Orangejus的个人主页 - 老虎社区

Orangejus

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

4关注

1粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-07-10

This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.

China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>

2021-07-10

I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-21

Strong defensive dividend stocks are the play in this market!

Global stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担忧美联储后全球股市下滑</blockquote>

2021-06-25

Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

Risky play, the hunt for yield…

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-25

Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-23

This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-24

Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-18

Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-06-25

Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world economy…. Bitcoin bulls should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news… =)

抱歉，原内容已删除

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"3586565070413371","uuid":"3586565070413371","gmtCreate":1623472364487,"gmtModify":1623472364487,"name":"Orangejus","pinyin":"orangejus","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":4,"tweetSize":45,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-3","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"偶像虎友","description":"加入老虎社区1500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8b40ae7da5bf081a1c84df14bf9e6367","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f160eceddd7c284a8e1136557615cfad","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/11792805c468334a9b31c39f95a41c6a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2026.04.22","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0}],"userBadgeCount":2,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"baikeInfo":{},"tab":"hot","tweets":[{"id":148030845,"gmtCreate":1625897799087,"gmtModify":1633936233576,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","listText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","text":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148030845","repostId":"1138077902","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1138077902","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1625883154,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1138077902?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-10 10:12","market":"us","language":"en","title":"China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138077902","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review","content":"<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局已经禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案，依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>国家市场监督管理总局根据《反垄断法》，综合分析评价参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在审查过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了相关政府部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，多次听取了腾讯方面的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案涉案市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和直播游戏市场。腾讯在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼分别占据了下游直播游戏市场份额的40%和30%以上，分列第一和第二位，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙实行单独管控，对斗鱼实行联合管控。如虎牙与斗鱼合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的实体，进一步强化腾讯在直播游戏市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除和限制竞争的效果，不利于市场的公平竞争，可能损害消费者的利益，不利于网络游戏和直播游戏市场的健康可持续发展。经评估，腾讯提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争担忧。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条和《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，市场监管总局决定依法禁止此类经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</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\">\nChina has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-07-10 10:12</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局已经禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案，依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>国家市场监督管理总局根据《反垄断法》，综合分析评价参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在审查过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了相关政府部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，多次听取了腾讯方面的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案涉案市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和直播游戏市场。腾讯在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼分别占据了下游直播游戏市场份额的40%和30%以上，分列第一和第二位，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙实行单独管控，对斗鱼实行联合管控。如虎牙与斗鱼合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的实体，进一步强化腾讯在直播游戏市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除和限制竞争的效果，不利于市场的公平竞争，可能损害消费者的利益，不利于网络游戏和直播游戏市场的健康可持续发展。经评估，腾讯提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争担忧。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条和《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，市场监管总局决定依法禁止此类经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"HUYA":"虎牙","DOYU":"斗鱼","00700":"腾讯控股"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138077902","content_text":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.\nOn January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.\nAccording to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.\nThe review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.\nAccording to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.\nTencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"00700":0.9,"HUYA":0.9,"DOYU":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3517,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":148094127,"gmtCreate":1625897660969,"gmtModify":1633936235173,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","listText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","text":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148094127","repostId":"2150306047","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2559,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122902171,"gmtCreate":1624591027493,"gmtModify":1633950808110,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","listText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","text":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122902171","repostId":"2145472760","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4067,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122901313,"gmtCreate":1624590895632,"gmtModify":1633950810382,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","listText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","text":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world economy…. Bitcoin bulls should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news… =)","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122901313","repostId":"2146021046","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2345,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122900360,"gmtCreate":1624590695850,"gmtModify":1633950812648,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","listText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","text":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122900360","repostId":"1156973335","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2706,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126067109,"gmtCreate":1624538258901,"gmtModify":1634004722801,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Good man!","listText":"Good man!","text":"Good man!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126067109","repostId":"1115900977","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2543,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126068310,"gmtCreate":1624538039430,"gmtModify":1631883985534,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"I’m wondering what kind of monthly&nbsp;ROI is considered decent if one trades on daily basis? Any inputs?","listText":"I’m wondering what kind of monthly&nbsp;ROI is considered decent if one trades on daily basis? Any inputs?","text":"I’m wondering what kind of monthly ROI is considered decent if one trades on daily basis? Any inputs?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126068310","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2260,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126063794,"gmtCreate":1624537951318,"gmtModify":1634004727774,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Look for the potential&nbsp;monopoly players as the market consolidates!","listText":"Look for the potential&nbsp;monopoly players as the market consolidates!","text":"Look for the potential monopoly players as the market consolidates!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126063794","repostId":"1198588492","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1198588492","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624519300,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1198588492?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-24 15:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Why Sundial Growers Stock Surged Wednesday<blockquote>为什么 Sundial Growers 股票周三飙升</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1198588492","media":"Motley Fool","summary":"The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.\n\nWhat happened\nShares of Sundial Growers ","content":"<p>  <b>The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.</b>  <b>What happened</b></p><p><blockquote><b>这种受欢迎的大麻股票在Reddit上拥有大批粉丝。</b><b>发生了什么事</b></blockquote></p><p> Shares of&nbsp;<b>Sundial Growers</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:SNDL)&nbsp;jumped 12% on Wednesday, fueled by positive mentions of the pot stock on Reddit and other social media platforms.</p><p><blockquote>股份<b>日晷生长器</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：SNDL）周三上涨 12%，这得益于 Reddit 和其他社交媒体平台上对大麻股票的积极提及。</blockquote></p><p> <b>So what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那又怎样</b></blockquote></p><p> Many individual investors are intrigued by the potential of themarijuanaindustry. The global cannabis market will grow to more than $90 billion by 2026, up from $20.5 billion in 2020, according to research firm MarketsandMarkets. Fortunes will be made in this rapidly expanding industry, and investors are eager to place their bets on who they believe will be the winners.</p><p><blockquote>许多个人投资者对大麻产业的潜力很感兴趣。根据研究公司MarketsandMarkets的数据，到2026年，全球大麻市场将从2020年的205亿美元增长到900亿美元以上。财富将在这个快速扩张的行业中创造，投资者渴望将赌注押在他们认为的赢家身上。</blockquote></p><p> In recent weeks, traders have gravitated toward the cannabis companies viewed as likely consolidators. With many weed producers struggling to turn a profit, a wave of mergers and acquisitions has swept over the industry. Sundial's popularity on Reddit and other stock-focused trading forums has helped to support its stock price, which has allowed the company to raise hundreds of millions of dollars via share offerings. It's now intent on using that cash to invest in and acquire other cannabis businesses.</p><p><blockquote>最近几周，交易员倾向于被视为可能整合者的大麻公司。随着许多杂草生产商努力扭亏为盈，一股并购浪潮席卷了整个行业。Sundial 在 Reddit 和其他专注于股票的交易论坛上的受欢迎程度有助于支撑其股价，这使得该公司能够通过股票发行筹集数亿美元。它现在打算用这笔现金投资和收购其他大麻业务。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Now what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>现在呢</b></blockquote></p><p> Sundial's cash hoard could position it to scoop up bargains, particularly if its smaller rivals continue to struggle to generate profits. However, investors should note that Sundial has also produced net losses in recent quarters, and the dilution caused by its stock sales will make it even more difficult for the company to deliver meaningful per-share profits from its existing cannabis operations. Thus, Sundial's long-term future is essentially tied to management's ability to identify value-creating investments, which makes its stock a relatively risky bet.</p><p><blockquote>Sundial 的现金储备可能使其能够抢购便宜货，特别是如果其规模较小的竞争对手继续难以盈利的话。然而，投资者应该注意到，Sundial 在最近几个季度也出现了净亏损，其股票出售造成的稀释将使该公司更难从现有的大麻业务中实现有意义的每股利润。因此，Sundial 的长期未来本质上与管理层识别价值创造投资的能力息息相关，这使得其股票成为相对风险的赌注。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Why Sundial Growers Stock Surged Wednesday<blockquote>为什么 Sundial Growers 股票周三飙升</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nWhy Sundial Growers Stock Surged Wednesday<blockquote>为什么 Sundial Growers 股票周三飙升</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">Motley Fool</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-24 15:21</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  <b>The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.</b>  <b>What happened</b></p><p><blockquote><b>这种受欢迎的大麻股票在Reddit上拥有大批粉丝。</b><b>发生了什么事</b></blockquote></p><p> Shares of&nbsp;<b>Sundial Growers</b>&nbsp;(NASDAQ:SNDL)&nbsp;jumped 12% on Wednesday, fueled by positive mentions of the pot stock on Reddit and other social media platforms.</p><p><blockquote>股份<b>日晷生长器</b>（纳斯达克股票代码：SNDL）周三上涨 12%，这得益于 Reddit 和其他社交媒体平台上对大麻股票的积极提及。</blockquote></p><p> <b>So what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>那又怎样</b></blockquote></p><p> Many individual investors are intrigued by the potential of themarijuanaindustry. The global cannabis market will grow to more than $90 billion by 2026, up from $20.5 billion in 2020, according to research firm MarketsandMarkets. Fortunes will be made in this rapidly expanding industry, and investors are eager to place their bets on who they believe will be the winners.</p><p><blockquote>许多个人投资者对大麻产业的潜力很感兴趣。根据研究公司MarketsandMarkets的数据，到2026年，全球大麻市场将从2020年的205亿美元增长到900亿美元以上。财富将在这个快速扩张的行业中创造，投资者渴望将赌注押在他们认为的赢家身上。</blockquote></p><p> In recent weeks, traders have gravitated toward the cannabis companies viewed as likely consolidators. With many weed producers struggling to turn a profit, a wave of mergers and acquisitions has swept over the industry. Sundial's popularity on Reddit and other stock-focused trading forums has helped to support its stock price, which has allowed the company to raise hundreds of millions of dollars via share offerings. It's now intent on using that cash to invest in and acquire other cannabis businesses.