yourself的个人主页 - 老虎社区

yourself

暂无个人介绍

IP属地：未知

135关注

2粉丝

0主题

0勋章

2021-07-26

The triangle will win the battle and the war

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-09-19

So I can do it was a lot of people who are sharing connections ideas and opportunities to the arts

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-07-31

lotto or mi

Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>

2021-08-16

Ok sure if you have any questions or concerns please visit the entrance to the arts in English literature

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-08-12

Hey it was a lot of people

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-07-23

Insightful

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-08-02

bananas

Expedia: Perfectly Valued, Perfectly Situated<blockquote>Expedia：物超所值，地理位置优越</blockquote>

2021-07-25

Cook Islands

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-09-02

Playback is it a bit iuyyy in my head

抱歉，原内容已删除

2021-09-08

Using mm 😀😀😀😀 the arts in English and cheese and the call just now and cheese and wine

抱歉，原内容已删除

去老虎APP查看更多动态

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"userPageInfo":{"id":"4089375229568220","uuid":"4089375229568220","gmtCreate":1626274010151,"gmtModify":1626274010151,"name":"yourself","pinyin":"yourself","introduction":"","introductionEn":null,"signature":"","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":2,"headSize":135,"tweetSize":29,"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":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-1","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"出道虎友","description":"加入老虎社区500天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0e4d0ca1da0456dc7894c946d44bf9ab","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0f2f65e8ce4cfaae8db2bea9b127f58b","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c5948a31b6edf154422335b265235809","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2022.12.09","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-3","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"传说交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到300次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":"93.52%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":3,"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":887624853,"gmtCreate":1632030304172,"gmtModify":1632803212813,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"So I can do it was a lot of people who are sharing connections ideas and opportunities to the arts","listText":"So I can do it was a lot of people who are sharing connections ideas and opportunities to the arts","text":"So I can do it was a lot of people who are sharing connections ideas and opportunities to the arts","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/887624853","repostId":"2168508161","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1796,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":886471180,"gmtCreate":1631621747140,"gmtModify":1631890130230,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CRNT\">$Ceragon Networks(CRNT)$</a>hhhu me know if there is a good day","listText":"<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CRNT\">$Ceragon Networks(CRNT)$</a>hhhu me know if there is a good day","text":"$Ceragon Networks(CRNT)$hhhu me know if there is a good day","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/886471180","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3158,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":880531642,"gmtCreate":1631064304286,"gmtModify":1631890130235,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Using mm 😀😀😀😀 the arts in English and cheese and&nbsp;the call just now and cheese and wine","listText":"Using mm 😀😀😀😀 the arts in English and cheese and&nbsp;the call just now and cheese and wine","text":"Using mm 😀😀😀😀 the arts in English and cheese and the call just now and cheese and wine","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/880531642","repostId":"2165545483","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1626,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":812505213,"gmtCreate":1630593112632,"gmtModify":1631890130237,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Playback is it a bit iuyyy in my head","listText":"Playback is it a bit iuyyy in my head","text":"Playback is it a bit iuyyy in my head","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/812505213","repostId":"1108690074","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1657,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":816199807,"gmtCreate":1630474454909,"gmtModify":1631890130240,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice 😊👍🏻 the arts the arts in English","listText":"Nice 😊👍🏻 the arts the arts in English","text":"Nice 😊👍🏻 the arts the arts in English","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/816199807","repostId":"1173514242","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1404,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":818227830,"gmtCreate":1630415833820,"gmtModify":1631890130247,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Nice 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻","listText":"Nice 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻","text":"Nice 👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻👍🏻","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/818227830","repostId":"2163450854","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"2163450854","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Share your news with media, investors, and consumers with targeted distribution options from one of the world’s largest and most trusted newswires.","home_visible":1,"media_name":"GlobeNewswire","id":"1016364462","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/31bb960c88eab45f27ccc9fce75dee9a"},"pubTimestamp":1630413300,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2163450854?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-31 20:35","market":"us","language":"en","title":"XpresSpa Group Announces Board Authorization for Stock Repurchase Program<blockquote>XpresSpa集团宣布董事会授权股票回购计划</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2163450854","media":"GlobeNewswire","summary":"Up to 15 Million Shares of Outstanding Common Stock May Be Repurchased\nNEW YORK, Aug. 31, 2021 (GLOB","content":"<p><i>Up to 15 Million Shares of Outstanding Common Stock May Be Repurchased</i></p><p><blockquote><i>最多可回购1500万股已发行普通股</i></blockquote></p><p> NEW YORK, Aug. 31, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XSPA\">XpresSpa Group</a>, Inc. (Nasdaq: XSPA), a travel health and wellness company, today announced that its Board of Directors has authorized a stock repurchase program for up to 15,000,000 shares of its outstanding common stock.</p><p><blockquote>纽约，2021年8月31日（环球通讯社）——<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XSPA\">XpresSpa集团</a>旅游健康和保健公司，Inc.（纳斯达克代码：XSPA）今天宣布，其董事会已授权一项股票回购计划，最多可回购15,000,000股已发行普通股。</blockquote></p><p> \"Our XpresCheck™ COVID-19 testing business continues to grow and perform well. In July, increased testing volumes and improved mix of higher margin rapid tests resulted in higher overall practice fees than in June. Additionally, these activities exclude any testing related to our new CDC relationship or from our El Al Airlines pilot program. We believe launching a stock buyback program reflects our confidence in the long-term prospects of the business and the undervalued price of our stock,\" said Bruce Bernstein, Chairman of the Board of XpresSpa Group, Inc. “Consistent with our business philosophy, we will continue to evaluate investment opportunities in the business against buying back shares.\"</p><p><blockquote>“我们的XpresCheck™新冠肺炎测试业务继续增长，表现良好。7月份，测试量的增加和利润率更高的快速测试组合的改善导致总体实践费用高于6月份。此外，这些活动不包括与我们新的CDC关系或我们的以色列航空公司试点计划相关的任何测试。XpresSpa Group，Inc.董事会主席Bruce Bernstein表示：“我们相信，启动股票回购计划反映了我们对业务长期前景和股票价格被低估的信心。”“与我们的经营理念一致，我们将继续评估业务中回购股票的投资机会。”</blockquote></p><p> The shares may be repurchased on the open market, in privately negotiated transactions, or otherwise in accordance with applicable federal securities laws. The specific timing and amount of future repurchases will be determined by market conditions, cash flow requirements, securities law limitations, and other factors. Repurchases may continue from time to time, as conditions permit, until the number of shares authorized to be repurchased have been acquired, or until the authorization to repurchase is terminated or expires, whichever occurs first.</p><p><blockquote>股票可以在公开市场、私下协商交易或根据适用的联邦证券法以其他方式回购。未来回购的具体时间和金额将由市场状况、现金流要求、证券法限制等因素决定。在条件允许的情况下，购回可不时继续，直至购回授权购回的股份数目，或直至购回授权终止或到期，以先发生者为准。</blockquote></p><p> The share repurchase authorization will be used at management’s discretion and will expire on September 15, 2022, unless further extended by the Board of Directors. The repurchase program may also be suspended, modified, or discontinued at any time.</p><p><blockquote>除非董事会进一步延长，否则股份回购授权将由管理层酌情使用，并将于2022年9月15日到期。回购计划也可能随时暂停、修改或终止。</blockquote></p><p> <b><u>About XpresSpa Group, Inc. </u></b></p><p><blockquote><b><u>关于XpresSpa集团公司。</u></b></blockquote></p><p> XpresSpa Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: XSPA) is a leading global health and wellness holding company operating three distinct brands: Treat™, XpresCheck™, and XpresSpa™. Treat is a travel health and wellness brand that will be providing on-demand access to healthcare through technology and personalized services. XpresCheck is a leading on-site airport provider of COVID-19 screening and testing with 13 locations in 11 domestic airports. XpresSpa is a leading airport retailer of spa services and related health and wellness products, with 43 locations in 21 airports globally.</p><p><blockquote>XpresSpa Group，Inc.（纳斯达克：XSPA）是一家全球领先的健康和保健控股公司，经营三个不同的品牌：Treat™, XpresCheck™，和XpresSpa。™Treat是一个旅游健康和保健品牌，将通过技术和个性化服务提供按需医疗保健。XpresCheck是领先的新冠肺炎筛查和测试现场机场提供商，在11个国内机场设有13个地点。XpresSpa是水疗服务及相关健康产品的领先机场零售商，在全球21个机场拥有43家分店。</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>XpresSpa Group Announces Board Authorization for Stock Repurchase Program<blockquote>XpresSpa集团宣布董事会授权股票回购计划</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\">\nXpresSpa Group Announces Board Authorization for Stock Repurchase Program<blockquote>XpresSpa集团宣布董事会授权股票回购计划</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1016364462\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/31bb960c88eab45f27ccc9fce75dee9a);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">GlobeNewswire </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2021-08-31 20:35</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><i>Up to 15 Million Shares of Outstanding Common Stock May Be Repurchased</i></p><p><blockquote><i>最多可回购1500万股已发行普通股</i></blockquote></p><p> NEW YORK, Aug. 31, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XSPA\">XpresSpa Group</a>, Inc. (Nasdaq: XSPA), a travel health and wellness company, today announced that its Board of Directors has authorized a stock repurchase program for up to 15,000,000 shares of its outstanding common stock.</p><p><blockquote>纽约，2021年8月31日（环球通讯社）——<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/XSPA\">XpresSpa集团</a>旅游健康和保健公司，Inc.（纳斯达克代码：XSPA）今天宣布，其董事会已授权一项股票回购计划，最多可回购15,000,000股已发行普通股。</blockquote></p><p> \"Our XpresCheck™ COVID-19 testing business continues to grow and perform well. In July, increased testing volumes and improved mix of higher margin rapid tests resulted in higher overall practice fees than in June. Additionally, these activities exclude any testing related to our new CDC relationship or from our El Al Airlines pilot program. We believe launching a stock buyback program reflects our confidence in the long-term prospects of the business and the undervalued price of our stock,\" said Bruce Bernstein, Chairman of the Board of XpresSpa Group, Inc. “Consistent with our business philosophy, we will continue to evaluate investment opportunities in the business against buying back shares.\"</p><p><blockquote>“我们的XpresCheck™新冠肺炎测试业务继续增长，表现良好。7月份，测试量的增加和利润率更高的快速测试组合的改善导致总体实践费用高于6月份。此外，这些活动不包括与我们新的CDC关系或我们的以色列航空公司试点计划相关的任何测试。XpresSpa Group，Inc.董事会主席Bruce Bernstein表示：“我们相信，启动股票回购计划反映了我们对业务长期前景和股票价格被低估的信心。”“与我们的经营理念一致，我们将继续评估业务中回购股票的投资机会。”</blockquote></p><p> The shares may be repurchased on the open market, in privately negotiated transactions, or otherwise in accordance with applicable federal securities laws. The specific timing and amount of future repurchases will be determined by market conditions, cash flow requirements, securities law limitations, and other factors. Repurchases may continue from time to time, as conditions permit, until the number of shares authorized to be repurchased have been acquired, or until the authorization to repurchase is terminated or expires, whichever occurs first.</p><p><blockquote>股票可以在公开市场、私下协商交易或根据适用的联邦证券法以其他方式回购。未来回购的具体时间和金额将由市场状况、现金流要求、证券法限制等因素决定。在条件允许的情况下，购回可不时继续，直至购回授权购回的股份数目，或直至购回授权终止或到期，以先发生者为准。</blockquote></p><p> The share repurchase authorization will be used at management’s discretion and will expire on September 15, 2022, unless further extended by the Board of Directors. The repurchase program may also be suspended, modified, or discontinued at any time.</p><p><blockquote>除非董事会进一步延长，否则股份回购授权将由管理层酌情使用，并将于2022年9月15日到期。回购计划也可能随时暂停、修改或终止。</blockquote></p><p> <b><u>About XpresSpa Group, Inc. </u></b></p><p><blockquote><b><u>关于XpresSpa集团公司。</u></b></blockquote></p><p> XpresSpa Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: XSPA) is a leading global health and wellness holding company operating three distinct brands: Treat™, XpresCheck™, and XpresSpa™. Treat is a travel health and wellness brand that will be providing on-demand access to healthcare through technology and personalized services. XpresCheck is a leading on-site airport provider of COVID-19 screening and testing with 13 locations in 11 domestic airports. XpresSpa is a leading airport retailer of spa services and related health and wellness products, with 43 locations in 21 airports globally.</p><p><blockquote>XpresSpa Group，Inc.（纳斯达克：XSPA）是一家全球领先的健康和保健控股公司，经营三个不同的品牌：Treat™, XpresCheck™，和XpresSpa。™Treat是一个旅游健康和保健品牌，将通过技术和个性化服务提供按需医疗保健。XpresCheck是领先的新冠肺炎筛查和测试现场机场提供商，在11个国内机场设有13个地点。XpresSpa是水疗服务及相关健康产品的领先机场零售商，在全球21个机场拥有43家分店。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{},"is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2163450854","content_text":"Up to 15 Million Shares of Outstanding Common Stock May Be Repurchased\nNEW YORK, Aug. 31, 2021 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- XpresSpa Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: XSPA), a travel health and wellness company, today announced that its Board of Directors has authorized a stock repurchase program for up to 15,000,000 shares of its outstanding common stock.\n\"Our XpresCheck™ COVID-19 testing business continues to grow and perform well. In July, increased testing volumes and improved mix of higher margin rapid tests resulted in higher overall practice fees than in June. Additionally, these activities exclude any testing related to our new CDC relationship or from our El Al Airlines pilot program. We believe launching a stock buyback program reflects our confidence in the long-term prospects of the business and the undervalued price of our stock,\" said Bruce Bernstein, Chairman of the Board of XpresSpa Group, Inc. “Consistent with our business philosophy, we will continue to evaluate investment opportunities in the business against buying back shares.\"\nThe shares may be repurchased on the open market, in privately negotiated transactions, or otherwise in accordance with applicable federal securities laws. The specific timing and amount of future repurchases will be determined by market conditions, cash flow requirements, securities law limitations, and other factors. Repurchases may continue from time to time, as conditions permit, until the number of shares authorized to be repurchased have been acquired, or until the authorization to repurchase is terminated or expires, whichever occurs first.\nThe share repurchase authorization will be used at management’s discretion and will expire on September 15, 2022, unless further extended by the Board of Directors. The repurchase program may also be suspended, modified, or discontinued at any time.\nAbout XpresSpa Group, Inc. \nXpresSpa Group, Inc. (Nasdaq: XSPA) is a leading global health and wellness holding company operating three distinct brands: Treat™, XpresCheck™, and XpresSpa™. Treat is a travel health and wellness brand that will be providing on-demand access to healthcare through technology and personalized services. XpresCheck is a leading on-site airport provider of COVID-19 screening and testing with 13 locations in 11 domestic airports. XpresSpa is a leading airport retailer of spa services and related health and wellness products, with 43 locations in 21 airports globally.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"XSPA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1308,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":819486785,"gmtCreate":1630089067547,"gmtModify":1704955832569,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"High quality of people who are","listText":"High quality of people who are","text":"High quality of people who are","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/819486785","repostId":"819395936","repostType":1,"repost":{"id":819395936,"gmtCreate":1630032338921,"gmtModify":1704954908136,"author":{"id":"3527667596890271","authorId":"3527667596890271","name":"Buy_Sell","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a5f0ed79a338c758a22e0b4ea13bf9d2","crmLevel":1,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3527667596890271","authorIdStr":"3527667596890271"},"themes":[],"title":"🚀【8月27日】美股连涨势头终结？！今天有什么操作？","htmlText":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 8月27日，港股三大指数集体低开，恒指跌0.31%报25337点，国指跌0.17%报8922点，恒生科技指数跌0.01%报6336点。 盘面上，燃气股、乳业股、餐饮股、医药股、烟草概念股、纸业股普遍上涨，蒙牛乳业涨2.65%；大型科网股涨跌不一，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09888\">$百度集团-SW(09888)$</a> 高开1.34%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09618\">$京东集团-SW(09618)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01024\">$快手-W(01024)$</a> 小幅上涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09988\">$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">$腾讯控股(00700)$</a> 低开；物管股、体育用品股、光伏股、教育股普跌。 <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/02318\">$中国平安(02318)$</a> 高开1.05%，2021年上半年，公司实现归属于母公司股东的营运利润818.36亿元，同比增长10.1%；年化营运ROE达21.0%；归属于母公司股东的净利润580.05亿元，同比下降15.5%。中国平安发布公告称，公司拟使用不低于50亿元且不超过100亿元的自有资金，以不超过82.56元/股的价格回购A股。","listText":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 8月27日，港股三大指数集体低开，恒指跌0.31%报25337点，国指跌0.17%报8922点，恒生科技指数跌0.01%报6336点。 盘面上，燃气股、乳业股、餐饮股、医药股、烟草概念股、纸业股普遍上涨，蒙牛乳业涨2.65%；大型科网股涨跌不一，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09888\">$百度集团-SW(09888)$</a> 高开1.34%，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09618\">$京东集团-SW(09618)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/01024\">$快手-W(01024)$</a> 小幅上涨，<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/09988\">$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$</a> 、<a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/00700\">$腾讯控股(00700)$</a> 低开；物管股、体育用品股、光伏股、教育股普跌。 <a target=\"_blank\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/02318\">$中国平安(02318)$</a> 高开1.05%，2021年上半年，公司实现归属于母公司股东的营运利润818.36亿元，同比增长10.1%；年化营运ROE达21.0%；归属于母公司股东的净利润580.05亿元，同比下降15.5%。