Steps to Discover Which Biotech Stocks May Get Hot
The biotech sector is in and of itself exciting. A company developing an idea that can improve human lives, decrease suffering, or even prevent death, by nature, could be a more rewarding endeavor than investing in a company that, by comparison, does little to make a big difference. If, at the same time, the opportunity to return the investor a multiple over returns available elsewhere in the market, then the motivation to allocate a portion of investment capital increases dramatically. But how does an investor gauge a company in the biotech sector and evaluate its chance of survival and likelihood of success?
As with much of investing, sure things don’t often provide a good return. And adding risk doesn’t necessarily equate to added return. The higher perceived risk of a sector such as biotech needs to be offset by research. Filtering stocks through a selection process is key, so the probability of picking those that survive and thrive is higher than average.
I spoke with Robert LeBoyer, the Senior Life Sciences Analyst at Noble Capital Markets, and asked him to list factors to improve the likelihood of choosing a successful biotech company. His knowledge and enthusiasm for the sector caused me to want to share what I learned.
Differentiation
Companies developing a drug that is different than all that came before for what it proposes to treat or prevent stand a good chance of getting funding to make it through the different phases of study. With a development time of 3-5 years, it is best if there is a clear unmet need for the therapy or no current therapies at all.
Investors should determine if there are treatments presently and ask whether the drug or treatment mechanism is a significant improvement over any current product. Also is the field crowded or will it soon be crowded with alternatives to what a company may bring to market? LeBoyer recommended asking where there is an improvement. He gave the example of many cholesterol-lowering drugs, which he said all target the same enzyme. A company with a drug that similarly targets that enzyme may not be worth exploring. Learning of a company that has a different mechanism of action, one which shows promise of greater efficacy, or, reduced cost, or fewer side effects may be worth exploring further.
As an example of a company that had met these criteria some years back, Gilead received approval for a once-daily tablet to treat hepatitis C. Prior to this, the only treatment options involved a year-long regimen of weekly interferon injections and ribavirin tablets. The side effects were depression, nausea, flu-like symptoms, and a reduction in some blood cells. The cost of the injections and treatments could cost a health insurer $1 million over the life of the patient. The Gilead treatment, which has a price tag of $93,000, is mathematically more cost-effective. The therapy which Gilead got approved in the U.S. in 2013 was a better treatment than what existed, and even better tolerated by patients. The stock went from $20 to $120 in about a years time after approval.
Development
Clinical development was another attribute brought up by Noble’s analyst. With even the best proof of concept or early-stage trial success, assessing the chance that clinical stage trials may fail for pipeline candidates is difficult. This is why a company with a diverse pipeline with a number of products being developed or in later stages of clinical trials, increases the probability of successful biotech investment. Many companies easily pass stage one trials and even stage two, but don’t get past the final hurdle. LeBoyer shared with me a story of a company he now covers that had a vaccine for Covid-19 early on. The human clinical trials, however, were not done in the U.S., but were instead the result of trials on persons mostly of similar lineage. The FDA required a sampling comparable to the diversification of heritage or gene pool in the U.S.
Obtaining a basic understanding of the FDA side of development is important for anyone making decisions on biotech stocks.
The drug approval process in the U.S. involves multi-layered (Step One through Step Four) with each representing an important milestone on the path to full approval so the product can be brought to market or meet rejection along the path.
Step One is the development phase, Step Two is research, Step Three is Clinical Trials, and Step Four is FDA Approval.
Knowing where companies stands in the FDA step process can help an investor assess the likelihood of approval. Many products, can get to the last step and not be approved, but those just starting out on Step One are a greater risk both in the time it will take and the chance for something to not be to the FDA’s liking.
Finances
Biotech companies, by and large burn through cash in their research, development and trial periods. Understanding how long the cash on hand and other available sources can last before they need to raise more cash, then comparing this with how close to an expected finish line they are, could help an investor steer away from a company that may have a product in the pipeline that meets other key elements investors should look at, but unfortunately, funds may stand in the way of success.
Robert LeBoyer explained that the current high-interest rate environment, coupled with depressed stock prices, makes this particularly important now. For those companies that can borrow, the cost of money is now far more expensive than it had been in the last decade and a half. And issuing more shares, essentially selling more of the company, dilutes the value of shares currently held. It could become a tricky situation that stockholders or those deciding to become a stockholder should monitor
Take Away
Are there companies with a pipeline that includes drugs that meet a large unmet need (as one example, Alzheimer’s), or can attack a disease like cancer in a unique way that would be embraced by the medical community and patients? “Unicorn” companies do exist, but finding them, assessing them, and doing it before a louder investment buzz occurs takes some digging. A solid place to start digging is under the biotech company section on Channelchek. Available by clicking here, here investors are exposed to many opportunities and the underlying data, the latest news, and of course, thorough company descriptions.