</p><p><blockquote>最近几周，交易员倾向于被视为可能整合者的大麻公司。随着许多杂草生产商努力扭亏为盈，一股并购浪潮席卷了整个行业。Sundial 在 Reddit 和其他专注于股票的交易论坛上的受欢迎程度有助于支撑其股价，这使得该公司能够通过股票发行筹集数亿美元。它现在打算用这笔现金投资和收购其他大麻业务。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Now what</b></p><p><blockquote><b>现在呢</b></blockquote></p><p> Sundial's cash hoard could position it to scoop up bargains, particularly if its smaller rivals continue to struggle to generate profits. However, investors should note that Sundial has also produced net losses in recent quarters, and the dilution caused by its stock sales will make it even more difficult for the company to deliver meaningful per-share profits from its existing cannabis operations. Thus, Sundial's long-term future is essentially tied to management's ability to identify value-creating investments, which makes its stock a relatively risky bet.</p><p><blockquote>Sundial 的现金储备可能使其能够抢购便宜货，特别是如果其规模较小的竞争对手继续难以盈利的话。然而，投资者应该注意到，Sundial 在最近几个季度也出现了净亏损，其股票出售造成的稀释将使该公司更难从现有的大麻业务中实现有意义的每股利润。因此，Sundial 的长期未来本质上与管理层识别价值创造投资的能力息息相关，这使得其股票成为相对风险的赌注。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/23/why-sundial-growers-stock-surged-today/\">Motley Fool</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SNDL":"SNDL Inc."},"source_url":"https://www.fool.com/investing/2021/06/23/why-sundial-growers-stock-surged-today/","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1198588492","content_text":"The popular cannabis stock has a legion of fans on Reddit.\n\nWhat happened\nShares of Sundial Growers (NASDAQ:SNDL) jumped 12% on Wednesday, fueled by positive mentions of the pot stock on Reddit and other social media platforms.\nSo what\nMany individual investors are intrigued by the potential of themarijuanaindustry. The global cannabis market will grow to more than $90 billion by 2026, up from $20.5 billion in 2020, according to research firm MarketsandMarkets. Fortunes will be made in this rapidly expanding industry, and investors are eager to place their bets on who they believe will be the winners.\nIn recent weeks, traders have gravitated toward the cannabis companies viewed as likely consolidators. With many weed producers struggling to turn a profit, a wave of mergers and acquisitions has swept over the industry. Sundial's popularity on Reddit and other stock-focused trading forums has helped to support its stock price, which has allowed the company to raise hundreds of millions of dollars via share offerings. It's now intent on using that cash to invest in and acquire other cannabis businesses.\nNow what\nSundial's cash hoard could position it to scoop up bargains, particularly if its smaller rivals continue to struggle to generate profits. However, investors should note that Sundial has also produced net losses in recent quarters, and the dilution caused by its stock sales will make it even more difficult for the company to deliver meaningful per-share profits from its existing cannabis operations. Thus, Sundial's long-term future is essentially tied to management's ability to identify value-creating investments, which makes its stock a relatively risky bet.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SNDL":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2823,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126087470,"gmtCreate":1624537806090,"gmtModify":1634004730839,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","listText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","text":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126087470","repostId":"1142469060","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2293,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126084012,"gmtCreate":1624537739036,"gmtModify":1634004731907,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Actually the real worry is the tax increase, and also possible anti-monopoly plays by Congress…","listText":"Actually the real worry is the tax increase, and also possible anti-monopoly plays by Congress…","text":"Actually the real worry is the tax increase, and also possible anti-monopoly plays by Congress…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126084012","repostId":"1137406909","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3404,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126088272,"gmtCreate":1624537621496,"gmtModify":1634004734284,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Damn… should have held =p&nbsp;","listText":"Damn… should have held =p&nbsp;","text":"Damn… should have held =p","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126088272","repostId":"1113369372","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1113369372","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624535308,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1113369372?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-24 19:48","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Eli Lilly Stock Jumps, Biogen Drops on Alzheimer's Treatment Approval<blockquote>礼来股价上涨，百健因阿尔茨海默氏症治疗批准下降</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1113369372","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)\nEli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in morning trading after th","content":"<p><i><b>(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)</b></i></p><p><blockquote><i><b>（更新：美国东部时间 2021 年 6 月 24 日上午 09:32）</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Eli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in&nbsp;morning trading after the drug maker said it received breakthrough therapy designation for its Alzheimer's treatment from the Food and Drug Administration.</p><p><blockquote>礼来公司股价在早盘交易中上涨超过 8%，此前该制药商表示，其阿尔茨海默氏症治疗获得了美国食品和药物管理局的突破性疗法认定。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b4cea69bed4d928fd18195924788827\" tg-width=\"658\" tg-height=\"438\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The move is meant to expedite the development and review of the experimental treatment.</p><p><blockquote>此举旨在加快实验治疗的开发和审查。</blockquote></p><p> Rival Biogen, whose own drug was approved earlier this month, fell over 6% in premarket trading. The FDA has faced criticism from some doctors and scientists for approving that drug.</p><p><blockquote>竞争对手百健（Biogen）的自家药物于本月早些时候获得批准，该公司在盘前交易中下跌超过 6%。FDA因批准该药物而面临一些医生和科学家的批评。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Eli Lilly Stock Jumps, Biogen Drops on Alzheimer's Treatment Approval<blockquote>礼来股价上涨，百健因阿尔茨海默氏症治疗批准下降</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\">\nEli Lilly Stock Jumps, Biogen Drops on Alzheimer's Treatment Approval<blockquote>礼来股价上涨，百健因阿尔茨海默氏症治疗批准下降</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-24 19:48</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><i><b>(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)</b></i></p><p><blockquote><i><b>（更新：美国东部时间 2021 年 6 月 24 日上午 09:32）</b></i></blockquote></p><p> Eli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in&nbsp;morning trading after the drug maker said it received breakthrough therapy designation for its Alzheimer's treatment from the Food and Drug Administration.</p><p><blockquote>礼来公司股价在早盘交易中上涨超过 8%，此前该制药商表示，其阿尔茨海默氏症治疗获得了美国食品和药物管理局的突破性疗法认定。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9b4cea69bed4d928fd18195924788827\" tg-width=\"658\" tg-height=\"438\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The move is meant to expedite the development and review of the experimental treatment.</p><p><blockquote>此举旨在加快实验治疗的开发和审查。</blockquote></p><p> Rival Biogen, whose own drug was approved earlier this month, fell over 6% in premarket trading. The FDA has faced criticism from some doctors and scientists for approving that drug.</p><p><blockquote>竞争对手百健（Biogen）的自家药物于本月早些时候获得批准，该公司在盘前交易中下跌超过 6%。FDA因批准该药物而面临一些医生和科学家的批评。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-news-live-updates-062421/card/C1AeSf1mE5Wh1f1ra8mc\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"LLY":"礼来"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/livecoverage/stock-market-news-live-updates-062421/card/C1AeSf1mE5Wh1f1ra8mc","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1113369372","content_text":"(Update: June 24, 2021 at 09:32 a.m. ET)\nEli Lilly shares jumped over 8% in morning trading after the drug maker said it received breakthrough therapy designation for its Alzheimer's treatment from the Food and Drug Administration.\n\nThe move is meant to expedite the development and review of the experimental treatment.\nRival Biogen, whose own drug was approved earlier this month, fell over 6% in premarket trading. The FDA has faced criticism from some doctors and scientists for approving that drug.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"LLY":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1007,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126012832,"gmtCreate":1624537286026,"gmtModify":1634004740046,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Buy in may and go away!&nbsp;","listText":"Buy in may and go away!&nbsp;","text":"Buy in may and go away!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126012832","repostId":"1104807513","repostType":2,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":487,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121335122,"gmtCreate":1624453318966,"gmtModify":1634005959615,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"A ‘store of value’ with nothing to hold it up. How many will have the hands to hold it when it stops growing? Capital will always chase yield, so if there’s is no reliable yield, and nothing to benchmark the value of the currency against, who will hold the bags?","listText":"A ‘store of value’ with nothing to hold it up. How many will have the hands to hold it when it stops growing? Capital will always chase yield, so if there’s is no reliable yield, and nothing to benchmark the value of the currency against, who will hold the bags?","text":"A ‘store of value’ with nothing to hold it up. How many will have the hands to hold it when it stops growing? Capital will always chase yield, so if there’s is no reliable yield, and nothing to benchmark the value of the currency against, who will hold the bags?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121335122","repostId":"1121798334","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1557,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121330812,"gmtCreate":1624453011236,"gmtModify":1634005963911,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","listText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","text":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121330812","repostId":"1128646024","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1101,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121392439,"gmtCreate":1624452879821,"gmtModify":1634005965826,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Cryptocurrencies have been a real&nbsp;boon in slowing the&nbsp;inflation of assets. Costs nothing, worth nothing, but it&nbsp;has been a very useful buffer for the economy. Forget the empty promises of DeFi andsmart contracts, they are currently insufficiently optimised to replace the real world instruments they are supposed to substitute. Now that the Fed has announced planned&nbsp;tapering of the money supply, this is as good as it gets for crypto, for now. It will pop again to buffer the next QE session though, so HODL at your own opportunity cost!","listText":"Cryptocurrencies have been a real&nbsp;boon in slowing the&nbsp;inflation of assets. Costs nothing, worth nothing, but it&nbsp;has been a very useful buffer for the economy. Forget the empty promises of DeFi andsmart contracts, they are currently insufficiently optimised to replace the real world instruments they are supposed to substitute. Now that the Fed has announced planned&nbsp;tapering of the money supply, this is as good as it gets for crypto, for now. It will pop again to buffer the next QE session though, so HODL at your own opportunity cost!","text":"Cryptocurrencies have been a real boon in slowing the inflation of assets. Costs nothing, worth nothing, but it has been a very useful buffer for the economy. Forget the empty promises of DeFi andsmart contracts, they are currently insufficiently optimised to replace the real world instruments they are supposed to substitute. Now that the Fed has announced planned tapering of the money supply, this is as good as it gets for crypto, for now. It will pop again to buffer the next QE session though, so HODL at your own opportunity cost!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121392439","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1099,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121972234,"gmtCreate":1624451991628,"gmtModify":1634005978905,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","listText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","text":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121972234","repostId":"1145825451","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":583,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129637354,"gmtCreate":1624370655978,"gmtModify":1634007132684,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"You do not take into account the economic expansion enabled by the rapid development of technology. The novel markets&nbsp;and industries generated by technology with provide the support structure for the increased money supply/inflation. Counterintuitively, increased inflation has actually madethe establishment and development of these newmarkets cheaper than it would have been without.","listText":"You do not take into account the economic expansion enabled by the rapid development of technology. The novel markets&nbsp;and industries generated by technology with provide the support structure for the increased money supply/inflation. Counterintuitively, increased inflation has actually madethe establishment and development of these newmarkets cheaper than it would have been without.","text":"You do not take into account the economic expansion enabled by the rapid development of technology. The novel markets and industries generated by technology with provide the support structure for the increased money supply/inflation. Counterintuitively, increased inflation has actually madethe establishment and development of these newmarkets cheaper than it would have been without.