Global Market Comments
December 2, 2019
Fiat Lux
Featured Trade:
(MARKET OUTLOOK FOR THE WEEK AHEAD, or 2020 IS ALREADY HAPPENING),
(TSLA), (X), (GE), (FCX), (SLB), (GOOGL), (MSFT), (GLD)
Posts
Drones whip by like mini whirling dervishes but are actually hardworking aerial robots that carry out surveillance and inspections for utilities, construction sites, airplanes, and trains from onboard cameras.
Drone delivery appears to be the next transportation bottleneck in the e-commerce wars as Amazon (AMZN) and Uber (UBER) pile capital investment into the technology.
In 2013, Founder and CEO of Amazon Jeff Bezos audaciously said that Amazon would have drone delivery operational by 2018.
But the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) did not acquiesce to Bezos’s ambitious timeline.
Progress has been slow.
When it comes to consumer appetite, the demand for drones will be voracious but only if delivered in a way to add value to the customer experience.
The last thing the world needs is billions of unmanned drones polluting the sky and parked in the sky.
More than 60% of consumers would accept the delivery of dry goods through a drone delivery service, it contrasts to only 26% of fresh produce or meat.
Clearly, fresh foods are more complicated to deliver because of temperature requirements to accommodate the products, and more R&D will need to take place to find a solution.
“When we (Amazon) have a full drone fleet, you'll be able to order anything and get it in 30 minutes if you live near a hub that's serviced by drones," said Amazon’s CEO of Worldwide Consumer Jeff Wilke
Amazon has spent more than six years developing drones which may one day drop packages in backyards assuming regulators green light it.
Timely delivery is important but the diversity of products that can be delivered is just as important.
This is not a one-size-fits-all solution.
Amazon has already ravaged through more than $35 billion on shipping costs this year, more than double what it spent two years ago.
It is yet to be determined whether the four-wheeled delivery robots they are testing that roll on sidewalks will ultimately be slipped into the delivery process, but at least they are making headway and allocating new resources to it by announcing plans for a new facility outside Boston to design and build robots.
Major companies such as Alphabet (GOOGL), FedEx (FDX) and UPS (UPS) are all investing in drone delivery all hoping to be the ones to lead this industry in the future.
The drone battles are taking place under the backdrop of military and political gamesmanship because drones have a large and legitimate role in military affairs.
Even though America’s e-commerce companies hope to take drones and nicely fit it into their delivery service, America is not even close to dominating.
One word – China.
The US-China Economic and Security Review Commission recommended that the US government promote advanced manufacturing and robotics technologies, monitor China’s advances, review bilateral investments and cooperation, and consider closely vetting proprietary academic research.
The Shenzhen, China-based drone company DJI Technology is the dominant worldwide market leader in the civilian drone industry, accounting for over 75% of the global drone market.
In 2017, the U.S. Army banned the military application of DJI drones because the Pentagon was worried that DJI would leak data to the Chinese government.
In 2018, the Defense Department banned the purchase of all commercial off-the-shelf unmanned aircraft system (UAS).
An amendment from Sen. Chris Murphy in the 2020 defense policy bill would ban all Chinese-made drones and Chinese-manufactured parts from military purpose.
DJI’s dramatic rise in the drone race has been nothing but breathtaking dwarfing Western competitors such as France’s Parrot.
They are cost-effective, making them the go-to product for individual consumers.
China has not only succeeded in pulling ahead in the drone wars, but are also pushing the envelope in areas like hypersonic weapons, artificial intelligence, and 5G.
The U.S. military has limited options now because of a generation of underinvestment and inactivity causing a dwindling of U.S. supply of the smallest class of unmanned aerial systems (UASs) that are needed for reconnaissance missions.
DJI has a near-monopoly for one of the most important pieces of technology moving forward.
“We don’t have much of a small UAS industrial base because DJI dumped so many low-price quadcopters on the market, and we then became dependent on them,” said Ellen Lord, the Pentagon’s chief weapons buyer. “We want to rebuild that capability,” she added.
