Mad Hedge Technology Letter
January 27, 2020
Fiat Lux
Featured Trade:
(HOW TO PLAY THE CHINESE PANDEMIC)
(TRIP), (TCOM), (GOOGL), (EXPE)
Am I going to rant about Peloton today?
No, I’ll save that for another day.
Let’s get straight to the chase – the epidemic from Wuhan is crushing tech stocks.
If you want a way to play the Chinese coronavirus outbreak, then look no further than Trip.com Group Limited (TCOM).
This company owns a series of reputable Chinese travel apps from Trip.com, Skyscanner, and Ctrip.com.
The Mad Hedge Technology Letter doesn’t tend to do tech alerts on Chinese companies listed in America as American depository receipts.
We rather not expose readers to the high risk of one of them suddenly being kicked off of one of the exchanges.
American investors have zero rights of recouping any losses if Alibaba or Baidu delists or even announces to switch its listing on the Shenzhen tech exchange.
Remember that founder of Alibaba Jack Ma signed over the PayPal of China Alipay to himself without even telling Yahoo about it.
Yahoo was also locked out of any profits from the decision as well even though they were seed investors in Alibaba.
That is China in a nutshell for you!
So what’s happening now? Tourists are staying home in droves and the ones that support the economy which are the Chinese ones during the peak travel season of Chinese New Year.
Cities are getting quarantined left and right in China and the mainland has ordered all travel agencies to suspend sales of domestic and international tours.
Chinese shares have felt the pain with shares of China Southern Airlines Co. – the carrier most exposed to the site of the outbreak – cratering 20% since the second death from the virus was confirmed.
If the situation unfolds like the SARS outbreak of 2003, things could turn bleak quickly.
Remember that in just one month of the SARS outbreak, Chinese air passenger traffic fell 71%, and Trip.com was rerated and has fell off the face of the earth.
I am predicting the same type of devastating numbers to the online travel world.
Trip.com has struggled to keep up with competition from digital rivals like Meituan Dianping and Alibaba, and even if the virus is conquered, business might never come back.
Despite the trade war and Hong Kong’s protests, the world has been held up by the Chinese tourist.
108.39 million Chinese overseas trips were taken last year, a 9.5% gain, after surging 11.7% in 2018.
Flight volume was brimming along nicely until the virus, but the hotel-booking sector is getting crowded.
Meituan Dianping has recently overtaken Trip.com as China’s top site, and now has 47% of China's market, 13% higher than Trip.com.
Now, Meituan is moving further onto Trip.com’s turf with luxury hotels, while chains like Marriott International Inc. are pushing for direct booking on their China websites.
Alibaba said part of the $13 billion it raised from its Hong Kong listing in November would go toward fliggy.com, its online travel group site.
The way the Mad Hedge Technology Letter is playing the sudden drop in overseas travel confidence is through the travel app I dislike the most – TripAdvisor (TRIP).
I actually don’t have a personal problem with the functionality, but the business behind it is terrible.
That was the main reason I strapped on a put spread and I can’t see TripAdvisor outperforming dramatically in the next few weeks in the face of a global pandemic.
This was a short-term trade that TripAdvisor won’t rise 11% in 30 day
I didn’t like this company before the coronavirus and now that Chinese tourists are home sitters for the Chinese New Year, this could put a dent into TripAdvisor’s new China initiative.
Trip.com Group had taken the lead in the day-to-day running of TripAdvisor China. It owns the majority share, with TripAdvisor claiming a 40 percent stake.
Chinese were supposed to increasingly travel the world while its customer base is also becoming more global, in particularly with Trip.com and Skyscanner.
But that is all on hold now.
Yes, it is possible that there could be a dead cat bounce in shares if the virus is tamed, but the 2-week travel season is something you can’t get back once it’s over for TripAdvisor.
I believe this will come out in the numbers along with details about Google’s algorithms further destroying TripAdvisor’s relevancy in the online travel industry.
Then take into account that the company just announced a 200-employee purge for the explicit reason of increased competition from Google and things seem to be going from bad to worse.
The company has done a proverbial deal with the devil by positioning itself to be utterly tied to Google’s search algorithm while Google is going head-to-head with them.
Google has upgraded its travel search tools recently to turn the screws on several trip booking websites like TripAdvisor, Booking.com and Priceline.
In its last earnings release, TripAdvisor noted that Google has placed ads at the top of its search results, forcing companies like it to buy more ads.
The company had a rough last quarter, reporting adjusted earnings of 58 cents a share, down from 72 cents a year earlier and short of analysts’ estimates of 69 cents.
Rhetoric from management was equally as disappointing with them saying, “Google (is) pushing its own hotel products in search results and siphoning off quality traffic that would otherwise find TripAdvisor via free links and generate high margin revenue in our hotel click-based auction.”
“Google has got more aggressive. We’re not predicting that it’s going to turn around.” TripAdvisor CEO Stephen Kaufer said at the time and I don’t see how our put spread will lose money in the short-term.
