The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech

cnn2021-03-10

New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now ...

网页链接

免责声明：本文观点仅代表作者个人观点，不构成本平台的投资建议，本平台不对文章信息准确性、完整性和及时性做出任何保证，亦不对因使用或信赖文章信息引发的任何损失承担责任。

精彩评论

NatxEJ
2021-03-10
NatxEJ
Meh
MCYR
2021-03-10
MCYR
hopefully not
Jabinlim
2021-03-10
Jabinlim
Recession soon
SGLian
2021-03-10
SGLian
......
SkylerTan
2021-03-10
SkylerTan
👍
Aaronykc
2021-03-10
Aaronykc
Please like and comment I’ll return the favour
- EV8:
  👍👍
- simivan154:
  👍

发表看法

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"isChannel":false,"data":{"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1160680775?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","thumbnail":"","is_english":true,"pubTime":"2021-03-10 11:51","share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","id":"1160680775","market":"us","top_or_hot":-1,"title":"The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech","media":"cnn","content":"<div>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now ...\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n","source":null,"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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech</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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech\n</h2>\n\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\n\n2021-03-10 11:51 GMT+8&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href=https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html>cnn</a>\n\n\n</h4>\n\n</header>\n<article>\n<div>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now ...\n\n<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">网页链接</a>\n\n</div>\n\n\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","isBrief":false,"type":0,"news_type":1,"symbol":null,"symbol_name":null,"start_time":0,"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html","article_id":"1160680775","we_media_id":null,"thumbnails":[],"rights":null,"url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1160680775","pubTimestamp":1615348263,"columns":[],"sourceInfo":null,"weMediaInfo":null,"summary":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start ","collect":0,"end_time":0,"defaultTopTitle":"cnn.com","property":[],"viewcount":null,"language":"en","relate_stocks":{},"translate_title":"2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大科技公司来说是个坏消息","themeId":null,"isJumpTheme":false,"ttsUrl":null,"symbols_score_info":{},"content_text":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.\nFor all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.\nThe rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.\nInvestors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.\nAnd all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.\nThere are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.\nInvestors partying too much like 1999?\nBlank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.\nBarnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.\nTracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.\nWith a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.\nDisney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.\nCNN owner AT&T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.\nNone of these tracking stocks exist anymore.\nIPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations\nThere were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.\nThe spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.\nThe good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.\nStill, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.\nThe prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.\nAccording to data from FactSet, the S&P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.\nIt's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.\nThat's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.\nAfter all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.\nSo last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.","kind":"news","is_publish_news":false,"is_publish_highlight":true,"is_publish_live":false,"is_publish_wemedia":null,"editions":null,"column":"","sentiment":"0","news_tag":"","news_rank":0,"symbols":[],"gpt_button":0,"need_auth":false,"code":"91000000","status":"200"},"commentList":[{"id":323589344,"gmtCreate":1615355264088,"gmtModify":1703487803263,"author":{"id":"3569583977305666","authorId":"3569583977305666","name":"NatxEJ","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":2,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3569583977305666","authorIdStr":"3569583977305666"},"htmlText":"Meh","listText":"Meh","text":"Meh","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/323589344","repostId":1160680775,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1160680775","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615348263,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1160680775?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-10 11:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1160680775","media":"cnn","summary":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start ","content":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>","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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\ncnn2021-03-10 11:51\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">cnn</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1160680775","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.\nFor all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.\nThe rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.\nInvestors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.\nAnd all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.\nThere are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.\nInvestors partying too much like 1999?\nBlank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.\nBarnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.\nTracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.\nWith a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.\nDisney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.\nCNN owner AT&T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.\nNone of these tracking stocks exist anymore.\nIPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations\nThere were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.\nThe spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.\nThe good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.\nStill, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.\nThe prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.\nAccording to data from FactSet, the S&P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.\nIt's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.\nThat's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.\nAfter all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.\nSo last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":323532944,"gmtCreate":1615353257388,"gmtModify":1703487782752,"author":{"id":"3566218798350603","authorId":"3566218798350603","name":"MCYR","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d0a29de257327dedf4ada72586cf9c09","vip":1,"crmLevel":7,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3566218798350603","authorIdStr":"3566218798350603"},"htmlText":"hopefully not","listText":"hopefully not","text":"hopefully not","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/323532944","repostId":1160680775,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1160680775","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615348263,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1160680775?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-10 11:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1160680775","media":"cnn","summary":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start ","content":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>","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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\ncnn2021-03-10 11:51\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">cnn</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1160680775","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.\nFor all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.\nThe rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.\nInvestors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.\nAnd all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.\nThere are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.\nInvestors partying too much like 1999?\nBlank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.\nBarnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.\nTracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.\nWith a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.\nDisney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.\nCNN owner AT&T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.\nNone of these tracking stocks exist anymore.\nIPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations\nThere were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.\nThe spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.\nThe good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.\nStill, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.\nThe prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.\nAccording to data from FactSet, the S&P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.\nIt's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.\nThat's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.\nAfter all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.\nSo last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":323533342,"gmtCreate":1615352824486,"gmtModify":1703487777383,"author":{"id":"3574724399840291","authorId":"3574724399840291","name":"Jabinlim","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/16b7f0f6ddc76fb4fc1d066ca1b55493","vip":1,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3574724399840291","authorIdStr":"3574724399840291"},"htmlText":"Recession soon&nbsp;","listText":"Recession soon&nbsp;","text":"Recession soon","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/323533342","repostId":1160680775,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1160680775","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615348263,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1160680775?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-10 11:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1160680775","media":"cnn","summary":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start ","content":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>","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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\ncnn2021-03-10 11:51\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">cnn</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1160680775","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.\nFor all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.\nThe rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.\nInvestors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.\nAnd all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.\nThere are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.\nInvestors partying too much like 1999?\nBlank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.\nBarnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.\nTracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.\nWith a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.\nDisney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.\nCNN owner AT&T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.\nNone of these tracking stocks exist anymore.\nIPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations\nThere were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.\nThe spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.