China’s DJI was hit by the recent tariff tsunami levied by the U.S. administration and the drone maker has decided to pass on the cost to the consumer.
DJI has also been banned from bidding for any U.S. military contracts because the Trump administration has concerns that DJI is a national security threat.
DJI reacted to the move by commenting that they are “obviously false” and is “unsubstantiated speculation.”
The second tranche of tariffs, which is scheduled to go live on December 15th, will put an additional 15% tariff on virtually everything that comes to the United States from China, including laptops, smartphones, and drones.
The DJI Mavic Air, now costs $919 on Best Buy instead of $799. Similarly, the DJI Mavic 2 Pro which I have crowned as the best drone to buy in 2019 will cost $1,729, up from $1,499.
Apart from DJI, China has state money pouring into the sector with the most cutting-edge drone technology in the works called Tianyi quadcopter built by a subsidiary of a state aerospace corporation.
It is designed to carry out ground-level reconnaissance and hyper-targeted strikes in cities.
The unmanned aerial vehicles (UAV) are still in the works, but once ready, could be available on the international market as a cheap and versatile option widening the gulf between America’s military in drone technology.
The drone is designed to be controlled by soldiers on the ground, has an operational distance of 5km (3 miles) and has a vertical range of 6km.
It will be loaded with infrared and laser detectors to enable night surveillance operations and is armed with two 50mm rockets designed to strike from up to 1km.
Sadly, there are no quality drone plays on the American public markets that I can confidently recommend.
The seriousness of the lack of investment really appears in the weakness of U.S. military drone capabilities and on the consumer side of things, drones will be a supercharger input to revenue growth for the likes of Walmart (WMT), Amazon, and the e-commerce companies.
It might be time to wake up and support the creation of a national champion in this critical technology then spin off the commercial synergies in similar fashion to how the personal computer and the internet developed.
The longer we wait, the further we fall behind.
DJI Mavic Air for $919
Granted that technology companies have been the mule carrying the load for the broader market, beneath it is an ugly underbelly of venomous spirits.
Digital tech companies are frauds.
This could crater the broader market if the worst-case scenarios play out.
What do I mean by labeling them frauds?
Well, first, not all tech companies are charlatans. The ones producing components like semiconductor companies and others creating hardware are not the target of my wrath.
Since content has migrated into an all-out assault on traditional media, there is a dirty little secret that is festering because the new online media isn’t regulated.
The numbers are all a lie.
Much of the analytics and calculus involved with crafting cost to the other side is being entirely gamed by tech companies quoting prices based on fake analytics.
Instagram switched over its algorithm to displaying photos chronologically, to now display posts that engage the most, more specifically, what gets clicked the most.
Consumers have complained about it being significantly harder to gain likes and followers because, for the ones that don’t have many clicks, it’s harder to get those added clicks if your post is relegated down the feed.
The platform has also been a breeding ground for fabricating likes, friends, views, clicks and so on. Companies can be hired per like, resulting in a beefed-up profile built on fantasy.
Ad companies gauge each Instagram profile by the amount of engagement generated and if most of them are fraudulent likes, there will be weak follow-through in sales after ad purchases since a good chunk of the potential audience is a mirage.
Instagram is the preferred social platform of most influencers and Facebook is attempting to merge both assets into one in order to claim to regulators that they can’t be separated.
Much of digital marketing has migrated down the path of growing a large following for the reason to qualify as an effective brand ambassador and siphon off influencer marketing budgets from corporates who desperately want to penetrate a target audience.
In an age of automated robocalls and strict email rules, companies hesitantly confess that the only way to reach their end buyer is through social media channels.
Corporates are wasting billions of dollars because they aren’t getting what they really pay for and are basically being fleeced by tech companies.
And if you think this is mutually exclusive to Facebook (FB) and Instagram, it happens in every tech company that involves data.
Tech companies are monetarily incentivized to flat out lie about their data, partially because the penalties are minimal or absent in many cases.
Marginal tactics to fast-track the process by buying likes should be rooted out of the eco-system.
