Michael Kramer

Amazon.com Inc.’s (AMZN) stock was trading lower on May 1, by roughly 8% after reporting better than expected revenue, but missing earnings estimates. Additionally, the company issued revenue guidance that was in line with forecasts but warned rising costs would suppress operating income. Expectations of these rising costs may have already been getting built into the stock in recent weeks, with the technical chart flashing bearish warning signs.

The company has never been one to shy away from spending a lot to build for the future. Amazon has been able to successfully do this in recent years, helped by the explosive growth from Amazon’s web services (AWS). However, it also means that earnings estimates for the stock will need to fall.

Technical Warnings Signs Emerge

Even when heading into results, the stock saw a substantial region of selling around the $2,440 level. Since the middle of April, the stock was battling to rise at that price level and failed despite multiple attempts. It suggests that there is a great deal of selling pressure that resides at that level. Since reporting results, it seems the sellers have moved lower, and if the stock break support at $2,285, it could result in the shares falling to around $2,090, a decline of about 9% from its price of $2,290 on May 1.

But more concerning is that the stock is forming a bearish divergence noted by the lower highs in the relative strength index, as the equity was making record highs. It would suggest that momentum in Amazon is now shifting from bullish to bearish and that shares could have even further to fall then the initial 9%.

Fundamentals Shift

The technical trends appear to reflect the changes in the fundamental story. In recent years the stock had been viewed as a revenue growth story. However, as earnings have climbed, the investment thesis shifted from revenue growth to earnings growth. But investors might need to revisit this thesis over the short-term as earnings estimates fall and valuation rises. It will put more focus on the company’s ability to grow its revenue fast enough to satisfy investors’ demands.

Analysts now see the company earning $24.45 per share in 2020, which is down from $27.38 on April 30. Meanwhile, earnings estimates for 2021 have declined to $38.23 per share from $39.16 per share. It leaves the stock trading for a one-year forward PE ratio of 58.6. This sounds high, but when adjusting for earnings growth in 2021 of 56.4%, it seems fairly reasonable. However, one must consider that earnings estimates may continue to decline, and that likely means that future growth rates contract and the PE ratios may rise.

AWS Drive Growth

The company reported revenue of $75.45 billion, which was about 1.8% higher than estimates for $74.15 billion. Meanwhile, earnings came in at $5.01 per share and missed estimates by about 19.8%. The company did see robust growth out of its AWS business unit, which rose by almost 33% to $10.2 billion while providing operating income of $3.075 billion. The AWS unit’s operating income accounted for nearly all of Amazon’s total operating income of $3.9 billion.

With the company back in spending mode, investors will need to recalibrate their expectations once again. It means refocusing emphasis on earnings growth to revenue growth and that a specific group of investors may decide to move on, rather than participate in a period of renewed spending.

Michael Kramer is a financial market strategist and the portfolio manager of the Mott Capital Thematic Growth Portfolio.

Mott Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment adviser. Information presented is for educational purposes only and does not intend to make an offer or solicitation for the sale or purchase of any specific securities, investments, or investment strategies. Investments involve risk and unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed. Be sure to first consult with a qualified financial adviser and/or tax professional before implementing any strategy discussed herein. Past performance is not indicative of future

https://www.forbes.com/sites/kramermichael/2020/05/01/amazons-pullback-may-only-be-starting/#44663e962012

Marshall Shepherd

Coronavirus continues to reshape everything that is familiar to us. This morning I learned that Atlanta’s iconic Peachtree Road Race has been moved to Thanksgiving Day because of COVID-19. Atlantans (native or transplants) know that the Peachtree Road Race, since 1970, is as synonymous with the 4th of July as fireworks. The road race joins another iconic sporting event, The Masters golf tournament, in moving to November because of the historic pandemic. As you can imagine, the weather is quite different in Atlanta during late November. Here is how the weather will be different?

The Peachtree Road Race is considered to be world’s largest 10-kilometer race. According to sources, approximately 60,000 runners participated in 2019. The race is very much a sports competition, but it has also become an annual summer ritual for amateur and professional runners. Every year I see friends proudly posting their registration credentials for a coveted spot in the race. The Atlanta Track Club posted the following message on its website this week: “Consistent with guidance we will receive from health experts in the fall, the 51st Running of the AJC Peachtree Road Race will take place on November 26, 2020.”

