logo

HomeArticlesServicePriceAbout

EN

Menu

Home
Articles
Search
About
EN
logo
Price
logo

Company

AboutTerms of Service Privacy Policy

Social

LinkedIn Twitter Discord

Contact

contact@coresixteen.com coresixteen.com
Company NameCORE16 Inc.
CEODavid Cho
Business Registration Number762-81-03235
Address83, Uisadang-daero, Yeongdeungpo-gu, Seoul, 07325, Republic of KOREA
Morgan Stanley
Search Result
Firm
user
박재훈투영인
·
2 months ago
0
0
Bank of America Highlights High-Quality Financial Stocks with Attractive Dividends
article
Neutral
Neutral
JPM
JPMorgan Chase
+4
user
박재훈투영인
·
2 months ago
0
0
Bank of America Highlights High-Quality Financial Stocks with Attractive Dividends
Bank of America’s View: High-Quality Dividends as a Hedge Against Market ShocksAccording to Bank of America, high-quality dividend stocks in the financial sector are among the best ways to brace for market turbulence.Financials have been trading up and down amid trade tensions and economic worries. Stocks have risen this week but remain lower since President Trump’s April 2 tariff announcement. Although reciprocal tariffs have been paused, unilateral 10% tariffs remain in effect.The Financial sector rose by 3% this week. The Financial Select SPDR Fund is roughly flat year-to-date, while the S&P 500 has declined 7%. Bank of America has maintained an Overweight rating on the sector.Although financials have shown some instability, Wall Street largely expects them to benefit from regulatory rollbacks under Trump. Nonetheless, Bank of America warns that policy uncertainty and tariffs could fuel ongoing market volatility and inflation risks."High quality is the best hedge against volatility... and income protection from inflation is where alpha will be generated," said Savita Subramanian."A traditional high-quality dividend approach is warranted," she added.Subramanian focused on financial stocks within the Russell 3000 that pay dividends, selecting companies based on profitability, dividend growth, and stability over a 10-year period. Selected firms had median or higher ROEs, higher dividend yields than the index, and a payout ratio (EPS to forward DPS) above 1.0.Here are five highlighted picks:Morgan Stanley (3.29% yield):Surpassed earnings and revenue estimates in Q1. Stock trading revenue surged by 45%.CEO Ted Pick noted that the outlook is "less predictable." Shares are down 8% YTD.JPMorgan (2.32% yield):Delivered a strong quarter, with a surge in trading revenue.CEO Jamie Dimon announced a $7 billion share buyback and a 12% dividend hike.The company is preparing for a range of scenarios, including tariffs and inflation. Stock is up 2% YTD.BlackRock (2.33% yield):Reported mixed Q1 results.CEO Larry Fink stated that BlackRock’s positioning is "stronger than ever," citing resilience through past crises like the financial crash, COVID, and inflation waves.Shares are down 11% YTD.Fifth Third Bancorp (4.22% yield):Shares have fallen 15% YTD despite an attractive yield.East West Bancorp (2.84% yield):Shares have declined 10% YTD.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Neutral
Neutral
JPM
JPMorgan Chase
+4
user
셀스마트 판다
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Spring Is Coming"... Morgan Stanley Raises Target Prices for Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix (Mar 19, 2025)
article
Neutral
Neutral
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
셀스마트 판다
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Spring Is Coming"... Morgan Stanley Raises Target Prices for Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix (Mar 19, 2025)
Morgan Stanley, which had maintained a conservative outlook on the semiconductor market, has now raised its target prices for Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix. With DRAM and NAND flash prices rebounding and production cuts by major players taking effect, expectations for gradual market recovery are growing.In a report, 'DRAM-Looking beyond the valley' released on March 18, Morgan Stanley increased its target price for Samsung Electronics from 65,000 KRW to 70,000 KRW and for SK Hynix from 150,000 KRW to 230,000 KRW. While Samsung retained its "Overweight" rating, SK Hynix’s rating was upgraded from "Underweight" to "Neutral".The semiconductor market is seeing the full impact of NAND flash production cuts, with prices expected to rise by up to 10% in Q2. Additionally, China’s AI investment and economic stimulus policies are expected to positively impact DRAM supply and demand. However, weak consumer sentiment and intensifying price competition from Chinese semiconductor firms could challenge the sustainability of the current uptrend.Morgan Stanley sees greater upside potential in Samsung Electronics compared to SK Hynix. While HBM (High Bandwidth Memory) market growth is already priced in, Samsung is expected to benefit more from NAND production cuts and a slower decline in DRAM prices, leading to a clearer earnings recovery.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Neutral
Neutral
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
How Analysts Measure Fundamental and Uncertainty Risk (12.11.29)
article
Neutral
Neutral
NONE
No Relevant Stock
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
How Analysts Measure Fundamental and Uncertainty Risk (12.11.29)
"Can Analysts Assess Fundamental Risk and Valuation Uncertainty? An Empirical Analysis of Scenario-Based Value Estimates"This study empirically analyzes how analysts assess fundamental risk using scenario-based valuation reports. By examining the dispersion and asymmetry in valuation estimates across different scenarios (bullish, bearish, and base cases), the study investigates how these variations relate to future company performance.1. Scenario-Based Valuation Estimates:Analysts’ Perspective: Analysts not only present their forecasts on a company’s future value but also provide scenario-based valuations, outlining how the company's worth could fluctuate under different economic conditions (bullish, bearish).Data Utilization: The study utilizes scenario-based valuation estimates from Morgan Stanley analysts’ reports published between 2007 and 2010.New Metrics: The study introduces two new metrics—Spread (valuation range across scenarios) and Tilt (valuation asymmetry)—to measure analysts’ perceived risk and uncertainty.2. Key Findings:Spread and Firm Characteristics: The wider the valuation range (Spread), the more volatile and financially unstable the company tends to be. This suggests that analysts assign broader valuation spreads to companies with greater uncertainty about their future performance.Tilt and Firm Characteristics: Analysts’ valuation bias (Tilt) toward either bullish or bearish scenarios is linked to company size, beta, and book-to-market ratio. This indicates that analysts’ outlooks are asymmetrically influenced by specific risk factors.Spread and Long-Term Volatility: A wider Spread correlates with greater long-term stock return volatility, indicating that analysts' valuation estimates effectively capture fundamental risk.Tilt and Return Skewness: Analysts’ asymmetric valuation biases (Tilt) are related to the skewness of future stock returns, suggesting they incorporate expectations about return distribution into their assessments.3. Implications:Analysts’ Capability: Analysts can reasonably assess fundamental risks associated with companies.Investment Strategy: Scenario-based valuation reports provide valuable insights that investors can leverage when making decisions.Future Research: Further studies are needed to examine how analyst experience, effort, and behavioral biases influence valuation estimates.4. Conclusion:This study demonstrates that analysts' scenario-based valuation estimates reflect company risk and uncertainty, providing useful information for investors. However, subjective judgment and biases can also influence valuations, necessitating cautious interpretation.Summary:Analysts’ scenario-based valuation estimates incorporate fundamental risks and offer valuable investment insights.Scenario analysis provides meaningful insights even in information-scarce environments.Analysts highlight companies' risk exposure to potential economic shocks.Scenario-based valuation helps analyze higher moments of return distributions.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Neutral
Neutral
NONE
No Relevant Stock
user
셀스마트 앤지
·
4 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley Lowers Apple Price Target Amid AI Delays & Tariff Concerns (Mar 12, 2025)
article
Neutral
Neutral
AAPL
Apple
user
셀스마트 앤지
·
4 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley Lowers Apple Price Target Amid AI Delays & Tariff Concerns (Mar 12, 2025)
Apple (AAPL) shares have come under pressure recently due to AI feature delays and tariff burdens. Morgan Stanley analyst Erik Woodring maintained an Overweight (Buy) rating on Apple but lowered the price target from $275 to $252.Key Reasons for Target CutAI-Enhanced Siri Delayed:Woodring highlighted that delays in the AI-upgraded Siri could negatively impact iPhone sales, as AI improvements are among the most anticipated upgrades.Apple’s stock declined for three consecutive sessions following news of the Siri delay.Lower iPhone Shipment Estimates:Woodring trimmed 2025 and 2026 iPhone shipment forecasts by 1-5%,Predicting iPhone shipments will reach approximately 230 million units in 2025.Tariff Concerns:U.S. import tariffs are another headwind for Apple, potentially impacting profitability.Despite these short-term challenges, Woodring maintained a Buy rating, citing Apple’s long-term strengths. However, he acknowledged that the AI delay and trade issues justify a price target reduction to $252.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Neutral
Neutral
AAPL
Apple
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Analysts Afraid to Issue 'Sell' Ratings While Korean Market Weakens" (Oct 30, 2024)
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+2
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Analysts Afraid to Issue 'Sell' Ratings While Korean Market Weakens" (Oct 30, 2024)
The influence of global investment banks (IBs) on Korean stocks has never been stronger. On September 15, Morgan Stanley slashed SK Hynix's target price from 260,000 KRW to 120,000 KRW, downgrading its rating from "Buy" to "Sell." When trading resumed after the Chuseok holiday on September 19, SK Hynix shares plummeted 6.14%. Similarly, Macquarie recently cut Samsung Electronics' target price from 125,000 KRW to 64,000 KRW, downgrading it from "Buy" to "Neutral." As a result, Samsung’s stock fell below 60,000 KRW, marking a new 52-week low.Why Are Korea’s Leading Stocks Collapsing?There are two key reasons for this:1. Korean Analysts’ Reluctance to Issue ‘Sell’ RatingsDomestic analysts almost never publish ‘Sell’ reports, making foreign IB research seem more credible to investors. With Korean securities firms consistently issuing "Buy" ratings, investors turn to foreign reports for more objective insights—which has triggered massive sell-offs in stocks like Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix.The issue stems from the conflict of interest between brokerage firms and the companies they cover. Since securities firms earn fees from these companies, issuing negative reports risks upsetting corporate clients. As a result, even when companies underperform, analysts continue to recommend buying.One notable example occurred in April 2023, when an analyst issued the first "Sell" rating on EcoPro. The Financial Supervisory Service (FSS) launched an investigation, suspecting collusion with short-sellers. While the FSS later justified its actions as a response to investor complaints, the incident demonstrated the risks analysts face when issuing negative ratings.2. Weak Market Structure & Investor SentimentThe second issue is the fragility of the Korean stock market itself. The impact of foreign reports is so severe because domestic investors lack the buying power to counteract foreign sell-offs.Even when global semiconductor companies received similar downgrades, Korean firms suffered disproportionately larger stock declines, exposing the weakness of Korea’s capital markets. This issue is further compounded by:Heavy reliance on foreign investment, making local stocks vulnerable to external shocks.Lack of domestic institutional support, meaning retail investors often bear the brunt of market volatility.Conspiracy Theories & Market Manipulation ConcernsWhenever major stocks collapse, conspiracy theories about market manipulation arise. Some suspect coordination between short-sellers and foreign IBs, particularly after Morgan Stanley’s Seoul branch sold 1.01 million SK Hynix shares just before issuing its bearish report on October 13.However, there’s no clear evidence of illegal activity. Foreign ownership of SK Hynix still remains at 54%, and accusations of front-running would require proof that these banks intentionally manipulated the market—an unlikely scenario given the regulatory risks.The Need for Reform: Strengthening Korea’s Capital MarketsInstead of chasing conspiracy theories, Korea must address the root causes of the problem:Enhancing Analyst Independence: Analysts must be able to issue objective research without corporate or regulatory pressure.Strengthening Domestic Institutional Support: Korea must build a more resilient market structure to absorb external shocks.Ending ‘Buy-Only’ Research Culture: Securities firms must prioritize credibility over client relationships to rebuild investor trust.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+2
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Buy" Ratings Despite Samsung's Earnings Shock: Are Local Brokerages Ignoring Reality?" (Oct 14, 2024)
article
Neutral
Neutral
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Buy" Ratings Despite Samsung's Earnings Shock: Are Local Brokerages Ignoring Reality?" (Oct 14, 2024)