中国平安发布公告称，公司拟使用不低于50亿元且不超过100亿元的自有资金，以不超过82.56元/股的价格回购A股。","text":"聊聊今日份的交易想法，包括对于大盘走势后续的看法？看涨/看跌哪只股票、晒晒单等等。 港股市场 8月27日，港股三大指数集体低开，恒指跌0.31%报25337点，国指跌0.17%报8922点，恒生科技指数跌0.01%报6336点。 盘面上，燃气股、乳业股、餐饮股、医药股、烟草概念股、纸业股普遍上涨，蒙牛乳业涨2.65%；大型科网股涨跌不一，$百度集团-SW(09888)$ 高开1.34%，$京东集团-SW(09618)$ 、$快手-W(01024)$ 小幅上涨，$阿里巴巴-SW(09988)$ 、$腾讯控股(00700)$ 低开；物管股、体育用品股、光伏股、教育股普跌。 $中国平安(02318)$ 高开1.05%，2021年上半年，公司实现归属于母公司股东的营运利润818.36亿元，同比增长10.1%；年化营运ROE达21.0%；归属于母公司股东的净利润580.05亿元，同比下降15.5%。中国平安发布公告称，公司拟使用不低于50亿元且不超过100亿元的自有资金，以不超过82.56元/股的价格回购A股。","images":[{"img":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2c713dcc3fbf69fd43b5daf1a7b65576","width":"226","height":"220"}],"top":1,"highlighted":2,"essential":2,"paper":2,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/819395936","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":0,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"subType":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":2,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1775,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":835175480,"gmtCreate":1629698986740,"gmtModify":1631890130250,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"East coast park and to the arts in English","listText":"East coast park and to the arts in English","text":"East coast park and to the arts in English","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/835175480","repostId":"2161742695","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3226,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":832071605,"gmtCreate":1629551025907,"gmtModify":1631890130254,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Dear user local I think it's the arts","listText":"Dear user local I think it's the arts","text":"Dear user local I think it's the arts","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/832071605","repostId":"1151608193","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1151608193","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1629728324,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1151608193?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-23 22:18","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Buy the pullback in chip stocks — and focus on these 6 companies for the long haul<blockquote>买入芯片股回调——长期关注这6家公司</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1151608193","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"The iShares Semiconductor ETF is down over 6% from recent highs.\nISTOCKPHOTO\nIn the rolling correcti","content":"<p><b>The iShares Semiconductor ETF is down over 6% from recent highs.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>iShares半导体ETF较近期高点下跌超过6%。</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b24e4a76a5d1cd0ff030cf1b0eeac0f\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>ISTOCKPHOTO</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>ISTOCKPHOTO</span></p></blockquote></p><p> In the rolling correction that’s running through the stock market, chip makers have been hit harder than most.</p><p><blockquote>在股市的滚动调整中，芯片制造商受到的打击比大多数制造商都要严重。</blockquote></p><p> The iShares Semiconductor ETF&nbsp;is down over 6% from recent highs, compared to declines of 2% or less for the S&amp;P 500,Nasdaq&nbsp;Composite&nbsp;and the Dow Jones Industrial Average.</p><p><blockquote>iShares半导体ETF较近期高点下跌超过6%，而标普500、纳斯达克综合指数和道琼斯工业平均指数的跌幅为2%或更少。</blockquote></p><p> Does that make chip stocks a buy? Or is this historically cyclical sector up to its old tricks and headed into a sustained downtrend that will rip your face off.</p><p><blockquote>这是否意味着芯片股值得买入？或者这个历史上周期性的行业是否会故技重施，进入持续下跌趋势，让你大吃一惊。</blockquote></p><p> A lot depends on your timeline but if you like to own stocks for years rather than rent them for days, the group is a buy. The chief reason: “It’s different this time.”</p><p><blockquote>很大程度上取决于您的时间表，但如果您喜欢持有多年股票而不是租用几天，那么该集团是值得买入的。主要原因：“这次不一样。”</blockquote></p><p> Those are admittedly among the scariest words in investing. But the chip sector has changed so much it really is different now – in ways that suggest it is less likely to crush you.</p><p><blockquote>诚然，这些是投资中最可怕的词语之一。但芯片行业已经发生了如此大的变化，现在确实有所不同——这表明它不太可能压垮你。</blockquote></p><p> You’d be a fool to think there are no risks. I’ll go over those. But first, here are the three main reasons why the group is “safer” now – and six names favored by the half-dozen sector experts I’ve talked with over the past several days.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为没有风险，那你就是个傻瓜。我去看看。但首先，以下是该组织现在“更安全”的三个主要原因，以及过去几天我与之交谈的六位行业专家青睐的六个名字。</blockquote></p><p> <b>1. The wicked witch of cyclicality is dead</b></p><p><blockquote><b>1.周期性的邪恶女巫死了</b></blockquote></p><p> “Demand in the chip sector was always boom and bust, driven by product cycles,” says David Winborne, a portfolio manager at Impax Asset Management. “<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FBNC\">First</a> PCs, then servers, then phones.” But now demand for chips has broadened across the economy so the secular growth story is more predictable, he says.</p><p><blockquote>Impax Asset Management的投资组合经理David Winborne表示：“芯片行业的需求总是由产品周期驱动而繁荣和萧条。”<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FBNC\">第一</a>个人电脑，然后是服务器，然后是电话。”但他表示，现在整个经济对芯片的需求已经扩大，因此长期增长情况更容易预测。</blockquote></p><p> <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/JE\">Just</a> look around you. Because of the increased “digitalization” of our lives and work, there’s greater diversity of end market demand from all angles. Think remote office services like <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZM\">Zoom</a>, online shopping, cloud services, electric vehicles, 5G phones, smart factories, big data computing and even washing machines, points out Hendi Susanto, a portfolio manager and tech analyst at Gabelli Funds who is bullish on the group.</p><p><blockquote><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/JE\">刚刚</a>看看你周围。由于我们的生活和工作日益“数字化”，从各个角度来看，终端市场需求更加多样化。将远程办公服务视为<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZM\">Zoom</a>看好该集团的Gabelli Funds投资组合经理兼科技分析师Hendi Susanto指出，在线购物、云服务、电动汽车、5G手机、智能工厂、大数据计算甚至洗衣机。</blockquote></p><p> “There is no aspect of the modern digital economy that can function without semiconductors,” says Motley Fool chip sector analyst John Rotonti. “That means more chips going into everything. The long-term demand is there.”</p><p><blockquote>Motley Fool芯片行业分析师John Rotonti表示：“现代数字经济的任何方面都离不开半导体。”“这意味着更多的芯片进入所有领域。长期需求是存在的。”</blockquote></p><p> He’s not kidding. Chip sector revenue will double by 2030 to $1 trillion from $465 billion in 2020, predicts William&nbsp;Blair&nbsp;analyst Greg Scolaro.</p><p><blockquote>他不是在开玩笑。William Blair分析师Greg Scolaro预测，到2030年，芯片行业的收入将从2020年的4650亿美元翻一番，达到1万亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> All of this means the widespread supply shortages you’ve been hearing about “likely won’t be cured until sometime late next year,” says <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BAC\">Bank of America</a> chip sector analyst Vivek Arya. “That’s not just our view, but <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> confirmed by a majority of large customers.”</p><p><blockquote>所有这些都意味着你所听到的普遍供应短缺“可能要到明年年底才能得到解决”，他说<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BAC\">美国银行</a>芯片行业分析师Vivek Arya。“这不仅仅是我们的观点，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">一</a>得到了大多数大客户的确认。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>2. The players have consolidated</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2.玩家已经巩固</b></blockquote></p><p> All up and down the production chain, from design through the various types of equipment producers to manufacturing, industry players have consolidated down into what Rotonti calls “earned” duopolies or monopolies.</p><p><blockquote>在生产链的上上下下，从设计到各种类型的设备生产商再到制造，行业参与者已经整合到罗通蒂·评级“赢得”的双头垄断或垄断中。</blockquote></p><p> In chip design software, you have Cadence Design Systems&nbsp;and Synopsys.In production equipment, companies dominate specialized niches like ASML&nbsp;in extreme ultraviolet lithography&nbsp;(EUV). Manufacturing is dominated by Taiwan Semiconductor&nbsp;and Samsung Electronics.</p><p><blockquote>在芯片设计软件中，有Cadence Design Systems和Synopsys。在生产设备方面，公司在极紫外光刻（EUV）领域的ASML等专业领域占据主导地位。制造业由台积电和三星电子主导。</blockquote></p><p> These companies earned their niche or duopoly status by being the best at what they do. This makes them interesting for investors. The consolidation also means players behave more rationally in terms of pricing and production capacity, says Rotonti.</p><p><blockquote>这些公司通过在他们所做的事情上做到最好来赢得他们的利基或双头垄断地位。这使得投资者对它们很感兴趣。罗通蒂表示，整合还意味着参与者在定价和产能方面表现得更加理性。</blockquote></p><p> <b>3. Profitability has improved</b></p><p><blockquote><b>3、盈利能力有所提升</b></blockquote></p><p> This more rational behavior, combined with cost cutting, means profitability is now much higher than it was historically. “The economics of chip making has improved massively over past few years,” says Winbourne. Cash flow or EBITDA margins are often now over 30% whereas a decade ago they were in the 20% range.</p><p><blockquote>这种更加理性的行为，加上成本削减，意味着现在的盈利能力远高于历史水平。“过去几年，芯片制造的经济性有了很大改善，”温伯恩说。现金流或EBITDA利润率现在通常超过30%，而十年前还在20%左右。</blockquote></p><p> This has implications for valuation. Though chip stocks trade at about a market multiple, they appear cheap because they are better companies, points out Lamar Villere, portfolio manager with Villere &amp; Co. “They are not trading at a frothy multiple.”</p><p><blockquote>这对估值有影响。Villere&amp;Co.的投资组合经理Lamar Villere指出，尽管芯片股的交易价格约为市场倍数，但它们看起来很便宜，因为它们是更好的公司。“他们的市盈率并不是泡沫。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The stocks to buy</b></p><p><blockquote><b>值得购买的股票</b></blockquote></p><p> Here are six names favored by chip experts I recently checked in with.</p><p><blockquote>以下是我最近调查的芯片专家青睐的六个名字。</blockquote></p><p> <b>New management plays</b></p><p><blockquote><b>新的管理策略</b></blockquote></p><p> Though Peter Karazeris, a senior equity research analyst at Thrivent, has reasons to be cautious on the group (see below), he singles out two companies whose performance may get a boost because they are under new management: Qualcomm&nbsp;and ON Semiconductor.</p><p><blockquote>尽管Thrivent的高级股票研究分析师Peter Karazeris有理由对该集团持谨慎态度（见下文），但他特别指出了两家公司，它们的业绩可能会因为在新管理层的领导下而得到提振：高通和安森美半导体。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Both have solid profitability. Qualcomm was recently hit by one-off issues like bad weather in Texas that disrupted production, but the company has good exposure to the 5G phone trend. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">ON Semiconductor</a> is expanding beyond phones into new areas like autos, industrial and the Internet of Things connected-device space.</p><p><blockquote>两者都具有稳健的盈利能力。高通最近受到了一次性问题的打击，例如德克萨斯州的恶劣天气导致生产中断，但该公司对5G手机趋势有很好的了解。<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">安森美半导体</a>正在从手机扩展到汽车、工业和物联网互联设备领域等新领域。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A data center and gaming play</b></p><p><blockquote><b>数据中心和游戏</b></blockquote></p><p> Karazeris also singles out Nvidia,which gets a continuing boost from its exposure to data center and gaming device chip demand — because of its superior design prowess.</p><p><blockquote>Karazeris还特别提到了Nvidia，该公司因其卓越的设计能力而从数据中心和游戏设备芯片需求中获得持续增长。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Design tool companies</b></p><p><blockquote><b>设计工具公司</b></blockquote></p><p> Speaking of design, when companies like Qualcomm and NVIDIA want to design chips, they turn to the design tools supplied by Cadence Design Systems and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SNPS\">Synopsys</a>.</p><p><blockquote>说到设计，当像高通和英伟达这样的公司想要设计芯片时，他们会求助于Cadence Design Systems提供的设计工具和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SNPS\">新思科技</a>.</blockquote></p><p> Their software-based design tools help chip innovators create the blueprint for their chips, explains Rotonti at Motley Fool, who singles out these names. “They are not the fastest growers in the world, but they have good profit margins.” They also dominate the space.</p><p><blockquote>Motley Fool的Rotonti解释说，他们基于软件的设计工具帮助芯片创新者为他们的芯片创建蓝图，他挑出了这些名字。“他们不是世界上最快的种植者，但他们有很好的利润率。”他们也主宰着这个空间。</blockquote></p><p> <b>An EUV&nbsp;play</b></p><p><blockquote><b>EUV播放</b></blockquote></p><p> To put those blueprints onto silicon in the early stages of chip production, companies like Taiwan Semiconductor and Samsung turn to ASML. Its machines use tiny bursts of light to stencil chip designs onto silicon wafers, in a process called extreme ultraviolet lithography. “No one else has figured out how to do it,” says Rotonti.</p><p><blockquote>为了在芯片生产的早期阶段将这些蓝图放在硅上，台积电和三星等公司转向ASML。它的机器使用微小的光脉冲将芯片设计模板到硅片上，这一过程被称为极紫外光刻。“没有人知道如何做到这一点，”罗通蒂说。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, it has a monopoly position in supplying machines that do this – which are necessary for any company that wants to make leading edge chips.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，它在供应做到这一点的机器方面拥有垄断地位——这对于任何想要制造领先芯片的公司来说都是必要的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Risks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>风险</b></blockquote></p><p> Here are some of the chief risks for chip sector investors to watch.</p><p><blockquote>以下是芯片行业投资者需要关注的一些主要风险。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Oversupply</b></p><p><blockquote><b>供应过剩</b></blockquote></p><p> Chip production has become politicized. The U.S. wants more production at home so it is not vulnerable to disruptions in Chinese supply chains. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CAAS\">China</a> wants to make 70% of the chips it uses by 2025, up from 5% now, says Winborne.</p><p><blockquote>芯片生产已经政治化。美国希望在国内生产更多产品，这样就不会受到中国供应链中断的影响。<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CAAS\">中国</a>Winborne表示，希望到2025年生产70%的芯片，高于目前的5%。</blockquote></p><p> The upshot here is that there’s lots of government support to boost manufacturing – so there will be much more of it. The risk is oversupply at some point in the future. This might also create a pull forward in chip equipment purchases — leading to a lull down the road which could hurt sales and margin trends at equipment makers.</p><p><blockquote>这里的结果是，有大量的政府支持来促进制造业——所以会有更多的支持。风险在于未来某个时候供应过剩。这也可能会推动芯片设备的购买，导致未来的平静，这可能会损害设备制造商的销售和利润趋势。</blockquote></p><p> Next, big tech companies like Alphabet,Apple&nbsp;and Ammazon.com&nbsp;are all doing their own chip design, which threatens specialized chip companies that do the same thing.</p><p><blockquote>接下来，像Alphabet、苹果和亚马逊这样的大型科技公司都在做自己的芯片设计，这威胁到了做同样事情的专业芯片公司。</blockquote></p><p> <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/QTM\">Quantum</a> computing</b></p><p><blockquote><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/QTM\">量子的</a>计算机的</b></blockquote></p><p> Computers using chip designs based on quantum physics instead of traditional semiconductor architectures have superior performance, points out Scolaro at William Blair. “While it probably won’t become mainstream for at least another five years, quantum computing has the potential to transform everything from technology to healthcare.”</p><p><blockquote>William Blair的Scolaro指出，使用基于量子物理学的芯片设计而不是传统半导体架构的计算机具有卓越的性能。“虽然量子计算可能至少在未来五年内不会成为主流，但它有潜力改变从技术到医疗保健的一切。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>A disturbing signal</b></p><p><blockquote><b>令人不安的信号</b></blockquote></p><p> A blend of global purchasing managers (PMI) indexes peaked in April and then decelerated for three months. Meanwhile chip sales growth continued. Normally the two follow the same trend, points out Karazeris, who tracks this indicator at Thrivent. He chalks the divergence up to inventory building which is less sustainable than true end-market demand. So, he takes the divergence as a bearish signal for the chip sector.</p><p><blockquote>全球采购经理人指数（PMI）在4月份达到顶峰，然后连续三个月减速。与此同时，芯片销售持续增长。在Thrivent跟踪这一指标的Karazeris指出，通常情况下，两者遵循相同的趋势。他将这种差异归因于库存建设，而库存建设的可持续性不如真实的终端市场需求。因此，他将这种背离视为芯片行业的看跌信号。</blockquote></p><p> Another cautionary sign comes from the forecasted weakness in pricing for dynamic random-access memory&nbsp;(DRAM) chips. “These are typically things you see at tops of cycles not the bottoms,” says Karazeris.</p><p><blockquote>另一个警告信号来自动态随机存取存储器（DRAM）芯片定价的预测疲软。“这些通常是你在周期顶部而不是底部看到的事情，”卡拉泽里斯说。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s also possible the slowdown in the global PMI is more a reflection of chip shortages than a sign that the shortages aren’t real (and are just inventory building). “The divergence doesn’t necessarily mean that chip orders are going to roll over and die. It means chip manufacturing has to catch up,” says Leuthold economist and strategist Jim Paulsen.</p><p><blockquote>但全球PMI放缓也有可能更多地反映了芯片短缺，而不是表明短缺并不真实（只是库存增加）。Leuthold经济学家兼策略师吉姆·保尔森(Jim Paulsen)表示：“这种分歧并不一定意味着芯片订单会滚动并死亡。这意味着芯片制造业必须迎头赶上。”</blockquote></p><p> Ford,for example, just announced it had to curtail production because of chip shortages, not a shortfall in underlying demand.</p><p><blockquote>例如，福特刚刚宣布，由于芯片短缺，而不是潜在需求短缺，它不得不削减产量。</blockquote></p><p> Paulsen predicts decent economic growth is sustainable because of factors like high savings rates, the rebound in employment and incomes as well as pent-up demand for big ticket items. If he’s right, the continued economic strength would support demand for all the products that use chips – including <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a> cars.</p><p><blockquote>保尔森预测，由于高储蓄率、就业和收入反弹以及被压抑的大件商品需求等因素，良好的经济增长是可持续的。如果他是对的，持续的经济实力将支持对所有使用芯片的产品的需求——包括<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特</a>汽车。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1603348471595","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>Buy the pullback in chip stocks — and focus on these 6 companies for the long haul<blockquote>买入芯片股回调——长期关注这6家公司</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\">\nBuy the pullback in chip stocks — and focus on these 6 companies for the long haul<blockquote>买入芯片股回调——长期关注这6家公司</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">MarketWatch</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-23 22:18</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>The iShares Semiconductor ETF is down over 6% from recent highs.</b></p><p><blockquote><b>iShares半导体ETF较近期高点下跌超过6%。</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7b24e4a76a5d1cd0ff030cf1b0eeac0f\" tg-width=\"700\" tg-height=\"466\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>ISTOCKPHOTO</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>ISTOCKPHOTO</span></p></blockquote></p><p> In the rolling correction that’s running through the stock market, chip makers have been hit harder than most.</p><p><blockquote>在股市的滚动调整中，芯片制造商受到的打击比大多数制造商都要严重。</blockquote></p><p> The iShares Semiconductor ETF&nbsp;is down over 6% from recent highs, compared to declines of 2% or less for the S&amp;P 500,Nasdaq&nbsp;Composite&nbsp;and the Dow Jones Industrial Average.</p><p><blockquote>iShares半导体ETF较近期高点下跌超过6%，而标普500、纳斯达克综合指数和道琼斯工业平均指数的跌幅为2%或更少。</blockquote></p><p> Does that make chip stocks a buy? Or is this historically cyclical sector up to its old tricks and headed into a sustained downtrend that will rip your face off.</p><p><blockquote>这是否意味着芯片股值得买入？或者这个历史上周期性的行业是否会故技重施，进入持续下跌趋势，让你大吃一惊。</blockquote></p><p> A lot depends on your timeline but if you like to own stocks for years rather than rent them for days, the group is a buy. The chief reason: “It’s different this time.”</p><p><blockquote>很大程度上取决于您的时间表，但如果您喜欢持有多年股票而不是租用几天，那么该集团是值得买入的。主要原因：“这次不一样。”</blockquote></p><p> Those are admittedly among the scariest words in investing. But the chip sector has changed so much it really is different now – in ways that suggest it is less likely to crush you.