个人中心 - 老虎社区

greenpepper

IP属地：未知

帖子 · 53帖子 · 53
关注 · 0关注 · 0
粉丝 · 0粉丝 · 0

- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-06-20
  Ok
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,371 评论
  6
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-06-18
  Be prepared!
  AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>
  Summary I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC. For investors, the gravitational pul
  AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>
  1,587 评论
  2
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-06-15
  Interesting!!
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,714 评论
  4
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-06-12
  High risk high gain!
  AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>
  Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks. A multipronged bet onAMC Enter
  AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>
  1,948 评论
  2
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-06-11
  Really!!
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,230 1
  2
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-06-08
  Really!!
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,191 评论
  2
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-05-25
  Pls , Like and comment !! Thanks
  Tesla Found Guilty Of Throttling Charging Speed And Battery Capacity In Norway<blockquote>特斯拉在挪威限制充电速度和电池容量被判有罪</blockquote>
  Tesla has been found guilty of throttling charging speed and battery capacity by a court in Norway.T
  Tesla Found Guilty Of Throttling Charging Speed And Battery Capacity In Norway<blockquote>特斯拉在挪威限制充电速度和电池容量被判有罪</blockquote>
  1,172 2
  4
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-05-24
  Amazing!!
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,262 评论
  4
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-05-24
  Wow!!
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,390 评论
  1
  分享
  举报
- greenpeppergreenpepper
  ·2021-05-23
  Unstopperable!
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,381 评论
  3
  分享
  举报

热议股票

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":"3567808422493554","uuid":"3567808422493554","gmtCreate":1604831906465,"gmtModify":1604831906465,"name":"greenpepper","pinyin":"greenpepper","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":5,"headSize":572,"tweetSize":53,"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":1,"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":"2022.03.24","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d-3","templateUuid":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d","name":"投资合伙人虎","description":"证券账户累计交易金额达到100万美元","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fbeac6bb240db7da8b972e5183d050ba","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/436cdf80292b99f0a992e78750ac4e3a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/506a259a7b456f037592c3b23c779599","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.22","exceedPercentage":"93.81%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37-1","templateUuid":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37","name":"博闻投资者","description":"累计交易超过10只正股","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-3","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"传说交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到300次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"93.07%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":164638000,"gmtCreate":1624199124300,"gmtModify":1631892245175,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok","listText":"Ok","text":"Ok","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/164638000","repostId":"1199331995","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1371,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":166167847,"gmtCreate":1623997447889,"gmtModify":1631892245185,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Be prepared!","listText":"Be prepared!","text":"Be prepared!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/166167847","repostId":"1131310015","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1131310015","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623987347,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1131310015?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-18 11:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1131310015","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pul","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线是——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——奈飞、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>AMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMC: Danger Signals For Investors And Speculators<blockquote>AMC：投资者和投机者的危险信号</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-18 11:35</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>I stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.</li>  <li>For investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.</li>  <li>A century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.</li>  <li>Sell before the other speculators do.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dabb985556b9f549dd561bf919495d08\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"513\"><span>RgStudio/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>我站在巨人的肩膀上，在AMC上指导你。</li><li>对于投资者来说，没有盈利前景的引力对该股几乎没有支撑。</li><li>对于指望轧空的投机者来说，这是一个百年的警示故事。</li><li>在其他投机者之前卖出。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>RgStudio/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> What are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “<i>If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.</i>” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer for<i>The Wall Street Journal</i>, and John Brooks, author of “<i>Business Adventures</i>”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.</p><p><blockquote>我们如何看待模因股票现象？几周前，我与AMC院线控股公司（纽约证券交易所股票代码：AMC）一起尝试了一下。在读了两篇有趣的文章后，我回来看更多。正如艾萨克·牛顿在1676年所说，“<i>如果说我看得更远了一点，那就是站在巨人的肩膀上。</i>“现在我不是艾萨克·牛顿了。首先，我看起来好多了。但就像齐克一样——艾萨克的朋友们可能从未使用过这个昵称——我也站在巨人的肩膀上。在这种情况下，杰森·茨威格（Jason Zweig）是一位出色的金融市场作家<i>华尔街日报</i>，以及约翰·布鲁克斯，《<i>商业冒险</i>》，比尔盖茨推荐的一本书。我将在本文中大量引用两者，然后为您划清界限AMC。