"Even after Samsung's stock dropped more than 30%, local brokerages kept shouting 'buy.' I followed their recommendations and now I'm stuck."Even as Samsung Electronics' stock price plunged to the "₩50,000 range" after a disastrous Q3 earnings report, domestic securities firms continued issuing "buy" recommendations without exception.Earnings Shock & Stock DeclineOn October 8, Samsung Electronics reported Q3 operating profit of ₩9.1 trillion, down 12.8% from Q2. The company issued a rare apology statement acknowledging the weak results. Despite this, from October 8–10, not a single local brokerage issued a "sell" rating. Instead, 14 securities firms—including KB Securities, NH Investment & Securities, and Kiwoom Securities—maintained "buy" ratings.Meanwhile, Samsung’s stock fell 31.32% from ₩87,800 on July 10 to October 8, breaking the ₩60,000 level three times. Despite this, local brokerages did not issue a single "sell" report, unlike foreign investment banks (IBs).Morgan Stanley (Sep 15):Report: "Winter Looms"Cut Samsung’s target price from ₩105,000 → ₩76,000 (-27.6%)Reasons: HBM oversupply, declining DRAM prices, and weak smartphone/PC demand.Macquarie (Late Sep):Cut target price from ₩125,000 → ₩64,000 (-48.8%)Reasons: Memory price declines & oversupply.In contrast, domestic brokerages dismissed these concerns, arguing that "negative factors were already priced in." However, Samsung’s Q3 earnings shock ultimately validated the foreign IBs’ warnings.Delayed Target Price Cuts: Too Little, Too LateAfter the Q3 earnings report, domestic brokerages finally lowered their target prices—but only after the damage was done:Target Price Downgrades (After Q3 Earnings Report):iM Securities: ₩77,000 → ₩76,000DB Financial: ₩100,000 → ₩90,000KB Securities: ₩95,000 → ₩80,000NH Investment: ₩92,000 → ₩90,000Eugene Investment: ₩91,000 → ₩82,000Hyundai Motor Securities: ₩104,000 → ₩86,000Heungkuk Securities: ₩110,000 → ₩88,000At the same time, seven brokerages left their target prices unchanged, reinforcing suspicions of biased analysis.Retail Investors Take the HitForeign Investors Sold ₩8.2 Trillion of Samsung Stock (Sep 8 – Oct 8)Retail Investors Bought ₩7 Trillion Worth of Samsung StockSamsung’s Margin Debt (Leverage Trading) Surged 49.4% to ₩923.6 BillionRetail investors, influenced by domestic brokerages' optimistic reports, heavily bought Samsung shares, even increasing margin debt to its highest level in three years. This suggests that brokerage firms' misleading optimism led retail investors into leveraged losses.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Neutral
Neutral
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Where Is Lee Jae-yong's Leadership? The Reality of Samsung’s Crisis (Oct 22, 2024)
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Where Is Lee Jae-yong's Leadership? The Reality of Samsung’s Crisis (Oct 22, 2024)
Concerns over Samsung Electronics Chairman Lee Jae-yong's leadership are growing both domestically and internationally. Critics argue that Samsung has failed to respond proactively in the semiconductor industry, while also facing internal inefficiencies that require urgent restructuring.Leadership Under ScrutinyLee Jae-yong marks his 2nd anniversary as chairman on October 27, but Samsung has no official plans for a statement.The company also approaches its 55th anniversary (Nov 1) and 50 years in semiconductors (Dec 6), raising speculation about future strategic directions.Despite his public appearances—such as the fourth anniversary of Samsung’s pediatric cancer support program on Oct 21—Lee has remained silent on the company's ongoing challenges.Samsung’s Mounting Crisis1. Semiconductor SetbacksFalling Behind in Foundry & Advanced Chips:TSMC dominates AI-driven demand, securing contracts with NVIDIA, Apple, AMD, and Qualcomm.Samsung’s foundry & system LSI division posted over ₩1 trillion in losses in Q3.In 2011, Samsung’s non-memory sales were 88% of TSMC’s; by 2023, this shrank to just 25%.Despite ₩15 trillion annual investments, the gap is widening.Taiwan’s Digitimes (Oct 15) stated that Samsung’s price competition strategy failed due to poor yield rates.HBM Missteps:SK Hynix leads the HBM market, securing early dominance in AI-driven memory.Samsung disbanded its HBM R&D team in 2019, now struggling to catch up.2. Stock Performance & Investor SentimentStock Price:October 21 closing price: ₩59,000 (-0.34%).Hit 52-week low amid continued foreign selling.Foreign investors dumped ₩12.6 trillion worth of Samsung shares over two months.Investor Confidence Eroding:Morgan Stanley's “Winter Looms” report forecasts a semiconductor downturn due to DRAM oversupply and HBM price declines.Macquarie downgraded Samsung to "Neutral" from "Buy".3. Inefficient Decision-Making StructureExcessive Influence of Samsung’s Business Support TF (Task Force):Led by Vice Chairman Chung Hyun-ho, this unit is criticized for slow, risk-averse decision-making.Compared to Intel’s past missteps, where middle management bottlenecks delayed crucial technology transitions.Internal Criticism & Employee Frustration:Employee forum discussions describe a rigid, top-heavy reporting structure stifling innovation and accountability.4. Lack of Bold Strategic MovesLeadership & Talent Strategy Issues:May 2024 appointment of new semiconductor chief Jeon Young-hyun was seen as too conservative.No major acquisitions or aggressive R&D initiatives have been pursued.Samsung’s Crisis = Korea’s Crisis?Samsung accounted for 18% of Korea’s total exports in 2023 (₩150 trillion out of ₩830 trillion).KDI research (2017) showed that shocks to Korea’s top 3 corporations explain 59% of macroeconomic volatility—highlighting Samsung’s systemic importance.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley Downgrade Sends SK Hynix Down 7%, Samsung Hits 1-Year Low (Sep 19, 2024)
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley Downgrade Sends SK Hynix Down 7%, Samsung Hits 1-Year Low (Sep 19, 2024)
Shares of SK Hynix and Samsung Electronics plunged in early trading on September 19, following a sharp target price cut by Morgan Stanley. The report, released during the Korean Chuseok holiday, significantly lowered its valuation for both chipmakers, triggering investor concerns.Market ReactionAs of 9:25 AM KST:SK Hynix fell 7.00% (-₩11,400) to ₩151,400.Samsung Electronics dropped 1.71% (-₩1,100) to ₩63,300, hitting an intraday low of ₩62,700—its lowest in a year.Morgan Stanley's Downgrade: "Winter Looms"New Target Prices:SK Hynix: ₩260,000 → ₩120,000 (-54%)Samsung Electronics: ₩105,000 → ₩76,000 (-27%)Key Reasons for Downgrade:DRAM Cycle Peaking in Q4 → Downturn expected through 2026.HBM Oversupply Risk → Rising production may push prices down.Chinese Chipmakers Expanding Aggressively → Increased competition may erode Korean firms’ dominance.Morgan Stanley's pessimistic outlook follows its August warning—"Prepare for the semiconductor cycle peak"—which questioned whether the industry could sustain its 2025 growth expectations.The "Winter Looms" title echoes its 2021 report, "Memory Winter is Coming," which accurately predicted the last downturn. This historical accuracy may explain the market's strong reaction.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Conflicting Views on Samsung: What’s Next for Investors? (Aug 9, 2024)
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Conflicting Views on Samsung: What’s Next for Investors? (Aug 9, 2024)
Analysts remain deeply divided on Samsung Electronics, with some raising target prices to ₩130,000, while others cut them below ₩100,000.The key debate centers around Samsung’s position in the high-bandwidth memory (HBM) market. While some see a turnaround with HBM3E mass production, others fear oversupply risks.For now, the market leans bullish, citing rising CAPEX guidance from Big Tech companies as a key tailwind for AI infrastructure investments.Brokerage Target Price RevisionsBullish: KB Securities (₩120,000 → ₩130,000)Justification: HBM3E supply ramp-up.Kim Dong-won (Head of Research, KB Securities):"Samsung is entering a phase where concerns are rapidly turning into optimism.""With HBM3E mass production expected in Q4, we see Samsung as the top KOSPI pick for H2."Samsung lags SK Hynix in HBM3E adoption:SK Hynix began HBM3E 8-layer supply to NVIDIA in March and will start HBM3E 12-layer shipments in Q4.Samsung is still undergoing NVIDIA’s quality testing and plans Q3 mass production for HBM3E 8-layer, with HBM3E 12-layer shipments later this year.Bearish: iM Securities (formerly Hi Investment & Securities) (₩101,000 → ₩97,000)Concerns:HBM oversupply risk in 2025.Samsung’s HBM3E supply ramp-up may intensify competition, leading to pricing pressure.AI investment bubble concerns.Song Myung-seop (iM Securities):"This year, HBM demand is expected to reach 880 million GB, but production plans total 1.38 billion GB.""If NVIDIA begins purchasing Samsung’s HBM3E, we could see oversupply and margin compression in the HBM sector."Additionally, NVIDIA’s Blackwell AI accelerator delay could further impact Samsung’s HBM3E adoption.The Information (U.S. tech media):Blackwell production was postponed from late 2024 to Q1 2025.Since HBM3E is a core component of Blackwell, delays could push back Samsung’s shipments.However, KB Securities argues this could work in Samsung’s favor, allowing it more time for mass production preparation.Big Tech CAPEX: The AI Investment Cycle ContinuesDespite AI bubble concerns, Big Tech companies continue to raise AI-related infrastructure spending.Meta increased 2024 CAPEX guidance from $35B → $37B.H1 CAPEX: $15.2BH2 projected CAPEX: $21.8BMicrosoft and Amazon have also signaled higher H2 spending.Shin Ji-hyun (Shinhan Investment & Securities):"Meta’s CAPEX revision reaffirms strong confidence in AI investment."If quarter-over-quarter CAPEX increases, this could fuel further AI value chain growth, benefiting Samsung’s AI-related semiconductor sales.Legacy DRAM & NAND: Supply Shortages Emerging?While HBM faces supply concerns, legacy DRAM and NAND markets are tightening.Morgan Stanley:"The shift toward HBM has created investment gaps in traditional DRAM, leading to potential shortages."Predicts a 23% demand-supply gap in DRAM for 2024, driving price increases.DRAM Pricing:PC DRAM (DDR4 8Gb 1Gx8): $2.10 (as of July 31, stable for 3 months).Shinhan Investment:"Stronger-than-expected memory price growth could offset some of the bearish pressures on Samsung’s stock."Samsung plans to mass-produce QLC-based 64TB and 128TB eSSD products in H2 2024, aiming to capitalize on NAND pricing recovery.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Samsung Target Price Slashed from ₩125,000 to ₩64,000"—Inside Macquarie’s Report (Oct 1, 2024)
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Samsung Target Price Slashed from ₩125,000 to ₩64,000"—Inside Macquarie’s Report (Oct 1, 2024)
Global brokerage Macquarie has cut its target price for Samsung Electronics by 50%, citing deteriorating memory market conditions. This follows a similarly bearish outlook from Morgan Stanley, marking another harsh assessment of the Korean semiconductor industry from foreign investment banks.Macquarie’s Key TakeawaysAccording to the financial investment industry, Macquarie downgraded Samsung from "Buy" to "Neutral" in a late-September report and cut its target price from ₩125,000 to ₩64,000 (-48.8%).Reasons for the Downgrade:Memory Market Downcycle → Declining profitability.DRAM Oversupply → ASP (Average Selling Price) is reversing downward.Weak Demand from Downstream Industries → Pressuring earnings.HBM Supply Delays to NVIDIA → Weakening stock momentum.Macquarie even raised the possibility that Samsung could lose its status as the world’s No.1 DRAM supplier.Additionally, Samsung’s HBM revenue forecast for 2026 is only $13 billion, compared to SK Hynix’s $30 billion—just 43% of its competitor’s projected sales.How Does This Compare to Korean Brokerages?While domestic securities firms have also been lowering Samsung’s target price, none have made a cut as drastic as Macquarie’s.Park Yoo-jin (Kiwoom Securities) argues that DRAM investment is not excessive and believes the market will shift from oversupply (2024) to undersupply (2025).This contrast suggests that Korean analysts may still be overly optimistic, underestimating the depth of the structural challenges Samsung faces.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Falling Price Targets… Only False Hope Remains for Semiconductors (Sep 23, 2024)
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Falling Price Targets… Only False Hope Remains for Semiconductors (Sep 23, 2024)
Concerns over a deteriorating semiconductor outlook continue to grow, weighing heavily on Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix. Once flooded with bullish forecasts, securities firms are now rapidly slashing their price targets.On September 19, Samsung Electronics hit a new 52-week low of ₩62,200, while SK Hynix briefly fell to the ₩150,000 range, returning to levels seen at the beginning of the year.According to FnGuide on September 23, the average price targets for Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix, as of September 22, stood at:Samsung Electronics: ₩101,958SK Hynix: ₩262,280This represents a 7.97% drop for Samsung Electronics from ₩110,783 on August 22, and a 4.51% decline for SK Hynix from ₩274,667 over the past month.Ironically, securities firms were raising price targets for both companies as recently as July and August, even as AI investment concerns started to weigh on semiconductor stocks. Now, they have reversed their forecasts.Securities Firms’ Shifting Price TargetsAn analysis of this year’s price target trends shows that July and August saw the highest projections, only for them to be cut sharply in September:Samsung Electronics’ average price target (by month):January: ₩94,621April: ₩104,647June: ₩109,071July: ₩110,692August: ₩113,462 → 80% above the current price (₩62,600)September: ₩97,750 (14% decline from August)Some firms have lowered targets below their January estimates:BNK Securities: ₩86,000 → ₩81,000NH Investment & Securities: ₩95,000 → ₩92,000Korea Investment & Securities: ₩99,000 → ₩96,000SK Hynix’s price target trend:January: ₩169,000July: ₩277,655 (+64% from January)September: ₩253,750 (-8% from July)Global Analysts Turn Bearish on SemiconductorsThe bearish sentiment isn’t limited to South Korea. Morgan Stanley, which recently slashed its price targets for Samsung and SK Hynix, also downgraded ASML, a key semiconductor equipment supplier, from "Overweight" to "Neutral".According to FnGuide, analysts from at least three institutions have cut their estimates for Samsung Electronics' Q3 earnings:Operating profit estimate: ₩11.70 trillion (14.3% lower than a month ago)Revenue estimate: ₩81.89 trillion (down 2.6%)SK Hynix’s Q3 forecasts have also been trimmed:Revenue: ₩18.20 trillion (-0.9%)Operating profit: ₩6.94 trillion (-2.0%)Contradictions in Securities Firms’ RatingsDespite the sharp price target cuts, no securities firm has downgraded its investment rating on either Samsung or SK Hynix. In fact, some analysts have even raised their ratings:Kiwoom Securities upgraded SK Hynix from "Market Perform" to "Buy" in August.Yuanta Securities’ Baek Gil-hyun, who cut his Samsung Electronics price target from ₩110,000 to ₩90,000 and SK Hynix from ₩270,000 to ₩220,000, still maintains a "Buy" recommendation.He argues that the semiconductor industry remains a "sector to overweight," predicting a rebound in 2025 as inventory adjustments end and AI-driven IT demand returns.However, most analysts agree that semiconductor stocks will remain volatile in the near term.Q4 Guidance Will Be a Key Market CatalystKB Securities’ Lee Eun-taek emphasized that upcoming earnings releases from Micron and Samsung Electronics will be crucial.“Unless we see a major upside surprise, volatility will persist.”“The most important factor will be guidance for mid-Q4.Depending on the outlook, the market may either fully price in negative factors or immediately rebound.”[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