They are not only hurting the trust users have with the platform, but misrepresenting the brand that associates with a product.
Tech firms ward off anyone and everything from taking a peek at internal data by claiming it is their proprietary IP causing them to effectively police themselves.
That is not even the worst part of it all.
Parent company Facebook is turning a blind eye to something that could crash the company.
Mark Zuckerberg's old classmate Aaron Greenspan published a report complaining that over 50% of Facebook accounts are fake.
Facebook is on record admitting that between 2-3% of accounts are fake, but that number is a dream and artificially low by a country mile.
If it is true that half of Facebook accounts are fake, this would mean that Facebook sits on over 1 billion fake accounts.
Never mind the fake likes or clicks issue, Facebook shareholders could lose most of their worth in this stock if the truth is ever discovered.
Remember, the network effect works on the way down just like it works on the way up as a de-facto force multiplier.
Facebook and many other tech firms are a black box just like the Google (GOOGL) search algorithm.
Yelp (YELP), the online review company, could potentially sub-contract out fake reviews and never disclose how many of them are truly fake, they have no incentive to.
I recently stayed in an Airbnb rental whose active management was sub-contracted to a local property manager.
When I met him, he told me “This apartment was just bought and you are the first guest to stay in this apartment, so if there are any issues, please contact us as soon as possible.”
Wait, hold on, in my head, I am thinking, how did I see 45 great reviews from the apartment’s profile if I am the first guest?
I logged on to reread some reviews and some of the responses were completely inaccurate about the apartment.
It was clear these were made up and paid for and I was, in fact, the first to stay in this apartment like the property manager said.
Expectedly, there was more wrong with the apartment than just the fake reviews.
The television, stove, and hot water didn’t work, the key to the apartment was half broken and I had to perform miracles just to get the front door open.
There is a reckoning coming to technology companies because of the rampant misuse of the technology by nefarious actors monetizing the platform while perverting it.
Companies look the other way because they don’t want a revaluation of their business model which would add costs and, in some cases, bankrupt a company if the problem isn’t fixable.
As we move forward, the problems enlarge.
In a nutshell, this is why everyone hates tech now and its already stomach-churning enough that these firms steal your personal data and sell it to whomever they want.
A harsh reckoning will eventually hit the involved companies, but until then, tech business models are manipulated to the extreme and they continue to print real and fake growth mixed together as one.
One day, that fake growth will vanish and these companies will have to explain why to their shareholders.
In the meantime, just assume all online reviews are fake and enjoy the bull market in tech.
Global Market Comments
November 25, 2019
Fiat Lux
Featured Trade:
(MARKET OUTLOOK FOR THE WEEK AHEAD, or CATCHING OUR BREATH),
(MSFT), (GOOGL), (TLT), (VIX), (TSLA)
Some might say that we were due for a revaluation of growth tech stocks.
They have contributed greatly in this nine-year bull market.
Profit-generating software stocks are the order of the day.
Tech has led the overall market higher after projected quarterly earnings growth of -9% came in better than expected at -5%.
We have ebbed and flowed from pricing in a full-out recession in mid-2020 to now believing a recession is further off than first thought.
The pendulum swing ruptured many growth stocks from Workday (WKDAY) to The Trade Desk, Inc. (TTD) plummeting 30%.
We have retraced some of those losses but momentum in share appreciation has shifted to the perceived safer variation of tech stocks.
Investors have cut volatility and headed into bulletproof companies of Apple (AAPL), Google (GOOGL), and Microsoft (MSFT).
These companies have significant competitive advantages, Teflon balance sheets, and print money.
The tech markets just about priced in the U.S - China trade war in the fall as broad-based volatility plummeted because of optimism around making a deal.
This, in turn, has boosted chips stocks along with investors front running the 5G revolution and the administration granting Huawei a reprieve was a cherry on top.
The Mad Hedge Technology Letter has taken every dip to initiate new longs in safe trades like software companies Adobe (ADBE) and Veeva Systems (VEEV).