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Investor vs. trader vs. speculator</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投资者、交易者、投机者</b></blockquote></p><p> Jason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021<i>Wall Street Journal</i>column:</p><p><blockquote>Jason Zweig在他的2021年6月11日以图形方式区分了这三种类型的股票买家<i>华尔街日报</i>柱：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”</i>  So why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assets<i>never</i>came up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>每当你因为有预感或只是为了好玩而购买任何金融资产，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传，或者其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你支付更多的钱。”“投资者依赖内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。”</i>那么为什么AMC的股价一直在上涨呢？我有一个非正式的数据来源，即我6月4日AMC文章的300多条评论。收益，收入，资产价值的增长<i>没有</i>上来了。出现的是“轧空”和股票图表。因此，我预计茨威格先生会将AMC的股票描述为由交易员和投机者推动的。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.</p><p><blockquote>茨威格先生还让我意识到，我的AMC文章遗漏了盈利预测。我给出了很多关于历史趋势的数据，这些数据只是暗示了未来的方向。我在这里纠正这个遗漏。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A 2022 AMC earnings forecast</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2022年AMC盈利预测</b></blockquote></p><p> I start with the key assumptions:</p><p><blockquote>我从关键假设开始：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f5311cb0ff00c046d122c2c84fc3aea\" tg-width=\"640\" tg-height=\"168\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <i>My time frame for reference</i>&nbsp;is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.</p><p><blockquote><i>我的参考时间框架</i>是2017年到2019年。早期的数据相关性较低，因为AMC在2016年进行了一项大型收购，而2020年和2021年的数据则因为新冠疫情而相关性更低。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The national box office</i>is the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.</p><p><blockquote><i>全国票房</i>是主要假设。我6月4日的文章显示，自2002年以来，电影上座率一直在下降。明年票房会是多少？流媒体在订户和内容方面的稳定增长无疑是一个阻力。从逻辑上讲，COVID应该增加从场外（剧院）娱乐到家庭娱乐的转变，就像购物和工作一样。保持电影上座率接近19年的水平将是一个小小的奇迹。下降10%，甚至20%的可能性要大得多。如上表所示，我使用所有三种票房假设对2022年AMC每股收益进行预测。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>AMC market share.</i></b>I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>AMC市场份额。</i></b>我假设AMC的份额会比17-19年的水平有所增加，因为一些竞争影院肯定因新冠疫情的财务压力而退出。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Admissions gross margin.</i></b>This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>招生毛利率。</i></b>这是门票销售的利润减去制片人授权电影的成本。我认为AMC在17-19年保持稳定，但我也可以想象电影制片人会寻求更好的条款，因为AMC必须与越来越多渴望内容的流媒体服务竞标。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food expenses as a percent of sales.</i></b>I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs and<i>multiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.</i>Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品费用占销售额的百分比。</i></b>我继承了低得惊人的数字。AMC，大概还有它的同行，承担他们的食品和饮料成本和<i>将它们对美国电影观众的定价乘以7。</i>走私你自己的Jujifruits，省下一捆。我今年最好的理财建议。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Food and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.</i></b>I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>食品和饮料销售额占票价的百分比。</i></b>我认为AMC小幅上涨的趋势仍在继续。</blockquote></p><p> <b><i>Operating expenses</i></b>are the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.</p><p><blockquote><b><i>营业费用</i></b>是剧院人员、公用事业等的成本。我认为运营费用率的逐步上升趋势仍在继续，原因有二。第一，这些运营费用基本上是固定的，收入将面临压力。其次，当前的劳动力短缺将给低端剧院工作的薪酬水平带来压力，这似乎是合乎逻辑的。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> We’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:</p><p><blockquote>我们现在已经为我的盈利和现金流模型做好了准备：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b8a5ce8ad10adb3336126cdb0a5e598\" tg-width=\"537\" tg-height=\"497\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:</p><p><blockquote>22年的预测是根据上述假设通过“毛利润”线设定的。我的管理费用预测假设AMC正在努力限制费用度过充满挑战的时期：</blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li><i>Depreciation/amortization</i>is a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.</li>  <li><i>Interest expense</i>should decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.</li> </ul> <b>The gravitational pull of earnings</b></p><p><blockquote><ul><li><i>折旧/摊销</i>是房地产和收购的会计费用的组合。疫情期间进行的减记本应减少这些费用。</li><li><i>利息支出</i>随着AMC用其筹集的股权偿还部分债务，这一数字应该会下降。</li></ul><b>盈利的引力</b></blockquote></p><p> We arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.</p><p><blockquote>我们到达了底线。我能看到的2022年每股收益的最佳情况是大致盈亏平衡。更有可能的是适度的损失。现金流应该会更糟，因为AMC保持影院对不断萎缩的观众的吸引力所需的现金资本支出应该超过其非现金折旧/摊销费用。如果资本支出远低于我的预测，可能是因为AMC管理层承认自己正处于死亡螺旋之中，并希望尽可能榨取现金。</blockquote></p><p> <i>The bottom line - no support for investors.</i>AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words of<i>Trading Places</i>, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”</p><p><blockquote><i>底线是——不支持投资者。</i>AMC的账面价值为负。在COVID之后，它似乎无法赚取任何物质收入。其业务因技术变革而长期下滑，新的竞争对手是拥有巨大资源的怪兽公司——奈飞、迪士尼、康卡斯特等。投资者只能看着AMC目前55美元的股价，不寒而栗地说，用不朽的话来说<i>交易场所</i>、“卖莫蒂默，卖！”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale</b></p><p><blockquote><b>投机游戏——轧空：历史警示</b></blockquote></p><p> Millennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The book<i>Business Adventures</i>by John Brooks<i>,</i>published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.</p><p><blockquote>千禧一代并没有发明轧空。它几乎和金融市场存在的时间一样长。这本书<i>商业冒险</i>约翰·布鲁克斯<i>,</i>早在1969年就出版了，生动地讲述了20世纪20年代初的空头挤压故事。一个世纪前。我将引用书中的话来说明在没有投资者支持的情况下，投机的故事将如何结束。所以，给自己倒点非法烈酒（我们正走向禁酒令时代），继续读下去。这是第一家超市Piggly Wiggly Stores的创始人克拉伦斯·桑德斯的故事；他那个时代的亚马逊。</blockquote></p><p> Shorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:</p><p><blockquote>1922年，空头追捧克拉伦斯的股票，将其从50美元推至40美元以下。桑德斯发誓要用空头挤压进行报复。以下是布鲁克斯先生讲述这个故事的摘录：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…</i>”  The sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>桑德斯……购买了33,000股Piggly Wiggly股票，大部分来自卖空者；不到一周，他就将总数增加到了10.5万股——超过了20万股已发行股票的一半。桑德斯购买活动的有效性显而易见；到1923年1月下旬，它已将价格推高了60多美元……</i>“昔日唯一的空头挤压者如今已被成群的“猿”所取代，而猿在推高价格方面要好得多。顺便说一句，信不信由你，一群猿显然被称为“精明”。一群猿很精明——有意思。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”</i>  Today we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.</p><p><blockquote>“<i>他赚了一大笔钱，证明了一个贫穷的南方男孩是如何教训城市里的狡猾分子的。”</i>今天，我们有猿类坚持对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.</i>”  Something to think about. What was Saunders to do?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>角落里最大的危险之一总是，即使一个玩家可能会击败他的对手，他也会发现他赢得了一场得不偿失的胜利。一旦卖空者被榨干，卖空者可能会发现他在这个过程中积累的大量股票是他脖子上的沉重负担；通过将其全部推回市场，他会将其价格降至零。</i>“值得思考的事情。桑德斯该怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   “[  <i>Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments</i>.”  