Investing Thread

[MU82]

Don't consider myself to be a trader, more of a long-term investor, but when a stock is up so much in such a short period of time, it's been my experience that these huge run-ups, and spike upwards in share price, almost always present an opportunity to buy back at a lower price. Just pull up a chart on MRNA, it's gone from a low of just under 18 to over 80 in a mater of a few months, and the bulk of those gains have happened in the last few weeks. When a stock is up over 300% in a month, in my book it makes sense to take some profits.

Well done!

I don't use the term "trader" as a dirty word, as some do. But I understand what you are saying. I definitely am a long-term investor but I also have taken some profits in the last year.

[WarriorDad]

The steel industry left for financial reasons.  They went into the real estate and leasing businesses with their assets.  GE went into leasing and insurance.   We have lost many industries over 45 years.  Commercial ship building, high speed rail, many aircraft types, clothing, tools, even elevators.  We service elevators, we dont manufactuer them.

This is far from a recent phenomenon, and education is not the solution.  Politics can't solve the problem.

Not only have we lost jobs, but we have lost capital.

It became too costly to do manufacturing in this country when others were willing to do it cheaper.  Let us not ignore that some of that cost was intentionally driven into the equation with environmental restrictions, workplace guidelines, safety measure and the like.  Those were good things to do to protect workers, some will argue environmental requirements have gone too far, but overall good things.  That adds large costs that didn’t exist in the 1940’s through the 1970’s.  The need for the products did not go away,  it the ability to make them here in the US became a financial game it cannot win.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

Agree on both of those.

Xi has a major advantage on Trump, because he doesn't need to get re-elected. He can delay and hem and haw on carrying out any "agreement." This is a desperate issue for Trump, who made it a central part of his campaign.

So far, his wrangling with China has put American farmers in such a world of hurt that he had to create an entirely new welfare program for them ... and then small farmers ended up getting very little of the money. And for a lot of other industries, the effects of the ongoing trade war have been amplified by the pandemic.

Ur 100% dead wrong on every single thing you say about farmers in this post.  Wholly ignorant!!

[MU82]

Ur 100% dead wrong on every single thing you say about farmers in this post.  Wholly ignorant!!

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

Not only that, but he never says anything factual to counter anyone.  Just insults.  You know...like a 8 year old.

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

Well u made a typical agenda based statement that was 100% wrong.  When shown that u changed the subject.  Journalist much??

[Mr. Sand-Knit]

Not only that, but he never says anything factual to counter anyone.  Just insults.  You know...like a 8 year old.

The factual part was stating he was 100% wrong.

[MU82]

Well u made a typical agenda based statement that was 100% wrong.  When shown that u changed the subject.  Journalist much??

What did you "show" me or anybody else? You stated your opinion, and provided no proof to support your opinion. Only in your world is that "showing" something.

Obsessed much?

[Hards Alumni]

The factual part was stating he was 100% wrong.

So then show why it is and stop acting like a petulant child.  Unless... its not acting, is it.

[The Hippie Satan of Hyperbole]

So then show why it is and stop acting like a petulant child.  Unless... its not acting, is it.

No it is pretty clear from his posting history that petulance is his main asset.

[vogue65]

It became too costly to do manufacturing in this country when others were willing to do it cheaper.  Let us not ignore that some of that cost was intentionally driven into the equation with environmental restrictions, workplace guidelines, safety measure and the like.  Those were good things to do to protect workers, some will argue environmental requirements have gone too far, but overall good things.  That adds large costs that didn’t exist in the 1940’s through the 1970’s.  The need for the products did not go away,  it the ability to make them here in the US became a financial game it cannot win.

If you mean the race to the bottom, we are in total agreement.

Yes, poor workers in the third world are "willing" to do the work for less.  They are "willing" to pollute and take risks most of us are unwilling to take.

I'll let it go at that, long live our way of life.

[MU82]

Stock prices of Moderna (MRNA) and Sorrento (SRNE) come crashing back down as reality sets in about them being "miracle" cures.

https://seekingalpha.com/news/3576079-moderna-under-pressure-on-capital-raise-data-questions

Selling (of Moderna) ramped up on the heels of a STAT report criticizing the company for selectively announcing preliminary results from an NIAID-led Phase 1 clinical trial evaluating its COVID-19 vaccine candidate mRNA-1273 in healthy volunteers.