</p><p><blockquote>诚然，这些是投资中最可怕的词语之一。但芯片行业已经发生了如此大的变化，现在确实有所不同——这表明它不太可能压垮你。</blockquote></p><p> You’d be a fool to think there are no risks. I’ll go over those. But first, here are the three main reasons why the group is “safer” now – and six names favored by the half-dozen sector experts I’ve talked with over the past several days.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为没有风险，那你就是个傻瓜。我去看看。但首先，以下是该组织现在“更安全”的三个主要原因，以及过去几天我与之交谈的六位行业专家青睐的六个名字。</blockquote></p><p> <b>1. The wicked witch of cyclicality is dead</b></p><p><blockquote><b>1.周期性的邪恶女巫死了</b></blockquote></p><p> “Demand in the chip sector was always boom and bust, driven by product cycles,” says David Winborne, a portfolio manager at Impax Asset Management. “<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FBNC\">First</a> PCs, then servers, then phones.” But now demand for chips has broadened across the economy so the secular growth story is more predictable, he says.</p><p><blockquote>Impax Asset Management的投资组合经理David Winborne表示：“芯片行业的需求总是由产品周期驱动而繁荣和萧条。”<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/FBNC\">第一</a>个人电脑，然后是服务器，然后是电话。”但他表示，现在整个经济对芯片的需求已经扩大，因此长期增长情况更容易预测。</blockquote></p><p> <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/JE\">Just</a> look around you. Because of the increased “digitalization” of our lives and work, there’s greater diversity of end market demand from all angles. Think remote office services like <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZM\">Zoom</a>, online shopping, cloud services, electric vehicles, 5G phones, smart factories, big data computing and even washing machines, points out Hendi Susanto, a portfolio manager and tech analyst at Gabelli Funds who is bullish on the group.</p><p><blockquote><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/JE\">刚刚</a>看看你周围。由于我们的生活和工作日益“数字化”，从各个角度来看，终端市场需求更加多样化。将远程办公服务视为<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ZM\">Zoom</a>看好该集团的Gabelli Funds投资组合经理兼科技分析师Hendi Susanto指出，在线购物、云服务、电动汽车、5G手机、智能工厂、大数据计算甚至洗衣机。</blockquote></p><p> “There is no aspect of the modern digital economy that can function without semiconductors,” says Motley Fool chip sector analyst John Rotonti. “That means more chips going into everything. The long-term demand is there.”</p><p><blockquote>Motley Fool芯片行业分析师John Rotonti表示：“现代数字经济的任何方面都离不开半导体。”“这意味着更多的芯片进入所有领域。长期需求是存在的。”</blockquote></p><p> He’s not kidding. Chip sector revenue will double by 2030 to $1 trillion from $465 billion in 2020, predicts William&nbsp;Blair&nbsp;analyst Greg Scolaro.</p><p><blockquote>他不是在开玩笑。William Blair分析师Greg Scolaro预测，到2030年，芯片行业的收入将从2020年的4650亿美元翻一番，达到1万亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> All of this means the widespread supply shortages you’ve been hearing about “likely won’t be cured until sometime late next year,” says <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BAC\">Bank of America</a> chip sector analyst Vivek Arya. “That’s not just our view, but <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">one</a> confirmed by a majority of large customers.”</p><p><blockquote>所有这些都意味着你所听到的普遍供应短缺“可能要到明年年底才能得到解决”，他说<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/BAC\">美国银行</a>芯片行业分析师Vivek Arya。“这不仅仅是我们的观点，<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/AONE.U\">一</a>得到了大多数大客户的确认。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>2. The players have consolidated</b></p><p><blockquote><b>2.玩家已经巩固</b></blockquote></p><p> All up and down the production chain, from design through the various types of equipment producers to manufacturing, industry players have consolidated down into what Rotonti calls “earned” duopolies or monopolies.</p><p><blockquote>在生产链的上上下下，从设计到各种类型的设备生产商再到制造，行业参与者已经整合到罗通蒂·评级“赢得”的双头垄断或垄断中。</blockquote></p><p> In chip design software, you have Cadence Design Systems&nbsp;and Synopsys.In production equipment, companies dominate specialized niches like ASML&nbsp;in extreme ultraviolet lithography&nbsp;(EUV). Manufacturing is dominated by Taiwan Semiconductor&nbsp;and Samsung Electronics.</p><p><blockquote>在芯片设计软件中，有Cadence Design Systems和Synopsys。在生产设备方面，公司在极紫外光刻（EUV）领域的ASML等专业领域占据主导地位。制造业由台积电和三星电子主导。</blockquote></p><p> These companies earned their niche or duopoly status by being the best at what they do. This makes them interesting for investors. The consolidation also means players behave more rationally in terms of pricing and production capacity, says Rotonti.</p><p><blockquote>这些公司通过在他们所做的事情上做到最好来赢得他们的利基或双头垄断地位。这使得投资者对它们很感兴趣。罗通蒂表示，整合还意味着参与者在定价和产能方面表现得更加理性。</blockquote></p><p> <b>3. Profitability has improved</b></p><p><blockquote><b>3、盈利能力有所提升</b></blockquote></p><p> This more rational behavior, combined with cost cutting, means profitability is now much higher than it was historically. “The economics of chip making has improved massively over past few years,” says Winbourne. Cash flow or EBITDA margins are often now over 30% whereas a decade ago they were in the 20% range.</p><p><blockquote>这种更加理性的行为，加上成本削减，意味着现在的盈利能力远高于历史水平。“过去几年，芯片制造的经济性有了很大改善，”温伯恩说。现金流或EBITDA利润率现在通常超过30%，而十年前还在20%左右。</blockquote></p><p> This has implications for valuation. Though chip stocks trade at about a market multiple, they appear cheap because they are better companies, points out Lamar Villere, portfolio manager with Villere &amp; Co. “They are not trading at a frothy multiple.”</p><p><blockquote>这对估值有影响。Villere&amp;Co.的投资组合经理Lamar Villere指出，尽管芯片股的交易价格约为市场倍数，但它们看起来很便宜，因为它们是更好的公司。“他们的市盈率并不是泡沫。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>The stocks to buy</b></p><p><blockquote><b>值得购买的股票</b></blockquote></p><p> Here are six names favored by chip experts I recently checked in with.</p><p><blockquote>以下是我最近调查的芯片专家青睐的六个名字。</blockquote></p><p> <b>New management plays</b></p><p><blockquote><b>新的管理策略</b></blockquote></p><p> Though Peter Karazeris, a senior equity research analyst at Thrivent, has reasons to be cautious on the group (see below), he singles out two companies whose performance may get a boost because they are under new management: Qualcomm&nbsp;and ON Semiconductor.</p><p><blockquote>尽管Thrivent的高级股票研究分析师Peter Karazeris有理由对该集团持谨慎态度（见下文），但他特别指出了两家公司，它们的业绩可能会因为在新管理层的领导下而得到提振：高通和安森美半导体。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Both have solid profitability. Qualcomm was recently hit by one-off issues like bad weather in Texas that disrupted production, but the company has good exposure to the 5G phone trend. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">ON Semiconductor</a> is expanding beyond phones into new areas like autos, industrial and the Internet of Things connected-device space.</p><p><blockquote>两者都具有稳健的盈利能力。高通最近受到了一次性问题的打击，例如德克萨斯州的恶劣天气导致生产中断，但该公司对5G手机趋势有很好的了解。<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/ON\">安森美半导体</a>正在从手机扩展到汽车、工业和物联网互联设备领域等新领域。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A data center and gaming play</b></p><p><blockquote><b>数据中心和游戏</b></blockquote></p><p> Karazeris also singles out Nvidia,which gets a continuing boost from its exposure to data center and gaming device chip demand — because of its superior design prowess.</p><p><blockquote>Karazeris还特别提到了Nvidia，该公司因其卓越的设计能力而从数据中心和游戏设备芯片需求中获得持续增长。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Design tool companies</b></p><p><blockquote><b>设计工具公司</b></blockquote></p><p> Speaking of design, when companies like Qualcomm and NVIDIA want to design chips, they turn to the design tools supplied by Cadence Design Systems and <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SNPS\">Synopsys</a>.</p><p><blockquote>说到设计，当像高通和英伟达这样的公司想要设计芯片时，他们会求助于Cadence Design Systems提供的设计工具和<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/SNPS\">新思科技</a>.</blockquote></p><p> Their software-based design tools help chip innovators create the blueprint for their chips, explains Rotonti at Motley Fool, who singles out these names. “They are not the fastest growers in the world, but they have good profit margins.” They also dominate the space.</p><p><blockquote>Motley Fool的Rotonti解释说，他们基于软件的设计工具帮助芯片创新者为他们的芯片创建蓝图，他挑出了这些名字。“他们不是世界上最快的种植者，但他们有很好的利润率。”他们也主宰着这个空间。</blockquote></p><p> <b>An EUV&nbsp;play</b></p><p><blockquote><b>EUV播放</b></blockquote></p><p> To put those blueprints onto silicon in the early stages of chip production, companies like Taiwan Semiconductor and Samsung turn to ASML. Its machines use tiny bursts of light to stencil chip designs onto silicon wafers, in a process called extreme ultraviolet lithography. “No one else has figured out how to do it,” says Rotonti.</p><p><blockquote>为了在芯片生产的早期阶段将这些蓝图放在硅上，台积电和三星等公司转向ASML。它的机器使用微小的光脉冲将芯片设计模板到硅片上，这一过程被称为极紫外光刻。“没有人知道如何做到这一点，”罗通蒂说。</blockquote></p><p> In other words, it has a monopoly position in supplying machines that do this – which are necessary for any company that wants to make leading edge chips.</p><p><blockquote>换句话说，它在供应做到这一点的机器方面拥有垄断地位——这对于任何想要制造领先芯片的公司来说都是必要的。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Risks</b></p><p><blockquote><b>风险</b></blockquote></p><p> Here are some of the chief risks for chip sector investors to watch.</p><p><blockquote>以下是芯片行业投资者需要关注的一些主要风险。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Oversupply</b></p><p><blockquote><b>供应过剩</b></blockquote></p><p> Chip production has become politicized. The U.S. wants more production at home so it is not vulnerable to disruptions in Chinese supply chains. <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CAAS\">China</a> wants to make 70% of the chips it uses by 2025, up from 5% now, says Winborne.</p><p><blockquote>芯片生产已经政治化。美国希望在国内生产更多产品，这样就不会受到中国供应链中断的影响。<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/CAAS\">中国</a>Winborne表示，希望到2025年生产70%的芯片，高于目前的5%。</blockquote></p><p> The upshot here is that there’s lots of government support to boost manufacturing – so there will be much more of it. The risk is oversupply at some point in the future. This might also create a pull forward in chip equipment purchases — leading to a lull down the road which could hurt sales and margin trends at equipment makers.</p><p><blockquote>这里的结果是，有大量的政府支持来促进制造业——所以会有更多的支持。风险在于未来某个时候供应过剩。这也可能会推动芯片设备的购买，导致未来的平静，这可能会损害设备制造商的销售和利润趋势。</blockquote></p><p> Next, big tech companies like Alphabet,Apple&nbsp;and Ammazon.com&nbsp;are all doing their own chip design, which threatens specialized chip companies that do the same thing.</p><p><blockquote>接下来，像Alphabet、苹果和亚马逊这样的大型科技公司都在做自己的芯片设计，这威胁到了做同样事情的专业芯片公司。</blockquote></p><p> <b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/QTM\">Quantum</a> computing</b></p><p><blockquote><b><a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/QTM\">量子的</a>计算机的</b></blockquote></p><p> Computers using chip designs based on quantum physics instead of traditional semiconductor architectures have superior performance, points out Scolaro at William Blair. “While it probably won’t become mainstream for at least another five years, quantum computing has the potential to transform everything from technology to healthcare.”</p><p><blockquote>William Blair的Scolaro指出，使用基于量子物理学的芯片设计而不是传统半导体架构的计算机具有卓越的性能。“虽然量子计算可能至少在未来五年内不会成为主流，但它有潜力改变从技术到医疗保健的一切。”</blockquote></p><p> <b>A disturbing signal</b></p><p><blockquote><b>令人不安的信号</b></blockquote></p><p> A blend of global purchasing managers (PMI) indexes peaked in April and then decelerated for three months. Meanwhile chip sales growth continued. Normally the two follow the same trend, points out Karazeris, who tracks this indicator at Thrivent. He chalks the divergence up to inventory building which is less sustainable than true end-market demand. So, he takes the divergence as a bearish signal for the chip sector.</p><p><blockquote>全球采购经理人指数（PMI）在4月份达到顶峰，然后连续三个月减速。与此同时，芯片销售持续增长。在Thrivent跟踪这一指标的Karazeris指出，通常情况下，两者遵循相同的趋势。他将这种差异归因于库存建设，而库存建设的可持续性不如真实的终端市场需求。因此，他将这种背离视为芯片行业的看跌信号。</blockquote></p><p> Another cautionary sign comes from the forecasted weakness in pricing for dynamic random-access memory&nbsp;(DRAM) chips. “These are typically things you see at tops of cycles not the bottoms,” says Karazeris.</p><p><blockquote>另一个警告信号来自动态随机存取存储器（DRAM）芯片定价的预测疲软。“这些通常是你在周期顶部而不是底部看到的事情，”卡拉泽里斯说。</blockquote></p><p> But it’s also possible the slowdown in the global PMI is more a reflection of chip shortages than a sign that the shortages aren’t real (and are just inventory building). “The divergence doesn’t necessarily mean that chip orders are going to roll over and die. It means chip manufacturing has to catch up,” says Leuthold economist and strategist Jim Paulsen.</p><p><blockquote>但全球PMI放缓也有可能更多地反映了芯片短缺，而不是表明短缺并不真实（只是库存增加）。Leuthold经济学家兼策略师吉姆·保尔森(Jim Paulsen)表示：“这种分歧并不一定意味着芯片订单会滚动并死亡。这意味着芯片制造业必须迎头赶上。”</blockquote></p><p> Ford,for example, just announced it had to curtail production because of chip shortages, not a shortfall in underlying demand.</p><p><blockquote>例如，福特刚刚宣布，由于芯片短缺，而不是潜在需求短缺，它不得不削减产量。</blockquote></p><p> Paulsen predicts decent economic growth is sustainable because of factors like high savings rates, the rebound in employment and incomes as well as pent-up demand for big ticket items. If he’s right, the continued economic strength would support demand for all the products that use chips – including <a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">Ford</a> cars.</p><p><blockquote>保尔森预测，由于高储蓄率、就业和收入反弹以及被压抑的大件商品需求等因素，良好的经济增长是可持续的。如果他是对的，持续的经济实力将支持对所有使用芯片的产品的需求——包括<a href=\"https://laohu8.com/S/F\">福特</a>汽车。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/buy-the-pullback-in-chip-stocks-and-focus-on-these-6-companies-for-the-long-haul-11629468380?mod=home-page\">MarketWatch</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":{"SSNLF":"三星电子","AAPL":"苹果","ASML":"阿斯麦","SNPS":"新思科技","GOOG":"谷歌","QCOM":"高通","ON":"安森美半导体","TSM":"台积电","CDNS":"铿腾电子","GOOGL":"谷歌A","NVDA":"英伟达","AMZN":"亚马逊","SOXX":"iShares费城交易所半导体ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/buy-the-pullback-in-chip-stocks-and-focus-on-these-6-companies-for-the-long-haul-11629468380?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1151608193","content_text":"The iShares Semiconductor ETF is down over 6% from recent highs.\nISTOCKPHOTO\nIn the rolling correction that’s running through the stock market, chip makers have been hit harder than most.\nThe iShares Semiconductor ETF is down over 6% from recent highs, compared to declines of 2% or less for the S&P 500,Nasdaq Composite and the Dow Jones Industrial Average.\nDoes that make chip stocks a buy? Or is this historically cyclical sector up to its old tricks and headed into a sustained downtrend that will rip your face off.\nA lot depends on your timeline but if you like to own stocks for years rather than rent them for days, the group is a buy. The chief reason: “It’s different this time.”\nThose are admittedly among the scariest words in investing. But the chip sector has changed so much it really is different now – in ways that suggest it is less likely to crush you.\nYou’d be a fool to think there are no risks. I’ll go over those. But first, here are the three main reasons why the group is “safer” now – and six names favored by the half-dozen sector experts I’ve talked with over the past several days.\n1. The wicked witch of cyclicality is dead\n“Demand in the chip sector was always boom and bust, driven by product cycles,” says David Winborne, a portfolio manager at Impax Asset Management. “First PCs, then servers, then phones.” But now demand for chips has broadened across the economy so the secular growth story is more predictable, he says.\nJust look around you. Because of the increased “digitalization” of our lives and work, there’s greater diversity of end market demand from all angles. Think remote office services like Zoom, online shopping, cloud services, electric vehicles, 5G phones, smart factories, big data computing and even washing machines, points out Hendi Susanto, a portfolio manager and tech analyst at Gabelli Funds who is bullish on the group.\n“There is no aspect of the modern digital economy that can function without semiconductors,” says Motley Fool chip sector analyst John Rotonti. “That means more chips going into everything. The long-term demand is there.”\nHe’s not kidding. Chip sector revenue will double by 2030 to $1 trillion from $465 billion in 2020, predicts William Blair analyst Greg Scolaro.\nAll of this means the widespread supply shortages you’ve been hearing about “likely won’t be cured until sometime late next year,” says Bank of America chip sector analyst Vivek Arya. “That’s not just our view, but one confirmed by a majority of large customers.”\n2. The players have consolidated\nAll up and down the production chain, from design through the various types of equipment producers to manufacturing, industry players have consolidated down into what Rotonti calls “earned” duopolies or monopolies.\nIn chip design software, you have Cadence Design Systems and Synopsys.In production equipment, companies dominate specialized niches like ASML in extreme ultraviolet lithography (EUV). Manufacturing is dominated by Taiwan Semiconductor and Samsung Electronics.\nThese companies earned their niche or duopoly status by being the best at what they do. This makes them interesting for investors. The consolidation also means players behave more rationally in terms of pricing and production capacity, says Rotonti.\n3. Profitability has improved\nThis more rational behavior, combined with cost cutting, means profitability is now much higher than it was historically. “The economics of chip making has improved massively over past few years,” says Winbourne. Cash flow or EBITDA margins are often now over 30% whereas a decade ago they were in the 20% range.\nThis has implications for valuation. Though chip stocks trade at about a market multiple, they appear cheap because they are better companies, points out Lamar Villere, portfolio manager with Villere & Co. “They are not trading at a frothy multiple.”\nThe stocks to buy\nHere are six names favored by chip experts I recently checked in with.\nNew management plays\nThough Peter Karazeris, a senior equity research analyst at Thrivent, has reasons to be cautious on the group (see below), he singles out two companies whose performance may get a boost because they are under new management: Qualcomm and ON Semiconductor.\nBoth have solid profitability. Qualcomm was recently hit by one-off issues like bad weather in Texas that disrupted production, but the company has good exposure to the 5G phone trend. ON Semiconductor is expanding beyond phones into new areas like autos, industrial and the Internet of Things connected-device space.\nA data center and gaming play\nKarazeris also singles out Nvidia,which gets a continuing boost from its exposure to data center and gaming device chip demand — because of its superior design prowess.\nDesign tool companies\nSpeaking of design, when companies like Qualcomm and NVIDIA want to design chips, they turn to the design tools supplied by Cadence Design Systems and Synopsys.\nTheir software-based design tools help chip innovators create the blueprint for their chips, explains Rotonti at Motley Fool, who singles out these names. “They are not the fastest growers in the world, but they have good profit margins.” They also dominate the space.\nAn EUV play\nTo put those blueprints onto silicon in the early stages of chip production, companies like Taiwan Semiconductor and Samsung turn to ASML. Its machines use tiny bursts of light to stencil chip designs onto silicon wafers, in a process called extreme ultraviolet lithography. “No one else has figured out how to do it,” says Rotonti.\nIn other words, it has a monopoly position in supplying machines that do this – which are necessary for any company that wants to make leading edge chips.