StockWatcher personal page - To The Moon

StockWatcher

StockWatcher

No personal profile

529Follow

25Followers

0Topic

0Badge

2021-05-23

Both counters are consolidating....cloudfare looks better from chart...

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-08-23

$Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing(TSM)$ will history repeat?

The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.

2021-06-14

Things to read for Meme follower

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-07-02

$Tiger Brokers(TIGR)$Is that a chance or a danger?

2022-02-27

Warren Buy Call lol

Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value

2021-06-04

Is that the end of hype?

Here's AMC's blunt new warning to prospective buyers of its new stock offering

2021-05-27

Another bullish call to bitcoin??

Apple Is Looking for Crypto Experience in ‘Alternative Payments’ Job Post

2022-04-04

[666] [666]

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-07-10

$Apple(AAPL)$for the win

Sorry, the original content has been removed

2021-05-01

Look alike the Avenger show for investment version

Sorry, the original content has been removed

Go to Tiger App to see more news

{"i18n":{"language":"en_US"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3581565649060536","uuid":"3581565649060536","gmtCreate":1618473411401,"gmtModify":1619058984129,"name":"StockWatcher","pinyin":"stockwatcher","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":25,"headSize":529,"tweetSize":0,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":3,"name":"书生虎","nameTw":"書生虎","represent":"努力向上","factor":"发布10条非转发主帖,其中5条获得他人回复或点赞","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":6,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":"success","userBadges":[{"badgeId":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493-3","templateUuid":"1026c425416b44e0aac28c11a0848493","name":" Tiger Idol","description":"Join the tiger community for 1500 days","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2025.05.25","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84-1","templateUuid":"a83d7582f45846ffbccbce770ce65d84","name":"Real Trader","description":"Completed a transaction","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":null,"starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":9018689787,"gmtCreate":1649032449238,"gmtModify":1676534438582,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[666]&nbsp;[666]&nbsp;","listText":"[666]&nbsp;[666]&nbsp;","text":"[666] [666]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9018689787","repostId":"1117420101","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3180,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9018147624,"gmtCreate":1649008250922,"gmtModify":1676534434626,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[Claw]&nbsp;[Claw]&nbsp;","listText":"[Claw]&nbsp;[Claw]&nbsp;","text":"[Claw] [Claw]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9018147624","repostId":"2224322198","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2224322198","kind":"highlight","pubTimestamp":1648903650,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2224322198?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-04-02 20:47","market":"us","language":"zh","title":"Tiger Global Fund, which was \"directionally blasted\": its first quarter performance plummeted by 34%","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2224322198","media":"华尔街见闻","summary":"被科技股拖累到巨亏的，并不止有木头姐。","content":"<p><html><body><span>It is not only Sister Mumu who has suffered huge losses due to technology stocks, but also the famous Tiger Global Fund.</span></p><p><span>Citing a letter to investors, Bloomberg said,<strong>Tiger Global's flagship hedge fund lost nearly</strong></span><strong>34%<span>, mainly due to the poor performance of the stocks it invests in, and the valuation of the unlisted companies it holds has also suffered a decline.</span></strong></p><p><span>From a single month perspective, the fund</span>3<span>The monthly decline exceeded</span><span>13%</span><span>, and has suffered losses for three consecutive months,</span><span>This year</span>1<span>Monthly</span><span>The decrease was</span>14.8%<span>。 To make matters worse, the fund lost money last year</span>7%<span>, yes</span><span>2016</span><span>It posted its first annual loss in years.</span></p><p><span>Although the fund made some gains in short positions, it failed to fill long positions</span>“<span>Black hole</span><span>”</span><span>。 In a letter to investors, its team said,</span><span>“</span><span>Stocks in our focused areas have fallen more, faster, and for a longer period of time.</span><span>”</span></p><p><strong><span>According to position data as of the end of last year, all six stocks in which Tiger Global Fund held heavily fell, with most companies falling by double digits.</span></strong></p><p><span>Wall Street has previously mentioned that the top five holdings of Tiger Global Fund are<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/JD\">JD.com</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">Microsoft</a>、</span>“<span>Southeast Asia small<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent</a></span><span>\"Sea</span><span>, fintech companies</span><span>Nu Holdings</span><span>And cloud data storage and application service providers</span><span><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SNOW\">Snowflake</a></span><span>, all technology stocks.</span></p><p><span>In addition, Tiger Global also holds shares including ByteDance,</span>Stripe<span>、</span><span>Checkout</span><span>And</span><span>Databricks</span><span>For the stocks of unlisted companies, Tiger Global has also lowered its valuation for this part of its holdings.</span></p><p><span>Tiger Global's long strategy fund lost about</span>36%<span>, investing in primary and secondary markets</span><span>Crossover</span><span>The fund fell about</span><span>21%</span><span>。</span></p><p><span>The company said</span>:“<span>In hindsight, we should be in</span><span>2021</span><span>Selling more shares in.</span><span>”“</span><span>We are working on</span><span>Use all the information you can get</span><span>Reevaluate and refine our model.</span>”</p><p></body></html></p>","source":"wallstreetcn_api","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Tiger Global Fund, which was \"directionally blasted\": its first quarter performance plummeted by 34%</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTiger Global Fund, which was \"directionally blasted\": its first quarter performance plummeted by 34%\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">华尔街见闻</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2022-04-02 20:47</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><body><span>It is not only Sister Mumu who has suffered huge losses due to technology stocks, but also the famous Tiger Global Fund.</span></p><p><span>Citing a letter to investors, Bloomberg said,<strong>Tiger Global's flagship hedge fund lost nearly</strong></span><strong>34%<span>, mainly due to the poor performance of the stocks it invests in, and the valuation of the unlisted companies it holds has also suffered a decline.</span></strong></p><p><span>From a single month perspective, the fund</span>3<span>The monthly decline exceeded</span><span>13%</span><span>, and has suffered losses for three consecutive months,</span><span>This year</span>1<span>Monthly</span><span>The decrease was</span>14.8%<span>。 To make matters worse, the fund lost money last year</span>7%<span>, yes</span><span>2016</span><span>It posted its first annual loss in years.</span></p><p><span>Although the fund made some gains in short positions, it failed to fill long positions</span>“<span>Black hole</span><span>”</span><span>。 In a letter to investors, its team said,</span><span>“</span><span>Stocks in our focused areas have fallen more, faster, and for a longer period of time.</span><span>”</span></p><p><strong><span>According to position data as of the end of last year, all six stocks in which Tiger Global Fund held heavily fell, with most companies falling by double digits.</span></strong></p><p><span>Wall Street has previously mentioned that the top five holdings of Tiger Global Fund are<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/JD\">JD.com</a>、<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/MSFT\">Microsoft</a>、</span>“<span>Southeast Asia small<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">Tencent</a></span><span>\"Sea</span><span>, fintech companies</span><span>Nu Holdings</span><span>And cloud data storage and application service providers</span><span><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SNOW\">Snowflake</a></span><span>, all technology stocks.</span></p><p><span>In addition, Tiger Global also holds shares including ByteDance,</span>Stripe<span>、</span><span>Checkout</span><span>And</span><span>Databricks</span><span>For the stocks of unlisted companies, Tiger Global has also lowered its valuation for this part of its holdings.</span></p><p><span>Tiger Global's long strategy fund lost about</span>36%<span>, investing in primary and secondary markets</span><span>Crossover</span><span>The fund fell about</span><span>21%</span><span>。</span></p><p><span>The company said</span>:“<span>In hindsight, we should be in</span><span>2021</span><span>Selling more shares in.</span><span>”“</span><span>We are working on</span><span>Use all the information you can get</span><span>Reevaluate and refine our model.</span>”</p><p></body></html></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> source：<a href=\"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3655967\">华尔街见闻</a></p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NQGM":"纳斯达克全球综合指数","BK4127":"投资银行业与经纪业","BK4526":"热门中概股","BK4563":"昨日强势股"},"source_url":"https://wallstreetcn.com/articles/3655967","is_english":false,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2224322198","content_text":"被科技股连累导致巨亏的不止有木头姐，还有大名鼎鼎的老虎环球基金。\n彭博援引一封致投资者的信称，老虎环球基金旗下的旗舰对冲基金在一季度亏损了近34%，主要原因是其投资的股票表现不佳，持有的未上市公司估值也遭遇滑坡。\n从单月来看，该基金3月跌幅超过13%，且为连续三个月亏损，今年1月跌幅为14.8%。更糟的是，这只基金去年就亏了7%，是2016年来首次出现年度亏损。\n尽管该基金的空头仓位有所斩获，但未能填补多头仓位的“黑洞”。在给投资者的信中，其团队表示，“我们重点关注领域的股票下跌幅度更大、更快，而且持续的时间更长。”\n根据截至去年年底的持仓数据，老虎环球基金重仓的六只股票都出现了下跌，大多数公司的跌幅都达到了两位数。\n华尔街见闻此前曾提及，老虎环球基金前五大持仓分别为京东、微软、“东南亚小腾讯”Sea、金融科技公司Nu Holdings和云数据储存及应用服务商Snowflake，清一色的科技股。\n此外，老虎环球还持有包括字节跳动、Stripe、Checkout和Databricks等未上市公司的股票，对于这部分持仓，老虎环球也下调了估值。\n老虎环球旗下的多头策略基金一季度亏损了约36%，投资一级和二级市场的Crossover基金下跌了约21%。\n该公司表示:“事后看来，我们应该在2021年出售更多的股票。”“我们正在利用所能得到的所有信息重新评估和完善我们的模型。”","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"NQGM":0}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3401,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9011994506,"gmtCreate":1648799733741,"gmtModify":1676534400488,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/SEDG\">$SolarEdge(SEDG)$</a>Surfing above 20 ema","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/SEDG\">$SolarEdge(SEDG)$</a>Surfing above 20 ema","text":"$SolarEdge(SEDG)$Surfing above 20 ema","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/67223c71bcb88642ba8e96e888e8c930","width":"750","height":"2009"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9011994506","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2743,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9019502840,"gmtCreate":1648605387913,"gmtModify":1676534363390,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Leader in the making<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/SEDG\">$SolarEdge(SEDG)$</a>","listText":"Leader in the making<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/SEDG\">$SolarEdge(SEDG)$</a>","text":"Leader in the making$SolarEdge(SEDG)$","images":[{"img":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/cc55b603449006433f8a23d3ed276b46","width":"750","height":"2069"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9019502840","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2589,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9010013300,"gmtCreate":1648202867814,"gmtModify":1676534316710,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/GBTC\">$Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (BTC)(GBTC)$</a> Is this equal with bitcoin value?&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/GBTC\">$Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (BTC)(GBTC)$</a> Is this equal with bitcoin value?&nbsp;","text":"$Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (BTC)(GBTC)$ Is this equal with bitcoin value?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9010013300","repostId":"1138150257","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1138150257","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1648199679,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1138150257?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-03-25 17:14","market":"fut","language":"en","title":"Bitcoin Rally May Soon Gain a Fresh Impetus, Chart Shows","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138150257","media":"Bloomberg","summary":"Bitcoin is tracing a pattern that suggests the world’s largest digital token could build on its rece","content":"<div>\n<p>Bitcoin is tracing a pattern that suggests the world’s largest digital token could build on its recent gains. A so-called triangle shape on Bitcoin’s price chart is squeezing tighter, and the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-25/bitcoin-s-rally-is-on-the-cusp-of-gaining-fresh-impetus-chart?srnd=markets-vp\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"lsy1584095487587","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Bitcoin Rally May Soon Gain a Fresh Impetus, Chart Shows</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBitcoin Rally May Soon Gain a Fresh Impetus, Chart Shows\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-03-25 17:14 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-25/bitcoin-s-rally-is-on-the-cusp-of-gaining-fresh-impetus-chart?srnd=markets-vp><strong>Bloomberg</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Bitcoin is tracing a pattern that suggests the world’s largest digital token could build on its recent gains. A so-called triangle shape on Bitcoin’s price chart is squeezing tighter, and the ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-25/bitcoin-s-rally-is-on-the-cusp-of-gaining-fresh-impetus-chart?srnd=markets-vp\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"GBTC":"比特币ETF-Grayscale"},"source_url":"https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2022-03-25/bitcoin-s-rally-is-on-the-cusp-of-gaining-fresh-impetus-chart?srnd=markets-vp","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138150257","content_text":"Bitcoin is tracing a pattern that suggests the world’s largest digital token could build on its recent gains. A so-called triangle shape on Bitcoin’s price chart is squeezing tighter, and the cryptocurrency is jabbing at the upper end of the triangle. That suggests a momentum tailwind for Bitcoin, and if it breaks a high of $45,300 from early March, targets of $50,450 and $54,000 come into play based on the popular technical analysis technique of Fibonacci extensions.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"GBTC":0.9,"MBTmain":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3621,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9039198029,"gmtCreate":1645940694684,"gmtModify":1676534076712,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Warren Buy Call lol","listText":"Warren Buy Call lol","text":"Warren Buy Call lol","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9039198029","repostId":"1125580913","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1125580913","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1645926503,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1125580913?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-02-27 09:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1125580913","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-yea","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBuffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2022-02-27 09:48</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1125580913","content_text":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”Read the full letter here：To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.What You OwnBerkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.Surprise, SurpriseHere are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.Our Four GiantsThrough Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.InvestmentsNow let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.U.S. Treasury BillsBerkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.But $144 billion?That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.Share RepurchasesThere are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful BusinessLast year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.In all ways, Paul was a class act.