国家提供自己的Covid-19药丸的计划形成鲜明对比。默克公司已与一个联合国支持的组织签署了一项协议，允许其药丸在全球范围内获得许可，无需向默克公司支付特许权使用费。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten said that Pfizer is looking into licensing its pill under a similar mechanism as Merck’s. “We will look at those options,” he said. “By no means have we said we would do something different. We just want to make sure whoever will be involved gets the advice and skill to do this.”</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕表示，辉瑞正在考虑根据与默克类似的机制许可其药物。“我们将考虑这些选择，”他说。“我们绝不是说我们会做一些不同的事情。我们只是想确保参与其中的人都能获得这样做的建议和技能。”</blockquote></p><p> Such a step couldn’t come soon enough. Late last month, activists protested outside Bourla’s home, calling on Pfizer to share its vaccine manufacturing technology and to fill orders from low-income countries ahead of those from wealthy countries.</p><p><blockquote>这样的一步来得太快了。上月底，活动人士在布尔拉家外抗议，呼吁辉瑞分享其疫苗制造技术，并在富裕国家之前完成低收入国家的订单。</blockquote></p><p> An aggressive plan to share its antiviral would help stave off such criticism, keeping Pfizer in the relative good graces of Washington and allowing its impressive science to continue to drive the stock higher.</p><p><blockquote>分享其抗病毒药物的积极计划将有助于避免此类批评，使辉瑞公司相对受到华盛顿的青睐，并使其令人印象深刻的科学知识继续推动股价走高。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Pfizer Shows Its R&D Is Strong. It’s a Good Sign for the Stock.<blockquote>辉瑞显示其研发实力雄厚。这对该股来说是一个好兆头。</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\">\nPfizer Shows Its R&D Is Strong. It’s a Good Sign for the Stock.<blockquote>辉瑞显示其研发实力雄厚。这对该股来说是一个好兆头。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-11-13 11:00</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Pfizer’s&nbsp;chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Monday morning. It was just days after his company knocked the socks off the market with the news that its Covid-19 antiviral had cut the risk of hospitalization by 89% in high-risk adults.</p><p><blockquote>周一早上，辉瑞公司首席科学官米凯尔·多尔斯滕(Mikael Dolsten)接到电话时，听起来很头晕。就在几天前，他的公司宣布其Covid-19抗病毒药物将高危成年人的住院风险降低了89%。</blockquote></p><p> “It can’t be just a random thing, that you’re able to beat this type of world record and get a grand slam at the same time by chance,” Dolsten said, scrambling sports metaphors as he sought to illustrate the magnitude of Pfizer’s twin wins: the development of a stunningly effective Covid-19 vaccine in just 10 months, followed a year later by the development of a similarly stunning Covid-19 antiviral.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕说：“你能够打破这种类型的世界纪录，同时偶然获得大满贯，这不可能只是一件随机的事情。”他在试图说明辉瑞的双重胜利：在短短10个月内开发出了一种效果惊人的Covid-19疫苗，一年后又开发出了一种同样令人惊叹的Covid-19抗病毒药物。</blockquote></p><p> Two years ago, Pfizer (ticker: PFE) CEO Albert Bourla asked investors to take a big gamble on the research-and-development operation that Dolsten has rebuilt over the course of more than a decade. That bet is looking smarter than ever.</p><p><blockquote>两年前，辉瑞（股票代码：PFE）首席执行官阿尔伯特·布尔拉（Albert Bourla）要求投资者对多尔斯滕十多年来重建的研发业务进行豪赌。这个赌注看起来比以往任何时候都更聪明。</blockquote></p><p> Bourla has gotten rid of Pfizer’s off-patent drugs division and the last of its consumer health products, leaving behind a pure-play biopharma company that will live or die on the strength of Dolsten’s science.</p><p><blockquote>Bourla已经摆脱了辉瑞的非专利药物部门及其最后的消费者健康产品，留下了一家纯粹的生物制药公司，该公司的生死存亡都取决于Dolsten的科学实力。</blockquote></p><p> In a cover story in November 2019, <i>Barron’s</i> argued that Bourla and Dolsten could pull it off.</p><p><blockquote>在2019年11月的一篇封面报道中，<i>巴伦周刊</i>认为布尔拉和多尔斯滕可以成功。</blockquote></p><p> The new antiviral data reaffirms the case for Pfizer that <i>Barron’s</i> made two years ago. Continuing to profit off the pandemic, however, brings new risks, as criticism grows over the global inequity in vaccine distribution. Low-income nations account for less than 1% of the more than seven billion doses administered worldwide. If distribution of Pfizer’s antiviral continues to favor wealthy nations, the company’s stock could ultimately suffer.</p><p><blockquote>新的抗病毒数据再次证实了辉瑞的理由<i>巴伦周刊</i>两年前做的。然而，随着对全球疫苗分配不平等的批评越来越多，继续从大流行中获利会带来新的风险。在全球超过70亿剂疫苗中，低收入国家仅占不到1%。如果辉瑞抗病毒药物的分销继续有利于富裕国家，该公司的股票最终可能会受到影响。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer’s shares surged 10.9% the day the data came out, their best daily showing in at least 20 years. Still, with the stock now changing hands at around $50, investors continue to undervalue the company. Investors are pricing Pfizer at 12 times next year’s expected earnings, cheaper than peers like&nbsp;Johnson &amp; Johnson&nbsp;(JNJ) and&nbsp;Eli Lilly&nbsp;(LLY).</p><p><blockquote>数据公布当天，辉瑞股价飙升10.9%，创下至少20年来的最佳单日表现。尽管如此，由于该股目前易手价格约为50美元，投资者继续低估该公司的价值。投资者对辉瑞的定价是明年预期收益的12倍，低于强生(JNJ)和礼来(LLY)等同行。</blockquote></p><p> The Pfizer discount can be attributed to concerns over the patent cliff the drugmaker faces at the end of the decade. The company stands to lose exclusivity over a handful of drugs that bring in billions in annual revenue.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞的折扣可归因于对该制药商在本世纪末面临专利悬崖的担忧。该公司将失去对少数年收入数十亿美元的药物的独家经营权。</blockquote></p><p> The worries are legitimate, but Pfizer’s scientific coup should give investors confidence that the company’s science can carry it safely over that cliff. It may take time for the market to catch up, but for long-term investors, it’s a promising opportunity.</p><p><blockquote>这些担忧是合理的，但辉瑞的科学政变应该让投资者相信该公司的科学能够安全地越过悬崖。市场可能需要时间才能赶上，但对于长期投资者来说，这是一个充满希望的机会。</blockquote></p><p> The success of the antiviral is the best illustration yet of Pfizer’s scientific prowess.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒药物的成功是辉瑞科学实力的最佳例证。</blockquote></p><p> While Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine came out of the labs of the German biotech&nbsp;BioNTech&nbsp;(BNTX), the new Covid-19 antiviral was whipped up by what Dolsten called a “dream team” of scientists at Pfizer’s own labs across the Northeast U.S.</p><p><blockquote>虽然辉瑞的新冠肺炎疫苗来自德国生物技术公司BioNTech(BNTX)的实验室，但新的新冠肺炎抗病毒药物是由多尔斯滕所说的辉瑞位于美国东北部实验室的科学家“梦之队”研制出来的。</blockquote></p><p> In the earliest days of the pandemic, Pfizer split its efforts between its collaboration with BioNTech on the vaccine and its quest for a Covid-19 pill. The vaccine effort operated on a huge scale; Dolsten called it a “mega team” that spanned the Atlantic.</p><p><blockquote>在大流行的早期，辉瑞公司将其努力分为与BioNTech在疫苗上的合作和对新冠肺炎药丸的探索。疫苗工作规模巨大；多尔斯滕称之为横跨大西洋的“巨型团队”。</blockquote></p><p> The antiviral project was a much smaller operation—a group of Pfizer experts operating with resources left over from the vaccine push.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒项目规模要小得多——一组辉瑞专家利用疫苗推广剩余的资源进行运营。</blockquote></p><p> “The small molecule was more like a nimble, laser-focused, high-end team, with rather moderate resources,” Dolsten said.</p><p><blockquote>“小分子更像是一个灵活、专注于激光的高端团队，拥有相当适中的资源，”多尔斯滕说。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten gathered some of Pfizer’s most experienced scientists to work on the antiviral project, including its head of medicine design, Charlotte Allerton. The scientists started with work Pfizer had done years ago on a type of antiviral called a protease inhibitor.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕召集了辉瑞公司一些最有经验的科学家参与抗病毒项目，其中包括药物设计主管夏洛特·阿勒顿。科学家们从辉瑞公司多年前在一种叫做蛋白酶抑制剂的抗病毒药物上所做的工作开始。</blockquote></p><p> “[Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought.”</p><p><blockquote>“（辉瑞的）制药研发比人们想象的要好。”</blockquote></p><p> The protease inhibitors in the Pfizer library, however, had been administered intravenously, and had not worked well when delivered orally. The team had to figure out how to adapt the drugs to oral administration, a substantial undertaking.</p><p><blockquote>然而，辉瑞文库中的蛋白酶抑制剂已经静脉内施用，并且当口服递送时效果不佳。该团队必须弄清楚如何使药物适应口服给药，这是一项艰巨的任务。</blockquote></p><p> “They had to really create a lot of new chemistry,” Dolsten said. The scientists created 600 compounds to nail down the right drug, a process that might normally take years, and which they accomplished in a matter of months. “Four years turned into four months here,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“他们必须真正创造很多新的化学反应，”多尔斯滕说。科学家们创造了600种化合物来确定正确的药物，这个过程通常可能需要数年时间，但他们在几个月内就完成了。“在这里，四年变成了四个月，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer started testing the pill in humans in March. It is now running a number of Phase 2/3 trials of the drug, including one for patients who are high risk, one for patients not high risk, and one as a prophylaxis for patients who have been exposed to the virus but aren’t yet sick. In the first readout, the drug looked substantially more effective than the Covid treatment pill from&nbsp;Merck&nbsp;(MRK).</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞公司于三月份开始在人体中测试这种药物。该公司目前正在进行该药物的多项2/3期试验，包括一项针对高风险患者，一项针对非高风险患者，以及一项针对接触过病毒但尚未患病的患者的预防试验。在第一次读数中，该药物看起来比默克公司(MRK)的新冠治疗药物有效得多。</blockquote></p><p> “It definitely helps prove the point that [Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought,” says Louise Chen, an analyst at Cantor Fitzgerald, who has an Overweight rating and a $61 price target on the stock.</p><p><blockquote>Cantor Fitzgerald分析师Louise Chen表示：“这无疑有助于证明辉瑞的制药研发比人们想象的要好。”她对该股给予跑赢大盘评级，目标价为61美元。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Chen says that she doesn’t expect investors to come around to her way of thinking until there is more clarity on the durability of Covid-19 vaccine and pill sales, and the rest of the pipeline gets proved out.</p><p><blockquote>陈表示，在Covid-19疫苗和药丸销售的持久性更加明确以及其余产品得到证实之前，她预计投资者不会接受她的想法。</blockquote></p><p> “There is not one event that I think will trigger a re-rating of the stock at the next level,” she says. “Until those things play out, I don’t think that it necessarily will.”</p><p><blockquote>“我认为没有一个事件会引发该股下一个级别的重新评级，”她说。“在这些事情发生之前，我认为不一定会发生。”</blockquote></p><p> That makes a bet on Pfizer a long-term play. In the meantime, the experience of&nbsp;Moderna&nbsp;(MRNA) in recent weeks is highlighting the potential for the vaccine makers to come under scrutiny over unequal distribution of vaccines.</p><p><blockquote>这使得对辉瑞的押注成为一项长期投资。与此同时，Moderna(MRNA)最近几周的经历凸显了疫苗制造商因疫苗分配不平等而受到审查的可能性。</blockquote></p><p> Biden administration officials have been increasingly frustrated with Moderna, calling on the company to ramp up production so it can offer more doses at not-for-profit prices to low-income countries, with one top official calling on the company to “step up.”</p><p><blockquote>拜登政府官员对Moderna越来越失望，呼吁该公司提高产量，以便能够以非营利价格向低收入国家提供更多剂量，一位高级官员呼吁该公司“挺身而出”。</blockquote></p><p> Moderna shares are down more than 40% over the past three months.</p><p><blockquote>Moderna股价在过去三个月下跌了40%以上。</blockquote></p><p> As the pandemic persists, Pfizer risks eroding the enormous goodwill it earned roughly a year ago when it introduced its Covid-19 vaccine. Earlier this month, Pfizer CEO Bourla blamed low-income countries for unfair vaccine distribution, telling <i>Barron’s</i> that it was their fault for not placing orders. Pfizer has sold a billion vaccine doses to the U.S. at a not-for-profit price to donate to poor countries, and says that a total of at least two billion doses will be delivered to low- and middle-income nations by the end of next year.</p><p><blockquote>随着疫情的持续，辉瑞面临着侵蚀大约一年前推出Covid-19疫苗时赢得的巨大商誉的风险。本月早些时候，辉瑞首席执行官布尔拉指责低收入国家疫苗分配不公平，告诉<i>巴伦周刊</i>没有下订单是他们的错。辉瑞公司已以非营利价格向美国出售了10亿剂疫苗，捐赠给贫穷国家，并表示到明年年底将向中低收入国家提供总计至少20亿剂疫苗。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to antivirals, Pfizer has said only that it will offer tiered pricing for poorer nations, the same approach it has taken with its vaccine.</p><p><blockquote>在抗病毒药物方面，辉瑞仅表示将为较贫穷国家提供分级定价，与其疫苗采取的方法相同。</blockquote></p><p> That contrasts sharply with Merck’s plan to make its own Covid-19 pill available to poor countries. Merck has signed a deal with a United Nations-backed group that will allow its pill to be licensed globally, with no royalties paid to Merck.</p><p><blockquote>这与默克公司向贫穷国家提供自己的Covid-19药丸的计划形成鲜明对比。默克公司已与一个联合国支持的组织签署了一项协议，允许其药丸在全球范围内获得许可，无需向默克公司支付特许权使用费。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten said that Pfizer is looking into licensing its pill under a similar mechanism as Merck’s. “We will look at those options,” he said. “By no means have we said we would do something different. We just want to make sure whoever will be involved gets the advice and skill to do this.”</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕表示，辉瑞正在考虑根据与默克类似的机制许可其药物。“我们将考虑这些选择，”他说。“我们绝不是说我们会做一些不同的事情。我们只是想确保参与其中的人都能获得这样做的建议和技能。”</blockquote></p><p> Such a step couldn’t come soon enough. Late last month, activists protested outside Bourla’s home, calling on Pfizer to share its vaccine manufacturing technology and to fill orders from low-income countries ahead of those from wealthy countries.</p><p><blockquote>这样的一步来得太快了。上月底，活动人士在布尔拉家外抗议，呼吁辉瑞分享其疫苗制造技术，并在富裕国家之前完成低收入国家的订单。</blockquote></p><p> An aggressive plan to share its antiviral would help stave off such criticism, keeping Pfizer in the relative good graces of Washington and allowing its impressive science to continue to drive the stock higher.</p><p><blockquote>分享其抗病毒药物的积极计划将有助于避免此类批评，使辉瑞公司相对受到华盛顿的青睐，并使其令人印象深刻的科学知识继续推动股价走高。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/buy-pfizer-stock-covid-19-51636674652?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Barrons</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":{"PFE":"辉瑞"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/buy-pfizer-stock-covid-19-51636674652?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1102251183","content_text":"Pfizer’s chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Monday morning. It was just days after his company knocked the socks off the market with the news that its Covid-19 antiviral had cut the risk of hospitalization by 89% in high-risk adults.\n“It can’t be just a random thing, that you’re able to beat this type of world record and get a grand slam at the same time by chance,” Dolsten said, scrambling sports metaphors as he sought to illustrate the magnitude of Pfizer’s twin wins: the development of a stunningly effective Covid-19 vaccine in just 10 months, followed a year later by the development of a similarly stunning Covid-19 antiviral.\nTwo years ago, Pfizer (ticker: PFE) CEO Albert Bourla asked investors to take a big gamble on the research-and-development operation that Dolsten has rebuilt over the course of more than a decade. That bet is looking smarter than ever.\nBourla has gotten rid of Pfizer’s off-patent drugs division and the last of its consumer health products, leaving behind a pure-play biopharma company that will live or die on the strength of Dolsten’s science.\nIn a cover story in November 2019, Barron’s argued that Bourla and Dolsten could pull it off.\nThe new antiviral data reaffirms the case for Pfizer that Barron’s made two years ago. Continuing to profit off the pandemic, however, brings new risks, as criticism grows over the global inequity in vaccine distribution. Low-income nations account for less than 1% of the more than seven billion doses administered worldwide. If distribution of Pfizer’s antiviral continues to favor wealthy nations, the company’s stock could ultimately suffer.\nPfizer’s shares surged 10.9% the day the data came out, their best daily showing in at least 20 years. Still, with the stock now changing hands at around $50, investors continue to undervalue the company. Investors are pricing Pfizer at 12 times next year’s expected earnings, cheaper than peers like Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) and Eli Lilly (LLY).\nThe Pfizer discount can be attributed to concerns over the patent cliff the drugmaker faces at the end of the decade. The company stands to lose exclusivity over a handful of drugs that bring in billions in annual revenue.\nThe worries are legitimate, but Pfizer’s scientific coup should give investors confidence that the company’s science can carry it safely over that cliff. It may take time for the market to catch up, but for long-term investors, it’s a promising opportunity.\nThe success of the antiviral is the best illustration yet of Pfizer’s scientific prowess.\nWhile Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine came out of the labs of the German biotech BioNTech (BNTX), the new Covid-19 antiviral was whipped up by what Dolsten called a “dream team” of scientists at Pfizer’s own labs across the Northeast U.S.\nIn the earliest days of the pandemic, Pfizer split its efforts between its collaboration with BioNTech on the vaccine and its quest for a Covid-19 pill. The vaccine effort operated on a huge scale; Dolsten called it a “mega team” that spanned the Atlantic.\nThe antiviral project was a much smaller operation—a group of Pfizer experts operating with resources left over from the vaccine push.\n“The small molecule was more like a nimble, laser-focused, high-end team, with rather moderate resources,” Dolsten said.\nDolsten gathered some of Pfizer’s most experienced scientists to work on the antiviral project, including its head of medicine design, Charlotte Allerton. The scientists started with work Pfizer had done years ago on a type of antiviral called a protease inhibitor.\n“[Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&D is better than people had thought.”\nThe protease inhibitors in the Pfizer library, however, had been administered intravenously, and had not worked well when delivered orally. The team had to figure out how to adapt the drugs to oral administration, a substantial undertaking.\n“They had to really create a lot of new chemistry,” Dolsten said. The scientists created 600 compounds to nail down the right drug, a process that might normally take years, and which they accomplished in a matter of months. “Four years turned into four months here,” he said.\nPfizer started testing the pill in humans in March. It is now running a number of Phase 2/3 trials of the drug, including one for patients who are high risk, one for patients not high risk, and one as a prophylaxis for patients who have been exposed to the virus but aren’t yet sick. In the first readout, the drug looked substantially more effective than the Covid treatment pill from Merck (MRK).\n“It definitely helps prove the point that [Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&D is better than people had thought,” says Louise Chen, an analyst at Cantor Fitzgerald, who has an Overweight rating and a $61 price target on the stock.\nChen says that she doesn’t expect investors to come around to her way of thinking until there is more clarity on the durability of Covid-19 vaccine and pill sales, and the rest of the pipeline gets proved out.\n“There is not one event that I think will trigger a re-rating of the stock at the next level,” she says. “Until those things play out, I don’t think that it necessarily will.”\nThat makes a bet on Pfizer a long-term play. In the meantime, the experience of Moderna (MRNA) in recent weeks is highlighting the potential for the vaccine makers to come under scrutiny over unequal distribution of vaccines.\nBiden administration officials have been increasingly frustrated with Moderna, calling on the company to ramp up production so it can offer more doses at not-for-profit prices to low-income countries, with one top official calling on the company to “step up.”\nModerna shares are down more than 40% over the past three months.\nAs the pandemic persists, Pfizer risks eroding the enormous goodwill it earned roughly a year ago when it introduced its Covid-19 vaccine. Earlier this month, Pfizer CEO Bourla blamed low-income countries for unfair vaccine distribution, telling Barron’s that it was their fault for not placing orders. Pfizer has sold a billion vaccine doses to the U.S. at a not-for-profit price to donate to poor countries, and says that a total of at least two billion doses will be delivered to low- and middle-income nations by the end of next year.\nWhen it comes to antivirals, Pfizer has said only that it will offer tiered pricing for poorer nations, the same approach it has taken with its vaccine.\nThat contrasts sharply with Merck’s plan to make its own Covid-19 pill available to poor countries. Merck has signed a deal with a United Nations-backed group that will allow its pill to be licensed globally, with no royalties paid to Merck.\nDolsten said that Pfizer is looking into licensing its pill under a similar mechanism as Merck’s. “We will look at those options,” he said. “By no means have we said we would do something different. We just want to make sure whoever will be involved gets the advice and skill to do this.”\nSuch a step couldn’t come soon enough. Late last month, activists protested outside Bourla’s home, calling on Pfizer to share its vaccine manufacturing technology and to fill orders from low-income countries ahead of those from wealthy countries.\nAn aggressive plan to share its antiviral would help stave off such criticism, keeping Pfizer in the relative good graces of Washington and allowing its impressive science to continue to drive the stock higher.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"PFE":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3592,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":873981731,"gmtCreate":1636843702976,"gmtModify":1636843703092,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like&nbsp;","listText":"Like&nbsp;","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/873981731","repostId":"1129004768","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129004768","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1636764434,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1129004768?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-11-13 08:47","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple: The Bear Argument, And Why It's Wrong<blockquote>苹果：熊市论点及其错误的原因</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129004768","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"Apple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.I list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.Maybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.This may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.</li>  <li>I list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</li>  <li>Maybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bc955cc5d27328c3b89b327b9368d27\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1020\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果未能长期保持在每股150美元以上，空头开始关注近期价格的疲软。</li><li>我列出了几个最流行的看跌论点，并解释了为什么我认为它们要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</li><li>也许苹果公司并不是同样值得买入的股票，但我仍然认为这是一只今天值得在未来几年持有的股票。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> With Apple (AAPL) once again failing to make fresh all-time highs, now down around 6% from the peak and dipping closer towards key moving-average support, bears have started to pay attention. Still, I think that the case for selling (or shorting) this stock does not hold much water in the long term, and I believe that bears will ultimately tire of swimming against the current.</p><p><blockquote>随着苹果(AAPL)再次未能创下历史新高，目前较峰值下跌约6%，并接近关键移动平均线支撑位，空头开始关注。尽管如此，我认为从长远来看，出售（或做空）这只股票的理由并不成立，而且我相信空头最终会厌倦逆流而上。</blockquote></p><p> Below, I list the most common few reasons why one might want to dump or stay away from Apple shares – and why I think that the bearish case is either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</p><p><blockquote>下面，我列出了人们可能想要抛售或远离苹果股票的几个最常见的原因，以及为什么我认为看跌情况要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #1: drop-off in demand</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#1：需求下降</b></blockquote></p><p> Not many analysts and portfolio managers have been vocal about avoiding or selling Apple. Experts like New Street's&nbsp;Pierre Ferragu&nbsp;and Satori Fund's&nbsp;Dan Niles&nbsp;are the few that come to mind, and their theses seem to align pretty well with every other bearish call on AAPL that I have seen recently.</p><p><blockquote>没有多少分析师和投资组合经理公开表示要避免或出售苹果。像New Street的Pierre Ferragu和Satori Fund的Dan Niles这样的专家是我想到的少数几个，他们的论点似乎与我最近看到的所有其他看跌AAPL的看涨期权非常一致。</blockquote></p><p> The first common reason to sell the stock is often phrased in different ways, but can effectively be summarized as follows: Apple's financial results in the near term should suffer from demand that has already turned into revenues in calendar 2020, during the thick of the pandemic and stay-at-home consumption wave. This is particularly true following the launch of the iPhone 13 that some (including legendary Apple founder&nbsp;Steve Wozniak) see as merely a minor upgrade from the previous model.</p><p><blockquote>出售股票的第一个常见原因通常以不同的方式表述，但可以有效地总结如下：苹果近期的财务业绩应该会受到需求的影响，而需求已经在2020年疫情最严重的时候转化为收入和居家消费浪潮。在iPhone 13发布之后尤其如此，一些人（包括传奇的苹果创始人Steve Wozniak）认为iPhone 13只是对上一款机型的小幅升级。</blockquote></p><p> I see the concern here, especially considering that Apple will start to face unsurmountable iPhone comps in the holidays and post-holiday quarters – see graph below. But the same chart also shows that there seemed to exist quite a bit of pent-up demand over the many quarters that preceded the iPhone 12 launch. One possible justification for this shift in sales from fiscal 2019-2020 to 2021 is Apple's late entry into the 5G space. Consumers that are loyal to or just prefer the iOS device probably waited patiently to upgrade or switch, and then they did it all at once.</p><p><blockquote>我看到了这里的担忧，特别是考虑到苹果将在假期和节后季度开始面临无法克服的iPhone竞争——见下图。但同一张图表还显示，在iPhone 12发布之前的许多季度中，似乎存在相当多被压抑的需求。销售额从2019-2020财年转移到2021财年的一个可能原因是苹果进入5G领域较晚。忠于或只是喜欢iOS设备的消费者可能会耐心等待升级或切换，然后他们一下子就完成了。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dc677f0a1c77dd39f40b4cc99c6fc15\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"322\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: DM Martins Research, data from company reports</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：DM Martins Research，数据来自公司报告</span></p></blockquote></p><p> This may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the roof in the past 6 to 12 months. With the country's 5G infrastructure being further developed, owning a device that can handle the faster speeds probably makes most sense. Sales in the region had been lackluster to say the least since 2015, and dropped YOY by as much as 29% in fiscal Q4 of 2020. In the past three quarters, however, revenues climbed by at least 57% in each period.</p><p><blockquote>这也可能有助于部分解释为什么苹果在大中华区的收入在过去6至12个月内飙升。随着该国5G基础设施的进一步发展，拥有一款能够处理更快速度的设备可能是最有意义的。至少可以说，自2015年以来，该地区的销售额一直低迷，2020财年第四季度同比下降了29%。然而，在过去三个季度中，每个季度的收入都至少增长了57%。</blockquote></p><p> In the end, over the last 12 quarters – i.e. roughly the useful life of the average iPhone – Apple's smartphone sales have risen by only 4.8% per year. Considering that ASP (average selling price) has likely increased during the period, this figure barely represents any meaningful growth in device shipments over a full cycle. Therefore, to think that demand for Apple's products will fall off a cliff next seems like a stretch, especially if one also considers chip innovation and design updates in Mac and iPad.</p><p><blockquote>最终，在过去的12个季度（大约是iPhone的平均使用寿命）中，苹果的智能手机销量每年仅增长4.8%。考虑到ASP（平均售价）在此期间可能有所上涨，这一数字几乎不能代表整个周期内设备出货量的任何有意义的增长。因此，认为接下来对苹果产品的需求会断崖式下跌似乎有些牵强，特别是如果还考虑到Mac和iPad的芯片创新和设计更新的话。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #2: valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#2：估值</b></blockquote></p><p> The other key risk of investing in Apple that is often brought up is valuation. Dan Niles, mentioned above, suggests that a next-year P/E of 26 times might not even be the biggest deal. The problem is that this multiple looks too rich against growth expectations that are modest.Analysts expect Apple's EPS&nbsp;to rise by only 4% per year through fiscal 2025. Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), valued at a similar earnings multiple, is expected to drive earnings 16% higher per year over a similar period.</p><p><blockquote>投资苹果经常被提及的另一个主要风险是估值。上面提到的丹·奈尔斯(Dan Niles)表示，明年26倍的市盈率可能甚至不是最大的交易。问题是，与温和的增长预期相比，这个市盈率看起来太高了。分析师预计，到2025财年，苹果的每股收益每年仅增长4%。Alphabet(GOOG)（GOOGL）的市盈率相似，预计同期盈利每年将增长16%。</blockquote></p><p> That, in my view, is a more reasonable bearish argument. Per my estimates, Apple is by far the stock with the highest PEG ratio (P/E over long-term EPS growth) of 6.5 times. Amazon (AMZN) is a very distant second on this metric, at 2.3 times. But even here, I see a good argument to be made in favor of Apple.</p><p><blockquote>在我看来，这是一个更合理的看跌论点。根据我的估计，苹果是迄今为止PEG比率（市盈率超过长期每股收益增长）最高的股票，为6.5倍。亚马逊(AMZN)在这一指标上远远落后于第二名，为2.3倍。但即使在这里，我也看到了一个支持苹果的好理由。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> First, the company has been proving to be a powerful gatekeeper in the tech world. Here is one example: the first, most blatant sign that Apple's iOS privacy policy changes in the summer&nbsp;have been hurting social media companies&nbsp;and their financial statements&nbsp;led to the Nasdaqe&nbsp;rasing $120 billion in market value in a matter of minutes – most of which coming from internet stocks. Should one be expected to pay a premium for a stock in the face of such market control? I would say so.</p><p><blockquote>首先，该公司已被证明是科技界强大的看门人。这里有一个例子：第一个也是最明显的迹象表明，苹果今年夏天iOS隐私政策的变化一直在损害社交媒体公司，它们的财务报表导致纳斯达克在几分钟内市值飙升1200亿美元——其中大部分来自互联网股票。面对这种市场控制，人们应该为股票支付溢价吗？我会这么说。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0946db3f3bc62569a56f2dbe2aa75922\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Also, as the chart above depicts, Apple's forward-year P/E has certainly expanded relative to what it used to be a few years ago. But the multi-year move higher seems consistent with (1) a wave of increased demand for Apple's products and services, (2) better margins, (3) a drop in interest rates in 2020, and (4) a broad stock market that has become generally more expensive. Compared to how AAPL traded only about three months ago, P/E has in fact dipped about three turns and returned to early 2021 levels.</p><p><blockquote>此外，如上图所示，苹果的远期市盈率相对于几年前肯定有所扩大。但多年来的上涨似乎与(1)对苹果产品和服务的需求增加浪潮、(2)利润率提高、(3)2020年利率下降以及(4)广泛的股市一致市场普遍变得更加昂贵。与大约三个月前AAPL的交易方式相比，市盈率实际上已经下降了大约三圈，并回到了2021年初的水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #3: lack of positive catalysts</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#3：缺乏积极的催化剂</b></blockquote></p><p> The next risk to investing in Apple that is often cited are short-term catalysts. The iPhone 13 was announced a few weeks ago, and&nbsp;so has the refreshed lineup&nbsp;of MacBook Pro devices equipped with the new M1 Pro and Max chips. Fiscal fourth quarter earnings is also in the rearview mirror. In fact, I think that the drop off in relevant Apple news in the fourth quarter correlates well with a stock that, seasonally, tends to perform worse in the November-to-January period. Bears may also argue that, with a few quarters of tough comps ahead, investors might have a hard time finding reasons to buy AAPL in the next few months.</p><p><blockquote>经常提到的投资苹果的下一个风险是短期催化剂。iPhone 13在几周前发布，配备新M1 Pro和Max芯片的MacBook Pro设备的更新阵容也是如此。第四财季盈利也已成为过去。事实上，我认为第四季度相关苹果新闻的下降与一只股票在11月至1月期间季节性表现往往较差的股票密切相关。看空者还可能辩称，由于未来几个季度的业绩艰难，投资者可能很难在未来几个月内找到购买苹果公司的理由。</blockquote></p><p> But here, I believe that a bit of patience is warranted. First, the recent malaise in share price alone may be enough to attract new money from investors looking for a good deal on a high-quality stock. But more importantly, longer-term catalysts are likely to make more of a difference on share price and financial performance over the next, say, five years.</p><p><blockquote>但在这里，我认为需要一点耐心。首先，仅最近股价的低迷就足以吸引寻求优质股票优惠的投资者的新资金。但更重要的是，长期催化剂可能会在未来五年内对股价和财务业绩产生更大影响。</blockquote></p><p> I have previously talked in more detail about two catalysts that quickly come to mind. I doubt that much upside from initiatives like mixed reality and&nbsp;autonomous vehicle&nbsp;has been factored into analysts' financial models – and hence, properly priced into the stock. Because Apple is run by a conservative team of executives, I bet that both massive growth opportunities will be pursued if and when they are accretive to the company's earnings. They should, therefore, serve as the key catalysts driving long-term growth expectations (which is relevant for risk #1 above) and share price higher.</p><p><blockquote>我之前已经更详细地谈到了两个很快浮现在脑海中的催化剂。我怀疑混合现实和自动驾驶汽车等举措的太大好处是否已纳入分析师的财务模型，因此也无法正确定价到股票中。由于苹果是由一个保守的高管团队运营的，我敢打赌，如果这两个巨大的增长机会能够增加公司的盈利，那么它们就会被追求。因此，它们应该成为推动长期增长预期（与上述风险#1相关）和股价上涨的关键催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> <b>In summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总之</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple may not be the same pound-the-table opportunity that I believed it to be&nbsp;in February 2021&nbsp;or, better yet,in April 2018&nbsp;– in both cases, I believed that shares had sold off for no good reason. But I continue to think that AAPL is a stock to own today through the next several years, especially now that the earnings multiple has started to rerate towards year-ago levels. Should Apple continue to head lower in the near term, the pullback (assuming no meaningful change in business fundamentals) would present an even better chance to buy.</p><p><blockquote>苹果可能不像我在2021年2月或更好的2018年4月那样是一个巨大的机会——在这两种情况下，我都认为股票毫无理由地遭到抛售。但我仍然认为，苹果公司是一只值得在未来几年持有的股票，尤其是现在市盈率已开始重估至去年同期的水平。如果苹果短期内继续走低，回调（假设商业基本面没有发生有意义的变化）将提供更好的买入机会。</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>Apple: The Bear Argument, And Why It's Wrong<blockquote>苹果：熊市论点及其错误的原因</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\">\nApple: The Bear Argument, And Why It's Wrong<blockquote>苹果：熊市论点及其错误的原因</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Seeking Alpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-11-13 08:47</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>Apple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.</li>  <li>I list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</li>  <li>Maybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bc955cc5d27328c3b89b327b9368d27\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1020\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果未能长期保持在每股150美元以上，空头开始关注近期价格的疲软。</li><li>我列出了几个最流行的看跌论点，并解释了为什么我认为它们要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</li><li>也许苹果公司并不是同样值得买入的股票，但我仍然认为这是一只今天值得在未来几年持有的股票。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> With Apple (AAPL) once again failing to make fresh all-time highs, now down around 6% from the peak and dipping closer towards key moving-average support, bears have started to pay attention. Still, I think that the case for selling (or shorting) this stock does not hold much water in the long term, and I believe that bears will ultimately tire of swimming against the current.</p><p><blockquote>随着苹果(AAPL)再次未能创下历史新高，目前较峰值下跌约6%，并接近关键移动平均线支撑位，空头开始关注。尽管如此，我认为从长远来看，出售（或做空）这只股票的理由并不成立，而且我相信空头最终会厌倦逆流而上。</blockquote></p><p> Below, I list the most common few reasons why one might want to dump or stay away from Apple shares – and why I think that the bearish case is either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</p><p><blockquote>下面，我列出了人们可能想要抛售或远离苹果股票的几个最常见的原因，以及为什么我认为看跌情况要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #1: drop-off in demand</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#1：需求下降</b></blockquote></p><p> Not many analysts and portfolio managers have been vocal about avoiding or selling Apple. Experts like New Street's&nbsp;Pierre Ferragu&nbsp;and Satori Fund's&nbsp;Dan Niles&nbsp;are the few that come to mind, and their theses seem to align pretty well with every other bearish call on AAPL that I have seen recently.</p><p><blockquote>没有多少分析师和投资组合经理公开表示要避免或出售苹果。像New Street的Pierre Ferragu和Satori Fund的Dan Niles这样的专家是我想到的少数几个，他们的论点似乎与我最近看到的所有其他看跌AAPL的看涨期权非常一致。</blockquote></p><p> The first common reason to sell the stock is often phrased in different ways, but can effectively be summarized as follows: Apple's financial results in the near term should suffer from demand that has already turned into revenues in calendar 2020, during the thick of the pandemic and stay-at-home consumption wave. This is particularly true following the launch of the iPhone 13 that some (including legendary Apple founder&nbsp;Steve Wozniak) see as merely a minor upgrade from the previous model.</p><p><blockquote>出售股票的第一个常见原因通常以不同的方式表述，但可以有效地总结如下：苹果近期的财务业绩应该会受到需求的影响，而需求已经在2020年疫情最严重的时候转化为收入和居家消费浪潮。在iPhone 13发布之后尤其如此，一些人（包括传奇的苹果创始人Steve Wozniak）认为iPhone 13只是对上一款机型的小幅升级。</blockquote></p><p> I see the concern here, especially considering that Apple will start to face unsurmountable iPhone comps in the holidays and post-holiday quarters – see graph below. But the same chart also shows that there seemed to exist quite a bit of pent-up demand over the many quarters that preceded the iPhone 12 launch. One possible justification for this shift in sales from fiscal 2019-2020 to 2021 is Apple's late entry into the 5G space. Consumers that are loyal to or just prefer the iOS device probably waited patiently to upgrade or switch, and then they did it all at once.</p><p><blockquote>我看到了这里的担忧，特别是考虑到苹果将在假期和节后季度开始面临无法克服的iPhone竞争——见下图。但同一张图表还显示，在iPhone 12发布之前的许多季度中，似乎存在相当多被压抑的需求。销售额从2019-2020财年转移到2021财年的一个可能原因是苹果进入5G领域较晚。忠于或只是喜欢iOS设备的消费者可能会耐心等待升级或切换，然后他们一下子就完成了。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dc677f0a1c77dd39f40b4cc99c6fc15\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"322\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: DM Martins Research, data from company reports</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：DM Martins Research，数据来自公司报告</span></p></blockquote></p><p> This may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the roof in the past 6 to 12 months. With the country's 5G infrastructure being further developed, owning a device that can handle the faster speeds probably makes most sense. Sales in the region had been lackluster to say the least since 2015, and dropped YOY by as much as 29% in fiscal Q4 of 2020. In the past three quarters, however, revenues climbed by at least 57% in each period.</p><p><blockquote>这也可能有助于部分解释为什么苹果在大中华区的收入在过去6至12个月内飙升。随着该国5G基础设施的进一步发展，拥有一款能够处理更快速度的设备可能是最有意义的。至少可以说，自2015年以来，该地区的销售额一直低迷，2020财年第四季度同比下降了29%。然而，在过去三个季度中，每个季度的收入都至少增长了57%。</blockquote></p><p> In the end, over the last 12 quarters – i.e. roughly the useful life of the average iPhone – Apple's smartphone sales have risen by only 4.8% per year. Considering that ASP (average selling price) has likely increased during the period, this figure barely represents any meaningful growth in device shipments over a full cycle. Therefore, to think that demand for Apple's products will fall off a cliff next seems like a stretch, especially if one also considers chip innovation and design updates in Mac and iPad.</p><p><blockquote>最终，在过去的12个季度（大约是iPhone的平均使用寿命）中，苹果的智能手机销量每年仅增长4.8%。考虑到ASP（平均售价）在此期间可能有所上涨，这一数字几乎不能代表整个周期内设备出货量的任何有意义的增长。因此，认为接下来对苹果产品的需求会断崖式下跌似乎有些牵强，特别是如果还考虑到Mac和iPad的芯片创新和设计更新的话。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #2: valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#2：估值</b></blockquote></p><p> The other key risk of investing in Apple that is often brought up is valuation. Dan Niles, mentioned above, suggests that a next-year P/E of 26 times might not even be the biggest deal. The problem is that this multiple looks too rich against growth expectations that are modest.Analysts expect Apple's EPS&nbsp;to rise by only 4% per year through fiscal 2025. Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), valued at a similar earnings multiple, is expected to drive earnings 16% higher per year over a similar period.</p><p><blockquote>投资苹果经常被提及的另一个主要风险是估值。上面提到的丹·奈尔斯(Dan Niles)表示，明年26倍的市盈率可能甚至不是最大的交易。问题是，与温和的增长预期相比，这个市盈率看起来太高了。分析师预计，到2025财年，苹果的每股收益每年仅增长4%。Alphabet(GOOG)（GOOGL）的市盈率相似，预计同期盈利每年将增长16%。</blockquote></p><p> That, in my view, is a more reasonable bearish argument. Per my estimates, Apple is by far the stock with the highest PEG ratio (P/E over long-term EPS growth) of 6.5 times. Amazon (AMZN) is a very distant second on this metric, at 2.3 times. But even here, I see a good argument to be made in favor of Apple.</p><p><blockquote>在我看来，这是一个更合理的看跌论点。根据我的估计，苹果是迄今为止PEG比率（市盈率超过长期每股收益增长）最高的股票，为6.5倍。亚马逊(AMZN)在这一指标上远远落后于第二名，为2.3倍。但即使在这里，我也看到了一个支持苹果的好理由。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> First, the company has been proving to be a powerful gatekeeper in the tech world. Here is one example: the first, most blatant sign that Apple's iOS privacy policy changes in the summer&nbsp;have been hurting social media companies&nbsp;and their financial statements&nbsp;led to the Nasdaqe&nbsp;rasing $120 billion in market value in a matter of minutes – most of which coming from internet stocks. Should one be expected to pay a premium for a stock in the face of such market control? I would say so.</p><p><blockquote>首先，该公司已被证明是科技界强大的看门人。这里有一个例子：第一个也是最明显的迹象表明，苹果今年夏天iOS隐私政策的变化一直在损害社交媒体公司，它们的财务报表导致纳斯达克在几分钟内市值飙升1200亿美元——其中大部分来自互联网股票。面对这种市场控制，人们应该为股票支付溢价吗？我会这么说。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0946db3f3bc62569a56f2dbe2aa75922\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Also, as the chart above depicts, Apple's forward-year P/E has certainly expanded relative to what it used to be a few years ago. But the multi-year move higher seems consistent with (1) a wave of increased demand for Apple's products and services, (2) better margins, (3) a drop in interest rates in 2020, and (4) a broad stock market that has become generally more expensive. Compared to how AAPL traded only about three months ago, P/E has in fact dipped about three turns and returned to early 2021 levels.</p><p><blockquote>此外，如上图所示，苹果的远期市盈率相对于几年前肯定有所扩大。但多年来的上涨似乎与(1)对苹果产品和服务的需求增加浪潮、(2)利润率提高、(3)2020年利率下降以及(4)广泛的股市一致市场普遍变得更加昂贵。与大约三个月前AAPL的交易方式相比，市盈率实际上已经下降了大约三圈，并回到了2021年初的水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #3: lack of positive catalysts</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#3：缺乏积极的催化剂</b></blockquote></p><p> The next risk to investing in Apple that is often cited are short-term catalysts. The iPhone 13 was announced a few weeks ago, and&nbsp;so has the refreshed lineup&nbsp;of MacBook Pro devices equipped with the new M1 Pro and Max chips. Fiscal fourth quarter earnings is also in the rearview mirror. In fact, I think that the drop off in relevant Apple news in the fourth quarter correlates well with a stock that, seasonally, tends to perform worse in the November-to-January period. Bears may also argue that, with a few quarters of tough comps ahead, investors might have a hard time finding reasons to buy AAPL in the next few months.</p><p><blockquote>经常提到的投资苹果的下一个风险是短期催化剂。iPhone 13在几周前发布，配备新M1 Pro和Max芯片的MacBook Pro设备的更新阵容也是如此。第四财季盈利也已成为过去。事实上，我认为第四季度相关苹果新闻的下降与一只股票在11月至1月期间季节性表现往往较差的股票密切相关。看空者还可能辩称，由于未来几个季度的业绩艰难，投资者可能很难在未来几个月内找到购买苹果公司的理由。</blockquote></p><p> But here, I believe that a bit of patience is warranted. First, the recent malaise in share price alone may be enough to attract new money from investors looking for a good deal on a high-quality stock. But more importantly, longer-term catalysts are likely to make more of a difference on share price and financial performance over the next, say, five years.</p><p><blockquote>但在这里，我认为需要一点耐心。首先，仅最近股价的低迷就足以吸引寻求优质股票优惠的投资者的新资金。但更重要的是，长期催化剂可能会在未来五年内对股价和财务业绩产生更大影响。</blockquote></p><p> I have previously talked in more detail about two catalysts that quickly come to mind. I doubt that much upside from initiatives like mixed reality and&nbsp;autonomous vehicle&nbsp;has been factored into analysts' financial models – and hence, properly priced into the stock. Because Apple is run by a conservative team of executives, I bet that both massive growth opportunities will be pursued if and when they are accretive to the company's earnings. They should, therefore, serve as the key catalysts driving long-term growth expectations (which is relevant for risk #1 above) and share price higher.</p><p><blockquote>我之前已经更详细地谈到了两个很快浮现在脑海中的催化剂。我怀疑混合现实和自动驾驶汽车等举措的太大好处是否已纳入分析师的财务模型，因此也无法正确定价到股票中。由于苹果是由一个保守的高管团队运营的，我敢打赌，如果这两个巨大的增长机会能够增加公司的盈利，那么它们就会被追求。因此，它们应该成为推动长期增长预期（与上述风险#1相关）和股价上涨的关键催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> <b>In summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总之</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple may not be the same pound-the-table opportunity that I believed it to be&nbsp;in February 2021&nbsp;or, better yet,in April 2018&nbsp;– in both cases, I believed that shares had sold off for no good reason. But I continue to think that AAPL is a stock to own today through the next several years, especially now that the earnings multiple has started to rerate towards year-ago levels. Should Apple continue to head lower in the near term, the pullback (assuming no meaningful change in business fundamentals) would present an even better chance to buy.</p><p><blockquote>苹果可能不像我在2021年2月或更好的2018年4月那样是一个巨大的机会——在这两种情况下，我都认为股票毫无理由地遭到抛售。但我仍然认为，苹果公司是一只值得在未来几年持有的股票，尤其是现在市盈率已开始重估至去年同期的水平。如果苹果短期内继续走低，回调（假设商业基本面没有发生有意义的变化）将提供更好的买入机会。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4468890-apple-the-bear-argument-and-why-its-wrong\">Seeking Alpha</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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4468890-apple-the-bear-argument-and-why-its-wrong","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129004768","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.\nI list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.\nMaybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.\n\nkmwphotography/iStock via Getty Images\nWith Apple (AAPL) once again failing to make fresh all-time highs, now down around 6% from the peak and dipping closer towards key moving-average support, bears have started to pay attention. Still, I think that the case for selling (or shorting) this stock does not hold much water in the long term, and I believe that bears will ultimately tire of swimming against the current.\nBelow, I list the most common few reasons why one might want to dump or stay away from Apple shares – and why I think that the bearish case is either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.\nKey risk #1: drop-off in demand\nNot many analysts and portfolio managers have been vocal about avoiding or selling Apple. Experts like New Street's Pierre Ferragu and Satori Fund's Dan Niles are the few that come to mind, and their theses seem to align pretty well with every other bearish call on AAPL that I have seen recently.\nThe first common reason to sell the stock is often phrased in different ways, but can effectively be summarized as follows: Apple's financial results in the near term should suffer from demand that has already turned into revenues in calendar 2020, during the thick of the pandemic and stay-at-home consumption wave. This is particularly true following the launch of the iPhone 13 that some (including legendary Apple founder Steve Wozniak) see as merely a minor upgrade from the previous model.\nI see the concern here, especially considering that Apple will start to face unsurmountable iPhone comps in the holidays and post-holiday quarters – see graph below. But the same chart also shows that there seemed to exist quite a bit of pent-up demand over the many quarters that preceded the iPhone 12 launch. One possible justification for this shift in sales from fiscal 2019-2020 to 2021 is Apple's late entry into the 5G space. Consumers that are loyal to or just prefer the iOS device probably waited patiently to upgrade or switch, and then they did it all at once.\nSource: DM Martins Research, data from company reports\nThis may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the roof in the past 6 to 12 months. With the country's 5G infrastructure being further developed, owning a device that can handle the faster speeds probably makes most sense. Sales in the region had been lackluster to say the least since 2015, and dropped YOY by as much as 29% in fiscal Q4 of 2020. In the past three quarters, however, revenues climbed by at least 57% in each period.\nIn the end, over the last 12 quarters – i.e. roughly the useful life of the average iPhone – Apple's smartphone sales have risen by only 4.8% per year. Considering that ASP (average selling price) has likely increased during the period, this figure barely represents any meaningful growth in device shipments over a full cycle. Therefore, to think that demand for Apple's products will fall off a cliff next seems like a stretch, especially if one also considers chip innovation and design updates in Mac and iPad.\nKey risk #2: valuation\nThe other key risk of investing in Apple that is often brought up is valuation. Dan Niles, mentioned above, suggests that a next-year P/E of 26 times might not even be the biggest deal. The problem is that this multiple looks too rich against growth expectations that are modest.Analysts expect Apple's EPS to rise by only 4% per year through fiscal 2025. Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), valued at a similar earnings multiple, is expected to drive earnings 16% higher per year over a similar period.\nThat, in my view, is a more reasonable bearish argument. Per my estimates, Apple is by far the stock with the highest PEG ratio (P/E over long-term EPS growth) of 6.5 times. Amazon (AMZN) is a very distant second on this metric, at 2.3 times. But even here, I see a good argument to be made in favor of Apple.\nFirst, the company has been proving to be a powerful gatekeeper in the tech world. Here is one example: the first, most blatant sign that Apple's iOS privacy policy changes in the summer have been hurting social media companies and their financial statements led to the Nasdaqe rasing $120 billion in market value in a matter of minutes – most of which coming from internet stocks. Should one be expected to pay a premium for a stock in the face of such market control? I would say so.\nData by YCharts\nAlso, as the chart above depicts, Apple's forward-year P/E has certainly expanded relative to what it used to be a few years ago. But the multi-year move higher seems consistent with (1) a wave of increased demand for Apple's products and services, (2) better margins, (3) a drop in interest rates in 2020, and (4) a broad stock market that has become generally more expensive. Compared to how AAPL traded only about three months ago, P/E has in fact dipped about three turns and returned to early 2021 levels.\nKey risk #3: lack of positive catalysts\nThe next risk to investing in Apple that is often cited are short-term catalysts. The iPhone 13 was announced a few weeks ago, and so has the refreshed lineup of MacBook Pro devices equipped with the new M1 Pro and Max chips. Fiscal fourth quarter earnings is also in the rearview mirror. In fact, I think that the drop off in relevant Apple news in the fourth quarter correlates well with a stock that, seasonally, tends to perform worse in the November-to-January period. Bears may also argue that, with a few quarters of tough comps ahead, investors might have a hard time finding reasons to buy AAPL in the next few months.\nBut here, I believe that a bit of patience is warranted. First, the recent malaise in share price alone may be enough to attract new money from investors looking for a good deal on a high-quality stock. But more importantly, longer-term catalysts are likely to make more of a difference on share price and financial performance over the next, say, five years.\nI have previously talked in more detail about two catalysts that quickly come to mind. I doubt that much upside from initiatives like mixed reality and autonomous vehicle has been factored into analysts' financial models – and hence, properly priced into the stock. Because Apple is run by a conservative team of executives, I bet that both massive growth opportunities will be pursued if and when they are accretive to the company's earnings. They should, therefore, serve as the key catalysts driving long-term growth expectations (which is relevant for risk #1 above) and share price higher.\nIn summary\nApple may not be the same pound-the-table opportunity that I believed it to be in February 2021 or, better yet,in April 2018 – in both cases, I believed that shares had sold off for no good reason. But I continue to think that AAPL is a stock to own today through the next several years, especially now that the earnings multiple has started to rerate towards year-ago levels. Should Apple continue to head lower in the near term, the pullback (assuming no meaningful change in business fundamentals) would present an even better chance to buy.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4104,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":855675027,"gmtCreate":1635376050925,"gmtModify":1635377491227,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"👍&nbsp;","listText":"👍&nbsp;","text":"👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/855675027","repostId":"2178234410","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3315,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":827145628,"gmtCreate":1634436722582,"gmtModify":1634436764081,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"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/827145628","repostId":"2175114209","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2175114209","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Stock Market Quotes, Business News, Financial News, Trading Ideas, and Stock Research by Professionals","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Benzinga","id":"1052270027","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa"},"pubTimestamp":1634289865,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2175114209?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-15 17:24","market":"us","language":"en","title":"5 Stocks To Watch For October 15, 2021<blockquote>2021年10月15日值得关注的5只股票</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2175114209","media":"Benzinga","summary":"Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:\n\tWall Street expects  Goldman Sachs Group Inc  (NYSE: GS) to report quarterly earnings at $10.11 per share on revenue of $11.67 billion before the opening bell. Goldman Sachs shares gained 0.5% to $393.10 in pre-market trading.\n","content":"<p>Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:</p><p><blockquote>今天可能引起投资者关注的一些股票包括：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Wall Street expects <b>Goldman Sachs Group Inc </b> (NYSE:GS) to report quarterly earnings at $10.11 per share on revenue of $11.67 billion before the opening bell. Goldman Sachs shares gained 0.5% to $393.10 in pre-market trading.</li>  <li><b>Toyota Motor Corp </b>(NYSE:TM) slashed its global production target for November by 15% due to the pandemic-triggered parts crisis. Toyota cut the production target from 1 million units to 850,000 - 900,000 units. Toyota shares slipped 0.2% to close at $175.51 on Thursday.