Tech is at the point that all loss-making companies are out of the running for tech alerts because the moment there is a recession scare, these shares drop 10% and often don’t stop until they lose 30%.
Now there is a deeply embedded set of narrow tech leadership by a few dominant tech companies buttressed by a select set of second-tier software stocks.
I would put PayPal (PYPL) and Twitter (TWTR), which I currently have open trades on, in the ranks of the second tier and they should do well as long as economic growth does better than expected.
Their share prices dipped on weak guidance and the bad news appears to have been shaken out of these names.
Professional investors could also be hanging on to meet end-of-year performance targets.
I do expect unique entry points on software stocks that drop after bad future guidance.
Profitability has moved to the fore as the biggest factor in holding a name or not.
Newly minted IPOs have fared even worse showing the markets' waning appetite for loss makers like Uber (UBER) and Lyft (LYFT).
Loss-making companies often tout their ability to change the world and disrupt industry, but that has been discovered as nothing more than a ruse.
They aren’t disrupting the way we change the world. For example, Uber is a dressed-up taxi service and the new CEO has failed to create any new momentum in the unit economics that spectacularly fail by any type of metric.
Even worse for these growth stocks, as the economy starts to falter, there will be even less appetite for them, and even more appetite for safer tech stocks.
A worst-case scenario would see Uber drop to $10 and Lyft to $20.
New all-time highs have crystalized with Google (GOOGL) under the gauntlet of regulation hysteria displaying the domination of these big tech machines.
The ongoing, consistent rotation out of growth and into value hasn’t run its course yet and fortunately, by identifying this important trend, our readers will be well placed to advantageously position themselves going into 2020.
Growth stocks won’t make a comeback anytime soon and deteriorating conditions could trigger renewed synchronized global monetary policy easing and central bank stimulus.
And yes, more negative rates.
I believe Oracle (ORCL), Fortinet (FTNT), Akamai Technologies, Inc. (AKAM) could weather the storm next year.
Tech growth is slowing and trade uncertainty is high, and readers must have a sense of urgency to avoid the losers in this scenario.
U.S. economic growth could slow to 1.3% next year, avoiding a recession, and the lack of enterprise spend will reduce software sales and combine that with peak smartphone growth and it won’t be smooth sailing.
The Mad Hedge Technology Letter has the pulse of the tech market and will show you how to navigate this minefield.
First, Apple (APPL) collaborates with Goldman Sachs’ (GS) offering of a credit card even giving credit access to subprime borrowers.
And now Google (GOOGL) has its eyes on the banking industry — specifically, it’ll soon offer checking accounts.
In a copycat league where anything and everything is fair game, we are seeing a huge influx of big tech companies vie for the digital wallets of Americans.
The project is aptly named Cache and accounts will be handled by Citibank (C) and a credit union at Stanford.
Google’s spokesman shared with us admitting that Google hopes to “partner deeply with banks and the financial system,” and further added, “If we can help more people do more stuff in a digital way online, it’s good for the internet and good for us.”
I would disagree with the marginal statement that it would be good for us.
Facebook (FB) is now offering a Pay option and how long will it be until Amazon (AMZN), Microsoft (MSFT), and others throw their name into the banking mix.
I believe there will be some monumental failures because it appears that these tech companies won’t offer anything that current bank intuitions aren’t offering already.
Moving forward, the odd that digital banking products will become saturated quickly is high.
Let’s cut to the chase, this is a pure data grab, and not in the vein of offering innovative services that force the consumer down a revolutionary product experience.
As the consumer starts to smarten up, will they happily reveal every single data point possible to these tech companies?
Big tech continues to be adamant that personal data is secure with them, but their track records are pitiful.
Even if Google doesn’t sell “individual data”, there are easy workarounds by just slapping number tags on aggregated data, then aggregated data can be reverse-engineered by extracting specific data with number tags.
The cracks have already started to surface, Co-Founder of Apple Steve Wozniak has already claimed that the credit algorithm for Apple’s Goldman Sach’s credit card is sexist and flawed.