Pretty clever, no? No:</p><p><blockquote>“[<i>桑德斯的解决方案是出售分期付款计划中价值55美元的股票。在他二月份的广告中，他规定公众只需支付25美元的首付，余款分三期支付10美元即可购买股票</i>“很聪明，不是吗？没有：</blockquote></p><p>   “  <i>At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”</i>  Uh oh. What now?</p><p><blockquote>“<i>在第三天结束时，认购的股份总数仍低于2.5万股，所做的卖出被取消。桑德斯不得不承认这次旅行是失败的。”</i>呃哦。现在怎么办？</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller &amp; Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”</i>  Ouch.</p><p><blockquote><i>“8月22日，Adrian H.Muller&amp;Son的纽约拍卖公司……以每股1美元的价格拍卖了1,500股Piggly Wiggly股票……第二年春天，Saunders进入了正式破产程序。”</i>哎哟。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Buyers beware</b></p><p><blockquote><b>买家当心</b></blockquote></p><p> As Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?</p><p><blockquote>正如杰森·茨威格上面指出的，投机者依赖于以更高的价格找到买家。如今AMC股票的持有者无疑让许多卖空者的生活变得痛苦。但真的有足够多的新买家来收购AMC目前280亿美元市值以上的现有股东吗？尤其是在没有盈利的情况下不断给股票带来压力的情况下？</blockquote></p><p></p><p> AMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.</p><p><blockquote>AMC股东们，不要赢得克拉伦斯·桑德斯得不偿失的胜利。拿着每股55美元跑吧。快的。在其他投机持有者首先这样做之前。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4435360-amc-stock-danger-signals-for-investors-and-speculators","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1131310015","content_text":"Summary\n\nI stand on the shoulder of giants to guide you on AMC.\nFor investors, the gravitational pull of no earning prospects provides little support to the stock.\nA century-old cautionary tale for speculators counting on a short squeeze.\nSell before the other speculators do.\n\nRgStudio/E+ via Getty Images\nWhat are we to make of the meme stock phenomena? I tookone stab at itwith AMC Entertainment Holdings, Inc.(NYSE:AMC)a few weeks ago. I’m back for more, after reading two interesting pieces. As Isaac Newton said in 1676, “If I have seen a little further it is by standing on the shoulders of Giants.” Now I’m no Isaac Newton. For one, I’m far better looking. But like Zeke – a nickname Isaac’s friends probably never used – I too stand on the shoulders of giants. In this case the shoulders of Jason Zweig, a wonderful financial markets writer forThe Wall Street Journal, and John Brooks, author of “Business Adventures”, a book recommended by Bill Gates. I will quote liberally from both in this article, then draw the line for you to AMC.\nInvestor vs. trader vs. speculator\nJason Zweig graphically distinguished between these three types of stock buyers in hisJune 11, 2021Wall Street Journalcolumn:\n\n “\n Whenever you buy any financial asset because you have a hunch or just for kicks, or because somebody famous is hyping the heck out of it, or everybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may be a speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.”“An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarily whether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.”\n\nSo why has AMC’s stock price been on a tear? I have one informal data source, namely the 300+ comments on my June 4 AMC article. Earnings, income, growth in the value of assetsnevercame up. What did come up was “short squeeze” and stock charts. So I expect Mr. Zweig would describe AMC’s stock as driven by traders and speculators.\nMr. Zweig also made me realize that my AMC article left out an earnings forecast. I gave lots of data on historic trends, which only implied a future direction. I correct that omission here.\nA 2022 AMC earnings forecast\nI start with the key assumptions:\n\nMy time frame for reference is 2017 to 2019. Earlier data is less relevant because AMC made a big acquisition in 2016, and 2020 and 2021 data is even less relevant because of COVID.\nThe national box officeis the major assumption.My June 4 articleshows that movie attendance has been declining since 2002. What will box office be next year? The steady growth in streaming, both in subscribers and content, certainly is a headwind. And COVID logically should increase the shift from offsite (theater) entertainment to home entertainment, as it has for shopping and working. Holding movie attendance near its ’19 level would be a minor miracle. A 10%, or even a 20%, decline is far more likely. As you can see in the table above, I make 2022 AMC EPS forecasts using all three box office assumptions.\nAMC market share.I assume a share increase from AMC’s ’17-’19 level because some competing theaters must have dropped out because of COVID financial pressures.\nAdmissions gross margin.This is the profit from ticket sales less the cost of licensing movies from their producers. I hold AMC steady with ’17-’19, but I can also imagine that movie producers seek better terms because AMC has to bid against a growing pool of streaming services desperate for content.\nFood expenses as a percent of sales.I carry forward the shockingly low number. AMC, and presumably its peers, take their food and beverage costs andmultiply them by 7 in their pricing to us moviegoers.Smuggle in your own Jujifruits and save a bundle. My best financial advice for the year.\nFood and beverage sales as a percent of ticket prices.I assume that AMC’s trend of modest increases continues.\nOperating expensesare the cost of the theater personnel, utilities, etc. I assume the gradual uptrend in the operating expense ratio continues, for two reasons. One, these operating expenses are largely fixed, and revenues will be under pressure. Second, it seems logical that the current labor shortage will pressure pay levels for low-end theater jobs.\nWe’re now ready for my earnings and cash flow models:\n\nThe ’22 forecasts are set by the assumptions above through the “gross profit” line. My overhead expense forecast assumes that AMC is working hard to limit expenses through its challenging times:\n\nDepreciation/amortizationis a combination of accounting expenses for real estate and acquisitions. Write-downs taken during the pandemic should have reduced these expenses.\nInterest expenseshould decline as AMC pays down some debt with the equity it has been raising.\n\nThe gravitational pull of earnings\nWe arrive at the bottom line. The best-case scenario I can see for 2022 EPS is roughly breakeven. More likely is a modest loss. Cash flow should be somewhat worse, because the cash capital spending needed by AMC to keep its theaters attractive to a shrinking audience should exceed its non-cash depreciation/amortization expenses. If capital spending is much lower than I forecast, it is probably because AMC management is conceding that it is in a death spiral and wants to milk what cash it can.