Orangejus的个人主页 - 老虎社区

Orangejus

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

4关注

1粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-07-10

This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.

China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>

2021-07-10

I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Strong defensive dividend stocks are the play in this market!

Global stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担心美联储后全球股市下跌</blockquote>

2021-06-25

Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

Risky play, the hunt for yield…

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-25

Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-24

Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-18

Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-25

Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world economy…. Bitcoin bulls should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news… =)

抱歉，原内容已删除

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3586565070413371","uuid":"3586565070413371","gmtCreate":1623472364487,"gmtModify":1623472364487,"name":"Orangejus","pinyin":"orangejus","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":4,"tweetSize":45,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-2","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"资深虎友","description":"加入老虎社区1000天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.03.20","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":148030845,"gmtCreate":1625897799087,"gmtModify":1633936233576,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","listText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","text":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148030845","repostId":"1138077902","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1138077902","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":1625883154,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1138077902?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-10 10:12","market":"hk","language":"en","title":"China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138077902","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review","content":"<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>市场监管总局依据《反垄断法》，综合分析评估参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在评审过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了政府有关部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，并多次听取了腾讯控股的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案相关市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和游戏直播市场。腾讯控股在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼在下游游戏直播市场份额分别超过40%和30%，排名第一和第二，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙分别控制，对斗鱼共同控制。例如，虎牙和斗鱼的合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的主体，进一步强化腾讯控股在游戏直播市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除、限制竞争的效果，不利于市场公平竞争，可能损害消费者利益，不利于网络游戏和游戏直播市场的健康持续发展。经评估，腾讯控股提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争关切。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条、《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，国家市场监管总局依法决定禁止该等经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</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>China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</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\">\nChina has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</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\">2021-07-10 10:12</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>市场监管总局依据《反垄断法》，综合分析评估参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在评审过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了政府有关部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，并多次听取了腾讯控股的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案相关市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和游戏直播市场。腾讯控股在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼在下游游戏直播市场份额分别超过40%和30%，排名第一和第二，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙分别控制，对斗鱼共同控制。例如，虎牙和斗鱼的合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的主体，进一步强化腾讯控股在游戏直播市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除、限制竞争的效果，不利于市场公平竞争，可能损害消费者利益，不利于网络游戏和游戏直播市场的健康持续发展。经评估，腾讯控股提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争关切。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条、《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，国家市场监管总局依法决定禁止该等经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"00700":"腾讯控股","DOYU":"斗鱼","HUYA":"虎牙"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138077902","content_text":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.\nOn January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.\nAccording to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.\nThe review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.\nAccording to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.\nTencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"00700":0.9,"DOYU":0.9,"HUYA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3012,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":148094127,"gmtCreate":1625897660969,"gmtModify":1633936235173,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","listText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","text":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148094127","repostId":"2150306047","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2008,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122902171,"gmtCreate":1624591027493,"gmtModify":1633950808110,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","listText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","text":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122902171","repostId":"2145472760","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3513,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122901313,"gmtCreate":1624590895632,"gmtModify":1633950810382,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","listText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","text":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world economy…. Bitcoin bulls should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news… =)","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122901313","repostId":"2146021046","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1935,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122900360,"gmtCreate":1624590695850,"gmtModify":1633950812648,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","listText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","text":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122900360","repostId":"1156973335","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2449,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126067109,"gmtCreate":1624538258901,"gmtModify":1634004722801,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Good man!","listText":"Good man!","text":"Good man!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126067109","repostId":"1115900977","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1972,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126068310,"gmtCreate":1624538039430,"gmtModify":1631883985534,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"I’m wondering what kind of monthly&nbsp;ROI is considered decent if one trades on daily basis? Any inputs?","listText":"I’m wondering what kind of monthly&nbsp;ROI is considered decent if one trades on daily basis? Any inputs?","text":"I’m wondering what kind of monthly ROI is considered decent if one trades on daily basis? Any inputs?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126068310","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1829,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126063794,"gmtCreate":1624537951318,"gmtModify":1634004727774,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Look for the potential&nbsp;monopoly players as the market consolidates!","listText":"Look for the potential&nbsp;monopoly players as the market consolidates!","text":"Look for the potential monopoly players as the market consolidates!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126063794","repostId":"1198588492","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1198588492","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624519300,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1198588492?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-24 15:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Sundial Growers Stock Surged Wednesday<blockquote>为什么Sundial Growers股价周三飙升</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1198588492","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.\n\nWhat happened\nShares of Sundial Growers ","content":"<p>  <b>The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.</b>  <b>What happened</b></p><p><blockquote><b>这种受欢迎的大麻股票在Reddit上拥有大批粉丝。</b><b>发生了什么</b></blockquote></p><p> Shares of&nbsp;<b>Sundial Growers</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:SNDL)&nbsp;jumped 12% on Wednesday, fueled by positive mentions of the pot stock on Reddit and other social media platforms.</p><p><blockquote>本公司之股份<b>日晷种植者</b>（纳斯达克：SNDL）周三上涨12%，受Reddit和其他社交媒体平台上对大麻股票的积极提及推动。</blockquote></p><p> <b>So what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那又怎样</b></blockquote></p><p> Many individual investors are intrigued by the potential of themarijuanaindustry. The global cannabis market will grow to more than $90 billion by 2026, up from $20.5 billion in 2020, according to research firm MarketsandMarkets. Fortunes will be made in this rapidly expanding industry, and investors are eager to place their bets on who they believe will be the winners.</p><p><blockquote>许多个人投资者对大麻行业的潜力很感兴趣。根据研究公司MarketsandMarkets的数据，到2026年，全球大麻市场将从2020年的205亿美元增长到900亿美元以上。在这个快速扩张的行业中，财富将会产生，投资者渴望将赌注押在他们认为将是赢家的人身上。</blockquote></p><p> In recent weeks, traders have gravitated toward the cannabis companies viewed as likely consolidators. With many weed producers struggling to turn a profit, a wave of mergers and acquisitions has swept over the industry. Sundial's popularity on Reddit and other stock-focused trading forums has helped to support its stock price, which has allowed the company to raise hundreds of millions of dollars via share offerings. It's now intent on using that cash to invest in and acquire other cannabis businesses.</p><p><blockquote>最近几周，交易员被那些被视为可能整合者的大麻公司所吸引。随着许多杂草生产商努力扭亏为盈，一股并购浪潮席卷了整个行业。Sundial在Reddit和其他股票交易论坛上的受欢迎程度帮助支撑了其股价，使该公司能够通过股票发行筹集数亿美元。它现在打算用这笔现金投资和收购其他大麻业务。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Now what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>现在怎么办</b></blockquote></p><p> Sundial's cash hoard could position it to scoop up bargains, particularly if its smaller rivals continue to struggle to generate profits. However, investors should note that Sundial has also produced net losses in recent quarters, and the dilution caused by its stock sales will make it even more difficult for the company to deliver meaningful per-share profits from its existing cannabis operations. Thus, Sundial's long-term future is essentially tied to management's ability to identify value-creating investments, which makes its stock a relatively risky bet.</p><p><blockquote>Sundial的现金储备可能使其能够捡到便宜货，特别是如果其规模较小的竞争对手继续难以盈利的话。然而，投资者应该注意到，Sundial最近几个季度也出现了净亏损，其股票出售造成的稀释将使该公司更难从现有的大麻业务中实现有意义的每股利润。因此，Sundial的长期未来本质上取决于管理层识别创造价值投资的能力，这使得其股票成为一个风险相对较高的赌注。</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>Why Sundial Growers Stock Surged Wednesday<blockquote>为什么Sundial Growers股价周三飙升</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\">\nWhy Sundial Growers Stock Surged Wednesday<blockquote>为什么Sundial Growers股价周三飙升</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Motley Fool</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-24 15:21</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  <b>The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.</b>  <b>What happened</b></p><p><blockquote><b>这种受欢迎的大麻股票在Reddit上拥有大批粉丝。</b><b>发生了什么</b></blockquote></p><p> Shares of&nbsp;<b>Sundial Growers</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:SNDL)&nbsp;jumped 12% on Wednesday, fueled by positive mentions of the pot stock on Reddit and other social media platforms.</p><p><blockquote>本公司之股份<b>日晷种植者</b>（纳斯达克：SNDL）周三上涨12%，受Reddit和其他社交媒体平台上对大麻股票的积极提及推动。</blockquote></p><p> <b>So what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那又怎样</b></blockquote></p><p> Many individual investors are intrigued by the potential of themarijuanaindustry. The global cannabis market will grow to more than $90 billion by 2026, up from $20.5 billion in 2020, according to research firm MarketsandMarkets. Fortunes will be made in this rapidly expanding industry, and investors are eager to place their bets on who they believe will be the winners.</p><p><blockquote>许多个人投资者对大麻行业的潜力很感兴趣。根据研究公司MarketsandMarkets的数据，到2026年，全球大麻市场将从2020年的205亿美元增长到900亿美元以上。在这个快速扩张的行业中，财富将会产生，投资者渴望将赌注押在他们认为将是赢家的人身上。