</li>  <li>Analysts are expecting <b>J B Hunt Transport Services Inc </b> (NASDAQ:JBHT) to have earned $1.79 per share on revenue of $3.01 billion for the latest quarter. The company will release earnings before the markets open. J B Hunt Transport shares gained 2.3% to close at $175.24 on Thursday.</li> </ul> <ul>  <li><b>Nio Inc - ADR</b> (NYSE:NIO) said it would be able to double annual production capacity at its Hefei facility in 2022, cnEVpost reported. Nio shares rose 1.6% to $36.85 in pre-market trading.</li>  <li><b>Alcoa Corp</b> (NYSE:AA) reported better-than-expected results for its third quarter. The company announced a $500 million buyback program and initiated a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share. Alcoa shares climbed 5% to $51.02 in pre-market trading.</li> </ul></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>华尔街预计<b>高盛集团</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：GS）将在开盘前公布季度收益为每股10.11美元，营收为116.7亿美元。高盛股价在盘前交易中上涨0.5%，至393.10美元。</li><li><b>丰田汽车公司</b>由于大流行引发的零部件危机，(NYSE：TM)将11月份的全球产量目标削减了15%。丰田将产量目标从100万辆下调至85-90万辆。丰田股价周四下跌0.2%，收于175.51美元。</li><li>分析师预计<b>J B亨特运输服务公司</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：JBHT）最近一个季度的营收为30.1亿美元，每股收益为1.79美元。该公司将在开市前发布财报。J B Hunt Transport股价周四上涨2.3%，收于175.24美元。</li></ul><ul><li><b>蔚来公司-ADR</b>据cnEVpost报道，（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）表示，到2022年，其合肥工厂的年产能将翻一番。蔚来股价在盘前交易中上涨1.6%，至36.85美元。</li><li><b>美国铝业公司</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AA）公布了好于预期的第三季度业绩。该公司宣布了一项5亿美元的回购计划，并启动了每股0.10美元的季度股息。美国铝业股价在盘前交易中上涨5%至51.02美元。</li></ul></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>5 Stocks To Watch For October 15, 2021<blockquote>2021年10月15日值得关注的5只股票</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\">\n5 Stocks To Watch For October 15, 2021<blockquote>2021年10月15日值得关注的5只股票</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Benzinga </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-10-15 17:24</p>\n</div>\n</div>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:</p><p><blockquote>今天可能引起投资者关注的一些股票包括：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Wall Street expects <b>Goldman Sachs Group Inc </b> (NYSE:GS) to report quarterly earnings at $10.11 per share on revenue of $11.67 billion before the opening bell. Goldman Sachs shares gained 0.5% to $393.10 in pre-market trading.</li>  <li><b>Toyota Motor Corp </b>(NYSE:TM) slashed its global production target for November by 15% due to the pandemic-triggered parts crisis. Toyota cut the production target from 1 million units to 850,000 - 900,000 units. Toyota shares slipped 0.2% to close at $175.51 on Thursday.</li>  <li>Analysts are expecting <b>J B Hunt Transport Services Inc </b> (NASDAQ:JBHT) to have earned $1.79 per share on revenue of $3.01 billion for the latest quarter. The company will release earnings before the markets open. J B Hunt Transport shares gained 2.3% to close at $175.24 on Thursday.</li> </ul> <ul>  <li><b>Nio Inc - ADR</b> (NYSE:NIO) said it would be able to double annual production capacity at its Hefei facility in 2022, cnEVpost reported. Nio shares rose 1.6% to $36.85 in pre-market trading.</li>  <li><b>Alcoa Corp</b> (NYSE:AA) reported better-than-expected results for its third quarter. The company announced a $500 million buyback program and initiated a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share. Alcoa shares climbed 5% to $51.02 in pre-market trading.</li> </ul></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>华尔街预计<b>高盛集团</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：GS）将在开盘前公布季度收益为每股10.11美元，营收为116.7亿美元。高盛股价在盘前交易中上涨0.5%，至393.10美元。</li><li><b>丰田汽车公司</b>由于大流行引发的零部件危机，(NYSE：TM)将11月份的全球产量目标削减了15%。丰田将产量目标从100万辆下调至85-90万辆。丰田股价周四下跌0.2%，收于175.51美元。</li><li>分析师预计<b>J B亨特运输服务公司</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：JBHT）最近一个季度的营收为30.1亿美元，每股收益为1.79美元。该公司将在开市前发布财报。J B Hunt Transport股价周四上涨2.3%，收于175.24美元。</li></ul><ul><li><b>蔚来公司-ADR</b>据cnEVpost报道，（纽约证券交易所股票代码：蔚来）表示，到2022年，其合肥工厂的年产能将翻一番。蔚来股价在盘前交易中上涨1.6%，至36.85美元。</li><li><b>美国铝业公司</b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AA）公布了好于预期的第三季度业绩。该公司宣布了一项5亿美元的回购计划，并启动了每股0.10美元的季度股息。美国铝业股价在盘前交易中上涨5%至51.02美元。</li></ul></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TM":"丰田汽车","NIO":"蔚来","JBHT":"JB Hunt运输服务","AA":"美国铝业","GS":"高盛","03160":"华夏日股对冲"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2175114209","content_text":"Some of the stocks that may grab investor focus today are:\n\nWall Street expects Goldman Sachs Group Inc  (NYSE:GS) to report quarterly earnings at $10.11 per share on revenue of $11.67 billion before the opening bell. Goldman Sachs shares gained 0.5% to $393.10 in pre-market trading.\nToyota Motor Corp (NYSE:TM) slashed its global production target for November by 15% due to the pandemic-triggered parts crisis. Toyota cut the production target from 1 million units to 850,000 - 900,000 units. Toyota shares slipped 0.2% to close at $175.51 on Thursday.\nAnalysts are expecting J B Hunt Transport Services Inc  (NASDAQ:JBHT) to have earned $1.79 per share on revenue of $3.01 billion for the latest quarter. The company will release earnings before the markets open. J B Hunt Transport shares gained 2.3% to close at $175.24 on Thursday.\n\n\nNio Inc - ADR (NYSE:NIO) said it would be able to double annual production capacity at its Hefei facility in 2022, cnEVpost reported. Nio shares rose 1.6% to $36.85 in pre-market trading.\nAlcoa Corp (NYSE:AA) reported better-than-expected results for its third quarter. The company announced a $500 million buyback program and initiated a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per share. Alcoa shares climbed 5% to $51.02 in pre-market trading.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"NIO":0.9,"GS":0.9,"03160":0.9,"TM":0.9,"AA":0.9,"JBHT":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3191,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":824332460,"gmtCreate":1634278010141,"gmtModify":1634278010223,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>","listText":"Like&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>","text":"Like $Apple(AAPL)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/824332460","repostId":"1176807279","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1176807279","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":1634203027,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1176807279?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-14 17:17","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading<blockquote>苹果股价在盘前交易中上涨0.8%</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1176807279","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Apple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading after Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple.Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple after reports that iPhone output might be hindered by the global chip shortage.Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty on Wednesday urged investors to buy the dip in Apple despite reports that the tech giant may need to cut production of its signature iPhone 13 by as much as 10 million units due ","content":"<p>Apple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading&nbsp;after&nbsp;Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple.</p><p><blockquote>摩根士丹利分析师Katy Huberty重申对苹果的跑赢大盘评级后，苹果股价在盘前交易中上涨0.8%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/735b28a2fae1ded576148e22cba94a98\" tg-width=\"848\" tg-height=\"619\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple after reports that iPhone output might be hindered by the global chip shortage.</p><p><blockquote>摩根士丹利分析师Katy Huberty重申了对苹果的跑赢大盘评级，此前有报道称iPhone产量可能受到全球芯片短缺的阻碍。</blockquote></p><p> Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty on Wednesday urged investors to buy the dip in Apple&nbsp;despite&nbsp;reports that the tech giant may need to cut production of its signature iPhone 13 by as much as 10 million units due to the global chip shortage.</p><p><blockquote>摩根士丹利分析师Katy Huberty周三敦促投资者逢低买入苹果，尽管有报道称，由于全球芯片短缺，这家科技巨头可能需要将其标志性iPhone 13的产量削减多达1000万部。</blockquote></p><p> \"We are buyers of any near-term Apple share price weakness on iPhone supply-chain disruption given Apple is likely to receive more supply than competitors, demand isn't perishable,\" Huberty wrote in a note.</p><p><blockquote>休伯蒂在一份报告中写道：“鉴于苹果可能比竞争对手获得更多的供应，因此苹果股价近期因iPhone供应链中断而疲软，我们都是买家，需求不会消失。”</blockquote></p><p> \"If Apple can't meet near-term demand, the shortfall is likely to be even greater at competitors, creating an opportunity for share gains,\" she wrote in a note published Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>她在周三发布的一份报告中写道：“如果苹果无法满足近期需求，竞争对手的缺口可能会更大，从而为份额增长创造机会。”</blockquote></p><p> Shares of the Cupertino, Calif., company on&nbsp;Wednesday slipped 0.4% to $140.91.</p><p><blockquote>这家位于加利福尼亚州库比蒂诺的公司股价周三下跌0.4%，至140.91美元。</blockquote></p><p> The investment firm maintained its overweight rating on the stock with a price target of $168 a share.</p><p><blockquote>该投资公司维持该股的跑赢大盘评级，目标价为每股168美元。</blockquote></p><p> \"While we have not specifically heard of material iPhone production bottlenecks due to semiconductor shortages at Broadcom&nbsp;or Texas Instruments, broader supply tightness continues to be a real issue across a number of end markets,\" she added.</p><p><blockquote>她补充道：“虽然我们没有具体听说过由于博通或德州仪器半导体短缺而导致iPhone生产出现重大瓶颈，但更广泛的供应紧张仍然是许多终端市场的现实问题。”</blockquote></p><p> Broadcom and Texas Instruments are manufacturing partners for Apple.</p><p><blockquote>博通和德州仪器是苹果的制造合作伙伴。</blockquote></p><p> Apple had expected to produce 90 million new iPhone models in the last three months of the year.</p><p><blockquote>苹果曾预计今年最后三个月将生产9000万部新款iPhone。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s now telling manufacturing partners that the total will be lower because Broadcom and Texas Instruments are struggling to deliver enough components,Bloomberg reported, citing sources.</p><p><blockquote>但据彭博社援引消息人士的话报道，该公司现在告诉制造合作伙伴，总数将会更低，因为博通和德州仪器正在努力交付足够的组件。</blockquote></p><p> \"Our FY22 estimates are unlikely to change materially even if revenue and EPS shift across quarters,\" she added.</p><p><blockquote>她补充道：“即使收入和每股收益跨季度发生变化，我们对2022财年的预测也不太可能发生重大变化。”</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>Apple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading<blockquote>苹果股价在盘前交易中上涨0.8%</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\">\nApple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading<blockquote>苹果股价在盘前交易中上涨0.8%</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\">2021-10-14 17:17</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Apple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading&nbsp;after&nbsp;Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple.</p><p><blockquote>摩根士丹利分析师Katy Huberty重申对苹果的跑赢大盘评级后，苹果股价在盘前交易中上涨0.8%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/735b28a2fae1ded576148e22cba94a98\" tg-width=\"848\" tg-height=\"619\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple after reports that iPhone output might be hindered by the global chip shortage.</p><p><blockquote>摩根士丹利分析师Katy Huberty重申了对苹果的跑赢大盘评级，此前有报道称iPhone产量可能受到全球芯片短缺的阻碍。</blockquote></p><p> Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty on Wednesday urged investors to buy the dip in Apple&nbsp;despite&nbsp;reports that the tech giant may need to cut production of its signature iPhone 13 by as much as 10 million units due to the global chip shortage.</p><p><blockquote>摩根士丹利分析师Katy Huberty周三敦促投资者逢低买入苹果，尽管有报道称，由于全球芯片短缺，这家科技巨头可能需要将其标志性iPhone 13的产量削减多达1000万部。</blockquote></p><p> \"We are buyers of any near-term Apple share price weakness on iPhone supply-chain disruption given Apple is likely to receive more supply than competitors, demand isn't perishable,\" Huberty wrote in a note.</p><p><blockquote>休伯蒂在一份报告中写道：“鉴于苹果可能比竞争对手获得更多的供应，因此苹果股价近期因iPhone供应链中断而疲软，我们都是买家，需求不会消失。”</blockquote></p><p> \"If Apple can't meet near-term demand, the shortfall is likely to be even greater at competitors, creating an opportunity for share gains,\" she wrote in a note published Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>她在周三发布的一份报告中写道：“如果苹果无法满足近期需求，竞争对手的缺口可能会更大，从而为份额增长创造机会。”</blockquote></p><p> Shares of the Cupertino, Calif., company on&nbsp;Wednesday slipped 0.4% to $140.91.</p><p><blockquote>这家位于加利福尼亚州库比蒂诺的公司股价周三下跌0.4%，至140.91美元。</blockquote></p><p> The investment firm maintained its overweight rating on the stock with a price target of $168 a share.</p><p><blockquote>该投资公司维持该股的跑赢大盘评级，目标价为每股168美元。</blockquote></p><p> \"While we have not specifically heard of material iPhone production bottlenecks due to semiconductor shortages at Broadcom&nbsp;or Texas Instruments, broader supply tightness continues to be a real issue across a number of end markets,\" she added.</p><p><blockquote>她补充道：“虽然我们没有具体听说过由于博通或德州仪器半导体短缺而导致iPhone生产出现重大瓶颈，但更广泛的供应紧张仍然是许多终端市场的现实问题。”</blockquote></p><p> Broadcom and Texas Instruments are manufacturing partners for Apple.</p><p><blockquote>博通和德州仪器是苹果的制造合作伙伴。</blockquote></p><p> Apple had expected to produce 90 million new iPhone models in the last three months of the year.</p><p><blockquote>苹果曾预计今年最后三个月将生产9000万部新款iPhone。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s now telling manufacturing partners that the total will be lower because Broadcom and Texas Instruments are struggling to deliver enough components,Bloomberg reported, citing sources.</p><p><blockquote>但据彭博社援引消息人士的话报道，该公司现在告诉制造合作伙伴，总数将会更低，因为博通和德州仪器正在努力交付足够的组件。</blockquote></p><p> \"Our FY22 estimates are unlikely to change materially even if revenue and EPS shift across quarters,\" she added.</p><p><blockquote>她补充道：“即使收入和每股收益跨季度发生变化，我们对2022财年的预测也不太可能发生重大变化。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1176807279","content_text":"Apple shares rallied 0.8% in premarket trading after Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple.\n\nMorgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty reiterated an overweight rating on Apple after reports that iPhone output might be hindered by the global chip shortage.\nMorgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty on Wednesday urged investors to buy the dip in Apple despite reports that the tech giant may need to cut production of its signature iPhone 13 by as much as 10 million units due to the global chip shortage.\n\"We are buyers of any near-term Apple share price weakness on iPhone supply-chain disruption given Apple is likely to receive more supply than competitors, demand isn't perishable,\" Huberty wrote in a note.\n\"If Apple can't meet near-term demand, the shortfall is likely to be even greater at competitors, creating an opportunity for share gains,\" she wrote in a note published Wednesday.\nShares of the Cupertino, Calif., company on Wednesday slipped 0.4% to $140.91.\nThe investment firm maintained its overweight rating on the stock with a price target of $168 a share.\n\"While we have not specifically heard of material iPhone production bottlenecks due to semiconductor shortages at Broadcom or Texas Instruments, broader supply tightness continues to be a real issue across a number of end markets,\" she added.\nBroadcom and Texas Instruments are manufacturing partners for Apple.\nApple had expected to produce 90 million new iPhone models in the last three months of the year.\nBut it’s now telling manufacturing partners that the total will be lower because Broadcom and Texas Instruments are struggling to deliver enough components,Bloomberg reported, citing sources.\n\"Our FY22 estimates are unlikely to change materially even if revenue and EPS shift across quarters,\" she added.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":820,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":826356956,"gmtCreate":1633993303711,"gmtModify":1633993303822,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"👍&nbsp;","listText":"👍&nbsp;","text":"👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/826356956","repostId":"1178640662","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1178640662","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1633963601,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1178640662?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-10-11 22:46","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple iPhone Wait Times Are at Multiyear Highs. What It Means for Sales.<blockquote>苹果iPhone等待时间创多年新高。这对销售意味着什么。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1178640662","media":"Barrons","summary":"If you want to buy the new iPhone, you’re going to have to wait a while. Usually that would be a goo","content":"<p> If you want to buy the new iPhone, you’re going to have to wait a while. Usually that would be a good sign for Apple stock, but the picture is a bit more complicated this year.</p><p><blockquote>如果你想买新的iPhone，你将不得不等待一段时间。通常这对苹果股票来说是一个好兆头，但今年的情况有点复杂。</blockquote></p><p> Wait times for the iPhone 13 family of devices remain extended across the board, analysts at&nbsp;Credit Suisse&nbsp;said Friday. Customers who want the iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max have to wait more than four weeks, which is the longest in at least four years, the team at the Swiss bank said.</p><p><blockquote>瑞士信贷分析师周五表示，iPhone 13系列设备的等待时间仍然全面延长。这家瑞士银行的团队表示，想要iPhone 13 Pro和Pro Max的客户必须等待四周以上，这是至少四年来最长的一次。</blockquote></p><p> For the iPhone 13, the wait time is also long at two to four weeks, the analysts noted, with wait times remaining similar or even growing modestly longer between Sept. 4 and Sept. 8.</p><p><blockquote>分析师指出，对于iPhone 13来说，等待时间也很长，为两到四周，在9月4日至9月8日期间，等待时间保持相似，甚至略有增加。</blockquote></p><p> The analysts’ methodology for calculating waiting periods involves measuring shipping lead times for iPhones purchased directly from Apple online in major markets around the world. They exclude demand through Apple’s physical stores as well as distribution through carriers and other retail outlets.</p><p><blockquote>分析师计算等待时间的方法包括测量直接从苹果在线购买的iPhone在全球主要市场的发货周期。它们不包括通过苹果实体店的需求以及通过运营商和其他零售店的分销。</blockquote></p><p> Wait times have in the past been viewed as an indicator of demand for devices, which would suggest the iPhone 13 is headed for blowout sales. That would be good for Apple investors, because, as <i>Barron’s</i> reporter Max A. Cherney wrote last month, “Apple stock practically lives and dies on the company’s iPhone sales every year.”</p><p><blockquote>等待时间过去一直被视为设备需求的指标，这表明iPhone 13将迎来井喷式销售。这对苹果投资者来说是件好事，因为<i>巴伦周刊</i>记者Max A.Cherney上个月写道，“苹果股票的生死几乎取决于该公司每年的iPhone销量。”</blockquote></p><p> But this year, in a world gripped by supply-chain issues, wait times for some models being at multiyear records might not be the clear green flag it would have been in the past.</p><p><blockquote>但今年，在一个受到供应链问题困扰的世界中，一些车型的等待时间创下多年记录可能不会像过去那样明显。</blockquote></p><p> “We’d highlight that while wait times are a rough proxy for initial demand, the metric is only one of many variables impacting iPhone sell-through; supply availability is a key unknown, particularly this year,” the analysts said.</p><p><blockquote>分析师表示：“我们要强调的是，虽然等待时间是初始需求的粗略指标，但该指标只是影响iPhone销量的众多变量之一；供应可用性是一个关键的未知数，尤其是今年。”</blockquote></p><p> They added that it was “encouraging” to see wait times for the more expensive higher-end models such as the Pro and Pro Max remaining most extended, but that supply likely also plays a critical role in longer waits. This makes it even more difficult to analyze underlying demand for the iPhone 13 family.</p><p><blockquote>他们补充说，看到Pro和Pro Max等更昂贵的高端型号的等待时间仍然最长，这是“令人鼓舞的”，但这种供应也可能在更长的等待中发挥关键作用。这使得分析iPhone 13家族的潜在需求变得更加困难。</blockquote></p><p> Credit Suisse has a price target of $150 on&nbsp;Apple&nbsp;(ticker: AAPL) stock, which was trading hands around $142 Monday. The company’s shares fell 0.6% when trading began this week.</p><p><blockquote>瑞士信贷对苹果（股票代码：AAPL）股票的目标价为150美元，该股周一的交易价格约为142美元。该公司股价本周开盘时下跌0.6%。</blockquote></p><p> Apple has been approached for comment.</p><p><blockquote>我们已联系苹果寻求置评。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Apple iPhone Wait Times Are at Multiyear Highs. What It Means for Sales.<blockquote>苹果iPhone等待时间创多年新高。这对销售意味着什么。</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\">\nApple iPhone Wait Times Are at Multiyear Highs. What It Means for Sales.<blockquote>苹果iPhone等待时间创多年新高。这对销售意味着什么。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-10-11 22:46</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p> If you want to buy the new iPhone, you’re going to have to wait a while. Usually that would be a good sign for Apple stock, but the picture is a bit more complicated this year.</p><p><blockquote>如果你想买新的iPhone，你将不得不等待一段时间。通常这对苹果股票来说是一个好兆头，但今年的情况有点复杂。</blockquote></p><p> Wait times for the iPhone 13 family of devices remain extended across the board, analysts at&nbsp;Credit Suisse&nbsp;said Friday. Customers who want the iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max have to wait more than four weeks, which is the longest in at least four years, the team at the Swiss bank said.</p><p><blockquote>瑞士信贷分析师周五表示，iPhone 13系列设备的等待时间仍然全面延长。这家瑞士银行的团队表示，想要iPhone 13 Pro和Pro Max的客户必须等待四周以上，这是至少四年来最长的一次。</blockquote></p><p> For the iPhone 13, the wait time is also long at two to four weeks, the analysts noted, with wait times remaining similar or even growing modestly longer between Sept. 4 and Sept. 8.</p><p><blockquote>分析师指出，对于iPhone 13来说，等待时间也很长，为两到四周，在9月4日至9月8日期间，等待时间保持相似，甚至略有增加。</blockquote></p><p> The analysts’ methodology for calculating waiting periods involves measuring shipping lead times for iPhones purchased directly from Apple online in major markets around the world. They exclude demand through Apple’s physical stores as well as distribution through carriers and other retail outlets.</p><p><blockquote>分析师计算等待时间的方法包括测量直接从苹果在线购买的iPhone在全球主要市场的发货周期。它们不包括通过苹果实体店的需求以及通过运营商和其他零售店的分销。</blockquote></p><p> Wait times have in the past been viewed as an indicator of demand for devices, which would suggest the iPhone 13 is headed for blowout sales. That would be good for Apple investors, because, as <i>Barron’s</i> reporter Max A. Cherney wrote last month, “Apple stock practically lives and dies on the company’s iPhone sales every year.”</p><p><blockquote>等待时间过去一直被视为设备需求的指标，这表明iPhone 13将迎来井喷式销售。这对苹果投资者来说是件好事，因为<i>巴伦周刊</i>记者Max A.Cherney上个月写道，“苹果股票的生死几乎取决于该公司每年的iPhone销量。”</blockquote></p><p> But this year, in a world gripped by supply-chain issues, wait times for some models being at multiyear records might not be the clear green flag it would have been in the past.</p><p><blockquote>但今年，在一个受到供应链问题困扰的世界中，一些车型的等待时间创下多年记录可能不会像过去那样明显。</blockquote></p><p> “We’d highlight that while wait times are a rough proxy for initial demand, the metric is only one of many variables impacting iPhone sell-through; supply availability is a key unknown, particularly this year,” the analysts said.</p><p><blockquote>分析师表示：“我们要强调的是，虽然等待时间是初始需求的粗略指标，但该指标只是影响iPhone销量的众多变量之一；供应可用性是一个关键的未知数，尤其是今年。”</blockquote></p><p> They added that it was “encouraging” to see wait times for the more expensive higher-end models such as the Pro and Pro Max remaining most extended, but that supply likely also plays a critical role in longer waits. This makes it even more difficult to analyze underlying demand for the iPhone 13 family.</p><p><blockquote>他们补充说，看到Pro和Pro Max等更昂贵的高端型号的等待时间仍然最长，这是“令人鼓舞的”，但这种供应也可能在更长的等待中发挥关键作用。这使得分析iPhone 13家族的潜在需求变得更加困难。</blockquote></p><p> Credit Suisse has a price target of $150 on&nbsp;Apple&nbsp;(ticker: AAPL) stock, which was trading hands around $142 Monday. The company’s shares fell 0.6% when trading began this week.</p><p><blockquote>瑞士信贷对苹果（股票代码：AAPL）股票的目标价为150美元，该股周一的交易价格约为142美元。该公司股价本周开盘时下跌0.6%。</blockquote></p><p> Apple has been approached for comment.</p><p><blockquote>我们已联系苹果寻求置评。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/apple-iphone-wait-times-multiyear-highs-51633962094?mod=hp_LATEST\">Barrons</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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/apple-iphone-wait-times-multiyear-highs-51633962094?mod=hp_LATEST","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1178640662","content_text":"If you want to buy the new iPhone, you’re going to have to wait a while. Usually that would be a good sign for Apple stock, but the picture is a bit more complicated this year.\nWait times for the iPhone 13 family of devices remain extended across the board, analysts at Credit Suisse said Friday. Customers who want the iPhone 13 Pro and Pro Max have to wait more than four weeks, which is the longest in at least four years, the team at the Swiss bank said.\nFor the iPhone 13, the wait time is also long at two to four weeks, the analysts noted, with wait times remaining similar or even growing modestly longer between Sept. 4 and Sept. 8.\nThe analysts’ methodology for calculating waiting periods involves measuring shipping lead times for iPhones purchased directly from Apple online in major markets around the world. They exclude demand through Apple’s physical stores as well as distribution through carriers and other retail outlets.\nWait times have in the past been viewed as an indicator of demand for devices, which would suggest the iPhone 13 is headed for blowout sales. That would be good for Apple investors, because, as Barron’s reporter Max A. Cherney wrote last month, “Apple stock practically lives and dies on the company’s iPhone sales every year.”\nBut this year, in a world gripped by supply-chain issues, wait times for some models being at multiyear records might not be the clear green flag it would have been in the past.\n“We’d highlight that while wait times are a rough proxy for initial demand, the metric is only one of many variables impacting iPhone sell-through; supply availability is a key unknown, particularly this year,” the analysts said.\nThey added that it was “encouraging” to see wait times for the more expensive higher-end models such as the Pro and Pro Max remaining most extended, but that supply likely also plays a critical role in longer waits. This makes it even more difficult to analyze underlying demand for the iPhone 13 family.\nCredit Suisse has a price target of $150 on Apple (ticker: AAPL) stock, which was trading hands around $142 Monday. The company’s shares fell 0.6% when trading began this week.\nApple has been approached for comment.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":734,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":821633938,"gmtCreate":1633738598329,"gmtModify":1633738598517,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thanks for sharing.&nbsp;","listText":"Thanks for sharing.&nbsp;","text":"Thanks for sharing.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/821633938","repostId":"2173926948","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":718,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":820600301,"gmtCreate":1633387291035,"gmtModify":1633387291255,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"👍&nbsp;","listText":"👍&nbsp;","text":"👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/820600301","repostId":"1144613093","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1207,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":866654165,"gmtCreate":1632780229357,"gmtModify":1632797972996,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","listText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","text":"Thanks for sharing","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/866654165","repostId":"2170623235","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":825,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":886837710,"gmtCreate":1631579401130,"gmtModify":1631888928536,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/886837710","repostId":"1171919128","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1171919128","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1631547161,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1171919128?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-09-13 23:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple App Store: The Tide Is Turning<blockquote>苹果应用商店：潮流正在转向</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1171919128","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nA US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>A US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic Games.</li>  <li>Despite that, and in conjunction with a recent settlement with Japanese regulators, Apple will be getting rid of their anti-steering rule. This is a bigger change than people think.</li>  <li>The threat to Apple doesn't end with the Epic trial. There are bigger threats coming from the executive and legislative branches in the US, and regulators in Europe and Asia.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/323e8503a813d4996ee819f5591992b8\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images News</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>美国联邦地区法院法官在Epic Games的案件中做出了对苹果有利的裁决。</li><li>尽管如此，加上最近与日本监管机构达成的和解，苹果将取消他们的反转向规则。这是一个比人们想象的更大的变化。</li><li>对苹果的威胁并没有随着史诗般的审判而结束。更大的威胁来自美国的行政和立法部门，以及欧洲和亚洲的监管机构。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>奇普·索莫德维拉/盖蒂图片社新闻</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>It Does Not End Here</b></p><p><blockquote><b>它并没有就此结束</b></blockquote></p><p> For&nbsp;some time now, I&nbsp;have been warning&nbsp;that&nbsp;antitrust law was about to change, and these changes would not be favorable to Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL), and that investors need to take these threats seriously. In every one of these attempts, I was rebuffed in the comments by many Apple shareholders telling me that these fears and warnings were overblown. “Long and strong AAPL!” cheerleading seems to be popular.Confirmation bias&nbsp;is a strong thing, and you should fight it every single day.</p><p><blockquote>一段时间以来，我一直警告反垄断法即将发生变化，这些变化对苹果（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）不利，投资者需要认真对待这些威胁。在每一次尝试中，我都遭到了许多苹果股东的拒绝，他们告诉我这些担忧和警告被夸大了。“长而强的AAPL！”啦啦队似乎很受欢迎。确认偏见是一种强烈的东西，你应该每天都与之斗争。</blockquote></p><p> My last attempt was&nbsp;less than two weeks ago, and I was similarly dismissed, and even accused of being a short-selling tout to boot. That last suggestion is pretty funny to anyone who has had to listen to me drone on about Apple stock the last 16 years. The consequence of those 16 years is that I have a lot of Apple stock, so I take things like this very seriously.</p><p><blockquote>我最后一次尝试是在不到两周前，我同样被驳回，甚至被指责为卖空者。对于那些在过去16年里不得不听我喋喋不休地谈论苹果股票的人来说，最后一个建议非常有趣。那16年的后果是我有很多苹果的股票，所以我非常认真地对待这样的事情。</blockquote></p><p> Friday’s decision in Epic v. Apple had one part very bad news for Apple, but mostly a rejection of Epic’s main claim — that iOS is a market unto itself. But the bigger threat continues to be from Congress, where they can change the law in a single session. The House has already passed several bipartisan bills through committee, and three of them seem to have pretty wide support with the rest of the House. A narrower, but just as damaging companion bill is about to start working its way through the Senate. Keep your eyes on Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah.</p><p><blockquote>周五Epic诉苹果案的判决对苹果来说有一部分是非常坏的消息，但主要是拒绝了Epic的主要主张——iOS本身就是一个市场。但更大的威胁仍然来自国会，他们可以在一次会议中改变法律。众议院已经通过了几项两党法案，其中三项似乎得到了众议院其他成员的广泛支持。一项范围更窄但同样具有破坏性的配套法案即将开始在参议院通过。请关注明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。</blockquote></p><p> Then we have regulatory action in the EU, Apple’s second most important region, where antitrust enforcers are siding with Spotify(NYSE:SPOT)in their dispute over in-app payments. Apple has already settled with Japan over their anti-steering rules. South Korea is forcing Apple and Google(NASDAQ:GOOGL)(NASDAQ:GOOG)to allow third-party in-app payments. China is a black hole of regulatory mystery.</p><p><blockquote>然后，我们在苹果第二重要地区欧盟采取了监管行动，那里的反垄断执法人员在应用内支付纠纷中站在Spotify（纽约证券交易所股票代码：SPOT）一边。苹果已经就日本的反转向规则与日本达成和解。南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌（纳斯达克：GOOGL）（纳斯达克：GOOG）允许第三方应用内支付。中国是一个监管神秘的黑洞。</blockquote></p><p> The tide is turning on Apple on this issue. If you think this begins and ends with the Epic case, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>在这个问题上，潮流正在转向苹果。如果你认为这是以史诗般的案件开始和结束的，那你就没有注意到。</blockquote></p><p> Right now the threat is confined to App Store, but this is the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end. This new antitrust movement may come for other parts of Apple, like the other pillar of their fast-growing Services segment, AppleCare, and even dig deeper into the way Apple likes to do business.</p><p><blockquote>目前威胁仅局限于App Store，但是这是开始的结束，而非结束的开始。这场新的反垄断运动可能会降临到苹果的其他部门，比如他们快速增长的服务部门的另一个支柱AppleCare，甚至更深入地挖掘苹果喜欢的做生意方式。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What The Ruling Says</b></p><p><blockquote><b>裁决内容</b></blockquote></p><p> Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hewed very closely to existing law, because that’s what usually happens in District Court, the lowest level of the federal system. She mostly had bad news for Epic, and targeted bad news for Apple.</p><p><blockquote>伊冯娜·冈萨雷斯·罗杰斯法官非常严格地遵守现有法律，因为这通常是联邦系统最低级别的地区法院发生的事情。她主要是给Epic带来坏消息，并针对苹果带来坏消息。</blockquote></p><p> The case rested on how the court defined the “relevant market” in question. Epic wanted it to be iOS, a market unto itself because of the high walls Apple builds around the ecosystem. Judge Rogers rejected that novel claim pretty handily. But she also rejected Apple’s definition: all gaming transactions, including PCs and consoles. She settled on mobile gaming transactions, so essentially the iOS-Android duopoly of mobile gaming transactions.</p><p><blockquote>该案取决于法院如何定义所讨论的“相关市场”。Epic希望它成为iOS，一个独立的市场，因为苹果在生态系统周围筑起了高墙。罗杰斯法官轻而易举地驳回了这一新颖的主张。但她也拒绝了苹果的定义：所有游戏交易，包括PC和主机。她选择了移动游戏交易，所以本质上是移动游戏交易的iOS和Android双头垄断。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the meat of the decision that follows from that:</p><p><blockquote>以下是由此得出的决定的实质：</blockquote></p><p>   Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal…    Nonetheless, the trial did show that Apple is engaging in anticompetitive conduct under California’s competition laws. The Court concludes that Apple’s anti-steering provisions hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice. When coupled with Apple’s incipient antitrust violations, these anti-steering provisions are anticompetitive and a nationwide remedy to eliminate those provisions is warranted.  The most important thing to note here is that the problem for Apple is California law, not federal law. Federal law changing is where the real threat remains, and we are already well into that process.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于审判记录，法院无法最终得出结论，根据联邦或州反垄断法，苹果是垄断者。虽然法院发现苹果享有超过55%的可观市场份额和极高的利润率，但仅凭这些因素并不表明存在反垄断行为。成功并不违法……尽管如此，审判确实表明苹果参与了加州竞争法下的反竞争行为。法院的结论是，苹果的反转向条款向消费者隐瞒了关键信息，非法扼杀了消费者的选择。再加上苹果初期的反垄断违规行为，这些反转向条款是反竞争的，有必要在全国范围内采取补救措施来消除这些条款。这里最需要注意的是，苹果的问题是加州法律，而不是联邦法律。联邦法律的改变是真正的威胁所在，我们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Judge Rogers ruled that Apple has to get rid of their anti-steering rules. App developers will now be allowed to inform users of less expensive options on their website, with a link. We’ll talk about the implications in a moment. Apple charges developers 30% for in-app payments, and the first year of in-app subscriptions (15% thereafter). In-app payments and subscriptions are substantially where all of App Store revenue comes from, about 28% of the Services segment and 5.4% of all revenue in calendar 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Rogers法官裁定苹果必须取消他们的反转向规则。应用开发者现在将被允许在他们的网站上通过链接通知用户更便宜的选项。我们一会儿会谈到其中的含义。苹果向开发者收取30%的应用内支付费用，以及第一年的应用内订阅费用（此后收取15%）。应用内支付和订阅基本上是App Store所有收入的来源，约占服务部门的28%，占2020年所有收入的5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Also, in the category of rounding errors, Epic has to pay Apple the $3.6 million they owe them when they breached their contract. That’s about 0.001% of Apple’s 2021 top line.</p><p><blockquote>此外，在舍入错误类别中，Epic必须向苹果支付他们违反合同时欠他们的360万美元。这约占苹果2021年营收的0.001%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Epic’s Game</b></p><p><blockquote><b>史诗的游戏</b></blockquote></p><p> If you read&nbsp;my first article&nbsp;about the trial from when the pre-trial filings dropped, you may notice that I was a bit confused about what precisely Epic’s game was here. The foundation of their entire argument — that iOS was a market unto itself — was novel, to say the least. At least one of their lawyers must have informed them of the low likelihood of success on their main claims. Moreover, they burned a lot of pages on arguments not central to their case, but seem more geared towards tarnishing Apple’s reputation.</p><p><blockquote>如果你读了我的第一篇关于预审文件撤销时的审判文章，你可能会注意到我对Epic的游戏到底是什么有点困惑。至少可以说，他们整个论点的基础——iOS本身就是一个市场——是新颖的。至少有一名律师必须告知他们主要索赔成功的可能性很低。此外，他们烧毁了很多页的论点，这些论点与他们的案件无关，但似乎更倾向于玷污苹果的声誉。</blockquote></p><p> My current understanding is that this case was a publicity stunt. What’s more, it worked. The point was to get this issue into the public conversation. Here I am writing about it, and here you are reading about it. But more importantly, the tide is turning in Washington, and I think the issues raised by this trial have accelerated that.</p><p><blockquote>我目前的理解是，这个案子是一个宣传噱头。更重要的是，它起作用了。重点是让这个问题进入公众对话。我在这里写它，你在这里读到它。但更重要的是，华盛顿的潮流正在发生转变，我认为这次审判提出的问题加速了这一点。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Anti-Steering Rule</b></p><p><blockquote><b>反转向规则</b></blockquote></p><p> Like many of the App Store rules, the anti-steering rule was part of a multi-year whack-a-mole process where developers tried to find ways to cut out Apple, and Apple closed those holes. Apple fought very hard to keep this rule, but now seems to be capitulating. They settled with Japanese regulators recently on the anti-steering rules as it applied to media subscription apps, and applied the settlement to the rest of the world as well, maybe in anticipation of this ruling. With the Epic ruling, the anti-steering rule is gone.</p><p><blockquote>与许多App Store规则一样，反转向规则是多年打地鼠过程的一部分，开发者试图找到切断苹果的方法，苹果填补了这些漏洞。苹果非常努力地维护这一规则，但现在似乎投降了。他们最近与日本监管机构就适用于媒体订阅应用程序的反转向规则达成了和解，并将和解协议也适用于世界其他地区，也许是对这一裁决的预期。随着史诗般的裁决，反转向规则消失了。</blockquote></p><p> When a game developer like Epic sells their virtual currency on the App Store, they have a 30% payment fee. When they make the same transaction on their website, it is probably under 3%. This was always what this was about. Epic wanted to have their own in-app payment system to supersede Apple’s, without the friction of sending people to the website. Judge Rogers rejected that, but gave Epic a partial victory by banning Apple’s anti-steering rules.</p><p><blockquote>当像Epic这样的游戏开发商在App Store上出售他们的虚拟货币时，他们有30%的支付费用。当他们在自己的网站上进行同样的交易时，大概在3%以下。这一直都是为了这个。Epic希望拥有自己的应用内支付系统来取代苹果的支付系统，而不会出现将人们送到网站的摩擦。Rogers法官驳回了这一要求，但通过禁止苹果的反转向规则，Epic获得了部分胜利。</blockquote></p><p> The anti-steering rules prevented app developers from having text and links to their own much less expensive in-app payments or subscriptions on their websites. This is a real loss for Apple, and puts the whole structure of the two most lucrative payment methods in the App Store at risk.</p><p><blockquote>反转向规则阻止应用程序开发者在其网站上发布文本和链接到他们自己便宜得多的应用内支付或订阅。这对苹果来说是一个真正的损失，并将App Store中最赚钱的两种支付方式的整个结构置于危险之中。</blockquote></p><p> Let’s say a gaming company pays a 2.5% processing fee on their website. That means they have 27.5 percentage points of marketing to play with. They could give that entire 27.5% to users in the form of a rebate or freebies. It certainly increases friction to have to leave a game you're having fun with, but if there is a big, friendly, dark-patterned button that says “Want free money?” I think a lot of people would tap that button. What’s more, they get to book the same amount in revenue, and stick the cost down in sales and marketing.</p><p><blockquote>假设一家游戏公司在其网站上支付2.5%的处理费。这意味着他们有27.5个百分点的营销空间可以利用。他们可以以折扣或免费赠品的形式给用户全部27.5%。不得不离开一个你正在享受的游戏肯定会增加摩擦，但是如果有一个大的、友好的、深色图案的按钮写着“想要免费的钱吗？”我想很多人会点击那个按钮。更重要的是，他们可以记录相同金额的收入，并在销售和营销方面降低成本。</blockquote></p><p> That’s just one example of how companies may decide to go with this. That’s a lot of margin to play with. The reason Apple had this rule in the first place is that they feared someone would find the magic formula that would provide more revenue by eschewing in-app payments altogether, and everyone else would copy them. They had fought very hard to keep this rule for a reason.</p><p><blockquote>这只是公司可能决定采取这种做法的一个例子。这是一个很大的空间。苹果最初制定这条规则的原因是，他们担心有人会找到一个神奇的公式，通过完全避免应用内支付来提供更多收入，而其他人都会效仿他们。他们努力维护这条规则是有原因的。</blockquote></p><p> Just after the news broke, a friend who knows&nbsp;I own both stocks&nbsp;trolled me with this Bloomberg Terminal screenshot:</p><p><blockquote>消息传出后，一位知道我拥有这两只股票的朋友用这张彭博终端截图向我进行了攻击：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/78570d7ae73401a933b2359f3dcd47da\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"281\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Roblox(NYSE:RBLX)is a pure-play mobile gaming company. The vast majority of their revenues come from in-app payments from iOS and Android, the rest from their website sales. Their cost-of-revenues almost all goes to Apple and Google. In the TTM, they had a 74.4% gross margin. If they pay a 2.5% processing fee for website sales, that means 84% of their transaction value was through iOS and Android. If they could get that to 50-50, that would raise all their margins down to EBT by 10 percentage points. If they could get to 73% of sales on the website, they would have a 90% gross margin.</p><p><blockquote>Roblox（纽约证券交易所股票代码：RBLX）是一家纯粹的移动游戏公司。他们的绝大多数收入来自iOS和Android的应用内支付，其余来自网站销售。他们的收入成本几乎全部归苹果和谷歌所有。在TTM，他们的毛利率为74.4%。如果他们为网站销售支付2.5%的处理费，这意味着他们84%的交易价值是通过iOS和Android进行的。如果他们能够将这一比例提高到50-50，那么他们在EBT的所有利润率将提高10个百分点。如果他们能在网站上获得73%的销售额，他们将有90%的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> There is a lot of money at stake, and a huge incentive for gaming and subscription media companies to figure out how to thread this needle. And that’s all in the absence of further action by the other two branches of government.</p><p><blockquote>这关系到大量的资金，游戏和订阅媒体公司也有巨大的动力去想办法解决这个问题。这一切都是在其他两个政府部门没有采取进一步行动的情况下发生的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Executive Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>行政部门</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> This is a good place to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the new antitrust movement, because two of its leaders now work in the Biden administration. The movement is sometimes referred to as the “neo-Brandeis” movement after Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, because it harkens back to a much earlier era of antitrust enforcement that drastically changed in the 1980s.</p><p><blockquote>这是讨论新反垄断运动理论基础的好地方，因为其两位领导人现在在拜登政府工作。这场运动有时被称为“新布兰代斯”运动，以最高法院大法官路易斯·布兰代斯的名字命名，因为它可以追溯到更早的反垄断执法时代，该时代在20世纪80年代发生了巨大变化。</blockquote></p><p> In 1978, Robert Bork (yes,that Robert Bork) wrote a very influential book called&nbsp;<i>The Antitrust Paradox</i>. His theory urged a refocusing of enforcement away from competition, and towards consumer benefit as the main test. He argued that antitrust enforcement was propping up smaller, less efficient companies to the detriment of the economy.</p><p><blockquote>1978年，罗伯特·博克（没错，就是那个罗伯特·博克）写了一本非常有影响力的书，叫做<i>反垄断悖论</i>他的理论敦促将执法重点从竞争转向消费者利益作为主要检验标准。他认为，反垄断执法正在支撑规模较小、效率较低的公司，损害了经济。</blockquote></p><p> The 1982 AT&amp;T breakup consent decree became the prototype for the new enforcement. By controlling local and long distance telecommunication, as well as the equipment, AT&amp;T had been underinvesting and overcharging for decades. Their breakup brought an explosion of investment into telecommunications, and brought down prices quickly for landline service and equipment. That became the limit of antitrust enforcement.</p><p><blockquote>1982年美国电话电报公司分手同意法令成为新执法的原型。通过控制本地和长途电信以及设备，美国电话电报公司几十年来一直投资不足，收费过高。他们的分手带来了电信投资的爆炸式增长，并迅速降低了固定电话服务和设备的价格。这成为反垄断执法的极限。</blockquote></p><p> But the focus on consumer benefit has affected competition, and that’s what the neo-Brandeis movement hopes to change. They want antitrust enforcement to return to the way it was a century ago, with more of a focus on how large companies affect competition. Lina Khan, a law professor at Columbia, now runs the FTC, the primary antitrust enforcer in the federal government. Her 2017 law review article, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox” was the spark that lit this fire. Her colleague at Columbia Law, Tim Wu, is also one of the leaders of this movement. He is a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, and his fingerprints are all over&nbsp;the July competition executive order.</p><p><blockquote>但是对消费者利益的关注影响了竞争，这就是新布兰代斯运动希望改变的。他们希望反垄断执法回到一个世纪前的样子，更多地关注大公司如何影响竞争。哥伦比亚大学法学教授莉娜·汗(Lina Khan)现在负责联邦政府主要的反垄断执法机构联邦贸易委员会(FTC)。她2017年的法律评论文章《亚马逊的反垄断悖论》是点燃这场大火的火花。她在哥伦比亚法学院的同事蒂姆·吴也是这场运动的领导者之一。他是白宫经济顾问委员会的成员，7月份的竞争行政命令上到处都是他的指纹。</blockquote></p><p> The order was very wide ranging, with 72 initiatives covering 14 departments and agencies. Most of it does not relate to Apple, but it gives you an idea of the wide breadth of the order. As it relates to Apple:</p><p><blockquote>该命令范围非常广泛，有72项举措，涵盖14个部门和机构。它的大部分与苹果无关，但它让你对秩序的广度有所了解。就苹果而言：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Right-to-repair is a huge threat to the other pillar of Services, AppleCare, which I estimate at 25%-30% of the segment. But more than that, it would change the way Apple makes devices. Apple squeezes out efficiency gains by attaching pooled memory directly to the main processor die, and by soldering storage into the motherboard. Both of these would likely be prohibited to them, and the devices would suffer.</li>  <li>The FTC is two months into a yearlong frisk of the mobile app ecosystem. Based on previous writings, Lina Khan will likely recommend third party app stores, “sideloading” directly from the web, and an end to the in-app payments monopoly.</li> </ul> Executive branch action is always subject to court challenges, and they can take very long to implement. But Congress can change the law in a single session. And they are already into that process.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>维修权对服务的另一个支柱AppleCare来说是一个巨大的威胁，我估计AppleCare占该细分市场的25%-30%。但更重要的是，它将改变苹果制造设备的方式。苹果通过将池内存直接连接到主处理器芯片，以及将存储焊接到主板来挤出效率增益。这两个都可能被禁止，设备也会受到影响。</li><li>联邦贸易委员会对移动应用生态系统长达一年的搜查已经进行了两个月。根据之前的著作，Lina Khan可能会推荐第三方应用商店，直接从网络“侧装”，并结束应用内支付垄断。</li></ul>行政部门的行动总是受到法院的质疑，而且可能需要很长时间才能实施。但是国会可以在一届会议上改变法律。他们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Legislative Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>立法部门</b></blockquote></p><p> Since there are two houses of Congress, this issue is off on two tracks. The House Judiciary Committee recently passed a suite of bipartisan bills. Of the ones that I think have a good likelihood of passing the full House, here’s how it affects Apple:</p><p><blockquote>由于国会有两院，这个问题在两条轨道上。众议院司法委员会最近通过了一系列两党法案。在我认为很有可能获得全院通过的法案中，以下是它对苹果的影响：</blockquote></p><p> They would be required to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party payments in the Apple App Store.</p><p><blockquote>他们将被要求允许苹果应用商店中的第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方支付。</blockquote></p><p> Restricting Apple’s ability to acquire smaller companies. In the past 6 years, Apple has bought around 100 companies, which works out to about one every three weeks on average. It looks like they had been accelerating since fiscal 2018, but then abruptly stopped in fiscal 2021. The reason is the new leader of the FTC.</p><p><blockquote>限制苹果收购小公司的能力。在过去的6年里，苹果收购了大约100家公司，平均每三周就收购一家。看起来他们自2018财年以来一直在加速，但在2021财年突然停止。原因是FTC的新领导人。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a2fc9a2578663cc746fdb19ca19dea4c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The big bulge you see there in 2014 is the Beats acquisition at $3 billion, which remains the exception. Otherwise, Apple buys very small companies for tens or hundreds of millions, usually shuts down any products they may have, and absorbs the talent and IP into Apple proper. Apple’s chip design unit, a cornerstone of their current success, began this way in 2008.</p><p><blockquote>你在2014年看到的最大增长是以30亿美元收购Beats，这仍然是个例外。否则，苹果会花数千万或数亿美元收购非常小的公司，通常会关闭他们可能拥有的任何产品，并将人才和知识产权吸收到苹果本土。苹果的芯片设计部门是他们目前成功的基石，2008年就是这样开始的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more private APIs.</b>This would mean everything, like the Apple Pay-enabling NFC chip, would be open to competitors.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有私有API。</b>这意味着一切，比如支持苹果支付的NFC芯片，都将向竞争对手开放。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more discriminatory rules.</b>Apple doesn’t force real-world product and service providers like Uber(NYSE:UBER)to use in-app payments. Apple would either have to try and get Uber to pay them 30%, or drop the requirement altogether.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有歧视性的规则。</b>苹果不会强迫Uber（纽约证券交易所股票代码：UBER）等现实世界的产品和服务提供商使用应用内支付。苹果要么试图让优步向他们支付30%的费用，要么完全放弃这一要求。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The end of the Google search deal.</b>Google currently pays Apple a purported $12 billion a year to make Google the default search engine on iOS. This cash goes directly to EBT.</p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索交易的结束。</b>谷歌目前据称每年向苹果支付120亿美元，以使谷歌成为iOS上的默认搜索引擎。这笔现金直接流向EBT。</blockquote></p><p> <b>They would have to expose more user data to developers.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>他们将不得不向开发者公开更多的用户数据。</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>Formalizing the anti-steering decision.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>正式确定反转向决策。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> <b>Anti-retaliation provision.</b>If these bills were law, Epic would still be on the App Store while they sued Apple.</p><p><blockquote><b>反报复条款。</b>如果这些法案成为法律，当他们起诉苹果时，Epic仍将在App Store上。</blockquote></p><p> After the House is done wrangling over budget reconciliation, I think these bills will hit the House floor this fall or winter, and I think that they have a high likelihood of passing in something like their current form.</p><p><blockquote>在众议院结束关于预算协调的争论后，我认为这些法案将在今年秋天或冬天提交众议院，我认为它们很有可能以目前的形式获得通过。</blockquote></p><p> But bills also have to clear the Senate, and they move slower. Things are just getting started there. The big movers in the Senate are Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah. Klobuchar has&nbsp;written a long book&nbsp;on the subject, and it is not friendly towards Apple. She has also authored a new bill, Open App Markets Act. It is more narrow than the House suite, but not by much. It would still force Apple to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party in-app payments. They would also have to get rid of their private APIs. The bill is narrower than the House suite, and less of a threat to Apple, but still would mean the end of App Store as a driver of growth.<i>The Senate bill is the better outcome for Apple, and it is still terrible.</i></p><p><blockquote>但法案也必须通过参议院，而且进展较慢。那里的事情才刚刚开始。参议院的大推动者是明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。Klobuchar就这个问题写了一本长书，它对苹果并不友好。她还起草了一项新法案《开放应用市场法案》。它比房子套房窄，但也窄不了多少。它仍将迫使苹果允许第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方应用内支付。他们还必须摆脱他们的私有API。该法案比众议院套房更窄，对苹果的威胁也更小，但仍意味着App Store作为增长驱动力的终结。<i>参议院的法案对苹果来说是更好的结果，但仍然很糟糕。</i></blockquote></p><p> I believe that we will see something pass before the next Presidential election, or even in this Congressional session. The best Apple shareholders can hope for is that the final bill gets watered down considerably.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，在下届总统选举之前，甚至在本届国会会议上，我们会看到一些事情通过。苹果股东最大的希望就是最终法案被大幅淡化。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Outside The US</b></p><p><blockquote><b>美国境外</b></blockquote></p><p> This is in no way limited to the US. We already discussed the Japanese settlement, and South Korea is forcing Apple and Google to allow third party in-app payments. The case that is farthest along in the EU is Spotify’s, which would force Apple to not charge fees to competing services, so that means music, podcasts, games, video and fitness.</p><p><blockquote>这绝不仅限于美国。我们已经讨论了日本的和解，南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌允许第三方应用内支付。欧盟进展最快的案例是Spotify，这将迫使苹果不向竞争服务收费，因此这意味着音乐、播客、游戏、视频和健身。</blockquote></p><p> The Chinese Communist Party remains the&nbsp;second biggest tail risk in the world&nbsp;after climate change. Apple’s regulatory risk there is uniquely high, both on the supply and demand sides. Apple has already given into them by not providing their Chinese customers with the same level of privacy as everyone else. With the mood in China right now, who knows where that goes.</p><p><blockquote>中国共产党仍然是仅次于气候变化的世界第二大尾部风险。无论是在供应还是需求方面，苹果的监管风险都非常高。苹果已经屈服于他们，没有向他们的中国客户提供和其他人一样的隐私水平。以中国现在的情绪，谁知道会走向何方。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What Losing Control Of App Store Looks Like</b></p><p><blockquote><b>失去对App Store的控制是什么样子</b></blockquote></p><p> Stone Fox Capital here at Seeking Alpha is&nbsp;out with an article&nbsp;pivoting off Katy Huberty's estimation of a 2% earnings loss if the top 20 apps on the App Store were able to eschew in-app payments. Stone Fox would also like you to care about that seemingly small number:</p><p><blockquote>Seeking Alpha的Stone Fox Capital发表了一篇文章，反驳了Katy Huberty的估计，如果App Store上排名前20的应用程序能够避免应用内支付，收益将损失2%。石狐也希望大家关心一下这个看似很小的数字：</blockquote></p><p>   Apple won most of their legal case with Epic Games based on the ruling announced on September 10, but the tech giant lost the ultimate battle. The stock remains priced for perfection while the company continues to have growth paths chipped away from the business.  My last article on this subject was called “Chipping Away at App Store.” This is what is happening and the trend is now clear. There is a mood globally to take Apple down a peg, and it is happening too slowly for many people to realize it is happening.</p><p><blockquote>根据9月10日宣布的裁决，苹果赢得了与Epic Games的大部分法律诉讼，但这家科技巨头输掉了最终的战斗。该股的定价仍然是完美的，而该公司的增长道路继续从业务中被削弱。我上一篇关于这个主题的文章叫做“在App Store上削足适履”。这就是正在发生的事情，趋势现在很明显。全球都有一种降低苹果汇率的情绪，但这种情绪发生得太慢，许多人都没有意识到它正在发生。</blockquote></p><p> My own way of modeling the worst case is through my DCF model. It’s modeled as a 25% hit to Services in the first year, with services gross margin reduced from 68% to 65%, followed by a slightly increased growth rate in the segment because of composition effects — the rest of Services grows faster than App Store. I used to model that happening in fiscal 2024, but I have moved that up to fiscal 2023, beginning less than 13 months from now.</p><p><blockquote>我自己对最坏情况建模的方法是通过我的DCF模型。它的模型是第一年服务受到25%的打击，服务毛利率从68%下降到65%，随后由于构成效应，该细分市场的增长率略有上升——其余服务的增长速度快于App Store。我曾经对2024财年发生的情况进行建模，但我已将其提前到2023财年，从现在开始不到13个月。