uma1的个人主页 - 老虎社区

uma1

uma1

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

90关注

0粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-09-02

Hi all

2021-08-16

Hi

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-08-15

Hai

US IPO Week Ahead: IPO calendar is quiet amid annual August break<blockquote>美国IPO一周：八月年度假期期间IPO日历平静</blockquote>

2021-08-15

Hi

Where Will Plug Power Be In 10 Years?<blockquote>10年后的普拉格能源会在哪里？</blockquote>

2021-08-13

Hi

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-08-13

Hi

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-08-13

Hi

Why XL Fleet Shares Are Trading Lower Today<blockquote>为什么XL Fleet股价今天走低</blockquote>

2021-08-13

Yes

U.S. consumer sentiment plummets in early August to decade low<blockquote>美国消费者信心8月初暴跌至十年低点</blockquote>

2021-08-12

Hi

U.S. jobless claims total 375,000, matching estimate<blockquote>美国初请失业金人数总计37.5万人，与预估相符</blockquote>

2021-08-12

Hi

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-08-12

Hi

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-08-12

Hi

Regulatory Scrutiny Tightens: Is Apple Stock Going Down?<blockquote>监管审查收紧：苹果股价会下跌吗？</blockquote>

2021-07-31

Good

Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>

2021-07-31

Hi

It’s Open Season on Closed-End Fund Activists. How Fund Holders Can Win—and Lose<blockquote>现在是封闭式基金积极分子的开放季节。基金持有人如何输赢</blockquote>