Biotech companies covered by analyst Robert LeBoyer, along with his current research are available here. Channelchek will be highlighting interesting biotechs in future articles and discussing their work and status against the criteria presented above. Join Channelchek to receive emails and gain free access to these articles, video presentations, updated research reports, and news of company roadshows. Visit Rob LeBoyers coverage list here.
Is the Fed Doing Too Much, Not Enough, or Just Right?
The Fed Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has an ongoing credibility problem. The problem is that markets, economists, and now Congress find him extremely credible. So credible that they have already declared him a winner fighting inflation, or of more pertinence, the economy a loser because Powell and the Fed policymakers have been so resolute in their fight against the rising cost of goods and services that soon there will be an abundance of newly unemployed, businesses will falter, and the stock market will be left in tatters. This view that he has already done too much and that the economy has been overkilled, even while it shows remarkable strength, was echoed many times during his visit to Capital Hill for his twice a year testimony.
“As of the end of December, there were 1.9 job openings for each unemployed individual, close to the all-time peak recorded last March, while unemployment insurance claims have remained near historic lows.” – Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell (March 8, 2023).
Powell’s Address
Perhaps the most influential individual on financial markets in the U.S. and around the world, Fed Chair Powell continued his hawkish (inflation fighter, interest rate hiker) tone at his Senate and House testimonies. The overall message was; inflation is bad, inflation has been persistent, we will continue on the path to bring it down, also employment is incredibly strong, the employment situation is such that we can do more, we will do more to protect the U.S. economy from the ravages of inflation.
Powell began, “My colleagues and I are acutely aware that high inflation is causing significant hardship, and we are strongly committed to returning inflation to our 2 percent goal.” Powell discussed the forceful actions taken to date and added, “we have more work to do. Our policy actions are guided by our dual mandate to promote maximum employment and stable prices. Without price stability, the economy does not work for anyone. In particular, without price stability, we will not achieve a sustained period of labor market conditions that benefit all.”
Powell discussed the slowed growth last year; there were two periods of negative GDP growth reported during the first two quarters. He mentioned how the once red-hot housing sector is weakening under higher interest rates and that “Higher interest rates and slower output growth also appear to be weighing on business fixed investment.” He then discussed the impact on labor markets, “Despite the slowdown in growth, the labor market remains extremely tight. The unemployment rate was 3.4 percent in January, its lowest level since 1969. Job gains remained very strong in January, while the supply of labor has continued to lag.1 As of the end of December, there were 1.9 job openings for each unemployed individual, close to the all-time peak recorded last March, while unemployment insurance claims have remained near historic lows.”
On the subject of monetary policy, the head of the Federal Reserve mentioned that the target of 2% inflation has not been met and that recent numbers have it moving in the wrong direction. Powell also discussed that the Fed had raised short-term interest rates by adding 4.50%. He suggested that recent economic numbers require that an increase to where the sufficient height of fed funds peaks is likely higher than previously thought. All the while, he added, “we are continuing the process of significantly reducing the size of our balance sheet.”
Powell acknowledged some headway, “We are seeing the effects of our policy actions on demand in the most interest-sensitive sectors of the economy. It will take time, however, for the full effects of monetary restraint to be realized, especially on inflation. In light of the cumulative tightening of monetary policy and the lags with which monetary policy affects economic activity and inflation, the Committee slowed the pace of interest rate increases over its past two meetings.” Powell added, “We will continue to make our decisions meeting by meeting, taking into account the totality of incoming data and their implications for the outlook for economic activity and inflation.”
Questions and Answers
Congressmen both in the Senate and the House use the Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to Congress (formerly known as Humphrey Hawkins Testimony) to ask questions of the person with the most economic insight in Washington. Often their questions have already been covered in the Chair’s opening address, but Congresspeople will ask anyway to show their constituents at home that they are looking after them.
Elizabeth Warren is on the Senate Banking Committee; her math concluded the result of even a 1% increase in unemployment is a two million-worker job loss. Warren asked Powell, “Do you call laying off two million people this year not a sharp increase in unemployment?” “Explain that to the two million families who are going to be out of work.” In his response, Powell went back to historical numbers and reminded the Senator that an increase in unemployment would still rank the current economy above what Americans have lived through in most of our lifetimes, “We’re not, again, we’re not targeting any of that. But I would say even 4.5 percent unemployment is well better than most of the time for the last, you know, 75 years,” Chair Powell answered.
U.S. House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday heard Congressman Frank Lucas concerned about the pressure for the Fed to include climate concerns as an additional Fed mandate. Lucas from Oklahoma asked, “How careful are you in ensuring that the Fed does not place itself into the climate debate, and how can Congress ensure that the Fed’s regulatory tool kit is not warped into creating policy outcomes?” Powell answered that the Fed has a narrow but real role involving bank supervision. It’s important that individual banks understand and can manage over time their risks from any climate change and it’s impact on business and the economy. He wants to make sure the Fed never assumes a role where they are becoming a climate policymaker.