Specifically, the company reported that all 45 subjects (15 per dose level cohort) seroconverted by day 15 after a single dose. At day 43,  two weeks after all participants in the 25 µg arm received a second dose (n=15), levels of neutralizing antibodies (the ones you want to see) were comparable to levels in convalescent plasma (derived from recovered patients and used as therapy for sick patients), but only in four subjects. Also, at day 43, the same high levels of binding antibodies were seen in the 100 µg arm but, apparently only in four of 10 subjects.

The company stated that neutralizing antibody data were only available for these eight participants which seems questionable since the post-dose follow-up periods were the same for all 45.

Also, confounding the data is the fact that neutralizing antibody titers in patients who have recovered from COVID-19 infection vary widely, from undetectable to "very high."

[Silkk the Shaka]

I saw this article yesterday a.m. (written in 2016 before it went public but still)

https://www.thrillist.com/tech/nation/what-does-moderna-therapeutics-do-why-is-it-a-silicon-valley-secret

Seems like a good time to take a print and watch this one from the sidelines

[TSmith34, Inc.]

"Although Luckin Coffee (NASDAQ:LK) has received a delisting notice from Nasdaq, the stock will begin trading again at 7:00 a.m. ET until that process is complete."

[WarriorDad]

If you mean the race to the bottom, we are in total agreement.

Yes, poor workers in the third world are "willing" to do the work for less.  They are "willing" to pollute and take risks most of us are unwilling to take.

I'll let it go at that, long live our way of life.

Unfortunately things we need in life like certain metals, plastics and other materials come at a cost.  We decided to no longer make them here in the USA because of strict (some say too strict) environmental concerns and the increased costs of doing business associated with them.  Think about the airplane business and the cost of producing aluminum.  Is it a race to the bottom to want airplanes and the travel that comes with it?  The cost of batteries, short and long term?  Immediate benefits to way of life, but disposal challenges. 

[Hards Alumni]

Unfortunately things we need in life like certain metals, plastics and other materials come at a cost.  We decided to no longer make them here in the USA because of strict (some say too strict) environmental concerns and the increased costs of doing business associated with them.  Think about the airplane business and the cost of producing aluminum.  Is it a race to the bottom to want airplanes and the travel that comes with it?  The cost of batteries, short and long term?  Immediate benefits to way of life, but disposal challenges.

You know who else used these exact talking points, don't you?  If you're trying to stay ahead of the lie then you need to do better.

[vogue65]

Unfortunately things we need in life like certain metals, plastics and other materials come at a cost.  We decided to no longer make them here in the USA because of strict (some say too strict) environmental concerns and the increased costs of doing business associated with them.  Think about the airplane business and the cost of producing aluminum.  Is it a race to the bottom to want airplanes and the travel that comes with it?  The cost of batteries, short and long term?  Immediate benefits to way of life, but disposal challenges.

One of my favorite topics.  Thanks Dad for bringing up the subject, probably the most important economic subject there is.   The airplane business is a big deal.

When I was a senior at  M.U., in the mid 60's, at the dawn of the jet age, I worked on a project with UNITED AIRLINES.  They were doing strategic planning for putting the people who used interstate busses for travel on planes.  America had an excess capacity in airframe manufacturing after WWII.  There was an excess capacity in aluminum.  The government, for national defense, was supporting research, running wind tunnels, and behind defense conversion.  The jet plane development was paid for by the taxpayer.  The long range plans included things like airport development and pilot training and it was sold as a national defense need.

I had no vision, I could not think strategically.  I could not invision, for example, Dulles International Airport.  Newark airport was l little nothing airport, before Peoples Express, before Continental, before UNITED grew.

The planes got larger, the crews became smaller, the seats got smaller, there was an large  increase in the number of passengers flying.  Cargo was then and still is a very large part of the business.  Passengers are a problem, a necessary evil.  Cargo is much more profitable.

BTW, Boeing is 50% defense and they have taken over McDonald Douglas, and even Sykorsky and are looking to buy other "compeditors".

So now we have the travel and entertainment "industry".  It is a monster, considered necessary for our economic survival. 

I wonder what the strategic thinking is today.  I flew to Marquette in DC-3's from Detroit and today I fly on 767, 777 from Newark, Liberty to Milano and Frankfort. 