End of Tightening Cycle: Rate Cuts Begin, but Market Cautious (Sep 19, 2024)
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
End of Tightening Cycle: Rate Cuts Begin, but Market Cautious (Sep 19, 2024)
The U.S. Federal Reserve (Fed) has officially ended its four-and-a-half-year tightening cycle by cutting interest rates at the September FOMC meeting. The 50 basis point (bp) cut ("big cut") has sparked uncertainty in global markets, with increased volatility expected in the near term.As concerns about an economic slowdown persist, investors are likely to adopt a wait-and-see approach until key economic indicators are released at the end of the month.According to the Korea Exchange on September 19, the KOSPI closed at 2,580.80, up 5.39 points (0.21%) from the previous session.Although the Fed’s rate cut met market expectations, foreign investors were net sellers, dragging down the KOSPI. Foreign investors offloaded ₩1.1765 trillion worth of shares, marking the largest sell-off since "Black Monday" on August 5.Semiconductor Stocks Drag Down the MarketSemiconductor stocks, which dominate the Korean stock market, failed to rally. Morgan Stanley sharply cut its price targets for Samsung Electronics and SK Hynix during the Chuseok holiday, further weakening investor sentiment.SK Hynix’s price target: Slashed from ₩260,000 to ₩120,000 → Stock plunged 6.14%.Samsung Electronics’ price target: Cut from ₩105,000 to ₩76,000 → Stock fell over 2%.The KOSDAQ index also saw a rollercoaster session, opening higher, dropping 0.45% intraday, before rebounding 0.86% to close at 739.51.U.S. Markets React Volatilely to Rate CutOn September 18 (U.S. time), Wall Street experienced significant swings following the Fed’s rate cut.Dow Jones: +375.79 points intraday → Closed -103 points (-0.25%) at 41,503.10.S&P 500 and Nasdaq: Hit new all-time highs intraday → Closed lower.Investors initially cheered the large rate cut, but sentiment deteriorated on concerns that the Fed was preemptively responding to a potential economic downturn.Fed Chair Jerome Powell attempted to downplay recession fears, stating that there was no clear evidence of a heightened risk of recession. However, his remarks failed to ease market concerns.Key Economic Data to WatchMarket participants await key U.S. economic indicators at the end of September, which could determine the market's next direction. If economic slowdown fears resurface, a deeper market decline is possible.September 23: U.S. S&P Global Manufacturing PMIAugust PMI: 47.2 (up from 46.8 in July but still below the expansion threshold of 50).September 26: U.S. Q2 GDPFed revised 2024 GDP growth forecast from 2.1% → 2.0%.September 27: U.S. August Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) Index (Fed’s preferred inflation measure).Diverging Views: Caution vs. Rebound PotentialChoi Sung-rak, Head of Stock Analysis at the International Finance Center, highlighted recession risks:"The biggest risk for equity markets is economic slowdown.""This year’s stock market rally was driven by corporate earnings, making markets more sensitive to recession fears.""AI and semiconductor stocks have already corrected about 15% from their July highs. If there is no sector rotation into other industries, the broader market could see an extended correction."Some analysts argue that foreign capital inflows could trigger a sharp rebound.Cho Joon-ki, SK Securities:"If the right reversal trigger emerges, the market could bounce back strongly.""This rate cut cycle is likely to be a soft landing rather than a response to a recession.""If risk appetite returns, a massive foreign capital inflow could fuel an explosive rally."Bank of America Global Research expects further aggressive rate cuts:Q4 2024: 75 bp cuts.2025: 125 bp additional cuts.The Fed has two more FOMC meetings scheduled for November and December.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
005930
Samsung Electronics
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
A Profit Fumble -- or Not?(Feb 4, 2008)
article
Sell
Sell
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
A Profit Fumble -- or Not?(Feb 4, 2008)
It is right around halftime of the earnings-reporting season, and bulls and bears have much to disagree about.More than half the companies in the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index have reported their fourth-quarter tally and the headline numbers show a bleak 19.3% drop, according to Reuters Estimates. That double-digit decline, however, largely reflects the huge write-downs by banks and brokerage houses suffering losses tied to bad mortgages. Earnings outside the financial sector are up 11%."It's very striking -- nonfinancial earnings are still quite healthy," said Thomas Doerflinger, executive director for U.S. equity strategy at UBS. That strength, he added, "has been fairly broad based." Earnings at technology companies are up 26%, energy earnings up are up 19% and health-care companies are up 18%, he said.The outlook for 2008 profits, however, leaves room for investors to differ over whether the cup is half empty or half full. First-quarter profits are forecast to rise anemically, 2.6% from a year earlier. That is forecast to be followed by a modest 3.5% rise in the second quarter.Financials are expected to have another rough time of it in the first quarter, with earnings forecast to be down 18.5%. A week ago, financials were expected to show a 17.3% decline, according to Morgan Stanley's data. Consumer discretionary earnings are expected up 1.2% this quarter, a slimmer rise than the 2.7% forecast a week earlier. In the past week, expectations for materials-producing companies swung to a loss of 2.1% from a 3.5% rise.For the year as whole, expectations also have been steadily worsening; in the past two months analysts have lowered 2008 forecasts on nine out of the 10 sectors of the S&P 500, according to UBS. Only among energy stocks have earnings forecasts been taken higher. Yet when it comes to the second half of the year, the theme song for stock analysts could be, "Happy days are here again." S&P 500 earnings are expected to be up 20% in the third quarter and 50% in the fourth quarter, analysts said.If the analysts are right, 2008 would end with earnings up a healthy 16%, according to Reuters Estimates. Based on those estimates, the stock market looks attractive, with S&P 500 companies changing hands at 16 times the trailing 12 months' earnings and 13.6 times projected 2008 earnings. That compares with a 19.4 average price-to-trailing earnings ratio going back to 1988, according to S&P's data.So which side is right, the bulls or the bears? Much depends whether expectations for later in the year turn out to be realistic. Some have said they are far too rosy.With the economic outlook deteriorating, the trend has been down in earnings estimates, and analysts still might be behind the curve, as they often are at turning points in the economy. Analysts have been lowering estimates twice as often as they have been raising them. With the government reporting an unexpected decline in employment in January there could be more earnings downgrades to come.Abhijit Chakrabortti, chief global and U.S. equity strategist at Morgan Stanley, said Wall Street's consensus forecast of about $900 billion in earnings for the S&P 500 for this year is at least $100 billion too high. "Earnings expectations have to come down a lot," he said.Part of the expected rebound in earnings this year will be a statistical mirage -- a so-called easy comparison with bad readings posted in the fourth quarter of 2007. That is especially the case on financials stocks, where analysts believe big write-downs and losses will be a memory by this time next year.Forecasts also are banking on the Federal Reserve's interest-rate cuts to give a shot in the arm to the economy, and to financial firms. When short-term rates are low and long-term rates are higher, as is now the case, financial firms often get a boost.Mr. Chakrabortti has a different read on some of those factors. He expects the dollar to be stable or even slightly stronger over the course of this year as other economies slow, thus creating a drag on earnings. He said balance-sheet strains will put an end to meaningful share buybacks, which have been boosting S&P earnings 2% to 3% in recent years. Meanwhile, he said industrial names and technology stocks will be hurt by the ripples from declining capacity utilization. "We're going to see some big misses on earnings," he said of technology stocks.While he said Wall Street analysts are overly optimistic on consumer-discretionary companies and financial stocks, he noted most of those names already have been down significantly in price. "We think technology is more vulnerable" because of loftier valuations, he said.Another big question mark is the outlook for profit margins, which have trended higher for years. The most recent earnings reports provide examples of big companies struggling with margins narrowing and creating a challenge for earnings prospects. McDonald's, for example, last week said higher food costs were pressuring its margins, while Procter & Gamble reported lower margins on higher commodity and energy costs. Energy stocks, a winner for investors in recent years, could face a headwind in refining operations, where margins face potential strains as new capacity comes online as demand for gasoline ebbs.Some easing of economic activity around the globe could remove some of the upward pressure on commodity prices, but they could stay at levels that will squeeze margins, said Mark Oline, head of corporate ratings at Fitch Ratings. "Any margin improvement that companies get is going to have to come through getting more operating efficiencies, but that will put downward pressure on wages and on employment levels," he said.Mr. Doerflinger, of UBS, said there still is reason to be bullish. Economic growth outside the U.S. will remain strong enough to help offset softening in the U.S., he said. "Companies are saying the foreign business is quite strong," he said.Shipping company United Parcel Service, for example, is expecting package volume in its domestic business to rise 1% to 2% in 2008. Export volume for its international operations should rise 10% -- the same pace as in 2007, the company said. DuPont, meanwhile, expects continued growth in emerging markets, and United Technologies predicted strong demand in Asia.Mr. Doerflinger said U.S. corporations are continuing to benefit from the depressed dollar, which makes it cheaper for those outside the country to buy their goods. Goods and services sold overseas also translate into more dollars back home when the currency is weakening. This translation effect added an average of 4.6 percentage points to revenue at large, multinational companies in the fourth quarter, up from 3% in the third quarter, he said.A final positive trend is stock buybacks, which Mr. Doerflinger said reduced shares on 235 companies he has tracked by 1.7%. That may slow somewhat this year, but still should work in the markets' favor because most companies boast healthy balance sheets, he said. When you add it all up, he said, the outlook is especially constructive for industrial and technology stocks.
article
Sell
Sell
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
If you think stocks are expensive, you have no idea...(Jun 13, 2015)
article
Sell
Sell
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
If you think stocks are expensive, you have no idea...(Jun 13, 2015)
Relative to the earnings generated by their underlying companies, stocks are looking pretty expensive.We're talking about the price-to-earnings, or P/E, ratio."The current 12-month forward P/E ratio is 16.8," FactSet's John Butters said on Friday. "This P/E ratio is above the 5-year average (13.8) and the 10-year average (14.1)."But just because stocks are expensive relative to their long-term average is no guarantee that prices are doomed to fall immediately. Indeed, there are many instances in history when stock prices continued to rise and valuations continued to stretch for years before they corrected and reverted to the mean."Market multiples rarely trade at average levels," Morgan Stanley's Adam Parker once said.Citi's Stephen Antczak examined the trajectory of the forward P/E ratio in the current and previous three cycles."The 'recovery' part of the last three business cycles has averaged 7.9 years (trough to peak)," Antczak said. "How far might we be from the peak of the current cycle? A sample of various markets suggest that we are 72% of the way through."The S&P 500 is currently trading right around 2,100. But it would have to surge another 1,000 points for this P/E cycle to be "average."Now, many folks would point out that the last two cycles were full-blown bubbles. But, that doesn't mean it won't happen again.