Time is ticking until the first mass data theft as well and let me add that the result of this is usually a slap on the wrist incentivizing bad behavior.
I believe big tech companies should be banned from issuing banking products.
Only 4% of consumers switched banks last year, and a 2017 survey by Bankrate shows that the average American adult keeps the same checking account for around 16 years.
As anti-trust regulation starts to gather more steam, I envision lawmakers snuffing out any and every attempt for big tech to diversify into fintech.
It’s fair to say that Google should have done this 10 years ago when the regulatory issues were nonexistent.
Now they have regulators breathing down their necks.
Let me remind readers that the reason why Facebook abandoned their digital currency Libra was because of the pressure lawmakers applied to every company interesting in working with Facebook’s Libra.
Lawmakers threatened Visa and Mastercard that they would investigate every part of their business, including the parts that have nothing to do with Facebook’s Libra, if they went ahead with the Libra project.
The most telling insight comes from the best tech company Microsoft who has raised the bar in terms of protecting their reputation on data and trust.
They decided to stay away from financial products like the black plague.
Better to stay in their lane than take wild shots that incur unneeded high risks.
When U.S. Senator Mark Warner, a Democrat on the Senate panel that oversees banking, was asked about Google and banking, he quipped, “There ought to be very strict scrutiny.”
Big tech is now on the verge of getting ferociously regulated and that could turn out positive for the big American banks, PayPal (PYPL), Visa (V), Mastercard (MA) and Square (SQ).
I heavily doubt that Google will turn Cache into a meaningful business unless Google offers some jaw-dropping interest rates or elevated points to move the needle.
Google has canceled weekly all-hands meetings because of the tension between staff members and Facebook is also just as dysfunctional at the employee level.
Whoever said it's easy to manage a high-stake, too-big-to-fail tech firm?
Even with all the negativity, Google is still a cash cow and if regulatory headwinds are 2-3 years off, they are a buy and hold until they are not.
The recent tech rally, after the rotation to value, has seen investors flood into Apple, Microsoft, and Google as de-facto safe haven tech plays.
San Francisco is 49.2 square miles of pure innovation – at least historically.
The most creative solutions to the world’s most complex problems have been generated from this diminutive peninsula that juts out into the Pacific Ocean.
But when it comes to transportation, and by that, I mean the public transportation efficiently operated in most European and Asian cities like Seoul, Korea and Frankfurt, Germany, San Francisco epically fails at delivering an adequate system to the masses.
Instead, the stopgap solution gave us Uber (UBER), the rideshare company, and the fall out is more cars clogging up a bigger portion of the roadways and bridges.
And then there is Tesla (TSLA), whose enigmatic CEO loves to tell investors that electric is the panacea to the world’s economy.
Is Silicon Valley that far off from solving the conundrum of smooth public transportation by applying technology?
The solution might be percolating in Wessling, Germany by a company named Lilium who developed the Lilium Jet, an electrically powered commuter aircraft capable of vertical taking off and landing (VTOL) flight.
Moving forward, it’s black and white that the answer is 3D and not 2D.
Lilium was founded in 2015 by four engineers and PhD students at the Technical University of Munich.
In 2017, The Lilium Eagle, an unmanned two-seat proof of concept model, performed its initial flight at the airfield Mindelheim-Mattsies near Munich, Germany.
The successful test led the company to launch the 5-seat Lilium Jet and they hope by 2025, to roll out a full-fledged aerial taxi service.
Co-Founder and CEO Daniel Wiegand swears that within five years, a fleet of them could offer a 10-minute trip from Manhattan to Kennedy International Airport for $70.
Expectations that aerial taxis will be a reality in the coming years are quickly skyrocketing.
Companies like Lilium are researching, testing, and laying the groundwork for wider production and hankering for support from government officials.
At least 20 companies have skin in the game, which Morgan Stanley estimates will become a $850 billion market by 2040.
Larry Page, the billionaire co-founder of Google (GOOGL), is financially buttressing Kitty Hawk, a Palo Alto company run by the first engineers on Google’s autonomous car.