\nThe bottom line - no support for investors.AMC’s book value is negative. It appears incapable of earning any material money post-COVID. Its business is in long-term decline due to technology changes, and its new competitors are monster companies – Netflix, Disney, Comcast, etc. – with huge resources. An investor can only look at AMC’s current $55 stock price and with a shudder say, in the immortal words ofTrading Places, “Sell Mortimer, sell!”\nThe speculative play - a short squeeze: A historical cautionary tale\nMillennials did not invent the short squeeze. It has been around almost as long financial markets have existed. The bookBusiness Adventuresby John Brooks,published way back in 1969, tells a vivid tale of a short squeeze even farther back, in the early 1920s. Literally a century ago. I’m going to quote from the book to suggest how the story ends for speculations with no investor support. So pour yourself some illegal hooch (we’re heading to the Prohibition Era) and read on. This is the story of Clarence Saunders, the founder of Piggly Wiggly Stores, the first supermarket; the Amazon of his day.\nShorts went after Clarence’s stock in 1922, driving it from $50 to below $40. Saunders vowed revenge with a short squeeze. Here are excerpts of Mr. Brooks’ recounting of the story:\n\n “\n Saunders…bought 33,000 shares of Piggly Wiggly, mostly from short sellers; within a week he had brought the total to 105,000 – more than half of the 200,000 shares outstanding. The effectiveness of Saunders’ buying campaign was readily apparent; by late January of 1923 it had driven he price up over $60…”\n\nThe sole short squeezer of yore has been replaced by herds of “apes” today, and the apes have been far better in driving up prices. By the way, believe it or not, a group of apes is apparently called a “shrewdness”. A group of apes is shrewd – interesting.\n\n “\n He had made himself a bundle and had demonstrated how a poor Southern boy could teach the city slickers a lesson.”\n\nToday we have apes sticking it to hedge funds.\n\n “\n One of the great hazards in the Corner was always that even though a player might defeat his opponents, he would discover that he had won a Pyrrhic victory. Once the short sellers had been squeezed dry, the cornerer might find that the reams of stock he had accumulated in the process were a dead weight around his neck; by pushing it all back into the market, he would drive its price down to zero.”\n\nSomething to think about. What was Saunders to do?\n\n “[\n Saunders’] solution was to sell his $55 shares on the installment plan. In his February advertisements, he stipulated that the public could buy shares only by paying $25 down and the balance in three $10 installments.”\n\nPretty clever, no? No:\n\n “\n At the end of the third day, the total number of shares subscribed for was still under 25,000, and the sales that were made were canceled. Saunders had to admit that the drive had been a failure.”\n\nUh oh. What now?\n\n“On August 22nd, the New York auction firm of Adrian H. Muller & Son…knocked down 1,500 shares of Piggly Wiggly at $1 a share…The following spring Saunders went through formal bankruptcy proceedings.”\n\nOuch.\nBuyers beware\nAs Jason Zweig noted above, speculators depend upon finding a buyer at a higher price. Today’s holders of AMC stock certainly have made life painful for many short sellers. But are there really enough new buyers to take out current shareholders above AMC’s present $28 billion market cap? Especially with the gravity of no earnings constantly weighing on the stock?\nAMC shareholders, don’t win Clarence Saunders’ Pyrrhic victory. Take your $55 a share and run. Fast. Before the other speculating holders do so first.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1587,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":187399493,"gmtCreate":1623738685512,"gmtModify":1631892245193,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Interesting!!","listText":"Interesting!!","text":"Interesting!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/187399493","repostId":"2143178756","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1714,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186254839,"gmtCreate":1623504719721,"gmtModify":1631892245209,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"High risk high gain!","listText":"High risk high gain!","text":"High risk high gain!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186254839","repostId":"1104635261","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1104635261","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470020,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1104635261?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:53","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1104635261","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.\n\nA multipronged bet onAMC Enter","content":"<p>  <b>Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.</b>  A multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.</p><p><blockquote><b>Mudrick Capital的亏损显示了投资模因股票的风险。</b>本月，对AMC Entertainment HoldingsINC.AMC 15.39%的多管齐下的押注在Mudrick Capital Management LP上适得其反，Mudrick Capital Management LP是最新一家成为大量日内交易者受害者的对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>知情人士称，穆德里克的旗舰基金在短短几天内损失了约10%，因为AMC股价的上涨意外引发了该基金作为复杂交易策略一部分持有的衍生品价值的变化。</blockquote></p><p> The setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.</p><p><blockquote>几个月前，一群在社交媒体上组织的交易员帮助GameStopCorp.GME5.88%和其他股票的价格在1月份飙升，远远超出了许多投资者对基本面的看法。</blockquote></p><p> The development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>这一事态发展促使许多对冲基金削减了对模因股票的投资。Mudrick Capital的损失凸显了保留对此类公司的大量投资的风险有多大，甚至会对一位与个人投资者的看涨情绪基本同步的对冲基金经理产生适得其反的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Jason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.</p><p><blockquote>该公司创始人杰森·穆德里克(Jason Mudrick)几个月来一直在交易AMC股票、期权和债券，个人投资者对这家连锁影院的热情高涨。但他也出售了看涨期权期权，这是一种衍生品合约，旨在对冲该基金在股价下跌时对AMC的敞口。知情人士称，这些衍生品合约赋予买家未来以约40美元的价格从Mudrick购买AMC股票的权利，但当Reddit推动的购买热潮最近将AMC股票推至新纪录时，这些衍生品合约就变成了负债。