article
Sell
Sell
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Wall Street Conflicts Make Analysts' Calls Suspect(2000-06-30)
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Wall Street Conflicts Make Analysts' Calls Suspect(2000-06-30)
Salomon on BoardIn April 1998 San Antonio-based SBC hired Salomon to advise it on its plans to acquire Ameritech Corp., another former Baby Bell, based in Chicago. Kahan says SBC's decision to retain Salomon for the Ameritech acquisition, which it announced that May, was not connected to Grubman's comments. Salomon earned $33 million on the SBC/Ameritech deal, which closed in October 1999.Grubman, who did not return phone calls seeking comment for this story, covers 34 companies. He has ``buy'' recommendations on all but three. Last November, Grubman raised his rating on AT&T Corp. to ``buy'' from ``neutral.'' Rival analysts suggested that Grubman had to be nice to AT&T so that Salomon could win a role in the largest U.S. IPO ever: the $10.6-billion sale in April of a so-called tracking stock in AT&T's wireless unit. AT&T did, in fact, name Salomon, Goldman, Sachs & Co. and Merrill Lynch & Co. to manage the underwriting.In May, Grubman praised WorldCom Inc. for first-quarter results that put the company far and away at the top of the industry. The glowing report came just at the time Salomon was comanaging a $5 billion sale of bonds for the telecommunications company. Asked to comment on these developments, a Salomon spokesperson said, ``We as a firm do objective research.''Analyst MarketersIt can't be easy for analysts with such extensive access to keep their dual duties separate. ``They're trying to be analysts, but at the same time they're marketers for the company,'' says Kent Womack, a finance professor at Dartmouth College. Because of that, opinions generally are more biased than they used to be, Womack says.Meeker made her name with a 300-page report in 1995 that hailed the dawn of the Internet age. She has since turned corporate finance on its head by valuing companies on their potential rather than their past. The upshot: start-ups now routinely seek her backing. Morgan Stanley has underwritten such IPOs as Priceline.com Inc., HomeGrocer.com Inc., Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia Inc., Ask Jeeves Inc. and Drugstore.com. Inc.Forever BullishDubbed Queen of the Internet, Meeker has been consistently bullish about her subjects. She has recommendations of ``outperform'' (read ``buy'') on all but two of 20 companies she covers; she's ``neutral'' on VeriSign Inc., a maker of Internet security software, and Electronic Arts Inc., a designer of interactive entertainment software.Morgan Stanley managed underwritings on 14 of the IPOs for these companies and comanaged another. Says a Morgan Stanley spokesperson, ``Long before the IPO boom, we erected a strict system of Chinese wall separations between the research and banking functions, and it still serves us well today.''The schmoozing and selling an analyst must do these days takes time away from doing research. That, in turn, reinforces a researcher's dependence on spoon-fed information from the companies. Junior analysts right out of college or business school often crunch the numbers. ``It's private-label research,'' says Ryan, the former Bear Stearns analyst. ``You just slap your name on it. Even I did that.''Ryan says Bear Stearns expects analysts to make 150 calls per month to clients, mostly institutional investors, to update them on companies they follow and to pitch stocks. A survey of 2,181 analysts at 102 securities firms by Tempest Consultants found analysts spent 40 percent of their time doing fundamental research in 1999. The analysts expect to spend less time this year -- 36 percent -- on research and more time on selling stocks.SEC ConcernAnalysts' conflicts of interest have worried Securities and Exchange Commission chairman Arthur Levitt Jr. for some time. In speeches in April and October of 1999, the stock market's top regulator complained that analysts all seem to have graduated from the Lake Woebegone School of Securities Analysis: the one that boasts that all stocks are above average.Levitt warned that analysts were protecting business relationships at the cost of fair analysis. ``I worry that investors hear from too many analysts who may be just a bit too eager to report that what looks like a frog is really a prince,'' he said in April. ``Sometimes a frog is just a frog.''Analyst conflicts aren't new. Wall Street is for bulls, and nobody in a firm likes to hear an analyst say sell. Investors have learned that a ``hold'' recommendation is really a warning to sell the stock. Still, researchers used to be thought of as people who visited companies, kicked some tires and drew independent conclusions.That started to change after 1975, when brokerage firms could no longer fix commissions and Wall Street started to make more money from new stock and bond sales and mergers. The stakes have soared since: The top 25 investment banks handled $68.9 billion in U.S. initial public offerings during 1999, up from $4.5 billion a decade earlier. The value of mergers and acquisitions stood at $1.6 trillion, 11 times the amount for 1990.CampaigningBig-name analysts always have been a magnet for new business. That's why securities firms campaign each year to get money managers to vote for their analysts when Institutional Investor magazine picks the top research talent. Now the stars are even more important as the returns from investment banking and mergers businesses increase.Consider the case of Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc., based in Tarrytown, New York. The company shifted its business to Merrill Lynch, largely because biotechnology analyst Eric Hecht had moved there three years ago from Morgan Stanley Dean Witter. Morgan Stanley handled the company's last stock sale in 1995. Regeneron's chief financial officer, Murray Goldberg, says: ``A bank is basically selling a company's stock to its customers. It can only do that if the analyst supports it. You need an analyst who understands your industry and your company and who has enthusiasm for the company.''Biotech BoosterHecht, 40, filled the bill. A medical doctor who ranked third in his category in Institutional Investor's latest poll published in October, he had long been a biotech booster. Better yet, he liked Regeneron even though it hasn't made a cent in the 12 years it's been developing drugs to treat obesity, arthritis, cancer and other diseases.On Feb. 23, when he recommended Regeneron shares as a ``long-term buy,'' Hecht was the only analyst covering the company. One was enough: Regeneron's stock price, which had crawled along the floor at less than 10 for most of 1999, jumped 75 percent the day Hecht's report came out and reached an all-time high of 57 3/8 six days later.No PreconditionRegeneron moved quickly to take advantage. Goldberg says that a week after the report came out, Regeneron met with underwriters and hired Merrill to lead the deal. On March 6, it registered the sale with the SEC. The company sold 2.6 million shares on March 29 to raise $77.4 million. Goldberg says the bullish coverage was not a precondition for Merrill to win the business.The preponderance of glowing research reports coming from Wall Street has made it increasingly difficult for investors to discern the truth. Stock trader Fiascone, for one, relied on favorable reports on MicroStrategy from firms like Friedman, Billings, Ramsey. That firm had helped take MicroStrategy public in June 1998 and comanaged a $54 million secondary issue in February 1999. FBR was also in on another sale of 4 million shares being planned for March.Michael Saylor, who started MicroStrategy in 1989, was never shy about his company's mission. He boasted that his firm would purge ignorance from the planet with data-mining software that could tell companies who was buying what where. Managerial and personal quirks like a mandatory annual Caribbean cruise for the staff (no spouses allowed) and lavish parties at places like Washington's Corcoran Gallery lifted the company's profile.After MicroStrategy went public at 12, its prospects looked good. The company's client roster included big names like General Electric Co. and Est,e Lauder Cos. Analysts loved the stock, which rose to 150 in late November 1999. If anyone saw trouble, they didn't admit it.
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Wall Street Conflicts Make Analysts' Calls Suspect(Jun.30.2000)
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Wall Street Conflicts Make Analysts' Calls Suspect(Jun.30.2000)
Stock trader Marty Fiascone says he's not normally a sore sport. Yet one trade continues to irk him.In March, he lost $70,000 of his own money when the shares of MicroStrategy Inc., an Internet software company, tanked. Fiascone, a managing director at Stafford Trading in Chicago, insists securities analysts knew MicroStrategy would restate its books to conform with standard accounting practices and that its earnings and stock price would suffer.Rather than alert him, the analysts kept urging him to buy shares, he says. On March 20, MicroStrategy did announce the accounting change. The stock plummeted 62 percent to 86 3/4 that day. Yesterday, it closed at 32 5/8.``They have no credibility,'' Fiascone says, getting angrier at the analyst corps with each breath. ``They should be exposed for what they are. They're used-car salesmen.''Fiascone isn't alone. Many investors these days complain that stocks they own fall precipitously without a warning from the analysts who persuaded them to buy the shares in the first place.Palley-Needelman Asset Management, a San Diego money manager, says it lost almost $10 million on its UnumProvident Corp. shares last year because it believed analysts who kept recommending the company in the face of evidence that its disability insurance business was deteriorating. Palley-Needelman sold the stock in December.P&G FallsMolly Guenther, who oversees $220 million in investments at SunTrust Banks in Atlanta, had about 4 percent of her customers' money in Procter & Gamble Co. stock on March 7. That day, the consumer-products giant said its earnings would fall short of analysts' estimates. The shares tumbled 30 percent.Guenther says she had no idea something was awry. Many of her clients were unaware of P&G's problems until they got their quarterly reports -- and then started calling her. ``It's one thing to lose money in an aggressive, speculative investment, but for a company like P&G to have a drop like that is very upsetting to them,'' she says.Why didn't Wall Street pros issue warnings before the routs? Well, why would they? Analysts are more rainmakers than researchers these days. They're paid to be positive: Their fawning research reports help their firms win and keep investment-banking clients -- and keep the brokerage machine oiled.The Skinny``An analyst is just a banker who writes reports,'' says Stephen Balog, former research director at Lehman Brothers and Furman Selz, who left the latter firm after ING Groep bought it in1997. ``No one makes a pretense that it's independent.''Analysts would sooner stop covering a company than recommend selling its stock. Of 28,000 analyst recommendations on 6,700 companies in the U.S. and Canada, less than 1 percent are ``sells'' or ``strong sells,'' according to First Call/Thomson Financial, which tracks ratings. By contrast, one-third of the ratings are ``strong buys,'' another third are ``buys'' and almost all the rest are ``holds.''The ratio hasn't changed since First Call started to keep count five years ago. It's not likely to change as long as analysts' pay -- $2 million to $3 million annually for the top-ranked names and as much as $15 million for the superstars -- is linked to how much business they bring to their firms.At Donaldson, Lufkin & Jenrette Inc., for instance, analysts get quarterly bonuses from the investment-banking budget. Tom Brown, chief executive of Second Curve Capital, a hedge fund, says that when he was a banking analyst at DLJ, an analyst who brought in, say, a midsize bank with assets of about $10 billion as a potential merger candidate could earn a $250,000 bonus if the merger came about. A DLJ spokesperson says the bank doesn't comment on compensation.Small PrintAnalysts must disclose their firm's relationship with companies covered, and they usually do it at the end of a report, in tiny type that's easily overlooked.The pressure from the top of the firm for buy recommendations can put analysts through the wringer. Sean Ryan, a former banking analyst at Bear Stearns Cos., says he recommended Net.Bank Inc., an Internet bank based in Alpharetta, Ga., even though he thought it was a crummy company. ``I put a `buy' on it because they paid for it,'' says Ryan.Bear Stearns underwrote two stock offerings and one subordinated debt sale for the company in the first half of 1999, helping it raise $307 million. Morgan Keegan, an investment bank in Memphis, Tennessee, that managed the bank's initial public offering in 1997, had downgraded the stock a year earlier.Ryan then called a few customers -- some who paid Bear Stearns a lot in trading commissions -- and told them what he really thought. ``I said, We just launched coverage on Net.Bank because they bought it fair and square with two offerings,''' he says. ``Unless money is burning a hole in your pocket, there isn't any reason to own it.''' Net.Bank traded at 12 3/16 yesterday, down from a high of 83 in April 1999.Censored?The analyst says he left Bear Stearns in January to form Byrne Ryan & Co., a brokerage that promised unbiased research. (It closed in May, and Ryan joined Banc of America Securities in June.) Ryan alleges that Bear Stearns censored his tough reports on First Union Corp., then refused to let him write about the bank.ear Stearns disputes Ryan's version of events. ``Bear Stearns stands by the quality and integrity of our research,'' the firm said in a written statement. ``Our analysts are encouraged and expected to maintain their independence and provide the best possible research product to our clients. Since his departure from Bear Stearns, Sean Ryan has made disparaging comments about the Bear Stearns research department in an effort to generate publicity for his latest business venture. The comments are the same ones he has made before and, as in the past, are totally inaccurate.''Comment, PleaseMany analysts routinely send drafts of their research reports to the companies being covered for comment and tweaking. ``The way the game is played is that we want to make money for our clients,'' Richard Leggett, head of research at Friedman, Billings, Ramsey & Co., a small investment bank in Arlington, Va., said at a conference in late March. ``So if a company guides us lower in our earnings estimates and then the company blows out the estimate, I look good, the company looks good,'' he said. ``We all win.'' Except, of course, for the investors who took the analysts' advice at face value.Headhunters know the game. The first question they ask about an analyst they might hire is whether the analyst is investment-banker friendly, says Balog. That is, does the researcher bring in deals, or if a bank does a mediocre deal, will the researcher look the other way?Today's star analysts are Jack Grubman, 46, of Salomon Smith Barney and Mary Meeker, 40, of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter & Co. These people are much more than stock pickers.In February 1998 executives at SBC Communications Inc., pondering an acquisition, invited Grubman to a strategy session in Arizona and asked for his overview of the industry and his opinion of where it was heading.``He confirmed the strategy we were working on,'' says James Kahan, SBC's senior executive vice president of corporate development, who adds that the company didn't specifically discuss possible acquisition targets. ``We valued his judgment because of his experience and knowledge.''