</blockquote></p><p> In recent weeks, traders have gravitated toward the cannabis companies viewed as likely consolidators. With many weed producers struggling to turn a profit, a wave of mergers and acquisitions has swept over the industry. Sundial's popularity on Reddit and other stock-focused trading forums has helped to support its stock price, which has allowed the company to raise hundreds of millions of dollars via share offerings. It's now intent on using that cash to invest in and acquire other cannabis businesses.</p><p><blockquote>最近几周，交易员被那些被视为可能整合者的大麻公司所吸引。随着许多杂草生产商努力扭亏为盈，一股并购浪潮席卷了整个行业。Sundial在Reddit和其他股票交易论坛上的受欢迎程度帮助支撑了其股价，使该公司能够通过股票发行筹集数亿美元。它现在打算用这笔现金投资和收购其他大麻业务。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Now what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>现在怎么办</b></blockquote></p><p> Sundial's cash hoard could position it to scoop up bargains, particularly if its smaller rivals continue to struggle to generate profits. However, investors should note that Sundial has also produced net losses in recent quarters, and the dilution caused by its stock sales will make it even more difficult for the company to deliver meaningful per-share profits from its existing cannabis operations. Thus, Sundial's long-term future is essentially tied to management's ability to identify value-creating investments, which makes its stock a relatively risky bet.</p><p><blockquote>Sundial的现金储备可能使其能够捡到便宜货，特别是如果其规模较小的竞争对手继续难以盈利的话。然而，投资者应该注意到，Sundial最近几个季度也出现了净亏损，其股票出售造成的稀释将使该公司更难从现有的大麻业务中实现有意义的每股利润。因此，Sundial的长期未来本质上取决于管理层识别创造价值投资的能力，这使得其股票成为一个风险相对较高的赌注。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/23/why-sundial-growers-stock-surged-today/\">Motley Fool</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SNDL":"SNDL Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/23/why-sundial-growers-stock-surged-today/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1198588492","content_text":"The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.\n\nWhat happened\nShares of Sundial Growers (NASDAQ:SNDL) jumped 12% on Wednesday, fueled by positive mentions of the pot stock on Reddit and other social media platforms.\nSo what\nMany individual investors are intrigued by the potential of themarijuanaindustry. The global cannabis market will grow to more than $90 billion by 2026, up from $20.5 billion in 2020, according to research firm MarketsandMarkets. Fortunes will be made in this rapidly expanding industry, and investors are eager to place their bets on who they believe will be the winners.\nIn recent weeks, traders have gravitated toward the cannabis companies viewed as likely consolidators. With many weed producers struggling to turn a profit, a wave of mergers and acquisitions has swept over the industry. Sundial's popularity on Reddit and other stock-focused trading forums has helped to support its stock price, which has allowed the company to raise hundreds of millions of dollars via share offerings. It's now intent on using that cash to invest in and acquire other cannabis businesses.\nNow what\nSundial's cash hoard could position it to scoop up bargains, particularly if its smaller rivals continue to struggle to generate profits. However, investors should note that Sundial has also produced net losses in recent quarters, and the dilution caused by its stock sales will make it even more difficult for the company to deliver meaningful per-share profits from its existing cannabis operations. Thus, Sundial's long-term future is essentially tied to management's ability to identify value-creating investments, which makes its stock a relatively risky bet.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SNDL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2441,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126087470,"gmtCreate":1624537806090,"gmtModify":1634004730839,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","listText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","text":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126087470","repostId":"1142469060","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1783,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126084012,"gmtCreate":1624537739036,"gmtModify":1634004731907,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Actually the real worry is the tax increase, and also possible anti-monopoly plays by Congress…","listText":"Actually the real worry is the tax increase, and also possible anti-monopoly plays by Congress…","text":"Actually the real worry is the tax increase, and also possible anti-monopoly plays by Congress…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126084012","repostId":"1137406909","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3030,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126088272,"gmtCreate":1624537621496,"gmtModify":1634004734284,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Damn… should have held =p&nbsp;","listText":"Damn… should have held =p&nbsp;","text":"Damn… should have held =p","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126088272","repostId":"1113369372","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1113369372","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624535308,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1113369372?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-24 19:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Eli Lilly Stock Jumps, Biogen Drops on Alzheimer's Treatment Approval<blockquote>礼来公司(Eli Lilly)股价上涨，百健(Biogen)因阿尔茨海默病治疗获得批准而下跌</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1113369372","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)\nEli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in morning trading after th","content":"<p><i><b>(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)</b></i></p><p><blockquote><i><b>（更新：美国东部时间2021年6月24日上午09:32）</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Eli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in&nbsp;morning trading after the drug maker said it received breakthrough therapy designation for its Alzheimer's treatment from the Food and Drug Administration.</p><p><blockquote>礼来公司(Eli Lilly)表示，其阿尔茨海默氏症治疗药物已获得美国食品和药物管理局的突破性疗法认定，该公司股价在早盘交易中上涨超过8%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b4cea69bed4d928fd18195924788827\" tg-width=\"658\" tg-height=\"438\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The move is meant to expedite the development and review of the experimental treatment.</p><p><blockquote>此举旨在加快实验性治疗的开发和审查。</blockquote></p><p> Rival Biogen, whose own drug was approved earlier this month, fell over 6% in premarket trading. The FDA has faced criticism from some doctors and scientists for approving that drug.</p><p><blockquote>竞争对手百健(Biogen)的自有药物本月早些时候获得批准，该公司在盘前交易中股价下跌超过6%。FDA因批准该药物而面临一些医生和科学家的批评。</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>Eli Lilly Stock Jumps, Biogen Drops on Alzheimer's Treatment Approval<blockquote>礼来公司(Eli Lilly)股价上涨，百健(Biogen)因阿尔茨海默病治疗获得批准而下跌</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\">\nEli Lilly Stock Jumps, Biogen Drops on Alzheimer's Treatment Approval<blockquote>礼来公司(Eli Lilly)股价上涨，百健(Biogen)因阿尔茨海默病治疗获得批准而下跌</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\">2021-06-24 19:48</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><i><b>(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)</b></i></p><p><blockquote><i><b>（更新：美国东部时间2021年6月24日上午09:32）</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Eli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in&nbsp;morning trading after the drug maker said it received breakthrough therapy designation for its Alzheimer's treatment from the Food and Drug Administration.</p><p><blockquote>礼来公司(Eli Lilly)表示，其阿尔茨海默氏症治疗药物已获得美国食品和药物管理局的突破性疗法认定，该公司股价在早盘交易中上涨超过8%。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b4cea69bed4d928fd18195924788827\" tg-width=\"658\" tg-height=\"438\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The move is meant to expedite the development and review of the experimental treatment.</p><p><blockquote>此举旨在加快实验性治疗的开发和审查。</blockquote></p><p> Rival Biogen, whose own drug was approved earlier this month, fell over 6% in premarket trading. The FDA has faced criticism from some doctors and scientists for approving that drug.</p><p><blockquote>竞争对手百健(Biogen)的自有药物本月早些时候获得批准，该公司在盘前交易中股价下跌超过6%。FDA因批准该药物而面临一些医生和科学家的批评。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-news-live-updates-062421/card/C1AeSf1mE5Wh1f1ra8mc\">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":{"LLY":"礼来"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-news-live-updates-062421/card/C1AeSf1mE5Wh1f1ra8mc","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1113369372","content_text":"(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)\nEli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in morning trading after the drug maker said it received breakthrough therapy designation for its Alzheimer's treatment from the Food and Drug Administration.\n\nThe move is meant to expedite the development and review of the experimental treatment.\nRival Biogen, whose own drug was approved earlier this month, fell over 6% in premarket trading. The FDA has faced criticism from some doctors and scientists for approving that drug.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"LLY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":835,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126012832,"gmtCreate":1624537286026,"gmtModify":1634004740046,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Buy in may and go away!&nbsp;","listText":"Buy in may and go away!&nbsp;","text":"Buy in may and go away!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126012832","repostId":"1104807513","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":375,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121335122,"gmtCreate":1624453318966,"gmtModify":1634005959615,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"A ‘store of value’ with nothing to hold it up. How many will have the hands to hold it when it stops growing? Capital will always chase yield, so if there’s is no reliable yield, and nothing to benchmark the value of the currency against, who will hold the bags?","listText":"A ‘store of value’ with nothing to hold it up. How many will have the hands to hold it when it stops growing? Capital will always chase yield, so if there’s is no reliable yield, and nothing to benchmark the value of the currency against, who will hold the bags?","text":"A ‘store of value’ with nothing to hold it up. How many will have the hands to hold it when it stops growing? Capital will always chase yield, so if there’s is no reliable yield, and nothing to benchmark the value of the currency against, who will hold the bags?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121335122","repostId":"1121798334","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1328,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121330812,"gmtCreate":1624453011236,"gmtModify":1634005963911,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","listText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","text":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121330812","repostId":"1128646024","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":978,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121392439,"gmtCreate":1624452879821,"gmtModify":1634005965826,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Cryptocurrencies have been a real&nbsp;boon in slowing the&nbsp;inflation of assets. Costs nothing, worth nothing, but it&nbsp;has been a very useful buffer for the economy. Forget the empty promises of DeFi andsmart contracts, they are currently insufficiently optimised to replace the real world instruments they are supposed to substitute. Now that the Fed has announced planned&nbsp;tapering of the money supply, this is as good as it gets for crypto, for now. It will pop again to buffer the next QE session though, so HODL at your own opportunity cost!","listText":"Cryptocurrencies have been a real&nbsp;boon in slowing the&nbsp;inflation of assets. Costs nothing, worth nothing, but it&nbsp;has been a very useful buffer for the economy. Forget the empty promises of DeFi andsmart contracts, they are currently insufficiently optimised to replace the real world instruments they are supposed to substitute. Now that the Fed has announced planned&nbsp;tapering of the money supply, this is as good as it gets for crypto, for now. It will pop again to buffer the next QE session though, so HODL at your own opportunity cost!","text":"Cryptocurrencies have been a real boon in slowing the inflation of assets. Costs nothing, worth nothing, but it has been a very useful buffer for the economy. Forget the empty promises of DeFi andsmart contracts, they are currently insufficiently optimised to replace the real world instruments they are supposed to substitute. Now that the Fed has announced planned tapering of the money supply, this is as good as it gets for crypto, for now. It will pop again to buffer the next QE session though, so HODL at your own opportunity cost!