\nThe good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.\nStill, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.\nThe prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.\nAccording to data from FactSet, the S&P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.\nIt's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.\nThat's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.\nAfter all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.\nSo last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":323595625,"gmtCreate":1615352316467,"gmtModify":1703487770311,"author":{"id":"3575420538111046","authorId":"3575420538111046","name":"SGLian","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3575420538111046","authorIdStr":"3575420538111046"},"htmlText":"......&nbsp;","listText":"......&nbsp;","text":"......","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/323595625","repostId":1160680775,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1160680775","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615348263,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1160680775?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-10 11:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1160680775","media":"cnn","summary":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start ","content":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>","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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\ncnn2021-03-10 11:51\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">cnn</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1160680775","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.\nFor all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.\nThe rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.\nInvestors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.\nAnd all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.\nThere are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.\nInvestors partying too much like 1999?\nBlank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.\nBarnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.\nTracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.\nWith a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.\nDisney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.\nCNN owner AT&T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.\nNone of these tracking stocks exist anymore.\nIPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations\nThere were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.\nThe spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.\nThe good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.\nStill, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.\nThe prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.\nAccording to data from FactSet, the S&P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.\nIt's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.\nThat's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.\nAfter all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.\nSo last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":323592862,"gmtCreate":1615352223556,"gmtModify":1703487769106,"author":{"id":"3577269269445542","authorId":"3577269269445542","name":"SkylerTan","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a7599105f5c2badfffd8c14fb075b48b","vip":1,"hat":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/5c5b6ed6e3b5dcb14f9ef3ceb365e412","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3577269269445542","authorIdStr":"3577269269445542"},"htmlText":"👍","listText":"👍","text":"👍","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/323592862","repostId":1160680775,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1160680775","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615348263,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1160680775?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-10 11:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1160680775","media":"cnn","summary":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start ","content":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>","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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\ncnn2021-03-10 11:51\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">cnn</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1160680775","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.\nFor all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.\nThe rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.\nInvestors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.\nAnd all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.\nThere are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.\nInvestors partying too much like 1999?\nBlank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.\nBarnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.\nTracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.\nWith a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.\nDisney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.\nCNN owner AT&T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.\nNone of these tracking stocks exist anymore.\nIPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations\nThere were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.\nThe spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.\nThe good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.\nStill, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.\nThe prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.\nAccording to data from FactSet, the S&P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.\nIt's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.\nThat's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.\nAfter all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.