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Too Few Sellers to Cool Feverish Oil Market( Jun 24 2008)
article
Sell
Sell
010950
S-Oil
+3
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Too Few Sellers to Cool Feverish Oil Market( Jun 24 2008)
“More buyers than sellers,” is often the answer traders give when asked why prices of shares, bonds or commodities are high.For oil, this seems to be one explanation why the market has risen to record levels near $140 a barrel and stayed there, says Marco Dunand, chief executive of oil trading firm Mercuria.“We’ve noticed in the last few months, it is more and more difficult to find people willing to sell the market,” he told Reuters in an interview. “It’s a kind of liquidity crisis.”Dunand, with partner Daniel Jaeggi, has helped turn Mercuria into one of the world’s top 5 independent energy traders with turnover last year of $33 billion.The company, created in 2004, is active around the globe trading crude oil and products.It has just signed a deal as part of a consortium to buy a refinery in Albania.It is about to start natural gas trading in North America and aims to expand refined products into the U.S.The firm’s main office is in Geneva in Place du Molard, which has longstanding links with commodities trading as it was the city’s commercial hub in medieval times.Dunand, who has been trading oil for two decades, says record prices have changed the shape of the market.The natural sellers, such as oil producers which traditionally hedge production by selling futures contracts, are no longer there, partly because of huge margin calls.The margin payments, a kind of deposit required to trade futures, are now around $10 to $20 a barrel.“That was the price of a real barrel of oil not so long ago,” says Dunand.Oil has doubled in price in the past year and risen about 40 percent since the start of this year.The advance partly reflects expectations that global supply may not keep pace with strong demand growth from newly industrializing China, India and the Middle East.High fuel costs have already caused protests from consumers in the United States, Europe and Asia.Politicians are under pressure to find a solution.“It’s not surprising that citizens of the world are feeling a bit upset because of how much it costs to drive their cars,” said Dunand. “It’s clearly a temptation to try to find the culprits.”For some, these are speculators, which could be investment banks, hedge funds, pension funds or retail investors, who can now buy investment products that mimic oil futures or indexes.Mom and Pop Investors“The nature of the investor has changed,” said Daniel Jaeggi, vice president and head of global trading. “Mom and pop can be punting oil now and that’s different from a few years ago.”Dunand points the finger at pension funds for creating a structural problem.Pension funds have begun investing in oil and other commodities over the past 6 years because they behave differently from stocks and bonds and offer diversification.An estimated $200 billion-plus is invested in investment indexes which track commodities, including oil.“If pension funds want to invest 3 to 4 percent in commodities, the size of the commodity market at the moment is not enough to provide the liquidity to sell against this wall of buying,” said Dunand.But he also said it would be “undemocratic” to make commodities off-limits to pension plans.The investment logic for moving into commodities is compelling, according to Jaeggi.A hundred dollars invested the U.S. S&P 500 index on January 1, 2000 would have delivered a negative return.The same $100 invested in commodities would made a return of 350 percent.“If you had diversified you would have done a financially prudent thing - so does that make you a speculator?” he said.The market’s fundamentals have also played a part.“Global commercial stocks were depleted over the last 12 months,” said Jaeggi, who sees the reasons behind oil’s rise as part inflow of investment money and part supply/demand.The market needs a bigger cushion of oil in storage to ease concerns over potential supply disruptions.“If OPEC is serious about trying to dampen the price rally we have seen, they have to accept the fact they need to produce a bit more oil,” said Dunand, who said this would help although not entirely resolve the situation.Goldman Sachs , Morgan Stanley and other market players have predicted oil could go to $150-$200 a barrel.Dunand and Jaeggi are not willing to make predictions.“What is the right price of oil? - I have no idea, but I can tell you one damn thing for sure, on December 31, 1999 oil was 10 bucks a barrel and that was too cheap,” Jaeggi said.
article
Sell
Sell
010950
S-Oil
+3
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Tech Stocks Extend Slide; Nasdaq Ends 3.7% Lower(Sept. 18, 2001)
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Tech Stocks Extend Slide; Nasdaq Ends 3.7% Lower(Sept. 18, 2001)
Technology stocks extended their losses Thursday as investors continued to assess the economic fallout from last week's terrorist attacks.The Nasdaq Composite fell 56.87, or 3.7%, to finish at 1470.93, after losing 1.8% Wednesday. Morgan Stanley's High Tech Index shed 16.57 to 369.01 and the Dow Jones Internet Index lost 2.43 to 40.71.On Capitol Hill, Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan told Congress the terrorist attacks had disrupted the business activity in a number of ways, including a drop in consumer spending and travel and the stock market's four-day shutdown last week (see article). But Mr. Greenspan also said, "I am confident that we will recover and prosper as we have in the past."Software stocks continued to tumble as investors worried that the terrorist attacks would hamper companies ability to close sales in the final weeks of the September quarter."All software is down. The sector is definitely under pressure," John Rizzuto, software analyst at Credit Suisse First Boston Corp., said.PeopleSoft slipped 75 cents to $19.99, Siebel Systems shares lost $1.01 to $14, and CheckPoint Software fell $1.52 to $25.41, all on the Nasdaq Stock Market.Cadence Design Systems dropped 69 cents to $16.23 on the New York Stock Exchange. John O. Barr, an analyst with Robertson Stephens cut his earnings and revenue estimates for the integrated-circuit design software provider amid continued weakness in information-technology spending. Mr. Barr now expects third-quarter earnings of 19 cents a share on revenue of $347.4 million, below his previous estimates.SAP fell 50 cents to $23 on the Big Board. The German software giant said Thursday it will meet its earnings expectations for the first nine months of 2001, calming investors' jitters, but the German software giant left the door open to revise its full-year targets (see article).EMC added 10 cents to $12.70 on the Big Board. The data-storage giant said Thursday it has acquired closely held Luminate Software for about $50 million in cash. Luminate develops performance-monitoring software for storage-intensive applications and operating environments.Microsoft slid $3.11 to $50.76 on Nasdaq. The software giant called the remedies sought by the Justice Department in its antitrust case "improper" in its latest court filing, as the company prepares for a meeting next week with the new judge in the case (see article).Meanwhile, Applied Materials and 3Com joined the list of companies announcing job cuts this week. Applied Materials fell $1.63 to $29.49, while 3Com gained 10 cents to $3.79, both on Nasdaq.Chip maker Applied Materials said Thursday it plans to reduce its work force by about 2,000 positions, or 10%. It said it will take an undisclosed restructuring charge in the fiscal fourth quarter ending Oct. 28 (see article).Networking-gear maker 3Com late Wednesday reported a wider-than-expected quarterly loss on a steep slide in revenue. The company also announced it will cut 1,000 more jobs than previously planned (see article).Elsewhere, Leap Wireless International climbed $1.06 to $14.01 on Nasdaq after the wireless Internet company gained some flexibility in its financing agreements with vendors Telefon AB L.M. Ericsson, Lucent Technologies and Nortel Networks by amending covenants relating to capital expenditures and gross revenue.Priceline.com rose 26 cents to $2.29 on Nasdaq. Cheung Kong and Hutchison Whampoa, two shareholders with a total stake of 27% in the Internet travel service, withdrew their request to file a shelf registration, which would have let them sell Priceline shares.
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley downgrades U.S. Steel, sees limited growth opportunities ahead(Feb 3 2025)
article
Neutral
Neutral
X
US Steel Corp
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley downgrades U.S. Steel, sees limited growth opportunities ahead(Feb 3 2025)
United States Steel is running out of runway for growth, according to Morgan Stanley. The firm downgraded the steel stock to equal weight from overweight on Monday, alongside a $39 per share price target. Morgan Stanley’s forecast implies nearly 6% upside from Friday’s close. Analyst Carlos De Alba said U.S. Steel stock is currently trading right around its target valuation for the company, which leaves little room to run moving forward. “However, we no longer see meaningful upside to our standalone price target. While a deal with Nippon — or another party — may still happen, which is reflected in our $55/[share] bull case, we continue to set our price target on a standalone basis,” the analyst said. More broadly, De Alba said he expects steel prices to rise due to President Donald Trump’s tariffs, but added that those price rises could be kept in check by sluggish demand. The White House over the weekend announced levies on imports from Mexico, China and Canada. The move sparked a global market sell-off. Analysts are mostly positive on the stock. LSEG data shows eight of 12 analysts who cover the stock rate it as a buy or strong buy. U.S. Steel has slipped nearly 20% over the past year. X 1Y mountain United States Steel stock.
article
Neutral
Neutral
X
US Steel Corp
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Wall Street is getting very bullish as stocks hit records. Here’s why that’s worrisome(Nov 15 2019)
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Wall Street is getting very bullish as stocks hit records. Here’s why that’s worrisome(Nov 15 2019)
As the S&P 500 has broken out of its trading range into record highs, euphoria has been growing — fast.Technicians like Stephen Suttmeier at Bank of America Merrill Lynch have been positively giddy recently, noting a bullish rotation into cyclicals, but also to value from growth, high beta from low volatility, cyclicals from defensives and small caps from large caps.It’s not just technicians. Strategists and retail investors are gaga with enthusiasm:1) Barclays says small caps are at an inflection point and poised to outperform: “Headwinds have subsided,” they declare.2) Bank of America also expects the cyclical rally will continue: “We think the stage is set for a restocking-driven recovery in Spring 2020 to extend the cyclical rally.”3) Morgan Stanley also loves the rotation: “We think a secular rotation from Growth to Value is beginning.”Even the average retail investor is getting bulled up. The American Association of Individual Investors’ weekly sentiment survey showed 40.7% of respondents are bullish, the highest levels since May, while only 23.8% are bearish, also near the lowest levels since May.Why is everyone so excited?The combination of a neutral/accommodative Fed and a better global growth outlook for 2020 are key factors in the euphoria, but the other factors are the seasonal strength and a belief that a China deal on tariffs will eventually be signed.Futures were jumping again on Friday as the White House signaled once again that the signing of the first part of the trade deal was close.“Everybody seems to think that FOMO [Fear of Missing Out] will cause institutional players to buy, buy, buy into the end of the year,” Matt Maley, chief market strategist at Miller Tabak, told me. “Everyone is saying that the only thing that can throw a wrench in the works is a breakdown in the Phase One [China] negotiations and nobody thinks that will happen (because both sides need some sort of smaller deal),” he wrote to me.Good or bad news?All this euphoria would be great if we were coming off of a big sell-off — but we’re not. The major indexes are at new highs as is the advance/decline line. Put it all together, and the market is clearly overbought.Tony Dwyer, senior managing director and chief market strategist at Cannacord Genuity, thinks investors should be cautious, citing the extreme overbought conditions, increased optimism, low volatility and a smaller number of stocks above their recent 10- and 50-day moving averages. “All four intermediate-term indicators suggest waiting to add exposure,” Dwyer wrote in a recent note.Some things never changeSome astute market observers are not impressed: They say there is nothing new under the sun. Brian Belski, managing director and chief investment strategist at BMO, noted that many on Wall Street are habitually late to the party.“In my almost 30 years on Wall Street, some things never change, namely, people get bullish after the market rallies,” Belski wrote to me.He does believe there is “some froth” as everyone on Wall Street chases performance going into the end of the year.“This does not mean the rally is over,” Belski said. “It just means they are late and undisciplined.”
