Cancer drugs developed by Pfizer (PFE) and Novartis got priority review while Bristol-Myers is being considered the next acquisition target.
Maybe I’ve missed a few, but I can't find 400 hitters in the Icahn, Soros and Bill Ackman crowd. Aggressive stock pickers like Carl Icahn and Bill Ackman doggedly run highly compressed portfolios in one-off stocks like Chipotle Mexican Grill, American International Group and Herbalife.
Could Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (BMY) soon be put on the market for sale as activist investor, Carl Icahn, takes interest in the company?
Activist investor Carl Icahn just announced his latest target: Bristol-Myers Squibb Co ($BMY). Bristol-Myers Squibb has been the focus of several activist investors in recent months and on Tuesday the company shook up its board to satisfy other activist investors.
Акции Apple обновили рекорд стоимости после публикации позитивной финансовой отчетности и благоприятного прогноза аналитиков Уолл-стрит. Котировки выросли в понедельник к закрытию торгов на 1% до рекордных $133,29.
Акции Apple обновили рекорд стоимости после публикации позитивной финансовой отчетности и благоприятного прогноза аналитиков Уолл-стрит. Котировки выросли в понедельник к закрытию торгов на 1%, до рекордных $133,29.
President Trump has tapped Carl Icahn to help him get rid of "strangling regulations" that are hurting the American economy.
What are the most surprising things in Snap's S-1? originally appeared on Quora: the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. Answer by Terrence Yang, Former Wall Street VP / Former Managing Director @ $1B+ AUM fund / Berkshire 50 attendee, on Quora: If you haven't been following Snap's progress, the most surprising things in Snap's S-1 are: War for Talent Risk. Snap's S-1 rightly lists their ability to recruit talent to work in Venice, California (in greater Los Angeles) as a risk factor. However, the real risk factor is Snapchat's bro culture risk. I'm reliably informed that Snap had serious problems persuading great software engineers from Silicon Valley to join Snap in Venice, CA. That was in 2015. I don't know if this is fixed or not. Like Uber, Snapchat has a small army of great engineers from China who work all the time. And Snapchat has been more successful recruiting great software engineers from Seattle, etc. I'm told Snap uses the "hotter women" in Venice (compared to other cities/regions like Seattle) to lure engineering talent. This is not uncommon. Successful startup founders, accelerator partners and investors in L.A. have basically said the same thing to me. Note that this is a tiny minority of successful startup folks in Los Angeles. But it is notable and whenever it used to happen, a voice inside my Harvard Law/SEC-regulated brain would say - "You are a walking lawsuit." Snap's DNA has a strong bro culture strain: They perpetuated it in their recruiting. I don't see how they recruit the best female, LGBTQ, or even male engineers who don't want to work in a bro culture. Maybe Snap's biggest risk is not having an adult supervisor like Sheryl Sandberg--who graciously but successfully fixed Facebook's bro culture. Snap is heavily dependent on Google Cloud (and vice versa), and Snap's cloud costs are very high. "Infrastructure Costs Per User. Because Snap is a data-heavy company, it pays a large server bill to Google Cloud Platform every year. The company's Cost of Revenue line item will give a clear picture as to how much the company has to spend in order to serve each user. When Facebook went public, it was spending around $1 per user on infrastructure costs. Most recently, that figure was around $2 or $3 per user. If Snap is already around that level, it could remain a significant cost center that bedevils attempts to break into profitability." (What Matters and What Doesn't in Snap's S-1.) Snap spent $400M last year all on Google Cloud, already a huge discount because Snap is Google Cloud's biggest customer. Snap may need to build its own cloud infrastructure like what Facebook and Uber are doing to control costs and have better terms. Uber is one startup that built its own cloud infrastructure early. Snap chose not to do this. Could this be related to its inability to recruit and retain great cloud experts? I had coffee with friend ex-Snap VP of Engineering Peter Magnusson (then head of cloud computing at Oracle) about 1.5 years ago and I did not get the sense that he left Snap on anything than good terms. But he was