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the effect on fair value on my base case:</p><p><blockquote>以下是我的基本案例对公允价值的影响：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94b635fe7a2473aafe36bd095a1206b6\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"352\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Even with the very slow start for the reason Stone Fox says — the share price has gotten way out ahead of cash flows — my base case still shows an 11% CAGR in fair value through the end of fiscal 2025. The App Store collapse takes that down to an 8% CAGR, 12% lower by 2025.</p><p><blockquote>尽管由于Stone Fox所说的原因，起步非常缓慢——股价已经远远领先于现金流——但我的基本假设仍然显示，到2025财年末，公允价值复合年增长率为11%。App Store的倒闭使复合年增长率降至8%，到2025年将下降12%。</blockquote></p><p> Circling back, Stone Fox puts a button on this more succinctly than I can:</p><p><blockquote>回头，石狐比我更简洁地按下了一个按钮：</blockquote></p><p>   The key investor takeaway is that Apple has a bright future. The company will continue generating profits with operating cash flows topping $100 billion annually, but the tech giant will struggle to generate the growth needed to warrant the current stock price. The 2% hit to earnings might not seem meaningful, but the amount is very harmful to a stock priced for perfection.  <b>How To Take This Seriously</b></p><p><blockquote>投资者的主要收获是苹果拥有光明的未来。该公司将继续创造利润，每年运营现金流超过1000亿美元，但这家科技巨头将难以实现维持当前股价所需的增长。盈利2%的打击似乎没有意义，但这个数额对于定价完美的股票来说是非常有害的。<b>如何认真对待这个</b></blockquote></p><p> In my last article on this subject, someone cheekily replied in the comments, “‘Please take this seriously.’ What does that even mean?” That’s a good question. The first part of the answer is to stop pretending it’s not happening.</p><p><blockquote>在我关于这个主题的上一篇文章中，有人在评论中厚颜无耻地回答说：“‘请认真对待这件事。’这到底是什么意思？”这是个好问题。答案的第一部分是不要假装它没有发生。</blockquote></p><p> “If your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.” I have been using that phrase frequently since Apple hit $140. The last chart just formalizes it with math, but my opinion is that Apple will remain range-bound for some time, between $125 and $155, roughly. I still mean it: if your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。”自从苹果股价达到140美元以来，我就经常使用这个短语。最后一张图表只是用数学将其形式化，但我的观点是苹果将在一段时间内保持区间波动，大约在125美元到155美元之间。我还是这个意思：如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> But I also believe that no other company is as prepared for the future of technology, regardless of what that brings. That is a&nbsp;far longer discussion. I have been buying Apple shares on the dip since 2005, which is two splits ago. My last buy was in January 2019, when Apple reported that they would miss guidance for the first time in many years. At the time, the commentariat was telling me that Apple’s best days were behind them. I tried to explain that Apple was in a transitional phase, part of a strategy they launched around 2015 to focus more on the growth of the iPhone user base than sales. The strategy would pay off soon, I predicted, and it did in fiscal 2021. That seems like a very long time ago now.</p><p><blockquote>但我也相信，没有其他公司为技术的未来做好了准备，无论它会带来什么。这是一个长得多的讨论。自2005年以来，我一直在逢低买入苹果股票，这是两次拆分前。我最后一次购买是在2019年1月，当时苹果报告称他们将多年来首次错过指导。当时，评论员告诉我，苹果最好的日子已经过去了。我试图解释说，苹果正处于过渡阶段，这是他们在2015年左右推出的战略的一部分，旨在更多地关注iPhone用户群的增长，而不是销售。我预测，这一策略很快就会得到回报，并且在2021财年就得到了回报。那似乎是很久以前的事了。</blockquote></p><p> A consequence of buying the dip from 2005 to 2019 is that I own way too many Apple shares that I could never bring myself to sell. I am massively overweight Apple. There is a “What To Do With The Apple Shares” clause in my will. It is our largest asset, worth more than the house. That has not made me nervous until the last few months, when the tide seemed to start turning on Apple on this issue. I also used to be someone who did not take this threat seriously. I am going to start shaving my position as opportunities present themselves, and one may happen this week with the iPhone launch on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>从2005年到2019年逢低买入的一个后果是，我拥有太多苹果股票，我永远无法出售。我完全是跑赢大盘·苹果。我的遗嘱里有一个“如何处理苹果股票”的条款。这是我们最大的资产，比房子还值钱。这并没有让我感到紧张，直到最近几个月，在这个问题上，潮流似乎开始转向苹果。我也曾经是一个不把这种威胁当回事的人。随着机会的出现，我将开始削减我的职位，其中一个可能会在本周周二iPhone的发布中发生。</blockquote></p><p> <i>To be clear, I will remain overweight Apple, just less so, and I remain bullish in the long term. But I no longer feel the safety I once did with this wildly overweight position.</i></p><p><blockquote><i>需要明确的是，我仍将是跑赢大盘·苹果，只是程度有所降低，而且从长远来看，我仍然看好。但是我不再感觉到曾经在这个疯狂的跑赢大盘位置上的安全感。</i></blockquote></p><p> In contrast, if you are a long term investor who does not have a massively overweight position, watch, wait and fight confirmation bias every day. If you think this begins and ends with Epic, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，如果您是一位没有大量跑赢大盘头寸的长期投资者，请每天观察、等待并对抗确认偏差。如果你认为这是以史诗开始和结束的，那你就没有注意。</blockquote></p><p> Please take this seriously.</p><p><blockquote>请认真对待这件事。</blockquote></p><p> I will be back in a few days with hopefully happier news from the iPhone launch on Tuesday. The big question is whether Apple can begin shipping iPhone before the quarter is out.</p><p><blockquote>几天后我会带着周二iPhone发布会的好消息回来。最大的问题是苹果能否在本季度结束前开始发货iPhone。</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>Apple App Store: The Tide Is Turning<blockquote>苹果应用商店：潮流正在转向</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\">\nApple App Store: The Tide Is Turning<blockquote>苹果应用商店：潮流正在转向</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-09-13 23:32</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>A US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic Games.</li>  <li>Despite that, and in conjunction with a recent settlement with Japanese regulators, Apple will be getting rid of their anti-steering rule. This is a bigger change than people think.</li>  <li>The threat to Apple doesn't end with the Epic trial. There are bigger threats coming from the executive and legislative branches in the US, and regulators in Europe and Asia.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/323e8503a813d4996ee819f5591992b8\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images News</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>美国联邦地区法院法官在Epic Games的案件中做出了对苹果有利的裁决。</li><li>尽管如此，加上最近与日本监管机构达成的和解，苹果将取消他们的反转向规则。这是一个比人们想象的更大的变化。</li><li>对苹果的威胁并没有随着史诗般的审判而结束。更大的威胁来自美国的行政和立法部门，以及欧洲和亚洲的监管机构。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>奇普·索莫德维拉/盖蒂图片社新闻</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>It Does Not End Here</b></p><p><blockquote><b>它并没有就此结束</b></blockquote></p><p> For&nbsp;some time now, I&nbsp;have been warning&nbsp;that&nbsp;antitrust law was about to change, and these changes would not be favorable to Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL), and that investors need to take these threats seriously. In every one of these attempts, I was rebuffed in the comments by many Apple shareholders telling me that these fears and warnings were overblown. “Long and strong AAPL!” cheerleading seems to be popular.Confirmation bias&nbsp;is a strong thing, and you should fight it every single day.</p><p><blockquote>一段时间以来，我一直警告反垄断法即将发生变化，这些变化对苹果（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）不利，投资者需要认真对待这些威胁。在每一次尝试中，我都遭到了许多苹果股东的拒绝，他们告诉我这些担忧和警告被夸大了。“长而强的AAPL！”啦啦队似乎很受欢迎。确认偏见是一种强烈的东西，你应该每天都与之斗争。</blockquote></p><p> My last attempt was&nbsp;less than two weeks ago, and I was similarly dismissed, and even accused of being a short-selling tout to boot. That last suggestion is pretty funny to anyone who has had to listen to me drone on about Apple stock the last 16 years. The consequence of those 16 years is that I have a lot of Apple stock, so I take things like this very seriously.</p><p><blockquote>我最后一次尝试是在不到两周前，我同样被驳回，甚至被指责为卖空者。对于那些在过去16年里不得不听我喋喋不休地谈论苹果股票的人来说，最后一个建议非常有趣。那16年的后果是我有很多苹果的股票，所以我非常认真地对待这样的事情。</blockquote></p><p> Friday’s decision in Epic v. Apple had one part very bad news for Apple, but mostly a rejection of Epic’s main claim — that iOS is a market unto itself. But the bigger threat continues to be from Congress, where they can change the law in a single session. The House has already passed several bipartisan bills through committee, and three of them seem to have pretty wide support with the rest of the House. A narrower, but just as damaging companion bill is about to start working its way through the Senate. Keep your eyes on Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah.</p><p><blockquote>周五Epic诉苹果案的判决对苹果来说有一部分是非常坏的消息，但主要是拒绝了Epic的主要主张——iOS本身就是一个市场。但更大的威胁仍然来自国会，他们可以在一次会议中改变法律。众议院已经通过了几项两党法案，其中三项似乎得到了众议院其他成员的广泛支持。一项范围更窄但同样具有破坏性的配套法案即将开始在参议院通过。请关注明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。</blockquote></p><p> Then we have regulatory action in the EU, Apple’s second most important region, where antitrust enforcers are siding with Spotify(NYSE:SPOT)in their dispute over in-app payments. Apple has already settled with Japan over their anti-steering rules. South Korea is forcing Apple and Google(NASDAQ:GOOGL)(NASDAQ:GOOG)to allow third-party in-app payments. China is a black hole of regulatory mystery.</p><p><blockquote>然后，我们在苹果第二重要地区欧盟采取了监管行动，那里的反垄断执法人员在应用内支付纠纷中站在Spotify（纽约证券交易所股票代码：SPOT）一边。苹果已经就日本的反转向规则与日本达成和解。南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌（纳斯达克：GOOGL）（纳斯达克：GOOG）允许第三方应用内支付。中国是一个监管神秘的黑洞。</blockquote></p><p> The tide is turning on Apple on this issue. If you think this begins and ends with the Epic case, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>在这个问题上，潮流正在转向苹果。如果你认为这是以史诗般的案件开始和结束的，那你就没有注意到。</blockquote></p><p> Right now the threat is confined to App Store, but this is the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end. This new antitrust movement may come for other parts of Apple, like the other pillar of their fast-growing Services segment, AppleCare, and even dig deeper into the way Apple likes to do business.</p><p><blockquote>目前威胁仅局限于App Store，但是这是开始的结束，而非结束的开始。这场新的反垄断运动可能会降临到苹果的其他部门，比如他们快速增长的服务部门的另一个支柱AppleCare，甚至更深入地挖掘苹果喜欢的做生意方式。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What The Ruling Says</b></p><p><blockquote><b>裁决内容</b></blockquote></p><p> Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hewed very closely to existing law, because that’s what usually happens in District Court, the lowest level of the federal system. She mostly had bad news for Epic, and targeted bad news for Apple.</p><p><blockquote>伊冯娜·冈萨雷斯·罗杰斯法官非常严格地遵守现有法律，因为这通常是联邦系统最低级别的地区法院发生的事情。她主要是给Epic带来坏消息，并针对苹果带来坏消息。</blockquote></p><p> The case rested on how the court defined the “relevant market” in question. Epic wanted it to be iOS, a market unto itself because of the high walls Apple builds around the ecosystem. Judge Rogers rejected that novel claim pretty handily. But she also rejected Apple’s definition: all gaming transactions, including PCs and consoles. She settled on mobile gaming transactions, so essentially the iOS-Android duopoly of mobile gaming transactions.</p><p><blockquote>该案取决于法院如何定义所讨论的“相关市场”。Epic希望它成为iOS，一个独立的市场，因为苹果在生态系统周围筑起了高墙。罗杰斯法官轻而易举地驳回了这一新颖的主张。但她也拒绝了苹果的定义：所有游戏交易，包括PC和主机。她选择了移动游戏交易，所以本质上是移动游戏交易的iOS和Android双头垄断。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the meat of the decision that follows from that:</p><p><blockquote>以下是由此得出的决定的实质：</blockquote></p><p>   Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal…    Nonetheless, the trial did show that Apple is engaging in anticompetitive conduct under California’s competition laws. The Court concludes that Apple’s anti-steering provisions hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice. When coupled with Apple’s incipient antitrust violations, these anti-steering provisions are anticompetitive and a nationwide remedy to eliminate those provisions is warranted.  The most important thing to note here is that the problem for Apple is California law, not federal law. Federal law changing is where the real threat remains, and we are already well into that process.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于审判记录，法院无法最终得出结论，根据联邦或州反垄断法，苹果是垄断者。虽然法院发现苹果享有超过55%的可观市场份额和极高的利润率，但仅凭这些因素并不表明存在反垄断行为。成功并不违法……尽管如此，审判确实表明苹果参与了加州竞争法下的反竞争行为。法院的结论是，苹果的反转向条款向消费者隐瞒了关键信息，非法扼杀了消费者的选择。再加上苹果初期的反垄断违规行为，这些反转向条款是反竞争的，有必要在全国范围内采取补救措施来消除这些条款。这里最需要注意的是，苹果的问题是加州法律，而不是联邦法律。联邦法律的改变是真正的威胁所在，我们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Judge Rogers ruled that Apple has to get rid of their anti-steering rules. App developers will now be allowed to inform users of less expensive options on their website, with a link. We’ll talk about the implications in a moment. Apple charges developers 30% for in-app payments, and the first year of in-app subscriptions (15% thereafter). In-app payments and subscriptions are substantially where all of App Store revenue comes from, about 28% of the Services segment and 5.4% of all revenue in calendar 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Rogers法官裁定苹果必须取消他们的反转向规则。应用开发者现在将被允许在他们的网站上通过链接通知用户更便宜的选项。我们一会儿会谈到其中的含义。苹果向开发者收取30%的应用内支付费用，以及第一年的应用内订阅费用（此后收取15%）。应用内支付和订阅基本上是App Store所有收入的来源，约占服务部门的28%，占2020年所有收入的5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Also, in the category of rounding errors, Epic has to pay Apple the $3.6 million they owe them when they breached their contract. That’s about 0.001% of Apple’s 2021 top line.</p><p><blockquote>此外，在舍入错误类别中，Epic必须向苹果支付他们违反合同时欠他们的360万美元。这约占苹果2021年营收的0.001%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Epic’s Game</b></p><p><blockquote><b>史诗的游戏</b></blockquote></p><p> If you read&nbsp;my first article&nbsp;about the trial from when the pre-trial filings dropped, you may notice that I was a bit confused about what precisely Epic’s game was here. The foundation of their entire argument — that iOS was a market unto itself — was novel, to say the least. At least one of their lawyers must have informed them of the low likelihood of success on their main claims. Moreover, they burned a lot of pages on arguments not central to their case, but seem more geared towards tarnishing Apple’s reputation.</p><p><blockquote>如果你读了我的第一篇关于预审文件撤销时的审判文章，你可能会注意到我对Epic的游戏到底是什么有点困惑。至少可以说，他们整个论点的基础——iOS本身就是一个市场——是新颖的。至少有一名律师必须告知他们主要索赔成功的可能性很低。此外，他们烧毁了很多页的论点，这些论点与他们的案件无关，但似乎更倾向于玷污苹果的声誉。</blockquote></p><p> My current understanding is that this case was a publicity stunt. What’s more, it worked. The point was to get this issue into the public conversation. Here I am writing about it, and here you are reading about it. But more importantly, the tide is turning in Washington, and I think the issues raised by this trial have accelerated that.</p><p><blockquote>我目前的理解是，这个案子是一个宣传噱头。更重要的是，它起作用了。重点是让这个问题进入公众对话。我在这里写它，你在这里读到它。但更重要的是，华盛顿的潮流正在发生转变，我认为这次审判提出的问题加速了这一点。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Anti-Steering Rule</b></p><p><blockquote><b>反转向规则</b></blockquote></p><p> Like many of the App Store rules, the anti-steering rule was part of a multi-year whack-a-mole process where developers tried to find ways to cut out Apple, and Apple closed those holes. Apple fought very hard to keep this rule, but now seems to be capitulating. They settled with Japanese regulators recently on the anti-steering rules as it applied to media subscription apps, and applied the settlement to the rest of the world as well, maybe in anticipation of this ruling. With the Epic ruling, the anti-steering rule is gone.</p><p><blockquote>与许多App Store规则一样，反转向规则是多年打地鼠过程的一部分，开发者试图找到切断苹果的方法，苹果填补了这些漏洞。苹果非常努力地维护这一规则，但现在似乎投降了。他们最近与日本监管机构就适用于媒体订阅应用程序的反转向规则达成了和解，并将和解协议也适用于世界其他地区，也许是对这一裁决的预期。随着史诗般的裁决，反转向规则消失了。</blockquote></p><p> When a game developer like Epic sells their virtual currency on the App Store, they have a 30% payment fee. When they make the same transaction on their website, it is probably under 3%. This was always what this was about. Epic wanted to have their own in-app payment system to supersede Apple’s, without the friction of sending people to the website. Judge Rogers rejected that, but gave Epic a partial victory by banning Apple’s anti-steering rules.</p><p><blockquote>当像Epic这样的游戏开发商在App Store上出售他们的虚拟货币时，他们有30%的支付费用。当他们在自己的网站上进行同样的交易时，大概在3%以下。这一直都是为了这个。Epic希望拥有自己的应用内支付系统来取代苹果的支付系统，而不会出现将人们送到网站的摩擦。Rogers法官驳回了这一要求，但通过禁止苹果的反转向规则，Epic获得了部分胜利。</blockquote></p><p> The anti-steering rules prevented app developers from having text and links to their own much less expensive in-app payments or subscriptions on their websites. This is a real loss for Apple, and puts the whole structure of the two most lucrative payment methods in the App Store at risk.</p><p><blockquote>反转向规则阻止应用程序开发者在其网站上发布文本和链接到他们自己便宜得多的应用内支付或订阅。这对苹果来说是一个真正的损失，并将App Store中最赚钱的两种支付方式的整个结构置于危险之中。</blockquote></p><p> Let’s say a gaming company pays a 2.5% processing fee on their website. That means they have 27.5 percentage points of marketing to play with. They could give that entire 27.5% to users in the form of a rebate or freebies. It certainly increases friction to have to leave a game you're having fun with, but if there is a big, friendly, dark-patterned button that says “Want free money?” I think a lot of people would tap that button. What’s more, they get to book the same amount in revenue, and stick the cost down in sales and marketing.</p><p><blockquote>假设一家游戏公司在其网站上支付2.5%的处理费。这意味着他们有27.5个百分点的营销空间可以利用。他们可以以折扣或免费赠品的形式给用户全部27.5%。不得不离开一个你正在享受的游戏肯定会增加摩擦，但是如果有一个大的、友好的、深色图案的按钮写着“想要免费的钱吗？”我想很多人会点击那个按钮。更重要的是，他们可以记录相同金额的收入，并在销售和营销方面降低成本。</blockquote></p><p> That’s just one example of how companies may decide to go with this. That’s a lot of margin to play with. The reason Apple had this rule in the first place is that they feared someone would find the magic formula that would provide more revenue by eschewing in-app payments altogether, and everyone else would copy them. They had fought very hard to keep this rule for a reason.</p><p><blockquote>这只是公司可能决定采取这种做法的一个例子。这是一个很大的空间。苹果最初制定这条规则的原因是，他们担心有人会找到一个神奇的公式，通过完全避免应用内支付来提供更多收入，而其他人都会效仿他们。他们努力维护这条规则是有原因的。</blockquote></p><p> Just after the news broke, a friend who knows&nbsp;I own both stocks&nbsp;trolled me with this Bloomberg Terminal screenshot:</p><p><blockquote>消息传出后，一位知道我拥有这两只股票的朋友用这张彭博终端截图向我进行了攻击：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/78570d7ae73401a933b2359f3dcd47da\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"281\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Roblox(NYSE:RBLX)is a pure-play mobile gaming company. The vast majority of their revenues come from in-app payments from iOS and Android, the rest from their website sales. Their cost-of-revenues almost all goes to Apple and Google. In the TTM, they had a 74.4% gross margin. If they pay a 2.5% processing fee for website sales, that means 84% of their transaction value was through iOS and Android. If they could get that to 50-50, that would raise all their margins down to EBT by 10 percentage points. If they could get to 73% of sales on the website, they would have a 90% gross margin.</p><p><blockquote>Roblox（纽约证券交易所股票代码：RBLX）是一家纯粹的移动游戏公司。他们的绝大多数收入来自iOS和Android的应用内支付，其余来自网站销售。他们的收入成本几乎全部归苹果和谷歌所有。在TTM，他们的毛利率为74.4%。如果他们为网站销售支付2.5%的处理费，这意味着他们84%的交易价值是通过iOS和Android进行的。如果他们能够将这一比例提高到50-50，那么他们在EBT的所有利润率将提高10个百分点。如果他们能在网站上获得73%的销售额，他们将有90%的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> There is a lot of money at stake, and a huge incentive for gaming and subscription media companies to figure out how to thread this needle. And that’s all in the absence of further action by the other two branches of government.</p><p><blockquote>这关系到大量的资金，游戏和订阅媒体公司也有巨大的动力去想办法解决这个问题。这一切都是在其他两个政府部门没有采取进一步行动的情况下发生的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Executive Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>行政部门</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> This is a good place to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the new antitrust movement, because two of its leaders now work in the Biden administration. The movement is sometimes referred to as the “neo-Brandeis” movement after Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, because it harkens back to a much earlier era of antitrust enforcement that drastically changed in the 1980s.</p><p><blockquote>这是讨论新反垄断运动理论基础的好地方，因为其两位领导人现在在拜登政府工作。这场运动有时被称为“新布兰代斯”运动，以最高法院大法官路易斯·布兰代斯的名字命名，因为它可以追溯到更早的反垄断执法时代，该时代在20世纪80年代发生了巨大变化。</blockquote></p><p> In 1978, Robert Bork (yes,that Robert Bork) wrote a very influential book called&nbsp;<i>The Antitrust Paradox</i>. His theory urged a refocusing of enforcement away from competition, and towards consumer benefit as the main test. He argued that antitrust enforcement was propping up smaller, less efficient companies to the detriment of the economy.</p><p><blockquote>1978年，罗伯特·博克（没错，就是那个罗伯特·博克）写了一本非常有影响力的书，叫做<i>反垄断悖论</i>他的理论敦促将执法重点从竞争转向消费者利益作为主要检验标准。他认为，反垄断执法正在支撑规模较小、效率较低的公司，损害了经济。</blockquote></p><p> The 1982 AT&amp;T breakup consent decree became the prototype for the new enforcement. By controlling local and long distance telecommunication, as well as the equipment, AT&amp;T had been underinvesting and overcharging for decades. Their breakup brought an explosion of investment into telecommunications, and brought down prices quickly for landline service and equipment. That became the limit of antitrust enforcement.</p><p><blockquote>1982年美国电话电报公司分手同意法令成为新执法的原型。通过控制本地和长途电信以及设备，美国电话电报公司几十年来一直投资不足，收费过高。他们的分手带来了电信投资的爆炸式增长，并迅速降低了固定电话服务和设备的价格。这成为反垄断执法的极限。</blockquote></p><p> But the focus on consumer benefit has affected competition, and that’s what the neo-Brandeis movement hopes to change. They want antitrust enforcement to return to the way it was a century ago, with more of a focus on how large companies affect competition. Lina Khan, a law professor at Columbia, now runs the FTC, the primary antitrust enforcer in the federal government. Her 2017 law review article, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox” was the spark that lit this fire. Her colleague at Columbia Law, Tim Wu, is also one of the leaders of this movement. He is a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, and his fingerprints are all over&nbsp;the July competition executive order.</p><p><blockquote>但是对消费者利益的关注影响了竞争，这就是新布兰代斯运动希望改变的。他们希望反垄断执法回到一个世纪前的样子，更多地关注大公司如何影响竞争。哥伦比亚大学法学教授莉娜·汗(Lina Khan)现在负责联邦政府主要的反垄断执法机构联邦贸易委员会(FTC)。她2017年的法律评论文章《亚马逊的反垄断悖论》是点燃这场大火的火花。她在哥伦比亚法学院的同事蒂姆·吴也是这场运动的领导者之一。他是白宫经济顾问委员会的成员，7月份的竞争行政命令上到处都是他的指纹。</blockquote></p><p> The order was very wide ranging, with 72 initiatives covering 14 departments and agencies. Most of it does not relate to Apple, but it gives you an idea of the wide breadth of the order. As it relates to Apple:</p><p><blockquote>该命令范围非常广泛，有72项举措，涵盖14个部门和机构。它的大部分与苹果无关，但它让你对秩序的广度有所了解。就苹果而言：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Right-to-repair is a huge threat to the other pillar of Services, AppleCare, which I estimate at 25%-30% of the segment. But more than that, it would change the way Apple makes devices. Apple squeezes out efficiency gains by attaching pooled memory directly to the main processor die, and by soldering storage into the motherboard. Both of these would likely be prohibited to them, and the devices would suffer.</li>  <li>The FTC is two months into a yearlong frisk of the mobile app ecosystem. Based on previous writings, Lina Khan will likely recommend third party app stores, “sideloading” directly from the web, and an end to the in-app payments monopoly.</li> </ul> Executive branch action is always subject to court challenges, and they can take very long to implement. But Congress can change the law in a single session. And they are already into that process.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>维修权对服务的另一个支柱AppleCare来说是一个巨大的威胁，我估计AppleCare占该细分市场的25%-30%。但更重要的是，它将改变苹果制造设备的方式。苹果通过将池内存直接连接到主处理器芯片，以及将存储焊接到主板来挤出效率增益。这两个都可能被禁止，设备也会受到影响。</li><li>联邦贸易委员会对移动应用生态系统长达一年的搜查已经进行了两个月。根据之前的著作，Lina Khan可能会推荐第三方应用商店，直接从网络“侧装”，并结束应用内支付垄断。</li></ul>行政部门的行动总是受到法院的质疑，而且可能需要很长时间才能实施。但是国会可以在一届会议上改变法律。他们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Legislative Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>立法部门</b></blockquote></p><p> Since there are two houses of Congress, this issue is off on two tracks. The House Judiciary Committee recently passed a suite of bipartisan bills. Of the ones that I think have a good likelihood of passing the full House, here’s how it affects Apple:</p><p><blockquote>由于国会有两院，这个问题在两条轨道上。众议院司法委员会最近通过了一系列两党法案。在我认为很有可能获得全院通过的法案中，以下是它对苹果的影响：</blockquote></p><p> They would be required to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party payments in the Apple App Store.</p><p><blockquote>他们将被要求允许苹果应用商店中的第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方支付。</blockquote></p><p> Restricting Apple’s ability to acquire smaller companies. In the past 6 years, Apple has bought around 100 companies, which works out to about one every three weeks on average. It looks like they had been accelerating since fiscal 2018, but then abruptly stopped in fiscal 2021. The reason is the new leader of the FTC.</p><p><blockquote>限制苹果收购小公司的能力。在过去的6年里，苹果收购了大约100家公司，平均每三周就收购一家。看起来他们自2018财年以来一直在加速，但在2021财年突然停止。原因是FTC的新领导人。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a2fc9a2578663cc746fdb19ca19dea4c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The big bulge you see there in 2014 is the Beats acquisition at $3 billion, which remains the exception. Otherwise, Apple buys very small companies for tens or hundreds of millions, usually shuts down any products they may have, and absorbs the talent and IP into Apple proper. Apple’s chip design unit, a cornerstone of their current success, began this way in 2008.</p><p><blockquote>你在2014年看到的最大增长是以30亿美元收购Beats，这仍然是个例外。否则，苹果会花数千万或数亿美元收购非常小的公司，通常会关闭他们可能拥有的任何产品，并将人才和知识产权吸收到苹果本土。苹果的芯片设计部门是他们目前成功的基石，2008年就是这样开始的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more private APIs.</b>This would mean everything, like the Apple Pay-enabling NFC chip, would be open to competitors.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有私有API。</b>这意味着一切，比如支持苹果支付的NFC芯片，都将向竞争对手开放。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more discriminatory rules.</b>Apple doesn’t force real-world product and service providers like Uber(NYSE:UBER)to use in-app payments. Apple would either have to try and get Uber to pay them 30%, or drop the requirement altogether.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有歧视性的规则。</b>苹果不会强迫Uber（纽约证券交易所股票代码：UBER）等现实世界的产品和服务提供商使用应用内支付。苹果要么试图让优步向他们支付30%的费用，要么完全放弃这一要求。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The end of the Google search deal.</b>Google currently pays Apple a purported $12 billion a year to make Google the default search engine on iOS. This cash goes directly to EBT.</p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索交易的结束。</b>谷歌目前据称每年向苹果支付120亿美元，以使谷歌成为iOS上的默认搜索引擎。这笔现金直接流向EBT。</blockquote></p><p> <b>They would have to expose more user data to developers.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>他们将不得不向开发者公开更多的用户数据。</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>Formalizing the anti-steering decision.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>正式确定反转向决策。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> <b>Anti-retaliation provision.</b>If these bills were law, Epic would still be on the App Store while they sued Apple.</p><p><blockquote><b>反报复条款。</b>如果这些法案成为法律，当他们起诉苹果时，Epic仍将在App Store上。</blockquote></p><p> After the House is done wrangling over budget reconciliation, I think these bills will hit the House floor this fall or winter, and I think that they have a high likelihood of passing in something like their current form.</p><p><blockquote>在众议院结束关于预算协调的争论后，我认为这些法案将在今年秋天或冬天提交众议院，我认为它们很有可能以目前的形式获得通过。</blockquote></p><p> But bills also have to clear the Senate, and they move slower. Things are just getting started there. The big movers in the Senate are Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah. Klobuchar has&nbsp;written a long book&nbsp;on the subject, and it is not friendly towards Apple. She has also authored a new bill, Open App Markets Act. It is more narrow than the House suite, but not by much. It would still force Apple to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party in-app payments. They would also have to get rid of their private APIs. The bill is narrower than the House suite, and less of a threat to Apple, but still would mean the end of App Store as a driver of growth.<i>The Senate bill is the better outcome for Apple, and it is still terrible.</i></p><p><blockquote>但法案也必须通过参议院，而且进展较慢。那里的事情才刚刚开始。参议院的大推动者是明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。Klobuchar就这个问题写了一本长书，它对苹果并不友好。她还起草了一项新法案《开放应用市场法案》。它比房子套房窄，但也窄不了多少。它仍将迫使苹果允许第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方应用内支付。他们还必须摆脱他们的私有API。该法案比众议院套房更窄，对苹果的威胁也更小，但仍意味着App Store作为增长驱动力的终结。<i>参议院的法案对苹果来说是更好的结果，但仍然很糟糕。</i></blockquote></p><p> I believe that we will see something pass before the next Presidential election, or even in this Congressional session. The best Apple shareholders can hope for is that the final bill gets watered down considerably.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，在下届总统选举之前，甚至在本届国会会议上，我们会看到一些事情通过。苹果股东最大的希望就是最终法案被大幅淡化。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Outside The US</b></p><p><blockquote><b>美国境外</b></blockquote></p><p> This is in no way limited to the US. We already discussed the Japanese settlement, and South Korea is forcing Apple and Google to allow third party in-app payments. The case that is farthest along in the EU is Spotify’s, which would force Apple to not charge fees to competing services, so that means music, podcasts, games, video and fitness.</p><p><blockquote>这绝不仅限于美国。我们已经讨论了日本的和解，南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌允许第三方应用内支付。欧盟进展最快的案例是Spotify，这将迫使苹果不向竞争服务收费，因此这意味着音乐、播客、游戏、视频和健身。</blockquote></p><p> The Chinese Communist Party remains the&nbsp;second biggest tail risk in the world&nbsp;after climate change. Apple’s regulatory risk there is uniquely high, both on the supply and demand sides. Apple has already given into them by not providing their Chinese customers with the same level of privacy as everyone else. With the mood in China right now, who knows where that goes.</p><p><blockquote>中国共产党仍然是仅次于气候变化的世界第二大尾部风险。无论是在供应还是需求方面，苹果的监管风险都非常高。苹果已经屈服于他们，没有向他们的中国客户提供和其他人一样的隐私水平。以中国现在的情绪，谁知道会走向何方。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What Losing Control Of App Store Looks Like</b></p><p><blockquote><b>失去对App Store的控制是什么样子</b></blockquote></p><p> Stone Fox Capital here at Seeking Alpha is&nbsp;out with an article&nbsp;pivoting off Katy Huberty's estimation of a 2% earnings loss if the top 20 apps on the App Store were able to eschew in-app payments. Stone Fox would also like you to care about that seemingly small number:</p><p><blockquote>Seeking Alpha的Stone Fox Capital发表了一篇文章，反驳了Katy Huberty的估计，如果App Store上排名前20的应用程序能够避免应用内支付，收益将损失2%。石狐也希望大家关心一下这个看似很小的数字：</blockquote></p><p>   Apple won most of their legal case with Epic Games based on the ruling announced on September 10, but the tech giant lost the ultimate battle. The stock remains priced for perfection while the company continues to have growth paths chipped away from the business.  My last article on this subject was called “Chipping Away at App Store.” This is what is happening and the trend is now clear. There is a mood globally to take Apple down a peg, and it is happening too slowly for many people to realize it is happening.</p><p><blockquote>根据9月10日宣布的裁决，苹果赢得了与Epic Games的大部分法律诉讼，但这家科技巨头输掉了最终的战斗。该股的定价仍然是完美的，而该公司的增长道路继续从业务中被削弱。我上一篇关于这个主题的文章叫做“在App Store上削足适履”。这就是正在发生的事情，趋势现在很明显。全球都有一种降低苹果汇率的情绪，但这种情绪发生得太慢，许多人都没有意识到它正在发生。</blockquote></p><p> My own way of modeling the worst case is through my DCF model. It’s modeled as a 25% hit to Services in the first year, with services gross margin reduced from 68% to 65%, followed by a slightly increased growth rate in the segment because of composition effects — the rest of Services grows faster than App Store. I used to model that happening in fiscal 2024, but I have moved that up to fiscal 2023, beginning less than 13 months from now.</p><p><blockquote>我自己对最坏情况建模的方法是通过我的DCF模型。它的模型是第一年服务受到25%的打击，服务毛利率从68%下降到65%，随后由于构成效应，该细分市场的增长率略有上升——其余服务的增长速度快于App Store。我曾经对2024财年发生的情况进行建模，但我已将其提前到2023财年，从现在开始不到13个月。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the effect on fair value on my base case:</p><p><blockquote>以下是我的基本案例对公允价值的影响：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94b635fe7a2473aafe36bd095a1206b6\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"352\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Even with the very slow start for the reason Stone Fox says — the share price has gotten way out ahead of cash flows — my base case still shows an 11% CAGR in fair value through the end of fiscal 2025. The App Store collapse takes that down to an 8% CAGR, 12% lower by 2025.</p><p><blockquote>尽管由于Stone Fox所说的原因，起步非常缓慢——股价已经远远领先于现金流——但我的基本假设仍然显示，到2025财年末，公允价值复合年增长率为11%。App Store的倒闭使复合年增长率降至8%，到2025年将下降12%。</blockquote></p><p> Circling back, Stone Fox puts a button on this more succinctly than I can:</p><p><blockquote>回头，石狐比我更简洁地按下了一个按钮：</blockquote></p><p>   The key investor takeaway is that Apple has a bright future. The company will continue generating profits with operating cash flows topping $100 billion annually, but the tech giant will struggle to generate the growth needed to warrant the current stock price. The 2% hit to earnings might not seem meaningful, but the amount is very harmful to a stock priced for perfection.  <b>How To Take This Seriously</b></p><p><blockquote>投资者的主要收获是苹果拥有光明的未来。该公司将继续创造利润，每年运营现金流超过1000亿美元，但这家科技巨头将难以实现维持当前股价所需的增长。盈利2%的打击似乎没有意义，但这个数额对于定价完美的股票来说是非常有害的。<b>如何认真对待这个</b></blockquote></p><p> In my last article on this subject, someone cheekily replied in the comments, “‘Please take this seriously.’ What does that even mean?” That’s a good question. The first part of the answer is to stop pretending it’s not happening.</p><p><blockquote>在我关于这个主题的上一篇文章中，有人在评论中厚颜无耻地回答说：“‘请认真对待这件事。’这到底是什么意思？”这是个好问题。答案的第一部分是不要假装它没有发生。</blockquote></p><p> “If your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.” I have been using that phrase frequently since Apple hit $140. The last chart just formalizes it with math, but my opinion is that Apple will remain range-bound for some time, between $125 and $155, roughly. I still mean it: if your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。”自从苹果股价达到140美元以来，我就经常使用这个短语。最后一张图表只是用数学将其形式化，但我的观点是苹果将在一段时间内保持区间波动，大约在125美元到155美元之间。我还是这个意思：如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> But I also believe that no other company is as prepared for the future of technology, regardless of what that brings. That is a&nbsp;far longer discussion. I have been buying Apple shares on the dip since 2005, which is two splits ago. My last buy was in January 2019, when Apple reported that they would miss guidance for the first time in many years. At the time, the commentariat was telling me that Apple’s best days were behind them. I tried to explain that Apple was in a transitional phase, part of a strategy they launched around 2015 to focus more on the growth of the iPhone user base than sales. The strategy would pay off soon, I predicted, and it did in fiscal 2021. That seems like a very long time ago now.</p><p><blockquote>但我也相信，没有其他公司为技术的未来做好了准备，无论它会带来什么。这是一个长得多的讨论。自2005年以来，我一直在逢低买入苹果股票，这是两次拆分前。我最后一次购买是在2019年1月，当时苹果报告称他们将多年来首次错过指导。当时，评论员告诉我，苹果最好的日子已经过去了。我试图解释说，苹果正处于过渡阶段，这是他们在2015年左右推出的战略的一部分，旨在更多地关注iPhone用户群的增长，而不是销售。我预测，这一策略很快就会得到回报，并且在2021财年就得到了回报。那似乎是很久以前的事了。</blockquote></p><p> A consequence of buying the dip from 2005 to 2019 is that I own way too many Apple shares that I could never bring myself to sell. I am massively overweight Apple. There is a “What To Do With The Apple Shares” clause in my will. It is our largest asset, worth more than the house. That has not made me nervous until the last few months, when the tide seemed to start turning on Apple on this issue. I also used to be someone who did not take this threat seriously. I am going to start shaving my position as opportunities present themselves, and one may happen this week with the iPhone launch on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>从2005年到2019年逢低买入的一个后果是，我拥有太多苹果股票，我永远无法出售。我完全是跑赢大盘·苹果。我的遗嘱里有一个“如何处理苹果股票”的条款。这是我们最大的资产，比房子还值钱。这并没有让我感到紧张，直到最近几个月，在这个问题上，潮流似乎开始转向苹果。我也曾经是一个不把这种威胁当回事的人。随着机会的出现，我将开始削减我的职位，其中一个可能会在本周周二iPhone的发布中发生。</blockquote></p><p> <i>To be clear, I will remain overweight Apple, just less so, and I remain bullish in the long term. But I no longer feel the safety I once did with this wildly overweight position.</i></p><p><blockquote><i>需要明确的是，我仍将是跑赢大盘·苹果，只是程度有所降低，而且从长远来看，我仍然看好。但是我不再感觉到曾经在这个疯狂的跑赢大盘位置上的安全感。</i></blockquote></p><p> In contrast, if you are a long term investor who does not have a massively overweight position, watch, wait and fight confirmation bias every day. If you think this begins and ends with Epic, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，如果您是一位没有大量跑赢大盘头寸的长期投资者，请每天观察、等待并对抗确认偏差。如果你认为这是以史诗开始和结束的，那你就没有注意。</blockquote></p><p> Please take this seriously.</p><p><blockquote>请认真对待这件事。</blockquote></p><p> I will be back in a few days with hopefully happier news from the iPhone launch on Tuesday. The big question is whether Apple can begin shipping iPhone before the quarter is out.</p><p><blockquote>几天后我会带着周二iPhone发布会的好消息回来。最大的问题是苹果能否在本季度结束前开始发货iPhone。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4454891-apple-app-store-the-tide-is-turning\">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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4454891-apple-app-store-the-tide-is-turning","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1171919128","content_text":"Summary\n\nA US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic Games.\nDespite that, and in conjunction with a recent settlement with Japanese regulators, Apple will be getting rid of their anti-steering rule. This is a bigger change than people think.\nThe threat to Apple doesn't end with the Epic trial. There are bigger threats coming from the executive and legislative branches in the US, and regulators in Europe and Asia.\n\nChip Somodevilla/Getty Images News\nIt Does Not End Here\nFor some time now, I have been warning that antitrust law was about to change, and these changes would not be favorable to Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL), and that investors need to take these threats seriously. In every one of these attempts, I was rebuffed in the comments by many Apple shareholders telling me that these fears and warnings were overblown. “Long and strong AAPL!” cheerleading seems to be popular.Confirmation bias is a strong thing, and you should fight it every single day.\nMy last attempt was less than two weeks ago, and I was similarly dismissed, and even accused of being a short-selling tout to boot. That last suggestion is pretty funny to anyone who has had to listen to me drone on about Apple stock the last 16 years. The consequence of those 16 years is that I have a lot of Apple stock, so I take things like this very seriously.\nFriday’s decision in Epic v. Apple had one part very bad news for Apple, but mostly a rejection of Epic’s main claim — that iOS is a market unto itself. But the bigger threat continues to be from Congress, where they can change the law in a single session. The House has already passed several bipartisan bills through committee, and three of them seem to have pretty wide support with the rest of the House. A narrower, but just as damaging companion bill is about to start working its way through the Senate. Keep your eyes on Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah.\nThen we have regulatory action in the EU, Apple’s second most important region, where antitrust enforcers are siding with Spotify(NYSE:SPOT)in their dispute over in-app payments. Apple has already settled with Japan over their anti-steering rules. South Korea is forcing Apple and Google(NASDAQ:GOOGL)(NASDAQ:GOOG)to allow third-party in-app payments. China is a black hole of regulatory mystery.\nThe tide is turning on Apple on this issue. If you think this begins and ends with the Epic case, you haven’t been paying attention.\nRight now the threat is confined to App Store, but this is the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end. This new antitrust movement may come for other parts of Apple, like the other pillar of their fast-growing Services segment, AppleCare, and even dig deeper into the way Apple likes to do business.\nWhat The Ruling Says\nJudge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hewed very closely to existing law, because that’s what usually happens in District Court, the lowest level of the federal system. She mostly had bad news for Epic, and targeted bad news for Apple.\nThe case rested on how the court defined the “relevant market” in question. Epic wanted it to be iOS, a market unto itself because of the high walls Apple builds around the ecosystem. Judge Rogers rejected that novel claim pretty handily. But she also rejected Apple’s definition: all gaming transactions, including PCs and consoles. She settled on mobile gaming transactions, so essentially the iOS-Android duopoly of mobile gaming transactions.\nHere is the meat of the decision that follows from that:\n\n Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal…\n\n\n Nonetheless, the trial did show that Apple is engaging in anticompetitive conduct under California’s competition laws. The Court concludes that Apple’s anti-steering provisions hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice. When coupled with Apple’s incipient antitrust violations, these anti-steering provisions are anticompetitive and a nationwide remedy to eliminate those provisions is warranted.\n\nThe most important thing to note here is that the problem for Apple is California law, not federal law. Federal law changing is where the real threat remains, and we are already well into that process.\nJudge Rogers ruled that Apple has to get rid of their anti-steering rules. App developers will now be allowed to inform users of less expensive options on their website, with a link. We’ll talk about the implications in a moment. Apple charges developers 30% for in-app payments, and the first year of in-app subscriptions (15% thereafter). In-app payments and subscriptions are substantially where all of App Store revenue comes from, about 28% of the Services segment and 5.4% of all revenue in calendar 2020.\nAlso, in the category of rounding errors, Epic has to pay Apple the $3.6 million they owe them when they breached their contract. That’s about 0.001% of Apple’s 2021 top line.\nEpic’s Game\nIf you read my first article about the trial from when the pre-trial filings dropped, you may notice that I was a bit confused about what precisely Epic’s game was here. The foundation of their entire argument — that iOS was a market unto itself — was novel, to say the least. At least one of their lawyers must have informed them of the low likelihood of success on their main claims. Moreover, they burned a lot of pages on arguments not central to their case, but seem more geared towards tarnishing Apple’s reputation.\nMy current understanding is that this case was a publicity stunt. What’s more, it worked. The point was to get this issue into the public conversation. Here I am writing about it, and here you are reading about it. But more importantly, the tide is turning in Washington, and I think the issues raised by this trial have accelerated that.\nThe Anti-Steering Rule\nLike many of the App Store rules, the anti-steering rule was part of a multi-year whack-a-mole process where developers tried to find ways to cut out Apple, and Apple closed those holes. Apple fought very hard to keep this rule, but now seems to be capitulating. They settled with Japanese regulators recently on the anti-steering rules as it applied to media subscription apps, and applied the settlement to the rest of the world as well, maybe in anticipation of this ruling. With the Epic ruling, the anti-steering rule is gone.\nWhen a game developer like Epic sells their virtual currency on the App Store, they have a 30% payment fee. When they make the same transaction on their website, it is probably under 3%. This was always what this was about. Epic wanted to have their own in-app payment system to supersede Apple’s, without the friction of sending people to the website. Judge Rogers rejected that, but gave Epic a partial victory by banning Apple’s anti-steering rules.\nThe anti-steering rules prevented app developers from having text and links to their own much less expensive in-app payments or subscriptions on their websites. This is a real loss for Apple, and puts the whole structure of the two most lucrative payment methods in the App Store at risk.\nLet’s say a gaming company pays a 2.5% processing fee on their website. That means they have 27.5 percentage points of marketing to play with. They could give that entire 27.5% to users in the form of a rebate or freebies. It certainly increases friction to have to leave a game you're having fun with, but if there is a big, friendly, dark-patterned button that says “Want free money?” I think a lot of people would tap that button. What’s more, they get to book the same amount in revenue, and stick the cost down in sales and marketing.\nThat’s just one example of how companies may decide to go with this. That’s a lot of margin to play with. The reason Apple had this rule in the first place is that they feared someone would find the magic formula that would provide more revenue by eschewing in-app payments altogether, and everyone else would copy them. They had fought very hard to keep this rule for a reason.\nJust after the news broke, a friend who knows I own both stocks trolled me with this Bloomberg Terminal screenshot:\n\nRoblox(NYSE:RBLX)is a pure-play mobile gaming company. The vast majority of their revenues come from in-app payments from iOS and Android, the rest from their website sales. Their cost-of-revenues almost all goes to Apple and Google. In the TTM, they had a 74.4% gross margin. If they pay a 2.5% processing fee for website sales, that means 84% of their transaction value was through iOS and Android. If they could get that to 50-50, that would raise all their margins down to EBT by 10 percentage points. If they could get to 73% of sales on the website, they would have a 90% gross margin.\nThere is a lot of money at stake, and a huge incentive for gaming and subscription media companies to figure out how to thread this needle. And that’s all in the absence of further action by the other two branches of government.\nThe Executive Branch\nThis is a good place to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the new antitrust movement, because two of its leaders now work in the Biden administration. The movement is sometimes referred to as the “neo-Brandeis” movement after Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, because it harkens back to a much earlier era of antitrust enforcement that drastically changed in the 1980s.\nIn 1978, Robert Bork (yes,that Robert Bork) wrote a very influential book called The Antitrust Paradox. His theory urged a refocusing of enforcement away from competition, and towards consumer benefit as the main test. He argued that antitrust enforcement was propping up smaller, less efficient companies to the detriment of the economy.\nThe 1982 AT&T breakup consent decree became the prototype for the new enforcement. By controlling local and long distance telecommunication, as well as the equipment, AT&T had been underinvesting and overcharging for decades. Their breakup brought an explosion of investment into telecommunications, and brought down prices quickly for landline service and equipment. That became the limit of antitrust enforcement.\nBut the focus on consumer benefit has affected competition, and that’s what the neo-Brandeis movement hopes to change. They want antitrust enforcement to return to the way it was a century ago, with more of a focus on how large companies affect competition. Lina Khan, a law professor at Columbia, now runs the FTC, the primary antitrust enforcer in the federal government. Her 2017 law review article, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox” was the spark that lit this fire. Her colleague at Columbia Law, Tim Wu, is also one of the leaders of this movement. He is a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, and his fingerprints are all over the July competition executive order.\nThe order was very wide ranging, with 72 initiatives covering 14 departments and agencies. Most of it does not relate to Apple, but it gives you an idea of the wide breadth of the order. As it relates to Apple:\n\nRight-to-repair is a huge threat to the other pillar of Services, AppleCare, which I estimate at 25%-30% of the segment. But more than that, it would change the way Apple makes devices. Apple squeezes out efficiency gains by attaching pooled memory directly to the main processor die, and by soldering storage into the motherboard. Both of these would likely be prohibited to them, and the devices would suffer.\nThe FTC is two months into a yearlong frisk of the mobile app ecosystem. Based on previous writings, Lina Khan will likely recommend third party app stores, “sideloading” directly from the web, and an end to the in-app payments monopoly.\n\nExecutive branch action is always subject to court challenges, and they can take very long to implement. But Congress can change the law in a single session. And they are already into that process.\nThe Legislative Branch\nSince there are two houses of Congress, this issue is off on two tracks. The House Judiciary Committee recently passed a suite of bipartisan bills. Of the ones that I think have a good likelihood of passing the full House, here’s how it affects Apple:\nThey would be required to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party payments in the Apple App Store.\nRestricting Apple’s ability to acquire smaller companies. In the past 6 years, Apple has bought around 100 companies, which works out to about one every three weeks on average. It looks like they had been accelerating since fiscal 2018, but then abruptly stopped in fiscal 2021. The reason is the new leader of the FTC.\nData by YCharts\nThe big bulge you see there in 2014 is the Beats acquisition at $3 billion, which remains the exception. Otherwise, Apple buys very small companies for tens or hundreds of millions, usually shuts down any products they may have, and absorbs the talent and IP into Apple proper. Apple’s chip design unit, a cornerstone of their current success, began this way in 2008.\nNo more private APIs.This would mean everything, like the Apple Pay-enabling NFC chip, would be open to competitors.\nNo more discriminatory rules.Apple doesn’t force real-world product and service providers like Uber(NYSE:UBER)to use in-app payments. Apple would either have to try and get Uber to pay them 30%, or drop the requirement altogether.\nThe end of the Google search deal.Google currently pays Apple a purported $12 billion a year to make Google the default search engine on iOS. This cash goes directly to EBT.\nThey would have to expose more user data to developers.\nFormalizing the anti-steering decision.\nAnti-retaliation provision.If these bills were law, Epic would still be on the App Store while they sued Apple.\nAfter the House is done wrangling over budget reconciliation, I think these bills will hit the House floor this fall or winter, and I think that they have a high likelihood of passing in something like their current form.\nBut bills also have to clear the Senate, and they move slower. Things are just getting started there. The big movers in the Senate are Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah. Klobuchar has written a long book on the subject, and it is not friendly towards Apple. She has also authored a new bill, Open App Markets Act. It is more narrow than the House suite, but not by much. It would still force Apple to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party in-app payments. They would also have to get rid of their private APIs. The bill is narrower than the House suite, and less of a threat to Apple, but still would mean the end of App Store as a driver of growth.The Senate bill is the better outcome for Apple, and it is still terrible.\nI believe that we will see something pass before the next Presidential election, or even in this Congressional session. The best Apple shareholders can hope for is that the final bill gets watered down considerably.\nOutside The US\nThis is in no way limited to the US. We already discussed the Japanese settlement, and South Korea is forcing Apple and Google to allow third party in-app payments. The case that is farthest along in the EU is Spotify’s, which would force Apple to not charge fees to competing services, so that means music, podcasts, games, video and fitness.\nThe Chinese Communist Party remains the second biggest tail risk in the world after climate change. Apple’s regulatory risk there is uniquely high, both on the supply and demand sides. Apple has already given into them by not providing their Chinese customers with the same level of privacy as everyone else. With the mood in China right now, who knows where that goes.\nWhat Losing Control Of App Store Looks Like\nStone Fox Capital here at Seeking Alpha is out with an article pivoting off Katy Huberty's estimation of a 2% earnings loss if the top 20 apps on the App Store were able to eschew in-app payments. Stone Fox would also like you to care about that seemingly small number:\n\n Apple won most of their legal case with Epic Games based on the ruling announced on September 10, but the tech giant lost the ultimate battle. The stock remains priced for perfection while the company continues to have growth paths chipped away from the business.\n\nMy last article on this subject was called “Chipping Away at App Store.” This is what is happening and the trend is now clear. There is a mood globally to take Apple down a peg, and it is happening too slowly for many people to realize it is happening.\nMy own way of modeling the worst case is through my DCF model. It’s modeled as a 25% hit to Services in the first year, with services gross margin reduced from 68% to 65%, followed by a slightly increased growth rate in the segment because of composition effects — the rest of Services grows faster than App Store. I used to model that happening in fiscal 2024, but I have moved that up to fiscal 2023, beginning less than 13 months from now.\nHere is the effect on fair value on my base case:\n\nEven with the very slow start for the reason Stone Fox says — the share price has gotten way out ahead of cash flows — my base case still shows an 11% CAGR in fair value through the end of fiscal 2025. The App Store collapse takes that down to an 8% CAGR, 12% lower by 2025.