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"4088330821097380","uuid":"4088330821097380","gmtCreate":1625279326701,"gmtModify":1627698580581,"name":"uma1","pinyin":"uma1","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":0,"headSize":90,"tweetSize":14,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.11.24","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"post","tweets":[{"id":812584809,"gmtCreate":1630594738901,"gmtModify":1632470983982,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi all","listText":"Hi all","text":"Hi all","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/812584809","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2356,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":839125901,"gmtCreate":1629128214503,"gmtModify":1633687173498,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/839125901","repostId":"2159222603","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1659,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":830063525,"gmtCreate":1628993957667,"gmtModify":1633688113740,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hai","listText":"Hai","text":"Hai","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/830063525","repostId":"1147342921","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147342921","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628987746,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1147342921?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-15 08:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"US IPO Week Ahead: IPO calendar is quiet amid annual August break<blockquote>美国IPO一周：八月年度假期期间IPO日历平静</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147342921","media":"Renaissance Capital","summary":"The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week a","content":"<p>The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week ahead. While the calendar is empty for now, we may see some SPACs join the calendar throughout the week. We also anticipate filing activity to pick up in the coming weeks ahead of the post-Labor Day rush.</p><p><blockquote>IPO市场一年一度的8月份平静期正在如火如荼地进行，目前未来一周没有IPO计划。虽然日历目前是空的，但我们可能会在本周看到一些SPAC加入日历。我们还预计，在劳动节后高峰到来之前的未来几周内，申请活动将会增加。</blockquote></p><p> Street research is expected for 19 companies in the week ahead, and lock-up periods will be expiring for up to seven companies. For access to Street research and lock-up expiration dates,sign up for a free trial of IPO Pro.</p><p><blockquote>预计未来一周将有19家公司接受街头调查，最多7家公司的禁售期将到期。要获得街头研究和锁定到期日，请注册免费试用IPO Pro。</blockquote></p><p> <b>IPO Market Snapshot</b></p><p><blockquote><b>IPO市场快照</b></blockquote></p><p> The Renaissance IPO Indices are market cap weighted baskets of newly public companies. As of 8/12/2021, the Renaissance IPO Index was up 0.8% year-to-date, while the S&amp;P 500 was up 18.8%. Renaissance Capital's IPO ETF (NYSE: IPO) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include Snowflake (SNOW) and Palantir Technologies (PLTR). The Renaissance International IPO Index was down 9.7% year-to-date, while the ACWX was up 9.3%. Renaissance Capital’s International IPO ETF (NYSE: IPOS) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include EQT Partners and Smoore International.</p><p><blockquote>文艺复兴IPO指数是新上市公司的市值加权篮子。截至2021年8月12日，文艺复兴IPO指数今年迄今上涨了0.8%，而标普500上涨了18.8%。Renaissance Capital的IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPO）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括Snowflake（SNOW）和Palantir Technologies（PLTR）。Renaissance International IPO指数今年迄今下跌9.7%，而ACWX指数上涨9.3%。Renaissance Capital的国际IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPOS）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括EQT Partners和思摩尔国际。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1603787993745","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>US IPO Week Ahead: IPO calendar is quiet amid annual August break<blockquote>美国IPO一周：八月年度假期期间IPO日历平静</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\">\nUS IPO Week Ahead: IPO calendar is quiet amid annual August break<blockquote>美国IPO一周：八月年度假期期间IPO日历平静</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Renaissance Capital</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-15 08:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week ahead. While the calendar is empty for now, we may see some SPACs join the calendar throughout the week. We also anticipate filing activity to pick up in the coming weeks ahead of the post-Labor Day rush.</p><p><blockquote>IPO市场一年一度的8月份平静期正在如火如荼地进行，目前未来一周没有IPO计划。虽然日历目前是空的，但我们可能会在本周看到一些SPAC加入日历。我们还预计，在劳动节后高峰到来之前的未来几周内，申请活动将会增加。</blockquote></p><p> Street research is expected for 19 companies in the week ahead, and lock-up periods will be expiring for up to seven companies. For access to Street research and lock-up expiration dates,sign up for a free trial of IPO Pro.</p><p><blockquote>预计未来一周将有19家公司接受街头调查，最多7家公司的禁售期将到期。要获得街头研究和锁定到期日，请注册免费试用IPO Pro。</blockquote></p><p> <b>IPO Market Snapshot</b></p><p><blockquote><b>IPO市场快照</b></blockquote></p><p> The Renaissance IPO Indices are market cap weighted baskets of newly public companies. As of 8/12/2021, the Renaissance IPO Index was up 0.8% year-to-date, while the S&amp;P 500 was up 18.8%. Renaissance Capital's IPO ETF (NYSE: IPO) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include Snowflake (SNOW) and Palantir Technologies (PLTR). The Renaissance International IPO Index was down 9.7% year-to-date, while the ACWX was up 9.3%. Renaissance Capital’s International IPO ETF (NYSE: IPOS) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include EQT Partners and Smoore International.</p><p><blockquote>文艺复兴IPO指数是新上市公司的市值加权篮子。截至2021年8月12日，文艺复兴IPO指数今年迄今上涨了0.8%，而标普500上涨了18.8%。Renaissance Capital的IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPO）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括Snowflake（SNOW）和Palantir Technologies（PLTR）。Renaissance International IPO指数今年迄今下跌9.7%，而ACWX指数上涨9.3%。Renaissance Capital的国际IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPOS）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括EQT Partners和思摩尔国际。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.renaissancecapital.com/IPO-Center/News/85282/US-IPO-Week-Ahead-IPO-calendar-is-quiet-amid-annual-August-break\">Renaissance Capital</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",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.renaissancecapital.com/IPO-Center/News/85282/US-IPO-Week-Ahead-IPO-calendar-is-quiet-amid-annual-August-break","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147342921","content_text":"The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week ahead. While the calendar is empty for now, we may see some SPACs join the calendar throughout the week. We also anticipate filing activity to pick up in the coming weeks ahead of the post-Labor Day rush.\nStreet research is expected for 19 companies in the week ahead, and lock-up periods will be expiring for up to seven companies. For access to Street research and lock-up expiration dates,sign up for a free trial of IPO Pro.\nIPO Market Snapshot\nThe Renaissance IPO Indices are market cap weighted baskets of newly public companies. As of 8/12/2021, the Renaissance IPO Index was up 0.8% year-to-date, while the S&P 500 was up 18.8%. Renaissance Capital's IPO ETF (NYSE: IPO) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include Snowflake (SNOW) and Palantir Technologies (PLTR). The Renaissance International IPO Index was down 9.7% year-to-date, while the ACWX was up 9.3%. Renaissance Capital’s International IPO ETF (NYSE: IPOS) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include EQT Partners and Smoore International.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1526,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":830063164,"gmtCreate":1628993915458,"gmtModify":1633688114194,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/830063164","repostId":"1133270372","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1133270372","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628988501,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1133270372?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-15 08:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Where Will Plug Power Be In 10 Years?<blockquote>10年后的普拉格能源会在哪里？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1133270372","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nPlug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.\nIt serves low-ri","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Plug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.</li>  <li>It serves low-risk customers and has a strong position in its industry.</li>  <li>Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth, and investors should consider what actual per-share returns might look like before deploying money at current valuations.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fa1aea5535d99338f385c168062b218\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"852\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>普拉格能源活跃在一个具有巨大增长动力的有吸引力的行业中。</li><li>它服务于低风险客户，在行业中拥有强大的地位。</li><li>股价反映了未来的大量增长，投资者在以当前估值配置资金之前应该考虑实际每股回报可能是什么样子。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. (PLUG) is active in a high-growth industry, which translates into a strong long-term business growth outlook, as long as the company can capitalize on its goals and management executes well. The company is, however, not profitable yet, and the path to meaningful net profits holds some uncertainties still. Taking a longer-term view, we can expect that Plug Power will generate positive net profits despite the fact that shares are valuing the company at a relatively high current valuation. From a risk-reward standpoint, there may be better picks available, though, despite the fact that I believe that shares will trade materially higher in 2031.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司（PLUG）活跃于高增长行业，只要公司能够实现其目标并且管理层执行良好，这就意味着强劲的长期业务增长前景。然而，该公司尚未盈利，实现有意义的净利润的道路仍然存在一些不确定性。从更长远的角度来看，我们可以预计普拉格能源将产生正的净利润，尽管该公司目前的估值相对较高。不过，从风险回报的角度来看，可能有更好的选择，尽管我相信2031年股价将大幅走高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. has seen its share price move up and down violently over the last year:</p><p><blockquote>去年，普拉格能源公司的股价剧烈上下波动：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d940297249151eddcccf6440d20ef031\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares trade 130% higher than 12 months ago, but at the same time, shares trade at just one-third of the all-time high today. In early 2021, shares exploded upwards at a time when other renewable/new energy and related stocks, including EV plays, benefited from massive investor enthusiasm. Since then, enthusiasm seems to have cooled, and shares have reverted back to the $20s. At current prices, Plug Power, Inc. is valued at $16 billion based on a diluted share count of a little less than 600 million. Analysts are pretty bullish on the stock right now, as the consensus price target of $41 implies an upside potential of around 50% from current prices throughout the next year. It should be noted, however, that the analyst consensus price target has been lowered in recent months, and may continue to be lowered going forward. Due to non-existent profits PLUG can't be valued on an earnings basis, but shares trade for around 30x this year's revenue, which is quite expensive.</p><p><blockquote>股价比12个月前上涨了130%，但与此同时，股价仅为今天历史高点的三分之一。2021年初，其他可再生能源/新能源及相关股票（包括电动汽车）受益于投资者的巨大热情，股价大幅上涨。此后，热情似乎有所降温，股价又回到了20多美元。按目前价格计算，普拉格能源公司的估值为160亿美元，稀释后的股票数量略低于6亿股。分析师目前非常看好该股，因为41美元的一致目标价意味着明年较当前价格有50%左右的上涨潜力。但值得注意的是，近几个月来分析师一致的目标价已被下调，并且未来可能会继续下调。由于不存在利润，PLUG无法以盈利为基础进行估值，但股价约为今年收入的30倍，这相当昂贵。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Prediction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. is active in an absolute growth industry, as hydrogen fuel cells will see huge demand growth in coming years as they allow for an environmentally friendly alternative to other fuels. Plug Power, as a turnkey provider in a market leadership position for this technology, is well-positioned to capitalize on this megatrend. Through a network of global partnerships, including with Brookfield Renewable Partners (BEP), Plug Power is working on growing the green hydrogen industryglobally:</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司活跃在一个绝对增长的行业，因为氢燃料电池将在未来几年看到巨大的需求增长，因为它们允许作为其他燃料的环保替代品。普拉格能源作为该技术市场领先地位的交钥匙供应商，完全有能力利用这一大趋势。通过包括Brookfield Renewable Partners(BEP)在内的全球合作伙伴网络，普拉格能源正在致力于在全球范围内发展绿色氢产业：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91a8e3b57882e429c9eace431bd1f541\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"350\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Plug Power presentation</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：普拉格能源演示</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power's green hydrogen can be used for powering trucks, busses, and other vehicles, while the company is also providing environmentally friendly alternatives to diesel generators in the megawatt scale range that can be used by utilities, for example. The company is, on top of that, also working on other ventures that are not ready to be commercialized yet, such as powering aircraft with hydrogen. Plug Power will have at least 5 hydrogen plants running in the US in 2024, i.e. three years from now, with more projects being in the pipeline both in the US and in overseas markets such as Europe.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源的绿色氢可用于为卡车、公共汽车和其他车辆提供动力，同时该公司还为公用事业公司使用的兆瓦级柴油发电机提供环保替代品。除此之外，该公司还致力于其他尚未准备好商业化的项目，例如用氢气为飞机提供动力。2024年，即三年后，普拉格能源将在美国运营至少5座氢气厂，美国以及欧洲等海外市场正在建设更多项目。</blockquote></p><p> 80% of Plug Power's customers are what the company calls blue chip customers, which includes companies such as Amazon (AMZN). These companies are oftentimes highly inclined to improve their CO2 footprint in order to receive better ESG ratings, and at the same time, these are low-risk customers as their strong balance sheets and cash flows mean that the risk of liquidity or solvency issues is negligible. Overall, Plug Power thus works with attractive counterparts, and their financial firepower means that Plug Power is not forced to sell its products at bargain prices, which is why the company has been able to generate relatively attractive product gross margins in the 30s in recent quarters.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源80%的客户是该公司的评级蓝筹客户，其中包括亚马逊（AMZN）等公司。这些公司通常非常倾向于改善其二氧化碳足迹，以获得更好的ESG评级，同时，这些公司是低风险客户，因为其强劲的资产负债表和现金流意味着流动性或偿付能力问题的风险可以忽略不计。总体而言，普拉格能源因此与有吸引力的同行合作，他们的财务火力意味着普拉格能源不会被迫以便宜的价格出售其产品，这就是为什么该公司最近几个季度能够产生相对有吸引力的产品毛利率在30年代。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Due to the still relatively small scale of the company, Plug Power is not profitable on a net basis or operating basis, however. The company's operating expenses, relative to the revenues that Plug Power generates, are still too high for now. This should, however, change over time, as operating leverage and improving product margins should allow Plug Power to grow gross profits relative to operating expenses, which will result in improving profitability. Analysts are currently predicting positive net profits for fiscal 2024, or three years from now. It would, of course, be better if Plug Power had hit that point already, but for long-term oriented investors, two more years of negative profits will not be a disaster.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于公司规模仍然相对较小，普拉格能源在净利润或运营基础上均未盈利。相对于普拉格能源产生的收入，该公司的运营费用目前仍然过高。然而，这种情况应该会随着时间的推移而改变，因为运营杠杆和产品利润率的提高应该会使普拉格能源的毛利润相对于运营费用增长，从而提高盈利能力。分析师目前预测2024财年（即三年后）净利润为正。当然，如果普拉格能源已经达到了这一点，那就更好了，但对于长期投资者来说，再有两年的负利润并不是一场灾难。</blockquote></p><p> When investing in a company such as Plug Power, the very near term is not too relevant, but what matters more is the longer-term potential of the company to grow its revenue and profits. Through the combination of ESG tailwinds, massive market growth, and its market leadership position, Plug Power seems to be well-positioned to grow its revenue for many years to come:</p><p><blockquote>在投资普拉格能源这样的公司时，短期并不太重要，但更重要的是公司收入和利润增长的长期潜力。通过ESG顺风、大规模市场增长及其市场领导地位的结合，普拉格能源似乎处于有利地位，可以在未来许多年增加收入：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4d6f0576ba51f219d85b18d90ccaf6f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"628\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source:Seeking Alpha</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：寻求阿尔法</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Analysts are currently predicting that revenues will grow at 50%+ a year over the next three years, while growth is forecasted to remain almost 30% through at least 2030, which equates to a highly attractive long-term growth outlook. There are, of course, no guarantees that this will indeed happen, as some risks to the business model remain. The company is not profitable yet, thus funding of future growth projects could theoretically become a problem. On top of that, it is possible that other players with deep pockets will try to disrupt the market or gain market share. The risk of that is, I believe, due to Plug Power's leadership position, not very large. But should the market become more competitive, non-profitable Plug Power might run into problems if it were to run into market share fights that could pressure margins.</p><p><blockquote>分析师目前预测，未来三年收入将以每年50%以上的速度增长，而至少到2030年，增长率预计将保持近30%，这相当于极具吸引力的长期增长前景。当然，不能保证这种情况确实会发生，因为商业模式的一些风险仍然存在。该公司尚未盈利，因此未来增长项目的资金理论上可能会成为一个问题。最重要的是，其他财力雄厚的参与者可能会试图扰乱市场或获得市场份额。我相信，由于普拉格能源的领导地位，这种风险并不是很大。但如果市场竞争变得更加激烈，非盈利的普拉格能源如果遭遇市场份额争夺战，可能会给利润率带来压力，可能会遇到问题。</blockquote></p><p> Some execution risks do thus remain for sure, and investors shouldn't see the above growth projections as crystal-clear forecasts that are infallible. Instead, however, the above predictions showcase what a base-case scenario could look like, and actual results might be better or worse than that. Overall, it can be said that the longer-term outlook for Plug Power's business is excellent, as the company should be able to grow at an attractive pace for many years to come, as investors, companies, and consumers put more and more emphasis on a smaller carbon footprint. Obvious growth prospects for an industry do not, however, automatically translate into share price gains. Those that bought shares of Cisco (CSCO) at the highs during the dot.com bubble, for example, are still in the red today, 22 years later, despite the massive growth the business has experienced in that time frame. Valuations should be considered as well, and Plug Power is far from cheap today.</p><p><blockquote>因此，一些执行风险确实仍然存在，投资者不应将上述增长预测视为绝对可靠的清晰预测。然而，相反，上述预测展示了基本情况可能是什么样子，实际结果可能比这更好或更差。总体而言，可以说普拉格能源业务的长期前景非常好，因为随着投资者、公司和消费者越来越重视更小的碳足迹，该公司应该能够在未来许多年以有吸引力的速度增长。然而，一个行业明显的增长前景并不会自动转化为股价上涨。例如，那些在互联网泡沫期间高位购买思科(CSCO)股票的公司，尽管该业务在此期间经历了巨大增长，但22年后的今天仍然处于亏损状态。估值也应该考虑，普拉格能源今天的价格远非便宜。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Forecast For 2030</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2030年普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Today, Plug Power is trading for around 32x this year's expected revenue. If that was an earnings multiple, the stock still wouldn't be especially cheap, relative to how the average company is valued. At more than 30x sales, shares do seem very expensive. When we consider PLUG's growth outlook over the coming decade, that is relativized to some degree, but I believe that shares are still trading above fair value.</p><p><blockquote>如今，普拉格能源的股价约为今年预期收入的32倍。如果这是市盈率，相对于公司的平均估值，该股仍然不会特别便宜。以超过30倍的销售额计算，股价确实看起来非常昂贵。当我们考虑PLUG未来十年的增长前景时，这在某种程度上是相对的，但我相信股价仍高于公允价值。</blockquote></p><p> If the analyst consensus estimate for 2030's revenues is correct, at $10.5 billion, then shares are trading at around 1.5x 2030's revenue right now. Many industrial names are trading for 1x to 2x this year's revenue right now, which indicates how much future growth is priced into PLUG's stock already. One can, of course, argue that PLUG's growth outlook in 2030 is likely still better than that of the average company today, as it seems very much possible for PLUG to grow at a double-digit rate well beyond 2030. But still, shares upside for PLUG's shares is not too great over the coming decade, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>如果分析师对2030年收入的一致估计是正确的，为105亿美元，那么目前股价的交易价格约为2030年收入的1.5倍。许多工业公司目前的交易价格是今年收入的1至2倍，这表明PLUG的股票已经反映了未来的增长。当然，人们可以说，PLUG在2030年的增长前景可能仍好于当今的普通公司，因为PLUG很有可能在2030年之后以两位数的速度增长。但我相信，PLUG股价在未来十年的上涨空间不会太大。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> If PLUG were to trade at a still relatively steep 3.5x revenue in 2030, this gets us to a market cap estimate of around $37billion, or roughly 2.3x as much as today. PLUG's share count will, however, not stay unchanged over the next decade, which is why returns on a per-share basis will be lower than that. If we assume that the share count climbs by just 2% a year, 2030's share count will stand at a little above 700 million. At a $37 billion market capitalization, each individual stock would then trade at around $53, which would mean a return of ~100% from today. On an annual basis, this would equate to returns of 8%. 8% annual returns are far from bad, but many things have to go right for that to happen -- PLUG has to execute well, deliver on growth projects, and avoid massive share issuance. When we also consider that this estimate requires a still rather high 3.5x sales multiple in 2030, then those returns are not great enough to warrant a buy rating, I believe. It would be different of 8% returns could come from a very de-risked blue chip with very low uncertainties, but that is not the case here. For reference, if PLUG executes well and hits growth estimates, but its shares trade for 2.5x sales in 2030, then the share price, assuming 2% annual dilution, would be $37, which would equate to just 4% annual returns. PLUG's share count has risen by around 50% over the last year alone, and even though I don't expect similar dilution in coming years, it is at least possible for PLUG's share count to rise by significantly more than 2% a year, which would pressure returns further.</p><p><blockquote>如果PLUG在2030年的交易收入仍然相对较高的3.5倍，那么我们的市值估计约为370亿美元，大约是今天的2.3倍。然而，PLUG的股票数量在未来十年不会保持不变，这就是为什么每股回报率将低于这一数字。如果我们假设股票数量每年仅增长2%，那么2030年的股票数量将略高于7亿股。在370亿美元的市值下，每只股票的交易价格约为53美元，这意味着从今天起的回报率约为100%。按年计算，这相当于8%的回报率。8%的年回报率远非坏事，但要实现这一目标，许多事情必须顺利进行——PLUG必须执行良好，交付增长项目，并避免大规模股票发行。当我们还考虑到这一估计需要2030年仍然相当高的3.5倍销售倍数时，我相信这些回报还不足以保证买入评级。8%的回报可能来自风险非常低、不确定性非常低的蓝筹股，但这里的情况并非如此。作为参考，如果PLUG执行良好并达到增长预期，但其股价在2030年的交易价格为销售额的2.5倍，那么假设年稀释2%，股价将为37美元，这相当于年回报率仅为4%。仅去年一年，PLUG的股票数量就增加了约50%，尽管我预计未来几年不会出现类似的稀释，但PLUG的股票数量至少有可能每年大幅增加2%以上，这将进一步给回报带来压力。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I do not believe that investors will lose money with PLUG over the next decade or more. But I also do not believe that investors will see very attractive returns in that time frame, despite the fact that Plug Power's underlying business growth outlook is highly attractive. Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth already, and I believe that returns in the sub-10% range can also be generated through lower-risk investments, with less volatile stocks.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我不认为投资者在未来十年或更长时间内会因PLUG而亏损。但我也不相信投资者会在这段时间内看到非常有吸引力的回报，尽管普拉格能源的基本业务增长前景非常有吸引力。股票已经反映了未来的大量增长，我相信通过风险较低、股票波动性较小的投资也可以产生低于10%的回报。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Conclusion: Where Could Plug Power Be In 10 Years?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>结论：10年后普拉格能源会在哪里？</b></blockquote></p><p> One can't know that today, but we can make educated guesses. According to may scenarios laid out above, PLUG could trade at $37-$55 in 2030, factoring in another year of growth, we could end up at $40-$60 in 2031, I believe -- if many things go right. In case there are major hiccups with growth projects, or if the share count rises more than expected, these estimates may be too high.</p><p><blockquote>今天人们无法知道这一点，但我们可以做出有根据的猜测。根据上面列出的5月份情景，PLUG在2030年的交易价格可能为37-55美元，考虑到又一年的增长，我相信，如果很多事情进展顺利，我们在2031年的交易价格可能会达到40-60美元。如果增长项目出现重大问题，或者股票数量增长超过预期，这些估计可能会过高。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe that there is considerable long-term upside potential for PLUG's shares, but expected returns in the mid-to-high-single digits range are not gigantic, and the same returns can be generated through more mature, less volatile investments with fewer uncertainties and less execution risk. I thus do think that PLUG is not a buy right here, even though I like the company's growth prospects and its position in an attractive industry.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我认为PLUG的股票有相当大的长期上涨潜力，但中高个位数范围的预期回报并不巨大，通过更成熟、波动性更小的投资可以产生相同的回报，不确定性更少，执行风险更小。因此，我确实认为PLUG在这里不值得买入，尽管我喜欢该公司的增长前景及其在有吸引力的行业中的地位。</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>Where Will Plug Power Be In 10 Years?<blockquote>10年后的普拉格能源会在哪里？</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\">\nWhere Will Plug Power Be In 10 Years?<blockquote>10年后的普拉格能源会在哪里？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-15 08:48</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Plug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.</li>  <li>It serves low-risk customers and has a strong position in its industry.</li>  <li>Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth, and investors should consider what actual per-share returns might look like before deploying money at current valuations.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fa1aea5535d99338f385c168062b218\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"852\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>普拉格能源活跃在一个具有巨大增长动力的有吸引力的行业中。</li><li>它服务于低风险客户，在行业中拥有强大的地位。</li><li>股价反映了未来的大量增长，投资者在以当前估值配置资金之前应该考虑实际每股回报可能是什么样子。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. (PLUG) is active in a high-growth industry, which translates into a strong long-term business growth outlook, as long as the company can capitalize on its goals and management executes well. The company is, however, not profitable yet, and the path to meaningful net profits holds some uncertainties still. Taking a longer-term view, we can expect that Plug Power will generate positive net profits despite the fact that shares are valuing the company at a relatively high current valuation. From a risk-reward standpoint, there may be better picks available, though, despite the fact that I believe that shares will trade materially higher in 2031.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司（PLUG）活跃于高增长行业，只要公司能够实现其目标并且管理层执行良好，这就意味着强劲的长期业务增长前景。然而，该公司尚未盈利，实现有意义的净利润的道路仍然存在一些不确定性。从更长远的角度来看，我们可以预计普拉格能源将产生正的净利润，尽管该公司目前的估值相对较高。不过，从风险回报的角度来看，可能有更好的选择，尽管我相信2031年股价将大幅走高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. has seen its share price move up and down violently over the last year:</p><p><blockquote>去年，普拉格能源公司的股价剧烈上下波动：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d940297249151eddcccf6440d20ef031\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares trade 130% higher than 12 months ago, but at the same time, shares trade at just one-third of the all-time high today. In early 2021, shares exploded upwards at a time when other renewable/new energy and related stocks, including EV plays, benefited from massive investor enthusiasm. Since then, enthusiasm seems to have cooled, and shares have reverted back to the $20s. At current prices, Plug Power, Inc. is valued at $16 billion based on a diluted share count of a little less than 600 million. Analysts are pretty bullish on the stock right now, as the consensus price target of $41 implies an upside potential of around 50% from current prices throughout the next year. It should be noted, however, that the analyst consensus price target has been lowered in recent months, and may continue to be lowered going forward. Due to non-existent profits PLUG can't be valued on an earnings basis, but shares trade for around 30x this year's revenue, which is quite expensive.</p><p><blockquote>股价比12个月前上涨了130%，但与此同时，股价仅为今天历史高点的三分之一。2021年初，其他可再生能源/新能源及相关股票（包括电动汽车）受益于投资者的巨大热情，股价大幅上涨。此后，热情似乎有所降温，股价又回到了20多美元。按目前价格计算，普拉格能源公司的估值为160亿美元，稀释后的股票数量略低于6亿股。分析师目前非常看好该股，因为41美元的一致目标价意味着明年较当前价格有50%左右的上涨潜力。但值得注意的是，近几个月来分析师一致的目标价已被下调，并且未来可能会继续下调。由于不存在利润，PLUG无法以盈利为基础进行估值，但股价约为今年收入的30倍，这相当昂贵。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Prediction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. is active in an absolute growth industry, as hydrogen fuel cells will see huge demand growth in coming years as they allow for an environmentally friendly alternative to other fuels. Plug Power, as a turnkey provider in a market leadership position for this technology, is well-positioned to capitalize on this megatrend. Through a network of global partnerships, including with Brookfield Renewable Partners (BEP), Plug Power is working on growing the green hydrogen industryglobally:</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司活跃在一个绝对增长的行业，因为氢燃料电池将在未来几年看到巨大的需求增长，因为它们允许作为其他燃料的环保替代品。普拉格能源作为该技术市场领先地位的交钥匙供应商，完全有能力利用这一大趋势。通过包括Brookfield Renewable Partners(BEP)在内的全球合作伙伴网络，普拉格能源正在致力于在全球范围内发展绿色氢产业：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91a8e3b57882e429c9eace431bd1f541\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"350\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Plug Power presentation</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：普拉格能源演示</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power's green hydrogen can be used for powering trucks, busses, and other vehicles, while the company is also providing environmentally friendly alternatives to diesel generators in the megawatt scale range that can be used by utilities, for example. The company is, on top of that, also working on other ventures that are not ready to be commercialized yet, such as powering aircraft with hydrogen. Plug Power will have at least 5 hydrogen plants running in the US in 2024, i.e. three years from now, with more projects being in the pipeline both in the US and in overseas markets such as Europe.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源的绿色氢可用于为卡车、公共汽车和其他车辆提供动力，同时该公司还为公用事业公司使用的兆瓦级柴油发电机提供环保替代品。除此之外，该公司还致力于其他尚未准备好商业化的项目，例如用氢气为飞机提供动力。2024年，即三年后，普拉格能源将在美国运营至少5座氢气厂，美国以及欧洲等海外市场正在建设更多项目。</blockquote></p><p> 80% of Plug Power's customers are what the company calls blue chip customers, which includes companies such as Amazon (AMZN). These companies are oftentimes highly inclined to improve their CO2 footprint in order to receive better ESG ratings, and at the same time, these are low-risk customers as their strong balance sheets and cash flows mean that the risk of liquidity or solvency issues is negligible. Overall, Plug Power thus works with attractive counterparts, and their financial firepower means that Plug Power is not forced to sell its products at bargain prices, which is why the company has been able to generate relatively attractive product gross margins in the 30s in recent quarters.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源80%的客户是该公司的评级蓝筹客户，其中包括亚马逊（AMZN）等公司。这些公司通常非常倾向于改善其二氧化碳足迹，以获得更好的ESG评级，同时，这些公司是低风险客户，因为其强劲的资产负债表和现金流意味着流动性或偿付能力问题的风险可以忽略不计。总体而言，普拉格能源因此与有吸引力的同行合作，他们的财务火力意味着普拉格能源不会被迫以便宜的价格出售其产品，这就是为什么该公司最近几个季度能够产生相对有吸引力的产品毛利率在30年代。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Due to the still relatively small scale of the company, Plug Power is not profitable on a net basis or operating basis, however. The company's operating expenses, relative to the revenues that Plug Power generates, are still too high for now. This should, however, change over time, as operating leverage and improving product margins should allow Plug Power to grow gross profits relative to operating expenses, which will result in improving profitability. Analysts are currently predicting positive net profits for fiscal 2024, or three years from now. It would, of course, be better if Plug Power had hit that point already, but for long-term oriented investors, two more years of negative profits will not be a disaster.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于公司规模仍然相对较小，普拉格能源在净利润或运营基础上均未盈利。相对于普拉格能源产生的收入，该公司的运营费用目前仍然过高。然而，这种情况应该会随着时间的推移而改变，因为运营杠杆和产品利润率的提高应该会使普拉格能源的毛利润相对于运营费用增长，从而提高盈利能力。分析师目前预测2024财年（即三年后）净利润为正。当然，如果普拉格能源已经达到了这一点，那就更好了，但对于长期投资者来说，再有两年的负利润并不是一场灾难。</blockquote></p><p> When investing in a company such as Plug Power, the very near term is not too relevant, but what matters more is the longer-term potential of the company to grow its revenue and profits. Through the combination of ESG tailwinds, massive market growth, and its market leadership position, Plug Power seems to be well-positioned to grow its revenue for many years to come:</p><p><blockquote>在投资普拉格能源这样的公司时，短期并不太重要，但更重要的是公司收入和利润增长的长期潜力。通过ESG顺风、大规模市场增长及其市场领导地位的结合，普拉格能源似乎处于有利地位，可以在未来许多年增加收入：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4d6f0576ba51f219d85b18d90ccaf6f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"628\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source:Seeking Alpha</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：寻求阿尔法</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Analysts are currently predicting that revenues will grow at 50%+ a year over the next three years, while growth is forecasted to remain almost 30% through at least 2030, which equates to a highly attractive long-term growth outlook. There are, of course, no guarantees that this will indeed happen, as some risks to the business model remain. The company is not profitable yet, thus funding of future growth projects could theoretically become a problem. On top of that, it is possible that other players with deep pockets will try to disrupt the market or gain market share. The risk of that is, I believe, due to Plug Power's leadership position, not very large. But should the market become more competitive, non-profitable Plug Power might run into problems if it were to run into market share fights that could pressure margins.</p><p><blockquote>分析师目前预测，未来三年收入将以每年50%以上的速度增长，而至少到2030年，增长率预计将保持近30%，这相当于极具吸引力的长期增长前景。当然，不能保证这种情况确实会发生，因为商业模式的一些风险仍然存在。该公司尚未盈利，因此未来增长项目的资金理论上可能会成为一个问题。最重要的是，其他财力雄厚的参与者可能会试图扰乱市场或获得市场份额。我相信，由于普拉格能源的领导地位，这种风险并不是很大。但如果市场竞争变得更加激烈，非盈利的普拉格能源如果遭遇市场份额争夺战，可能会给利润率带来压力，可能会遇到问题。</blockquote></p><p> Some execution risks do thus remain for sure, and investors shouldn't see the above growth projections as crystal-clear forecasts that are infallible. Instead, however, the above predictions showcase what a base-case scenario could look like, and actual results might be better or worse than that. Overall, it can be said that the longer-term outlook for Plug Power's business is excellent, as the company should be able to grow at an attractive pace for many years to come, as investors, companies, and consumers put more and more emphasis on a smaller carbon footprint. Obvious growth prospects for an industry do not, however, automatically translate into share price gains. Those that bought shares of Cisco (CSCO) at the highs during the dot.com bubble, for example, are still in the red today, 22 years later, despite the massive growth the business has experienced in that time frame. Valuations should be considered as well, and Plug Power is far from cheap today.</p><p><blockquote>因此，一些执行风险确实仍然存在，投资者不应将上述增长预测视为绝对可靠的清晰预测。然而，相反，上述预测展示了基本情况可能是什么样子，实际结果可能比这更好或更差。总体而言，可以说普拉格能源业务的长期前景非常好，因为随着投资者、公司和消费者越来越重视更小的碳足迹，该公司应该能够在未来许多年以有吸引力的速度增长。然而，一个行业明显的增长前景并不会自动转化为股价上涨。例如，那些在互联网泡沫期间高位购买思科(CSCO)股票的公司，尽管该业务在此期间经历了巨大增长，但22年后的今天仍然处于亏损状态。估值也应该考虑，普拉格能源今天的价格远非便宜。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Forecast For 2030</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2030年普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Today, Plug Power is trading for around 32x this year's expected revenue. If that was an earnings multiple, the stock still wouldn't be especially cheap, relative to how the average company is valued. At more than 30x sales, shares do seem very expensive. When we consider PLUG's growth outlook over the coming decade, that is relativized to some degree, but I believe that shares are still trading above fair value.</p><p><blockquote>如今，普拉格能源的股价约为今年预期收入的32倍。如果这是市盈率，相对于公司的平均估值，该股仍然不会特别便宜。以超过30倍的销售额计算，股价确实看起来非常昂贵。当我们考虑PLUG未来十年的增长前景时，这在某种程度上是相对的，但我相信股价仍高于公允价值。</blockquote></p><p> If the analyst consensus estimate for 2030's revenues is correct, at $10.5 billion, then shares are trading at around 1.5x 2030's revenue right now. Many industrial names are trading for 1x to 2x this year's revenue right now, which indicates how much future growth is priced into PLUG's stock already. One can, of course, argue that PLUG's growth outlook in 2030 is likely still better than that of the average company today, as it seems very much possible for PLUG to grow at a double-digit rate well beyond 2030. But still, shares upside for PLUG's shares is not too great over the coming decade, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>如果分析师对2030年收入的一致估计是正确的，为105亿美元，那么目前股价的交易价格约为2030年收入的1.5倍。许多工业公司目前的交易价格是今年收入的1至2倍，这表明PLUG的股票已经反映了未来的增长。当然，人们可以说，PLUG在2030年的增长前景可能仍好于当今的普通公司，因为PLUG很有可能在2030年之后以两位数的速度增长。但我相信，PLUG股价在未来十年的上涨空间不会太大。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> If PLUG were to trade at a still relatively steep 3.5x revenue in 2030, this gets us to a market cap estimate of around $37billion, or roughly 2.3x as much as today. PLUG's share count will, however, not stay unchanged over the next decade, which is why returns on a per-share basis will be lower than that. If we assume that the share count climbs by just 2% a year, 2030's share count will stand at a little above 700 million. At a $37 billion market capitalization, each individual stock would then trade at around $53, which would mean a return of ~100% from today. On an annual basis, this would equate to returns of 8%. 8% annual returns are far from bad, but many things have to go right for that to happen -- PLUG has to execute well, deliver on growth projects, and avoid massive share issuance. When we also consider that this estimate requires a still rather high 3.5x sales multiple in 2030, then those returns are not great enough to warrant a buy rating, I believe. It would be different of 8% returns could come from a very de-risked blue chip with very low uncertainties, but that is not the case here. For reference, if PLUG executes well and hits growth estimates, but its shares trade for 2.5x sales in 2030, then the share price, assuming 2% annual dilution, would be $37, which would equate to just 4% annual returns. PLUG's share count has risen by around 50% over the last year alone, and even though I don't expect similar dilution in coming years, it is at least possible for PLUG's share count to rise by significantly more than 2% a year, which would pressure returns further.</p><p><blockquote>如果PLUG在2030年的交易收入仍然相对较高的3.5倍，那么我们的市值估计约为370亿美元，大约是今天的2.3倍。然而，PLUG的股票数量在未来十年不会保持不变，这就是为什么每股回报率将低于这一数字。如果我们假设股票数量每年仅增长2%，那么2030年的股票数量将略高于7亿股。在370亿美元的市值下，每只股票的交易价格约为53美元，这意味着从今天起的回报率约为100%。按年计算，这相当于8%的回报率。8%的年回报率远非坏事，但要实现这一目标，许多事情必须顺利进行——PLUG必须执行良好，交付增长项目，并避免大规模股票发行。当我们还考虑到这一估计需要2030年仍然相当高的3.5倍销售倍数时，我相信这些回报还不足以保证买入评级。8%的回报可能来自风险非常低、不确定性非常低的蓝筹股，但这里的情况并非如此。作为参考，如果PLUG执行良好并达到增长预期，但其股价在2030年的交易价格为销售额的2.5倍，那么假设年稀释2%，股价将为37美元，这相当于年回报率仅为4%。仅去年一年，PLUG的股票数量就增加了约50%，尽管我预计未来几年不会出现类似的稀释，但PLUG的股票数量至少有可能每年大幅增加2%以上，这将进一步给回报带来压力。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I do not believe that investors will lose money with PLUG over the next decade or more. But I also do not believe that investors will see very attractive returns in that time frame, despite the fact that Plug Power's underlying business growth outlook is highly attractive. Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth already, and I believe that returns in the sub-10% range can also be generated through lower-risk investments, with less volatile stocks.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我不认为投资者在未来十年或更长时间内会因PLUG而亏损。但我也不相信投资者会在这段时间内看到非常有吸引力的回报，尽管普拉格能源的基本业务增长前景非常有吸引力。股票已经反映了未来的大量增长，我相信通过风险较低、股票波动性较小的投资也可以产生低于10%的回报。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Conclusion: Where Could Plug Power Be In 10 Years?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>结论：10年后普拉格能源会在哪里？</b></blockquote></p><p> One can't know that today, but we can make educated guesses. According to may scenarios laid out above, PLUG could trade at $37-$55 in 2030, factoring in another year of growth, we could end up at $40-$60 in 2031, I believe -- if many things go right. In case there are major hiccups with growth projects, or if the share count rises more than expected, these estimates may be too high.</p><p><blockquote>今天人们无法知道这一点，但我们可以做出有根据的猜测。根据上面列出的5月份情景，PLUG在2030年的交易价格可能为37-55美元，考虑到又一年的增长，我相信，如果很多事情进展顺利，我们在2031年的交易价格可能会达到40-60美元。