I have seen Eastern, TWA, Braniff, Northwest, North Central, Pan Am all disappear.  I have seen the arrival of Southwest, Alaska, Frontier, Qatar, Emirates, Saudi, El Al, Cargolux, etc.  Our way of life is very tenuous.   

When will we ever recover from WWII?   How many planes do we need, how many airports, how many international travelers do we need?  If you haven't, you should see Milano and Frankfort airports.  It makes Denver, Chicago, and DFW tiny by comparison. 

Oh if I only knew then what I know now, ha.  As Boeing goes so goes America, in my day it was as GM goes so goes America.

[JWags85]

ORD, DIA, DFW, and IAD all dwarf Frankfort which isn’t even a top 10 airport globally by size. Malpensa isn’t even the biggest or busiest airport in Italy.  The only true competition the US has in airport size or volume is in Asia

[ZiggysFryBoy]

ORD, DIA, DFW, and IAD all dwarf Frankfort which isn’t even a top 10 airport globally by size. Malpensa isn’t even the biggest or busiest airport in Italy.  The only true competition the US has in airport size or volume is in Asia

Let him go. He's on a roll.

[vogue65]

ORD, DIA, DFW, and IAD all dwarf Frankfort which isn’t even a top 10 airport globally by size. Malpensa isn’t even the biggest or busiest airport in Italy.  The only true competition the US has in airport size or volume is in Asia

You know better than I.  Frankfurt seemed to have a lot of Luftansa on the ground, 747, etc..
Malpensa has very long walks and lots of space for growth that may never happen.  Probably not many take offs and landings and many smaller planes, eastern European types.

Fact check on myself.  Heathrow does 475,000 take offs and landings per year.  How do the airports stack up in freight tonnage?  Hong Kong , 4,809,000 tons.

Whats the point of the roll?

The whole Megillah is a very big deal. Investment wise or any other wise.

Let him go. He's on a roll.

[Tortuga94]

Since the topic of airports has come up and this is an investing thread, I don't think investing in airlines at this particular moment is a good idea, way too much risk and uncertainty there, that includes Boeing too. I'm looking at airport operators. In particular, PAC(Grupo Aeroportuario del Pacifico) and ASR(Grupo Aeroportuario del Sureste). People will eventually travel again and will take vacations to places that are sunny.

PAC owns 12 airports in western Mexico including the ones in Guadalajara and Tijuana, as well as 2 in Jamaica.
ASR owns the airports in Cancun and other tourist destinations in southern Mexico, as well as the airport in San Juan Puerto Rico.

There are extremely high barriers to entry, they are essentially monopolies in their regions. The stocks are still down about 50% for the year. I'm in the early process of doing further dd, but may decide to roll the dice here with one or maybe both of these.

[vogue65]

Since the topic of airports has come up and this is an investing thread, I don't think investing in airlines at this particular moment is a good idea, way too much risk and uncertainty there, that includes Boeing too. I'm looking at airport operators. In particular, PAC(Grupo Aeroportuario del Pacifico) and ASR(Grupo Aeroportuario del Sureste). People will eventually travel again and will take vacations to places that are sunny.

PAC owns 12 airports in western Mexico including the ones in Guadalajara and Tijuana, as well as 2 in Jamaica.
ASR owns the airports in Cancun and other tourist destinations in southern Mexico, as well as the airport in San Juan Puerto Rico.

There are extremely high barriers to entry, they are essentially monopolies in their regions. The stocks are still down about 50% for the year. I'm in the early process of doing further dd, but may decide to roll the dice here with one or maybe both of these.

Sounds like as good a roll of the dice as any.  However, it is just another segment of the travel and entertainment industry.

With the excess capacity, how can this industry survive?  How can I dd with load factors at 50%, with 80% of the planes grounded?  I made up the numbers.  Extrapolation from Flightradar24.com .  We have very little real data around here on most subjects.

Are we where the wealthy flying private with the poor on the bus?

Boeing survives because half the company is defense.  Survival is a far cry from a high flyer.  Does survival mean another service company?  Overhall and refitting may be the future of Boeing.  Ugh.

[JWags85]

Sounds like as good a roll of the dice as any.  However, it is just another segment of the travel and entertainment industry.