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129637354","repostId":"1145563175","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1145563175","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624359605,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1145563175?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 19:00","market":"us","language":"en","title":"One Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检查</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1145563175","media":"zerohedge","summary":"Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.Putting their \"facts\" into conte","content":"<p>Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.<b>Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.</b></p><p><blockquote>核实政客、头条新闻和央行行长的事实是一回事。<b>把他们的“事实”放在上下文中是另一回事。</b></blockquote></p><p> Toward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.</p><p><blockquote>为此，至关重要的是要将所谓的 “经济增长 ”、国债市场增长、股市增长、国内生产总值增长，当然还有金价增长置于更清晰的视角，尽管全球背景十分疯狂，但这些背景并没有得到明确报道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 1: The Rising Growth Headline</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 1：增长头条上升</b></blockquote></p><p> Recently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.</p><p><blockquote>最近，拜登的经济顾问贾里德-伯恩斯坦（Jared Bernstein）又一次头条新闻吹嘘说，美国的增长速度比他们的贸易伙伴快得多，这让群众平静下来。</blockquote></p><p> Fair enough.</p><p><blockquote>很公平。</blockquote></p><p> But given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…</p><p><blockquote>但鉴于美国正面临历史记录中最大的赤字……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ac5ed804cb5613af2890f604dac56be\" tg-width=\"575\" tg-height=\"405\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> …such “growth” is not surprising.</p><p><blockquote>……这样的“增长”并不奇怪。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，以极端赤字支出为幌子吹嘘经济增长，就像一个被宠坏的孩子吹嘘用父亲的信用卡秘密购买的新保时捷一样： 只有在账单到来、汽车消失之前，它才会看起来不错。</blockquote></p><p> In a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.</p><p><blockquote>在一个疯狂的金融世界里，至关重要的是要审视什么是增长，什么是价格发现的基本原则、债务水平或供求关系。</blockquote></p><p> In short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之： 由极端债务推动的 “增长 ”根本不是增长--它只是一辆买不起的跑车的表面光泽。</blockquote></p><p> And yet&nbsp;<b>the madness continues</b>…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.</p><p><blockquote>然而<b>疯狂仍在继续</b>……以美国国债市场为例。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 2: The Treasury “Market”?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 2：国债“市场”？</b></blockquote></p><p> How can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?</p><p><blockquote>自去年 2 月以来发行的 4.5 万亿美元债券中有 56% 是由美联储自己购买的，怎么会有人看涨期权美国国债市场呢？</blockquote></p><p> Sounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?</p><p><blockquote>听起来更像是内部操纵价格，而不是 “市场 ”，不是吗？</blockquote></p><p> Such context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.</p><p><blockquote>这样的背景赋予了 “喝自己的 Kool-aide ”的想法全新的含义，并应该冷静地提醒人们，国债，尤其是债券收益率，是伪装成信贷奥林匹克的僵尸。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.</p><p><blockquote>当然，美联储会假装这种 “支持 ”和他们的 “暂时性通胀 ”备忘录一样是暂时的，但大多数市场现实主义者早就明白，更多、更疯狂的债券收益率 “支持 ”是国债泡沫（和借据）像僵尸一样存活的唯一途径。</blockquote></p><p> In short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，财政部 “支持 ”、 “通融 ”或 “刺激 ”的更好措辞很简单： “生命支持”。</blockquote></p><p> With central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.</p><p><blockquote>随着美联储等央行在遥远的未来继续创造法定货币，以将其不可持续的债务货币化，我们可以有把握地预见美元将进一步走弱，金价、矿业股和科技和工业股等关键风险资产将进一步走强。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 3: Deflation is back?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景3：通货紧缩又回来了？</b></blockquote></p><p> Hardly.</p><p><blockquote>几乎不。</blockquote></p><p> Last week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.</p><p><blockquote>上周鲍威尔、费舍尔和布拉德的口诛笔伐让市场怀疑美联储是否会在遥远的未来加息。</blockquote></p><p> The very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky&nbsp;<b>rather than “transitory”</b>and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔之所以提出这个问题，是因为美联储意识到通胀将是棘手的<b>而不是“短暂的”</b>因此，他们已经在假装自己是鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> But if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.</p><p><blockquote>但是，如果美联储加息是为了平息实际通胀而不是 “暂时性 ”通胀，市场和山姆大叔就会大发脾气。故事结束。</blockquote></p><p> As I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—<b>tanking markets or surging inflation.</b>Eventually, we foresee both.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在其他地方写过的：选择你的美联储毒药--<b>市场下滑或通胀飙升。</b>最终，我们预见到了两者。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，鲍威尔充分意识到通货膨胀率会有所下降，只会走高，因此他已经在中途使用语义学改变了规则，现在他说，他们不会 “允许 ”2% 的通货膨胀率，而是满足于 2% 的 “平均 ”通货膨胀率。</blockquote></p><p> Translated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.</p><p><blockquote>翻译成诚实的英语，这只是意味着预计更多的通货膨胀即将到来。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 4: Rising Stock Markets</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 4：股市上涨</b></blockquote></p><p> Despite reaching nosebleed levels which defy&nbsp;<i>every</i>&nbsp;traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.</p><p><blockquote>尽管流鼻血的程度<i>每一</i>传统的估值上限，从开普比率和托宾比率到账面价值和自由现金流数据，头条新闻提醒我们，股票可以走得更高——而且确实可以。</blockquote></p><p> But context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.</p><p><blockquote>但背景和历史都提醒我们，泡沫越大，均值回归的下跌就越大。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1586e90684f7b8ae0525c04b1fa4bc7\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>No Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>国库中没有宝藏 = 股票中充满空气</b></blockquote></p><p> Based upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.</p><p><blockquote>基于以上客观事实，我们现在知道，出现在美国国债拍卖中的唯一主要买家是美联储本身。</blockquote></p><p> This is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.</p><p><blockquote>这是因为世界其他地区（亚洲、欧洲等）不想要它们。</blockquote></p><p> The next question is “why”?</p><p><blockquote>下一个问题是“为什么”？</blockquote></p><p> The answer is multiple yet simple.</p><p><blockquote>答案是多重而简单的。</blockquote></p><p> First, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.</p><p><blockquote>首先，尽管美国例外论是公开的神话，但其他国家的投资者实际上可以自己思考、阅读和计算，这意味着他们并不是盲目地信任美联储或其借据。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Stated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，他们并不相信最近从联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）口中涌出的 “暂时性通胀 ”或 “强势美元 ”的说法。</blockquote></p><p> Inflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.</p><p><blockquote>通货膨胀不仅在美国上升，在其他地方也在攀升--甚至在日本，尤其是在中国。这在很大程度上是因为美国通过贸易和财政赤字将其通货膨胀（和贬值的美元）输出到海外。</blockquote></p><p> Such deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the&nbsp;<i>outflow</i>&nbsp;of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.</p><p><blockquote>美国这种蓄意的通货膨胀出口让那些借钱给山姆大叔的国家（债权人）陷入了两难境地：他们要么 1) 让本国货币与美元一起升值（几乎没有乐趣），要么 2) 试图平息<i>流出</i>出口（贬值）美元，以防止本国货币进一步贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Option 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.</p><p><blockquote>当然，方案2是更好的选择，这意味着外国投资者需要购买比名誉扫地的美国国债更具吸引力的东西。</blockquote></p><p> Sadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than&nbsp;<i>bogus</i>&nbsp;US Treasuries are&nbsp;<i>bloated</i>&nbsp;U.S. stocks.</p><p><blockquote>可悲的是，讽刺的是，但事实上，唯一比<i>假的</i>美国国债是<i>臃肿的</i>美国股票。</blockquote></p><p> In short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，定价过高的美国股票仍然是美国两害相权取其轻，因此外国人购买/将股票视为比主权债券更好的对冲美元贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t believe me?</p><p><blockquote>不相信我？</blockquote></p><p> See for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:</p><p><blockquote>你自己看看——世界其他国家正在给美国股市泡沫增加大量空气：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc5b73212bd7c3126d6a130e88169139\" tg-width=\"582\" tg-height=\"407\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This is&nbsp;<i>contextually</i>&nbsp;troublesome for a number of reasons.</p><p><blockquote>这是<i>上下文</i>麻烦有很多原因。</blockquote></p><p> First, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).</p><p><blockquote>首先，这意味着美国的衰落已经从向世界其他地方抛售债券变成了向世界其他地方抛售股票（即中国……）。</blockquote></p><p> Longer term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…</p><p><blockquote>从长远来看，这仅仅意味着通过直接持股，外国人将慢慢拥有比美国更多的美国企业股份……</blockquote></p><p> As for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.</p><p><blockquote>至于曾经伟大的美国被外国买家慢慢掏空，不要责怪数据。责怪美联储和其他政策制定者（包括劳动力外包首席执行官）出卖美国，并假装债务可以通过神奇的（假）货币创造神奇地解决。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.</p><p><blockquote>当然，股票上涨超出理智、盈利和诚实的自由现金流数据的第二个讨厌的小问题是一种叫做波动性的东西——即市场晕船。</blockquote></p><p> Nothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.</p><p><blockquote>没有什么是直线的，包括美元和市场。会有波动。</blockquote></p><p> Right now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.</p><p><blockquote>目前，美元空头是四年来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c420ec0af0df42eabb7a3d248da4db10\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"507\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Yet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果美联储有机会试图缩减或加息，所有这些涌入美国股票的外币（上图）就会产生一个总是破裂的泡沫，就像前面提到的美元空头一样，受到挤压。</blockquote></p><p> That could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.</p><p><blockquote>随着外国人抛售股票以购买更多美元，这可能会导致美国股市大规模抛售。</blockquote></p><p> In short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，有很多不同的指针指向当前的股票泡沫，在未来一个月左右的时间内出现回调的可能性很大。</blockquote></p><p> The sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage)&nbsp;<i>not</i>&nbsp;making the headlines yet&nbsp;<i>now</i>&nbsp;making all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>顺便说一句，这些针中最锋利的是美国保证金债务（即杠杆）的惊人水平<i>不</i>成为头条新闻<i>现在</i>创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/021f71bd7e78a1c275a9c9d74691c525\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">As a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.</p><p><blockquote>提醒一下，每当保证金债务达到峰值（上图）时，市场很快就会暴跌，任何记得过去互联网和次级市场惨败的人都可以证明这一点。</blockquote></p><p> Just saying…</p><p><blockquote>只是说……</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 5：“飙升”GDP 增长的阴暗面</b></blockquote></p><p> The World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.</p><p><blockquote>世界银行最近成为头条新闻，预测全球GDP增长5.6%，为80年来最快。</blockquote></p><p> Good stuff, right?</p><p><blockquote>好东西，对吧？</blockquote></p><p> Well, not when placed into&nbsp;<i>context</i>…</p><p><blockquote>嗯，当放在<i>上下文</i>…</blockquote></p><p> The last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a&nbsp;<i>global world war</i>.</p><p><blockquote>我们上一次看到5.6%的全球GDP增长是在<i>全球世界大战</i>.</blockquote></p><p> Obviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.</p><p><blockquote>显然，当世界处于全球军事废墟之中时，任何形式的增长都有可能从这样一个历史（和可怕）的基线 “激增 ”。</blockquote></p><p> Coming out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…</p><p><blockquote>二战结束后，包括美国在内的每个人都负债累累。毕竟，世界大战可以做到这一点……</blockquote></p><p> As the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.</p><p><blockquote>随着胜利和拯救文明的美国从那场战争中走出来，通过印钞、抑制债券收益率和刺激GDP增长来降低高贵但极端的债务杠杆化在一定程度上是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> What followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.</p><p><blockquote>接下来的至少是一个站得住脚的40年，在此期间，美国名义GDP比美国国债收益率高出500-800个基点。</blockquote></p><p> In short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，债券持有人受到了打击，但事业、危机和击败轴心国后的重建证明了这种牺牲是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> The same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如今情况却并非如此，因为债券持有者再次陷入一种新的异常现象，即GDP将大大（类似地）超过长期债券收益率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Needless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.</p><p><blockquote>不用说，当前的政策制定者，正是那些把全球经济鸡舍扔进当前债务废墟堆的狐狸，喜欢把这归咎于COVID，而不是他们的浴室镜子。</blockquote></p><p> Ironically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the&nbsp;<i>Wehrmacht</i>, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy&nbsp;<i>today</i>&nbsp;(with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s&nbsp;<i>Blitzkrieg</i>&nbsp;or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.</p><p><blockquote>然而，具有讽刺意味的是，央行行长（相对于<i>德国国防军</i>日本帝国或意大利的墨索里尼）对全球经济造成了同样大的损害。<i>当今</i>（采取赤字政策和假装印钞机）作为德国的<i>闪电战</i>或者裕仁在 20 世纪 40 年代的万岁突袭。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?</p><p><blockquote>说到背景，我们真的可以或应该将一场全球流感（死亡人数375万）与一场全球战争（死亡人数8500万）进行比较吗？</blockquote></p><p> The policy makers would like&nbsp;<i>you</i>&nbsp;to think so.</p><p><blockquote>政策制定者希望<i>你</i>这么想。</blockquote></p><p> Folks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real&nbsp;<i>casus belli</i>&nbsp;(reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.</p><p><blockquote>像姆努钦（去年）或耶伦、鲍威尔和国际货币基金组织（今年）这样的人实际上都在试图说服自己和世界，对抗新冠病毒的战争是真实的<i>战争理由</i>（一场正当战争的理由）我们当前的债务困境——就其对金融世界的巨大影响而言，其范围与第二次世界大战相当。</blockquote></p><p> But regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.</p><p><blockquote>但是，无论任何人对科维德 “战争 ”的看法或其可疑的政策反应如何，将其经济影响与第二次世界大战相提并论都是对历史和军事隐喻的侮辱。</blockquote></p><p> The simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was&nbsp;<i>already</i>&nbsp;in a debt crisis long&nbsp;<i>before</i>&nbsp;the first Corona headline of early 2020.</p><p><blockquote>简单、客观且经过数学验证的事实是，全球经济<i>已经</i>长期陷入债务危机<i>以前</i>2020年初的第一个电晕头条。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/173b90a9931417cc655b6129fc7dc38c\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Today, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.