\nCircling back, Stone Fox puts a button on this more succinctly than I can:\n\n The key investor takeaway is that Apple has a bright future. The company will continue generating profits with operating cash flows topping $100 billion annually, but the tech giant will struggle to generate the growth needed to warrant the current stock price. The 2% hit to earnings might not seem meaningful, but the amount is very harmful to a stock priced for perfection.\n\nHow To Take This Seriously\nIn my last article on this subject, someone cheekily replied in the comments, “‘Please take this seriously.’ What does that even mean?” That’s a good question. The first part of the answer is to stop pretending it’s not happening.\n“If your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.” I have been using that phrase frequently since Apple hit $140. The last chart just formalizes it with math, but my opinion is that Apple will remain range-bound for some time, between $125 and $155, roughly. I still mean it: if your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.\nBut I also believe that no other company is as prepared for the future of technology, regardless of what that brings. That is a far longer discussion. I have been buying Apple shares on the dip since 2005, which is two splits ago. My last buy was in January 2019, when Apple reported that they would miss guidance for the first time in many years. At the time, the commentariat was telling me that Apple’s best days were behind them. I tried to explain that Apple was in a transitional phase, part of a strategy they launched around 2015 to focus more on the growth of the iPhone user base than sales. The strategy would pay off soon, I predicted, and it did in fiscal 2021. That seems like a very long time ago now.\nA consequence of buying the dip from 2005 to 2019 is that I own way too many Apple shares that I could never bring myself to sell. I am massively overweight Apple. There is a “What To Do With The Apple Shares” clause in my will. It is our largest asset, worth more than the house. That has not made me nervous until the last few months, when the tide seemed to start turning on Apple on this issue. I also used to be someone who did not take this threat seriously. I am going to start shaving my position as opportunities present themselves, and one may happen this week with the iPhone launch on Tuesday.\nTo be clear, I will remain overweight Apple, just less so, and I remain bullish in the long term. But I no longer feel the safety I once did with this wildly overweight position.\nIn contrast, if you are a long term investor who does not have a massively overweight position, watch, wait and fight confirmation bias every day. If you think this begins and ends with Epic, you haven’t been paying attention.\nPlease take this seriously.\nI will be back in a few days with hopefully happier news from the iPhone launch on Tuesday. The big question is whether Apple can begin shipping iPhone before the quarter is out.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":520,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":888863222,"gmtCreate":1631488299666,"gmtModify":1631888928539,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/888863222","repostId":"2166377772","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":522,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":888087240,"gmtCreate":1631413863580,"gmtModify":1631888928544,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Buy the dip","listText":"Buy the dip","text":"Buy the dip","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/888087240","repostId":"1101906502","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101906502","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1631407634,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1101906502?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-09-12 08:47","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Buy or Sell Apple Stock Ahead of iPhone Event?<blockquote>在iPhone活动之前买入或卖出苹果股票？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101906502","media":"TheStreet","summary":"Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.Shares of Apple Report fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.On Sept. 14, the company will hold a virtual event to introduce the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.However, Apple remains in the news for other reas","content":"<p>Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.</p><p><blockquote>苹果股价周五承压，距离iPhone发布会只有几天了。以下是如何从这里交易股票。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Apple&nbsp;Report&nbsp;fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.</p><p><blockquote>苹果报告股价周五下跌5.10美元，跌幅3.31%，收于148.97美元，因投资者消化近期消息并为下周的iPhone发布会做准备。</blockquote></p><p> On Sept. 14, the company will&nbsp;hold a virtual event to introduce&nbsp;the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.</p><p><blockquote>9月14日，该公司将举办一场虚拟活动来介绍这款新设备。被称为“加州流媒体”的苹果预计将推出其新的iPhone和苹果手表。</blockquote></p><p> However, Apple remains in the news for other reasons, too.</p><p><blockquote>然而，苹果仍然因为其他原因出现在新闻中。</blockquote></p><p> After hitting new highs earlier this week, the stock declined Friday after news of a court ruling&nbsp;in its case with Epic Games.</p><p><blockquote>在本周早些时候创下新高后，在法院对其与Epic Games的案件做出裁决的消息传出后，该股周五下跌。</blockquote></p><p> That’s alongside a report that was published by well-known Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty, who made the case that Apple stock&nbsp;is “compelling” ahead of its upcoming event.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，摩根士丹利著名分析师凯蒂·休伯蒂(Katy Huberty)发表了一份报告，她认为苹果股票在即将举行的活动之前“引人注目”。</blockquote></p><p> Like I said, it’s a lot of information for investors to digest. Let’s take a look at how the charts are setting up.</p><p><blockquote>就像我说的，投资者需要消化很多信息。让我们来看看图表是如何设置的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading Apple Stock</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易苹果股票</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd94f6dcfc32af44a4ae542425f3c92f\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"429\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Daily chart of Apple stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>苹果股票日线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Each time Apple has reported earnings this year, it has resulted in a selloff. Unfortunately, those selloffs would come right as the stock was at or near all-time highs. Those events are marked on the chart with blue arrows.</p><p><blockquote>苹果今年每次公布财报，都会引发抛售。不幸的是，当该股处于或接近历史高点时，这些抛售就会发生。这些事件在图表上用蓝色箭头标记。</blockquote></p><p> It was even more frustrating that Apple&nbsp;blew out analysts’ expectations each time, yet the stock sold off anyway.</p><p><blockquote>更令人沮丧的是，苹果每次都超出分析师的预期，但该股仍遭到抛售。</blockquote></p><p> However, rather than a massive dip following the most recent report, the stock only pulled back to the $145 area, near the prior high. It also held the 21-day moving average as support.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在最新报告发布后，该股并没有大幅下跌，而是仅回落至145美元区域，接近之前的高点。它还持有21日均线作为支撑。</blockquote></p><p> The stock has since pushed up through $150 and earlier this week, hit new all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>此后，该股已升至150美元，并于本周早些时候创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> For now, we’re getting a dip back down to the key $150 area and the 21-day moving average. Aggressive bulls can buy this dip ahead of the company’s event on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>目前，我们正在回落至关键的150美元区域和21日移动平均线。激进的多头可以在该公司周二的活动之前逢低买入。</blockquote></p><p> If we break Friday’s low, investors may consider stopping out of the trade and buying on a potentially larger dip down to the 50-day moving average or the $145 area.</p><p><blockquote>如果我们突破周五的低点，投资者可能会考虑停止交易，并在可能更大的跌幅跌至50日移动平均线或145美元区域时买入。</blockquote></p><p> Below $145 may put the $138 level and the 200-day moving average in play.</p><p><blockquote>低于145美元可能会影响138美元水平和200日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Should Apple trade up through the all-time high at $157.26, the 161.8% extension is in play up near $160. Above that mark could put the $172 to $175 zone on the table, depending on how investors react to the event.</p><p><blockquote>如果苹果股价上涨至157.26美元的历史高点，则161.8%的涨幅将升至160美元附近。高于该关口可能会出现172美元至175美元的区域，具体取决于投资者对该事件的反应。</blockquote></p><p> For what it’s worth, September is by far Apple’s worst-performing month, up just three of the last 11 years for the month.</p><p><blockquote>无论如何，9月份是苹果迄今为止表现最差的一个月，在过去11年中，该月份仅增长了3年。</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>Buy or Sell Apple Stock Ahead of iPhone Event?<blockquote>在iPhone活动之前买入或卖出苹果股票？</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\">\nBuy or Sell Apple Stock Ahead of iPhone Event?<blockquote>在iPhone活动之前买入或卖出苹果股票？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">TheStreet</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-09-12 08:47</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.</p><p><blockquote>苹果股价周五承压，距离iPhone发布会只有几天了。以下是如何从这里交易股票。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Apple&nbsp;Report&nbsp;fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.</p><p><blockquote>苹果报告股价周五下跌5.10美元，跌幅3.31%，收于148.97美元，因投资者消化近期消息并为下周的iPhone发布会做准备。</blockquote></p><p> On Sept. 14, the company will&nbsp;hold a virtual event to introduce&nbsp;the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.</p><p><blockquote>9月14日，该公司将举办一场虚拟活动来介绍这款新设备。被称为“加州流媒体”的苹果预计将推出其新的iPhone和苹果手表。</blockquote></p><p> However, Apple remains in the news for other reasons, too.</p><p><blockquote>然而，苹果仍然因为其他原因出现在新闻中。</blockquote></p><p> After hitting new highs earlier this week, the stock declined Friday after news of a court ruling&nbsp;in its case with Epic Games.</p><p><blockquote>在本周早些时候创下新高后，在法院对其与Epic Games的案件做出裁决的消息传出后，该股周五下跌。</blockquote></p><p> That’s alongside a report that was published by well-known Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty, who made the case that Apple stock&nbsp;is “compelling” ahead of its upcoming event.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，摩根士丹利著名分析师凯蒂·休伯蒂(Katy Huberty)发表了一份报告，她认为苹果股票在即将举行的活动之前“引人注目”。</blockquote></p><p> Like I said, it’s a lot of information for investors to digest. Let’s take a look at how the charts are setting up.</p><p><blockquote>就像我说的，投资者需要消化很多信息。让我们来看看图表是如何设置的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading Apple Stock</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易苹果股票</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd94f6dcfc32af44a4ae542425f3c92f\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"429\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Daily chart of Apple stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>苹果股票日线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Each time Apple has reported earnings this year, it has resulted in a selloff. Unfortunately, those selloffs would come right as the stock was at or near all-time highs. Those events are marked on the chart with blue arrows.</p><p><blockquote>苹果今年每次公布财报，都会引发抛售。不幸的是，当该股处于或接近历史高点时，这些抛售就会发生。这些事件在图表上用蓝色箭头标记。</blockquote></p><p> It was even more frustrating that Apple&nbsp;blew out analysts’ expectations each time, yet the stock sold off anyway.</p><p><blockquote>更令人沮丧的是，苹果每次都超出分析师的预期，但该股仍遭到抛售。</blockquote></p><p> However, rather than a massive dip following the most recent report, the stock only pulled back to the $145 area, near the prior high. It also held the 21-day moving average as support.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在最新报告发布后，该股并没有大幅下跌，而是仅回落至145美元区域，接近之前的高点。它还持有21日均线作为支撑。</blockquote></p><p> The stock has since pushed up through $150 and earlier this week, hit new all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>此后，该股已升至150美元，并于本周早些时候创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> For now, we’re getting a dip back down to the key $150 area and the 21-day moving average. Aggressive bulls can buy this dip ahead of the company’s event on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>目前，我们正在回落至关键的150美元区域和21日移动平均线。激进的多头可以在该公司周二的活动之前逢低买入。</blockquote></p><p> If we break Friday’s low, investors may consider stopping out of the trade and buying on a potentially larger dip down to the 50-day moving average or the $145 area.</p><p><blockquote>如果我们突破周五的低点，投资者可能会考虑停止交易，并在可能更大的跌幅跌至50日移动平均线或145美元区域时买入。</blockquote></p><p> Below $145 may put the $138 level and the 200-day moving average in play.</p><p><blockquote>低于145美元可能会影响138美元水平和200日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Should Apple trade up through the all-time high at $157.26, the 161.8% extension is in play up near $160. Above that mark could put the $172 to $175 zone on the table, depending on how investors react to the event.</p><p><blockquote>如果苹果股价上涨至157.26美元的历史高点，则161.8%的涨幅将升至160美元附近。高于该关口可能会出现172美元至175美元的区域，具体取决于投资者对该事件的反应。</blockquote></p><p> For what it’s worth, September is by far Apple’s worst-performing month, up just three of the last 11 years for the month.</p><p><blockquote>无论如何，9月份是苹果迄今为止表现最差的一个月，在过去11年中，该月份仅增长了3年。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/trading-apple-aapl-stock-ahead-of-iphone13-event\">TheStreet</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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/trading-apple-aapl-stock-ahead-of-iphone13-event","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101906502","content_text":"Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.\nShares of Apple Report fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.\nOn Sept. 14, the company will hold a virtual event to introduce the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.\nHowever, Apple remains in the news for other reasons, too.\nAfter hitting new highs earlier this week, the stock declined Friday after news of a court ruling in its case with Epic Games.\nThat’s alongside a report that was published by well-known Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty, who made the case that Apple stock is “compelling” ahead of its upcoming event.\nLike I said, it’s a lot of information for investors to digest. Let’s take a look at how the charts are setting up.\nTrading Apple Stock\nDaily chart of Apple stock.\nEach time Apple has reported earnings this year, it has resulted in a selloff. Unfortunately, those selloffs would come right as the stock was at or near all-time highs. Those events are marked on the chart with blue arrows.\nIt was even more frustrating that Apple blew out analysts’ expectations each time, yet the stock sold off anyway.\nHowever, rather than a massive dip following the most recent report, the stock only pulled back to the $145 area, near the prior high. It also held the 21-day moving average as support.\nThe stock has since pushed up through $150 and earlier this week, hit new all-time highs.\nFor now, we’re getting a dip back down to the key $150 area and the 21-day moving average. Aggressive bulls can buy this dip ahead of the company’s event on Tuesday.\nIf we break Friday’s low, investors may consider stopping out of the trade and buying on a potentially larger dip down to the 50-day moving average or the $145 area.\nBelow $145 may put the $138 level and the 200-day moving average in play.\nShould Apple trade up through the all-time high at $157.26, the 161.8% extension is in play up near $160. Above that mark could put the $172 to $175 zone on the table, depending on how investors react to the event.\nFor what it’s worth, September is by far Apple’s worst-performing month, up just three of the last 11 years for the month.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":465,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":881899856,"gmtCreate":1631321584075,"gmtModify":1631888928548,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/881899856","repostId":"2166711943","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":578,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":880694514,"gmtCreate":1631053025138,"gmtModify":1631883892861,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586332417338594","idStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"buy<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>","listText":"buy<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>","text":"buy$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/880694514","repostId":"817455241","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":817455241,"gmtCreate":1630982859979,"gmtModify":1734394412956,"author":{"id":"3527667596890271","authorId":"3527667596890271","name":"Buy_Sell","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5f0ed79a338c758a22e0b4ea13bf9d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3527667596890271","idStr":"3527667596890271"},"themes":[],"title":"🚀【9月7日】美股昨夜休市，港股今日高开，今天买什么？","htmlText":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 9月7日讯，港股三大指数集体高开，恒指涨0.17%报26207点，国指涨0.16%报9386点，恒生科技指数涨0.52%报6814点。盘面上，国内煤炭期货开盘大涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01898\">$中煤能源(01898)$</a> 高开1.75%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01088\">$中国神华(01088)$</a> 涨0.9%；内房股、铝业股表现强势，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/02600\">$中国铝业(02600)$</a> 涨超2%；深圳前海合作区大扩容，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00152\">$深圳国际(00152)$</a> 涨近4%，深圳控股涨超3%；大型科技股普涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03690\">$美团-W(03690)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09888\">$百度集团-SW(09888)$</a> 涨1.4%，腾讯涨1%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09988\">$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09618\">$京东集团-SW(09618)$</a> 小幅高开；生物医药下跌明显，电力","listText":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 9月7日讯，港股三大指数集体高开，恒指涨0.17%报26207点，国指涨0.16%报9386点，恒生科技指数涨0.52%报6814点。盘面上，国内煤炭期货开盘大涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01898\">$中煤能源(01898)$</a> 高开1.75%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01088\">$中国神华(01088)$</a> 涨0.9%；内房股、铝业股表现强势，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/02600\">$中国铝业(02600)$</a> 涨超2%；深圳前海合作区大扩容，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00152\">$深圳国际(00152)$</a> 涨近4%，深圳控股涨超3%；大型科技股普涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03690\">$美团-W(03690)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09888\">$百度集团-SW(09888)$</a> 涨1.4%，腾讯涨1%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09988\">$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09618\">$京东集团-SW(09618)$</a> 小幅高开；生物医药下跌明显，电力","text":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 9月7日讯，港股三大指数集体高开，恒指涨0.17%报26207点，国指涨0.16%报9386点，恒生科技指数涨0.52%报6814点。盘面上，国内煤炭期货开盘大涨，$中煤能源(01898)$ 高开1.75%，$中国神华(01088)$ 涨0.9%；内房股、铝业股表现强势，$中国铝业(02600)$ 涨超2%；深圳前海合作区大扩容，$深圳国际(00152)$ 涨近4%，深圳控股涨超3%；大型科技股普涨，$美团-W(03690)$ 、$百度集团-SW(09888)$ 涨1.4%，腾讯涨1%，$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$ 、$京东集团-SW(09618)$ 小幅高开；生物医药下跌明显，电力","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8eb78770aab19e4545f8e5f25ed9867a","width":"299","height":"168"}],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":2,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/817455241","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"subType":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":2,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":834,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":804815808,"gmtCreate":1627949568704,"gmtModify":1631891880889,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like&nbsp;","listText":"Like&nbsp;","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/804815808","repostId":"1183793139","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1183793139","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":1627914562,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1183793139?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-02 22:29","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Semiconductor stocks rally after ON Semi's strong earnings<blockquote>安森美强劲盈利后半导体股上涨</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1183793139","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"(August 2) The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index is up 1.6%, outperforming the 0.3% gain for the broa","content":"<p>(August 2)&nbsp;The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index is up 1.6%, outperforming the 0.3% gain for the broader tech sector (NYSEARCA:XLK) after chipmaker ON Semiconductor (NASDAQ:ON) reported strong earnings and an upside forecast despite the continuing supply chain constraints.</p><p><blockquote>（8月2日）费城半导体指数上涨1.6%，跑赢更广泛的科技板块（NYSEARCA：XLK）0.3%的涨幅，此前芯片制造商安森美半导体（纳斯达克：ON）报告了强劲的收益和上行预测，尽管供应链持续受到限制。</blockquote></p><p> ON Semiconductor stock surges over&nbsp;14%&nbsp;after record earnings that beat expectations, upbeat outlook.</p><p><blockquote>在创纪录的盈利超出预期、前景乐观后，安森美半导体股价飙升超过14%。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">ON Semiconductor Corp.</a> (ON) shot up over&nbsp;14% in morning trading Monday, after the chipmaker reported record adjusted profit and revenue that beat expectations and provided an upbeat outlook, citing accelerating demand in the automotive and industrial end markets.</p><p><blockquote>本公司之股份<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">安森美半导体公司。</a>(ON)周一早盘交易中飙升超过14%，此前这家芯片制造商公布了创纪录的调整后利润和收入，超出预期，并提供了乐观的前景，理由是汽车和工业终端市场的需求加速。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Net income was $184.1 million, or 42 cents a share, after a loss of $1.4 billion, or roughly breakeven on a per-share basis, in the year-ago period.</li>  <li>Excluding nonrecurring items, adjusted earnings per share increased to a record 63 cents from 12 cents, beating the FactSet consensus of 49 cents.</li>  <li>Revenue grew 37.6% to $1.67 billion, above the FactSet consensus of $1.62 billion.</li>  <li>For the third quarter, the company expects adjusted EPS of 68 cents to 80 cents and revenue of $1.66 billion to $1.76 billion, above the FactSet consensus for EPS of 51 cents and revenue of $1.61 billion.</li>  <li>Gross margin is expected to improve to 38.8% to 40.9% in the third quarter from 38.3% in the second quarter.</li> </ul> The stock has rallied 19.3% year to date through Friday, while the PHLX Semiconductor Index has run up 20.1% and the S&amp;P 500 has advanced 17.0%.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>净利润为1.841亿美元，即每股42美分，去年同期亏损14亿美元，即每股大致盈亏平衡。</li><li>不包括非经常性项目，调整后每股收益从12美分增至创纪录的63美分，超过FactSet预期的49美分。</li><li>收入增长37.6%至16.7亿美元，高于FactSet预期的16.2亿美元。</li><li>该公司预计第三季度调整后每股收益为68美分至80美分，营收为16.6亿美元至17.6亿美元，高于FactSet预期的每股收益51美分和营收16.1亿美元。</li><li>预计第三季度毛利率将从第二季度的38.3%改善至38.8%至40.9%。</li></ul>截至周五，该股今年迄今已上涨19.3%，而PHLX半导体指数上涨20.1%，标普500上涨17.0%。</blockquote></p><p> MKM Partners notes that ON called out \"accelerating demand for the auto and industrial end markets\" even as the global chip shortage continues.</p><p><blockquote>MKM Partners指出，尽管全球芯片短缺仍在持续，但ON仍呼吁“汽车和工业终端市场的需求正在加速”。</blockquote></p><p> Top semiconductor gainers include ON's auto chip peers Microchip (MCHP +3.3%) and NXP Semiconductors (NXPI +2.6%) with the latter reporting earnings today after the bell. Semiconductor equipment players Applied Materials (AMAT +3.2%) and Lam Research (LRCX +2.0%) are also among the top tech gainers.</p><p><blockquote>半导体涨幅最大的股票包括ON的汽车芯片同行Microchip(MCHP+3.3%)和恩智浦半导体(NXPI+2.6%)，后者今天盘后公布了财报。半导体设备公司应用材料公司(AMAT+3.2%)和泛林研究(LRCX+2.0%)也位居科技股涨幅前列。</blockquote></p><p> Silicon Labs (SLAB +4.2%) continues to rally after announcing plans for a $1B modified Dutch auction.</p><p><blockquote>Silicon Labs(SLAB+4.2%)在宣布计划进行10亿美元修改后的荷兰拍卖后继续上涨。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/29705170f6277ecc6c92943d45c08bb7\" tg-width=\"315\" tg-height=\"412\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></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>Semiconductor stocks rally after ON Semi's strong earnings<blockquote>安森美强劲盈利后半导体股上涨</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\">\nSemiconductor stocks rally after ON Semi's strong earnings<blockquote>安森美强劲盈利后半导体股上涨</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\">2021-08-02 22:29</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(August 2)&nbsp;The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index is up 1.6%, outperforming the 0.3% gain for the broader tech sector (NYSEARCA:XLK) after chipmaker ON Semiconductor (NASDAQ:ON) reported strong earnings and an upside forecast despite the continuing supply chain constraints.</p><p><blockquote>（8月2日）费城半导体指数上涨1.6%，跑赢更广泛的科技板块（NYSEARCA：XLK）0.3%的涨幅，此前芯片制造商安森美半导体（纳斯达克：ON）报告了强劲的收益和上行预测，尽管供应链持续受到限制。</blockquote></p><p> ON Semiconductor stock surges over&nbsp;14%&nbsp;after record earnings that beat expectations, upbeat outlook.</p><p><blockquote>在创纪录的盈利超出预期、前景乐观后，安森美半导体股价飙升超过14%。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">ON Semiconductor Corp.</a> (ON) shot up over&nbsp;14% in morning trading Monday, after the chipmaker reported record adjusted profit and revenue that beat expectations and provided an upbeat outlook, citing accelerating demand in the automotive and industrial end markets.</p><p><blockquote>本公司之股份<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">安森美半导体公司。</a>(ON)周一早盘交易中飙升超过14%，此前这家芯片制造商公布了创纪录的调整后利润和收入，超出预期，并提供了乐观的前景，理由是汽车和工业终端市场的需求加速。</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Net income was $184.1 million, or 42 cents a share, after a loss of $1.4 billion, or roughly breakeven on a per-share basis, in the year-ago period.</li>  <li>Excluding nonrecurring items, adjusted earnings per share increased to a record 63 cents from 12 cents, beating the FactSet consensus of 49 cents.</li>  <li>Revenue grew 37.6% to $1.67 billion, above the FactSet consensus of $1.62 billion.</li>  <li>For the third quarter, the company expects adjusted EPS of 68 cents to 80 cents and revenue of $1.66 billion to $1.76 billion, above the FactSet consensus for EPS of 51 cents and revenue of $1.61 billion.</li>  <li>Gross margin is expected to improve to 38.8% to 40.9% in the third quarter from 38.3% in the second quarter.</li> </ul> The stock has rallied 19.3% year to date through Friday, while the PHLX Semiconductor Index has run up 20.1% and the S&amp;P 500 has advanced 17.0%.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>净利润为1.841亿美元，即每股42美分，去年同期亏损14亿美元，即每股大致盈亏平衡。</li><li>不包括非经常性项目，调整后每股收益从12美分增至创纪录的63美分，超过FactSet预期的49美分。</li><li>收入增长37.6%至16.7亿美元，高于FactSet预期的16.2亿美元。</li><li>该公司预计第三季度调整后每股收益为68美分至80美分，营收为16.6亿美元至17.6亿美元，高于FactSet预期的每股收益51美分和营收16.1亿美元。</li><li>预计第三季度毛利率将从第二季度的38.3%改善至38.8%至40.9%。</li></ul>截至周五，该股今年迄今已上涨19.3%，而PHLX半导体指数上涨20.1%，标普500上涨17.0%。</blockquote></p><p> MKM Partners notes that ON called out \"accelerating demand for the auto and industrial end markets\" even as the global chip shortage continues.</p><p><blockquote>MKM Partners指出，尽管全球芯片短缺仍在持续，但ON仍呼吁“汽车和工业终端市场的需求正在加速”。</blockquote></p><p> Top semiconductor gainers include ON's auto chip peers Microchip (MCHP +3.3%) and NXP Semiconductors (NXPI +2.6%) with the latter reporting earnings today after the bell. Semiconductor equipment players Applied Materials (AMAT +3.2%) and Lam Research (LRCX +2.0%) are also among the top tech gainers.</p><p><blockquote>半导体涨幅最大的股票包括ON的汽车芯片同行Microchip(MCHP+3.3%)和恩智浦半导体(NXPI+2.6%)，后者今天盘后公布了财报。半导体设备公司应用材料公司(AMAT+3.2%)和泛林研究(LRCX+2.0%)也位居科技股涨幅前列。</blockquote></p><p> Silicon Labs (SLAB +4.2%) continues to rally after announcing plans for a $1B modified Dutch auction.</p><p><blockquote>Silicon Labs(SLAB+4.2%)在宣布计划进行10亿美元修改后的荷兰拍卖后继续上涨。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/29705170f6277ecc6c92943d45c08bb7\" tg-width=\"315\" tg-height=\"412\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1183793139","content_text":"(August 2) The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index is up 1.6%, outperforming the 0.3% gain for the broader tech sector (NYSEARCA:XLK) after chipmaker ON Semiconductor (NASDAQ:ON) reported strong earnings and an upside forecast despite the continuing supply chain constraints.\nON Semiconductor stock surges over 14% after record earnings that beat expectations, upbeat outlook.\nShares of ON Semiconductor Corp. (ON) shot up over 14% in morning trading Monday, after the chipmaker reported record adjusted profit and revenue that beat expectations and provided an upbeat outlook, citing accelerating demand in the automotive and industrial end markets.\n\nNet income was $184.1 million, or 42 cents a share, after a loss of $1.4 billion, or roughly breakeven on a per-share basis, in the year-ago period.\nExcluding nonrecurring items, adjusted earnings per share increased to a record 63 cents from 12 cents, beating the FactSet consensus of 49 cents.\nRevenue grew 37.6% to $1.67 billion, above the FactSet consensus of $1.62 billion.\nFor the third quarter, the company expects adjusted EPS of 68 cents to 80 cents and revenue of $1.66 billion to $1.76 billion, above the FactSet consensus for EPS of 51 cents and revenue of $1.61 billion.\nGross margin is expected to improve to 38.8% to 40.9% in the third quarter from 38.3% in the second quarter.\n\nThe stock has rallied 19.3% year to date through Friday, while the PHLX Semiconductor Index has run up 20.1% and the S&P 500 has advanced 17.0%.\nMKM Partners notes that ON called out \"accelerating demand for the auto and industrial end markets\" even as the global chip shortage continues.\nTop semiconductor gainers include ON's auto chip peers Microchip (MCHP +3.3%) and NXP Semiconductors (NXPI +2.6%) with the latter reporting earnings today after the bell. Semiconductor equipment players Applied Materials (AMAT +3.2%) and Lam Research (LRCX +2.0%) are also among the top tech gainers.\nSilicon Labs (SLAB +4.2%) continues to rally after announcing plans for a $1B modified Dutch auction.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":628,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":891810339,"gmtCreate":1628377591321,"gmtModify":1631891880817,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like and follow","listText":"Like and follow","text":"Like and follow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/891810339","repostId":"1180025090","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":492,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":888863222,"gmtCreate":1631488299666,"gmtModify":1631888928539,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/888863222","repostId":"2166377772","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":522,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":888087240,"gmtCreate":1631413863580,"gmtModify":1631888928544,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Buy the dip","listText":"Buy the dip","text":"Buy the dip","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/888087240","repostId":"1101906502","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101906502","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1631407634,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1101906502?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-09-12 08:47","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Buy or Sell Apple Stock Ahead of iPhone Event?<blockquote>在iPhone活动之前买入或卖出苹果股票？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101906502","media":"TheStreet","summary":"Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.Shares of Apple Report fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.On Sept. 14, the company will hold a virtual event to introduce the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.However, Apple remains in the news for other reas","content":"<p>Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.</p><p><blockquote>苹果股价周五承压，距离iPhone发布会只有几天了。以下是如何从这里交易股票。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Apple&nbsp;Report&nbsp;fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.</p><p><blockquote>苹果报告股价周五下跌5.10美元，跌幅3.31%，收于148.97美元，因投资者消化近期消息并为下周的iPhone发布会做准备。</blockquote></p><p> On Sept. 14, the company will&nbsp;hold a virtual event to introduce&nbsp;the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.</p><p><blockquote>9月14日，该公司将举办一场虚拟活动来介绍这款新设备。被称为“加州流媒体”的苹果预计将推出其新的iPhone和苹果手表。</blockquote></p><p> However, Apple remains in the news for other reasons, too.</p><p><blockquote>然而，苹果仍然因为其他原因出现在新闻中。</blockquote></p><p> After hitting new highs earlier this week, the stock declined Friday after news of a court ruling&nbsp;in its case with Epic Games.</p><p><blockquote>在本周早些时候创下新高后，在法院对其与Epic Games的案件做出裁决的消息传出后，该股周五下跌。</blockquote></p><p> That’s alongside a report that was published by well-known Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty, who made the case that Apple stock&nbsp;is “compelling” ahead of its upcoming event.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，摩根士丹利著名分析师凯蒂·休伯蒂(Katy Huberty)发表了一份报告，她认为苹果股票在即将举行的活动之前“引人注目”。</blockquote></p><p> Like I said, it’s a lot of information for investors to digest. Let’s take a look at how the charts are setting up.</p><p><blockquote>就像我说的，投资者需要消化很多信息。让我们来看看图表是如何设置的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading Apple Stock</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易苹果股票</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd94f6dcfc32af44a4ae542425f3c92f\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"429\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Daily chart of Apple stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>苹果股票日线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Each time Apple has reported earnings this year, it has resulted in a selloff. Unfortunately, those selloffs would come right as the stock was at or near all-time highs. Those events are marked on the chart with blue arrows.</p><p><blockquote>苹果今年每次公布财报，都会引发抛售。不幸的是，当该股处于或接近历史高点时，这些抛售就会发生。这些事件在图表上用蓝色箭头标记。</blockquote></p><p> It was even more frustrating that Apple&nbsp;blew out analysts’ expectations each time, yet the stock sold off anyway.</p><p><blockquote>更令人沮丧的是，苹果每次都超出分析师的预期，但该股仍遭到抛售。</blockquote></p><p> However, rather than a massive dip following the most recent report, the stock only pulled back to the $145 area, near the prior high. It also held the 21-day moving average as support.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在最新报告发布后，该股并没有大幅下跌，而是仅回落至145美元区域，接近之前的高点。它还持有21日均线作为支撑。</blockquote></p><p> The stock has since pushed up through $150 and earlier this week, hit new all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>此后，该股已升至150美元，并于本周早些时候创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> For now, we’re getting a dip back down to the key $150 area and the 21-day moving average. Aggressive bulls can buy this dip ahead of the company’s event on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>目前，我们正在回落至关键的150美元区域和21日移动平均线。激进的多头可以在该公司周二的活动之前逢低买入。</blockquote></p><p> If we break Friday’s low, investors may consider stopping out of the trade and buying on a potentially larger dip down to the 50-day moving average or the $145 area.</p><p><blockquote>如果我们突破周五的低点，投资者可能会考虑停止交易，并在可能更大的跌幅跌至50日移动平均线或145美元区域时买入。</blockquote></p><p> Below $145 may put the $138 level and the 200-day moving average in play.</p><p><blockquote>低于145美元可能会影响138美元水平和200日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Should Apple trade up through the all-time high at $157.26, the 161.8% extension is in play up near $160. Above that mark could put the $172 to $175 zone on the table, depending on how investors react to the event.</p><p><blockquote>如果苹果股价上涨至157.26美元的历史高点，则161.8%的涨幅将升至160美元附近。高于该关口可能会出现172美元至175美元的区域，具体取决于投资者对该事件的反应。</blockquote></p><p> For what it’s worth, September is by far Apple’s worst-performing month, up just three of the last 11 years for the month.</p><p><blockquote>无论如何，9月份是苹果迄今为止表现最差的一个月，在过去11年中，该月份仅增长了3年。</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>Buy or Sell Apple Stock Ahead of iPhone Event?<blockquote>在iPhone活动之前买入或卖出苹果股票？</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\">\nBuy or Sell Apple Stock Ahead of iPhone Event?<blockquote>在iPhone活动之前买入或卖出苹果股票？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">TheStreet</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-09-12 08:47</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.</p><p><blockquote>苹果股价周五承压，距离iPhone发布会只有几天了。以下是如何从这里交易股票。</blockquote></p><p> Shares of Apple&nbsp;Report&nbsp;fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.</p><p><blockquote>苹果报告股价周五下跌5.10美元，跌幅3.31%，收于148.97美元，因投资者消化近期消息并为下周的iPhone发布会做准备。</blockquote></p><p> On Sept. 14, the company will&nbsp;hold a virtual event to introduce&nbsp;the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.</p><p><blockquote>9月14日，该公司将举办一场虚拟活动来介绍这款新设备。被称为“加州流媒体”的苹果预计将推出其新的iPhone和苹果手表。</blockquote></p><p> However, Apple remains in the news for other reasons, too.</p><p><blockquote>然而，苹果仍然因为其他原因出现在新闻中。</blockquote></p><p> After hitting new highs earlier this week, the stock declined Friday after news of a court ruling&nbsp;in its case with Epic Games.</p><p><blockquote>在本周早些时候创下新高后，在法院对其与Epic Games的案件做出裁决的消息传出后，该股周五下跌。</blockquote></p><p> That’s alongside a report that was published by well-known Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty, who made the case that Apple stock&nbsp;is “compelling” ahead of its upcoming event.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，摩根士丹利著名分析师凯蒂·休伯蒂(Katy Huberty)发表了一份报告，她认为苹果股票在即将举行的活动之前“引人注目”。</blockquote></p><p> Like I said, it’s a lot of information for investors to digest. Let’s take a look at how the charts are setting up.</p><p><blockquote>就像我说的，投资者需要消化很多信息。让我们来看看图表是如何设置的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading Apple Stock</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易苹果股票</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bd94f6dcfc32af44a4ae542425f3c92f\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"429\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Daily chart of Apple stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>苹果股票日线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Each time Apple has reported earnings this year, it has resulted in a selloff. Unfortunately, those selloffs would come right as the stock was at or near all-time highs. Those events are marked on the chart with blue arrows.</p><p><blockquote>苹果今年每次公布财报，都会引发抛售。不幸的是，当该股处于或接近历史高点时，这些抛售就会发生。这些事件在图表上用蓝色箭头标记。</blockquote></p><p> It was even more frustrating that Apple&nbsp;blew out analysts’ expectations each time, yet the stock sold off anyway.</p><p><blockquote>更令人沮丧的是，苹果每次都超出分析师的预期，但该股仍遭到抛售。</blockquote></p><p> However, rather than a massive dip following the most recent report, the stock only pulled back to the $145 area, near the prior high. It also held the 21-day moving average as support.</p><p><blockquote>然而，在最新报告发布后，该股并没有大幅下跌，而是仅回落至145美元区域，接近之前的高点。它还持有21日均线作为支撑。</blockquote></p><p> The stock has since pushed up through $150 and earlier this week, hit new all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>此后，该股已升至150美元，并于本周早些时候创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> For now, we’re getting a dip back down to the key $150 area and the 21-day moving average. Aggressive bulls can buy this dip ahead of the company’s event on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>目前，我们正在回落至关键的150美元区域和21日移动平均线。激进的多头可以在该公司周二的活动之前逢低买入。</blockquote></p><p> If we break Friday’s low, investors may consider stopping out of the trade and buying on a potentially larger dip down to the 50-day moving average or the $145 area.</p><p><blockquote>如果我们突破周五的低点，投资者可能会考虑停止交易，并在可能更大的跌幅跌至50日移动平均线或145美元区域时买入。</blockquote></p><p> Below $145 may put the $138 level and the 200-day moving average in play.</p><p><blockquote>低于145美元可能会影响138美元水平和200日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Should Apple trade up through the all-time high at $157.26, the 161.8% extension is in play up near $160. Above that mark could put the $172 to $175 zone on the table, depending on how investors react to the event.</p><p><blockquote>如果苹果股价上涨至157.26美元的历史高点，则161.8%的涨幅将升至160美元附近。高于该关口可能会出现172美元至175美元的区域，具体取决于投资者对该事件的反应。</blockquote></p><p> For what it’s worth, September is by far Apple’s worst-performing month, up just three of the last 11 years for the month.</p><p><blockquote>无论如何，9月份是苹果迄今为止表现最差的一个月，在过去11年中，该月份仅增长了3年。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/trading-apple-aapl-stock-ahead-of-iphone13-event\">TheStreet</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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/trading-apple-aapl-stock-ahead-of-iphone13-event","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101906502","content_text":"Apple stock was under pressure on Friday, with its iPhone event just days away. Here's how to trade the stock from here.\nShares of Apple Report fell $5.10, or 3.31%, to end at $148.97 Friday, as investors digested recent news and prepared for the iPhone event next week.\nOn Sept. 14, the company will hold a virtual event to introduce the new device. Dubbed “California Streaming,” it’s expected that Apple will introduce its new iPhone and Apple Watch.\nHowever, Apple remains in the news for other reasons, too.\nAfter hitting new highs earlier this week, the stock declined Friday after news of a court ruling in its case with Epic Games.\nThat’s alongside a report that was published by well-known Morgan Stanley analyst Katy Huberty, who made the case that Apple stock is “compelling” ahead of its upcoming event.\nLike I said, it’s a lot of information for investors to digest. Let’s take a look at how the charts are setting up.\nTrading Apple Stock\nDaily chart of Apple stock.\nEach time Apple has reported earnings this year, it has resulted in a selloff. Unfortunately, those selloffs would come right as the stock was at or near all-time highs. Those events are marked on the chart with blue arrows.\nIt was even more frustrating that Apple blew out analysts’ expectations each time, yet the stock sold off anyway.\nHowever, rather than a massive dip following the most recent report, the stock only pulled back to the $145 area, near the prior high. It also held the 21-day moving average as support.\nThe stock has since pushed up through $150 and earlier this week, hit new all-time highs.\nFor now, we’re getting a dip back down to the key $150 area and the 21-day moving average. Aggressive bulls can buy this dip ahead of the company’s event on Tuesday.\nIf we break Friday’s low, investors may consider stopping out of the trade and buying on a potentially larger dip down to the 50-day moving average or the $145 area.\nBelow $145 may put the $138 level and the 200-day moving average in play.\nShould Apple trade up through the all-time high at $157.26, the 161.8% extension is in play up near $160. Above that mark could put the $172 to $175 zone on the table, depending on how investors react to the event.\nFor what it’s worth, September is by far Apple’s worst-performing month, up just three of the last 11 years for the month.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":465,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":899398088,"gmtCreate":1628157428944,"gmtModify":1631891880853,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest","listText":"Latest","text":"Latest","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/899398088","repostId":"1119138550","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1119138550","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628157065,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1119138550?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-05 17:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Intel has a plan to go beyond 3nm chips<blockquote>英特尔计划超越3纳米芯片</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1119138550","media":"engadget","summary":"Its moving past nanometers, in more than one way.\n\nEarlier this year, Intel announced they were plan","content":"<p>  Its moving past nanometers, in more than <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> way.  Earlier this year, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">Intel</a> announced they were planning toretake the CPU manufacturing leadand \"unquestioned leadership\" in the PC world. These were impressive goals, but what was missing was any sense of how they'd actually achieve them. Now, we finally know Intel's plan.</p><p><blockquote>它超越了纳米，超过<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">一</a>方式。今年早些时候，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">英特尔</a>宣布他们计划夺回CPU制造的领先地位和个人电脑领域“毫无疑问的领导地位”。这些都是令人印象深刻的目标，但缺少的是他们将如何实际实现这些目标的任何感觉。现在，我们终于知道了英特尔的计划。</blockquote></p><p> Intel's CEO Pat Gelsinger and SVP of Technology Development Dr. Ann Kelleher,laid out the company's plan for the future.For starters, Intel is renaming its manufacturing nodes. What used to be 10nm \"Enhanced Superfin\" is now just \"7.\" This may feel a little duplicitous — \"just wave a wand a you've got better technology!\" — but to be fair to intel, the nanometer measurements of process nodes don't really correspond to anything physical any more, and in terms of density Intel's current 10nm chips are competitive with TSMC and Samsung's 7nm.</p><p><blockquote>英特尔首席执行官Pat Gelsinger和技术开发高级副总裁Ann Kelleher博士阐述了公司的未来计划。首先，英特尔正在重新命名其制造节点。曾经的10nm“增强型Superfin”现在只有“7”。这可能感觉有点口是心非——“只要挥挥魔杖，你就有更好的技术！”-但公平地说，工艺节点的纳米测量不再真正对应于任何物理事物，就密度而言，英特尔目前的10纳米芯片与台积电和三星的7纳米芯片具有竞争力。</blockquote></p><p> Looking beyond 7nm, Intel is targeting an aggressive release schedule with major product updates happening annually. We're expecting their Alder Lake chips this fall, which will mix high and low-powered cores, followed by now-4nm Meteor Lake chips that will move to a \"tile\" (chiplet) design, and incorporate Intel's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DDD\">3D</a> stacked-chip technology, Foveros.</p><p><blockquote>展望7纳米之后，英特尔的目标是制定积极的发布时间表，每年都会进行重大产品更新。我们预计今年秋天他们的Alder Lake芯片将混合高功率和低功率内核，随后是现在的4纳米Meteor Lake芯片，将转向“平铺”（chiplet）设计，并结合英特尔的<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DDD\">3D</a>堆叠芯片技术。</blockquote></p><p> Beyond that, Intel has technology mapped out for an EUV-based 3nm node that will use the high-energy manufacturing process to streamline chip creation, and a \"20A\" for angstrom node. This is one ten-billionth of a meter (meaning it's 2nm), and will be followed by a 18A node that Intel hopes to start moving into production in 2025 for products sometime in the 2nd half of the decade. Again, while node measurements don't really correspond to physical structures any more, a silicon atom is in the area of 2 angstroms wide, so these are seriously tiny transistors.</p><p><blockquote>除此之外，英特尔还为基于EUV的3纳米节点制定了技术，该节点将使用高能制造工艺来简化芯片创建，并为angstrom节点制定了“20A”技术。这是十亿分之一米（意味着它是2纳米），随后将是一个18A节点，英特尔希望在2025年开始生产，用于本十年后半期的产品。同样，虽然节点测量不再真正对应于物理结构，但硅原子的宽度约为2埃，因此这些晶体管非常微小。</blockquote></p><p> This release schedule seems aggressive, and Intel does not have the best track record of meeting targets for new nodes, but if it can even come close to these goals, expect your laptops and desktops to get a huge performance boost in the next few years.</p><p><blockquote>这个发布时间表似乎很激进，英特尔在满足新节点目标方面没有最好的记录，但如果它甚至可以接近这些目标，预计您的笔记本电脑和台式机将在未来几年内获得巨大的性能提升。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1628157128723","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>Intel has a plan to go beyond 3nm chips<blockquote>英特尔计划超越3纳米芯片</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\">\nIntel has a plan to go beyond 3nm chips<blockquote>英特尔计划超越3纳米芯片</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">engadget</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-05 17:51</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Its moving past nanometers, in more than <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> way.  Earlier this year, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">Intel</a> announced they were planning toretake the CPU manufacturing leadand \"unquestioned leadership\" in the PC world. These were impressive goals, but what was missing was any sense of how they'd actually achieve them. Now, we finally know Intel's plan.</p><p><blockquote>它超越了纳米，超过<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">一</a>方式。今年早些时候，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">英特尔</a>宣布他们计划夺回CPU制造的领先地位和个人电脑领域“毫无疑问的领导地位”。这些都是令人印象深刻的目标，但缺少的是他们将如何实际实现这些目标的任何感觉。现在，我们终于知道了英特尔的计划。</blockquote></p><p> Intel's CEO Pat Gelsinger and SVP of Technology Development Dr. Ann Kelleher,laid out the company's plan for the future.For starters, Intel is renaming its manufacturing nodes. What used to be 10nm \"Enhanced Superfin\" is now just \"7.\" This may feel a little duplicitous — \"just wave a wand a you've got better technology!\" — but to be fair to intel, the nanometer measurements of process nodes don't really correspond to anything physical any more, and in terms of density Intel's current 10nm chips are competitive with TSMC and Samsung's 7nm.</p><p><blockquote>英特尔首席执行官Pat Gelsinger和技术开发高级副总裁Ann Kelleher博士阐述了公司的未来计划。首先，英特尔正在重新命名其制造节点。曾经的10nm“增强型Superfin”现在只有“7”。这可能感觉有点口是心非——“只要挥挥魔杖，你就有更好的技术！”-但公平地说，工艺节点的纳米测量不再真正对应于任何物理事物，就密度而言，英特尔目前的10纳米芯片与台积电和三星的7纳米芯片具有竞争力。</blockquote></p><p> Looking beyond 7nm, Intel is targeting an aggressive release schedule with major product updates happening annually. We're expecting their Alder Lake chips this fall, which will mix high and low-powered cores, followed by now-4nm Meteor Lake chips that will move to a \"tile\" (chiplet) design, and incorporate Intel's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DDD\">3D</a> stacked-chip technology, Foveros.</p><p><blockquote>展望7纳米之后，英特尔的目标是制定积极的发布时间表，每年都会进行重大产品更新。我们预计今年秋天他们的Alder Lake芯片将混合高功率和低功率内核，随后是现在的4纳米Meteor Lake芯片，将转向“平铺”（chiplet）设计，并结合英特尔的<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DDD\">3D</a>堆叠芯片技术。</blockquote></p><p> Beyond that, Intel has technology mapped out for an EUV-based 3nm node that will use the high-energy manufacturing process to streamline chip creation, and a \"20A\" for angstrom node. This is one ten-billionth of a meter (meaning it's 2nm), and will be followed by a 18A node that Intel hopes to start moving into production in 2025 for products sometime in the 2nd half of the decade. Again, while node measurements don't really correspond to physical structures any more, a silicon atom is in the area of 2 angstroms wide, so these are seriously tiny transistors.</p><p><blockquote>除此之外，英特尔还为基于EUV的3纳米节点制定了技术，该节点将使用高能制造工艺来简化芯片创建，并为angstrom节点制定了“20A”技术。这是十亿分之一米（意味着它是2纳米），随后将是一个18A节点，英特尔希望在2025年开始生产，用于本十年后半期的产品。同样，虽然节点测量不再真正对应于物理结构，但硅原子的宽度约为2埃，因此这些晶体管非常微小。</blockquote></p><p> This release schedule seems aggressive, and Intel does not have the best track record of meeting targets for new nodes, but if it can even come close to these goals, expect your laptops and desktops to get a huge performance boost in the next few years.</p><p><blockquote>这个发布时间表似乎很激进，英特尔在满足新节点目标方面没有最好的记录，但如果它甚至可以接近这些目标，预计您的笔记本电脑和台式机将在未来几年内获得巨大的性能提升。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.engadget.com/intel-laid-out-an-aggressive-plan-to-build-angstrom-scale-transistors-within-the-next-five-years-180020485.html\">engadget</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":{"INTC":"英特尔","03086":"华夏纳指","09086":"华夏纳指-U"},"source_url":"https://www.engadget.com/intel-laid-out-an-aggressive-plan-to-build-angstrom-scale-transistors-within-the-next-five-years-180020485.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1119138550","content_text":"Its moving past nanometers, in more than one way.\n\nEarlier this year, Intel announced they were planning toretake the CPU manufacturing leadand \"unquestioned leadership\" in the PC world. These were impressive goals, but what was missing was any sense of how they'd actually achieve them. Now, we finally know Intel's plan.\nIntel's CEO Pat Gelsinger and SVP of Technology Development Dr. Ann Kelleher,laid out the company's plan for the future.For starters, Intel is renaming its manufacturing nodes. What used to be 10nm \"Enhanced Superfin\" is now just \"7.\" This may feel a little duplicitous — \"just wave a wand a you've got better technology!\" — but to be fair to intel, the nanometer measurements of process nodes don't really correspond to anything physical any more, and in terms of density Intel's current 10nm chips are competitive with TSMC and Samsung's 7nm.\nLooking beyond 7nm, Intel is targeting an aggressive release schedule with major product updates happening annually. We're expecting their Alder Lake chips this fall, which will mix high and low-powered cores, followed by now-4nm Meteor Lake chips that will move to a \"tile\" (chiplet) design, and incorporate Intel's 3D stacked-chip technology, Foveros.\nBeyond that, Intel has technology mapped out for an EUV-based 3nm node that will use the high-energy manufacturing process to streamline chip creation, and a \"20A\" for angstrom node. This is one ten-billionth of a meter (meaning it's 2nm), and will be followed by a 18A node that Intel hopes to start moving into production in 2025 for products sometime in the 2nd half of the decade. Again, while node measurements don't really correspond to physical structures any more, a silicon atom is in the area of 2 angstroms wide, so these are seriously tiny transistors.\nThis release schedule seems aggressive, and Intel does not have the best track record of meeting targets for new nodes, but if it can even come close to these goals, expect your laptops and desktops to get a huge performance boost in the next few years.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"INTC":0.9,"03086":0.9,"09086":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":688,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":890754380,"gmtCreate":1628137045540,"gmtModify":1631891880864,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like please","listText":"Like please","text":"Like please","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/890754380","repostId":"1158747638","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":445,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":873988440,"gmtCreate":1636843830814,"gmtModify":1636843830928,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good news&nbsp;","listText":"Good news&nbsp;","text":"Good news","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/873988440","repostId":"1102251183","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1102251183","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1636772424,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1102251183?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-11-13 11:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Pfizer Shows Its R&D Is Strong. It’s a Good Sign for the Stock.<blockquote>辉瑞显示其研发实力雄厚。这对该股来说是一个好兆头。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1102251183","media":"Barrons","summary":"Pfizer’s chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Mo","content":"<p>Pfizer’s&nbsp;chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Monday morning. It was just days after his company knocked the socks off the market with the news that its Covid-19 antiviral had cut the risk of hospitalization by 89% in high-risk adults.