* * * * * * * * * * * *Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.ThanksI taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction workingfor you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”The Annual MeetingClear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.February 26, 2022Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BRK.A":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3953,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9098118171,"gmtCreate":1644041327903,"gmtModify":1676533885690,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/DIS\">$Walt Disney(DIS)$</a><a href=\"https://ttm.financial/U/3527667618000160\">@CaptainTiger</a>Ok?","listText":"<a href=\"https://ttm.financial/S/DIS\">$Walt Disney(DIS)$</a><a href=\"https://ttm.financial/U/3527667618000160\">@CaptainTiger</a>Ok?","text":"$Walt Disney(DIS)$@CaptainTigerOk?","images":[{"img":"https://static.itradeup.com/news/e5bd03be3a6b9f3ab098b23b905696d5","width":"750","height":"1174"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9098118171","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2521,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9099744691,"gmtCreate":1643435250542,"gmtModify":1676533821183,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good game","listText":"Good game","text":"Good game","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9099744691","repostId":"9004448317","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":9004448317,"gmtCreate":1642676525258,"gmtModify":1676533734534,"author":{"id":"3527667667103859","authorId":"3527667667103859","name":"TigerEvents","avatar":"https://community-static.tradeup.com/news/c266ef25181ace18bec1262357bbe1a8","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3527667667103859","authorIdStr":"3527667667103859"},"themes":[],"title":"Join Tiger Ski Championship, Win a Bonus of Up to USD 2022","htmlText":"2022 is the Year of Tiger in Chinese lunar calendar, it’s also a special year for Tiger Brokers. To celebrate the special year, we want to invite you to join the ski game presented by Tiger Brokers specially, and it’s very easy and interesting game for users to play. Join the game and win a bonus of up to USD 2022 and limited-edition Tiger Toys Spring Festival and Winter Olympic are both on the way, open your Tiger Trade App and play the ski game with us, win golden medals as many as you can! You could have chance to try Lucky Draw when you win medals.The more medal you win, the bigger bonus you may win! Big Rewards are as follow: <a href=\"https://www.tigerbrokers.com.sg/activity/market/2022/happy-new-year/#/\" target=\"_blank\">Click to Join the Game</a>","listText":"2022 is the Year of Tiger in Chinese lunar calendar, it’s also a special year for Tiger Brokers. To celebrate the special year, we want to invite you to join the ski game presented by Tiger Brokers specially, and it’s very easy and interesting game for users to play. Join the game and win a bonus of up to USD 2022 and limited-edition Tiger Toys Spring Festival and Winter Olympic are both on the way, open your Tiger Trade App and play the ski game with us, win golden medals as many as you can! You could have chance to try Lucky Draw when you win medals.The more medal you win, the bigger bonus you may win! Big Rewards are as follow: <a href=\"https://www.tigerbrokers.com.sg/activity/market/2022/happy-new-year/#/\" target=\"_blank\">Click to Join the Game</a>","text":"2022 is the Year of Tiger in Chinese lunar calendar, it’s also a special year for Tiger Brokers. To celebrate the special year, we want to invite you to join the ski game presented by Tiger Brokers specially, and it’s very easy and interesting game for users to play. Join the game and win a bonus of up to USD 2022 and limited-edition Tiger Toys Spring Festival and Winter Olympic are both on the way, open your Tiger Trade App and play the ski game with us, win golden medals as many as you can! You could have chance to try Lucky Draw when you win medals.The more medal you win, the bigger bonus you may win! Big Rewards are as follow: Click to Join the Game","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a7b44fa056439fb4010fa55e163d27c3","width":"750","height":"1726"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":2,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9004448317","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":2,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2581,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9005705188,"gmtCreate":1642396059683,"gmtModify":1676533707614,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice","listText":"Nice","text":"Nice","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9005705188","repostId":"2204218377","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3266,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9008200512,"gmtCreate":1641440988526,"gmtModify":1676533616070,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[Call]&nbsp;[Call]&nbsp;[Call]&nbsp;","listText":"[Call]&nbsp;[Call]&nbsp;[Call]&nbsp;","text":"[Call] [Call] [Call]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9008200512","repostId":"1126735044","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1126735044","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1641436961,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1126735044?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-01-06 10:42","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Intel Popped, but AMD and Nvidia Dropped","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1126735044","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"What happenedIt's Jan. 5 and at long last, the 2022 Consumer Electronics Show (CES 2022) is underway","content":"<html><head></head><body><p><b>What happened</b></p><p>It&#39;s Jan. 5 and at long last, the 2022 Consumer Electronics Show (CES 2022) is underway in Las Vegas.</p><p>In contrast to last year&#39;s fully virtual event, this year&#39;s CES is going the hybrid route, with some exhibitors coming in person while others appearing only virtually. One thing that is definitely <i>not</i> virtual -- but real -- is the effect that the CES presentations seem to be having on tech stock prices, and semiconductor stocks in particular.</p><p>As chipmakers demo their wares today, shares of <b>Intel</b>(NASDAQ:INTC)(a &#34;featured exhibitor&#34; at CES 2022) are enjoying a nice 1.4% pop in afternoon trading, as of 4 p.m. ET. In contrast, Intel rivals <b>Nvidia</b>(NASDAQ:NVDA)and <b>Advanced Micro Devices</b>(NASDAQ:AMD)are moving in the opposite direction -- down 5.8% and 5.7%, respectively.</p><p><b>So what</b></p><p>So did Intel buy itself a pass on the chipmaker stock price declines, along with its &#34;featured exhibitor&#34; status at CES?</p><p>Not exactly. But investors do seem to be taking a shine to Intel&#39;s products unveiled at the show, and seem to be thinking that they position Intel&#39;s stock (if not necessarily Intel&#39;s business) to outperform its rivals in the coming year. AsIGN Entertainmentreported yesterday, &#34;Intel is planning to take on AMD and Nvidia in the GPU market this year, with its first generation of Arc series GPUs codenamed Alchemist slated to release sometime early this year.&#34;</p><p>Granted, AMD and Nvidia are also focusing heavily on graphics this year (graphics being the historical roots of each of these companies). Yesterday, for example,data analytics company Lynxhighlighted the more than two dozen new chips that AMD will bring to market in 2022, with emphasis on the Radeon RX 6000S and RX 6000M chips for gaming laptops. And IGN seemed particularly impressed by the prospect of Nvidia bringing to market a new &#34;RTX 3090 Ti&#34; chip with &#34;24GB of GDDR6X VRAM and 40 teraflops of GPU performance.&#34;</p><p>Translating the tech-speak into English, IGN helpfully explained that this chip, when it comes to market, will be &#34;roughly 11% faster than its non-Ti RTX 3090 variant.&#34;</p><p><b>Now what</b></p><p>At least one analyst still thinks the advantage lies with Intel, however. In a note out this morning, Northland Capital Markets said it isupgradingIntel stock to outperform based on its view that Intel has laid out for investors a coherent strategy to reverse its decline &#34;for the first time in many years,&#34; reportsStreetInsider.com.</p><p>Beyond just Intel&#39;s efforts to compete with AMD and Nvidia in graphics, Northland believes that Intel is upping its game in basic chip technology, to the point that it could &#34;significantly reduce the AMD/INTC performance gap if not eliminate it in 2023.&#34; Northland sees Intel collaborating with <b>Taiwan Semiconductor</b> on production of next generation 3 nm and even 2 nm semiconductors, and refocusing its internal efforts on &#34;manufacturing [static random access memory chips] which dominate modern CPU die area.&#34;</p><p>More significant for investors, Northland simply thinks that Intel stock at less than 10 times earnings is a better bargain than &#34;high multiple stocks&#34; such as AMD (which costs 43 times earnings today) and Nvidia (which costs 93 times earnings). In contrast to its pricier rivals, which may suffer from &#34;multiple compression&#34; this year (i.e., investors may not want to pay high multiples of earnings to own the stocks, resulting in falling stock prices), low-priced Intel stock could rise as much as 14% in value over the course of the next year.</p><p>Investors who watched their Intel shares underperform the market all year long in 2021 can only hope that Northland is right about that, and that Intel will finally reverse its slump in 2022.</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why Intel Popped, but AMD and Nvidia Dropped</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy Intel Popped, but AMD and Nvidia Dropped\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2022-01-06 10:42 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/05/why-intel-popped-but-amd-and-nvidia-dropped-today/><strong>Motley Fool</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>What happenedIt's Jan. 5 and at long last, the 2022 Consumer Electronics Show (CES 2022) is underway in Las Vegas.In contrast to last year's fully virtual event, this year's CES is going the hybrid ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/05/why-intel-popped-but-amd-and-nvidia-dropped-today/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"NVDA":"英伟达","AMD":"美国超微公司","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2022/01/05/why-intel-popped-but-amd-and-nvidia-dropped-today/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1126735044","content_text":"What happenedIt's Jan. 5 and at long last, the 2022 Consumer Electronics Show (CES 2022) is underway in Las Vegas.In contrast to last year's fully virtual event, this year's CES is going the hybrid route, with some exhibitors coming in person while others appearing only virtually. One thing that is definitely not virtual -- but real -- is the effect that the CES presentations seem to be having on tech stock prices, and semiconductor stocks in particular.As chipmakers demo their wares today, shares of Intel(NASDAQ:INTC)(a \"featured exhibitor\" at CES 2022) are enjoying a nice 1.4% pop in afternoon trading, as of 4 p.m. ET. In contrast, Intel rivals Nvidia(NASDAQ:NVDA)and Advanced Micro Devices(NASDAQ:AMD)are moving in the opposite direction -- down 5.8% and 5.7%, respectively.So whatSo did Intel buy itself a pass on the chipmaker stock price declines, along with its \"featured exhibitor\" status at CES?Not exactly. But investors do seem to be taking a shine to Intel's products unveiled at the show, and seem to be thinking that they position Intel's stock (if not necessarily Intel's business) to outperform its rivals in the coming year. AsIGN Entertainmentreported yesterday, \"Intel is planning to take on AMD and Nvidia in the GPU market this year, with its first generation of Arc series GPUs codenamed Alchemist slated to release sometime early this year.\"Granted, AMD and Nvidia are also focusing heavily on graphics this year (graphics being the historical roots of each of these companies). Yesterday, for example,data analytics company Lynxhighlighted the more than two dozen new chips that AMD will bring to market in 2022, with emphasis on the Radeon RX 6000S and RX 6000M chips for gaming laptops. And IGN seemed particularly impressed by the prospect of Nvidia bringing to market a new \"RTX 3090 Ti\" chip with \"24GB of GDDR6X VRAM and 40 teraflops of GPU performance.\"Translating the tech-speak into English, IGN helpfully explained that this chip, when it comes to market, will be \"roughly 11% faster than its non-Ti RTX 3090 variant.\"Now whatAt least one analyst still thinks the advantage lies with Intel, however. In a note out this morning, Northland Capital Markets said it isupgradingIntel stock to outperform based on its view that Intel has laid out for investors a coherent strategy to reverse its decline \"for the first time in many years,\" reportsStreetInsider.com.Beyond just Intel's efforts to compete with AMD and Nvidia in graphics, Northland believes that Intel is upping its game in basic chip technology, to the point that it could \"significantly reduce the AMD/INTC performance gap if not eliminate it in 2023.\" Northland sees Intel collaborating with Taiwan Semiconductor on production of next generation 3 nm and even 2 nm semiconductors, and refocusing its internal efforts on \"manufacturing [static random access memory chips] which dominate modern CPU die area.\"More significant for investors, Northland simply thinks that Intel stock at less than 10 times earnings is a better bargain than \"high multiple stocks\" such as AMD (which costs 43 times earnings today) and Nvidia (which costs 93 times earnings). In contrast to its pricier rivals, which may suffer from \"multiple compression\" this year (i.e., investors may not want to pay high multiples of earnings to own the stocks, resulting in falling stock prices), low-priced Intel stock could rise as much as 14% in value over the course of the next year.Investors who watched their Intel shares underperform the market all year long in 2021 can only hope that Northland is right about that, and that Intel will finally reverse its slump in 2022.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"INTC":0.9,"NVDA":0.9,"AMD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3435,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9009327244,"gmtCreate":1640520496120,"gmtModify":1676533524281,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Trend isnt right yet","listText":"Trend isnt right yet","text":"Trend isnt right yet","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9009327244","repostId":"1123414772","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1123414772","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1640483546,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1123414772?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-12-26 09:52","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why It’s Not the Time to Buy the Dip on Upstart","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1123414772","media":"InvestorPlace","summary":"Upstart (UPST)as a concept is extraordinary in my eyes because it assigns credit ratings with a much","content":"<div>\n<p>Upstart (UPST)as a concept is extraordinary in my eyes because it assigns credit ratings with a much more forward-looking approach than traditional loan facilitators do. Furthermore, the AI used by ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://investorplace.com/2021/12/upst-stock-upstart-why-its-not-the-time-to-buy-the-dip/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":"lsy1606302653667","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why It’s Not the Time to Buy the Dip on Upstart</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy It’s Not the Time to Buy the Dip on Upstart\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-12-26 09:52 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://investorplace.com/2021/12/upst-stock-upstart-why-its-not-the-time-to-buy-the-dip/><strong>InvestorPlace</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Upstart (UPST)as a concept is extraordinary in my eyes because it assigns credit ratings with a much more forward-looking approach than traditional loan facilitators do. Furthermore, the AI used by ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://investorplace.com/2021/12/upst-stock-upstart-why-its-not-the-time-to-buy-the-dip/\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"UPST":"Upstart Holdings, Inc."},"source_url":"https://investorplace.com/2021/12/upst-stock-upstart-why-its-not-the-time-to-buy-the-dip/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1123414772","content_text":"Upstart (UPST)as a concept is extraordinary in my eyes because it assigns credit ratings with a much more forward-looking approach than traditional loan facilitators do. Furthermore, the AI used by the firm is flawless, with speed and accuracy being the name of the game.\nHowever, as an investor, it’s critical to remind yourself that you’re investing in a stock and not only the company’s concept, which means that we need to determine whether its potential is priced-in or not.\nNext year’s market climate will be much different than it’s been the past 2-years. I, for one, expect a more price-efficient market, which means that investors will need to start distinguishing good companies from undervalued stock prices if they’re to realize gains.\nUPST stock could be a prime example of how a good company doesn’t always translate into a good stock.\nUPST stock Won’t Benefit From the Cyclical Trade\nMost of you would’ve heard about the rate hike buzz by now and how that will stimulate banking stocks. The theory behind this is that if the U.S. Federal Reserve raises interest rates, the debt market will be more lucrative to originators as the spreads they’d be able to charge on loans will increase.\nUpstart won’t necessarily benefit from this climate as it’s considered a hybrid between an advertising platform and a brokerage rather than a lender. This means that its revenue will actually decrease with higher rates because the transactional volume will likely taper off slightly as soon as rates rise.\nFurther to the above, Upstart is a growth stock rather than a value play. Rising interest rates in 2022 could be detrimental to growth stocks as it tends to flatline their exponential earnings growth curve.\nUpstart’s revenue and EBITDA surged over the past year, coming in at187.56% and 447.28%respectively; these figures will likely diminish over the coming year, and I can’t help but think that the stock’s recent drawdown has been the market’s way of pricing in the expected decline in growth for next year.\nA final matter to mention regarding cyclicality isJ.P. Morgan’s recent neutral rating on the stock, with analyst James Faucette using a similar argument to mine in claiming that the stock’s growth has been priced in for now. Faucette thinks that Upstart’s relationship with its investors has enabled it to perform well in 2021, but the current market climate won’t allow that to sustain itself.