🌻美國生活
打了疫苗後, 在上週進城了一趟.
許久未出門的感覺很奇妙. 進了城, 也感到大家的生活還是如往常一般, 只是餐廳沒甚麼人(都用電話下單, 或是當場點了東西後就走), 許多人(並不是全部)的臉上也多了個口罩. 旅館的人倒是不多. 但商家停車場的車子應該如往常一樣, 沒有減少.
每次進城, 也一定會到Chipotle打牙祭. 這次試了他們新的飯(參雜了cauliflower花椰菜), 酸酸滋味, 配上原來burrito裡面就有的料, 真的是開胃又好吃, 一口接一口.
最近吃了三家不同的burrito, 還是覺得Chipotle的最好吃. 我想原因之一(不知道我的觀察有沒有誤), 可能是他們把不同口感的配料加在一起時, 有多家一道手續, 讓新鮮脆口的生菜, 烤熟的肉類, sour cream與其他配料均勻地被融合起來, 也讓滋味豐富了起來. 不像其他家的burrito, 一口咬下去, 就是飯, 或是豆類, 分得很清楚, 而沒有不同食材所帶來的多層次的口感.
Anyway. 附上這次進城照的幾張照片在下方.
🌻My happiness project: 年報財報導讀
股市對我來說像戰場; 年報財報就像是兵書. 而一家家公司的年報財報, 對我來說, 就像是故事書一樣, 述說著公司的成長營運軌跡. 做了這些功課後, 持股也會有信心. "Buy and do homework," 是我認為投資該有的態度.
下半年時間比較多, 所以想抽一點時間出來, 跟對看年報財報有興趣的投資人一起來讀資料, 順便藉此分享我是如何抓重點&透過年報財報來做思考的. 也想要藉此來宣揚看年報財報的好處&消除投資人對英文年報財報可能會有的恐懼感. Anyway. 這只是初步的想法. 若要實行也會是九月的事情了.
不過先錄了一段影片, 解釋我是怎麼做財報內容&電話會議內容整理的: https://youtu.be/vvkrs6CiWdw
🌻本周做的功課與閱讀
https://makingsenseofusastocks.blogspot.com/2021/05/blog-post_19.html
這次的閱讀中, 跟成長股比較有關的是這段. 目前成長股也被重新定價中, 所以建議成長股投資人在挑股的時候, 盡量找有現金流, 還有獲利的公司.
"That’s true even for the highflying growth stocks that have been getting hit so hard recently—as long as they have earnings. Adam Parker, founder of Trivariate Research, notes that following large growth selloffs, S&P 500 growth stocks with both free cash flow and expanding margins tend to outperform in the months ahead. That means favoring stocks like ServiceNow (ticker: NOW) and Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) over shares of Chegg (CHGG) and Twitter (TWTR). “Buy some growth stocks on the selloff, but they have to have positive free cash flow and margin expansion,” Parker says."
🌻投資金句
"I learned that you may be right, but if enough people believe you're wrong the markets can really hurt you." --BlackRock bond chief Rick Rieder
🌻The Future of Work
看到BofA寫的這一段, 覺得挺感動的. 這也是投資的目的之一, 能夠藉著這個方式, 來接觸到世界的脈動.
The Future of Work
Thematic Research
BofA Global Research
bofa.com
May 12: The future of work is not zero-sum between humanity and technology. We believe humans can collaborate with and work alongside robots, rather than be displaced by them, and that technology can create more jobs than it destroys. By 2025 alone, the WEF [World Economic Forum] thinks automation will add 12 million net new jobs, with robots eliminating 85 million jobs but creating 97 million new ones. Other grounds for optimism include: (1) 65% of children starting school today will work in jobs that have not been invented yet; (2) “new” collar jobs will be generated from well-placed thematic sectors like healthcare, renewables, new mobility, or even moonshot technologies; and (3) we might actually be more productive and have more leisure time if robots can relieve us of more mundane, repetitive everyday tasks. We have identified $14 trillion in market cap of enablers for the future of work. Technology, industrials, and medtech are some key beneficiaries. We also see opportunities in education and the upskilling/retraining of workers by corporates. Conversely, commercial real estate/offices and legacy transport are some of the sectors facing headwinds...
So, what are the truly futuristic jobs that could be invented? Data-privacy managers, nanomedicine surgeons, lab-meat scientists, blockchain strategists, space-tourist guides, freelance biohackers, AI avatar designers, 3D food-printer chefs, leisure-time planners, ethical algorithm programmers, and brain simulation specialists, to name but a few.