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
Economy & Strategy
user
박재훈투영인
·
2 months ago
1
0
Asia's Consumer Staples Emerge as a Safe Haven Amid Tariff Turmoil (Apr 20, 2025)
article
Sell
Sell
SPX
S&P500
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
2 months ago
1
0
Asia's Consumer Staples Emerge as a Safe Haven Amid Tariff Turmoil (Apr 20, 2025)
As U.S.-China trade tensions and global tariff risks escalate, Asia’s consumer staples sector is increasingly being seen as a defensive haven.Fidelity and Goldman Sachs are shifting their strategies away from tech stocks toward staples, signaling a broader investor rotation toward stability.Since the April 2 tariff announcements, the MSCI Asia Pacific Consumer Staples Index has outperformed, gaining 5% even as broader regional benchmarks fell by 2.5%.Chinese retailer Yonghui Superstores and Japan’s Kobe Bussan each rallied by over 19%, while food and beverage companies also showed notable strength.Fidelity has highlighted policy tailwinds in China, while Goldman Sachs raised its weighting on the sector, citing relative insulation from trade disruptions.In contrast, the consumer discretionary sector dropped more than 5% over the same timeframe, underscoring the growing investor preference for essentials.Governments across Asia are reinforcing this trend.China announced 48 initiatives to spur household spending, South Korea unveiled a ₩12 trillion (approx. $8.7 billion) supplementary budget, and a favorable monsoon outlook in India is expected to boost rural consumption.Strategists frame this shift as a transition from export dependence toward domestic resilience.Saxo Markets’ Charu Chanana describes it as "pricing in local demand in a more protectionist world," while Hiroyuki Akizawa of Tokio Marine Asset Management emphasizes consumer staples' lower U.S. export exposure as an added shield against tariffs.JP Morgan and Morgan Stanley have also recommended increasing exposure to Southeast Asian consumer sectors.Risks remain: Aberdeen Investment’s James Thom warns that a sharp inflation surge could erode profit margins and dampen enthusiasm for the sector.Still, for now, consumer staples are widely seen as a relative safe haven, with MSCI forecasts expecting double the earnings growth for staples compared to the broader Asia market over the next 12 months.Nick Twidale at AT Global Markets notes, "Consumer staples are the current focus, but as sentiment recovers, investors may rotate back into discretionary and services sectors" — though he cautions that such a shift would depend heavily on changes in U.S. tariff policy.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Sell
Sell
SPX
S&P500
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Soaring Stock Market Faces Warning Signals from Bonds" (Jan 8, 2025)
article
Neutral
Neutral
NONE
No Relevant Stock
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
"Soaring Stock Market Faces Warning Signals from Bonds" (Jan 8, 2025)
The U.S. bond market is sending signals that the bullish sentiment in equities may be overly optimistic.Stocks are now nearing their most overvalued levels in 20 years compared to corporate bonds and Treasuries. The earnings yield on S&P 500 stocks—the inverse of the P/E ratio—has fallen to its lowest level relative to Treasury yields since 2002, indicating that stocks are historically expensive relative to bonds.Key Market DiscrepanciesS&P 500 vs. Corporate Bonds:S&P 500 earnings yield: 3.7%BBB-rated U.S. corporate bond yield: 5.6% (widest gap since 2008)Typically, stock earnings yields should exceed corporate bond yields due to higher equity risk, but the current negative gap has historically signaled market trouble.Valuation Concerns:S&P 500 is trading at 27x trailing earnings, well above the 20-year average of 18.7x.U.S. investment-grade corporate bond risk premium (spread) is at 0.81%, one of the tightest levels in decades, indicating both stocks and bonds are expensive.Historical Warning Signs:Bloomberg’s Ben Ram noted that such negative stock-bond yield spreads have typically appeared during bubbles or periods of rising credit risk.Morgan Stanley strategists, including Michael Wilson, warn that high interest rates and a strong dollar could weigh on stock valuations and corporate earnings.Short-Term vs. Long-Term RiskWhile this valuation gap does not guarantee an immediate market correction, history suggests it raises downside risk.The spread between S&P 500 earnings yield and BBB bond yields has remained negative for two years, and such dislocations can persist for extended periods before a correction occurs.Investors reacted sharply when the Federal Reserve signaled slower-than-expected rate cuts on December 18, causing stocks to fall nearly 3%—the worst Fed-day decline since 2001—before rebounding.Investor Sentiment & Risk AppetiteDespite these warning signs, investors continue to embrace risk, as seen in soaring equity prices and speculative crypto investments.However, Goldman Sachs has already issued a long-term caution, forecasting just 3% average annual S&P 500 returns over the next decade.[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Neutral
Neutral
NONE
No Relevant Stock
user
셀스마트 자민
·
4 months ago
0
0
Citigroup Raises Copper Price Forecast Amid U.S. Tariff Speculation (Mar 13, 2025)
article
Neutral
Neutral
160580
Mirae Asset TIGER Physical Copper ETF
user
셀스마트 자민
·
4 months ago
0
0
Citigroup Raises Copper Price Forecast Amid U.S. Tariff Speculation (Mar 13, 2025)
Copper prices are surging amid growing concerns over potential U.S. import tariffs. Following President Donald Trump’s recent move to initiate an investigation under Section 232 of the Trade Expansion Act, investors are increasingly worried about prolonged global supply shortages.In response to the tariff review announcement, Citigroup has revised its Q2 copper price forecast upward. Initially, the bank had projected copper prices at $8,500 per tonne for Q2. However, in a recent report, Citi analysts indicated that tightening global supply conditions could push prices above $10,000 per tonne in the short term until the U.S. finalizes its tariff decision. Similarly, Morgan Stanley has also forecasted continued price increases driven by potential U.S. tariffs.The global copper market is already under supply pressure. Major commodity traders are rushing to ship copper to the U.S. before the tariffs take effect, further fueling price spikes. On the London Metal Exchange (LME), copper prices have reached an all-time high, trading at approximately $10,071 per tonne ($4.87 per pound).[Compliance Note]All posts by Sellsmart are for informational purposes only. Final investment decisions should be made with careful judgment and at the investor’s own risk.The content of this post may be inaccurate, and any profits or losses resulting from trades are solely the responsibility of the investor.Core16 may hold positions in the stocks mentioned in this post and may buy or sell them at any time.
article
Neutral
Neutral
160580
Mirae Asset TIGER Physical Copper ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
5 signs the world is headed for a recession(Oct 2, 2022)
article
Sell
Sell
226490
Samsung KODEX KOSPI ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
5 signs the world is headed for a recession(Oct 2, 2022)
Around the world, markets are flashing warning signs that the global economy is teetering on a cliff’s edge.The question of a recession is no longer if, but when.Over the past week, the pulse of those flashing red lights quickened as markets grappled with the reality — once speculative, now certain — that the Federal Reserve will press on with its most aggressive monetary tightening campaign in decades to wring inflation from the US economy. Even if that means triggering a recession. And even if it comes at the expense of consumers and businesses far beyond US borders.There’s now a 98% chance of a global recession, according to research firm Ned Davis, which brings some sobering historical credibility to the table. The firm’s recession probability reading has only been this high twice before — in 2008 and 2020.When economists warn of a downturn, they’re typically basing their assessment on a variety of indicators.Let’s unpack five key trends:The mighty US dollarThe US dollar plays an outsized role in the global economy and international finance. And right now, it is stronger than it’s been in two decades.The simplest explanation comes back to the Fed.When the US central bank raises interest rates, as it has been doing since March, it makes the dollar more appealing to investors around the world.In any economic climate, the dollar is seen as a safe place to park your money. In a tumultuous climate — a global pandemic, say, or a war in Eastern Europe — investors have even more incentive to purchase dollars, usually in the form of US government bonds.While a strong dollar is a nice perk for Americans traveling abroad, it creates headaches for just about everyone else.The value of the UK pound, the euro, China’s yuan and Japan’s yen, among many others, has tumbled. That makes it more expensive for those nations to import essential items like food and fuel.In response, central banks that are already fighting pandemic-induced inflation wind up raising rates higher and faster to shore up the value of their own currencies.The dollar’s strength also creates destabilizing effects for Wall Street, as many of the S&P 500 companies do business around the world. By one estimate from Morgan Stanley, each 1% rise in the dollar index has a negative 0.5% impact on S&P 500 earnings.America’s economic engine stallsThe No. 1 driver of the world’s largest economy is shopping. And America’s shoppers are tired.After more than a year of rising prices on just about everything, with wages not keeping up, consumers have pulled back.“The hardship caused by inflation means that consumers are dipping into their savings,” EY Parthenon Chief Economist Gregory Daco said in a note Friday. The personal saving rate in August remained unchanged at only 3.5%, Daco said — near its lowest rate since 2008, and well below its pre-Covid level of around 9%.Once again, the reason behind the pullback has a lot to do with the Fed.Interest rates have risen at a historic pace, pushing mortgage rates to their highest level in more than a decade and making it harder for businesses to grow. Eventually, the Fed’s rate hikes should broadly bring costs down. But in the meantime, consumers are getting a one-two punch of high borrowing rates and high prices, especially when it comes to necessities like food and housing.Americans opened their wallets during the 2020 lockdowns, which powered the economy out of its brief-but-severe pandemic recession. Since then, government aid has evaporated and inflation has taken root, pushing prices up at their fastest rate in 40 years and sapping consumers’ spending power.Corporate America tightens its beltBusiness has been booming across industries for the bulk of the pandemic era, even with historically high inflation eating into profits. That is thanks (once again) to the tenacity of American shoppers, as businesses were largely able to pass on their higher costs to consumers to cushion profit margins.But the earnings bonanza may not last.In mid-September, one company whose fortunes serve as a kind of economic bellwether gave investors a shock.FedEx, which operates in more than 200 countries, unexpectedly revised its outlook, warning that demand was softening, and earnings were likely to plunge more than 40%.In an interview, its CEO was asked whether he believes the slowdown was a sign of a looming global recession.“I think so,” he responded. “These numbers, they don’t portend very well.”FedEx isn’t alone. On Tuesday, Apple’s stock fell after Bloomberg reported the company was scrapping plans to increase iPhone 14 production after demand came in below expectations.And just ahead of the holiday season, when employers would normally ramp up hiring, the mood is now more cautious.“We’ve not seen the normal September uptick in companies posting for temporary help,” said Julia Pollak, chief economist at ZipRecruiter. “Companies are hanging back and waiting to see what conditions hold.”Welcome to bear territoryWall Street has been hit with whiplash, and stocks are now on track for their worst year since 2008 — in case anyone needs yet another scary historical comparison.But last year was a very different story. Equity markets thrived in 2021, with the S&P 500 soaring 27%, thanks to a torrent of cash pumped in by the Federal Reserve, which unleashed a double-barreled monetary-easing policy in the spring of 2020 to keep financial markets from crumbling.The party lasted until early 2022. But as inflation set in, the Fed began to take away the proverbial punch bowl, raising interest rates and unwinding its bond-buying mechanism that had propped up the market.The hangover has been brutal. The S&P 500, the broadest measure of Wall Street — and the index responsible for the bulk of Americans’ 401(k)s — is down nearly 24% for the year. And it’s not alone. All three major US indexes are in bear markets — down at least 20% from their most recent highs.In an unfortunate twist, bond markets, typically a safe haven for investors when stocks and other assets decline, are also in a tailspin.FedEx isn’t alone. On Tuesday, Apple’s stock fell after Bloomberg reported the company was scrapping plans to increase iPhone 14 production after demand came in below expectations.And just ahead of the holiday season, when employers would normally ramp up hiring, the mood is now more cautious.“We’ve not seen the normal September uptick in companies posting for temporary help,” said Julia Pollak, chief economist at ZipRecruiter. “Companies are hanging back and waiting to see what conditions hold.”Welcome to bear territoryWall Street has been hit with whiplash, and stocks are now on track for their worst year since 2008 — in case anyone needs yet another scary historical comparison.But last year was a very different story. Equity markets thrived in 2021, with the S&P 500 soaring 27%, thanks to a torrent of cash pumped in by the Federal Reserve, which unleashed a double-barreled monetary-easing policy in the spring of 2020 to keep financial markets from crumbling.The party lasted until early 2022. But as inflation set in, the Fed began to take away the proverbial punch bowl, raising interest rates and unwinding its bond-buying mechanism that had propped up the market.The hangover has been brutal. The S&P 500, the broadest measure of Wall Street — and the index responsible for the bulk of Americans’ 401(k)s — is down nearly 24% for the year. And it’s not alone. All three major US indexes are in bear markets — down at least 20% from their most recent highs.In an unfortunate twist, bond markets, typically a safe haven for investors when stocks and other assets decline, are also in a tailspin.Once again, blame the Fed.Inflation, along with the steep rise in interest rates by the central bank, has pushed bond prices down, which causes bond yields (aka the return an investor gets for their loan to the government) to go up.On Wednesday, the yield on the 10-year US Treasury briefly surpassed 4%, hitting its highest level in 14 years. That surge was followed by a steep drop in response to the Bank of England’s intervention in its own spiraling bond market — amounting to tectonic moves in a corner of the financial world that is designed to be steady, if not downright boring.European bond yields are also spiking as central banks follow the Fed’s lead in raising rates to shore up their own currencies.Bottom line: There are few safe places for investors to put their money right now, and that’s unlikely to change until global inflation gets under control and central banks loosen their grips.War, soaring prices and radical policies collideNowhere is the collision of economic, financial, and political calamities more painfully visible than in the United Kingdom.Like the rest of the world, the UK has struggled with surging prices that are largely attributable to the colossal shock of Covid-19, followed by the trade disruptions created by Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. As the West cut off imports of Russian natural gas, energy prices have soared and supplies have dwindled.Those events were bad enough on their own.But then, just over a week ago, the freshly installed government of Prime Minister Liz Truss announced a sweeping tax-cut plan that economists from both ends of the political spectrum have decried as unorthodox at best, diabolical at worst.In short, the Truss administration said it would slash taxes for all Britons to encourage spending and investment and, in theory, soften the blow of a recession. But the tax cuts aren’t funded, which means the government must take on debt to finance them.That decision set off a panic in financial markets and put Downing Street in a standoff with its independent central bank, the Bank of England. Investors around the world sold off UK bonds in droves, plunging the pound to its lowest level against the dollar in nearly 230 years. As in, since 1792, when Congress made the US dollar legal tender.The BOE staged an emergency intervention to buy up UK bonds on Wednesday and restore order in financial markets. It stemmed the bleeding, for now. But the ripple effects of the Trussonomics turmoil is spreading far beyond the offices of bond traders.Britons, who are already in a cost-of-living crisis, with inflation at 10% — the highest of any G7 economy — are now panicking over higher borrowing costs that could force millions of homeowners’ monthly mortgage payments to go up by hundreds or even thousands of pounds.The upshotWhile the consensus is that a global recession is likely sometime in 2023, it’s impossible to predict how severe it will be or how long it will last. Not every recession is as painful as the 2007-09 Great Recession, but every recession is, of course, painful.Some economies, particularly the United States, with its strong labor market and resilient consumers, will be able to withstand the blow better than others.“We are in uncharted waters in the months ahead,” wrote economists at the World Economic Forum in a report this week.“The immediate outlook for the global economy and for much of the world’s population is dark,” they continued, adding that the challenges “will test the resilience of economies and societies and exact a punishing human toll.”But there are some silver linings, they said. Crises force transformations that can ultimately improve standards of living and make economies stronger.“Businesses have to change. This has been the story since the pandemic started,” said Rima Bhatia, an economic adviser for Gulf International Bank. “Businesses no longer can continue on the path that they were at. That’s the opportunity and that’s the silver lining.”