there rather briefly. Snap's user growth is slowing faster than Twitter did in 2014. Snapchat's daily active users is up 23% from the end of the first quarter of last year. But the user growth in the second half of last year was slower than during the first half. What Matters and What Doesn't in Snap's S-1 That means Snap's annual user growth is now below 23%. That's horrible for a growth stock. And there is no way in hell Warren Buffett or any other self-respecting value investor will invest in Snap (too expensive, terrible financials, unproven moat). So who will invest in Snap besides mo-mo investors? Because Snap offers zero voting power to investors, no shareholder activist like Carl Icahn will touch Snap. We've seen this before with Twitter, which IPO'd on November 7, 2013 at $26 and is currently trading at about $17.70. Check out Twitter's plummeting growth rate before and right after IPO: Snap is kind of nichey. Their most active users (under 25 years old) are also the most mercurial. And that's the problem with social media startups. Young people keep switching social media platforms. We've seen this now with Yik Yak, Secret, Meerkat, Friendster and of course MySpace. Can Snap figure out a way to attract new users (such as adults) while retaining current ones (who might leave as soon as their parents are Snapping at them or asking them or their friends for Snaps?) Snap is stuck with users with low spending power. As soon as we have another recession (like we did in 2000 or 2008), the 12 to 24 year old sector will suffer a drop in their purchasing power -- possibly to the point where they lack money to spend on discretionary purchases. To de-risk, I hope Snap can get a lot of advertising dollars for food and shelter. Snap needs to increase its growth rate significantly. Not sure it can. This could be a much smaller company than people had been hoping for. The Information just said on a Snap S-1 subscriber call that this is a company that is very early. If you're early, you need to F****G grow. Period. More from The Information subscriber call: (My comments in italics, all errors mine.) From Q3 to Q4 2016, Snap had a 29% increase in users. Twitter had a 44% increase Q3 to Q4 right before it went public. But Snap wants a 2X multiple to what Twitter fetched. Snap had a slowdown from Q4 to Q1. For a growth stock, that is awful. 40% of users are in the U.S. 70 million out of 160 million DAU. ARPU is $2.15 Facebook is $20 ARPU. Snap arguably has room to monetize. Lumpiness: Lenses -> huge increase in users and engagement. 2016 products - not oriented on new users but about engaging current users (Memories, Specatacles). 1/4 of stock granted to employees and management haven't vested because it is younger (many new employees) and because Snap uses a 10/20/30/40 vesting schedule vs. 25 for each of 4 years. This will greatly dilute investor shares, putting downward pressure on the price. Twitter, Square were 30-40% at IPO. Spiegel gets 3% in new RSUs on IPO. That is a gift to Evan, who already has a lot of stock. It feels quite greedy to me. Not quite Shkreli level, but in the same vein. Wow. The Information is completely misunderstanding Amazon's history. In comparing Snap to Amazon, they are saying investors have been very lenient to Amazon. No way. Public investors hated Amazon stock in 2002. Hard to see here but here's a graph:This is why the future of journalism is people with skin in the game. Own the stock or short it. I want to true believers or true haters to explain why they feel that way about the stock. Unlike Facebook (low Oculus adoption) and Google (Glass being a disaster), Snap is a software company that can successfully launch hardware products, given Spectacles success. Snap may have a whole suite of hardware products 5 years from now that contribute meaningful revenue. Snap's Discover: May not be core value of Snap. Has an audience. Some media companies like Cosmo, Refinery29 and Buzzfeed do great at Discover. Most do not. Hard for Snap to launch Discover as a separate app but Discover may not be that core to Snap.Snap signed deals with Disney, Turner, NBC to get original programming to Discover. This could be big. High quality content, great for ads. But if just a digital piece of overall app, not paying much attention to as much as other ad products. Automating ad buying on Snap will help a lot. Right not it is too manual. Snap API is for ads in between user Stories. Adverisers are clamoring for automatic ad buying