</p><p><blockquote>周一早上，辉瑞公司首席科学官米凯尔·多尔斯滕(Mikael Dolsten)接到电话时，听起来很头晕。就在几天前，他的公司宣布其Covid-19抗病毒药物将高危成年人的住院风险降低了89%。</blockquote></p><p> “It can’t be just a random thing, that you’re able to beat this type of world record and get a grand slam at the same time by chance,” Dolsten said, scrambling sports metaphors as he sought to illustrate the magnitude of Pfizer’s twin wins: the development of a stunningly effective Covid-19 vaccine in just 10 months, followed a year later by the development of a similarly stunning Covid-19 antiviral.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕说：“你能够打破这种类型的世界纪录，同时偶然获得大满贯，这不可能只是一件随机的事情。”他在试图说明辉瑞的双重胜利：在短短10个月内开发出了一种效果惊人的Covid-19疫苗，一年后又开发出了一种同样令人惊叹的Covid-19抗病毒药物。</blockquote></p><p> Two years ago, Pfizer (ticker: PFE) CEO Albert Bourla asked investors to take a big gamble on the research-and-development operation that Dolsten has rebuilt over the course of more than a decade. That bet is looking smarter than ever.</p><p><blockquote>两年前，辉瑞（股票代码：PFE）首席执行官阿尔伯特·布尔拉（Albert Bourla）要求投资者对多尔斯滕十多年来重建的研发业务进行豪赌。这个赌注看起来比以往任何时候都更聪明。</blockquote></p><p> Bourla has gotten rid of Pfizer’s off-patent drugs division and the last of its consumer health products, leaving behind a pure-play biopharma company that will live or die on the strength of Dolsten’s science.</p><p><blockquote>Bourla已经摆脱了辉瑞的非专利药物部门及其最后的消费者健康产品，留下了一家纯粹的生物制药公司，该公司的生死存亡都取决于Dolsten的科学实力。</blockquote></p><p> In a cover story in November 2019, <i>Barron’s</i> argued that Bourla and Dolsten could pull it off.</p><p><blockquote>在2019年11月的一篇封面报道中，<i>巴伦周刊</i>认为布尔拉和多尔斯滕可以成功。</blockquote></p><p> The new antiviral data reaffirms the case for Pfizer that <i>Barron’s</i> made two years ago. Continuing to profit off the pandemic, however, brings new risks, as criticism grows over the global inequity in vaccine distribution. Low-income nations account for less than 1% of the more than seven billion doses administered worldwide. If distribution of Pfizer’s antiviral continues to favor wealthy nations, the company’s stock could ultimately suffer.</p><p><blockquote>新的抗病毒数据再次证实了辉瑞的理由<i>巴伦周刊</i>两年前做的。然而，随着对全球疫苗分配不平等的批评越来越多，继续从大流行中获利会带来新的风险。在全球超过70亿剂疫苗中，低收入国家仅占不到1%。如果辉瑞抗病毒药物的分销继续有利于富裕国家，该公司的股票最终可能会受到影响。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer’s shares surged 10.9% the day the data came out, their best daily showing in at least 20 years. Still, with the stock now changing hands at around $50, investors continue to undervalue the company. Investors are pricing Pfizer at 12 times next year’s expected earnings, cheaper than peers like&nbsp;Johnson &amp; Johnson&nbsp;(JNJ) and&nbsp;Eli Lilly&nbsp;(LLY).</p><p><blockquote>数据公布当天，辉瑞股价飙升10.9%，创下至少20年来的最佳单日表现。尽管如此，由于该股目前易手价格约为50美元，投资者继续低估该公司的价值。投资者对辉瑞的定价是明年预期收益的12倍，低于强生(JNJ)和礼来(LLY)等同行。</blockquote></p><p> The Pfizer discount can be attributed to concerns over the patent cliff the drugmaker faces at the end of the decade. The company stands to lose exclusivity over a handful of drugs that bring in billions in annual revenue.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞的折扣可归因于对该制药商在本世纪末面临专利悬崖的担忧。该公司将失去对少数年收入数十亿美元的药物的独家经营权。</blockquote></p><p> The worries are legitimate, but Pfizer’s scientific coup should give investors confidence that the company’s science can carry it safely over that cliff. It may take time for the market to catch up, but for long-term investors, it’s a promising opportunity.</p><p><blockquote>这些担忧是合理的，但辉瑞的科学政变应该让投资者相信该公司的科学能够安全地越过悬崖。市场可能需要时间才能赶上，但对于长期投资者来说，这是一个充满希望的机会。</blockquote></p><p> The success of the antiviral is the best illustration yet of Pfizer’s scientific prowess.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒药物的成功是辉瑞科学实力的最佳例证。</blockquote></p><p> While Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine came out of the labs of the German biotech&nbsp;BioNTech&nbsp;(BNTX), the new Covid-19 antiviral was whipped up by what Dolsten called a “dream team” of scientists at Pfizer’s own labs across the Northeast U.S.</p><p><blockquote>虽然辉瑞的新冠肺炎疫苗来自德国生物技术公司BioNTech(BNTX)的实验室，但新的新冠肺炎抗病毒药物是由多尔斯滕所说的辉瑞位于美国东北部实验室的科学家“梦之队”研制出来的。</blockquote></p><p> In the earliest days of the pandemic, Pfizer split its efforts between its collaboration with BioNTech on the vaccine and its quest for a Covid-19 pill. The vaccine effort operated on a huge scale; Dolsten called it a “mega team” that spanned the Atlantic.</p><p><blockquote>在大流行的早期，辉瑞公司将其努力分为与BioNTech在疫苗上的合作和对新冠肺炎药丸的探索。疫苗工作规模巨大；多尔斯滕称之为横跨大西洋的“巨型团队”。</blockquote></p><p> The antiviral project was a much smaller operation—a group of Pfizer experts operating with resources left over from the vaccine push.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒项目规模要小得多——一组辉瑞专家利用疫苗推广剩余的资源进行运营。</blockquote></p><p> “The small molecule was more like a nimble, laser-focused, high-end team, with rather moderate resources,” Dolsten said.</p><p><blockquote>“小分子更像是一个灵活、专注于激光的高端团队，拥有相当适中的资源，”多尔斯滕说。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten gathered some of Pfizer’s most experienced scientists to work on the antiviral project, including its head of medicine design, Charlotte Allerton. The scientists started with work Pfizer had done years ago on a type of antiviral called a protease inhibitor.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕召集了辉瑞公司一些最有经验的科学家参与抗病毒项目，其中包括药物设计主管夏洛特·阿勒顿。科学家们从辉瑞公司多年前在一种叫做蛋白酶抑制剂的抗病毒药物上所做的工作开始。</blockquote></p><p> “[Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought.”</p><p><blockquote>“（辉瑞的）制药研发比人们想象的要好。”</blockquote></p><p> The protease inhibitors in the Pfizer library, however, had been administered intravenously, and had not worked well when delivered orally. The team had to figure out how to adapt the drugs to oral administration, a substantial undertaking.</p><p><blockquote>然而，辉瑞文库中的蛋白酶抑制剂已经静脉内施用，并且当口服递送时效果不佳。该团队必须弄清楚如何使药物适应口服给药，这是一项艰巨的任务。</blockquote></p><p> “They had to really create a lot of new chemistry,” Dolsten said. The scientists created 600 compounds to nail down the right drug, a process that might normally take years, and which they accomplished in a matter of months. “Four years turned into four months here,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“他们必须真正创造很多新的化学反应，”多尔斯滕说。科学家们创造了600种化合物来确定正确的药物，这个过程通常可能需要数年时间，但他们在几个月内就完成了。“在这里，四年变成了四个月，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer started testing the pill in humans in March. It is now running a number of Phase 2/3 trials of the drug, including one for patients who are high risk, one for patients not high risk, and one as a prophylaxis for patients who have been exposed to the virus but aren’t yet sick. In the first readout, the drug looked substantially more effective than the Covid treatment pill from&nbsp;Merck&nbsp;(MRK).</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞公司于三月份开始在人体中测试这种药物。该公司目前正在进行该药物的多项2/3期试验，包括一项针对高风险患者，一项针对非高风险患者，以及一项针对接触过病毒但尚未患病的患者的预防试验。在第一次读数中，该药物看起来比默克公司(MRK)的新冠治疗药物有效得多。</blockquote></p><p> “It definitely helps prove the point that [Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought,” says Louise Chen, an analyst at Cantor Fitzgerald, who has an Overweight rating and a $61 price target on the stock.</p><p><blockquote>Cantor Fitzgerald分析师Louise Chen表示：“这无疑有助于证明辉瑞的制药研发比人们想象的要好。”她对该股给予跑赢大盘评级，目标价为61美元。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Chen says that she doesn’t expect investors to come around to her way of thinking until there is more clarity on the durability of Covid-19 vaccine and pill sales, and the rest of the pipeline gets proved out.</p><p><blockquote>陈表示，在Covid-19疫苗和药丸销售的持久性更加明确以及其余产品得到证实之前，她预计投资者不会接受她的想法。</blockquote></p><p> “There is not one event that I think will trigger a re-rating of the stock at the next level,” she says. “Until those things play out, I don’t think that it necessarily will.”</p><p><blockquote>“我认为没有一个事件会引发该股下一个级别的重新评级，”她说。“在这些事情发生之前，我认为不一定会发生。”</blockquote></p><p> That makes a bet on Pfizer a long-term play. In the meantime, the experience of&nbsp;Moderna&nbsp;(MRNA) in recent weeks is highlighting the potential for the vaccine makers to come under scrutiny over unequal distribution of vaccines.</p><p><blockquote>这使得对辉瑞的押注成为一项长期投资。与此同时，Moderna(MRNA)最近几周的经历凸显了疫苗制造商因疫苗分配不平等而受到审查的可能性。</blockquote></p><p> Biden administration officials have been increasingly frustrated with Moderna, calling on the company to ramp up production so it can offer more doses at not-for-profit prices to low-income countries, with one top official calling on the company to “step up.”</p><p><blockquote>拜登政府官员对Moderna越来越失望，呼吁该公司提高产量，以便能够以非营利价格向低收入国家提供更多剂量，一位高级官员呼吁该公司“挺身而出”。</blockquote></p><p> Moderna shares are down more than 40% over the past three months.</p><p><blockquote>Moderna股价在过去三个月下跌了40%以上。</blockquote></p><p> As the pandemic persists, Pfizer risks eroding the enormous goodwill it earned roughly a year ago when it introduced its Covid-19 vaccine. Earlier this month, Pfizer CEO Bourla blamed low-income countries for unfair vaccine distribution, telling <i>Barron’s</i> that it was their fault for not placing orders. Pfizer has sold a billion vaccine doses to the U.S. at a not-for-profit price to donate to poor countries, and says that a total of at least two billion doses will be delivered to low- and middle-income nations by the end of next year.</p><p><blockquote>随着疫情的持续，辉瑞面临着侵蚀大约一年前推出Covid-19疫苗时赢得的巨大商誉的风险。本月早些时候，辉瑞首席执行官布尔拉指责低收入国家疫苗分配不公平，告诉<i>巴伦周刊</i>没有下订单是他们的错。辉瑞公司已以非营利价格向美国出售了10亿剂疫苗，捐赠给贫穷国家，并表示到明年年底将向中低收入国家提供总计至少20亿剂疫苗。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to antivirals, Pfizer has said only that it will offer tiered pricing for poorer nations, the same approach it has taken with its vaccine.</p><p><blockquote>在抗病毒药物方面，辉瑞仅表示将为较贫穷国家提供分级定价，与其疫苗采取的方法相同。</blockquote></p><p> That contrasts sharply with Merck’s plan to make its own Covid-19 pill available to poor countries. Merck has signed a deal with a United Nations-backed group that will allow its pill to be licensed globally, with no royalties paid to Merck.</p><p><blockquote>这与默克公司向贫穷国家提供自己的Covid-19药丸的计划形成鲜明对比。默克公司已与一个联合国支持的组织签署了一项协议，允许其药丸在全球范围内获得许可，无需向默克公司支付特许权使用费。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten said that Pfizer is looking into licensing its pill under a similar mechanism as Merck’s. “We will look at those options,” he said. “By no means have we said we would do something different. We just want to make sure whoever will be involved gets the advice and skill to do this.”</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕表示，辉瑞正在考虑根据与默克类似的机制许可其药物。“我们将考虑这些选择，”他说。“我们绝不是说我们会做一些不同的事情。我们只是想确保参与其中的人都能获得这样做的建议和技能。”</blockquote></p><p> Such a step couldn’t come soon enough. Late last month, activists protested outside Bourla’s home, calling on Pfizer to share its vaccine manufacturing technology and to fill orders from low-income countries ahead of those from wealthy countries.</p><p><blockquote>这样的一步来得太快了。上月底，活动人士在布尔拉家外抗议，呼吁辉瑞分享其疫苗制造技术，并在富裕国家之前完成低收入国家的订单。</blockquote></p><p> An aggressive plan to share its antiviral would help stave off such criticism, keeping Pfizer in the relative good graces of Washington and allowing its impressive science to continue to drive the stock higher.</p><p><blockquote>分享其抗病毒药物的积极计划将有助于避免此类批评，使辉瑞公司相对受到华盛顿的青睐，并使其令人印象深刻的科学知识继续推动股价走高。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Pfizer Shows Its R&D Is Strong. It’s a Good Sign for the Stock.<blockquote>辉瑞显示其研发实力雄厚。这对该股来说是一个好兆头。</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\">\nPfizer Shows Its R&D Is Strong. It’s a Good Sign for the Stock.<blockquote>辉瑞显示其研发实力雄厚。这对该股来说是一个好兆头。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barrons</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-11-13 11:00</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Pfizer’s&nbsp;chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Monday morning. It was just days after his company knocked the socks off the market with the news that its Covid-19 antiviral had cut the risk of hospitalization by 89% in high-risk adults.</p><p><blockquote>周一早上，辉瑞公司首席科学官米凯尔·多尔斯滕(Mikael Dolsten)接到电话时，听起来很头晕。就在几天前，他的公司宣布其Covid-19抗病毒药物将高危成年人的住院风险降低了89%。</blockquote></p><p> “It can’t be just a random thing, that you’re able to beat this type of world record and get a grand slam at the same time by chance,” Dolsten said, scrambling sports metaphors as he sought to illustrate the magnitude of Pfizer’s twin wins: the development of a stunningly effective Covid-19 vaccine in just 10 months, followed a year later by the development of a similarly stunning Covid-19 antiviral.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕说：“你能够打破这种类型的世界纪录，同时偶然获得大满贯，这不可能只是一件随机的事情。”他在试图说明辉瑞的双重胜利：在短短10个月内开发出了一种效果惊人的Covid-19疫苗，一年后又开发出了一种同样令人惊叹的Covid-19抗病毒药物。</blockquote></p><p> Two years ago, Pfizer (ticker: PFE) CEO Albert Bourla asked investors to take a big gamble on the research-and-development operation that Dolsten has rebuilt over the course of more than a decade. That bet is looking smarter than ever.</p><p><blockquote>两年前，辉瑞（股票代码：PFE）首席执行官阿尔伯特·布尔拉（Albert Bourla）要求投资者对多尔斯滕十多年来重建的研发业务进行豪赌。这个赌注看起来比以往任何时候都更聪明。</blockquote></p><p> Bourla has gotten rid of Pfizer’s off-patent drugs division and the last of its consumer health products, leaving behind a pure-play biopharma company that will live or die on the strength of Dolsten’s science.</p><p><blockquote>Bourla已经摆脱了辉瑞的非专利药物部门及其最后的消费者健康产品，留下了一家纯粹的生物制药公司，该公司的生死存亡都取决于Dolsten的科学实力。</blockquote></p><p> In a cover story in November 2019, <i>Barron’s</i> argued that Bourla and Dolsten could pull it off.</p><p><blockquote>在2019年11月的一篇封面报道中，<i>巴伦周刊</i>认为布尔拉和多尔斯滕可以成功。</blockquote></p><p> The new antiviral data reaffirms the case for Pfizer that <i>Barron’s</i> made two years ago. Continuing to profit off the pandemic, however, brings new risks, as criticism grows over the global inequity in vaccine distribution. Low-income nations account for less than 1% of the more than seven billion doses administered worldwide. If distribution of Pfizer’s antiviral continues to favor wealthy nations, the company’s stock could ultimately suffer.</p><p><blockquote>新的抗病毒数据再次证实了辉瑞的理由<i>巴伦周刊</i>两年前做的。然而，随着对全球疫苗分配不平等的批评越来越多，继续从大流行中获利会带来新的风险。在全球超过70亿剂疫苗中，低收入国家仅占不到1%。如果辉瑞抗病毒药物的分销继续有利于富裕国家，该公司的股票最终可能会受到影响。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer’s shares surged 10.9% the day the data came out, their best daily showing in at least 20 years. Still, with the stock now changing hands at around $50, investors continue to undervalue the company. Investors are pricing Pfizer at 12 times next year’s expected earnings, cheaper than peers like&nbsp;Johnson &amp; Johnson&nbsp;(JNJ) and&nbsp;Eli Lilly&nbsp;(LLY).</p><p><blockquote>数据公布当天，辉瑞股价飙升10.9%，创下至少20年来的最佳单日表现。尽管如此，由于该股目前易手价格约为50美元，投资者继续低估该公司的价值。投资者对辉瑞的定价是明年预期收益的12倍，低于强生(JNJ)和礼来(LLY)等同行。</blockquote></p><p> The Pfizer discount can be attributed to concerns over the patent cliff the drugmaker faces at the end of the decade. The company stands to lose exclusivity over a handful of drugs that bring in billions in annual revenue.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞的折扣可归因于对该制药商在本世纪末面临专利悬崖的担忧。该公司将失去对少数年收入数十亿美元的药物的独家经营权。</blockquote></p><p> The worries are legitimate, but Pfizer’s scientific coup should give investors confidence that the company’s science can carry it safely over that cliff. It may take time for the market to catch up, but for long-term investors, it’s a promising opportunity.</p><p><blockquote>这些担忧是合理的，但辉瑞的科学政变应该让投资者相信该公司的科学能够安全地越过悬崖。市场可能需要时间才能赶上，但对于长期投资者来说，这是一个充满希望的机会。</blockquote></p><p> The success of the antiviral is the best illustration yet of Pfizer’s scientific prowess.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒药物的成功是辉瑞科学实力的最佳例证。</blockquote></p><p> While Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine came out of the labs of the German biotech&nbsp;BioNTech&nbsp;(BNTX), the new Covid-19 antiviral was whipped up by what Dolsten called a “dream team” of scientists at Pfizer’s own labs across the Northeast U.S.</p><p><blockquote>虽然辉瑞的新冠肺炎疫苗来自德国生物技术公司BioNTech(BNTX)的实验室，但新的新冠肺炎抗病毒药物是由多尔斯滕所说的辉瑞位于美国东北部实验室的科学家“梦之队”研制出来的。</blockquote></p><p> In the earliest days of the pandemic, Pfizer split its efforts between its collaboration with BioNTech on the vaccine and its quest for a Covid-19 pill. The vaccine effort operated on a huge scale; Dolsten called it a “mega team” that spanned the Atlantic.</p><p><blockquote>在大流行的早期，辉瑞公司将其努力分为与BioNTech在疫苗上的合作和对新冠肺炎药丸的探索。疫苗工作规模巨大；多尔斯滕称之为横跨大西洋的“巨型团队”。</blockquote></p><p> The antiviral project was a much smaller operation—a group of Pfizer experts operating with resources left over from the vaccine push.</p><p><blockquote>抗病毒项目规模要小得多——一组辉瑞专家利用疫苗推广剩余的资源进行运营。</blockquote></p><p> “The small molecule was more like a nimble, laser-focused, high-end team, with rather moderate resources,” Dolsten said.</p><p><blockquote>“小分子更像是一个灵活、专注于激光的高端团队，拥有相当适中的资源，”多尔斯滕说。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten gathered some of Pfizer’s most experienced scientists to work on the antiviral project, including its head of medicine design, Charlotte Allerton. The scientists started with work Pfizer had done years ago on a type of antiviral called a protease inhibitor.</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕召集了辉瑞公司一些最有经验的科学家参与抗病毒项目，其中包括药物设计主管夏洛特·阿勒顿。科学家们从辉瑞公司多年前在一种叫做蛋白酶抑制剂的抗病毒药物上所做的工作开始。</blockquote></p><p> “[Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought.”</p><p><blockquote>“（辉瑞的）制药研发比人们想象的要好。”</blockquote></p><p> The protease inhibitors in the Pfizer library, however, had been administered intravenously, and had not worked well when delivered orally. The team had to figure out how to adapt the drugs to oral administration, a substantial undertaking.</p><p><blockquote>然而，辉瑞文库中的蛋白酶抑制剂已经静脉内施用，并且当口服递送时效果不佳。该团队必须弄清楚如何使药物适应口服给药，这是一项艰巨的任务。</blockquote></p><p> “They had to really create a lot of new chemistry,” Dolsten said. The scientists created 600 compounds to nail down the right drug, a process that might normally take years, and which they accomplished in a matter of months. “Four years turned into four months here,” he said.</p><p><blockquote>“他们必须真正创造很多新的化学反应，”多尔斯滕说。科学家们创造了600种化合物来确定正确的药物，这个过程通常可能需要数年时间，但他们在几个月内就完成了。“在这里，四年变成了四个月，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer started testing the pill in humans in March. It is now running a number of Phase 2/3 trials of the drug, including one for patients who are high risk, one for patients not high risk, and one as a prophylaxis for patients who have been exposed to the virus but aren’t yet sick. In the first readout, the drug looked substantially more effective than the Covid treatment pill from&nbsp;Merck&nbsp;(MRK).</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞公司于三月份开始在人体中测试这种药物。该公司目前正在进行该药物的多项2/3期试验，包括一项针对高风险患者，一项针对非高风险患者，以及一项针对接触过病毒但尚未患病的患者的预防试验。在第一次读数中，该药物看起来比默克公司(MRK)的新冠治疗药物有效得多。</blockquote></p><p> “It definitely helps prove the point that [Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&amp;D is better than people had thought,” says Louise Chen, an analyst at Cantor Fitzgerald, who has an Overweight rating and a $61 price target on the stock.</p><p><blockquote>Cantor Fitzgerald分析师Louise Chen表示：“这无疑有助于证明辉瑞的制药研发比人们想象的要好。”她对该股给予跑赢大盘评级，目标价为61美元。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Chen says that she doesn’t expect investors to come around to her way of thinking until there is more clarity on the durability of Covid-19 vaccine and pill sales, and the rest of the pipeline gets proved out.</p><p><blockquote>陈表示，在Covid-19疫苗和药丸销售的持久性更加明确以及其余产品得到证实之前，她预计投资者不会接受她的想法。</blockquote></p><p> “There is not one event that I think will trigger a re-rating of the stock at the next level,” she says. “Until those things play out, I don’t think that it necessarily will.”</p><p><blockquote>“我认为没有一个事件会引发该股下一个级别的重新评级，”她说。“在这些事情发生之前，我认为不一定会发生。”</blockquote></p><p> That makes a bet on Pfizer a long-term play. In the meantime, the experience of&nbsp;Moderna&nbsp;(MRNA) in recent weeks is highlighting the potential for the vaccine makers to come under scrutiny over unequal distribution of vaccines.</p><p><blockquote>这使得对辉瑞的押注成为一项长期投资。与此同时，Moderna(MRNA)最近几周的经历凸显了疫苗制造商因疫苗分配不平等而受到审查的可能性。</blockquote></p><p> Biden administration officials have been increasingly frustrated with Moderna, calling on the company to ramp up production so it can offer more doses at not-for-profit prices to low-income countries, with one top official calling on the company to “step up.”</p><p><blockquote>拜登政府官员对Moderna越来越失望，呼吁该公司提高产量，以便能够以非营利价格向低收入国家提供更多剂量，一位高级官员呼吁该公司“挺身而出”。</blockquote></p><p> Moderna shares are down more than 40% over the past three months.</p><p><blockquote>Moderna股价在过去三个月下跌了40%以上。</blockquote></p><p> As the pandemic persists, Pfizer risks eroding the enormous goodwill it earned roughly a year ago when it introduced its Covid-19 vaccine. Earlier this month, Pfizer CEO Bourla blamed low-income countries for unfair vaccine distribution, telling <i>Barron’s</i> that it was their fault for not placing orders. Pfizer has sold a billion vaccine doses to the U.S. at a not-for-profit price to donate to poor countries, and says that a total of at least two billion doses will be delivered to low- and middle-income nations by the end of next year.</p><p><blockquote>随着疫情的持续，辉瑞面临着侵蚀大约一年前推出Covid-19疫苗时赢得的巨大商誉的风险。本月早些时候，辉瑞首席执行官布尔拉指责低收入国家疫苗分配不公平，告诉<i>巴伦周刊</i>没有下订单是他们的错。辉瑞公司已以非营利价格向美国出售了10亿剂疫苗，捐赠给贫穷国家，并表示到明年年底将向中低收入国家提供总计至少20亿剂疫苗。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to antivirals, Pfizer has said only that it will offer tiered pricing for poorer nations, the same approach it has taken with its vaccine.</p><p><blockquote>在抗病毒药物方面，辉瑞仅表示将为较贫穷国家提供分级定价，与其疫苗采取的方法相同。</blockquote></p><p> That contrasts sharply with Merck’s plan to make its own Covid-19 pill available to poor countries. Merck has signed a deal with a United Nations-backed group that will allow its pill to be licensed globally, with no royalties paid to Merck.</p><p><blockquote>这与默克公司向贫穷国家提供自己的Covid-19药丸的计划形成鲜明对比。默克公司已与一个联合国支持的组织签署了一项协议，允许其药丸在全球范围内获得许可，无需向默克公司支付特许权使用费。</blockquote></p><p> Dolsten said that Pfizer is looking into licensing its pill under a similar mechanism as Merck’s. “We will look at those options,” he said. “By no means have we said we would do something different. We just want to make sure whoever will be involved gets the advice and skill to do this.”</p><p><blockquote>多尔斯滕表示，辉瑞正在考虑根据与默克类似的机制许可其药物。“我们将考虑这些选择，”他说。“我们绝不是说我们会做一些不同的事情。我们只是想确保参与其中的人都能获得这样做的建议和技能。”</blockquote></p><p> Such a step couldn’t come soon enough. Late last month, activists protested outside Bourla’s home, calling on Pfizer to share its vaccine manufacturing technology and to fill orders from low-income countries ahead of those from wealthy countries.</p><p><blockquote>这样的一步来得太快了。上月底，活动人士在布尔拉家外抗议，呼吁辉瑞分享其疫苗制造技术，并在富裕国家之前完成低收入国家的订单。</blockquote></p><p> An aggressive plan to share its antiviral would help stave off such criticism, keeping Pfizer in the relative good graces of Washington and allowing its impressive science to continue to drive the stock higher.</p><p><blockquote>分享其抗病毒药物的积极计划将有助于避免此类批评，使辉瑞公司相对受到华盛顿的青睐，并使其令人印象深刻的科学知识继续推动股价走高。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/buy-pfizer-stock-covid-19-51636674652?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Barrons</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":{"PFE":"辉瑞"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/buy-pfizer-stock-covid-19-51636674652?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1102251183","content_text":"Pfizer’s chief scientific officer, Mikael Dolsten, sounded giddy when reached via telephone early Monday morning. It was just days after his company knocked the socks off the market with the news that its Covid-19 antiviral had cut the risk of hospitalization by 89% in high-risk adults.\n“It can’t be just a random thing, that you’re able to beat this type of world record and get a grand slam at the same time by chance,” Dolsten said, scrambling sports metaphors as he sought to illustrate the magnitude of Pfizer’s twin wins: the development of a stunningly effective Covid-19 vaccine in just 10 months, followed a year later by the development of a similarly stunning Covid-19 antiviral.\nTwo years ago, Pfizer (ticker: PFE) CEO Albert Bourla asked investors to take a big gamble on the research-and-development operation that Dolsten has rebuilt over the course of more than a decade. That bet is looking smarter than ever.\nBourla has gotten rid of Pfizer’s off-patent drugs division and the last of its consumer health products, leaving behind a pure-play biopharma company that will live or die on the strength of Dolsten’s science.\nIn a cover story in November 2019, Barron’s argued that Bourla and Dolsten could pull it off.\nThe new antiviral data reaffirms the case for Pfizer that Barron’s made two years ago. Continuing to profit off the pandemic, however, brings new risks, as criticism grows over the global inequity in vaccine distribution. Low-income nations account for less than 1% of the more than seven billion doses administered worldwide. If distribution of Pfizer’s antiviral continues to favor wealthy nations, the company’s stock could ultimately suffer.\nPfizer’s shares surged 10.9% the day the data came out, their best daily showing in at least 20 years. Still, with the stock now changing hands at around $50, investors continue to undervalue the company. Investors are pricing Pfizer at 12 times next year’s expected earnings, cheaper than peers like Johnson & Johnson (JNJ) and Eli Lilly (LLY).\nThe Pfizer discount can be attributed to concerns over the patent cliff the drugmaker faces at the end of the decade. The company stands to lose exclusivity over a handful of drugs that bring in billions in annual revenue.\nThe worries are legitimate, but Pfizer’s scientific coup should give investors confidence that the company’s science can carry it safely over that cliff. It may take time for the market to catch up, but for long-term investors, it’s a promising opportunity.\nThe success of the antiviral is the best illustration yet of Pfizer’s scientific prowess.\nWhile Pfizer’s Covid-19 vaccine came out of the labs of the German biotech BioNTech (BNTX), the new Covid-19 antiviral was whipped up by what Dolsten called a “dream team” of scientists at Pfizer’s own labs across the Northeast U.S.\nIn the earliest days of the pandemic, Pfizer split its efforts between its collaboration with BioNTech on the vaccine and its quest for a Covid-19 pill. The vaccine effort operated on a huge scale; Dolsten called it a “mega team” that spanned the Atlantic.\nThe antiviral project was a much smaller operation—a group of Pfizer experts operating with resources left over from the vaccine push.\n“The small molecule was more like a nimble, laser-focused, high-end team, with rather moderate resources,” Dolsten said.\nDolsten gathered some of Pfizer’s most experienced scientists to work on the antiviral project, including its head of medicine design, Charlotte Allerton. The scientists started with work Pfizer had done years ago on a type of antiviral called a protease inhibitor.\n“[Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&D is better than people had thought.”\nThe protease inhibitors in the Pfizer library, however, had been administered intravenously, and had not worked well when delivered orally. The team had to figure out how to adapt the drugs to oral administration, a substantial undertaking.\n“They had to really create a lot of new chemistry,” Dolsten said. The scientists created 600 compounds to nail down the right drug, a process that might normally take years, and which they accomplished in a matter of months. “Four years turned into four months here,” he said.\nPfizer started testing the pill in humans in March. It is now running a number of Phase 2/3 trials of the drug, including one for patients who are high risk, one for patients not high risk, and one as a prophylaxis for patients who have been exposed to the virus but aren’t yet sick. In the first readout, the drug looked substantially more effective than the Covid treatment pill from Merck (MRK).\n“It definitely helps prove the point that [Pfizer’s] pharmaceutical R&D is better than people had thought,” says Louise Chen, an analyst at Cantor Fitzgerald, who has an Overweight rating and a $61 price target on the stock.\nChen says that she doesn’t expect investors to come around to her way of thinking until there is more clarity on the durability of Covid-19 vaccine and pill sales, and the rest of the pipeline gets proved out.\n“There is not one event that I think will trigger a re-rating of the stock at the next level,” she says. “Until those things play out, I don’t think that it necessarily will.”\nThat makes a bet on Pfizer a long-term play. In the meantime, the experience of Moderna (MRNA) in recent weeks is highlighting the potential for the vaccine makers to come under scrutiny over unequal distribution of vaccines.\nBiden administration officials have been increasingly frustrated with Moderna, calling on the company to ramp up production so it can offer more doses at not-for-profit prices to low-income countries, with one top official calling on the company to “step up.”\nModerna shares are down more than 40% over the past three months.\nAs the pandemic persists, Pfizer risks eroding the enormous goodwill it earned roughly a year ago when it introduced its Covid-19 vaccine. Earlier this month, Pfizer CEO Bourla blamed low-income countries for unfair vaccine distribution, telling Barron’s that it was their fault for not placing orders. Pfizer has sold a billion vaccine doses to the U.S. at a not-for-profit price to donate to poor countries, and says that a total of at least two billion doses will be delivered to low- and middle-income nations by the end of next year.\nWhen it comes to antivirals, Pfizer has said only that it will offer tiered pricing for poorer nations, the same approach it has taken with its vaccine.\nThat contrasts sharply with Merck’s plan to make its own Covid-19 pill available to poor countries. Merck has signed a deal with a United Nations-backed group that will allow its pill to be licensed globally, with no royalties paid to Merck.\nDolsten said that Pfizer is looking into licensing its pill under a similar mechanism as Merck’s. “We will look at those options,” he said. “By no means have we said we would do something different. We just want to make sure whoever will be involved gets the advice and skill to do this.”\nSuch a step couldn’t come soon enough. Late last month, activists protested outside Bourla’s home, calling on Pfizer to share its vaccine manufacturing technology and to fill orders from low-income countries ahead of those from wealthy countries.\nAn aggressive plan to share its antiviral would help stave off such criticism, keeping Pfizer in the relative good graces of Washington and allowing its impressive science to continue to drive the stock higher.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"PFE":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3592,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":873981731,"gmtCreate":1636843702976,"gmtModify":1636843703092,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like&nbsp;","listText":"Like&nbsp;","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/873981731","repostId":"1129004768","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1129004768","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1636764434,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1129004768?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-11-13 08:47","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple: The Bear Argument, And Why It's Wrong<blockquote>苹果：熊市论点及其错误的原因</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1129004768","media":"Seeking Alpha","summary":"Apple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.I list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.Maybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.This may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Apple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.</li>  <li>I list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</li>  <li>Maybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bc955cc5d27328c3b89b327b9368d27\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1020\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果未能长期保持在每股150美元以上，空头开始关注近期价格的疲软。</li><li>我列出了几个最流行的看跌论点，并解释了为什么我认为它们要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</li><li>也许苹果公司并不是同样值得买入的股票，但我仍然认为这是一只今天值得在未来几年持有的股票。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> With Apple (AAPL) once again failing to make fresh all-time highs, now down around 6% from the peak and dipping closer towards key moving-average support, bears have started to pay attention. Still, I think that the case for selling (or shorting) this stock does not hold much water in the long term, and I believe that bears will ultimately tire of swimming against the current.</p><p><blockquote>随着苹果(AAPL)再次未能创下历史新高，目前较峰值下跌约6%，并接近关键移动平均线支撑位，空头开始关注。尽管如此，我认为从长远来看，出售（或做空）这只股票的理由并不成立，而且我相信空头最终会厌倦逆流而上。</blockquote></p><p> Below, I list the most common few reasons why one might want to dump or stay away from Apple shares – and why I think that the bearish case is either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</p><p><blockquote>下面，我列出了人们可能想要抛售或远离苹果股票的几个最常见的原因，以及为什么我认为看跌情况要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #1: drop-off in demand</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#1：需求下降</b></blockquote></p><p> Not many analysts and portfolio managers have been vocal about avoiding or selling Apple. Experts like New Street's&nbsp;Pierre Ferragu&nbsp;and Satori Fund's&nbsp;Dan Niles&nbsp;are the few that come to mind, and their theses seem to align pretty well with every other bearish call on AAPL that I have seen recently.</p><p><blockquote>没有多少分析师和投资组合经理公开表示要避免或出售苹果。像New Street的Pierre Ferragu和Satori Fund的Dan Niles这样的专家是我想到的少数几个，他们的论点似乎与我最近看到的所有其他看跌AAPL的看涨期权非常一致。</blockquote></p><p> The first common reason to sell the stock is often phrased in different ways, but can effectively be summarized as follows: Apple's financial results in the near term should suffer from demand that has already turned into revenues in calendar 2020, during the thick of the pandemic and stay-at-home consumption wave. This is particularly true following the launch of the iPhone 13 that some (including legendary Apple founder&nbsp;Steve Wozniak) see as merely a minor upgrade from the previous model.</p><p><blockquote>出售股票的第一个常见原因通常以不同的方式表述，但可以有效地总结如下：苹果近期的财务业绩应该会受到需求的影响，而需求已经在2020年疫情最严重的时候转化为收入和居家消费浪潮。在iPhone 13发布之后尤其如此，一些人（包括传奇的苹果创始人Steve Wozniak）认为iPhone 13只是对上一款机型的小幅升级。</blockquote></p><p> I see the concern here, especially considering that Apple will start to face unsurmountable iPhone comps in the holidays and post-holiday quarters – see graph below. But the same chart also shows that there seemed to exist quite a bit of pent-up demand over the many quarters that preceded the iPhone 12 launch. One possible justification for this shift in sales from fiscal 2019-2020 to 2021 is Apple's late entry into the 5G space. Consumers that are loyal to or just prefer the iOS device probably waited patiently to upgrade or switch, and then they did it all at once.</p><p><blockquote>我看到了这里的担忧，特别是考虑到苹果将在假期和节后季度开始面临无法克服的iPhone竞争——见下图。但同一张图表还显示，在iPhone 12发布之前的许多季度中，似乎存在相当多被压抑的需求。销售额从2019-2020财年转移到2021财年的一个可能原因是苹果进入5G领域较晚。忠于或只是喜欢iOS设备的消费者可能会耐心等待升级或切换，然后他们一下子就完成了。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dc677f0a1c77dd39f40b4cc99c6fc15\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"322\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: DM Martins Research, data from company reports</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：DM Martins Research，数据来自公司报告</span></p></blockquote></p><p> This may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the roof in the past 6 to 12 months. With the country's 5G infrastructure being further developed, owning a device that can handle the faster speeds probably makes most sense. Sales in the region had been lackluster to say the least since 2015, and dropped YOY by as much as 29% in fiscal Q4 of 2020. In the past three quarters, however, revenues climbed by at least 57% in each period.</p><p><blockquote>这也可能有助于部分解释为什么苹果在大中华区的收入在过去6至12个月内飙升。随着该国5G基础设施的进一步发展，拥有一款能够处理更快速度的设备可能是最有意义的。至少可以说，自2015年以来，该地区的销售额一直低迷，2020财年第四季度同比下降了29%。然而，在过去三个季度中，每个季度的收入都至少增长了57%。</blockquote></p><p> In the end, over the last 12 quarters – i.e. roughly the useful life of the average iPhone – Apple's smartphone sales have risen by only 4.8% per year. Considering that ASP (average selling price) has likely increased during the period, this figure barely represents any meaningful growth in device shipments over a full cycle. Therefore, to think that demand for Apple's products will fall off a cliff next seems like a stretch, especially if one also considers chip innovation and design updates in Mac and iPad.</p><p><blockquote>最终，在过去的12个季度（大约是iPhone的平均使用寿命）中，苹果的智能手机销量每年仅增长4.8%。考虑到ASP（平均售价）在此期间可能有所上涨，这一数字几乎不能代表整个周期内设备出货量的任何有意义的增长。因此，认为接下来对苹果产品的需求会断崖式下跌似乎有些牵强，特别是如果还考虑到Mac和iPad的芯片创新和设计更新的话。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #2: valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#2：估值</b></blockquote></p><p> The other key risk of investing in Apple that is often brought up is valuation. Dan Niles, mentioned above, suggests that a next-year P/E of 26 times might not even be the biggest deal. The problem is that this multiple looks too rich against growth expectations that are modest.Analysts expect Apple's EPS&nbsp;to rise by only 4% per year through fiscal 2025. Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), valued at a similar earnings multiple, is expected to drive earnings 16% higher per year over a similar period.</p><p><blockquote>投资苹果经常被提及的另一个主要风险是估值。上面提到的丹·奈尔斯(Dan Niles)表示，明年26倍的市盈率可能甚至不是最大的交易。问题是，与温和的增长预期相比，这个市盈率看起来太高了。分析师预计，到2025财年，苹果的每股收益每年仅增长4%。Alphabet(GOOG)（GOOGL）的市盈率相似，预计同期盈利每年将增长16%。</blockquote></p><p> That, in my view, is a more reasonable bearish argument. Per my estimates, Apple is by far the stock with the highest PEG ratio (P/E over long-term EPS growth) of 6.5 times. Amazon (AMZN) is a very distant second on this metric, at 2.3 times. But even here, I see a good argument to be made in favor of Apple.</p><p><blockquote>在我看来，这是一个更合理的看跌论点。根据我的估计，苹果是迄今为止PEG比率（市盈率超过长期每股收益增长）最高的股票，为6.5倍。亚马逊(AMZN)在这一指标上远远落后于第二名，为2.3倍。但即使在这里，我也看到了一个支持苹果的好理由。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> First, the company has been proving to be a powerful gatekeeper in the tech world. Here is one example: the first, most blatant sign that Apple's iOS privacy policy changes in the summer&nbsp;have been hurting social media companies&nbsp;and their financial statements&nbsp;led to the Nasdaqe&nbsp;rasing $120 billion in market value in a matter of minutes – most of which coming from internet stocks. Should one be expected to pay a premium for a stock in the face of such market control? I would say so.</p><p><blockquote>首先，该公司已被证明是科技界强大的看门人。这里有一个例子：第一个也是最明显的迹象表明，苹果今年夏天iOS隐私政策的变化一直在损害社交媒体公司，它们的财务报表导致纳斯达克在几分钟内市值飙升1200亿美元——其中大部分来自互联网股票。面对这种市场控制，人们应该为股票支付溢价吗？我会这么说。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0946db3f3bc62569a56f2dbe2aa75922\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Also, as the chart above depicts, Apple's forward-year P/E has certainly expanded relative to what it used to be a few years ago. But the multi-year move higher seems consistent with (1) a wave of increased demand for Apple's products and services, (2) better margins, (3) a drop in interest rates in 2020, and (4) a broad stock market that has become generally more expensive. Compared to how AAPL traded only about three months ago, P/E has in fact dipped about three turns and returned to early 2021 levels.</p><p><blockquote>此外，如上图所示，苹果的远期市盈率相对于几年前肯定有所扩大。但多年来的上涨似乎与(1)对苹果产品和服务的需求增加浪潮、(2)利润率提高、(3)2020年利率下降以及(4)广泛的股市一致市场普遍变得更加昂贵。与大约三个月前AAPL的交易方式相比，市盈率实际上已经下降了大约三圈，并回到了2021年初的水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #3: lack of positive catalysts</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#3：缺乏积极的催化剂</b></blockquote></p><p> The next risk to investing in Apple that is often cited are short-term catalysts. The iPhone 13 was announced a few weeks ago, and&nbsp;so has the refreshed lineup&nbsp;of MacBook Pro devices equipped with the new M1 Pro and Max chips. Fiscal fourth quarter earnings is also in the rearview mirror. In fact, I think that the drop off in relevant Apple news in the fourth quarter correlates well with a stock that, seasonally, tends to perform worse in the November-to-January period. Bears may also argue that, with a few quarters of tough comps ahead, investors might have a hard time finding reasons to buy AAPL in the next few months.</p><p><blockquote>经常提到的投资苹果的下一个风险是短期催化剂。iPhone 13在几周前发布，配备新M1 Pro和Max芯片的MacBook Pro设备的更新阵容也是如此。第四财季盈利也已成为过去。事实上，我认为第四季度相关苹果新闻的下降与一只股票在11月至1月期间季节性表现往往较差的股票密切相关。看空者还可能辩称，由于未来几个季度的业绩艰难，投资者可能很难在未来几个月内找到购买苹果公司的理由。</blockquote></p><p> But here, I believe that a bit of patience is warranted. First, the recent malaise in share price alone may be enough to attract new money from investors looking for a good deal on a high-quality stock. But more importantly, longer-term catalysts are likely to make more of a difference on share price and financial performance over the next, say, five years.</p><p><blockquote>但在这里，我认为需要一点耐心。首先，仅最近股价的低迷就足以吸引寻求优质股票优惠的投资者的新资金。但更重要的是，长期催化剂可能会在未来五年内对股价和财务业绩产生更大影响。</blockquote></p><p> I have previously talked in more detail about two catalysts that quickly come to mind. I doubt that much upside from initiatives like mixed reality and&nbsp;autonomous vehicle&nbsp;has been factored into analysts' financial models – and hence, properly priced into the stock. Because Apple is run by a conservative team of executives, I bet that both massive growth opportunities will be pursued if and when they are accretive to the company's earnings. They should, therefore, serve as the key catalysts driving long-term growth expectations (which is relevant for risk #1 above) and share price higher.</p><p><blockquote>我之前已经更详细地谈到了两个很快浮现在脑海中的催化剂。我怀疑混合现实和自动驾驶汽车等举措的太大好处是否已纳入分析师的财务模型，因此也无法正确定价到股票中。由于苹果是由一个保守的高管团队运营的，我敢打赌，如果这两个巨大的增长机会能够增加公司的盈利，那么它们就会被追求。因此，它们应该成为推动长期增长预期（与上述风险#1相关）和股价上涨的关键催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> <b>In summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总之</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple may not be the same pound-the-table opportunity that I believed it to be&nbsp;in February 2021&nbsp;or, better yet,in April 2018&nbsp;– in both cases, I believed that shares had sold off for no good reason. But I continue to think that AAPL is a stock to own today through the next several years, especially now that the earnings multiple has started to rerate towards year-ago levels. Should Apple continue to head lower in the near term, the pullback (assuming no meaningful change in business fundamentals) would present an even better chance to buy.</p><p><blockquote>苹果可能不像我在2021年2月或更好的2018年4月那样是一个巨大的机会——在这两种情况下，我都认为股票毫无理由地遭到抛售。但我仍然认为，苹果公司是一只值得在未来几年持有的股票，尤其是现在市盈率已开始重估至去年同期的水平。如果苹果短期内继续走低，回调（假设商业基本面没有发生有意义的变化）将提供更好的买入机会。</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>Apple: The Bear Argument, And Why It's Wrong<blockquote>苹果：熊市论点及其错误的原因</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\">\nApple: The Bear Argument, And Why It's Wrong<blockquote>苹果：熊市论点及其错误的原因</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Seeking Alpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-11-13 08:47</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>Apple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.</li>  <li>I list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</li>  <li>Maybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bc955cc5d27328c3b89b327b9368d27\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1020\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>苹果未能长期保持在每股150美元以上，空头开始关注近期价格的疲软。</li><li>我列出了几个最流行的看跌论点，并解释了为什么我认为它们要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</li><li>也许苹果公司并不是同样值得买入的股票，但我仍然认为这是一只今天值得在未来几年持有的股票。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>kmwphotography/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> With Apple (AAPL) once again failing to make fresh all-time highs, now down around 6% from the peak and dipping closer towards key moving-average support, bears have started to pay attention. Still, I think that the case for selling (or shorting) this stock does not hold much water in the long term, and I believe that bears will ultimately tire of swimming against the current.</p><p><blockquote>随着苹果(AAPL)再次未能创下历史新高，目前较峰值下跌约6%，并接近关键移动平均线支撑位，空头开始关注。尽管如此，我认为从长远来看，出售（或做空）这只股票的理由并不成立，而且我相信空头最终会厌倦逆流而上。</blockquote></p><p> Below, I list the most common few reasons why one might want to dump or stay away from Apple shares – and why I think that the bearish case is either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.</p><p><blockquote>下面，我列出了人们可能想要抛售或远离苹果股票的几个最常见的原因，以及为什么我认为看跌情况要么是短视的，要么很可能是不正确的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #1: drop-off in demand</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#1：需求下降</b></blockquote></p><p> Not many analysts and portfolio managers have been vocal about avoiding or selling Apple. Experts like New Street's&nbsp;Pierre Ferragu&nbsp;and Satori Fund's&nbsp;Dan Niles&nbsp;are the few that come to mind, and their theses seem to align pretty well with every other bearish call on AAPL that I have seen recently.</p><p><blockquote>没有多少分析师和投资组合经理公开表示要避免或出售苹果。像New Street的Pierre Ferragu和Satori Fund的Dan Niles这样的专家是我想到的少数几个，他们的论点似乎与我最近看到的所有其他看跌AAPL的看涨期权非常一致。</blockquote></p><p> The first common reason to sell the stock is often phrased in different ways, but can effectively be summarized as follows: Apple's financial results in the near term should suffer from demand that has already turned into revenues in calendar 2020, during the thick of the pandemic and stay-at-home consumption wave. This is particularly true following the launch of the iPhone 13 that some (including legendary Apple founder&nbsp;Steve Wozniak) see as merely a minor upgrade from the previous model.</p><p><blockquote>出售股票的第一个常见原因通常以不同的方式表述，但可以有效地总结如下：苹果近期的财务业绩应该会受到需求的影响，而需求已经在2020年疫情最严重的时候转化为收入和居家消费浪潮。在iPhone 13发布之后尤其如此，一些人（包括传奇的苹果创始人Steve Wozniak）认为iPhone 13只是对上一款机型的小幅升级。</blockquote></p><p> I see the concern here, especially considering that Apple will start to face unsurmountable iPhone comps in the holidays and post-holiday quarters – see graph below. But the same chart also shows that there seemed to exist quite a bit of pent-up demand over the many quarters that preceded the iPhone 12 launch. One possible justification for this shift in sales from fiscal 2019-2020 to 2021 is Apple's late entry into the 5G space. Consumers that are loyal to or just prefer the iOS device probably waited patiently to upgrade or switch, and then they did it all at once.</p><p><blockquote>我看到了这里的担忧，特别是考虑到苹果将在假期和节后季度开始面临无法克服的iPhone竞争——见下图。但同一张图表还显示，在iPhone 12发布之前的许多季度中，似乎存在相当多被压抑的需求。销售额从2019-2020财年转移到2021财年的一个可能原因是苹果进入5G领域较晚。忠于或只是喜欢iOS设备的消费者可能会耐心等待升级或切换，然后他们一下子就完成了。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7dc677f0a1c77dd39f40b4cc99c6fc15\" tg-width=\"460\" tg-height=\"322\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: DM Martins Research, data from company reports</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：DM Martins Research，数据来自公司报告</span></p></blockquote></p><p> This may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the roof in the past 6 to 12 months. With the country's 5G infrastructure being further developed, owning a device that can handle the faster speeds probably makes most sense. Sales in the region had been lackluster to say the least since 2015, and dropped YOY by as much as 29% in fiscal Q4 of 2020. In the past three quarters, however, revenues climbed by at least 57% in each period.</p><p><blockquote>这也可能有助于部分解释为什么苹果在大中华区的收入在过去6至12个月内飙升。随着该国5G基础设施的进一步发展，拥有一款能够处理更快速度的设备可能是最有意义的。至少可以说，自2015年以来，该地区的销售额一直低迷，2020财年第四季度同比下降了29%。然而，在过去三个季度中，每个季度的收入都至少增长了57%。</blockquote></p><p> In the end, over the last 12 quarters – i.e. roughly the useful life of the average iPhone – Apple's smartphone sales have risen by only 4.8% per year. Considering that ASP (average selling price) has likely increased during the period, this figure barely represents any meaningful growth in device shipments over a full cycle. Therefore, to think that demand for Apple's products will fall off a cliff next seems like a stretch, especially if one also considers chip innovation and design updates in Mac and iPad.</p><p><blockquote>最终，在过去的12个季度（大约是iPhone的平均使用寿命）中，苹果的智能手机销量每年仅增长4.8%。考虑到ASP（平均售价）在此期间可能有所上涨，这一数字几乎不能代表整个周期内设备出货量的任何有意义的增长。因此，认为接下来对苹果产品的需求会断崖式下跌似乎有些牵强，特别是如果还考虑到Mac和iPad的芯片创新和设计更新的话。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #2: valuation</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#2：估值</b></blockquote></p><p> The other key risk of investing in Apple that is often brought up is valuation. Dan Niles, mentioned above, suggests that a next-year P/E of 26 times might not even be the biggest deal. The problem is that this multiple looks too rich against growth expectations that are modest.Analysts expect Apple's EPS&nbsp;to rise by only 4% per year through fiscal 2025. Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), valued at a similar earnings multiple, is expected to drive earnings 16% higher per year over a similar period.</p><p><blockquote>投资苹果经常被提及的另一个主要风险是估值。上面提到的丹·奈尔斯(Dan Niles)表示，明年26倍的市盈率可能甚至不是最大的交易。问题是，与温和的增长预期相比，这个市盈率看起来太高了。分析师预计，到2025财年，苹果的每股收益每年仅增长4%。Alphabet(GOOG)（GOOGL）的市盈率相似，预计同期盈利每年将增长16%。</blockquote></p><p> That, in my view, is a more reasonable bearish argument. Per my estimates, Apple is by far the stock with the highest PEG ratio (P/E over long-term EPS growth) of 6.5 times. Amazon (AMZN) is a very distant second on this metric, at 2.3 times. But even here, I see a good argument to be made in favor of Apple.</p><p><blockquote>在我看来，这是一个更合理的看跌论点。根据我的估计，苹果是迄今为止PEG比率（市盈率超过长期每股收益增长）最高的股票，为6.5倍。亚马逊(AMZN)在这一指标上远远落后于第二名，为2.3倍。但即使在这里，我也看到了一个支持苹果的好理由。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> First, the company has been proving to be a powerful gatekeeper in the tech world. Here is one example: the first, most blatant sign that Apple's iOS privacy policy changes in the summer&nbsp;have been hurting social media companies&nbsp;and their financial statements&nbsp;led to the Nasdaqe&nbsp;rasing $120 billion in market value in a matter of minutes – most of which coming from internet stocks. Should one be expected to pay a premium for a stock in the face of such market control? I would say so.</p><p><blockquote>首先，该公司已被证明是科技界强大的看门人。这里有一个例子：第一个也是最明显的迹象表明，苹果今年夏天iOS隐私政策的变化一直在损害社交媒体公司，它们的财务报表导致纳斯达克在几分钟内市值飙升1200亿美元——其中大部分来自互联网股票。面对这种市场控制，人们应该为股票支付溢价吗？我会这么说。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0946db3f3bc62569a56f2dbe2aa75922\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Also, as the chart above depicts, Apple's forward-year P/E has certainly expanded relative to what it used to be a few years ago. But the multi-year move higher seems consistent with (1) a wave of increased demand for Apple's products and services, (2) better margins, (3) a drop in interest rates in 2020, and (4) a broad stock market that has become generally more expensive. Compared to how AAPL traded only about three months ago, P/E has in fact dipped about three turns and returned to early 2021 levels.</p><p><blockquote>此外，如上图所示，苹果的远期市盈率相对于几年前肯定有所扩大。但多年来的上涨似乎与(1)对苹果产品和服务的需求增加浪潮、(2)利润率提高、(3)2020年利率下降以及(4)广泛的股市一致市场普遍变得更加昂贵。与大约三个月前AAPL的交易方式相比，市盈率实际上已经下降了大约三圈，并回到了2021年初的水平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Key risk #3: lack of positive catalysts</b></p><p><blockquote><b>关键风险#3：缺乏积极的催化剂</b></blockquote></p><p> The next risk to investing in Apple that is often cited are short-term catalysts. The iPhone 13 was announced a few weeks ago, and&nbsp;so has the refreshed lineup&nbsp;of MacBook Pro devices equipped with the new M1 Pro and Max chips. Fiscal fourth quarter earnings is also in the rearview mirror. In fact, I think that the drop off in relevant Apple news in the fourth quarter correlates well with a stock that, seasonally, tends to perform worse in the November-to-January period. Bears may also argue that, with a few quarters of tough comps ahead, investors might have a hard time finding reasons to buy AAPL in the next few months.</p><p><blockquote>经常提到的投资苹果的下一个风险是短期催化剂。iPhone 13在几周前发布，配备新M1 Pro和Max芯片的MacBook Pro设备的更新阵容也是如此。第四财季盈利也已成为过去。事实上，我认为第四季度相关苹果新闻的下降与一只股票在11月至1月期间季节性表现往往较差的股票密切相关。看空者还可能辩称，由于未来几个季度的业绩艰难，投资者可能很难在未来几个月内找到购买苹果公司的理由。</blockquote></p><p> But here, I believe that a bit of patience is warranted. First, the recent malaise in share price alone may be enough to attract new money from investors looking for a good deal on a high-quality stock. But more importantly, longer-term catalysts are likely to make more of a difference on share price and financial performance over the next, say, five years.</p><p><blockquote>但在这里，我认为需要一点耐心。首先，仅最近股价的低迷就足以吸引寻求优质股票优惠的投资者的新资金。但更重要的是，长期催化剂可能会在未来五年内对股价和财务业绩产生更大影响。</blockquote></p><p> I have previously talked in more detail about two catalysts that quickly come to mind. I doubt that much upside from initiatives like mixed reality and&nbsp;autonomous vehicle&nbsp;has been factored into analysts' financial models – and hence, properly priced into the stock. Because Apple is run by a conservative team of executives, I bet that both massive growth opportunities will be pursued if and when they are accretive to the company's earnings. They should, therefore, serve as the key catalysts driving long-term growth expectations (which is relevant for risk #1 above) and share price higher.</p><p><blockquote>我之前已经更详细地谈到了两个很快浮现在脑海中的催化剂。我怀疑混合现实和自动驾驶汽车等举措的太大好处是否已纳入分析师的财务模型，因此也无法正确定价到股票中。由于苹果是由一个保守的高管团队运营的，我敢打赌，如果这两个巨大的增长机会能够增加公司的盈利，那么它们就会被追求。因此，它们应该成为推动长期增长预期（与上述风险#1相关）和股价上涨的关键催化剂。</blockquote></p><p> <b>In summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总之</b></blockquote></p><p> Apple may not be the same pound-the-table opportunity that I believed it to be&nbsp;in February 2021&nbsp;or, better yet,in April 2018&nbsp;– in both cases, I believed that shares had sold off for no good reason. But I continue to think that AAPL is a stock to own today through the next several years, especially now that the earnings multiple has started to rerate towards year-ago levels. Should Apple continue to head lower in the near term, the pullback (assuming no meaningful change in business fundamentals) would present an even better chance to buy.</p><p><blockquote>苹果可能不像我在2021年2月或更好的2018年4月那样是一个巨大的机会——在这两种情况下，我都认为股票毫无理由地遭到抛售。