\nRisks\nHere are some of the chief risks for chip sector investors to watch.\nOversupply\nChip production has become politicized. The U.S. wants more production at home so it is not vulnerable to disruptions in Chinese supply chains. China wants to make 70% of the chips it uses by 2025, up from 5% now, says Winborne.\nThe upshot here is that there’s lots of government support to boost manufacturing – so there will be much more of it. The risk is oversupply at some point in the future. This might also create a pull forward in chip equipment purchases — leading to a lull down the road which could hurt sales and margin trends at equipment makers.\nNext, big tech companies like Alphabet,Apple and Ammazon.com are all doing their own chip design, which threatens specialized chip companies that do the same thing.\nQuantum computing\nComputers using chip designs based on quantum physics instead of traditional semiconductor architectures have superior performance, points out Scolaro at William Blair. “While it probably won’t become mainstream for at least another five years, quantum computing has the potential to transform everything from technology to healthcare.”\nA disturbing signal\nA blend of global purchasing managers (PMI) indexes peaked in April and then decelerated for three months. Meanwhile chip sales growth continued. Normally the two follow the same trend, points out Karazeris, who tracks this indicator at Thrivent. He chalks the divergence up to inventory building which is less sustainable than true end-market demand. So, he takes the divergence as a bearish signal for the chip sector.\nAnother cautionary sign comes from the forecasted weakness in pricing for dynamic random-access memory (DRAM) chips. “These are typically things you see at tops of cycles not the bottoms,” says Karazeris.\nBut it’s also possible the slowdown in the global PMI is more a reflection of chip shortages than a sign that the shortages aren’t real (and are just inventory building). “The divergence doesn’t necessarily mean that chip orders are going to roll over and die. It means chip manufacturing has to catch up,” says Leuthold economist and strategist Jim Paulsen.\nFord,for example, just announced it had to curtail production because of chip shortages, not a shortfall in underlying demand.\nPaulsen predicts decent economic growth is sustainable because of factors like high savings rates, the rebound in employment and incomes as well as pent-up demand for big ticket items. If he’s right, the continued economic strength would support demand for all the products that use chips – including Ford cars.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"GOOGL":0.9,"TSM":0.9,"SSNLF":0.9,"AAPL":0.9,"AMZN":0.9,"SOXX":0.9,"GOOG":0.9,"CDNS":0.9,"NVDA":0.9,"ASML":0.9,"SNPS":0.9,"QCOM":0.9,"ON":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1867,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":830404490,"gmtCreate":1629086877410,"gmtModify":1631890130257,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok sure if you have any questions or concerns please visit the entrance to the arts in English literature","listText":"Ok sure if you have any questions or concerns please visit the entrance to the arts in English literature","text":"Ok sure if you have any questions or concerns please visit the entrance to the arts in English literature","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/830404490","repostId":"1157945388","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1752,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895473492,"gmtCreate":1628770060116,"gmtModify":1631890130260,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hey it was a lot of people","listText":"Hey it was a lot of people","text":"Hey it was a lot of people","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895473492","repostId":"2158254838","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":528,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":892803368,"gmtCreate":1628646327954,"gmtModify":1631892627754,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Yes I am not sure if you have any questions","listText":"Yes I am not sure if you have any questions","text":"Yes I am not sure if you have any questions","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/892803368","repostId":"1179634268","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":439,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":892809852,"gmtCreate":1628646303576,"gmtModify":1631892627761,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hey I just wanted to let you know that I have a great day and I will be in the future of our games are based on the entrance","listText":"Hey I just wanted to let you know that I have a great day and I will be in the future of our games are based on the entrance","text":"Hey I just wanted to let you know that I have a great day and I will be in the future of our games are based on the entrance","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/892809852","repostId":"1144336160","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":574,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":890527717,"gmtCreate":1628125063539,"gmtModify":1631892627765,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"H","listText":"H","text":"H","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/890527717","repostId":"2029382087","repostType":2,"repost":{"id":"2029382087","kind":"highlight","weMediaInfo":{"introduction":"Reuters.com brings you the latest news from around the world, covering breaking news in markets, business, politics, entertainment and technology","home_visible":1,"media_name":"T-Reuters","id":"1086160438","head_image":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a113a995fbbc262262d15a5ce37e7bc5"},"pubTimestamp":1587462749,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/2029382087?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2020-04-21 17:52","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Chongqing Fuling Zhacai Group's Q1 Net Profit Up 6.7% Y/Y<blockquote>重庆涪陵榨菜集团Q1净利润同比增长6.7%</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=2029382087","media":"T-Reuters","summary":"Chongqing Fuling Zhacai Group Co Ltd <002507.SZ>:Says Q1 Net Profit Up 6.7% Y/Y At 165.6 Million Yua","content":"<p><html><body>Chongqing Fuling Zhacai Group Co Ltd &lt;002507.SZ&gt;:Says Q1 Net Profit Up 6.7% Y/Y At 165.6 Million Yuan ($23.35 Million).</p><p><blockquote><html><body>重庆涪陵榨菜集团有限公司&lt;002507.SZ&gt;：表示第一季度净利润同比增长6.7%至1.656亿元人民币（2335万美元）。</body></html></blockquote></p><p></body></html></p><p><blockquote></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>Chongqing Fuling Zhacai Group's Q1 Net Profit Up 6.7% Y/Y<blockquote>重庆涪陵榨菜集团Q1净利润同比增长6.7%</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\">\nChongqing Fuling Zhacai Group's Q1 Net Profit Up 6.7% Y/Y<blockquote>重庆涪陵榨菜集团Q1净利润同比增长6.7%</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<a class=\"head\" href=\"https://laohu8.com/wemedia/1086160438\">\n\n<div class=\"h-thumb\" style=\"background-image:url(https://static.tigerbbs.com/a113a995fbbc262262d15a5ce37e7bc5);background-size:cover;\"></div>\n\n<div class=\"h-content\">\n<p class=\"h-name\">T-Reuters </p>\n<p class=\"h-time smaller\">2020-04-21 17:52</p>\n</div>\n</a>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><html><body>Chongqing Fuling Zhacai Group Co Ltd &lt;002507.SZ&gt;:Says Q1 Net Profit Up 6.7% Y/Y At 165.6 Million Yuan ($23.35 Million).</p><p><blockquote><html><body>重庆涪陵榨菜集团有限公司&lt;002507.SZ&gt;：表示第一季度净利润同比增长6.7%至1.656亿元人民币（2335万美元）。</body></html></blockquote></p><p></body></html></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"002507":"涪陵榨菜"},"source_url":"https://www.trkd.thomsonreuters.com","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"2029382087","content_text":"Chongqing Fuling Zhacai Group Co Ltd <002507.SZ>:Says Q1 Net Profit Up 6.7% Y/Y At 165.6 Million Yuan ($23.35 Million).","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"002507":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":743,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":805624305,"gmtCreate":1627877847707,"gmtModify":1631892627768,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"bananas","listText":"bananas","text":"bananas","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/805624305","repostId":"1190185935","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1190185935","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627874910,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1190185935?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-02 11:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Expedia: Perfectly Valued, Perfectly Situated<blockquote>Expedia：物超所值，地理位置优越</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1190185935","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nExpedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are t","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Expedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are trading above pre-pandemic levels with travel not yet recovered.</li>  <li>With business and international travel expected to pick up in late 2020 or early 2021, I believe the company is perfectly valued and situated to take advantage of steady growth.</li>  <li>I am bullish on the company's 5-year prospects.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7c936ae728a0a5e399ec9eb9f9d5a71d\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>ArtMarie/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>封锁导致全球旅行关闭后，Expedia的收入大幅下降。现在，由于旅游业尚未恢复，它们的交易价格高于大流行前的水平。</li><li>由于商务和国际旅行预计将在2020年底或2021年初回升，我相信该公司的估值非常理想，并且能够利用稳定增长的优势。</li><li>我看好该公司的5年前景。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>ArtMarie/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Travel, in all of its forms, has taken the biggest hit from closures and lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic as flights were cancelled, hotels shuttered and individuals and companies reducing travel to near zero for nearly a year.</p><p><blockquote>在COVID-19大流行期间，各种形式的旅行都受到了关闭和封锁的最大打击，航班取消，酒店关闭，个人和公司在近一年的时间里将旅行减少到接近于零。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia (EXPE), through its various offerings, is a major player in the travel industry, where it offers a database of flights, hotels, car rentals, short-term apartment rentals, cruise bookings and more. During the pandemic, they've seen their revenues plunge from over $12 billion in 2019 to just over $5 billion in 2020 and subsequently suspended their dividend and reported a wide loss of over $1.5 billion for 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia(EXPE)通过其各种产品成为旅游行业的主要参与者，提供航班、酒店、汽车租赁、短期公寓租赁、邮轮预订等数据库。在疫情期间，他们的收入从2019年的超过120亿美元暴跌至2020年的略高于50亿美元，随后暂停派息，并报告2020年亏损超过15亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Now, with the recovery underway and retail travel reaching record reopening numbers, there are several positives and negatives to consider with Expedia. The negative one being share price, with them currently trading at roughly double where they were before the pandemic even started, yet travel is not expected to return to those levels for quite some time. The positive side of this is that we now have a clear indication that travel growth is expected to remain high for quite some time, allowing for higher industry valuations. Let's explore these catalysts and see where the company stands relative to the industry and its closest peers.</p><p><blockquote>现在，随着复苏的进行和零售旅游达到创纪录的重新开业数量，Expedia有几个积极和消极的方面需要考虑。负面因素是股价，目前股价大约是大流行开始前的两倍，但预计旅游业在相当长一段时间内不会恢复到这些水平。积极的一面是，我们现在有一个明确的迹象表明，旅游业增长预计将在相当长一段时间内保持高位，从而实现更高的行业估值。让我们探索这些催化剂，看看该公司相对于行业及其最接近的同行的地位。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Negative Approach: Overvalued? Competition?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>消极方法：估值过高？竞争？</b></blockquote></p><p> Before getting to the share price and competitive parts of the conversation, let's explore some other negative elements to Expedia.</p><p><blockquote>在讨论股价和对话的竞争部分之前，让我们探讨一下Expedia的其他一些负面因素。</blockquote></p><p> Debt and interest expense had surged in2019following expansion into various industries and consolidation. Debt went from $4.2 billion in 2019 to $8.2 billion in 2020 and interest expense nearlydoubledas well, from under $200 million to $408 million in the most recent company update. This may have been a strategic mistake on behalf of the company since we're now expecting interest rates to increase over the coming years, meaning that the company can see interest expense nearly double and approach $750 million by 2023 if they don't put a plan to retire or restructure some of the debt.</p><p><blockquote>随着向各个行业的扩张和整合，2019年债务和利息支出激增。债务从2019年的42亿美元增加到2020年的82亿美元，利息支出也几乎翻了一番，从不到2亿美元增加到最近公司更新的4.08亿美元。这可能是公司的一个战略错误，因为我们现在预计未来几年利率将会上升，这意味着如果不这样做，公司的利息支出可能会增加近一倍，到2023年将接近7.5亿美元制定退休或重组部分债务的计划。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, the company does have a high cash position and they can, in theory, use it to pay down some of their high interest debt earlier than expected to avoid this charge. I'll discuss their cash situation later in the article.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，该公司确实拥有很高的现金头寸，理论上他们可以用它比预期更早地偿还一些高息债务，以避免这笔费用。我将在文章后面讨论他们的现金状况。</blockquote></p><p> The main negative approach I had when I first saw the company's share price recovery in full effect is their valuation. Before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down worldwide travel, the company was trading around the $120.00 per share levels and are now trading around $170.00 per share, roughly 50% higher at various peaks. This is happening even as travel, and revenues, are not expected to recover to pre-pandemic levels until 24 months from now and even longer if we don't see the expected international travel pick up, since right now domestic travel surges are compensating for softer business and international travel.</p><p><blockquote>当我第一次看到该公司股价全面回升时，我的主要负面看法是他们的估值。在COVID-19大流行导致worldwide travel关闭之前，该公司的交易价格约为每股120.00美元，目前的交易价格约为每股170.00美元，在各个峰值上涨了约50%。尽管旅行和收入预计要到24个月后才能恢复到大流行前的水平，如果我们没有看到预期的国际旅行回升，甚至会更长时间，但这种情况仍在发生，因为目前国内旅行激增正在弥补商务和国际旅行疲软的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, a look at the company's valuation and multiples based off analyst projections, along with what I believe will be a better-than-expected actual results from the company, shows that the company is, for lack of a better term, perfectly and fairly valued.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，根据分析师预测对该公司的估值和市盈率，以及我认为该公司好于预期的实际业绩，表明该公司由于缺乏更好的术语，表现完美且估值公平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Company Valuation: Perfection</b></p><p><blockquote><b>公司估值：完美</b></blockquote></p><p> Looking at the company's own projections isn't enough here, since competitive pressures remain high in this relatively saturated industry. Let's evaluate the company relative to Booking Holdings (BKNG), which is currently the world's largest online travel company and Expedia's closest competitor in the public markets.</p><p><blockquote>光看公司自己的预测是不够的，因为在这个相对饱和的行业中，竞争压力仍然很大。让我们相对于Booking Holdings(BKNG)来评估该公司，后者是目前全球最大的在线旅游公司，也是Expedia在公开市场上最接近的竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> First, let's look at&nbsp;expected EPS growth&nbsp;through the next 5 years.</p><p><blockquote>首先，让我们看看未来5年的预期每股收益增长。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8564ffd38e826bfa96a0864185eba3f\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"351\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Given that Expedia is coming out of a loss per share while Booking managed to maintain a profit, it's important to look at the expected growth from 2022 to 2025 to get a sense of comparison. Over that time period, Expedia is set to grow EPS by 82% while Booking is set to grow EPS by 62%. This given Expedia an advantage, I believe, in valuation multiples when compared to Booking. Let's look at multiples.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于Expedia正在摆脱每股亏损，而Booking则设法保持盈利，因此了解2022年至2025年的预期增长以进行比较非常重要。在此期间，Expedia的每股收益将增长82%，而Booking的每股收益将增长62%。我认为，与Booking相比，这使得Expedia在估值倍数方面具有优势。让我们看看倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f8870ade9bafc30cdd64dcaa252ef94\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"213\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As we can see, even though Expedia is expected to grow at a slightly faster rate over the next 5 years than Booking is, they're trading at slightly lower to even multiples. Now, it's possible that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is fairly valued, but I believe that based off the aforementioned factors and given that I believe Expedia can continue to enjoy higher margins (Expedia currently holds a 68% gross margin while Booking a 64% margin), that both cases are true and that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is ever-so-slightly undervalued.</p><p><blockquote>正如我们所看到的，尽管Expedia预计在未来5年内的增长速度将略快于Booking，但它们的市盈率仍略低至偶数倍。现在，Booking的估值可能略有高估，而Expedia的估值合理，但我相信，基于上述因素，并考虑到我相信Expedia可以继续享受更高的利润率（Expedia目前拥有68%的毛利率，而Booking的毛利率为64%），这两种情况都是正确的，Booking的估值略有高估，而Expedia的估值则略有低估。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Balance Sheets and Other Competition</b></p><p><blockquote><b>资产负债表和其他竞争</b></blockquote></p><p> There are 2 more factors worth considering, one positive and one negative.</p><p><blockquote>还有两个因素值得考虑，一个是积极的，一个是消极的。</blockquote></p><p> The positive factor is the company's balance sheet. Even though they hold a large debt position of over $8 billion and are likely to see interest expense rise as interest rates do, they hold one of their largest cash positions they've even had, aided by cost cutting initiatives throughout the pandemic, including suspending their dividend, a factor I'll get into in the next segment.</p><p><blockquote>积极因素是公司的资产负债表。尽管他们持有超过80亿美元的巨额债务头寸，并且利息支出可能会随着利率的上升而上升，但在整个大流行期间的成本削减举措的帮助下，他们持有有史以来最大的现金头寸之一，包括暂停他们的股息，这是我将在下一部分讨论的一个因素。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia currently holds almost$4.3 billionin cash and equivalents and another $23 million in short term investments. This puts their net debt position at under $4.5 billion with expected cash flows over the next few years being enough to cover interest and restructuring charges as interest rates inch higher.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia目前持有近43亿美元现金及等价物，以及另外2300万美元的短期投资。这使得他们的净债务头寸低于45亿美元，随着利率小幅上升，预计未来几年的现金流足以支付利息和重组费用。</blockquote></p><p> The negative factor here is direct and indirect competition. As mentioned earlier, companies like Booking are their main competitive headwinds but there is also the constant possibility that new websites with superior algorithms may spur up at any moment and take away business. An example of this are various sites like Skyscanner (TCOM), which does to sites like Expedia what Expedia does to hotel and airlines sites and occasionally can find significant savings by booking with one of Expedia's competitors. The emergence of these sites won't hurt their core sales stream but can put significant pressure on the company's margins.</p><p><blockquote>这里的负面因素是直接和间接竞争。如前所述，像Booking这样的公司是他们的主要竞争对手，但也有可能拥有卓越算法的新网站随时可能出现并夺走业务。这方面的一个例子是Skyscanner(TCOM)等各种网站，它对Expedia等网站的作用就像Expedia对酒店和航空公司网站的作用一样，偶尔可以通过向Expedia的竞争对手之一预订来节省大量费用。这些网站的出现不会损害其核心销售流，但可能会给公司的利润率带来巨大压力。