article
Sell
Sell
226490
Samsung KODEX KOSPI ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Who's raising our rates?(May 22, 2000)
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Who's raising our rates?(May 22, 2000)
Who are these guys, and why are they jacking up the nation's rent, so to speak, by raising the cost of credit-card, car-loan, home-mortgage and other debt?In one sense, last week's stiff interest-rate hike by the Federal Reserve's little known Federal Open Market Committee was a no-brainer, given the still sizzling growth of the U.S. economy. But in another sense, the panel's increase in the so-called federal-funds rate from 6% to 6.5% marked a spectacular wager on your future, with your money, by 10 unelected and largely unknown officials operating behind closed doors. By raising the rate that underpins most other borrowing costs to its highest level in nine years, the committee is hoping--make that praying--to cool the economy and forestall ruinous inflation without jeopardizing the longest-running expansion in U.S. history.Such high-stakes crapshoots are routine for the FOMC, a secretive body whose ability to raise or lower interest rates makes it perhaps the second most powerful group of appointees in Washington--behind only the Supreme Court. Led by Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan--the one member with star wattage--the panel gathers eight times a year around a 27-ft. 11-in. black granite and mahogany table to issue diktats that are feverishly parsed on Wall Street and around the world. The members are the seven Fed governors, plus five of the 12 regional Federal Reserve Bank presidents at a time. (Two governors' seats are currently vacant; a Ph.D. in economics will help if you'd like to apply.) The remaining bank chiefs are nonvoting but vocal participants.While the press tends to treat Greenspan as the sole author of interest-rate policies, insiders and Fed watchers know that is hardly the case. Greenspan, actually considered a moderate among the group's inflation hawks and doves, is clearly first among equals and exerts a considerable influence over the FOMC. But as a careful consensus builder, he is also at pains to stake out positions that the rest of the committee can live with--and thereby avoid any risk of being embarrassed by a close vote. "There is a limit to how far the chairman's influence can be extended," Fed governor Laurence Meyer recently explained. "A good chairman sometimes has to lead the FOMC by following the consensus within the committee."What confronted this increasingly hawkish panel last week was a maverick economy that simply refuses to do what it's told. The Fed had raised rates a quarter of a percent--or 25 basis points, in the lingo--no fewer than five times since last June, with little tangible impact on either GDP growth or unemployment. Joblessness stood at just 3.9% in April, its lowest level in three decades. This persistent lack of idleness sent shivers up the spines of FOMC members, who fear that tight labor markets will lead to inflationary wage increases. To make matters worse, from a Fed perspective, the economy expanded at a brisk 5.4% clip in the recent first quarter, well above the presumed 3.5% to 4% "speed limit" that many economists have viewed as the upper range for growth without inflation."There is real frustration within the FOMC," says Fed watcher David Jones of the Aubrey G. Lanston investment firm. "Borrowing costs have been going up for more than a year, and yet no one seems to care. The Fed is asking 'What does it take to get the consumer's attention?'" The FOMC's answer: its first 50-basis-point increase in the federal-funds rate--the interest that banks charge one another for overnight loans--in five years, plus a stern warning that you can expect another boost when the committee meets again next month. (What should you do about your finances? See following story.)Ironically, the Fed's get-tough stance came just hours after a Commerce Department report showed that the "core" rate of inflation (the Consumer Price Index with volatile food and energy prices omitted) had fallen to an annual rate of 2.4% in April, down from 4.8% in March. That led Senator Tom Harkin, an Iowa Democrat, to denounce the FOMC increase as "clearly excessive" at a time when "accelerating inflation is not apparent." If this continues, says Harkin, "our economy is going to bleed to death." In other words, the Democrats need a slowing economy in an election year like they do another Monica.Last week's hawkish increase marked a clear departure from the gradualist policies that Greenspan had championed for years. "Three years ago," recalls former Fed vice chairman Alice Rivlin, "some [FOMC] members were worried about the economy overheating. But I wasn't, and neither was Greenspan." Both argued that technology was making workers more productive and stifling inflation. The FOMC thus opted for a string of small rate hikes that became a hallmark of Greenspan's cautious approach to monetary policy.But this spring the chairman reset his course, and other doves on the panel found themselves in full retreat. The tough new thinking was reinforced by the arrival of voting members like Jerry Jordan, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Ohio). "There is [agreement] right now that the economy is growing too rapidly," Rivlin says. The moral: "If you step on the brakes a little and the car doesn't slow down, then you need to step on them a bit harder the next time."The stubbornly strong growth convinced Robert McTeer, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, that larger rate increases may be appropriate this year. McTeer, whose voting term expired last December, had been the only panelist to dissent from Fed tightening in 1999. "I believed, unlike some others, that productivity gains were keeping inflation sufficiently in check," McTeer says. "But as we moved into 2000, the signals from the economy were fairly clear cut. There was little question in anyone's mind that inflationary pressures were building."Nor was there much doubt on Wall Street about what the Fed panel was planning. Just two weeks ago, Robert Parry, the president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco and a voting member, strongly hinted at the outcome by declaring in a speech "We have moved cautiously, but that doesn't mean we only have a single note to play."The curtain went up promptly at 9 a.m. last Tuesday when Greenspan stepped through the doorway that connects his office to the boardroom to signal the start of the FOMC meeting. (The room sports a large map of the U.S. at one end and, at the other, a fireplace with a bronze sculpture of Demeter, the Greek goddess of agriculture and fertility.) Instead of taking his usual place at the head of the table, Greenspan pulled out a chair in the middle--a move that highlighted his desire to forge a consensus but set off a round of musical chairs to preserve the customary seating plan in relation to the chairman.The meeting commenced, as all do, with the approval of the minutes of the last gathering--this is a government bureaucracy, after all--and some staff reports. Then a "go-round" took place in which the presidents and Fed governors discussed the economic outlook, each having had access to two briefing books bulging with fresh data and policy choices. Then it was Greenspan's turn, the meeting's moment of truth, when he delivers his interest-rate recommendation and the rationale for it. "Greenspan always has some striking insight, or some number that no one else has ever heard of before," notes Fed watcher Jones.The complete transcript of what the chairman and other FOMC members said won't be released for five years, yet Fed watchers have little doubt that most speakers expressed exasperation at the refusal of the expansion to knuckle under to past rate increases and stressed their determination to try again.Nor did students of the Fed see any sign of dissent from the doves. "In the old days," says economist Kevin Flanagan of Morgan Stanley Dean Witter, "there was a debate over who was an influential hawk and who an influential dove." But today, Flanagan notes, any policy disagreements tend to vanish into Greenspan's carefully nurtured consensus. Concurs Fed governor Meyer, who has a reputation as a hawk's hawk on inflation: "Many members will voice some disagreement with the chairman's view in the go-rounds. But many of those will vote with the chairman in the end."Having done so, the most powerful monetary movers and shakers on the planet invariably line up for an informal boardroom lunch. Reaching for paper plates and plasticware, the FOMC members help themselves to a buffet that last week featured cold cuts, soft drinks, salads and chocolate-chip cookies--a special favorite of many members. Then they headed back to their offices to watch Wall Street's reaction, while bankers across the country adjusted the loan-rate signs in their windows. --Reported by Bernard Baumohl and Eric Roston/New York and Adam Zagorin/Washington
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Still On A Roll?(Nov 10, 1997)
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
4 months ago
0
0
Still On A Roll?(Nov 10, 1997)
New York City's 21 Club, a famed Midtown eatery, was expecting a group of 90 Wall Street types from Salomon Brothers, a famed investment house, for lunch last Monday. Only 40 showed. "And they were grim," recalls Swapan Rozario, who works 21's banquet room. Downtown, the stock market was having Solly and all the other big swinging brokerage houses for lunch, plunging a record 554 points in one nauseating session. The next day, Turnaround Tuesday, Salomon's traders, and everyone else, were too busy making money to have lunch, as the Dow reared up to gain back 337 points of that loss.The mesmerizing pair of panics--the headlong retreat on Monday followed by a buying frenzy the next day--is causing policymakers, corporations and investors to make an abrupt re-evaluation of the economy and the stock market in the face of an unexpected jolt from the Far East. If the market is the sum of all investors' knowledge at any given moment, as many theorists argue, then what on earth is this barking dog trying to tell us?For one thing, it says the notion that small investors, inexperienced in down markets, would bolt at the first sign of trouble is all wrong. It was the pros who fled on Monday: if these guys had been on the Titanic, they would have been fighting the children for lifeboats. The pros were saved by the little guys on Tuesday. Most folks did nothing; others couldn't wait to "buy the dips," just as they had been counseled to do so often. "I have been through this a few times," says Kooshy Afshar, the owner of a small printing company in Beverly Hills, Calif. "When the market goes down, I sit tight. I look at the market as a long-term investment."But beyond that obvious message, is there a deeper meaning? It seems farfetched that such a panic could occur for no good reason and without consequence. We're way beyond normal price volatility here. Throughout history, daily Dow moves of 1% or 2% up or down have been relatively common. But Monday's 7% decline was the 12th worst ever; Tuesday's 4.7% gain, the best in a decade. Was the market right on Monday or on Tuesday?We have been cruising along under the fuzzy notion that the '90s are different, that an economy with seemingly rock-solid fundamentals could withstand the buffeting of currency crises in countries half a world away. Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who likes this kind of excitement about as much as he does a rash, carefully reinforced his long-held belief that the Nirvana-like state of low unemployment and steady growth that correlates with his tenure can be sustained by riding herd on inflation. Said he: "Our economy has enjoyed a lengthy period of good economic growth, linked, not coincidentally, to damped inflation. The Federal Reserve is dedicated to contributing as best it can to prolonging this performance." And right on cue, data released Friday showed that inflation slowed dramatically this summer.The consensus on Wall Street and in Washington, where, in both places, it is undeniably lucrative to be bullish, is that Monday was the mistake; Tuesday set things right. The believers in this sort of "new economy" school see the sell-off as an overreaction to an economic slowdown in Asia, a development that heralds only a modest drag on the U.S. economy and the earnings of U.S. companies.Why? Only 4% of America's exports land in the more problematic Asian nations--Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia and the Philippines--not nearly enough for troubles there to seriously cut into the earnings of U.S. companies, at least not directly. In fact, the Asian problems might not have even registered with American investors if not for the fact that stock prices in the U.S. are so high that they have become hypersensitive to any and all adverse news. "It doesn't take much to derail a market that has gone to the moon," says Stephen Roach, chief global economist for Morgan Stanley Dean Witter.In Wall Street parlance, Monday's sharp decline was "a market event," meaning that it had little to do with the real economy and everything to do with the sheer unsustainable height of stock prices. That view makes the decline easy to swallow and lends credibility to the wisdom of staying happy and staying in stocks or, as the little guy did Tuesday, buying even more. "There is no reason to think the U.S. stock market is going to go into a bear market," says economist Allen Sinai at Primark Decision Economics. "The U.S. economy is not going to be knocked down by the crisis in Asia."Soothing proclamations like that one came quickly and from many quarters, reverberating throughout brokerage firms, mutual-fund companies, barbershops and shopping malls all week. Mighty IBM announced that its shares were so attractive, it would spend as much as $3.5 billion buying them back. From her perch as co-chair of the investment-policy committee at venerable Goldman Sachs, Abby Joseph Cohen, the most consistently bullish--and correct--market forecaster of the 1990s, declared the sell-off a buying opportunity and promptly raised from 60% to 65% her portfolio's allocation to stocks.No gesture seemed too small with a full-blown panic possibly still ahead. At half time of Monday Night Football, the NASDAQ stock market, a sponsor, stated its closing value as it usually does, but failed to mention, as it usually does, the index's change for the day. In this case, it was down a record 116 points, or 7%.Perhaps the most soothing of all, though, were the carefully chosen words of Greenspan. In his inimitable style, the Fed chief called the swift market decline "a salutary event" that might be just what the economy needs to keep from overheating and allow the '90s expansion to continue for years.Like a snake charmer, Greenspan talked the market into a catatonic state--or was it that traders were merely exhausted? Prices remained somewhat stable the rest of the week, and by Friday the Dow stood 9.9% below its all-time high and few investors seemed much worse for the wear. There were some casualties, among them speculator George Soros, whose company lost $2 billion on Monday. Several Fed presidents joined Greenspan in talking up the economy. "The basics of the U.S. economy are strong," said Cathy Minehan, president of the Boston Federal Reserve Bank. "I see no reason why that should change." Thomas Melzer, president of the St. Louis Federal Reserve, said the economy was doing "exceptionally well."