但我仍然认为，苹果公司是一只值得在未来几年持有的股票，尤其是现在市盈率已开始重估至去年同期的水平。如果苹果短期内继续走低，回调（假设商业基本面没有发生有意义的变化）将提供更好的买入机会。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4468890-apple-the-bear-argument-and-why-its-wrong\">Seeking Alpha</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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4468890-apple-the-bear-argument-and-why-its-wrong","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1129004768","content_text":"Summary\n\nApple has failed to stay above $150 per share for long, and bears are starting to pay attention to the recent weakness in price.\nI list a couple of the most popular bearish arguments, and explain why I believe that they are either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.\nMaybe AAPL is not the same pound-the-table buy, but I continue to think that this is a stock to own today through the next several years.\n\nkmwphotography/iStock via Getty Images\nWith Apple (AAPL) once again failing to make fresh all-time highs, now down around 6% from the peak and dipping closer towards key moving-average support, bears have started to pay attention. Still, I think that the case for selling (or shorting) this stock does not hold much water in the long term, and I believe that bears will ultimately tire of swimming against the current.\nBelow, I list the most common few reasons why one might want to dump or stay away from Apple shares – and why I think that the bearish case is either short-sighted or most likely incorrect.\nKey risk #1: drop-off in demand\nNot many analysts and portfolio managers have been vocal about avoiding or selling Apple. Experts like New Street's Pierre Ferragu and Satori Fund's Dan Niles are the few that come to mind, and their theses seem to align pretty well with every other bearish call on AAPL that I have seen recently.\nThe first common reason to sell the stock is often phrased in different ways, but can effectively be summarized as follows: Apple's financial results in the near term should suffer from demand that has already turned into revenues in calendar 2020, during the thick of the pandemic and stay-at-home consumption wave. This is particularly true following the launch of the iPhone 13 that some (including legendary Apple founder Steve Wozniak) see as merely a minor upgrade from the previous model.\nI see the concern here, especially considering that Apple will start to face unsurmountable iPhone comps in the holidays and post-holiday quarters – see graph below. But the same chart also shows that there seemed to exist quite a bit of pent-up demand over the many quarters that preceded the iPhone 12 launch. One possible justification for this shift in sales from fiscal 2019-2020 to 2021 is Apple's late entry into the 5G space. Consumers that are loyal to or just prefer the iOS device probably waited patiently to upgrade or switch, and then they did it all at once.\nSource: DM Martins Research, data from company reports\nThis may also help to explain, in part, why Apple's revenues in Greater China shot through the roof in the past 6 to 12 months. With the country's 5G infrastructure being further developed, owning a device that can handle the faster speeds probably makes most sense. Sales in the region had been lackluster to say the least since 2015, and dropped YOY by as much as 29% in fiscal Q4 of 2020. In the past three quarters, however, revenues climbed by at least 57% in each period.\nIn the end, over the last 12 quarters – i.e. roughly the useful life of the average iPhone – Apple's smartphone sales have risen by only 4.8% per year. Considering that ASP (average selling price) has likely increased during the period, this figure barely represents any meaningful growth in device shipments over a full cycle. Therefore, to think that demand for Apple's products will fall off a cliff next seems like a stretch, especially if one also considers chip innovation and design updates in Mac and iPad.\nKey risk #2: valuation\nThe other key risk of investing in Apple that is often brought up is valuation. Dan Niles, mentioned above, suggests that a next-year P/E of 26 times might not even be the biggest deal. The problem is that this multiple looks too rich against growth expectations that are modest.Analysts expect Apple's EPS to rise by only 4% per year through fiscal 2025. Alphabet (GOOG)(GOOGL), valued at a similar earnings multiple, is expected to drive earnings 16% higher per year over a similar period.\nThat, in my view, is a more reasonable bearish argument. Per my estimates, Apple is by far the stock with the highest PEG ratio (P/E over long-term EPS growth) of 6.5 times. Amazon (AMZN) is a very distant second on this metric, at 2.3 times. But even here, I see a good argument to be made in favor of Apple.\nFirst, the company has been proving to be a powerful gatekeeper in the tech world. Here is one example: the first, most blatant sign that Apple's iOS privacy policy changes in the summer have been hurting social media companies and their financial statements led to the Nasdaqe rasing $120 billion in market value in a matter of minutes – most of which coming from internet stocks. Should one be expected to pay a premium for a stock in the face of such market control? I would say so.\nData by YCharts\nAlso, as the chart above depicts, Apple's forward-year P/E has certainly expanded relative to what it used to be a few years ago. But the multi-year move higher seems consistent with (1) a wave of increased demand for Apple's products and services, (2) better margins, (3) a drop in interest rates in 2020, and (4) a broad stock market that has become generally more expensive. Compared to how AAPL traded only about three months ago, P/E has in fact dipped about three turns and returned to early 2021 levels.\nKey risk #3: lack of positive catalysts\nThe next risk to investing in Apple that is often cited are short-term catalysts. The iPhone 13 was announced a few weeks ago, and so has the refreshed lineup of MacBook Pro devices equipped with the new M1 Pro and Max chips. Fiscal fourth quarter earnings is also in the rearview mirror. In fact, I think that the drop off in relevant Apple news in the fourth quarter correlates well with a stock that, seasonally, tends to perform worse in the November-to-January period. Bears may also argue that, with a few quarters of tough comps ahead, investors might have a hard time finding reasons to buy AAPL in the next few months.\nBut here, I believe that a bit of patience is warranted. First, the recent malaise in share price alone may be enough to attract new money from investors looking for a good deal on a high-quality stock. But more importantly, longer-term catalysts are likely to make more of a difference on share price and financial performance over the next, say, five years.\nI have previously talked in more detail about two catalysts that quickly come to mind. I doubt that much upside from initiatives like mixed reality and autonomous vehicle has been factored into analysts' financial models – and hence, properly priced into the stock. Because Apple is run by a conservative team of executives, I bet that both massive growth opportunities will be pursued if and when they are accretive to the company's earnings. They should, therefore, serve as the key catalysts driving long-term growth expectations (which is relevant for risk #1 above) and share price higher.\nIn summary\nApple may not be the same pound-the-table opportunity that I believed it to be in February 2021 or, better yet,in April 2018 – in both cases, I believed that shares had sold off for no good reason. But I continue to think that AAPL is a stock to own today through the next several years, especially now that the earnings multiple has started to rerate towards year-ago levels. Should Apple continue to head lower in the near term, the pullback (assuming no meaningful change in business fundamentals) would present an even better chance to buy.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4104,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":866654165,"gmtCreate":1632780229357,"gmtModify":1632797972996,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","listText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","text":"Thanks for sharing","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/866654165","repostId":"2170623235","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":825,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":898982112,"gmtCreate":1628468545636,"gmtModify":1631891880806,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like please","listText":"Like please","text":"Like please","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/898982112","repostId":"1101851851","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1101851851","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628467943,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1101851851?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-09 08:12","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Biden’s Electric-Car Ambitions Face Real-World Roadblocks<blockquote>拜登的电动汽车雄心面临现实障碍</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1101851851","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Auto makers want congressional moves on charging stations and tax incentives; consumer support also ","content":"<p><i>Auto makers want congressional moves on charging stations and tax incentives; consumer support also is needed.</i></p><p><blockquote><i>汽车制造商希望国会在充电站和税收优惠方面采取行动；还需要消费者支持。</i></blockquote></p><p> WASHINGTON—President Biden wants to convert American motorists to electric cars as a linchpin of his plan to address&nbsp;climate change. Success heavily depends on factors outside his control.</p><p><blockquote>华盛顿——拜登总统希望将美国驾车者转向电动汽车，作为其应对气候变化计划的关键。成功在很大程度上取决于他无法控制的因素。</blockquote></p><p> The executive order&nbsp;that Mr. Biden signed Thursday—calling on sales of electric, fuel-cell and plug-in hybrids to account for 50% of car and light truck sales by 2030—has no binding authority.</p><p><blockquote>拜登周四签署的行政命令——呼吁到2030年电动、燃料电池和插电式混合动力车的销量占汽车和轻型卡车销量的50%——没有约束力。</blockquote></p><p> Auto makers say they could meet a target of somewhere&nbsp;between 40% and 50% of sales, but only if Congress spends billions of dollars to build out a network of EV charging stations and provides tax incentives to consumers, among other measures.</p><p><blockquote>汽车制造商表示，他们可以实现销量40%至50%的目标，但前提是国会斥资数十亿美元建设电动汽车充电站网络并向消费者提供税收优惠等措施。</blockquote></p><p> Beyond that,&nbsp;consumers must buy in. EVs currently account for about 3% of sales, reflecting in part generally higher upfront costs and limits on their range.</p><p><blockquote>除此之外，消费者必须买账。电动汽车目前约占销量的3%，部分反映了普遍较高的前期成本和续航里程的限制。</blockquote></p><p> “Possibly the biggest hurdle ahead is consumer acceptance,” said Jessica Caldwell, an analyst at auto-data firm Edmunds. “What will it take for Americans to be willing to change their car ownership habits to go electric?”</p><p><blockquote>汽车数据公司Edmunds的分析师杰西卡·考德威尔(Jessica Caldwell)表示：“未来最大的障碍可能是消费者的接受度。”“怎样才能让美国人愿意改变他们的汽车拥有习惯转向电动汽车？”</blockquote></p><p> Supporters of Mr. Biden’s plan acknowledge the magnitude of the task ahead but insist the goal is achievable.</p><p><blockquote>拜登计划的支持者承认未来任务的艰巨，但坚称目标是可以实现的。</blockquote></p><p> Tax incentives can help bridge the price difference between gasoline and electric vehicles at the dealership, these people say. Once purchased, electric vehicles&nbsp;offer continued savings&nbsp;in fuel and maintenance costs compared with gas vehicles, and often a better ride.</p><p><blockquote>这些人士表示，税收优惠可以帮助弥合经销商处汽油汽车和电动汽车之间的价格差异。一旦购买，与燃气汽车相比，电动汽车可以持续节省燃料和维护成本，而且通常乘坐体验更好。</blockquote></p><p> A bigger national&nbsp;network of charging stations&nbsp;is also seen as key to alleviating fears of range anxiety, or running out of charge on the highway.</p><p><blockquote>更大的全国充电站网络也被视为缓解里程焦虑或高速公路电量耗尽担忧的关键。</blockquote></p><p> Providing those solutions will require&nbsp;balancing a long list of interests, from industry, political parties, unions, environmentalists, regulators and local governments, among others.</p><p><blockquote>提供这些解决方案需要平衡来自行业、政党、工会、环保人士、监管机构和地方政府等的一长串利益。</blockquote></p><p> “That’s a Rubik’s cube of complexity,” said Larry Burns, a former GM executive and adviser to&nbsp;Alphabet&nbsp;Inc.’s&nbsp;self-driving affiliate Waymo. “And this scale is massive. So we have to have collective will to make this happen.”</p><p><blockquote>“这是一个复杂的魔方，”通用汽车前高管、Alphabet公司自动驾驶子公司Waymo的顾问Larry Burns说。“而且这个规模是巨大的。所以我们必须有集体意愿才能实现这一目标。”</blockquote></p><p> But Mr. Burns and others say the industry is ready to make the transition, spurred by government and international competition.</p><p><blockquote>但伯恩斯和其他人表示，在政府和国际竞争的推动下，该行业已准备好进行转型。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden has made transportation a central part of his&nbsp;agenda on climate change. The sector is the country’s top source of greenhouse-gas emissions, contributing more than a quarter of the country’s planet-warming gases. And China has become a world leader in batteries and electric vehicles, a long-term threat to U.S. manufacturing.</p><p><blockquote>拜登已将交通作为其气候变化议程的核心部分。该行业是该国温室气体排放的最大来源，占该国全球变暖气体的四分之一以上。中国已经成为电池和电动汽车的世界领导者，这对美国制造业构成了长期威胁。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden’s most immediate impact will be through using the authority he does have at the Environmental Protection Agency. It is proposing new rules that would require auto makers to raise average fleetwide fuel efficiency to the equivalent of 52 miles per gallon by the 2026 model year, using an industry measure that takes both fuel efficiency and emissions reductions into account.</p><p><blockquote>拜登最直接的影响将是利用他在环境保护局的权力。它正在提出新规则，要求汽车制造商到2026车型年将整个车队的平均燃油效率提高到相当于每加仑52英里，采用一种同时考虑燃油效率和减排的行业措施。</blockquote></p><p> That compares with the current requirement of 43.3 mpg for that model year under rules set last year by the Trump administration.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，根据特朗普政府去年制定的规则，该车型年目前的油耗要求为43.3英里/加仑。</blockquote></p><p> Under the agency’s proposal, which is now subject to a public-comment period, auto makers would be allowed some increased flexibility to comply by using credits they banked in past years when they surpassed their sales goals under the fuel-efficiency requirements.</p><p><blockquote>根据该机构的提案（目前正在接受公众意见征询期），汽车制造商将被允许更大的灵活性来遵守规定，使用他们过去几年在燃油效率要求下超过销售目标时存入的信贷。</blockquote></p><p> <i>‘There is going to be a massive dislocation...[President Biden] has to navigate through it and enforce the compromise.’</i></p><p><blockquote><i>“将会出现大规模的混乱……（拜登总统）必须克服这一局面并执行妥协。”</i></blockquote></p><p> <p style=\"text-align:right;\"><i>— Bob Lutz, former auto executive</i></p><p><blockquote><p style=\"text-align:right;\"><i>——鲍勃·卢茨，前汽车业高管</i></p></blockquote></p><p> That is likely to spur opposition from the left, with some environmentalists already saying the president is caving in to the auto industry. The EPA’s proposal would produce just 75% of efficiency gains that would have come from the original Obama-era rules, according to an analysis from Consumer Reports Inc., a nonprofit membership organization known for its product reviews.</p><p><blockquote>这可能会激起左翼的反对，一些环保人士已经表示，总统正在向汽车行业屈服。根据消费者报告公司（Consumer Reports Inc.）的分析，环保局的提议只能产生奥巴马时代原始规则的75%的效率收益。消费者报告公司是一家以产品评论闻名的非营利会员组织。</blockquote></p><p> “There’s no doubt [the EPA proposal] is a big improvement over where we were,” said David Friedman, Consumer Reports’ vice president of advocacy. “But it doesn’t go as far as our technology can go, and both where consumers and the climate need us to go.”</p><p><blockquote>《消费者报告》负责宣传的副总裁戴维·弗里德曼(David Friedman)表示：“毫无疑问，[环保局的提案]比我们之前的情况有了很大的改进。”“但它并没有达到我们的技术所能达到的程度，也没有达到消费者和气候需要我们达到的程度。”</blockquote></p><p> And the regulations themselves aren’t set in stone, said Mary Nichols, a former chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board and a pioneer of fuel-economy regulation.</p><p><blockquote>加州空气资源委员会前主席、燃油经济性监管先驱玛丽·尼科尔斯表示，这些法规本身并不是一成不变的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden is taking action now to toughen fuel-efficiency standards in large part because former President Donald Trump drastically relaxed standards first imposed by former President Barack Obama.</p><p><blockquote>拜登现在正在采取行动收紧燃油效率标准，很大程度上是因为前总统唐纳德·特朗普大幅放宽了前总统巴拉克·奥巴马首次实施的标准。</blockquote></p><p> “An administration that is determined to dismantle them can quickly shift course,” Ms. Nichols said.</p><p><blockquote>“决心拆除它们的政府可以很快改变路线，”尼科尔斯女士说。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> That makes Mr. Biden’s deal making with the auto makers important as an attempt to bulletproof his plan for the auto industry. The former GM executive Mr. Burns and other industry experts note that the major auto makers&nbsp;are already spending big&nbsp;to transform themselves, a major reason Mr. Biden’s plan might succeed.</p><p><blockquote>这使得拜登与汽车制造商达成协议对于保护他的汽车行业计划非常重要。通用汽车前高管伯恩斯和其他行业专家指出，主要汽车制造商已经在投入巨资进行转型，这是拜登计划可能成功的主要原因。</blockquote></p><p> But it faces risks, too. Because it is voluntary, auto makers could still backtrack on their commitments, as&nbsp;they have done before. Congress has taken some of the tax credits and spending that the industry says it needs out of a pending bipartisan infrastructure package, leaving it for Democrats to consider for&nbsp;another spending billthat faces high hurdles to passage.</p><p><blockquote>但它也面临风险。因为这是自愿的，汽车制造商仍然可以像以前一样收回他们的承诺。国会已从悬而未决的两党基础设施一揽子计划中取消了该行业所需的一些税收抵免和支出，让民主党考虑另一项面临很高通过障碍的支出法案。</blockquote></p><p> There has been pushback from auto dealers fearful of the loss of lucrative maintenance work on traditional engines.</p><p><blockquote>汽车经销商担心失去利润丰厚的传统发动机维护工作，因此遭到了抵制。</blockquote></p><p> Unions&nbsp;are fearful of job losses&nbsp;if the transition moves too quickly.</p><p><blockquote>工会担心如果转型过快会导致失业。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden voiced his support for union workers throughout an event at the White House on Thursday where he signed the executive order, with executives from&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a>,&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">General Motors</a> and&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/STLA\">Stellantis NV</a> (formerly Fiat Chrysler)—all union shops—looking on.</p><p><blockquote>拜登周四在白宫签署行政命令的一次活动中表达了对工会工人的支持，来自<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特</a>, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">通用汽车</a>和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/STLA\">斯特兰蒂斯公司</a>（前菲亚特克莱斯勒）-所有工会商店-在一旁观看。</blockquote></p><p> The White House left out foreign auto makers, including&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">Toyota</a>&nbsp;or&nbsp;Hyundai Motor&nbsp;Co., whose U.S. workforces aren’t union-represented, as well as&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">Tesla Motors</a>,&nbsp;the company that has led the way in building a market for EVs.</p><p><blockquote>白宫排除了外国汽车制造商，包括<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">丰田</a>或者现代汽车公司，其美国劳动力没有工会代表，以及<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">特斯拉</a>该公司在打造电动汽车市场方面处于领先地位。</blockquote></p><p> The exclusion led to a rebuke from the American International Automobile Dealers Association, which noted that any policies that “prioritize some American auto workers above others…politicize what should be a shared mission,” making reaching the EV sales target more difficult.</p><p><blockquote>这一排除导致了美国国际汽车经销商协会的谴责，该协会指出，任何“将一些美国汽车工人置于其他人之上……将本应是共同使命的事情政治化”的政策，使实现电动汽车销售目标变得更加困难。</blockquote></p><p> Bob Lutz, a former senior executive at Ford, Chrysler, BMW and GM, where he was vice chairman, said Mr. Biden has now put himself at the center of what could be a messy transition process, one that will upend the status quo as auto manufacturing shifts to EV technology.</p><p><blockquote>曾担任福特、克莱斯勒、宝马和通用汽车副董事长的前高管鲍勃·卢茨(Bob Lutz)表示，拜登现在将自己置于可能是一个混乱的过渡过程的中心，这一过程将颠覆现状随着汽车制造转向电动汽车技术。</blockquote></p><p> “There is going to be a massive dislocation,” especially for workers, Mr. Lutz said. “He has to navigate through it and enforce the compromise. If everybody is a little unhappy but willing to accept it, that’s what he’s shooting for.”</p><p><blockquote>卢茨先生说，“将会出现大规模的混乱”，尤其是对工人来说。“他必须度过难关并执行妥协。如果每个人都有点不高兴但愿意接受，这就是他的目标。”</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>Biden’s Electric-Car Ambitions Face Real-World Roadblocks<blockquote>拜登的电动汽车雄心面临现实障碍</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\">\nBiden’s Electric-Car Ambitions Face Real-World Roadblocks<blockquote>拜登的电动汽车雄心面临现实障碍</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-09 08:12</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><i>Auto makers want congressional moves on charging stations and tax incentives; consumer support also is needed.</i></p><p><blockquote><i>汽车制造商希望国会在充电站和税收优惠方面采取行动；还需要消费者支持。</i></blockquote></p><p> WASHINGTON—President Biden wants to convert American motorists to electric cars as a linchpin of his plan to address&nbsp;climate change. Success heavily depends on factors outside his control.</p><p><blockquote>华盛顿——拜登总统希望将美国驾车者转向电动汽车，作为其应对气候变化计划的关键。成功在很大程度上取决于他无法控制的因素。</blockquote></p><p> The executive order&nbsp;that Mr. Biden signed Thursday—calling on sales of electric, fuel-cell and plug-in hybrids to account for 50% of car and light truck sales by 2030—has no binding authority.</p><p><blockquote>拜登周四签署的行政命令——呼吁到2030年电动、燃料电池和插电式混合动力车的销量占汽车和轻型卡车销量的50%——没有约束力。</blockquote></p><p> Auto makers say they could meet a target of somewhere&nbsp;between 40% and 50% of sales, but only if Congress spends billions of dollars to build out a network of EV charging stations and provides tax incentives to consumers, among other measures.</p><p><blockquote>汽车制造商表示，他们可以实现销量40%至50%的目标，但前提是国会斥资数十亿美元建设电动汽车充电站网络并向消费者提供税收优惠等措施。</blockquote></p><p> Beyond that,&nbsp;consumers must buy in. EVs currently account for about 3% of sales, reflecting in part generally higher upfront costs and limits on their range.</p><p><blockquote>除此之外，消费者必须买账。电动汽车目前约占销量的3%，部分反映了普遍较高的前期成本和续航里程的限制。</blockquote></p><p> “Possibly the biggest hurdle ahead is consumer acceptance,” said Jessica Caldwell, an analyst at auto-data firm Edmunds. “What will it take for Americans to be willing to change their car ownership habits to go electric?”</p><p><blockquote>汽车数据公司Edmunds的分析师杰西卡·考德威尔(Jessica Caldwell)表示：“未来最大的障碍可能是消费者的接受度。”“怎样才能让美国人愿意改变他们的汽车拥有习惯转向电动汽车？”</blockquote></p><p> Supporters of Mr. Biden’s plan acknowledge the magnitude of the task ahead but insist the goal is achievable.</p><p><blockquote>拜登计划的支持者承认未来任务的艰巨，但坚称目标是可以实现的。</blockquote></p><p> Tax incentives can help bridge the price difference between gasoline and electric vehicles at the dealership, these people say. Once purchased, electric vehicles&nbsp;offer continued savings&nbsp;in fuel and maintenance costs compared with gas vehicles, and often a better ride.</p><p><blockquote>这些人士表示，税收优惠可以帮助弥合经销商处汽油汽车和电动汽车之间的价格差异。一旦购买，与燃气汽车相比，电动汽车可以持续节省燃料和维护成本，而且通常乘坐体验更好。</blockquote></p><p> A bigger national&nbsp;network of charging stations&nbsp;is also seen as key to alleviating fears of range anxiety, or running out of charge on the highway.</p><p><blockquote>更大的全国充电站网络也被视为缓解里程焦虑或高速公路电量耗尽担忧的关键。</blockquote></p><p> Providing those solutions will require&nbsp;balancing a long list of interests, from industry, political parties, unions, environmentalists, regulators and local governments, among others.</p><p><blockquote>提供这些解决方案需要平衡来自行业、政党、工会、环保人士、监管机构和地方政府等的一长串利益。</blockquote></p><p> “That’s a Rubik’s cube of complexity,” said Larry Burns, a former GM executive and adviser to&nbsp;Alphabet&nbsp;Inc.’s&nbsp;self-driving affiliate Waymo. “And this scale is massive. So we have to have collective will to make this happen.”</p><p><blockquote>“这是一个复杂的魔方，”通用汽车前高管、Alphabet公司自动驾驶子公司Waymo的顾问Larry Burns说。“而且这个规模是巨大的。所以我们必须有集体意愿才能实现这一目标。”</blockquote></p><p> But Mr. Burns and others say the industry is ready to make the transition, spurred by government and international competition.</p><p><blockquote>但伯恩斯和其他人表示，在政府和国际竞争的推动下，该行业已准备好进行转型。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden has made transportation a central part of his&nbsp;agenda on climate change. The sector is the country’s top source of greenhouse-gas emissions, contributing more than a quarter of the country’s planet-warming gases. And China has become a world leader in batteries and electric vehicles, a long-term threat to U.S. manufacturing.</p><p><blockquote>拜登已将交通作为其气候变化议程的核心部分。该行业是该国温室气体排放的最大来源，占该国全球变暖气体的四分之一以上。中国已经成为电池和电动汽车的世界领导者，这对美国制造业构成了长期威胁。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden’s most immediate impact will be through using the authority he does have at the Environmental Protection Agency. It is proposing new rules that would require auto makers to raise average fleetwide fuel efficiency to the equivalent of 52 miles per gallon by the 2026 model year, using an industry measure that takes both fuel efficiency and emissions reductions into account.</p><p><blockquote>拜登最直接的影响将是利用他在环境保护局的权力。它正在提出新规则，要求汽车制造商到2026车型年将整个车队的平均燃油效率提高到相当于每加仑52英里，采用一种同时考虑燃油效率和减排的行业措施。</blockquote></p><p> That compares with the current requirement of 43.3 mpg for that model year under rules set last year by the Trump administration.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，根据特朗普政府去年制定的规则，该车型年目前的油耗要求为43.3英里/加仑。</blockquote></p><p> Under the agency’s proposal, which is now subject to a public-comment period, auto makers would be allowed some increased flexibility to comply by using credits they banked in past years when they surpassed their sales goals under the fuel-efficiency requirements.</p><p><blockquote>根据该机构的提案（目前正在接受公众意见征询期），汽车制造商将被允许更大的灵活性来遵守规定，使用他们过去几年在燃油效率要求下超过销售目标时存入的信贷。</blockquote></p><p> <i>‘There is going to be a massive dislocation...[President Biden] has to navigate through it and enforce the compromise.’</i></p><p><blockquote><i>“将会出现大规模的混乱……（拜登总统）必须克服这一局面并执行妥协。”</i></blockquote></p><p> <p style=\"text-align:right;\"><i>— Bob Lutz, former auto executive</i></p><p><blockquote><p style=\"text-align:right;\"><i>——鲍勃·卢茨，前汽车业高管</i></p></blockquote></p><p> That is likely to spur opposition from the left, with some environmentalists already saying the president is caving in to the auto industry. The EPA’s proposal would produce just 75% of efficiency gains that would have come from the original Obama-era rules, according to an analysis from Consumer Reports Inc., a nonprofit membership organization known for its product reviews.</p><p><blockquote>这可能会激起左翼的反对，一些环保人士已经表示，总统正在向汽车行业屈服。根据消费者报告公司（Consumer Reports Inc.）的分析，环保局的提议只能产生奥巴马时代原始规则的75%的效率收益。消费者报告公司是一家以产品评论闻名的非营利会员组织。</blockquote></p><p> “There’s no doubt [the EPA proposal] is a big improvement over where we were,” said David Friedman, Consumer Reports’ vice president of advocacy. “But it doesn’t go as far as our technology can go, and both where consumers and the climate need us to go.”</p><p><blockquote>《消费者报告》负责宣传的副总裁戴维·弗里德曼(David Friedman)表示：“毫无疑问，[环保局的提案]比我们之前的情况有了很大的改进。”“但它并没有达到我们的技术所能达到的程度，也没有达到消费者和气候需要我们达到的程度。”</blockquote></p><p> And the regulations themselves aren’t set in stone, said Mary Nichols, a former chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board and a pioneer of fuel-economy regulation.</p><p><blockquote>加州空气资源委员会前主席、燃油经济性监管先驱玛丽·尼科尔斯表示，这些法规本身并不是一成不变的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden is taking action now to toughen fuel-efficiency standards in large part because former President Donald Trump drastically relaxed standards first imposed by former President Barack Obama.</p><p><blockquote>拜登现在正在采取行动收紧燃油效率标准，很大程度上是因为前总统唐纳德·特朗普大幅放宽了前总统巴拉克·奥巴马首次实施的标准。</blockquote></p><p> “An administration that is determined to dismantle them can quickly shift course,” Ms. Nichols said.</p><p><blockquote>“决心拆除它们的政府可以很快改变路线，”尼科尔斯女士说。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> That makes Mr. Biden’s deal making with the auto makers important as an attempt to bulletproof his plan for the auto industry. The former GM executive Mr. Burns and other industry experts note that the major auto makers&nbsp;are already spending big&nbsp;to transform themselves, a major reason Mr. Biden’s plan might succeed.</p><p><blockquote>这使得拜登与汽车制造商达成协议对于保护他的汽车行业计划非常重要。通用汽车前高管伯恩斯和其他行业专家指出，主要汽车制造商已经在投入巨资进行转型，这是拜登计划可能成功的主要原因。</blockquote></p><p> But it faces risks, too. Because it is voluntary, auto makers could still backtrack on their commitments, as&nbsp;they have done before. Congress has taken some of the tax credits and spending that the industry says it needs out of a pending bipartisan infrastructure package, leaving it for Democrats to consider for&nbsp;another spending billthat faces high hurdles to passage.</p><p><blockquote>但它也面临风险。因为这是自愿的，汽车制造商仍然可以像以前一样收回他们的承诺。国会已从悬而未决的两党基础设施一揽子计划中取消了该行业所需的一些税收抵免和支出，让民主党考虑另一项面临很高通过障碍的支出法案。</blockquote></p><p> There has been pushback from auto dealers fearful of the loss of lucrative maintenance work on traditional engines.</p><p><blockquote>汽车经销商担心失去利润丰厚的传统发动机维护工作，因此遭到了抵制。</blockquote></p><p> Unions&nbsp;are fearful of job losses&nbsp;if the transition moves too quickly.</p><p><blockquote>工会担心如果转型过快会导致失业。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Biden voiced his support for union workers throughout an event at the White House on Thursday where he signed the executive order, with executives from&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a>,&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">General Motors</a> and&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/STLA\">Stellantis NV</a> (formerly Fiat Chrysler)—all union shops—looking on.</p><p><blockquote>拜登周四在白宫签署行政命令的一次活动中表达了对工会工人的支持，来自<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特</a>, <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">通用汽车</a>和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/STLA\">斯特兰蒂斯公司</a>（前菲亚特克莱斯勒）-所有工会商店-在一旁观看。</blockquote></p><p> The White House left out foreign auto makers, including&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">Toyota</a>&nbsp;or&nbsp;Hyundai Motor&nbsp;Co., whose U.S. workforces aren’t union-represented, as well as&nbsp;<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">Tesla Motors</a>,&nbsp;the company that has led the way in building a market for EVs.</p><p><blockquote>白宫排除了外国汽车制造商，包括<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">丰田</a>或者现代汽车公司，其美国劳动力没有工会代表，以及<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSLA\">特斯拉</a>该公司在打造电动汽车市场方面处于领先地位。</blockquote></p><p> The exclusion led to a rebuke from the American International Automobile Dealers Association, which noted that any policies that “prioritize some American auto workers above others…politicize what should be a shared mission,” making reaching the EV sales target more difficult.</p><p><blockquote>这一排除导致了美国国际汽车经销商协会的谴责，该协会指出，任何“将一些美国汽车工人置于其他人之上……将本应是共同使命的事情政治化”的政策，使实现电动汽车销售目标变得更加困难。</blockquote></p><p> Bob Lutz, a former senior executive at Ford, Chrysler, BMW and GM, where he was vice chairman, said Mr. Biden has now put himself at the center of what could be a messy transition process, one that will upend the status quo as auto manufacturing shifts to EV technology.</p><p><blockquote>曾担任福特、克莱斯勒、宝马和通用汽车副董事长的前高管鲍勃·卢茨(Bob Lutz)表示，拜登现在将自己置于可能是一个混乱的过渡过程的中心，这一过程将颠覆现状随着汽车制造转向电动汽车技术。</blockquote></p><p> “There is going to be a massive dislocation,” especially for workers, Mr. Lutz said. “He has to navigate through it and enforce the compromise. If everybody is a little unhappy but willing to accept it, that’s what he’s shooting for.”</p><p><blockquote>卢茨先生说，“将会出现大规模的混乱”，尤其是对工人来说。“他必须度过难关并执行妥协。如果每个人都有点不高兴但愿意接受，这就是他的目标。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-electric-car-ambitions-face-real-world-roadblocks-11628427780?mod=hp_lead_pos11\">The Wall Street Journal</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":{"TM":"丰田汽车","F":"福特汽车","TSLA":"特斯拉","GM":"通用汽车","STLA":"Stellantis NV"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/bidens-electric-car-ambitions-face-real-world-roadblocks-11628427780?mod=hp_lead_pos11","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1101851851","content_text":"Auto makers want congressional moves on charging stations and tax incentives; consumer support also is needed.\nWASHINGTON—President Biden wants to convert American motorists to electric cars as a linchpin of his plan to address climate change. Success heavily depends on factors outside his control.\nThe executive order that Mr. Biden signed Thursday—calling on sales of electric, fuel-cell and plug-in hybrids to account for 50% of car and light truck sales by 2030—has no binding authority.\nAuto makers say they could meet a target of somewhere between 40% and 50% of sales, but only if Congress spends billions of dollars to build out a network of EV charging stations and provides tax incentives to consumers, among other measures.\nBeyond that, consumers must buy in. EVs currently account for about 3% of sales, reflecting in part generally higher upfront costs and limits on their range.\n“Possibly the biggest hurdle ahead is consumer acceptance,” said Jessica Caldwell, an analyst at auto-data firm Edmunds. “What will it take for Americans to be willing to change their car ownership habits to go electric?”\nSupporters of Mr. Biden’s plan acknowledge the magnitude of the task ahead but insist the goal is achievable.\nTax incentives can help bridge the price difference between gasoline and electric vehicles at the dealership, these people say. Once purchased, electric vehicles offer continued savings in fuel and maintenance costs compared with gas vehicles, and often a better ride.\nA bigger national network of charging stations is also seen as key to alleviating fears of range anxiety, or running out of charge on the highway.\nProviding those solutions will require balancing a long list of interests, from industry, political parties, unions, environmentalists, regulators and local governments, among others.\n“That’s a Rubik’s cube of complexity,” said Larry Burns, a former GM executive and adviser to Alphabet Inc.’s self-driving affiliate Waymo. “And this scale is massive. So we have to have collective will to make this happen.”\nBut Mr. Burns and others say the industry is ready to make the transition, spurred by government and international competition.\nMr. Biden has made transportation a central part of his agenda on climate change. The sector is the country’s top source of greenhouse-gas emissions, contributing more than a quarter of the country’s planet-warming gases. And China has become a world leader in batteries and electric vehicles, a long-term threat to U.S. manufacturing.\nMr. Biden’s most immediate impact will be through using the authority he does have at the Environmental Protection Agency. It is proposing new rules that would require auto makers to raise average fleetwide fuel efficiency to the equivalent of 52 miles per gallon by the 2026 model year, using an industry measure that takes both fuel efficiency and emissions reductions into account.\nThat compares with the current requirement of 43.3 mpg for that model year under rules set last year by the Trump administration.\nUnder the agency’s proposal, which is now subject to a public-comment period, auto makers would be allowed some increased flexibility to comply by using credits they banked in past years when they surpassed their sales goals under the fuel-efficiency requirements.\n‘There is going to be a massive dislocation...[President Biden] has to navigate through it and enforce the compromise.’\n— Bob Lutz, former auto executive\nThat is likely to spur opposition from the left, with some environmentalists already saying the president is caving in to the auto industry. The EPA’s proposal would produce just 75% of efficiency gains that would have come from the original Obama-era rules, according to an analysis from Consumer Reports Inc., a nonprofit membership organization known for its product reviews.\n“There’s no doubt [the EPA proposal] is a big improvement over where we were,” said David Friedman, Consumer Reports’ vice president of advocacy. “But it doesn’t go as far as our technology can go, and both where consumers and the climate need us to go.”\nAnd the regulations themselves aren’t set in stone, said Mary Nichols, a former chairwoman of the California Air Resources Board and a pioneer of fuel-economy regulation.\nMr. Biden is taking action now to toughen fuel-efficiency standards in large part because former President Donald Trump drastically relaxed standards first imposed by former President Barack Obama.\n“An administration that is determined to dismantle them can quickly shift course,” Ms. Nichols said.\nThat makes Mr. Biden’s deal making with the auto makers important as an attempt to bulletproof his plan for the auto industry. The former GM executive Mr. Burns and other industry experts note that the major auto makers are already spending big to transform themselves, a major reason Mr. Biden’s plan might succeed.\nBut it faces risks, too. Because it is voluntary, auto makers could still backtrack on their commitments, as they have done before. Congress has taken some of the tax credits and spending that the industry says it needs out of a pending bipartisan infrastructure package, leaving it for Democrats to consider for another spending billthat faces high hurdles to passage.\nThere has been pushback from auto dealers fearful of the loss of lucrative maintenance work on traditional engines.\nUnions are fearful of job losses if the transition moves too quickly.\nMr. Biden voiced his support for union workers throughout an event at the White House on Thursday where he signed the executive order, with executives from Ford, General Motors and Stellantis NV (formerly Fiat Chrysler)—all union shops—looking on.\nThe White House left out foreign auto makers, including Toyota or Hyundai Motor Co., whose U.S. workforces aren’t union-represented, as well as Tesla Motors, the company that has led the way in building a market for EVs.\nThe exclusion led to a rebuke from the American International Automobile Dealers Association, which noted that any policies that “prioritize some American auto workers above others…politicize what should be a shared mission,” making reaching the EV sales target more difficult.\nBob Lutz, a former senior executive at Ford, Chrysler, BMW and GM, where he was vice chairman, said Mr. Biden has now put himself at the center of what could be a messy transition process, one that will upend the status quo as auto manufacturing shifts to EV technology.\n“There is going to be a massive dislocation,” especially for workers, Mr. Lutz said. “He has to navigate through it and enforce the compromise. If everybody is a little unhappy but willing to accept it, that’s what he’s shooting for.”","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TM":0.9,"GM":0.9,"F":0.9,"TSLA":0.9,"STLA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":667,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":602827948,"gmtCreate":1639008697068,"gmtModify":1639008697193,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","listText":"Thanks for sharing&nbsp;","text":"Thanks for sharing","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/602827948","repostId":"1137331022","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1137331022","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"为用户提供金融资讯、行情、数据，旨在帮助投资者理解世界，做投资决策。","home_visible":1,"media_name":"老虎资讯综合","id":"102","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1639005672,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1137331022?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-09 07:21","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"昨夜今晨：疫苗利好再度传来！苹果续刷历史新高","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1137331022","media":"老虎资讯综合","summary":"摘要：美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；辉瑞公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%>>>\n\n海外市场\n美股三大指","content":"<blockquote>\n <b>摘要：</b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">苹果</a>续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PFE\">辉瑞</a>公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GME\">游戏驿站</a>Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%&gt;&gt;&gt;\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>海外市场</b></p>\n<p><b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创收盘历史新高</b></p>\n<p>美国股市周三小幅上涨，许多投资者已经预期到，奥密克戎的威胁将是可控的，这种预期推动了本周股市的连续反弹。截至收盘，道琼斯指数涨0.1%，报35754.75点；标普500指数涨0.31%，报4701.21点；纳斯达克指数涨0.64%，报15786.99点。</p>\n<p><b>热门中概股收盘大多走高，雾芯科技涨超21%</b></p>\n<p>中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TAL\">好未来</a>涨超13%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEKE\">贝壳</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOTU\">高途</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LUCKIN\">瑞幸咖啡</a>涨超9%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EDU\">新东方</a>涨超8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZTO\">中通快递</a>涨近6%；中概新能源汽车中，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NIO\">蔚来</a>涨超5.8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LI\">理想汽车</a>涨2.1%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">小鹏汽车</a>涨超1%。</p>\n<p><b>美油收高0.4%，布油上涨0.5%</b></p>\n<p>美国原油期货价格周三创两周来的最高收盘价。关于奥密克戎变异毒株可能不会像人们担心的那样严重破坏经济的消息接踵而至，令油价持续获得支持。纽约商品交易所1月交割的西德克萨斯中质原油（WTI）期货价格上涨31美分，涨幅0.4%，收于每桶72.36美元，创11月24日以来的最高收盘价；欧洲<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ICE\">洲际交易所</a>2月交割的布伦特原油期货价格上涨38美分，涨幅0.5%，收于每桶75.82美元，创11月25日以来的最高收盘价。</p>\n<p><b>黄金期货收高0.1%，并创一周来盘中最高价</b></p>\n<p>黄金期货周三小幅收高，盘中一度创一周以来新高。投资者关注奥密克戎变异毒株的发展，并等待本周即将公布的美国通胀数据。纽约商品交易所最活跃的2月黄金合约上涨80美分，涨幅不到0.1%，收于每盎司1785.50美元。盘中最高为1794.30美元，创12月1日以来的最高价格。</p>\n<p><b>欧股主要指数收跌，德国DAX30指数跌0.79%</b></p>\n<p>德国DAX30指数周三收跌0.79%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VUKE.UK\">英国富时100</a>跌0.08%，法国CAC40跌0.7%，欧洲斯托克50指数跌0.99%。</p>\n<p><b>国际宏观</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞CEO：因omicron的出现 可能要比预期更早接种第四针疫苗</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞首席执行官Albert Bourla周三表示，在初步研究表明omicron变体会破坏新冠疫苗产生的保护性抗体后，人们可能需要比预期更早地接种第四针新冠疫苗。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>摩根大通：2022年全球经济将全面复苏</b></a></p>\n<p>美国投行摩根大通周三预测，2022年将标志着新冠疫情的结束，全球经济将全面复苏。该行在2022年的展望报告中称，新的疫苗和疗法将引发“强劲的周期性复苏、全球流动性的回归以及消费者被压抑需求的释放”。</p>\n<p><b>世卫组织：奥密克戎毒株将显著影响全球疫情</b></p>\n<p>世卫组织总干事谭德塞表示，已有57个国家和地区出现奥密克戎毒株，预计还将继续扩散，该毒株将对全球疫情产生显著影响，但目前还难以预估具体情况。南非感染奥密克戎毒株的病例数量正在迅速增加，谭德塞呼吁各国加强监测和病毒基因测序，以了解奥密克戎毒株是否能超越德尔塔毒株成为新的主要流行毒株。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190693181\" target=\"_blank\"><b>全球芯片短缺问题未有起色，交付等待时长再创历史新高</b></a></p>\n<p>芯片的交付时间再度延长，这项关键产品的短缺让许多行业希望再次破灭。根据Susquehanna金融集团的最新研究结果，11月芯片的交货时长（从订购到交付）比10月的21.9周增加了4天，达到约22.3周，再创该数据有史以来最长的等待时间。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190869550\" target=\"_blank\"><b>美国职位空缺接近历史高位，“大辞职潮”近半年来首次放缓</b></a><b></b></p>\n<p>美国10月职位空缺数跃升至有纪录以来的次高水平，凸显出雇主在填补岗位空缺方面所面临的挑战。美国劳工部周三发布的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查报告显示，职位空缺数升至1100万，前月数据意外上修至1060万。辞职率降至2.8%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英国首相恢复居家工作建议 以遏制omicron传播</b></a></p>\n<p>英国首相鲍里斯·约翰逊收紧防疫规定以遏制变异毒株omicron的传播，建议人们在家工作，并强制要求在大型公共场所使用“疫苗护照”。“越来越明显的是，omicron增长速度远快于德尔塔，”约翰逊在周三电视新闻发布会上宣布了英格兰地区的新防疫措施。他表示，“实施B计划是合适而负责任的做法”。</p>\n<p><b>公司新闻</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190931896\" target=\"_blank\"><b>苹果股价续刷历史新高，市值逼近3万亿美元</b></a></p>\n<p>周三苹果股价再度刷新历史高位，市值也逐步接近3万亿美元。而就在一年多前，苹果市值才刚刚突破2万亿美元大关。据悉美国法院批准苹果推迟修改应用商店规则最后期限的动议，暂停执行Epic Games反垄断诉讼中针对苹果公司的应用商店禁令，该消息推动苹果股价短线拉升。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1141082394\" target=\"_blank\"><b>飙涨近22%！电子烟龙头豪掷超30亿回购股票</b></a></p>\n<p>电子烟龙头雾芯科技12月8日晚间发布公告称，董事会授权一项股票回购计划，根据该计划，公司可在截至2023年12月31日的一段时间内回购至多5亿美元（折合人民币31.7亿元）的股票。受此消息影响，雾芯科技股价高开高走，截至收盘，涨近22%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1124189543\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞：加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞和BioNTech公司宣布，加强针新冠疫苗能中和奥密克戎变异毒株。初步试验数据显示，尽管两剂疫苗阻断奥密克戎的效果明显较差，但接种第三剂疫苗后，针对该毒株的抗体水平提高了25倍，足以和两剂疫苗对原始毒株的效果相媲美。</p>\n<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AZN\">阿斯利康</a>Evusheld疫苗获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权</b></p>\n<p>周三阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权。FDA表示，此前针对阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld发布的紧急使用授权，是为了帮助特定的成人和儿童抵御新冠病毒。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189667417\" target=\"_blank\"><b>谷歌和Roku达成新协议 确保YouTube和YouTube TV继续发行</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，ROKU和谷歌今日达成了一项新的多年合作协议，使得YouTube和YouTube TV得以在Roku平台上继续存在。两家公司并未披露新协议的条款。Roku的一名代表在一份声明中称，“这项协议对我们的共同客户来说是一个积极的进展，使Roku平台上的所有流媒体用户都可以使用YouTube和YouTube TV。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189663059\" target=\"_blank\"><b>福特首款电动皮卡需求火爆，预订量接近20万辆</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特汽车</a>证实，首款电动皮卡F150 Lightning目前零售预订量已经接近20万辆。F-150 Lightning自今年9月以来一直处于试生产阶段，根据计划，将于2022年春季正式上市，预计在2022年下半年交付。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189527726\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英特尔CEO：供应链问题将持续至2023年</b></a></p>\n<p>英特尔和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ACN\">埃森哲</a>CEO表示，对一些公司来说，波及整个美国经济的供应链问题正在改善，但长期修复可能需要更多时间。芯片业巨头英特尔身处全球半导体短缺的风暴中心，该公司CEO基辛格预计供应链问题将持续到2023年，部分是因为建造一家新厂需要三年时间。基辛格说：“我们认为当前正是最糟糕的阶段。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1131202578\" target=\"_blank\"><b>游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收12.97亿美元，市场预期11.89亿美元，去年同期10.05亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.054亿美元，市场预期净亏损3213.3万美元，去年同期1880万美元；第三季度每股亏损1.39美元，市场预期亏损0.4美元，去年同期亏损0.29美元。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1177663836\" target=\"_blank\"><b>UiPath&nbsp;2022财年第三季度净亏损同比扩大</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收2.21亿美元，市场预期2.09亿美元，去年同期1.47亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.23亿美元，市场预期净亏损6258.2万美元，去年同期净亏损7079.6万美元；第三季度每股亏损0.23美元，市场预期亏损0.14美元，去年同期亏损0.41美元。</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>昨夜今晨：疫苗利好再度传来！苹果续刷历史新高</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\n昨夜今晨：疫苗利好再度传来！苹果续刷历史新高\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/102\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">老虎资讯综合 </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-12-09 07:21</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<blockquote>\n <b>摘要：</b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">苹果</a>续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/PFE\">辉瑞</a>公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GME\">游戏驿站</a>Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%&gt;&gt;&gt;\n</blockquote>\n<p><b>海外市场</b></p>\n<p><b>美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创收盘历史新高</b></p>\n<p>美国股市周三小幅上涨，许多投资者已经预期到，奥密克戎的威胁将是可控的，这种预期推动了本周股市的连续反弹。截至收盘，道琼斯指数涨0.1%，报35754.75点；标普500指数涨0.31%，报4701.21点；纳斯达克指数涨0.64%，报15786.99点。</p>\n<p><b>热门中概股收盘大多走高，雾芯科技涨超21%</b></p>\n<p>中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TAL\">好未来</a>涨超13%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BEKE\">贝壳</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GOTU\">高途</a>涨超11%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LUCKIN\">瑞幸咖啡</a>涨超9%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/EDU\">新东方</a>涨超8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZTO\">中通快递</a>涨近6%；中概新能源汽车中，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/NIO\">蔚来</a>涨超5.8%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/LI\">理想汽车</a>涨2.1%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XPEV\">小鹏汽车</a>涨超1%。</p>\n<p><b>美油收高0.4%，布油上涨0.5%</b></p>\n<p>美国原油期货价格周三创两周来的最高收盘价。关于奥密克戎变异毒株可能不会像人们担心的那样严重破坏经济的消息接踵而至，令油价持续获得支持。纽约商品交易所1月交割的西德克萨斯中质原油（WTI）期货价格上涨31美分，涨幅0.4%，收于每桶72.36美元，创11月24日以来的最高收盘价；欧洲<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ICE\">洲际交易所</a>2月交割的布伦特原油期货价格上涨38美分，涨幅0.5%，收于每桶75.82美元，创11月25日以来的最高收盘价。</p>\n<p><b>黄金期货收高0.1%，并创一周来盘中最高价</b></p>\n<p>黄金期货周三小幅收高，盘中一度创一周以来新高。投资者关注奥密克戎变异毒株的发展，并等待本周即将公布的美国通胀数据。纽约商品交易所最活跃的2月黄金合约上涨80美分，涨幅不到0.1%，收于每盎司1785.50美元。盘中最高为1794.30美元，创12月1日以来的最高价格。</p>\n<p><b>欧股主要指数收跌，德国DAX30指数跌0.79%</b></p>\n<p>德国DAX30指数周三收跌0.79%，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/VUKE.UK\">英国富时100</a>跌0.08%，法国CAC40跌0.7%，欧洲斯托克50指数跌0.99%。</p>\n<p><b>国际宏观</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞CEO：因omicron的出现 可能要比预期更早接种第四针疫苗</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞首席执行官Albert Bourla周三表示，在初步研究表明omicron变体会破坏新冠疫苗产生的保护性抗体后，人们可能需要比预期更早地接种第四针新冠疫苗。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>摩根大通：2022年全球经济将全面复苏</b></a></p>\n<p>美国投行摩根大通周三预测，2022年将标志着新冠疫情的结束，全球经济将全面复苏。该行在2022年的展望报告中称，新的疫苗和疗法将引发“强劲的周期性复苏、全球流动性的回归以及消费者被压抑需求的释放”。</p>\n<p><b>世卫组织：奥密克戎毒株将显著影响全球疫情</b></p>\n<p>世卫组织总干事谭德塞表示，已有57个国家和地区出现奥密克戎毒株，预计还将继续扩散，该毒株将对全球疫情产生显著影响，但目前还难以预估具体情况。南非感染奥密克戎毒株的病例数量正在迅速增加，谭德塞呼吁各国加强监测和病毒基因测序，以了解奥密克戎毒株是否能超越德尔塔毒株成为新的主要流行毒株。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190693181\" target=\"_blank\"><b>全球芯片短缺问题未有起色，交付等待时长再创历史新高</b></a></p>\n<p>芯片的交付时间再度延长，这项关键产品的短缺让许多行业希望再次破灭。根据Susquehanna金融集团的最新研究结果，11月芯片的交货时长（从订购到交付）比10月的21.9周增加了4天，达到约22.3周，再创该数据有史以来最长的等待时间。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190869550\" target=\"_blank\"><b>美国职位空缺接近历史高位，“大辞职潮”近半年来首次放缓</b></a><b></b></p>\n<p>美国10月职位空缺数跃升至有纪录以来的次高水平，凸显出雇主在填补岗位空缺方面所面临的挑战。美国劳工部周三发布的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查报告显示，职位空缺数升至1100万，前月数据意外上修至1060万。辞职率降至2.8%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190969538\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英国首相恢复居家工作建议 以遏制omicron传播</b></a></p>\n<p>英国首相鲍里斯·约翰逊收紧防疫规定以遏制变异毒株omicron的传播，建议人们在家工作，并强制要求在大型公共场所使用“疫苗护照”。“越来越明显的是，omicron增长速度远快于德尔塔，”约翰逊在周三电视新闻发布会上宣布了英格兰地区的新防疫措施。他表示，“实施B计划是合适而负责任的做法”。</p>\n<p><b>公司新闻</b></p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2190931896\" target=\"_blank\"><b>苹果股价续刷历史新高，市值逼近3万亿美元</b></a></p>\n<p>周三苹果股价再度刷新历史高位，市值也逐步接近3万亿美元。而就在一年多前，苹果市值才刚刚突破2万亿美元大关。据悉美国法院批准苹果推迟修改应用商店规则最后期限的动议，暂停执行Epic Games反垄断诉讼中针对苹果公司的应用商店禁令，该消息推动苹果股价短线拉升。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1141082394\" target=\"_blank\"><b>飙涨近22%！电子烟龙头豪掷超30亿回购股票</b></a></p>\n<p>电子烟龙头雾芯科技12月8日晚间发布公告称，董事会授权一项股票回购计划，根据该计划，公司可在截至2023年12月31日的一段时间内回购至多5亿美元（折合人民币31.7亿元）的股票。受此消息影响，雾芯科技股价高开高走，截至收盘，涨近22%。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1124189543\" target=\"_blank\"><b>辉瑞：加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株</b></a></p>\n<p>辉瑞和BioNTech公司宣布，加强针新冠疫苗能中和奥密克戎变异毒株。初步试验数据显示，尽管两剂疫苗阻断奥密克戎的效果明显较差，但接种第三剂疫苗后，针对该毒株的抗体水平提高了25倍，足以和两剂疫苗对原始毒株的效果相媲美。</p>\n<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AZN\">阿斯利康</a>Evusheld疫苗获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权</b></p>\n<p>周三阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权。FDA表示，此前针对阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld发布的紧急使用授权，是为了帮助特定的成人和儿童抵御新冠病毒。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189667417\" target=\"_blank\"><b>谷歌和Roku达成新协议 确保YouTube和YouTube TV继续发行</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，ROKU和谷歌今日达成了一项新的多年合作协议，使得YouTube和YouTube TV得以在Roku平台上继续存在。两家公司并未披露新协议的条款。Roku的一名代表在一份声明中称，“这项协议对我们的共同客户来说是一个积极的进展，使Roku平台上的所有流媒体用户都可以使用YouTube和YouTube TV。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189663059\" target=\"_blank\"><b>福特首款电动皮卡需求火爆，预订量接近20万辆</b></a></p>\n<p>据报道，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特汽车</a>证实，首款电动皮卡F150 Lightning目前零售预订量已经接近20万辆。F-150 Lightning自今年9月以来一直处于试生产阶段，根据计划，将于2022年春季正式上市，预计在2022年下半年交付。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/2189527726\" target=\"_blank\"><b>英特尔CEO：供应链问题将持续至2023年</b></a></p>\n<p>英特尔和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ACN\">埃森哲</a>CEO表示，对一些公司来说，波及整个美国经济的供应链问题正在改善，但长期修复可能需要更多时间。芯片业巨头英特尔身处全球半导体短缺的风暴中心，该公司CEO基辛格预计供应链问题将持续到2023年，部分是因为建造一家新厂需要三年时间。基辛格说：“我们认为当前正是最糟糕的阶段。”</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1131202578\" target=\"_blank\"><b>游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收12.97亿美元，市场预期11.89亿美元，去年同期10.05亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.054亿美元，市场预期净亏损3213.3万美元，去年同期1880万美元；第三季度每股亏损1.39美元，市场预期亏损0.4美元，去年同期亏损0.29美元。</p>\n<p><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/NW/1177663836\" target=\"_blank\"><b>UiPath&nbsp;2022财年第三季度净亏损同比扩大</b></a></p>\n<p>财报显示，第三季度营收2.21亿美元，市场预期2.09亿美元，去年同期1.47亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.23亿美元，市场预期净亏损6258.2万美元，去年同期净亏损7079.6万美元；第三季度每股亏损0.23美元，市场预期亏损0.14美元，去年同期亏损0.41美元。</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/b23574aac95526c9e5c62ebc8dd25130","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite","BK4507":"流媒体概念","BK4505":"高瓴资本持仓","BK4534":"瑞士信贷持仓",".DJI":"道琼斯","BK4170":"电脑硬件、储存设备及电脑周边","BK4554":"元宇宙及AR概念",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","BK4515":"5G概念","BK4532":"文艺复兴科技持仓","BK4550":"红杉资本持仓","BK4559":"巴菲特持仓","BK4533":"AQR资本管理(全球第二大对冲基金)","BK4553":"喜马拉雅资本持仓","BK4501":"段永平概念","BK4527":"明星科技股","BK4566":"资本集团","AAPL":"苹果"},"is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1137331022","content_text":"摘要：美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创历史新高；中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%；辉瑞公司宣布加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株；游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%>>>\n\n海外市场\n美股三大指数小幅收涨，苹果续创收盘历史新高\n美国股市周三小幅上涨，许多投资者已经预期到，奥密克戎的威胁将是可控的，这种预期推动了本周股市的连续反弹。截至收盘，道琼斯指数涨0.1%，报35754.75点；标普500指数涨0.31%，报4701.21点；纳斯达克指数涨0.64%，报15786.99点。\n热门中概股收盘大多走高，雾芯科技涨超21%\n中概股多数上涨，雾芯科技收涨超21%，好未来涨超13%，贝壳涨超11%，高途涨超11%，瑞幸咖啡涨超9%，新东方涨超8%，中通快递涨近6%；中概新能源汽车中，蔚来涨超5.8%，理想汽车涨2.1%，小鹏汽车涨超1%。\n美油收高0.4%，布油上涨0.5%\n美国原油期货价格周三创两周来的最高收盘价。关于奥密克戎变异毒株可能不会像人们担心的那样严重破坏经济的消息接踵而至，令油价持续获得支持。纽约商品交易所1月交割的西德克萨斯中质原油（WTI）期货价格上涨31美分，涨幅0.4%，收于每桶72.36美元，创11月24日以来的最高收盘价；欧洲洲际交易所2月交割的布伦特原油期货价格上涨38美分，涨幅0.5%，收于每桶75.82美元，创11月25日以来的最高收盘价。\n黄金期货收高0.1%，并创一周来盘中最高价\n黄金期货周三小幅收高，盘中一度创一周以来新高。投资者关注奥密克戎变异毒株的发展，并等待本周即将公布的美国通胀数据。纽约商品交易所最活跃的2月黄金合约上涨80美分，涨幅不到0.1%，收于每盎司1785.50美元。盘中最高为1794.30美元，创12月1日以来的最高价格。\n欧股主要指数收跌，德国DAX30指数跌0.79%\n德国DAX30指数周三收跌0.79%，英国富时100跌0.08%，法国CAC40跌0.7%，欧洲斯托克50指数跌0.99%。\n国际宏观\n辉瑞CEO：因omicron的出现 可能要比预期更早接种第四针疫苗\n辉瑞首席执行官Albert Bourla周三表示，在初步研究表明omicron变体会破坏新冠疫苗产生的保护性抗体后，人们可能需要比预期更早地接种第四针新冠疫苗。\n摩根大通：2022年全球经济将全面复苏\n美国投行摩根大通周三预测，2022年将标志着新冠疫情的结束，全球经济将全面复苏。该行在2022年的展望报告中称，新的疫苗和疗法将引发“强劲的周期性复苏、全球流动性的回归以及消费者被压抑需求的释放”。\n世卫组织：奥密克戎毒株将显著影响全球疫情\n世卫组织总干事谭德塞表示，已有57个国家和地区出现奥密克戎毒株，预计还将继续扩散，该毒株将对全球疫情产生显著影响，但目前还难以预估具体情况。南非感染奥密克戎毒株的病例数量正在迅速增加，谭德塞呼吁各国加强监测和病毒基因测序，以了解奥密克戎毒株是否能超越德尔塔毒株成为新的主要流行毒株。\n全球芯片短缺问题未有起色，交付等待时长再创历史新高\n芯片的交付时间再度延长，这项关键产品的短缺让许多行业希望再次破灭。根据Susquehanna金融集团的最新研究结果，11月芯片的交货时长（从订购到交付）比10月的21.9周增加了4天，达到约22.3周，再创该数据有史以来最长的等待时间。\n美国职位空缺接近历史高位，“大辞职潮”近半年来首次放缓\n美国10月职位空缺数跃升至有纪录以来的次高水平，凸显出雇主在填补岗位空缺方面所面临的挑战。美国劳工部周三发布的职位空缺和劳动力流动调查报告显示，职位空缺数升至1100万，前月数据意外上修至1060万。辞职率降至2.8%。\n英国首相恢复居家工作建议 以遏制omicron传播\n英国首相鲍里斯·约翰逊收紧防疫规定以遏制变异毒株omicron的传播，建议人们在家工作，并强制要求在大型公共场所使用“疫苗护照”。“越来越明显的是，omicron增长速度远快于德尔塔，”约翰逊在周三电视新闻发布会上宣布了英格兰地区的新防疫措施。他表示，“实施B计划是合适而负责任的做法”。\n公司新闻\n苹果股价续刷历史新高，市值逼近3万亿美元\n周三苹果股价再度刷新历史高位，市值也逐步接近3万亿美元。而就在一年多前，苹果市值才刚刚突破2万亿美元大关。