in other parts of Snap. Snap making lots of money with customized Lenses, turning your head into a Taco Bell taco. But what is the value of this? Lens is one of the first successful implementations of AR. However overlaying AR on Spectacles hardware is years away. S-1 didn't dig into the patent portfolio much. However, Snap did patent a lot of products. Should include near-field communication, IOT (products for the home), etc. Snap is great at marketing hardware (see Spectacles) and created an aura of cool. That's not easy to do. Snap's M&A strategy is super important. Snap has relied heavily on their stock to acquire companies. Snap made a lot of important technology startup acquisitions. Bitmoji, Spectacles, etc. are all significant acquisitions. Search on Snap is perfunctory right now. Snap made an acquisition and hired ex-Google Search people in San Francisco. (Is that because they don't want to move to Venice and work with bros?) Snap's ability to recruit great talent in the Bay Area will be important. Snap has sales offices and offices in Western Europe, Australia. How effectively can you monetize international audiences? Facebook - North American audience is 19% but revenue is much bigger. Snap has no aspirations to connect the world. They want to provide a fun, cool product. (That's why the S-1 pitches Snap as a camera company.) What does it mean that Snap is a camera company? Snap is trying to say it is not a social media company. That won't really work because you are selling ads to show to your users. Don't pay too much attention to the idea that Snap is a camera company. Snap price and Facebook overreach in its IPO. Snap IPOing at $20B to $25B valuation. Depending on how you count shares, they might not have to issue price at much of a premium. Snap already issuing shares at $20B valuation (not counting Evan's 3% IPO RSU bonus, etc.) Without changing the price much from where Snap is already offering its stock, they are already there at $20-25BN IPO price. So it's very doable. Benchmark, Lightspeed - own 20% of Snap. Lockup period for investors and founders, etc. is SHORTER than typical. 4-5 months for most stockholders. This is another very pro-founder term. Unlikely Snap's VIPs will sell all their stock as soon as they get a chance. They can. It's horrible optics. Snap voting control. You as public investor are betting on the founders to reach numbers that are not on near-term horizon that would justify the current valuations. Been a long time since Snap gave investors voting rights or other protections. Snap has had full control for a long time. Snap has many, many advantages over Twitter. Daily active users, video ads, engagement times, etc. Snap is already larger than Twitter in the U.S. especially on DAU level. But potential growth is tough. Is Snap the next Twitter? Still a question worth asking where S-1 doesn't really address that. Can Snap really monetize its user base. Bobby Murphy, Snap CTO. Bobby is very understated. Willing to mix it up with lower level employees, eating in cafeteria. Evan's security detail mentioned in S-1. Not Bobby's. (Why?) Bobby is CTO and leads SnapLabs division, building products that will become important overtime, by attaching emoji to your Snaps. That's very important (and does not sound like adding a fucking mustache that moves as you move your face like in the show "Silicon Valley" at all!) Evan/Bobby relationship vs. Larry/Sergey? Bobby is much lower profile than Evan, who's already pretty low profile. No indication of any issue between the two founders. Presumably they fight and make up well, like Larry and Sergey. Snap having issues getting CPG brands. Snap is great for movie trailers, etc. Unclear if car companies, P&G will find great value running ads on Snap. Some don't spend more than one second on an ad. 60% of ads are sound on for Snap, unlike Facebook. Expect advertisers to pressure Snap to prove with metrics that ads are actually effective. This is a big risk and can propel or hurt Snap. This question originally appeared on Quora. the place to gain and share knowledge, empowering people to learn from others and better understand the world. You can follow Quora on Twitter, Facebook, and Google+. More questions: Initial Public Offerings (IPOs): After an IPO, what benefits does a company have from being in the stock market? SEC Filings: Is there an API to parse SEC filings on EDGAR? Snapchat: How do you use Snapchat? -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.