\nValuation & Momentum\nLet’s start with the latter to provide context to the valuation argument. Upstart’s relative strength index (RSI) is below30, indicating that the stock has been oversold, but this doesn’t necessarily mean that it’s a “buy the dip opportunity.”\nFor this to really be a buy low, sell high opportunity, we’d need to see an uptick in volume and a sign that the stock’s going to breach its moving averages; as of now UPST stock possesses neither of these attributes, and I believe that it’s due to a valuation issue.\nHere’s the big valuation problem; by comparing Upstart stock to its sector peers, it can be observed through price-sales and price-cash flow premiums of3.47x and 4.46xthat investors have gotten ahead of themselves. Adding to this is the argument that the stock could be the victim of a cyclical downturn, meaning that these ratios could play a key role in investor sell-offs moving forward.\nWhat now for UPST stock?\nA few investors are likely to buy into the recent dip, but I don’t think it will prevent a further downward trajectory. UPST stock has a massive valuation issue induced by over-optimism from investors during a pent-up broader market.\nFurthermore, the market’s set for a cyclical swing as monetary policy changes are en route, and Upstart stock’s characteristics mean that it could be a victim of such policies instead of being a beneficiary.\nThe bottom line is that the stock isn’t worth the risk right now.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"UPST":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1148,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":882134959,"gmtCreate":1631666252471,"gmtModify":1676530603075,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Next market trend","listText":"Next market trend","text":"Next market trend","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/882134959","repostId":"2167929558","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1561,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":889643864,"gmtCreate":1631147543958,"gmtModify":1676530479119,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good doggie performace at tough&nbsp;period. Waiting for breakout","listText":"Good doggie performace at tough&nbsp;period. Waiting for breakout","text":"Good doggie performace at tough period. Waiting for breakout","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c1baadf7324845570af7b28347cb9d52","width":"750","height":"2007"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/889643864","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1339,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":817583910,"gmtCreate":1630975007730,"gmtModify":1676530430803,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Chip war","listText":"Chip war","text":"Chip war","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/817583910","repostId":"1113754693","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1113754693","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1630974255,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1113754693?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-09-07 08:24","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chip prices set to rise into 2022 as TSMC hikes rates","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1113754693","media":"Nikkei Asia","summary":"Semiconductor and electronics prices are set to rise absent major economic slowdowns\nTSMC's move to ","content":"<p>Semiconductor and electronics prices are set to rise absent major economic slowdowns</p>\n<p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f6e7393360b1a36607fb16bb8d77f0a\" tg-width=\"1400\" tg-height=\"788\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"><span>TSMC's move to raise its fees for chip production services took many in the industry by surprise. © AFP/Jiji</span></p>\n<p>TAIPEI/HSINCHU, Taiwan -- The price of chips -- and the electronic devices they power -- are on track to rise into 2022 as the world's biggest contract chipmaker joins its rivals in ramping up production fees.</p>\n<p>Prices of semiconductors have been climbing since the last quarter of 2020 amid a global supply crunch. But news that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. was preparing its&nbsp;biggest price hike in a decade&nbsp;still came as a shock to some, bringing home just how entrenched chip price inflation has become.</p>\n<p>TSMC controls over half the global foundry market, making chips for the likes of Apple, Nvidia and Qualcomm. Known for its cutting-edge tech and high quality, the Taiwanese company normally commands production fees around 20% higher than its rivals, according to industry insiders.</p>\n<p>Since the end of last year, however, smaller foundries have repeatedly ramped up their own prices, so that United Microelectronics, the world's No. 3 player, now charges more than its bigger compatriot for some services, four industry executives told Nikkei Asia.</p>\n<p>These higher prices stem from a range of factors, including higher material and logistics costs as well as the race by device makers to secure adequate chip supplies, that have emerged since the chip shortage first began to bite late last year.</p>\n<p>TSMC has been slower than most other chip companies in raising its prices, in part because it already enjoyed such a hefty premium. But with investment costs also rising -- the company has pledged $100 billion in spending over the next three years -- the chip giant felt compelled to&nbsp;pass on some of the burden, sources briefed on the matter said.</p>\n<p>More urgently, industry sources say, the company is keen to weed out so-called double-booking, in which clients place orders for more chips than they actually need in hopes of securing production line space and support from contract chipmakers amid the global supply crunch. This, in turn, has made it difficult for TSMC to grasp the \"real demand\" picture, sources briefed on the matter told Nikkei.</p>\n<p>Client reactions to the planned price rise are mixed.</p>\n<p>\"We are glad that TSMC eventually adjusted prices so that it could fend off the practice of double-booking, when industry players race to secure enough chip production capacity during a shortage,\" K.S. Pua, chairman and CEO of Phison Electronics, told Nikkei. The leading NAND flash controller chip and solution provider is a client of both TSMC and UMC.</p>\n<p>\"We are still short of supplies and want more chip capacity to support our growth for the second half of 2021,\" Pua said.</p>\n<p>Phison raised its own chip prices around April this year to reflect the rising supply chain costs, and Pua said his company will have discussions with clients about further increases.</p>\n<p>Others, however, have expressed concern over whether they will be able to pass on these higher costs to customers.</p>\n<p>\"We are all in a great shock and all of our account managers need to speak to our customers to see if we can renegotiate some of the contracts,\" a chip executive told Nikkei. \"We haven't seen TSMC introduce such a broad rate increase in over a decade.\"</p>\n<p>The impact of TSMC's price will be felt more obviously from next year, analysts say, as the company is still working through existing orders. Customers will also negotiate their own specific terms with TSMC before Oct. 1, when the price hikes officially take effect, they said.</p>\n<p>Overall chip prices, however, have already surged.</p>\n<p>According to Dale Gai, research director of Counterpoint Research, chip developers are paying 40% higher production fees for legacy chips that are in the shortest supply.</p>\n<p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/201b6c1300dd3cb3b2a783df4cf2a849\" tg-width=\"770\" tg-height=\"788\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p>\n<p>Electronics makers, meanwhile, face even steeper increases as they try to source enough chips to complete their devices. The price of some microcontroller chips, for example, has jumped from $0.20 each to more than $1, supply chain executives and distributors told Nikkei -- a 400% increase in less than a year.</p>\n<p>The reason is that these chips, while not necessarily the most important part of a smartphone or server, are still essential and not easily replaced. Such chips can also be stockpiled more easily than, say, CPUs, which quickly become obsolete, so anyone who has extra inventory can name their price if they find a buyer in need.</p>\n<p>Prices have risen in just about every step of the chip supply chain, from basic materials to chip packing and testing services -- the last step before chips are mounted on printed circuit boards.</p>\n<p>For top chip developers that outsource production -- namely Qualcomm, Nvidia, MediaTek and Advanced Micro Devices -- this translated to an increase in \"cost of sales\" in 2020, according to a Nikkei analysis. Defined as the total cost of production, materials and delivery of goods, cost of sales continued to surge in the first half of 2021.</p>\n<p>Mobile chip giant Qualcomm's accumulated cost of sales from last October until June this year jumped nearly 60% on the year, while that of MediaTek, its key Asia rival, increased more than 64% for the same period. Both Qualcomm and MediaTek's revenue surged even more during the period, however, indicating they have adjusted the selling prices of their chips, which are used by the world's major smartphone makers.</p>\n<p>Industry players and analysts predict strong chip demand -- and thus higher prices -- to continue into next year.</p>\n<p>Doris Hsu, chair and CEO of Globalwafers, the world's third-largest wafer material maker, said the price of wafers -- the essential substrate that all chips are fabricated on -- is set to go up.</p>\n<p>\"Materials and chemicals used in production and transportation logistics costs are all on the rise,\" Hsu said. \"That means we have to adjust the selling price of our wafers, otherwise our profit margin could be affected.\"</p>\n<p>Peter Hanbury, a partner specializing in chip and tech supply chain at Bain &amp; Co., told Nikkei chip prices will likely rise into next year due to the time it takes to expand production capacity.</p>\n<p>Chip developers such as Qualcomm, NXP and Nvidia, he added, will likely negotiate to pass these price increases onto their own customers -- namely device makers and electronics builders such as Apple, Samsung, Xiaomi, HP, Dell and Ford.</p>\n<p>\"[For] products like smartphones and PCs, the price increases will be more noticeable, while for other devices with limited semiconductor content you may not even notice,\" Hanbury said, referring to the retail prices.</p>\n<p>Gai, of Counterpoint Research, said the rising cost of chips may even impact smartphone makers' business strategies.</p>\n<p>\"The net profit margin for smartphone makers excluding Apple is only about 5% to 10%. In that case, the rising chip costs will definitely push all the industry players to roll out higher-end handset models for next year to offset the cost impacts rather than focus on midrange or lower-end phones,\" he said.</p>\n<p>Meanwhile, the race to develop cutting-edge technologies is also expected to keep chip prices high for the long term, particularly the more advanced offerings.</p>\n<p>\"Advanced chip production, such as 7-nanometer, 5-nanometer and future 3-nanometer, is extremely expensive,\" Mark Li, a veteran semiconductor analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein, told Nikkei. \"Only TSMC, Samsung and Intel could afford the investment. I am not going to say those advanced chip prices will never fall, but it's not easy for them to go down much given the scale of the investment,\" Li said.</p>\n<p>For smaller players and for more mature production technology, Li said the market \"could be more volatile once there is an economic slowdown. The correction could be quite substantial and quick, too.\"</p>\n<p>Li said the most important factor in determining prices, however, is the same as always: demand.</p>\n<p>\"Chip plants operate like airlines. Airlines must shoulder fixed costs even if there are only one or two passengers on board. Chipmaking plants are the same. If the demand slows, they have to lower prices to lure more clients and maintain utilization rates.\"</p>\n<p>TSMC told Nikkei that it will not comment on pricing adjustment but referred to CEO C.C. Wei's statement during an earnings briefing in July, when he said, \"TSMC's pricing strategy is strategic, not opportunistic. At the same time, we face manufacturing cost challenges due to increasing process complexity at leading node, new investment in mature nodes, expansion of our global manufacturing footprint and rising materials and basic commodities cost. Therefore, we are firming up our wafer pricing.\"</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Chip prices set to rise into 2022 as TSMC hikes rates</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nChip prices set to rise into 2022 as TSMC hikes rates\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-09-07 08:24 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Tech/Semiconductors/Chip-prices-set-to-rise-into-2022-as-TSMC-hikes-rates><strong>Nikkei Asia</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Semiconductor and electronics prices are set to rise absent major economic slowdowns\nTSMC's move to raise its fees for chip production services took many in the industry by surprise. © AFP/Jiji\nTAIPEI...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Tech/Semiconductors/Chip-prices-set-to-rise-into-2022-as-TSMC-hikes-rates\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","NVDA":"英伟达","AAPL":"苹果","QCOM":"高通","TSM":"台积电","UMC":"联电"},"source_url":"https://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Tech/Semiconductors/Chip-prices-set-to-rise-into-2022-as-TSMC-hikes-rates","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1113754693","content_text":"Semiconductor and electronics prices are set to rise absent major economic slowdowns\nTSMC's move to raise its fees for chip production services took many in the industry by surprise. © AFP/Jiji\nTAIPEI/HSINCHU, Taiwan -- The price of chips -- and the electronic devices they power -- are on track to rise into 2022 as the world's biggest contract chipmaker joins its rivals in ramping up production fees.\nPrices of semiconductors have been climbing since the last quarter of 2020 amid a global supply crunch. But news that Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. was preparing its biggest price hike in a decade still came as a shock to some, bringing home just how entrenched chip price inflation has become.\nTSMC controls over half the global foundry market, making chips for the likes of Apple, Nvidia and Qualcomm. Known for its cutting-edge tech and high quality, the Taiwanese company normally commands production fees around 20% higher than its rivals, according to industry insiders.\nSince the end of last year, however, smaller foundries have repeatedly ramped up their own prices, so that United Microelectronics, the world's No. 3 player, now charges more than its bigger compatriot for some services, four industry executives told Nikkei Asia.\nThese higher prices stem from a range of factors, including higher material and logistics costs as well as the race by device makers to secure adequate chip supplies, that have emerged since the chip shortage first began to bite late last year.\nTSMC has been slower than most other chip companies in raising its prices, in part because it already enjoyed such a hefty premium. But with investment costs also rising -- the company has pledged $100 billion in spending over the next three years -- the chip giant felt compelled to pass on some of the burden, sources briefed on the matter said.\nMore urgently, industry sources say, the company is keen to weed out so-called double-booking, in which clients place orders for more chips than they actually need in hopes of securing production line space and support from contract chipmakers amid the global supply crunch. This, in turn, has made it difficult for TSMC to grasp the \"real demand\" picture, sources briefed on the matter told Nikkei.\nClient reactions to the planned price rise are mixed.\n\"We are glad that TSMC eventually adjusted prices so that it could fend off the practice of double-booking, when industry players race to secure enough chip production capacity during a shortage,\" K.S. Pua, chairman and CEO of Phison Electronics, told Nikkei. The leading NAND flash controller chip and solution provider is a client of both TSMC and UMC.\n\"We are still short of supplies and want more chip capacity to support our growth for the second half of 2021,\" Pua said.\nPhison raised its own chip prices around April this year to reflect the rising supply chain costs, and Pua said his company will have discussions with clients about further increases.\nOthers, however, have expressed concern over whether they will be able to pass on these higher costs to customers.\n\"We are all in a great shock and all of our account managers need to speak to our customers to see if we can renegotiate some of the contracts,\" a chip executive told Nikkei. \"We haven't seen TSMC introduce such a broad rate increase in over a decade.\"\nThe impact of TSMC's price will be felt more obviously from next year, analysts say, as the company is still working through existing orders. Customers will also negotiate their own specific terms with TSMC before Oct. 1, when the price hikes officially take effect, they said.\nOverall chip prices, however, have already surged.\nAccording to Dale Gai, research director of Counterpoint Research, chip developers are paying 40% higher production fees for legacy chips that are in the shortest supply.\n\nElectronics makers, meanwhile, face even steeper increases as they try to source enough chips to complete their devices. The price of some microcontroller chips, for example, has jumped from $0.20 each to more than $1, supply chain executives and distributors told Nikkei -- a 400% increase in less than a year.