Terri Smith is a long-time meteorologist with The Weather Channel. Her post on social media sums up my initial thoughts as well, “Is it really the Peachtree without heat and humidity: Average low July 4th: 71.1 deg Average low Nov 26th: 41.2 deg.” Smith received the temperature data from Weather Channel colleague Jessica Arnoldy. The start times for the race are typically in waves ranging from about 6:25 am to 8:40 am according to WABE. Though the summer solstice (in June) represents the peak in receipt of energy from the sun, July is often the hottest month in Atlanta. The day before the 2019 race, CBS 46 Atlanta Chief Meteorologist Jennifer Valdez tweeted the forecast below and cautioned that it was going to be one of the hottest starts to the race on record. With humidity, temperatures felt like the low to mid eighties during the race.

Terri Smith is a long-time meteorologist with The Weather Channel. Her post on social media sums up my initial thoughts as well, “Is it really the Peachtree without heat and humidity: Average low July 4th: 71.1 deg Average low Nov 26th: 41.2 deg.” Smith received the temperature data from Weather Channel colleague Jessica Arnoldy. The start times for the race are typically in waves ranging from about 6:25 am to 8:40 am according to WABE. Though the summer solstice (in June) represents the peak in receipt of energy from the sun, July is often the hottest month in Atlanta. The day before the 2019 race, CBS 46 Atlanta Chief Meteorologist Jennifer Valdez tweeted the forecast below and cautioned that it was going to be one of the hottest starts to the race on record. With humidity, temperatures felt like the low to mid eighties during the race.

Weather conditions affect performance so it will be interesting to see how running times from the Thanksgiving race compare to previous years. Here are some ways, according to the Active.com website, that weather affects running performance:

• Temperature: running pace is adversely affected as temperatures increase. The website notes that an increase in temperature from 60 degrees F to 80 degrees F can increase a mile pace by 12 to 15%.
• Humidity: higher humidity increases heart rate significantly, and hydration is even more critical.

Family friend Tasha Allen is the Director of Accounting and Human Resources at the Georgia Chamber of Commerce. She has run the Peachtree Road Race and told me, “The heat was always a problem for me….since I am not a real runner I would never receive an early wave time making my start time closer to 8am, and it’s usually 80-85 degrees by then.” At such a late start time, the temperatures are approaching or exceeding 90 degrees F by the end of the race for some runners. Allen went on to say, “Having the race on Thanksgiving hopefully will eliminate the heat issue. BUT this is Georgia and we could still have an unusual hot day on Thanksgiving (smile).”

I will put on my “meteorologist and Director of University of Georgia Atmospheric Sciences program” hat and point out an additional weather factor that Thanksgiving introduces, a somewhat greater possibility of rainfall than in July. November is a weather transition period for the state of Georgia. The jet stream is starting to return to the region and frontal systems are more active. During July, frontal activity is minimal, and the main threat of rainfall is from pop-up afternoon storms.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/marshallshepherd/2020/05/01/coronavirus-forces-worlds-largest-10k-race-from-july-4th-to-thanksgivinghow-will-weather-differ/#6e88b8a7ceae

Privacy, freedom of expression and transparency are becoming essential currencies in international business. These values are reshaping the global trade landscape into distinct ideological blocks that will dictate corporate behavior—as well as accelerate the West’s decoupling from China.

Nowhere is this more apparent than in the tech-sector, where the tensions between socio-political values and the application of leading-edge technologies have become entangled.

This outcome has fueled a specific aspect of techno-nationalism, from a Western societal perspective, which seeks to prevent the use of technology to suppress people’s right to privacy and freedom of expression.  This has resulted in an increasing number of laws that block the sale of products and technology to autocratic governments, if these technologies would enhance their surveillance and censorship capabilities.

For international business, this cuts three ways: more backlash and barriers to transactions between Western and Chinese entities; more ideologically-driven standards in international frameworks; and, higher corporate governance standards regarding transparency.

On its 75^th anniversary, the United Nations needed a global videoconferencing  platform to broadcast and capture millions of conversations for an initiative called “What the World Should Look Like in 25 Years.” The agency chose to partner with China’s Tencent, the digital giant that owns WeChat, the social media app with some 1 billion users.  

But this decision produced an immediate backlash from Western governments and human rights groups, on the grounds that the UN was effectively validating the Chinese Communist Party’s state surveillance and censorship apparatus.

Tencent has been a key player in Beijing’s digital surveillance systems. And like all Chinese tech companies, Tencent must turn over data to the central government under the country’s Cyber Security Law, if asked to do so.

Ironically, the UN chose the WeChat platform because it was the only one that would enable communication behind China’s internet firewall, which has kept Western companies like Facebook locked out because of the CCP’s strict censorship practices.

Facing intense ideological backlash from both state and non-state actors, the UN promptly backed out of its partnership with Tencent.