Uber is developing an air taxi service, with plans to operate by 2023, but I highly doubt that investors would give the go ahead if the cash burn overwhelms them.
The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) is another tripwire that could knock the 2025 schedule off kilter and their notorious bureaucratic ways do not infuse certainty into the project.
Can Lilium build a platform that is broadly accessible and efficient?
That answer will be unpacked in the next few years.
The aerial vehicle has a carbon fiber body, 36-foot wingspan, and is battery powered, providing a range of 186 miles and a top speed of nearly 190 mph.
Inside the oblong-shaped cabin, posh seats await four passengers and a pilot.
The aircraft can take off and land vertically like a helicopter and is even quieter than a helicopter.
Once scaled out, production costs will run in the several hundred thousand dollars for each aircraft-making profitability realistic.
There will be lower maintenance costs because there are fewer mechanical components, and rides should cost less than Uber.
If rolled out on a mass scale, cityscapes will be revolutionized.
San Francisco and California effectively could bypass proper land public transport and skip straight to aerial vehicles as taxis.
Lilium’s plane has packed 36 smaller engines in its rotating wings that act as thrusters for takeoffs, landings, and subtle movements forward and back. Encasing the engines in the wings reduces friction and noise.
Lilium’s performance is currently unmatched but its secretive nature of the technology means it’s hard to quantify where they are now in the development.
With the funneling of capital to solve global transportation issues, aerial aspects will definitely be intertwined into the solution.
The race is on to capture the first-mover advantage and my bet it will be Lilium.
The tech story is still intact, but the edges are losing its shine.
That is the takeaway from the recent slew of earnings reports from many of the prominent yet second-tier tech companies.
On one hand, companies like Apple (AAPL) have been holding the fort as it blasts through to new highs even amid the backdrop of the Chinese trade war that has dragged many of the strong tech names into the mud.
What we did see lately was a magnificent swan dive by chip names like Western Digital (WDC) and Texas Instruments (TXI) which were blindsided by 10-15% haircuts because of lackluster guidance.
The agony didn’t stop there with second rate cloud names like Pinterest (PINS) and Arista Networks, Inc. (ANET) reaching for scapegoats for their weak guidance. These took instant 20% haircuts.
The problem with smaller stocks like these besides having narrower spreads, they are slaves to just a few contracts and when one goes, their guidance and revenue estimates implode in their faces.
Arista slid more than 25% on news that they expect quarterly revenue of $540 million-$560 million, with the midpoint about 20% below the previous Street consensus at $686.2 million.
Arista CEO Jayshree Ullal said in a statement that the company expects “a sudden softening in Q4 with a specific cloud titan customer.”
That is Facebook who comprise about 10% of Arista’s revenue composition because Facebook has pulled back the reigns on cloud spend to cut costs amid a murky global backdrop and regulatory minefield.
Unfortunately, second tier cloud names must accept that they do not offer the best pricing when directly competing with the superior cloud names of Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and Amazon Web Services (AWS) because they simply can’t scale as well to the extent these monopolistic FANGs can.
Data storage often comes down to whoever has the cheapest cost of capital to pile into server farms allowing pricing to be ultra-cheap and these three companies win out.
If these firms lose one contract like Walmart’s switch over to Microsoft Azure from Amazon, it’s not a big deal.
It doesn’t put a 10% black hole in the revenue stream like for Arista.
Pinterest was one of the most overhyped IPOs of 2019 promising growth, growth and more growth.
Its digital ad business needs to deliver accelerating growth for its share price to rise and when the latest earnings report showed year-over-year growth slow from 62% to 47%, investors saw the writing on the wall.
The company only grew its users 8% in the lucrative North American market and 38% abroad.
But the foreign markets were tainted by the gruesome underbelly of earning only 13 cents per foreign users.
There is user growth but at the cost of an inferior quality of growth.
Analysts can clearly observe the accelerated erosion of Pinterest, and I can say from a personal point of view that the website isn’t that useful.