\nThe reason is that these chips, while not necessarily the most important part of a smartphone or server, are still essential and not easily replaced. Such chips can also be stockpiled more easily than, say, CPUs, which quickly become obsolete, so anyone who has extra inventory can name their price if they find a buyer in need.\nPrices have risen in just about every step of the chip supply chain, from basic materials to chip packing and testing services -- the last step before chips are mounted on printed circuit boards.\nFor top chip developers that outsource production -- namely Qualcomm, Nvidia, MediaTek and Advanced Micro Devices -- this translated to an increase in \"cost of sales\" in 2020, according to a Nikkei analysis. Defined as the total cost of production, materials and delivery of goods, cost of sales continued to surge in the first half of 2021.\nMobile chip giant Qualcomm's accumulated cost of sales from last October until June this year jumped nearly 60% on the year, while that of MediaTek, its key Asia rival, increased more than 64% for the same period. Both Qualcomm and MediaTek's revenue surged even more during the period, however, indicating they have adjusted the selling prices of their chips, which are used by the world's major smartphone makers.\nIndustry players and analysts predict strong chip demand -- and thus higher prices -- to continue into next year.\nDoris Hsu, chair and CEO of Globalwafers, the world's third-largest wafer material maker, said the price of wafers -- the essential substrate that all chips are fabricated on -- is set to go up.\n\"Materials and chemicals used in production and transportation logistics costs are all on the rise,\" Hsu said. \"That means we have to adjust the selling price of our wafers, otherwise our profit margin could be affected.\"\nPeter Hanbury, a partner specializing in chip and tech supply chain at Bain & Co., told Nikkei chip prices will likely rise into next year due to the time it takes to expand production capacity.\nChip developers such as Qualcomm, NXP and Nvidia, he added, will likely negotiate to pass these price increases onto their own customers -- namely device makers and electronics builders such as Apple, Samsung, Xiaomi, HP, Dell and Ford.\n\"[For] products like smartphones and PCs, the price increases will be more noticeable, while for other devices with limited semiconductor content you may not even notice,\" Hanbury said, referring to the retail prices.\nGai, of Counterpoint Research, said the rising cost of chips may even impact smartphone makers' business strategies.\n\"The net profit margin for smartphone makers excluding Apple is only about 5% to 10%. In that case, the rising chip costs will definitely push all the industry players to roll out higher-end handset models for next year to offset the cost impacts rather than focus on midrange or lower-end phones,\" he said.\nMeanwhile, the race to develop cutting-edge technologies is also expected to keep chip prices high for the long term, particularly the more advanced offerings.\n\"Advanced chip production, such as 7-nanometer, 5-nanometer and future 3-nanometer, is extremely expensive,\" Mark Li, a veteran semiconductor analyst with Sanford C. Bernstein, told Nikkei. \"Only TSMC, Samsung and Intel could afford the investment. I am not going to say those advanced chip prices will never fall, but it's not easy for them to go down much given the scale of the investment,\" Li said.\nFor smaller players and for more mature production technology, Li said the market \"could be more volatile once there is an economic slowdown. The correction could be quite substantial and quick, too.\"\nLi said the most important factor in determining prices, however, is the same as always: demand.\n\"Chip plants operate like airlines. Airlines must shoulder fixed costs even if there are only one or two passengers on board. Chipmaking plants are the same. If the demand slows, they have to lower prices to lure more clients and maintain utilization rates.\"\nTSMC told Nikkei that it will not comment on pricing adjustment but referred to CEO C.C. Wei's statement during an earnings briefing in July, when he said, \"TSMC's pricing strategy is strategic, not opportunistic. At the same time, we face manufacturing cost challenges due to increasing process complexity at leading node, new investment in mature nodes, expansion of our global manufacturing footprint and rising materials and basic commodities cost. Therefore, we are firming up our wafer pricing.\"","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMD":0.9,"AAPL":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"UMC":0.9,"NVDA":0.9,"QCOM":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1503,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":832762595,"gmtCreate":1629678661018,"gmtModify":1676530092717,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Will history repeat?","listText":"Will history repeat?","text":"Will history repeat?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/832762595","repostId":"1111103954","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1111103954","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629675616,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1111103954?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 07:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1111103954","media":"Barrons","summary":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the worl","content":"<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.</p>\n<p>Back then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.</p>\n<p>The spike was good news for <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVX\">Chevron</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XOM\">Exxon Mobil</a>, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.</p>\n<p>If oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.</p>\n<p>Roughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.</p>\n<p>“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.</p>\n<p>The global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">Toyota</a>&nbsp;this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.</p>\n<p>Part of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.</p>\n<p>The result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.</p>\n<p>That’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">General Motors</a> shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.</p>\n<p>And that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">Intel</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</a>. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.</p>\n<p>Don’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 07:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","CVX":"雪佛龙","MU":"美光科技","XOM":"埃克森美孚","TSM":"台积电","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1111103954","content_text":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.\nThe spike was good news for Chevron and Exxon Mobil, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.\nIf oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.\nRoughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.\n“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.\nThe global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by Toyota this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.\nPart of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.\nThe result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.\nThat’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. Ford and General Motors shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.\nAnd that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.\nDon’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CVX":0.9,"XOM":0.9,"AMD":0.9,"MU":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"INTC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1667,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":832762393,"gmtCreate":1629678647312,"gmtModify":1676530092690,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Will history repeat?","listText":"Will history repeat?","text":"Will history repeat?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/832762393","repostId":"1111103954","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1111103954","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629675616,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1111103954?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 07:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1111103954","media":"Barrons","summary":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the worl","content":"<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.</p>\n<p>Back then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.</p>\n<p>The spike was good news for <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVX\">Chevron</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XOM\">Exxon Mobil</a>, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.</p>\n<p>If oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.</p>\n<p>Roughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.</p>\n<p>“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.</p>\n<p>The global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">Toyota</a>&nbsp;this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.</p>\n<p>Part of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.</p>\n<p>The result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.</p>\n<p>That’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">General Motors</a> shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.</p>\n<p>And that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">Intel</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</a>. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.</p>\n<p>Don’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 07:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","CVX":"雪佛龙","MU":"美光科技","XOM":"埃克森美孚","TSM":"台积电","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1111103954","content_text":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.\nThe spike was good news for Chevron and Exxon Mobil, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.\nIf oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.\nRoughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.\n“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.\nThe global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by Toyota this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.\nPart of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.\nThe result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.\nThat’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. Ford and General Motors shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.\nAnd that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.\nDon’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CVX":0.9,"XOM":0.9,"AMD":0.9,"MU":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"INTC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1574,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":832768565,"gmtCreate":1629678589557,"gmtModify":1676530092646,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">$Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing(TSM)$</a> will history repeat?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">$Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing(TSM)$</a> will history repeat?","text":"$Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing(TSM)$ will history repeat?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/832768565","repostId":"1111103954","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1111103954","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629675616,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1111103954?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 07:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1111103954","media":"Barrons","summary":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the worl","content":"<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.</p>\n<p>Back then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.</p>\n<p>The spike was good news for <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVX\">Chevron</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XOM\">Exxon Mobil</a>, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.</p>\n<p>If oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.</p>\n<p>Roughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.</p>\n<p>“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.</p>\n<p>The global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">Toyota</a>&nbsp;this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.</p>\n<p>Part of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.</p>\n<p>The result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.</p>\n<p>That’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">General Motors</a> shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.</p>\n<p>And that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">Intel</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</a>. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.</p>\n<p>Don’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 07:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","CVX":"雪佛龙","MU":"美光科技","XOM":"埃克森美孚","TSM":"台积电","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1111103954","content_text":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.\nThe spike was good news for Chevron and Exxon Mobil, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.\nIf oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.\nRoughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.\n“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.\nThe global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by Toyota this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.\nPart of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.\nThe result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.\nThat’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. Ford and General Motors shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.\nAnd that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.\nDon’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CVX":0.9,"XOM":0.9,"AMD":0.9,"MU":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"INTC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1595,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":892375934,"gmtCreate":1628641475028,"gmtModify":1676529804469,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Miss this<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/UPST\">$Upstart Holdings, Inc.(UPST)$</a>","listText":"Miss this<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/UPST\">$Upstart Holdings, Inc.(UPST)$</a>","text":"Miss this$Upstart Holdings, Inc.(UPST)$","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1e0078e294ddd86f70959829b76d4bf5","width":"750","height":"2007"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/892375934","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1546,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":141706104,"gmtCreate":1625889616108,"gmtModify":1703750530714,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>for the win","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>for the win","text":"$Apple(AAPL)$for the win","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/141706104","repostId":"1177397700","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1104,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":154100899,"gmtCreate":1625485636911,"gmtModify":1703742526982,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581565649060536","authorIdStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/UPST\">$Upstart Holdings, Inc.(UPST)$</a>Waiting for BO","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/UPST\">$Upstart Holdings, Inc.(UPST)$</a>Waiting for BO","text":"$Upstart Holdings, Inc.(UPST)$Waiting for BO","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/154100899","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1206,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":133623183,"gmtCreate":1621743977442,"gmtModify":1704362001226,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Both counters are consolidating....cloudfare looks better from chart...","listText":"Both counters are consolidating....cloudfare looks better from chart...","text":"Both counters are consolidating....cloudfare looks better from chart...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/133623183","repostId":"2137990425","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":297,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":832768565,"gmtCreate":1629678589557,"gmtModify":1676530092646,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">$Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing(TSM)$</a> will history repeat?","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">$Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing(TSM)$</a> will history repeat?","text":"$Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing(TSM)$ will history repeat?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/832768565","repostId":"1111103954","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1111103954","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629675616,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1111103954?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-08-23 07:40","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1111103954","media":"Barrons","summary":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the worl","content":"<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.</p>\n<p>Back then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.</p>\n<p>The spike was good news for <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CVX\">Chevron</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XOM\">Exxon Mobil</a>, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&amp;P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.