Another example of techno-ideological backlash involves Zoom, the American video-conferencing app, which has seen its value skyrocket during the coronavirus pandemic. It was revealed that Zoom had been transmitting the keys for encryption and decryption of data from its virtual meetings through its servers in China, where the company maintains an R&D operation of 700 people.

Unencrypted data sent to China came from, among others, global meetings involving NASA, SpaceX and the government of Taiwan, which subsequently banned the use of Zoom for all Taiwanese businesses. Many other organizations have since dropped Zoom as a service provider.

Technology and human rights

Ideological backlash in the form of public condemnation and shaming is one thing, but passing laws prohibiting technology transfer, based on human-rights criteria, is an entirely different matter.

In October of 2019, the United States placed 28 Chinese entities on a blacklist for enabling the surveillance and electronic monitoring of Uighurs, Kazakhs and other Muslim minority groups in the Xinjiang autonomous region of China’s far West.

Chinese tech firms on the list included HikVision—42% owned by the Chinese state— and Dahua Technology, which are the world’s two largest makers of video surveillance and facial recognition technology. Also included were SenseTime and Megvii, two massive Chinese AI companies immersed in surveillance-tech.

U.S. technology restrictions, however, affect a much broader range of companies: HikVision’s suppliers of microchips and other core technology, for example, include U.S. companies such as Intel, Nvidia, Western Digital and Seagate, all of which must get special permission from the U.S. government to continue selling to restricted Chinese companies.

For Amazon, the American tech giant, these technology controls present a dilemma. Because of the coronavirus pandemic, Amazon desperately needed to temperature-screen its employees, but had no other alternative than to turn to Dahua Technology— which dominates the thermal imaging niche—and purchase $10 million worth of thermal imaging technology. Dahua, of course, is now a U.S. restricted entity.

Amazon’s predicament will serve to further galvanize political efforts in the U.S. to re-shore the manufacturing of strategic technologies—from civilian drones to pharma. Meanwhile, Chinese companies have already been de-Americanizing their supply chains and accelerating de-coupling to avoid exposure to further American export controls.

Ideological frameworks and corporate governance

Differing ideologies are shaping the emergence of global trade blocks with uniquely Western rules and standards. These are increasingly manifest in free trade agreements.

Various tones of the European Union’s privacy standards, for example, embodied in the General Data Protection Regulations (GDPR) are baked into the EU’s free trade agreements with the likes of Singapore, Japan and Vietnam. Similarly, the Comprehensive and Progressive Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP), originally led by the U.S., was designed not only to protect data privacy but had transparency standards baked in to alienate the behavior of Chinese state-owned enterprises. 

All of this raises the bar for corporate governance. From a transparency angle, organizations will need to have much more sophisticated processes to be able to peer into extended value chains and assess the behavior of suppliers, customers and product end-users.

Are a company’s partners selling or buying technology that is enabling censorship and loss of privacy? The costs of ascertaining this will be high, but the reward will be come in the form of less uncertainty and a stamp of approval from partners adhering to these standards.

These questions will be playing out even as China and the West undergo a more fundamental and irreversible decoupling.

Alex Capri

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alexcapri/2020/05/01/divorcing-china-the-wests-return-to-ideology-and-its-impact-on-global-business/#6b2f55932cfd

After first launching its new photo and video transfer tool to users in Ireland last December, Facebook is this week expanding the option to users in the US and Canada, which enables you to easily transfer all of your Facebook photo and video content to Google Photos.

As noted in Facebook’s original announcement:

“At Facebook, we believe that if you share data with one service, you should be able to move it to another. That’s the principle of data portability, which gives people control and choice while also encouraging innovation.”

As part of this, Facebook has begun with the option to transfer your Facebook visual content to Google Photos, which provides another way to preserve your memories, and share them via another outlet.”

As noted, Facebook initially launched the option to users in Ireland, before expanding it to more regions in February and March. The US is actually among the last regions to get access to the option, which is not the usual way that these types of tools are rolled out. But it could be reflective of Facebook’s broadening international user base – although it may also be in alignment with European data ownership provisions and meeting necessary requirements for such.

As reported by The Verge, Facebook’s eventual plan is to enable users to transfer any of their Facebook data to other platforms that are part of The Data Transfer Project, a sharing initiative between the major tech companies which aims to facilitate greater access and ownership of your digital information.

As explained on the DTP website:

“The DTP facilitates the transfer of an individual’s data between providers. For a provider to be included in the Project, they have to provide export (and ideally import) functionality for some or all of their users’ data. Functionality may be executed through a public-facing API or other reasonable substitute.”

Current contributors to the DTP include Apple, Facebook, Google, Microsoft, and Twitter.