如果增长项目出现重大问题，或者股票数量增长超过预期，这些估计可能会过高。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe that there is considerable long-term upside potential for PLUG's shares, but expected returns in the mid-to-high-single digits range are not gigantic, and the same returns can be generated through more mature, less volatile investments with fewer uncertainties and less execution risk. I thus do think that PLUG is not a buy right here, even though I like the company's growth prospects and its position in an attractive industry.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我认为PLUG的股票有相当大的长期上涨潜力，但中高个位数范围的预期回报并不巨大，通过更成熟、波动性更小的投资可以产生相同的回报，不确定性更少，执行风险更小。因此，我确实认为PLUG在这里不值得买入，尽管我喜欢该公司的增长前景及其在有吸引力的行业中的地位。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4449266-plug-power-stock-in-10-years\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLUG":"普拉格能源"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4449266-plug-power-stock-in-10-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1133270372","content_text":"Summary\n\nPlug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.\nIt serves low-risk customers and has a strong position in its industry.\nShares are pricing in a lot of future growth, and investors should consider what actual per-share returns might look like before deploying money at current valuations.\n\nFokusiert/iStock via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nPlug Power, Inc. (PLUG) is active in a high-growth industry, which translates into a strong long-term business growth outlook, as long as the company can capitalize on its goals and management executes well. The company is, however, not profitable yet, and the path to meaningful net profits holds some uncertainties still. Taking a longer-term view, we can expect that Plug Power will generate positive net profits despite the fact that shares are valuing the company at a relatively high current valuation. From a risk-reward standpoint, there may be better picks available, though, despite the fact that I believe that shares will trade materially higher in 2031.\nPlug Power Stock Price\nPlug Power, Inc. has seen its share price move up and down violently over the last year:\nData by YCharts\nShares trade 130% higher than 12 months ago, but at the same time, shares trade at just one-third of the all-time high today. In early 2021, shares exploded upwards at a time when other renewable/new energy and related stocks, including EV plays, benefited from massive investor enthusiasm. Since then, enthusiasm seems to have cooled, and shares have reverted back to the $20s. At current prices, Plug Power, Inc. is valued at $16 billion based on a diluted share count of a little less than 600 million. Analysts are pretty bullish on the stock right now, as the consensus price target of $41 implies an upside potential of around 50% from current prices throughout the next year. It should be noted, however, that the analyst consensus price target has been lowered in recent months, and may continue to be lowered going forward. Due to non-existent profits PLUG can't be valued on an earnings basis, but shares trade for around 30x this year's revenue, which is quite expensive.\nPlug Power Stock Prediction\nPlug Power, Inc. is active in an absolute growth industry, as hydrogen fuel cells will see huge demand growth in coming years as they allow for an environmentally friendly alternative to other fuels. Plug Power, as a turnkey provider in a market leadership position for this technology, is well-positioned to capitalize on this megatrend. Through a network of global partnerships, including with Brookfield Renewable Partners (BEP), Plug Power is working on growing the green hydrogen industryglobally:\nSource: Plug Power presentation\nPlug Power's green hydrogen can be used for powering trucks, busses, and other vehicles, while the company is also providing environmentally friendly alternatives to diesel generators in the megawatt scale range that can be used by utilities, for example. The company is, on top of that, also working on other ventures that are not ready to be commercialized yet, such as powering aircraft with hydrogen. Plug Power will have at least 5 hydrogen plants running in the US in 2024, i.e. three years from now, with more projects being in the pipeline both in the US and in overseas markets such as Europe.\n80% of Plug Power's customers are what the company calls blue chip customers, which includes companies such as Amazon (AMZN). These companies are oftentimes highly inclined to improve their CO2 footprint in order to receive better ESG ratings, and at the same time, these are low-risk customers as their strong balance sheets and cash flows mean that the risk of liquidity or solvency issues is negligible. Overall, Plug Power thus works with attractive counterparts, and their financial firepower means that Plug Power is not forced to sell its products at bargain prices, which is why the company has been able to generate relatively attractive product gross margins in the 30s in recent quarters.\nDue to the still relatively small scale of the company, Plug Power is not profitable on a net basis or operating basis, however. The company's operating expenses, relative to the revenues that Plug Power generates, are still too high for now. This should, however, change over time, as operating leverage and improving product margins should allow Plug Power to grow gross profits relative to operating expenses, which will result in improving profitability. Analysts are currently predicting positive net profits for fiscal 2024, or three years from now. It would, of course, be better if Plug Power had hit that point already, but for long-term oriented investors, two more years of negative profits will not be a disaster.\nWhen investing in a company such as Plug Power, the very near term is not too relevant, but what matters more is the longer-term potential of the company to grow its revenue and profits. Through the combination of ESG tailwinds, massive market growth, and its market leadership position, Plug Power seems to be well-positioned to grow its revenue for many years to come:\nSource:Seeking Alpha\nAnalysts are currently predicting that revenues will grow at 50%+ a year over the next three years, while growth is forecasted to remain almost 30% through at least 2030, which equates to a highly attractive long-term growth outlook. There are, of course, no guarantees that this will indeed happen, as some risks to the business model remain. The company is not profitable yet, thus funding of future growth projects could theoretically become a problem. On top of that, it is possible that other players with deep pockets will try to disrupt the market or gain market share. The risk of that is, I believe, due to Plug Power's leadership position, not very large. But should the market become more competitive, non-profitable Plug Power might run into problems if it were to run into market share fights that could pressure margins.\nSome execution risks do thus remain for sure, and investors shouldn't see the above growth projections as crystal-clear forecasts that are infallible. Instead, however, the above predictions showcase what a base-case scenario could look like, and actual results might be better or worse than that. Overall, it can be said that the longer-term outlook for Plug Power's business is excellent, as the company should be able to grow at an attractive pace for many years to come, as investors, companies, and consumers put more and more emphasis on a smaller carbon footprint. Obvious growth prospects for an industry do not, however, automatically translate into share price gains. Those that bought shares of Cisco (CSCO) at the highs during the dot.com bubble, for example, are still in the red today, 22 years later, despite the massive growth the business has experienced in that time frame. Valuations should be considered as well, and Plug Power is far from cheap today.\nPlug Power Stock Forecast For 2030\nToday, Plug Power is trading for around 32x this year's expected revenue. If that was an earnings multiple, the stock still wouldn't be especially cheap, relative to how the average company is valued. At more than 30x sales, shares do seem very expensive. When we consider PLUG's growth outlook over the coming decade, that is relativized to some degree, but I believe that shares are still trading above fair value.\nIf the analyst consensus estimate for 2030's revenues is correct, at $10.5 billion, then shares are trading at around 1.5x 2030's revenue right now. Many industrial names are trading for 1x to 2x this year's revenue right now, which indicates how much future growth is priced into PLUG's stock already. One can, of course, argue that PLUG's growth outlook in 2030 is likely still better than that of the average company today, as it seems very much possible for PLUG to grow at a double-digit rate well beyond 2030. But still, shares upside for PLUG's shares is not too great over the coming decade, I believe.\nIf PLUG were to trade at a still relatively steep 3.5x revenue in 2030, this gets us to a market cap estimate of around $37billion, or roughly 2.3x as much as today. PLUG's share count will, however, not stay unchanged over the next decade, which is why returns on a per-share basis will be lower than that. If we assume that the share count climbs by just 2% a year, 2030's share count will stand at a little above 700 million. At a $37 billion market capitalization, each individual stock would then trade at around $53, which would mean a return of ~100% from today. On an annual basis, this would equate to returns of 8%. 8% annual returns are far from bad, but many things have to go right for that to happen -- PLUG has to execute well, deliver on growth projects, and avoid massive share issuance. When we also consider that this estimate requires a still rather high 3.5x sales multiple in 2030, then those returns are not great enough to warrant a buy rating, I believe. It would be different of 8% returns could come from a very de-risked blue chip with very low uncertainties, but that is not the case here. For reference, if PLUG executes well and hits growth estimates, but its shares trade for 2.5x sales in 2030, then the share price, assuming 2% annual dilution, would be $37, which would equate to just 4% annual returns. PLUG's share count has risen by around 50% over the last year alone, and even though I don't expect similar dilution in coming years, it is at least possible for PLUG's share count to rise by significantly more than 2% a year, which would pressure returns further.\nOverall, I do not believe that investors will lose money with PLUG over the next decade or more. But I also do not believe that investors will see very attractive returns in that time frame, despite the fact that Plug Power's underlying business growth outlook is highly attractive. Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth already, and I believe that returns in the sub-10% range can also be generated through lower-risk investments, with less volatile stocks.\nConclusion: Where Could Plug Power Be In 10 Years?\nOne can't know that today, but we can make educated guesses. According to may scenarios laid out above, PLUG could trade at $37-$55 in 2030, factoring in another year of growth, we could end up at $40-$60 in 2031, I believe -- if many things go right. In case there are major hiccups with growth projects, or if the share count rises more than expected, these estimates may be too high.\nOverall, I believe that there is considerable long-term upside potential for PLUG's shares, but expected returns in the mid-to-high-single digits range are not gigantic, and the same returns can be generated through more mature, less volatile investments with fewer uncertainties and less execution risk. I thus do think that PLUG is not a buy right here, even though I like the company's growth prospects and its position in an attractive industry.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"PLUG":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2021,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897995163,"gmtCreate":1628866591052,"gmtModify":1633688869193,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897995163","repostId":"1185363621","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1145,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897992238,"gmtCreate":1628866564124,"gmtModify":1633688869905,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897992238","repostId":"2159188392","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1802,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897996206,"gmtCreate":1628866523105,"gmtModify":1633688870593,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897996206","repostId":"2159903472","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2159903472","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Stock Market Quotes, Business News, Financial News, Trading Ideas, and Stock Research by Professionals","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Benzinga","id":"1052270027","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa"},"pubTimestamp":1628863309,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2159903472?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-13 22:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why XL Fleet Shares Are Trading Lower Today<blockquote>为什么XL Fleet股价今天走低</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2159903472","media":"Benzinga","summary":"XL Fleet Corp (NYSE: XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.","content":"<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL Fleet Corp</a></b> (NYSE:XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.</p><p><blockquote><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL舰队公司</a></b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XL）周五股价走低，此前该公司公布了差于预期的第二季度财务业绩。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet reported a quarterly earnings loss of 8 cents per share, which came in below the estimate for a loss of 5 cents per share. The company reported quarterly revenue of $3.69 million, which came in below the estimate of $4.4 million.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet报告季度收益每股亏损8美分，低于每股亏损5美分的预期。该公司报告季度收入为369万美元，低于预期的440万美元。</blockquote></p><p> We believe market interest in commercial fleet electrification solutions remains strong, however, supply chain issues and wide scale shortages of key materials, especially microchips, continue to impact the global automotive industry, significantly interrupting the ability of fleet customers to secure new vehicles on which our electrified drive systems are installed,” said <b>Dimitri Kazarinoff</b>, CEO of XL Fleet.</p><p><blockquote>我们相信市场对商用车队电气化解决方案的兴趣依然浓厚，然而，供应链问题和关键材料（尤其是微芯片）的大规模短缺继续影响全球汽车行业，严重干扰了车队客户获得新车的能力。我们安装了电气化驱动系统，”他说<b>季米特里·卡扎里诺夫</b>，XL Fleet首席执行官。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet is a provider of fleet electrification solutions for commercial vehicles in North America.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet是北美商用车车队电气化解决方案提供商。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Price Action: </b>XL Fleet has traded as high as $35 and as low as $5.41 over a 52-week period.</p><p><blockquote><b>价格走势：</b>XL Fleet在52周内的交易价格最高为35美元，最低为5.41美元。</blockquote></p><p> At last check Friday, the stock was down 6.90% at $6.61.</p><p><blockquote>截至周五最后一次检查，该股下跌6.90%，至6.61美元。</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 XL Fleet Shares Are Trading Lower Today<blockquote>为什么XL Fleet股价今天走低</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 XL Fleet Shares Are Trading Lower Today<blockquote>为什么XL Fleet股价今天走低</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Benzinga </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-08-13 22:01</p>\n</div>\n</div>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL Fleet Corp</a></b> (NYSE:XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.</p><p><blockquote><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL舰队公司</a></b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XL）周五股价走低，此前该公司公布了差于预期的第二季度财务业绩。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet reported a quarterly earnings loss of 8 cents per share, which came in below the estimate for a loss of 5 cents per share. The company reported quarterly revenue of $3.69 million, which came in below the estimate of $4.4 million.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet报告季度收益每股亏损8美分，低于每股亏损5美分的预期。该公司报告季度收入为369万美元，低于预期的440万美元。</blockquote></p><p> We believe market interest in commercial fleet electrification solutions remains strong, however, supply chain issues and wide scale shortages of key materials, especially microchips, continue to impact the global automotive industry, significantly interrupting the ability of fleet customers to secure new vehicles on which our electrified drive systems are installed,” said <b>Dimitri Kazarinoff</b>, CEO of XL Fleet.</p><p><blockquote>我们相信市场对商用车队电气化解决方案的兴趣依然浓厚，然而，供应链问题和关键材料（尤其是微芯片）的大规模短缺继续影响全球汽车行业，严重干扰了车队客户获得新车的能力。我们安装了电气化驱动系统，”他说<b>季米特里·卡扎里诺夫</b>，XL Fleet首席执行官。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet is a provider of fleet electrification solutions for commercial vehicles in North America.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet是北美商用车车队电气化解决方案提供商。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Price Action: </b>XL Fleet has traded as high as $35 and as low as $5.41 over a 52-week period.</p><p><blockquote><b>价格走势：</b>XL Fleet在52周内的交易价格最高为35美元，最低为5.41美元。</blockquote></p><p> At last check Friday, the stock was down 6.90% at $6.61.</p><p><blockquote>截至周五最后一次检查，该股下跌6.90%，至6.61美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2159903472","content_text":"XL Fleet Corp (NYSE:XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.\nXL Fleet reported a quarterly earnings loss of 8 cents per share, which came in below the estimate for a loss of 5 cents per share. The company reported quarterly revenue of $3.69 million, which came in below the estimate of $4.4 million.\nWe believe market interest in commercial fleet electrification solutions remains strong, however, supply chain issues and wide scale shortages of key materials, especially microchips, continue to impact the global automotive industry, significantly interrupting the ability of fleet customers to secure new vehicles on which our electrified drive systems are installed,” said Dimitri Kazarinoff, CEO of XL Fleet.\nXL Fleet is a provider of fleet electrification solutions for commercial vehicles in North America.\nPrice Action: XL Fleet has traded as high as $35 and as low as $5.41 over a 52-week period.\nAt last check Friday, the stock was down 6.90% at $6.61.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"XL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1317,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897998000,"gmtCreate":1628866429100,"gmtModify":1633688871386,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897998000","repostId":"1108390674","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108390674","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628865354,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108390674?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-13 22:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"U.S. consumer sentiment plummets in early August to decade low<blockquote>美国消费者信心8月初暴跌至十年低点</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108390674","media":"Reuters","summary":"(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade ","content":"<p>(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade as Americans gave faltering outlooks on everything from personal finances to inflation and employment, a survey showed on Friday.</p><p><blockquote>（路透社）-周五的一项调查显示，美国消费者信心在8月初大幅下降至十年来的最低水平，因为美国人对从个人财务到通胀和就业等各个方面的前景都不稳定。</blockquote></p><p> The University of Michigan said its preliminary consumer sentiment index fell to 70.2 in the first half of this month from a final reading of 81.2 in July. That was the lowest level since 2011 and one of the six largest drops in the past 50 years of the survey. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the index would remain unchanged at 81.2.</p><p><blockquote>密歇根大学表示，本月上半月消费者信心指数初值从7月份的81.2降至70.2。这是自2011年以来的最低水平，也是过去50年调查中最大的六次跌幅之一。路透社调查的经济学家此前预测该指数将保持在81.2不变。</blockquote></p><p> Economic growth is still expected to grow this year at its fastest pace in four decades after falling into a brief recession in 2020 caused by the coronavirus pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在2020年因冠状病毒大流行而陷入短暂衰退后，预计今年经济增长仍将以四十年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> However, the recovery is showing some indication of cooling off and COVID-19 cases have doubled in the past two weeks to reach a six-month peak as the more transmissible Delta variant spreads rapidly across the country. Labor shortages across the service sector also persist while supply chain disruptions have continued.</p><p><blockquote>然而，复苏显示出一些降温的迹象，随着传染性更强的德尔塔变异毒株在全国迅速传播，COVID-19病例在过去两周翻了一番，达到六个月来的峰值。整个服务业的劳动力短缺也持续存在，而供应链中断也在继续。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1612507957220","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>U.S. consumer sentiment plummets in early August to decade low<blockquote>美国消费者信心8月初暴跌至十年低点</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\">\nU.S. consumer sentiment plummets in early August to decade low<blockquote>美国消费者信心8月初暴跌至十年低点</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Reuters</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-13 22:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade as Americans gave faltering outlooks on everything from personal finances to inflation and employment, a survey showed on Friday.</p><p><blockquote>（路透社）-周五的一项调查显示，美国消费者信心在8月初大幅下降至十年来的最低水平，因为美国人对从个人财务到通胀和就业等各个方面的前景都不稳定。</blockquote></p><p> The University of Michigan said its preliminary consumer sentiment index fell to 70.2 in the first half of this month from a final reading of 81.2 in July. That was the lowest level since 2011 and one of the six largest drops in the past 50 years of the survey. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the index would remain unchanged at 81.2.</p><p><blockquote>密歇根大学表示，本月上半月消费者信心指数初值从7月份的81.2降至70.2。这是自2011年以来的最低水平，也是过去50年调查中最大的六次跌幅之一。路透社调查的经济学家此前预测该指数将保持在81.2不变。</blockquote></p><p> Economic growth is still expected to grow this year at its fastest pace in four decades after falling into a brief recession in 2020 caused by the coronavirus pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在2020年因冠状病毒大流行而陷入短暂衰退后，预计今年经济增长仍将以四十年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> However, the recovery is showing some indication of cooling off and COVID-19 cases have doubled in the past two weeks to reach a six-month peak as the more transmissible Delta variant spreads rapidly across the country. Labor shortages across the service sector also persist while supply chain disruptions have continued.</p><p><blockquote>然而，复苏显示出一些降温的迹象，随着传染性更强的德尔塔变异毒株在全国迅速传播，COVID-19病例在过去两周翻了一番，达到六个月来的峰值。整个服务业的劳动力短缺也持续存在，而供应链中断也在继续。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-consumer-sentiment-plummets-early-142604920.html\">Reuters</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":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-consumer-sentiment-plummets-early-142604920.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108390674","content_text":"(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade as Americans gave faltering outlooks on everything from personal finances to inflation and employment, a survey showed on Friday.\nThe University of Michigan said its preliminary consumer sentiment index fell to 70.2 in the first half of this month from a final reading of 81.2 in July. That was the lowest level since 2011 and one of the six largest drops in the past 50 years of the survey. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the index would remain unchanged at 81.2.\nEconomic growth is still expected to grow this year at its fastest pace in four decades after falling into a brief recession in 2020 caused by the coronavirus pandemic.\nHowever, the recovery is showing some indication of cooling off and COVID-19 cases have doubled in the past two weeks to reach a six-month peak as the more transmissible Delta variant spreads rapidly across the country. Labor shortages across the service sector also persist while supply chain disruptions have continued.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1239,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895754258,"gmtCreate":1628775567874,"gmtModify":1633689608406,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895754258","repostId":"1130906606","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1130906606","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628771607,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1130906606?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-12 20:33","market":"hk","language":"en","title":"U.S. jobless claims total 375,000, matching estimate<blockquote>美国初请失业金人数总计37.5万人，与预估相符</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1130906606","media":"finance.yahoo","summary":"New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still ","content":"<p>New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still making headway despite the lingering threat of the Delta variant.</p><p><blockquote>上周每周新申请失业救济人数再次下降，尽管德尔塔变异毒株的威胁挥之不去，但劳动力市场的复苏仍在取得进展。</blockquote></p><p> The Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims report on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics from the print, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg:</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部于美国东部时间周四上午8:30发布了每周初请失业金报告。以下是印刷品中的主要指标，与彭博社编制的共识估计进行了比较：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Initial unemployment claims, week ended August 7:</b>375,000 vs. 375,000 expected and 385,000 during prior week</p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>截至8月7日当周首次申请失业救济人数：</b>375,000 vs预期375,000和前一周385,000</li></ul></blockquote></p><p></li>  <li><b>Continuing claims, week ended July 31:</b>2.866 million vs. 2.900 million expected and 2.930 million during prior week</p><p><blockquote><li><b>截至7月31日当周的持续索赔：</b>286.6万，预期29亿，前一周293万</li></blockquote></p><p></li> </ul> New weekly jobless claims fell for a third straight period and came in below the psychologically important 400,000 level. Continuing claims were also expected to dip to a fresh pandemic-era low below 3 million, pacing back toward pre-virus levels.</p><p><blockquote>每周新申请失业救济人数连续第三次下降，低于40万人的重要心理水平。预计持续申请失业救济人数也将降至大流行时期的新低，低于300万，恢复到病毒爆发前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> Economists have been expecting to see an improvement in the number of individuals returning to the labor force as more states roll off federal enhanced unemployment benefits. As of mid-summer, about two dozen states had decided to end these benefits ahead of their official September expiration date at the national level, in a move seen as incentivizing workers to return to jobs.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家一直预计，随着越来越多的州取消联邦强化失业救济金，重返劳动力市场的人数将会有所改善。截至仲夏，大约24个州已决定在国家层面9月份正式到期日之前终止这些福利，此举被视为激励工人重返工作岗位。</blockquote></p><p> As of July 17, just under 13 million individuals were still claiming unemployment benefits across all programs, including nearly 9.5 million claiming crisis-era Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation. The overall number of claimants was down by nearly 200,000 from the prior week.</p><p><blockquote>截至7月17日，仍有近1300万人在所有项目中申请失业救济金，其中近950万人申请危机时期的疫情失业援助和疫情紧急失业补偿。申请人总数比前一周减少了近20万人。</blockquote></p><p> Other data on the labor market have also recently pointed to a more robust pick-up in activity.Last Friday's jobs report from the Labor Department showed a much better-than-expected 943,000 payrollswere created in July, marking a back-to-back month with job gains north of 900,000. The unemployment rate, labor force participation rates and length of the workweek each also improved.</p><p><blockquote>劳动力市场的其他数据最近也表明经济活动出现了更强劲的回升。美国劳工部上周五发布的就业报告显示，7月份新增就业人数为943,000人，远好于预期，连续一个月新增就业人数超过900,000人。失业率、劳动力参与率和每周工作时间也都有所改善。</blockquote></p><p> Additional reports have underscored the extent of the demand for workers in the recovering economy. The Labor Department's Job Openings and Labor Turnover report showed a record of more than 10 million vacancies last month. And in a separate report,the National Federation of Independent Businessessaid a record share of small businesses also reported difficulties filling open positions in July.</p><p><blockquote>其他报告强调了经济复苏中对工人的需求程度。劳工部的职位空缺和劳动力流动报告显示，上个月有超过1000万个职位空缺。全国独立企业联合会在另一份报告中表示，7月份也有创纪录比例的小企业表示难以填补空缺职位。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e614df7c46a8c02625c7ee85c09136c0\" tg-width=\"704\" tg-height=\"469\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Shoppers wear face masks as they leave a Walmart store in Vernon Hills, Ill. Walmart is reversing its mask policy, Friday, July 30, 2021, and will require vaccinated workers in its distribution centers and stores in areas to wear masks in areas with high infection rates of the virus. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh, File)More</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>购物者在离开伊利诺伊州弗农山庄的沃尔玛商店时戴着口罩。沃尔玛将于2021年7月30日星期五取消其口罩政策，并将要求其配送中心和商店的接种疫苗的工人在病毒感染率高的地区佩戴口罩。（美联社照片/Nam Y.Huh，档案）更多</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The recent spread of the Delta variant across the U.S. has called into question the pace of further progress in the labor market, adding another hurdle in the path toward full employment. Airlines and travel companies have been among the most vocal about the impact of the variant,with Southwest Airlines on Wednesday highlightinga deceleration in bookings and increase in cancellations as infections in hot spots rise.</p><p><blockquote>最近美国德尔塔变异毒株的蔓延引发了人们对劳动力市场进一步进步的步伐的质疑，为实现充分就业的道路增添了另一个障碍。航空公司和旅游公司一直是对该变种影响最直言不讳的公司之一，西南航空公司周三强调，随着热点地区感染人数上升，预订量放缓，取消预订量增加。</blockquote></p><p> \"As last week revealed, incoming data at the start of Q3 points to further strong GDP growth and a recovering labor market,\" Sam Bullard, senior economist for Wells Fargo, wrote in a note. \"That said, the Delta variant which has led to a surge in hospitalizations and a rise in deaths attributed to COVID has to be monitored and poses downside risk to the growth and labor market outlooks — especially if plans to bring back office workers and re-open schools this fall are delayed.\"</p><p><blockquote>富国银行高级经济学家萨姆·布拉德在一份报告中写道：“正如上周透露的那样，第三季度初的数据表明GDP进一步强劲增长，劳动力市场正在复苏。”“也就是说，必须对导致新冠肺炎住院人数激增和死亡人数上升的德尔塔变异毒株进行监测，并对增长和劳动力市场前景构成下行风险——特别是如果计划让办公室工作人员返回并重新开放的话——今年秋天的学校将被推迟。”</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1612507957220","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>U.S. jobless claims total 375,000, matching estimate<blockquote>美国初请失业金人数总计37.5万人，与预估相符</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\">\nU.S. jobless claims total 375,000, matching estimate<blockquote>美国初请失业金人数总计37.5万人，与预估相符</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">finance.yahoo</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-12 20:33</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still making headway despite the lingering threat of the Delta variant.</p><p><blockquote>上周每周新申请失业救济人数再次下降，尽管德尔塔变异毒株的威胁挥之不去，但劳动力市场的复苏仍在取得进展。</blockquote></p><p> The Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims report on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics from the print, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg:</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部于美国东部时间周四上午8:30发布了每周初请失业金报告。以下是印刷品中的主要指标，与彭博社编制的共识估计进行了比较：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Initial unemployment claims, week ended August 7:</b>375,000 vs. 375,000 expected and 385,000 during prior week</p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>截至8月7日当周首次申请失业救济人数：</b>375,000 vs预期375,000和前一周385,000</li></ul></blockquote></p><p></li>  <li><b>Continuing claims, week ended July 31:</b>2.866 million vs. 2.900 million expected and 2.930 million during prior week</p><p><blockquote><li><b>截至7月31日当周的持续索赔：</b>286.6万，预期29亿，前一周293万</li></blockquote></p><p></li> </ul> New weekly jobless claims fell for a third straight period and came in below the psychologically important 400,000 level. Continuing claims were also expected to dip to a fresh pandemic-era low below 3 million, pacing back toward pre-virus levels.</p><p><blockquote>每周新申请失业救济人数连续第三次下降，低于40万人的重要心理水平。预计持续申请失业救济人数也将降至大流行时期的新低，低于300万，恢复到病毒爆发前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> Economists have been expecting to see an improvement in the number of individuals returning to the labor force as more states roll off federal enhanced unemployment benefits. As of mid-summer, about two dozen states had decided to end these benefits ahead of their official September expiration date at the national level, in a move seen as incentivizing workers to return to jobs.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家一直预计，随着越来越多的州取消联邦强化失业救济金，重返劳动力市场的人数将会有所改善。截至仲夏，大约24个州已决定在国家层面9月份正式到期日之前终止这些福利，此举被视为激励工人重返工作岗位。</blockquote></p><p> As of July 17, just under 13 million individuals were still claiming unemployment benefits across all programs, including nearly 9.5 million claiming crisis-era Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation. The overall number of claimants was down by nearly 200,000 from the prior week.</p><p><blockquote>截至7月17日，仍有近1300万人在所有项目中申请失业救济金，其中近950万人申请危机时期的疫情失业援助和疫情紧急失业补偿。申请人总数比前一周减少了近20万人。</blockquote></p><p> Other data on the labor market have also recently pointed to a more robust pick-up in activity.Last Friday's jobs report from the Labor Department showed a much better-than-expected 943,000 payrollswere created in July, marking a back-to-back month with job gains north of 900,000. The unemployment rate, labor force participation rates and length of the workweek each also improved.</p><p><blockquote>劳动力市场的其他数据最近也表明经济活动出现了更强劲的回升。美国劳工部上周五发布的就业报告显示，7月份新增就业人数为943,000人，远好于预期，连续一个月新增就业人数超过900,000人。失业率、劳动力参与率和每周工作时间也都有所改善。</blockquote></p><p> Additional reports have underscored the extent of the demand for workers in the recovering economy. The Labor Department's Job Openings and Labor Turnover report showed a record of more than 10 million vacancies last month. And in a separate report,the National Federation of Independent Businessessaid a record share of small businesses also reported difficulties filling open positions in July.</p><p><blockquote>其他报告强调了经济复苏中对工人的需求程度。劳工部的职位空缺和劳动力流动报告显示，上个月有超过1000万个职位空缺。全国独立企业联合会在另一份报告中表示，7月份也有创纪录比例的小企业表示难以填补空缺职位。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e614df7c46a8c02625c7ee85c09136c0\" tg-width=\"704\" tg-height=\"469\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Shoppers wear face masks as they leave a Walmart store in Vernon Hills, Ill. Walmart is reversing its mask policy, Friday, July 30, 2021, and will require vaccinated workers in its distribution centers and stores in areas to wear masks in areas with high infection rates of the virus. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh, File)More</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>购物者在离开伊利诺伊州弗农山庄的沃尔玛商店时戴着口罩。沃尔玛将于2021年7月30日星期五取消其口罩政策，并将要求其配送中心和商店的接种疫苗的工人在病毒感染率高的地区佩戴口罩。（美联社照片/Nam Y.Huh，档案）更多</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The recent spread of the Delta variant across the U.S. has called into question the pace of further progress in the labor market, adding another hurdle in the path toward full employment. Airlines and travel companies have been among the most vocal about the impact of the variant,with Southwest Airlines on Wednesday highlightinga deceleration in bookings and increase in cancellations as infections in hot spots rise.</p><p><blockquote>最近美国德尔塔变异毒株的蔓延引发了人们对劳动力市场进一步进步的步伐的质疑，为实现充分就业的道路增添了另一个障碍。航空公司和旅游公司一直是对该变种影响最直言不讳的公司之一，西南航空公司周三强调，随着热点地区感染人数上升，预订量放缓，取消预订量增加。</blockquote></p><p> \"As last week revealed, incoming data at the start of Q3 points to further strong GDP growth and a recovering labor market,\" Sam Bullard, senior economist for Wells Fargo, wrote in a note. \"That said, the Delta variant which has led to a surge in hospitalizations and a rise in deaths attributed to COVID has to be monitored and poses downside risk to the growth and labor market outlooks — especially if plans to bring back office workers and re-open schools this fall are delayed.\"</p><p><blockquote>富国银行高级经济学家萨姆·布拉德在一份报告中写道：“正如上周透露的那样，第三季度初的数据表明GDP进一步强劲增长，劳动力市场正在复苏。”“也就是说，必须对导致新冠肺炎住院人数激增和死亡人数上升的德尔塔变异毒株进行监测，并对增长和劳动力市场前景构成下行风险——特别是如果计划让办公室工作人员返回并重新开放的话——今年秋天的学校将被推迟。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/weekly-jobless-claims-week-ended-august-7-2021-183650493.html\">finance.yahoo</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",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/weekly-jobless-claims-week-ended-august-7-2021-183650493.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1130906606","content_text":"New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still making headway despite the lingering threat of the Delta variant.\nThe Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims report on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics from the print, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg:\n\nInitial unemployment claims, week ended August 7:375,000 vs. 375,000 expected and 385,000 during prior week\nContinuing claims, week ended July 31:2.866 million vs. 2.900 million expected and 2.930 million during prior week\n\nNew weekly jobless claims fell for a third straight period and came in below the psychologically important 400,000 level. Continuing claims were also expected to dip to a fresh pandemic-era low below 3 million, pacing back toward pre-virus levels.\nEconomists have been expecting to see an improvement in the number of individuals returning to the labor force as more states roll off federal enhanced unemployment benefits. As of mid-summer, about two dozen states had decided to end these benefits ahead of their official September expiration date at the national level, in a move seen as incentivizing workers to return to jobs.\nAs of July 17, just under 13 million individuals were still claiming unemployment benefits across all programs, including nearly 9.5 million claiming crisis-era Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation. The overall number of claimants was down by nearly 200,000 from the prior week.\nOther data on the labor market have also recently pointed to a more robust pick-up in activity.Last Friday's jobs report from the Labor Department showed a much better-than-expected 943,000 payrollswere created in July, marking a back-to-back month with job gains north of 900,000. The unemployment rate, labor force participation rates and length of the workweek each also improved.\nAdditional reports have underscored the extent of the demand for workers in the recovering economy. The Labor Department's Job Openings and Labor Turnover report showed a record of more than 10 million vacancies last month. And in a separate report,the National Federation of Independent Businessessaid a record share of small businesses also reported difficulties filling open positions in July.\nShoppers wear face masks as they leave a Walmart store in Vernon Hills, Ill. Walmart is reversing its mask policy, Friday, July 30, 2021, and will require vaccinated workers in its distribution centers and stores in areas to wear masks in areas with high infection rates of the virus. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh, File)More\nThe recent spread of the Delta variant across the U.S. has called into question the pace of further progress in the labor market, adding another hurdle in the path toward full employment. Airlines and travel companies have been among the most vocal about the impact of the variant,with Southwest Airlines on Wednesday highlightinga deceleration in bookings and increase in cancellations as infections in hot spots rise.\n\"As last week revealed, incoming data at the start of Q3 points to further strong GDP growth and a recovering labor market,\" Sam Bullard, senior economist for Wells Fargo, wrote in a note. \"That said, the Delta variant which has led to a surge in hospitalizations and a rise in deaths attributed to COVID has to be monitored and poses downside risk to the growth and labor market outlooks — especially if plans to bring back office workers and re-open schools this fall are delayed.