</p>\n<p>If oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.</p>\n<p>Roughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.</p>\n<p>“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.</p>\n<p>The global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TM\">Toyota</a>&nbsp;this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.</p>\n<p>Part of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.</p>\n<p>The result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.</p>\n<p>That’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/GM\">General Motors</a> shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.</p>\n<p>And that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/INTC\">Intel</a> and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TSM\">Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing</a>. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.</p>\n<p>Don’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.</p>","source":"lsy1601382232898","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>The Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe Chip Shortage Looks Like the Oil Shortage of the 1970s. What It Means for Stocks and the Economy.\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-08-23 07:40 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1><strong>Barrons</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司","CVX":"雪佛龙","MU":"美光科技","XOM":"埃克森美孚","TSM":"台积电","INTC":"英特尔"},"source_url":"https://www.barrons.com/articles/chip-shortage-stocks-economy-51629507891?mod=hp_LEAD_1","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1111103954","content_text":"Semiconductors might be the new oil—and that could make the 2020s the new 1970s.\nBack then, the world ran on oil—and any change in supply had a massive impact on demand. When OPEC embargoed the U.S. in the 1970s, the price of crude rose from about $3 a barrel at the beginning of the decade to $13 a barrel by its end. The U.S. even issued gas ration coupons in 1974.\nThe spike was good news for Chevron and Exxon Mobil, which returned roughly 100% and 70%, respectively, in the 1970s, but painful for everyone else, as inflation raged. The S&P 500 and Dow Jones Industrial Average rose just 17% and 5%, respectively, over the decade.\nIf oil was the necessary component for the 1970s economy, chips provide the same function in the 2020s. They power everything from our computers and phones to our cars and appliances. And, as everyone knows by now, there is a shortage, with delivery times growing to more than 20 weeks, per Susquehanna Financial Group data.\nRoughly 80% of all the chips in the world are made in Northeast Asia. Politicians realize how big a problem this is, and they have started to demand local manufacturing, with President Joe Biden introducing a plan for $50 billion in chip research earlier this year. Reshoring any industry, including semiconductors, is a yearslong process that requires billions in capital. There will be winners and losers. And if it goes on too long, it will filter into the prices of all kinds of goods.\n“Shortages related to rapid upswings in demand could become inflationary,” TS Lombard’s Rory Green and Steven Blitz wrote back in January, when the scarcity of chips—”a product more known for steadily declining prices”—was in its infancy.\nThe global semiconductor shortage has been a particular thorn in the side of the automotive industry all year. It was supposed to resolve itself by the second half of 2021. But more production cuts announced by Toyota this past week shows the problem isn’t going away soon. In fact, RBC analyst Joseph Spak argues the shortage could last for years.\nPart of the problem is structural, Spak says. Electric vehicles need more computing power, but the auto industry typically relies on older-generation chip technology, where capacity isn’t being as readily added by chip makers. Instead, they prefer to focus on newer, higher-end chips for the consumer electronics industry.\nThe result: Instead of lines at the gas stations, there are lines at the automotive dealerships. Low new- and used-car inventories have pushed up pricing and contributed to rising inflation. Used-car prices rose about 20% in the first half of 2021, while new-car prices rose about 3%. The rise in used-car prices has started to slow, but new-car price gains are accelerating, rising about 7% year over year in July.\nThat’s not good for consumers, but auto makers stand to benefit. Constrained production will lead to persistently low inventories and higher pricing. Companies will sell fewer cars, but that’s been offset by higher prices. Ford and General Motors shares are up 43% and 17%, respectively, in 2021, and both still trade for about seven times 2022 earnings.\nAnd that’s just the auto industry. The longer the chip shortage goes on, the more prices will rise in all types of products. That will benefit chip makers such as Intel and Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing. Wall Street sees upside in the latter. Some two-thirds of analysts covering the stock rate it Buy, and the average price target implies about a 33% upside.\nDon’t expect long lines outside RadioShack, but expect the chip shortage to be felt just the same.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"CVX":0.9,"XOM":0.9,"AMD":0.9,"MU":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"INTC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1595,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":185141391,"gmtCreate":1623638309913,"gmtModify":1704207532066,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Things to read for Meme follower","listText":"Things to read for Meme follower","text":"Things to read for Meme follower","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":5,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/185141391","repostId":"1105297799","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":937,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[{"author":{"id":"3568696694714874","authorId":"3568696694714874","name":"Diamondhand6","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3d95004a1d764b1b82eacaa7b9537269","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"authorIdStr":"3568696694714874","idStr":"3568696694714874"},"content":"Like n comment pls","text":"Like n comment pls","html":"Like n comment pls"}],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":158558941,"gmtCreate":1625158358983,"gmtModify":1703737474301,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TIGR\">$Tiger Brokers(TIGR)$</a>Is that&nbsp;a chance or a danger?&nbsp;","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/TIGR\">$Tiger Brokers(TIGR)$</a>Is that&nbsp;a chance or a danger?&nbsp;","text":"$Tiger Brokers(TIGR)$Is that a chance or a danger?","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/eac7feee98bd6ca14b4f2286be80d7f7","width":"750","height":"2200"}],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":4,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/158558941","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2082,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":1,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9039198029,"gmtCreate":1645940694684,"gmtModify":1676534076712,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Warren Buy Call lol","listText":"Warren Buy Call lol","text":"Warren Buy Call lol","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9039198029","repostId":"1125580913","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1125580913","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1645926503,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1125580913?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2022-02-27 09:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1125580913","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-yea","content":"<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Buffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nBuffett Full Annual Letter：Apple is One of ‘Four Giants’ Driving the Conglomerate’s Value\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2022-02-27 09:48</p>\n</div>\n\n</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<html><head></head><body><p>Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.</p><p>Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.</p><p>In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.</p><p>“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.</p><p>Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.</p><p>“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”</p><p>Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.</p><p>“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.</p><p>Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.</p><p>Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.</p><p>“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”</p><p><b>Read the full letter here：</b></p><p>To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:</p><p>Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.</p><p>Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.</p><p>Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.</p><p>A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.</p><p>Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.</p><p><b>What You Own</b></p><p>Berkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.</p><p>Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.</p><p>I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.</p><h2><b>Surprise, Surprise</b></h2><p>Here are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:</p><p>• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.</p><p>At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.</p><p>• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid</p><p>$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.</p><p>Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.</p><p></p><p>The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).</p><p>I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.</p><p>In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from</p><p>$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.</p><p>During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.</p><p>Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.</p><p>Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.</p><p>In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.</p><p>• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.</p><p>So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.</p><p>Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.</p><p>If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.</p><p>Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”</p><p>I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.</p><p>One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.</p><p>Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.</p><h2>Our Four Giants</h2><p>Through Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.</p><p>• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.</p><p>The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.</p><p>There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.</p><p>• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.</p><p>It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.</p><p>• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.</p><p>Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )</p><p>BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.</p><p>• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.</p><p>BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.</p><p>Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.</p><p>To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.</p><h2>Investments</h2><p>Now let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.</p><p><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d43587e9f59c0ff76e6c04c6bf9af324\" tg-width=\"1047\" tg-height=\"530\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"/>* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.</p><p>** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.</p><p>*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.</p><p>In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.</p><p>Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.</p><h2>U.S. Treasury Bills</h2><p>Berkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.</p><p>Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.</p><h2>But $144 billion?</h2><p>That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)</p><p>After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.</p><p>Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.</p><h2>Share Repurchases</h2><p>There are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.</p><p>Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.</p><p>That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.</p><p>Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)</p><p>Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).</p><p>I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.</p><p>It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.</p><p>Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.</p><h2>A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful Business</h2><p>Last year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.</p><p>In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.</p><p>With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.</p><p>But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?</p><p>For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.</p><p>But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.</p><p>Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.</p><p>When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.</p><p>To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.</p><p>Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”</p><p>When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.</p><p>At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.</p><p>In all ways, Paul was a class act.</p><p>* * * * * * * * * * * *</p><p>Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.</p><p>Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.</p><p>In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.</p><p>Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.</p><p>The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.</p><p>On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.</p><p>Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.</p><p>The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.</p><h2>Thanks</h2><p>I taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.</p><p>Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.</p><p>Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.</p><p>Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”</p><p>Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.</p><p>Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.</p><p>I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction working</p><p>for you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.</p><p>Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.</p><p>To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.</p><p>Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.</p><p>Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”</p><h2>The Annual Meeting</h2><p>Clear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.</p><p>I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.</p><p>February 26, 2022</p><p>Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board</p></body></html>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"BRK.A":"伯克希尔","BRK.B":"伯克希尔B"},"source_url":"","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1125580913","content_text":"Warren Buffett released his annual letter to Berkshire Hathaway shareholders on Saturday. The 91-year-old investing legend has been publishing the letter for over six decades and it has become required reading for investors around the world.Warren Buffett said he now considers tech giant Apple as one of the four pillars driving Berkshire Hathaway, the conglomerate of mostly old-economy businesses he’s assembled over the last five decades.In his annual letter to shareholders released on Saturday, the 91-year-old investing legend listed Apple under the heading “Our Four Giants” and even called the company the second-most important after Berkshire’s cluster of insurers, thanks to its chief executive.“Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well,” the letter stated.Buffett made clear he is a fan of Cook’s stock repurchase strategy, and how it gives the conglomerate increased ownership of each dollar of the iPhone maker’s earnings without the investor having to lift a finger.“Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier,” Buffett said in the letter. “That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.”Berkshire began buying Apple stock in 2016 under the influence of Buffett’s investing deputies Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. By mid-2018, the conglomerate accumulated 5% ownership of the iPhone maker, a stake that cost $36 billion. Today, the Apple investment is now worth more than $160 billion, taking up 40% of Berkshire’s equity portfolio.“It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our ‘share’ of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud,” Buffett said.Berkshire is Apple’s largest shareholder, outside of index and exchange-traded fund providers.Buffett also credited his railroad business BNSF and energy segment BHE as two other giants of the conglomerate, which both registered record earnings in 2021.“BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire,” Buffett said. “BHE has become a utility powerhouse and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.”Read the full letter here：To the Shareholders of Berkshire Hathaway Inc.:Charlie Munger, my long-time partner, and I have the job of managing a portion of your savings. We are honored by your trust.Our position carries with it the responsibility to report to you what we would like to know if we were the absentee owner and you were the manager. We enjoy communicating directly with you through this annual letter, and through the annual meeting as well.Our policy is to treat all shareholders equally. Therefore, we do not hold discussions with analysts nor large institutions. Whenever possible, also, we release important communications on Saturday mornings in order to maximize the time for shareholders and the media to absorb the news before markets open on Monday.A wealth of Berkshire facts and figures are set forth in the annual 10-K that the company regularly files with the S.E.C. and that we reproduce on pages K-1 – K-119. Some shareholders will find this detail engrossing; others will simply prefer to learn what Charlie and I believe is new or interesting at Berkshire.Alas, there was little action of that sort in 2021. We did, though, make reasonable progress in increasing the intrinsic value of your shares. That task has been my primary duty for 57 years. And it will continue to be.What You OwnBerkshire owns a wide variety of businesses, some in their entirety, some only in part. The second group largely consists of marketable common stocks of major American companies. Additionally, we own a few non-U.S. equities and participate in several joint ventures or other collaborative activities.Whatever our form of ownership, our goal is to have meaningful investments in businesses with both durable economic advantages and a first-class CEO. Please note particularly that we own stocks based upon our expectations about their long-term business performance and not because we view them as vehicles for timely market moves. That point is crucial: Charlie and I are not stock-pickers; we are business-pickers.I make many mistakes. Consequently, our extensive collection of businesses includes some enterprises that have truly extraordinary economics, many others that enjoy good economic characteristics, and a few that are marginal. One advantage of our common-stock segment is that – on occasion – it becomes easy to buy pieces of wonderful businesses at wonderful prices. That shooting-fish-in-a-barrel experience is very rare in negotiated transactions and never occurs en masse. It is also far easier to exit from a mistake when it has been made in the marketable arena.Surprise, SurpriseHere are a few items about your company that often surprise even seasoned investors:• Many people perceive Berkshire as a large and somewhat strange collection of financial assets. In truth, Berkshire owns and operates more U.S.-based “infrastructure” assets – classified on our balance sheet as property, plant and equipment – than are owned and operated by any other American corporation. That supremacy has never been our goal. It has, however, become a fact.At yearend, those domestic infrastructure assets were carried on Berkshire’s balance sheet at $158 billion. That number increased last year and will continue to increase. Berkshire always will be building.• Every year, your company makes substantial federal income tax payments. In 2021, for example, we paid$3.3 billion while the U.S. Treasury reported total corporate income-tax receipts of $402 billion. Additionally, Berkshire pays substantial state and foreign taxes. “I gave at the office” is an unassailable assertion when made by Berkshire shareholders.Berkshire’s history vividly illustrates the invisible and often unrecognized financial partnership between  government and American businesses. Our tale begins early in 1955, when Berkshire Fine Spinning and Hathaway Manufacturing agreed to merge their businesses. In their requests for shareholder approval, these venerable New England textile companies expressed high hopes for the combination.The Hathaway solicitation, for example, assured its shareholders that “The combination of the resources and managements will result in one of the strongest and most efficient organizations in the textile industry.” That upbeat view was endorsed by the company’s advisor, Lehman Brothers (yes, that Lehman Brothers).I’m sure it was a joyous day in both Fall River (Berkshire) and New Bedford (Hathaway) when the union was consummated. After the bands stopped playing and the bankers went home, however, the shareholders reaped a disaster.In the nine years following the merger, Berkshire’s owners watched the company’s net worth crater from$51.4 million to $22.1 million. In part, this decline was caused by stock repurchases, ill-advised dividends and plant shutdowns. But nine years of effort by many thousands of employees delivered an operating loss as well. Berkshire’s struggles were not unusual: The New England textile industry had silently entered an extended and non-reversible death march.During the nine post-merger years, the U.S. Treasury suffered as well from Berkshire’s troubles. All told, the company paid the government only $337,359 in income tax during that period – a pathetic $100 per day.Early in 1965, things changed. Berkshire installed new management that redeployed available cash and steered essentially all earnings into a variety of good businesses, most of which remained good through the years. Coupling reinvestment of earnings with the power of compounding worked its magic, and shareholders prospered.Berkshire’s owners, it should be noted, were not the only beneficiary of that course correction. Their “silent partner,” the U.S. Treasury, proceeded to collect many tens of billions of dollars from the company in income tax payments. Remember the $100 daily? Now, Berkshire pays roughly $9 million daily to the Treasury.In fairness to our governmental partner, our shareholders should acknowledge – indeed trumpet – the fact that Berkshire’s prosperity has been fostered mightily because the company has operated in America. Our country would have done splendidly in the years since 1965 without Berkshire. Absent our American home, however, Berkshire would never have come close to becoming what it is today. When you see the flag, say thanks.• From an $8.6 million purchase of National Indemnity in 1967, Berkshire has become the world leader in insurance “float” – money we hold and can invest but that does not belong to us. Including a relatively small sum derived from life insurance, Berkshire’s total float has grown from $19 million when we entered the insurance business to $147 billion.So far, this float has cost us less than nothing. Though we have experienced a number of years when insurance losses combined with operating expenses exceeded premiums, overall we have earned a modest 55-year profit from the underwriting activities that generated our float.Of equal importance, float is very sticky. Funds attributable to our insurance operations come and go daily, but their aggregate total is immune from precipitous decline. When it comes to investing float, we can therefore think long-term.If you are not already familiar with the concept of float, I refer you to a long explanation on page A-5. To my surprise, our float increased $9 billion last year, a buildup of value that is important to Berkshire owners though is not reflected in our GAAP (“generally-accepted accounting principles”) presentation of earnings and net worth.Much of our huge value creation in insurance is attributable to Berkshire’s good luck in my 1986 hiring of Ajit Jain. We first met on a Saturday morning, and I quickly asked Ajit what his insurance experience had been. He replied, “None.”I said, “Nobody’s perfect,” and hired him. That was my lucky day: Ajit actually was as perfect a choice as could have been made. Better yet, he continues to be – 35 years later.One final thought about insurance: I believe that it is likely – but far from assured – that Berkshire’s float can be maintained without our incurring a long-term underwriting loss. I am certain, however, that there will be some years when we experience such losses, perhaps involving very large sums.Berkshire is constructed to handle catastrophic events as no other insurer – and that priority will remain long after Charlie and I are gone.Our Four GiantsThrough Berkshire, our shareholders own many dozens of businesses. Some of these, in turn, have a collection of subsidiaries of their own. For example, Marmon has more than 100 individual business operations, ranging from the leasing of railroad cars to the manufacture of medical devices.• Nevertheless, operations of our “Big Four” companies account for a very large chunk of Berkshire’s value. Leading this list is our cluster of insurers. Berkshire effectively owns 100% of this group, whose massive float value we earlier described. The invested assets of these insurers are further enlarged by the extraordinary amount of capital we invest to back up their promises.The insurance business is made to order for Berkshire. The product will never be obsolete, and sales volume will generally increase along with both economic growth and inflation. Also, integrity and capital will forever be important. Our company can and will behave well.There are, of course, other insurers with excellent business models and prospects. Replication of Berkshire’s operation, however, would be almost impossible.• Apple – our runner-up Giant as measured by its yearend market value – is a different sort of holding. Here, our ownership is a mere 5.55%, up from 5.39% a year earlier. That increase sounds like small potatoes. But consider that each 0.1% of Apple’s 2021 earnings amounted to $100 million. We spent no Berkshire funds to gain our accretion. Apple’s repurchases did the job.It’s important to understand that only dividends from Apple are counted in the GAAP earnings Berkshire reports – and last year, Apple paid us $785 million of those. Yet our “share” of Apple’s earnings amounted to a staggering $5.6 billion. Much of what the company retained was used to repurchase Apple shares, an act we applaud. Tim Cook, Apple’s brilliant CEO, quite properly regards users of Apple products as his first love, but all of his other constituencies benefit from Tim’s managerial touch as well.• BNSF, our third Giant, continues to be the number one artery of American commerce, which makes it an indispensable asset for America as well as for Berkshire. If the many essential products BNSF carries were instead hauled by truck, America’s carbon emissions would soar.Your railroad had record earnings of $6 billion in 2021. Here, it should be noted, we are talking about the old-fashioned sort of earnings that we favor: a figure calculated after interest, taxes, depreciation, amortization and all forms of compensation. (Our definition suggests a warning: Deceptive “adjustments” to earnings – to use a polite description – have become both more frequent and more fanciful as stocks have risen. Speaking less politely, I would say that bull markets breed bloviated bull )BNSF trains traveled 143 million miles last year and carried 535 million tons of cargo. Both accomplishments far exceed those of any other American carrier. You can be proud of your railroad.• BHE, our final Giant, earned a record $4 billion in 2021. That’s up more than 30-fold from the $122 million earned in 2000, the year that Berkshire first purchased a BHE stake. Now, Berkshire owns 91.1% of the company.BHE’s record of societal accomplishment is as remarkable as its financial performance. The company had no wind or solar generation in 2000. It was then regarded simply as a relatively new and minor participant in the huge electric utility industry. Subsequently, under David Sokol’s and Greg Abel’s leadership, BHE has become a utility powerhouse (no groaning, please) and a leading force in wind, solar and transmission throughout much of the United States.Greg’s report on these accomplishments appears on pages A-3 and A-4. The profile you will find there is not in any way one of those currently-fashionable “green-washing” stories. BHE has been faithfully detailing its plans and performance in renewables and transmissions every year since 2007.To further review this information, visit BHE’s website at brkenergy.com. There, you will see that the company has long been making climate-conscious moves that soak up all of its earnings. More opportunities lie ahead. BHE has the management, the experience, the capital and the appetite for the huge power projects that our country needs.InvestmentsNow let’s talk about companies we don’t control, a list that again references Apple. Below we list our fifteen largest equity holdings, several of which are selections of Berkshire’s two long-time investment managers, Todd Combs and Ted Weschler. At yearend, this valued pair had total authority in respect to $34 billion of investments, many of which do not meet the threshold value we use in the table. Also, a significant portion of the dollars that Todd and Ted manage are lodged in various pension plans of Berkshire-owned businesses, with the assets of these plans not included in this table.* This is our actual purchase price and also our tax basis.** Held by BHE; consequently, Berkshire shareholders have only a 91.1% interest in this position.*** Includes a $10 billion investment in Occidental Petroleum, consisting of preferred stock and warrants to buy common stock, a combination now being valued at $10.7 billion.In addition to the footnoted Occidental holding and our various common-stock positions, Berkshire also owns a 26.6% interest in Kraft Heinz (accounted for on the “equity” method, not market value, and carried at $13.1 billion) and 38.6% of Pilot Corp., a leader in travel centers that had revenues last year of $45 billion.Since we purchased our Pilot stake in 2017, this holding has warranted “equity” accounting treatment. Early in 2023, Berkshire will purchase an additional interest in Pilot that will raise our ownership to 80% and lead to our fully consolidating Pilot’s earnings, assets and liabilities in our financial statements.U.S. Treasury BillsBerkshire’s balance sheet includes $144 billion of cash and cash equivalents (excluding the holdings of BNSF and BHE). Of this sum, $120 billion is held in U.S. Treasury bills, all maturing in less than a year. That stake leaves Berkshire financing about 12 of 1% of the publicly-held national debt.Charlie and I have pledged that Berkshire (along with our subsidiaries other than BNSF and BHE) will always hold more than $30 billion of cash and equivalents. We want your company to be financially impregnable and never dependent on the kindness of strangers (or even that of friends). Both of us like to sleep soundly, and we want our creditors, insurance claimants and you to do so as well.But $144 billion?That imposing sum, I assure you, is not some deranged expression of patriotism. Nor have Charlie and I lost our overwhelming preference for business ownership. Indeed, I first manifested my enthusiasm for that 80 years ago, on March 11, 1942, when I purchased three shares of Cities Services preferred stock. Their cost was $114.75 and required all of my savings. (The Dow Jones Industrial Average that day closed at 99, a fact that should scream to you: Never bet against America.)After my initial plunge, I always kept at least 80% of my net worth in equities. My favored status throughout that period was 100% – and still is. Berkshire’s current 80%-or-so position in businesses is a consequence of my failure to find entire companies or small portions thereof (that is, marketable stocks) which meet our criteria for long- term holding.Charlie and I have endured similar cash-heavy positions from time to time in the past. These periods are never pleasant; they are also never permanent. And, fortunately, we have had a mildly attractive alternative during 2020 and 2021 for deploying capital. Read on.Share RepurchasesThere are three ways that we can increase the value of your investment. The first is always front and center in our minds: Increase the long-term earning power of Berkshire’s controlled businesses through internal growth or by making acquisitions. Today, internal opportunities deliver far better returns than acquisitions. The size of those opportunities, however, is small compared to Berkshire’s resources.Our second choice is to buy non-controlling part-interests in the many good or great businesses that are publicly traded. From time to time, such possibilities are both numerous and blatantly attractive. Today, though, we find little that excites us.That’s largely because of a truism: Long-term interest rates that are low push the prices of all productive investments upward, whether these are stocks, apartments, farms, oil wells, whatever. Other factors influence valuations as well, but interest rates will always be important.Our final path to value creation is to repurchase Berkshire shares. Through that simple act, we increase your share of the many controlled and non-controlled businesses Berkshire owns. When the price/value equation is right, this path is the easiest and most certain way for us to increase your wealth. (Alongside the accretion of value to continuing shareholders, a couple of other parties gain: Repurchases are modestly beneficial to the seller of the repurchased shares and to society as well.)Periodically, as alternative paths become unattractive, repurchases make good sense for Berkshire’s owners. During the past two years, we therefore repurchased 9% of the shares that were outstanding at yearend 2019 for a total cost of $51.7 billion. That expenditure left our continuing shareholders owning about 10% more of all Berkshire businesses, whether these are wholly-owned (such as BNSF and GEICO) or partly-owned (such as Coca-Cola and Moody’s).I want to underscore that for Berkshire repurchases to make sense, our shares must offer appropriate value. We don’t want to overpay for the shares of other companies, and it would be value-destroying if we were to overpay when we are buying Berkshire. As of February 23, 2022, since yearend we repurchased additional shares at a cost of $1.2 billion. Our appetite remains large but will always remain price-dependent.It should be