I will advise readers to take profits when the time comes. Be aware that TripAdvisor also has an earnings report coming up in 2 weeks that could gyrate the stock.
I expect broad-based weakness in guidance and poor performance last quarter in the report.
“I don’t want to be liked.” – Said Founder and Former CEO of Alibaba Jack Ma
Mad Hedge Technology Letter
January 24, 2020
Fiat Lux
Featured Trade:
(THE NETFLIX EARNINGS SHOCKER)
(NFLX)
Netflix is saying no to over $2 billion in extra digital ad revenue – that is the critical takeaway from Netflix’s earnings call that fell in line with exactly what I thought would transpire.
As Netflix’s domestic subscriptions continue to soften, this is the first of many earnings calls where management will be put to the sword on why they still haven’t swiveled to digital ads.
As you guessed right, Founder and CEO Reed Hastings pulled out all the usual excuses explaining why Netflix is leaving a massive chunk of revenue on the table.
Some of his evasive rhetoric came in the form of explaining there’s no “easy money” in an online advertising business that has to compete with the likes of Google, Amazon, and Facebook.
He continued to spruce up his excuses by saying, “Google and Facebook and Amazon are tremendously powerful at online advertising because they’re integrating so much data from so many sources. There’s a business cost to that, but that makes the advertising more targeted and effective. So I think those three are going to get most of the online advertising business.”
Even most peons would understand that Netflix’s network effect is so robust that they could turn on the digital ad revenue spigots with a flick of a wrist.
It doesn’t matter that there are also three other tech firms in the digital ad sphere.
Netflix certainly has the infrastructure in place and manpower laid out to harness the power lines of the digital ad game.
Hastings weirdly lamented that revenue would need to be “ripped away” from the existing providers, he continued. And stealing online advertising business from Amazon, Google and Facebook is “quite challenging.”
I don’t believe that is entirely accurate.
Dipping into that digital ad revenue would be quite challenging if you are a 2-man start-up, but the power centrifuge that has become to be known as Netflix is stark crazy for taking the high road on data privacy when the US government still allows tech companies to profit off of digital ads.
The musical chairs might stop in less than 3 years, but not now.
It’s hard to understand why Netflix isn’t approaching this as a short-term smash and grab type of business.
If they really wanted to, they could have layered each service into ads and non-ad subscriptions just like Spotify does.
If muddying their premium service is taboo, then there are alternative solutions.
I understand and agree with Hastings that delivering “customer pleasure” is the ultimate goal, but that doesn’t mean there can’t be an ad-based model as one of the options.
I believe this is a substantial letdown to the shareholder and the stock price would be closer to $500 if there was a realistic ad revenue option.
Even worse, Hasting’s argument for not delving into digital ads is flawed by saying, “We don’t collect anything. We’re really focused on just making our members happy.”
That is materially false.
Netflix already tracks loads of data and it doesn’t take a Ph.D. data analyst to ignore that when you are busy perusing the Netflix platform, Netflix’s are tracked non-stop.
Netflix uses algorithms to track user’s behavior through tracking viewership data in order to make critical decisions about which of its original programs should be renewed and which should be booted.
It also looks at overall viewing trends to make decisions about which new programs to pursue.
It then also tracks user's own engagement with Netflix’s content in order to personalize the Netflix home screen to user’s preference.
Netflix is already “exploiting users” and they are doing shareholders a massive disservice by not maximizing revenue to the full amount they can.
And yes, I do agree Netflix is not as good as Facebook, Google, and Amazon at tracking users, but the roadmap is certainly out there for Netflix to indulge in digital ads.
It would take less than 18 months for Netflix to be running on full cylinders if they poached a few experts.
Aside from the lack of digital ads, Netflix finally is starting to acknowledge the new competition from two major streaming services, Disney+ and Apple+ — both of which have subsidized their launch with free promotions in order to gain viewership.
Then it gets worse with streaming service Quibi, WarnerMedia’s HBO Max and NBCU’s Peacock rolling out.
The latter features a multi-tiered business model, including a free service for pay-TV subscribers, an ad-free premium tier and one that’s ad-supported.
Other TV streaming services also rely on ads for revenue, including Hulu and CBS All Access. Meanwhile, a number of ad-supported services are also emerging, like Roku’s The Roku Channel, Amazon’s IMDb TV, TUBI, Viacom’s Pluto TV, and others.
Considering much of Netflix’s rise is fueled on debt, it’s bonkers they aren’t going after every little bit of revenue that is there for the taking.
Netflix could lose 4 million subscribers this year, and sooner or later, Hastings will run out of places to hide.
Slowing domestic subscriber growth and bad guidance don’t sound like a roaring growth tech stock to me.