\nSo last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"langContent":"EN"},{"id":323591869,"gmtCreate":1615351892751,"gmtModify":1703487765236,"author":{"id":"3571535693267201","authorId":"3571535693267201","name":"Aaronykc","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a6fb0a4f08d4e7b8733e7ebc2445aad5","vip":1,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"idStr":"3571535693267201","authorIdStr":"3571535693267201"},"htmlText":"Please like and comment I’ll return the favour&nbsp;","listText":"Please like and comment I’ll return the favour&nbsp;","text":"Please like and comment I’ll return the favour","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/323591869","repostId":1160680775,"repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1160680775","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615348263,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1160680775?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-10 11:51","market":"us","language":"en","title":"The 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1160680775","media":"cnn","summary":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start ","content":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>","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 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nThe 2021 stock market looks an awful lot like 2000. That's bad news for Big Tech<blockquote>2021年的股市看起来与2000年非常相似。这对大型科技公司来说是个坏消息</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n\ncnn2021-03-10 11:51\n\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\nNew York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.<blockquote>纽约（CNN Business）科技股在年初大幅飙升后，最近又出现了回调。这应该会让长期的市场观察人士担心现在与2000年互联网泡沫顶峰时期的相似之处。</blockquote> For all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.<blockquote>对于所有那些20年前还是孩子、市场相对新手的千禧一代Robinhood交易者来说，最近的波动应该成为一个教训。尽管人们总是说“这次不同了”，但这通常是一个信号，表明事实并非如此。</blockquote> The rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.<blockquote>游戏驿站（GME）等模因股票的崛起、一系列首次公开募股和特殊目的收购公司合并，以及特斯拉（TSLA）和比特币（XBT）的惊人表现，只不过是市场投机力量的又一个例子。</blockquote> Investors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.<blockquote>投资者正在购买面临重大挑战的公司，而忽视了疲软的基本面。游戏驿站并不是唯一的“模因”股票。连锁影院AMC(AMC)、服装零售商Express(EXPR)和耳机制造商Koss(KOSS)的股价一直在飙升。</blockquote> And all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.<blockquote>Reddit和TikTok视频中所有关于“stonks”和加密货币的讨论实际上与人们在Raging Bull和雅虎财经留言板上喋喋不休地谈论他们认为高通(QCOM)和思科(CSCO)在20世纪90年代末会达到多高没有太大区别。</blockquote> There are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.<blockquote>20世纪90年代末的科技疯狂还有许多其他的回声。</blockquote> Investors partying too much like 1999?<blockquote>投资者聚会太像1999年了？</blockquote> Blank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.<blockquote>空白支票SPAC合并在二十多年前可能并不流行。但当时还有另一个炙手可热的金融趋势也是市场泡沫的标志——公司剥离其在线部门或为其设立所谓的跟踪股票。</blockquote> Barnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.<blockquote>例如，Barnes and Noble为了抵御来自相对较新的亚马逊(AMZN)的竞争，于1999年将其Barnesandnoble.com部门分拆为一家独立上市的公司。它最终被收归母公司。</blockquote> Tracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.<blockquote>跟踪股票甚至比互联网公司的分拆更荒谬。</blockquote> With a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.<blockquote>通过跟踪股票，公司将出售仅跟踪该部门业绩的业务部门的股票。但拥有该股票的投资者没有权像其他上市公司的投资者那样对公司事务进行投票。</blockquote> Disney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.<blockquote>迪士尼(DIS)曾经有一只名为Go.com的跟踪股票，用于其在线业务。NBC也有一只互联网跟踪股票。NBCi于1999年推出，当时通用电气(GE)拥有NBC。康卡斯特(CMCSA)现在是NBC的母公司。</blockquote> CNN owner AT&amp;T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.<blockquote>CNN所有者AT&amp;T(T)在2000年代初为其新的（当时的）无线部门持有跟踪股票。Sprint（现归T-Mobile(TMUS)所有）的PCS无线部门也是如此。</blockquote> None of these tracking stocks exist anymore.<blockquote>这些跟踪股票均已不复存在。</blockquote> IPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations<blockquote>IPO和SPAC泡沫以及对昂贵估值的担忧</blockquote> There were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.<blockquote>还有许多未盈利的公司争先恐后地上市，尽管它们几乎没有收入，更不用说利润了。</blockquote> The spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.<blockquote>Pets.com股票在2000年2月首次公开募股后（就在纳斯达克见顶之前）的惊人暴跌仍然是市场过剩的典型代表。</blockquote> The good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.<blockquote>今天对投资者来说，好消息是，许多通过IPO、SPAC或直接在交易所上市的大型独角兽公司都不是Pets.com 2.0。爱彼迎、Palantir、DoorDash和许多其他最近首次亮相的股票都是行业领导者。</blockquote> Still, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.<blockquote>尽管如此，考虑到许多公司仍然没有盈利——尽管它们的收入可观且增长迅速，但其中许多股票的估值确实是疯狂的。</blockquote> The prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&amp;P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.<blockquote>顶级科技股的价格，甚至是目前主导标普500的FAANG、微软（MSFT）和特斯拉，也可能过高。</blockquote> According to data from FactSet, the S&amp;P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.<blockquote>FactSet的数据显示，这家标普500目前的市盈率超过未来12个月盈利预期的21倍。这高于略低于18岁的五年平均水平和近16岁的10年平均水平。</blockquote> It's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.<blockquote>它也接近2000年3月24倍盈利预期的峰值水平。换句话说，市场是为完美定价的。</blockquote> That's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.<blockquote>这是有问题的。如果（或当）最具泡沫的股票最终开始回调，抛售可能会持续很长时间，损害可能会很严重。</blockquote> After all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.<blockquote>毕竟，当纳斯达克在2000年3月首次突破5,000点时，它是在几个月前飙升至3,000点和4,000点之后才这样做的。这是一种狂热。但一旦互联网泡沫破裂，纳斯达克直到2015年3月才再次回升至5000点以上。</blockquote> So last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.<blockquote>因此，去年3月份Covid-19爆发后的短暂熊市回调可能只是科技股和动量股未来的一小部分。</blockquote>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html\">cnn</a>\n为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/03/09/investing/stocks-tech-spacs-ipos-bubble/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1160680775","content_text":"New York (CNN Business)The recent pullback in tech stocks followed a spectacular surge at the start of the year. That should have longtime market observers worried about the similarities between now and the height of the dot-com bubble in 2000.\nFor all those Millennial Robinhood traders who were just kids 20 years ago and are relative newbies to the market, the recent volatility should serve as a lesson. For all the times that people say that \"this time is different\" that's usually a telltale sign that it actually isn't.