noted that Berkshire’s buyback opportunities are limited because of its high-class investor base. If our shares were heavily held by short-term speculators, both price volatility and transaction volumes would materially increase. That kind of reshaping would offer us far greater opportunities for creating value by making repurchases. Nevertheless, Charlie and I far prefer the owners we have, even though their admirable buy-and-keep attitudes limit the extent to which long-term shareholders can profit from opportunistic repurchases.Finally, one easily-overlooked value calculation specific to Berkshire: As we’ve discussed, insurance “float” of the right sort is of great value to us. As it happens, repurchases automatically increase the amount of “float” per share. That figure has increased during the past two years by 25% – going from $79,387 per “A” share to $99,497, a meaningful gain that, as noted, owes some thanks to repurchases.A Wonderful Man and a Wonderful BusinessLast year, Paul Andrews died. Paul was the founder and CEO of TTI, a Fort Worth-based subsidiary of Berkshire. Throughout his life – in both his business and his personal pursuits – Paul quietly displayed all the qualities that Charlie and I admire. His story should be told.In 1971, Paul was working as a purchasing agent for General Dynamics when the roof fell in. After losing a huge defense contract, the company fired thousands of employees, including Paul.With his first child due soon, Paul decided to bet on himself, using $500 of his savings to found Tex-Tronics (later renamed TTI). The company set itself up to distribute small electronic components, and first-year sales totaled $112,000. Today, TTI markets more than one million different items with annual volume of $7.7 billion.But back to 2006: Paul, at 63, then found himself happy with his family, his job, and his associates. But he had one nagging worry, heightened because he had recently witnessed a friend’s early death and the disastrous results that followed for that man’s family and business. What, Paul asked himself in 2006, would happen to the many people depending on him if he should unexpectedly die?For a year, Paul wrestled with his options. Sell to a competitor? From a strictly economic viewpoint, that course made the most sense. After all, competitors could envision lucrative “synergies” – savings that would be achieved as the acquiror slashed duplicated functions at TTI.But . . . Such a purchaser would most certainly also retain its CFO, its legal counsel, its HR unit. Their TTI counterparts would therefore be sent packing. And ugh! If a new distribution center were to be needed, the acquirer’s home city would certainly be favored over Fort Worth.Whatever the financial benefits, Paul quickly concluded that selling to a competitor was not for him. He next considered seeking a financial buyer, a species once labeled – aptly so – a leveraged buyout firm. Paul knew, however, that such a purchaser would be focused on an “exit strategy.” And who could know what that would be? Brooding over it all, Paul found himself having no interest in handing his 35-year-old creation over to a reseller.When Paul met me, he explained why he had eliminated these two alternatives as buyers. He then summed up his dilemma by saying – in far more tactful phrasing than this – “After a year of pondering the alternatives, I want to sell to Berkshire because you are the only guy left.” So, I made an offer and Paul said “Yes.” One meeting; one lunch; one deal.To say we both lived happily ever after is an understatement. When Berkshire purchased TTI, the company employed 2,387. Now the number is 8,043. A large percentage of that growth took place in Fort Worth and environs. Earnings have increased 673%.Annually, I would call Paul and tell him his salary should be substantially increased. Annually, he would tell me, “We can talk about that next year, Warren; I’m too busy now.”When Greg Abel and I attended Paul’s memorial service, we met children, grandchildren, long-time associates (including TTI’s first employee) and John Roach, the former CEO of a Fort Worth company Berkshire had purchased in 2000. John had steered his friend Paul to Omaha, instinctively knowing we would be a match.At the service, Greg and I heard about the multitudes of people and organizations that Paul had silently supported. The breadth of his generosity was extraordinary – geared always to improving the lives of others, particularly those in Fort Worth.In all ways, Paul was a class act.* * * * * * * * * * * *Good luck – occasionally extraordinary luck – has played its part at Berkshire. If Paul and I had not enjoyed a mutual friend – John Roach – TTI would not have found its home with us. But that ample serving of luck was only the beginning. TTI was soon to lead Berkshire to its most important acquisition.Every fall, Berkshire directors gather for a presentation by a few of our executives. We sometimes choose the site based upon the location of a recent acquisition, by that means allowing directors to meet the new subsidiary’s CEO and learn more about the acquiree’s activities.In the fall of 2009, we consequently selected Fort Worth so that we could visit TTI. At that time, BNSF, which also had Fort Worth as its hometown, was the third-largest holding among our marketable equities. Despite that large stake, I had never visited the railroad’s headquarters.Deb Bosanek, my assistant, scheduled our board’s opening dinner for October 22. Meanwhile, I arranged to arrive earlier that day to meet with Matt Rose, CEO of BNSF, whose accomplishments I had long admired. When I made the date, I had no idea that our get-together would coincide with BNSF’s third-quarter earnings report, which was released late on the 22nd.The market reacted badly to the railroad’s results. The Great Recession was in full force in the third quarter, and BNSF’s earnings reflected that slump. The economic outlook was also bleak, and Wall Street wasn’t feeling friendly to railroads – or much else.On the following day, I again got together with Matt and suggested that Berkshire would offer the railroad a better long-term home than it could expect as a public company. I also told him the maximum price that Berkshire would pay.Matt relayed the offer to his directors and advisors. Eleven busy days later, Berkshire and BNSF announced a firm deal. And here I’ll venture a rare prediction: BNSF will be a key asset for Berkshire and our country a century from now.The BNSF acquisition would never have happened if Paul Andrews hadn’t sized up Berkshire as the right home for TTI.ThanksI taught my first investing class 70 years ago. Since then, I have enjoyed working almost every year with students of all ages, finally “retiring” from that pursuit in 2018.Along the way, my toughest audience was my grandson’s fifth-grade class. The 11-year-olds were squirming in their seats and giving me blank stares until I mentioned Coca-Cola and its famous secret formula. Instantly, every hand went up, and I learned that “secrets” are catnip to kids.Teaching, like writing, has helped me develop and clarify my own thoughts. Charlie calls this phenomenon the orangutan effect: If you sit down with an orangutan and carefully explain to it one of your cherished ideas, you may leave behind a puzzled primate, but will yourself exit thinking more clearly.Talking to university students is far superior. I have urged that they seek employment in (1) the field and (2) with the kind of people they would select, if they had no need for money. Economic realities, I acknowledge, may interfere with that kind of search. Even so, I urge the students never to give up the quest, for when they find that sort of job, they will no longer be “working.”Charlie and I, ourselves, followed that liberating course after a few early stumbles. We both started as part- timers at my grandfather’s grocery store, Charlie in 1940 and I in 1942. We were each assigned boring tasks and paid little, definitely not what we had in mind. Charlie later took up law, and I tried selling securities. Job satisfaction continued to elude us.Finally, at Berkshire, we found what we love to do. With very few exceptions, we have now “worked” for many decades with people whom we like and trust. It’s a joy in life to join with managers such as Paul Andrews or the Berkshire families I told you about last year. In our home office, we employ decent and talented people – no jerks. Turnover averages, perhaps, one person per year.I would like, however, to emphasize a further item that turns our jobs into fun and satisfaction workingfor you. There is nothing more rewarding to Charlie and me than enjoying the trust of individual long-term shareholders who, for many decades, have joined us with the expectation that we would be a reliable custodian of their funds.Obviously, we can’t select our owners, as we could do if our form of operation were a partnership. Anyone can buy shares of Berkshire today with the intention of soon reselling them. For sure, we get a few of that type of shareholder, just as we get index funds that own huge amounts of Berkshire simply because they are required to do so.To a truly unusual degree, however, Berkshire has as owners a very large corps of individuals and families that have elected to join us with an intent approaching “til death do us part.” Often, they have trusted us with a large – some might say excessive – portion of their savings.Berkshire, these shareholders would sometimes acknowledge, might be far from the best selection they could have made. But they would add that Berkshire would rank high among those with which they would be most comfortable. And people who are comfortable with their investments will, on average, achieve better results than those who are motivated by ever-changing headlines, chatter and promises.Long-term individual owners are both the “partners” Charlie and I have always sought and the ones we constantly have in mind as we make decisions at Berkshire. To them we say, “It feels good to ‘work’ for you, and you have our thanks for your trust.”The Annual MeetingClear your calendar! Berkshire will have its annual gathering of capitalists in Omaha on Friday, April 29th through Sunday, May 1st. The details regarding the weekend are laid out on pages A-1 and A-2. Omaha eagerly awaits you, as do I.I will end this letter with a sales pitch. “Cousin” Jimmy Buffett has designed a pontoon “party” boat that is now being manufactured by Forest River, a Berkshire subsidiary. The boat will be introduced on April 29 at our Berkshire Bazaar of Bargains. And, for two days only, shareholders will be able to purchase Jimmy’s masterpiece at a 10% discount. Your bargain-hunting chairman will be buying a boat for his family’s use. Join me.February 26, 2022Warren E. Buffett Chairman of the Board","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"BRK.A":0.9,"BRK.B":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3953,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":116896781,"gmtCreate":1622785937743,"gmtModify":1704191174003,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Is that the end of hype?&nbsp;","listText":"Is that the end of hype?&nbsp;","text":"Is that the end of hype?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/116896781","repostId":"2140026421","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2140026421","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Dow Jones publishes the world’s most trusted business news and financial information in a variety of media.","home_visible":0,"media_name":"Dow Jones","id":"106","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99"},"pubTimestamp":1622775272,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/2140026421?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-06-04 10:54","market":"hk","language":"en","title":"Here's AMC's blunt new warning to prospective buyers of its new stock offering","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2140026421","media":"Dow Jones","summary":"AMC Entertainment Holdings on Thursday announced a new stock sale to take advantage of the extraordi","content":"<p>AMC Entertainment Holdings on Thursday announced a new stock sale to take advantage of the extraordinary retail interest that has driven the movie-theater chain's equity up by 2,850% this year.</p><p>AMC's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMC\">$(AMC)$</a> lawyers are apparently as surprised as anyone -- so much so that the company added a fresh risk factor to its 11 million--share sale, which basically boils down to this warning: Prepare to lose everything if you buy the stock.</p><p>The following is the full, extraordinary warning (bolded and italicized text reproduced as in AMC prospectus):</p><p>The market prices and trading volume of our shares of Class A common stock have recently experienced, and may continue to experience, extreme volatility, which could cause purchasers of our Class A common stock to incur substantial losses.</p><p>The market prices and trading volume of our shares of Class A common stock have recently experienced, and may continue to experience, extreme volatility, which could cause purchasers of our Class A common stock to incur substantial losses. For example, during 2021 to date, the market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated from an intra-day low of $1.91 per share on January 5, 2021 to an intra-day high on the NYSE of $72.62 on June 2, 2021 and the last reported sale price of our Class A common stock on the NYSE on June 2, 2021, was $62.55 per share. During 2021 to date, daily trading volume ranged from approximately 23,598,228 to 1,253,253,550 shares. Within the last seven business days, the market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated from an intra-day low of $12.18 on May 24, 2021 to an intra-day high of $72.62 on June 2, 2021, and we have made no disclosure regarding a change to our underlying business during that period, other than with respect to an additional financing.</p><p>We believe that the recent volatility and our current market prices reflect market and trading dynamics unrelated to our underlying business, or macro or industry fundamentals, and we do not know how long these dynamics will last. Under the circumstances, we caution you against investing in our Class A common stock, unless you are prepared to incur the risk of losing all or a substantial portion of your investment.</p><p>Extreme fluctuations in the market price of our Class A common stock have been accompanied by reports of strong and atypical retail investor interest, including on social media and online forums. The market volatility and trading patterns we have experienced create several risks for investors, including the following:</p><ul><li>the market price of our Class A common stock has experienced and may continue to experience rapid and substantial increases or decreases unrelated to our operating performance or prospects, or macro or industry fundamentals, and substantial increases may be significantly inconsistent with the risks and uncertainties that we continue to face;</li><li>factors in the public trading market for our Class A common stock include the sentiment of retail investors (including as may be expressed on financial trading and other social media sites and online forums), the direct access by retail investors to broadly available trading platforms, the amount and status of short interest in our securities, access to margin debt, trading in options and other derivatives on our Class A common stock and any related hedging and other trading factors;</li><li>our market capitalization, as implied by various trading prices, currently reflects valuations that diverge significantly from those seen prior to recent volatility and that are significantly higher than our market capitalization immediately prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to the extent these valuations reflect trading dynamics unrelated to our financial performance or prospects, purchasers of our Class A common stock could incur substantial losses if there are declines in market prices driven by a return to earlier valuations;</li><li>to the extent volatility in our Class A common stock is caused, as has widely been reported, by a “short squeeze” in which coordinated trading activity causes a spike in the market price of our Class A common stock as traders with a short position make market purchases to avoid or to mitigate potential losses, investors purchase at inflated prices unrelated to our financial performance or prospects, and may thereafter suffer substantial losses as prices decline once the level of short-covering purchases has abated; and</li><li>if the market price of our Class A common stock declines, you may be unable to resell your shares at or above the price at which you acquired them. We cannot assure you that the equity issuance of our Class A common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future, in which case you could incur substantial losses.</li></ul><p>We may continue to incur rapid and substantial increases or decreases in our stock price in the foreseeable future that may not coincide in timing with the disclosure of news or developments by or affecting us. Accordingly, the market price of our shares of Class A common stock may fluctuate dramatically, and may decline rapidly, regardless of any developments in our business.</p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Here's AMC's blunt new warning to prospective buyers of its new stock offering</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nHere's AMC's blunt new warning to prospective buyers of its new stock offering\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n<div class=\"head\" \">\n\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/150f88aa4d182df19190059f4a365e99);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Dow Jones </p>\n<p class=\"h-time\">2021-06-04 10:54</p>\n</div>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>AMC Entertainment Holdings on Thursday announced a new stock sale to take advantage of the extraordinary retail interest that has driven the movie-theater chain's equity up by 2,850% this year.