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1925,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895755253,"gmtCreate":1628775524872,"gmtModify":1633689609302,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895755253","repostId":"2158579452","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1774,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895752209,"gmtCreate":1628775496701,"gmtModify":1633689609849,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895752209","repostId":"2158579452","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":711,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895756992,"gmtCreate":1628775450816,"gmtModify":1633689610970,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895756992","repostId":"1118557765","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1118557765","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628773597,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1118557765?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-12 21:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Regulatory Scrutiny Tightens: Is Apple Stock Going Down?<blockquote>监管审查收紧：苹果股价会下跌吗？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1118557765","media":"Thestreet","summary":"Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(AAPL)and government regulatory bodies is unf","content":"<p>Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(<b>AAPL</b>)and government regulatory bodies is unfolding. The Open App Markets Act,introducedon August 11, would “protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing”, among other things.</p><p><blockquote>一场涉及苹果的旷日持久的戏剧的另一章（<b>AAPL</b>）和政府监管机构正在展开。8月11日推出的《开放应用市场法案》将“保护开发者告诉消费者更低价格并提供有竞争力的定价的权利”等。</blockquote></p><p> If passed, will the new legislation have a substantial impact on Apple’s App Store and its high-growth, high-margin business? And if so, could this be a negative catalyst pushing Apple stock lower in the foreseeable future?</p><p><blockquote>如果通过，新立法是否会对苹果的App Store及其高增长、高利润的业务产生实质性影响？如果是这样，这是否会成为在可预见的未来推低苹果股价的负面催化剂？</blockquote></p><p> <b>Some background first</b></p><p><blockquote><b>先来点背景</b></blockquote></p><p> US Republican and Democrat policymakers agree on very little. A notable exception is the belief that Big Tech needs to be better regulated to ensure fairness and open competition in mobile apps, social media, online search, consumer tech services and others.</p><p><blockquote>美国共和党和民主党的政策制定者几乎没有达成一致。一个值得注意的例外是，人们认为大型科技公司需要更好地监管，以确保移动应用、社交媒体、在线搜索、消费科技服务等领域的公平和公开竞争。</blockquote></p><p> The history of scrutiny over the tech monopolies and oligopolies is long. Since launching the Apple Maven channel as recently as May 2020, I have witnessed:</p><p><blockquote>对科技垄断和寡头垄断的审查由来已久。自2020年5月推出苹果Maven频道以来，我见证了：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>alawsuitbrought against Alphabet (GOOG) over search ads;</li>  <li>four proposed antitrust billsagainst Amazon and peers;</li>  <li>a series of investigationsabout the App Store’s controlof the app market in Europe;</li>  <li>an epic battle between Apple and Epic Gamesover the App Store’s competitive powers.</li> </ul> Now, app stores have taken center stage once again. According to the Senate bill, U.S. consumers spent nearly $33 billion in mobile app stores in 2020 alone. If the app space were controlled by one single company (it is largely controlled by two), it would be a Fortune 100 company by revenue size.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>就搜索广告对Alphabet(GOOG)提起诉讼；</li><li>针对亚马逊及其同行的四项拟议反垄断法案；</li><li>关于App Store对欧洲App市场控制的一系列调查；</li><li>苹果和Epic Games之间关于App Store竞争力的史诗般的战斗。</li></ul>现在，应用商店再次占据了中心舞台。根据参议院法案，仅2020年，美国消费者在移动应用商店的支出就接近330亿美元。如果应用领域由一家公司控制（很大程度上由两家公司控制），按收入规模计算，它将是财富100强公司。</blockquote></p><p> Yes, it matters a lot</p><p><blockquote>是的，这很重要</blockquote></p><p> To be fair, this Wednesday’s news did not lead to bearishness, as Apple stock managed to top the performance of a struggling Nasdaq index for the day. But make no mistake: any restriction on Apple’s ability to monetize its user base through the App Store can and should be considered a significant risk.</p><p><blockquote>公平地说，本周三的消息并没有导致看跌，因为苹果股票当天的表现优于陷入困境的纳斯达克指数。但毫无疑问：对苹果通过App Store将其用户群货币化的能力的任何限制都可以而且应该被视为重大风险。</blockquote></p><p> The chart below shows how Apple’s services segment has grown at a healthy average pace of 20% over the past quarters. I estimate that the App Store accounted for about one-third of Apple service revenues in fiscal 2020. Better yet, services carry better margins than Apple’s already high-margin products.</p><p><blockquote>下图显示了苹果的服务部门在过去几个季度如何以20%的平均健康速度增长。我估计，2020财年，App Store约占苹果服务收入的三分之一。更好的是，服务比苹果已经高利润的产品有更好的利润。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e37f208f9bc9ab7a6689bb1564c333c\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"780\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Figure 2: Apple's services growth. Apple Maven</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图2：苹果服务业增长。苹果·马文</span></p></blockquote></p><p> A dent on Apple’s services model could certainly be harmful to the stock. Remember, from myconversation with Wedbush’s Dan Ives, that AAPL’s valuations have expanded substantially in the past decade due, in great part, to this shift toward subscription and recurring revenues.</p><p><blockquote>苹果服务模式的削弱肯定会对该股造成损害。请记住，从我与Wedbush的Dan Ives的对话来看，AAPL的估值在过去十年中大幅扩张，这在很大程度上是由于向订阅和经常性收入的转变。</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>Regulatory Scrutiny Tightens: Is Apple Stock Going Down?<blockquote>监管审查收紧：苹果股价会下跌吗？</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\">\nRegulatory Scrutiny Tightens: Is Apple Stock Going Down?<blockquote>监管审查收紧：苹果股价会下跌吗？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Thestreet</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-12 21:06</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(<b>AAPL</b>)and government regulatory bodies is unfolding. The Open App Markets Act,introducedon August 11, would “protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing”, among other things.</p><p><blockquote>一场涉及苹果的旷日持久的戏剧的另一章（<b>AAPL</b>）和政府监管机构正在展开。8月11日推出的《开放应用市场法案》将“保护开发者告诉消费者更低价格并提供有竞争力的定价的权利”等。</blockquote></p><p> If passed, will the new legislation have a substantial impact on Apple’s App Store and its high-growth, high-margin business? And if so, could this be a negative catalyst pushing Apple stock lower in the foreseeable future?</p><p><blockquote>如果通过，新立法是否会对苹果的App Store及其高增长、高利润的业务产生实质性影响？如果是这样，这是否会成为在可预见的未来推低苹果股价的负面催化剂？</blockquote></p><p> <b>Some background first</b></p><p><blockquote><b>先来点背景</b></blockquote></p><p> US Republican and Democrat policymakers agree on very little. A notable exception is the belief that Big Tech needs to be better regulated to ensure fairness and open competition in mobile apps, social media, online search, consumer tech services and others.</p><p><blockquote>美国共和党和民主党的政策制定者几乎没有达成一致。一个值得注意的例外是，人们认为大型科技公司需要更好地监管，以确保移动应用、社交媒体、在线搜索、消费科技服务等领域的公平和公开竞争。</blockquote></p><p> The history of scrutiny over the tech monopolies and oligopolies is long. Since launching the Apple Maven channel as recently as May 2020, I have witnessed:</p><p><blockquote>对科技垄断和寡头垄断的审查由来已久。自2020年5月推出苹果Maven频道以来，我见证了：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>alawsuitbrought against Alphabet (GOOG) over search ads;</li>  <li>four proposed antitrust billsagainst Amazon and peers;</li>  <li>a series of investigationsabout the App Store’s controlof the app market in Europe;</li>  <li>an epic battle between Apple and Epic Gamesover the App Store’s competitive powers.</li> </ul> Now, app stores have taken center stage once again. According to the Senate bill, U.S. consumers spent nearly $33 billion in mobile app stores in 2020 alone. If the app space were controlled by one single company (it is largely controlled by two), it would be a Fortune 100 company by revenue size.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>就搜索广告对Alphabet(GOOG)提起诉讼；</li><li>针对亚马逊及其同行的四项拟议反垄断法案；</li><li>关于App Store对欧洲App市场控制的一系列调查；</li><li>苹果和Epic Games之间关于App Store竞争力的史诗般的战斗。</li></ul>现在，应用商店再次占据了中心舞台。根据参议院法案，仅2020年，美国消费者在移动应用商店的支出就接近330亿美元。如果应用领域由一家公司控制（很大程度上由两家公司控制），按收入规模计算，它将是财富100强公司。</blockquote></p><p> Yes, it matters a lot</p><p><blockquote>是的，这很重要</blockquote></p><p> To be fair, this Wednesday’s news did not lead to bearishness, as Apple stock managed to top the performance of a struggling Nasdaq index for the day. But make no mistake: any restriction on Apple’s ability to monetize its user base through the App Store can and should be considered a significant risk.</p><p><blockquote>公平地说，本周三的消息并没有导致看跌，因为苹果股票当天的表现优于陷入困境的纳斯达克指数。但毫无疑问：对苹果通过App Store将其用户群货币化的能力的任何限制都可以而且应该被视为重大风险。</blockquote></p><p> The chart below shows how Apple’s services segment has grown at a healthy average pace of 20% over the past quarters. I estimate that the App Store accounted for about one-third of Apple service revenues in fiscal 2020. Better yet, services carry better margins than Apple’s already high-margin products.</p><p><blockquote>下图显示了苹果的服务部门在过去几个季度如何以20%的平均健康速度增长。我估计，2020财年，App Store约占苹果服务收入的三分之一。更好的是，服务比苹果已经高利润的产品有更好的利润。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e37f208f9bc9ab7a6689bb1564c333c\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"780\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Figure 2: Apple's services growth. Apple Maven</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图2：苹果服务业增长。苹果·马文</span></p></blockquote></p><p> A dent on Apple’s services model could certainly be harmful to the stock. Remember, from myconversation with Wedbush’s Dan Ives, that AAPL’s valuations have expanded substantially in the past decade due, in great part, to this shift toward subscription and recurring revenues.</p><p><blockquote>苹果服务模式的削弱肯定会对该股造成损害。请记住，从我与Wedbush的Dan Ives的对话来看，AAPL的估值在过去十年中大幅扩张，这在很大程度上是由于向订阅和经常性收入的转变。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/apple/apple-services/regulatory-scrutiny-tightens-is-apple-stock-going-down\">Thestreet</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/apple/apple-services/regulatory-scrutiny-tightens-is-apple-stock-going-down","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1118557765","content_text":"Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(AAPL)and government regulatory bodies is unfolding. The Open App Markets Act,introducedon August 11, would “protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing”, among other things.\nIf passed, will the new legislation have a substantial impact on Apple’s App Store and its high-growth, high-margin business? And if so, could this be a negative catalyst pushing Apple stock lower in the foreseeable future?\nSome background first\nUS Republican and Democrat policymakers agree on very little. A notable exception is the belief that Big Tech needs to be better regulated to ensure fairness and open competition in mobile apps, social media, online search, consumer tech services and others.\nThe history of scrutiny over the tech monopolies and oligopolies is long. Since launching the Apple Maven channel as recently as May 2020, I have witnessed:\n\nalawsuitbrought against Alphabet (GOOG) over search ads;\nfour proposed antitrust billsagainst Amazon and peers;\na series of investigationsabout the App Store’s controlof the app market in Europe;\nan epic battle between Apple and Epic Gamesover the App Store’s competitive powers.\n\nNow, app stores have taken center stage once again. According to the Senate bill, U.S. consumers spent nearly $33 billion in mobile app stores in 2020 alone. If the app space were controlled by one single company (it is largely controlled by two), it would be a Fortune 100 company by revenue size.\nYes, it matters a lot\nTo be fair, this Wednesday’s news did not lead to bearishness, as Apple stock managed to top the performance of a struggling Nasdaq index for the day. But make no mistake: any restriction on Apple’s ability to monetize its user base through the App Store can and should be considered a significant risk.\nThe chart below shows how Apple’s services segment has grown at a healthy average pace of 20% over the past quarters. I estimate that the App Store accounted for about one-third of Apple service revenues in fiscal 2020. Better yet, services carry better margins than Apple’s already high-margin products.\nFigure 2: Apple's services growth. Apple Maven\nA dent on Apple’s services model could certainly be harmful to the stock. Remember, from myconversation with Wedbush’s Dan Ives, that AAPL’s valuations have expanded substantially in the past decade due, in great part, to this shift toward subscription and recurring revenues.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":541,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":806458244,"gmtCreate":1627690540488,"gmtModify":1633757151009,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/806458244","repostId":"1152039134","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1152039134","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627689014,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1152039134?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-31 07:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1152039134","media":"The Street","summary":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Repor","content":"<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订阅者加入，大多数是在开盘时购买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","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>Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</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\">\nJim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Street</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-31 07:50</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订阅者加入，大多数是在开盘时购买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21\">The Street</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":{"HOOD":"Robinhood"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1152039134","content_text":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Report have done to avoid the IPO debacle?\nI can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.\nI can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.\nSecond, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?\nThird, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.\nI lost on every single point.\nThe underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.\nSecond, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.\nThird, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.\nEveryone who bought that day lost money.\nEveryone who sold that day made money.\nNo subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.\nIt is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.\nI always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.\nWhy do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.\nSo, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.\nGreed?\nStupidity?\nHow about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.\nJust like the offering ofTheStreet.com.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"HOOD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":415,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":806451988,"gmtCreate":1627690454044,"gmtModify":1633757152394,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/806451988","repostId":"1138566016","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1138566016","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627689251,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1138566016?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-31 07:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"It’s Open Season on Closed-End Fund Activists. How Fund Holders Can Win—and Lose<blockquote>现在是封闭式基金积极分子的开放季节。基金持有人如何输赢</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138566016","media":"Barron's","summary":"TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasensta","content":"<p>TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasenstab at the helm, the closed-end fund returned an average of 0.3% annually in the past decade, versus an average 7% for peers in global income. Also frustrating, its shares rarely traded close to the fund’s underlying net asset value, or NAV. The discount averaged 11% in the past three years.</p><p><blockquote>邓普顿全球收益基金多年来一直让投资者感到沮丧。尽管明星经理迈克尔·哈森斯塔布(Michael Hasenstab)掌舵，但该封闭式基金在过去十年中的平均年回报率为0.3%，而全球收入同行的平均回报率为7%。同样令人沮丧的是，其股票的交易价格很少接近该基金的基础资产净值（NAV）。过去三年折扣平均为11%。</blockquote></p><p> Investors have caught a break, however, thanks to Saba Capital Management, a hedge fund shop run by activist investor Boaz Weinstein. Saba amassed a 20% stake in the Templeton fund and recently won four contested board seats. It has been pressuring the board to take actions to boost the share price. Its moves have paid off: The fund has returned a total 4.5% this year as its share price improved, and the discount to NAV has shrunk to 4%.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于激进投资者Boaz Weinstein经营的对冲基金公司Saba Capital Management，投资者得到了喘息的机会。Saba持有邓普顿基金20%的股份，最近赢得了四个有争议的董事会席位。它一直在向董事会施压，要求其采取行动提振股价。其举措得到了回报：随着股价上涨，该基金今年的总回报率为4.5%，相对资产净值的折扣已缩小至4%。</blockquote></p><p> Tactics like Saba’s have long infuriated mutual fund companies; no one wants a hedge fund threatening a coup. Now, with some help from Congress, the playing field could tilt in favor of closed-end funds and their company sponsors, due to a bill recently introduced in the House. That could work against the interests of fund investors.</p><p><blockquote>像萨巴这样的策略长期以来一直激怒着共同基金公司；没有人希望对冲基金威胁政变。现在，在国会的一些帮助下，由于众议院最近提出的一项法案，竞争环境可能会向封闭式基金及其公司赞助商倾斜。这可能会损害基金投资者的利益。</blockquote></p><p> The Increasing Investor Opportunities Act, introduced in June by Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R., Ohio) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., New York), includes two measures that could make it much tougher for hedge funds to pressure closed-end funds and win proxy fights. One proposed change would lift the current 15% limit on closed-end-fund ownership of illiquid private funds, such as venture-capital and private-equity funds. A second measure would prevent activist hedge funds from acquiring more than 10% of a closed-end fund’s shares.</p><p><blockquote>《增加投资者机会法案》由俄亥俄州共和党众议员安东尼·冈萨雷斯（Anthony Gonzalez）和纽约州民主党众议员格雷戈里·米克斯（Gregory Meeks）于6月提出，其中包括两项措施，可能会使对冲基金更难向封闭式基金施压并赢得代理权之争。一项拟议的变化将取消目前对风险投资和私募股权基金等非流动性私募基金封闭式基金所有权15%的限制。第二项措施将阻止激进对冲基金收购封闭式基金10%以上的股份。</blockquote></p><p> A spokesman for Gonzalez declined to comment. Meeks didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>冈萨雷斯的发言人拒绝置评。米克斯没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Proponents of the changes say they would expand access to private markets for retail investors. They also say hedge funds are exploiting gaps in securities laws at a cost to long-term shareholders, saddling them with tax liabilities, higher fees, and forced fund liquidations. The bill would eliminate a “loophole that activist investors have used to extract short-term profits at the expense of retail investors,” the Investment Company Institute, or ICI, said in a recent statement.</p><p><blockquote>这些变化的支持者表示，他们将扩大散户投资者进入私人市场的机会。他们还表示，对冲基金正在利用证券法的漏洞，以牺牲长期股东的利益为代价，给他们带来纳税义务、更高的费用和强制基金清算的负担。投资公司协会（ICI）在最近的一份声明中表示，该法案将消除“激进投资者利用该漏洞以牺牲散户投资者的利益为代价来获取短期利润”。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds and portfolio managers who invest in closed-end funds say that mutual fund companies are simply trying to protect a pool of assets and fees from shareholder interference. Most retail investors don’t vote their shares in proxy contests. That may leave fund boards largely free to pursue their own agendas.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的对冲基金和投资组合经理表示，共同基金公司只是想保护一个资产池和费用不受股东干涉。大多数散户投资者不会在代理权竞争中投票。这可能会让基金董事会在很大程度上自由追求自己的议程。</blockquote></p><p> “Activism plays an important role, and if this bill passes, it will become more difficult for activists to threaten or create changes,” says Matt Buffington, a portfolio manager at Dryden Capital, an activist hedge fund.</p><p><blockquote>激进主义对冲基金德莱顿资本(Dryden Capital)的投资组合经理马特·巴芬顿(Matt Buffington)表示：“激进主义发挥着重要作用，如果这项法案获得通过，激进主义将更难威胁或创造变革。”</blockquote></p><p> Gregory Neer, a portfolio manager with Relative Value Partners, an advisory firm that invests in closed-end funds, agrees. “The ability for investors to pressure funds is beneficial to all shareholders,” he says.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的咨询公司Relative Value Partners的投资组合经理格雷戈里·尼尔(Gregory Neer)对此表示同意。“投资者向资金施压的能力对所有股东都有利，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Closed-end funds have long been popular with investors due to their high yields and steady distributions. Many use leverage, borrowing money at market rates to boost payouts. They also generate income with options strategies and investments in high-yielding areas of the stock and bond markets.</p><p><blockquote>封闭式基金由于收益率高、分配稳健，长期以来深受投资者欢迎。许多人使用杠杆，以市场利率借钱来增加支出。他们还通过期权策略以及对股票和债券市场高收益领域的投资来产生收入。</blockquote></p><p> But the funds have structural drawbacks. Expense ratios are steep, averaging 2.1%, according to Morningstar Direct. And since the funds have a fixed number of shares outstanding, prices reflect market demand for both a fund and its underlying assets. Funds usually trade at a discount to NAV. While it is attractive, in theory, to pay 90 cents for a dollar of assets, investors might never see the extra dime.</p><p><blockquote>但这些基金存在结构性缺陷。根据Morningstar Direct的数据，费用率很高，平均为2.1%。由于基金有固定数量的已发行股票，价格反映了市场对基金及其基础资产的需求。基金的交易价格通常低于资产净值。虽然从理论上讲，为一美元的资产支付90美分很有吸引力，但投资者可能永远看不到额外的一毛钱。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds aim to exploit this inefficiency, buying closed-end funds at below-market value. They then pressure fund boards to take steps to lift the funds’ prices. The playbook is straightforward: accumulate a stake, win board seats, and then force a fund company into a tender offer, whereby it agrees to repurchase shares at nearly full price.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金旨在利用这种低效率，以低于市场价值的价格购买封闭式基金。然后，他们向基金董事会施压，要求其采取措施提高基金价格。剧本很简单：积累股份，赢得董事会席位，然后迫使基金公司发起要约收购，同意以接近全价回购股票。</blockquote></p><p> If that fails, a hedge fund might try to replace a fund’s manager, orchestrate a liquidation of the fund, or get it converted to an open-end fund—moves that could also pay off with the share price rising to parity with the NAV. Firms like Saba have also taken over funds entirely.</p><p><blockquote>如果失败，对冲基金可能会尝试更换基金经理，策划基金清算，或将其转换为开放式基金——这些举措也可能随着股价上涨至与资产净值平价而获得回报。像Saba这样的公司也完全接管了资金。</blockquote></p><p> Giving closed-end funds freedom to own more private securities could throw a wrench into the strategy. Tender offers work only if a fund can liquidate most of its holdings at market prices. Because venture-capital and private-equity holdings generally don’t trade publicly, their pricing isn’t transparent. “When closed-end funds invest in illiquid things, it protects them from activism,” one activist manager tells<i>Barron’s</i>.</p><p><blockquote>给予封闭式基金持有更多私人证券的自由可能会破坏这一策略。只有当基金能够以市场价格清算其大部分持股时，要约收购才会起作用。由于风险投资和私募股权控股公司通常不公开交易，因此它们的定价并不透明。一位激进主义经理表示：“当封闭式基金投资于非流动性的东西时，它可以保护它们免受激进主义的影响。”<i>巴伦周刊</i>.</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Removing the cap on private-fund ownership is “in line with a legislative agenda of getting retail investors more access to private investments,” says Thomas DeCapo, an attorney for the mutual fund industry.</p><p><blockquote>共同基金行业律师托马斯·迪卡波表示，取消私募基金所有权上限“符合让散户投资者更多获得私人投资的立法议程”。</blockquote></p><p> And capping activists at 10% of a fund doesn’t stop them from mounting proxy campaigns. “Nothing about this is antidemocratic,” he says. “It doesn’t stop a majority of investors who are unhappy or want change. It stops one investor from using its economic power, with other people’s money, to basically force changes on everybody else.”</p><p><blockquote>将活动人士的资金限制在10%并不能阻止他们发起代理活动。“这一切都不是反民主的，”他说。“这并不能阻止大多数不满意或想要改变的投资者。它阻止了一个投资者利用其经济实力和其他人的钱，基本上迫使其他人做出改变。”</blockquote></p><p> Investor advocates see it differently, however, saying fund investors could wind up paying higher fees for funds that hold more-opaque investments. “It’s just another fund-of-funds structure, and those are notoriously high-fee,” says Tyler Gellasch, head of Healthy Markets, an investor-protection group.</p><p><blockquote>然而，投资者倡导者对此有不同的看法，他们表示，基金投资者最终可能会为持有更不透明投资的基金支付更高的费用。投资者保护组织Healthy Markets的负责人泰勒·盖拉施(Tyler Gellasch)表示：“这只是另一种基金中的基金结构，而且费用是出了名的高。”</blockquote></p><p> Individual hedge funds technically can’t own more than 3% of a closed-end fund, under ownership restrictions in the Investment Company Act of 1940. But they skirt the rule by building stakes through affiliated entities, creating enough of a critical mass to force changes at a fund through proxy voting.</p><p><blockquote>根据1940年《投资公司法》的所有权限制，从技术上讲，个人对冲基金不能拥有封闭式基金超过3%的股份。但他们通过附属实体增持股份来规避这一规则，从而创造足够的临界质量，通过代理投票迫使基金发生变化。</blockquote></p><p> The ICI—the mutual fund industry’s lobby—has tried to persuade regulators to crack down on hedge funds. In a submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the ICI argued that hedge fund campaigns often consume a fund’s resources, trigger tax liabilities for long-term investors, and result in the forced selling of securities to meet a hedge fund’s demands for a tender offer. A fund’s expense ratio could increase if it is forced to buy back shares and its asset base shrinks.</p><p><blockquote>ICI——共同基金行业的游说团体——试图说服监管机构打击对冲基金。在去年提交给美国证券交易委员会的一份文件中，ICI辩称，对冲基金的活动往往会消耗基金的资源，引发长期投资者的纳税义务，并导致被迫出售证券以满足对冲基金的要约收购要求。如果基金被迫回购股票且资产基础萎缩，其费用率可能会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The activist community’s “assault” on the industry has had a chilling effect on product launches, the ICI said, resulting in fewer closed-end funds on the market today than in 2007.</p><p><blockquote>ICI表示，维权人士对该行业的“攻击”对产品发布产生了寒蝉效应，导致目前市场上的封闭式基金比2007年有所减少。</blockquote></p><p> But hedge funds argue that changing the 1940 act would amount to a power grab by mutual funds. “This is all coming from the mutual fund industry, and it’s no coincidence that this protects them,” says Phil Goldstein, co-founder of Bulldog Investors, an activist that has long targeted closed-end funds. “There are funds with terrible performance and wide discounts. The ICI never says we need a mechanism where shareholders can hold those managers accountable.”</p><p><blockquote>但对冲基金认为，修改1940年法案无异于共同基金攫取权力。Bulldog Investors的联合创始人菲尔·戈尔茨坦(Phil Goldstein)表示：“这一切都来自共同基金行业，这保护了他们并非巧合。”Bulldog Investors是一位长期瞄准封闭式基金的活动家。“有些基金的业绩很糟糕，折扣很大。ICI从未说过我们需要一种机制，让股东可以让这些经理承担责任。”</blockquote></p><p> Imposing an ownership cap would also make proxy campaigns less economic. Limited to 10%, hedge funds wouldn’t own enough shares, with sufficient economic interest, to justify the expense of a proxy contest, which can cost millions of dollars. “If you’re limited to 10% and have to spend 2.5% of your assets on a proxy campaign, you’d say it’s too risky,” says Goldstein. “Meanwhile, management isn’t spending anything—just shareholder money. They want to make it economically unattractive to run a proxy contest.”</p><p><blockquote>设定所有权上限也会降低代理活动的经济性。仅限于10%，对冲基金不会拥有足够的股份和足够的经济利益来证明代理权竞争的费用是合理的，而代理权竞争可能会花费数百万美元。“如果你被限制在10%，并且必须将2.5%的资产用于代理活动，你会说风险太大，”戈尔茨坦说。“与此同时，管理层没有花费任何东西——只是股东的钱。他们想让举办代理权竞争在经济上失去吸引力。”</blockquote></p><p> Regulators and courts have expressed skepticism about some defenses that closed-end funds have adopted to prevent shareholder challenges. And, the SEC might not side with the fund industry. Since 2010, the SEC has warned fund companies against using state securities laws to thwart hedge fund takeovers. The SEC dropped its objection to these state “control share” laws last year under its Republican chairman, Jay Clayton. But the new, Democratic chairman, Gary Gensler, might reinstate the SEC’s objection—a reason for the industry to enlist Congress to change the law. The SEC didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>监管机构和法院对封闭式基金为防止股东挑战而采取的一些防御措施表示怀疑。而且，美国证券交易委员会可能不会站在基金行业一边。自2010年以来，SEC一直警告基金公司不要利用州证券法来阻止对冲基金收购。去年，在共和党主席杰伊·克莱顿的领导下，美国证券交易委员会放弃了对这些州“控股权”法的反对。但新任民主党主席加里·詹斯勒(Gary Gensler)可能会恢复SEC的反对意见——这是该行业争取国会修改法律的一个理由。美国证券交易委员会没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Institutional Shareholder Services,a firm that makes recommendations on proxy voting, says investors should reject fund companies’ use of state control-share laws, which limit the voting rights of shareholders. With the SEC on the sidelines, ISS says, “CEF shareholders are denied important voting rights and are subject to management entrenchment.”</p><p><blockquote>就代理投票提出建议的机构股东服务公司表示，投资者应该拒绝基金公司使用限制股东投票权的国家控股权法。ISS表示，由于SEC的袖手旁观，“CEF股东被剥夺了重要的投票权，并受到管理层的巩固。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/70323ed9daef142f19afd48be72b6299\" tg-width=\"755\" tg-height=\"334\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/68beb47d59eb02e90b04eb7093f9f17b\" tg-width=\"759\" tg-height=\"285\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Hedge funds don’t always win, but investors might want to ride along as activists build a stake. “When an activist comes in, you usually see an increase in the share price and a decrease in the discount,” says Matt Souther, an associate finance professor at the University of South Carolina.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金并不总是获胜，但随着激进分子增持股份，投资者可能希望随波逐流。南卡罗来纳大学金融学副教授马特·沙无然(Matt Souther)表示：“当激进分子介入时，你通常会看到股价上涨而折扣减少。”</blockquote></p><p> Templeton Global Income’s (ticker: GIM) discount to NAV could narrow further if Saba acquires more shares or tries to take over the fund’s $743 million in assets. Saba recently took over management of another fund, Voya Prime Rate Trust, which it rebrandedSaba Capital Income &amp; Opportunities(BRW).Franklin Templetonand Saba declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>如果Saba收购更多股票或试图接管该基金7.43亿美元的资产，Templeton Global Income（股票代码：GIM）相对于资产净值的折扣可能会进一步缩小。Saba最近接管了另一只基金Voya Prime Rate Trust的管理，并将其更名为Saba Capital Income&amp;Opportunities(BRW)。富兰克林邓普顿和Saba拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Miller/Howard High Income Equity(HIE) is also in Saba’s crosshairs. The fund is a “term trust” with a mandated liquidation date in 2024. It trades at a 5.9% discount to NAV. “In a worst-case scenario, you buy it at a discount and you’ll earn an excess return from now to 2024 because that discount will narrow,” says Patrick Galley, co-manager ofRiverNorth Opportunities(RIV), a closed-end fund that owns HIE.</p><p><blockquote>米勒/霍华德高收入股票（HIE）也是萨巴的目标。该基金是“定期信托”，强制清算日期为2024年。其交易价格较资产净值折价5.9%。封闭式RiverNorth Opportunities(RIV)联席经理帕特里克·加利(Patrick Galley)表示：“在最坏的情况下，你以折扣价购买，从现在到2024年，你将获得超额回报，因为折扣将会缩小。”拥有HIE的基金。</blockquote></p><p> Other closed-end funds in which Saba owns stakes includeSource Capital(SOR) andInvesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA). Bulldog has built a position inTortoise Energy Independence(NDP).</p><p><blockquote>Saba持有股份的其他封闭式基金包括Source Capital(SOR)和Invesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA)。Bulldog在乌龟能源独立(NDP)中建立了地位。</blockquote></p><p> Some closed-end funds look attractive on their fundamentals.Adams Diversified Equity(ADX) offers exposure to big tech stocks, trades at a 14% discount to NAV, and is committed to an annualized distribution of at least 6%. “For investors who expect tech to do well, ADX is a good holding,” says David Tepper, a closed-end investor and head of Tepper Capital Management in San Francisco.</p><p><blockquote>一些封闭式基金的基本面看起来很有吸引力。Adams Diversified Equity(ADX)提供大型科技股的投资，交易价格较资产净值折价14%，并承诺年化分配至少6%。“对于预计科技股表现良好的投资者来说，ADX是一个不错的持股，”封闭式投资者兼旧金山Tepper Capital Management主管David Tepper表示。</blockquote></p><p> Sprott Focus Trust(FUND) is another fund he likes. Veteran small-cap manager Whitney George runs it, and his family owns 45% of the shares. It trades at a 10% discount and yields 5.7%. Tepper also favorsRoyce Global Value Trust(RGT), trading at a 9% discount and yielding 7.9%.</p><p><blockquote>Sprott Focus Trust（基金）是他喜欢的另一只基金。资深小盘股经理惠特尼·乔治(Whitney George)经营该公司，他的家族拥有45%的股份。其交易价格有10%的折扣，收益率为5.7%。Tepper还青睐Royce Global Value Trust(RGT)，其交易价格折扣9%，收益率为7.9%。</blockquote></p><p> None of these funds has attracted much activist involvement, according to securities filings. But if activists see opportunity, they could pile in and pressure fund management—assuming that Congress doesn’t rewrite the rules of engagement.</p><p><blockquote>根据证券备案文件，这些基金都没有吸引太多激进分子的参与。但如果活动人士看到机会，他们可能会涌入并向基金管理层施压——假设国会不会重写交战规则。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>It’s Open Season on Closed-End Fund Activists. How Fund Holders Can Win—and Lose<blockquote>现在是封闭式基金积极分子的开放季节。基金持有人如何输赢</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\">\nIt’s Open Season on Closed-End Fund Activists. How Fund Holders Can Win—and Lose<blockquote>现在是封闭式基金积极分子的开放季节。基金持有人如何输赢</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barron's</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-31 07:54</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasenstab at the helm, the closed-end fund returned an average of 0.3% annually in the past decade, versus an average 7% for peers in global income. Also frustrating, its shares rarely traded close to the fund’s underlying net asset value, or NAV. The discount averaged 11% in the past three years.</p><p><blockquote>邓普顿全球收益基金多年来一直让投资者感到沮丧。尽管明星经理迈克尔·哈森斯塔布(Michael Hasenstab)掌舵，但该封闭式基金在过去十年中的平均年回报率为0.3%，而全球收入同行的平均回报率为7%。同样令人沮丧的是，其股票的交易价格很少接近该基金的基础资产净值（NAV）。过去三年折扣平均为11%。</blockquote></p><p> Investors have caught a break, however, thanks to Saba Capital Management, a hedge fund shop run by activist investor Boaz Weinstein. Saba amassed a 20% stake in the Templeton fund and recently won four contested board seats. It has been pressuring the board to take actions to boost the share price. Its moves have paid off: The fund has returned a total 4.5% this year as its share price improved, and the discount to NAV has shrunk to 4%.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于激进投资者Boaz Weinstein经营的对冲基金公司Saba Capital Management，投资者得到了喘息的机会。Saba持有邓普顿基金20%的股份，最近赢得了四个有争议的董事会席位。它一直在向董事会施压，要求其采取行动提振股价。其举措得到了回报：随着股价上涨，该基金今年的总回报率为4.5%，相对资产净值的折扣已缩小至4%。</blockquote></p><p> Tactics like Saba’s have long infuriated mutual fund companies; no one wants a hedge fund threatening a coup. Now, with some help from Congress, the playing field could tilt in favor of closed-end funds and their company sponsors, due to a bill recently introduced in the House. That could work against the interests of fund investors.</p><p><blockquote>像萨巴这样的策略长期以来一直激怒着共同基金公司；没有人希望对冲基金威胁政变。现在，在国会的一些帮助下，由于众议院最近提出的一项法案，竞争环境可能会向封闭式基金及其公司赞助商倾斜。这可能会损害基金投资者的利益。</blockquote></p><p> The Increasing Investor Opportunities Act, introduced in June by Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R., Ohio) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., New York), includes two measures that could make it much tougher for hedge funds to pressure closed-end funds and win proxy fights. One proposed change would lift the current 15% limit on closed-end-fund ownership of illiquid private funds, such as venture-capital and private-equity funds. A second measure would prevent activist hedge funds from acquiring more than 10% of a closed-end fund’s shares.</p><p><blockquote>《增加投资者机会法案》由俄亥俄州共和党众议员安东尼·冈萨雷斯（Anthony Gonzalez）和纽约州民主党众议员格雷戈里·米克斯（Gregory Meeks）于6月提出，其中包括两项措施，可能会使对冲基金更难向封闭式基金施压并赢得代理权之争。一项拟议的变化将取消目前对风险投资和私募股权基金等非流动性私募基金封闭式基金所有权15%的限制。第二项措施将阻止激进对冲基金收购封闭式基金10%以上的股份。</blockquote></p><p> A spokesman for Gonzalez declined to comment. Meeks didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>冈萨雷斯的发言人拒绝置评。米克斯没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Proponents of the changes say they would expand access to private markets for retail investors. They also say hedge funds are exploiting gaps in securities laws at a cost to long-term shareholders, saddling them with tax liabilities, higher fees, and forced fund liquidations. The bill would eliminate a “loophole that activist investors have used to extract short-term profits at the expense of retail investors,” the Investment Company Institute, or ICI, said in a recent statement.</p><p><blockquote>这些变化的支持者表示，他们将扩大散户投资者进入私人市场的机会。他们还表示，对冲基金正在利用证券法的漏洞，以牺牲长期股东的利益为代价，给他们带来纳税义务、更高的费用和强制基金清算的负担。投资公司协会（ICI）在最近的一份声明中表示，该法案将消除“激进投资者利用该漏洞以牺牲散户投资者的利益为代价来获取短期利润”。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds and portfolio managers who invest in closed-end funds say that mutual fund companies are simply trying to protect a pool of assets and fees from shareholder interference. Most retail investors don’t vote their shares in proxy contests. That may leave fund boards largely free to pursue their own agendas.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的对冲基金和投资组合经理表示，共同基金公司只是想保护一个资产池和费用不受股东干涉。大多数散户投资者不会在代理权竞争中投票。这可能会让基金董事会在很大程度上自由追求自己的议程。</blockquote></p><p> “Activism plays an important role, and if this bill passes, it will become more difficult for activists to threaten or create changes,” says Matt Buffington, a portfolio manager at Dryden Capital, an activist hedge fund.</p><p><blockquote>激进主义对冲基金德莱顿资本(Dryden Capital)的投资组合经理马特·巴芬顿(Matt Buffington)表示：“激进主义发挥着重要作用，如果这项法案获得通过，激进主义将更难威胁或创造变革。”</blockquote></p><p> Gregory Neer, a portfolio manager with Relative Value Partners, an advisory firm that invests in closed-end funds, agrees. “The ability for investors to pressure funds is beneficial to all shareholders,” he says.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的咨询公司Relative Value Partners的投资组合经理格雷戈里·尼尔(Gregory Neer)对此表示同意。“投资者向资金施压的能力对所有股东都有利，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Closed-end funds have long been popular with investors due to their high yields and steady distributions. Many use leverage, borrowing money at market rates to boost payouts. They also generate income with options strategies and investments in high-yielding areas of the stock and bond markets.</p><p><blockquote>封闭式基金由于收益率高、分配稳健，长期以来深受投资者欢迎。许多人使用杠杆，以市场利率借钱来增加支出。他们还通过期权策略以及对股票和债券市场高收益领域的投资来产生收入。</blockquote></p><p> But the funds have structural drawbacks. Expense ratios are steep, averaging 2.1%, according to Morningstar Direct. And since the funds have a fixed number of shares outstanding, prices reflect market demand for both a fund and its underlying assets. Funds usually trade at a discount to NAV. While it is attractive, in theory, to pay 90 cents for a dollar of assets, investors might never see the extra dime.</p><p><blockquote>但这些基金存在结构性缺陷。根据Morningstar Direct的数据，费用率很高，平均为2.1%。由于基金有固定数量的已发行股票，价格反映了市场对基金及其基础资产的需求。基金的交易价格通常低于资产净值。虽然从理论上讲，为一美元的资产支付90美分很有吸引力，但投资者可能永远看不到额外的一毛钱。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds aim to exploit this inefficiency, buying closed-end funds at below-market value. They then pressure fund boards to take steps to lift the funds’ prices. The playbook is straightforward: accumulate a stake, win board seats, and then force a fund company into a tender offer, whereby it agrees to repurchase shares at nearly full price.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金旨在利用这种低效率，以低于市场价值的价格购买封闭式基金。然后，他们向基金董事会施压，要求其采取措施提高基金价格。剧本很简单：积累股份，赢得董事会席位，然后迫使基金公司发起要约收购，同意以接近全价回购股票。</blockquote></p><p> If that fails, a hedge fund might try to replace a fund’s manager, orchestrate a liquidation of the fund, or get it converted to an open-end fund—moves that could also pay off with the share price rising to parity with the NAV. Firms like Saba have also taken over funds entirely.</p><p><blockquote>如果失败，对冲基金可能会尝试更换基金经理，策划基金清算，或将其转换为开放式基金——这些举措也可能随着股价上涨至与资产净值平价而获得回报。像Saba这样的公司也完全接管了资金。</blockquote></p><p> Giving closed-end funds freedom to own more private securities could throw a wrench into the strategy. Tender offers work only if a fund can liquidate most of its holdings at market prices. Because venture-capital and private-equity holdings generally don’t trade publicly, their pricing isn’t transparent. “When closed-end funds invest in illiquid things, it protects them from activism,” one activist manager tells<i>Barron’s</i>.</p><p><blockquote>给予封闭式基金持有更多私人证券的自由可能会破坏这一策略。只有当基金能够以市场价格清算其大部分持股时，要约收购才会起作用。由于风险投资和私募股权控股公司通常不公开交易，因此它们的定价并不透明。一位激进主义经理表示：“当封闭式基金投资于非流动性的东西时，它可以保护它们免受激进主义的影响。”<i>巴伦周刊</i>.</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Removing the cap on private-fund ownership is “in line with a legislative agenda of getting retail investors more access to private investments,” says Thomas DeCapo, an attorney for the mutual fund industry.</p><p><blockquote>共同基金行业律师托马斯·迪卡波表示，取消私募基金所有权上限“符合让散户投资者更多获得私人投资的立法议程”。