Other non-policy questions included Central Bank Digital Currencies. House Congressman Steven Lynch showed concerns that the Fed was experimenting with digital currencies. His question concerned receiving a public update on where they are with their partnership with MIT, their testing, and what they are trying to accomplish. Powell’s response seemed to satisfy the Congressman. “we engage with the public on an ongoing basis, we are also doing research on policy, and also technology,” said Powell. Follow-up questions on the architecture of a CBDC, were met with responses that indicated that the Fed, they are not at the stage of making decisions, instead, they are experimenting and learning. “How would this work, does it work, what is the best technology, what’s the most efficient.” Powell emphasized that the U.S. Federal Reserve is at an early stage, but making technological progress. They have not decided from a policy perspective if this is something that the country needs or desires.
Issues at Stake
As it relates to the stock and bond markets, the Fed has been holding overnight interest rates at a level that is more than one percentage point below the rate of inflation. The reality of this situation is that investors and savers that are earning near the Fed Funds rate on their deposits are losing buying power to the erosive effects of inflation. Those that are investing farther out on the yield curve are earning even less than overnight money. The impact here could be worse if inflation remains at current levels or higher, or better if the locked-in yields out longer on the curve are met with inflation coming down early on.
The Fed Chair indicated at the two testimony before both Houses of Congress that inflation has been surprisingly sticky. He also indicated that they might increase their expected stopping point on tightening credit. Interest rates out in the periods are actually lower than they had been in recent days and as much as 0.25% lower than they were last Fall. The lower market rates and inverted yield curve suggest the market thinks the Fed has already won and has likely gone too far. This thought process has made it difficult for the Fed Chair and others at the Fed that discuss a further need to throw cold water on an overheated economy. Fed Tightening has not led to an equal amount of upward movement out on the yield curve. This trust or expectation that the Fed has inflation under control would seem to be undermining the Fed’s efforts. With this, the Fed is likely to have to move even further to get the reaction it desires. The risk of an unwanted negative impact on the economy is heightened by the trust the bond market gives to Powell that he has this under control and may have already won.
Powell’s words are that the Fed has lost ground and has much more work to do.
Take Away
At his semiannual testimony to Congress, an important message was sent to the markets. The Fed has the right tools to do the job of bringing inflation down to the 2% range, but those tools operate on the demand side. In the U.S. we are fortunate to have two jobs open for every person seeking employment. While this is inflationary, it provides policy with more options.
As of the reporting of January economic numbers, a trend may be beginning indicating the Fed is losing its fight against inflation. It is likely that it will have to do more, but the Fed stands willing to do what it takes. Powell ended his prepared address by saying, “Everything we do is in service to our public mission. We at the Federal Reserve will do everything we can to achieve our maximum-employment and price-stability goals.”
Why Meta’s Embrace of a ‘Flat’ Management Structure May Not Lead to the Innovation and Efficiency Mark Zuckerberg Seeks
Big Tech, under pressure from dwindling profits and falling stock prices, is seeking some of that old startup magic.
Meta, the parent of Facebook, recently became the latest of the industry’s dominant players to lay off thousands of employees, particularly middle managers, in an effort to return to a flatter, more nimble organization – a structure more typical when a company is very young or very small.
Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg joins Elon Musk and other business leaders in betting that eliminating layers of management will boost profits. But is flatter better? Will getting rid of managers improve organizational efficiency and the bottom line?
This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts ofAmber Stephenson, Associate Professor of Management and Director of Healthcare Management Programs, Clarkson University.
As someone who has studied and taught organization theory as well as leadership and organizational behavior for nearly a decade, I think it’s not that simple.
Resilient Bureaucracies
Since the 1800s, management scholars have sought to understand how organizational structure influences productivity. Most early scholars focused on bureaucratic models that promised managerial authority, rational decision-making and efficiency, impartiality and fairness toward employees.
These centralized bureaucratic structures still reign supreme today. Most of us have likely worked in such organizations, with a boss at the top and clearly defined layers of management below. Rigid, written rules and policies dictate how work is done.
Research shows that some hierarchy correlates with commercial success – even in startups – because adding just one level of management helps prevent directionless exploration of ideas and damaging conflicts among staff. Bureaucracies, in their pure form, are viewed as the most efficient way to organize complex companies; they are reliable and predictable.
While adept at solving routine problems, such as coordinating work and executing plans, hierarchies do less well adapting to rapid changes, such as increased competition, shifting consumer tastes or new government regulations.
Bureaucratic hierarchies can stifle the development of employees and limit entrepreneurial initiative. They are slow and inept at tackling complex problems beyond the routine.