Given that so much of our information and content is now posted online, it’s important for consumers to maintain some level of control and ownership over such. If a platform shuts down, all of your information is gone – which is just one of the reasons why it’s important that there is a level of interoperability and data sharing capacity available.

Facebook’s initial steps with Google Photos are one of the early developments, and it’s good to see the tech giants working together to facilitate greater sharing.

https://www.socialmediatoday.com/news/facebook-expands-access-to-option-to-transfer-your-photos-and-videos-to-goo/577152/

Yesterday, Apple and Google launched the first phase of their joint effort to help track the spread of COVID-19. The two tech companies have begun testing an initial version of their exposure notification API that should help public health authorities contain the spread of coronavirus by quickly identifying people who might have been exposed to new cases. It will be widely available to most public health agencies by mid-May. 

For this effort to work, people using Apple and Android phones will need to download the apps and report whether or not they have been diagnosed with coronavirus. In a country where people are protesting lockdowns and social distancing and where big tech hasn’t exactly gained the public’s trust, how likely are Americans to use these apps?

A new survey conducted by The Washington Post and the University of Maryland found that a majority Americans aren’t planning on using the apps, with nearly 3 in 5 Americans are either unwilling or unable to use the infection-alert system that Google and Apple have developed. For the apps to be most effective, they require a large portion of the population to contribute. A recent study by epidemiologists at Oxford University estimated that the ideal number would be 60% of the population. If Americans are already rather adverse to the idea of using the contact-tracing tech, then it’ll be difficult to persuade them that this initiative will help find potential new infections, thus helping us to ease lockdown restrictions faster and make resuming economic and social activities safer. 

Just under half of polled Americans said that they would definitely or probably use the apps, however, and that’s no small number. Additionally, 59% said that they would feel comfortable using the app to anonymously inform people they came physically close to if they were to be diagnosed with coronavirus. 

In Australia, coronavirus tracing app COVIDsafe was released on Sunday and by Tuesday had over 2 million downloads, which is about 10% of Australia’s population. Singapore’s contact tracing app saw similar percentages of downloads, whereas among Norway’s population, about 30% have downloaded the app. As Casey Newton points out in his newsletter The Interface, “The first thing to say about this is that it’s very difficult to predict what people will do when they are asked to begin participating in Big Tech’s exposure notification system…if exposure notification appeared to be working — if public health agencies use it as part of a broader scheme relying on human beings to do more old-fashioned tracing — you can imagine big campaigns within communities to get more people to opt in. (Or your employer forcing you to!)”

According to the survey, Democrats and people who reported they are worried about becoming seriously ill from COVID-19 are more willing to use the apps, whereas Republicans and people who are less worried about getting infected are more likely to resist use of contact-tracing apps. One barrier to the success of this effort is the fact that 1 in 6 Americans don’t have smartphones, especially among the senior population who are more vulnerable to the virus. 

Another barrier to adoption would be concerns about privacy and lack of trust. The poll asked Americans how much they trusted tech companies like Apple and Google, universities, public health agencies and health insurance companies to keep their identities anonymous. More than half of Americans don’t trust tech companies or health insurance companies, and only 56% and 57% do trust universities and public health agencies.

Contact-tracing sounds very dystopian and concerns over privacy are understandable, but are they justified? Apple and Google say that they’d be using Bluetooth technology “with user privacy and security central to the design.” This means that the app will use your phone’s Bluetooth chip to find other devices whose owners have also opted to use the COVID-19 tracking apps. Public health authorities will determine what they consider to be likely exposure, based on physical proximity — six feet or closer based on current CDC guidelines — and time spent in proximity. These variables will be calculated on a user’s phone and if contact is likely, then both phones will log the event, but the information will not be shared with Google or Apple.

The most likely concern here is that governments or third parties can use this tech for surveillance. Google and Apple are essentially addressing this by changing the code that each device’s Bluetooth signals outward every 10 to 20 minutes, limiting a person’s ability to eavesdrop on these codes to track a someone’s movements. 

“When a user reports a positive COVID-19 diagnosis, their app uploads the cryptographic keys that were used to generate their codes over the last two weeks to a server,” reports Wired. “Everyone else’s app then downloads those daily keys and uses them to recreate the unique rotating codes they generated. If it finds a match with one of its stored codes, the app will notify that person that they may have been exposed, and will then show them information about self-quarantining or getting tested themselves.”