Management’s excuse was a tough comparison to the prior year but if a growth firm has a superior model, they should be able to grow past any minor problems if the secular trends stay hemmed in.
Weak excuses now and probably weak excuses next quarter as the global tech landscape gets squeezed even more at the periphery.
What does this all mean?
There has been a flight to tech quality into the Teflon names like Microsoft and Apple.
Names that are showing growth headaches saddled with too much competition and structural softness are getting killed.
Don’t even think about investing in the marginal names like Pinterest and Arista.
Better to be safe on your perch inside the moat than outside isolated from the drawbridge.
Not all tech is created equal and it's rearing its ugly face in a frothy market.
Global Market Comments
November 1, 2019
Fiat Lux
Featured Trade:
(OCTOBER 30 BIWEEKLY STRATEGY WEBINAR Q&A),
(SQ), (CCI), (SPG), (PGE), (BA), (MSFT), (GOOGL), (FB), (AAPL), (IBB), (XLV), (USO), (GM), (VNQ)
Publishing magnate and self-described populist William Randolph Hearst was a deep admirer of Adolph Hitler and did not shy away from using his newspapers as a de-facto mouthpiece spouting off der Fuhrer's propaganda.
Hearst created content sympathizing with the Nazi ethos and even mobilized an embedded secret agent from the German government to act as a correspondent that followed hot, daily scoops inside Germany.
Hearst also used his publishing clout to pull the strings in the 1932 presidential election backing candidate John Nance Garner or "Cactus Jack" who later agreed to be Franklin D. Roosevelt's running mate.
The fusion of politics and media has been chiseled into human DNA since antiquity. However, the purpose of newspapers has evolved significantly since it became impossible to break even about 10 years ago.
Print newspapers are a lot like the United States Postal Service (USPS) - it specializes in losing money.
However, the (USPS) was never politicized as was the publishing industry until the administration managed to commingle the loss-making mail outfit and Amazon as a joint problem roiling society.
The politicization comes at a cost to society.
All the well-intentioned journalists involved in earnest and quality journalism lose out because the new normal for newspapers has evolved into a William Hearst-like blatant tool promoting targeted interests.
Do you ever wonder why the Washington Post hardly ever publishes content harmful to the image and interests of Amazon?
Because it is owned by the same man, Jeff Bezos, who founded Amazon (AMZN) in 1994, as he cruised in his car cross-country from New York to Seattle where he would establish his tech empire.
Effectively, Jeff Bezos has the ear of each corner of the political power grid in Washington and even more so as he establishes another Amazon headquarter in the state capitol.
And while the administration attacked Bezos as a job destroyer repeatedly, Amazon has in fact been the largest private job CREATOR in the U.S. It added a staggering 130,000 new jobs in 2017, and an eye-popping 560,000 jobs over the past 10 years.
Laurene Powell Jobs, widow to Steve Jobs, acquire the Boston-based American magazine The Atlantic.
The Atlantic earns more than $10 million per year in revenue and lures in over 33 million readers per month.
Billionaire biotech investor Patrick Soon-Shiong reached a deal with Tribune Publishing Co. (TPCO), a portfolio of a vast array of various legacy media assets, to take over the Los Angeles Times and San Diego Union-Tribune for $500 million.
Tribune Publishing Co is a potential investment for SoftBanks' (SFTBY) Masayoshi Son, looking to scoop up parts of the extensive portfolio.
Private equity group Apollo and media firm Gannett Company are also in the mix to acquire Tribune Publishing Co
Some of Tribune Publishing Co.'s crown assets are the Chicago Tribune, the New York Daily News, and the Baltimore Sun among other regional newspapers with a large audience base.
The courting of these news media assets comes at a time when Google (GOOGL) is funding a project to automate more than 30,000 stories per month for the local media as a cost-effective way to advance the business model.
Quality journalism written by a human is the last thing in which these mega-tech companies are interested.