Moreover, they are thought to be very costly. Management scholars Gary Hamel and Michele Zanini estimated in 2016 that waste, rigidity and resistance to change in bureaucratic structures cost the U.S. economy US$3 trillion in lost output a year. That is the equivalent of about 17% of all goods and services produced by the U.S. economy at the time of the study.
Even with the mounting criticisms, bureaucratic structures have shown resilience over time. “The formal managerial hierarchy in modern organizations is as persistent as are calls for its replacement,” Harvard scholars Michael Lee and Amy Edmondson wrote in 2017.
Fascinatingly Flat
Flat structures, on the other hand, aim to decentralize authority by reducing or eliminating hierarchy. The structure is harnessed to flexibility and agility rather than efficiency, which is why flat organizations adapt better to dynamic and changing environments.
Flat structures vary. Online retailer Zappos, for example, adopted one of the most extreme versions of the flat structure – known as holacracy – when it eliminated all managers in 2014. Computer game company Valve has a president but no formal managerial structure, leaving employees free to work on projects they choose.
Other companies, such as Gore Tex maker W. L. Gore & Associates and film-streaming service Netflix, have instituted structures that empower employees with wide-reaching autonomy but still allow for some degree of management.
In general, flat structures rely on constant communication, decentralized decision-making and the self-motivation of employees. As a result, flat structures are associated with innovation, creativity, speed, resilience and improved employee morale.
The promises of going flat are understandably enticing, but flat organizations are tricky to get right.
The list of companies succeeding with flat structures is noticeably short. Besides the companies mentioned above, the list typically includes social media marketing organization Buffer, online publisher Medium and tomato processing and packing company Morning Star Tomatoes.
Other organizations that attempted flatter structures have encountered conflicts between staff, ambiguity around job roles and the emergence of unofficial hierarchies – which undermines the whole point of going flat. They eventually reverted back to hierarchical structures.
“While people may lament the proliferation of red tape,” management scholars Pedro Monteiro and Paul Adler explain, “in the next breath, many complain that ‘there ought to be a rule.’”
Even Zappos, often cited as the case study for flat organizations, has slowly added back managers in recent years.
Right Tool
In many ways, flat organizations require even stronger management than hierarchical ones.
When managers are removed, the span of control for those remaining increases. Corporate leaders must delegate – and track – tasks across greater numbers of employees and constantly communicate with workers.
Careful planning is needed to determine how work is organized, information shared, conflicts resolved and employees compensated, hired and reviewed. It is not surprising that as companies grow, the complexity of bigger organizations poses barriers to flat models.
In the end, organizational structure is a tool. History shows that business and economic conditions determine which type of structure works for an organization at any given time.
All organizations navigate the trade-off between stability and flexibility. While a hospital system facing extensive regulations and patient safety protocols may require a stable and consistent hierarchy, an online game developer in a competitive environment may need an organizational structure that’s more nimble so it can adapt to changes quickly.
Business and economic conditions are changing for Big Tech, as digital advertising declines, new competitors surface and emerging technologies demand risky investments. Meta’s corporate flattening is one response.
As Zuckerberg noted when explaining recent changes, “Our management theme for 2023 is the ‘Year of Efficiency,’ and we’re focused on becoming a stronger and more nimble organization.”
But context matters. So does planning. All the evidence I’ve seen indicates that embracing flatness by cutting middle management will not, by itself, do much to make a company more efficient.
Will Tesla Investors be Inspired or Disappointed on March 1 (Investor Day)?
Tesla’s Investor Day is March 1st. The lead-up to these events is usually filled with speculation of how the founder, Elon Musk, may surprise EV fans and the investment community. Tesla’s (TSLA) innovations and unique marketing and distribution have made it the most valuable car company in the world. Part of that marketing is the mystique and confidence Musk brings whenever he has an audience. The company is also inspiring as it is less than 20 years in the making and is leading a revolution in how automobiles are built, driven, and fueled.
As plans are kept under wraps, most of the rumors as to what to expect fall in the category of speculation. Below are some of the most likely ideas from past announcements from Tesla and across the internet since the meeting date was announced.
Battery Production
Sourcing raw materials for batteries to make certain new EVs have all the needed components is becoming a concern among car manufacturers.
News has leaked of a proposed $3.6 billion Giga factory to produce up to 100 Gwh of batteries. The factory is expected to be in Nevada and eventually be used to assemble the Tesla semi when production eventually starts.
Tesla is expected to build a processing facility to make lithium hydroxide from spodumene concentrate in Corpus Christie, Texas. The location is good for shipping, and it is close to sources of sulfuric acid from the oil industry. This would be the first lithium hydroxide production facility in the U.S. If true, it would help Tesla fulfill the raw material sourcing requirements of the Inflation Reduction Act to qualify its cars for the $7,500 federal tax credit.