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121392439","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":894,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121972234,"gmtCreate":1624451991628,"gmtModify":1634005978905,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","listText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","text":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121972234","repostId":"1145825451","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":496,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129637354,"gmtCreate":1624370655978,"gmtModify":1634007132684,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"You do not take into account the economic expansion enabled by the rapid development of technology. The novel markets&nbsp;and industries generated by technology with provide the support structure for the increased money supply/inflation. Counterintuitively, increased inflation has actually madethe establishment and development of these newmarkets cheaper than it would have been without.","listText":"You do not take into account the economic expansion enabled by the rapid development of technology. The novel markets&nbsp;and industries generated by technology with provide the support structure for the increased money supply/inflation. Counterintuitively, increased inflation has actually madethe establishment and development of these newmarkets cheaper than it would have been without.","text":"You do not take into account the economic expansion enabled by the rapid development of technology. The novel markets and industries generated by technology with provide the support structure for the increased money supply/inflation. Counterintuitively, increased inflation has actually madethe establishment and development of these newmarkets cheaper than it would have been without.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129637354","repostId":"1145563175","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1145563175","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624359605,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1145563175?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 19:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"One Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检验</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1145563175","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.Putting their \"facts\" into conte","content":"<p>Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.<b>Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.</b></p><p><blockquote>事实核查政客、头条新闻和央行行长是一回事。<b>将他们的“事实”放在上下文中是另一回事。</b></blockquote></p><p> Toward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.</p><p><blockquote>为此，尽管疯狂的全球背景没有得到明确报道，但将所谓的“经济增长”、国债市场增长、股市增长、GDP增长，当然还有黄金价格增长置于更清晰的视角至关重要。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 1: The Rising Growth Headline</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景1：不断上升的增长标题</b></blockquote></p><p> Recently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.</p><p><blockquote>最近，拜登的经济顾问贾里德·伯恩斯坦（Jared Bernstein）用另一个头条吹嘘美国比他们的贸易伙伴“增长得快得多”来安抚大众。</blockquote></p><p> Fair enough.</p><p><blockquote>很公平。</blockquote></p><p> But given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…</p><p><blockquote>但鉴于美国正面临历史记录中最大的赤字……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ac5ed804cb5613af2890f604dac56be\" tg-width=\"575\" tg-height=\"405\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> …such “growth” is not surprising.</p><p><blockquote>……这样的“增长”并不令人意外。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，在极端赤字支出的背景下吹嘘增长，就像一个被宠坏的孩子吹嘘用他父亲的信用卡秘密购买的新保时捷：只有在账单到达、汽车消失之前，它才看起来不错。</blockquote></p><p> In a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.</p><p><blockquote>在一个疯狂的金融世界中，审视所谓的增长或价格发现、债务水平或一般供需的基本原则至关重要。</blockquote></p><p> In short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之：由极端债务驱动的“增长”根本不是增长——它只是一辆买不起的跑车的头条表面。</blockquote></p><p> And yet&nbsp;<b>the madness continues</b>…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.</p><p><blockquote>然而<b>疯狂还在继续</b>……以美国国债市场为例。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 2: The Treasury “Market”?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景二：国债“市场”？</b></blockquote></p><p> How can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?</p><p><blockquote>当去年2月以来发行的4.5 T美元债券中有56%被美联储自己购买时，怎么会有人将美国国债市场看涨期权为“市场”呢？</blockquote></p><p> Sounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?</p><p><blockquote>听起来更像是内部价格操纵，而不是“市场”，不是吗？</blockquote></p><p> Such context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.</p><p><blockquote>这种背景赋予了“喝自己的库尔助手”的想法全新的含义，并且应该是一个很酷的提醒，即总体而言，国债，尤其是债券收益率，是伪装成信贷奥运选手的僵尸。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.</p><p><blockquote>当然，美联储会假装这种“支持”就像他们的“暂时性通胀”模因一样是暂时的，但大多数市场现实主义者很久以前就明白，更多、更疯狂的债券收益率“支持”是国债泡沫（和借据）像僵尸一样存活的唯一途径。</blockquote></p><p> In short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，财政部的“支持”、“通融”或“刺激”更好的说法就是：“生命支持”。</blockquote></p><p> With central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.</p><p><blockquote>随着美联储等央行在遥远的未来继续创造法定货币，将其不可持续的债务货币化，我们可以有把握地预见美元将进一步走弱，金价、矿业股以及科技股和工业股等关键风险资产将进一步走强。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 3: Deflation is back?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景三：通缩又回来了？</b></blockquote></p><p> Hardly.</p><p><blockquote>几乎不。</blockquote></p><p> Last week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔、费舍尔和布拉德上周的令人瞠目结舌的言论让市场怀疑美联储是否会在遥远的未来加息。</blockquote></p><p> The very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky&nbsp;<b>rather than “transitory”</b>and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔提出这个问题的事实是因为美联储意识到通胀将是粘性的<b>而不是“暂时性”</b>因此，他们已经在假装鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> But if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.</p><p><blockquote>但如果美联储加息是为了平息实际通胀而不是“暂时性”通胀，市场和山姆大叔就会大发脾气。故事结束。</blockquote></p><p> As I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—<b>tanking markets or surging inflation.</b>Eventually, we foresee both.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在其他地方写过的：选择你的毒药——<b>市场暴跌或通胀飙升。</b>最终，我们预见到了两者。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，鲍威尔充分意识到通胀虽然有所下降，但只会呈上升趋势，他已经在游戏中期使用语义来改变规则，现在表示，他们不会“允许”2%的通胀，而是会满足于2%的“平均”。</blockquote></p><p> Translated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.</p><p><blockquote>翻译成诚实的英语，这只是意味着预计更多的通货膨胀即将到来。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 4: Rising Stock Markets</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景4：股市上涨</b></blockquote></p><p> Despite reaching nosebleed levels which defy&nbsp;<i>every</i>&nbsp;traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.</p><p><blockquote>尽管达到了流鼻血的程度<i>每一</i>传统的估值上限，从CAPE比率和托宾比率到账面价值和自由现金流数据，头条新闻提醒我们股票可以走得更高——而且确实可以。</blockquote></p><p> But context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.</p><p><blockquote>但背景和历史提醒我们，泡沫越大，均值回归下降就越大。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1586e90684f7b8ae0525c04b1fa4bc7\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>No Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>国债中没有宝藏=股票中有很多空气</b></blockquote></p><p> Based upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.</p><p><blockquote>基于上述客观事实，我们现在知道，出现在美国国债拍卖中的唯一主要买家是美联储本身。</blockquote></p><p> This is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.</p><p><blockquote>这是因为世界其他地方（亚洲、欧洲等。）不想要他们。</blockquote></p><p> The next question is “why”?</p><p><blockquote>下一个问题是“为什么”？</blockquote></p><p> The answer is multiple yet simple.</p><p><blockquote>答案是多重而简单的。</blockquote></p><p> First, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.</p><p><blockquote>首先，尽管存在美国例外论的公开神话，但其他国家的投资者实际上可以自己思考、阅读和计算，这意味着他们不仅仅是盲目信任美联储或其借据。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Stated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，他们并不相信最近从FOMC喉舌中涌出的“暂时性通胀”或“强势美元”的故事。</blockquote></p><p> Inflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.</p><p><blockquote>通货膨胀不仅在美国上升，在其他地方也在攀升——甚至在日本，尤其是在中国。这主要是因为美国通过贸易和财政赤字将通货膨胀（和贬值的美元）输出到海外。</blockquote></p><p> Such deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the&nbsp;<i>outflow</i>&nbsp;of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.</p><p><blockquote>美国这种蓄意输出的通胀让那些借钱给山姆大叔的国家（债权人）陷入了两难境地：他们要么1）让本国货币与美元一起通胀（这一点都不好玩），要么2）试图平息<i>流出</i>出口（贬值）美元以避免本国货币进一步贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Option 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.</p><p><blockquote>当然，选项2是更好的选择，这意味着外国投资者需要购买比信誉不佳的美国国债更有吸引力的东西。</blockquote></p><p> Sadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than&nbsp;<i>bogus</i>&nbsp;US Treasuries are&nbsp;<i>bloated</i>&nbsp;U.S. stocks.</p><p><blockquote>可悲的是，讽刺的是，但事实上，唯一比<i>假的</i>美国国债是<i>臃肿的</i>美国。股票。</blockquote></p><p> In short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，价格令人流鼻血的美国股票仍然是美国两害相权取其轻，因此外国人购买/将股票视为比主权债券更好的对冲美元贬值的工具。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t believe me?</p><p><blockquote>不相信我？</blockquote></p><p> See for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:</p><p><blockquote>亲眼看看——世界其他地区正在为美国股市泡沫增添大量空气：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc5b73212bd7c3126d6a130e88169139\" tg-width=\"582\" tg-height=\"407\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This is&nbsp;<i>contextually</i>&nbsp;troublesome for a number of reasons.</p><p><blockquote>这是<i>上下文</i>麻烦有很多原因。</blockquote></p><p> First, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).</p><p><blockquote>首先，这意味着衰落的美国已经从向世界其他地区典当其债券转向向世界其他地区（即中国……）典当其股票。</blockquote></p><p> Longer term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…</p><p><blockquote>从长远来看，这仅仅意味着通过直接持股，外国人将慢慢拥有比美国更多的企业股份……</blockquote></p><p> As for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.</p><p><blockquote>至于外国买家对曾经伟大的美国的缓慢侵蚀，不要责怪数据。指责你的美联储和其他政策制定者（包括劳动力离岸首席执行官的）出卖了美国，假装债务可以通过神奇的（假）货币创造神奇地解决。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.</p><p><blockquote>当然，股市上涨超出理智、盈利和诚实的自由现金流数据的第二个讨厌的小问题是一种叫做波动性的东西，即市场晕船。</blockquote></p><p> Nothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.</p><p><blockquote>没有什么是直线前进的，包括美元或市场。会有秋千。</blockquote></p><p> Right now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.</p><p><blockquote>目前，美元空头达到四年来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c420ec0af0df42eabb7a3d248da4db10\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"507\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Yet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果美联储碰巧试图缩减或加息，所有涌入美国股市的外国美元（见上图）就会产生一个泡沫，泡沫总是会破裂，上述美元空头也会受到挤压。</blockquote></p><p> That could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.</p><p><blockquote>这可能会导致美国股市大规模抛售，因为外国人抛售股票以购买更多美元。</blockquote></p><p> In short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，当前的股市泡沫有很多不同的迹象，未来一个月左右很可能会出现回调。</blockquote></p><p> The sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage)&nbsp;<i>not</i>&nbsp;making the headlines yet&nbsp;<i>now</i>&nbsp;making all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>顺便说一句，这些针中最尖锐的是美国保证金债务（即杠杆）的惊人滑稽水平<i>不</i>尚未成为头条新闻<i>现在</i>创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/021f71bd7e78a1c275a9c9d74691c525\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">As a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.</p><p><blockquote>提醒一下，每当保证金债务达到峰值（上图）时，市场很快就会暴跌，任何记得过去互联网和次贷市场惨败的人都可以证明这一点。</blockquote></p><p> Just saying…</p><p><blockquote>只是说……</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景五：GDP增长“激增”的阴暗面</b></blockquote></p><p> The World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.</p><p><blockquote>世界银行最近成为头条新闻，预测全球GDP增长5.6%，为80年来最快。</blockquote></p><p> Good stuff, right?</p><p><blockquote>好东西，对吧？</blockquote></p><p> Well, not when placed into&nbsp;<i>context</i>…</p><p><blockquote>嗯，不是放在<i>上下文</i>…</blockquote></p><p> The last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a&nbsp;<i>global world war</i>.</p><p><blockquote>我们上一次看到全球GDP增长5.6%是在<i>全球世界大战</i>.</blockquote></p><p> Obviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.</p><p><blockquote>显然，当世界处于全球军事废墟状态时，任何形式的增长都可能从这样一个历史（和可怕的）基线“激增”。</blockquote></p><p> Coming out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…</p><p><blockquote>二战结束后，包括美国在内的所有人都负债累累。毕竟世界大战可以做到这一点……</blockquote></p><p> As the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.</p><p><blockquote>随着取得胜利并拯救文明的美国从那场战争中走出来，通过印钞、抑制债券收益率和刺激GDP增长来降低这种崇高但极端的债务杠杆是有一定道理的。</blockquote></p><p> What followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.</p><p><blockquote>接下来的至少是一段可以防御的40年，在这段时间里，美国名义GDP比美国国债收益率高出500-800个基点。</blockquote></p><p> In short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，债券持有人受到了猛烈抨击，但击败轴心国后的事业、危机和重建证明了牺牲的合理性。</blockquote></p><p> The same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.</p><p><blockquote>然而，今天就不一样了，因为债券持有者在一种新的异常中再次受到挤压，在这种异常中，GDP将大大（并且类似地）超过长期债券收益率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Needless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.