How not to lose money on the decline of American social networks - and even make money on it? What awaits stocks from developing countries? And what conclusions should investors draw from the spread of the “Plushkin syndrome” among American leaders?
Disclaimer: when we talk about, that something has grown, we mean a comparison with the same quarter a year earlier. Since all issuers are from the USA, then all results in dollars. When creating the material, sources were used, inaccessible to users from the Russian Federation. We hope, Do you know, what to do.
"It is seen, the captain doesn't care, riot broke out in the Pacific
How are you, maybe, remember, 6 On January 2021, a crowd of right-wing conservative protesters stormed the US Capitol in an attempt to challenge the results of the previous presidential election., on which their candidate, the current US President Donald Trump, lost.
Need to say, the American media still care about this episode more than others: on the first anniversary of this event, numerous news applications, which i use, bombarded my phone with notifications with articles about this event. curious, that these media paid much less attention to the events in Kazakhstan.
Now in the United States there is a special committee, investigating events 6 January 2021. And as part of this investigation, he sent a subpoena to the largest American social media platforms.: Facebook, Twitter, Reddit и Google. The committee plans to establish, to what extent these companies are involved in the situation with the spread of disinformation and extremist messages, leading to the storming of the Capitol.
It is not yet known, what conclusions will the committee come to, but, Honestly, I don't expect anything good. Here's why.
In general, these companies during the entire election crisis, and throughout the Trump administration, behaved exemplarily from the point of view of the ruling left-liberal establishment in the United States.
Twitter and Facebook have banned key right-wing figures ranging from Trump himself to lesser-known figures.. Google's repressive practices, especially on youtube, have long been known to all. Perhaps, only Reddit has not yet become a body for the supervision of "thought crimes" - probably, because, that Biden's political opponents are not yet using the company's platform particularly actively.
Therefore, from the point of view of a real fight against the right-wing radical underground, the committee’s attack on the mentioned media platforms does not make sense.. The management of these companies was already running ahead of the locomotive, diligently blocking the activity of those who disagree with the current course of the US administration and indulging left-wing initiatives such as the BLM movement. Unfortunately, For these companies it's different..
All these media platforms over the past few years have shown themselves to be the ideal weapon of political struggle to varying degrees., allowing to disrupt the communication of an entire political camp, representing virtually half of the US population.
Blocking Trump while he was the current president of the United States is a thing absolutely beyond good and evil. So the Biden administration, at first sight, contradicts itself, putting pressure on seemingly loyal companies. But there is no contradiction here.: if Twitter and Facebook are banning Trump today, then tomorrow they may well play “for a rival organization” and ban Biden and the top of the Democratic Party, complicating the transfer of power in crisis circumstances.
I would expect, that the US authorities will continue to work on putting pressure on listed companies in order to stop their influence on the processes taking place in the country. Probably, the US government will force these companies to change their algorithms, which will more effectively block "extremist" content, but will make their platforms less convenient and attractive both for customers, as well as for users.
Such algorithms will work, probably, based on the principle of sentient Icarian bioweapons from the TV series "Babylon V": criteria of "correctness" on 100% only a small part of the content will match, which will lead to wholesale censorship. In this case, stories like the ban of the football player Khokhlov and the Bolognese Neptune will no longer be an exception., but the rule. Added to this is the problem of declining quality of personnel in the American IT industry., almost inevitable due to changes in society and the US education system, - it will exacerbate the first problem.
And this is, certainly, very bad for shareholders: since it is the current degree of influence of these companies, giving the breadth of audience coverage and extensive tools for broadcasting content to this audience, and enables them to earn money from advertising and other features.
So I would be in the place of Facebook shareholders, Google and Twitter mentally prepared for bad news. Maybe, Google in which case will get the "least of all". But I would be afraid, that, at the request of the authorities, the company will have to change its search algorithms for the worse, so that “politically incorrect” results are not displayed in the issue. This will lead to a churn of users to other search engines and, Consequently, hit the core advertising business, though not immediately.
Reddit is just getting ready to go public, but in the context of the activities of the said “committee 6 January" I would be afraid of that, that the placement will fail and the shares will then fall. However, there is an opportunity to make money on it.
Firstly, user traffic and, respectively, advertising revenues in the event of degradation of the platforms we are discussing can go to emphatically “apolitical” platforms like Snap (NYSE: SNAP) и Pinterest (NYSE: PINS).
The benefits of these companies are seen as medium-term at best.: probably, right-wing users will begin to develop their methods of encoding audiovisual communication on these platforms like triple parentheses, that sooner or later will unleash the wrath of the American state on Snap and Pinterest, and with the same consequences, as for larger companies before.
Considering, how fast digital communities are developing these days, very likely, that the entire cycle — from the beginning of the exodus of large user bases from Facebook to Snap and Pinterest to the first investigation by the US government against these platforms — will take even less than a year.
Secondly, a good option would be to bet investors on diversifying the business of online platforms. Many of them already have “non-social” business segments: cloud computing and various devices from Google, augmented reality and the gaming segment of Facebook and the like. So that, as long as they have a lot of money, i would expect, that they will buy startups of varying degrees of unprofitability, to be ready for the future, where their main "advertising-social" business will be killed or seriously maimed.