\nThe rise of meme stocks like GameStop (GME), the flurry of initial public offerings and special purpose acquisition company mergers as well as the stunning runs in Tesla (TSLA) and bitcoin (XBT) are nothing more than another case of the forces of market speculation running amok.\nInvestors are buying companies with significant challenges and ignoring the weak fundamentals. GameStop isn't the only \"meme\" stock out there. Movie theater chain AMC (AMC), clothing retailer Express (EXPR) and headphone maker Koss (KOSS) have been soaring.\nAnd all the talk about \"stonks\" and cryptocurrencies on Reddit and in TikTok videos isn't really that much different than people chattering about how high they thought Qualcomm (QCOM) and Cisco (CSCO) were going to go in the late 1990s on Raging Bull and Yahoo Finance message boards.\nThere are numerous other echoes to the tech craziness of the late 1990s.\nInvestors partying too much like 1999?\nBlank check SPAC mergers may not have been popular more than twenty years ago. But there was another hot financial trend at that time that was also a sign of market froth -- companies spinning off their online divisions or setting up so-called tracking stocks for them.\nBarnes and Noble, for example, trying to fight off competition from a still relatively new Amazon (AMZN), spun off its Barnesandnoble.com unit into a separately traded company in 1999. It was eventually folded back into the parent company.\nTracking stocks were even more ridiculous than dot-com spinoffs.\nWith a tracking stock, a company would sell shares of a business unit that merely tracked the performance of the division. But investors who owned the stock didn't have the right to vote on company matters like investors in other public companies did.\nDisney (DIS) used to have a tracking stock named Go.com for its online operations. NBC had an internet tracking stock as well. NBCi launched in 1999 -- back when GE (GE) owned NBC. Comcast (CMCSA) is now the parent of NBC.\nCNN owner AT&T (T) had a tracking stock for its new (at the time) wireless unit in the early 2000s. So did Sprint (now owned by T-Mobile (TMUS)) for its PCS wireless division.\nNone of these tracking stocks exist anymore.\nIPO and SPAC bubble and concerns about pricey valuations\nThere were also plenty of unprofitable companies rushing to go public, despite having little in the way of revenue let alone profits.\nThe spectacular collapse of Pets.com stock after its IPO in February 2000 -- just before the Nasdaq peaked -- is still the poster child of wretched market excess.\nThe good news for investors today is that many of the big unicorns going public via IPOs, SPACs or directly listing their shares on exchanges are not Pets.com 2.0. Airbnb, Palantir, DoorDash and many other recent stock debuts are industry leaders.\nStill, the valuations for many of these stocks are certifiably insane considering that many of the companies are still not profitable -- even though their revenues are substantial and growing rapidly.\nThe prices for top tech stocks, even the FAANGs, Microsoft (MSFT) and Tesla that currently dominate the S&P 500, might be unjustifiably high as well.\nAccording to data from FactSet, the S&P 500 is currently trading at more than 21 times earnings estimates for the next 12 months. That's above the five-year average of just under 18 and the 10-year average of nearly 16.\nIt's also approaching the peak March 2000 levels of 24 times earnings estimates. In other words, the market is priced for perfection.\nThat's problematic. If (or when) the most bubbilicious stocks finally start to pull back, the sell-off can last a long time and the damage could be severe.\nAfter all, when the Nasdaq first topped the 5,000 level in March 2000, it did so after surging past the 3,000 and 4,000 levels just a few months earlier. It was a mania. But once the dot-com bubble burst, the Nasdaq did not climb back above 5,000 again until March...2015.\nSo last year's brief bear market pullback following the beginning of the Covid-19 outbreak in March could be just a small taste of what's to come for tech and momentum stocks.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{}},"isVote":1,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false,"reportStatus":false,"tweetType":1,"comments":[{"id":3757875,"gmtCreate":1615352151920,"gmtModify":1635756523624,"authorId":3576472032670521,"author":{"id":3576472032670521,"idStr":"3576472032670521","authorId":3576472032670521,"name":"EV8","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":323591869,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":"👍👍","text":"👍👍","html":"👍👍"},{"id":3758105,"gmtCreate":1615354810050,"gmtModify":1635756511008,"authorId":3576308035119524,"author":{"id":3576308035119524,"idStr":"3576308035119524","authorId":3576308035119524,"name":"simivan154","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","vip":1,"crmLevel":12,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"individualDisplayBadges":[]},"repliedAuthorId":0,"objectId":323591869,"type":1,"supId":0,"prevId":0,"content":" 👍","text":" 👍","html":" 👍"}],"langContent":"EN"}],"isCommentEnd":false,"newsSizeData":{"likeSize":46,"commentSize":11,"repostSize":0,"favoriteSize":0,"likeStatus":false,"favoriteStatus":false},"APP":{"userAgent":"Mozilla/5.0 AppleWebKit/537.36 (KHTML, like Gecko; compatible; ClaudeBot/1.0; +claudebot@anthropic.com)","isDev":false,"isTTM":false,"tenantId":"TBCN","deviceId":"web-server-community-laohu8-v3","version":"4.36.2","shortVersion":"4.36.2","platform":"web","vendor":"web","appName":"laohu8","isIOS":false,"isAndroid":false,"isTiger":false,"isTHS":false,"isWeiXin":false,"isWeiXinMini":false,"isWeiBo":false,"isQQ":false,"isBaiduSwan":false,"isBaiduBox":false,"isDingTalk":false,"isToutiao":false,"isOnePlus":false,"isHuaWei":false,"isXiaomi":false,"isXiaomiWebView":false,"isOppo":false,"isVivo":false,"isSamsung":false,"isMobile":false},"href":"/m/news/1160680775","isCrawlerRequest":true}