</blockquote></p><p> As part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.</p><p><blockquote>作为更广泛的AMC战略的一部分，Mudrick Capital的高管正在与AMC就购买该公司的额外股票进行谈判。6月1日，AMC披露，Mudrick Capital已同意以每股27.12美元的价格直接从该公司购买2.305亿美元的新股，高于当时的交易价格。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克立即出售了该股票并获利，彭博新闻报道了这一快速抛售，并在社交媒体上引发了强烈反对。</blockquote></p><p> “Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.</p><p><blockquote>6月1日，Reddit华尔街博彩论坛上的一篇帖子写道：“穆德里克没有在背后捅AMC一刀……他们是搬起石头砸自己的脚。”当时的其他帖子称穆德里克为“失败者”、“人渣”和“一大堆没有未来的挥舞着的S-T”。论坛成员互相催促买入并持有。</blockquote></p><p> Inside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.</p><p><blockquote>随着AMC反弹势头增强，穆德里克内部的高管们越来越感到担忧。该公司的风险委员会于6月1日晚在该股收于32美元后召开会议，并决定在第二天退出所有债务和衍生品头寸。</blockquote></p><p> It was a day too late.</p><p><blockquote>晚了一天。</blockquote></p><p> AMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.</p><p><blockquote>6月2日，AMC股价在几个小时内突破40美元，触及72.62美元的盘中高点。在穆德里克资本促成的疯狂交易中，看涨期权期权价格飙升，到本周末，获胜的交易变成了失败，使该基金损失了数亿美元。Mudrick Capital出售的债务回报率约为5%，但考虑到期权交易后，该基金在AMC上的净亏损约为5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.</p><p><blockquote>其中一位知情人士表示，穆德里克的基金今年仍上涨了约12%。与此同时，年初购买AMC股票并持有的投资者已上涨约2000%。</blockquote></p><p> The impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>社交媒体推动的日内交易者的影响已成为今年市场的决定性发展，导致顶级对冲基金损失数十亿美元，引发国会听证会并受到美国证券交易委员会的审查。更多的对冲基金现在跟踪个人投资者在社交媒体上的情绪，更加关注市值较小的公司，这些公司的股价可能更容易受到个人投资者热情的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生专门从事不良债务投资，经常以高利率向陷入困境的公司提供贷款，或者在破产法庭上将其现有债务换成股权。Mudrick管理着全公司约35亿美元的投资，并通过此类交易所持有电子烟制造商NJOY Holdings Inc.和卫星通信公司GlobalStarInc.的大量非流动性股份。汇丰另类投资集团的数据显示，2018年至2020年，该旗舰基金的年回报率约为17%。</blockquote></p><p> But distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.</p><p><blockquote>但由于美联储的宽松资金甚至为陷入困境的公司提供了进入债务市场的机会，因此陷入困境的投资机会变得越来越难找到。穆德里克先生还探索了其他策略，成立了几家特殊目的收购公司，就AMC而言，最终通过大宗交易购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Mr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克最初将他的典型策略应用于AMC，以低至20美分的价格购买债券，在12月向该公司借出1亿美元，并将部分债券换成新股。在Covid-19大流行封锁期间，已经面临压力的影院上座率几乎完全消失，AMC股票交易价格低至2美元。他推断，随着越来越多的美国人接种疫苗，消费者今年将恢复对大屏幕娱乐的兴趣。</blockquote></p><p> Day traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.</p><p><blockquote>1月下旬，日内交易者首次在AMC进行了交易，在社交媒体上高呼#SaveAMC，并短暂将该股推升至20美元左右。AMC不断上涨的股票价值推高了债务价格——Mudrick Capital持有的一只债券在一周内翻了一番——很快就回报了Mudrick先生的看涨情绪。AMC利用其飙升的股价在1月底筹集了近10亿美元的新融资，使其能够避免此前预期的破产申请。</blockquote></p><p> Around that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.</p><p><blockquote>大约在那个时候，穆德里克先生出售了AMC股票的看涨期权期权，如果连锁影院确实面临问题，可以立即产生收入来抵消潜在的损失。这些衍生品让买家可以选择以约40美元的价格从Mudrick Capital购买AMC股票——当该股交易价格低于10美元时，这似乎不太可能。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生与AMC首席执行官亚当·阿伦(Adam Aron)就提供额外资金保持联系，导致他最近购买了股票。但一位知情人士表示，作为一项保险政策，他保留了衍生品合约。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>AMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMC Bet by Hedge Fund Unravels Thanks to Meme-Stock Traders<blockquote>对冲基金对AMC的押注因模因股票交易员而瓦解</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-12 11:53</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  <b>Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.</b>  A multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.</p><p><blockquote><b>Mudrick Capital的亏损显示了投资模因股票的风险。</b>本月，对AMC Entertainment HoldingsINC.AMC 15.39%的多管齐下的押注在Mudrick Capital Management LP上适得其反，Mudrick Capital Management LP是最新一家成为大量日内交易者受害者的对冲基金。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>知情人士称，穆德里克的旗舰基金在短短几天内损失了约10%，因为AMC股价的上涨意外引发了该基金作为复杂交易策略一部分持有的衍生品价值的变化。</blockquote></p><p> The setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.</p><p><blockquote>几个月前，一群在社交媒体上组织的交易员帮助GameStopCorp.GME5.88%和其他股票的价格在1月份飙升，远远超出了许多投资者对基本面的看法。</blockquote></p><p> The development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>这一事态发展促使许多对冲基金削减了对模因股票的投资。Mudrick Capital的损失凸显了保留对此类公司的大量投资的风险有多大，甚至会对一位与个人投资者的看涨情绪基本同步的对冲基金经理产生适得其反的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Jason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.</p><p><blockquote>该公司创始人杰森·穆德里克(Jason Mudrick)几个月来一直在交易AMC股票、期权和债券，个人投资者对这家连锁影院的热情高涨。但他也出售了看涨期权期权，这是一种衍生品合约，旨在对冲该基金在股价下跌时对AMC的敞口。知情人士称，这些衍生品合约赋予买家未来以约40美元的价格从Mudrick购买AMC股票的权利，但当Reddit推动的购买热潮最近将AMC股票推至新纪录时，这些衍生品合约就变成了负债。</blockquote></p><p> As part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.</p><p><blockquote>作为更广泛的AMC战略的一部分，Mudrick Capital的高管正在与AMC就购买该公司的额外股票进行谈判。6月1日，AMC披露，Mudrick Capital已同意以每股27.12美元的价格直接从该公司购买2.305亿美元的新股，高于当时的交易价格。</blockquote></p><p> Mudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克立即出售了该股票并获利，彭博新闻报道了这一快速抛售，并在社交媒体上引发了强烈反对。</blockquote></p><p> “Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.</p><p><blockquote>6月1日，Reddit华尔街博彩论坛上的一篇帖子写道：“穆德里克没有在背后捅AMC一刀……他们是搬起石头砸自己的脚。”当时的其他帖子称穆德里克为“失败者”、“人渣”和“一大堆没有未来的挥舞着的S-T”。论坛成员互相催促买入并持有。</blockquote></p><p> Inside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.</p><p><blockquote>随着AMC反弹势头增强，穆德里克内部的高管们越来越感到担忧。该公司的风险委员会于6月1日晚在该股收于32美元后召开会议，并决定在第二天退出所有债务和衍生品头寸。</blockquote></p><p> It was a day too late.</p><p><blockquote>晚了一天。</blockquote></p><p> AMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.</p><p><blockquote>6月2日，AMC股价在几个小时内突破40美元，触及72.62美元的盘中高点。在穆德里克资本促成的疯狂交易中，看涨期权期权价格飙升，到本周末，获胜的交易变成了失败，使该基金损失了数亿美元。Mudrick Capital出售的债务回报率约为5%，但考虑到期权交易后，该基金在AMC上的净亏损约为5.4%。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.</p><p><blockquote>其中一位知情人士表示，穆德里克的基金今年仍上涨了约12%。与此同时，年初购买AMC股票并持有的投资者已上涨约2000%。</blockquote></p><p> The impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.</p><p><blockquote>社交媒体推动的日内交易者的影响已成为今年市场的决定性发展，导致顶级对冲基金损失数十亿美元，引发国会听证会并受到美国证券交易委员会的审查。更多的对冲基金现在跟踪个人投资者在社交媒体上的情绪，更加关注市值较小的公司，这些公司的股价可能更容易受到个人投资者热情的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生专门从事不良债务投资，经常以高利率向陷入困境的公司提供贷款，或者在破产法庭上将其现有债务换成股权。Mudrick管理着全公司约35亿美元的投资，并通过此类交易所持有电子烟制造商NJOY Holdings Inc.和卫星通信公司GlobalStarInc.的大量非流动性股份。汇丰另类投资集团的数据显示，2018年至2020年，该旗舰基金的年回报率约为17%。</blockquote></p><p> But distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.</p><p><blockquote>但由于美联储的宽松资金甚至为陷入困境的公司提供了进入债务市场的机会，因此陷入困境的投资机会变得越来越难找到。穆德里克先生还探索了其他策略，成立了几家特殊目的收购公司，就AMC而言，最终通过大宗交易购买股票。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Mr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克最初将他的典型策略应用于AMC，以低至20美分的价格购买债券，在12月向该公司借出1亿美元，并将部分债券换成新股。在Covid-19大流行封锁期间，已经面临压力的影院上座率几乎完全消失，AMC股票交易价格低至2美元。他推断，随着越来越多的美国人接种疫苗，消费者今年将恢复对大屏幕娱乐的兴趣。</blockquote></p><p> Day traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.