In a similar case, Take-Two game developers decided to try their hand at developing the mobile market segment as a response to the difficulties of producing large games like GTA.. So invest in tech start-ups with a specific focus, that "Google will buy them", wouldn't be the smartest decision..
"There is a win - you can eat": about prospects (forever) developing countries
The World Bank (VB) shared "with the city and the world" a huge - 240 pages - forecast of the prospects for the global economy. Of course, WB is an extremely committed organization. Therefore, her reports should not be taken too seriously.. But in the new report there is one very interesting thought.
The authors of the report consider, that in the new “pandemic” economy of the 2020s, it is the economies of developing countries that will suffer the most and stop demonstrating their previous high growth rates for a number of reasons.
Vaccination. Limited resources and underdeveloped state apparatus will make it more difficult for them to obtain coronavirus vaccines and ensure their rapid distribution.. This thesis seems to be the most doubtful due to the large number of cases of new strains of coronavirus just among the previously vaccinated population in all countries of the world..
The US position, maybe, shows us that, how states around the world in the future will work out the threat of the emergence of new strains - that is, in no way. They will live in a "perpetual pandemic" - with a reduction in quarantine time for those infected and the abolition of mandatory vaccination for certain categories of workers in the private sector.
What are vaccines, that they are not - it does not play such a big role. Maybe, in future, when and if new, more deadly diseases, it will matter. But still doubtful, that the pandemic in its current form will greatly affect the growth rate of the economies of developing countries in comparison with developed ones.
Rising food prices. WB considers, that the cost of food will have a dampening effect on economies outside the first world, because food is a more visible cost item for people in developing countries. This thesis is still difficult to confirm or refute., since we have not yet seen problems in the same China or India with ensuring their food security.
Limited access to capital markets. It will limit the ability of developing country governments to borrow money, that could be used to stimulate the economy.
Wider - to fight inflation, the central banks of developing countries will increase the cost of loans, what will slow down the activity of business and consumers, for which loans will become more expensive. In developed countries, rates will remain very low even after they are raised., which in general will allow the economy to develop more or less at a good pace. This, in my opinion, really accurate observation, from which far-reaching conclusions can be drawn., about which below.
WB conclusion on the availability of capital, affecting economic growth, risks becoming a self-fulfilling prophecy: in the two thousandth WB and similar organizations constantly talked about, how "the 21st century will be the time of developing countries", what contributed to the pumping of these countries with investments. So now the problems listed above will limit the inflow of money and really slow down the pace of economic growth..
And this is, in its turn, will limit the prospects for growth of shares of companies, based in developing countries, - this should be kept in mind by investors, invested in companies outside the US.
I would prepare for that, that due to the distortion of investor perception, the normal situation will now be the state of affairs, under which Chinese and Indian companies will have even more significant "discounts" in their price compared to American and European counterparts, - Just because, that investors will fear a “growth slowdown”, which these specific companies may not be affected at all.
In other words, speaking of the "fair value" of shares of specific issuers from developing countries, there is a real risk of never waiting for this very fair value. Let's say, The Russian ruble has long been considered an undervalued currency, but this state of affairs is in no hurry to change - and it is very possible, that due to the politically conditioned position of Western investors, it will not change for a very long time.
Traditionally, developing countries do not have much of their own capital to, to ensure the growth of quotes. As an example, you can look at the same Russian stock market, where there are a lot of efficient businesses with good growth rates of operational metrics, but their price is much lower, than in the West, and it's not growing very fast., when compared with American counterparts.
Therefore, with investments in shares of developing countries, now you need to be at least very careful., and, at the very least, avoid them altogether.. Anyway, until a new turn in the opinion of the WB.
Hoards, warehouses, two chairs: What a new survey of American business leaders tells us
American investment bank J. P. Morgan (NYSE: JPM) released another survey among American executives of private companies. Directors of 1602 medium-sized enterprises were interviewed, so you can talk about, that the survey is more or less representative. Let's talk about the results in more detail..
We will not once again point out the problems with the availability of labor and rising labor costs.: there is nothing surprising and new for us, this problem is too obvious and old. That's why 95% of respondents expect revenue growth, but a slightly smaller number of respondents 88% - expects growth or stability in profits. Think, also needless to say, that these difficulties will lead to an accelerated acceptance of high technologies by enterprises, making the most of available resources and reducing costs.
The most valuable fact for investors in this survey, that a large number of leaders 65% - decided to create strategic stocks of materials and raw materials in case of recurrence of logistical crises in the future.
It used to be the norm to order only when needed.: could be expected, that the right raw material will come quickly. But now, when constant delays and disruptions in deliveries became the norm, forcing companies to stop production processes, can be expected, that enterprises will carry out orders "with a slide" - more, what you need, - just to ensure that there is always a sufficient number of components in stock.
I consider this a great success for suppliers of components and industrial raw materials.: probably, their order volumes will remain at a fairly high level, even if in the foreseeable future problems with the timeliness of deliveries begin to be resolved. And that means, that the rate on suppliers of chips and other important materials will be just as relevant for a year - or even longer.
Another trend towards “warehousing” will be a big plus for companies, working in the field of logistics: from direct transportation and management of logistics centers to the supply of loading machines and software for inventory management.