</blockquote></p><p> And capping activists at 10% of a fund doesn’t stop them from mounting proxy campaigns. “Nothing about this is antidemocratic,” he says. “It doesn’t stop a majority of investors who are unhappy or want change. It stops one investor from using its economic power, with other people’s money, to basically force changes on everybody else.”</p><p><blockquote>将活动人士的资金限制在10%并不能阻止他们发起代理活动。“这一切都不是反民主的，”他说。“这并不能阻止大多数不满意或想要改变的投资者。它阻止了一个投资者利用其经济实力和其他人的钱，基本上迫使其他人做出改变。”</blockquote></p><p> Investor advocates see it differently, however, saying fund investors could wind up paying higher fees for funds that hold more-opaque investments. “It’s just another fund-of-funds structure, and those are notoriously high-fee,” says Tyler Gellasch, head of Healthy Markets, an investor-protection group.</p><p><blockquote>然而，投资者倡导者对此有不同的看法，他们表示，基金投资者最终可能会为持有更不透明投资的基金支付更高的费用。投资者保护组织Healthy Markets的负责人泰勒·盖拉施(Tyler Gellasch)表示：“这只是另一种基金中的基金结构，而且费用是出了名的高。”</blockquote></p><p> Individual hedge funds technically can’t own more than 3% of a closed-end fund, under ownership restrictions in the Investment Company Act of 1940. But they skirt the rule by building stakes through affiliated entities, creating enough of a critical mass to force changes at a fund through proxy voting.</p><p><blockquote>根据1940年《投资公司法》的所有权限制，从技术上讲，个人对冲基金不能拥有封闭式基金超过3%的股份。但他们通过附属实体增持股份来规避这一规则，从而创造足够的临界质量，通过代理投票迫使基金发生变化。</blockquote></p><p> The ICI—the mutual fund industry’s lobby—has tried to persuade regulators to crack down on hedge funds. In a submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the ICI argued that hedge fund campaigns often consume a fund’s resources, trigger tax liabilities for long-term investors, and result in the forced selling of securities to meet a hedge fund’s demands for a tender offer. A fund’s expense ratio could increase if it is forced to buy back shares and its asset base shrinks.</p><p><blockquote>ICI——共同基金行业的游说团体——试图说服监管机构打击对冲基金。在去年提交给美国证券交易委员会的一份文件中，ICI辩称，对冲基金的活动往往会消耗基金的资源，引发长期投资者的纳税义务，并导致被迫出售证券以满足对冲基金的要约收购要求。如果基金被迫回购股票且资产基础萎缩，其费用率可能会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The activist community’s “assault” on the industry has had a chilling effect on product launches, the ICI said, resulting in fewer closed-end funds on the market today than in 2007.</p><p><blockquote>ICI表示，维权人士对该行业的“攻击”对产品发布产生了寒蝉效应，导致目前市场上的封闭式基金比2007年有所减少。</blockquote></p><p> But hedge funds argue that changing the 1940 act would amount to a power grab by mutual funds. “This is all coming from the mutual fund industry, and it’s no coincidence that this protects them,” says Phil Goldstein, co-founder of Bulldog Investors, an activist that has long targeted closed-end funds. “There are funds with terrible performance and wide discounts. The ICI never says we need a mechanism where shareholders can hold those managers accountable.”</p><p><blockquote>但对冲基金认为，修改1940年法案无异于共同基金攫取权力。Bulldog Investors的联合创始人菲尔·戈尔茨坦(Phil Goldstein)表示：“这一切都来自共同基金行业，这保护了他们并非巧合。”Bulldog Investors是一位长期瞄准封闭式基金的活动家。“有些基金的业绩很糟糕，折扣很大。ICI从未说过我们需要一种机制，让股东可以让这些经理承担责任。”</blockquote></p><p> Imposing an ownership cap would also make proxy campaigns less economic. Limited to 10%, hedge funds wouldn’t own enough shares, with sufficient economic interest, to justify the expense of a proxy contest, which can cost millions of dollars. “If you’re limited to 10% and have to spend 2.5% of your assets on a proxy campaign, you’d say it’s too risky,” says Goldstein. “Meanwhile, management isn’t spending anything—just shareholder money. They want to make it economically unattractive to run a proxy contest.”</p><p><blockquote>设定所有权上限也会降低代理活动的经济性。仅限于10%，对冲基金不会拥有足够的股份和足够的经济利益来证明代理权竞争的费用是合理的，而代理权竞争可能会花费数百万美元。“如果你被限制在10%，并且必须将2.5%的资产用于代理活动，你会说风险太大，”戈尔茨坦说。“与此同时，管理层没有花费任何东西——只是股东的钱。他们想让举办代理权竞争在经济上失去吸引力。”</blockquote></p><p> Regulators and courts have expressed skepticism about some defenses that closed-end funds have adopted to prevent shareholder challenges. And, the SEC might not side with the fund industry. Since 2010, the SEC has warned fund companies against using state securities laws to thwart hedge fund takeovers. The SEC dropped its objection to these state “control share” laws last year under its Republican chairman, Jay Clayton. But the new, Democratic chairman, Gary Gensler, might reinstate the SEC’s objection—a reason for the industry to enlist Congress to change the law. The SEC didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>监管机构和法院对封闭式基金为防止股东挑战而采取的一些防御措施表示怀疑。而且，美国证券交易委员会可能不会站在基金行业一边。自2010年以来，SEC一直警告基金公司不要利用州证券法来阻止对冲基金收购。去年，在共和党主席杰伊·克莱顿的领导下，美国证券交易委员会放弃了对这些州“控股权”法的反对。但新任民主党主席加里·詹斯勒(Gary Gensler)可能会恢复SEC的反对意见——这是该行业争取国会修改法律的一个理由。美国证券交易委员会没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Institutional Shareholder Services,a firm that makes recommendations on proxy voting, says investors should reject fund companies’ use of state control-share laws, which limit the voting rights of shareholders. With the SEC on the sidelines, ISS says, “CEF shareholders are denied important voting rights and are subject to management entrenchment.”</p><p><blockquote>就代理投票提出建议的机构股东服务公司表示，投资者应该拒绝基金公司使用限制股东投票权的国家控股权法。ISS表示，由于SEC的袖手旁观，“CEF股东被剥夺了重要的投票权，并受到管理层的巩固。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/70323ed9daef142f19afd48be72b6299\" tg-width=\"755\" tg-height=\"334\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/68beb47d59eb02e90b04eb7093f9f17b\" tg-width=\"759\" tg-height=\"285\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Hedge funds don’t always win, but investors might want to ride along as activists build a stake. “When an activist comes in, you usually see an increase in the share price and a decrease in the discount,” says Matt Souther, an associate finance professor at the University of South Carolina.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金并不总是获胜，但随着激进分子增持股份，投资者可能希望随波逐流。南卡罗来纳大学金融学副教授马特·沙无然(Matt Souther)表示：“当激进分子介入时，你通常会看到股价上涨而折扣减少。”</blockquote></p><p> Templeton Global Income’s (ticker: GIM) discount to NAV could narrow further if Saba acquires more shares or tries to take over the fund’s $743 million in assets. Saba recently took over management of another fund, Voya Prime Rate Trust, which it rebrandedSaba Capital Income &amp; Opportunities(BRW).Franklin Templetonand Saba declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>如果Saba收购更多股票或试图接管该基金7.43亿美元的资产，Templeton Global Income（股票代码：GIM）相对于资产净值的折扣可能会进一步缩小。Saba最近接管了另一只基金Voya Prime Rate Trust的管理，并将其更名为Saba Capital Income&amp;Opportunities(BRW)。富兰克林邓普顿和Saba拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Miller/Howard High Income Equity(HIE) is also in Saba’s crosshairs. The fund is a “term trust” with a mandated liquidation date in 2024. It trades at a 5.9% discount to NAV. “In a worst-case scenario, you buy it at a discount and you’ll earn an excess return from now to 2024 because that discount will narrow,” says Patrick Galley, co-manager ofRiverNorth Opportunities(RIV), a closed-end fund that owns HIE.</p><p><blockquote>米勒/霍华德高收入股票（HIE）也是萨巴的目标。该基金是“定期信托”，强制清算日期为2024年。其交易价格较资产净值折价5.9%。封闭式RiverNorth Opportunities(RIV)联席经理帕特里克·加利(Patrick Galley)表示：“在最坏的情况下，你以折扣价购买，从现在到2024年，你将获得超额回报，因为折扣将会缩小。”拥有HIE的基金。</blockquote></p><p> Other closed-end funds in which Saba owns stakes includeSource Capital(SOR) andInvesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA). Bulldog has built a position inTortoise Energy Independence(NDP).</p><p><blockquote>Saba持有股份的其他封闭式基金包括Source Capital(SOR)和Invesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA)。Bulldog在乌龟能源独立(NDP)中建立了地位。</blockquote></p><p> Some closed-end funds look attractive on their fundamentals.Adams Diversified Equity(ADX) offers exposure to big tech stocks, trades at a 14% discount to NAV, and is committed to an annualized distribution of at least 6%. “For investors who expect tech to do well, ADX is a good holding,” says David Tepper, a closed-end investor and head of Tepper Capital Management in San Francisco.</p><p><blockquote>一些封闭式基金的基本面看起来很有吸引力。Adams Diversified Equity(ADX)提供大型科技股的投资，交易价格较资产净值折价14%，并承诺年化分配至少6%。“对于预计科技股表现良好的投资者来说，ADX是一个不错的持股，”封闭式投资者兼旧金山Tepper Capital Management主管David Tepper表示。</blockquote></p><p> Sprott Focus Trust(FUND) is another fund he likes. Veteran small-cap manager Whitney George runs it, and his family owns 45% of the shares. It trades at a 10% discount and yields 5.7%. Tepper also favorsRoyce Global Value Trust(RGT), trading at a 9% discount and yielding 7.9%.</p><p><blockquote>Sprott Focus Trust（基金）是他喜欢的另一只基金。资深小盘股经理惠特尼·乔治(Whitney George)经营该公司，他的家族拥有45%的股份。其交易价格有10%的折扣，收益率为5.7%。Tepper还青睐Royce Global Value Trust(RGT)，其交易价格折扣9%，收益率为7.9%。</blockquote></p><p> None of these funds has attracted much activist involvement, according to securities filings. But if activists see opportunity, they could pile in and pressure fund management—assuming that Congress doesn’t rewrite the rules of engagement.</p><p><blockquote>根据证券备案文件，这些基金都没有吸引太多激进分子的参与。但如果活动人士看到机会，他们可能会涌入并向基金管理层施压——假设国会不会重写交战规则。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/congress-closed-end-funds-legislation-51627657959?mod=newsviewer_click\">Barron's</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":{},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/congress-closed-end-funds-legislation-51627657959?mod=newsviewer_click","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138566016","content_text":"TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasenstab at the helm, the closed-end fund returned an average of 0.3% annually in the past decade, versus an average 7% for peers in global income. Also frustrating, its shares rarely traded close to the fund’s underlying net asset value, or NAV. The discount averaged 11% in the past three years.\nInvestors have caught a break, however, thanks to Saba Capital Management, a hedge fund shop run by activist investor Boaz Weinstein. Saba amassed a 20% stake in the Templeton fund and recently won four contested board seats. It has been pressuring the board to take actions to boost the share price. Its moves have paid off: The fund has returned a total 4.5% this year as its share price improved, and the discount to NAV has shrunk to 4%.\nTactics like Saba’s have long infuriated mutual fund companies; no one wants a hedge fund threatening a coup. Now, with some help from Congress, the playing field could tilt in favor of closed-end funds and their company sponsors, due to a bill recently introduced in the House. That could work against the interests of fund investors.\nThe Increasing Investor Opportunities Act, introduced in June by Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R., Ohio) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., New York), includes two measures that could make it much tougher for hedge funds to pressure closed-end funds and win proxy fights. One proposed change would lift the current 15% limit on closed-end-fund ownership of illiquid private funds, such as venture-capital and private-equity funds. A second measure would prevent activist hedge funds from acquiring more than 10% of a closed-end fund’s shares.\nA spokesman for Gonzalez declined to comment. Meeks didn’t respond to requests for comment.\nProponents of the changes say they would expand access to private markets for retail investors. They also say hedge funds are exploiting gaps in securities laws at a cost to long-term shareholders, saddling them with tax liabilities, higher fees, and forced fund liquidations. The bill would eliminate a “loophole that activist investors have used to extract short-term profits at the expense of retail investors,” the Investment Company Institute, or ICI, said in a recent statement.\nHedge funds and portfolio managers who invest in closed-end funds say that mutual fund companies are simply trying to protect a pool of assets and fees from shareholder interference. Most retail investors don’t vote their shares in proxy contests. That may leave fund boards largely free to pursue their own agendas.\n“Activism plays an important role, and if this bill passes, it will become more difficult for activists to threaten or create changes,” says Matt Buffington, a portfolio manager at Dryden Capital, an activist hedge fund.\nGregory Neer, a portfolio manager with Relative Value Partners, an advisory firm that invests in closed-end funds, agrees. “The ability for investors to pressure funds is beneficial to all shareholders,” he says.\nClosed-end funds have long been popular with investors due to their high yields and steady distributions. Many use leverage, borrowing money at market rates to boost payouts. They also generate income with options strategies and investments in high-yielding areas of the stock and bond markets.\nBut the funds have structural drawbacks. Expense ratios are steep, averaging 2.1%, according to Morningstar Direct. And since the funds have a fixed number of shares outstanding, prices reflect market demand for both a fund and its underlying assets. Funds usually trade at a discount to NAV. While it is attractive, in theory, to pay 90 cents for a dollar of assets, investors might never see the extra dime.\nHedge funds aim to exploit this inefficiency, buying closed-end funds at below-market value. They then pressure fund boards to take steps to lift the funds’ prices. The playbook is straightforward: accumulate a stake, win board seats, and then force a fund company into a tender offer, whereby it agrees to repurchase shares at nearly full price.\nIf that fails, a hedge fund might try to replace a fund’s manager, orchestrate a liquidation of the fund, or get it converted to an open-end fund—moves that could also pay off with the share price rising to parity with the NAV. Firms like Saba have also taken over funds entirely.\nGiving closed-end funds freedom to own more private securities could throw a wrench into the strategy. Tender offers work only if a fund can liquidate most of its holdings at market prices. Because venture-capital and private-equity holdings generally don’t trade publicly, their pricing isn’t transparent. “When closed-end funds invest in illiquid things, it protects them from activism,” one activist manager tellsBarron’s.\nRemoving the cap on private-fund ownership is “in line with a legislative agenda of getting retail investors more access to private investments,” says Thomas DeCapo, an attorney for the mutual fund industry.\nAnd capping activists at 10% of a fund doesn’t stop them from mounting proxy campaigns. “Nothing about this is antidemocratic,” he says. “It doesn’t stop a majority of investors who are unhappy or want change. It stops one investor from using its economic power, with other people’s money, to basically force changes on everybody else.”\nInvestor advocates see it differently, however, saying fund investors could wind up paying higher fees for funds that hold more-opaque investments. “It’s just another fund-of-funds structure, and those are notoriously high-fee,” says Tyler Gellasch, head of Healthy Markets, an investor-protection group.\nIndividual hedge funds technically can’t own more than 3% of a closed-end fund, under ownership restrictions in the Investment Company Act of 1940. But they skirt the rule by building stakes through affiliated entities, creating enough of a critical mass to force changes at a fund through proxy voting.\nThe ICI—the mutual fund industry’s lobby—has tried to persuade regulators to crack down on hedge funds. In a submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the ICI argued that hedge fund campaigns often consume a fund’s resources, trigger tax liabilities for long-term investors, and result in the forced selling of securities to meet a hedge fund’s demands for a tender offer. A fund’s expense ratio could increase if it is forced to buy back shares and its asset base shrinks.\nThe activist community’s “assault” on the industry has had a chilling effect on product launches, the ICI said, resulting in fewer closed-end funds on the market today than in 2007.\nBut hedge funds argue that changing the 1940 act would amount to a power grab by mutual funds. “This is all coming from the mutual fund industry, and it’s no coincidence that this protects them,” says Phil Goldstein, co-founder of Bulldog Investors, an activist that has long targeted closed-end funds. “There are funds with terrible performance and wide discounts. The ICI never says we need a mechanism where shareholders can hold those managers accountable.”\nImposing an ownership cap would also make proxy campaigns less economic. Limited to 10%, hedge funds wouldn’t own enough shares, with sufficient economic interest, to justify the expense of a proxy contest, which can cost millions of dollars. “If you’re limited to 10% and have to spend 2.5% of your assets on a proxy campaign, you’d say it’s too risky,” says Goldstein. “Meanwhile, management isn’t spending anything—just shareholder money. They want to make it economically unattractive to run a proxy contest.”\nRegulators and courts have expressed skepticism about some defenses that closed-end funds have adopted to prevent shareholder challenges. And, the SEC might not side with the fund industry. Since 2010, the SEC has warned fund companies against using state securities laws to thwart hedge fund takeovers. The SEC dropped its objection to these state “control share” laws last year under its Republican chairman, Jay Clayton. But the new, Democratic chairman, Gary Gensler, might reinstate the SEC’s objection—a reason for the industry to enlist Congress to change the law. The SEC didn’t respond to requests for comment.\nInstitutional Shareholder Services,a firm that makes recommendations on proxy voting, says investors should reject fund companies’ use of state control-share laws, which limit the voting rights of shareholders. With the SEC on the sidelines, ISS says, “CEF shareholders are denied important voting rights and are subject to management entrenchment.”\nHedge funds don’t always win, but investors might want to ride along as activists build a stake. “When an activist comes in, you usually see an increase in the share price and a decrease in the discount,” says Matt Souther, an associate finance professor at the University of South Carolina.\nTempleton Global Income’s (ticker: GIM) discount to NAV could narrow further if Saba acquires more shares or tries to take over the fund’s $743 million in assets. Saba recently took over management of another fund, Voya Prime Rate Trust, which it rebrandedSaba Capital Income & Opportunities(BRW).Franklin Templetonand Saba declined to comment.\nMiller/Howard High Income Equity(HIE) is also in Saba’s crosshairs. The fund is a “term trust” with a mandated liquidation date in 2024. It trades at a 5.9% discount to NAV. “In a worst-case scenario, you buy it at a discount and you’ll earn an excess return from now to 2024 because that discount will narrow,” says Patrick Galley, co-manager ofRiverNorth Opportunities(RIV), a closed-end fund that owns HIE.\nOther closed-end funds in which Saba owns stakes includeSource Capital(SOR) andInvesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA). Bulldog has built a position inTortoise Energy Independence(NDP).\nSome closed-end funds look attractive on their fundamentals.Adams Diversified Equity(ADX) offers exposure to big tech stocks, trades at a 14% discount to NAV, and is committed to an annualized distribution of at least 6%. “For investors who expect tech to do well, ADX is a good holding,” says David Tepper, a closed-end investor and head of Tepper Capital Management in San Francisco.\nSprott Focus Trust(FUND) is another fund he likes. Veteran small-cap manager Whitney George runs it, and his family owns 45% of the shares. It trades at a 10% discount and yields 5.7%. Tepper also favorsRoyce Global Value Trust(RGT), trading at a 9% discount and yielding 7.9%.\nNone of these funds has attracted much activist involvement, according to securities filings. But if activists see opportunity, they could pile in and pressure fund management—assuming that Congress doesn’t rewrite the rules of engagement.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":527,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":806458244,"gmtCreate":1627690540488,"gmtModify":1633757151009,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good","listText":"Good","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/806458244","repostId":"1152039134","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1152039134","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627689014,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1152039134?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-31 07:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1152039134","media":"The Street","summary":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Repor","content":"<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订阅者加入，大多数是在开盘时购买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","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>Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</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\">\nJim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Street</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-31 07:50</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订阅者加入，大多数是在开盘时购买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21\">The Street</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":{"HOOD":"Robinhood"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1152039134","content_text":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Report have done to avoid the IPO debacle?\nI can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.\nI can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.\nSecond, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?\nThird, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.\nI lost on every single point.\nThe underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.\nSecond, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.\nThird, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.\nEveryone who bought that day lost money.\nEveryone who sold that day made money.\nNo subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.\nIt is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.\nI always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.\nWhy do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.\nSo, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.\nGreed?\nStupidity?\nHow about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.\nJust like the offering ofTheStreet.com.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"HOOD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":415,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":830063164,"gmtCreate":1628993915458,"gmtModify":1633688114194,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/830063164","repostId":"1133270372","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1133270372","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628988501,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1133270372?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-15 08:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Where Will Plug Power Be In 10 Years?<blockquote>10年后的普拉格能源会在哪里？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1133270372","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nPlug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.\nIt serves low-ri","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Plug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.</li>  <li>It serves low-risk customers and has a strong position in its industry.</li>  <li>Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth, and investors should consider what actual per-share returns might look like before deploying money at current valuations.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fa1aea5535d99338f385c168062b218\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"852\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>普拉格能源活跃在一个具有巨大增长动力的有吸引力的行业中。</li><li>它服务于低风险客户，在行业中拥有强大的地位。</li><li>股价反映了未来的大量增长，投资者在以当前估值配置资金之前应该考虑实际每股回报可能是什么样子。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. (PLUG) is active in a high-growth industry, which translates into a strong long-term business growth outlook, as long as the company can capitalize on its goals and management executes well. The company is, however, not profitable yet, and the path to meaningful net profits holds some uncertainties still. Taking a longer-term view, we can expect that Plug Power will generate positive net profits despite the fact that shares are valuing the company at a relatively high current valuation. From a risk-reward standpoint, there may be better picks available, though, despite the fact that I believe that shares will trade materially higher in 2031.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司（PLUG）活跃于高增长行业，只要公司能够实现其目标并且管理层执行良好，这就意味着强劲的长期业务增长前景。然而，该公司尚未盈利，实现有意义的净利润的道路仍然存在一些不确定性。从更长远的角度来看，我们可以预计普拉格能源将产生正的净利润，尽管该公司目前的估值相对较高。不过，从风险回报的角度来看，可能有更好的选择，尽管我相信2031年股价将大幅走高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. has seen its share price move up and down violently over the last year:</p><p><blockquote>去年，普拉格能源公司的股价剧烈上下波动：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d940297249151eddcccf6440d20ef031\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares trade 130% higher than 12 months ago, but at the same time, shares trade at just one-third of the all-time high today. In early 2021, shares exploded upwards at a time when other renewable/new energy and related stocks, including EV plays, benefited from massive investor enthusiasm. Since then, enthusiasm seems to have cooled, and shares have reverted back to the $20s. At current prices, Plug Power, Inc. is valued at $16 billion based on a diluted share count of a little less than 600 million. Analysts are pretty bullish on the stock right now, as the consensus price target of $41 implies an upside potential of around 50% from current prices throughout the next year. It should be noted, however, that the analyst consensus price target has been lowered in recent months, and may continue to be lowered going forward. Due to non-existent profits PLUG can't be valued on an earnings basis, but shares trade for around 30x this year's revenue, which is quite expensive.</p><p><blockquote>股价比12个月前上涨了130%，但与此同时，股价仅为今天历史高点的三分之一。2021年初，其他可再生能源/新能源及相关股票（包括电动汽车）受益于投资者的巨大热情，股价大幅上涨。此后，热情似乎有所降温，股价又回到了20多美元。按目前价格计算，普拉格能源公司的估值为160亿美元，稀释后的股票数量略低于6亿股。分析师目前非常看好该股，因为41美元的一致目标价意味着明年较当前价格有50%左右的上涨潜力。但值得注意的是，近几个月来分析师一致的目标价已被下调，并且未来可能会继续下调。由于不存在利润，PLUG无法以盈利为基础进行估值，但股价约为今年收入的30倍，这相当昂贵。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Prediction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. is active in an absolute growth industry, as hydrogen fuel cells will see huge demand growth in coming years as they allow for an environmentally friendly alternative to other fuels. Plug Power, as a turnkey provider in a market leadership position for this technology, is well-positioned to capitalize on this megatrend. Through a network of global partnerships, including with Brookfield Renewable Partners (BEP), Plug Power is working on growing the green hydrogen industryglobally:</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司活跃在一个绝对增长的行业，因为氢燃料电池将在未来几年看到巨大的需求增长，因为它们允许作为其他燃料的环保替代品。普拉格能源作为该技术市场领先地位的交钥匙供应商，完全有能力利用这一大趋势。通过包括Brookfield Renewable Partners(BEP)在内的全球合作伙伴网络，普拉格能源正在致力于在全球范围内发展绿色氢产业：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91a8e3b57882e429c9eace431bd1f541\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"350\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Plug Power presentation</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：普拉格能源演示</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power's green hydrogen can be used for powering trucks, busses, and other vehicles, while the company is also providing environmentally friendly alternatives to diesel generators in the megawatt scale range that can be used by utilities, for example. The company is, on top of that, also working on other ventures that are not ready to be commercialized yet, such as powering aircraft with hydrogen. Plug Power will have at least 5 hydrogen plants running in the US in 2024, i.e. three years from now, with more projects being in the pipeline both in the US and in overseas markets such as Europe.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源的绿色氢可用于为卡车、公共汽车和其他车辆提供动力，同时该公司还为公用事业公司使用的兆瓦级柴油发电机提供环保替代品。除此之外，该公司还致力于其他尚未准备好商业化的项目，例如用氢气为飞机提供动力。2024年，即三年后，普拉格能源将在美国运营至少5座氢气厂，美国以及欧洲等海外市场正在建设更多项目。</blockquote></p><p> 80% of Plug Power's customers are what the company calls blue chip customers, which includes companies such as Amazon (AMZN). These companies are oftentimes highly inclined to improve their CO2 footprint in order to receive better ESG ratings, and at the same time, these are low-risk customers as their strong balance sheets and cash flows mean that the risk of liquidity or solvency issues is negligible. Overall, Plug Power thus works with attractive counterparts, and their financial firepower means that Plug Power is not forced to sell its products at bargain prices, which is why the company has been able to generate relatively attractive product gross margins in the 30s in recent quarters.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源80%的客户是该公司的评级蓝筹客户，其中包括亚马逊（AMZN）等公司。这些公司通常非常倾向于改善其二氧化碳足迹，以获得更好的ESG评级，同时，这些公司是低风险客户，因为其强劲的资产负债表和现金流意味着流动性或偿付能力问题的风险可以忽略不计。总体而言，普拉格能源因此与有吸引力的同行合作，他们的财务火力意味着普拉格能源不会被迫以便宜的价格出售其产品，这就是为什么该公司最近几个季度能够产生相对有吸引力的产品毛利率在30年代。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Due to the still relatively small scale of the company, Plug Power is not profitable on a net basis or operating basis, however. The company's operating expenses, relative to the revenues that Plug Power generates, are still too high for now. This should, however, change over time, as operating leverage and improving product margins should allow Plug Power to grow gross profits relative to operating expenses, which will result in improving profitability. Analysts are currently predicting positive net profits for fiscal 2024, or three years from now. It would, of course, be better if Plug Power had hit that point already, but for long-term oriented investors, two more years of negative profits will not be a disaster.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于公司规模仍然相对较小，普拉格能源在净利润或运营基础上均未盈利。相对于普拉格能源产生的收入，该公司的运营费用目前仍然过高。然而，这种情况应该会随着时间的推移而改变，因为运营杠杆和产品利润率的提高应该会使普拉格能源的毛利润相对于运营费用增长，从而提高盈利能力。分析师目前预测2024财年（即三年后）净利润为正。当然，如果普拉格能源已经达到了这一点，那就更好了，但对于长期投资者来说，再有两年的负利润并不是一场灾难。</blockquote></p><p> When investing in a company such as Plug Power, the very near term is not too relevant, but what matters more is the longer-term potential of the company to grow its revenue and profits. Through the combination of ESG tailwinds, massive market growth, and its market leadership position, Plug Power seems to be well-positioned to grow its revenue for many years to come:</p><p><blockquote>在投资普拉格能源这样的公司时，短期并不太重要，但更重要的是公司收入和利润增长的长期潜力。通过ESG顺风、大规模市场增长及其市场领导地位的结合，普拉格能源似乎处于有利地位，可以在未来许多年增加收入：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4d6f0576ba51f219d85b18d90ccaf6f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"628\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source:Seeking Alpha</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：寻求阿尔法</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Analysts are currently predicting that revenues will grow at 50%+ a year over the next three years, while growth is forecasted to remain almost 30% through at least 2030, which equates to a highly attractive long-term growth outlook. There are, of course, no guarantees that this will indeed happen, as some risks to the business model remain. The company is not profitable yet, thus funding of future growth projects could theoretically become a problem. On top of that, it is possible that other players with deep pockets will try to disrupt the market or gain market share. The risk of that is, I believe, due to Plug Power's leadership position, not very large. But should the market become more competitive, non-profitable Plug Power might run into problems if it were to run into market share fights that could pressure margins.</p><p><blockquote>分析师目前预测，未来三年收入将以每年50%以上的速度增长，而至少到2030年，增长率预计将保持近30%，这相当于极具吸引力的长期增长前景。当然，不能保证这种情况确实会发生，因为商业模式的一些风险仍然存在。该公司尚未盈利，因此未来增长项目的资金理论上可能会成为一个问题。最重要的是，其他财力雄厚的参与者可能会试图扰乱市场或获得市场份额。我相信，由于普拉格能源的领导地位，这种风险并不是很大。但如果市场竞争变得更加激烈，非盈利的普拉格能源如果遭遇市场份额争夺战，可能会给利润率带来压力，可能会遇到问题。</blockquote></p><p> Some execution risks do thus remain for sure, and investors shouldn't see the above growth projections as crystal-clear forecasts that are infallible. Instead, however, the above predictions showcase what a base-case scenario could look like, and actual results might be better or worse than that. Overall, it can be said that the longer-term outlook for Plug Power's business is excellent, as the company should be able to grow at an attractive pace for many years to come, as investors, companies, and consumers put more and more emphasis on a smaller carbon footprint. Obvious growth prospects for an industry do not, however, automatically translate into share price gains. Those that bought shares of Cisco (CSCO) at the highs during the dot.com bubble, for example, are still in the red today, 22 years later, despite the massive growth the business has experienced in that time frame. Valuations should be considered as well, and Plug Power is far from cheap today.</p><p><blockquote>因此，一些执行风险确实仍然存在，投资者不应将上述增长预测视为绝对可靠的清晰预测。然而，相反，上述预测展示了基本情况可能是什么样子，实际结果可能比这更好或更差。总体而言，可以说普拉格能源业务的长期前景非常好，因为随着投资者、公司和消费者越来越重视更小的碳足迹，该公司应该能够在未来许多年以有吸引力的速度增长。然而，一个行业明显的增长前景并不会自动转化为股价上涨。例如，那些在互联网泡沫期间高位购买思科(CSCO)股票的公司，尽管该业务在此期间经历了巨大增长，但22年后的今天仍然处于亏损状态。估值也应该考虑，普拉格能源今天的价格远非便宜。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Forecast For 2030</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2030年普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Today, Plug Power is trading for around 32x this year's expected revenue. If that was an earnings multiple, the stock still wouldn't be especially cheap, relative to how the average company is valued. At more than 30x sales, shares do seem very expensive. When we consider PLUG's growth outlook over the coming decade, that is relativized to some degree, but I believe that shares are still trading above fair value.</p><p><blockquote>如今，普拉格能源的股价约为今年预期收入的32倍。如果这是市盈率，相对于公司的平均估值，该股仍然不会特别便宜。以超过30倍的销售额计算，股价确实看起来非常昂贵。当我们考虑PLUG未来十年的增长前景时，这在某种程度上是相对的，但我相信股价仍高于公允价值。</blockquote></p><p> If the analyst consensus estimate for 2030's revenues is correct, at $10.5 billion, then shares are trading at around 1.5x 2030's revenue right now. Many industrial names are trading for 1x to 2x this year's revenue right now, which indicates how much future growth is priced into PLUG's stock already. One can, of course, argue that PLUG's growth outlook in 2030 is likely still better than that of the average company today, as it seems very much possible for PLUG to grow at a double-digit rate well beyond 2030. But still, shares upside for PLUG's shares is not too great over the coming decade, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>如果分析师对2030年收入的一致估计是正确的，为105亿美元，那么目前股价的交易价格约为2030年收入的1.5倍。许多工业公司目前的交易价格是今年收入的1至2倍，这表明PLUG的股票已经反映了未来的增长。当然，人们可以说，PLUG在2030年的增长前景可能仍好于当今的普通公司，因为PLUG很有可能在2030年之后以两位数的速度增长。但我相信，PLUG股价在未来十年的上涨空间不会太大。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> If PLUG were to trade at a still relatively steep 3.5x revenue in 2030, this gets us to a market cap estimate of around $37billion, or roughly 2.3x as much as today. PLUG's share count will, however, not stay unchanged over the next decade, which is why returns on a per-share basis will be lower than that. If we assume that the share count climbs by just 2% a year, 2030's share count will stand at a little above 700 million. At a $37 billion market capitalization, each individual stock would then trade at around $53, which would mean a return of ~100% from today. On an annual basis, this would equate to returns of 8%. 8% annual returns are far from bad, but many things have to go right for that to happen -- PLUG has to execute well, deliver on growth projects, and avoid massive share issuance. When we also consider that this estimate requires a still rather high 3.5x sales multiple in 2030, then those returns are not great enough to warrant a buy rating, I believe. It would be different of 8% returns could come from a very de-risked blue chip with very low uncertainties, but that is not the case here. For reference, if PLUG executes well and hits growth estimates, but its shares trade for 2.5x sales in 2030, then the share price, assuming 2% annual dilution, would be $37, which would equate to just 4% annual returns. PLUG's share count has risen by around 50% over the last year alone, and even though I don't expect similar dilution in coming years, it is at least possible for PLUG's share count to rise by significantly more than 2% a year, which would pressure returns further.</p><p><blockquote>如果PLUG在2030年的交易收入仍然相对较高的3.5倍，那么我们的市值估计约为370亿美元，大约是今天的2.3倍。然而，PLUG的股票数量在未来十年不会保持不变，这就是为什么每股回报率将低于这一数字。如果我们假设股票数量每年仅增长2%，那么2030年的股票数量将略高于7亿股。在370亿美元的市值下，每只股票的交易价格约为53美元，这意味着从今天起的回报率约为100%。按年计算，这相当于8%的回报率。8%的年回报率远非坏事，但要实现这一目标，许多事情必须顺利进行——PLUG必须执行良好，交付增长项目，并避免大规模股票发行。当我们还考虑到这一估计需要2030年仍然相当高的3.5倍销售倍数时，我相信这些回报还不足以保证买入评级。8%的回报可能来自风险非常低、不确定性非常低的蓝筹股，但这里的情况并非如此。作为参考，如果PLUG执行良好并达到增长预期，但其股价在2030年的交易价格为销售额的2.5倍，那么假设年稀释2%，股价将为37美元，这相当于年回报率仅为4%。仅去年一年，PLUG的股票数量就增加了约50%，尽管我预计未来几年不会出现类似的稀释，但PLUG的股票数量至少有可能每年大幅增加2%以上，这将进一步给回报带来压力。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I do not believe that investors will lose money with PLUG over the next decade or more. But I also do not believe that investors will see very attractive returns in that time frame, despite the fact that Plug Power's underlying business growth outlook is highly attractive. Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth already, and I believe that returns in the sub-10% range can also be generated through lower-risk investments, with less volatile stocks.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我不认为投资者在未来十年或更长时间内会因PLUG而亏损。但我也不相信投资者会在这段时间内看到非常有吸引力的回报，尽管普拉格能源的基本业务增长前景非常有吸引力。股票已经反映了未来的大量增长，我相信通过风险较低、股票波动性较小的投资也可以产生低于10%的回报。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Conclusion: Where Could Plug Power Be In 10 Years?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>结论：10年后普拉格能源会在哪里？</b></blockquote></p><p> One can't know that today, but we can make educated guesses. According to may scenarios laid out above, PLUG could trade at $37-$55 in 2030, factoring in another year of growth, we could end up at $40-$60 in 2031, I believe -- if many things go right. In case there are major hiccups with growth projects, or if the share count rises more than expected, these estimates may be too high.</p><p><blockquote>今天人们无法知道这一点，但我们可以做出有根据的猜测。根据上面列出的5月份情景，PLUG在2030年的交易价格可能为37-55美元，考虑到又一年的增长，我相信，如果很多事情进展顺利，我们在2031年的交易价格可能会达到40-60美元。如果增长项目出现重大问题，或者股票数量增长超过预期，这些估计可能会过高。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe that there is considerable long-term upside potential for PLUG's shares, but expected returns in the mid-to-high-single digits range are not gigantic, and the same returns can be generated through more mature, less volatile investments with fewer uncertainties and less execution risk. I thus do think that PLUG is not a buy right here, even though I like the company's growth prospects and its position in an attractive industry.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我认为PLUG的股票有相当大的长期上涨潜力，但中高个位数范围的预期回报并不巨大，通过更成熟、波动性更小的投资可以产生相同的回报，不确定性更少，执行风险更小。因此，我确实认为PLUG在这里不值得买入，尽管我喜欢该公司的增长前景及其在有吸引力的行业中的地位。</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>Where Will Plug Power Be In 10 Years?<blockquote>10年后的普拉格能源会在哪里？</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\">\nWhere Will Plug Power Be In 10 Years?<blockquote>10年后的普拉格能源会在哪里？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-15 08:48</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Plug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.</li>  <li>It serves low-risk customers and has a strong position in its industry.</li>  <li>Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth, and investors should consider what actual per-share returns might look like before deploying money at current valuations.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2fa1aea5535d99338f385c168062b218\" tg-width=\"1536\" tg-height=\"852\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>普拉格能源活跃在一个具有巨大增长动力的有吸引力的行业中。</li><li>它服务于低风险客户，在行业中拥有强大的地位。</li><li>股价反映了未来的大量增长，投资者在以当前估值配置资金之前应该考虑实际每股回报可能是什么样子。