State Dining Room 10:16 A.M. EST THE PRESIDENT: Well, thank you, everybody, for being here this morning. This is a really world-class group and I want to thank and congratulate Steve. You have done, as usual, an amazing job. Steve called me up the day after the election -- it might have even been the same night, Jamie, to be honest with you. You know Steve -- (inaudible) -- in fact, I think maybe one minute. And he said, I'd like to put together a group of world-class leaders and that's what he's done. So good job, Steve. A couple of things happened this morning -- 227,000 jobs, great spirit in the country right now. So we're very happy about that. I think that it's going to continue big league. We're bringing back jobs, we're bringing down your taxes. We're getting rid of your regulations. And I think it's going to be some really very exciting times ahead. We're going to be doing -- we're doing it, we're going to be coming up with a tax bill soon, a health care bill even sooner. And it's really working out. Toby from the Cleveland Clinic has been helping us a lot with the veterans, and we appreciate that, Toby. You've been amazing. And I and all of our friends, we really appreciate it. One of the things that I heard this morning in watching the news was that, amazingly, it's never happened before, that politics has become a much bigger subject than the Super Bowl -- this is usually Super Bowl territory. And I have to say that politics is more interesting to people. So that's good. I see we have Larry here -- where is Larry Fink? Larry did a great job for me. He managed a lot of my money, and, I have to tell you, he got me great returns last year. (Laughter.) And then they go crazy -- they'll meet very smart people that made money, why don't you let other people to run the economy? I said, no, we have to get the right people. And the people that voted for me understand that, and that's what they want. So when I campaigned for office, I promised the American people that I'd ask for our country's best and brightest, and we have that. Wilbur is representing us as secretary. I tell you, you're going to be so great -- Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross. In fact, Carl Icahn got called up, and he goes, I hear you got Wilbur. Everybody calls him Wilbur. I've never heard him called -- what, we just know him as Wilbur, right? We've got the great Jack Welch, the legendary Jack Welch. We appreciate him. We're looking forward in a little while, and we have coming in a few moments, to discuss all of the things that you think we can do to bring back our jobs, to get taxes even lower than what they'll be cutting them. We have a great plan, but I want to have your input on the plan in particular and to do what we have to do in terms of regulation. We have some of the bankers here. There’s nobody better to tell me about Dodd-Frank than Jamie, so you’re going to tell me about it. But we expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank, because, frankly, I have so many people, friends of mine that have nice businesses that can’t borrow money, they just can’t get any money because the banks just won’t let them borrow because of the rules and regulations in Dodd-Frank. So we’ll be talking about that, Jamie, in terms of the banking industry. And with that, I just want to introduce somebody I’ve known for a long time. He’s done a fantastic job, and we’re thinking of have these meetings -- I think we’ll start maybe on a monthly basis. It will go to a quarterly basis, because all of a sudden monthly basis sounds like a lot. But we really want your input. We have the biggest, the brightest in the world. They’re in this country, in this case. We also have a manufacturing group which is worldwide, where we have, as you know, great companies representing. But these are the biggest and the best minds in this country, and I really appreciate you being here. And I want to thank Steve. And Steve is going to say a few words. MR. SCHWARZMAN: Sure. Well, I’d like to just start out and thank everybody for being here. The purpose of this group isn’t for general discussion, which is okay. But the real purpose is to get things done, to advise the government as to areas where we can do things a lot better as a country, for all Americans, and de-bottleneck some things. We have a full agenda, unlike a lot of other meetings that happen of this general type. We’re going to cover some of the immigration things. We’re going to cover regulatory, I believe. We’re going to cover tax and trade, women in the workplace, infrastructure and education. And in each of those areas we'll get suggestions, ways to make things happen, happen faster to improve the country. And anybody can say anything else they want. But it’s really important that we mobilize the non-governmental sector, and also, importantly, that we do it on a bipartisan basis. Apparently, a first in Washington for a (inaudible) Washington. And everybody on the group was selected because they’re terrific, because they have domain expertise, because they want the country