</p><p><blockquote>不用说，当前的政策制定者，正是那些将全球经济鸡舍置于当前债务废墟中的狐狸，喜欢将此归咎于COVID，而不是他们的浴室镜子。</blockquote></p><p> Ironically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the&nbsp;<i>Wehrmacht</i>, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy&nbsp;<i>today</i>&nbsp;(with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s&nbsp;<i>Blitzkrieg</i>&nbsp;or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.</p><p><blockquote>然而，具有讽刺意味的是，中央银行家（相对于<i>德国国防军</i>日本帝国或意大利墨索里尼）成功地对全球经济造成了同样大的伤害<i>当今</i>（有赤字政策和扩大和假装印钞机）作为德国的<i>闪电战</i>或者裕仁在20世纪40年代的万岁袭击。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?</p><p><blockquote>说到背景，我们真的可以或应该将全球流感（死亡人数375万）与全球战争（死亡人数8500万）相提并论吗？</blockquote></p><p> The policy makers would like&nbsp;<i>you</i>&nbsp;to think so.</p><p><blockquote>政策制定者希望<i>你</i>这么想。</blockquote></p><p> Folks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real&nbsp;<i>casus belli</i>&nbsp;(reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.</p><p><blockquote>像姆努钦（去年）或耶伦、鲍威尔和国际货币基金组织（今年）这样的人实际上正试图说服自己和世界，抗击新冠病毒的战争是真实的<i>开战理由</i>（一场正当战争的理由）我们当前的债务困境——就其对金融界的巨大影响而言，其范围相当于第二次世界大战。</blockquote></p><p> But regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.</p><p><blockquote>但无论任何人对COVID“战争”的看法或其可疑的政策反应如何，将其经济影响与二战进行比较都是对历史和军事隐喻的侮辱。</blockquote></p><p> The simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was&nbsp;<i>already</i>&nbsp;in a debt crisis long&nbsp;<i>before</i>&nbsp;the first Corona headline of early 2020.</p><p><blockquote>简单、客观和数学上证实的事实是，全球经济<i>已经</i>长期陷入债务危机<i>以前</i>2020年初的第一个电晕头条。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/173b90a9931417cc655b6129fc7dc38c\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Today, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.</p><p><blockquote>如今，美国债务占GDP的比例达到了自那场悲惨的第二次世界大战以来的最高水平，而且预计还会高得多。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54e71ae4475b3449c8833ca918ddbd82\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> So, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.</p><p><blockquote>因此，如果您仍然认为美联储能够并且将会像20世纪70年代或80年代那样有意义地加息来对抗明显的通胀，请三思。</blockquote></p><p> In the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.</p><p><blockquote>在20世纪70年代和80年代，美国债务/GDP为30%。今天是130%。</blockquote></p><p> Given this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于这一自我造成的（而不是新冠归咎的）现实，美联储根本无力加息。周期。句号。</blockquote></p><p> But as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.</p><p><blockquote>但正如我的同事埃贡·冯·格雷耶兹(Egon von Greyerz)提醒的那样，这绝不意味着利率不能也不会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.</p><p><blockquote>美联储（和其他央行）可能很强大，但他们并不神圣。简而言之，他们通过点击鼠标简单地“控制”利率的能力是有限的。</blockquote></p><p> At some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.</p><p><blockquote>在某些时候，没有足够可信的假币来管理收益率曲线——尤其是在长期来看。</blockquote></p><p> As more printed and&nbsp;<b>tanking currencies</b>&nbsp;try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.</p><p><blockquote>随着更多的印刷和<b>贬值货币</b>试图购买较低的产量和利率，最终整个实验失败。</blockquote></p><p> At that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.</p><p><blockquote>在这个关键时刻，利率飙升，通货膨胀抬头，央行行长们寻找自己以外的东西来指责，而世界其他地区则盯着毫无价值的货币被滑稽的央行数字美元取代。</blockquote></p><p> Wonderful…</p><p><blockquote>精彩…</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 6: That Barbaric Relic?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景6：那个野蛮遗迹？</b></blockquote></p><p> What the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.</p><p><blockquote>上述通胀和利率背景意味着，在未来几年，通胀将走高，利率将走低（被迫/控制），直到利率和通胀一起飙升。</blockquote></p><p> This further means that&nbsp;<i>real</i>&nbsp;rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.</p><p><blockquote>这进一步意味着<i>真的</i>未来几年，利率（即经通胀调整的利率）可能高达-5%至-10%。</blockquote></p><p> Such negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.</p><p><blockquote>这种负实际利率水平很容易超过70年代和80年代的水平，这意味着黄金（和白银）都喜欢负实际利率，在这种完全债务扭曲的背景下，除了上涨、上涨和离开之外，无处可去。</blockquote></p><p> How’s that for context?</p><p><blockquote>背景怎么样？</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>One Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检验</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\">\nOne Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检验</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-22 19:00</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.<b>Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.</b></p><p><blockquote>事实核查政客、头条新闻和央行行长是一回事。<b>将他们的“事实”放在上下文中是另一回事。</b></blockquote></p><p> Toward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.</p><p><blockquote>为此，尽管疯狂的全球背景没有得到明确报道，但将所谓的“经济增长”、国债市场增长、股市增长、GDP增长，当然还有黄金价格增长置于更清晰的视角至关重要。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 1: The Rising Growth Headline</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景1：不断上升的增长标题</b></blockquote></p><p> Recently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.</p><p><blockquote>最近，拜登的经济顾问贾里德·伯恩斯坦（Jared Bernstein）用另一个头条吹嘘美国比他们的贸易伙伴“增长得快得多”来安抚大众。</blockquote></p><p> Fair enough.</p><p><blockquote>很公平。</blockquote></p><p> But given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…</p><p><blockquote>但鉴于美国正面临历史记录中最大的赤字……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ac5ed804cb5613af2890f604dac56be\" tg-width=\"575\" tg-height=\"405\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> …such “growth” is not surprising.</p><p><blockquote>……这样的“增长”并不令人意外。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，在极端赤字支出的背景下吹嘘增长，就像一个被宠坏的孩子吹嘘用他父亲的信用卡秘密购买的新保时捷：只有在账单到达、汽车消失之前，它才看起来不错。</blockquote></p><p> In a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.</p><p><blockquote>在一个疯狂的金融世界中，审视所谓的增长或价格发现、债务水平或一般供需的基本原则至关重要。</blockquote></p><p> In short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之：由极端债务驱动的“增长”根本不是增长——它只是一辆买不起的跑车的头条表面。</blockquote></p><p> And yet&nbsp;<b>the madness continues</b>…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.</p><p><blockquote>然而<b>疯狂还在继续</b>……以美国国债市场为例。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 2: The Treasury “Market”?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景二：国债“市场”？</b></blockquote></p><p> How can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?</p><p><blockquote>当去年2月以来发行的4.5 T美元债券中有56%被美联储自己购买时，怎么会有人将美国国债市场看涨期权为“市场”呢？</blockquote></p><p> Sounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?</p><p><blockquote>听起来更像是内部价格操纵，而不是“市场”，不是吗？</blockquote></p><p> Such context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.</p><p><blockquote>这种背景赋予了“喝自己的库尔助手”的想法全新的含义，并且应该是一个很酷的提醒，即总体而言，国债，尤其是债券收益率，是伪装成信贷奥运选手的僵尸。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.</p><p><blockquote>当然，美联储会假装这种“支持”就像他们的“暂时性通胀”模因一样是暂时的，但大多数市场现实主义者很久以前就明白，更多、更疯狂的债券收益率“支持”是国债泡沫（和借据）像僵尸一样存活的唯一途径。</blockquote></p><p> In short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，财政部的“支持”、“通融”或“刺激”更好的说法就是：“生命支持”。</blockquote></p><p> With central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.</p><p><blockquote>随着美联储等央行在遥远的未来继续创造法定货币，将其不可持续的债务货币化，我们可以有把握地预见美元将进一步走弱，金价、矿业股以及科技股和工业股等关键风险资产将进一步走强。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 3: Deflation is back?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景三：通缩又回来了？</b></blockquote></p><p> Hardly.</p><p><blockquote>几乎不。</blockquote></p><p> Last week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔、费舍尔和布拉德上周的令人瞠目结舌的言论让市场怀疑美联储是否会在遥远的未来加息。</blockquote></p><p> The very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky&nbsp;<b>rather than “transitory”</b>and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔提出这个问题的事实是因为美联储意识到通胀将是粘性的<b>而不是“暂时性”</b>因此，他们已经在假装鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> But if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.</p><p><blockquote>但如果美联储加息是为了平息实际通胀而不是“暂时性”通胀，市场和山姆大叔就会大发脾气。故事结束。</blockquote></p><p> As I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—<b>tanking markets or surging inflation.</b>Eventually, we foresee both.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在其他地方写过的：选择你的毒药——<b>市场暴跌或通胀飙升。</b>最终，我们预见到了两者。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，鲍威尔充分意识到通胀虽然有所下降，但只会呈上升趋势，他已经在游戏中期使用语义来改变规则，现在表示，他们不会“允许”2%的通胀，而是会满足于2%的“平均”。</blockquote></p><p> Translated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.</p><p><blockquote>翻译成诚实的英语，这只是意味着预计更多的通货膨胀即将到来。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 4: Rising Stock Markets</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景4：股市上涨</b></blockquote></p><p> Despite reaching nosebleed levels which defy&nbsp;<i>every</i>&nbsp;traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.</p><p><blockquote>尽管达到了流鼻血的程度<i>每一</i>传统的估值上限，从CAPE比率和托宾比率到账面价值和自由现金流数据，头条新闻提醒我们股票可以走得更高——而且确实可以。</blockquote></p><p> But context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.</p><p><blockquote>但背景和历史提醒我们，泡沫越大，均值回归下降就越大。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1586e90684f7b8ae0525c04b1fa4bc7\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>No Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>国债中没有宝藏=股票中有很多空气</b></blockquote></p><p> Based upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.</p><p><blockquote>基于上述客观事实，我们现在知道，出现在美国国债拍卖中的唯一主要买家是美联储本身。</blockquote></p><p> This is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.</p><p><blockquote>这是因为世界其他地方（亚洲、欧洲等。）不想要他们。</blockquote></p><p> The next question is “why”?</p><p><blockquote>下一个问题是“为什么”？</blockquote></p><p> The answer is multiple yet simple.</p><p><blockquote>答案是多重而简单的。</blockquote></p><p> First, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.</p><p><blockquote>首先，尽管存在美国例外论的公开神话，但其他国家的投资者实际上可以自己思考、阅读和计算，这意味着他们不仅仅是盲目信任美联储或其借据。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Stated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，他们并不相信最近从FOMC喉舌中涌出的“暂时性通胀”或“强势美元”的故事。</blockquote></p><p> Inflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.</p><p><blockquote>通货膨胀不仅在美国上升，在其他地方也在攀升——甚至在日本，尤其是在中国。这主要是因为美国通过贸易和财政赤字将通货膨胀（和贬值的美元）输出到海外。</blockquote></p><p> Such deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the&nbsp;<i>outflow</i>&nbsp;of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.</p><p><blockquote>美国这种蓄意输出的通胀让那些借钱给山姆大叔的国家（债权人）陷入了两难境地：他们要么1）让本国货币与美元一起通胀（这一点都不好玩），要么2）试图平息<i>流出</i>出口（贬值）美元以避免本国货币进一步贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Option 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.</p><p><blockquote>当然，选项2是更好的选择，这意味着外国投资者需要购买比信誉不佳的美国国债更有吸引力的东西。</blockquote></p><p> Sadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than&nbsp;<i>bogus</i>&nbsp;US Treasuries are&nbsp;<i>bloated</i>&nbsp;U.S. stocks.</p><p><blockquote>可悲的是，讽刺的是，但事实上，唯一比<i>假的</i>美国国债是<i>臃肿的</i>美国。股票。</blockquote></p><p> In short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，价格令人流鼻血的美国股票仍然是美国两害相权取其轻，因此外国人购买/将股票视为比主权债券更好的对冲美元贬值的工具。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t believe me?</p><p><blockquote>不相信我？</blockquote></p><p> See for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:</p><p><blockquote>亲眼看看——世界其他地区正在为美国股市泡沫增添大量空气：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc5b73212bd7c3126d6a130e88169139\" tg-width=\"582\" tg-height=\"407\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This is&nbsp;<i>contextually</i>&nbsp;troublesome for a number of reasons.</p><p><blockquote>这是<i>上下文</i>麻烦有很多原因。</blockquote></p><p> First, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).</p><p><blockquote>首先，这意味着衰落的美国已经从向世界其他地区典当其债券转向向世界其他地区（即中国……）典当其股票。</blockquote></p><p> Longer term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…</p><p><blockquote>从长远来看，这仅仅意味着通过直接持股，外国人将慢慢拥有比美国更多的企业股份……</blockquote></p><p> As for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.</p><p><blockquote>至于外国买家对曾经伟大的美国的缓慢侵蚀，不要责怪数据。指责你的美联储和其他政策制定者（包括劳动力离岸首席执行官的）出卖了美国，假装债务可以通过神奇的（假）货币创造神奇地解决。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.</p><p><blockquote>当然，股市上涨超出理智、盈利和诚实的自由现金流数据的第二个讨厌的小问题是一种叫做波动性的东西，即市场晕船。</blockquote></p><p> Nothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.</p><p><blockquote>没有什么是直线前进的，包括美元或市场。会有秋千。</blockquote></p><p> Right now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.</p><p><blockquote>目前，美元空头达到四年来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c420ec0af0df42eabb7a3d248da4db10\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"507\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Yet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果美联储碰巧试图缩减或加息，所有涌入美国股市的外国美元（见上图）就会产生一个泡沫，泡沫总是会破裂，上述美元空头也会受到挤压。</blockquote></p><p> That could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.</p><p><blockquote>这可能会导致美国股市大规模抛售，因为外国人抛售股票以购买更多美元。</blockquote></p><p> In short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，当前的股市泡沫有很多不同的迹象，未来一个月左右很可能会出现回调。</blockquote></p><p> The sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage)&nbsp;<i>not</i>&nbsp;making the headlines yet&nbsp;<i>now</i>&nbsp;making all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>顺便说一句，这些针中最尖锐的是美国保证金债务（即杠杆）的惊人滑稽水平<i>不</i>尚未成为头条新闻<i>现在</i>创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/021f71bd7e78a1c275a9c9d74691c525\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">As a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.