</p><p><blockquote>如今，美国债务占国内生产总值的比重已达到自那场悲惨的第二次世界大战以来从未见过的水平，而且预计还会更高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54e71ae4475b3449c8833ca918ddbd82\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> So, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.</p><p><blockquote>因此，如果你仍然认为美联储能够而且将会像上世纪 70 年代或 80 年代那样，有意义地加息以对抗明显的通货膨胀，请再想想。</blockquote></p><p> In the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.</p><p><blockquote>在 20 世纪 70 年代和 80 年代，美国债务与国内生产总值的比率为 30%。今天是 130%。</blockquote></p><p> Given this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于这种自我造成的（而不是科维德的）现实，美联储根本无力加息。周期。句号。</blockquote></p><p> But as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.</p><p><blockquote>但正如我的同事埃贡-冯-格雷尔茨（Egon von Greyerz）提醒的那样，这绝不意味着利率不能也不会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.</p><p><blockquote>美联储（和其他央行）可能很强大，但它们不是神。简而言之，他们仅仅通过点击鼠标来 “控制 ”利率的能力是有限的。</blockquote></p><p> At some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.</p><p><blockquote>在某些时候，没有足够可信的假币来管理收益率曲线--尤其是在长期收益率曲线上。</blockquote></p><p> As more printed and&nbsp;<b>tanking currencies</b>&nbsp;try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.</p><p><blockquote>随着更多的印刷和<b>加注货币</b>试图购买更低的收益率和利率，最终整个实验失败。</blockquote></p><p> At that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.</p><p><blockquote>在那个关键时刻，利率飙升，通货膨胀抬起了丑陋的头，当世界其他地方都在盯着毫无价值的货币被滑稽的央行数字美元所取代时，央行行长们正在寻找自己以外的东西来指责。</blockquote></p><p> Wonderful…</p><p><blockquote>太棒了…</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 6: That Barbaric Relic?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景6：那个野蛮的遗迹？</b></blockquote></p><p> What the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.</p><p><blockquote>上述通货膨胀和利率背景意味着，在未来几年，通货膨胀将走高，利率将走低（被迫/控制），直到利率和通货膨胀一起飙升。</blockquote></p><p> This further means that&nbsp;<i>real</i>&nbsp;rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.</p><p><blockquote>这进一步意味着<i>真的</i>未来几年，利率（即根据通货膨胀调整的利率）可能会低至-5%至-10%。</blockquote></p><p> Such negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.</p><p><blockquote>这样的负实际利率水平很容易超过 70 年代和 80 年代的水平，这意味着黄金（和白银）都喜欢负实际利率，但在这种完全债务扭曲的背景下，黄金（和白银）别无选择，只能上涨、上涨、下跌。</blockquote></p><p> How’s that for context?</p><p><blockquote>这对上下文有什么影响？</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>One Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检查</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\">\nOne Mad Market & Six Cold Reality-Checks<blockquote>一个疯狂的市场和六个冷酷的现实检查</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">zerohedge</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-22 19:00</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.<b>Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.</b></p><p><blockquote>核实政客、头条新闻和央行行长的事实是一回事。<b>把他们的“事实”放在上下文中是另一回事。</b></blockquote></p><p> Toward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.</p><p><blockquote>为此，至关重要的是要将所谓的 “经济增长 ”、国债市场增长、股市增长、国内生产总值增长，当然还有金价增长置于更清晰的视角，尽管全球背景十分疯狂，但这些背景并没有得到明确报道。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 1: The Rising Growth Headline</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 1：增长头条上升</b></blockquote></p><p> Recently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.</p><p><blockquote>最近，拜登的经济顾问贾里德-伯恩斯坦（Jared Bernstein）又一次头条新闻吹嘘说，美国的增长速度比他们的贸易伙伴快得多，这让群众平静下来。</blockquote></p><p> Fair enough.</p><p><blockquote>很公平。</blockquote></p><p> But given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…</p><p><blockquote>但鉴于美国正面临历史记录中最大的赤字……</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0ac5ed804cb5613af2890f604dac56be\" tg-width=\"575\" tg-height=\"405\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> …such “growth” is not surprising.</p><p><blockquote>……这样的“增长”并不奇怪。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，以极端赤字支出为幌子吹嘘经济增长，就像一个被宠坏的孩子吹嘘用父亲的信用卡秘密购买的新保时捷一样： 只有在账单到来、汽车消失之前，它才会看起来不错。</blockquote></p><p> In a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.</p><p><blockquote>在一个疯狂的金融世界里，至关重要的是要审视什么是增长，什么是价格发现的基本原则、债务水平或供求关系。</blockquote></p><p> In short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之： 由极端债务推动的 “增长 ”根本不是增长--它只是一辆买不起的跑车的表面光泽。</blockquote></p><p> And yet&nbsp;<b>the madness continues</b>…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.</p><p><blockquote>然而<b>疯狂仍在继续</b>……以美国国债市场为例。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 2: The Treasury “Market”?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 2：国债“市场”？</b></blockquote></p><p> How can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?</p><p><blockquote>自去年 2 月以来发行的 4.5 万亿美元债券中有 56% 是由美联储自己购买的，怎么会有人看涨期权美国国债市场呢？</blockquote></p><p> Sounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?</p><p><blockquote>听起来更像是内部操纵价格，而不是 “市场 ”，不是吗？</blockquote></p><p> Such context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.</p><p><blockquote>这样的背景赋予了 “喝自己的 Kool-aide ”的想法全新的含义，并应该冷静地提醒人们，国债，尤其是债券收益率，是伪装成信贷奥林匹克的僵尸。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.</p><p><blockquote>当然，美联储会假装这种 “支持 ”和他们的 “暂时性通胀 ”备忘录一样是暂时的，但大多数市场现实主义者早就明白，更多、更疯狂的债券收益率 “支持 ”是国债泡沫（和借据）像僵尸一样存活的唯一途径。</blockquote></p><p> In short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，财政部 “支持 ”、 “通融 ”或 “刺激 ”的更好措辞很简单： “生命支持”。</blockquote></p><p> With central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.</p><p><blockquote>随着美联储等央行在遥远的未来继续创造法定货币，以将其不可持续的债务货币化，我们可以有把握地预见美元将进一步走弱，金价、矿业股和科技和工业股等关键风险资产将进一步走强。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 3: Deflation is back?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景3：通货紧缩又回来了？</b></blockquote></p><p> Hardly.</p><p><blockquote>几乎不。</blockquote></p><p> Last week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.</p><p><blockquote>上周鲍威尔、费舍尔和布拉德的口诛笔伐让市场怀疑美联储是否会在遥远的未来加息。</blockquote></p><p> The very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky&nbsp;<b>rather than “transitory”</b>and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.</p><p><blockquote>鲍威尔之所以提出这个问题，是因为美联储意识到通胀将是棘手的<b>而不是“短暂的”</b>因此，他们已经在假装自己是鹰派。</blockquote></p><p> But if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.</p><p><blockquote>但是，如果美联储加息是为了平息实际通胀而不是 “暂时性 ”通胀，市场和山姆大叔就会大发脾气。故事结束。</blockquote></p><p> As I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—<b>tanking markets or surging inflation.</b>Eventually, we foresee both.</p><p><blockquote>正如我在其他地方写过的：选择你的美联储毒药--<b>市场下滑或通胀飙升。</b>最终，我们预见到了两者。</blockquote></p><p> Meanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，鲍威尔充分意识到通货膨胀率会有所下降，只会走高，因此他已经在中途使用语义学改变了规则，现在他说，他们不会 “允许 ”2% 的通货膨胀率，而是满足于 2% 的 “平均 ”通货膨胀率。</blockquote></p><p> Translated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.</p><p><blockquote>翻译成诚实的英语，这只是意味着预计更多的通货膨胀即将到来。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 4: Rising Stock Markets</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 4：股市上涨</b></blockquote></p><p> Despite reaching nosebleed levels which defy&nbsp;<i>every</i>&nbsp;traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.</p><p><blockquote>尽管流鼻血的程度<i>每一</i>传统的估值上限，从开普比率和托宾比率到账面价值和自由现金流数据，头条新闻提醒我们，股票可以走得更高——而且确实可以。</blockquote></p><p> But context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.</p><p><blockquote>但背景和历史都提醒我们，泡沫越大，均值回归的下跌就越大。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f1586e90684f7b8ae0525c04b1fa4bc7\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> <b>No Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>国库中没有宝藏 = 股票中充满空气</b></blockquote></p><p> Based upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.</p><p><blockquote>基于以上客观事实，我们现在知道，出现在美国国债拍卖中的唯一主要买家是美联储本身。</blockquote></p><p> This is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.</p><p><blockquote>这是因为世界其他地区（亚洲、欧洲等）不想要它们。</blockquote></p><p> The next question is “why”?</p><p><blockquote>下一个问题是“为什么”？</blockquote></p><p> The answer is multiple yet simple.</p><p><blockquote>答案是多重而简单的。</blockquote></p><p> First, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.</p><p><blockquote>首先，尽管美国例外论是公开的神话，但其他国家的投资者实际上可以自己思考、阅读和计算，这意味着他们并不是盲目地信任美联储或其借据。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Stated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，他们并不相信最近从联邦公开市场委员会（FOMC）口中涌出的 “暂时性通胀 ”或 “强势美元 ”的说法。</blockquote></p><p> Inflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.</p><p><blockquote>通货膨胀不仅在美国上升，在其他地方也在攀升--甚至在日本，尤其是在中国。这在很大程度上是因为美国通过贸易和财政赤字将其通货膨胀（和贬值的美元）输出到海外。</blockquote></p><p> Such deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the&nbsp;<i>outflow</i>&nbsp;of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.</p><p><blockquote>美国这种蓄意的通货膨胀出口让那些借钱给山姆大叔的国家（债权人）陷入了两难境地：他们要么 1) 让本国货币与美元一起升值（几乎没有乐趣），要么 2) 试图平息<i>流出</i>出口（贬值）美元，以防止本国货币进一步贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Option 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.</p><p><blockquote>当然，方案2是更好的选择，这意味着外国投资者需要购买比名誉扫地的美国国债更具吸引力的东西。</blockquote></p><p> Sadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than&nbsp;<i>bogus</i>&nbsp;US Treasuries are&nbsp;<i>bloated</i>&nbsp;U.S. stocks.</p><p><blockquote>可悲的是，讽刺的是，但事实上，唯一比<i>假的</i>美国国债是<i>臃肿的</i>美国股票。</blockquote></p><p> In short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，定价过高的美国股票仍然是美国两害相权取其轻，因此外国人购买/将股票视为比主权债券更好的对冲美元贬值。</blockquote></p><p> Don’t believe me?</p><p><blockquote>不相信我？</blockquote></p><p> See for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:</p><p><blockquote>你自己看看——世界其他国家正在给美国股市泡沫增加大量空气：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fc5b73212bd7c3126d6a130e88169139\" tg-width=\"582\" tg-height=\"407\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">This is&nbsp;<i>contextually</i>&nbsp;troublesome for a number of reasons.</p><p><blockquote>这是<i>上下文</i>麻烦有很多原因。</blockquote></p><p> First, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).</p><p><blockquote>首先，这意味着美国的衰落已经从向世界其他地方抛售债券变成了向世界其他地方抛售股票（即中国……）。</blockquote></p><p> Longer term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…</p><p><blockquote>从长远来看，这仅仅意味着通过直接持股，外国人将慢慢拥有比美国更多的美国企业股份……</blockquote></p><p> As for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.</p><p><blockquote>至于曾经伟大的美国被外国买家慢慢掏空，不要责怪数据。责怪美联储和其他政策制定者（包括劳动力外包首席执行官）出卖美国，并假装债务可以通过神奇的（假）货币创造神奇地解决。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.</p><p><blockquote>当然，股票上涨超出理智、盈利和诚实的自由现金流数据的第二个讨厌的小问题是一种叫做波动性的东西——即市场晕船。</blockquote></p><p> Nothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.</p><p><blockquote>没有什么是直线的，包括美元和市场。会有波动。</blockquote></p><p> Right now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.</p><p><blockquote>目前，美元空头是四年来的最高水平。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c420ec0af0df42eabb7a3d248da4db10\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"507\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Yet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果美联储有机会试图缩减或加息，所有这些涌入美国股票的外币（上图）就会产生一个总是破裂的泡沫，就像前面提到的美元空头一样，受到挤压。</blockquote></p><p> That could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.</p><p><blockquote>随着外国人抛售股票以购买更多美元，这可能会导致美国股市大规模抛售。</blockquote></p><p> In short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，有很多不同的指针指向当前的股票泡沫，在未来一个月左右的时间内出现回调的可能性很大。</blockquote></p><p> The sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage)&nbsp;<i>not</i>&nbsp;making the headlines yet&nbsp;<i>now</i>&nbsp;making all-time highs.</p><p><blockquote>顺便说一句，这些针中最锋利的是美国保证金债务（即杠杆）的惊人水平<i>不</i>成为头条新闻<i>现在</i>创下历史新高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/021f71bd7e78a1c275a9c9d74691c525\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"531\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">As a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.</p><p><blockquote>提醒一下，每当保证金债务达到峰值（上图）时，市场很快就会暴跌，任何记得过去互联网和次级市场惨败的人都可以证明这一点。</blockquote></p><p> Just saying…</p><p><blockquote>只是说……</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景 5：“飙升”GDP 增长的阴暗面</b></blockquote></p><p> The World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.</p><p><blockquote>世界银行最近成为头条新闻，预测全球GDP增长5.6%，为80年来最快。</blockquote></p><p> Good stuff, right?</p><p><blockquote>好东西，对吧？</blockquote></p><p> Well, not when placed into&nbsp;<i>context</i>…</p><p><blockquote>嗯，当放在<i>上下文</i>…</blockquote></p><p> The last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a&nbsp;<i>global world war</i>.</p><p><blockquote>我们上一次看到5.6%的全球GDP增长是在<i>全球世界大战</i>.</blockquote></p><p> Obviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.</p><p><blockquote>显然，当世界处于全球军事废墟之中时，任何形式的增长都有可能从这样一个历史（和可怕）的基线 “激增 ”。</blockquote></p><p> Coming out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…</p><p><blockquote>二战结束后，包括美国在内的每个人都负债累累。毕竟，世界大战可以做到这一点……</blockquote></p><p> As the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.</p><p><blockquote>随着胜利和拯救文明的美国从那场战争中走出来，通过印钞、抑制债券收益率和刺激GDP增长来降低高贵但极端的债务杠杆化在一定程度上是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> What followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.</p><p><blockquote>接下来的至少是一个站得住脚的40年，在此期间，美国名义GDP比美国国债收益率高出500-800个基点。</blockquote></p><p> In short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.</p><p><blockquote>简而言之，债券持有人受到了打击，但事业、危机和击败轴心国后的重建证明了这种牺牲是合理的。</blockquote></p><p> The same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如今情况却并非如此，因为债券持有者再次陷入一种新的异常现象，即GDP将大大（类似地）超过长期债券收益率。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Needless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.</p><p><blockquote>不用说，当前的政策制定者，正是那些把全球经济鸡舍扔进当前债务废墟堆的狐狸，喜欢把这归咎于COVID，而不是他们的浴室镜子。</blockquote></p><p> Ironically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the&nbsp;<i>Wehrmacht</i>, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy&nbsp;<i>today</i>&nbsp;(with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s&nbsp;<i>Blitzkrieg</i>&nbsp;or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.</p><p><blockquote>然而，具有讽刺意味的是，央行行长（相对于<i>德国国防军</i>日本帝国或意大利的墨索里尼）对全球经济造成了同样大的损害。<i>当今</i>（采取赤字政策和假装印钞机）作为德国的<i>闪电战</i>或者裕仁在 20 世纪 40 年代的万岁突袭。</blockquote></p><p> When it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?</p><p><blockquote>说到背景，我们真的可以或应该将一场全球流感（死亡人数375万）与一场全球战争（死亡人数8500万）进行比较吗？</blockquote></p><p> The policy makers would like&nbsp;<i>you</i>&nbsp;to think so.