Tech is about automating and then scaling the automation. This bodes ill for personalized authors, and newspaper journalists are the lowest rung on the totem pole. They will be the first to be replaced by automation.
The first thought that came into my head when I heard about SoftBank's vision fund swooping in for another company was data grab.
We have seen this story time and time again.
Newspapers and how an online subscriber behaves on a digital newspaper platform offer valuable data points unfound elsewhere.
The data will reveal the political ideas, topics of interest, and other sensitive information deduced into a comprehensive data profile.
Effectively, a company such as SoftBank will be able to create a functional shadow profile for almost anyone.
The concept of shadow profiling emerged from the acrimony of Mark Zuckerberg's testimony in Washington and could be the next point of heated contention.
What are shadow profiles?
Shadow profiles are digital profiles crafted from data not directly handed over to Facebook (FB) by the user.
This data is extracted through fringe third parties, other friends on Facebook if they post content unique to you, and specifically through the "find your friends" function that recommends the uploading of an entire digital address book giving Facebook access to everyone you know.
Scarily, there is no opt-out for shadow profiling, and there probably won't be another congressional testimony about this topic anytime soon.
If Facebook wanted to turn into the FBI, it would be easy.
The treasure trove of data would give insight on the subtle nuances of authentic human behavior and how to best manipulate it.
This artificial profile would seem real.
If you are an Android user like most of the world, Google could fill out the most comprehensive profile with a high degree of accuracy on most people.
The scandalous bit about shadow profiling is that these profiles are whipped up even if a user has never signed up for Facebook.
Shadow profiling, along with other data, becomes more precise as the volume of data piles up. To understand the behavior, trends, and tastes of most of the world's population is incredibly valuable.
Facebook could use this shadow profiling data to understand the wide range of non-Facebook user behavior.
This way of monetizing data would be highly illegal if leaked to an actionable third party and would be significantly worse than the Cambridge Analytica scandal.
This data should be deleted immediately, but Facebook has a backdoor way to keep the data in the system.
If Facebook got slammed for data leakage then others are in danger, too. That's because Facebook is not the only player mining data for money.
It wouldn't be surprising if other large-cap tech companies started to create these shadow profiles to get dirt on their competitors as well as other use cases.
Tech is evolving at such a fast pace. It subconsciously encourages the never-give-up mentality that coerces firms to stay one step ahead which Amazon has been able to do since its inception.
Newspaper companies are next in line to be absorbed by large-cap techs continuously expanding web assets that hyper-focus on exponential data generation.
These newspapers will defend tech's interests in the economy similar to how newspapers were used as William Hearst's rallying cry for politics.
Jeff Bezos has chosen silence to react to the administration's vendetta against him but he could easily mobilize his assets to protect Amazon's interests.
Bezos just shrugs his shoulders and goes about his day because he knows Washington cannot do anything to prevent Amazon's dominance at the top of the tech food chain.
Better take the high road.
Not only do these big tech companies know who you talk to, what you buy, and where you are, but now they are given deeper access into the identity of users.
Be on the lookout for these assets to get cherry-picked and look forward to reading your future newspaper owned by Google, Facebook, and the usual cast of characters.
Stay away from legacy newspaper stocks. Only weigh up the media stocks that have already pivoted to the online streaming business model of scaling original premium content.
Legal Disclaimer
There is a very high degree of risk involved in trading. Past results are not indicative of future returns. MadHedgeFundTrader.com and all individuals affiliated with this site assume no responsibilities for your trading and investment results. The indicators, strategies, columns, articles and all other features are for educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment advice. Information for futures trading observations are obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but we do not warrant its completeness or accuracy, or warrant any results from the use of the information. Your use of the trading observations is entirely at your own risk and it is your sole responsibility to evaluate the accuracy, completeness and usefulness of the information. You must assess the risk of any trade with your broker and make your own independent decisions regarding any securities mentioned herein. Affiliates of MadHedgeFundTrader.com may have a position or effect transactions in the securities described herein (or options thereon) and/or otherwise employ trading strategies that may be consistent or inconsistent with the provided strategies.