</p><p><blockquote>1月下旬，日内交易者首次在AMC进行了交易，在社交媒体上高呼#SaveAMC，并短暂将该股推升至20美元左右。AMC不断上涨的股票价值推高了债务价格——Mudrick Capital持有的一只债券在一周内翻了一番——很快就回报了Mudrick先生的看涨情绪。AMC利用其飙升的股价在1月底筹集了近10亿美元的新融资，使其能够避免此前预期的破产申请。</blockquote></p><p> Around that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.</p><p><blockquote>大约在那个时候，穆德里克先生出售了AMC股票的看涨期权期权，如果连锁影院确实面临问题，可以立即产生收入来抵消潜在的损失。这些衍生品让买家可以选择以约40美元的价格从Mudrick Capital购买AMC股票——当该股交易价格低于10美元时，这似乎不太可能。</blockquote></p><p> Mr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.</p><p><blockquote>穆德里克先生与AMC首席执行官亚当·阿伦(Adam Aron)就提供额外资金保持联系，导致他最近购买了股票。但一位知情人士表示，作为一项保险政策，他保留了衍生品合约。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/amc-bet-by-hedge-fund-unravels-thanks-to-meme-stock-traders-11623431320?mod=markets_lead_pos2\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/amc-bet-by-hedge-fund-unravels-thanks-to-meme-stock-traders-11623431320?mod=markets_lead_pos2","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1104635261","content_text":"Losses by Mudrick Capital show the risks of exposure to meme stocks.\n\nA multipronged bet onAMC Entertainment HoldingsInc.AMC15.39%boomeranged this month on Mudrick Capital Management LP, the latest hedge fund to fall victim to swarming day traders.\nMudrick’s flagship fund lost about 10% in just a few days as a jump in AMC’s stock price unexpectedly triggered changes in the value of derivatives the fund held as part of a complex trading strategy, people familiar with the matter said.\nThe setback comes months after a group of traders organizing on social media helped send the price ofGameStopCorp.GME5.88%and other stocks soaring in January, well beyond many investors’ views of underlying fundamentals.\nThe development prompted many hedge funds to slash their exposure to meme stocks. Mudrick Capital’s losses highlight how risky retaining significant exposure to such companies can be—even backfiring on a hedge-fund manager who was mostly in sync with the bullishness of individual investors.\nJason Mudrick, the firm’s founder, had been trading AMC stock, options and bonds for months, surfing a surge of enthusiasm for the theater chain among individual investors. But he also sold call options, derivative contracts meant to hedge the fund’s exposure to AMC should the stock price founder. Those derivative contracts, which gave its buyers the right to buy AMC stock from Mudrick at roughly $40 in the future, ballooned into liabilities when a resurgence ofReddit-fueled buyingrecently pushed AMC’s stock to new records, the people said.\nAs part of the broader AMC strategy, executives at Mudrick Capital were in talks with AMC to buy additional shares from the company in late May. On June 1, AMC disclosed that Mudrick Capital had agreed to buy $230.5 million of new stock directly from the company at $27.12 apiece, a premium over where it was then trading.\nMudrick immediately sold the stock at a profit, a quick flip that was reported by Bloomberg News and that sparked backlash on social media.\n“Mudrick didn’t stab AMC in the back…They shot themselves in the foot,” read one post on Reddit’s Wall Street Bets forum on June 1. Other posts around that time referenced Mudrick as “losers,” “scum bags” and “a large waving pile of s—t with no future.” Members of the forum urged each other to buy and hold.\nInside Mudrick, executives were growing apprehensive as the AMC rally gained steam. The firm’s risk committee met on the evening of June 1 after the stock closed at $32 and decided to exit all debt and derivative positions the following day.\nIt was a day too late.\nAMC’s stock price blew past $40in a matter of hours June 2, hitting an intraday high of $72.62.Call option prices soaredamid a frenzy of trading that Mudrick Capital contributed to and, by the end of the week, the winning trade had turned into a bust, costing the fund hundreds of millions of dollars in losses. Mudrick Capital made a roughly 5% return on the debt it sold but after accounting for its options trade, the fund took a net loss of about 5.4% on AMC.\nMr. Mudrick’s fund is still up about 12% for the year, one of the people said. Meanwhile, investors who bought AMC stock at the start of the year and held on have gained about 2000%.\nThe impact of social media-fueled day traders has become a defining market development this year, costing top hedge funds billions of dollars in losses, sparking a congressional hearing anddrawing scrutinyfrom the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. More hedge funds now track individual investors’ sentiment on social media and pay greater attention to companies with smaller market values whose stock price may be more susceptible to the enthusiasms of individual investors.\nMr. Mudrick specializes in distressed debt investing, often lending to troubled companies at high interest rates or swapping their existing debt for equity in bankruptcy court. Mudrick manages about $3.5 billion in investments firmwide and holds large, illiquid stakes in E-cigarette maker NJOY Holdings Inc. and satellite communications companyGlobalstarInc.from such exchanges. The flagship fund reported returns of about 17% annually from 2018 to 2020, according to data from HSBC Alternative Investment Group.\nBut distressed investing opportunities have grownharder to findas easy money from the Federal Reserve has given even struggling companies open access to debt markets. Mr. Mudrick has explored other strategies, launching several special-purpose acquisition companiesand, in the case of AMC, ultimately buying stock in block trades.\nMr. Mudrick initially applied his typical playbook to AMC, buying bonds for as little as 20 cents on the dollar,lending the company $100 millionin December and swapping some bonds into new shares. Theater attendance, already under pressure, had disappeared almost entirely amid Covid-19 pandemic lockdowns, and AMC stock traded as low as $2. He reasoned that consumers would regain their appetite for big-screen entertainment this year as more Americans got vaccinated.\nDay traders took theirfirst run at AMC in late January, urging each other on with the social-media rallying cry of #SaveAMC and briefly lifting the stock to around $20. AMC’s rising equity value boosted debt prices—one bond Mudrick Capital owned doubled within a week—quickly rewarding Mr. Mudrick’s bullishness. AMC capitalized on its surging stock priceto raise nearly $1 billion in new financingin late January, enabling it to ward off a previously expected bankruptcy filing.