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>Fokusiert/iStock来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> <b>Article Thesis</b></p><p><blockquote><b>文章论文</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. (PLUG) is active in a high-growth industry, which translates into a strong long-term business growth outlook, as long as the company can capitalize on its goals and management executes well. The company is, however, not profitable yet, and the path to meaningful net profits holds some uncertainties still. Taking a longer-term view, we can expect that Plug Power will generate positive net profits despite the fact that shares are valuing the company at a relatively high current valuation. From a risk-reward standpoint, there may be better picks available, though, despite the fact that I believe that shares will trade materially higher in 2031.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司（PLUG）活跃于高增长行业，只要公司能够实现其目标并且管理层执行良好，这就意味着强劲的长期业务增长前景。然而，该公司尚未盈利，实现有意义的净利润的道路仍然存在一些不确定性。从更长远的角度来看，我们可以预计普拉格能源将产生正的净利润，尽管该公司目前的估值相对较高。不过，从风险回报的角度来看，可能有更好的选择，尽管我相信2031年股价将大幅走高。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Price</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股价</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. has seen its share price move up and down violently over the last year:</p><p><blockquote>去年，普拉格能源公司的股价剧烈上下波动：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d940297249151eddcccf6440d20ef031\" tg-width=\"635\" tg-height=\"417\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Data by YCharts</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>数据来自YCharts</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Shares trade 130% higher than 12 months ago, but at the same time, shares trade at just one-third of the all-time high today. In early 2021, shares exploded upwards at a time when other renewable/new energy and related stocks, including EV plays, benefited from massive investor enthusiasm. Since then, enthusiasm seems to have cooled, and shares have reverted back to the $20s. At current prices, Plug Power, Inc. is valued at $16 billion based on a diluted share count of a little less than 600 million. Analysts are pretty bullish on the stock right now, as the consensus price target of $41 implies an upside potential of around 50% from current prices throughout the next year. It should be noted, however, that the analyst consensus price target has been lowered in recent months, and may continue to be lowered going forward. Due to non-existent profits PLUG can't be valued on an earnings basis, but shares trade for around 30x this year's revenue, which is quite expensive.</p><p><blockquote>股价比12个月前上涨了130%，但与此同时，股价仅为今天历史高点的三分之一。2021年初，其他可再生能源/新能源及相关股票（包括电动汽车）受益于投资者的巨大热情，股价大幅上涨。此后，热情似乎有所降温，股价又回到了20多美元。按目前价格计算，普拉格能源公司的估值为160亿美元，稀释后的股票数量略低于6亿股。分析师目前非常看好该股，因为41美元的一致目标价意味着明年较当前价格有50%左右的上涨潜力。但值得注意的是，近几个月来分析师一致的目标价已被下调，并且未来可能会继续下调。由于不存在利润，PLUG无法以盈利为基础进行估值，但股价约为今年收入的30倍，这相当昂贵。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Prediction</b></p><p><blockquote><b>普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power, Inc. is active in an absolute growth industry, as hydrogen fuel cells will see huge demand growth in coming years as they allow for an environmentally friendly alternative to other fuels. Plug Power, as a turnkey provider in a market leadership position for this technology, is well-positioned to capitalize on this megatrend. Through a network of global partnerships, including with Brookfield Renewable Partners (BEP), Plug Power is working on growing the green hydrogen industryglobally:</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源公司活跃在一个绝对增长的行业，因为氢燃料电池将在未来几年看到巨大的需求增长，因为它们允许作为其他燃料的环保替代品。普拉格能源作为该技术市场领先地位的交钥匙供应商，完全有能力利用这一大趋势。通过包括Brookfield Renewable Partners(BEP)在内的全球合作伙伴网络，普拉格能源正在致力于在全球范围内发展绿色氢产业：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/91a8e3b57882e429c9eace431bd1f541\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"350\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source: Plug Power presentation</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：普拉格能源演示</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Plug Power's green hydrogen can be used for powering trucks, busses, and other vehicles, while the company is also providing environmentally friendly alternatives to diesel generators in the megawatt scale range that can be used by utilities, for example. The company is, on top of that, also working on other ventures that are not ready to be commercialized yet, such as powering aircraft with hydrogen. Plug Power will have at least 5 hydrogen plants running in the US in 2024, i.e. three years from now, with more projects being in the pipeline both in the US and in overseas markets such as Europe.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源的绿色氢可用于为卡车、公共汽车和其他车辆提供动力，同时该公司还为公用事业公司使用的兆瓦级柴油发电机提供环保替代品。除此之外，该公司还致力于其他尚未准备好商业化的项目，例如用氢气为飞机提供动力。2024年，即三年后，普拉格能源将在美国运营至少5座氢气厂，美国以及欧洲等海外市场正在建设更多项目。</blockquote></p><p> 80% of Plug Power's customers are what the company calls blue chip customers, which includes companies such as Amazon (AMZN). These companies are oftentimes highly inclined to improve their CO2 footprint in order to receive better ESG ratings, and at the same time, these are low-risk customers as their strong balance sheets and cash flows mean that the risk of liquidity or solvency issues is negligible. Overall, Plug Power thus works with attractive counterparts, and their financial firepower means that Plug Power is not forced to sell its products at bargain prices, which is why the company has been able to generate relatively attractive product gross margins in the 30s in recent quarters.</p><p><blockquote>普拉格能源80%的客户是该公司的评级蓝筹客户，其中包括亚马逊（AMZN）等公司。这些公司通常非常倾向于改善其二氧化碳足迹，以获得更好的ESG评级，同时，这些公司是低风险客户，因为其强劲的资产负债表和现金流意味着流动性或偿付能力问题的风险可以忽略不计。总体而言，普拉格能源因此与有吸引力的同行合作，他们的财务火力意味着普拉格能源不会被迫以便宜的价格出售其产品，这就是为什么该公司最近几个季度能够产生相对有吸引力的产品毛利率在30年代。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Due to the still relatively small scale of the company, Plug Power is not profitable on a net basis or operating basis, however. The company's operating expenses, relative to the revenues that Plug Power generates, are still too high for now. This should, however, change over time, as operating leverage and improving product margins should allow Plug Power to grow gross profits relative to operating expenses, which will result in improving profitability. Analysts are currently predicting positive net profits for fiscal 2024, or three years from now. It would, of course, be better if Plug Power had hit that point already, but for long-term oriented investors, two more years of negative profits will not be a disaster.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于公司规模仍然相对较小，普拉格能源在净利润或运营基础上均未盈利。相对于普拉格能源产生的收入，该公司的运营费用目前仍然过高。然而，这种情况应该会随着时间的推移而改变，因为运营杠杆和产品利润率的提高应该会使普拉格能源的毛利润相对于运营费用增长，从而提高盈利能力。分析师目前预测2024财年（即三年后）净利润为正。当然，如果普拉格能源已经达到了这一点，那就更好了，但对于长期投资者来说，再有两年的负利润并不是一场灾难。</blockquote></p><p> When investing in a company such as Plug Power, the very near term is not too relevant, but what matters more is the longer-term potential of the company to grow its revenue and profits. Through the combination of ESG tailwinds, massive market growth, and its market leadership position, Plug Power seems to be well-positioned to grow its revenue for many years to come:</p><p><blockquote>在投资普拉格能源这样的公司时，短期并不太重要，但更重要的是公司收入和利润增长的长期潜力。通过ESG顺风、大规模市场增长及其市场领导地位的结合，普拉格能源似乎处于有利地位，可以在未来许多年增加收入：</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4d6f0576ba51f219d85b18d90ccaf6f4\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"628\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>Source:Seeking Alpha</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>资料来源：寻求阿尔法</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Analysts are currently predicting that revenues will grow at 50%+ a year over the next three years, while growth is forecasted to remain almost 30% through at least 2030, which equates to a highly attractive long-term growth outlook. There are, of course, no guarantees that this will indeed happen, as some risks to the business model remain. The company is not profitable yet, thus funding of future growth projects could theoretically become a problem. On top of that, it is possible that other players with deep pockets will try to disrupt the market or gain market share. The risk of that is, I believe, due to Plug Power's leadership position, not very large. But should the market become more competitive, non-profitable Plug Power might run into problems if it were to run into market share fights that could pressure margins.</p><p><blockquote>分析师目前预测，未来三年收入将以每年50%以上的速度增长，而至少到2030年，增长率预计将保持近30%，这相当于极具吸引力的长期增长前景。当然，不能保证这种情况确实会发生，因为商业模式的一些风险仍然存在。该公司尚未盈利，因此未来增长项目的资金理论上可能会成为一个问题。最重要的是，其他财力雄厚的参与者可能会试图扰乱市场或获得市场份额。我相信，由于普拉格能源的领导地位，这种风险并不是很大。但如果市场竞争变得更加激烈，非盈利的普拉格能源如果遭遇市场份额争夺战，可能会给利润率带来压力，可能会遇到问题。</blockquote></p><p> Some execution risks do thus remain for sure, and investors shouldn't see the above growth projections as crystal-clear forecasts that are infallible. Instead, however, the above predictions showcase what a base-case scenario could look like, and actual results might be better or worse than that. Overall, it can be said that the longer-term outlook for Plug Power's business is excellent, as the company should be able to grow at an attractive pace for many years to come, as investors, companies, and consumers put more and more emphasis on a smaller carbon footprint. Obvious growth prospects for an industry do not, however, automatically translate into share price gains. Those that bought shares of Cisco (CSCO) at the highs during the dot.com bubble, for example, are still in the red today, 22 years later, despite the massive growth the business has experienced in that time frame. Valuations should be considered as well, and Plug Power is far from cheap today.</p><p><blockquote>因此，一些执行风险确实仍然存在，投资者不应将上述增长预测视为绝对可靠的清晰预测。然而，相反，上述预测展示了基本情况可能是什么样子，实际结果可能比这更好或更差。总体而言，可以说普拉格能源业务的长期前景非常好，因为随着投资者、公司和消费者越来越重视更小的碳足迹，该公司应该能够在未来许多年以有吸引力的速度增长。然而，一个行业明显的增长前景并不会自动转化为股价上涨。例如，那些在互联网泡沫期间高位购买思科(CSCO)股票的公司，尽管该业务在此期间经历了巨大增长，但22年后的今天仍然处于亏损状态。估值也应该考虑，普拉格能源今天的价格远非便宜。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Plug Power Stock Forecast For 2030</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2030年普拉格能源股票预测</b></blockquote></p><p> Today, Plug Power is trading for around 32x this year's expected revenue. If that was an earnings multiple, the stock still wouldn't be especially cheap, relative to how the average company is valued. At more than 30x sales, shares do seem very expensive. When we consider PLUG's growth outlook over the coming decade, that is relativized to some degree, but I believe that shares are still trading above fair value.</p><p><blockquote>如今，普拉格能源的股价约为今年预期收入的32倍。如果这是市盈率，相对于公司的平均估值，该股仍然不会特别便宜。以超过30倍的销售额计算，股价确实看起来非常昂贵。当我们考虑PLUG未来十年的增长前景时，这在某种程度上是相对的，但我相信股价仍高于公允价值。</blockquote></p><p> If the analyst consensus estimate for 2030's revenues is correct, at $10.5 billion, then shares are trading at around 1.5x 2030's revenue right now. Many industrial names are trading for 1x to 2x this year's revenue right now, which indicates how much future growth is priced into PLUG's stock already. One can, of course, argue that PLUG's growth outlook in 2030 is likely still better than that of the average company today, as it seems very much possible for PLUG to grow at a double-digit rate well beyond 2030. But still, shares upside for PLUG's shares is not too great over the coming decade, I believe.</p><p><blockquote>如果分析师对2030年收入的一致估计是正确的，为105亿美元，那么目前股价的交易价格约为2030年收入的1.5倍。许多工业公司目前的交易价格是今年收入的1至2倍，这表明PLUG的股票已经反映了未来的增长。当然，人们可以说，PLUG在2030年的增长前景可能仍好于当今的普通公司，因为PLUG很有可能在2030年之后以两位数的速度增长。但我相信，PLUG股价在未来十年的上涨空间不会太大。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> If PLUG were to trade at a still relatively steep 3.5x revenue in 2030, this gets us to a market cap estimate of around $37billion, or roughly 2.3x as much as today. PLUG's share count will, however, not stay unchanged over the next decade, which is why returns on a per-share basis will be lower than that. If we assume that the share count climbs by just 2% a year, 2030's share count will stand at a little above 700 million. At a $37 billion market capitalization, each individual stock would then trade at around $53, which would mean a return of ~100% from today. On an annual basis, this would equate to returns of 8%. 8% annual returns are far from bad, but many things have to go right for that to happen -- PLUG has to execute well, deliver on growth projects, and avoid massive share issuance. When we also consider that this estimate requires a still rather high 3.5x sales multiple in 2030, then those returns are not great enough to warrant a buy rating, I believe. It would be different of 8% returns could come from a very de-risked blue chip with very low uncertainties, but that is not the case here. For reference, if PLUG executes well and hits growth estimates, but its shares trade for 2.5x sales in 2030, then the share price, assuming 2% annual dilution, would be $37, which would equate to just 4% annual returns. PLUG's share count has risen by around 50% over the last year alone, and even though I don't expect similar dilution in coming years, it is at least possible for PLUG's share count to rise by significantly more than 2% a year, which would pressure returns further.</p><p><blockquote>如果PLUG在2030年的交易收入仍然相对较高的3.5倍，那么我们的市值估计约为370亿美元，大约是今天的2.3倍。然而，PLUG的股票数量在未来十年不会保持不变，这就是为什么每股回报率将低于这一数字。如果我们假设股票数量每年仅增长2%，那么2030年的股票数量将略高于7亿股。在370亿美元的市值下，每只股票的交易价格约为53美元，这意味着从今天起的回报率约为100%。按年计算，这相当于8%的回报率。8%的年回报率远非坏事，但要实现这一目标，许多事情必须顺利进行——PLUG必须执行良好，交付增长项目，并避免大规模股票发行。当我们还考虑到这一估计需要2030年仍然相当高的3.5倍销售倍数时，我相信这些回报还不足以保证买入评级。8%的回报可能来自风险非常低、不确定性非常低的蓝筹股，但这里的情况并非如此。作为参考，如果PLUG执行良好并达到增长预期，但其股价在2030年的交易价格为销售额的2.5倍，那么假设年稀释2%，股价将为37美元，这相当于年回报率仅为4%。仅去年一年，PLUG的股票数量就增加了约50%，尽管我预计未来几年不会出现类似的稀释，但PLUG的股票数量至少有可能每年大幅增加2%以上，这将进一步给回报带来压力。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I do not believe that investors will lose money with PLUG over the next decade or more. But I also do not believe that investors will see very attractive returns in that time frame, despite the fact that Plug Power's underlying business growth outlook is highly attractive. Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth already, and I believe that returns in the sub-10% range can also be generated through lower-risk investments, with less volatile stocks.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我不认为投资者在未来十年或更长时间内会因PLUG而亏损。但我也不相信投资者会在这段时间内看到非常有吸引力的回报，尽管普拉格能源的基本业务增长前景非常有吸引力。股票已经反映了未来的大量增长，我相信通过风险较低、股票波动性较小的投资也可以产生低于10%的回报。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Conclusion: Where Could Plug Power Be In 10 Years?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>结论：10年后普拉格能源会在哪里？</b></blockquote></p><p> One can't know that today, but we can make educated guesses. According to may scenarios laid out above, PLUG could trade at $37-$55 in 2030, factoring in another year of growth, we could end up at $40-$60 in 2031, I believe -- if many things go right. In case there are major hiccups with growth projects, or if the share count rises more than expected, these estimates may be too high.</p><p><blockquote>今天人们无法知道这一点，但我们可以做出有根据的猜测。根据上面列出的5月份情景，PLUG在2030年的交易价格可能为37-55美元，考虑到又一年的增长，我相信，如果很多事情进展顺利，我们在2031年的交易价格可能会达到40-60美元。如果增长项目出现重大问题，或者股票数量增长超过预期，这些估计可能会过高。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe that there is considerable long-term upside potential for PLUG's shares, but expected returns in the mid-to-high-single digits range are not gigantic, and the same returns can be generated through more mature, less volatile investments with fewer uncertainties and less execution risk. I thus do think that PLUG is not a buy right here, even though I like the company's growth prospects and its position in an attractive industry.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我认为PLUG的股票有相当大的长期上涨潜力，但中高个位数范围的预期回报并不巨大，通过更成熟、波动性更小的投资可以产生相同的回报，不确定性更少，执行风险更小。因此，我确实认为PLUG在这里不值得买入，尽管我喜欢该公司的增长前景及其在有吸引力的行业中的地位。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4449266-plug-power-stock-in-10-years\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"PLUG":"普拉格能源"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4449266-plug-power-stock-in-10-years","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1133270372","content_text":"Summary\n\nPlug Power is active in an attractive industry with huge growth tailwinds.\nIt serves low-risk customers and has a strong position in its industry.\nShares are pricing in a lot of future growth, and investors should consider what actual per-share returns might look like before deploying money at current valuations.\n\nFokusiert/iStock via Getty Images\nArticle Thesis\nPlug Power, Inc. (PLUG) is active in a high-growth industry, which translates into a strong long-term business growth outlook, as long as the company can capitalize on its goals and management executes well. The company is, however, not profitable yet, and the path to meaningful net profits holds some uncertainties still. Taking a longer-term view, we can expect that Plug Power will generate positive net profits despite the fact that shares are valuing the company at a relatively high current valuation. From a risk-reward standpoint, there may be better picks available, though, despite the fact that I believe that shares will trade materially higher in 2031.\nPlug Power Stock Price\nPlug Power, Inc. has seen its share price move up and down violently over the last year:\nData by YCharts\nShares trade 130% higher than 12 months ago, but at the same time, shares trade at just one-third of the all-time high today. In early 2021, shares exploded upwards at a time when other renewable/new energy and related stocks, including EV plays, benefited from massive investor enthusiasm. Since then, enthusiasm seems to have cooled, and shares have reverted back to the $20s. At current prices, Plug Power, Inc. is valued at $16 billion based on a diluted share count of a little less than 600 million. Analysts are pretty bullish on the stock right now, as the consensus price target of $41 implies an upside potential of around 50% from current prices throughout the next year. It should be noted, however, that the analyst consensus price target has been lowered in recent months, and may continue to be lowered going forward. Due to non-existent profits PLUG can't be valued on an earnings basis, but shares trade for around 30x this year's revenue, which is quite expensive.\nPlug Power Stock Prediction\nPlug Power, Inc. is active in an absolute growth industry, as hydrogen fuel cells will see huge demand growth in coming years as they allow for an environmentally friendly alternative to other fuels. Plug Power, as a turnkey provider in a market leadership position for this technology, is well-positioned to capitalize on this megatrend. Through a network of global partnerships, including with Brookfield Renewable Partners (BEP), Plug Power is working on growing the green hydrogen industryglobally:\nSource: Plug Power presentation\nPlug Power's green hydrogen can be used for powering trucks, busses, and other vehicles, while the company is also providing environmentally friendly alternatives to diesel generators in the megawatt scale range that can be used by utilities, for example. The company is, on top of that, also working on other ventures that are not ready to be commercialized yet, such as powering aircraft with hydrogen. Plug Power will have at least 5 hydrogen plants running in the US in 2024, i.e. three years from now, with more projects being in the pipeline both in the US and in overseas markets such as Europe.\n80% of Plug Power's customers are what the company calls blue chip customers, which includes companies such as Amazon (AMZN). These companies are oftentimes highly inclined to improve their CO2 footprint in order to receive better ESG ratings, and at the same time, these are low-risk customers as their strong balance sheets and cash flows mean that the risk of liquidity or solvency issues is negligible. Overall, Plug Power thus works with attractive counterparts, and their financial firepower means that Plug Power is not forced to sell its products at bargain prices, which is why the company has been able to generate relatively attractive product gross margins in the 30s in recent quarters.\nDue to the still relatively small scale of the company, Plug Power is not profitable on a net basis or operating basis, however. The company's operating expenses, relative to the revenues that Plug Power generates, are still too high for now. This should, however, change over time, as operating leverage and improving product margins should allow Plug Power to grow gross profits relative to operating expenses, which will result in improving profitability. Analysts are currently predicting positive net profits for fiscal 2024, or three years from now. It would, of course, be better if Plug Power had hit that point already, but for long-term oriented investors, two more years of negative profits will not be a disaster.\nWhen investing in a company such as Plug Power, the very near term is not too relevant, but what matters more is the longer-term potential of the company to grow its revenue and profits. Through the combination of ESG tailwinds, massive market growth, and its market leadership position, Plug Power seems to be well-positioned to grow its revenue for many years to come:\nSource:Seeking Alpha\nAnalysts are currently predicting that revenues will grow at 50%+ a year over the next three years, while growth is forecasted to remain almost 30% through at least 2030, which equates to a highly attractive long-term growth outlook. There are, of course, no guarantees that this will indeed happen, as some risks to the business model remain. The company is not profitable yet, thus funding of future growth projects could theoretically become a problem. On top of that, it is possible that other players with deep pockets will try to disrupt the market or gain market share. The risk of that is, I believe, due to Plug Power's leadership position, not very large. But should the market become more competitive, non-profitable Plug Power might run into problems if it were to run into market share fights that could pressure margins.\nSome execution risks do thus remain for sure, and investors shouldn't see the above growth projections as crystal-clear forecasts that are infallible. Instead, however, the above predictions showcase what a base-case scenario could look like, and actual results might be better or worse than that. Overall, it can be said that the longer-term outlook for Plug Power's business is excellent, as the company should be able to grow at an attractive pace for many years to come, as investors, companies, and consumers put more and more emphasis on a smaller carbon footprint. Obvious growth prospects for an industry do not, however, automatically translate into share price gains. Those that bought shares of Cisco (CSCO) at the highs during the dot.com bubble, for example, are still in the red today, 22 years later, despite the massive growth the business has experienced in that time frame. Valuations should be considered as well, and Plug Power is far from cheap today.\nPlug Power Stock Forecast For 2030\nToday, Plug Power is trading for around 32x this year's expected revenue. If that was an earnings multiple, the stock still wouldn't be especially cheap, relative to how the average company is valued. At more than 30x sales, shares do seem very expensive. When we consider PLUG's growth outlook over the coming decade, that is relativized to some degree, but I believe that shares are still trading above fair value.\nIf the analyst consensus estimate for 2030's revenues is correct, at $10.5 billion, then shares are trading at around 1.5x 2030's revenue right now. Many industrial names are trading for 1x to 2x this year's revenue right now, which indicates how much future growth is priced into PLUG's stock already. One can, of course, argue that PLUG's growth outlook in 2030 is likely still better than that of the average company today, as it seems very much possible for PLUG to grow at a double-digit rate well beyond 2030. But still, shares upside for PLUG's shares is not too great over the coming decade, I believe.\nIf PLUG were to trade at a still relatively steep 3.5x revenue in 2030, this gets us to a market cap estimate of around $37billion, or roughly 2.3x as much as today. PLUG's share count will, however, not stay unchanged over the next decade, which is why returns on a per-share basis will be lower than that. If we assume that the share count climbs by just 2% a year, 2030's share count will stand at a little above 700 million. At a $37 billion market capitalization, each individual stock would then trade at around $53, which would mean a return of ~100% from today. On an annual basis, this would equate to returns of 8%. 8% annual returns are far from bad, but many things have to go right for that to happen -- PLUG has to execute well, deliver on growth projects, and avoid massive share issuance. When we also consider that this estimate requires a still rather high 3.5x sales multiple in 2030, then those returns are not great enough to warrant a buy rating, I believe. It would be different of 8% returns could come from a very de-risked blue chip with very low uncertainties, but that is not the case here. For reference, if PLUG executes well and hits growth estimates, but its shares trade for 2.5x sales in 2030, then the share price, assuming 2% annual dilution, would be $37, which would equate to just 4% annual returns. PLUG's share count has risen by around 50% over the last year alone, and even though I don't expect similar dilution in coming years, it is at least possible for PLUG's share count to rise by significantly more than 2% a year, which would pressure returns further.\nOverall, I do not believe that investors will lose money with PLUG over the next decade or more. But I also do not believe that investors will see very attractive returns in that time frame, despite the fact that Plug Power's underlying business growth outlook is highly attractive. Shares are pricing in a lot of future growth already, and I believe that returns in the sub-10% range can also be generated through lower-risk investments, with less volatile stocks.\nConclusion: Where Could Plug Power Be In 10 Years?\nOne can't know that today, but we can make educated guesses. According to may scenarios laid out above, PLUG could trade at $37-$55 in 2030, factoring in another year of growth, we could end up at $40-$60 in 2031, I believe -- if many things go right. In case there are major hiccups with growth projects, or if the share count rises more than expected, these estimates may be too high.\nOverall, I believe that there is considerable long-term upside potential for PLUG's shares, but expected returns in the mid-to-high-single digits range are not gigantic, and the same returns can be generated through more mature, less volatile investments with fewer uncertainties and less execution risk. I thus do think that PLUG is not a buy right here, even though I like the company's growth prospects and its position in an attractive industry.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"PLUG":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2021,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897998000,"gmtCreate":1628866429100,"gmtModify":1633688871386,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes","listText":"Yes","text":"Yes","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897998000","repostId":"1108390674","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1108390674","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628865354,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1108390674?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-13 22:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"U.S. consumer sentiment plummets in early August to decade low<blockquote>美国消费者信心8月初暴跌至十年低点</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1108390674","media":"Reuters","summary":"(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade ","content":"<p>(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade as Americans gave faltering outlooks on everything from personal finances to inflation and employment, a survey showed on Friday.</p><p><blockquote>（路透社）-周五的一项调查显示，美国消费者信心在8月初大幅下降至十年来的最低水平，因为美国人对从个人财务到通胀和就业等各个方面的前景都不稳定。</blockquote></p><p> The University of Michigan said its preliminary consumer sentiment index fell to 70.2 in the first half of this month from a final reading of 81.2 in July. That was the lowest level since 2011 and one of the six largest drops in the past 50 years of the survey. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the index would remain unchanged at 81.2.</p><p><blockquote>密歇根大学表示，本月上半月消费者信心指数初值从7月份的81.2降至70.2。这是自2011年以来的最低水平，也是过去50年调查中最大的六次跌幅之一。路透社调查的经济学家此前预测该指数将保持在81.2不变。</blockquote></p><p> Economic growth is still expected to grow this year at its fastest pace in four decades after falling into a brief recession in 2020 caused by the coronavirus pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在2020年因冠状病毒大流行而陷入短暂衰退后，预计今年经济增长仍将以四十年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> However, the recovery is showing some indication of cooling off and COVID-19 cases have doubled in the past two weeks to reach a six-month peak as the more transmissible Delta variant spreads rapidly across the country. Labor shortages across the service sector also persist while supply chain disruptions have continued.</p><p><blockquote>然而，复苏显示出一些降温的迹象，随着传染性更强的德尔塔变异毒株在全国迅速传播，COVID-19病例在过去两周翻了一番，达到六个月来的峰值。整个服务业的劳动力短缺也持续存在，而供应链中断也在继续。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1612507957220","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>U.S. consumer sentiment plummets in early August to decade low<blockquote>美国消费者信心8月初暴跌至十年低点</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\">\nU.S. consumer sentiment plummets in early August to decade low<blockquote>美国消费者信心8月初暴跌至十年低点</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Reuters</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-13 22:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade as Americans gave faltering outlooks on everything from personal finances to inflation and employment, a survey showed on Friday.</p><p><blockquote>（路透社）-周五的一项调查显示，美国消费者信心在8月初大幅下降至十年来的最低水平，因为美国人对从个人财务到通胀和就业等各个方面的前景都不稳定。</blockquote></p><p> The University of Michigan said its preliminary consumer sentiment index fell to 70.2 in the first half of this month from a final reading of 81.2 in July. That was the lowest level since 2011 and one of the six largest drops in the past 50 years of the survey. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the index would remain unchanged at 81.2.</p><p><blockquote>密歇根大学表示，本月上半月消费者信心指数初值从7月份的81.2降至70.2。这是自2011年以来的最低水平，也是过去50年调查中最大的六次跌幅之一。路透社调查的经济学家此前预测该指数将保持在81.2不变。</blockquote></p><p> Economic growth is still expected to grow this year at its fastest pace in four decades after falling into a brief recession in 2020 caused by the coronavirus pandemic.</p><p><blockquote>在2020年因冠状病毒大流行而陷入短暂衰退后，预计今年经济增长仍将以四十年来最快的速度增长。</blockquote></p><p> However, the recovery is showing some indication of cooling off and COVID-19 cases have doubled in the past two weeks to reach a six-month peak as the more transmissible Delta variant spreads rapidly across the country. Labor shortages across the service sector also persist while supply chain disruptions have continued.</p><p><blockquote>然而，复苏显示出一些降温的迹象，随着传染性更强的德尔塔变异毒株在全国迅速传播，COVID-19病例在过去两周翻了一番，达到六个月来的峰值。整个服务业的劳动力短缺也持续存在，而供应链中断也在继续。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-consumer-sentiment-plummets-early-142604920.html\">Reuters</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":{".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/u-consumer-sentiment-plummets-early-142604920.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1108390674","content_text":"(Reuters) - U.S. consumer sentiment dropped sharply in early August to its lowest level in a decade as Americans gave faltering outlooks on everything from personal finances to inflation and employment, a survey showed on Friday.\nThe University of Michigan said its preliminary consumer sentiment index fell to 70.2 in the first half of this month from a final reading of 81.2 in July. That was the lowest level since 2011 and one of the six largest drops in the past 50 years of the survey. Economists polled by Reuters had forecast the index would remain unchanged at 81.2.\nEconomic growth is still expected to grow this year at its fastest pace in four decades after falling into a brief recession in 2020 caused by the coronavirus pandemic.\nHowever, the recovery is showing some indication of cooling off and COVID-19 cases have doubled in the past two weeks to reach a six-month peak as the more transmissible Delta variant spreads rapidly across the country. Labor shortages across the service sector also persist while supply chain disruptions have continued.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1239,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":806451988,"gmtCreate":1627690454044,"gmtModify":1633757152394,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/806451988","repostId":"1138566016","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1138566016","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627689251,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1138566016?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-31 07:54","market":"us","language":"en","title":"It’s Open Season on Closed-End Fund Activists. How Fund Holders Can Win—and Lose<blockquote>现在是封闭式基金积极分子的开放季节。基金持有人如何输赢</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138566016","media":"Barron's","summary":"TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasensta","content":"<p>TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasenstab at the helm, the closed-end fund returned an average of 0.3% annually in the past decade, versus an average 7% for peers in global income. Also frustrating, its shares rarely traded close to the fund’s underlying net asset value, or NAV. The discount averaged 11% in the past three years.</p><p><blockquote>邓普顿全球收益基金多年来一直让投资者感到沮丧。尽管明星经理迈克尔·哈森斯塔布(Michael Hasenstab)掌舵，但该封闭式基金在过去十年中的平均年回报率为0.3%，而全球收入同行的平均回报率为7%。同样令人沮丧的是，其股票的交易价格很少接近该基金的基础资产净值（NAV）。过去三年折扣平均为11%。</blockquote></p><p> Investors have caught a break, however, thanks to Saba Capital Management, a hedge fund shop run by activist investor Boaz Weinstein. Saba amassed a 20% stake in the Templeton fund and recently won four contested board seats. It has been pressuring the board to take actions to boost the share price. Its moves have paid off: The fund has returned a total 4.5% this year as its share price improved, and the discount to NAV has shrunk to 4%.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于激进投资者Boaz Weinstein经营的对冲基金公司Saba Capital Management，投资者得到了喘息的机会。Saba持有邓普顿基金20%的股份，最近赢得了四个有争议的董事会席位。它一直在向董事会施压，要求其采取行动提振股价。其举措得到了回报：随着股价上涨，该基金今年的总回报率为4.5%，相对资产净值的折扣已缩小至4%。</blockquote></p><p> Tactics like Saba’s have long infuriated mutual fund companies; no one wants a hedge fund threatening a coup. Now, with some help from Congress, the playing field could tilt in favor of closed-end funds and their company sponsors, due to a bill recently introduced in the House. That could work against the interests of fund investors.</p><p><blockquote>像萨巴这样的策略长期以来一直激怒着共同基金公司；没有人希望对冲基金威胁政变。现在，在国会的一些帮助下，由于众议院最近提出的一项法案，竞争环境可能会向封闭式基金及其公司赞助商倾斜。这可能会损害基金投资者的利益。</blockquote></p><p> The Increasing Investor Opportunities Act, introduced in June by Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R., Ohio) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., New York), includes two measures that could make it much tougher for hedge funds to pressure closed-end funds and win proxy fights. One proposed change would lift the current 15% limit on closed-end-fund ownership of illiquid private funds, such as venture-capital and private-equity funds. A second measure would prevent activist hedge funds from acquiring more than 10% of a closed-end fund’s shares.</p><p><blockquote>《增加投资者机会法案》由俄亥俄州共和党众议员安东尼·冈萨雷斯（Anthony Gonzalez）和纽约州民主党众议员格雷戈里·米克斯（Gregory Meeks）于6月提出，其中包括两项措施，可能会使对冲基金更难向封闭式基金施压并赢得代理权之争。一项拟议的变化将取消目前对风险投资和私募股权基金等非流动性私募基金封闭式基金所有权15%的限制。第二项措施将阻止激进对冲基金收购封闭式基金10%以上的股份。</blockquote></p><p> A spokesman for Gonzalez declined to comment. Meeks didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>冈萨雷斯的发言人拒绝置评。米克斯没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Proponents of the changes say they would expand access to private markets for retail investors. They also say hedge funds are exploiting gaps in securities laws at a cost to long-term shareholders, saddling them with tax liabilities, higher fees, and forced fund liquidations. The bill would eliminate a “loophole that activist investors have used to extract short-term profits at the expense of retail investors,” the Investment Company Institute, or ICI, said in a recent statement.</p><p><blockquote>这些变化的支持者表示，他们将扩大散户投资者进入私人市场的机会。他们还表示，对冲基金正在利用证券法的漏洞，以牺牲长期股东的利益为代价，给他们带来纳税义务、更高的费用和强制基金清算的负担。投资公司协会（ICI）在最近的一份声明中表示，该法案将消除“激进投资者利用该漏洞以牺牲散户投资者的利益为代价来获取短期利润”。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds and portfolio managers who invest in closed-end funds say that mutual fund companies are simply trying to protect a pool of assets and fees from shareholder interference. Most retail investors don’t vote their shares in proxy contests. That may leave fund boards largely free to pursue their own agendas.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的对冲基金和投资组合经理表示，共同基金公司只是想保护一个资产池和费用不受股东干涉。大多数散户投资者不会在代理权竞争中投票。这可能会让基金董事会在很大程度上自由追求自己的议程。</blockquote></p><p> “Activism plays an important role, and if this bill passes, it will become more difficult for activists to threaten or create changes,” says Matt Buffington, a portfolio manager at Dryden Capital, an activist hedge fund.</p><p><blockquote>激进主义对冲基金德莱顿资本(Dryden Capital)的投资组合经理马特·巴芬顿(Matt Buffington)表示：“激进主义发挥着重要作用，如果这项法案获得通过，激进主义将更难威胁或创造变革。”</blockquote></p><p> Gregory Neer, a portfolio manager with Relative Value Partners, an advisory firm that invests in closed-end funds, agrees. “The ability for investors to pressure funds is beneficial to all shareholders,” he says.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的咨询公司Relative Value Partners的投资组合经理格雷戈里·尼尔(Gregory Neer)对此表示同意。“投资者向资金施压的能力对所有股东都有利，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Closed-end funds have long been popular with investors due to their high yields and steady distributions. Many use leverage, borrowing money at market rates to boost payouts. They also generate income with options strategies and investments in high-yielding areas of the stock and bond markets.</p><p><blockquote>封闭式基金由于收益率高、分配稳健，长期以来深受投资者欢迎。许多人使用杠杆，以市场利率借钱来增加支出。他们还通过期权策略以及对股票和债券市场高收益领域的投资来产生收入。</blockquote></p><p> But the funds have structural drawbacks. Expense ratios are steep, averaging 2.1%, according to Morningstar Direct. And since the funds have a fixed number of shares outstanding, prices reflect market demand for both a fund and its underlying assets. Funds usually trade at a discount to NAV. While it is attractive, in theory, to pay 90 cents for a dollar of assets, investors might never see the extra dime.</p><p><blockquote>但这些基金存在结构性缺陷。根据Morningstar Direct的数据，费用率很高，平均为2.1%。由于基金有固定数量的已发行股票，价格反映了市场对基金及其基础资产的需求。基金的交易价格通常低于资产净值。虽然从理论上讲，为一美元的资产支付90美分很有吸引力，但投资者可能永远看不到额外的一毛钱。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds aim to exploit this inefficiency, buying closed-end funds at below-market value. They then pressure fund boards to take steps to lift the funds’ prices. The playbook is straightforward: accumulate a stake, win board seats, and then force a fund company into a tender offer, whereby it agrees to repurchase shares at nearly full price.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金旨在利用这种低效率，以低于市场价值的价格购买封闭式基金。然后，他们向基金董事会施压，要求其采取措施提高基金价格。剧本很简单：积累股份，赢得董事会席位，然后迫使基金公司发起要约收购，同意以接近全价回购股票。</blockquote></p><p> If that fails, a hedge fund might try to replace a fund’s manager, orchestrate a liquidation of the fund, or get it converted to an open-end fund—moves that could also pay off with the share price rising to parity with the NAV. Firms like Saba have also taken over funds entirely.</p><p><blockquote>如果失败，对冲基金可能会尝试更换基金经理，策划基金清算，或将其转换为开放式基金——这些举措也可能随着股价上涨至与资产净值平价而获得回报。像Saba这样的公司也完全接管了资金。