🌻Dividend Growers’ Allure
這段從股息的角度, 來講解傳統價值股跟成長股的不同處.
Dividend Growers’ Allure
Insights & Commentaries
Washington Crossing Advisors
washingtoncrossingadvisors.com
May 10: Buy quality stocks that increase dividends regularly. This simple strategy takes a long-term view of investing and focuses on the dividend, not the stock price. Passive income generated from dividend growth has two main benefits. First, it focuses your investment strategy on cash-generating, growing companies. Second, it tends to lead to quality businesses that are neither too young nor too old.
Why is this so? Almost by definition, a dividend-growing company tends to cover expenses with rising cash flow. And which companies do these tend to be? They tend to be profitable, established companies in the middle of their corporate life cycle. By contrast, young companies tend to be burning cash, constantly in need of capital, and face a higher risk of failure. Such young firms tend to not pay dividends at all as they are consumed with growth. On the other hand, older companies often funnel most or all cash to investors as dividends because viable investments can no longer be found. These firms are often in decline and offer little growth, often reflected in a high current yield.
Picture:
1. Chipotle內部. 可以看到有個取餐的架子. 餐廳人員也不時在電腦螢幕前, 看進來的訂單, 備菜.
2. 旅館外一區. 面向密西根湖.
3. CSX, Union Pacific的火車廂(這兩家都有上市)
why blackrock 在 利世民 Facebook 的最佳貼文
強貼推介
[我嫁咗畀佢,都可以同你一齊架]知道出處嘅比個叻自己,唔知嘅睇comment張圖。睇埋comment張圖都唔知係乜嘅,你太年輕了
講返楊恭如,呀,孔慈,呀,倫交所。
除咗上一篇文啲基本嘢外(http://bit.ly/32ENlYb),當然亦可以好多政治分析。我特別鍾意吾友Cory嘅一句:估唔到紐倫港發展成咁。真係的,從來冇諗過會係香港同倫敦交易所合併。但,又多得脫歐啦。
講返,今次合併,要過到,除咗啲基本要求(股東舉手,反壟斷)外,仲有樣好有特色嘅條件。如圖
即係點?即係,你飛咗佢,先好同我一齊。唔好諗住做楊恭如,同時同郭富城鄭伊健一齊,亦唔好諗住做楊千嬅,古天樂同吳彥祖爭你。科幻片嚟架!(識揀梗係要高圓圓)
個故事要由早幾個月講起。多得我每日睇Financial Times ,三十蚊份抵睇。我估好多人連Refintiv呢單嘢都唔知
是咁的,港交所同倫交所合併,但要求倫交所啲股東要否決同Refintiv(下稱Ref)本身嘅合併,或者因為其他嘢告吹。總之,有佢就冇我。你當人地之前有婚約,但橫刀奪愛咁。
當然蔣生話齋,做大事嘅,三樣嘢,銀紙銀紙同埋銀紙,誰大誰惡誰正確。況且,Ref又唔係交易所,兩單嘢都唔係完全一樣。你當當初倫交所係想買起Ref多啲。
但我嘅問題係,Why not both?步驚雲聶風(加埋秦霜丫)一齊嚟,或者張申然加埋方啟宏一齊嘛。
先要講前半部嘅故事。Ref係咩公司?都有啲難解。但,就係近年最炙手可熱,街邊阿叔都講嘅FinTech(然後保險有現梳tech地產有扑tech,爭在141未有chic-tech).
當然Ref是一間很大很大,well established 嘅Fin Tech 公司,唔係香港啲Vanessa手作仔。簡單嚟講,佢原本係路透社(其實係Thompson Reuters)嘅一個部門,Financial & Risk。後來拆出嚟,甚至妹仔大過主人婆。冇上市(應冇?),黑石(BlackStone,唔係BlackRock)55%,Thompson Reuters 45%.
Ref有乜咁巴閉?有咩在手?一樣嘢。Data,你可以當佢係Bloomberg嘅競爭者。另外仲有數據庫,幫你解決呢十年金融業最頭痕嘅問題:反洗錢,KYC(Knock your client)—我點知嚟開戶嗰條托布係咪某西非小國嘅乜乜石油部部長?