</blockquote></p><p> An inorganic way that the company faces competitive pressures is from the original airlines, hotel, car rental and cruise companies themselves, which in recent years have made a big push to develop their own websites, applications and rewards centers to incentivize customers to book directly with them, saving them the booking costs to these third party sites and apps like Expedia. As these competitive pressures grow, Expedia and other online travel booking companies can see their margin take a hit as they lower commissions and prices to adapt to the rising pressures.</p><p><blockquote>该公司面临竞争压力的一种无机方式来自最初的航空公司、酒店、汽车租赁和邮轮公司本身，这些公司近年来大力开发自己的网站、应用程序和奖励中心，以激励客户直接向他们预订，为他们节省了向Expedia等第三方网站和应用程序的预订费用。随着这些竞争压力的增加，Expedia和其他在线旅游预订公司可能会看到他们的利润率受到打击，因为他们降低了佣金和价格以适应不断上升的压力。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overall: Perfectly Situated</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总体：地理位置优越</b></blockquote></p><p> With the industry overall and Expedia in particular expected to grow steadily over the next 5 years, as they recover from the COVID-19 pandemic plunge, investors will likely enjoy a steady growth rate of around 8% annually from Expedia, which given current overall valuations, will almost certainly be higher than the overall market.</p><p><blockquote>随着整个行业，尤其是Expedia预计将在未来5年内稳步增长，随着他们从COVID-19大流行的暴跌中恢复过来，投资者可能会从Expedia中享受每年8%左右的稳定增长率，鉴于目前的整体估值，几乎肯定会高于整体市场。</blockquote></p><p> Another positive factor for Expedia is the return of their dividend. They suspended their dividend back in late 2020 to save costs as the pandemic raged on, keeping nearly $200 million annually in cash. As they stated in that same release, so this isn't just a wild speculation, I expect them to return the dividend as they recover and regain their cash flow generating capabilities.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia的另一个积极因素是股息回报。在疫情肆虐期间，他们于2020年底暂停派息，以节省成本，每年保留近2亿美元的现金。正如他们在同一份新闻稿中所说，这不仅仅是一个疯狂的猜测，我预计他们会在恢复并重新获得现金流产生能力时返还股息。</blockquote></p><p> I don't know if they'll return to the $1.34 annual dividend for a yield of 0.83% annually, but I'll await further news related to their expected payout ratio. The speculative part of this is that we can see a jump in dividend payout given expected cash flows and it's possible we see a yield of over 1%, bringing total potential return closer to 10% annually, which can entice long term investors.</p><p><blockquote>我不知道他们是否会恢复到1.34美元的年度股息，年收益率为0.83%，但我会等待与他们预期派息率相关的进一步消息。其中的推测部分是，考虑到预期现金流，我们可以看到股息支付的跃升，并且我们可能会看到超过1%的收益率，使每年的总潜在回报率接近10%，这可以吸引长期投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe Expedia is perfectly valued and perfectly situated to take advantage of the steady growth back to and beyond levels we saw pre-pandemic as business and international travel bounces back late this year or early next year.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我相信随着商务和国际旅行在今年年底或明年初反弹，Expedia的估值非常高，并且完全有能力利用稳定增长，恢复到甚至超过我们在大流行前看到的水平。</blockquote></p><p> I am bullish on Expedia's 5-year prospects.</p><p><blockquote>我看好Expedia的5年前景。</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>Expedia: Perfectly Valued, Perfectly Situated<blockquote>Expedia：物超所值，地理位置优越</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\">\nExpedia: Perfectly Valued, Perfectly Situated<blockquote>Expedia：物超所值，地理位置优越</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-02 11:28</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Expedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are trading above pre-pandemic levels with travel not yet recovered.</li>  <li>With business and international travel expected to pick up in late 2020 or early 2021, I believe the company is perfectly valued and situated to take advantage of steady growth.</li>  <li>I am bullish on the company's 5-year prospects.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7c936ae728a0a5e399ec9eb9f9d5a71d\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>ArtMarie/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>封锁导致全球旅行关闭后，Expedia的收入大幅下降。现在，由于旅游业尚未恢复，它们的交易价格高于大流行前的水平。</li><li>由于商务和国际旅行预计将在2020年底或2021年初回升，我相信该公司的估值非常理想，并且能够利用稳定增长的优势。</li><li>我看好该公司的5年前景。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>ArtMarie/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Travel, in all of its forms, has taken the biggest hit from closures and lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic as flights were cancelled, hotels shuttered and individuals and companies reducing travel to near zero for nearly a year.</p><p><blockquote>在COVID-19大流行期间，各种形式的旅行都受到了关闭和封锁的最大打击，航班取消，酒店关闭，个人和公司在近一年的时间里将旅行减少到接近于零。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia (EXPE), through its various offerings, is a major player in the travel industry, where it offers a database of flights, hotels, car rentals, short-term apartment rentals, cruise bookings and more. During the pandemic, they've seen their revenues plunge from over $12 billion in 2019 to just over $5 billion in 2020 and subsequently suspended their dividend and reported a wide loss of over $1.5 billion for 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia(EXPE)通过其各种产品成为旅游行业的主要参与者，提供航班、酒店、汽车租赁、短期公寓租赁、邮轮预订等数据库。在疫情期间，他们的收入从2019年的超过120亿美元暴跌至2020年的略高于50亿美元，随后暂停派息，并报告2020年亏损超过15亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Now, with the recovery underway and retail travel reaching record reopening numbers, there are several positives and negatives to consider with Expedia. The negative one being share price, with them currently trading at roughly double where they were before the pandemic even started, yet travel is not expected to return to those levels for quite some time. The positive side of this is that we now have a clear indication that travel growth is expected to remain high for quite some time, allowing for higher industry valuations. Let's explore these catalysts and see where the company stands relative to the industry and its closest peers.</p><p><blockquote>现在，随着复苏的进行和零售旅游达到创纪录的重新开业数量，Expedia有几个积极和消极的方面需要考虑。负面因素是股价，目前股价大约是大流行开始前的两倍，但预计旅游业在相当长一段时间内不会恢复到这些水平。积极的一面是，我们现在有一个明确的迹象表明，旅游业增长预计将在相当长一段时间内保持高位，从而实现更高的行业估值。让我们探索这些催化剂，看看该公司相对于行业及其最接近的同行的地位。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Negative Approach: Overvalued? Competition?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>消极方法：估值过高？竞争？</b></blockquote></p><p> Before getting to the share price and competitive parts of the conversation, let's explore some other negative elements to Expedia.</p><p><blockquote>在讨论股价和对话的竞争部分之前，让我们探讨一下Expedia的其他一些负面因素。</blockquote></p><p> Debt and interest expense had surged in2019following expansion into various industries and consolidation. Debt went from $4.2 billion in 2019 to $8.2 billion in 2020 and interest expense nearlydoubledas well, from under $200 million to $408 million in the most recent company update. This may have been a strategic mistake on behalf of the company since we're now expecting interest rates to increase over the coming years, meaning that the company can see interest expense nearly double and approach $750 million by 2023 if they don't put a plan to retire or restructure some of the debt.</p><p><blockquote>随着向各个行业的扩张和整合，2019年债务和利息支出激增。债务从2019年的42亿美元增加到2020年的82亿美元，利息支出也几乎翻了一番，从不到2亿美元增加到最近公司更新的4.08亿美元。这可能是公司的一个战略错误，因为我们现在预计未来几年利率将会上升，这意味着如果不这样做，公司的利息支出可能会增加近一倍，到2023年将接近7.5亿美元制定退休或重组部分债务的计划。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, the company does have a high cash position and they can, in theory, use it to pay down some of their high interest debt earlier than expected to avoid this charge. I'll discuss their cash situation later in the article.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，该公司确实拥有很高的现金头寸，理论上他们可以用它比预期更早地偿还一些高息债务，以避免这笔费用。我将在文章后面讨论他们的现金状况。</blockquote></p><p> The main negative approach I had when I first saw the company's share price recovery in full effect is their valuation. Before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down worldwide travel, the company was trading around the $120.00 per share levels and are now trading around $170.00 per share, roughly 50% higher at various peaks. This is happening even as travel, and revenues, are not expected to recover to pre-pandemic levels until 24 months from now and even longer if we don't see the expected international travel pick up, since right now domestic travel surges are compensating for softer business and international travel.</p><p><blockquote>当我第一次看到该公司股价全面回升时，我的主要负面看法是他们的估值。在COVID-19大流行导致worldwide travel关闭之前，该公司的交易价格约为每股120.00美元，目前的交易价格约为每股170.00美元，在各个峰值上涨了约50%。尽管旅行和收入预计要到24个月后才能恢复到大流行前的水平，如果我们没有看到预期的国际旅行回升，甚至会更长时间，但这种情况仍在发生，因为目前国内旅行激增正在弥补商务和国际旅行疲软的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, a look at the company's valuation and multiples based off analyst projections, along with what I believe will be a better-than-expected actual results from the company, shows that the company is, for lack of a better term, perfectly and fairly valued.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，根据分析师预测对该公司的估值和市盈率，以及我认为该公司好于预期的实际业绩，表明该公司由于缺乏更好的术语，表现完美且估值公平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Company Valuation: Perfection</b></p><p><blockquote><b>公司估值：完美</b></blockquote></p><p> Looking at the company's own projections isn't enough here, since competitive pressures remain high in this relatively saturated industry. Let's evaluate the company relative to Booking Holdings (BKNG), which is currently the world's largest online travel company and Expedia's closest competitor in the public markets.</p><p><blockquote>光看公司自己的预测是不够的，因为在这个相对饱和的行业中，竞争压力仍然很大。让我们相对于Booking Holdings(BKNG)来评估该公司，后者是目前全球最大的在线旅游公司，也是Expedia在公开市场上最接近的竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> First, let's look at&nbsp;expected EPS growth&nbsp;through the next 5 years.</p><p><blockquote>首先，让我们看看未来5年的预期每股收益增长。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8564ffd38e826bfa96a0864185eba3f\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"351\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Given that Expedia is coming out of a loss per share while Booking managed to maintain a profit, it's important to look at the expected growth from 2022 to 2025 to get a sense of comparison. Over that time period, Expedia is set to grow EPS by 82% while Booking is set to grow EPS by 62%. This given Expedia an advantage, I believe, in valuation multiples when compared to Booking. Let's look at multiples.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于Expedia正在摆脱每股亏损，而Booking则设法保持盈利，因此了解2022年至2025年的预期增长以进行比较非常重要。在此期间，Expedia的每股收益将增长82%，而Booking的每股收益将增长62%。我认为，与Booking相比，这使得Expedia在估值倍数方面具有优势。让我们看看倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f8870ade9bafc30cdd64dcaa252ef94\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"213\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As we can see, even though Expedia is expected to grow at a slightly faster rate over the next 5 years than Booking is, they're trading at slightly lower to even multiples. Now, it's possible that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is fairly valued, but I believe that based off the aforementioned factors and given that I believe Expedia can continue to enjoy higher margins (Expedia currently holds a 68% gross margin while Booking a 64% margin), that both cases are true and that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is ever-so-slightly undervalued.</p><p><blockquote>正如我们所看到的，尽管Expedia预计在未来5年内的增长速度将略快于Booking，但它们的市盈率仍略低至偶数倍。现在，Booking的估值可能略有高估，而Expedia的估值合理，但我相信，基于上述因素，并考虑到我相信Expedia可以继续享受更高的利润率（Expedia目前拥有68%的毛利率，而Booking的毛利率为64%），这两种情况都是正确的，Booking的估值略有高估，而Expedia的估值则略有低估。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Balance Sheets and Other Competition</b></p><p><blockquote><b>资产负债表和其他竞争</b></blockquote></p><p> There are 2 more factors worth considering, one positive and one negative.</p><p><blockquote>还有两个因素值得考虑，一个是积极的，一个是消极的。</blockquote></p><p> The positive factor is the company's balance sheet. Even though they hold a large debt position of over $8 billion and are likely to see interest expense rise as interest rates do, they hold one of their largest cash positions they've even had, aided by cost cutting initiatives throughout the pandemic, including suspending their dividend, a factor I'll get into in the next segment.</p><p><blockquote>积极因素是公司的资产负债表。尽管他们持有超过80亿美元的巨额债务头寸，并且利息支出可能会随着利率的上升而上升，但在整个大流行期间的成本削减举措的帮助下，他们持有有史以来最大的现金头寸之一，包括暂停他们的股息，这是我将在下一部分讨论的一个因素。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia currently holds almost$4.3 billionin cash and equivalents and another $23 million in short term investments. This puts their net debt position at under $4.5 billion with expected cash flows over the next few years being enough to cover interest and restructuring charges as interest rates inch higher.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia目前持有近43亿美元现金及等价物，以及另外2300万美元的短期投资。这使得他们的净债务头寸低于45亿美元，随着利率小幅上升，预计未来几年的现金流足以支付利息和重组费用。</blockquote></p><p> The negative factor here is direct and indirect competition. As mentioned earlier, companies like Booking are their main competitive headwinds but there is also the constant possibility that new websites with superior algorithms may spur up at any moment and take away business. An example of this are various sites like Skyscanner (TCOM), which does to sites like Expedia what Expedia does to hotel and airlines sites and occasionally can find significant savings by booking with one of Expedia's competitors. The emergence of these sites won't hurt their core sales stream but can put significant pressure on the company's margins.</p><p><blockquote>这里的负面因素是直接和间接竞争。如前所述，像Booking这样的公司是他们的主要竞争对手，但也有可能拥有卓越算法的新网站随时可能出现并夺走业务。这方面的一个例子是Skyscanner(TCOM)等各种网站，它对Expedia等网站的作用就像Expedia对酒店和航空公司网站的作用一样，偶尔可以通过向Expedia的竞争对手之一预订来节省大量费用。这些网站的出现不会损害其核心销售流，但可能会给公司的利润率带来巨大压力。</blockquote></p><p> An inorganic way that the company faces competitive pressures is from the original airlines, hotel, car rental and cruise companies themselves, which in recent years have made a big push to develop their own websites, applications and rewards centers to incentivize customers to book directly with them, saving them the booking costs to these third party sites and apps like Expedia. As these competitive pressures grow, Expedia and other online travel booking companies can see their margin take a hit as they lower commissions and prices to adapt to the rising pressures.</p><p><blockquote>该公司面临竞争压力的一种无机方式来自最初的航空公司、酒店、汽车租赁和邮轮公司本身，这些公司近年来大力开发自己的网站、应用程序和奖励中心，以激励客户直接向他们预订，为他们节省了向Expedia等第三方网站和应用程序的预订费用。随着这些竞争压力的增加，Expedia和其他在线旅游预订公司可能会看到他们的利润率受到打击，因为他们降低了佣金和价格以适应不断上升的压力。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overall: Perfectly Situated</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总体：地理位置优越</b></blockquote></p><p> With the industry overall and Expedia in particular expected to grow steadily over the next 5 years, as they recover from the COVID-19 pandemic plunge, investors will likely enjoy a steady growth rate of around 8% annually from Expedia, which given current overall valuations, will almost certainly be higher than the overall market.</p><p><blockquote>随着整个行业，尤其是Expedia预计将在未来5年内稳步增长，随着他们从COVID-19大流行的暴跌中恢复过来，投资者可能会从Expedia中享受每年8%左右的稳定增长率，鉴于目前的整体估值，几乎肯定会高于整体市场。</blockquote></p><p> Another positive factor for Expedia is the return of their dividend. They suspended their dividend back in late 2020 to save costs as the pandemic raged on, keeping nearly $200 million annually in cash. As they stated in that same release, so this isn't just a wild speculation, I expect them to return the dividend as they recover and regain their cash flow generating capabilities.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia的另一个积极因素是股息回报。在疫情肆虐期间，他们于2020年底暂停派息，以节省成本，每年保留近2亿美元的现金。正如他们在同一份新闻稿中所说，这不仅仅是一个疯狂的猜测，我预计他们会在恢复并重新获得现金流产生能力时返还股息。</blockquote></p><p> I don't know if they'll return to the $1.34 annual dividend for a yield of 0.83% annually, but I'll await further news related to their expected payout ratio. The speculative part of this is that we can see a jump in dividend payout given expected cash flows and it's possible we see a yield of over 1%, bringing total potential return closer to 10% annually, which can entice long term investors.</p><p><blockquote>我不知道他们是否会恢复到1.34美元的年度股息，年收益率为0.83%，但我会等待与他们预期派息率相关的进一步消息。其中的推测部分是，考虑到预期现金流，我们可以看到股息支付的跃升，并且我们可能会看到超过1%的收益率，使每年的总潜在回报率接近10%，这可以吸引长期投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe Expedia is perfectly valued and perfectly situated to take advantage of the steady growth back to and beyond levels we saw pre-pandemic as business and international travel bounces back late this year or early next year.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我相信随着商务和国际旅行在今年年底或明年初反弹，Expedia的估值非常高，并且完全有能力利用稳定增长，恢复到甚至超过我们在大流行前看到的水平。</blockquote></p><p> I am bullish on Expedia's 5-year prospects.</p><p><blockquote>我看好Expedia的5年前景。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4443422-expedia-perfectly-valued-perfectly-situated\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"EXPE":"Expedia"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4443422-expedia-perfectly-valued-perfectly-situated","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1190185935","content_text":"Summary\n\nExpedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are trading above pre-pandemic levels with travel not yet recovered.\nWith business and international travel expected to pick up in late 2020 or early 2021, I believe the company is perfectly valued and situated to take advantage of steady growth.\nI am bullish on the company's 5-year prospects.\n\nArtMarie/E+ via Getty Images\nTravel, in all of its forms, has taken the biggest hit from closures and lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic as flights were cancelled, hotels shuttered and individuals and companies reducing travel to near zero for nearly a year.\nExpedia (EXPE), through its various offerings, is a major player in the travel industry, where it offers a database of flights, hotels, car rentals, short-term apartment rentals, cruise bookings and more. During the pandemic, they've seen their revenues plunge from over $12 billion in 2019 to just over $5 billion in 2020 and subsequently suspended their dividend and reported a wide loss of over $1.5 billion for 2020.\nNow, with the recovery underway and retail travel reaching record reopening numbers, there are several positives and negatives to consider with Expedia. The negative one being share price, with them currently trading at roughly double where they were before the pandemic even started, yet travel is not expected to return to those levels for quite some time. The positive side of this is that we now have a clear indication that travel growth is expected to remain high for quite some time, allowing for higher industry valuations. Let's explore these catalysts and see where the company stands relative to the industry and its closest peers.\nNegative Approach: Overvalued? Competition?\nBefore getting to the share price and competitive parts of the conversation, let's explore some other negative elements to Expedia.\nDebt and interest expense had surged in2019following expansion into various industries and consolidation. Debt went from $4.2 billion in 2019 to $8.2 billion in 2020 and interest expense nearlydoubledas well, from under $200 million to $408 million in the most recent company update. This may have been a strategic mistake on behalf of the company since we're now expecting interest rates to increase over the coming years, meaning that the company can see interest expense nearly double and approach $750 million by 2023 if they don't put a plan to retire or restructure some of the debt.\nEven so, the company does have a high cash position and they can, in theory, use it to pay down some of their high interest debt earlier than expected to avoid this charge. I'll discuss their cash situation later in the article.