Those deals are at market prices; Tesla would reap the profits from processing the spodumene concentrate into hydroxide, but the bulk of the profit from the material supply accrues to the mining company. Tesla has hinted previously of plans to enter the lithium mining business.
The $25,000 EV
First mentioned in 2020, Tesla’s proposed $25,000 car earned the nickname “fluffy pillow” after Musk showed a picture of an object covered by a blanket that many thought resembled a large pillow. The project was put on hold in early 2022 when Musk said Tesla had too much on its plate.
Tesla’s existing best sellers, the Model 3 and Model Y, have been around for a while, a new model, whether it is the truck or an affordable entry level car would freshen up the line-up.
New Factory
Tesla’s production goals put it at or near capacity. The current factory capacity is listed as 1.9 million vehicles per year. The current goal is six million cars a year by 2026. This would require the expansion of existing plants and then some. A new factory takes three years to design, construct, and get rolling. So planning would have to start now. Musk is more likely to build a new plant than change his production goals.
Thoughts from across the internet suggest this could be in Indonesia or Mexico. Cars built in Mexico could qualify for the $7500 tax credit to purchasers.
Capital Raise
To accomplish the above requires money. Currently, there is construction in progress building out Tesla’s German and Texas factories. Billions more would be needed to implement other plans.
There is as of recent reporting, $22 billion in cash on Tesla’s balance sheet. This is a snapshot of quarter-end and not an accurate representation of the company’s finances. Offsetting this large number is $15 billion in trade payables and $7 billion in accrued payables, much of which is due soon.
Tesla may have to go to the market to raise cash for projects that will be presented on March 1st.
About Tesla Day
The investor event will be live-streamed from Tesla’s Gigafactory in Texas, with some of the company’s institutional and retail investors attending in person. According to Tesla’s press release, investors will be able to see its most advanced production line as well as discuss long-term expansion plans, the generation 3 platform, and capital allocation.
Image: Marine Corps Warfighting Laboratory MAGTAF Integrated Experiment (MCWL) 160709-M-OB268-165.jpg
War in Ukraine Accelerates Global Drive Toward Killer Robots
The U.S. military is intensifying its commitment to the development and use of autonomous weapons, as confirmed by an update to a Department of Defense directive. The update, released Jan. 25, 2023, is the first in a decade to focus on artificial intelligence autonomous weapons. It follows a related implementation plan released by NATO on Oct. 13, 2022, that is aimed at preserving the alliance’s “technological edge” in what are sometimes called “killer robots.”
Both announcements reflect a crucial lesson militaries around the world have learned from recent combat operations in Ukraine and Nagorno-Karabakh: Weaponized artificial intelligence is the future of warfare.
“We know that commanders are seeing a military value in loitering munitions in Ukraine,” Richard Moyes, director of Article 36, a humanitarian organization focused on reducing harm from weapons, told me in an interview. These weapons, which are a cross between a bomb and a drone, can hover for extended periods while waiting for a target. For now, such semi-autonomous missiles are generally being operated with significant human control over key decisions, he said.
Pressure of War
But as casualties mount in Ukraine, so does the pressure to achieve decisive battlefield advantages with fully autonomous weapons – robots that can choose, hunt down and attack their targets all on their own, without needing any human supervision.
This month, a key Russian manufacturer announced plans to develop a new combat version of its Marker reconnaissance robot, an uncrewed ground vehicle, to augment existing forces in Ukraine. Fully autonomous drones are already being used to defend Ukrainian energy facilities from other drones. Wahid Nawabi, CEO of the U.S. defense contractor that manufactures the semi-autonomous Switchblade drone, said the technology is already within reach to convert these weapons to become fully autonomous.
Mykhailo Fedorov, Ukraine’s digital transformation minister, has argued that fully autonomous weapons are the war’s “logical and inevitable next step” and recently said that soldiers might see them on the battlefield in the next six months.
Proponents of fully autonomous weapons systems argue that the technology will keep soldiers out of harm’s way by keeping them off the battlefield. They will also allow for military decisions to be made at superhuman speed, allowing for radically improved defensive capabilities.
Currently, semi-autonomous weapons, like loitering munitions that track and detonate themselves on targets, require a “human in the loop.” They can recommend actions but require their operators to initiate them.
This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of, James Dawes, Professor, Macalester College.
By contrast, fully autonomous drones, like the so-called “drone hunters” now deployed in Ukraine, can track and disable incoming unmanned aerial vehicles day and night, with no need for operator intervention and faster than human-controlled weapons systems.
Calling for a Timeout
Critics like The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots have been advocating for more than a decade to ban research and development of autonomous weapons systems. They point to a future where autonomous weapons systems are designed specifically to target humans, not just vehicles, infrastructure and other weapons. They argue that wartime decisions over life and death must remain in human hands. Turning them over to an algorithm amounts to the ultimate form of digital dehumanization.