article
Sell
Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
+1
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley in Talks With Wachovia, Others(Sept. 18, 2008)
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Morgan Stanley in Talks With Wachovia, Others(Sept. 18, 2008)
Morgan Stanley sought shelter from the growing financial storm Wednesday, entering preliminary merger talks with Wachovia Corp. and other banks as a seventh straight decline in the company's share price sent the stock to its lowest level since 1998.After a harrowing day, Morgan Stanley's shares finished down $6.95, or 24%, to $21.75. Goldman Sachs Group, the largest U.S. investment bank by market value, also fell $18.51, or 14%, to $114.50.While the situation is more acute at Morgan Stanley, the two Wall Street banks are both battling extraordinary market pressures that have already pushed stable franchises such as Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and Merrill Lynch & Co. into bankruptcy protection or hasty merger deals. At Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs, two of the oldest and most successful investment banks, market confidence withered in the past 24 hours for firms that were once trusted and envied.As employees stared at their trading screens and television sets, a sense of disbelief hung over people who had thought themselves largely insulated from credit-market fears. "I've lost more than half my net worth in a month," said one Goldman employee.The perception hurting investment-bank shares is that they can no longer rely on jittery global markets to replenish the cash necessary to fund their trading and lending businesses. That has forced the companies' borrowing costs higher, which means, ultimately, it will likely become prohibitively expensive for them to fund their businesses.Commercial banks such as Wachovia are perceived as more stable, creating strong incentive for investment banks to link up with them, as Merrill Lynch did earlier this week with Bank of America Corp. But even some retail banks are under attack, such as the large savings-and-loan Washington Mutual Inc., which was exploring its own deal Wednesday with several other banks. WaMu has received expressions of interest from Wells Fargo & Co., Citigroup Inc. and other large banks, including one based outside the U.S., according to people familiar with the situation.Inside Morgan Stanley there was a growing feeling that the firm's chief executive, John Mack, would have to explore a merger or outside investment. Just 10 days ago Mr. Mack said in a Fortune magazine interview that he was "not thinking about selling the firm."But markets have moved with such force that yesterday Mr. Mack fielded a call from Wachovia CEO Robert Steel about a potential tie-up. Messrs. Mack and Steel both attended Duke University and have been on its board of trustees for more than a decade. Mr. Mack grew up in Mooresville, N.C., about 30 miles from Charlotte, N.C., where Wachovia is based.A spokeswoman for Morgan Stanley said that the firm is "focused on solutions" to address the falling stock price. Wachovia declined to comment.As much as Morgan Stanley is suffering, Wachovia faces its own uncertain future. Saddled with a mountain of troubled adjustable-rate mortgages inherited through its 2006 takeover of Golden West Financial Corp., Wachovia has seen its financial condition weaken and its stock price plunge. After the disastrous Golden West acquisition, few Wachovia shareholders are likely to relish the idea of another huge deal, particularly one with another battered financial institution.Morgan Stanley is also exploring preliminary tie-ups with a range of other banks around the globe, say people familiar with the matter. Morgan Stanley may well remain independent, but if a deal were struck it could come with the likes of HSBC Holdings PLC of the U.K., Banco Santander SA of Spain, Japan's Nomura Holdings Inc., a Chinese financial institution or a domestic partner such as Bank of New York Mellon Corp., say the people familiar with the matter.Mr. Mack also took another tack Wednesday. He dialed U.S. Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson and Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox, as well as Goldman Sachs CEO Lloyd Blankfein, to discuss how to stop the rapid decline in the two firms' share price. The two firms didn't discuss a merger but focused instead on how to stop short sellers betting on a decline in Goldman and Morgan shares, people familiar with the matter said.Mr. Mack entertained the idea of a lockup with Merrill Lynch last weekend as banking executives met at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York to discuss the future of Lehman Brothers, but Merrill wanted to move too quickly for Mr. Mack, according to people familiar with the matter.Goldman Sachs has publicly toed a much more independent line in recent weeks. Its share price hasn't fallen as much as Morgan Stanley's, but its latest quarterly earnings report was its worst since 2005. The company says it has managed risk better than many commercial banks. Goldman officials add that commercial banks use the same funding markets as Goldman and Morgan Stanley do for large parts of their businesses.Mr. Mack and his fellow executives had hoped that their stock price would react better to the company's earnings announcement this week. The company's profits and net revenue topped even Goldman Sachs, which has avoided the blowups suffered by many peers.But after the earnings announcement late Tuesday afternoon caused initial enthusiasm among investors, Morgan Stanley shares resumed their downward march Wednesday. They continued lower even after the SEC announced that new restrictions would be placed on investors who bet on declines in share prices.
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Mounting Fears Shake World Markets As Banking Giants Rush to Raise Capital(Sept. 18, 2008)
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF
user
박재훈투영인
·
5 months ago
0
0
Mounting Fears Shake World Markets As Banking Giants Rush to Raise Capital(Sept. 18, 2008)
Fear coursed through the U.S. financial system on Wednesday, as hope for a resolution to the year-old credit crisis faded.Stocks tumbled, concern grew about which financial firm would fall next, and investors rushed toward the safe haven of government bonds in the wake of the collapse of Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc. and the crisis at insurer American International Group.The market turmoil is doing more than inflicting losses on investors. Borrowing costs for U.S. companies have skyrocketed, and the debt markets have become nearly inaccessible to all but the most creditworthy borrowers.The desperation was especially striking in the market for U.S. government debt, long considered the safest of investments. At one point during the day, investors were willing to pay more for one-month Treasurys than they could expect to get back when the bonds matured. Some investors, in essence, had decided that a small but known loss was better than the uncertainty connected to any other type of investment.That's never happened before. In a special government auction on Wednesday, demand ran so high that the Treasury Department sold $40 billion in bills, far beyond what it needed to cover the government's obligations."We've seen crisis. We've seen recession. But we've not seen the core of the financial system shaken like this," says Joseph Balestrino, a portfolio manager at Federated Investors. "It's just crazy."A 449-point selloff took the Dow Jones Industrial Average to its lowest level in almost three years, leaving it 23% below where it stood a year ago. Volume on the New York Stock Exchange was the second highest in history, falling just shy of the record set on Tuesday. The VIX, a widely watched measure of market volatility that is often referred to as the "fear index," hit its highest level since late 2002.In Europe, stock markets lost roughly 2% of their value. In Russia, the scene of recent massive declines, trading on the country's major exchanges was halted for the second day in a row, this time only an hour and a half into the session. Gold prices rose 9% to $846.60 an ounce amid the global turmoil. In early trading Thursday, Tokyo stocks were down 3.2%, among other declining markets in the region."Forget about retail investors, all the pros are scared," says one broker. "People have no idea where to put their money."For now, "if you have cash, you're going to put it in the short-term, most liquid stuff you can," says Steve Van Order, fixed-income strategist for Calvert Asset Management.Adding to the fear was a loss in a prominent money-market fund, the Reserve Primary Fund, which held Lehman Brothers debt. It was the first time since 1994 that such a fund, which is supposed to be as safe as a bank account, had lost money. The loss was made worse by a run on the fund. Over two days, investors pulled more than half of their assets from the fund, once valued at $64 billion."This is a panic situation" in the bond markets, says Charles Comiskey, head of U.S. government-bond trading in New York at HSBC Securities USA Inc.Riskier assets were sold off. Yields on bonds issued by financial companies hit a record high of about six percentage points above U.S. Treasurys. In the market for credit-default swaps -- essentially insurance against default on assets tied to corporate debt and mortgage securities -- fears increased on Wednesday about whether counterparties would be able to honor their agreements. Investors tried to reduce their exposures to two more big players in the market, Goldman Sachs Group Inc. and Morgan Stanley. That sent the cost of protection on both Wall Street firms soaring to new highs.In the stock market, the pressure on financial firms continued, with Morgan Stanley stock dropping 24% and Goldman Sachs shares losing 14%.Investors say the government takeover of AIG and Lehman's bankruptcy filing are evidence that the situation is grimmer than all but the most pessimistic had expected. Problems have spread from complex debt markets tied directly to the housing market into plain-vanilla corporate bonds."Another front is opening," says Ajay Rajadhyaksha, head of fixed-income research at Barclays Capital.Some people fear that the dwindling ranks of investment banks, coming at a time when commercial banks are pulling back on their own use of capital, will prolong the credit crunch."It's unclear who is going to be a credit provider going forward, and if having fewer credit providers means higher costs of borrowing going forward," says Basil Williams, chief executive of hedge-fund manager Concordia Advisors.Ordinarily, bondholders are better protected from losses than stock investors. But the events of the past two weeks have shown that they are vulnerable, too. The Federal Reserve's rescue of AIG doesn't protect the company's bondholders. That's because the deal, which consists of a high-priced loan to the company from the government, requires AIG to pay the Treasury before current bondholders. If AIG can't raise enough cash by selling assets, bondholders won't be fully repaid.As a result, despite the Fed lifeline, some AIG debt is changing hands at just 40 cents on the dollar, less than half of the price one week ago. Now that Lehman has defaulted on its debt, its senior bonds are worth as little as 17 cents on the dollar, traders say.That's spilled over to other financial names seen as under stress. Bonds of Morgan Stanley are trading at around 60 cents on the dollar. Goldman Sachs's bonds are trading at prices in the range of 70 cents on the dollar.As bond prices dropped, their yields rose. The spread between yields on corporate bonds and safe U.S. Treasurys have blown out to the widest levels traders have seen in years. On Wednesday, yields on investment-grade corporate bonds were more than four percentage points higher than comparable Treasury bonds, according to Merrill Lynch. Junk bonds ended the day more than nine percentage points over Treasurys, approaching the 2002 high of 10.6 percentage points, according to Merrill.Short-term debt markets, where companies borrow overnight or in periods up to one year, have dried up. The money-market-fund managers who normally buy such short-term debt have suffered losses on their holdings of debt in Lehman Brothers and other financial institutions.If companies can't borrow in the short-term debt markets, they may be forced to draw down on their revolving credit lines, yet another drain on banks' dwindling capital.The Lehman bankruptcy also pressured the market for leveraged loans, which are used by private-equity firms to finance buyouts. When the firm attempted to sell some of its loan holdings earlier this week, prices dropped toward 85 cents on the dollar, according to Standard & Poor's Leveraged Commentary & Data.The damage has gone beyond banks and brokerages. Ford Motor Credit Co., the finance arm of Ford Motor Co., paid 7.5% for Tuesday-night overnight borrowings, says one trader. Typically, the rate for such debt would be about one-quarter percentage point over the federal-funds rate, which is currently 2%, he says. Even for companies considered of the safest credit quality, the cost of overnight debt is rising. General Electric Co. was forced to pay 3.5% for overnight borrowing on Wednesday, the trader says. In normal times, GE, which has the highest debt rating, would have to pay the equivalent of the federal-funds rate."There's no evident catalyst for ending the pain," says Guy Lebas, chief fixed-income strategist at Janney Montgomery in Philadelphia.
article
Strong Sell
Strong Sell
133690
Mirae Asset TIGER NASDAQ100 ETF