\nThe main negative approach I had when I first saw the company's share price recovery in full effect is their valuation. Before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down worldwide travel, the company was trading around the $120.00 per share levels and are now trading around $170.00 per share, roughly 50% higher at various peaks. This is happening even as travel, and revenues, are not expected to recover to pre-pandemic levels until 24 months from now and even longer if we don't see the expected international travel pick up, since right now domestic travel surges are compensating for softer business and international travel.\nEven so, a look at the company's valuation and multiples based off analyst projections, along with what I believe will be a better-than-expected actual results from the company, shows that the company is, for lack of a better term, perfectly and fairly valued.\nCompany Valuation: Perfection\nLooking at the company's own projections isn't enough here, since competitive pressures remain high in this relatively saturated industry. Let's evaluate the company relative to Booking Holdings (BKNG), which is currently the world's largest online travel company and Expedia's closest competitor in the public markets.\nFirst, let's look at expected EPS growth through the next 5 years.\n\nGiven that Expedia is coming out of a loss per share while Booking managed to maintain a profit, it's important to look at the expected growth from 2022 to 2025 to get a sense of comparison. Over that time period, Expedia is set to grow EPS by 82% while Booking is set to grow EPS by 62%. This given Expedia an advantage, I believe, in valuation multiples when compared to Booking. Let's look at multiples.\n\nAs we can see, even though Expedia is expected to grow at a slightly faster rate over the next 5 years than Booking is, they're trading at slightly lower to even multiples. Now, it's possible that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is fairly valued, but I believe that based off the aforementioned factors and given that I believe Expedia can continue to enjoy higher margins (Expedia currently holds a 68% gross margin while Booking a 64% margin), that both cases are true and that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is ever-so-slightly undervalued.\nBalance Sheets and Other Competition\nThere are 2 more factors worth considering, one positive and one negative.\nThe positive factor is the company's balance sheet. Even though they hold a large debt position of over $8 billion and are likely to see interest expense rise as interest rates do, they hold one of their largest cash positions they've even had, aided by cost cutting initiatives throughout the pandemic, including suspending their dividend, a factor I'll get into in the next segment.\nExpedia currently holds almost$4.3 billionin cash and equivalents and another $23 million in short term investments. This puts their net debt position at under $4.5 billion with expected cash flows over the next few years being enough to cover interest and restructuring charges as interest rates inch higher.\nThe negative factor here is direct and indirect competition. As mentioned earlier, companies like Booking are their main competitive headwinds but there is also the constant possibility that new websites with superior algorithms may spur up at any moment and take away business. An example of this are various sites like Skyscanner (TCOM), which does to sites like Expedia what Expedia does to hotel and airlines sites and occasionally can find significant savings by booking with one of Expedia's competitors. The emergence of these sites won't hurt their core sales stream but can put significant pressure on the company's margins.\nAn inorganic way that the company faces competitive pressures is from the original airlines, hotel, car rental and cruise companies themselves, which in recent years have made a big push to develop their own websites, applications and rewards centers to incentivize customers to book directly with them, saving them the booking costs to these third party sites and apps like Expedia. As these competitive pressures grow, Expedia and other online travel booking companies can see their margin take a hit as they lower commissions and prices to adapt to the rising pressures.\nOverall: Perfectly Situated\nWith the industry overall and Expedia in particular expected to grow steadily over the next 5 years, as they recover from the COVID-19 pandemic plunge, investors will likely enjoy a steady growth rate of around 8% annually from Expedia, which given current overall valuations, will almost certainly be higher than the overall market.\nAnother positive factor for Expedia is the return of their dividend. They suspended their dividend back in late 2020 to save costs as the pandemic raged on, keeping nearly $200 million annually in cash. As they stated in that same release, so this isn't just a wild speculation, I expect them to return the dividend as they recover and regain their cash flow generating capabilities.\nI don't know if they'll return to the $1.34 annual dividend for a yield of 0.83% annually, but I'll await further news related to their expected payout ratio. The speculative part of this is that we can see a jump in dividend payout given expected cash flows and it's possible we see a yield of over 1%, bringing total potential return closer to 10% annually, which can entice long term investors.\nOverall, I believe Expedia is perfectly valued and perfectly situated to take advantage of the steady growth back to and beyond levels we saw pre-pandemic as business and international travel bounces back late this year or early next year.\nI am bullish on Expedia's 5-year prospects.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"EXPE":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":719,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802736230,"gmtCreate":1627805258320,"gmtModify":1631892627768,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"so smart and funny","listText":"so smart and funny","text":"so smart and funny","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/802736230","repostId":"1122171439","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":588,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802017382,"gmtCreate":1627698947346,"gmtModify":1631892627769,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"lotto or mi","listText":"lotto or mi","text":"lotto or mi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/802017382","repostId":"1152039134","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1152039134","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627689014,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1152039134?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-31 07:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1152039134","media":"The Street","summary":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Repor","content":"<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订户进来，大多数是在开盘时买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","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>Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</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\">\nJim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Street</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-31 07:50</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订户进来，大多数是在开盘时买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21\">The Street</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":{"HOOD":"Robinhood"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1152039134","content_text":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Report have done to avoid the IPO debacle?\nI can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.\nI can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.\nSecond, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?\nThird, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.\nI lost on every single point.\nThe underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.\nSecond, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.\nThird, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.\nEveryone who bought that day lost money.\nEveryone who sold that day made money.\nNo subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.\nIt is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.\nI always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.\nWhy do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.\nSo, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.\nGreed?\nStupidity?\nHow about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.\nJust like the offering ofTheStreet.com.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"HOOD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":653,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":808411860,"gmtCreate":1627605692650,"gmtModify":1631892627776,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"&nbsp; n","listText":"&nbsp; n","text":"n","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/808411860","repostId":"2155818241","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":851,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":808437225,"gmtCreate":1627605525467,"gmtModify":1631892627775,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"i think therefore i am","listText":"i think therefore i am","text":"i think therefore i am","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/808437225","repostId":"2155218153","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":494,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":808434292,"gmtCreate":1627605491016,"gmtModify":1631892627783,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"4089375229568220","authorIdStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"what is love?","listText":"what is love?","text":"what is love?","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/808434292","repostId":"2155181160","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":385,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"hots":[{"id":177274394,"gmtCreate":1627230955418,"gmtModify":1633767014971,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"The triangle will win the battle and the war","listText":"The triangle will win the battle and the war","text":"The triangle will win the battle and the war","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/177274394","repostId":"2153936352","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":326,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":887624853,"gmtCreate":1632030304172,"gmtModify":1632803212813,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"So I can do it was a lot of people who are sharing connections ideas and opportunities to the arts","listText":"So I can do it was a lot of people who are sharing connections ideas and opportunities to the arts","text":"So I can do it was a lot of people who are sharing connections ideas and opportunities to the arts","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/887624853","repostId":"2168508161","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1796,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":802017382,"gmtCreate":1627698947346,"gmtModify":1631892627769,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"lotto or mi","listText":"lotto or mi","text":"lotto or mi","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/802017382","repostId":"1152039134","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1152039134","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627689014,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1152039134?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-07-31 07:50","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1152039134","media":"The Street","summary":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Repor","content":"<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订户进来，大多数是在开盘时买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"lsy1610613172068","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>Jim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</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\">\nJim Cramer: Robinhood's IPO Debacle Shows How Little Has Changed Over the Decades<blockquote>吉姆·克莱默：Robinhood的IPO惨败表明几十年来变化很小</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Street</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-07-31 07:50</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.  What should Robinhood&nbsp;(<b>HOOD</b>) -Get Report&nbsp;have done to avoid the IPO debacle?</p><p><blockquote>听一个知道的人说，这个过程真的有缺陷。罗宾汉应该做什么（<b>发动机罩</b>)-获取报告为避免IPO失败做了哪些工作？</blockquote></p><p> I can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.</p><p><blockquote>我不能说周四发生了什么，谁是负责人，谁为什么辩护。</blockquote></p><p> I can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.</p><p><blockquote>我只能告诉你22年前TheStreet.com上市时我争论了什么。首先，作为创始人，我决心用股票奖励所有订阅者，以表明我对他们的忠诚。</blockquote></p><p> Second, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?</p><p><blockquote>其次，我坚持认为这笔交易的定价要比承销商想要的低得多。我们已经为初始投资者赚了一大笔钱。为什么不把很多留在桌面上，让新投资者做好呢？</blockquote></p><p> Third, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.</p><p><blockquote>第三，我希望有足够多的股票交给好人，这样就不会有脚蹼，我希望与各种经纪人密切协调，这些经纪人往往会渗透到流程中，通过批量市场订单、开仓过高然后做空股票来劫持开盘。一路下跌。</blockquote></p><p> I lost on every single point.</p><p><blockquote>我在每一点上都输了。</blockquote></p><p> The underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.</p><p><blockquote>承销商说我们不能分配给认购者。</blockquote></p><p> Second, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.</p><p><blockquote>第二，交易的价格不会被控制在我们可以有一个小的流行，这样每个人都会赢。</blockquote></p><p> Third, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.</p><p><blockquote>第三，场外订单，即那些下市价订单的人，是由一家名为Knight Securities的机构分批的，而不是承销商高盛，开盘价是62美元——甚至不清楚开盘价是多少，太混乱了——交易到66美元，就像Robinhood交易到39美元然后改变，然后再也没有交易更高。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who bought that day lost money.</p><p><blockquote>那天买的都亏了。</blockquote></p><p> Everyone who sold that day made money.</p><p><blockquote>那天卖出的每个人都赚钱了。</blockquote></p><p> No subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.</p><p><blockquote>据我所知，没有订户进来，大多数是在开盘时买的，我疏远了除了大狗之外的所有人。</blockquote></p><p> It is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.</p><p><blockquote>令人惊讶的是，我们现在是2021年，这个过程虽然让客户进入，但却未能定价，因此Robinhood将钱留在了桌面上。相信我，这是可能的。但承销商和管理层选择不这样做。我们不知道哪一方搞砸了，或者两者都搞砸了，但有一个成功的蓝图；相信我，如果我知道1999年是什么，他们也知道现在是什么。</blockquote></p><p> I always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.</p><p><blockquote>我一直对发生的事感到后悔。大多数人责怪我，因为我是这个过程的代言人。我被它的可怕程度震惊了，没有“从长计议”，因为从长计议很糟糕。</blockquote></p><p> Why do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.</p><p><blockquote>为什么这些事情会出错？我确实责怪承销商，因为他们每天都这样做，而委托人只做一次。他们必须阻止管理层背叛股东，因为股东认为这是管理层的错。没有承销商会说他们搞砸了。那是不可能的。</blockquote></p><p> So, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.</p><p><blockquote>因此，我们坐下来，惊叹于这笔交易进行得有多糟糕，尽管它完全在承销商和委托人的范围内，所以罗宾汉留下了更多。</blockquote></p><p> Greed?</p><p><blockquote>贪婪？</blockquote></p><p> Stupidity?</p><p><blockquote>愚蠢？</blockquote></p><p> How about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.</p><p><blockquote>糟糕的执行和缺乏透明度表明事情处理得有多糟糕怎么样？</blockquote></p><p> Just like the offering ofTheStreet.com.</p><p><blockquote>就像TheStreet.com的产品一样。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21\">The Street</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":{"HOOD":"Robinhood"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/cramer-robinhood-ipo-debacle-thestreet-7-30-21","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1152039134","content_text":"Take it from a guy who knows, the process is really flawed.\n\nWhat should Robinhood (HOOD) -Get Report have done to avoid the IPO debacle?\nI can't speak to what happened on Thursday, who was in charge, who argued for what.\nI can only tell you what I argued for 22 years ago whenTheStreet.comwas coming public. First, as the founder, I was determined to award all the subscribers with stock to demonstrate my loyalty to them.\nSecond, I was insistent that the deal be priced much lower than the underwriters wanted. We had already made a ton of money for initial investors. Why not leave a lot on the table and let the new investors do well?\nThird, I wanted enough stock placed with good hands that there would be no flippers and I wanted close coordination with the various brokers who tended to infiltrate the process and hijack the openings by batching market orders and opening the stocks way too high and then shorting them all the way down.\nI lost on every single point.\nThe underwriters said we could not allocate to subscribers.\nSecond, the price of the deal would not be controlled to where we could have a small pop so everyone would win.\nThird, the over-the-transom orders, those who placed market orders, were batched by an outfit called Knight Securities, not the underwriter, Goldman Sachs, and it opened at $62 -- it wasn't even clear what the opening price was it was so chaotic -- traded to $66, like how Robinhood traded to $39 and change, and then never traded higher.\nEveryone who bought that day lost money.\nEveryone who sold that day made money.\nNo subscribers got in, most bought at the opening, from what I can tell, and I alienated everyone except the big dogs.\nIt is amazing that here we are in 2021 and the process, while letting clients in, failed to price it so that Robinhood left money on the table. Believe me, it was possible to do so. But the underwriters and the management chose not to do so. We don't know which side screwed up, or both, but there was a successful blueprint; believe me, if I knew what it was in 1999, they knew what it is now.\nI always regretted what happened. Most people blamed me as I was the face of the process. I was astounded by how horrendous it was and did not \"take the long view\" because the long view sucked.\nWhy do these things go wrong? I do blame the underwriter because they do this every day and the principals only do it once. They have to keep the management from betraying the shareholders because the shareholders think that it is management's fault. No underwriter is EVER going to say that they screwed up. That's not in the cards.\nSo, we sit back and we marvel about how badly the deal went even as it was well within the province of the underwriter and the principals to make it so Robinhood left more on the table.\nGreed?\nStupidity?\nHow about poor execution and a lack of transparency that shows how badly it was handled.\nJust like the offering ofTheStreet.com.