</p><p><blockquote>政策制定者希望<i>你</i>这么想。</blockquote></p><p> Folks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real&nbsp;<i>casus belli</i>&nbsp;(reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.</p><p><blockquote>像姆努钦（去年）或耶伦、鲍威尔和国际货币基金组织（今年）这样的人实际上都在试图说服自己和世界，对抗新冠病毒的战争是真实的<i>战争理由</i>（一场正当战争的理由）我们当前的债务困境——就其对金融世界的巨大影响而言，其范围与第二次世界大战相当。</blockquote></p><p> But regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.</p><p><blockquote>但是，无论任何人对科维德 “战争 ”的看法或其可疑的政策反应如何，将其经济影响与第二次世界大战相提并论都是对历史和军事隐喻的侮辱。</blockquote></p><p> The simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was&nbsp;<i>already</i>&nbsp;in a debt crisis long&nbsp;<i>before</i>&nbsp;the first Corona headline of early 2020.</p><p><blockquote>简单、客观且经过数学验证的事实是，全球经济<i>已经</i>长期陷入债务危机<i>以前</i>2020年初的第一个电晕头条。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/173b90a9931417cc655b6129fc7dc38c\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"466\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\">Today, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.</p><p><blockquote>如今，美国债务占国内生产总值的比重已达到自那场悲惨的第二次世界大战以来从未见过的水平，而且预计还会更高。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/54e71ae4475b3449c8833ca918ddbd82\" tg-width=\"624\" tg-height=\"297\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> So, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.</p><p><blockquote>因此，如果你仍然认为美联储能够而且将会像上世纪 70 年代或 80 年代那样，有意义地加息以对抗明显的通货膨胀，请再想想。</blockquote></p><p> In the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.</p><p><blockquote>在 20 世纪 70 年代和 80 年代，美国债务与国内生产总值的比率为 30%。今天是 130%。</blockquote></p><p> Given this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于这种自我造成的（而不是科维德的）现实，美联储根本无力加息。周期。句号。</blockquote></p><p> But as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.</p><p><blockquote>但正如我的同事埃贡-冯-格雷尔茨（Egon von Greyerz）提醒的那样，这绝不意味着利率不能也不会上升。</blockquote></p><p> The Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.</p><p><blockquote>美联储（和其他央行）可能很强大，但它们不是神。简而言之，他们仅仅通过点击鼠标来 “控制 ”利率的能力是有限的。</blockquote></p><p> At some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.</p><p><blockquote>在某些时候，没有足够可信的假币来管理收益率曲线--尤其是在长期收益率曲线上。</blockquote></p><p> As more printed and&nbsp;<b>tanking currencies</b>&nbsp;try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.</p><p><blockquote>随着更多的印刷和<b>加注货币</b>试图购买更低的收益率和利率，最终整个实验失败。</blockquote></p><p> At that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.</p><p><blockquote>在那个关键时刻，利率飙升，通货膨胀抬起了丑陋的头，当世界其他地方都在盯着毫无价值的货币被滑稽的央行数字美元所取代时，央行行长们正在寻找自己以外的东西来指责。</blockquote></p><p> Wonderful…</p><p><blockquote>太棒了…</blockquote></p><p> <b>Context 6: That Barbaric Relic?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>背景6：那个野蛮的遗迹？</b></blockquote></p><p> What the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.</p><p><blockquote>上述通货膨胀和利率背景意味着，在未来几年，通货膨胀将走高，利率将走低（被迫/控制），直到利率和通货膨胀一起飙升。</blockquote></p><p> This further means that&nbsp;<i>real</i>&nbsp;rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.</p><p><blockquote>这进一步意味着<i>真的</i>未来几年，利率（即根据通货膨胀调整的利率）可能会低至-5%至-10%。</blockquote></p><p> Such negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.</p><p><blockquote>这样的负实际利率水平很容易超过 70 年代和 80 年代的水平，这意味着黄金（和白银）都喜欢负实际利率，但在这种完全债务扭曲的背景下，黄金（和白银）别无选择，只能上涨、上涨、下跌。</blockquote></p><p> How’s that for context?</p><p><blockquote>这对上下文有什么影响？</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-mad-market-six-cold-reality-checks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29\">zerohedge</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/one-mad-market-six-cold-reality-checks?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+zerohedge%2Ffeed+%28zero+hedge+-+on+a+long+enough+timeline%2C+the+survival+rate+for+everyone+drops+to+zero%29","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1145563175","content_text":"Fact checking politicos, headlines and central bankers is one thing.Putting their \"facts\" into context is another.\nToward that end, it’s critical to place so-called “economic growth,” Treasury market growth, stock market growth, GDP growth and, of course, gold price growth into clearer perspective despite an insane global backdrop that is anything but clearly reported.\nContext 1: The Rising Growth Headline\nRecently, Biden’s economic advisor, Jared Bernstein, calmed the masses with yet another headline-making boast that the U.S. is “growing considerably faster” than their trading partners.\nFair enough.\nBut given that the U.S. is running the largest deficits on historical record…\n\n…such “growth” is not surprising.\nIn other words, bragging about growth on the back of extreme deficit spending is like a spoiled kid bragging about a new Porsche secretly purchased with his father’s credit card: It only looks good until the bill arrives and the car vanishes.\nIn a financial world gone mad, it’s critical to look under the hood of what passes for growth in particular or basic principles of price discovery, debt levels or supply and demand in general.\nIn short: “Growth” driven by extreme debt is not growth at all–it’s just the headline surface shine on a sports car one can’t afford.\nAnd yet the madness continues…Take the U.S. Treasury market, for example.\nContext 2: The Treasury “Market”?\nHow can anyone call the U.S. Treasury market a “market” when 56% of the $4.5T of bonds issued since last February have been bought by the Fed itself?\nSounds more like an insider price-fix than a “market,” no?\nSuch context gives an entirely new meaning to the idea of “drinking your own Kool-aide” and ought to be a cool reminder that Treasury bonds in general, and bond yields in particular, are zombies masquerading as credit Olympians.\nThe Fed, of course, will pretend that such “support” is as temporary as their “transitory inflation” meme, but most market realists understood long ago that more and crazier bond yield “support” is the only way for national debt bubbles (and IOU’s) to stay zombie-like alive.\nIn short, the better phrase for Treasury “support,” “accommodation,” or “stimulus” is simply: “Life Support.”\nWith central banks like the Fed continuing to create fiat currencies to monetize their unsustainable debt well into the distant future, we can safely foresee a further weakening of the USD and further strengthening of gold prices, mining stocks and key risk assets like tech and industrial stocks.\nContext 3: Deflation is back?\nHardly.\nLast week’s jaw-boning from Powell, Fisher and Bullard had the markets wondering if the Fed will be raising rates in the distant future.\nThe very fact that Powell raised the issue is because the Fed is realizing that inflation is going to be sticky rather than “transitory”and thus they are already pretending to pose as Hawkish.\nBut if the Fed raises rates to quell real rather than “transitory” inflation, the markets and Uncle Sam will go into a tantrum. End of story.\nAs I’ve written elsewhere: Pick your Fed poison—tanking markets or surging inflation.Eventually, we foresee both.\nMeanwhile, and fully aware that inflation, with some dips, is only going to trend higher, Powell is already using semantics to change the rules mid-game, now saying that rather than “allow” 2% inflation, they’ll settle for an “average” of 2%.\nTranslated into honest English, this just means expect more inflation around the corner.\nContext 4: Rising Stock Markets\nDespite reaching nosebleed levels which defy every traditional valuation ceiling, from CAPE ratios and Tobin ratios to book values and FCF data, the headlines remind us that stocks can go even higher—and they can indeed.\nBut context, as well as history, reminds us that the bigger the bubble the bigger the mean-reverting fall.\n\nNo Treasure in Treasuries = Lot’s of Air in Stocks\nBased upon the objective facts above, we now know that the only primary buyers showing up at U.S. Treasury auctions is the Fed itself.\nThis is because the rest of the world (Asia, Europe etc.) doesn’t want them.\nThe next question is “why”?\nThe answer is multiple yet simple.\nFirst, and despite the open myth of American Exceptionalism, investors in other countries can actually think, read and count for themselves, which means they’re not simply trusting the Fed—or its IOU’s– blindly.\nStated otherwise, they are not buying the “transitory inflation” or “strong USD” story pouring recently out of the FOMC mouthpieces.\nInflation is not only rising in the U.S., it’s also creeping up elsewhere—even in Japan, but especially in China. This is largely because the U.S. exports its inflation (and debased dollars) offshore via trade and fiscal deficits.\nSuch deliberate inflation exporting by the U.S. places those countries (creditors) that lent money to Uncle Sam into a dilemma: They can either 1) let their currencies inflate alongside the dollar (hardly fun), or 2) try to quell the outflow of exported (debased) US dollars to save their own currencies from further debasement.\nOption 2, of course, is the better option, which means foreign investors need to buy something more appealing than discredited U.S. Treasuries.\nSadly, ironically, and yet factually, the only assets better than bogus US Treasuries are bloated U.S. stocks.\nIn short, nosebleed-priced US stocks are still the lesser of the two US evils, and foreigners are therefore buying/seeing stocks as a better hedge against the debased USD than sovereign bonds.\nDon’t believe me?\nSee for yourself—the rest of the world is adding lots of air to the U.S. equity bubble:\nThis is contextually troublesome for a number of reasons.\nFirst, it means the declining US of A has gone from hocking its bonds to the rest of the world to hocking it stocks to the rest of the world (i.e., China…).\nLonger term, this simply means that via direct stock ownership, foreigners will slowly own more of corporate America than, well America…\nAs for this slow gutting of the once-great America to foreign buyers, don’t blame the data. Blame your Fed and other policy makers (including labor off-shoring CEO’s) for selling-out America and pretending debt can be magically solved with magical (fake) money creation.\nOf course, the second pesky little problem with stocks rising beyond the pale of sanity, earnings and honest FCF data is a thing called volatility—i.e., market seasickness.\nNothing goes in a straight line, including the dollar or the market. There will be swings.\nRight now, the short on the USD is the highest it has been in four years.\nYet if, by some chance, the Fed ever attempts to taper or raise rates, all those foreign dollars piling into U.S. stocks (above) create a bubble that always pops, as do the foregoing dollar shorts, which get squeezed.\nThat could cause a massive sell-off in U.S. equity markets as foreigners sell their stocks to buy more dollars.\nIn short, there’s a lot of different needles pointing at the current equity bubble, and a correction within the next month or so is more than likely.\nThe sharpest of those needles, by the way, is the appallingly comical level of U.S. margin debt (i.e. leverage) not making the headlines yet now making all-time highs.\nAs a reminder, whenever margin debt peaks (above), markets tank soon thereafter, as anyone who remembers the dot.com and sub-prime market fiascos of yore can attest.\nJust saying…\nContext 5: The Dark Side of “Surging” GDP Growth\nThe World Bank recently made its own headlines projecting 5.6% global GDP growth, the fastest seen in 80 years.\nGood stuff, right?\nWell, not when placed into context…\nThe last time we saw 5.6% global GDP growth was during a global world war.\nObviously, when the world is in a state of global military rubble, growth of any kind is likely to “surge” from such an historical (and horrific) baseline.\nComing out of World War II, everyone, including the U.S. was in debt. World wars, after all, can do that…\nAs the victorious and civilization-saving U.S. came out of that war, it made some justifiable sense to de-lever that noble yet extreme debt by printing money, repressing bond yields and stimulating GDP growth.\nWhat followed was at least a defendable 40-year stretch in which US nominal GDP ran 500-800 bps above US Treasury yields.\nIn short, bond-holders got slammed, but the cause, crisis and re-building after defeating the Axis powers justified the sacrifice.\nThe same, however, can not be said today as bond-holders get crushed yet again in a new-abnormal in which GDP will greatly (and similarly) outpace long-term bond yields.\nNeedless to say, current policy makers, the very foxes who put the global economic henhouse into the current pile of debt of rubble, like to blame this on COVID rather their bathroom mirrors.\nIronically, however, central bankers (as opposed to the Wehrmacht, the Japanese Empire or Italy’s Mussolini) managed to do as much harm to the global economy today (with deficit policies and extend-and-pretend money printers) as Germany’s Blitzkrieg or Hirohito’s Banzai raids did in the 1940’s.\nWhen it comes to context, can or should we really be comparing a global flu (death toll 3.75M) to a global war (death toll 85 million)?\nThe policy makers would like you to think so.\nFolks like Mnuchin (last year) or Yellen, Powell and the IMF (this year), are in fact trying to convince themselves and the world that the war against COVID was the real casus belli (reason for a justifiable war) of our current debt distress—equal in scope to World War II in its drastic impact on the financial world.\nBut regardless of anyone’s views on the COVID “War” or its questionable policy reactions, comparing its economic impact to that of World War II is an insult to both history and military metaphors.\nThe simple, objective and mathematically-confirmed fact is that the global economy was already in a debt crisis long before the first Corona headline of early 2020.