据悉美国法院批准苹果推迟修改应用商店规则最后期限的动议，暂停执行Epic Games反垄断诉讼中针对苹果公司的应用商店禁令，该消息推动苹果股价短线拉升。\n飙涨近22%！电子烟龙头豪掷超30亿回购股票\n电子烟龙头雾芯科技12月8日晚间发布公告称，董事会授权一项股票回购计划，根据该计划，公司可在截至2023年12月31日的一段时间内回购至多5亿美元（折合人民币31.7亿元）的股票。受此消息影响，雾芯科技股价高开高走，截至收盘，涨近22%。\n辉瑞：加强针疫苗可中和奥密克戎毒株\n辉瑞和BioNTech公司宣布，加强针新冠疫苗能中和奥密克戎变异毒株。初步试验数据显示，尽管两剂疫苗阻断奥密克戎的效果明显较差，但接种第三剂疫苗后，针对该毒株的抗体水平提高了25倍，足以和两剂疫苗对原始毒株的效果相媲美。\n阿斯利康Evusheld疫苗获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权\n周三阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld获得美国食品药品监督管理局紧急使用授权。FDA表示，此前针对阿斯利康的新冠注射剂Evusheld发布的紧急使用授权，是为了帮助特定的成人和儿童抵御新冠病毒。\n谷歌和Roku达成新协议 确保YouTube和YouTube TV继续发行\n据报道，ROKU和谷歌今日达成了一项新的多年合作协议，使得YouTube和YouTube TV得以在Roku平台上继续存在。两家公司并未披露新协议的条款。Roku的一名代表在一份声明中称，“这项协议对我们的共同客户来说是一个积极的进展，使Roku平台上的所有流媒体用户都可以使用YouTube和YouTube TV。”\n福特首款电动皮卡需求火爆，预订量接近20万辆\n据报道，福特汽车证实，首款电动皮卡F150 Lightning目前零售预订量已经接近20万辆。F-150 Lightning自今年9月以来一直处于试生产阶段，根据计划，将于2022年春季正式上市，预计在2022年下半年交付。\n英特尔CEO：供应链问题将持续至2023年\n英特尔和埃森哲CEO表示，对一些公司来说，波及整个美国经济的供应链问题正在改善，但长期修复可能需要更多时间。芯片业巨头英特尔身处全球半导体短缺的风暴中心，该公司CEO基辛格预计供应链问题将持续到2023年，部分是因为建造一家新厂需要三年时间。基辛格说：“我们认为当前正是最糟糕的阶段。”\n游戏驿站Q3净亏损同比扩大，盘后一度跌逾7%\n财报显示，第三季度营收12.97亿美元，市场预期11.89亿美元，去年同期10.05亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.054亿美元，市场预期净亏损3213.3万美元，去年同期1880万美元；第三季度每股亏损1.39美元，市场预期亏损0.4美元，去年同期亏损0.29美元。\nUiPath 2022财年第三季度净亏损同比扩大\n财报显示，第三季度营收2.21亿美元，市场预期2.09亿美元，去年同期1.47亿美元；第三季度净亏损1.23亿美元，市场预期净亏损6258.2万美元，去年同期净亏损7079.6万美元；第三季度每股亏损0.23美元，市场预期亏损0.14美元，去年同期亏损0.41美元。","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,"AAPL":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2720,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":817943138,"gmtCreate":1630900987724,"gmtModify":1631888928550,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/817943138","repostId":"1110543090","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":424,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":808975375,"gmtCreate":1627554182597,"gmtModify":1631884320246,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hope is Good","listText":"Hope is Good","text":"Hope is Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/808975375","repostId":"1108176649","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":427,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":605785199,"gmtCreate":1639265033810,"gmtModify":1639265033928,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"又是一个坑。看谁往里跳。","listText":"又是一个坑。看谁往里跳。","text":"又是一个坑。看谁往里跳。","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/605785199","repostId":"1134450838","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1134450838","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":1639148939,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1134450838?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-12-10 23:08","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading<blockquote>Grab股价早盘再下跌9%</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1134450838","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.","content":"<p>Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.</p><p><blockquote>Grab股价继昨天下跌超过9%后，早盘又下跌9%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/963eb8dd73ce8daa0d852d63f0bcc276\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></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>Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading<blockquote>Grab股价早盘再下跌9%</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\">\nGrab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading<blockquote>Grab股价早盘再下跌9%</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\">2021-12-10 23:08</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.</p><p><blockquote>Grab股价继昨天下跌超过9%后，早盘又下跌9%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/963eb8dd73ce8daa0d852d63f0bcc276\" tg-width=\"840\" tg-height=\"470\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GRAB":"Grab Holdings"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1134450838","content_text":"Grab shares dropped another 9% in morning trading after falling more than 9% yesterday.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"GRAB":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2668,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":855675027,"gmtCreate":1635376050925,"gmtModify":1635377491227,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"👍&nbsp;","listText":"👍&nbsp;","text":"👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/855675027","repostId":"2178234410","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3315,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":886837710,"gmtCreate":1631579401130,"gmtModify":1631888928536,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Like","listText":"Like","text":"Like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/886837710","repostId":"1171919128","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1171919128","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1631547161,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1171919128?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-09-13 23:32","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple App Store: The Tide Is Turning<blockquote>苹果应用商店：潮流正在转向</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1171919128","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nA US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>A US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic Games.</li>  <li>Despite that, and in conjunction with a recent settlement with Japanese regulators, Apple will be getting rid of their anti-steering rule. This is a bigger change than people think.</li>  <li>The threat to Apple doesn't end with the Epic trial. There are bigger threats coming from the executive and legislative branches in the US, and regulators in Europe and Asia.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/323e8503a813d4996ee819f5591992b8\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images News</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>美国联邦地区法院法官在Epic Games的案件中做出了对苹果有利的裁决。</li><li>尽管如此，加上最近与日本监管机构达成的和解，苹果将取消他们的反转向规则。这是一个比人们想象的更大的变化。</li><li>对苹果的威胁并没有随着史诗般的审判而结束。更大的威胁来自美国的行政和立法部门，以及欧洲和亚洲的监管机构。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>奇普·索莫德维拉/盖蒂图片社新闻</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>It Does Not End Here</b></p><p><blockquote><b>它并没有就此结束</b></blockquote></p><p> For&nbsp;some time now, I&nbsp;have been warning&nbsp;that&nbsp;antitrust law was about to change, and these changes would not be favorable to Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL), and that investors need to take these threats seriously. In every one of these attempts, I was rebuffed in the comments by many Apple shareholders telling me that these fears and warnings were overblown. “Long and strong AAPL!” cheerleading seems to be popular.Confirmation bias&nbsp;is a strong thing, and you should fight it every single day.</p><p><blockquote>一段时间以来，我一直警告反垄断法即将发生变化，这些变化对苹果（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）不利，投资者需要认真对待这些威胁。在每一次尝试中，我都遭到了许多苹果股东的拒绝，他们告诉我这些担忧和警告被夸大了。“长而强的AAPL！”啦啦队似乎很受欢迎。确认偏见是一种强烈的东西，你应该每天都与之斗争。</blockquote></p><p> My last attempt was&nbsp;less than two weeks ago, and I was similarly dismissed, and even accused of being a short-selling tout to boot. That last suggestion is pretty funny to anyone who has had to listen to me drone on about Apple stock the last 16 years. The consequence of those 16 years is that I have a lot of Apple stock, so I take things like this very seriously.</p><p><blockquote>我最后一次尝试是在不到两周前，我同样被驳回，甚至被指责为卖空者。对于那些在过去16年里不得不听我喋喋不休地谈论苹果股票的人来说，最后一个建议非常有趣。那16年的后果是我有很多苹果的股票，所以我非常认真地对待这样的事情。</blockquote></p><p> Friday’s decision in Epic v. Apple had one part very bad news for Apple, but mostly a rejection of Epic’s main claim — that iOS is a market unto itself. But the bigger threat continues to be from Congress, where they can change the law in a single session. The House has already passed several bipartisan bills through committee, and three of them seem to have pretty wide support with the rest of the House. A narrower, but just as damaging companion bill is about to start working its way through the Senate. Keep your eyes on Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah.</p><p><blockquote>周五Epic诉苹果案的判决对苹果来说有一部分是非常坏的消息，但主要是拒绝了Epic的主要主张——iOS本身就是一个市场。但更大的威胁仍然来自国会，他们可以在一次会议中改变法律。众议院已经通过了几项两党法案，其中三项似乎得到了众议院其他成员的广泛支持。一项范围更窄但同样具有破坏性的配套法案即将开始在参议院通过。请关注明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。</blockquote></p><p> Then we have regulatory action in the EU, Apple’s second most important region, where antitrust enforcers are siding with Spotify(NYSE:SPOT)in their dispute over in-app payments. Apple has already settled with Japan over their anti-steering rules. South Korea is forcing Apple and Google(NASDAQ:GOOGL)(NASDAQ:GOOG)to allow third-party in-app payments. China is a black hole of regulatory mystery.</p><p><blockquote>然后，我们在苹果第二重要地区欧盟采取了监管行动，那里的反垄断执法人员在应用内支付纠纷中站在Spotify（纽约证券交易所股票代码：SPOT）一边。苹果已经就日本的反转向规则与日本达成和解。南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌（纳斯达克：GOOGL）（纳斯达克：GOOG）允许第三方应用内支付。中国是一个监管神秘的黑洞。</blockquote></p><p> The tide is turning on Apple on this issue. If you think this begins and ends with the Epic case, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>在这个问题上，潮流正在转向苹果。如果你认为这是以史诗般的案件开始和结束的，那你就没有注意到。</blockquote></p><p> Right now the threat is confined to App Store, but this is the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end. This new antitrust movement may come for other parts of Apple, like the other pillar of their fast-growing Services segment, AppleCare, and even dig deeper into the way Apple likes to do business.</p><p><blockquote>目前威胁仅局限于App Store，但是这是开始的结束，而非结束的开始。这场新的反垄断运动可能会降临到苹果的其他部门，比如他们快速增长的服务部门的另一个支柱AppleCare，甚至更深入地挖掘苹果喜欢的做生意方式。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What The Ruling Says</b></p><p><blockquote><b>裁决内容</b></blockquote></p><p> Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hewed very closely to existing law, because that’s what usually happens in District Court, the lowest level of the federal system. She mostly had bad news for Epic, and targeted bad news for Apple.</p><p><blockquote>伊冯娜·冈萨雷斯·罗杰斯法官非常严格地遵守现有法律，因为这通常是联邦系统最低级别的地区法院发生的事情。她主要是给Epic带来坏消息，并针对苹果带来坏消息。</blockquote></p><p> The case rested on how the court defined the “relevant market” in question. Epic wanted it to be iOS, a market unto itself because of the high walls Apple builds around the ecosystem. Judge Rogers rejected that novel claim pretty handily. But she also rejected Apple’s definition: all gaming transactions, including PCs and consoles. She settled on mobile gaming transactions, so essentially the iOS-Android duopoly of mobile gaming transactions.</p><p><blockquote>该案取决于法院如何定义所讨论的“相关市场”。Epic希望它成为iOS，一个独立的市场，因为苹果在生态系统周围筑起了高墙。罗杰斯法官轻而易举地驳回了这一新颖的主张。但她也拒绝了苹果的定义：所有游戏交易，包括PC和主机。她选择了移动游戏交易，所以本质上是移动游戏交易的iOS和Android双头垄断。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the meat of the decision that follows from that:</p><p><blockquote>以下是由此得出的决定的实质：</blockquote></p><p>   Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal…    Nonetheless, the trial did show that Apple is engaging in anticompetitive conduct under California’s competition laws. The Court concludes that Apple’s anti-steering provisions hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice. When coupled with Apple’s incipient antitrust violations, these anti-steering provisions are anticompetitive and a nationwide remedy to eliminate those provisions is warranted.  The most important thing to note here is that the problem for Apple is California law, not federal law. Federal law changing is where the real threat remains, and we are already well into that process.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于审判记录，法院无法最终得出结论，根据联邦或州反垄断法，苹果是垄断者。虽然法院发现苹果享有超过55%的可观市场份额和极高的利润率，但仅凭这些因素并不表明存在反垄断行为。成功并不违法……尽管如此，审判确实表明苹果参与了加州竞争法下的反竞争行为。法院的结论是，苹果的反转向条款向消费者隐瞒了关键信息，非法扼杀了消费者的选择。再加上苹果初期的反垄断违规行为，这些反转向条款是反竞争的，有必要在全国范围内采取补救措施来消除这些条款。这里最需要注意的是，苹果的问题是加州法律，而不是联邦法律。联邦法律的改变是真正的威胁所在，我们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Judge Rogers ruled that Apple has to get rid of their anti-steering rules. App developers will now be allowed to inform users of less expensive options on their website, with a link. We’ll talk about the implications in a moment. Apple charges developers 30% for in-app payments, and the first year of in-app subscriptions (15% thereafter). In-app payments and subscriptions are substantially where all of App Store revenue comes from, about 28% of the Services segment and 5.4% of all revenue in calendar 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Rogers法官裁定苹果必须取消他们的反转向规则。应用开发者现在将被允许在他们的网站上通过链接通知用户更便宜的选项。我们一会儿会谈到其中的含义。苹果向开发者收取30%的应用内支付费用，以及第一年的应用内订阅费用（此后收取15%）。应用内支付和订阅基本上是App Store所有收入的来源，约占服务部门的28%，占2020年所有收入的5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Also, in the category of rounding errors, Epic has to pay Apple the $3.6 million they owe them when they breached their contract. That’s about 0.001% of Apple’s 2021 top line.</p><p><blockquote>此外，在舍入错误类别中，Epic必须向苹果支付他们违反合同时欠他们的360万美元。这约占苹果2021年营收的0.001%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Epic’s Game</b></p><p><blockquote><b>史诗的游戏</b></blockquote></p><p> If you read&nbsp;my first article&nbsp;about the trial from when the pre-trial filings dropped, you may notice that I was a bit confused about what precisely Epic’s game was here. The foundation of their entire argument — that iOS was a market unto itself — was novel, to say the least. At least one of their lawyers must have informed them of the low likelihood of success on their main claims. Moreover, they burned a lot of pages on arguments not central to their case, but seem more geared towards tarnishing Apple’s reputation.</p><p><blockquote>如果你读了我的第一篇关于预审文件撤销时的审判文章，你可能会注意到我对Epic的游戏到底是什么有点困惑。至少可以说，他们整个论点的基础——iOS本身就是一个市场——是新颖的。至少有一名律师必须告知他们主要索赔成功的可能性很低。此外，他们烧毁了很多页的论点，这些论点与他们的案件无关，但似乎更倾向于玷污苹果的声誉。</blockquote></p><p> My current understanding is that this case was a publicity stunt. What’s more, it worked. The point was to get this issue into the public conversation. Here I am writing about it, and here you are reading about it. But more importantly, the tide is turning in Washington, and I think the issues raised by this trial have accelerated that.</p><p><blockquote>我目前的理解是，这个案子是一个宣传噱头。更重要的是，它起作用了。重点是让这个问题进入公众对话。我在这里写它，你在这里读到它。但更重要的是，华盛顿的潮流正在发生转变，我认为这次审判提出的问题加速了这一点。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Anti-Steering Rule</b></p><p><blockquote><b>反转向规则</b></blockquote></p><p> Like many of the App Store rules, the anti-steering rule was part of a multi-year whack-a-mole process where developers tried to find ways to cut out Apple, and Apple closed those holes. Apple fought very hard to keep this rule, but now seems to be capitulating. They settled with Japanese regulators recently on the anti-steering rules as it applied to media subscription apps, and applied the settlement to the rest of the world as well, maybe in anticipation of this ruling. With the Epic ruling, the anti-steering rule is gone.</p><p><blockquote>与许多App Store规则一样，反转向规则是多年打地鼠过程的一部分，开发者试图找到切断苹果的方法，苹果填补了这些漏洞。苹果非常努力地维护这一规则，但现在似乎投降了。他们最近与日本监管机构就适用于媒体订阅应用程序的反转向规则达成了和解，并将和解协议也适用于世界其他地区，也许是对这一裁决的预期。随着史诗般的裁决，反转向规则消失了。</blockquote></p><p> When a game developer like Epic sells their virtual currency on the App Store, they have a 30% payment fee. When they make the same transaction on their website, it is probably under 3%. This was always what this was about. Epic wanted to have their own in-app payment system to supersede Apple’s, without the friction of sending people to the website. Judge Rogers rejected that, but gave Epic a partial victory by banning Apple’s anti-steering rules.</p><p><blockquote>当像Epic这样的游戏开发商在App Store上出售他们的虚拟货币时，他们有30%的支付费用。当他们在自己的网站上进行同样的交易时，大概在3%以下。这一直都是为了这个。Epic希望拥有自己的应用内支付系统来取代苹果的支付系统，而不会出现将人们送到网站的摩擦。Rogers法官驳回了这一要求，但通过禁止苹果的反转向规则，Epic获得了部分胜利。</blockquote></p><p> The anti-steering rules prevented app developers from having text and links to their own much less expensive in-app payments or subscriptions on their websites. This is a real loss for Apple, and puts the whole structure of the two most lucrative payment methods in the App Store at risk.</p><p><blockquote>反转向规则阻止应用程序开发者在其网站上发布文本和链接到他们自己便宜得多的应用内支付或订阅。这对苹果来说是一个真正的损失，并将App Store中最赚钱的两种支付方式的整个结构置于危险之中。</blockquote></p><p> Let’s say a gaming company pays a 2.5% processing fee on their website. That means they have 27.5 percentage points of marketing to play with. They could give that entire 27.5% to users in the form of a rebate or freebies. It certainly increases friction to have to leave a game you're having fun with, but if there is a big, friendly, dark-patterned button that says “Want free money?” I think a lot of people would tap that button. What’s more, they get to book the same amount in revenue, and stick the cost down in sales and marketing.</p><p><blockquote>假设一家游戏公司在其网站上支付2.5%的处理费。这意味着他们有27.5个百分点的营销空间可以利用。他们可以以折扣或免费赠品的形式给用户全部27.5%。不得不离开一个你正在享受的游戏肯定会增加摩擦，但是如果有一个大的、友好的、深色图案的按钮写着“想要免费的钱吗？”我想很多人会点击那个按钮。更重要的是，他们可以记录相同金额的收入，并在销售和营销方面降低成本。</blockquote></p><p> That’s just one example of how companies may decide to go with this. That’s a lot of margin to play with. The reason Apple had this rule in the first place is that they feared someone would find the magic formula that would provide more revenue by eschewing in-app payments altogether, and everyone else would copy them. They had fought very hard to keep this rule for a reason.</p><p><blockquote>这只是公司可能决定采取这种做法的一个例子。这是一个很大的空间。苹果最初制定这条规则的原因是，他们担心有人会找到一个神奇的公式，通过完全避免应用内支付来提供更多收入，而其他人都会效仿他们。他们努力维护这条规则是有原因的。</blockquote></p><p> Just after the news broke, a friend who knows&nbsp;I own both stocks&nbsp;trolled me with this Bloomberg Terminal screenshot:</p><p><blockquote>消息传出后，一位知道我拥有这两只股票的朋友用这张彭博终端截图向我进行了攻击：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/78570d7ae73401a933b2359f3dcd47da\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"281\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Roblox(NYSE:RBLX)is a pure-play mobile gaming company. The vast majority of their revenues come from in-app payments from iOS and Android, the rest from their website sales. Their cost-of-revenues almost all goes to Apple and Google. In the TTM, they had a 74.4% gross margin. If they pay a 2.5% processing fee for website sales, that means 84% of their transaction value was through iOS and Android. If they could get that to 50-50, that would raise all their margins down to EBT by 10 percentage points. If they could get to 73% of sales on the website, they would have a 90% gross margin.</p><p><blockquote>Roblox（纽约证券交易所股票代码：RBLX）是一家纯粹的移动游戏公司。他们的绝大多数收入来自iOS和Android的应用内支付，其余来自网站销售。他们的收入成本几乎全部归苹果和谷歌所有。在TTM，他们的毛利率为74.4%。如果他们为网站销售支付2.5%的处理费，这意味着他们84%的交易价值是通过iOS和Android进行的。如果他们能够将这一比例提高到50-50，那么他们在EBT的所有利润率将提高10个百分点。如果他们能在网站上获得73%的销售额，他们将有90%的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> There is a lot of money at stake, and a huge incentive for gaming and subscription media companies to figure out how to thread this needle. And that’s all in the absence of further action by the other two branches of government.</p><p><blockquote>这关系到大量的资金，游戏和订阅媒体公司也有巨大的动力去想办法解决这个问题。这一切都是在其他两个政府部门没有采取进一步行动的情况下发生的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Executive Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>行政部门</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> This is a good place to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the new antitrust movement, because two of its leaders now work in the Biden administration. The movement is sometimes referred to as the “neo-Brandeis” movement after Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, because it harkens back to a much earlier era of antitrust enforcement that drastically changed in the 1980s.</p><p><blockquote>这是讨论新反垄断运动理论基础的好地方，因为其两位领导人现在在拜登政府工作。这场运动有时被称为“新布兰代斯”运动，以最高法院大法官路易斯·布兰代斯的名字命名，因为它可以追溯到更早的反垄断执法时代，该时代在20世纪80年代发生了巨大变化。</blockquote></p><p> In 1978, Robert Bork (yes,that Robert Bork) wrote a very influential book called&nbsp;<i>The Antitrust Paradox</i>. His theory urged a refocusing of enforcement away from competition, and towards consumer benefit as the main test. He argued that antitrust enforcement was propping up smaller, less efficient companies to the detriment of the economy.</p><p><blockquote>1978年，罗伯特·博克（没错，就是那个罗伯特·博克）写了一本非常有影响力的书，叫做<i>反垄断悖论</i>他的理论敦促将执法重点从竞争转向消费者利益作为主要检验标准。他认为，反垄断执法正在支撑规模较小、效率较低的公司，损害了经济。</blockquote></p><p> The 1982 AT&amp;T breakup consent decree became the prototype for the new enforcement. By controlling local and long distance telecommunication, as well as the equipment, AT&amp;T had been underinvesting and overcharging for decades. Their breakup brought an explosion of investment into telecommunications, and brought down prices quickly for landline service and equipment. That became the limit of antitrust enforcement.</p><p><blockquote>1982年美国电话电报公司分手同意法令成为新执法的原型。通过控制本地和长途电信以及设备，美国电话电报公司几十年来一直投资不足，收费过高。他们的分手带来了电信投资的爆炸式增长，并迅速降低了固定电话服务和设备的价格。这成为反垄断执法的极限。</blockquote></p><p> But the focus on consumer benefit has affected competition, and that’s what the neo-Brandeis movement hopes to change. They want antitrust enforcement to return to the way it was a century ago, with more of a focus on how large companies affect competition. Lina Khan, a law professor at Columbia, now runs the FTC, the primary antitrust enforcer in the federal government. Her 2017 law review article, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox” was the spark that lit this fire. Her colleague at Columbia Law, Tim Wu, is also one of the leaders of this movement. He is a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, and his fingerprints are all over&nbsp;the July competition executive order.</p><p><blockquote>但是对消费者利益的关注影响了竞争，这就是新布兰代斯运动希望改变的。他们希望反垄断执法回到一个世纪前的样子，更多地关注大公司如何影响竞争。哥伦比亚大学法学教授莉娜·汗(Lina Khan)现在负责联邦政府主要的反垄断执法机构联邦贸易委员会(FTC)。她2017年的法律评论文章《亚马逊的反垄断悖论》是点燃这场大火的火花。她在哥伦比亚法学院的同事蒂姆·吴也是这场运动的领导者之一。他是白宫经济顾问委员会的成员，7月份的竞争行政命令上到处都是他的指纹。</blockquote></p><p> The order was very wide ranging, with 72 initiatives covering 14 departments and agencies. Most of it does not relate to Apple, but it gives you an idea of the wide breadth of the order. As it relates to Apple:</p><p><blockquote>该命令范围非常广泛，有72项举措，涵盖14个部门和机构。它的大部分与苹果无关，但它让你对秩序的广度有所了解。就苹果而言：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Right-to-repair is a huge threat to the other pillar of Services, AppleCare, which I estimate at 25%-30% of the segment. But more than that, it would change the way Apple makes devices. Apple squeezes out efficiency gains by attaching pooled memory directly to the main processor die, and by soldering storage into the motherboard. Both of these would likely be prohibited to them, and the devices would suffer.</li>  <li>The FTC is two months into a yearlong frisk of the mobile app ecosystem. Based on previous writings, Lina Khan will likely recommend third party app stores, “sideloading” directly from the web, and an end to the in-app payments monopoly.</li> </ul> Executive branch action is always subject to court challenges, and they can take very long to implement. But Congress can change the law in a single session. And they are already into that process.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>维修权对服务的另一个支柱AppleCare来说是一个巨大的威胁，我估计AppleCare占该细分市场的25%-30%。但更重要的是，它将改变苹果制造设备的方式。苹果通过将池内存直接连接到主处理器芯片，以及将存储焊接到主板来挤出效率增益。这两个都可能被禁止，设备也会受到影响。</li><li>联邦贸易委员会对移动应用生态系统长达一年的搜查已经进行了两个月。根据之前的著作，Lina Khan可能会推荐第三方应用商店，直接从网络“侧装”，并结束应用内支付垄断。</li></ul>行政部门的行动总是受到法院的质疑，而且可能需要很长时间才能实施。但是国会可以在一届会议上改变法律。他们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Legislative Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>立法部门</b></blockquote></p><p> Since there are two houses of Congress, this issue is off on two tracks. The House Judiciary Committee recently passed a suite of bipartisan bills. Of the ones that I think have a good likelihood of passing the full House, here’s how it affects Apple:</p><p><blockquote>由于国会有两院，这个问题在两条轨道上。众议院司法委员会最近通过了一系列两党法案。在我认为很有可能获得全院通过的法案中，以下是它对苹果的影响：</blockquote></p><p> They would be required to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party payments in the Apple App Store.</p><p><blockquote>他们将被要求允许苹果应用商店中的第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方支付。</blockquote></p><p> Restricting Apple’s ability to acquire smaller companies. In the past 6 years, Apple has bought around 100 companies, which works out to about one every three weeks on average. It looks like they had been accelerating since fiscal 2018, but then abruptly stopped in fiscal 2021. The reason is the new leader of the FTC.</p><p><blockquote>限制苹果收购小公司的能力。在过去的6年里，苹果收购了大约100家公司，平均每三周就收购一家。看起来他们自2018财年以来一直在加速，但在2021财年突然停止。原因是FTC的新领导人。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a2fc9a2578663cc746fdb19ca19dea4c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The big bulge you see there in 2014 is the Beats acquisition at $3 billion, which remains the exception. Otherwise, Apple buys very small companies for tens or hundreds of millions, usually shuts down any products they may have, and absorbs the talent and IP into Apple proper. Apple’s chip design unit, a cornerstone of their current success, began this way in 2008.</p><p><blockquote>你在2014年看到的最大增长是以30亿美元收购Beats，这仍然是个例外。否则，苹果会花数千万或数亿美元收购非常小的公司，通常会关闭他们可能拥有的任何产品，并将人才和知识产权吸收到苹果本土。苹果的芯片设计部门是他们目前成功的基石，2008年就是这样开始的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more private APIs.</b>This would mean everything, like the Apple Pay-enabling NFC chip, would be open to competitors.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有私有API。</b>这意味着一切，比如支持苹果支付的NFC芯片，都将向竞争对手开放。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more discriminatory rules.</b>Apple doesn’t force real-world product and service providers like Uber(NYSE:UBER)to use in-app payments. Apple would either have to try and get Uber to pay them 30%, or drop the requirement altogether.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有歧视性的规则。</b>苹果不会强迫Uber（纽约证券交易所股票代码：UBER）等现实世界的产品和服务提供商使用应用内支付。苹果要么试图让优步向他们支付30%的费用，要么完全放弃这一要求。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The end of the Google search deal.</b>Google currently pays Apple a purported $12 billion a year to make Google the default search engine on iOS. This cash goes directly to EBT.</p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索交易的结束。</b>谷歌目前据称每年向苹果支付120亿美元，以使谷歌成为iOS上的默认搜索引擎。这笔现金直接流向EBT。</blockquote></p><p> <b>They would have to expose more user data to developers.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>他们将不得不向开发者公开更多的用户数据。</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>Formalizing the anti-steering decision.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>正式确定反转向决策。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> <b>Anti-retaliation provision.</b>If these bills were law, Epic would still be on the App Store while they sued Apple.</p><p><blockquote><b>反报复条款。</b>如果这些法案成为法律，当他们起诉苹果时，Epic仍将在App Store上。</blockquote></p><p> After the House is done wrangling over budget reconciliation, I think these bills will hit the House floor this fall or winter, and I think that they have a high likelihood of passing in something like their current form.</p><p><blockquote>在众议院结束关于预算协调的争论后，我认为这些法案将在今年秋天或冬天提交众议院，我认为它们很有可能以目前的形式获得通过。</blockquote></p><p> But bills also have to clear the Senate, and they move slower. Things are just getting started there. The big movers in the Senate are Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah. Klobuchar has&nbsp;written a long book&nbsp;on the subject, and it is not friendly towards Apple. She has also authored a new bill, Open App Markets Act. It is more narrow than the House suite, but not by much. It would still force Apple to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party in-app payments. They would also have to get rid of their private APIs. The bill is narrower than the House suite, and less of a threat to Apple, but still would mean the end of App Store as a driver of growth.<i>The Senate bill is the better outcome for Apple, and it is still terrible.</i></p><p><blockquote>但法案也必须通过参议院，而且进展较慢。那里的事情才刚刚开始。参议院的大推动者是明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。Klobuchar就这个问题写了一本长书，它对苹果并不友好。她还起草了一项新法案《开放应用市场法案》。它比房子套房窄，但也窄不了多少。它仍将迫使苹果允许第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方应用内支付。他们还必须摆脱他们的私有API。该法案比众议院套房更窄，对苹果的威胁也更小，但仍意味着App Store作为增长驱动力的终结。<i>参议院的法案对苹果来说是更好的结果，但仍然很糟糕。</i></blockquote></p><p> I believe that we will see something pass before the next Presidential election, or even in this Congressional session. The best Apple shareholders can hope for is that the final bill gets watered down considerably.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，在下届总统选举之前，甚至在本届国会会议上，我们会看到一些事情通过。苹果股东最大的希望就是最终法案被大幅淡化。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Outside The US</b></p><p><blockquote><b>美国境外</b></blockquote></p><p> This is in no way limited to the US. We already discussed the Japanese settlement, and South Korea is forcing Apple and Google to allow third party in-app payments. The case that is farthest along in the EU is Spotify’s, which would force Apple to not charge fees to competing services, so that means music, podcasts, games, video and fitness.</p><p><blockquote>这绝不仅限于美国。我们已经讨论了日本的和解，南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌允许第三方应用内支付。欧盟进展最快的案例是Spotify，这将迫使苹果不向竞争服务收费，因此这意味着音乐、播客、游戏、视频和健身。</blockquote></p><p> The Chinese Communist Party remains the&nbsp;second biggest tail risk in the world&nbsp;after climate change. Apple’s regulatory risk there is uniquely high, both on the supply and demand sides. Apple has already given into them by not providing their Chinese customers with the same level of privacy as everyone else. With the mood in China right now, who knows where that goes.</p><p><blockquote>中国共产党仍然是仅次于气候变化的世界第二大尾部风险。无论是在供应还是需求方面，苹果的监管风险都非常高。苹果已经屈服于他们，没有向他们的中国客户提供和其他人一样的隐私水平。以中国现在的情绪，谁知道会走向何方。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What Losing Control Of App Store Looks Like</b></p><p><blockquote><b>失去对App Store的控制是什么样子</b></blockquote></p><p> Stone Fox Capital here at Seeking Alpha is&nbsp;out with an article&nbsp;pivoting off Katy Huberty's estimation of a 2% earnings loss if the top 20 apps on the App Store were able to eschew in-app payments. Stone Fox would also like you to care about that seemingly small number:</p><p><blockquote>Seeking Alpha的Stone Fox Capital发表了一篇文章，反驳了Katy Huberty的估计，如果App Store上排名前20的应用程序能够避免应用内支付，收益将损失2%。石狐也希望大家关心一下这个看似很小的数字：</blockquote></p><p>   Apple won most of their legal case with Epic Games based on the ruling announced on September 10, but the tech giant lost the ultimate battle. The stock remains priced for perfection while the company continues to have growth paths chipped away from the business.  My last article on this subject was called “Chipping Away at App Store.” This is what is happening and the trend is now clear. There is a mood globally to take Apple down a peg, and it is happening too slowly for many people to realize it is happening.</p><p><blockquote>根据9月10日宣布的裁决，苹果赢得了与Epic Games的大部分法律诉讼，但这家科技巨头输掉了最终的战斗。该股的定价仍然是完美的，而该公司的增长道路继续从业务中被削弱。我上一篇关于这个主题的文章叫做“在App Store上削足适履”。这就是正在发生的事情，趋势现在很明显。全球都有一种降低苹果汇率的情绪，但这种情绪发生得太慢，许多人都没有意识到它正在发生。</blockquote></p><p> My own way of modeling the worst case is through my DCF model. It’s modeled as a 25% hit to Services in the first year, with services gross margin reduced from 68% to 65%, followed by a slightly increased growth rate in the segment because of composition effects — the rest of Services grows faster than App Store. I used to model that happening in fiscal 2024, but I have moved that up to fiscal 2023, beginning less than 13 months from now.</p><p><blockquote>我自己对最坏情况建模的方法是通过我的DCF模型。它的模型是第一年服务受到25%的打击，服务毛利率从68%下降到65%，随后由于构成效应，该细分市场的增长率略有上升——其余服务的增长速度快于App Store。我曾经对2024财年发生的情况进行建模，但我已将其提前到2023财年，从现在开始不到13个月。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the effect on fair value on my base case:</p><p><blockquote>以下是我的基本案例对公允价值的影响：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94b635fe7a2473aafe36bd095a1206b6\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"352\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Even with the very slow start for the reason Stone Fox says — the share price has gotten way out ahead of cash flows — my base case still shows an 11% CAGR in fair value through the end of fiscal 2025. The App Store collapse takes that down to an 8% CAGR, 12% lower by 2025.</p><p><blockquote>尽管由于Stone Fox所说的原因，起步非常缓慢——股价已经远远领先于现金流——但我的基本假设仍然显示，到2025财年末，公允价值复合年增长率为11%。App Store的倒闭使复合年增长率降至8%，到2025年将下降12%。</blockquote></p><p> Circling back, Stone Fox puts a button on this more succinctly than I can:</p><p><blockquote>回头，石狐比我更简洁地按下了一个按钮：</blockquote></p><p>   The key investor takeaway is that Apple has a bright future. The company will continue generating profits with operating cash flows topping $100 billion annually, but the tech giant will struggle to generate the growth needed to warrant the current stock price. The 2% hit to earnings might not seem meaningful, but the amount is very harmful to a stock priced for perfection.  <b>How To Take This Seriously</b></p><p><blockquote>投资者的主要收获是苹果拥有光明的未来。该公司将继续创造利润，每年运营现金流超过1000亿美元，但这家科技巨头将难以实现维持当前股价所需的增长。盈利2%的打击似乎没有意义，但这个数额对于定价完美的股票来说是非常有害的。<b>如何认真对待这个</b></blockquote></p><p> In my last article on this subject, someone cheekily replied in the comments, “‘Please take this seriously.’ What does that even mean?” That’s a good question. The first part of the answer is to stop pretending it’s not happening.</p><p><blockquote>在我关于这个主题的上一篇文章中，有人在评论中厚颜无耻地回答说：“‘请认真对待这件事。’这到底是什么意思？”这是个好问题。答案的第一部分是不要假装它没有发生。</blockquote></p><p> “If your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.” I have been using that phrase frequently since Apple hit $140. The last chart just formalizes it with math, but my opinion is that Apple will remain range-bound for some time, between $125 and $155, roughly. I still mean it: if your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。”自从苹果股价达到140美元以来，我就经常使用这个短语。最后一张图表只是用数学将其形式化，但我的观点是苹果将在一段时间内保持区间波动，大约在125美元到155美元之间。我还是这个意思：如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> But I also believe that no other company is as prepared for the future of technology, regardless of what that brings. That is a&nbsp;far longer discussion. I have been buying Apple shares on the dip since 2005, which is two splits ago. My last buy was in January 2019, when Apple reported that they would miss guidance for the first time in many years. At the time, the commentariat was telling me that Apple’s best days were behind them. I tried to explain that Apple was in a transitional phase, part of a strategy they launched around 2015 to focus more on the growth of the iPhone user base than sales. The strategy would pay off soon, I predicted, and it did in fiscal 2021. That seems like a very long time ago now.</p><p><blockquote>但我也相信，没有其他公司为技术的未来做好了准备，无论它会带来什么。这是一个长得多的讨论。自2005年以来，我一直在逢低买入苹果股票，这是两次拆分前。我最后一次购买是在2019年1月，当时苹果报告称他们将多年来首次错过指导。当时，评论员告诉我，苹果最好的日子已经过去了。我试图解释说，苹果正处于过渡阶段，这是他们在2015年左右推出的战略的一部分，旨在更多地关注iPhone用户群的增长，而不是销售。我预测，这一策略很快就会得到回报，并且在2021财年就得到了回报。那似乎是很久以前的事了。</blockquote></p><p> A consequence of buying the dip from 2005 to 2019 is that I own way too many Apple shares that I could never bring myself to sell. I am massively overweight Apple. There is a “What To Do With The Apple Shares” clause in my will. It is our largest asset, worth more than the house. That has not made me nervous until the last few months, when the tide seemed to start turning on Apple on this issue. I also used to be someone who did not take this threat seriously. I am going to start shaving my position as opportunities present themselves, and one may happen this week with the iPhone launch on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>从2005年到2019年逢低买入的一个后果是，我拥有太多苹果股票，我永远无法出售。我完全是跑赢大盘·苹果。我的遗嘱里有一个“如何处理苹果股票”的条款。这是我们最大的资产，比房子还值钱。这并没有让我感到紧张，直到最近几个月，在这个问题上，潮流似乎开始转向苹果。我也曾经是一个不把这种威胁当回事的人。随着机会的出现，我将开始削减我的职位，其中一个可能会在本周周二iPhone的发布中发生。</blockquote></p><p> <i>To be clear, I will remain overweight Apple, just less so, and I remain bullish in the long term. But I no longer feel the safety I once did with this wildly overweight position.</i></p><p><blockquote><i>需要明确的是，我仍将是跑赢大盘·苹果，只是程度有所降低，而且从长远来看，我仍然看好。但是我不再感觉到曾经在这个疯狂的跑赢大盘位置上的安全感。</i></blockquote></p><p> In contrast, if you are a long term investor who does not have a massively overweight position, watch, wait and fight confirmation bias every day. If you think this begins and ends with Epic, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，如果您是一位没有大量跑赢大盘头寸的长期投资者，请每天观察、等待并对抗确认偏差。如果你认为这是以史诗开始和结束的，那你就没有注意。</blockquote></p><p> Please take this seriously.</p><p><blockquote>请认真对待这件事。</blockquote></p><p> I will be back in a few days with hopefully happier news from the iPhone launch on Tuesday. The big question is whether Apple can begin shipping iPhone before the quarter is out.</p><p><blockquote>几天后我会带着周二iPhone发布会的好消息回来。最大的问题是苹果能否在本季度结束前开始发货iPhone。</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>Apple App Store: The Tide Is Turning<blockquote>苹果应用商店：潮流正在转向</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\">\nApple App Store: The Tide Is Turning<blockquote>苹果应用商店：潮流正在转向</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-09-13 23:32</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>A US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic Games.</li>  <li>Despite that, and in conjunction with a recent settlement with Japanese regulators, Apple will be getting rid of their anti-steering rule. This is a bigger change than people think.</li>  <li>The threat to Apple doesn't end with the Epic trial. There are bigger threats coming from the executive and legislative branches in the US, and regulators in Europe and Asia.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/323e8503a813d4996ee819f5591992b8\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"1024\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Chip Somodevilla/Getty Images News</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>美国联邦地区法院法官在Epic Games的案件中做出了对苹果有利的裁决。</li><li>尽管如此，加上最近与日本监管机构达成的和解，苹果将取消他们的反转向规则。这是一个比人们想象的更大的变化。</li><li>对苹果的威胁并没有随着史诗般的审判而结束。更大的威胁来自美国的行政和立法部门，以及欧洲和亚洲的监管机构。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>奇普·索莫德维拉/盖蒂图片社新闻</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>It Does Not End Here</b></p><p><blockquote><b>它并没有就此结束</b></blockquote></p><p> For&nbsp;some time now, I&nbsp;have been warning&nbsp;that&nbsp;antitrust law was about to change, and these changes would not be favorable to Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL), and that investors need to take these threats seriously. In every one of these attempts, I was rebuffed in the comments by many Apple shareholders telling me that these fears and warnings were overblown. “Long and strong AAPL!” cheerleading seems to be popular.Confirmation bias&nbsp;is a strong thing, and you should fight it every single day.</p><p><blockquote>一段时间以来，我一直警告反垄断法即将发生变化，这些变化对苹果（纳斯达克股票代码：AAPL）不利，投资者需要认真对待这些威胁。在每一次尝试中，我都遭到了许多苹果股东的拒绝，他们告诉我这些担忧和警告被夸大了。“长而强的AAPL！”啦啦队似乎很受欢迎。确认偏见是一种强烈的东西，你应该每天都与之斗争。</blockquote></p><p> My last attempt was&nbsp;less than two weeks ago, and I was similarly dismissed, and even accused of being a short-selling tout to boot. That last suggestion is pretty funny to anyone who has had to listen to me drone on about Apple stock the last 16 years. The consequence of those 16 years is that I have a lot of Apple stock, so I take things like this very seriously.</p><p><blockquote>我最后一次尝试是在不到两周前，我同样被驳回，甚至被指责为卖空者。对于那些在过去16年里不得不听我喋喋不休地谈论苹果股票的人来说，最后一个建议非常有趣。那16年的后果是我有很多苹果的股票，所以我非常认真地对待这样的事情。</blockquote></p><p> Friday’s decision in Epic v. Apple had one part very bad news for Apple, but mostly a rejection of Epic’s main claim — that iOS is a market unto itself. But the bigger threat continues to be from Congress, where they can change the law in a single session. The House has already passed several bipartisan bills through committee, and three of them seem to have pretty wide support with the rest of the House. A narrower, but just as damaging companion bill is about to start working its way through the Senate. Keep your eyes on Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah.</p><p><blockquote>周五Epic诉苹果案的判决对苹果来说有一部分是非常坏的消息，但主要是拒绝了Epic的主要主张——iOS本身就是一个市场。但更大的威胁仍然来自国会，他们可以在一次会议中改变法律。众议院已经通过了几项两党法案，其中三项似乎得到了众议院其他成员的广泛支持。一项范围更窄但同样具有破坏性的配套法案即将开始在参议院通过。请关注明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。</blockquote></p><p> Then we have regulatory action in the EU, Apple’s second most important region, where antitrust enforcers are siding with Spotify(NYSE:SPOT)in their dispute over in-app payments. Apple has already settled with Japan over their anti-steering rules. South Korea is forcing Apple and Google(NASDAQ:GOOGL)(NASDAQ:GOOG)to allow third-party in-app payments. China is a black hole of regulatory mystery.</p><p><blockquote>然后，我们在苹果第二重要地区欧盟采取了监管行动，那里的反垄断执法人员在应用内支付纠纷中站在Spotify（纽约证券交易所股票代码：SPOT）一边。苹果已经就日本的反转向规则与日本达成和解。南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌（纳斯达克：GOOGL）（纳斯达克：GOOG）允许第三方应用内支付。中国是一个监管神秘的黑洞。</blockquote></p><p> The tide is turning on Apple on this issue. If you think this begins and ends with the Epic case, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>在这个问题上，潮流正在转向苹果。如果你认为这是以史诗般的案件开始和结束的，那你就没有注意到。</blockquote></p><p> Right now the threat is confined to App Store, but this is the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end. This new antitrust movement may come for other parts of Apple, like the other pillar of their fast-growing Services segment, AppleCare, and even dig deeper into the way Apple likes to do business.</p><p><blockquote>目前威胁仅局限于App Store，但是这是开始的结束，而非结束的开始。这场新的反垄断运动可能会降临到苹果的其他部门，比如他们快速增长的服务部门的另一个支柱AppleCare，甚至更深入地挖掘苹果喜欢的做生意方式。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What The Ruling Says</b></p><p><blockquote><b>裁决内容</b></blockquote></p><p> Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hewed very closely to existing law, because that’s what usually happens in District Court, the lowest level of the federal system. She mostly had bad news for Epic, and targeted bad news for Apple.</p><p><blockquote>伊冯娜·冈萨雷斯·罗杰斯法官非常严格地遵守现有法律，因为这通常是联邦系统最低级别的地区法院发生的事情。她主要是给Epic带来坏消息，并针对苹果带来坏消息。</blockquote></p><p> The case rested on how the court defined the “relevant market” in question. Epic wanted it to be iOS, a market unto itself because of the high walls Apple builds around the ecosystem. Judge Rogers rejected that novel claim pretty handily. But she also rejected Apple’s definition: all gaming transactions, including PCs and consoles. She settled on mobile gaming transactions, so essentially the iOS-Android duopoly of mobile gaming transactions.</p><p><blockquote>该案取决于法院如何定义所讨论的“相关市场”。Epic希望它成为iOS，一个独立的市场，因为苹果在生态系统周围筑起了高墙。罗杰斯法官轻而易举地驳回了这一新颖的主张。但她也拒绝了苹果的定义：所有游戏交易，包括PC和主机。她选择了移动游戏交易，所以本质上是移动游戏交易的iOS和Android双头垄断。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the meat of the decision that follows from that:</p><p><blockquote>以下是由此得出的决定的实质：</blockquote></p><p>   Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal…    Nonetheless, the trial did show that Apple is engaging in anticompetitive conduct under California’s competition laws. The Court concludes that Apple’s anti-steering provisions hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice. When coupled with Apple’s incipient antitrust violations, these anti-steering provisions are anticompetitive and a nationwide remedy to eliminate those provisions is warranted.  The most important thing to note here is that the problem for Apple is California law, not federal law. Federal law changing is where the real threat remains, and we are already well into that process.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于审判记录，法院无法最终得出结论，根据联邦或州反垄断法，苹果是垄断者。虽然法院发现苹果享有超过55%的可观市场份额和极高的利润率，但仅凭这些因素并不表明存在反垄断行为。成功并不违法……尽管如此，审判确实表明苹果参与了加州竞争法下的反竞争行为。法院的结论是，苹果的反转向条款向消费者隐瞒了关键信息，非法扼杀了消费者的选择。再加上苹果初期的反垄断违规行为，这些反转向条款是反竞争的，有必要在全国范围内采取补救措施来消除这些条款。这里最需要注意的是，苹果的问题是加州法律，而不是联邦法律。联邦法律的改变是真正的威胁所在，我们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Judge Rogers ruled that Apple has to get rid of their anti-steering rules. App developers will now be allowed to inform users of less expensive options on their website, with a link. We’ll talk about the implications in a moment. Apple charges developers 30% for in-app payments, and the first year of in-app subscriptions (15% thereafter). In-app payments and subscriptions are substantially where all of App Store revenue comes from, about 28% of the Services segment and 5.4% of all revenue in calendar 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Rogers法官裁定苹果必须取消他们的反转向规则。应用开发者现在将被允许在他们的网站上通过链接通知用户更便宜的选项。我们一会儿会谈到其中的含义。苹果向开发者收取30%的应用内支付费用，以及第一年的应用内订阅费用（此后收取15%）。应用内支付和订阅基本上是App Store所有收入的来源，约占服务部门的28%，占2020年所有收入的5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Also, in the category of rounding errors, Epic has to pay Apple the $3.6 million they owe them when they breached their contract. That’s about 0.001% of Apple’s 2021 top line.</p><p><blockquote>此外，在舍入错误类别中，Epic必须向苹果支付他们违反合同时欠他们的360万美元。这约占苹果2021年营收的0.001%。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Epic’s Game</b></p><p><blockquote><b>史诗的游戏</b></blockquote></p><p> If you read&nbsp;my first article&nbsp;about the trial from when the pre-trial filings dropped, you may notice that I was a bit confused about what precisely Epic’s game was here. The foundation of their entire argument — that iOS was a market unto itself — was novel, to say the least. At least one of their lawyers must have informed them of the low likelihood of success on their main claims. Moreover, they burned a lot of pages on arguments not central to their case, but seem more geared towards tarnishing Apple’s reputation.</p><p><blockquote>如果你读了我的第一篇关于预审文件撤销时的审判文章，你可能会注意到我对Epic的游戏到底是什么有点困惑。至少可以说，他们整个论点的基础——iOS本身就是一个市场——是新颖的。至少有一名律师必须告知他们主要索赔成功的可能性很低。此外，他们烧毁了很多页的论点，这些论点与他们的案件无关，但似乎更倾向于玷污苹果的声誉。</blockquote></p><p> My current understanding is that this case was a publicity stunt. What’s more, it worked. The point was to get this issue into the public conversation. Here I am writing about it, and here you are reading about it. But more importantly, the tide is turning in Washington, and I think the issues raised by this trial have accelerated that.</p><p><blockquote>我目前的理解是，这个案子是一个宣传噱头。更重要的是，它起作用了。重点是让这个问题进入公众对话。我在这里写它，你在这里读到它。但更重要的是，华盛顿的潮流正在发生转变，我认为这次审判提出的问题加速了这一点。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Anti-Steering Rule</b></p><p><blockquote><b>反转向规则</b></blockquote></p><p> Like many of the App Store rules, the anti-steering rule was part of a multi-year whack-a-mole process where developers tried to find ways to cut out Apple, and Apple closed those holes. Apple fought very hard to keep this rule, but now seems to be capitulating. They settled with Japanese regulators recently on the anti-steering rules as it applied to media subscription apps, and applied the settlement to the rest of the world as well, maybe in anticipation of this ruling. With the Epic ruling, the anti-steering rule is gone.</p><p><blockquote>与许多App Store规则一样，反转向规则是多年打地鼠过程的一部分，开发者试图找到切断苹果的方法，苹果填补了这些漏洞。苹果非常努力地维护这一规则，但现在似乎投降了。他们最近与日本监管机构就适用于媒体订阅应用程序的反转向规则达成了和解，并将和解协议也适用于世界其他地区，也许是对这一裁决的预期。随着史诗般的裁决，反转向规则消失了。</blockquote></p><p> When a game developer like Epic sells their virtual currency on the App Store, they have a 30% payment fee. When they make the same transaction on their website, it is probably under 3%. This was always what this was about. Epic wanted to have their own in-app payment system to supersede Apple’s, without the friction of sending people to the website. Judge Rogers rejected that, but gave Epic a partial victory by banning Apple’s anti-steering rules.</p><p><blockquote>当像Epic这样的游戏开发商在App Store上出售他们的虚拟货币时，他们有30%的支付费用。当他们在自己的网站上进行同样的交易时，大概在3%以下。这一直都是为了这个。Epic希望拥有自己的应用内支付系统来取代苹果的支付系统，而不会出现将人们送到网站的摩擦。Rogers法官驳回了这一要求，但通过禁止苹果的反转向规则，Epic获得了部分胜利。</blockquote></p><p> The anti-steering rules prevented app developers from having text and links to their own much less expensive in-app payments or subscriptions on their websites. This is a real loss for Apple, and puts the whole structure of the two most lucrative payment methods in the App Store at risk.</p><p><blockquote>反转向规则阻止应用程序开发者在其网站上发布文本和链接到他们自己便宜得多的应用内支付或订阅。这对苹果来说是一个真正的损失，并将App Store中最赚钱的两种支付方式的整个结构置于危险之中。</blockquote></p><p> Let’s say a gaming company pays a 2.5% processing fee on their website. That means they have 27.5 percentage points of marketing to play with. They could give that entire 27.5% to users in the form of a rebate or freebies. It certainly increases friction to have to leave a game you're having fun with, but if there is a big, friendly, dark-patterned button that says “Want free money?” I think a lot of people would tap that button. What’s more, they get to book the same amount in revenue, and stick the cost down in sales and marketing.</p><p><blockquote>假设一家游戏公司在其网站上支付2.5%的处理费。这意味着他们有27.5个百分点的营销空间可以利用。他们可以以折扣或免费赠品的形式给用户全部27.5%。不得不离开一个你正在享受的游戏肯定会增加摩擦，但是如果有一个大的、友好的、深色图案的按钮写着“想要免费的钱吗？”我想很多人会点击那个按钮。更重要的是，他们可以记录相同金额的收入，并在销售和营销方面降低成本。</blockquote></p><p> That’s just one example of how companies may decide to go with this. That’s a lot of margin to play with. The reason Apple had this rule in the first place is that they feared someone would find the magic formula that would provide more revenue by eschewing in-app payments altogether, and everyone else would copy them. They had fought very hard to keep this rule for a reason.</p><p><blockquote>这只是公司可能决定采取这种做法的一个例子。这是一个很大的空间。苹果最初制定这条规则的原因是，他们担心有人会找到一个神奇的公式，通过完全避免应用内支付来提供更多收入，而其他人都会效仿他们。他们努力维护这条规则是有原因的。</blockquote></p><p> Just after the news broke, a friend who knows&nbsp;I own both stocks&nbsp;trolled me with this Bloomberg Terminal screenshot:</p><p><blockquote>消息传出后，一位知道我拥有这两只股票的朋友用这张彭博终端截图向我进行了攻击：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/78570d7ae73401a933b2359f3dcd47da\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"281\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Roblox(NYSE:RBLX)is a pure-play mobile gaming company. The vast majority of their revenues come from in-app payments from iOS and Android, the rest from their website sales. Their cost-of-revenues almost all goes to Apple and Google. In the TTM, they had a 74.4% gross margin. If they pay a 2.5% processing fee for website sales, that means 84% of their transaction value was through iOS and Android. If they could get that to 50-50, that would raise all their margins down to EBT by 10 percentage points. If they could get to 73% of sales on the website, they would have a 90% gross margin.</p><p><blockquote>Roblox（纽约证券交易所股票代码：RBLX）是一家纯粹的移动游戏公司。他们的绝大多数收入来自iOS和Android的应用内支付，其余来自网站销售。他们的收入成本几乎全部归苹果和谷歌所有。在TTM，他们的毛利率为74.4%。如果他们为网站销售支付2.5%的处理费，这意味着他们84%的交易价值是通过iOS和Android进行的。如果他们能够将这一比例提高到50-50，那么他们在EBT的所有利润率将提高10个百分点。如果他们能在网站上获得73%的销售额，他们将有90%的毛利率。</blockquote></p><p> There is a lot of money at stake, and a huge incentive for gaming and subscription media companies to figure out how to thread this needle. And that’s all in the absence of further action by the other two branches of government.</p><p><blockquote>这关系到大量的资金，游戏和订阅媒体公司也有巨大的动力去想办法解决这个问题。这一切都是在其他两个政府部门没有采取进一步行动的情况下发生的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Executive Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>行政部门</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> This is a good place to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the new antitrust movement, because two of its leaders now work in the Biden administration. The movement is sometimes referred to as the “neo-Brandeis” movement after Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, because it harkens back to a much earlier era of antitrust enforcement that drastically changed in the 1980s.</p><p><blockquote>这是讨论新反垄断运动理论基础的好地方，因为其两位领导人现在在拜登政府工作。这场运动有时被称为“新布兰代斯”运动，以最高法院大法官路易斯·布兰代斯的名字命名，因为它可以追溯到更早的反垄断执法时代，该时代在20世纪80年代发生了巨大变化。</blockquote></p><p> In 1978, Robert Bork (yes,that Robert Bork) wrote a very influential book called&nbsp;<i>The Antitrust Paradox</i>. His theory urged a refocusing of enforcement away from competition, and towards consumer benefit as the main test. He argued that antitrust enforcement was propping up smaller, less efficient companies to the detriment of the economy.</p><p><blockquote>1978年，罗伯特·博克（没错，就是那个罗伯特·博克）写了一本非常有影响力的书，叫做<i>反垄断悖论</i>他的理论敦促将执法重点从竞争转向消费者利益作为主要检验标准。他认为，反垄断执法正在支撑规模较小、效率较低的公司，损害了经济。</blockquote></p><p> The 1982 AT&amp;T breakup consent decree became the prototype for the new enforcement. By controlling local and long distance telecommunication, as well as the equipment, AT&amp;T had been underinvesting and overcharging for decades. Their breakup brought an explosion of investment into telecommunications, and brought down prices quickly for landline service and equipment. That became the limit of antitrust enforcement.</p><p><blockquote>1982年美国电话电报公司分手同意法令成为新执法的原型。通过控制本地和长途电信以及设备，美国电话电报公司几十年来一直投资不足，收费过高。他们的分手带来了电信投资的爆炸式增长，并迅速降低了固定电话服务和设备的价格。这成为反垄断执法的极限。</blockquote></p><p> But the focus on consumer benefit has affected competition, and that’s what the neo-Brandeis movement hopes to change. They want antitrust enforcement to return to the way it was a century ago, with more of a focus on how large companies affect competition. Lina Khan, a law professor at Columbia, now runs the FTC, the primary antitrust enforcer in the federal government. Her 2017 law review article, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox” was the spark that lit this fire. Her colleague at Columbia Law, Tim Wu, is also one of the leaders of this movement. He is a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, and his fingerprints are all over&nbsp;the July competition executive order.</p><p><blockquote>但是对消费者利益的关注影响了竞争，这就是新布兰代斯运动希望改变的。他们希望反垄断执法回到一个世纪前的样子，更多地关注大公司如何影响竞争。哥伦比亚大学法学教授莉娜·汗(Lina Khan)现在负责联邦政府主要的反垄断执法机构联邦贸易委员会(FTC)。她2017年的法律评论文章《亚马逊的反垄断悖论》是点燃这场大火的火花。她在哥伦比亚法学院的同事蒂姆·吴也是这场运动的领导者之一。他是白宫经济顾问委员会的成员，7月份的竞争行政命令上到处都是他的指纹。</blockquote></p><p> The order was very wide ranging, with 72 initiatives covering 14 departments and agencies. Most of it does not relate to Apple, but it gives you an idea of the wide breadth of the order. As it relates to Apple:</p><p><blockquote>该命令范围非常广泛，有72项举措，涵盖14个部门和机构。它的大部分与苹果无关，但它让你对秩序的广度有所了解。就苹果而言：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Right-to-repair is a huge threat to the other pillar of Services, AppleCare, which I estimate at 25%-30% of the segment. But more than that, it would change the way Apple makes devices. Apple squeezes out efficiency gains by attaching pooled memory directly to the main processor die, and by soldering storage into the motherboard. Both of these would likely be prohibited to them, and the devices would suffer.</li>  <li>The FTC is two months into a yearlong frisk of the mobile app ecosystem. Based on previous writings, Lina Khan will likely recommend third party app stores, “sideloading” directly from the web, and an end to the in-app payments monopoly.