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"HOOD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":653,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":830404490,"gmtCreate":1629086877410,"gmtModify":1631890130257,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Ok sure if you have any questions or concerns please visit the entrance to the arts in English literature","listText":"Ok sure if you have any questions or concerns please visit the entrance to the arts in English literature","text":"Ok sure if you have any questions or concerns please visit the entrance to the arts in English literature","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/830404490","repostId":"1157945388","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1752,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":895473492,"gmtCreate":1628770060116,"gmtModify":1631890130260,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Hey it was a lot of people","listText":"Hey it was a lot of people","text":"Hey it was a lot of people","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/895473492","repostId":"2158254838","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":528,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":172484283,"gmtCreate":1626973692242,"gmtModify":1633769163705,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Insightful","listText":"Insightful","text":"Insightful","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":6,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/172484283","repostId":"1107511555","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":452,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":805624305,"gmtCreate":1627877847707,"gmtModify":1631892627768,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"bananas","listText":"bananas","text":"bananas","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/805624305","repostId":"1190185935","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1190185935","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1627874910,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1190185935?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-08-02 11:28","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Expedia: Perfectly Valued, Perfectly Situated<blockquote>Expedia：物超所值，地理位置优越</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1190185935","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nExpedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are t","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Expedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are trading above pre-pandemic levels with travel not yet recovered.</li>  <li>With business and international travel expected to pick up in late 2020 or early 2021, I believe the company is perfectly valued and situated to take advantage of steady growth.</li>  <li>I am bullish on the company's 5-year prospects.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7c936ae728a0a5e399ec9eb9f9d5a71d\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>ArtMarie/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>封锁导致全球旅行关闭后，Expedia的收入大幅下降。现在，由于旅游业尚未恢复，它们的交易价格高于大流行前的水平。</li><li>由于商务和国际旅行预计将在2020年底或2021年初回升，我相信该公司的估值非常理想，并且能够利用稳定增长的优势。</li><li>我看好该公司的5年前景。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>ArtMarie/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Travel, in all of its forms, has taken the biggest hit from closures and lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic as flights were cancelled, hotels shuttered and individuals and companies reducing travel to near zero for nearly a year.</p><p><blockquote>在COVID-19大流行期间，各种形式的旅行都受到了关闭和封锁的最大打击，航班取消，酒店关闭，个人和公司在近一年的时间里将旅行减少到接近于零。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia (EXPE), through its various offerings, is a major player in the travel industry, where it offers a database of flights, hotels, car rentals, short-term apartment rentals, cruise bookings and more. During the pandemic, they've seen their revenues plunge from over $12 billion in 2019 to just over $5 billion in 2020 and subsequently suspended their dividend and reported a wide loss of over $1.5 billion for 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia(EXPE)通过其各种产品成为旅游行业的主要参与者，提供航班、酒店、汽车租赁、短期公寓租赁、邮轮预订等数据库。在疫情期间，他们的收入从2019年的超过120亿美元暴跌至2020年的略高于50亿美元，随后暂停派息，并报告2020年亏损超过15亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Now, with the recovery underway and retail travel reaching record reopening numbers, there are several positives and negatives to consider with Expedia. The negative one being share price, with them currently trading at roughly double where they were before the pandemic even started, yet travel is not expected to return to those levels for quite some time. The positive side of this is that we now have a clear indication that travel growth is expected to remain high for quite some time, allowing for higher industry valuations. Let's explore these catalysts and see where the company stands relative to the industry and its closest peers.</p><p><blockquote>现在，随着复苏的进行和零售旅游达到创纪录的重新开业数量，Expedia有几个积极和消极的方面需要考虑。负面因素是股价，目前股价大约是大流行开始前的两倍，但预计旅游业在相当长一段时间内不会恢复到这些水平。积极的一面是，我们现在有一个明确的迹象表明，旅游业增长预计将在相当长一段时间内保持高位，从而实现更高的行业估值。让我们探索这些催化剂，看看该公司相对于行业及其最接近的同行的地位。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Negative Approach: Overvalued? Competition?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>消极方法：估值过高？竞争？</b></blockquote></p><p> Before getting to the share price and competitive parts of the conversation, let's explore some other negative elements to Expedia.</p><p><blockquote>在讨论股价和对话的竞争部分之前，让我们探讨一下Expedia的其他一些负面因素。</blockquote></p><p> Debt and interest expense had surged in2019following expansion into various industries and consolidation. Debt went from $4.2 billion in 2019 to $8.2 billion in 2020 and interest expense nearlydoubledas well, from under $200 million to $408 million in the most recent company update. This may have been a strategic mistake on behalf of the company since we're now expecting interest rates to increase over the coming years, meaning that the company can see interest expense nearly double and approach $750 million by 2023 if they don't put a plan to retire or restructure some of the debt.</p><p><blockquote>随着向各个行业的扩张和整合，2019年债务和利息支出激增。债务从2019年的42亿美元增加到2020年的82亿美元，利息支出也几乎翻了一番，从不到2亿美元增加到最近公司更新的4.08亿美元。这可能是公司的一个战略错误，因为我们现在预计未来几年利率将会上升，这意味着如果不这样做，公司的利息支出可能会增加近一倍，到2023年将接近7.5亿美元制定退休或重组部分债务的计划。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, the company does have a high cash position and they can, in theory, use it to pay down some of their high interest debt earlier than expected to avoid this charge. I'll discuss their cash situation later in the article.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，该公司确实拥有很高的现金头寸，理论上他们可以用它比预期更早地偿还一些高息债务，以避免这笔费用。我将在文章后面讨论他们的现金状况。</blockquote></p><p> The main negative approach I had when I first saw the company's share price recovery in full effect is their valuation. Before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down worldwide travel, the company was trading around the $120.00 per share levels and are now trading around $170.00 per share, roughly 50% higher at various peaks. This is happening even as travel, and revenues, are not expected to recover to pre-pandemic levels until 24 months from now and even longer if we don't see the expected international travel pick up, since right now domestic travel surges are compensating for softer business and international travel.</p><p><blockquote>当我第一次看到该公司股价全面回升时，我的主要负面看法是他们的估值。在COVID-19大流行导致worldwide travel关闭之前，该公司的交易价格约为每股120.00美元，目前的交易价格约为每股170.00美元，在各个峰值上涨了约50%。尽管旅行和收入预计要到24个月后才能恢复到大流行前的水平，如果我们没有看到预期的国际旅行回升，甚至会更长时间，但这种情况仍在发生，因为目前国内旅行激增正在弥补商务和国际旅行疲软的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, a look at the company's valuation and multiples based off analyst projections, along with what I believe will be a better-than-expected actual results from the company, shows that the company is, for lack of a better term, perfectly and fairly valued.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，根据分析师预测对该公司的估值和市盈率，以及我认为该公司好于预期的实际业绩，表明该公司由于缺乏更好的术语，表现完美且估值公平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Company Valuation: Perfection</b></p><p><blockquote><b>公司估值：完美</b></blockquote></p><p> Looking at the company's own projections isn't enough here, since competitive pressures remain high in this relatively saturated industry. Let's evaluate the company relative to Booking Holdings (BKNG), which is currently the world's largest online travel company and Expedia's closest competitor in the public markets.</p><p><blockquote>光看公司自己的预测是不够的，因为在这个相对饱和的行业中，竞争压力仍然很大。让我们相对于Booking Holdings(BKNG)来评估该公司，后者是目前全球最大的在线旅游公司，也是Expedia在公开市场上最接近的竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> First, let's look at&nbsp;expected EPS growth&nbsp;through the next 5 years.</p><p><blockquote>首先，让我们看看未来5年的预期每股收益增长。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8564ffd38e826bfa96a0864185eba3f\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"351\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Given that Expedia is coming out of a loss per share while Booking managed to maintain a profit, it's important to look at the expected growth from 2022 to 2025 to get a sense of comparison. Over that time period, Expedia is set to grow EPS by 82% while Booking is set to grow EPS by 62%. This given Expedia an advantage, I believe, in valuation multiples when compared to Booking. Let's look at multiples.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于Expedia正在摆脱每股亏损，而Booking则设法保持盈利，因此了解2022年至2025年的预期增长以进行比较非常重要。在此期间，Expedia的每股收益将增长82%，而Booking的每股收益将增长62%。我认为，与Booking相比，这使得Expedia在估值倍数方面具有优势。让我们看看倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f8870ade9bafc30cdd64dcaa252ef94\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"213\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As we can see, even though Expedia is expected to grow at a slightly faster rate over the next 5 years than Booking is, they're trading at slightly lower to even multiples. Now, it's possible that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is fairly valued, but I believe that based off the aforementioned factors and given that I believe Expedia can continue to enjoy higher margins (Expedia currently holds a 68% gross margin while Booking a 64% margin), that both cases are true and that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is ever-so-slightly undervalued.</p><p><blockquote>正如我们所看到的，尽管Expedia预计在未来5年内的增长速度将略快于Booking，但它们的市盈率仍略低至偶数倍。现在，Booking的估值可能略有高估，而Expedia的估值合理，但我相信，基于上述因素，并考虑到我相信Expedia可以继续享受更高的利润率（Expedia目前拥有68%的毛利率，而Booking的毛利率为64%），这两种情况都是正确的，Booking的估值略有高估，而Expedia的估值则略有低估。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Balance Sheets and Other Competition</b></p><p><blockquote><b>资产负债表和其他竞争</b></blockquote></p><p> There are 2 more factors worth considering, one positive and one negative.</p><p><blockquote>还有两个因素值得考虑，一个是积极的，一个是消极的。</blockquote></p><p> The positive factor is the company's balance sheet. Even though they hold a large debt position of over $8 billion and are likely to see interest expense rise as interest rates do, they hold one of their largest cash positions they've even had, aided by cost cutting initiatives throughout the pandemic, including suspending their dividend, a factor I'll get into in the next segment.</p><p><blockquote>积极因素是公司的资产负债表。尽管他们持有超过80亿美元的巨额债务头寸，并且利息支出可能会随着利率的上升而上升，但在整个大流行期间的成本削减举措的帮助下，他们持有有史以来最大的现金头寸之一，包括暂停他们的股息，这是我将在下一部分讨论的一个因素。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia currently holds almost$4.3 billionin cash and equivalents and another $23 million in short term investments. This puts their net debt position at under $4.5 billion with expected cash flows over the next few years being enough to cover interest and restructuring charges as interest rates inch higher.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia目前持有近43亿美元现金及等价物，以及另外2300万美元的短期投资。这使得他们的净债务头寸低于45亿美元，随着利率小幅上升，预计未来几年的现金流足以支付利息和重组费用。</blockquote></p><p> The negative factor here is direct and indirect competition. As mentioned earlier, companies like Booking are their main competitive headwinds but there is also the constant possibility that new websites with superior algorithms may spur up at any moment and take away business. An example of this are various sites like Skyscanner (TCOM), which does to sites like Expedia what Expedia does to hotel and airlines sites and occasionally can find significant savings by booking with one of Expedia's competitors. The emergence of these sites won't hurt their core sales stream but can put significant pressure on the company's margins.</p><p><blockquote>这里的负面因素是直接和间接竞争。如前所述，像Booking这样的公司是他们的主要竞争对手，但也有可能拥有卓越算法的新网站随时可能出现并夺走业务。这方面的一个例子是Skyscanner(TCOM)等各种网站，它对Expedia等网站的作用就像Expedia对酒店和航空公司网站的作用一样，偶尔可以通过向Expedia的竞争对手之一预订来节省大量费用。这些网站的出现不会损害其核心销售流，但可能会给公司的利润率带来巨大压力。</blockquote></p><p> An inorganic way that the company faces competitive pressures is from the original airlines, hotel, car rental and cruise companies themselves, which in recent years have made a big push to develop their own websites, applications and rewards centers to incentivize customers to book directly with them, saving them the booking costs to these third party sites and apps like Expedia. As these competitive pressures grow, Expedia and other online travel booking companies can see their margin take a hit as they lower commissions and prices to adapt to the rising pressures.</p><p><blockquote>该公司面临竞争压力的一种无机方式来自最初的航空公司、酒店、汽车租赁和邮轮公司本身，这些公司近年来大力开发自己的网站、应用程序和奖励中心，以激励客户直接向他们预订，为他们节省了向Expedia等第三方网站和应用程序的预订费用。随着这些竞争压力的增加，Expedia和其他在线旅游预订公司可能会看到他们的利润率受到打击，因为他们降低了佣金和价格以适应不断上升的压力。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overall: Perfectly Situated</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总体：地理位置优越</b></blockquote></p><p> With the industry overall and Expedia in particular expected to grow steadily over the next 5 years, as they recover from the COVID-19 pandemic plunge, investors will likely enjoy a steady growth rate of around 8% annually from Expedia, which given current overall valuations, will almost certainly be higher than the overall market.</p><p><blockquote>随着整个行业，尤其是Expedia预计将在未来5年内稳步增长，随着他们从COVID-19大流行的暴跌中恢复过来，投资者可能会从Expedia中享受每年8%左右的稳定增长率，鉴于目前的整体估值，几乎肯定会高于整体市场。</blockquote></p><p> Another positive factor for Expedia is the return of their dividend. They suspended their dividend back in late 2020 to save costs as the pandemic raged on, keeping nearly $200 million annually in cash. As they stated in that same release, so this isn't just a wild speculation, I expect them to return the dividend as they recover and regain their cash flow generating capabilities.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia的另一个积极因素是股息回报。在疫情肆虐期间，他们于2020年底暂停派息，以节省成本，每年保留近2亿美元的现金。正如他们在同一份新闻稿中所说，这不仅仅是一个疯狂的猜测，我预计他们会在恢复并重新获得现金流产生能力时返还股息。</blockquote></p><p> I don't know if they'll return to the $1.34 annual dividend for a yield of 0.83% annually, but I'll await further news related to their expected payout ratio. The speculative part of this is that we can see a jump in dividend payout given expected cash flows and it's possible we see a yield of over 1%, bringing total potential return closer to 10% annually, which can entice long term investors.</p><p><blockquote>我不知道他们是否会恢复到1.34美元的年度股息，年收益率为0.83%，但我会等待与他们预期派息率相关的进一步消息。其中的推测部分是，考虑到预期现金流，我们可以看到股息支付的跃升，并且我们可能会看到超过1%的收益率，使每年的总潜在回报率接近10%，这可以吸引长期投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe Expedia is perfectly valued and perfectly situated to take advantage of the steady growth back to and beyond levels we saw pre-pandemic as business and international travel bounces back late this year or early next year.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我相信随着商务和国际旅行在今年年底或明年初反弹，Expedia的估值非常高，并且完全有能力利用稳定增长，恢复到甚至超过我们在大流行前看到的水平。</blockquote></p><p> I am bullish on Expedia's 5-year prospects.</p><p><blockquote>我看好Expedia的5年前景。</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>Expedia: Perfectly Valued, Perfectly Situated<blockquote>Expedia：物超所值，地理位置优越</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\">\nExpedia: Perfectly Valued, Perfectly Situated<blockquote>Expedia：物超所值，地理位置优越</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-08-02 11:28</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Expedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are trading above pre-pandemic levels with travel not yet recovered.</li>  <li>With business and international travel expected to pick up in late 2020 or early 2021, I believe the company is perfectly valued and situated to take advantage of steady growth.</li>  <li>I am bullish on the company's 5-year prospects.</li> </ul> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/7c936ae728a0a5e399ec9eb9f9d5a71d\" tg-width=\"768\" tg-height=\"512\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><span>ArtMarie/E+ via Getty Images</span></p><p><blockquote><ul><li>封锁导致全球旅行关闭后，Expedia的收入大幅下降。现在，由于旅游业尚未恢复，它们的交易价格高于大流行前的水平。</li><li>由于商务和国际旅行预计将在2020年底或2021年初回升，我相信该公司的估值非常理想，并且能够利用稳定增长的优势。</li><li>我看好该公司的5年前景。</li></ul><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>ArtMarie/E+来自Getty Images</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Travel, in all of its forms, has taken the biggest hit from closures and lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic as flights were cancelled, hotels shuttered and individuals and companies reducing travel to near zero for nearly a year.</p><p><blockquote>在COVID-19大流行期间，各种形式的旅行都受到了关闭和封锁的最大打击，航班取消，酒店关闭，个人和公司在近一年的时间里将旅行减少到接近于零。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia (EXPE), through its various offerings, is a major player in the travel industry, where it offers a database of flights, hotels, car rentals, short-term apartment rentals, cruise bookings and more. During the pandemic, they've seen their revenues plunge from over $12 billion in 2019 to just over $5 billion in 2020 and subsequently suspended their dividend and reported a wide loss of over $1.5 billion for 2020.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia(EXPE)通过其各种产品成为旅游行业的主要参与者，提供航班、酒店、汽车租赁、短期公寓租赁、邮轮预订等数据库。在疫情期间，他们的收入从2019年的超过120亿美元暴跌至2020年的略高于50亿美元，随后暂停派息，并报告2020年亏损超过15亿美元。</blockquote></p><p> Now, with the recovery underway and retail travel reaching record reopening numbers, there are several positives and negatives to consider with Expedia. The negative one being share price, with them currently trading at roughly double where they were before the pandemic even started, yet travel is not expected to return to those levels for quite some time. The positive side of this is that we now have a clear indication that travel growth is expected to remain high for quite some time, allowing for higher industry valuations. Let's explore these catalysts and see where the company stands relative to the industry and its closest peers.</p><p><blockquote>现在，随着复苏的进行和零售旅游达到创纪录的重新开业数量，Expedia有几个积极和消极的方面需要考虑。负面因素是股价，目前股价大约是大流行开始前的两倍，但预计旅游业在相当长一段时间内不会恢复到这些水平。积极的一面是，我们现在有一个明确的迹象表明，旅游业增长预计将在相当长一段时间内保持高位，从而实现更高的行业估值。让我们探索这些催化剂，看看该公司相对于行业及其最接近的同行的地位。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Negative Approach: Overvalued? Competition?</b></p><p><blockquote><b>消极方法：估值过高？竞争？</b></blockquote></p><p> Before getting to the share price and competitive parts of the conversation, let's explore some other negative elements to Expedia.</p><p><blockquote>在讨论股价和对话的竞争部分之前，让我们探讨一下Expedia的其他一些负面因素。</blockquote></p><p> Debt and interest expense had surged in2019following expansion into various industries and consolidation. Debt went from $4.2 billion in 2019 to $8.2 billion in 2020 and interest expense nearlydoubledas well, from under $200 million to $408 million in the most recent company update. This may have been a strategic mistake on behalf of the company since we're now expecting interest rates to increase over the coming years, meaning that the company can see interest expense nearly double and approach $750 million by 2023 if they don't put a plan to retire or restructure some of the debt.</p><p><blockquote>随着向各个行业的扩张和整合，2019年债务和利息支出激增。债务从2019年的42亿美元增加到2020年的82亿美元，利息支出也几乎翻了一番，从不到2亿美元增加到最近公司更新的4.08亿美元。这可能是公司的一个战略错误，因为我们现在预计未来几年利率将会上升，这意味着如果不这样做，公司的利息支出可能会增加近一倍，到2023年将接近7.5亿美元制定退休或重组部分债务的计划。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, the company does have a high cash position and they can, in theory, use it to pay down some of their high interest debt earlier than expected to avoid this charge. I'll discuss their cash situation later in the article.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，该公司确实拥有很高的现金头寸，理论上他们可以用它比预期更早地偿还一些高息债务，以避免这笔费用。