“If the Starbucks secret is a smile when you get your latte... ours is that the Web site adapts to the individual's taste.” – Said Founder of Netflix Reed Hastings
Mad Hedge Technology Letter
January 22, 2020
Fiat Lux
Featured Trade:
(THE HOLLOW VICTORY FOR TECH IN THE CHINA TRADE DEAL)
(MSFT), (AMZN), (HUAWEI)
The Davos World Economic Forum is the optimal place to get a snapshot of the state of the American technology sector and apply its underpinnings to an overall trading strategy for 2020.
Stepping back, one clear theme is the lasting effects of the trade war and how that will manifest itself in the broader tech sector.
We got some serious sound bites from CEO of Microsoft Satya Nadella at Davos who is convinced that mutual economic saber-rattling between the US and China will show up in higher costs because of the misallocation of resources.
The most critical point of contention is the development in the semiconductor space as we move into the 5G world and this $470 billion industry which realizes cost savings from scaling by global supply is splintering off as we speak into two separate industries.
This just translates into higher costs to source components for your Microsoft Surface laptop or your Apple Ear Buds.
The follow-through effect is ultimately bludgeoning global growth rates and tech intermediaries will be forced to pick up the extra tab or face the looming decision to pass costs on to the consumer.
As we move forward, the administration is considering more limits to US semiconductor companies’ access to the Chinese consumer market.
The scaremongering fueled by the rise and threat of Huawei has reached fever pitch.
Remember that even with the aggression of the American administration hoping to cap Huawei’s revenue explosion, Huawei still managed to grow sales 18% last year to $122 billion.
I can tell you that if the U.S. administration came after the Mad Hedge Technology Letter guns blazing, we wouldn’t be sitting here growing 18% annually!
The U.S. administration hasn’t stopped at Huawei and is putting in shifts attempting to convince other nations to avoid using Chinese infrastructure equipment for the 5G revolution.
The “Phase One” of the trade agreement is largely seen as a moot point in the technology community and in some cases can be argued as a net negative to component makers whose access to the local Chinese market has narrowed.
The agreement signed also delivered no meaningful protection to intellectual property for US technology companies working with China which was largely viewed as the main catalyst provoking a geopolitical fight.
The trade war has sped up the bifurcation of internets, better known as “splinternet,” and I believe that sometime in the near future, you will need to download Chinese software and platforms to function inside of China.
Much of these misunderstandings stem from the lack of trust that has accumulated between the two parties.
The American tech sector and Wall Street have indirectly subsidized China’s technological rise to this point and now they must go head-to-head in every future technology such as artificial intelligence, 5G, fintech, augmented reality, and virtual reality.
This appears to be the new normal - a frosty and adversarial tech relationship.
There is now zero good will between each other.
The trust of tech on American shores could almost be ironically argued that it is worse than the trust level with China.
Edelman’s 20th annual trust barometer surveyed more than 34,000 adult respondents in 38 markets around the world.
It found that 61% of participants said the pace of change in technology is too fast and government does not fully understand emerging technologies enough to regulate them efficiently.
Trust in tech from 2019 to 2020 declined the most significantly in France, Canada, Italy, Russia, Singapore, the U.S. and Australia.
Much of the narrative has been about the domination of American tech by a handful of actors that has seen American companies go up against foreign governments.
France and America recently announced a temporary truce after the French President Emmanuel Macron reached out by phone to President Trump hoping to end the threat of tariffs while they work out a broader accord on digital taxation.
The French leader agreed to postpone until the end of 2020 a tax that France levied on big tech companies last year and in turn, the U.S. will delay the counter-tariffs that were in the works set to be levied on the French.
And it’s not just the French.
India has taken heed from the brooding trouble between the encroachment on sovereignty and American tech giants by adopting an aggressive stance towards Amazon.
Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos' lowlight of a recent India work trip came in the form of being snubbed by the Indian government.
India’s commerce minister Piyush Goyal said, “It’s not as if they (Amazon) are doing a great favor to India when they invest a billion dollars.”
He called Amazon a capital guzzler equating its mounting losses up to “predatory pricing or some unfair trade practices.”
India is on the verge of turning protectionist on foreign tech and this flies in the face of the tech atmosphere even just a few years ago.
Governments have come to realize that America’s FANGs are too dominant and entrenched often resulting in a net negative to the local populace.
More often than not, American tech found ways of rerouting local revenue to coffers of a few billionaires while paying zero local tax.
The easy money has been made and now the Tim Cooks and Sundar Pichais of the world will have to fight tooth and nail with not only the U.S. antitrust regulators, but foreign governments.
This is why a handful of tech companies this dominant has been the outsized winners over the past generation as their share prices have gone from the lower left to the upper right but now command minimal consumer trust.
The ultimate Davos message is that big tech continues to grind higher, but alarm bells have started to ring.
There’s only so much friction they can handle before investors pull the rug.
“We also welcome any regulation that helps the marketplace not be a race to the bottom.” – Said CEO of Microsoft Satya Nadella
Mad Hedge Technology Letter
January 17, 2020
Fiat Lux
Featured Trade:
(WHY ZOOM IS ZOOMING)
(ZM)