But it’s not foolproof against correlation attacks or linkage attacks. In the case of a correlation attack, the contacts of an infected person can figure out which people they encountered is infected. “Taken to an extreme, bad actors could collect RPIDS [(rolling proximity identifiers)] en masse, connect them to identities using face recognition or other tech, and create a database of who’s infected,” writes the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit that defends civil liberties in the digital world. “A well-resourced adversary could collect RPIDs from many different places at once by setting up static Bluetooth beacons in public places, or by convincing thousands of users to install an app. The tracker will receive a firehose of RPIDs at different times and places. With just the RPIDs, the tracker has no way of linking its observations together.” 

Given the global state of emergency, many argue that potential surveillance is a “price worth paying.” The Tony Blair Institute for Global Change recently published a report that argues that the public must accept a level of intrusion that would normally be unacceptable in liberal democracies. 

“The paper argues all governments must choose one of three undesirable outcomes: an overwhelmed health system, economic shutdown, or increased surveillance,” reports the BBC. 

In May, we’ll see a larger rollout of APIs that can communicate between Android and iOS devices using apps from public health authorities that users can download from the Apple App Store or Google Play. Over the summer, the second phase of the effort will allow exposure notification to be built directly into iOS and Android.

“This is a more robust solution than an API and would allow more individuals to participate, if they choose to opt in, as well as enable interaction with a broader ecosystem of apps and government health authorities,” according to an Apple press release. “Privacy, transparency, and consent are of utmost importance in this effort, and we look forward to building this functionality in consultation with interested stakeholders. We will openly publish information about our work for others to analyse.”

Rebecca Bellan

Facebook Inc. (FB) shares are jumping on April 30 by about 5% following its first quarter results. Despite the rally, the company is likely to face several headwinds in 2020 that may pressure operating margins, and in return, reduce earnings per share. Additionally, there is a lack of clarity to how the business may perform since the company did not provide second quarter or full-year guidance.

Still, even with all of that uncertainty and potential margin pressure, the stock is quickly approaching its all-time highs. An odd move higher due to the uncertainty that lies ahead for the company and the broader economy.

Stock Deserve Trade At Lower Earnings Multiple

Despite the lack of clarity, the stock is trading less than 9% from its all-time high at the end of January. The stock certainly is not expensive at current levels trading for around 21 times one-year forward earnings. That one-year forward PE ratio does come towards the lower end of its historical range of 13 to 28 over the past three years. 

However, one could easily argue that during a time of considerable uncertainty regarding a business outlook that a stock deserves to trade at a lower price to earnings multiple. While in the face of these uncertainties, earnings estimates for future quarters are likely to continue to decline. It could suggest that at this point, Facebook’s stock may have less to gain and more to lose.

Analysts Cutting Forecast

Analyst forecast that revenue for the second quarter will grow by 1% versus last year to approximately $17.1 billion, while earnings are forecast to decline by more than 27% to $1.45 per share. For the full year, analysts forecast earnings will fall by over 10% to $7.68, with revenue expected to climb by around 9.8% to $77.6 billion.  However, 2021 holds promise for improvement, with earnings forecast to rise by 30.4% to $10.01 per share as those estimates have been trending lower.

Beating Significantly Reduced Expectations

For the first quarter, Facebook was able to beat significantly reduced earnings and revenue estimates. The company reported revenue of $17.7 billion, which was 3% better than analysts’ estimates. However, that was significantly worse than what analysts had been forecasting on March 17 when they stood at $18.5 billion. Additionally, earnings came in at $1.71, in line with expectations, but again significantly below estimates on March 17 of $1.99 per share.

Cutting Expenses

The one benefit that may help to offset some of these uncertainties is that the company plans to spend less in 2020, lowering its expense forecast to $54 billion at the midpoint of the range, from $57.5 billion.  Additionally, the company is cutting back on capital expenditures to $15 billion at the midpoint of the range from $18 billion. But the reductions in spending are still likely not to be enough, as the company is forecasting a negative impact on its operating margins.

Should the coronavirus spread come under control, and the economy can pick up steam, then it seems likely that advertiser spending will improve. As a result, Facebook could see a surge in business, thus helping to lift its revenue, earnings, and stock. But in the absence of that recovery, the shares may struggle.

Michael Kramer is a financial market strategist and the portfolio manager of the Mott Capital Thematic Growth Portfolio.

Mott Capital Management, LLC is a registered investment adviser. Information presented is for educational purposes only and does not intend to make an offer or solicitation for the sale or purchase of any specific securities, investments, or investment strategies. Investments involve risk and unless otherwise stated, are not guaranteed. Be sure to first consult with a qualified financial adviser and/or tax professional before implementing any strategy discussed herein. Past performance is not indicative of future results.

Michael KramerContributorSocial MediaFounder of Mott Capital Management