</blockquote></p><p> Giving closed-end funds freedom to own more private securities could throw a wrench into the strategy. Tender offers work only if a fund can liquidate most of its holdings at market prices. Because venture-capital and private-equity holdings generally don’t trade publicly, their pricing isn’t transparent. “When closed-end funds invest in illiquid things, it protects them from activism,” one activist manager tells<i>Barron’s</i>.</p><p><blockquote>给予封闭式基金持有更多私人证券的自由可能会破坏这一策略。只有当基金能够以市场价格清算其大部分持股时，要约收购才会起作用。由于风险投资和私募股权控股公司通常不公开交易，因此它们的定价并不透明。一位激进主义经理表示：“当封闭式基金投资于非流动性的东西时，它可以保护它们免受激进主义的影响。”<i>巴伦周刊</i>.</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Removing the cap on private-fund ownership is “in line with a legislative agenda of getting retail investors more access to private investments,” says Thomas DeCapo, an attorney for the mutual fund industry.</p><p><blockquote>共同基金行业律师托马斯·迪卡波表示，取消私募基金所有权上限“符合让散户投资者更多获得私人投资的立法议程”。</blockquote></p><p> And capping activists at 10% of a fund doesn’t stop them from mounting proxy campaigns. “Nothing about this is antidemocratic,” he says. “It doesn’t stop a majority of investors who are unhappy or want change. It stops one investor from using its economic power, with other people’s money, to basically force changes on everybody else.”</p><p><blockquote>将活动人士的资金限制在10%并不能阻止他们发起代理活动。“这一切都不是反民主的，”他说。“这并不能阻止大多数不满意或想要改变的投资者。它阻止了一个投资者利用其经济实力和其他人的钱，基本上迫使其他人做出改变。”</blockquote></p><p> Investor advocates see it differently, however, saying fund investors could wind up paying higher fees for funds that hold more-opaque investments. “It’s just another fund-of-funds structure, and those are notoriously high-fee,” says Tyler Gellasch, head of Healthy Markets, an investor-protection group.</p><p><blockquote>然而，投资者倡导者对此有不同的看法，他们表示，基金投资者最终可能会为持有更不透明投资的基金支付更高的费用。投资者保护组织Healthy Markets的负责人泰勒·盖拉施(Tyler Gellasch)表示：“这只是另一种基金中的基金结构，而且费用是出了名的高。”</blockquote></p><p> Individual hedge funds technically can’t own more than 3% of a closed-end fund, under ownership restrictions in the Investment Company Act of 1940. But they skirt the rule by building stakes through affiliated entities, creating enough of a critical mass to force changes at a fund through proxy voting.</p><p><blockquote>根据1940年《投资公司法》的所有权限制，从技术上讲，个人对冲基金不能拥有封闭式基金超过3%的股份。但他们通过附属实体增持股份来规避这一规则，从而创造足够的临界质量，通过代理投票迫使基金发生变化。</blockquote></p><p> The ICI—the mutual fund industry’s lobby—has tried to persuade regulators to crack down on hedge funds. In a submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the ICI argued that hedge fund campaigns often consume a fund’s resources, trigger tax liabilities for long-term investors, and result in the forced selling of securities to meet a hedge fund’s demands for a tender offer. A fund’s expense ratio could increase if it is forced to buy back shares and its asset base shrinks.</p><p><blockquote>ICI——共同基金行业的游说团体——试图说服监管机构打击对冲基金。在去年提交给美国证券交易委员会的一份文件中，ICI辩称，对冲基金的活动往往会消耗基金的资源，引发长期投资者的纳税义务，并导致被迫出售证券以满足对冲基金的要约收购要求。如果基金被迫回购股票且资产基础萎缩，其费用率可能会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The activist community’s “assault” on the industry has had a chilling effect on product launches, the ICI said, resulting in fewer closed-end funds on the market today than in 2007.</p><p><blockquote>ICI表示，维权人士对该行业的“攻击”对产品发布产生了寒蝉效应，导致目前市场上的封闭式基金比2007年有所减少。</blockquote></p><p> But hedge funds argue that changing the 1940 act would amount to a power grab by mutual funds. “This is all coming from the mutual fund industry, and it’s no coincidence that this protects them,” says Phil Goldstein, co-founder of Bulldog Investors, an activist that has long targeted closed-end funds. “There are funds with terrible performance and wide discounts. The ICI never says we need a mechanism where shareholders can hold those managers accountable.”</p><p><blockquote>但对冲基金认为，修改1940年法案无异于共同基金攫取权力。Bulldog Investors的联合创始人菲尔·戈尔茨坦(Phil Goldstein)表示：“这一切都来自共同基金行业，这保护了他们并非巧合。”Bulldog Investors是一位长期瞄准封闭式基金的活动家。“有些基金的业绩很糟糕，折扣很大。ICI从未说过我们需要一种机制，让股东可以让这些经理承担责任。”</blockquote></p><p> Imposing an ownership cap would also make proxy campaigns less economic. Limited to 10%, hedge funds wouldn’t own enough shares, with sufficient economic interest, to justify the expense of a proxy contest, which can cost millions of dollars. “If you’re limited to 10% and have to spend 2.5% of your assets on a proxy campaign, you’d say it’s too risky,” says Goldstein. “Meanwhile, management isn’t spending anything—just shareholder money. They want to make it economically unattractive to run a proxy contest.”</p><p><blockquote>设定所有权上限也会降低代理活动的经济性。仅限于10%，对冲基金不会拥有足够的股份和足够的经济利益来证明代理权竞争的费用是合理的，而代理权竞争可能会花费数百万美元。“如果你被限制在10%，并且必须将2.5%的资产用于代理活动，你会说风险太大，”戈尔茨坦说。“与此同时，管理层没有花费任何东西——只是股东的钱。他们想让举办代理权竞争在经济上失去吸引力。”</blockquote></p><p> Regulators and courts have expressed skepticism about some defenses that closed-end funds have adopted to prevent shareholder challenges. And, the SEC might not side with the fund industry. Since 2010, the SEC has warned fund companies against using state securities laws to thwart hedge fund takeovers. The SEC dropped its objection to these state “control share” laws last year under its Republican chairman, Jay Clayton. But the new, Democratic chairman, Gary Gensler, might reinstate the SEC’s objection—a reason for the industry to enlist Congress to change the law. The SEC didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>监管机构和法院对封闭式基金为防止股东挑战而采取的一些防御措施表示怀疑。而且，美国证券交易委员会可能不会站在基金行业一边。自2010年以来，SEC一直警告基金公司不要利用州证券法来阻止对冲基金收购。去年，在共和党主席杰伊·克莱顿的领导下，美国证券交易委员会放弃了对这些州“控股权”法的反对。但新任民主党主席加里·詹斯勒(Gary Gensler)可能会恢复SEC的反对意见——这是该行业争取国会修改法律的一个理由。美国证券交易委员会没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Institutional Shareholder Services,a firm that makes recommendations on proxy voting, says investors should reject fund companies’ use of state control-share laws, which limit the voting rights of shareholders. With the SEC on the sidelines, ISS says, “CEF shareholders are denied important voting rights and are subject to management entrenchment.”</p><p><blockquote>就代理投票提出建议的机构股东服务公司表示，投资者应该拒绝基金公司使用限制股东投票权的国家控股权法。ISS表示，由于SEC的袖手旁观，“CEF股东被剥夺了重要的投票权，并受到管理层的巩固。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/70323ed9daef142f19afd48be72b6299\" tg-width=\"755\" tg-height=\"334\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/68beb47d59eb02e90b04eb7093f9f17b\" tg-width=\"759\" tg-height=\"285\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Hedge funds don’t always win, but investors might want to ride along as activists build a stake. “When an activist comes in, you usually see an increase in the share price and a decrease in the discount,” says Matt Souther, an associate finance professor at the University of South Carolina.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金并不总是获胜，但随着激进分子增持股份，投资者可能希望随波逐流。南卡罗来纳大学金融学副教授马特·沙无然(Matt Souther)表示：“当激进分子介入时，你通常会看到股价上涨而折扣减少。”</blockquote></p><p> Templeton Global Income’s (ticker: GIM) discount to NAV could narrow further if Saba acquires more shares or tries to take over the fund’s $743 million in assets. Saba recently took over management of another fund, Voya Prime Rate Trust, which it rebrandedSaba Capital Income &amp; Opportunities(BRW).Franklin Templetonand Saba declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>如果Saba收购更多股票或试图接管该基金7.43亿美元的资产，Templeton Global Income（股票代码：GIM）相对于资产净值的折扣可能会进一步缩小。Saba最近接管了另一只基金Voya Prime Rate Trust的管理，并将其更名为Saba Capital Income&amp;Opportunities(BRW)。富兰克林邓普顿和Saba拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Miller/Howard High Income Equity(HIE) is also in Saba’s crosshairs. The fund is a “term trust” with a mandated liquidation date in 2024. It trades at a 5.9% discount to NAV. “In a worst-case scenario, you buy it at a discount and you’ll earn an excess return from now to 2024 because that discount will narrow,” says Patrick Galley, co-manager ofRiverNorth Opportunities(RIV), a closed-end fund that owns HIE.</p><p><blockquote>米勒/霍华德高收入股票（HIE）也是萨巴的目标。该基金是“定期信托”，强制清算日期为2024年。其交易价格较资产净值折价5.9%。封闭式RiverNorth Opportunities(RIV)联席经理帕特里克·加利(Patrick Galley)表示：“在最坏的情况下，你以折扣价购买，从现在到2024年，你将获得超额回报，因为折扣将会缩小。”拥有HIE的基金。</blockquote></p><p> Other closed-end funds in which Saba owns stakes includeSource Capital(SOR) andInvesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA). Bulldog has built a position inTortoise Energy Independence(NDP).</p><p><blockquote>Saba持有股份的其他封闭式基金包括Source Capital(SOR)和Invesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA)。Bulldog在乌龟能源独立(NDP)中建立了地位。</blockquote></p><p> Some closed-end funds look attractive on their fundamentals.Adams Diversified Equity(ADX) offers exposure to big tech stocks, trades at a 14% discount to NAV, and is committed to an annualized distribution of at least 6%. “For investors who expect tech to do well, ADX is a good holding,” says David Tepper, a closed-end investor and head of Tepper Capital Management in San Francisco.</p><p><blockquote>一些封闭式基金的基本面看起来很有吸引力。Adams Diversified Equity(ADX)提供大型科技股的投资，交易价格较资产净值折价14%，并承诺年化分配至少6%。“对于预计科技股表现良好的投资者来说，ADX是一个不错的持股，”封闭式投资者兼旧金山Tepper Capital Management主管David Tepper表示。</blockquote></p><p> Sprott Focus Trust(FUND) is another fund he likes. Veteran small-cap manager Whitney George runs it, and his family owns 45% of the shares. It trades at a 10% discount and yields 5.7%. Tepper also favorsRoyce Global Value Trust(RGT), trading at a 9% discount and yielding 7.9%.</p><p><blockquote>Sprott Focus Trust（基金）是他喜欢的另一只基金。资深小盘股经理惠特尼·乔治(Whitney George)经营该公司，他的家族拥有45%的股份。其交易价格有10%的折扣，收益率为5.7%。Tepper还青睐Royce Global Value Trust(RGT)，其交易价格折扣9%，收益率为7.9%。</blockquote></p><p> None of these funds has attracted much activist involvement, according to securities filings. But if activists see opportunity, they could pile in and pressure fund management—assuming that Congress doesn’t rewrite the rules of engagement.</p><p><blockquote>根据证券备案文件，这些基金都没有吸引太多激进分子的参与。但如果活动人士看到机会，他们可能会涌入并向基金管理层施压——假设国会不会重写交战规则。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1610680873436","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>It’s Open Season on Closed-End Fund Activists. How Fund Holders Can Win—and Lose<blockquote>现在是封闭式基金积极分子的开放季节。基金持有人如何输赢</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\">\nIt’s Open Season on Closed-End Fund Activists. How Fund Holders Can Win—and Lose<blockquote>现在是封闭式基金积极分子的开放季节。基金持有人如何输赢</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Barron's</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-31 07:54</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasenstab at the helm, the closed-end fund returned an average of 0.3% annually in the past decade, versus an average 7% for peers in global income. Also frustrating, its shares rarely traded close to the fund’s underlying net asset value, or NAV. The discount averaged 11% in the past three years.</p><p><blockquote>邓普顿全球收益基金多年来一直让投资者感到沮丧。尽管明星经理迈克尔·哈森斯塔布(Michael Hasenstab)掌舵，但该封闭式基金在过去十年中的平均年回报率为0.3%，而全球收入同行的平均回报率为7%。同样令人沮丧的是，其股票的交易价格很少接近该基金的基础资产净值（NAV）。过去三年折扣平均为11%。</blockquote></p><p> Investors have caught a break, however, thanks to Saba Capital Management, a hedge fund shop run by activist investor Boaz Weinstein. Saba amassed a 20% stake in the Templeton fund and recently won four contested board seats. It has been pressuring the board to take actions to boost the share price. Its moves have paid off: The fund has returned a total 4.5% this year as its share price improved, and the discount to NAV has shrunk to 4%.</p><p><blockquote>然而，由于激进投资者Boaz Weinstein经营的对冲基金公司Saba Capital Management，投资者得到了喘息的机会。Saba持有邓普顿基金20%的股份，最近赢得了四个有争议的董事会席位。它一直在向董事会施压，要求其采取行动提振股价。其举措得到了回报：随着股价上涨，该基金今年的总回报率为4.5%，相对资产净值的折扣已缩小至4%。</blockquote></p><p> Tactics like Saba’s have long infuriated mutual fund companies; no one wants a hedge fund threatening a coup. Now, with some help from Congress, the playing field could tilt in favor of closed-end funds and their company sponsors, due to a bill recently introduced in the House. That could work against the interests of fund investors.</p><p><blockquote>像萨巴这样的策略长期以来一直激怒着共同基金公司；没有人希望对冲基金威胁政变。现在，在国会的一些帮助下，由于众议院最近提出的一项法案，竞争环境可能会向封闭式基金及其公司赞助商倾斜。这可能会损害基金投资者的利益。</blockquote></p><p> The Increasing Investor Opportunities Act, introduced in June by Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R., Ohio) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., New York), includes two measures that could make it much tougher for hedge funds to pressure closed-end funds and win proxy fights. One proposed change would lift the current 15% limit on closed-end-fund ownership of illiquid private funds, such as venture-capital and private-equity funds. A second measure would prevent activist hedge funds from acquiring more than 10% of a closed-end fund’s shares.</p><p><blockquote>《增加投资者机会法案》由俄亥俄州共和党众议员安东尼·冈萨雷斯（Anthony Gonzalez）和纽约州民主党众议员格雷戈里·米克斯（Gregory Meeks）于6月提出，其中包括两项措施，可能会使对冲基金更难向封闭式基金施压并赢得代理权之争。一项拟议的变化将取消目前对风险投资和私募股权基金等非流动性私募基金封闭式基金所有权15%的限制。第二项措施将阻止激进对冲基金收购封闭式基金10%以上的股份。</blockquote></p><p> A spokesman for Gonzalez declined to comment. Meeks didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>冈萨雷斯的发言人拒绝置评。米克斯没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Proponents of the changes say they would expand access to private markets for retail investors. They also say hedge funds are exploiting gaps in securities laws at a cost to long-term shareholders, saddling them with tax liabilities, higher fees, and forced fund liquidations. The bill would eliminate a “loophole that activist investors have used to extract short-term profits at the expense of retail investors,” the Investment Company Institute, or ICI, said in a recent statement.</p><p><blockquote>这些变化的支持者表示，他们将扩大散户投资者进入私人市场的机会。他们还表示，对冲基金正在利用证券法的漏洞，以牺牲长期股东的利益为代价，给他们带来纳税义务、更高的费用和强制基金清算的负担。投资公司协会（ICI）在最近的一份声明中表示，该法案将消除“激进投资者利用该漏洞以牺牲散户投资者的利益为代价来获取短期利润”。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds and portfolio managers who invest in closed-end funds say that mutual fund companies are simply trying to protect a pool of assets and fees from shareholder interference. Most retail investors don’t vote their shares in proxy contests. That may leave fund boards largely free to pursue their own agendas.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的对冲基金和投资组合经理表示，共同基金公司只是想保护一个资产池和费用不受股东干涉。大多数散户投资者不会在代理权竞争中投票。这可能会让基金董事会在很大程度上自由追求自己的议程。</blockquote></p><p> “Activism plays an important role, and if this bill passes, it will become more difficult for activists to threaten or create changes,” says Matt Buffington, a portfolio manager at Dryden Capital, an activist hedge fund.</p><p><blockquote>激进主义对冲基金德莱顿资本(Dryden Capital)的投资组合经理马特·巴芬顿(Matt Buffington)表示：“激进主义发挥着重要作用，如果这项法案获得通过，激进主义将更难威胁或创造变革。”</blockquote></p><p> Gregory Neer, a portfolio manager with Relative Value Partners, an advisory firm that invests in closed-end funds, agrees. “The ability for investors to pressure funds is beneficial to all shareholders,” he says.</p><p><blockquote>投资封闭式基金的咨询公司Relative Value Partners的投资组合经理格雷戈里·尼尔(Gregory Neer)对此表示同意。“投资者向资金施压的能力对所有股东都有利，”他说。</blockquote></p><p> Closed-end funds have long been popular with investors due to their high yields and steady distributions. Many use leverage, borrowing money at market rates to boost payouts. They also generate income with options strategies and investments in high-yielding areas of the stock and bond markets.</p><p><blockquote>封闭式基金由于收益率高、分配稳健，长期以来深受投资者欢迎。许多人使用杠杆，以市场利率借钱来增加支出。他们还通过期权策略以及对股票和债券市场高收益领域的投资来产生收入。</blockquote></p><p> But the funds have structural drawbacks. Expense ratios are steep, averaging 2.1%, according to Morningstar Direct. And since the funds have a fixed number of shares outstanding, prices reflect market demand for both a fund and its underlying assets. Funds usually trade at a discount to NAV. While it is attractive, in theory, to pay 90 cents for a dollar of assets, investors might never see the extra dime.</p><p><blockquote>但这些基金存在结构性缺陷。根据Morningstar Direct的数据，费用率很高，平均为2.1%。由于基金有固定数量的已发行股票，价格反映了市场对基金及其基础资产的需求。基金的交易价格通常低于资产净值。虽然从理论上讲，为一美元的资产支付90美分很有吸引力，但投资者可能永远看不到额外的一毛钱。</blockquote></p><p> Hedge funds aim to exploit this inefficiency, buying closed-end funds at below-market value. They then pressure fund boards to take steps to lift the funds’ prices. The playbook is straightforward: accumulate a stake, win board seats, and then force a fund company into a tender offer, whereby it agrees to repurchase shares at nearly full price.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金旨在利用这种低效率，以低于市场价值的价格购买封闭式基金。然后，他们向基金董事会施压，要求其采取措施提高基金价格。剧本很简单：积累股份，赢得董事会席位，然后迫使基金公司发起要约收购，同意以接近全价回购股票。</blockquote></p><p> If that fails, a hedge fund might try to replace a fund’s manager, orchestrate a liquidation of the fund, or get it converted to an open-end fund—moves that could also pay off with the share price rising to parity with the NAV. Firms like Saba have also taken over funds entirely.</p><p><blockquote>如果失败，对冲基金可能会尝试更换基金经理，策划基金清算，或将其转换为开放式基金——这些举措也可能随着股价上涨至与资产净值平价而获得回报。像Saba这样的公司也完全接管了资金。</blockquote></p><p> Giving closed-end funds freedom to own more private securities could throw a wrench into the strategy. Tender offers work only if a fund can liquidate most of its holdings at market prices. Because venture-capital and private-equity holdings generally don’t trade publicly, their pricing isn’t transparent. “When closed-end funds invest in illiquid things, it protects them from activism,” one activist manager tells<i>Barron’s</i>.</p><p><blockquote>给予封闭式基金持有更多私人证券的自由可能会破坏这一策略。只有当基金能够以市场价格清算其大部分持股时，要约收购才会起作用。由于风险投资和私募股权控股公司通常不公开交易，因此它们的定价并不透明。一位激进主义经理表示：“当封闭式基金投资于非流动性的东西时，它可以保护它们免受激进主义的影响。”<i>巴伦周刊</i>.</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Removing the cap on private-fund ownership is “in line with a legislative agenda of getting retail investors more access to private investments,” says Thomas DeCapo, an attorney for the mutual fund industry.</p><p><blockquote>共同基金行业律师托马斯·迪卡波表示，取消私募基金所有权上限“符合让散户投资者更多获得私人投资的立法议程”。</blockquote></p><p> And capping activists at 10% of a fund doesn’t stop them from mounting proxy campaigns. “Nothing about this is antidemocratic,” he says. “It doesn’t stop a majority of investors who are unhappy or want change. It stops one investor from using its economic power, with other people’s money, to basically force changes on everybody else.”</p><p><blockquote>将活动人士的资金限制在10%并不能阻止他们发起代理活动。“这一切都不是反民主的，”他说。“这并不能阻止大多数不满意或想要改变的投资者。它阻止了一个投资者利用其经济实力和其他人的钱，基本上迫使其他人做出改变。”</blockquote></p><p> Investor advocates see it differently, however, saying fund investors could wind up paying higher fees for funds that hold more-opaque investments. “It’s just another fund-of-funds structure, and those are notoriously high-fee,” says Tyler Gellasch, head of Healthy Markets, an investor-protection group.</p><p><blockquote>然而，投资者倡导者对此有不同的看法，他们表示，基金投资者最终可能会为持有更不透明投资的基金支付更高的费用。投资者保护组织Healthy Markets的负责人泰勒·盖拉施(Tyler Gellasch)表示：“这只是另一种基金中的基金结构，而且费用是出了名的高。”</blockquote></p><p> Individual hedge funds technically can’t own more than 3% of a closed-end fund, under ownership restrictions in the Investment Company Act of 1940. But they skirt the rule by building stakes through affiliated entities, creating enough of a critical mass to force changes at a fund through proxy voting.</p><p><blockquote>根据1940年《投资公司法》的所有权限制，从技术上讲，个人对冲基金不能拥有封闭式基金超过3%的股份。但他们通过附属实体增持股份来规避这一规则，从而创造足够的临界质量，通过代理投票迫使基金发生变化。</blockquote></p><p> The ICI—the mutual fund industry’s lobby—has tried to persuade regulators to crack down on hedge funds. In a submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the ICI argued that hedge fund campaigns often consume a fund’s resources, trigger tax liabilities for long-term investors, and result in the forced selling of securities to meet a hedge fund’s demands for a tender offer. A fund’s expense ratio could increase if it is forced to buy back shares and its asset base shrinks.</p><p><blockquote>ICI——共同基金行业的游说团体——试图说服监管机构打击对冲基金。在去年提交给美国证券交易委员会的一份文件中，ICI辩称，对冲基金的活动往往会消耗基金的资源，引发长期投资者的纳税义务，并导致被迫出售证券以满足对冲基金的要约收购要求。如果基金被迫回购股票且资产基础萎缩，其费用率可能会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The activist community’s “assault” on the industry has had a chilling effect on product launches, the ICI said, resulting in fewer closed-end funds on the market today than in 2007.</p><p><blockquote>ICI表示，维权人士对该行业的“攻击”对产品发布产生了寒蝉效应，导致目前市场上的封闭式基金比2007年有所减少。</blockquote></p><p> But hedge funds argue that changing the 1940 act would amount to a power grab by mutual funds. “This is all coming from the mutual fund industry, and it’s no coincidence that this protects them,” says Phil Goldstein, co-founder of Bulldog Investors, an activist that has long targeted closed-end funds. “There are funds with terrible performance and wide discounts. The ICI never says we need a mechanism where shareholders can hold those managers accountable.”</p><p><blockquote>但对冲基金认为，修改1940年法案无异于共同基金攫取权力。Bulldog Investors的联合创始人菲尔·戈尔茨坦(Phil Goldstein)表示：“这一切都来自共同基金行业，这保护了他们并非巧合。”Bulldog Investors是一位长期瞄准封闭式基金的活动家。“有些基金的业绩很糟糕，折扣很大。ICI从未说过我们需要一种机制，让股东可以让这些经理承担责任。”</blockquote></p><p> Imposing an ownership cap would also make proxy campaigns less economic. Limited to 10%, hedge funds wouldn’t own enough shares, with sufficient economic interest, to justify the expense of a proxy contest, which can cost millions of dollars. “If you’re limited to 10% and have to spend 2.5% of your assets on a proxy campaign, you’d say it’s too risky,” says Goldstein. “Meanwhile, management isn’t spending anything—just shareholder money. They want to make it economically unattractive to run a proxy contest.”</p><p><blockquote>设定所有权上限也会降低代理活动的经济性。仅限于10%，对冲基金不会拥有足够的股份和足够的经济利益来证明代理权竞争的费用是合理的，而代理权竞争可能会花费数百万美元。“如果你被限制在10%，并且必须将2.5%的资产用于代理活动，你会说风险太大，”戈尔茨坦说。“与此同时，管理层没有花费任何东西——只是股东的钱。他们想让举办代理权竞争在经济上失去吸引力。”</blockquote></p><p> Regulators and courts have expressed skepticism about some defenses that closed-end funds have adopted to prevent shareholder challenges. And, the SEC might not side with the fund industry. Since 2010, the SEC has warned fund companies against using state securities laws to thwart hedge fund takeovers. The SEC dropped its objection to these state “control share” laws last year under its Republican chairman, Jay Clayton. But the new, Democratic chairman, Gary Gensler, might reinstate the SEC’s objection—a reason for the industry to enlist Congress to change the law. The SEC didn’t respond to requests for comment.</p><p><blockquote>监管机构和法院对封闭式基金为防止股东挑战而采取的一些防御措施表示怀疑。而且，美国证券交易委员会可能不会站在基金行业一边。自2010年以来，SEC一直警告基金公司不要利用州证券法来阻止对冲基金收购。去年，在共和党主席杰伊·克莱顿的领导下，美国证券交易委员会放弃了对这些州“控股权”法的反对。但新任民主党主席加里·詹斯勒(Gary Gensler)可能会恢复SEC的反对意见——这是该行业争取国会修改法律的一个理由。美国证券交易委员会没有回应置评请求。</blockquote></p><p> Institutional Shareholder Services,a firm that makes recommendations on proxy voting, says investors should reject fund companies’ use of state control-share laws, which limit the voting rights of shareholders. With the SEC on the sidelines, ISS says, “CEF shareholders are denied important voting rights and are subject to management entrenchment.”</p><p><blockquote>就代理投票提出建议的机构股东服务公司表示，投资者应该拒绝基金公司使用限制股东投票权的国家控股权法。ISS表示，由于SEC的袖手旁观，“CEF股东被剥夺了重要的投票权，并受到管理层的巩固。”</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/70323ed9daef142f19afd48be72b6299\" tg-width=\"755\" tg-height=\"334\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/68beb47d59eb02e90b04eb7093f9f17b\" tg-width=\"759\" tg-height=\"285\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Hedge funds don’t always win, but investors might want to ride along as activists build a stake. “When an activist comes in, you usually see an increase in the share price and a decrease in the discount,” says Matt Souther, an associate finance professor at the University of South Carolina.</p><p><blockquote>对冲基金并不总是获胜，但随着激进分子增持股份，投资者可能希望随波逐流。南卡罗来纳大学金融学副教授马特·沙无然(Matt Souther)表示：“当激进分子介入时，你通常会看到股价上涨而折扣减少。”</blockquote></p><p> Templeton Global Income’s (ticker: GIM) discount to NAV could narrow further if Saba acquires more shares or tries to take over the fund’s $743 million in assets. Saba recently took over management of another fund, Voya Prime Rate Trust, which it rebrandedSaba Capital Income &amp; Opportunities(BRW).Franklin Templetonand Saba declined to comment.</p><p><blockquote>如果Saba收购更多股票或试图接管该基金7.43亿美元的资产，Templeton Global Income（股票代码：GIM）相对于资产净值的折扣可能会进一步缩小。Saba最近接管了另一只基金Voya Prime Rate Trust的管理，并将其更名为Saba Capital Income&amp;Opportunities(BRW)。富兰克林邓普顿和Saba拒绝置评。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Miller/Howard High Income Equity(HIE) is also in Saba’s crosshairs. The fund is a “term trust” with a mandated liquidation date in 2024. It trades at a 5.9% discount to NAV. “In a worst-case scenario, you buy it at a discount and you’ll earn an excess return from now to 2024 because that discount will narrow,” says Patrick Galley, co-manager ofRiverNorth Opportunities(RIV), a closed-end fund that owns HIE.</p><p><blockquote>米勒/霍华德高收入股票（HIE）也是萨巴的目标。该基金是“定期信托”，强制清算日期为2024年。其交易价格较资产净值折价5.9%。封闭式RiverNorth Opportunities(RIV)联席经理帕特里克·加利(Patrick Galley)表示：“在最坏的情况下，你以折扣价购买，从现在到2024年，你将获得超额回报，因为折扣将会缩小。”拥有HIE的基金。</blockquote></p><p> Other closed-end funds in which Saba owns stakes includeSource Capital(SOR) andInvesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA). Bulldog has built a position inTortoise Energy Independence(NDP).</p><p><blockquote>Saba持有股份的其他封闭式基金包括Source Capital(SOR)和Invesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA)。Bulldog在乌龟能源独立(NDP)中建立了地位。</blockquote></p><p> Some closed-end funds look attractive on their fundamentals.Adams Diversified Equity(ADX) offers exposure to big tech stocks, trades at a 14% discount to NAV, and is committed to an annualized distribution of at least 6%. “For investors who expect tech to do well, ADX is a good holding,” says David Tepper, a closed-end investor and head of Tepper Capital Management in San Francisco.</p><p><blockquote>一些封闭式基金的基本面看起来很有吸引力。Adams Diversified Equity(ADX)提供大型科技股的投资，交易价格较资产净值折价14%，并承诺年化分配至少6%。“对于预计科技股表现良好的投资者来说，ADX是一个不错的持股，”封闭式投资者兼旧金山Tepper Capital Management主管David Tepper表示。</blockquote></p><p> Sprott Focus Trust(FUND) is another fund he likes. Veteran small-cap manager Whitney George runs it, and his family owns 45% of the shares. It trades at a 10% discount and yields 5.7%. Tepper also favorsRoyce Global Value Trust(RGT), trading at a 9% discount and yielding 7.9%.</p><p><blockquote>Sprott Focus Trust（基金）是他喜欢的另一只基金。资深小盘股经理惠特尼·乔治(Whitney George)经营该公司，他的家族拥有45%的股份。其交易价格有10%的折扣，收益率为5.7%。Tepper还青睐Royce Global Value Trust(RGT)，其交易价格折扣9%，收益率为7.9%。</blockquote></p><p> None of these funds has attracted much activist involvement, according to securities filings. But if activists see opportunity, they could pile in and pressure fund management—assuming that Congress doesn’t rewrite the rules of engagement.</p><p><blockquote>根据证券备案文件，这些基金都没有吸引太多激进分子的参与。但如果活动人士看到机会，他们可能会涌入并向基金管理层施压——假设国会不会重写交战规则。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/congress-closed-end-funds-legislation-51627657959?mod=newsviewer_click\">Barron's</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":{},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/articles/congress-closed-end-funds-legislation-51627657959?mod=newsviewer_click","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138566016","content_text":"TheTempleton Global Incomefund frustrated investors for years. Despite star manager Michael Hasenstab at the helm, the closed-end fund returned an average of 0.3% annually in the past decade, versus an average 7% for peers in global income. Also frustrating, its shares rarely traded close to the fund’s underlying net asset value, or NAV. The discount averaged 11% in the past three years.\nInvestors have caught a break, however, thanks to Saba Capital Management, a hedge fund shop run by activist investor Boaz Weinstein. Saba amassed a 20% stake in the Templeton fund and recently won four contested board seats. It has been pressuring the board to take actions to boost the share price. Its moves have paid off: The fund has returned a total 4.5% this year as its share price improved, and the discount to NAV has shrunk to 4%.\nTactics like Saba’s have long infuriated mutual fund companies; no one wants a hedge fund threatening a coup. Now, with some help from Congress, the playing field could tilt in favor of closed-end funds and their company sponsors, due to a bill recently introduced in the House. That could work against the interests of fund investors.\nThe Increasing Investor Opportunities Act, introduced in June by Rep. Anthony Gonzalez (R., Ohio) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D., New York), includes two measures that could make it much tougher for hedge funds to pressure closed-end funds and win proxy fights. One proposed change would lift the current 15% limit on closed-end-fund ownership of illiquid private funds, such as venture-capital and private-equity funds. A second measure would prevent activist hedge funds from acquiring more than 10% of a closed-end fund’s shares.\nA spokesman for Gonzalez declined to comment. Meeks didn’t respond to requests for comment.\nProponents of the changes say they would expand access to private markets for retail investors. They also say hedge funds are exploiting gaps in securities laws at a cost to long-term shareholders, saddling them with tax liabilities, higher fees, and forced fund liquidations. The bill would eliminate a “loophole that activist investors have used to extract short-term profits at the expense of retail investors,” the Investment Company Institute, or ICI, said in a recent statement.\nHedge funds and portfolio managers who invest in closed-end funds say that mutual fund companies are simply trying to protect a pool of assets and fees from shareholder interference. Most retail investors don’t vote their shares in proxy contests. That may leave fund boards largely free to pursue their own agendas.\n“Activism plays an important role, and if this bill passes, it will become more difficult for activists to threaten or create changes,” says Matt Buffington, a portfolio manager at Dryden Capital, an activist hedge fund.\nGregory Neer, a portfolio manager with Relative Value Partners, an advisory firm that invests in closed-end funds, agrees. “The ability for investors to pressure funds is beneficial to all shareholders,” he says.\nClosed-end funds have long been popular with investors due to their high yields and steady distributions. Many use leverage, borrowing money at market rates to boost payouts. They also generate income with options strategies and investments in high-yielding areas of the stock and bond markets.\nBut the funds have structural drawbacks. Expense ratios are steep, averaging 2.1%, according to Morningstar Direct. And since the funds have a fixed number of shares outstanding, prices reflect market demand for both a fund and its underlying assets. Funds usually trade at a discount to NAV. While it is attractive, in theory, to pay 90 cents for a dollar of assets, investors might never see the extra dime.\nHedge funds aim to exploit this inefficiency, buying closed-end funds at below-market value. They then pressure fund boards to take steps to lift the funds’ prices. The playbook is straightforward: accumulate a stake, win board seats, and then force a fund company into a tender offer, whereby it agrees to repurchase shares at nearly full price.\nIf that fails, a hedge fund might try to replace a fund’s manager, orchestrate a liquidation of the fund, or get it converted to an open-end fund—moves that could also pay off with the share price rising to parity with the NAV. Firms like Saba have also taken over funds entirely.\nGiving closed-end funds freedom to own more private securities could throw a wrench into the strategy. Tender offers work only if a fund can liquidate most of its holdings at market prices. Because venture-capital and private-equity holdings generally don’t trade publicly, their pricing isn’t transparent. “When closed-end funds invest in illiquid things, it protects them from activism,” one activist manager tellsBarron’s.\nRemoving the cap on private-fund ownership is “in line with a legislative agenda of getting retail investors more access to private investments,” says Thomas DeCapo, an attorney for the mutual fund industry.\nAnd capping activists at 10% of a fund doesn’t stop them from mounting proxy campaigns. “Nothing about this is antidemocratic,” he says. “It doesn’t stop a majority of investors who are unhappy or want change. It stops one investor from using its economic power, with other people’s money, to basically force changes on everybody else.”\nInvestor advocates see it differently, however, saying fund investors could wind up paying higher fees for funds that hold more-opaque investments. “It’s just another fund-of-funds structure, and those are notoriously high-fee,” says Tyler Gellasch, head of Healthy Markets, an investor-protection group.\nIndividual hedge funds technically can’t own more than 3% of a closed-end fund, under ownership restrictions in the Investment Company Act of 1940. But they skirt the rule by building stakes through affiliated entities, creating enough of a critical mass to force changes at a fund through proxy voting.\nThe ICI—the mutual fund industry’s lobby—has tried to persuade regulators to crack down on hedge funds. In a submission to the Securities and Exchange Commission last year, the ICI argued that hedge fund campaigns often consume a fund’s resources, trigger tax liabilities for long-term investors, and result in the forced selling of securities to meet a hedge fund’s demands for a tender offer. A fund’s expense ratio could increase if it is forced to buy back shares and its asset base shrinks.\nThe activist community’s “assault” on the industry has had a chilling effect on product launches, the ICI said, resulting in fewer closed-end funds on the market today than in 2007.\nBut hedge funds argue that changing the 1940 act would amount to a power grab by mutual funds. “This is all coming from the mutual fund industry, and it’s no coincidence that this protects them,” says Phil Goldstein, co-founder of Bulldog Investors, an activist that has long targeted closed-end funds. “There are funds with terrible performance and wide discounts. The ICI never says we need a mechanism where shareholders can hold those managers accountable.”\nImposing an ownership cap would also make proxy campaigns less economic. Limited to 10%, hedge funds wouldn’t own enough shares, with sufficient economic interest, to justify the expense of a proxy contest, which can cost millions of dollars. “If you’re limited to 10% and have to spend 2.5% of your assets on a proxy campaign, you’d say it’s too risky,” says Goldstein. “Meanwhile, management isn’t spending anything—just shareholder money. They want to make it economically unattractive to run a proxy contest.”\nRegulators and courts have expressed skepticism about some defenses that closed-end funds have adopted to prevent shareholder challenges. And, the SEC might not side with the fund industry. Since 2010, the SEC has warned fund companies against using state securities laws to thwart hedge fund takeovers. The SEC dropped its objection to these state “control share” laws last year under its Republican chairman, Jay Clayton. But the new, Democratic chairman, Gary Gensler, might reinstate the SEC’s objection—a reason for the industry to enlist Congress to change the law. The SEC didn’t respond to requests for comment.\nInstitutional Shareholder Services,a firm that makes recommendations on proxy voting, says investors should reject fund companies’ use of state control-share laws, which limit the voting rights of shareholders. With the SEC on the sidelines, ISS says, “CEF shareholders are denied important voting rights and are subject to management entrenchment.”\nHedge funds don’t always win, but investors might want to ride along as activists build a stake. “When an activist comes in, you usually see an increase in the share price and a decrease in the discount,” says Matt Souther, an associate finance professor at the University of South Carolina.\nTempleton Global Income’s (ticker: GIM) discount to NAV could narrow further if Saba acquires more shares or tries to take over the fund’s $743 million in assets. Saba recently took over management of another fund, Voya Prime Rate Trust, which it rebrandedSaba Capital Income & Opportunities(BRW).Franklin Templetonand Saba declined to comment.\nMiller/Howard High Income Equity(HIE) is also in Saba’s crosshairs. The fund is a “term trust” with a mandated liquidation date in 2024. It trades at a 5.9% discount to NAV. “In a worst-case scenario, you buy it at a discount and you’ll earn an excess return from now to 2024 because that discount will narrow,” says Patrick Galley, co-manager ofRiverNorth Opportunities(RIV), a closed-end fund that owns HIE.\nOther closed-end funds in which Saba owns stakes includeSource Capital(SOR) andInvesco Dynamic Credit Opportunities(VTA). Bulldog has built a position inTortoise Energy Independence(NDP).\nSome closed-end funds look attractive on their fundamentals.Adams Diversified Equity(ADX) offers exposure to big tech stocks, trades at a 14% discount to NAV, and is committed to an annualized distribution of at least 6%. “For investors who expect tech to do well, ADX is a good holding,” says David Tepper, a closed-end investor and head of Tepper Capital Management in San Francisco.\nSprott Focus Trust(FUND) is another fund he likes. Veteran small-cap manager Whitney George runs it, and his family owns 45% of the shares. It trades at a 10% discount and yields 5.7%. Tepper also favorsRoyce Global Value Trust(RGT), trading at a 9% discount and yielding 7.9%.\nNone of these funds has attracted much activist involvement, according to securities filings. But if activists see opportunity, they could pile in and pressure fund management—assuming that Congress doesn’t rewrite the rules of engagement.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":527,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":839125901,"gmtCreate":1629128214503,"gmtModify":1633687173498,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/839125901","repostId":"2159222603","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1659,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":830063525,"gmtCreate":1628993957667,"gmtModify":1633688113740,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hai","listText":"Hai","text":"Hai","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/830063525","repostId":"1147342921","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147342921","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628987746,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1147342921?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-15 08:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"US IPO Week Ahead: IPO calendar is quiet amid annual August break<blockquote>美国IPO一周：八月年度假期期间IPO日历平静</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147342921","media":"Renaissance Capital","summary":"The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week a","content":"<p>The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week ahead. While the calendar is empty for now, we may see some SPACs join the calendar throughout the week. We also anticipate filing activity to pick up in the coming weeks ahead of the post-Labor Day rush.</p><p><blockquote>IPO市场一年一度的8月份平静期正在如火如荼地进行，目前未来一周没有IPO计划。虽然日历目前是空的，但我们可能会在本周看到一些SPAC加入日历。我们还预计，在劳动节后高峰到来之前的未来几周内，申请活动将会增加。</blockquote></p><p> Street research is expected for 19 companies in the week ahead, and lock-up periods will be expiring for up to seven companies. For access to Street research and lock-up expiration dates,sign up for a free trial of IPO Pro.</p><p><blockquote>预计未来一周将有19家公司接受街头调查，最多7家公司的禁售期将到期。要获得街头研究和锁定到期日，请注册免费试用IPO Pro。</blockquote></p><p> <b>IPO Market Snapshot</b></p><p><blockquote><b>IPO市场快照</b></blockquote></p><p> The Renaissance IPO Indices are market cap weighted baskets of newly public companies. As of 8/12/2021, the Renaissance IPO Index was up 0.8% year-to-date, while the S&amp;P 500 was up 18.8%. Renaissance Capital's IPO ETF (NYSE: IPO) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include Snowflake (SNOW) and Palantir Technologies (PLTR). The Renaissance International IPO Index was down 9.7% year-to-date, while the ACWX was up 9.3%. Renaissance Capital’s International IPO ETF (NYSE: IPOS) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include EQT Partners and Smoore International.</p><p><blockquote>文艺复兴IPO指数是新上市公司的市值加权篮子。截至2021年8月12日，文艺复兴IPO指数今年迄今上涨了0.8%，而标普500上涨了18.8%。Renaissance Capital的IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPO）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括Snowflake（SNOW）和Palantir Technologies（PLTR）。