</p><p><blockquote>提醒一下，每当保证金债务达到峰值（上图）时，市场很快就会暴跌，任何记得过去互联网和次贷市场惨败的人都可以证明这一点。</blockquote></p><p> Just saying…</p><p><blockquote>只是说……</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景五：GDP增长“激增”的阴暗面</b></blockquote></p><p> The World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.</p><p><blockquote>世界银行最近成为头条新闻，预测全球GDP增长5.6%，为80年来最快。</blockquote></p><p> Good stuff, right?</p><p><blockquote>好东西，对吧？</blockquote></p><p> Well, not when placed into&nbsp;<i>context</i>…</p><p><blockquote>嗯，不是放在<i>上下文</i>…</blockquote></p><p> The last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a&nbsp;<i>global world war</i>.</p><p><blockquote>我们上一次看到全球GDP增长5.6%是在<i>全球世界大战</i>.</blockquote></p><p> Obviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.</p><p><blockquote>显然，当世界处于全球军事废墟状态时，任何形式的增长都可能从这样一个历史（和可怕的）基线“激增”。</blockquote></p><p> Coming out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…</p><p><blockquote>二战结束后，包括美国在内的所有人都负债累累。毕竟世界大战可以做到这一点……</blockquote></p><p> As the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.</p><p><blockquote>随着取得胜利并拯救文明的美国从那场战争中走出来，通过印钞、抑制债券收益率和刺激GDP增长来降低这种崇高但极端的债务杠杆是有一定道理的。</blockquote></p><p> What followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.</p><p><blockquote>接下来的至少是一段可以防御的40年，在这段时间里，美国名义GDP比美国国债收益率高出500-800个基点。</blockquote></p><p> In short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，债券持有人受到了猛烈抨击，但击败轴心国后的事业、危机和重建证明了牺牲的合理性。</blockquote></p><p> The same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.</p><p><blockquote>然而，今天就不一样了，因为债券持有者在一种新的异常中再次受到挤压，在这种异常中，GDP将大大（并且类似地）超过长期债券收益率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Needless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.</p><p><blockquote>不用说，当前的政策制定者，正是那些将全球经济鸡舍置于当前债务废墟中的狐狸，喜欢将此归咎于COVID，而不是他们的浴室镜子。</blockquote></p><p> Ironically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the&nbsp;<i>Wehrmacht</i>, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy&nbsp;<i>today</i>&nbsp;(with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s&nbsp;<i>Blitzkrieg</i>&nbsp;or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.</p><p><blockquote>然而，具有讽刺意味的是，中央银行家（相对于<i>德国国防军</i>日本帝国或意大利墨索里尼）成功地对全球经济造成了同样大的伤害<i>当今</i>（有赤字政策和扩大和假装印钞机）作为德国的<i>闪电战</i>或者裕仁在20世纪40年代的万岁袭击。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?</p><p><blockquote>说到背景，我们真的可以或应该将全球流感（死亡人数375万）与全球战争（死亡人数8500万）相提并论吗？</blockquote></p><p> The policy makers would like&nbsp;<i>you</i>&nbsp;to think so.</p><p><blockquote>政策制定者希望<i>你</i>这么想。</blockquote></p><p> Folks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real&nbsp;<i>casus belli</i>&nbsp;(reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.</p><p><blockquote>像姆努钦（去年）或耶伦、鲍威尔和国际货币基金组织（今年）这样的人实际上正试图说服自己和世界，抗击新冠病毒的战争是真实的<i>开战理由</i>（一场正当战争的理由）我们当前的债务困境——就其对金融界的巨大影响而言，其范围相当于第二次世界大战。</blockquote></p><p> But regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.</p><p><blockquote>但无论任何人对COVID“战争”的看法或其可疑的政策反应如何，将其经济影响与二战进行比较都是对历史和军事隐喻的侮辱。</blockquote></p><p> The simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was&nbsp;<i>already</i>&nbsp;in a debt crisis long&nbsp;<i>before</i>&nbsp;the first Corona headline of early 2020.</p><p><blockquote>简单、客观和数学上证实的事实是，全球经济<i>已经</i>长期陷入债务危机<i>以前</i>2020年初的第一个电晕头条。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/173b90a9931417cc655b6129fc7dc38c\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Today, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.</p><p><blockquote>如今，美国债务占GDP的比例达到了自那场悲惨的第二次世界大战以来的最高水平，而且预计还会高得多。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54e71ae4475b3449c8833ca918ddbd82\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> So, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.</p><p><blockquote>因此，如果您仍然认为美联储能够并且将会像20世纪70年代或80年代那样有意义地加息来对抗明显的通胀，请三思。</blockquote></p><p> In the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.</p><p><blockquote>在20世纪70年代和80年代，美国债务/GDP为30%。今天是130%。</blockquote></p><p> Given this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于这一自我造成的（而不是新冠归咎的）现实，美联储根本无力加息。周期。句号。</blockquote></p><p> But as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.</p><p><blockquote>但正如我的同事埃贡·冯·格雷耶兹(Egon von Greyerz)提醒的那样，这绝不意味着利率不能也不会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.</p><p><blockquote>美联储（和其他央行）可能很强大，但他们并不神圣。简而言之，他们通过点击鼠标简单地“控制”利率的能力是有限的。</blockquote></p><p> At some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.</p><p><blockquote>在某些时候，没有足够可信的假币来管理收益率曲线——尤其是在长期来看。</blockquote></p><p> As more printed and&nbsp;<b>tanking currencies</b>&nbsp;try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.</p><p><blockquote>随着更多的印刷和<b>贬值货币</b>试图购买较低的产量和利率，最终整个实验失败。</blockquote></p><p> At that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.</p><p><blockquote>在这个关键时刻，利率飙升，通货膨胀抬头，央行行长们寻找自己以外的东西来指责，而世界其他地区则盯着毫无价值的货币被滑稽的央行数字美元取代。</blockquote></p><p> Wonderful…</p><p><blockquote>精彩…</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 6: That Barbaric Relic?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景6：那个野蛮遗迹？</b></blockquote></p><p> What the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.</p><p><blockquote>上述通胀和利率背景意味着，在未来几年，通胀将走高，利率将走低（被迫/控制），直到利率和通胀一起飙升。</blockquote></p><p> This further means that&nbsp;<i>real</i>&nbsp;rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.</p><p><blockquote>这进一步意味着<i>真的</i>未来几年，利率（即经通胀调整的利率）可能高达-5%至-10%。</blockquote></p><p> Such negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.</p><p><blockquote>这种负实际利率水平很容易超过70年代和80年代的水平，这意味着黄金（和白银）都喜欢负实际利率，在这种完全债务扭曲的背景下，除了上涨、上涨和离开之外，无处可去。</blockquote></p><p> How’s that for context?</p><p><blockquote>背景怎么样？</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-mad-market-six-cold-reality-checks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">zerohedge</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":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-mad-market-six-cold-reality-checks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1145563175","content_text":"Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.\nToward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.\nContext 1: The Rising Growth Headline\nRecently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.\nFair enough.\nBut given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…\n\n…such “growth” is not surprising.\nIn other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.\nIn a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.\nIn short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.\nAnd yet the madness continues…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.\nContext 2: The Treasury “Market”?\nHow can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?\nSounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?\nSuch context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.\nThe Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.\nIn short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”\nWith central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.\nContext 3: Deflation is back?\nHardly.\nLast week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.\nThe very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky rather than “transitory”and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.\nBut if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.\nAs I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—tanking markets or surging inflation.Eventually, we foresee both.\nMeanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.\nTranslated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.\nContext 4: Rising Stock Markets\nDespite reaching nosebleed levels which defy every traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.\nBut context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.\n\nNo Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks\nBased upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.\nThis is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.\nThe next question is “why”?\nThe answer is multiple yet simple.\nFirst, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.\nStated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.\nInflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.\nSuch deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the outflow of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.\nOption 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.\nSadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than bogus US Treasuries are bloated U.S. stocks.\nIn short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.\nDon’t believe me?\nSee for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:\nThis is contextually troublesome for a number of reasons.\nFirst, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).\nLonger term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…\nAs for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.\nOf course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.\nNothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.\nRight now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.\nYet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.\nThat could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.\nIn short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.\nThe sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage) not making the headlines yet now making all-time highs.\nAs a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.\nJust saying…\nContext 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth\nThe World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.\nGood stuff, right?\nWell, not when placed into context…\nThe last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a global world war.\nObviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.\nComing out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…\nAs the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.\nWhat followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.\nIn short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.\nThe same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.\nNeedless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.\nIronically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the Wehrmacht, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy today (with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s Blitzkrieg or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.\nWhen it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?\nThe policy makers would like you to think so.\nFolks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real casus belli (reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.\nBut regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.\nThe simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was already in a debt crisis long before the first Corona headline of early 2020.\nToday, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.\n\nSo, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.\nIn the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.\nGiven this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.\nBut as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.\nThe Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.\nAt some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.\nAs more printed and tanking currencies try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.\nAt that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.\nWonderful…\nContext 6: That Barbaric Relic?\nWhat the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.\nThis further means that real rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.\nSuch negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.\nHow’s that for context?","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":682,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129872502,"gmtCreate":1624369933506,"gmtModify":1634007152367,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Safe yields are in stable companies with good dividends, which can raise prices in tandem with inflation. Let’s play a guessing game! No it’s not AMC or GME….","listText":"Safe yields are in stable companies with good dividends, which can raise prices in tandem with inflation. Let’s play a guessing game! No it’s not AMC or GME….","text":"Safe yields are in stable companies with good dividends, which can raise prices in tandem with inflation. Let’s play a guessing game! No it’s not AMC or GME….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129872502","repostId":"1152615512","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1152615512","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624360383,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1152615512?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 19:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Confused by the Fed? So Are Markets<blockquote>被美联储搞糊涂了？