\nToday, US debt to GDP is at levels it has not seen since that tragic and Second World War, and it’s projected to go much, much higher.\n\nSo, just in case you still think the Fed can and will meaningfully raise rates to fight obvious inflation, as it did in the 1970’s or 1980’s, think again.\nIn the 1970’s and 1980’s US debt/GDP was 30%. Today it’s 130%.\nGiven this self-inflicted (rather than COVID-blamed) reality, the Fed simply can’t afford to raise rates. Period. Full stop.\nBut as my colleague, Egon von Greyerz reminds, that by no means suggests that rates can’t and won’t rise.\nThe Fed (and other central banks) may be powerful, but they are not divine. In short, there’s a limit to their powers to simply “control” rates with a mouse-click.\nAt some point, there’s not enough credible fake money to manage the yield curve—especially on the long end.\nAs more printed and tanking currencies try to purchase lower yields and rates, eventually the entire experiment fails.\nAt that critical point, rates spike, inflation raises its ugly head and the central bankers look for something other than themselves to blame as the rest of the world stares at worthless currencies being replaced by comical central bank digital dollars.\nWonderful…\nContext 6: That Barbaric Relic?\nWhat the foregoing inflation and rate contexts means is that in the years ahead, inflation will run higher and rates will run (be forced/controlled) lower until both rates and inflation spike together.\nThis further means that real rates (i.e., those adjusted for inflation) could run as deep as -5% to -10% in the years ahead.\nSuch negative real rate levels could easily surpass those seen in the 70’s and 80’s, which means gold (and silver), both of whom love negative real rates, has nowhere to go but up, up and away in this totally debt-distorted backdrop.\nHow’s that for context?","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":815,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129872502,"gmtCreate":1624369933506,"gmtModify":1634007152367,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Safe yields are in stable companies with good dividends, which can raise prices in tandem with inflation. Let’s play a guessing game! No it’s not AMC or GME….","listText":"Safe yields are in stable companies with good dividends, which can raise prices in tandem with inflation. Let’s play a guessing game! No it’s not AMC or GME….","text":"Safe yields are in stable companies with good dividends, which can raise prices in tandem with inflation. Let’s play a guessing game! No it’s not AMC or GME….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129872502","repostId":"1152615512","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1152615512","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624360383,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1152615512?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-22 19:13","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Confused by the Fed? So Are Markets<blockquote>被美联储搞糊涂了？市场也是如此</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1152615512","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the stren","content":"<p>  Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength of the post-pandemic recovery.  The bond market is supposed to be the smart older cousin that keeps its head while the flighty stock market zooms about all over the place. Not so much in the past week.</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率的波动揭示了投资者对美联储意图和大流行后复苏力度的深深困惑。债券市场应该是聪明的表亲，当浮躁的股票市场到处乱窜时，它能保持领先。过去一周没那么多。</blockquote></p><p> Instead of a calm response to the Federal Reserve’sslightly more hawkish tone, the 10-year yield first leapt by the most in months, then plunged. On Monday, it dropped during Asian trading hours to the lowest since February, before bouncing all the way back and then some.</p><p><blockquote>10 年期国债收益率没有对美联储略显鹰派的语气做出冷静反应，而是在几个月内先是跃升最大，然后暴跌。周一，它在亚洲交易时段跌至二月份以来的最低水平，然后一路反弹，然后又有所回升。</blockquote></p><p> The moves reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength ofthe post-pandemic recovery, as well as the extraordinary desperation for safe yields.</p><p><blockquote>这些举动揭示了投资者对美联储意图和大流行后复苏力度的深深困惑，以及对安全收益率的极度绝望。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5911d5e0ad74414b1b88185c2769f99\" tg-width=\"336\" tg-height=\"410\">Before stock traders get too smug, bond-market volatility is mirrored by similar swings below the surface of the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>在股票交易员变得过于自满之前，债券市场的波动反映在股市表面之下的类似波动中。</blockquote></p><p> For me, the most extraordinary shift was the $235 billion depositedin the Fed’s reverse repurchase facilityafter it raised the rate it pays from zero to 0.05%, because it was concerned that it was losing control of the lower bound of rates.</p><p><blockquote>对我来说，最不寻常的转变是美联储将利率从零提高到 0.05% 后，美联储的逆回购工具存入了 2350 亿美元，因为美联储担心自己正在失去对利率下限的控制。</blockquote></p><p> This is a true tightening of monetary policy, not the mere technicality the Fed presented it as. For monetarists who care about the amount of money in circulation, in one day it drained reserves equivalent to two months of quantitative easing, and showed just how much cash is sloshing around the system looking for even the tiniest yield.</p><p><blockquote>这是一次真正的货币政策紧缩，而不仅仅是美联储所描述的技术性紧缩。对于关心流通中货币量的货币主义者来说，它在一天之内消耗了相当于两个月量化宽松的储备，并显示了有多少现金在系统中晃动，寻找哪怕是最小的收益率。</blockquote></p><p> For those, including me, who prefer to focus on the price of money, it is now higher—albeit not very much, it is a tightening. Secured overnight rates in the money market had been stuck on the floor of 0.01% since March, according to the New York Fed, with some borrowing at negative rates. It rose to 0.05% after the Fed’s announcement, and negative rates vanished.</p><p><blockquote>对于包括我在内的那些更喜欢关注货币价格的人来说，现在货币价格更高了——尽管不是很高，但这是一种紧缩。根据纽约联储的数据，自 3 月份以来，货币市场的担保隔夜利率一直停留在 0.01% 的下限，部分借款利率为负。美联储宣布这一消息后，利率升至 0.05%，负利率消失了。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1707a50e4704c3c16d8d2eac7a0204f9\" tg-width=\"317\" tg-height=\"419\">After the initial volatility, the bond market’s considered reaction was in the right direction for tighter policy: Higher short-term real rates reduced the longer-term inflation threat and so led to lower 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields—until the reflation trade returned on Monday. Higher rates pulled down stocks most sensitive to the economy—cyclicals and cheap value stocks—until Monday’s reverse. Growth stocks did fine thanks to lower long-term rates, before lagging on Monday.</p><p><blockquote>在经历了最初的波动之后，债券市场经过深思熟虑的反应朝着收紧政策的正确方向发展： 较高的短期实际利率降低了长期通胀威胁，从而导致 10 年期和 30 年期国债收益率下降--直到周一重新通胀交易回归。利率上升拖累了对经济最敏感的股票--周期性股票和廉价价值股票--直到周一出现逆转。由于长期利率较低，成长型股票表现良好，但周一表现落后。</blockquote></p><p> Yet, 0.05% is a very small tightening, to put it mildly. Usually, the Fed moves in 0.25-percentage-point increments, so this was equivalent to one-fifth of a normal rate increase. What mattered for Treasurys wasn’t the immediate shift in the price of money, but the prospect of a bigger change by the Fed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，温和地说，0.05%是一个非常小的紧缩。通常，美联储的加息幅度为 0.25 个百分点，因此这相当于正常加息的五分之一。对美国国债来说，重要的不是货币价格的立即变化，而是美联储做出更大改变的前景。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bacd47e561e9d7ffdb95d180913fadf\" tg-width=\"321\" tg-height=\"418\">Much of the focus was on the “dots,” the projections of individual Fed policy makers. The median prediction for 2023 was for two 0.25-point increases that year, having previously been for no move. Again, in normal times this wouldn’t be terribly significant, as the predictions aren’t binding, have been a terrible guide to future policy and anyway are still two years away. They were even dismissed by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell in his news conference on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>大部分焦点都集中在 “点”上，即美联储个别决策者的预测。2023 年的中值预测是当年两次增长 0.25 个百分点，而此前则没有变动。同样，在正常情况下，这并不会非常重要，因为这些预测没有约束力，对未来的政策起到了很糟糕的指导作用，而且无论如何还有两年的时间。他们甚至在周三的新闻发布会上被美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔驳回。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5df90890ee96402b8d5375020d3c135\" tg-width=\"353\" tg-height=\"454\">The reason the market cared so much isn’t the specifics, but the shift in tone from super-dovish to a hint of hawk. St. Louis Fed President James Bullard emphasized this—and the market moved further—on Friday when he said the first increase could even come next year. Seven of the 18 dots had one or two rises penciled in for 2022, so the news here was merely that Mr. Bullard was one of them.</p><p><blockquote>市场如此关心的原因不是具体细节，而是基调从超级鸽派转变为一丝鹰派。圣路易斯联储主席詹姆斯·布拉德周五强调了这一点，市场进一步走势，他表示第一次加息甚至可能在明年到来。18个点中有7个点在2022年有一两次上升，所以这里的消息仅仅是布拉德先生是其中之一。</blockquote></p><p> Having previously been careful not to say anything that could possibly be interpreted as worrying about inflation, the Fed suddenly seemed to be concerned.</p><p><blockquote>美联储此前一直小心翼翼地不说任何可能被解读为担心通胀的话，但突然似乎感到担忧。</blockquote></p><p> We will have to wait for more from Mr. Powell and other Fed members to find out if this is the interpretation they wanted. They might well be taken aback by the scale of the market moves, which on Friday briefly pushed five-year Treasury yields—the base for much corporate borrowing—up to where they stood in February last year, before the first lockdown. It wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. Powell tries to talk the market back.</p><p><blockquote>我们将不得不等待鲍威尔先生和其他美联储成员提供更多信息，以了解这是否是他们想要的解释。他们很可能会对市场走势的规模感到惊讶，周五市场走势短暂地将五年期国债收益率（许多企业借款的基础）推至去年 2 月第一次封锁前的水平。如果鲍威尔先生试图说服市场，我不会感到惊讶。</blockquote></p><p> The problem is that investors are supersensitive to the Fed’s views. They think the real economy will be hit much harder than it usually is by higher rates. The Fed also has spent the past year convincing investors that low rates are here pretty much forever.</p><p><blockquote>问题在于投资者对美联储的观点极其敏感。他们认为实体经济将受到比平时更高利率的打击。美联储还在过去一年里让投资者相信低利率几乎永远存在。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> The threat of higher rates holding back the economy pushed investors toward the post-2010 playbook, at least for a few days: Buy long-dated bonds, buy Big Tech and other growth stocks, steer clear of anything dependent on a strong expansion.</p><p><blockquote>利率上升阻碍经济的威胁促使投资者走向 2010 年后的剧本，至少在几天内是这样：购买长期债券，购买大型科技股和其他成长型股票，避开任何依赖于强劲扩张的股票。</blockquote></p><p> The shift from thinking there is no risk of rate rises to thinking there is some risk of increases marks a major change of mindset. But I urge caution: Don’t assume the Treasury market is right about inflation, let alone that the wildly swinging yield is anything more than a best guess at what the Fed plans.</p><p><blockquote>从认为没有加息风险转变为认为有一些加息风险标志着心态的重大转变。但我敦促大家谨慎行事：不要以为国债市场对通胀的看法是正确的，更不用说疯狂波动的收益率只不过是对美联储计划的最佳猜测了。</blockquote></p><p> But just as withthe taper tantrum of 2013, when investors start to price in Fed action, they can overdo it as everyone tries to adjust their portfolio to the new reality at once.</p><p><blockquote>但就像 2013 年的缩减规模发脾气一样，当投资者开始对美联储的行动进行定价时，他们可能会过度，因为每个人都试图立即调整自己的投资组合以适应新的现实。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Confused by the Fed? So Are Markets<blockquote>被美联储搞糊涂了？市场也是如此</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\">\nConfused by the Fed? So Are Markets<blockquote>被美联储搞糊涂了？市场也是如此</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-22 19:13</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength of the post-pandemic recovery.  The bond market is supposed to be the smart older cousin that keeps its head while the flighty stock market zooms about all over the place. Not so much in the past week.</p><p><blockquote>债券收益率的波动揭示了投资者对美联储意图和大流行后复苏力度的深深困惑。债券市场应该是聪明的表亲，当浮躁的股票市场到处乱窜时，它能保持领先。过去一周没那么多。</blockquote></p><p> Instead of a calm response to the Federal Reserve’sslightly more hawkish tone, the 10-year yield first leapt by the most in months, then plunged. On Monday, it dropped during Asian trading hours to the lowest since February, before bouncing all the way back and then some.</p><p><blockquote>10 年期国债收益率没有对美联储略显鹰派的语气做出冷静反应，而是在几个月内先是跃升最大，然后暴跌。周一，它在亚洲交易时段跌至二月份以来的最低水平，然后一路反弹，然后又有所回升。</blockquote></p><p> The moves reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength ofthe post-pandemic recovery, as well as the extraordinary desperation for safe yields.</p><p><blockquote>这些举动揭示了投资者对美联储意图和大流行后复苏力度的深深困惑，以及对安全收益率的极度绝望。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5911d5e0ad74414b1b88185c2769f99\" tg-width=\"336\" tg-height=\"410\">Before stock traders get too smug, bond-market volatility is mirrored by similar swings below the surface of the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>在股票交易员变得过于自满之前，债券市场的波动反映在股市表面之下的类似波动中。</blockquote></p><p> For me, the most extraordinary shift was the $235 billion depositedin the Fed’s reverse repurchase facilityafter it raised the rate it pays from zero to 0.05%, because it was concerned that it was losing control of the lower bound of rates.</p><p><blockquote>对我来说，最不寻常的转变是美联储将利率从零提高到 0.05% 后，美联储的逆回购工具存入了 2350 亿美元，因为美联储担心自己正在失去对利率下限的控制。</blockquote></p><p> This is a true tightening of monetary policy, not the mere technicality the Fed presented it as. For monetarists who care about the amount of money in circulation, in one day it drained reserves equivalent to two months of quantitative easing, and showed just how much cash is sloshing around the system looking for even the tiniest yield.</p><p><blockquote>这是一次真正的货币政策紧缩，而不仅仅是美联储所描述的技术性紧缩。对于关心流通中货币量的货币主义者来说，它在一天之内消耗了相当于两个月量化宽松的储备，并显示了有多少现金在系统中晃动，寻找哪怕是最小的收益率。</blockquote></p><p> For those, including me, who prefer to focus on the price of money, it is now higher—albeit not very much, it is a tightening. Secured overnight rates in the money market had been stuck on the floor of 0.01% since March, according to the New York Fed, with some borrowing at negative rates. It rose to 0.05% after the Fed’s announcement, and negative rates vanished.</p><p><blockquote>对于包括我在内的那些更喜欢关注货币价格的人来说，现在货币价格更高了——尽管不是很高，但这是一种紧缩。