Together with Human Rights Watch, The Campaign to Stop Killer Robots argues that autonomous weapons systems lack the human judgment necessary to distinguish between civilians and legitimate military targets. They also lower the threshold to war by reducing the perceived risks, and they erode meaningful human control over what happens on the battlefield.
This composite image shows a ‘Switchblade’ loitering munition drone launching from a tube and extending its folded wings. U.S. Army AMRDEC Public Affairs
The organizations argue that the militaries investing most heavily in autonomous weapons systems, including the U.S., Russia, China, South Korea and the European Union, are launching the world into a costly and destabilizing new arms race. One consequence could be this dangerous new technology falling into the hands of terrorists and others outside of government control.
The updated Department of Defense directive tries to address some of the key concerns. It declares that the U.S. will use autonomous weapons systems with “appropriate levels of human judgment over the use of force.” Human Rights Watch issued a statement saying that the new directive fails to make clear what the phrase “appropriate level” means and doesn’t establish guidelines for who should determine it.
But as Gregory Allen, an expert from the national defense and international relations think tank Center for Strategic and International Studies, argues, this language establishes a lower threshold than the “meaningful human control” demanded by critics. The Defense Department’s wording, he points out, allows for the possibility that in certain cases, such as with surveillance aircraft, the level of human control considered appropriate “may be little to none.”
The updated directive also includes language promising ethical use of autonomous weapons systems, specifically by establishing a system of oversight for developing and employing the technology, and by insisting that the weapons will be used in accordance with existing international laws of war. But Article 36’s Moyes noted that international law currently does not provide an adequate framework for understanding, much less regulating, the concept of weapon autonomy.
The current legal framework does not make it clear, for instance, that commanders are responsible for understanding what will trigger the systems that they use, or that they must limit the area and time over which those systems will operate. “The danger is that there is not a bright line between where we are now and where we have accepted the unacceptable,” said Moyes.
Impossible Balance?
The Pentagon’s update demonstrates a simultaneous commitment to deploying autonomous weapons systems and to complying with international humanitarian law. How the U.S. will balance these commitments, and if such a balance is even possible, remains to be seen.
The International Committee of the Red Cross, the custodian of international humanitarian law, insists that the legal obligations of commanders and operators “cannot be transferred to a machine, algorithm or weapon system.” Right now, human beings are held responsible for protecting civilians and limiting combat damage by making sure the use of force is proportional to military objectives.
If and when artificially intelligent weapons are deployed on the battlefield, who should be held responsible when needless civilian deaths occur? There isn’t a clear answer to that very important question.
Image: Silver Peak Lithium Mine, Nevada – Ken Lund (Flickr)
The Lithium Dip May Be Worth Exploring
Lithium (Li) was once synonymous with treating depression. Today the mineral is more often discussed as part of the subject of sustainable energy storage, specifically batteries. So it’s ironic that the recent stock price movement of a number of companies tied to lithium may have depressed some investors, as February has seen a sudden depression in values. The primary reason for the decline in lithium stocks may actually be a net plus for miners and others tied to production. This thinking is outlined below.
Many companies involved in Li exploration and/or production were up on the year along with the overall market. Late last week and carrying over to today, many of these stocks have fallen dramatically. The reason for the sudden decline coincided with the largest EV battery manufacturer, Contemporary Amperex Technology’s (CATL) announcement that it will cut the price it charges for Li-ion batteries.
As seen in the chart below, Shares of the larger lithium miners Albemarle ALB (ALB), SQM (SQM), Livent (LTHM), Piedmont Lithium (PLL), and Lithium Americas (LAC) are down between 7% and 14% with much of that drop coming in the past few trading days. Smaller lithium mining operations like LithiumBank Resources Corp. (LBNKF), and Century Lithium Corp. (CYDVF) fared much better, outperforming the more established larger companies.
CATL seems to have aimed to maintain or grow its market share as a battery manufacturer. Any price war they may have started is likely to have a direct impact on competitors. Even car manufacturers that are involved in battery sales may shed some profitability, but is it necessarily a negative for companies involved in mining or refining?
CATL plans on pricing its batteries on a lithium-price-linked calculation. With this, 50% of each battery will benchmark to lithium carbonate, which would largely embed the price of lithium in its Li-ion product. The rest of the batteries will key off of the spot market for lithium carbonate.
Spot prices for lithium carbonate are up about ninefold over the past few years as the growth in EV demand and other battery-operated products has stressed the global lithium supply chain. So while CATL has decided to discount batteries, the production costs are unlikely to fall. The move may instead place greater demand on lithium carbonate. If production doesn’t keep up with, what should spark greater demand for Li-ion batteries, miners may benefit. If correct, this could suggest the declines in mining stock prices related to CATL’s new pricing policy, may be considered as an entry point for investors that had been looking for a price dip.