Renaissance International IPO指数今年迄今下跌9.7%，而ACWX指数上涨9.3%。Renaissance Capital的国际IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPOS）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括EQT Partners和思摩尔国际。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1603787993745","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>US IPO Week Ahead: IPO calendar is quiet amid annual August break<blockquote>美国IPO一周：八月年度假期期间IPO日历平静</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\">\nUS IPO Week Ahead: IPO calendar is quiet amid annual August break<blockquote>美国IPO一周：八月年度假期期间IPO日历平静</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Renaissance Capital</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-15 08:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week ahead. While the calendar is empty for now, we may see some SPACs join the calendar throughout the week. We also anticipate filing activity to pick up in the coming weeks ahead of the post-Labor Day rush.</p><p><blockquote>IPO市场一年一度的8月份平静期正在如火如荼地进行，目前未来一周没有IPO计划。虽然日历目前是空的，但我们可能会在本周看到一些SPAC加入日历。我们还预计，在劳动节后高峰到来之前的未来几周内，申请活动将会增加。</blockquote></p><p> Street research is expected for 19 companies in the week ahead, and lock-up periods will be expiring for up to seven companies. For access to Street research and lock-up expiration dates,sign up for a free trial of IPO Pro.</p><p><blockquote>预计未来一周将有19家公司接受街头调查，最多7家公司的禁售期将到期。要获得街头研究和锁定到期日，请注册免费试用IPO Pro。</blockquote></p><p> <b>IPO Market Snapshot</b></p><p><blockquote><b>IPO市场快照</b></blockquote></p><p> The Renaissance IPO Indices are market cap weighted baskets of newly public companies. As of 8/12/2021, the Renaissance IPO Index was up 0.8% year-to-date, while the S&amp;P 500 was up 18.8%. Renaissance Capital's IPO ETF (NYSE: IPO) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include Snowflake (SNOW) and Palantir Technologies (PLTR). The Renaissance International IPO Index was down 9.7% year-to-date, while the ACWX was up 9.3%. Renaissance Capital’s International IPO ETF (NYSE: IPOS) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include EQT Partners and Smoore International.</p><p><blockquote>文艺复兴IPO指数是新上市公司的市值加权篮子。截至2021年8月12日，文艺复兴IPO指数今年迄今上涨了0.8%，而标普500上涨了18.8%。Renaissance Capital的IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPO）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括Snowflake（SNOW）和Palantir Technologies（PLTR）。Renaissance International IPO指数今年迄今下跌9.7%，而ACWX指数上涨9.3%。Renaissance Capital的国际IPO ETF（纽约证券交易所股票代码：IPOS）跟踪该指数，持有的顶级ETF包括EQT Partners和思摩尔国际。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.renaissancecapital.com/IPO-Center/News/85282/US-IPO-Week-Ahead-IPO-calendar-is-quiet-amid-annual-August-break\">Renaissance Capital</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",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://www.renaissancecapital.com/IPO-Center/News/85282/US-IPO-Week-Ahead-IPO-calendar-is-quiet-amid-annual-August-break","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147342921","content_text":"The IPO market’s annual August lull is in full swing with no IPOs currently scheduled for the week ahead. While the calendar is empty for now, we may see some SPACs join the calendar throughout the week. We also anticipate filing activity to pick up in the coming weeks ahead of the post-Labor Day rush.\nStreet research is expected for 19 companies in the week ahead, and lock-up periods will be expiring for up to seven companies. For access to Street research and lock-up expiration dates,sign up for a free trial of IPO Pro.\nIPO Market Snapshot\nThe Renaissance IPO Indices are market cap weighted baskets of newly public companies. As of 8/12/2021, the Renaissance IPO Index was up 0.8% year-to-date, while the S&P 500 was up 18.8%. Renaissance Capital's IPO ETF (NYSE: IPO) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include Snowflake (SNOW) and Palantir Technologies (PLTR). The Renaissance International IPO Index was down 9.7% year-to-date, while the ACWX was up 9.3%. Renaissance Capital’s International IPO ETF (NYSE: IPOS) tracks the index, and top ETF holdings include EQT Partners and Smoore International.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1526,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897992238,"gmtCreate":1628866564124,"gmtModify":1633688869905,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897992238","repostId":"2159188392","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1802,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895752209,"gmtCreate":1628775496701,"gmtModify":1633689609849,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895752209","repostId":"2158579452","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":711,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895756992,"gmtCreate":1628775450816,"gmtModify":1633689610970,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895756992","repostId":"1118557765","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1118557765","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628773597,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1118557765?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-12 21:06","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Regulatory Scrutiny Tightens: Is Apple Stock Going Down?<blockquote>监管审查收紧：苹果股价会下跌吗？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1118557765","media":"Thestreet","summary":"Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(AAPL)and government regulatory bodies is unf","content":"<p>Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(<b>AAPL</b>)and government regulatory bodies is unfolding. The Open App Markets Act,introducedon August 11, would “protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing”, among other things.</p><p><blockquote>一场涉及苹果的旷日持久的戏剧的另一章（<b>AAPL</b>）和政府监管机构正在展开。8月11日推出的《开放应用市场法案》将“保护开发者告诉消费者更低价格并提供有竞争力的定价的权利”等。</blockquote></p><p> If passed, will the new legislation have a substantial impact on Apple’s App Store and its high-growth, high-margin business? And if so, could this be a negative catalyst pushing Apple stock lower in the foreseeable future?</p><p><blockquote>如果通过，新立法是否会对苹果的App Store及其高增长、高利润的业务产生实质性影响？如果是这样，这是否会成为在可预见的未来推低苹果股价的负面催化剂？</blockquote></p><p> <b>Some background first</b></p><p><blockquote><b>先来点背景</b></blockquote></p><p> US Republican and Democrat policymakers agree on very little. A notable exception is the belief that Big Tech needs to be better regulated to ensure fairness and open competition in mobile apps, social media, online search, consumer tech services and others.</p><p><blockquote>美国共和党和民主党的政策制定者几乎没有达成一致。一个值得注意的例外是，人们认为大型科技公司需要更好地监管，以确保移动应用、社交媒体、在线搜索、消费科技服务等领域的公平和公开竞争。</blockquote></p><p> The history of scrutiny over the tech monopolies and oligopolies is long. Since launching the Apple Maven channel as recently as May 2020, I have witnessed:</p><p><blockquote>对科技垄断和寡头垄断的审查由来已久。自2020年5月推出苹果Maven频道以来，我见证了：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>alawsuitbrought against Alphabet (GOOG) over search ads;</li>  <li>four proposed antitrust billsagainst Amazon and peers;</li>  <li>a series of investigationsabout the App Store’s controlof the app market in Europe;</li>  <li>an epic battle between Apple and Epic Gamesover the App Store’s competitive powers.</li> </ul> Now, app stores have taken center stage once again. According to the Senate bill, U.S. consumers spent nearly $33 billion in mobile app stores in 2020 alone. If the app space were controlled by one single company (it is largely controlled by two), it would be a Fortune 100 company by revenue size.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>就搜索广告对Alphabet(GOOG)提起诉讼；</li><li>针对亚马逊及其同行的四项拟议反垄断法案；</li><li>关于App Store对欧洲App市场控制的一系列调查；</li><li>苹果和Epic Games之间关于App Store竞争力的史诗般的战斗。</li></ul>现在，应用商店再次占据了中心舞台。根据参议院法案，仅2020年，美国消费者在移动应用商店的支出就接近330亿美元。如果应用领域由一家公司控制（很大程度上由两家公司控制），按收入规模计算，它将是财富100强公司。</blockquote></p><p> Yes, it matters a lot</p><p><blockquote>是的，这很重要</blockquote></p><p> To be fair, this Wednesday’s news did not lead to bearishness, as Apple stock managed to top the performance of a struggling Nasdaq index for the day. But make no mistake: any restriction on Apple’s ability to monetize its user base through the App Store can and should be considered a significant risk.</p><p><blockquote>公平地说，本周三的消息并没有导致看跌，因为苹果股票当天的表现优于陷入困境的纳斯达克指数。但毫无疑问：对苹果通过App Store将其用户群货币化的能力的任何限制都可以而且应该被视为重大风险。</blockquote></p><p> The chart below shows how Apple’s services segment has grown at a healthy average pace of 20% over the past quarters. I estimate that the App Store accounted for about one-third of Apple service revenues in fiscal 2020. Better yet, services carry better margins than Apple’s already high-margin products.</p><p><blockquote>下图显示了苹果的服务部门在过去几个季度如何以20%的平均健康速度增长。我估计，2020财年，App Store约占苹果服务收入的三分之一。更好的是，服务比苹果已经高利润的产品有更好的利润。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e37f208f9bc9ab7a6689bb1564c333c\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"780\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Figure 2: Apple's services growth. Apple Maven</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图2：苹果服务业增长。苹果·马文</span></p></blockquote></p><p> A dent on Apple’s services model could certainly be harmful to the stock. Remember, from myconversation with Wedbush’s Dan Ives, that AAPL’s valuations have expanded substantially in the past decade due, in great part, to this shift toward subscription and recurring revenues.</p><p><blockquote>苹果服务模式的削弱肯定会对该股造成损害。请记住，从我与Wedbush的Dan Ives的对话来看，AAPL的估值在过去十年中大幅扩张，这在很大程度上是由于向订阅和经常性收入的转变。</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>Regulatory Scrutiny Tightens: Is Apple Stock Going Down?<blockquote>监管审查收紧：苹果股价会下跌吗？</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\">\nRegulatory Scrutiny Tightens: Is Apple Stock Going Down?<blockquote>监管审查收紧：苹果股价会下跌吗？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Thestreet</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-12 21:06</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(<b>AAPL</b>)and government regulatory bodies is unfolding. The Open App Markets Act,introducedon August 11, would “protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing”, among other things.</p><p><blockquote>一场涉及苹果的旷日持久的戏剧的另一章（<b>AAPL</b>）和政府监管机构正在展开。8月11日推出的《开放应用市场法案》将“保护开发者告诉消费者更低价格并提供有竞争力的定价的权利”等。</blockquote></p><p> If passed, will the new legislation have a substantial impact on Apple’s App Store and its high-growth, high-margin business? And if so, could this be a negative catalyst pushing Apple stock lower in the foreseeable future?</p><p><blockquote>如果通过，新立法是否会对苹果的App Store及其高增长、高利润的业务产生实质性影响？如果是这样，这是否会成为在可预见的未来推低苹果股价的负面催化剂？</blockquote></p><p> <b>Some background first</b></p><p><blockquote><b>先来点背景</b></blockquote></p><p> US Republican and Democrat policymakers agree on very little. A notable exception is the belief that Big Tech needs to be better regulated to ensure fairness and open competition in mobile apps, social media, online search, consumer tech services and others.</p><p><blockquote>美国共和党和民主党的政策制定者几乎没有达成一致。一个值得注意的例外是，人们认为大型科技公司需要更好地监管，以确保移动应用、社交媒体、在线搜索、消费科技服务等领域的公平和公开竞争。</blockquote></p><p> The history of scrutiny over the tech monopolies and oligopolies is long. Since launching the Apple Maven channel as recently as May 2020, I have witnessed:</p><p><blockquote>对科技垄断和寡头垄断的审查由来已久。自2020年5月推出苹果Maven频道以来，我见证了：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>alawsuitbrought against Alphabet (GOOG) over search ads;</li>  <li>four proposed antitrust billsagainst Amazon and peers;</li>  <li>a series of investigationsabout the App Store’s controlof the app market in Europe;</li>  <li>an epic battle between Apple and Epic Gamesover the App Store’s competitive powers.</li> </ul> Now, app stores have taken center stage once again. According to the Senate bill, U.S. consumers spent nearly $33 billion in mobile app stores in 2020 alone. If the app space were controlled by one single company (it is largely controlled by two), it would be a Fortune 100 company by revenue size.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>就搜索广告对Alphabet(GOOG)提起诉讼；</li><li>针对亚马逊及其同行的四项拟议反垄断法案；</li><li>关于App Store对欧洲App市场控制的一系列调查；</li><li>苹果和Epic Games之间关于App Store竞争力的史诗般的战斗。</li></ul>现在，应用商店再次占据了中心舞台。根据参议院法案，仅2020年，美国消费者在移动应用商店的支出就接近330亿美元。如果应用领域由一家公司控制（很大程度上由两家公司控制），按收入规模计算，它将是财富100强公司。</blockquote></p><p> Yes, it matters a lot</p><p><blockquote>是的，这很重要</blockquote></p><p> To be fair, this Wednesday’s news did not lead to bearishness, as Apple stock managed to top the performance of a struggling Nasdaq index for the day. But make no mistake: any restriction on Apple’s ability to monetize its user base through the App Store can and should be considered a significant risk.</p><p><blockquote>公平地说，本周三的消息并没有导致看跌，因为苹果股票当天的表现优于陷入困境的纳斯达克指数。但毫无疑问：对苹果通过App Store将其用户群货币化的能力的任何限制都可以而且应该被视为重大风险。</blockquote></p><p> The chart below shows how Apple’s services segment has grown at a healthy average pace of 20% over the past quarters. I estimate that the App Store accounted for about one-third of Apple service revenues in fiscal 2020. Better yet, services carry better margins than Apple’s already high-margin products.</p><p><blockquote>下图显示了苹果的服务部门在过去几个季度如何以20%的平均健康速度增长。我估计，2020财年，App Store约占苹果服务收入的三分之一。更好的是，服务比苹果已经高利润的产品有更好的利润。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5e37f208f9bc9ab7a6689bb1564c333c\" tg-width=\"1200\" tg-height=\"780\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Figure 2: Apple's services growth. Apple Maven</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>图2：苹果服务业增长。苹果·马文</span></p></blockquote></p><p> A dent on Apple’s services model could certainly be harmful to the stock. Remember, from myconversation with Wedbush’s Dan Ives, that AAPL’s valuations have expanded substantially in the past decade due, in great part, to this shift toward subscription and recurring revenues.</p><p><blockquote>苹果服务模式的削弱肯定会对该股造成损害。请记住，从我与Wedbush的Dan Ives的对话来看，AAPL的估值在过去十年中大幅扩张，这在很大程度上是由于向订阅和经常性收入的转变。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/apple/apple-services/regulatory-scrutiny-tightens-is-apple-stock-going-down\">Thestreet</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/apple/apple-services/regulatory-scrutiny-tightens-is-apple-stock-going-down","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1118557765","content_text":"Another chapter in a long-lasting drama involving Apple(AAPL)and government regulatory bodies is unfolding. The Open App Markets Act,introducedon August 11, would “protect developers’ rights to tell consumers about lower prices and offer competitive pricing”, among other things.\nIf passed, will the new legislation have a substantial impact on Apple’s App Store and its high-growth, high-margin business? And if so, could this be a negative catalyst pushing Apple stock lower in the foreseeable future?\nSome background first\nUS Republican and Democrat policymakers agree on very little. A notable exception is the belief that Big Tech needs to be better regulated to ensure fairness and open competition in mobile apps, social media, online search, consumer tech services and others.\nThe history of scrutiny over the tech monopolies and oligopolies is long. Since launching the Apple Maven channel as recently as May 2020, I have witnessed:\n\nalawsuitbrought against Alphabet (GOOG) over search ads;\nfour proposed antitrust billsagainst Amazon and peers;\na series of investigationsabout the App Store’s controlof the app market in Europe;\nan epic battle between Apple and Epic Gamesover the App Store’s competitive powers.\n\nNow, app stores have taken center stage once again. According to the Senate bill, U.S. consumers spent nearly $33 billion in mobile app stores in 2020 alone. If the app space were controlled by one single company (it is largely controlled by two), it would be a Fortune 100 company by revenue size.\nYes, it matters a lot\nTo be fair, this Wednesday’s news did not lead to bearishness, as Apple stock managed to top the performance of a struggling Nasdaq index for the day. But make no mistake: any restriction on Apple’s ability to monetize its user base through the App Store can and should be considered a significant risk.\nThe chart below shows how Apple’s services segment has grown at a healthy average pace of 20% over the past quarters. I estimate that the App Store accounted for about one-third of Apple service revenues in fiscal 2020. Better yet, services carry better margins than Apple’s already high-margin products.\nFigure 2: Apple's services growth. Apple Maven\nA dent on Apple’s services model could certainly be harmful to the stock. Remember, from myconversation with Wedbush’s Dan Ives, that AAPL’s valuations have expanded substantially in the past decade due, in great part, to this shift toward subscription and recurring revenues.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":541,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":812584809,"gmtCreate":1630594738901,"gmtModify":1632470983982,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi all","listText":"Hi all","text":"Hi all","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/812584809","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2356,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895755253,"gmtCreate":1628775524872,"gmtModify":1633689609302,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895755253","repostId":"2158579452","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1774,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895754258,"gmtCreate":1628775567874,"gmtModify":1633689608406,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895754258","repostId":"1130906606","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1130906606","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1628771607,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1130906606?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-12 20:33","market":"hk","language":"en","title":"U.S. jobless claims total 375,000, matching estimate<blockquote>美国初请失业金人数总计37.5万人，与预估相符</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1130906606","media":"finance.yahoo","summary":"New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still ","content":"<p>New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still making headway despite the lingering threat of the Delta variant.</p><p><blockquote>上周每周新申请失业救济人数再次下降，尽管德尔塔变异毒株的威胁挥之不去，但劳动力市场的复苏仍在取得进展。</blockquote></p><p> The Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims report on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics from the print, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg:</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部于美国东部时间周四上午8:30发布了每周初请失业金报告。以下是印刷品中的主要指标，与彭博社编制的共识估计进行了比较：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Initial unemployment claims, week ended August 7:</b>375,000 vs. 375,000 expected and 385,000 during prior week</p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>截至8月7日当周首次申请失业救济人数：</b>375,000 vs预期375,000和前一周385,000</li></ul></blockquote></p><p></li>  <li><b>Continuing claims, week ended July 31:</b>2.866 million vs. 2.900 million expected and 2.930 million during prior week</p><p><blockquote><li><b>截至7月31日当周的持续索赔：</b>286.6万，预期29亿，前一周293万</li></blockquote></p><p></li> </ul> New weekly jobless claims fell for a third straight period and came in below the psychologically important 400,000 level. Continuing claims were also expected to dip to a fresh pandemic-era low below 3 million, pacing back toward pre-virus levels.</p><p><blockquote>每周新申请失业救济人数连续第三次下降，低于40万人的重要心理水平。预计持续申请失业救济人数也将降至大流行时期的新低，低于300万，恢复到病毒爆发前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> Economists have been expecting to see an improvement in the number of individuals returning to the labor force as more states roll off federal enhanced unemployment benefits. As of mid-summer, about two dozen states had decided to end these benefits ahead of their official September expiration date at the national level, in a move seen as incentivizing workers to return to jobs.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家一直预计，随着越来越多的州取消联邦强化失业救济金，重返劳动力市场的人数将会有所改善。截至仲夏，大约24个州已决定在国家层面9月份正式到期日之前终止这些福利，此举被视为激励工人重返工作岗位。</blockquote></p><p> As of July 17, just under 13 million individuals were still claiming unemployment benefits across all programs, including nearly 9.5 million claiming crisis-era Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation. The overall number of claimants was down by nearly 200,000 from the prior week.</p><p><blockquote>截至7月17日，仍有近1300万人在所有项目中申请失业救济金，其中近950万人申请危机时期的疫情失业援助和疫情紧急失业补偿。申请人总数比前一周减少了近20万人。</blockquote></p><p> Other data on the labor market have also recently pointed to a more robust pick-up in activity.Last Friday's jobs report from the Labor Department showed a much better-than-expected 943,000 payrollswere created in July, marking a back-to-back month with job gains north of 900,000. The unemployment rate, labor force participation rates and length of the workweek each also improved.</p><p><blockquote>劳动力市场的其他数据最近也表明经济活动出现了更强劲的回升。美国劳工部上周五发布的就业报告显示，7月份新增就业人数为943,000人，远好于预期，连续一个月新增就业人数超过900,000人。失业率、劳动力参与率和每周工作时间也都有所改善。</blockquote></p><p> Additional reports have underscored the extent of the demand for workers in the recovering economy. The Labor Department's Job Openings and Labor Turnover report showed a record of more than 10 million vacancies last month. And in a separate report,the National Federation of Independent Businessessaid a record share of small businesses also reported difficulties filling open positions in July.</p><p><blockquote>其他报告强调了经济复苏中对工人的需求程度。劳工部的职位空缺和劳动力流动报告显示，上个月有超过1000万个职位空缺。全国独立企业联合会在另一份报告中表示，7月份也有创纪录比例的小企业表示难以填补空缺职位。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e614df7c46a8c02625c7ee85c09136c0\" tg-width=\"704\" tg-height=\"469\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Shoppers wear face masks as they leave a Walmart store in Vernon Hills, Ill. Walmart is reversing its mask policy, Friday, July 30, 2021, and will require vaccinated workers in its distribution centers and stores in areas to wear masks in areas with high infection rates of the virus. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh, File)More</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>购物者在离开伊利诺伊州弗农山庄的沃尔玛商店时戴着口罩。沃尔玛将于2021年7月30日星期五取消其口罩政策，并将要求其配送中心和商店的接种疫苗的工人在病毒感染率高的地区佩戴口罩。（美联社照片/Nam Y.Huh，档案）更多</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The recent spread of the Delta variant across the U.S. has called into question the pace of further progress in the labor market, adding another hurdle in the path toward full employment. Airlines and travel companies have been among the most vocal about the impact of the variant,with Southwest Airlines on Wednesday highlightinga deceleration in bookings and increase in cancellations as infections in hot spots rise.</p><p><blockquote>最近美国德尔塔变异毒株的蔓延引发了人们对劳动力市场进一步进步的步伐的质疑，为实现充分就业的道路增添了另一个障碍。航空公司和旅游公司一直是对该变种影响最直言不讳的公司之一，西南航空公司周三强调，随着热点地区感染人数上升，预订量放缓，取消预订量增加。</blockquote></p><p> \"As last week revealed, incoming data at the start of Q3 points to further strong GDP growth and a recovering labor market,\" Sam Bullard, senior economist for Wells Fargo, wrote in a note. \"That said, the Delta variant which has led to a surge in hospitalizations and a rise in deaths attributed to COVID has to be monitored and poses downside risk to the growth and labor market outlooks — especially if plans to bring back office workers and re-open schools this fall are delayed.\"</p><p><blockquote>富国银行高级经济学家萨姆·布拉德在一份报告中写道：“正如上周透露的那样，第三季度初的数据表明GDP进一步强劲增长，劳动力市场正在复苏。”“也就是说，必须对导致新冠肺炎住院人数激增和死亡人数上升的德尔塔变异毒株进行监测，并对增长和劳动力市场前景构成下行风险——特别是如果计划让办公室工作人员返回并重新开放的话——今年秋天的学校将被推迟。”</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1612507957220","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>U.S. jobless claims total 375,000, matching estimate<blockquote>美国初请失业金人数总计37.5万人，与预估相符</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\">\nU.S. jobless claims total 375,000, matching estimate<blockquote>美国初请失业金人数总计37.5万人，与预估相符</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">finance.yahoo</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-12 20:33</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still making headway despite the lingering threat of the Delta variant.</p><p><blockquote>上周每周新申请失业救济人数再次下降，尽管德尔塔变异毒株的威胁挥之不去，但劳动力市场的复苏仍在取得进展。</blockquote></p><p> The Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims report on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics from the print, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg:</p><p><blockquote>美国劳工部于美国东部时间周四上午8:30发布了每周初请失业金报告。以下是印刷品中的主要指标，与彭博社编制的共识估计进行了比较：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><b>Initial unemployment claims, week ended August 7:</b>375,000 vs. 375,000 expected and 385,000 during prior week</p><p><blockquote><ul><li><b>截至8月7日当周首次申请失业救济人数：</b>375,000 vs预期375,000和前一周385,000</li></ul></blockquote></p><p></li>  <li><b>Continuing claims, week ended July 31:</b>2.866 million vs. 2.900 million expected and 2.930 million during prior week</p><p><blockquote><li><b>截至7月31日当周的持续索赔：</b>286.6万，预期29亿，前一周293万</li></blockquote></p><p></li> </ul> New weekly jobless claims fell for a third straight period and came in below the psychologically important 400,000 level. Continuing claims were also expected to dip to a fresh pandemic-era low below 3 million, pacing back toward pre-virus levels.</p><p><blockquote>每周新申请失业救济人数连续第三次下降，低于40万人的重要心理水平。预计持续申请失业救济人数也将降至大流行时期的新低，低于300万，恢复到病毒爆发前的水平。</blockquote></p><p> Economists have been expecting to see an improvement in the number of individuals returning to the labor force as more states roll off federal enhanced unemployment benefits. As of mid-summer, about two dozen states had decided to end these benefits ahead of their official September expiration date at the national level, in a move seen as incentivizing workers to return to jobs.</p><p><blockquote>经济学家一直预计，随着越来越多的州取消联邦强化失业救济金，重返劳动力市场的人数将会有所改善。截至仲夏，大约24个州已决定在国家层面9月份正式到期日之前终止这些福利，此举被视为激励工人重返工作岗位。</blockquote></p><p> As of July 17, just under 13 million individuals were still claiming unemployment benefits across all programs, including nearly 9.5 million claiming crisis-era Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation. The overall number of claimants was down by nearly 200,000 from the prior week.</p><p><blockquote>截至7月17日，仍有近1300万人在所有项目中申请失业救济金，其中近950万人申请危机时期的疫情失业援助和疫情紧急失业补偿。申请人总数比前一周减少了近20万人。</blockquote></p><p> Other data on the labor market have also recently pointed to a more robust pick-up in activity.Last Friday's jobs report from the Labor Department showed a much better-than-expected 943,000 payrollswere created in July, marking a back-to-back month with job gains north of 900,000. The unemployment rate, labor force participation rates and length of the workweek each also improved.</p><p><blockquote>劳动力市场的其他数据最近也表明经济活动出现了更强劲的回升。美国劳工部上周五发布的就业报告显示，7月份新增就业人数为943,000人，远好于预期，连续一个月新增就业人数超过900,000人。失业率、劳动力参与率和每周工作时间也都有所改善。</blockquote></p><p> Additional reports have underscored the extent of the demand for workers in the recovering economy. The Labor Department's Job Openings and Labor Turnover report showed a record of more than 10 million vacancies last month. And in a separate report,the National Federation of Independent Businessessaid a record share of small businesses also reported difficulties filling open positions in July.</p><p><blockquote>其他报告强调了经济复苏中对工人的需求程度。劳工部的职位空缺和劳动力流动报告显示，上个月有超过1000万个职位空缺。全国独立企业联合会在另一份报告中表示，7月份也有创纪录比例的小企业表示难以填补空缺职位。</blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e614df7c46a8c02625c7ee85c09136c0\" tg-width=\"704\" tg-height=\"469\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>Shoppers wear face masks as they leave a Walmart store in Vernon Hills, Ill. Walmart is reversing its mask policy, Friday, July 30, 2021, and will require vaccinated workers in its distribution centers and stores in areas to wear masks in areas with high infection rates of the virus. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh, File)More</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>购物者在离开伊利诺伊州弗农山庄的沃尔玛商店时戴着口罩。沃尔玛将于2021年7月30日星期五取消其口罩政策，并将要求其配送中心和商店的接种疫苗的工人在病毒感染率高的地区佩戴口罩。（美联社照片/Nam Y.Huh，档案）更多</span></p></blockquote></p><p> The recent spread of the Delta variant across the U.S. has called into question the pace of further progress in the labor market, adding another hurdle in the path toward full employment. Airlines and travel companies have been among the most vocal about the impact of the variant,with Southwest Airlines on Wednesday highlightinga deceleration in bookings and increase in cancellations as infections in hot spots rise.</p><p><blockquote>最近美国德尔塔变异毒株的蔓延引发了人们对劳动力市场进一步进步的步伐的质疑，为实现充分就业的道路增添了另一个障碍。航空公司和旅游公司一直是对该变种影响最直言不讳的公司之一，西南航空公司周三强调，随着热点地区感染人数上升，预订量放缓，取消预订量增加。</blockquote></p><p> \"As last week revealed, incoming data at the start of Q3 points to further strong GDP growth and a recovering labor market,\" Sam Bullard, senior economist for Wells Fargo, wrote in a note. \"That said, the Delta variant which has led to a surge in hospitalizations and a rise in deaths attributed to COVID has to be monitored and poses downside risk to the growth and labor market outlooks — especially if plans to bring back office workers and re-open schools this fall are delayed.\"</p><p><blockquote>富国银行高级经济学家萨姆·布拉德在一份报告中写道：“正如上周透露的那样，第三季度初的数据表明GDP进一步强劲增长，劳动力市场正在复苏。”“也就是说，必须对导致新冠肺炎住院人数激增和死亡人数上升的德尔塔变异毒株进行监测，并对增长和劳动力市场前景构成下行风险——特别是如果计划让办公室工作人员返回并重新开放的话——今年秋天的学校将被推迟。”</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/weekly-jobless-claims-week-ended-august-7-2021-183650493.html\">finance.yahoo</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",".DJI":"道琼斯",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index"},"source_url":"https://finance.yahoo.com/news/weekly-jobless-claims-week-ended-august-7-2021-183650493.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1130906606","content_text":"New weekly jobless claims took another step lower last week, with the labor market's recovery still making headway despite the lingering threat of the Delta variant.\nThe Labor Department released its weekly jobless claims report on Thursday at 8:30 a.m. ET. Here were the main metrics from the print, compared to consensus estimates compiled by Bloomberg:\n\nInitial unemployment claims, week ended August 7:375,000 vs. 375,000 expected and 385,000 during prior week\nContinuing claims, week ended July 31:2.866 million vs. 2.900 million expected and 2.930 million during prior week\n\nNew weekly jobless claims fell for a third straight period and came in below the psychologically important 400,000 level. Continuing claims were also expected to dip to a fresh pandemic-era low below 3 million, pacing back toward pre-virus levels.\nEconomists have been expecting to see an improvement in the number of individuals returning to the labor force as more states roll off federal enhanced unemployment benefits. As of mid-summer, about two dozen states had decided to end these benefits ahead of their official September expiration date at the national level, in a move seen as incentivizing workers to return to jobs.\nAs of July 17, just under 13 million individuals were still claiming unemployment benefits across all programs, including nearly 9.5 million claiming crisis-era Pandemic Unemployment Assistance and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation. The overall number of claimants was down by nearly 200,000 from the prior week.\nOther data on the labor market have also recently pointed to a more robust pick-up in activity.Last Friday's jobs report from the Labor Department showed a much better-than-expected 943,000 payrollswere created in July, marking a back-to-back month with job gains north of 900,000. The unemployment rate, labor force participation rates and length of the workweek each also improved.\nAdditional reports have underscored the extent of the demand for workers in the recovering economy. The Labor Department's Job Openings and Labor Turnover report showed a record of more than 10 million vacancies last month. And in a separate report,the National Federation of Independent Businessessaid a record share of small businesses also reported difficulties filling open positions in July.\nShoppers wear face masks as they leave a Walmart store in Vernon Hills, Ill. Walmart is reversing its mask policy, Friday, July 30, 2021, and will require vaccinated workers in its distribution centers and stores in areas to wear masks in areas with high infection rates of the virus. (AP Photo/Nam Y. Huh, File)More\nThe recent spread of the Delta variant across the U.S. has called into question the pace of further progress in the labor market, adding another hurdle in the path toward full employment. Airlines and travel companies have been among the most vocal about the impact of the variant,with Southwest Airlines on Wednesday highlightinga deceleration in bookings and increase in cancellations as infections in hot spots rise.\n\"As last week revealed, incoming data at the start of Q3 points to further strong GDP growth and a recovering labor market,\" Sam Bullard, senior economist for Wells Fargo, wrote in a note. \"That said, the Delta variant which has led to a surge in hospitalizations and a rise in deaths attributed to COVID has to be monitored and poses downside risk to the growth and labor market outlooks — especially if plans to bring back office workers and re-open schools this fall are delayed.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1925,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897995163,"gmtCreate":1628866591052,"gmtModify":1633688869193,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897995163","repostId":"1185363621","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1145,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":897996206,"gmtCreate":1628866523105,"gmtModify":1633688870593,"author":{"id":"4088330821097380","authorId":"4088330821097380","name":"uma1","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d7c7894dd53f479bb22d730ab5ba0db8","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4088330821097380","idStr":"4088330821097380"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hi","listText":"Hi","text":"Hi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/897996206","repostId":"2159903472","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2159903472","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Stock Market Quotes, Business News, Financial News, Trading Ideas, and Stock Research by Professionals","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Benzinga","id":"1052270027","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa"},"pubTimestamp":1628863309,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2159903472?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-13 22:01","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why XL Fleet Shares Are Trading Lower Today<blockquote>为什么XL Fleet股价今天走低</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2159903472","media":"Benzinga","summary":"XL Fleet Corp (NYSE: XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.","content":"<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL Fleet Corp</a></b> (NYSE:XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.</p><p><blockquote><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL舰队公司</a></b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XL）周五股价走低，此前该公司公布了差于预期的第二季度财务业绩。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet reported a quarterly earnings loss of 8 cents per share, which came in below the estimate for a loss of 5 cents per share. The company reported quarterly revenue of $3.69 million, which came in below the estimate of $4.4 million.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet报告季度收益每股亏损8美分，低于每股亏损5美分的预期。该公司报告季度收入为369万美元，低于预期的440万美元。</blockquote></p><p> We believe market interest in commercial fleet electrification solutions remains strong, however, supply chain issues and wide scale shortages of key materials, especially microchips, continue to impact the global automotive industry, significantly interrupting the ability of fleet customers to secure new vehicles on which our electrified drive systems are installed,” said <b>Dimitri Kazarinoff</b>, CEO of XL Fleet.</p><p><blockquote>我们相信市场对商用车队电气化解决方案的兴趣依然浓厚，然而，供应链问题和关键材料（尤其是微芯片）的大规模短缺继续影响全球汽车行业，严重干扰了车队客户获得新车的能力。我们安装了电气化驱动系统，”他说<b>季米特里·卡扎里诺夫</b>，XL Fleet首席执行官。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet is a provider of fleet electrification solutions for commercial vehicles in North America.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet是北美商用车车队电气化解决方案提供商。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Price Action: </b>XL Fleet has traded as high as $35 and as low as $5.41 over a 52-week period.</p><p><blockquote><b>价格走势：</b>XL Fleet在52周内的交易价格最高为35美元，最低为5.41美元。</blockquote></p><p> At last check Friday, the stock was down 6.90% at $6.61.</p><p><blockquote>截至周五最后一次检查，该股下跌6.90%，至6.61美元。</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 XL Fleet Shares Are Trading Lower Today<blockquote>为什么XL Fleet股价今天走低</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 XL Fleet Shares Are Trading Lower Today<blockquote>为什么XL Fleet股价今天走低</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/d08bf7808052c0ca9deb4e944cae32aa);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Benzinga </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-08-13 22:01</p>\n</div>\n</div>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL Fleet Corp</a></b> (NYSE:XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.</p><p><blockquote><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XL\">XL舰队公司</a></b>（纽约证券交易所股票代码：XL）周五股价走低，此前该公司公布了差于预期的第二季度财务业绩。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet reported a quarterly earnings loss of 8 cents per share, which came in below the estimate for a loss of 5 cents per share. The company reported quarterly revenue of $3.69 million, which came in below the estimate of $4.4 million.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet报告季度收益每股亏损8美分，低于每股亏损5美分的预期。该公司报告季度收入为369万美元，低于预期的440万美元。</blockquote></p><p> We believe market interest in commercial fleet electrification solutions remains strong, however, supply chain issues and wide scale shortages of key materials, especially microchips, continue to impact the global automotive industry, significantly interrupting the ability of fleet customers to secure new vehicles on which our electrified drive systems are installed,” said <b>Dimitri Kazarinoff</b>, CEO of XL Fleet.</p><p><blockquote>我们相信市场对商用车队电气化解决方案的兴趣依然浓厚，然而，供应链问题和关键材料（尤其是微芯片）的大规模短缺继续影响全球汽车行业，严重干扰了车队客户获得新车的能力。我们安装了电气化驱动系统，”他说<b>季米特里·卡扎里诺夫</b>，XL Fleet首席执行官。</blockquote></p><p> XL Fleet is a provider of fleet electrification solutions for commercial vehicles in North America.</p><p><blockquote>XL Fleet是北美商用车车队电气化解决方案提供商。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Price Action: </b>XL Fleet has traded as high as $35 and as low as $5.41 over a 52-week period.</p><p><blockquote><b>价格走势：</b>XL Fleet在52周内的交易价格最高为35美元，最低为5.41美元。</blockquote></p><p> At last check Friday, the stock was down 6.90% at $6.61.</p><p><blockquote>截至周五最后一次检查，该股下跌6.90%，至6.61美元。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2159903472","content_text":"XL Fleet Corp (NYSE:XL) is trading lower Friday after the company announced worse-than-expected second-quarter financial results.\nXL Fleet reported a quarterly earnings loss of 8 cents per share, which came in below the estimate for a loss of 5 cents per share. The company reported quarterly revenue of $3.69 million, which came in below the estimate of $4.4 million.\nWe believe market interest in commercial fleet electrification solutions remains strong, however, supply chain issues and wide scale shortages of key materials, especially microchips, continue to impact the global automotive industry, significantly interrupting the ability of fleet customers to secure new vehicles on which our electrified drive systems are installed,” said Dimitri Kazarinoff, CEO of XL Fleet.\nXL Fleet is a provider of fleet electrification solutions for commercial vehicles in North America.\nPrice Action: XL Fleet has traded as high as $35 and as low as $5.41 over a 52-week period.\nAt last check Friday, the stock was down 6.90% at $6.61.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"XL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1317,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}