\nAround that time, Mr. Mudrick sold call options on AMC stock, producing immediate income to offset potential losses if the theater chain did face problems. The derivatives gave buyers the option to buy AMC shares from Mudrick Capital for about $40—viewed as a seeming improbability when the stock was trading below $10.\nMr. Mudrick remained in contact with AMC Chief Executive Adam Aron about providing additional funding, leading to his recent share purchase. But he kept the derivative contracts outstanding as an insurance policy, one of the people familiar with the matter said.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1948,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":181596973,"gmtCreate":1623400207992,"gmtModify":1631892245219,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Really!!","listText":"Really!!","text":"Really!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/181596973","repostId":"2142274300","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1230,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":117173879,"gmtCreate":1623126150191,"gmtModify":1631892245235,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Really!!","listText":"Really!!","text":"Really!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/117173879","repostId":"2141342255","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1191,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":138948333,"gmtCreate":1621906745022,"gmtModify":1631892245264,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp;Pls ,&nbsp;Like and comment !! Thanks","listText":"&nbsp;Pls ,&nbsp;Like and comment !! Thanks","text":"Pls , Like and comment !! Thanks","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/138948333","repostId":"1189735723","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1189735723","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1621904116,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1189735723?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-05-25 08:55","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Tesla Found Guilty Of Throttling Charging Speed And Battery Capacity In Norway<blockquote>特斯拉在挪威限制充电速度和电池容量被判有罪</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1189735723","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Tesla has been found guilty of throttling charging speed and battery capacity by a court in Norway.T","content":"<p>Tesla has been found guilty of throttling charging speed and battery capacity by a court in Norway.</p><p><blockquote>挪威一家法院裁定特斯拉犯有限制充电速度和电池容量的罪行。</blockquote></p><p>The company is going to \"have to pay $16,000 to each of the thousands of owners affected in the country\", until it appeals,&nbsp;according to the pro-Tesla lot over at&nbsp;<i>electrek.</i></p><p><blockquote>据支持特斯拉的人士称，该公司将“向该国数千名受影响的业主每人支付16,000美元”，直到上诉为止。<i>电子公司。</i></blockquote></p><p>Dating back to 2019,<i>electrek</i>had pointed out reports that Tesla owners were seeing drops in range of 12 to 30 miles after a software update. The affected vehicles appear to only be&nbsp;Model S and Model X vehicles with 85 kWh battery packs.</p><p><blockquote>追溯到2019年，<i>电子</i>曾指出有报道称，特斯拉车主在软件更新后行驶里程下降了12至30英里。受影响的车辆似乎只有配备85千瓦时电池组的Model S和Model X车辆。</blockquote></p><p>Tesla owner David Rasmussen told the blog at the time:&nbsp;<b>“My 2014 Model S 85 was getting Rated Range of 247 miles until May 13. Now after the next update, it continued to drop to now 217 miles. This is an 11% drop in 5 weeks.”</b></p><p><blockquote>特斯拉老板大卫·拉斯穆森当时在博客上表示：<b>“直到5月13日，我的2014款Model S 85的额定续航里程为247英里。现在在下一次更新后，它继续下降到现在的217英里。这在5周内下降了11%。”</b></blockquote></p><p>He even plotted the battery capacity of his Model S, showing the obvious dropoff in capacity around&nbsp;the time of the update.</p><p><blockquote>他甚至绘制了Model S的电池容量，显示更新前后容量明显下降。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c1f6de87b1971580e94f5568ca61f01\" tg-width=\"764\" tg-height=\"348\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>Around the same time, the DC fast-charging rate at Supercharger stations had also been reduced, the blog notes, stating: \"Affected owners are seeing much slower charging sessions.\"</p><p><blockquote>博客指出，大约在同一时间，超级充电站的直流快速充电速率也降低了，并指出：“受影响的车主发现充电速度要慢得多。”</blockquote></p><p>Tesla, meanwhile, claimed that the update would&nbsp;“protect the battery and improve battery longevity”. The company claimed that range loss only happened for&nbsp;“a small percentage of owners.”</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，特斯拉声称更新将“保护电池并提高电池寿命”。该公司声称，里程损失仅发生在“一小部分车主”身上。</blockquote></p><p>The controversy led to a \"series of lawsuits\", one of which was in Norway. When Tesla didn't respond to the lawsuit, the 30 owners<b>\"were automatically awarded 136,000 kroner (~$16,000 USD) each in compensation\"</b>unless Tesla appeals.</p><p><blockquote>争议导致了“一系列诉讼”，其中之一是在挪威。当特斯拉没有回应诉讼时，30名业主<b>“每人自动获得136,000克朗（约16,000美元）的赔偿”</b>除非特斯拉上诉。</blockquote></p><p>But the real devil could be in the forthcoming details: there could be over 10,000 other Tesla owners affected by the update in Norway&nbsp;<i>alone,</i>not to mention owners involved in similar lawsuits in other countries.</p><p><blockquote>但真正的问题可能在于即将公布的细节：挪威可能有超过10,000名其他特斯拉车主受到此次更新的影响<i>独自一人，</i>更不用说其他国家卷入类似诉讼的业主了。</blockquote></p><p>The affected update was&nbsp;Tesla’s 2019.16.1 and .2 update.</p><p><blockquote>受影响的更新是特斯拉的2019.16.1和.2更新。</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>Tesla Found Guilty Of Throttling Charging Speed And Battery Capacity In Norway<blockquote>特斯拉在挪威限制充电速度和电池容量被判有罪</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\">\nTesla Found Guilty Of Throttling Charging Speed And Battery Capacity In Norway<blockquote>特斯拉在挪威限制充电速度和电池容量被判有罪</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-05-25 08:55</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Tesla has been found guilty of throttling charging speed and battery capacity by a court in Norway.</p><p><blockquote>挪威一家法院裁定特斯拉犯有限制充电速度和电池容量的罪行。</blockquote></p><p>The company is going to \"have to pay $16,000 to each of the thousands of owners affected in the country\", until it appeals,&nbsp;according to the pro-Tesla lot over at&nbsp;<i>electrek.