As for battery makers, this may have more permanently drained value. CATL is about 68% of the mainland Chinese EV battery manufacturing industry. Other battery producers may have to similarly adjust their pricing models to compete. This group includes Panasonic, LG Energy, Samsung, and SK Innovations that also tumbled this month.
Take Away
Mining analysts discuss supply and demand, or deficit and surplus, when adjusting forecasts. If demand grows as a result of the large battery manufacturer CATL discounting prices, and this discounting causes others to follow, the result could be a larger lithium deficit that could raise the price of the mineral per USD/metric-ton. Time will tell.
The US Budget Office Just Laid Out its Ten-Year Forecast – What Investors Should Know
The US National Debt Clock app might be useful for those that suffer from low blood pressure. I’m being facetious – the app and website provide a visual of the current estimated overall national debt. It breaks out what each citizen’s theoretical share is, and then divides it up in dozens f other categories. The clock is an estimate of real-time. For a future projection, the better place to turn is the just-released forecast from the Congressional Budget Office (CBO). The CBO’s website can be insightful and idea-provoking for investors as it includes a 10-year forecast for government spending, which is broken down by industry type.
Source: USdebtclock.org (February 17, 2023)
Direction of Overall US Debt
The US is on track to accumulate more than $19 trillion in additional debt over the next decade, according to a CBO document released on February 15.
This new expectation is $3 trillion more than previously forecast. Coming at a time when there is headbutting and chest pounding going on in Washington surrounding the debt ceiling (US Treasury borrowing cap), the significantly larger 10-year budget may additionally stress the governments ability to pay its bills. Phillip Swagel, a director at the CBO expressed his concern saying, “The warning is that the fiscal trajectory is unsustainable.”
The federal government is expected to collect $65 trillion in revenue over the next ten years. More than half is expected to come from individual income taxes, and another third comes from payroll taxes. Individually, we can’t change what may be higher taxes, or a weakened government financial situation, which, separate from the Federal Reserve, puts upward pressure on interest rate levels.
Source: CBO
Drilling down deeper into where the funding is expected to flow from, individual income taxes are planned to remain level through 2025, then ramp up at a pace quicker than payroll taxes and corporate taxes.
But the country will spend much more than what it collects. Rising interest payments, large federal stimulus bills, and the growing costs of Social Security and Medicare benefits for retiring baby boomers are some of the government’s largest spending items.
Source: CBO (Data excludes offsetting receipts)
Of the Federal agencies budgeted to spend the highest amount, health and human services top the list. Small percentage increases are a lot in actual dollar amounts when trillions are involved. Social Security is the agency consuming the second most amount, followed by the Treasury, which is experiencing growing interest expenses.
Source: CBO
Looking at a broader swath of areas that should benefit as a result of government budget expansion, we see in the graph above the top three areas already mentioned, followed by at least a trillion spent over ten years in defense, veterans affairs, agriculture, transportation, personnel, education, and homeland security.
For Investors to Think About
Short-term investors tend to ignore some approaching realities while overly focusing on others. Long-term, investors may find that the cost and expansion of public debt will eventually have the US responsible to pay more in interest over the next decade. By 2033, the net interest on public debt is expected to make up 14% of the federal government’s total spending.
There was another period in US history when net interest made up such a large slice of Federal spending, this was in the mid-to-late 1980s. Eventually, Congress did pay some attention to deficit reduction; it took years to taper the growth. The resurgence of the expanding debt trend in recent years has been explosive.
Interest rates on bonds could have built upward pressure as more debt would need to be issued to refinance at higher rates and pay for additional spending. A greater supply of debt without a growing supply of buyers is a recipe for higher bond yields. Are higher yields attractive? In bond markets, the value of a fixed bond goes down when rates rise. Floating rate bonds tend to approximate par throughout their life, but the Treasury and Wall Street have not been quick to issue these in the face of rising coupon rates.
Stock market investors may find value in investing in companies that receive 25% or more of their revenue from government contracts, particularly those agencies on the chart above that are budgeted to grow by billions or trillions. This could include smaller companies where the impact is greater. Within this category are aerospace contractors like Kratos (KTOS), communications companies like Comtech (CMTL), or transportation-related spending that could benefit dredging from companies like Great Lakes Dredge and Dock (GLDD).
The smaller companies mentioned may benefit from the massive budget growth. But they are not alone, Channelchek is a great source of data and discovery of many companies doing great things that are destined to become even greater. Be sure to sign-up for all the free resources available to investors by going here.
How Dangerous Was the Ohio Chemical Train Derailment? An Environmental Engineer Assesses the Long-Term Risks
State officials offered more details of the cleanup process and a timeline of the environmental disaster during a news conference on Feb. 14, 2023. Nearly a dozen cars carrying chemicals, including vinyl chloride, a carcinogen, derailed on the evening of Feb. 3, and fire from the site sent up acrid black smoke. Officials said they were testing over 400 nearby homes for contamination and tracking a plume of spilled chemicals that had killed 3,500 fish in streams and reached the Ohio River.