根据纽约联储的数据，自 3 月份以来，货币市场的担保隔夜利率一直停留在 0.01% 的下限，部分借款利率为负。美联储宣布这一消息后，利率升至 0.05%，负利率消失了。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1707a50e4704c3c16d8d2eac7a0204f9\" tg-width=\"317\" tg-height=\"419\">After the initial volatility, the bond market’s considered reaction was in the right direction for tighter policy: Higher short-term real rates reduced the longer-term inflation threat and so led to lower 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields—until the reflation trade returned on Monday. Higher rates pulled down stocks most sensitive to the economy—cyclicals and cheap value stocks—until Monday’s reverse. Growth stocks did fine thanks to lower long-term rates, before lagging on Monday.</p><p><blockquote>在经历了最初的波动之后，债券市场经过深思熟虑的反应朝着收紧政策的正确方向发展： 较高的短期实际利率降低了长期通胀威胁，从而导致 10 年期和 30 年期国债收益率下降--直到周一重新通胀交易回归。利率上升拖累了对经济最敏感的股票--周期性股票和廉价价值股票--直到周一出现逆转。由于长期利率较低，成长型股票表现良好，但周一表现落后。</blockquote></p><p> Yet, 0.05% is a very small tightening, to put it mildly. Usually, the Fed moves in 0.25-percentage-point increments, so this was equivalent to one-fifth of a normal rate increase. What mattered for Treasurys wasn’t the immediate shift in the price of money, but the prospect of a bigger change by the Fed.</p><p><blockquote>然而，温和地说，0.05%是一个非常小的紧缩。通常，美联储的加息幅度为 0.25 个百分点，因此这相当于正常加息的五分之一。对美国国债来说，重要的不是货币价格的立即变化，而是美联储做出更大改变的前景。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4bacd47e561e9d7ffdb95d180913fadf\" tg-width=\"321\" tg-height=\"418\">Much of the focus was on the “dots,” the projections of individual Fed policy makers. The median prediction for 2023 was for two 0.25-point increases that year, having previously been for no move. Again, in normal times this wouldn’t be terribly significant, as the predictions aren’t binding, have been a terrible guide to future policy and anyway are still two years away. They were even dismissed by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell in his news conference on Wednesday.</p><p><blockquote>大部分焦点都集中在 “点”上，即美联储个别决策者的预测。2023 年的中值预测是当年两次增长 0.25 个百分点，而此前则没有变动。同样，在正常情况下，这并不会非常重要，因为这些预测没有约束力，对未来的政策起到了很糟糕的指导作用，而且无论如何还有两年的时间。他们甚至在周三的新闻发布会上被美联储主席杰罗姆·鲍威尔驳回。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e5df90890ee96402b8d5375020d3c135\" tg-width=\"353\" tg-height=\"454\">The reason the market cared so much isn’t the specifics, but the shift in tone from super-dovish to a hint of hawk. St. Louis Fed President James Bullard emphasized this—and the market moved further—on Friday when he said the first increase could even come next year. Seven of the 18 dots had one or two rises penciled in for 2022, so the news here was merely that Mr. Bullard was one of them.</p><p><blockquote>市场如此关心的原因不是具体细节，而是基调从超级鸽派转变为一丝鹰派。圣路易斯联储主席詹姆斯·布拉德周五强调了这一点，市场进一步走势，他表示第一次加息甚至可能在明年到来。18个点中有7个点在2022年有一两次上升，所以这里的消息仅仅是布拉德先生是其中之一。</blockquote></p><p> Having previously been careful not to say anything that could possibly be interpreted as worrying about inflation, the Fed suddenly seemed to be concerned.</p><p><blockquote>美联储此前一直小心翼翼地不说任何可能被解读为担心通胀的话，但突然似乎感到担忧。</blockquote></p><p> We will have to wait for more from Mr. Powell and other Fed members to find out if this is the interpretation they wanted. They might well be taken aback by the scale of the market moves, which on Friday briefly pushed five-year Treasury yields—the base for much corporate borrowing—up to where they stood in February last year, before the first lockdown. It wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. Powell tries to talk the market back.</p><p><blockquote>我们将不得不等待鲍威尔先生和其他美联储成员提供更多信息，以了解这是否是他们想要的解释。他们很可能会对市场走势的规模感到惊讶，周五市场走势短暂地将五年期国债收益率（许多企业借款的基础）推至去年 2 月第一次封锁前的水平。如果鲍威尔先生试图说服市场，我不会感到惊讶。</blockquote></p><p> The problem is that investors are supersensitive to the Fed’s views. They think the real economy will be hit much harder than it usually is by higher rates. The Fed also has spent the past year convincing investors that low rates are here pretty much forever.</p><p><blockquote>问题在于投资者对美联储的观点极其敏感。他们认为实体经济将受到比平时更高利率的打击。美联储还在过去一年里让投资者相信低利率几乎永远存在。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> The threat of higher rates holding back the economy pushed investors toward the post-2010 playbook, at least for a few days: Buy long-dated bonds, buy Big Tech and other growth stocks, steer clear of anything dependent on a strong expansion.</p><p><blockquote>利率上升阻碍经济的威胁促使投资者走向 2010 年后的剧本，至少在几天内是这样：购买长期债券，购买大型科技股和其他成长型股票，避开任何依赖于强劲扩张的股票。</blockquote></p><p> The shift from thinking there is no risk of rate rises to thinking there is some risk of increases marks a major change of mindset. But I urge caution: Don’t assume the Treasury market is right about inflation, let alone that the wildly swinging yield is anything more than a best guess at what the Fed plans.</p><p><blockquote>从认为没有加息风险转变为认为有一些加息风险标志着心态的重大转变。但我敦促大家谨慎行事：不要以为国债市场对通胀的看法是正确的，更不用说疯狂波动的收益率只不过是对美联储计划的最佳猜测了。</blockquote></p><p> But just as withthe taper tantrum of 2013, when investors start to price in Fed action, they can overdo it as everyone tries to adjust their portfolio to the new reality at once.</p><p><blockquote>但就像 2013 年的缩减规模发脾气一样，当投资者开始对美联储的行动进行定价时，他们可能会过度，因为每个人都试图立即调整自己的投资组合以适应新的现实。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/confused-by-the-fed-so-are-markets-11624352991\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/confused-by-the-fed-so-are-markets-11624352991","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1152615512","content_text":"Swings in bond yields reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength of the post-pandemic recovery.\n\nThe bond market is supposed to be the smart older cousin that keeps its head while the flighty stock market zooms about all over the place. Not so much in the past week.\nInstead of a calm response to the Federal Reserve’sslightly more hawkish tone, the 10-year yield first leapt by the most in months, then plunged. On Monday, it dropped during Asian trading hours to the lowest since February, before bouncing all the way back and then some.\nThe moves reveal deep confusion among investors about the Fed’s intentions and the strength ofthe post-pandemic recovery, as well as the extraordinary desperation for safe yields.\nBefore stock traders get too smug, bond-market volatility is mirrored by similar swings below the surface of the stock market.\nFor me, the most extraordinary shift was the $235 billion depositedin the Fed’s reverse repurchase facilityafter it raised the rate it pays from zero to 0.05%, because it was concerned that it was losing control of the lower bound of rates.\nThis is a true tightening of monetary policy, not the mere technicality the Fed presented it as. For monetarists who care about the amount of money in circulation, in one day it drained reserves equivalent to two months of quantitative easing, and showed just how much cash is sloshing around the system looking for even the tiniest yield.\nFor those, including me, who prefer to focus on the price of money, it is now higher—albeit not very much, it is a tightening. Secured overnight rates in the money market had been stuck on the floor of 0.01% since March, according to the New York Fed, with some borrowing at negative rates. It rose to 0.05% after the Fed’s announcement, and negative rates vanished.\nAfter the initial volatility, the bond market’s considered reaction was in the right direction for tighter policy: Higher short-term real rates reduced the longer-term inflation threat and so led to lower 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields—until the reflation trade returned on Monday. Higher rates pulled down stocks most sensitive to the economy—cyclicals and cheap value stocks—until Monday’s reverse. Growth stocks did fine thanks to lower long-term rates, before lagging on Monday.\nYet, 0.05% is a very small tightening, to put it mildly. Usually, the Fed moves in 0.25-percentage-point increments, so this was equivalent to one-fifth of a normal rate increase. What mattered for Treasurys wasn’t the immediate shift in the price of money, but the prospect of a bigger change by the Fed.\nMuch of the focus was on the “dots,” the projections of individual Fed policy makers. The median prediction for 2023 was for two 0.25-point increases that year, having previously been for no move. Again, in normal times this wouldn’t be terribly significant, as the predictions aren’t binding, have been a terrible guide to future policy and anyway are still two years away. They were even dismissed by Fed Chairman Jerome Powell in his news conference on Wednesday.\nThe reason the market cared so much isn’t the specifics, but the shift in tone from super-dovish to a hint of hawk. St. Louis Fed President James Bullard emphasized this—and the market moved further—on Friday when he said the first increase could even come next year. Seven of the 18 dots had one or two rises penciled in for 2022, so the news here was merely that Mr. Bullard was one of them.\nHaving previously been careful not to say anything that could possibly be interpreted as worrying about inflation, the Fed suddenly seemed to be concerned.\nWe will have to wait for more from Mr. Powell and other Fed members to find out if this is the interpretation they wanted. They might well be taken aback by the scale of the market moves, which on Friday briefly pushed five-year Treasury yields—the base for much corporate borrowing—up to where they stood in February last year, before the first lockdown. It wouldn’t surprise me if Mr. Powell tries to talk the market back.\nThe problem is that investors are supersensitive to the Fed’s views. They think the real economy will be hit much harder than it usually is by higher rates. The Fed also has spent the past year convincing investors that low rates are here pretty much forever.\nThe threat of higher rates holding back the economy pushed investors toward the post-2010 playbook, at least for a few days: Buy long-dated bonds, buy Big Tech and other growth stocks, steer clear of anything dependent on a strong expansion.\nThe shift from thinking there is no risk of rate rises to thinking there is some risk of increases marks a major change of mindset. But I urge caution: Don’t assume the Treasury market is right about inflation, let alone that the wildly swinging yield is anything more than a best guess at what the Fed plans.\nBut just as withthe taper tantrum of 2013, when investors start to price in Fed action, they can overdo it as everyone tries to adjust their portfolio to the new reality at once.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1109,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":129847430,"gmtCreate":1624369796420,"gmtModify":1631885483507,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"No more Fed money to prop up. Time to fold andfind greener pastures!","listText":"No more Fed money to prop up. Time to fold andfind greener pastures!","text":"No more Fed money to prop up. Time to fold andfind greener pastures!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/129847430","repostId":"1133339567","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":539,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167510589,"gmtCreate":1624276425041,"gmtModify":1631884666174,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3586565070413371","idStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"China has a domestic market that dwarfs the US and EU combined, of course it’s gonna rise!","listText":"China has a domestic market that dwarfs the US and EU combined, of course it’s gonna rise!","text":"China has a domestic market that dwarfs the US and EU combined, of course it’s gonna rise!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167510589","repostId":"2145081082","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":812,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":148030845,"gmtCreate":1625897799087,"gmtModify":1633936233576,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","listText":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","text":"This is not a bad decision by the Chinese government. Monopolies are very bad for the consumer.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148030845","repostId":"1138077902","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"1138077902","kind":"news","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Providing stock market headlines, business news, financials and earnings ","home_visible":1,"media_name":"Tiger Newspress","id":"1079075236","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba"},"pubTimestamp":1625883154,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1138077902?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-10 10:12","market":"us","language":"en","title":"China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1138077902","media":"Tiger Newspress","summary":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review","content":"<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局已经禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案，依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>国家市场监督管理总局根据《反垄断法》，综合分析评价参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在审查过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了相关政府部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，多次听取了腾讯方面的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案涉案市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和直播游戏市场。腾讯在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼分别占据了下游直播游戏市场份额的40%和30%以上，分列第一和第二位，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙实行单独管控，对斗鱼实行联合管控。如虎牙与斗鱼合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的实体，进一步强化腾讯在直播游戏市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除和限制竞争的效果，不利于市场的公平竞争，可能损害消费者的利益，不利于网络游戏和直播游戏市场的健康可持续发展。经评估，腾讯提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争担忧。