咁幾個月(定半年?)前,倫交所係宣佈同Ref 合併-留意,Ref嘅收入同EBITDA(好憎呢個字,自己查)甚至係高過倫交所。所以小象吞大象之類。就當然都係換股。
股東反應唔呃人,宣佈完後,倫交所股價係咁升,升三成咁滯—然後先到港交所嚟接力,或火棒。
故事交代完,我嘅問題就係,Ref好似咁勁,咁做乜唔一齊?三個人的晚餐嘛。
原因,我都唔係好知,經我問專家(即係,whatsapp人)後,以下係可能嘅答案
1:港交所唔想孭債—Ref債務都成120億美金,成千億港紙。倫交所原本孭起埋,咁可能港交所唔想。但,以港倫交所合併後嘅規模,孭呢1000億債,真係有難度?唔好忘記而家債息咁低。倫交所宣佈後股價都係咁升喎,到合併後反而孭唔起?唔似
2:唔想啲貨去外人手。留意,Ref同倫交所又係互相換股。如果佢做完,先同港交所換,即係港交所啲貨可能會不少落咗去BlackRock手上?但,有何問題?反正港交所有高登些牙,冇得狙擊的。所以都唔多似
3:我諗嘅理由,其實未必咁複雜,純粹係唔清唔楚啲合約款條搞唔掂—我並非律師亦唔係做併購,但正路地啲條款一定有包你不能有material change。俗啲講句就係訂咗婚先知你唔係十八歲係三十,仲要啤咗三件,仲要帶埋嚟買一送三,條仔梗係縮沙。企業上嘅,我當我係日本仔最初買譚仔,但你譚仔未完成合併自己去買埋KFC香港,咁又要我食埋啲雞胸佢?我買米線咋喎。
而家一樣啫,我係Ref股東嘅,最初點預你會變咗有港交所份?可能我唔想同佢玩呢,可能我想反價呢,可能我不如飛起你直接同佢呢,太多變數。原本啲terms應該失晒效的
以上全部係門外漢(都話唔係做M&A又唔係做律師)估,睇下有冇高人指點。
留意,寫完先見到,Financial Times嘅報導係:
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing has made a £32bn proposal to buy the London Stock Exchange Group, aiming to break up the UK group’s agreed deal for Refinitiv.
唔知聽日香港報紙點寫,但好可能寫好多政治呀,中港呀,中英呀,港英呀。但FT就相當重視港交所要倫交所同Ref分手呢個條件。
不枉我就呢個課題寫多篇文,「真係英雄所見樂瞳」。彭博都講呢樣嘢
初步倫交所嘅官方講法,係仲係想同Ref一齊。但當然都講句要時間評估。即係冇講過,冇嘅,計掂數咯。
似乎未必過到。而如果撻Q啲冷氣軍師又可以話港交所不自量力 條件霸王(升咗成倍仲買要你斷絶個未婚夫都唔得?)之類,當然要加埋李小加嘅大陸仔身份。
又睇下點
why blackrock 在 君子馬蘭頭 - Ivan Li 李聲揚 Facebook 的最讚貼文
[我嫁咗畀佢,都可以同你一齊架]知道出處嘅比個叻自己,唔知嘅睇comment張圖。睇埋comment張圖都唔知係乜嘅,你太年輕了
講返楊恭如,呀,孔慈,呀,倫交所。
除咗上一篇文啲基本嘢外(http://bit.ly/32ENlYb),當然亦可以好多政治分析。我特別鍾意吾友Cory嘅一句:估唔到紐倫港發展成咁。真係的,從來冇諗過會係香港同倫敦交易所合併。但,又多得脫歐啦。
講返,今次合併,要過到,除咗啲基本要求(股東舉手,反壟斷)外,仲有樣好有特色嘅條件。如圖
即係點?即係,你飛咗佢,先好同我一齊。唔好諗住做楊恭如,同時同郭富城鄭伊健一齊,亦唔好諗住做楊千嬅,古天樂同吳彥祖爭你。科幻片嚟架!(識揀梗係要高圓圓)
個故事要由早幾個月講起。多得我每日睇Financial Times ,三十蚊份抵睇。我估好多人連Refintiv呢單嘢都唔知
是咁的,港交所同倫交所合併,但要求倫交所啲股東要否決同Refintiv(下稱Ref)本身嘅合併,或者因為其他嘢告吹。總之,有佢就冇我。你當人地之前有婚約,但橫刀奪愛咁。
當然蔣生話齋,做大事嘅,三樣嘢,銀紙銀紙同埋銀紙,誰大誰惡誰正確。況且,Ref又唔係交易所,兩單嘢都唔係完全一樣。你當當初倫交所係想買起Ref多啲。
但我嘅問題係,Why not both?步驚雲聶風(加埋秦霜丫)一齊嚟,或者張申然加埋方啟宏一齊嘛。
先要講前半部嘅故事。Ref係咩公司?都有啲難解。但,就係近年最炙手可熱,街邊阿叔都講嘅FinTech(然後保險有現梳tech地產有扑tech,爭在141未有chic-tech).