With the excess capacity, how can this industry survive?  How can I dd with load factors at 50%, with 80% of the planes grounded?  I made up the numbers.  Extrapolation from Flightradar24.com .  We have very little real data around here on most subjects.

Are we where the wealthy flying private with the poor on the bus?

Boeing survives because half the company is defense.  Survival is a far cry from a high flyer.  Does survival mean another service company?  Overhall and refitting may be the future of Boeing.  Ugh.

Are you implying air travel is going to implode permanently?  People are going to stop flying?  The "transformational" overreactions in terms of travel, entertainment, and vacation are getting to be ridiculous.  For every person that says they wont fly for a LONG time, there are 2-3 that are looking to schedule trips for both work and pleasure.  Once a vaccine or treatment comes around, we will return to normal travel levels.  We've already doubled the air travel where we were at lows in April, wait till things start to open up.

BA survives because there are 2 major producers of long haul, large passenger volume planes in the world, and the barrier to entry is enormous.  Normal US travel volume is 2.5MM people a day.  We're currently seeing around 250K in May.  I struggle to see how that doesn't return to over 1MM by fall provided there isn't another wave of shutdowns.

There are some very real challenges that air travel faces in the short term, but challenges are just that, short term.  Maybe you see a decrease in some domestic business trips in favor of Zoom.  Maybe the next travel season or two is a bit lighter for holiday travel.  But look at the eagerness of people to return to EVERYTHING about their lives on the other side of this lockdown, travel wont be any different.  I honestly feel that the majority of people saying they wont travel or this will make them second guess getting on a plane or staying in a hotel, either are significantly older or in a susceptible group, or more likely not frequent travelers anyways.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Are you implying air travel is going to implode permanently?  People are going to stop flying?  The "transformational" overreactions in terms of travel, entertainment, and vacation are getting to be ridiculous.  For every person that says they wont fly for a LONG time, there are 2-3 that are looking to schedule trips for both work and pleasure.  Once a vaccine or treatment comes around, we will return to normal travel levels.  We've already doubled the air travel where we were at lows in April, wait till things start to open up.

BA survives because there are 2 major producers of long haul, large passenger volume planes in the world, and the barrier to entry is enormous.  Normal US travel volume is 2.5MM people a day.  We're currently seeing around 250K in May.  I struggle to see how that doesn't return to over 1MM by fall provided there isn't another wave of shutdowns.

There are some very real challenges that air travel faces in the short term, but challenges are just that, short term.  Maybe you see a decrease in some domestic business trips in favor of Zoom.  Maybe the next travel season or two is a bit lighter for holiday travel.  But look at the eagerness of people to return to EVERYTHING about their lives on the other side of this lockdown, travel wont be any different.  I honestly feel that the majority of people saying they wont travel or this will make them second guess getting on a plane or staying in a hotel, either are significantly older or in a susceptible group, or more likely not frequent travelers anyways.

I plan to travel as soon as possible, whenever customers are willing to see suppliers again.
I've found face-to-face to be so much more productive to work out issues and build trust in the long run.  Electronic communications only goes so far.

[JWags85]

I plan to travel as soon as possible, whenever customers are willing to see suppliers again.
I've found face-to-face to be so much more productive to work out issues and build trust in the long run.  Electronic communications only goes so far.

Could not agree more.  I mentioned it weeks back when people were talking about the upside of Zoom and MSFT Teams and how it would be the "death of traditional business travel".  Felt like it was written by techno evangelists, academics, or other people who dont have outward facing client relationships.  Especially when it comes to foreign customers/suppliers where there is a language difference.  I have people I chase for weeks to try and get on a call or the like.  And if I do, its minimally effective.  But if I travel to where they are, they clear big blocks of time, set up dinner reservations, and give me more information exchange than I would get in 4-6 months of electronic communication.  Hell, I have contacts at customers I talk to weekly via call or email, but the nature of the business and our relationship means I might see them once a year at a trade show.  Whereas I have people I see 3-4 times a year on visits but talk to 10-20% as much as I talk to the others.  Guess which ones I have a bigger relationship with and would do whatever I need in a pinch?

I see business consultants with travel cutbacks as clients see where they can save with Zoom and the like.  But not sales/account management/biz development, no chance