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条和《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，市场监管总局决定依法禁止此类经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</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\">\nChina has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu<blockquote>中国禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1079075236\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/8274c5b9d4c2852bfb1c4d6ce16c68ba);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">Tiger Newspress </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-07-10 10:12</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.</p><p><blockquote>中国国家市场监督管理总局已经禁止虎牙和斗鱼合并。</blockquote></p><p> On January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.</p><p><blockquote>2021年1月4日，国家市场监督管理总局对腾讯控股控股有限公司申报的虎牙公司与斗鱼国际控股有限公司合并一案，依法进行了经营者集中反垄断审查。</blockquote></p><p> According to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.</p><p><blockquote>国家市场监督管理总局根据《反垄断法》，综合分析评价参与集中的经营者在相关市场的市场份额及其对市场的控制力、市场集中程度、集中对市场进入和技术进步的影响、集中对消费者和其他相关经营者的影响，以及腾讯控股提出的附加限制性承诺方案的有效性。在审查过程中，市场监管总局广泛征求了相关政府部门、行业协会、专家学者、同行业竞争对手和下游客户的意见，多次听取了腾讯方面的意见。</blockquote></p><p> The review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.</p><p><blockquote>审查显示，本案涉案市场为我国网络游戏运营服务市场和直播游戏市场。腾讯在上游网络游戏运营服务市场份额超过40%，排名第一；虎牙和斗鱼分别占据了下游直播游戏市场份额的40%和30%以上，分列第一和第二位，合计超过70%。目前，腾讯控股对虎牙实行单独管控，对斗鱼实行联合管控。如虎牙与斗鱼合并将使腾讯控股单独控制合并后的实体，进一步强化腾讯在直播游戏市场的主导地位，使腾讯控股有能力和动力在上下游市场实施闭环管理和双向垂直封锁，具有或可能具有排除和限制竞争的效果，不利于市场的公平竞争，可能损害消费者的利益，不利于网络游戏和直播游戏市场的健康可持续发展。经评估，腾讯提出的附加限制性条件承诺不能有效解决上述竞争担忧。</blockquote></p><p> According to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.</p><p><blockquote>根据《反垄断法》第二十八条和《经营者集中审查暂行规定》第三十五条的规定，市场监管总局决定依法禁止此类经营者集中。</blockquote></p><p> Tencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.</p><p><blockquote>腾讯控股回应称，公司将认真遵守审查决定，积极配合监管要求，依法经营，履行社会责任。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"HUYA":"虎牙","DOYU":"斗鱼","00700":"腾讯控股"},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1138077902","content_text":"The State Administration of market supervision of China has prohibited the merger of HuYa and DouYu.\nOn January 4, 2021, the State Administration of market supervision of the people's Republic of China conducted an anti-monopoly examination on the concentration of business operators in accordance with the law in the merger case of tiger tooth company and Betta International Holding Co., Ltd. declared by Tencent Holding Co., Ltd.\nAccording to the anti monopoly law, the State Administration of market supervision comprehensively analyzes and evaluates the market share of the operators participating in the concentration in the relevant market and their control over the market, the degree of market concentration, the impact of concentration on market entry and technological progress, the impact of concentration on consumers and other relevant operators, as well as the effectiveness of the additional restrictive commitment scheme proposed by Tencent. During the review process, the State Administration of market supervision extensively solicited opinions from relevant government departments, industry associations, experts and scholars, competitors in the same industry and downstream customers, and listened to Tencent's opinions for many times.\nThe review shows that the relevant market of this case is the online game operation service market and the live game market in China. Tencent's market share in the upstream online game operation service exceeds 40%, ranking first; Tiger teeth and fighting fish have more than 40% and 30% of the downstream live game market shares respectively, ranking first and second, with a total of more than 70%. At present, Tencent has separate control over tiger tooth and joint control over Betta. For example, the merger of tiger tooth and Betta will make Tencent control the merged entity separately, further strengthen Tencent's dominant position in the live game market, and enable Tencent to have the ability and motivation to implement closed-loop management and two-way vertical blockade in the upstream and downstream markets, which has or may have the effect of excluding and limiting competition, which is not conducive to fair competition in the market and may damage the interests of consumers, It is not conducive to the healthy and sustainable development of online games and live game market. After evaluation, Tencent's proposal of additional restrictive conditions commitment can not effectively solve the above competition concerns.\nAccording to Article 28 of the anti monopoly law and Article 35 of the Interim Provisions on the examination of business concentration, the State Administration of market supervision has decided to prohibit such business concentration according to law.\nTencent responded that the company will seriously abide by the review decision, actively cooperate with regulatory requirements, operate in accordance with the law and fulfill its social responsibilities.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"00700":0.9,"HUYA":0.9,"DOYU":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3517,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":148094127,"gmtCreate":1625897660969,"gmtModify":1633936235173,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","listText":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","text":"I think the regulators will be regretting this ill-considered criterion. 1 million isn’t much for a platform company…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/148094127","repostId":"2150306047","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2559,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":167535014,"gmtCreate":1624276199438,"gmtModify":1634008564410,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Strong defensive&nbsp;dividend stocks are the play in this market!","listText":"Strong defensive&nbsp;dividend stocks are the play in this market!","text":"Strong defensive dividend stocks are the play in this market!","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/167535014","repostId":"1179311244","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1179311244","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1624274237,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1179311244?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-21 19:17","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Global stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担忧美联储后全球股市下滑</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1179311244","media":"CNN Business","summary":"Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors c","content":"<p><div> Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors continue to weigh signals from the Federal Reserve that it could raise interest rates sooner than ...</p><p><blockquote><div>香港（CNN Business）周一，全球股市和加密货币出现回调，因为投资者继续权衡美联储发出的可能比……更早加息的信号。</div></blockquote></p><p>  <a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html\">网页链接</a>  </div> </p><p><blockquote><a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html\">网页连接</a></blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Global stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担忧美联储后全球股市下滑</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\">\nGlobal stocks slide after Wall Street frets about the Fed<blockquote>华尔街担忧美联储后全球股市下滑</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">CNN Business</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-21 19:17</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><div> Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors continue to weigh signals from the Federal Reserve that it could raise interest rates sooner than ...</p><p><blockquote><div>香港（CNN Business）周一，全球股市和加密货币出现回调，因为投资者继续权衡美联储发出的可能比……更早加息的信号。</div></blockquote></p><p>  <a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html\">网页链接</a>  </div> </p><p><blockquote><a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html\">网页连接</a></blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html\">CNN Business</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://edition.cnn.com/2021/06/21/investing/global-stocks-fed/index.html","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1179311244","content_text":"Hong Kong (CNN Business)Global stocks and cryptocurrencies are pulling back on Monday as investors continue to weigh signals from the Federal Reserve that it could raise interest rates sooner than expected.\nMarkets were broadly lower, with Japan's Nikkei 225 (N225) dropping more than 3% — easily the worst major performer — after Wall Street closed out its worst week in months on Friday with a 1.6% fall on the Dow Jones Industrial Average (INDU).\nHong Kong's Hang Seng (HSI) fell 1.1% and South Korea's Kospi (KOSPI) dropped 0.8%. China's Shanghai Composite (SHCOMP) was the regional outlier in Asia, up 0.1%.\nThe fallout spilled over into Europe, where London's FTSE 100 (UKX) dropped 0.1%. France's CAC 40 (CAC40) fell 0.2%, while Germany's DAX (DAX) was up 0.2%.\nThe declines followed volatility in the United States on Friday, where the Dow's weak close left it 3.5% lower on the week, its worst pullback since late January. The S&P 500 (SPX) lost 1.3% on Friday, while the Nasdaq Composite (COMP) shed 0.9%.\nUS futures were muted early Monday, experiencing little change.\nWall Street was already having a rough week, but stocks slid even further on Friday after St. Louis Federal Reserve President James Bullard told CNBC that he thinks the Fed should raise interest rates as soon as the end of next year. That was even more hawkish than the signal the Fed sent out on Wednesday that it may raise rates twice by late 2023.\nWall Street is worried about inflation. But investors are also nervous about the Fed taking away the stimulus it is injecting into the market to counter the economic impact of the Covid-19 pandemic.\nThe crypto market is also struggling Monday, though it wasn't immediately apparent why. Bitcoin is down more than 6% in the last 24 hours, trading just above $33,000 per coin, according to CoinDesk. Ethereum fell more than 7%, while dogecoin plunged more than 8%.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".SPX":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":472,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122900360,"gmtCreate":1624590695850,"gmtModify":1633950812648,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","listText":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","text":"Railroad stocks…. Don’t say bojio..","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122900360","repostId":"1156973335","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2706,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121330812,"gmtCreate":1624453011236,"gmtModify":1634005963911,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","listText":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","text":"Risky play, the hunt for yield…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121330812","repostId":"1128646024","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1101,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122902171,"gmtCreate":1624591027493,"gmtModify":1633950808110,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","listText":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","text":"Covid vaccine + infrastructure bill. I think the market will be fine….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122902171","repostId":"2145472760","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":4067,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":121972234,"gmtCreate":1624451991628,"gmtModify":1634005978905,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","listText":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","text":"This is like saying Samsung will beat out Apple…","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/121972234","repostId":"1145825451","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":583,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":126087470,"gmtCreate":1624537806090,"gmtModify":1634004730839,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","listText":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","text":"Singapore shares are like Singaporeans, ultra conservative….","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/126087470","repostId":"1142469060","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2293,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":162091953,"gmtCreate":1624026941772,"gmtModify":1634023882413,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.","listText":"Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.","text":"Capitalism at its finest. 1% of 100 billion is still 1 billion. Free.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/162091953","repostId":"1111305468","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":719,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":122901313,"gmtCreate":1624590895632,"gmtModify":1633950810382,"author":{"id":"3586565070413371","authorId":"3586565070413371","name":"Orangejus","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3586565070413371","authorIdStr":"3586565070413371"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","listText":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world&nbsp;economy…. Bitcoin bulls&nbsp;should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news…&nbsp;=)","text":"Oh this is quite interesting… everyone will be looking to see how this fares in a real world economy…. Bitcoin bulls should be boosted for the next month or so. Aunty Cathy will also be quite happywith this news… =)","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/122901313","repostId":"2146021046","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2345,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}