當然Ref是一間很大很大,well established 嘅Fin Tech 公司,唔係香港啲Vanessa手作仔。簡單嚟講,佢原本係路透社(其實係Thompson Reuters)嘅一個部門,Financial & Risk。後來拆出嚟,甚至妹仔大過主人婆。冇上市(應冇?),黑石(BlackStone,唔係BlackRock)55%,Thompson Reuters 45%.
Ref有乜咁巴閉?有咩在手?一樣嘢。Data,你可以當佢係Bloomberg嘅競爭者。另外仲有數據庫,幫你解決呢十年金融業最頭痕嘅問題:反洗錢,KYC(Knock your client)—我點知嚟開戶嗰條托布係咪某西非小國嘅乜乜石油部部長?
咁幾個月(定半年?)前,倫交所係宣佈同Ref 合併-留意,Ref嘅收入同EBITDA(好憎呢個字,自己查)甚至係高過倫交所。所以小象吞大象之類。就當然都係換股。
股東反應唔呃人,宣佈完後,倫交所股價係咁升,升三成咁滯—然後先到港交所嚟接力,或火棒。
故事交代完,我嘅問題就係,Ref好似咁勁,咁做乜唔一齊?三個人的晚餐嘛。
原因,我都唔係好知,經我問專家(即係,whatsapp人)後,以下係可能嘅答案
1:港交所唔想孭債—Ref債務都成120億美金,成千億港紙。倫交所原本孭起埋,咁可能港交所唔想。但,以港倫交所合併後嘅規模,孭呢1000億債,真係有難度?唔好忘記而家債息咁低。倫交所宣佈後股價都係咁升喎,到合併後反而孭唔起?唔似
2:唔想啲貨去外人手。留意,Ref同倫交所又係互相換股。如果佢做完,先同港交所換,即係港交所啲貨可能會不少落咗去BlackRock手上?但,有何問題?反正港交所有高登些牙,冇得狙擊的。所以都唔多似
3:我諗嘅理由,其實未必咁複雜,純粹係唔清唔楚啲合約款條搞唔掂—我並非律師亦唔係做併購,但正路地啲條款一定有包你不能有material change。俗啲講句就係訂咗婚先知你唔係十八歲係三十,仲要啤咗三件,仲要帶埋嚟買一送三,條仔梗係縮沙。企業上嘅,我當我係日本仔最初買譚仔,但你譚仔未完成合併自己去買埋KFC香港,咁又要我食埋啲雞胸佢?我買米線咋喎。
而家一樣啫,我係Ref股東嘅,最初點預你會變咗有港交所份?可能我唔想同佢玩呢,可能我想反價呢,可能我不如飛起你直接同佢呢,太多變數。原本啲terms應該失晒效的
以上全部係門外漢(都話唔係做M&A又唔係做律師)估,睇下有冇高人指點。
留意,寫完先見到,Financial Times嘅報導係:
Hong Kong Exchanges and Clearing has made a £32bn proposal to buy the London Stock Exchange Group, aiming to break up the UK group’s agreed deal for Refinitiv.
唔知聽日香港報紙點寫,但好可能寫好多政治呀,中港呀,中英呀,港英呀。但FT就相當重視港交所要倫交所同Ref分手呢個條件。
不枉我就呢個課題寫多篇文,「真係英雄所見樂瞳」。彭博都講呢樣嘢
初步倫交所嘅官方講法,係仲係想同Ref一齊。但當然都講句要時間評估。即係冇講過,冇嘅,計掂數咯。
似乎未必過到。而如果撻Q啲冷氣軍師又可以話港交所不自量力 條件霸王(升咗成倍仲買要你斷絶個未婚夫都唔得?)之類,當然要加埋李小加嘅大陸仔身份。
又睇下點