to do better. And we had no criteria -- we have all kinds of different people from different backgrounds and different political persuasions. And if we can make things work right, that’s the way the country is supposed to work. And so it’s a big sacrifice for the people who are here to spend the time. Everybody is busy. That’s America. So to puts those things aside to focus on this, not just for me, but there’s prep work that goes into any successful meeting -- means these people who attended have taken the time to care about their country. And so that’s the spirit in which we’re approaching things. I want to thank everybody on the committee here. You're terrific. THE PRESIDENT: Thank you very much. We're going to go around the room, but before we do that I just want to say that so many people I call friends of mine in big business, and they wanted to be in the committee. And I call Steve and I say, Steve, can we get so-and-so? No. (Laughter.) I said, what do you mean no? (Laughter.) It’s a big business, massive business -- you know, public companies. And every once in a while I’d call him -- Steve, how about this one? I don’t -- he’s a corporate raider, these people don’t want to be sitting with corporate raiders. (Laughter.) Five raiders that wanted to come. But he’s been very, very selective. And we’ll be putting a couple of more (inaudible). He’s been very selective. I thought we might go around the room -- Mary and I met last week, we had a fantastic meeting on the auto industry. We had Ford there, we had a lot of companies. We had some great companies -- Fiat-Chrysler, Sergio. And I will tell you, I learned a lot about the automobile business. I thought I knew a lot, but they are being so stymied, so restricted with regulation and so many other reasons, and they’re pouring back into the country already. If you look at Mark, who was telling us what they’re doing with Ford, and Bill Ford, too. A lot of jobs are going to be coming back into Ohio and Michigan and Pennsylvania, and all of the places that really have been hurt so badly. So maybe we can start with Mary. We’ll just go around the room real fast so that everybody -- pretty much everybody knows each other, but it would be nice to see. MS. BARRA: Mary Barra, Chairman and CEO of General Motors. MR. MCMILLON: Doug McMillon, Walmart. MR. FINK: Larry Fink, BlackRock. MR. LESSER: Rich Lesser, Boston Consulting Group. MR. MCNERNEY: Jim McNerney, the old Boeing guy. (Laughter.) MR. ATKINS: Paul Atkins, Patomak Global Partners. MR. WARSH: Kevin Warsh, Stanford University. MR. MUSK: Elon Musk, Tesla and SpaceX. MR. COSGROVE: Toby Cosgrove, Cleveland Clinic. MR. DIMON: Jamie Dimon, JPMorgan Chase. MR. YERGIN: Dan Yergin, IHS Markit. MR. WELCH: Jack Welch, retired. (Laughter.) MR. WEINBERGER: Mark Weinberger -- someday, maybe, I hope –- (laughter) -- but EY. MR. OGUNLESI: Adebayo Ogunlesi, Global Infrastructure Partners. MS. ROMETTY: Ginni Rometty, IBM. MS. NOOYI: Indra Nooyi, PepsiCo. MS. SCHWARZMAN: Steve Schwarzman from Blackstone. THE PRESIDENT: Okay. Thank you very much. Thank you, folks. Thank you, press. END 10:24 A.M. EST
Конни Брук – о Карле Айкане, корпоративном рейдере и консультанте президента Дональда Трампа
Royal Dutch Shell (NYSE:RDS.A) is making “significant progress” on selling another US$5 billion worth of assets, chief financial officer Simon Henry said on Thursday after the oil supermajor reported 2016 profits below analyst expectations. Shell’s current cost of supplies (CCS) – a key measure comparable with net income – came in at US$1.8 billion, excluding identified items, compared with US$1.6 billion for the fourth quarter 2015, the company said today. Full-year 2016 CCS earnings attributable to shareholders excluding…
Although the volume of global oil and gas transactions dropped last year, the deals’ total value rose to US$395 billion from US$340 billion in 2015, thanks to megadeals in the midstream and oilfield services segments, EY said in its Global oil and gas transaction review 2016 published on Wednesday. In early 2016, companies were more concerned about adapting to the new reality, and transactions took a back seat, according to Andy Brogan, EY Global Oil & Gas Transactions Leader. But Brogan went on to add: “Now, with the consensus…
The shares of oil refining company CVR Energy have almost doubled in value since the U.S. presidential elections, with a major boost for the stock coming from the naming of Carl Icahn as special adviser to president Trump. Icahn is the majority shareholder of CVR Energy, with an 82-percent stake. As a special adviser, Icahn will be in a position to recommend industry-friendly regulation and encourage the repealment of non-friendly rules. One of these that the investor has been vocally opposing, is the requirement for refiners who don’t blend…
В должность 45 президента США вступает Дональд Трамп, часто сравниваемый с Рональдом Рейганом Давайте взглянем на его кабинет и на него самого более пристально WASP,пресвитерианец, изоляционист, консерватор (в хорошем смысле этого слова) и натоящий мужик!