</p><p>AMC's <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AMC\">$(AMC)$</a> lawyers are apparently as surprised as anyone -- so much so that the company added a fresh risk factor to its 11 million--share sale, which basically boils down to this warning: Prepare to lose everything if you buy the stock.</p><p>The following is the full, extraordinary warning (bolded and italicized text reproduced as in AMC prospectus):</p><p>The market prices and trading volume of our shares of Class A common stock have recently experienced, and may continue to experience, extreme volatility, which could cause purchasers of our Class A common stock to incur substantial losses.</p><p>The market prices and trading volume of our shares of Class A common stock have recently experienced, and may continue to experience, extreme volatility, which could cause purchasers of our Class A common stock to incur substantial losses. For example, during 2021 to date, the market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated from an intra-day low of $1.91 per share on January 5, 2021 to an intra-day high on the NYSE of $72.62 on June 2, 2021 and the last reported sale price of our Class A common stock on the NYSE on June 2, 2021, was $62.55 per share. During 2021 to date, daily trading volume ranged from approximately 23,598,228 to 1,253,253,550 shares. Within the last seven business days, the market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated from an intra-day low of $12.18 on May 24, 2021 to an intra-day high of $72.62 on June 2, 2021, and we have made no disclosure regarding a change to our underlying business during that period, other than with respect to an additional financing.</p><p>We believe that the recent volatility and our current market prices reflect market and trading dynamics unrelated to our underlying business, or macro or industry fundamentals, and we do not know how long these dynamics will last. Under the circumstances, we caution you against investing in our Class A common stock, unless you are prepared to incur the risk of losing all or a substantial portion of your investment.</p><p>Extreme fluctuations in the market price of our Class A common stock have been accompanied by reports of strong and atypical retail investor interest, including on social media and online forums. The market volatility and trading patterns we have experienced create several risks for investors, including the following:</p><ul><li>the market price of our Class A common stock has experienced and may continue to experience rapid and substantial increases or decreases unrelated to our operating performance or prospects, or macro or industry fundamentals, and substantial increases may be significantly inconsistent with the risks and uncertainties that we continue to face;</li><li>factors in the public trading market for our Class A common stock include the sentiment of retail investors (including as may be expressed on financial trading and other social media sites and online forums), the direct access by retail investors to broadly available trading platforms, the amount and status of short interest in our securities, access to margin debt, trading in options and other derivatives on our Class A common stock and any related hedging and other trading factors;</li><li>our market capitalization, as implied by various trading prices, currently reflects valuations that diverge significantly from those seen prior to recent volatility and that are significantly higher than our market capitalization immediately prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to the extent these valuations reflect trading dynamics unrelated to our financial performance or prospects, purchasers of our Class A common stock could incur substantial losses if there are declines in market prices driven by a return to earlier valuations;</li><li>to the extent volatility in our Class A common stock is caused, as has widely been reported, by a “short squeeze” in which coordinated trading activity causes a spike in the market price of our Class A common stock as traders with a short position make market purchases to avoid or to mitigate potential losses, investors purchase at inflated prices unrelated to our financial performance or prospects, and may thereafter suffer substantial losses as prices decline once the level of short-covering purchases has abated; and</li><li>if the market price of our Class A common stock declines, you may be unable to resell your shares at or above the price at which you acquired them. We cannot assure you that the equity issuance of our Class A common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future, in which case you could incur substantial losses.</li></ul><p>We may continue to incur rapid and substantial increases or decreases in our stock price in the foreseeable future that may not coincide in timing with the disclosure of news or developments by or affecting us. Accordingly, the market price of our shares of Class A common stock may fluctuate dramatically, and may decline rapidly, regardless of any developments in our business.</p>\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMC":"AMC院线"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2140026421","content_text":"AMC Entertainment Holdings on Thursday announced a new stock sale to take advantage of the extraordinary retail interest that has driven the movie-theater chain's equity up by 2,850% this year.AMC's $(AMC)$ lawyers are apparently as surprised as anyone -- so much so that the company added a fresh risk factor to its 11 million--share sale, which basically boils down to this warning: Prepare to lose everything if you buy the stock.The following is the full, extraordinary warning (bolded and italicized text reproduced as in AMC prospectus):The market prices and trading volume of our shares of Class A common stock have recently experienced, and may continue to experience, extreme volatility, which could cause purchasers of our Class A common stock to incur substantial losses.The market prices and trading volume of our shares of Class A common stock have recently experienced, and may continue to experience, extreme volatility, which could cause purchasers of our Class A common stock to incur substantial losses. For example, during 2021 to date, the market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated from an intra-day low of $1.91 per share on January 5, 2021 to an intra-day high on the NYSE of $72.62 on June 2, 2021 and the last reported sale price of our Class A common stock on the NYSE on June 2, 2021, was $62.55 per share. During 2021 to date, daily trading volume ranged from approximately 23,598,228 to 1,253,253,550 shares. Within the last seven business days, the market price of our Class A common stock has fluctuated from an intra-day low of $12.18 on May 24, 2021 to an intra-day high of $72.62 on June 2, 2021, and we have made no disclosure regarding a change to our underlying business during that period, other than with respect to an additional financing.We believe that the recent volatility and our current market prices reflect market and trading dynamics unrelated to our underlying business, or macro or industry fundamentals, and we do not know how long these dynamics will last. Under the circumstances, we caution you against investing in our Class A common stock, unless you are prepared to incur the risk of losing all or a substantial portion of your investment.Extreme fluctuations in the market price of our Class A common stock have been accompanied by reports of strong and atypical retail investor interest, including on social media and online forums. The market volatility and trading patterns we have experienced create several risks for investors, including the following:the market price of our Class A common stock has experienced and may continue to experience rapid and substantial increases or decreases unrelated to our operating performance or prospects, or macro or industry fundamentals, and substantial increases may be significantly inconsistent with the risks and uncertainties that we continue to face;factors in the public trading market for our Class A common stock include the sentiment of retail investors (including as may be expressed on financial trading and other social media sites and online forums), the direct access by retail investors to broadly available trading platforms, the amount and status of short interest in our securities, access to margin debt, trading in options and other derivatives on our Class A common stock and any related hedging and other trading factors;our market capitalization, as implied by various trading prices, currently reflects valuations that diverge significantly from those seen prior to recent volatility and that are significantly higher than our market capitalization immediately prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, and to the extent these valuations reflect trading dynamics unrelated to our financial performance or prospects, purchasers of our Class A common stock could incur substantial losses if there are declines in market prices driven by a return to earlier valuations;to the extent volatility in our Class A common stock is caused, as has widely been reported, by a “short squeeze” in which coordinated trading activity causes a spike in the market price of our Class A common stock as traders with a short position make market purchases to avoid or to mitigate potential losses, investors purchase at inflated prices unrelated to our financial performance or prospects, and may thereafter suffer substantial losses as prices decline once the level of short-covering purchases has abated; andif the market price of our Class A common stock declines, you may be unable to resell your shares at or above the price at which you acquired them. We cannot assure you that the equity issuance of our Class A common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future, in which case you could incur substantial losses.We may continue to incur rapid and substantial increases or decreases in our stock price in the foreseeable future that may not coincide in timing with the disclosure of news or developments by or affecting us. Accordingly, the market price of our shares of Class A common stock may fluctuate dramatically, and may decline rapidly, regardless of any developments in our business.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":549,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[{"author":{"id":"3566532164444643","authorId":"3566532164444643","name":"ZEROHERO","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/62813b6df1c4722e559d112fadd5486a","crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":1,"authorIdStr":"3566532164444643","idStr":"3566532164444643"},"content":"Still got some room but good to avoid. No difference as visiting a casino.","text":"Still got some room but good to avoid. No difference as visiting a casino.","html":"Still got some room but good to avoid. No difference as visiting a casino."}],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":132065994,"gmtCreate":1622046105318,"gmtModify":1704178518080,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Another bullish call to bitcoin??","listText":"Another bullish call to bitcoin??","text":"Another bullish call to bitcoin??","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/132065994","repostId":"1111418097","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1111418097","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1622041378,"share":"https://ttm.financial/m/news/1111418097?lang=en_US&edition=fundamental","pubTime":"2021-05-26 23:02","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Apple Is Looking for Crypto Experience in ‘Alternative Payments’ Job Post","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1111418097","media":"coindesk","summary":"Apple is looking to hire a business development manager with experience in the cryptocurrency indust","content":"<p>Apple is looking to hire a business development manager with experience in the cryptocurrency industry to lead its “alternative payments” partnership program.</p><p>In a Wednesday&nbsp;job posting, Apple said candidates should have five years or more “working in or with alternative payment providers, such as digital wallets, BNPL [buy now pay later], Fast Payments, cryptocurrency and etc.”</p><p>The Cupertino tech giant said the manager would be Apple’s chief negotiator for the alternative payments space.</p><p>“The Apple Wallets, Payments, and Commerce (WPC) team is seeking an experienced Business Development Manager to lead Alternative Payments Partnerships,” the company wrote.</p><p>Apple has long maintained an ironclad grip over payments, especially in its App Store, which has never accepted customers’ crypto and forces all catalog apps to use Apple’s commerce rails and play by Apple’s rules.</p><p>That tightly-controlled ecosystem is the focus of a blockbuster court fight launched by Fortnite developer Epic Games. Epic alleges Apple’s rules violate antitrust laws and stifle payments innovation. App developers could accept “bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies” if not for Apple’s restrictions, Epicclaimedin the suit.</p><p>Apple has made no public statements about its plans for the crypto space. The company did not immediately return CoinDesk’s calls.</p><p>Even so, pockets of the crypto space seem to be preparing for Apple. Coinbase included Apple Pay graphics in a recent app update, according toMacRumors.</p>","source":"lsy1572937250936","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Apple Is Looking for Crypto Experience in ‘Alternative Payments’ Job Post</title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 11px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;line-height: 11px;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nApple Is Looking for Crypto Experience in ‘Alternative Payments’ Job Post\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-05-26 23:02 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://www.coindesk.com/apple-is-looking-for-crypto-experience-in-alternative-payments-job-post><strong>coindesk</strong></a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\n<p>Apple is looking to hire a business development manager with experience in the cryptocurrency industry to lead its “alternative payments” partnership program.In a Wednesday job posting, Apple said ...</p>\n\n<a href=\"https://www.coindesk.com/apple-is-looking-for-crypto-experience-in-alternative-payments-job-post\">Source Link</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AAPL":"苹果"},"source_url":"https://www.coindesk.com/apple-is-looking-for-crypto-experience-in-alternative-payments-job-post","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1111418097","content_text":"Apple is looking to hire a business development manager with experience in the cryptocurrency industry to lead its “alternative payments” partnership program.In a Wednesday job posting, Apple said candidates should have five years or more “working in or with alternative payment providers, such as digital wallets, BNPL [buy now pay later], Fast Payments, cryptocurrency and etc.”The Cupertino tech giant said the manager would be Apple’s chief negotiator for the alternative payments space.“The Apple Wallets, Payments, and Commerce (WPC) team is seeking an experienced Business Development Manager to lead Alternative Payments Partnerships,” the company wrote.Apple has long maintained an ironclad grip over payments, especially in its App Store, which has never accepted customers’ crypto and forces all catalog apps to use Apple’s commerce rails and play by Apple’s rules.That tightly-controlled ecosystem is the focus of a blockbuster court fight launched by Fortnite developer Epic Games. Epic alleges Apple’s rules violate antitrust laws and stifle payments innovation. App developers could accept “bitcoin or other cryptocurrencies” if not for Apple’s restrictions, Epicclaimedin the suit.Apple has made no public statements about its plans for the crypto space. The company did not immediately return CoinDesk’s calls.Even so, pockets of the crypto space seem to be preparing for Apple. Coinbase included Apple Pay graphics in a recent app update, according toMacRumors.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AAPL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":795,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":9018689787,"gmtCreate":1649032449238,"gmtModify":1676534438582,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"[666]&nbsp;[666]&nbsp;","listText":"[666]&nbsp;[666]&nbsp;","text":"[666] [666]","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/9018689787","repostId":"1117420101","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3180,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":141706104,"gmtCreate":1625889616108,"gmtModify":1703750530714,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>for the win","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AAPL\">$Apple(AAPL)$</a>for the win","text":"$Apple(AAPL)$for the win","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/141706104","repostId":"1177397700","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1104,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":103431768,"gmtCreate":1619798759554,"gmtModify":1704272605500,"author":{"id":"3581565649060536","authorId":"3581565649060536","name":"StockWatcher","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/648f98c0d0a1e2a6bdf618a2b6cf1878","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3581565649060536","idStr":"3581565649060536"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Look alike the&nbsp;Avenger show for&nbsp;investment version","listText":"Look alike the&nbsp;Avenger show for&nbsp;investment version","text":"Look alike the Avenger show for investment version","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://ttm.financial/post/103431768","repostId":"1141258080","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":659,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}