市场也是如此</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1152615512","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the stren","content":"<p>  Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength of the post-pandemic recovery.  The bond market is supposed to be the smart older cousin that keeps its head while the flighty stock market zooms about all over the place. Not so much in the past week.</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率的波动揭示了投资者对美联储意图和疫情后复苏力度的深深困惑。债券市场应该是聪明的表亲，在反复无常的股市到处乱跑时，它会保持冷静。过去一周没那么多。</blockquote></p><p> Instead of a calm response to the Federal Reserve’sslightly more hawkish tone, the 10-year yield first leapt by the most in months, then plunged. On Monday, it dropped during Asian trading hours to the lowest since February, before bouncing all the way back and then some.</p><p><blockquote>10年期国债收益率并没有对美联储稍微鹰派的语气做出冷静反应，而是首先出现数月来的最大涨幅，然后暴跌。周一，该指数在亚洲交易时段跌至2月份以来的最低水平，随后一路反弹，然后有所回升。</blockquote></p><p> The moves reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength ofthe post-pandemic recovery, as well as the extraordinary desperation for safe yields.</p><p><blockquote>这些举措揭示了投资者对美联储的意图和大流行后复苏的力度的深深困惑，以及对安全收益率的极度绝望。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5911d5e0ad74414b1b88185c2769f99\" tg-width=\"336\" tg-height=\"410\">Before stock traders get too smug, bond-market volatility is mirrored by similar swings below the surface of the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>在股票交易者过于自鸣得意之前，债券市场的波动反映在股票市场表面之下的类似波动中。</blockquote></p><p> For me, the most extraordinary shift was the $235 billion depositedin the Fed’s reverse repurchase facilityafter it raised the rate it pays from zero to 0.05%, because it was concerned that it was losing control of the lower bound of rates.</p><p><blockquote>对我来说，最非同寻常的转变是美联储将利率从零提高到0.05%后存入逆回购工具的2350亿美元，因为它担心失去对利率下限的控制。</blockquote></p><p> This is a true tightening of monetary policy, not the mere technicality the Fed presented it as. For monetarists who care about the amount of money in circulation, in one day it drained reserves equivalent to two months of quantitative easing, and showed just how much cash is sloshing around the system looking for even the tiniest yield.</p><p><blockquote>这是真正的货币政策收紧，而不仅仅是美联储所说的技术性收紧。对于关心流通中货币数量的货币主义者来说，一天之内就耗尽了相当于两个月量化宽松的储备，并显示出有多少现金在系统中流动，寻求哪怕是最小的收益。</blockquote></p><p> For those, including me, who prefer to focus on the price of money, it is now higher—albeit not very much, it is a tightening. Secured overnight rates in the money market had been stuck on the floor of 0.01% since March, according to the New York Fed, with some borrowing at negative rates. It rose to 0.05% after the Fed’s announcement, and negative rates vanished.</p><p><blockquote>对于包括我在内的那些更喜欢关注货币价格的人来说，现在的价格更高了——尽管不是很高，但这是一种紧缩。根据纽约联储的数据，自3月份以来，货币市场的担保隔夜利率一直停留在0.01%的下限，一些借款利率为负。美联储宣布后升至0.05%，负利率消失。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1707a50e4704c3c16d8d2eac7a0204f9\" tg-width=\"317\" tg-height=\"419\">After the initial volatility, the bond market’s considered reaction was in the right direction for tighter policy: Higher short-term real rates reduced the longer-term inflation threat and so led to lower 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields—until the reflation trade returned on Monday. Higher rates pulled down stocks most sensitive to the economy—cyclicals and cheap value stocks—until Monday’s reverse. Growth stocks did fine thanks to lower long-term rates, before lagging on Monday.</p><p><blockquote>在最初的波动之后，债券市场经过深思熟虑的反应朝着收紧政策的正确方向发展：短期实际利率上升降低了长期通胀威胁，从而导致10年期和30年期国债收益率下降——直到通货再膨胀交易于周一回归。利率上升拖累了对经济最敏感的股票——周期性股票和廉价价值股票——直到周一出现逆转。由于长期利率较低，成长型股票表现良好，但周一表现落后。</blockquote></p><p> Yet, 0.05% is a very small tightening, to put it mildly. Usually, the Fed moves in 0.25-percentage-point increments, so this was equivalent to one-fifth of a normal rate increase. What mattered for Treasurys wasn’t the immediate shift in the price of money, but the prospect of a bigger change by the Fed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，温和地说，0.05%是一个非常小的紧缩。通常，美联储的加息幅度为0.25个百分点，因此这相当于正常加息的五分之一。对美国国债来说，重要的不是货币价格的立即变化，而是美联储做出更大改变的前景。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bacd47e561e9d7ffdb95d180913fadf\" tg-width=\"321\" tg-height=\"418\">Much of the focus was on the “dots,” the projections of individual Fed policy makers. The median prediction for 2023 was for two 0.25-point increases that year, having previously been for no move. Again, in normal times this wouldn’t be terribly significant, as the predictions aren’t binding, have been a terrible guide to future policy and anyway are still two years away. They were even dismissed by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell in his news conference on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>大部分焦点都集中在“点”上，即美联储个别政策制定者的预测。对2023年的预测中值是当年上涨两次0.25个百分点，而此前没有变动。同样，在正常情况下，这不会有太大的意义，因为这些预测没有约束力，对未来的政策来说是一个糟糕的指南，而且无论如何还有两年的时间。他们甚至在周三的新闻发布会上被美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔驳回。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5df90890ee96402b8d5375020d3c135\" tg-width=\"353\" tg-height=\"454\">The reason the market cared so much isn’t the specifics, but the shift in tone from super-dovish to a hint of hawk. St. Louis Fed President James Bullard emphasized this—and the market moved further—on Friday when he said the first increase could even come next year. Seven of the 18 dots had one or two rises penciled in for 2022, so the news here was merely that Mr. Bullard was one of them.</p><p><blockquote>市场如此关心的原因不是细节，而是基调从超级鸽派转变为一丝鹰派。圣路易斯联储主席詹姆斯·布拉德周五强调了这一点，市场进一步上涨，他表示首次加息甚至可能在明年到来。18个点中有7个在2022年有一两次上涨，所以这里的消息只是布拉德先生是其中之一。</blockquote></p><p> Having previously been careful not to say anything that could possibly be interpreted as worrying about inflation, the Fed suddenly seemed to be concerned.</p><p><blockquote>美联储此前一直小心翼翼地不说任何可能被解读为担心通胀的话，但现在似乎突然感到担忧。</blockquote></p><p> We will have to wait for more from Mr. Powell and other Fed members to find out if this is the interpretation they wanted. They might well be taken aback by the scale of the market moves, which on Friday briefly pushed five-year Treasury yields—the base for much corporate borrowing—up to where they stood in February last year, before the first lockdown. It wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. Powell tries to talk the market back.</p><p><blockquote>我们将不得不等待鲍威尔先生和其他美联储成员的更多信息，以了解这是否是他们想要的解释。他们很可能会对市场走势的规模感到惊讶，周五，市场走势短暂将五年期国债收益率（许多企业借款的基础）推高至去年2月第一次封锁前的水平。如果鲍威尔先生试图说服市场，我不会感到惊讶。</blockquote></p><p> The problem is that investors are supersensitive to the Fed’s views. They think the real economy will be hit much harder than it usually is by higher rates. The Fed also has spent the past year convincing investors that low rates are here pretty much forever.</p><p><blockquote>问题是投资者对美联储的观点超级敏感。他们认为实体经济将因利率上升而受到比通常更严重的打击。美联储还在过去一年里让投资者相信低利率几乎永远存在。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> The threat of higher rates holding back the economy pushed investors toward the post-2010 playbook, at least for a few days: Buy long-dated bonds, buy Big Tech and other growth stocks, steer clear of anything dependent on a strong expansion.</p><p><blockquote>利率上升阻碍经济发展的威胁促使投资者转向2010年后的策略，至少在几天内是这样：购买长期债券，购买大型科技股和其他成长型股票，避开任何依赖强劲扩张的股票。</blockquote></p><p> The shift from thinking there is no risk of rate rises to thinking there is some risk of increases marks a major change of mindset. But I urge caution: Don’t assume the Treasury market is right about inflation, let alone that the wildly swinging yield is anything more than a best guess at what the Fed plans.</p><p><blockquote>从认为不存在加息风险到认为存在一定加息风险的转变标志着心态的重大转变。但我敦促谨慎行事：不要假设国债市场对通胀的看法是正确的，更不用说剧烈波动的收益率只不过是对美联储计划的最佳猜测。</blockquote></p><p> But just as withthe taper tantrum of 2013, when investors start to price in Fed action, they can overdo it as everyone tries to adjust their portfolio to the new reality at once.</p><p><blockquote>但就像2013年的缩减恐慌一样，当投资者开始为美联储的行动定价时，他们可能会做得太过分，因为每个人都试图立即调整自己的投资组合以适应新的现实。</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>Confused by the Fed? So Are Markets<blockquote>被美联储搞糊涂了？市场也是如此</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\">\nConfused by the Fed? So Are Markets<blockquote>被美联储搞糊涂了？市场也是如此</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\">2021-06-22 19:13</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength of the post-pandemic recovery.  The bond market is supposed to be the smart older cousin that keeps its head while the flighty stock market zooms about all over the place. Not so much in the past week.</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率的波动揭示了投资者对美联储意图和疫情后复苏力度的深深困惑。债券市场应该是聪明的表亲，在反复无常的股市到处乱跑时，它会保持冷静。过去一周没那么多。</blockquote></p><p> Instead of a calm response to the Federal Reserve’sslightly more hawkish tone, the 10-year yield first leapt by the most in months, then plunged. On Monday, it dropped during Asian trading hours to the lowest since February, before bouncing all the way back and then some.</p><p><blockquote>10年期国债收益率并没有对美联储稍微鹰派的语气做出冷静反应，而是首先出现数月来的最大涨幅，然后暴跌。周一，该指数在亚洲交易时段跌至2月份以来的最低水平，随后一路反弹，然后有所回升。</blockquote></p><p> The moves reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength ofthe post-pandemic recovery, as well as the extraordinary desperation for safe yields.</p><p><blockquote>这些举措揭示了投资者对美联储的意图和大流行后复苏的力度的深深困惑，以及对安全收益率的极度绝望。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5911d5e0ad74414b1b88185c2769f99\" tg-width=\"336\" tg-height=\"410\">Before stock traders get too smug, bond-market volatility is mirrored by similar swings below the surface of the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>在股票交易者过于自鸣得意之前，债券市场的波动反映在股票市场表面之下的类似波动中。</blockquote></p><p> For me, the most extraordinary shift was the $235 billion depositedin the Fed’s reverse repurchase facilityafter it raised the rate it pays from zero to 0.05%, because it was concerned that it was losing control of the lower bound of rates.</p><p><blockquote>对我来说，最非同寻常的转变是美联储将利率从零提高到0.05%后存入逆回购工具的2350亿美元，因为它担心失去对利率下限的控制。</blockquote></p><p> This is a true tightening of monetary policy, not the mere technicality the Fed presented it as. For monetarists who care about the amount of money in circulation, in one day it drained reserves equivalent to two months of quantitative easing, and showed just how much cash is sloshing around the system looking for even the tiniest yield.</p><p><blockquote>这是真正的货币政策收紧，而不仅仅是美联储所说的技术性收紧。对于关心流通中货币数量的货币主义者来说，一天之内就耗尽了相当于两个月量化宽松的储备，并显示出有多少现金在系统中流动，寻求哪怕是最小的收益。</blockquote></p><p> For those, including me, who prefer to focus on the price of money, it is now higher—albeit not very much, it is a tightening. Secured overnight rates in the money market had been stuck on the floor of 0.01% since March, according to the New York Fed, with some borrowing at negative rates. It rose to 0.05% after the Fed’s announcement, and negative rates vanished.</p><p><blockquote>对于包括我在内的那些更喜欢关注货币价格的人来说，现在的价格更高了——尽管不是很高，但这是一种紧缩。根据纽约联储的数据，自3月份以来，货币市场的担保隔夜利率一直停留在0.01%的下限，一些借款利率为负。美联储宣布后升至0.05%，负利率消失。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1707a50e4704c3c16d8d2eac7a0204f9\" tg-width=\"317\" tg-height=\"419\">After the initial volatility, the bond market’s considered reaction was in the right direction for tighter policy: Higher short-term real rates reduced the longer-term inflation threat and so led to lower 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields—until the reflation trade returned on Monday. Higher rates pulled down stocks most sensitive to the economy—cyclicals and cheap value stocks—until Monday’s reverse. Growth stocks did fine thanks to lower long-term rates, before lagging on Monday.</p><p><blockquote>在最初的波动之后，债券市场经过深思熟虑的反应朝着收紧政策的正确方向发展：短期实际利率上升降低了长期通胀威胁，从而导致10年期和30年期国债收益率下降——直到通货再膨胀交易于周一回归。利率上升拖累了对经济最敏感的股票——周期性股票和廉价价值股票——直到周一出现逆转。由于长期利率较低，成长型股票表现良好，但周一表现落后。</blockquote></p><p> Yet, 0.05% is a very small tightening, to put it mildly. Usually, the Fed moves in 0.25-percentage-point increments, so this was equivalent to one-fifth of a normal rate increase. What mattered for Treasurys wasn’t the immediate shift in the price of money, but the prospect of a bigger change by the Fed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，温和地说，0.05%是一个非常小的紧缩。通常，美联储的加息幅度为0.25个百分点，因此这相当于正常加息的五分之一。对美国国债来说，重要的不是货币价格的立即变化，而是美联储做出更大改变的前景。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bacd47e561e9d7ffdb95d180913fadf\" tg-width=\"321\" tg-height=\"418\">Much of the focus was on the “dots,” the projections of individual Fed policy makers. The median prediction for 2023 was for two 0.25-point increases that year, having previously been for no move. Again, in normal times this wouldn’t be terribly significant, as the predictions aren’t binding, have been a terrible guide to future policy and anyway are still two years away. They were even dismissed by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell in his news conference on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>大部分焦点都集中在“点”上，即美联储个别政策制定者的预测。对2023年的预测中值是当年上涨两次0.25个百分点，而此前没有变动。同样，在正常情况下，这不会有太大的意义，因为这些预测没有约束力，对未来的政策来说是一个糟糕的指南，而且无论如何还有两年的时间。他们甚至在周三的新闻发布会上被美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔驳回。