</i></p><p><blockquote>据支持特斯拉的人士称，该公司将“向该国数千名受影响的业主每人支付16,000美元”，直到上诉为止。<i>电子公司。</i></blockquote></p><p>Dating back to 2019,<i>electrek</i>had pointed out reports that Tesla owners were seeing drops in range of 12 to 30 miles after a software update. The affected vehicles appear to only be&nbsp;Model S and Model X vehicles with 85 kWh battery packs.</p><p><blockquote>追溯到2019年，<i>电子</i>曾指出有报道称，特斯拉车主在软件更新后行驶里程下降了12至30英里。受影响的车辆似乎只有配备85千瓦时电池组的Model S和Model X车辆。</blockquote></p><p>Tesla owner David Rasmussen told the blog at the time:&nbsp;<b>“My 2014 Model S 85 was getting Rated Range of 247 miles until May 13. Now after the next update, it continued to drop to now 217 miles. This is an 11% drop in 5 weeks.”</b></p><p><blockquote>特斯拉老板大卫·拉斯穆森当时在博客上表示：<b>“直到5月13日，我的2014款Model S 85的额定续航里程为247英里。现在在下一次更新后，它继续下降到现在的217英里。这在5周内下降了11%。”</b></blockquote></p><p>He even plotted the battery capacity of his Model S, showing the obvious dropoff in capacity around&nbsp;the time of the update.</p><p><blockquote>他甚至绘制了Model S的电池容量，显示更新前后容量明显下降。</blockquote></p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3c1f6de87b1971580e94f5568ca61f01\" tg-width=\"764\" tg-height=\"348\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p>Around the same time, the DC fast-charging rate at Supercharger stations had also been reduced, the blog notes, stating: \"Affected owners are seeing much slower charging sessions.\"</p><p><blockquote>博客指出，大约在同一时间，超级充电站的直流快速充电速率也降低了，并指出：“受影响的车主发现充电速度要慢得多。”</blockquote></p><p>Tesla, meanwhile, claimed that the update would&nbsp;“protect the battery and improve battery longevity”. The company claimed that range loss only happened for&nbsp;“a small percentage of owners.”</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，特斯拉声称更新将“保护电池并提高电池寿命”。该公司声称，里程损失仅发生在“一小部分车主”身上。</blockquote></p><p>The controversy led to a \"series of lawsuits\", one of which was in Norway. When Tesla didn't respond to the lawsuit, the 30 owners<b>\"were automatically awarded 136,000 kroner (~$16,000 USD) each in compensation\"</b>unless Tesla appeals.</p><p><blockquote>争议导致了“一系列诉讼”，其中之一是在挪威。当特斯拉没有回应诉讼时，30名业主<b>“每人自动获得136,000克朗（约16,000美元）的赔偿”</b>除非特斯拉上诉。</blockquote></p><p>But the real devil could be in the forthcoming details: there could be over 10,000 other Tesla owners affected by the update in Norway&nbsp;<i>alone,</i>not to mention owners involved in similar lawsuits in other countries.</p><p><blockquote>但真正的问题可能在于即将公布的细节：挪威可能有超过10,000名其他特斯拉车主受到此次更新的影响<i>独自一人，</i>更不用说其他国家卷入类似诉讼的业主了。</blockquote></p><p>The affected update was&nbsp;Tesla’s 2019.16.1 and .2 update.</p><p><blockquote>受影响的更新是特斯拉的2019.16.1和.2更新。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/tesla-found-guilty-throttling-charging-speed-and-battery-capacity-norway\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"TSLA":"特斯拉"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/tesla-found-guilty-throttling-charging-speed-and-battery-capacity-norway","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1189735723","content_text":"Tesla has been found guilty of throttling charging speed and battery capacity by a court in Norway.The company is going to \"have to pay $16,000 to each of the thousands of owners affected in the country\", until it appeals, according to the pro-Tesla lot over at electrek.Dating back to 2019,electrekhad pointed out reports that Tesla owners were seeing drops in range of 12 to 30 miles after a software update. The affected vehicles appear to only be Model S and Model X vehicles with 85 kWh battery packs.Tesla owner David Rasmussen told the blog at the time: “My 2014 Model S 85 was getting Rated Range of 247 miles until May 13. Now after the next update, it continued to drop to now 217 miles. This is an 11% drop in 5 weeks.”He even plotted the battery capacity of his Model S, showing the obvious dropoff in capacity around the time of the update.Around the same time, the DC fast-charging rate at Supercharger stations had also been reduced, the blog notes, stating: \"Affected owners are seeing much slower charging sessions.\"Tesla, meanwhile, claimed that the update would “protect the battery and improve battery longevity”. The company claimed that range loss only happened for “a small percentage of owners.”The controversy led to a \"series of lawsuits\", one of which was in Norway. When Tesla didn't respond to the lawsuit, the 30 owners\"were automatically awarded 136,000 kroner (~$16,000 USD) each in compensation\"unless Tesla appeals.But the real devil could be in the forthcoming details: there could be over 10,000 other Tesla owners affected by the update in Norway alone,not to mention owners involved in similar lawsuits in other countries.The affected update was Tesla’s 2019.16.1 and .2 update.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"TSLA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1172,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":131528588,"gmtCreate":1621868568644,"gmtModify":1631892245277,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Amazing!!","listText":"Amazing!!","text":"Amazing!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/131528588","repostId":"1113349208","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1262,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":131866078,"gmtCreate":1621846436494,"gmtModify":1631892245292,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Wow!!","listText":"Wow!!","text":"Wow!!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/131866078","repostId":"2137413949","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1390,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":133213652,"gmtCreate":1621751852676,"gmtModify":1631892245305,"author":{"id":"3567808422493554","authorId":"3567808422493554","name":"greenpepper","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3567808422493554","authorIdStr":"3567808422493554"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Unstopperable!","listText":"Unstopperable!","text":"Unstopperable!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/133213652","repostId":"2137190485","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1381,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"posts","isTTM":false}