我将在文章后面讨论他们的现金状况。</blockquote></p><p> The main negative approach I had when I first saw the company's share price recovery in full effect is their valuation. Before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down worldwide travel, the company was trading around the $120.00 per share levels and are now trading around $170.00 per share, roughly 50% higher at various peaks. This is happening even as travel, and revenues, are not expected to recover to pre-pandemic levels until 24 months from now and even longer if we don't see the expected international travel pick up, since right now domestic travel surges are compensating for softer business and international travel.</p><p><blockquote>当我第一次看到该公司股价全面回升时，我的主要负面看法是他们的估值。在COVID-19大流行导致worldwide travel关闭之前，该公司的交易价格约为每股120.00美元，目前的交易价格约为每股170.00美元，在各个峰值上涨了约50%。尽管旅行和收入预计要到24个月后才能恢复到大流行前的水平，如果我们没有看到预期的国际旅行回升，甚至会更长时间，但这种情况仍在发生，因为目前国内旅行激增正在弥补商务和国际旅行疲软的影响。</blockquote></p><p> Even so, a look at the company's valuation and multiples based off analyst projections, along with what I believe will be a better-than-expected actual results from the company, shows that the company is, for lack of a better term, perfectly and fairly valued.</p><p><blockquote>即便如此，根据分析师预测对该公司的估值和市盈率，以及我认为该公司好于预期的实际业绩，表明该公司由于缺乏更好的术语，表现完美且估值公平。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Company Valuation: Perfection</b></p><p><blockquote><b>公司估值：完美</b></blockquote></p><p> Looking at the company's own projections isn't enough here, since competitive pressures remain high in this relatively saturated industry. Let's evaluate the company relative to Booking Holdings (BKNG), which is currently the world's largest online travel company and Expedia's closest competitor in the public markets.</p><p><blockquote>光看公司自己的预测是不够的，因为在这个相对饱和的行业中，竞争压力仍然很大。让我们相对于Booking Holdings(BKNG)来评估该公司，后者是目前全球最大的在线旅游公司，也是Expedia在公开市场上最接近的竞争对手。</blockquote></p><p> First, let's look at&nbsp;expected EPS growth&nbsp;through the next 5 years.</p><p><blockquote>首先，让我们看看未来5年的预期每股收益增长。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e8564ffd38e826bfa96a0864185eba3f\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"351\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Given that Expedia is coming out of a loss per share while Booking managed to maintain a profit, it's important to look at the expected growth from 2022 to 2025 to get a sense of comparison. Over that time period, Expedia is set to grow EPS by 82% while Booking is set to grow EPS by 62%. This given Expedia an advantage, I believe, in valuation multiples when compared to Booking. Let's look at multiples.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于Expedia正在摆脱每股亏损，而Booking则设法保持盈利，因此了解2022年至2025年的预期增长以进行比较非常重要。在此期间，Expedia的每股收益将增长82%，而Booking的每股收益将增长62%。我认为，与Booking相比，这使得Expedia在估值倍数方面具有优势。让我们看看倍数。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/3f8870ade9bafc30cdd64dcaa252ef94\" tg-width=\"905\" tg-height=\"213\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p></p><p> As we can see, even though Expedia is expected to grow at a slightly faster rate over the next 5 years than Booking is, they're trading at slightly lower to even multiples. Now, it's possible that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is fairly valued, but I believe that based off the aforementioned factors and given that I believe Expedia can continue to enjoy higher margins (Expedia currently holds a 68% gross margin while Booking a 64% margin), that both cases are true and that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is ever-so-slightly undervalued.</p><p><blockquote>正如我们所看到的，尽管Expedia预计在未来5年内的增长速度将略快于Booking，但它们的市盈率仍略低至偶数倍。现在，Booking的估值可能略有高估，而Expedia的估值合理，但我相信，基于上述因素，并考虑到我相信Expedia可以继续享受更高的利润率（Expedia目前拥有68%的毛利率，而Booking的毛利率为64%），这两种情况都是正确的，Booking的估值略有高估，而Expedia的估值则略有低估。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Balance Sheets and Other Competition</b></p><p><blockquote><b>资产负债表和其他竞争</b></blockquote></p><p> There are 2 more factors worth considering, one positive and one negative.</p><p><blockquote>还有两个因素值得考虑，一个是积极的，一个是消极的。</blockquote></p><p> The positive factor is the company's balance sheet. Even though they hold a large debt position of over $8 billion and are likely to see interest expense rise as interest rates do, they hold one of their largest cash positions they've even had, aided by cost cutting initiatives throughout the pandemic, including suspending their dividend, a factor I'll get into in the next segment.</p><p><blockquote>积极因素是公司的资产负债表。尽管他们持有超过80亿美元的巨额债务头寸，并且利息支出可能会随着利率的上升而上升，但在整个大流行期间的成本削减举措的帮助下，他们持有有史以来最大的现金头寸之一，包括暂停他们的股息，这是我将在下一部分讨论的一个因素。</blockquote></p><p> Expedia currently holds almost$4.3 billionin cash and equivalents and another $23 million in short term investments. This puts their net debt position at under $4.5 billion with expected cash flows over the next few years being enough to cover interest and restructuring charges as interest rates inch higher.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia目前持有近43亿美元现金及等价物，以及另外2300万美元的短期投资。这使得他们的净债务头寸低于45亿美元，随着利率小幅上升，预计未来几年的现金流足以支付利息和重组费用。</blockquote></p><p> The negative factor here is direct and indirect competition. As mentioned earlier, companies like Booking are their main competitive headwinds but there is also the constant possibility that new websites with superior algorithms may spur up at any moment and take away business. An example of this are various sites like Skyscanner (TCOM), which does to sites like Expedia what Expedia does to hotel and airlines sites and occasionally can find significant savings by booking with one of Expedia's competitors. The emergence of these sites won't hurt their core sales stream but can put significant pressure on the company's margins.</p><p><blockquote>这里的负面因素是直接和间接竞争。如前所述，像Booking这样的公司是他们的主要竞争对手，但也有可能拥有卓越算法的新网站随时可能出现并夺走业务。这方面的一个例子是Skyscanner(TCOM)等各种网站，它对Expedia等网站的作用就像Expedia对酒店和航空公司网站的作用一样，偶尔可以通过向Expedia的竞争对手之一预订来节省大量费用。这些网站的出现不会损害其核心销售流，但可能会给公司的利润率带来巨大压力。</blockquote></p><p> An inorganic way that the company faces competitive pressures is from the original airlines, hotel, car rental and cruise companies themselves, which in recent years have made a big push to develop their own websites, applications and rewards centers to incentivize customers to book directly with them, saving them the booking costs to these third party sites and apps like Expedia. As these competitive pressures grow, Expedia and other online travel booking companies can see their margin take a hit as they lower commissions and prices to adapt to the rising pressures.</p><p><blockquote>该公司面临竞争压力的一种无机方式来自最初的航空公司、酒店、汽车租赁和邮轮公司本身，这些公司近年来大力开发自己的网站、应用程序和奖励中心，以激励客户直接向他们预订，为他们节省了向Expedia等第三方网站和应用程序的预订费用。随着这些竞争压力的增加，Expedia和其他在线旅游预订公司可能会看到他们的利润率受到打击，因为他们降低了佣金和价格以适应不断上升的压力。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Overall: Perfectly Situated</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总体：地理位置优越</b></blockquote></p><p> With the industry overall and Expedia in particular expected to grow steadily over the next 5 years, as they recover from the COVID-19 pandemic plunge, investors will likely enjoy a steady growth rate of around 8% annually from Expedia, which given current overall valuations, will almost certainly be higher than the overall market.</p><p><blockquote>随着整个行业，尤其是Expedia预计将在未来5年内稳步增长，随着他们从COVID-19大流行的暴跌中恢复过来，投资者可能会从Expedia中享受每年8%左右的稳定增长率，鉴于目前的整体估值，几乎肯定会高于整体市场。</blockquote></p><p> Another positive factor for Expedia is the return of their dividend. They suspended their dividend back in late 2020 to save costs as the pandemic raged on, keeping nearly $200 million annually in cash. As they stated in that same release, so this isn't just a wild speculation, I expect them to return the dividend as they recover and regain their cash flow generating capabilities.</p><p><blockquote>Expedia的另一个积极因素是股息回报。在疫情肆虐期间，他们于2020年底暂停派息，以节省成本，每年保留近2亿美元的现金。正如他们在同一份新闻稿中所说，这不仅仅是一个疯狂的猜测，我预计他们会在恢复并重新获得现金流产生能力时返还股息。</blockquote></p><p> I don't know if they'll return to the $1.34 annual dividend for a yield of 0.83% annually, but I'll await further news related to their expected payout ratio. The speculative part of this is that we can see a jump in dividend payout given expected cash flows and it's possible we see a yield of over 1%, bringing total potential return closer to 10% annually, which can entice long term investors.</p><p><blockquote>我不知道他们是否会恢复到1.34美元的年度股息，年收益率为0.83%，但我会等待与他们预期派息率相关的进一步消息。其中的推测部分是，考虑到预期现金流，我们可以看到股息支付的跃升，并且我们可能会看到超过1%的收益率，使每年的总潜在回报率接近10%，这可以吸引长期投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Overall, I believe Expedia is perfectly valued and perfectly situated to take advantage of the steady growth back to and beyond levels we saw pre-pandemic as business and international travel bounces back late this year or early next year.</p><p><blockquote>总体而言，我相信随着商务和国际旅行在今年年底或明年初反弹，Expedia的估值非常高，并且完全有能力利用稳定增长，恢复到甚至超过我们在大流行前看到的水平。</blockquote></p><p> I am bullish on Expedia's 5-year prospects.</p><p><blockquote>我看好Expedia的5年前景。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4443422-expedia-perfectly-valued-perfectly-situated\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"EXPE":"Expedia"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4443422-expedia-perfectly-valued-perfectly-situated","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1190185935","content_text":"Summary\n\nExpedia's income plunged after lockdowns shut down travel across the world. Now, they are trading above pre-pandemic levels with travel not yet recovered.\nWith business and international travel expected to pick up in late 2020 or early 2021, I believe the company is perfectly valued and situated to take advantage of steady growth.\nI am bullish on the company's 5-year prospects.\n\nArtMarie/E+ via Getty Images\nTravel, in all of its forms, has taken the biggest hit from closures and lockdown during the COVID-19 pandemic as flights were cancelled, hotels shuttered and individuals and companies reducing travel to near zero for nearly a year.\nExpedia (EXPE), through its various offerings, is a major player in the travel industry, where it offers a database of flights, hotels, car rentals, short-term apartment rentals, cruise bookings and more. During the pandemic, they've seen their revenues plunge from over $12 billion in 2019 to just over $5 billion in 2020 and subsequently suspended their dividend and reported a wide loss of over $1.5 billion for 2020.\nNow, with the recovery underway and retail travel reaching record reopening numbers, there are several positives and negatives to consider with Expedia. The negative one being share price, with them currently trading at roughly double where they were before the pandemic even started, yet travel is not expected to return to those levels for quite some time. The positive side of this is that we now have a clear indication that travel growth is expected to remain high for quite some time, allowing for higher industry valuations. Let's explore these catalysts and see where the company stands relative to the industry and its closest peers.\nNegative Approach: Overvalued? Competition?\nBefore getting to the share price and competitive parts of the conversation, let's explore some other negative elements to Expedia.\nDebt and interest expense had surged in2019following expansion into various industries and consolidation. Debt went from $4.2 billion in 2019 to $8.2 billion in 2020 and interest expense nearlydoubledas well, from under $200 million to $408 million in the most recent company update. This may have been a strategic mistake on behalf of the company since we're now expecting interest rates to increase over the coming years, meaning that the company can see interest expense nearly double and approach $750 million by 2023 if they don't put a plan to retire or restructure some of the debt.\nEven so, the company does have a high cash position and they can, in theory, use it to pay down some of their high interest debt earlier than expected to avoid this charge. I'll discuss their cash situation later in the article.\nThe main negative approach I had when I first saw the company's share price recovery in full effect is their valuation. Before the COVID-19 pandemic shut down worldwide travel, the company was trading around the $120.00 per share levels and are now trading around $170.00 per share, roughly 50% higher at various peaks. This is happening even as travel, and revenues, are not expected to recover to pre-pandemic levels until 24 months from now and even longer if we don't see the expected international travel pick up, since right now domestic travel surges are compensating for softer business and international travel.\nEven so, a look at the company's valuation and multiples based off analyst projections, along with what I believe will be a better-than-expected actual results from the company, shows that the company is, for lack of a better term, perfectly and fairly valued.\nCompany Valuation: Perfection\nLooking at the company's own projections isn't enough here, since competitive pressures remain high in this relatively saturated industry. Let's evaluate the company relative to Booking Holdings (BKNG), which is currently the world's largest online travel company and Expedia's closest competitor in the public markets.\nFirst, let's look at expected EPS growth through the next 5 years.\n\nGiven that Expedia is coming out of a loss per share while Booking managed to maintain a profit, it's important to look at the expected growth from 2022 to 2025 to get a sense of comparison. Over that time period, Expedia is set to grow EPS by 82% while Booking is set to grow EPS by 62%. This given Expedia an advantage, I believe, in valuation multiples when compared to Booking. Let's look at multiples.\n\nAs we can see, even though Expedia is expected to grow at a slightly faster rate over the next 5 years than Booking is, they're trading at slightly lower to even multiples. Now, it's possible that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is fairly valued, but I believe that based off the aforementioned factors and given that I believe Expedia can continue to enjoy higher margins (Expedia currently holds a 68% gross margin while Booking a 64% margin), that both cases are true and that Booking is slightly overvalued while Expedia is ever-so-slightly undervalued.\nBalance Sheets and Other Competition\nThere are 2 more factors worth considering, one positive and one negative.\nThe positive factor is the company's balance sheet. Even though they hold a large debt position of over $8 billion and are likely to see interest expense rise as interest rates do, they hold one of their largest cash positions they've even had, aided by cost cutting initiatives throughout the pandemic, including suspending their dividend, a factor I'll get into in the next segment.\nExpedia currently holds almost$4.3 billionin cash and equivalents and another $23 million in short term investments. This puts their net debt position at under $4.5 billion with expected cash flows over the next few years being enough to cover interest and restructuring charges as interest rates inch higher.\nThe negative factor here is direct and indirect competition. As mentioned earlier, companies like Booking are their main competitive headwinds but there is also the constant possibility that new websites with superior algorithms may spur up at any moment and take away business. An example of this are various sites like Skyscanner (TCOM), which does to sites like Expedia what Expedia does to hotel and airlines sites and occasionally can find significant savings by booking with one of Expedia's competitors. The emergence of these sites won't hurt their core sales stream but can put significant pressure on the company's margins.\nAn inorganic way that the company faces competitive pressures is from the original airlines, hotel, car rental and cruise companies themselves, which in recent years have made a big push to develop their own websites, applications and rewards centers to incentivize customers to book directly with them, saving them the booking costs to these third party sites and apps like Expedia. As these competitive pressures grow, Expedia and other online travel booking companies can see their margin take a hit as they lower commissions and prices to adapt to the rising pressures.\nOverall: Perfectly Situated\nWith the industry overall and Expedia in particular expected to grow steadily over the next 5 years, as they recover from the COVID-19 pandemic plunge, investors will likely enjoy a steady growth rate of around 8% annually from Expedia, which given current overall valuations, will almost certainly be higher than the overall market.\nAnother positive factor for Expedia is the return of their dividend. They suspended their dividend back in late 2020 to save costs as the pandemic raged on, keeping nearly $200 million annually in cash. As they stated in that same release, so this isn't just a wild speculation, I expect them to return the dividend as they recover and regain their cash flow generating capabilities.\nI don't know if they'll return to the $1.34 annual dividend for a yield of 0.83% annually, but I'll await further news related to their expected payout ratio. The speculative part of this is that we can see a jump in dividend payout given expected cash flows and it's possible we see a yield of over 1%, bringing total potential return closer to 10% annually, which can entice long term investors.\nOverall, I believe Expedia is perfectly valued and perfectly situated to take advantage of the steady growth back to and beyond levels we saw pre-pandemic as business and international travel bounces back late this year or early next year.\nI am bullish on Expedia's 5-year prospects.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"EXPE":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":719,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":174755257,"gmtCreate":1627144612479,"gmtModify":1633767659554,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Cook Islands","listText":"Cook Islands","text":"Cook Islands","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/174755257","repostId":"2153981075","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":751,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":812505213,"gmtCreate":1630593112632,"gmtModify":1631890130237,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Playback is it a bit iuyyy in my head","listText":"Playback is it a bit iuyyy in my head","text":"Playback is it a bit iuyyy in my head","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/812505213","repostId":"1108690074","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1657,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":880531642,"gmtCreate":1631064304286,"gmtModify":1631890130235,"author":{"id":"4089375229568220","authorId":"4089375229568220","name":"yourself","avatar":"https://static.laohu8.com/default-avatar.jpg","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"4089375229568220","idStr":"4089375229568220"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Using mm 😀😀😀😀 the arts in English and cheese and&nbsp;the call just now and cheese and wine","listText":"Using mm 😀😀😀😀 the arts in English and cheese and&nbsp;the call just now and cheese and wine","text":"Using mm 😀😀😀😀 the arts in English and cheese and the call just now and cheese and wine","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/880531642","repostId":"2165545483","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1626,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"lives":[]}