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5df90890ee96402b8d5375020d3c135\" tg-width=\"353\" tg-height=\"454\">The reason the market cared so much isn’t the specifics, but the shift in tone from super-dovish to a hint of hawk. St. Louis Fed President James Bullard emphasized this—and the market moved further—on Friday when he said the first increase could even come next year. Seven of the 18 dots had one or two rises penciled in for 2022, so the news here was merely that Mr. Bullard was one of them.</p><p><blockquote>市场如此关心的原因不是细节，而是基调从超级鸽派转变为一丝鹰派。圣路易斯联储主席詹姆斯·布拉德周五强调了这一点，市场进一步上涨，他表示首次加息甚至可能在明年到来。18个点中有7个在2022年有一两次上涨，所以这里的消息只是布拉德先生是其中之一。</blockquote></p><p> Having previously been careful not to say anything that could possibly be interpreted as worrying about inflation, the Fed suddenly seemed to be concerned.</p><p><blockquote>美联储此前一直小心翼翼地不说任何可能被解读为担心通胀的话，但现在似乎突然感到担忧。</blockquote></p><p> We will have to wait for more from Mr. Powell and other Fed members to find out if this is the interpretation they wanted. They might well be taken aback by the scale of the market moves, which on Friday briefly pushed five-year Treasury yields—the base for much corporate borrowing—up to where they stood in February last year, before the first lockdown. It wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. Powell tries to talk the market back.</p><p><blockquote>我们将不得不等待鲍威尔先生和其他美联储成员的更多信息，以了解这是否是他们想要的解释。他们很可能会对市场走势的规模感到惊讶，周五，市场走势短暂将五年期国债收益率（许多企业借款的基础）推高至去年2月第一次封锁前的水平。如果鲍威尔先生试图说服市场，我不会感到惊讶。</blockquote></p><p> The problem is that investors are supersensitive to the Fed’s views. They think the real economy will be hit much harder than it usually is by higher rates. The Fed also has spent the past year convincing investors that low rates are here pretty much forever.</p><p><blockquote>问题是投资者对美联储的观点超级敏感。他们认为实体经济将因利率上升而受到比通常更严重的打击。美联储还在过去一年里让投资者相信低利率几乎永远存在。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> The threat of higher rates holding back the economy pushed investors toward the post-2010 playbook, at least for a few days: Buy long-dated bonds, buy Big Tech and other growth stocks, steer clear of anything dependent on a strong expansion.</p><p><blockquote>利率上升阻碍经济发展的威胁促使投资者转向2010年后的策略，至少在几天内是这样：购买长期债券，购买大型科技股和其他成长型股票，避开任何依赖强劲扩张的股票。</blockquote></p><p> The shift from thinking there is no risk of rate rises to thinking there is some risk of increases marks a major change of mindset. But I urge caution: Don’t assume the Treasury market is right about inflation, let alone that the wildly swinging yield is anything more than a best guess at what the Fed plans.</p><p><blockquote>从认为不存在加息风险到认为存在一定加息风险的转变标志着心态的重大转变。但我敦促谨慎行事：不要假设国债市场对通胀的看法是正确的，更不用说剧烈波动的收益率只不过是对美联储计划的最佳猜测。</blockquote></p><p> But just as withthe taper tantrum of 2013, when investors start to price in Fed action, they can overdo it as everyone tries to adjust their portfolio to the new reality at once.</p><p><blockquote>但就像2013年的缩减恐慌一样，当投资者开始为美联储的行动定价时，他们可能会做得太过分，因为每个人都试图立即调整自己的投资组合以适应新的现实。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/confused-by-the-fed-so-are-markets-11624352991\">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":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index","SPY":"标普500ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/confused-by-the-fed-so-are-markets-11624352991","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1152615512","content_text":"Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength of the post-pandemic recovery.\n\nThe bond market is supposed to be the smart older cousin that keeps its head while the flighty stock market zooms about all over the place. Not so much in the past week.\nInstead of a calm response to the Federal Reserve’sslightly more hawkish tone, the 10-year yield first leapt by the most in months, then plunged. On Monday, it dropped during Asian trading hours to the lowest since February, before bouncing all the way back and then some.\nThe moves reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength ofthe post-pandemic recovery, as well as the extraordinary desperation for safe yields.\nBefore stock traders get too smug, bond-market volatility is mirrored by similar swings below the surface of the stock market.\nFor me, the most extraordinary shift was the $235 billion depositedin the Fed’s reverse repurchase facilityafter it raised the rate it pays from zero to 0.05%, because it was concerned that it was losing control of the lower bound of rates.\nThis is a true tightening of monetary policy, not the mere technicality the Fed presented it as. For monetarists who care about the amount of money in circulation, in one day it drained reserves equivalent to two months of quantitative easing, and showed just how much cash is sloshing around the system looking for even the tiniest yield.\nFor those, including me, who prefer to focus on the price of money, it is now higher—albeit not very much, it is a tightening. Secured overnight rates in the money market had been stuck on the floor of 0.01% since March, according to the New York Fed, with some borrowing at negative rates. It rose to 0.05% after the Fed’s announcement, and negative rates vanished.\nAfter the initial volatility, the bond market’s considered reaction was in the right direction for tighter policy: Higher short-term real rates reduced the longer-term inflation threat and so led to lower 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields—until the reflation trade returned on Monday. Higher rates pulled down stocks most sensitive to the economy—cyclicals and cheap value stocks—until Monday’s reverse. Growth stocks did fine thanks to lower long-term rates, before lagging on Monday.\nYet, 0.05% is a very small tightening, to put it mildly. Usually, the Fed moves in 0.25-percentage-point increments, so this was equivalent to one-fifth of a normal rate increase. What mattered for Treasurys wasn’t the immediate shift in the price of money, but the prospect of a bigger change by the Fed.\nMuch of the focus was on the “dots,” the projections of individual Fed policy makers. The median prediction for 2023 was for two 0.25-point increases that year, having previously been for no move. Again, in normal times this wouldn’t be terribly significant, as the predictions aren’t binding, have been a terrible guide to future policy and anyway are still two years away. They were even dismissed by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell in his news conference on Wednesday.\nThe reason the market cared so much isn’t the specifics, but the shift in tone from super-dovish to a hint of hawk. St. Louis Fed President James Bullard emphasized this—and the market moved further—on Friday when he said the first increase could even come next year. Seven of the 18 dots had one or two rises penciled in for 2022, so the news here was merely that Mr. Bullard was one of them.\nHaving previously been careful not to say anything that could possibly be interpreted as worrying about inflation, the Fed suddenly seemed to be concerned.\nWe will have to wait for more from Mr. Powell and other Fed members to find out if this is the interpretation they wanted. They might well be taken aback by the scale of the market moves, which on Friday briefly pushed five-year Treasury yields—the base for much corporate borrowing—up to where they stood in February last year, before the first lockdown. It wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. Powell tries to talk the market back.\nThe problem is that investors are supersensitive to the Fed’s views. They think the real economy will be hit much harder than it usually is by higher rates. The Fed also has spent the past year convincing investors that low rates are here pretty much forever.\nThe threat of higher rates holding back the economy pushed investors toward the post-2010 playbook, at least for a few days: Buy long-dated bonds, buy Big Tech and other growth stocks, steer clear of anything dependent on a strong expansion.\nThe shift from thinking there is no risk of rate rises to thinking there is some risk of increases marks a major change of mindset. But I urge caution: Don’t assume the Treasury market is right about inflation, let alone that the wildly swinging yield is anything more than a best guess at what the Fed plans.\nBut just as withthe taper tantrum of 2013, when investors start to price in Fed action, they can overdo it as everyone tries to adjust their portfolio to the new reality at once.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":859,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129847430,"gmtCreate":1624369796420,"gmtModify":1631885483507,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"No more Fed money to prop up. Time to fold andfind greener pastures!","listText":"No more Fed money to prop up. Time to fold andfind greener pastures!","text":"No more Fed money to prop up. Time to fold andfind greener pastures!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129847430","repostId":"1133339567","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":399,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167510589,"gmtCreate":1624276425041,"gmtModify":1631884666174,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"China has a domestic market that dwarfs the US and EU combined, of course it’s gonna rise!","listText":"China has a domestic market that dwarfs the US and EU combined, of course it’s gonna rise!","text":"China has a domestic market that dwarfs the US and EU combined, of course it’s gonna rise!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167510589","repostId":"2145081082","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":661,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":148030845,"gmtCreate":1625897799087,"gmtModify":1633936233576,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","listText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","text":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148030845","repostId":"1138077902","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1138077902","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":1625883154,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1138077902?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-10 10:12","market":"hk","language":"en","title":"China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138077902","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review","content":"<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>市场监管总局依据《反垄断法》，综合分析评估参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在评审过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了政府有关部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，并多次听取了腾讯控股的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案相关市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和游戏直播市场。腾讯控股在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼在下游游戏直播市场份额分别超过40%和30%，排名第一和第二，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙分别控制，对斗鱼共同控制。例如，虎牙和斗鱼的合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的主体，进一步强化腾讯控股在游戏直播市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除、限制竞争的效果，不利于市场公平竞争，可能损害消费者利益，不利于网络游戏和游戏直播市场的健康持续发展。经评估，腾讯控股提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争关切。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条、《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，国家市场监管总局依法决定禁止该等经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</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>China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</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\">\nChina has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</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\">2021-07-10 10:12</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>市场监管总局依据《反垄断法》，综合分析评估参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在评审过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了政府有关部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，并多次听取了腾讯控股的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案相关市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和游戏直播市场。腾讯控股在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼在下游游戏直播市场份额分别超过40%和30%，排名第一和第二，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙分别控制，对斗鱼共同控制。例如，虎牙和斗鱼的合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的主体，进一步强化腾讯控股在游戏直播市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除、限制竞争的效果，不利于市场公平竞争，可能损害消费者利益，不利于网络游戏和游戏直播市场的健康持续发展。经评估，腾讯控股提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争关切。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条、《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，国家市场监管总局依法决定禁止该等经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"00700":"腾讯控股","DOYU":"斗鱼","HUYA":"虎牙"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138077902","content_text":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.\nOn January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.\nAccording to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.