Карл Айкан – это легенда американского фондового рынка, его состояние оценивается сейчас в 24,5 млрд долларов. В начале карьеры у молодого Айкана было совсем немного денег, он работал рядовым брокером на бирже. Дальше он основал свою фирму и начал зарабатывать деньги на банкротствах других компаний – безжалостно выдавливая из них все соки ради своих прибылей. Вначале безжалостный мистер Айкан пожирал относительно небольшие организации, потом, по мере роста капитала, перешёл на крупные корпорации. Похоже, что теперь этот признанный специалист по банкротствам готовится сделать хорошие деньги на банкротстве Соединённых Штатах. Пессимизм Карла Айкана не стал особым сюрпризом для тех, кто следит за новостями – вот уже несколько месяцев мистер Айкан выдаёт всё более и более мрачные прогнозы по финансовому сектору США. Карл Айкан поставил несколько миллиардов долларов на обрушение американских бирж. Он не только полностью избавился от всех акций Apple, но и поставил огромные деньги на понижение – чистая короткая позиция его фонда достигла уже уверенных 149%. Проще говоря, мистер Айкан настолько уверен в том, что рынок пойдёт вниз, что он поставил на это не только свои деньги, но и кредитные. Когда мы говорим о самом «медвежьем» хедж-фонде в мире, мы всегда вспоминаем Horseman Global, который не только был прибыльным последние 4 года, но и сделал это, имея чистую короткую позицию. По состоянию на 31 марта размер чистой короткой позиции к капиталу составил рекордные 98%. Как оказалось, это не идет ни в какое сравнение с короткой позицией Карла Айкана.По информации, только-что опубликованной формы Q-10 инвестиционной фирмы Айкана, Icahn Enterprises LP, в которой 80-ти летнему инвестору принадлежит 90%-ная доля капитала, мы выяснили, что по состоянию на 31 марта, Карл Айкан, который ранее избавился от акций Apple, ставит по-настоящему серьезные деньги на шорт. Еще в декабре 2015 года чистая короткая позиция компании Айкана составляла 25 % от суммы капитала, но с тех пор эта цифра стремительно взлетела до беспрецедентных для Айкана 149%. Такой результат стал возможен благодаря сложению длинной позиции, которая составляет 164% от капитала компании (156% — лонг акций, 8%-лонг долговых инструментов), и стремительно выросшей короткой позиции, которая в марте 2015 года составляла 150% к капиталу, а годом позднее – невероятные 313% (277%-шорт акций, 36%-шорт долговых инструментов). Чтобы понять суть этих цифр, скажем, что не только компания Icahn Enterprises никогда ранее не имела таких коротких позиций, но и то, что, жалуясь на перспективы рынка акций год назад, Карл Айкан имел чистую длинную позицию в 4%. Те времена прошли, и, начиная 3-4 квартала, Айкан начал увеличивать чистую короткую позицию, которая на тот момент составляла примерно 25% от капитала компании. С тех пор эта цифра увеличилась в 6 раз на конец прошлого квартала!Примечателен размер плеча, которое использует Айкан. Но ничто не может сравниться с 3-х кратным левереджем в его короткой позиции по акциям (заметьте, это не CDS). В качестве напоминания: Icahn Enterprises представляет собою хедж-фонд, ранее привлекавший деньги сторонних инвесторов. В 2011 году Айкан вернул деньги всем инвесторам, оставив в капитале только свои средства и средства компании IEP. По информации Barron, капитал фонда составляет около $5.8 млрд., в котором доля Карла Айкана равна $4 млрд. Все это говорит о том, что личная ставка Айкана очень солидна в долларовом выражении.Когда 5 мая на конференции, посвященной финансовым результатам компании, управляющего Icahn Enterprises Кейта Козза (Keith Cozza) попросили прокомментировать излишний медвежий настрой Айкана, который он озвучивал по ТВ, тот сказал, что Айкан немножко преувеличивал. Оказалось, что нет.«Мы считаем, что рынок скорее двинется вниз на 20%, чем на 20% вверх. Наша короткая позиция- это отражение наших взглядов», добавил Козза.Айкан лично не присутствовал на той конференции, однако после того, как его ставка на обвал рынка стала известна публике, мы уверены, что остались считанные дни или даже часы, когда Bloomberg и CNBC начнут восстановительные работы, направленные на избежание паники. Иначе инвесторы-любители начнут задаваться вопросом, что же такого знают самые проницательные инвесторы в мире, о чем они даже не догадываются. www.zerohedge.com/news/2016-05-09/historic-150-net-short-position-carl-icahn-betting-imminent-market-collapse