</li> </ul> Executive branch action is always subject to court challenges, and they can take very long to implement. But Congress can change the law in a single session. And they are already into that process.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>维修权对服务的另一个支柱AppleCare来说是一个巨大的威胁，我估计AppleCare占该细分市场的25%-30%。但更重要的是，它将改变苹果制造设备的方式。苹果通过将池内存直接连接到主处理器芯片，以及将存储焊接到主板来挤出效率增益。这两个都可能被禁止，设备也会受到影响。</li><li>联邦贸易委员会对移动应用生态系统长达一年的搜查已经进行了两个月。根据之前的著作，Lina Khan可能会推荐第三方应用商店，直接从网络“侧装”，并结束应用内支付垄断。</li></ul>行政部门的行动总是受到法院的质疑，而且可能需要很长时间才能实施。但是国会可以在一届会议上改变法律。他们已经进入了这个过程。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The Legislative Branch</b></p><p><blockquote><b>立法部门</b></blockquote></p><p> Since there are two houses of Congress, this issue is off on two tracks. The House Judiciary Committee recently passed a suite of bipartisan bills. Of the ones that I think have a good likelihood of passing the full House, here’s how it affects Apple:</p><p><blockquote>由于国会有两院，这个问题在两条轨道上。众议院司法委员会最近通过了一系列两党法案。在我认为很有可能获得全院通过的法案中，以下是它对苹果的影响：</blockquote></p><p> They would be required to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party payments in the Apple App Store.</p><p><blockquote>他们将被要求允许苹果应用商店中的第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方支付。</blockquote></p><p> Restricting Apple’s ability to acquire smaller companies. In the past 6 years, Apple has bought around 100 companies, which works out to about one every three weeks on average. It looks like they had been accelerating since fiscal 2018, but then abruptly stopped in fiscal 2021. The reason is the new leader of the FTC.</p><p><blockquote>限制苹果收购小公司的能力。在过去的6年里，苹果收购了大约100家公司，平均每三周就收购一家。看起来他们自2018财年以来一直在加速，但在2021财年突然停止。原因是FTC的新领导人。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a2fc9a2578663cc746fdb19ca19dea4c\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The big bulge you see there in 2014 is the Beats acquisition at $3 billion, which remains the exception. Otherwise, Apple buys very small companies for tens or hundreds of millions, usually shuts down any products they may have, and absorbs the talent and IP into Apple proper. Apple’s chip design unit, a cornerstone of their current success, began this way in 2008.</p><p><blockquote>你在2014年看到的最大增长是以30亿美元收购Beats，这仍然是个例外。否则，苹果会花数千万或数亿美元收购非常小的公司，通常会关闭他们可能拥有的任何产品，并将人才和知识产权吸收到苹果本土。苹果的芯片设计部门是他们目前成功的基石，2008年就是这样开始的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more private APIs.</b>This would mean everything, like the Apple Pay-enabling NFC chip, would be open to competitors.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有私有API。</b>这意味着一切，比如支持苹果支付的NFC芯片，都将向竞争对手开放。</blockquote></p><p> <b>No more discriminatory rules.</b>Apple doesn’t force real-world product and service providers like Uber(NYSE:UBER)to use in-app payments. Apple would either have to try and get Uber to pay them 30%, or drop the requirement altogether.</p><p><blockquote><b>不再有歧视性的规则。</b>苹果不会强迫Uber（纽约证券交易所股票代码：UBER）等现实世界的产品和服务提供商使用应用内支付。苹果要么试图让优步向他们支付30%的费用，要么完全放弃这一要求。</blockquote></p><p> <b>The end of the Google search deal.</b>Google currently pays Apple a purported $12 billion a year to make Google the default search engine on iOS. This cash goes directly to EBT.</p><p><blockquote><b>谷歌搜索交易的结束。</b>谷歌目前据称每年向苹果支付120亿美元，以使谷歌成为iOS上的默认搜索引擎。这笔现金直接流向EBT。</blockquote></p><p> <b>They would have to expose more user data to developers.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>他们将不得不向开发者公开更多的用户数据。</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>Formalizing the anti-steering decision.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>正式确定反转向决策。</b></blockquote></p><p></p><p> <b>Anti-retaliation provision.</b>If these bills were law, Epic would still be on the App Store while they sued Apple.</p><p><blockquote><b>反报复条款。</b>如果这些法案成为法律，当他们起诉苹果时，Epic仍将在App Store上。</blockquote></p><p> After the House is done wrangling over budget reconciliation, I think these bills will hit the House floor this fall or winter, and I think that they have a high likelihood of passing in something like their current form.</p><p><blockquote>在众议院结束关于预算协调的争论后，我认为这些法案将在今年秋天或冬天提交众议院，我认为它们很有可能以目前的形式获得通过。</blockquote></p><p> But bills also have to clear the Senate, and they move slower. Things are just getting started there. The big movers in the Senate are Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah. Klobuchar has&nbsp;written a long book&nbsp;on the subject, and it is not friendly towards Apple. She has also authored a new bill, Open App Markets Act. It is more narrow than the House suite, but not by much. It would still force Apple to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party in-app payments. They would also have to get rid of their private APIs. The bill is narrower than the House suite, and less of a threat to Apple, but still would mean the end of App Store as a driver of growth.<i>The Senate bill is the better outcome for Apple, and it is still terrible.</i></p><p><blockquote>但法案也必须通过参议院，而且进展较慢。那里的事情才刚刚开始。参议院的大推动者是明尼苏达州的艾米·克洛布查尔和犹他州的李政颖。Klobuchar就这个问题写了一本长书，它对苹果并不友好。她还起草了一项新法案《开放应用市场法案》。它比房子套房窄，但也窄不了多少。它仍将迫使苹果允许第三方应用商店、侧装和第三方应用内支付。他们还必须摆脱他们的私有API。该法案比众议院套房更窄，对苹果的威胁也更小，但仍意味着App Store作为增长驱动力的终结。<i>参议院的法案对苹果来说是更好的结果，但仍然很糟糕。</i></blockquote></p><p> I believe that we will see something pass before the next Presidential election, or even in this Congressional session. The best Apple shareholders can hope for is that the final bill gets watered down considerably.</p><p><blockquote>我相信，在下届总统选举之前，甚至在本届国会会议上，我们会看到一些事情通过。苹果股东最大的希望就是最终法案被大幅淡化。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Outside The US</b></p><p><blockquote><b>美国境外</b></blockquote></p><p> This is in no way limited to the US. We already discussed the Japanese settlement, and South Korea is forcing Apple and Google to allow third party in-app payments. The case that is farthest along in the EU is Spotify’s, which would force Apple to not charge fees to competing services, so that means music, podcasts, games, video and fitness.</p><p><blockquote>这绝不仅限于美国。我们已经讨论了日本的和解，南韩正在迫使苹果和谷歌允许第三方应用内支付。欧盟进展最快的案例是Spotify，这将迫使苹果不向竞争服务收费，因此这意味着音乐、播客、游戏、视频和健身。</blockquote></p><p> The Chinese Communist Party remains the&nbsp;second biggest tail risk in the world&nbsp;after climate change. Apple’s regulatory risk there is uniquely high, both on the supply and demand sides. Apple has already given into them by not providing their Chinese customers with the same level of privacy as everyone else. With the mood in China right now, who knows where that goes.</p><p><blockquote>中国共产党仍然是仅次于气候变化的世界第二大尾部风险。无论是在供应还是需求方面，苹果的监管风险都非常高。苹果已经屈服于他们，没有向他们的中国客户提供和其他人一样的隐私水平。以中国现在的情绪，谁知道会走向何方。</blockquote></p><p> <b>What Losing Control Of App Store Looks Like</b></p><p><blockquote><b>失去对App Store的控制是什么样子</b></blockquote></p><p> Stone Fox Capital here at Seeking Alpha is&nbsp;out with an article&nbsp;pivoting off Katy Huberty's estimation of a 2% earnings loss if the top 20 apps on the App Store were able to eschew in-app payments. Stone Fox would also like you to care about that seemingly small number:</p><p><blockquote>Seeking Alpha的Stone Fox Capital发表了一篇文章，反驳了Katy Huberty的估计，如果App Store上排名前20的应用程序能够避免应用内支付，收益将损失2%。石狐也希望大家关心一下这个看似很小的数字：</blockquote></p><p>   Apple won most of their legal case with Epic Games based on the ruling announced on September 10, but the tech giant lost the ultimate battle. The stock remains priced for perfection while the company continues to have growth paths chipped away from the business.  My last article on this subject was called “Chipping Away at App Store.” This is what is happening and the trend is now clear. There is a mood globally to take Apple down a peg, and it is happening too slowly for many people to realize it is happening.</p><p><blockquote>根据9月10日宣布的裁决，苹果赢得了与Epic Games的大部分法律诉讼，但这家科技巨头输掉了最终的战斗。该股的定价仍然是完美的，而该公司的增长道路继续从业务中被削弱。我上一篇关于这个主题的文章叫做“在App Store上削足适履”。这就是正在发生的事情，趋势现在很明显。全球都有一种降低苹果汇率的情绪，但这种情绪发生得太慢，许多人都没有意识到它正在发生。</blockquote></p><p> My own way of modeling the worst case is through my DCF model. It’s modeled as a 25% hit to Services in the first year, with services gross margin reduced from 68% to 65%, followed by a slightly increased growth rate in the segment because of composition effects — the rest of Services grows faster than App Store. I used to model that happening in fiscal 2024, but I have moved that up to fiscal 2023, beginning less than 13 months from now.</p><p><blockquote>我自己对最坏情况建模的方法是通过我的DCF模型。它的模型是第一年服务受到25%的打击，服务毛利率从68%下降到65%，随后由于构成效应，该细分市场的增长率略有上升——其余服务的增长速度快于App Store。我曾经对2024财年发生的情况进行建模，但我已将其提前到2023财年，从现在开始不到13个月。</blockquote></p><p> Here is the effect on fair value on my base case:</p><p><blockquote>以下是我的基本案例对公允价值的影响：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/94b635fe7a2473aafe36bd095a1206b6\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"352\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Even with the very slow start for the reason Stone Fox says — the share price has gotten way out ahead of cash flows — my base case still shows an 11% CAGR in fair value through the end of fiscal 2025. The App Store collapse takes that down to an 8% CAGR, 12% lower by 2025.</p><p><blockquote>尽管由于Stone Fox所说的原因，起步非常缓慢——股价已经远远领先于现金流——但我的基本假设仍然显示，到2025财年末，公允价值复合年增长率为11%。App Store的倒闭使复合年增长率降至8%，到2025年将下降12%。</blockquote></p><p> Circling back, Stone Fox puts a button on this more succinctly than I can:</p><p><blockquote>回头，石狐比我更简洁地按下了一个按钮：</blockquote></p><p>   The key investor takeaway is that Apple has a bright future. The company will continue generating profits with operating cash flows topping $100 billion annually, but the tech giant will struggle to generate the growth needed to warrant the current stock price. The 2% hit to earnings might not seem meaningful, but the amount is very harmful to a stock priced for perfection.  <b>How To Take This Seriously</b></p><p><blockquote>投资者的主要收获是苹果拥有光明的未来。该公司将继续创造利润，每年运营现金流超过1000亿美元，但这家科技巨头将难以实现维持当前股价所需的增长。盈利2%的打击似乎没有意义，但这个数额对于定价完美的股票来说是非常有害的。<b>如何认真对待这个</b></blockquote></p><p> In my last article on this subject, someone cheekily replied in the comments, “‘Please take this seriously.’ What does that even mean?” That’s a good question. The first part of the answer is to stop pretending it’s not happening.</p><p><blockquote>在我关于这个主题的上一篇文章中，有人在评论中厚颜无耻地回答说：“‘请认真对待这件事。’这到底是什么意思？”这是个好问题。答案的第一部分是不要假装它没有发生。</blockquote></p><p> “If your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.” I have been using that phrase frequently since Apple hit $140. The last chart just formalizes it with math, but my opinion is that Apple will remain range-bound for some time, between $125 and $155, roughly. I still mean it: if your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.</p><p><blockquote>“如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。”自从苹果股价达到140美元以来，我就经常使用这个短语。最后一张图表只是用数学将其形式化，但我的观点是苹果将在一段时间内保持区间波动，大约在125美元到155美元之间。我还是这个意思：如果你的时间范围很短，现在是获利了结的好时机。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> But I also believe that no other company is as prepared for the future of technology, regardless of what that brings. That is a&nbsp;far longer discussion. I have been buying Apple shares on the dip since 2005, which is two splits ago. My last buy was in January 2019, when Apple reported that they would miss guidance for the first time in many years. At the time, the commentariat was telling me that Apple’s best days were behind them. I tried to explain that Apple was in a transitional phase, part of a strategy they launched around 2015 to focus more on the growth of the iPhone user base than sales. The strategy would pay off soon, I predicted, and it did in fiscal 2021. That seems like a very long time ago now.</p><p><blockquote>但我也相信，没有其他公司为技术的未来做好了准备，无论它会带来什么。这是一个长得多的讨论。自2005年以来，我一直在逢低买入苹果股票，这是两次拆分前。我最后一次购买是在2019年1月，当时苹果报告称他们将多年来首次错过指导。当时，评论员告诉我，苹果最好的日子已经过去了。我试图解释说，苹果正处于过渡阶段，这是他们在2015年左右推出的战略的一部分，旨在更多地关注iPhone用户群的增长，而不是销售。我预测，这一策略很快就会得到回报，并且在2021财年就得到了回报。那似乎是很久以前的事了。</blockquote></p><p> A consequence of buying the dip from 2005 to 2019 is that I own way too many Apple shares that I could never bring myself to sell. I am massively overweight Apple. There is a “What To Do With The Apple Shares” clause in my will. It is our largest asset, worth more than the house. That has not made me nervous until the last few months, when the tide seemed to start turning on Apple on this issue. I also used to be someone who did not take this threat seriously. I am going to start shaving my position as opportunities present themselves, and one may happen this week with the iPhone launch on Tuesday.</p><p><blockquote>从2005年到2019年逢低买入的一个后果是，我拥有太多苹果股票，我永远无法出售。我完全是跑赢大盘·苹果。我的遗嘱里有一个“如何处理苹果股票”的条款。这是我们最大的资产，比房子还值钱。这并没有让我感到紧张，直到最近几个月，在这个问题上，潮流似乎开始转向苹果。我也曾经是一个不把这种威胁当回事的人。随着机会的出现，我将开始削减我的职位，其中一个可能会在本周周二iPhone的发布中发生。</blockquote></p><p> <i>To be clear, I will remain overweight Apple, just less so, and I remain bullish in the long term. But I no longer feel the safety I once did with this wildly overweight position.</i></p><p><blockquote><i>需要明确的是，我仍将是跑赢大盘·苹果，只是程度有所降低，而且从长远来看，我仍然看好。但是我不再感觉到曾经在这个疯狂的跑赢大盘位置上的安全感。</i></blockquote></p><p> In contrast, if you are a long term investor who does not have a massively overweight position, watch, wait and fight confirmation bias every day. If you think this begins and ends with Epic, you haven’t been paying attention.</p><p><blockquote>相比之下，如果您是一位没有大量跑赢大盘头寸的长期投资者，请每天观察、等待并对抗确认偏差。如果你认为这是以史诗开始和结束的，那你就没有注意。</blockquote></p><p> Please take this seriously.</p><p><blockquote>请认真对待这件事。</blockquote></p><p> I will be back in a few days with hopefully happier news from the iPhone launch on Tuesday. The big question is whether Apple can begin shipping iPhone before the quarter is out.</p><p><blockquote>几天后我会带着周二iPhone发布会的好消息回来。最大的问题是苹果能否在本季度结束前开始发货iPhone。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4454891-apple-app-store-the-tide-is-turning\">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":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4454891-apple-app-store-the-tide-is-turning","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1171919128","content_text":"Summary\n\nA US Federal District Court judge has ruled mostly in Apple’s favor in their case with Epic Games.\nDespite that, and in conjunction with a recent settlement with Japanese regulators, Apple will be getting rid of their anti-steering rule. This is a bigger change than people think.\nThe threat to Apple doesn't end with the Epic trial. There are bigger threats coming from the executive and legislative branches in the US, and regulators in Europe and Asia.\n\nChip Somodevilla/Getty Images News\nIt Does Not End Here\nFor some time now, I have been warning that antitrust law was about to change, and these changes would not be favorable to Apple(NASDAQ:AAPL), and that investors need to take these threats seriously. In every one of these attempts, I was rebuffed in the comments by many Apple shareholders telling me that these fears and warnings were overblown. “Long and strong AAPL!” cheerleading seems to be popular.Confirmation bias is a strong thing, and you should fight it every single day.\nMy last attempt was less than two weeks ago, and I was similarly dismissed, and even accused of being a short-selling tout to boot. That last suggestion is pretty funny to anyone who has had to listen to me drone on about Apple stock the last 16 years. The consequence of those 16 years is that I have a lot of Apple stock, so I take things like this very seriously.\nFriday’s decision in Epic v. Apple had one part very bad news for Apple, but mostly a rejection of Epic’s main claim — that iOS is a market unto itself. But the bigger threat continues to be from Congress, where they can change the law in a single session. The House has already passed several bipartisan bills through committee, and three of them seem to have pretty wide support with the rest of the House. A narrower, but just as damaging companion bill is about to start working its way through the Senate. Keep your eyes on Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah.\nThen we have regulatory action in the EU, Apple’s second most important region, where antitrust enforcers are siding with Spotify(NYSE:SPOT)in their dispute over in-app payments. Apple has already settled with Japan over their anti-steering rules. South Korea is forcing Apple and Google(NASDAQ:GOOGL)(NASDAQ:GOOG)to allow third-party in-app payments. China is a black hole of regulatory mystery.\nThe tide is turning on Apple on this issue. If you think this begins and ends with the Epic case, you haven’t been paying attention.\nRight now the threat is confined to App Store, but this is the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end. This new antitrust movement may come for other parts of Apple, like the other pillar of their fast-growing Services segment, AppleCare, and even dig deeper into the way Apple likes to do business.\nWhat The Ruling Says\nJudge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers hewed very closely to existing law, because that’s what usually happens in District Court, the lowest level of the federal system. She mostly had bad news for Epic, and targeted bad news for Apple.\nThe case rested on how the court defined the “relevant market” in question. Epic wanted it to be iOS, a market unto itself because of the high walls Apple builds around the ecosystem. Judge Rogers rejected that novel claim pretty handily. But she also rejected Apple’s definition: all gaming transactions, including PCs and consoles. She settled on mobile gaming transactions, so essentially the iOS-Android duopoly of mobile gaming transactions.\nHere is the meat of the decision that follows from that:\n\n Given the trial record, the Court cannot ultimately conclude that Apple is a monopolist under either federal or state antitrust laws. While the Court finds that Apple enjoys considerable market share of over 55% and extraordinarily high profit margins, these factors alone do not show antitrust conduct. Success is not illegal…\n\n\n Nonetheless, the trial did show that Apple is engaging in anticompetitive conduct under California’s competition laws. The Court concludes that Apple’s anti-steering provisions hide critical information from consumers and illegally stifle consumer choice. When coupled with Apple’s incipient antitrust violations, these anti-steering provisions are anticompetitive and a nationwide remedy to eliminate those provisions is warranted.\n\nThe most important thing to note here is that the problem for Apple is California law, not federal law. Federal law changing is where the real threat remains, and we are already well into that process.\nJudge Rogers ruled that Apple has to get rid of their anti-steering rules. App developers will now be allowed to inform users of less expensive options on their website, with a link. We’ll talk about the implications in a moment. Apple charges developers 30% for in-app payments, and the first year of in-app subscriptions (15% thereafter). In-app payments and subscriptions are substantially where all of App Store revenue comes from, about 28% of the Services segment and 5.4% of all revenue in calendar 2020.\nAlso, in the category of rounding errors, Epic has to pay Apple the $3.6 million they owe them when they breached their contract. That’s about 0.001% of Apple’s 2021 top line.\nEpic’s Game\nIf you read my first article about the trial from when the pre-trial filings dropped, you may notice that I was a bit confused about what precisely Epic’s game was here. The foundation of their entire argument — that iOS was a market unto itself — was novel, to say the least. At least one of their lawyers must have informed them of the low likelihood of success on their main claims. Moreover, they burned a lot of pages on arguments not central to their case, but seem more geared towards tarnishing Apple’s reputation.\nMy current understanding is that this case was a publicity stunt. What’s more, it worked. The point was to get this issue into the public conversation. Here I am writing about it, and here you are reading about it. But more importantly, the tide is turning in Washington, and I think the issues raised by this trial have accelerated that.\nThe Anti-Steering Rule\nLike many of the App Store rules, the anti-steering rule was part of a multi-year whack-a-mole process where developers tried to find ways to cut out Apple, and Apple closed those holes. Apple fought very hard to keep this rule, but now seems to be capitulating. They settled with Japanese regulators recently on the anti-steering rules as it applied to media subscription apps, and applied the settlement to the rest of the world as well, maybe in anticipation of this ruling. With the Epic ruling, the anti-steering rule is gone.\nWhen a game developer like Epic sells their virtual currency on the App Store, they have a 30% payment fee. When they make the same transaction on their website, it is probably under 3%. This was always what this was about. Epic wanted to have their own in-app payment system to supersede Apple’s, without the friction of sending people to the website. Judge Rogers rejected that, but gave Epic a partial victory by banning Apple’s anti-steering rules.\nThe anti-steering rules prevented app developers from having text and links to their own much less expensive in-app payments or subscriptions on their websites. This is a real loss for Apple, and puts the whole structure of the two most lucrative payment methods in the App Store at risk.\nLet’s say a gaming company pays a 2.5% processing fee on their website. That means they have 27.5 percentage points of marketing to play with. They could give that entire 27.5% to users in the form of a rebate or freebies. It certainly increases friction to have to leave a game you're having fun with, but if there is a big, friendly, dark-patterned button that says “Want free money?” I think a lot of people would tap that button. What’s more, they get to book the same amount in revenue, and stick the cost down in sales and marketing.\nThat’s just one example of how companies may decide to go with this. That’s a lot of margin to play with. The reason Apple had this rule in the first place is that they feared someone would find the magic formula that would provide more revenue by eschewing in-app payments altogether, and everyone else would copy them. They had fought very hard to keep this rule for a reason.\nJust after the news broke, a friend who knows I own both stocks trolled me with this Bloomberg Terminal screenshot:\n\nRoblox(NYSE:RBLX)is a pure-play mobile gaming company. The vast majority of their revenues come from in-app payments from iOS and Android, the rest from their website sales. Their cost-of-revenues almost all goes to Apple and Google. In the TTM, they had a 74.4% gross margin. If they pay a 2.5% processing fee for website sales, that means 84% of their transaction value was through iOS and Android. If they could get that to 50-50, that would raise all their margins down to EBT by 10 percentage points. If they could get to 73% of sales on the website, they would have a 90% gross margin.\nThere is a lot of money at stake, and a huge incentive for gaming and subscription media companies to figure out how to thread this needle. And that’s all in the absence of further action by the other two branches of government.\nThe Executive Branch\nThis is a good place to discuss the theoretical underpinnings of the new antitrust movement, because two of its leaders now work in the Biden administration. The movement is sometimes referred to as the “neo-Brandeis” movement after Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis, because it harkens back to a much earlier era of antitrust enforcement that drastically changed in the 1980s.\nIn 1978, Robert Bork (yes,that Robert Bork) wrote a very influential book called The Antitrust Paradox. His theory urged a refocusing of enforcement away from competition, and towards consumer benefit as the main test. He argued that antitrust enforcement was propping up smaller, less efficient companies to the detriment of the economy.\nThe 1982 AT&T breakup consent decree became the prototype for the new enforcement. By controlling local and long distance telecommunication, as well as the equipment, AT&T had been underinvesting and overcharging for decades. Their breakup brought an explosion of investment into telecommunications, and brought down prices quickly for landline service and equipment. That became the limit of antitrust enforcement.\nBut the focus on consumer benefit has affected competition, and that’s what the neo-Brandeis movement hopes to change. They want antitrust enforcement to return to the way it was a century ago, with more of a focus on how large companies affect competition. Lina Khan, a law professor at Columbia, now runs the FTC, the primary antitrust enforcer in the federal government. Her 2017 law review article, “Amazon’s Antitrust Paradox” was the spark that lit this fire. Her colleague at Columbia Law, Tim Wu, is also one of the leaders of this movement. He is a member of the White House Council of Economic Advisors, and his fingerprints are all over the July competition executive order.\nThe order was very wide ranging, with 72 initiatives covering 14 departments and agencies. Most of it does not relate to Apple, but it gives you an idea of the wide breadth of the order. As it relates to Apple:\n\nRight-to-repair is a huge threat to the other pillar of Services, AppleCare, which I estimate at 25%-30% of the segment. But more than that, it would change the way Apple makes devices. Apple squeezes out efficiency gains by attaching pooled memory directly to the main processor die, and by soldering storage into the motherboard. Both of these would likely be prohibited to them, and the devices would suffer.\nThe FTC is two months into a yearlong frisk of the mobile app ecosystem. Based on previous writings, Lina Khan will likely recommend third party app stores, “sideloading” directly from the web, and an end to the in-app payments monopoly.\n\nExecutive branch action is always subject to court challenges, and they can take very long to implement. But Congress can change the law in a single session. And they are already into that process.\nThe Legislative Branch\nSince there are two houses of Congress, this issue is off on two tracks. The House Judiciary Committee recently passed a suite of bipartisan bills. Of the ones that I think have a good likelihood of passing the full House, here’s how it affects Apple:\nThey would be required to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party payments in the Apple App Store.\nRestricting Apple’s ability to acquire smaller companies. In the past 6 years, Apple has bought around 100 companies, which works out to about one every three weeks on average. It looks like they had been accelerating since fiscal 2018, but then abruptly stopped in fiscal 2021. The reason is the new leader of the FTC.\nData by YCharts\nThe big bulge you see there in 2014 is the Beats acquisition at $3 billion, which remains the exception. Otherwise, Apple buys very small companies for tens or hundreds of millions, usually shuts down any products they may have, and absorbs the talent and IP into Apple proper. Apple’s chip design unit, a cornerstone of their current success, began this way in 2008.\nNo more private APIs.This would mean everything, like the Apple Pay-enabling NFC chip, would be open to competitors.\nNo more discriminatory rules.Apple doesn’t force real-world product and service providers like Uber(NYSE:UBER)to use in-app payments. Apple would either have to try and get Uber to pay them 30%, or drop the requirement altogether.\nThe end of the Google search deal.Google currently pays Apple a purported $12 billion a year to make Google the default search engine on iOS. This cash goes directly to EBT.\nThey would have to expose more user data to developers.\nFormalizing the anti-steering decision.\nAnti-retaliation provision.If these bills were law, Epic would still be on the App Store while they sued Apple.\nAfter the House is done wrangling over budget reconciliation, I think these bills will hit the House floor this fall or winter, and I think that they have a high likelihood of passing in something like their current form.\nBut bills also have to clear the Senate, and they move slower. Things are just getting started there. The big movers in the Senate are Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota and Mike Lee of Utah. Klobuchar has written a long book on the subject, and it is not friendly towards Apple. She has also authored a new bill, Open App Markets Act. It is more narrow than the House suite, but not by much. It would still force Apple to allow third party app stores, sideloading, and third party in-app payments. They would also have to get rid of their private APIs. The bill is narrower than the House suite, and less of a threat to Apple, but still would mean the end of App Store as a driver of growth.The Senate bill is the better outcome for Apple, and it is still terrible.\nI believe that we will see something pass before the next Presidential election, or even in this Congressional session. The best Apple shareholders can hope for is that the final bill gets watered down considerably.\nOutside The US\nThis is in no way limited to the US. We already discussed the Japanese settlement, and South Korea is forcing Apple and Google to allow third party in-app payments. The case that is farthest along in the EU is Spotify’s, which would force Apple to not charge fees to competing services, so that means music, podcasts, games, video and fitness.\nThe Chinese Communist Party remains the second biggest tail risk in the world after climate change. Apple’s regulatory risk there is uniquely high, both on the supply and demand sides. Apple has already given into them by not providing their Chinese customers with the same level of privacy as everyone else. With the mood in China right now, who knows where that goes.\nWhat Losing Control Of App Store Looks Like\nStone Fox Capital here at Seeking Alpha is out with an article pivoting off Katy Huberty's estimation of a 2% earnings loss if the top 20 apps on the App Store were able to eschew in-app payments. Stone Fox would also like you to care about that seemingly small number:\n\n Apple won most of their legal case with Epic Games based on the ruling announced on September 10, but the tech giant lost the ultimate battle. The stock remains priced for perfection while the company continues to have growth paths chipped away from the business.\n\nMy last article on this subject was called “Chipping Away at App Store.” This is what is happening and the trend is now clear. There is a mood globally to take Apple down a peg, and it is happening too slowly for many people to realize it is happening.\nMy own way of modeling the worst case is through my DCF model. It’s modeled as a 25% hit to Services in the first year, with services gross margin reduced from 68% to 65%, followed by a slightly increased growth rate in the segment because of composition effects — the rest of Services grows faster than App Store. I used to model that happening in fiscal 2024, but I have moved that up to fiscal 2023, beginning less than 13 months from now.\nHere is the effect on fair value on my base case:\n\nEven with the very slow start for the reason Stone Fox says — the share price has gotten way out ahead of cash flows — my base case still shows an 11% CAGR in fair value through the end of fiscal 2025. The App Store collapse takes that down to an 8% CAGR, 12% lower by 2025.\nCircling back, Stone Fox puts a button on this more succinctly than I can:\n\n The key investor takeaway is that Apple has a bright future. The company will continue generating profits with operating cash flows topping $100 billion annually, but the tech giant will struggle to generate the growth needed to warrant the current stock price. The 2% hit to earnings might not seem meaningful, but the amount is very harmful to a stock priced for perfection.\n\nHow To Take This Seriously\nIn my last article on this subject, someone cheekily replied in the comments, “‘Please take this seriously.’ What does that even mean?” That’s a good question. The first part of the answer is to stop pretending it’s not happening.\n“If your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.” I have been using that phrase frequently since Apple hit $140. The last chart just formalizes it with math, but my opinion is that Apple will remain range-bound for some time, between $125 and $155, roughly. I still mean it: if your time horizon is short, now is a good time to take profits.\nBut I also believe that no other company is as prepared for the future of technology, regardless of what that brings. That is a far longer discussion. I have been buying Apple shares on the dip since 2005, which is two splits ago. My last buy was in January 2019, when Apple reported that they would miss guidance for the first time in many years. At the time, the commentariat was telling me that Apple’s best days were behind them. I tried to explain that Apple was in a transitional phase, part of a strategy they launched around 2015 to focus more on the growth of the iPhone user base than sales. The strategy would pay off soon, I predicted, and it did in fiscal 2021. That seems like a very long time ago now.\nA consequence of buying the dip from 2005 to 2019 is that I own way too many Apple shares that I could never bring myself to sell. I am massively overweight Apple. There is a “What To Do With The Apple Shares” clause in my will. It is our largest asset, worth more than the house. That has not made me nervous until the last few months, when the tide seemed to start turning on Apple on this issue. I also used to be someone who did not take this threat seriously. I am going to start shaving my position as opportunities present themselves, and one may happen this week with the iPhone launch on Tuesday.\nTo be clear, I will remain overweight Apple, just less so, and I remain bullish in the long term. But I no longer feel the safety I once did with this wildly overweight position.\nIn contrast, if you are a long term investor who does not have a massively overweight position, watch, wait and fight confirmation bias every day. If you think this begins and ends with Epic, you haven’t been paying attention.\nPlease take this seriously.\nI will be back in a few days with hopefully happier news from the iPhone launch on Tuesday. The big question is whether Apple can begin shipping iPhone before the quarter is out.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":520,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":880694514,"gmtCreate":1631053025138,"gmtModify":1631883892861,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"buy<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>","listText":"buy<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/DIDI\">$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$</a>","text":"buy$DiDi Global Inc.(DIDI)$","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/880694514","repostId":"817455241","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":817455241,"gmtCreate":1630982859979,"gmtModify":1734394412956,"author":{"id":"3527667596890271","authorId":"3527667596890271","name":"Buy_Sell","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5f0ed79a338c758a22e0b4ea13bf9d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3527667596890271","authorIdStr":"3527667596890271"},"themes":[],"title":"🚀【9月7日】美股昨夜休市，港股今日高开，今天买什么？","htmlText":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 9月7日讯，港股三大指数集体高开，恒指涨0.17%报26207点，国指涨0.16%报9386点，恒生科技指数涨0.52%报6814点。盘面上，国内煤炭期货开盘大涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01898\">$中煤能源(01898)$</a> 高开1.75%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01088\">$中国神华(01088)$</a> 涨0.9%；内房股、铝业股表现强势，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/02600\">$中国铝业(02600)$</a> 涨超2%；深圳前海合作区大扩容，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00152\">$深圳国际(00152)$</a> 涨近4%，深圳控股涨超3%；大型科技股普涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03690\">$美团-W(03690)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09888\">$百度集团-SW(09888)$</a> 涨1.4%，腾讯涨1%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09988\">$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09618\">$京东集团-SW(09618)$</a> 小幅高开；生物医药下跌明显，电力","listText":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 9月7日讯，港股三大指数集体高开，恒指涨0.17%报26207点，国指涨0.16%报9386点，恒生科技指数涨0.52%报6814点。盘面上，国内煤炭期货开盘大涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01898\">$中煤能源(01898)$</a> 高开1.75%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01088\">$中国神华(01088)$</a> 涨0.9%；内房股、铝业股表现强势，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/02600\">$中国铝业(02600)$</a> 涨超2%；深圳前海合作区大扩容，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00152\">$深圳国际(00152)$</a> 涨近4%，深圳控股涨超3%；大型科技股普涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/03690\">$美团-W(03690)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09888\">$百度集团-SW(09888)$</a> 涨1.4%，腾讯涨1%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09988\">$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09618\">$京东集团-SW(09618)$</a> 小幅高开；生物医药下跌明显，电力","text":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 9月7日讯，港股三大指数集体高开，恒指涨0.17%报26207点，国指涨0.16%报9386点，恒生科技指数涨0.52%报6814点。盘面上，国内煤炭期货开盘大涨，$中煤能源(01898)$ 高开1.75%，$中国神华(01088)$ 涨0.9%；内房股、铝业股表现强势，$中国铝业(02600)$ 涨超2%；深圳前海合作区大扩容，$深圳国际(00152)$ 涨近4%，深圳控股涨超3%；大型科技股普涨，$美团-W(03690)$ 、$百度集团-SW(09888)$ 涨1.4%，腾讯涨1%，$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$ 、$京东集团-SW(09618)$ 小幅高开；生物医药下跌明显，电力","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8eb78770aab19e4545f8e5f25ed9867a","width":"299","height":"168"}],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":2,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/817455241","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"subType":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":2,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":834,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":839290462,"gmtCreate":1629159772056,"gmtModify":1631888928564,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/839290462","repostId":"1166738043","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1166738043","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629158127,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1166738043?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-17 07:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Pfizer, BioNTech Seek FDA Clearance for Covid-19 Booster<blockquote>辉瑞和BioNTech寻求FDA批准Covid-19加强剂</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1166738043","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Early-stage study shows third dose of vaccine offers a higher level of protection, companies say\nThe","content":"<p>Early-stage study shows third dose of vaccine offers a higher level of protection, companies say</p><p><blockquote>公司表示，早期研究表明第三剂疫苗可提供更高水平的保护</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14a5e62531f6fe58f57ee8f19db73a40\" tg-width=\"860\" tg-height=\"573\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>The addition of a third dose appeared safe, Pfizer and BioNTech said. A Covid-19 vaccination at a Schwenksville, Pa., pharmacy.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>辉瑞和BioNTech表示，添加第三剂似乎是安全的。宾夕法尼亚州施文克斯维尔的新冠肺炎疫苗接种。，药房。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Pfizer&nbsp;Inc.&nbsp;and partner&nbsp;BioNTech SE&nbsp;have submitted data to U.S. health regulators needed to cleara Covid-19 booster shot among the general public.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞公司和合作伙伴BioNTech SE已向美国卫生监管机构提交了在公众中清除Covid-19加强注射所需的数据。</blockquote></p><p> The companies said Monday they sent to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration results from a small, early-stage study showing a third dose of their vaccine generated higher levels of neutralizing antibodies against the original virus and against the Beta and Delta variants than the standard two-dose regimen.</p><p><blockquote>这些公司周一表示，他们向美国发送了。美国食品和药物管理局的一项小型早期研究结果显示，与标准的两剂方案相比，第三剂疫苗产生了更高水平的针对原始病毒以及针对β和δ变异体的中和抗体。</blockquote></p><p> The addition of the third dose also appeared safe in the trial, the companies said.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，在试验中添加第三剂似乎也是安全的。</blockquote></p><p> Given the immune response boost from a third dose, the companies said, a booster shot within six months to a year after the second shot might help maintain protection against&nbsp;symptomatic Covid-19.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，鉴于第三剂疫苗的免疫反应增强，在第二剂疫苗接种后六个月至一年内进行加强注射可能有助于保持对有症状的Covid-19的保护。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer and BioNTech are also conducting a larger late-stage study evaluating whether a third dose safely provides more protection. The companies said they expect those results shortly and will then submit the data to the FDA.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞和BioNTech也在进行一项更大规模的后期研究，评估第三剂疫苗是否能安全地提供更多保护。两家公司表示，他们预计这些结果将很快公布，然后将向FDA提交数据。</blockquote></p><p> The FDA is considering a broader booster strategy, which the agency could issue in the next few weeks.</p><p><blockquote>FDA正在考虑一个更广泛的加强策略，该机构可能会在未来几周内发布。</blockquote></p><p> Two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech shot, given three weeks apart, are authorized for people ages 12 years and older.</p><p><blockquote>两剂辉瑞-BioNTech疫苗被授权用于12岁及以上的人群，间隔三周注射。</blockquote></p><p> Some physicians and scientists in the U.S. say there isn’t a clear answer yet on whether boosters are needed for the general population, partly because of evidence that shows vaccines continue to be highly effective at preventing severe disease.</p><p><blockquote>美国的一些医生和科学家表示，对于普通人群是否需要加强剂，目前还没有明确的答案，部分原因是有证据表明疫苗在预防严重疾病方面仍然非常有效。</blockquote></p><p> Studies indicate the vaccine is still highly effective in people&nbsp;six months after their second dose. Yet there is some evidence its efficacy might diminish over longer periods, and the shot isn’t as effective againstt&nbsp;he Delta variant, prompting research into adding a third dose.</p><p><blockquote>研究表明，该疫苗在接种第二剂疫苗六个月后仍然非常有效。然而，有一些证据表明，随着时间的推移，它的功效可能会减弱，而且这种疫苗对德尔塔变异毒株病的疗效并不那么有效，这促使研究增加第三剂。</blockquote></p><p> Last week, the FDA authorized a third dose of an mRNA vaccine like the Pfizer-BioNTech shot&nbsp;for certain people with weakened immune systems, in a bid to bolster their immune defenses against Covid-19.</p><p><blockquote>上周，FDA批准为某些免疫系统较弱的人注射第三剂mRNA疫苗，例如辉瑞-BioNTech疫苗，以增强他们对Covid-19的免疫防御。</blockquote></p><p> In the early-stage study looking at a booster among generally healthy people, subjects got a third 30-microgram dose, Pfizer and BioNTech said. The subjects received the extra dose eight to nine months after receiving their second dose.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞和BioNTech表示，在针对一般健康人群的早期研究中，受试者接受了第三剂30微克剂量。受试者在接受第二剂后8至9个月接受额外剂量。</blockquote></p><p> Then researchers measured in subjects their levels of neutralizing antibodies, which play a crucial role in protection against the virus, the companies said.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，然后研究人员测量了受试者的中和抗体水平，中和抗体在预防病毒方面发挥着至关重要的作用。</blockquote></p><p> The levels rose against the initial strain of the virus, as well as the Beta and Delta variants, the companies said. After the booster dose, neutralizing antibodies against the variants were similar to the earlier strain, the companies said.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，针对病毒的初始毒株以及Beta和Delta变种，水平有所上升。两家公司表示，加强剂量后，针对变种的中和抗体与早期菌株相似。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer presented some of the scientific data during its second-quarter earnings presentation last month, but hasn’t detailed the results yet. After a third shot, antibody levels were up more than five times among people ages 18 to 55 and more than 11 times in people ages 65 to 85, compared with two doses, according to Pfizer’s data.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞在上个月的第二季度财报中公布了一些科学数据，但尚未详细说明结果。辉瑞的数据显示，第三次注射后，与注射两剂相比，18至55岁人群的抗体水平上升了5倍以上，65至85岁人群的抗体水平上升了11倍以上。</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>Pfizer, BioNTech Seek FDA Clearance for Covid-19 Booster<blockquote>辉瑞和BioNTech寻求FDA批准Covid-19加强剂</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\">\nPfizer, BioNTech Seek FDA Clearance for Covid-19 Booster<blockquote>辉瑞和BioNTech寻求FDA批准Covid-19加强剂</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-17 07:55</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Early-stage study shows third dose of vaccine offers a higher level of protection, companies say</p><p><blockquote>公司表示，早期研究表明第三剂疫苗可提供更高水平的保护</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/14a5e62531f6fe58f57ee8f19db73a40\" tg-width=\"860\" tg-height=\"573\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>The addition of a third dose appeared safe, Pfizer and BioNTech said. A Covid-19 vaccination at a Schwenksville, Pa., pharmacy.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>辉瑞和BioNTech表示，添加第三剂似乎是安全的。宾夕法尼亚州施文克斯维尔的新冠肺炎疫苗接种。，药房。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Pfizer&nbsp;Inc.&nbsp;and partner&nbsp;BioNTech SE&nbsp;have submitted data to U.S. health regulators needed to cleara Covid-19 booster shot among the general public.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞公司和合作伙伴BioNTech SE已向美国卫生监管机构提交了在公众中清除Covid-19加强注射所需的数据。</blockquote></p><p> The companies said Monday they sent to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration results from a small, early-stage study showing a third dose of their vaccine generated higher levels of neutralizing antibodies against the original virus and against the Beta and Delta variants than the standard two-dose regimen.</p><p><blockquote>这些公司周一表示，他们向美国发送了。美国食品和药物管理局的一项小型早期研究结果显示，与标准的两剂方案相比，第三剂疫苗产生了更高水平的针对原始病毒以及针对β和δ变异体的中和抗体。</blockquote></p><p> The addition of the third dose also appeared safe in the trial, the companies said.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，在试验中添加第三剂似乎也是安全的。</blockquote></p><p> Given the immune response boost from a third dose, the companies said, a booster shot within six months to a year after the second shot might help maintain protection against&nbsp;symptomatic Covid-19.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，鉴于第三剂疫苗的免疫反应增强，在第二剂疫苗接种后六个月至一年内进行加强注射可能有助于保持对有症状的Covid-19的保护。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer and BioNTech are also conducting a larger late-stage study evaluating whether a third dose safely provides more protection. The companies said they expect those results shortly and will then submit the data to the FDA.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞和BioNTech也在进行一项更大规模的后期研究，评估第三剂疫苗是否能安全地提供更多保护。两家公司表示，他们预计这些结果将很快公布，然后将向FDA提交数据。</blockquote></p><p> The FDA is considering a broader booster strategy, which the agency could issue in the next few weeks.</p><p><blockquote>FDA正在考虑一个更广泛的加强策略，该机构可能会在未来几周内发布。</blockquote></p><p> Two doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech shot, given three weeks apart, are authorized for people ages 12 years and older.</p><p><blockquote>两剂辉瑞-BioNTech疫苗被授权用于12岁及以上的人群，间隔三周注射。</blockquote></p><p> Some physicians and scientists in the U.S. say there isn’t a clear answer yet on whether boosters are needed for the general population, partly because of evidence that shows vaccines continue to be highly effective at preventing severe disease.</p><p><blockquote>美国的一些医生和科学家表示，对于普通人群是否需要加强剂，目前还没有明确的答案，部分原因是有证据表明疫苗在预防严重疾病方面仍然非常有效。</blockquote></p><p> Studies indicate the vaccine is still highly effective in people&nbsp;six months after their second dose. Yet there is some evidence its efficacy might diminish over longer periods, and the shot isn’t as effective againstt&nbsp;he Delta variant, prompting research into adding a third dose.</p><p><blockquote>研究表明，该疫苗在接种第二剂疫苗六个月后仍然非常有效。然而，有一些证据表明，随着时间的推移，它的功效可能会减弱，而且这种疫苗对德尔塔变异毒株病的疗效并不那么有效，这促使研究增加第三剂。</blockquote></p><p> Last week, the FDA authorized a third dose of an mRNA vaccine like the Pfizer-BioNTech shot&nbsp;for certain people with weakened immune systems, in a bid to bolster their immune defenses against Covid-19.</p><p><blockquote>上周，FDA批准为某些免疫系统较弱的人注射第三剂mRNA疫苗，例如辉瑞-BioNTech疫苗，以增强他们对Covid-19的免疫防御。</blockquote></p><p> In the early-stage study looking at a booster among generally healthy people, subjects got a third 30-microgram dose, Pfizer and BioNTech said. The subjects received the extra dose eight to nine months after receiving their second dose.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞和BioNTech表示，在针对一般健康人群的早期研究中，受试者接受了第三剂30微克剂量。受试者在接受第二剂后8至9个月接受额外剂量。</blockquote></p><p> Then researchers measured in subjects their levels of neutralizing antibodies, which play a crucial role in protection against the virus, the companies said.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，然后研究人员测量了受试者的中和抗体水平，中和抗体在预防病毒方面发挥着至关重要的作用。</blockquote></p><p> The levels rose against the initial strain of the virus, as well as the Beta and Delta variants, the companies said. After the booster dose, neutralizing antibodies against the variants were similar to the earlier strain, the companies said.</p><p><blockquote>两家公司表示，针对病毒的初始毒株以及Beta和Delta变种，水平有所上升。两家公司表示，加强剂量后，针对变种的中和抗体与早期菌株相似。</blockquote></p><p> Pfizer presented some of the scientific data during its second-quarter earnings presentation last month, but hasn’t detailed the results yet. After a third shot, antibody levels were up more than five times among people ages 18 to 55 and more than 11 times in people ages 65 to 85, compared with two doses, according to Pfizer’s data.</p><p><blockquote>辉瑞在上个月的第二季度财报中公布了一些科学数据，但尚未详细说明结果。辉瑞的数据显示，第三次注射后，与注射两剂相比，18至55岁人群的抗体水平上升了5倍以上，65至85岁人群的抗体水平上升了11倍以上。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/pfizer-biontech-seek-fda-clearance-for-covid-19-booster-11629136057?mod=hp_lead_pos6\">The Wall Street Journal</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":{"PFE":"辉瑞","BNTX":"BioNTech SE"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/pfizer-biontech-seek-fda-clearance-for-covid-19-booster-11629136057?mod=hp_lead_pos6","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1166738043","content_text":"Early-stage study shows third dose of vaccine offers a higher level of protection, companies say\nThe addition of a third dose appeared safe, Pfizer and BioNTech said. A Covid-19 vaccination at a Schwenksville, Pa., pharmacy.\nPfizer Inc. and partner BioNTech SE have submitted data to U.S. health regulators needed to cleara Covid-19 booster shot among the general public.\nThe companies said Monday they sent to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration results from a small, early-stage study showing a third dose of their vaccine generated higher levels of neutralizing antibodies against the original virus and against the Beta and Delta variants than the standard two-dose regimen.\nThe addition of the third dose also appeared safe in the trial, the companies said.\nGiven the immune response boost from a third dose, the companies said, a booster shot within six months to a year after the second shot might help maintain protection against symptomatic Covid-19.\nPfizer and BioNTech are also conducting a larger late-stage study evaluating whether a third dose safely provides more protection. The companies said they expect those results shortly and will then submit the data to the FDA.\nThe FDA is considering a broader booster strategy, which the agency could issue in the next few weeks.\nTwo doses of the Pfizer-BioNTech shot, given three weeks apart, are authorized for people ages 12 years and older.\nSome physicians and scientists in the U.S. say there isn’t a clear answer yet on whether boosters are needed for the general population, partly because of evidence that shows vaccines continue to be highly effective at preventing severe disease.\nStudies indicate the vaccine is still highly effective in people six months after their second dose. Yet there is some evidence its efficacy might diminish over longer periods, and the shot isn’t as effective againstt he Delta variant, prompting research into adding a third dose.\nLast week, the FDA authorized a third dose of an mRNA vaccine like the Pfizer-BioNTech shot for certain people with weakened immune systems, in a bid to bolster their immune defenses against Covid-19.\nIn the early-stage study looking at a booster among generally healthy people, subjects got a third 30-microgram dose, Pfizer and BioNTech said. The subjects received the extra dose eight to nine months after receiving their second dose.\nThen researchers measured in subjects their levels of neutralizing antibodies, which play a crucial role in protection against the virus, the companies said.\nThe levels rose against the initial strain of the virus, as well as the Beta and Delta variants, the companies said. After the booster dose, neutralizing antibodies against the variants were similar to the earlier strain, the companies said.\nPfizer presented some of the scientific data during its second-quarter earnings presentation last month, but hasn’t detailed the results yet. After a third shot, antibody levels were up more than five times among people ages 18 to 55 and more than 11 times in people ages 65 to 85, compared with two doses, according to Pfizer’s data.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"PFE":0.9,"BNTX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":386,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897476792,"gmtCreate":1628982601416,"gmtModify":1631884932632,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FB\">$Facebook(FB)$</a>like","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FB\">$Facebook(FB)$</a>like","text":"$Facebook(FB)$like","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897476792","repostId":"1196685545","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":759,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":807859560,"gmtCreate":1628031481550,"gmtModify":1631891880878,"author":{"id":"3586332417338594","authorId":"3586332417338594","name":"YangXH","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2da16ba61657b694381bbd12971282c6","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586332417338594","authorIdStr":"3586332417338594"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Latest up","listText":"Latest up","text":"Latest up","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/807859560","repostId":"1171505764","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":370,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}