\nThe review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.\nAccording to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.\nTencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"00700":0.9,"DOYU":0.9,"HUYA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3012,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":148094127,"gmtCreate":1625897660969,"gmtModify":1633936235173,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","listText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","text":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148094127","repostId":"2150306047","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2008,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167535014,"gmtCreate":1624276199438,"gmtModify":1634008564410,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Strong defensive&nbsp;dividend stocks are the play in this market!","listText":"Strong defensive&nbsp;dividend stocks are the play in this market!","text":"Strong defensive dividend stocks are the play in this market!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167535014","repostId":"1179311244","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1179311244","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624274237,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1179311244?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 19:17","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Global stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担心美联储后全球股市下跌</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1179311244","media":"CNN Business","summary":"Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors c","content":"<p>Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors continue to weigh signals from the Federal Reserve that it could raise interest rates sooner than expected.</p><p><blockquote>香港（CNN Business）全球股市和加密货币周一回调，投资者继续权衡美联储可能比预期更早加息的信号。</blockquote></p><p> Markets were broadly lower, with Japan's Nikkei 225 (N225) dropping more than 3% — easily the worst major performer — after Wall Street closed out its worst week in months on Friday with a 1.6% fall on the Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDU).</p><p><blockquote>市场普遍走低，日本日经225指数(N225)下跌超过3%，无疑是表现最差的主要指数，此前华尔街周五结束了数月来最糟糕的一周，道琼斯工业平均指数(INDU)下跌1.6%。</blockquote></p><p> Hong Kong's Hang Seng (HSI) fell 1.1% and South Korea's Kospi (KOSPI) dropped 0.8%. China's Shanghai Composite (SHCOMP) was the regional outlier in Asia, up 0.1%.</p><p><blockquote>香港恒生指数(HSI)下跌1.1%，韩国综合指数(KOSPI)下跌0.8%。中国上证综指(SHCOMP)是亚洲地区的异常值，上涨0.1%。</blockquote></p><p> The fallout spilled over into Europe, where London's FTSE 100 (UKX) dropped 0.1%. France's CAC 40 (CAC40) fell 0.2%, while Germany's DAX (DAX) was up 0.2%.</p><p><blockquote>影响蔓延到欧洲，伦敦富时100指数(UKX)下跌0.1%。法国CAC 40指数(CAC40)下跌0.2%，德国DAX指数(DAX)上涨0.2%。</blockquote></p><p> The declines followed volatility in the United States on Friday, where the Dow's weak close left it 3.5% lower on the week, its worst pullback since late January. The S&amp;P 500 (SPX) lost 1.3% on Friday, while the Nasdaq Composite (COMP) shed 0.9%.</p><p><blockquote>周五美国股市出现波动，道琼斯指数收盘疲软，本周下跌3.5%，为1月底以来最严重回调。标普500(SPX)周五下跌1.3%，纳斯达克综合指数(COMP)下跌0.9%。</blockquote></p><p> US futures were muted early Monday, experiencing little change.</p><p><blockquote>美国期货周一早盘表现平淡，变化不大。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street was already having a rough week, but stocks slid even further on Friday after St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard told CNBC that he thinks the Fed should raise interest rates as soon as the end of next year. That was even more hawkish than the signal the Fed sent out on Wednesday that it may raise rates twice by late 2023.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街已经度过了艰难的一周，但在圣路易斯联储主席詹姆斯·布拉德告诉CNBC，他认为美联储最早应该在明年年底加息后，周五股市进一步下跌。这比美联储周三发出的可能在2023年底前加息两次的信号更加鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street is worried about inflation. But investors are also nervous about the Fed taking away the stimulus it is injecting into the market to counter the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街担心通货膨胀。但投资者也对美联储取消向市场注入的刺激措施感到紧张，以应对Covid-19大流行对经济的影响。</blockquote></p><p> The crypto market is also struggling Monday, though it wasn't immediately apparent why. Bitcoin is down more than 6% in the last 24 hours, trading just above $33,000 per coin, according to CoinDesk. Ethereum fell more than 7%, while dogecoin plunged more than 8%.</p><p><blockquote>加密货币市场周一也陷入困境，但原因尚不清楚。根据CoinDesk的数据，比特币在过去24小时内下跌了6%以上，每枚硬币的交易价格略高于33,000美元。以太币跌超7%，狗狗币暴跌超8%。</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>Global stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担心美联储后全球股市下跌</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\">\nGlobal stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担心美联储后全球股市下跌</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">CNN Business</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-21 19:17</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors continue to weigh signals from the Federal Reserve that it could raise interest rates sooner than expected.</p><p><blockquote>香港（CNN Business）全球股市和加密货币周一回调，投资者继续权衡美联储可能比预期更早加息的信号。</blockquote></p><p> Markets were broadly lower, with Japan's Nikkei 225 (N225) dropping more than 3% — easily the worst major performer — after Wall Street closed out its worst week in months on Friday with a 1.6% fall on the Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDU).</p><p><blockquote>市场普遍走低，日本日经225指数(N225)下跌超过3%，无疑是表现最差的主要指数，此前华尔街周五结束了数月来最糟糕的一周，道琼斯工业平均指数(INDU)下跌1.6%。</blockquote></p><p> Hong Kong's Hang Seng (HSI) fell 1.1% and South Korea's Kospi (KOSPI) dropped 0.8%. China's Shanghai Composite (SHCOMP) was the regional outlier in Asia, up 0.1%.</p><p><blockquote>香港恒生指数(HSI)下跌1.1%，韩国综合指数(KOSPI)下跌0.8%。中国上证综指(SHCOMP)是亚洲地区的异常值，上涨0.1%。</blockquote></p><p> The fallout spilled over into Europe, where London's FTSE 100 (UKX) dropped 0.1%. France's CAC 40 (CAC40) fell 0.2%, while Germany's DAX (DAX) was up 0.2%.</p><p><blockquote>影响蔓延到欧洲，伦敦富时100指数(UKX)下跌0.1%。法国CAC 40指数(CAC40)下跌0.2%，德国DAX指数(DAX)上涨0.2%。</blockquote></p><p> The declines followed volatility in the United States on Friday, where the Dow's weak close left it 3.5% lower on the week, its worst pullback since late January. The S&amp;P 500 (SPX) lost 1.3% on Friday, while the Nasdaq Composite (COMP) shed 0.9%.</p><p><blockquote>周五美国股市出现波动，道琼斯指数收盘疲软，本周下跌3.5%，为1月底以来最严重回调。标普500(SPX)周五下跌1.3%，纳斯达克综合指数(COMP)下跌0.9%。</blockquote></p><p> US futures were muted early Monday, experiencing little change.</p><p><blockquote>美国期货周一早盘表现平淡，变化不大。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street was already having a rough week, but stocks slid even further on Friday after St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard told CNBC that he thinks the Fed should raise interest rates as soon as the end of next year. That was even more hawkish than the signal the Fed sent out on Wednesday that it may raise rates twice by late 2023.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街已经度过了艰难的一周，但在圣路易斯联储主席詹姆斯·布拉德告诉CNBC，他认为美联储最早应该在明年年底加息后，周五股市进一步下跌。这比美联储周三发出的可能在2023年底前加息两次的信号更加鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> Wall Street is worried about inflation. But investors are also nervous about the Fed taking away the stimulus it is injecting into the market to counter the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>华尔街担心通货膨胀。但投资者也对美联储取消向市场注入的刺激措施感到紧张，以应对Covid-19大流行对经济的影响。</blockquote></p><p> The crypto market is also struggling Monday, though it wasn't immediately apparent why. Bitcoin is down more than 6% in the last 24 hours, trading just above $33,000 per coin, according to CoinDesk. Ethereum fell more than 7%, while dogecoin plunged more than 8%.</p><p><blockquote>加密货币市场周一也陷入困境，但原因尚不清楚。根据CoinDesk的数据，比特币在过去24小时内下跌了6%以上，每枚硬币的交易价格略高于33,000美元。以太币跌超7%，狗狗币暴跌超8%。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html\">CNN Business</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":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1179311244","content_text":"Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors continue to weigh signals from the Federal Reserve that it could raise interest rates sooner than expected.\nMarkets were broadly lower, with Japan's Nikkei 225 (N225) dropping more than 3% — easily the worst major performer — after Wall Street closed out its worst week in months on Friday with a 1.6% fall on the Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDU).\nHong Kong's Hang Seng (HSI) fell 1.1% and South Korea's Kospi (KOSPI) dropped 0.8%. China's Shanghai Composite (SHCOMP) was the regional outlier in Asia, up 0.1%.\nThe fallout spilled over into Europe, where London's FTSE 100 (UKX) dropped 0.1%. France's CAC 40 (CAC40) fell 0.2%, while Germany's DAX (DAX) was up 0.2%.\nThe declines followed volatility in the United States on Friday, where the Dow's weak close left it 3.5% lower on the week, its worst pullback since late January. The S&P 500 (SPX) lost 1.3% on Friday, while the Nasdaq Composite (COMP) shed 0.9%.\nUS futures were muted early Monday, experiencing little change.\nWall Street was already having a rough week, but stocks slid even further on Friday after St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard told CNBC that he thinks the Fed should raise interest rates as soon as the end of next year. That was even more hawkish than the signal the Fed sent out on Wednesday that it may raise rates twice by late 2023.\nWall Street is worried about inflation. But investors are also nervous about the Fed taking away the stimulus it is injecting into the market to counter the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.\nThe crypto market is also struggling Monday, though it wasn't immediately apparent why. Bitcoin is down more than 6% in the last 24 hours, trading just above $33,000 per coin, according to CoinDesk. Ethereum fell more than 7%, while dogecoin plunged more than 8%.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,"SPY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":428,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122900360,"gmtCreate":1624590695850,"gmtModify":1633950812648,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","listText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","text":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122900360","repostId":"1156973335","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2449,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121330812,"gmtCreate":1624453011236,"gmtModify":1634005963911,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","listText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","text":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121330812","repostId":"1128646024","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":978,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122902171,"gmtCreate":1624591027493,"gmtModify":1633950808110,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","listText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","text":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122902171","repostId":"2145472760","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3513,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121972234,"gmtCreate":1624451991628,"gmtModify":1634005978905,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","listText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","text":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121972234","repostId":"1145825451","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":496,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126087470,"gmtCreate":1624537806090,"gmtModify":1634004730839,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","listText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","text":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126087470","repostId":"1142469060","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1783,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":162091953,"gmtCreate":1624026941772,"gmtModify":1634023882413,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.","listText":"Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.","text":"Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/162091953","repostId":"1111305468","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":683,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122901313,"gmtCreate":1624590895632,"gmtModify":1633950810382,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","listText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","text":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world economy…. Bitcoin bulls should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news… =)","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122901313","repostId":"2146021046","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1935,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}