However, the slow release of information after the derailment has left many questions unanswered about the risks and longer-term impact. We discussed the chemical release with Andrew Whelton, an environmental engineer who investigates chemical risks during disasters.
This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of, Andrew J. Whelton, Professor of Civil, Environmental & Ecological Engineering, Director of the Healthy Plumbing Consortium and Center for Plumbing Safety, Purdue University.
Let’s start with what was in the train cars. What are the most concerning chemicals for human health and the environment long term, and what’s known so far about the impact?
The main concerns now are the contamination of homes, soil and water, primarily from volatile organic compounds and semivolatile organic compounds, known as VOCs and SVOCs.
The train had nearly a dozen cars with vinyl chloride and other materials, such as ethylhexyl acrylate and butyl acrylate. These chemicals have varying levels of toxicity and different fates in soil and groundwater. Officials have detected some of those chemicals in the nearby waterway and particulate matter in the air from the fire. But so far, the fate of many of the chemicals is not known. A variety of other materials were also released, but discussion about those chemicals has been limited.
State officials disclosed that a plume of contamination released into the nearby creek had made its way into the Ohio River. Other cities get their drinking water from the river, and were warned about the risk. The farther this plume moves downstream, the less concentrated the chemical will be in water, posing less of a risk.
Long term, the greatest risk is closest to the derailment location. And again, there’s limited information about what chemicals are present – or were created through chemical reactions during the fire.
It isn’t clear yet how much went into storm drains, was flushed down the streams or may have settled to the bottom of waterways.
There was also a lot of combusted particulate matter. The black smoke is a clear indication. It’s unclear how much was diluted in the air or fell to the ground.
How long can these chemicals linger in soil and water, and what’s their potential long-term risk to humans and wildlife?
The heavier the chemical, often the slower it degrades and the more likely it is to stick to soil. These compounds can remain for years if left unaddressed.
After the Kalamazoo River oil pipeline break in Michigan in 2010, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency excavated a tributary where the oil settled. We’ve also seen from oil spills on the coasts of Alaska and Alabama that oil chemicals can find their way into soil if it isn’t remediated.
The long-term impact in Ohio will depend in part on how fast – and thoroughly – cleanup occurs.
If the heavily contaminated soils and liquids are excavated and removed, the long-term impacts can be reduced. But the longer removal takes, the farther the contamination can spread. It’s in everyone’s best interest to clean this up as soon as possible and before the region gets rain.
Air-stripping devices, like this one used after the derailment, can help separate chemicals from water. U.S. EPA
Booms in a nearby stream have been deployed to capture chemicals. Air-stripping devices have been deployed to remove chemicals from the waterways. Air stripping causes the light chemicals to leave the water and enter air. This is a common treatment technique and was used after an 2015 oil spill in the Yellowstone River near Glendive, Montana.
At the derailment site in Ohio, workers are already removing contaminated soil as deep as 7 feet (about 2 meters) near where the rail cars burned.
Some of the train cars were intentionally drained and the chemicals set on fire to eliminate them. That fire had thick black smoke. What does that tell you about the chemicals and longer-term risks?
Incineration is one way we dispose of hazardous chemicals, but incomplete chemical destruction creates a host of byproducts. Chemicals can be destroyed when heated to extremely high temperatures so they burn thoroughly.
The black smoke plume you saw on TV was incomplete combustion. A number of other chemicals were created. Officials don’t necessarily know what these were or where they went until they test for them.
We know ash can post health risks, which is why we test inside homes after wildfires where structures burn. This is one reason the state’s health director told residents with private wells near and downwind of the derailment to use bottled water until they can have their wells tested.
The EPA has been screening homes near the derailment for indoor air-quality concerns. How do these chemicals get into homes and what happens to them in enclosed spaces?
Homes are not airtight, and sometimes dust and other materials get in. It might be through an open door or a window sill. Sometimes people track it in.
So far, the U.S. EPA has reported no evidence of high levels of vinyl chloride or hydrogen chloride in the 400 or so homes tested. But full transparency has been lacking. Just because an agency is doing testing doesn’t mean it is testing for what it needs to test for. Media reports talk about four or five chemicals, but the manifest from Norfolk Southern also listed a bunch of other materials in tanks that burned. All those materials create potentially hundreds to thousands of VOCs and SVOCs.
Are Government Officials Testing for Everything they Should?
People in the community have reported headaches, which can be caused by VOCs and other chemicals. They’re understandably concerned.
Ohio and federal officials need to better communicate what they’re doing, why, and what they plan to do. It’s unclear what questions they are trying to answer. For a disaster this serious, little testing information has been shared.
In the absence of this transparency, misinformation is filling that void. From a homeowner’s perspective, it’s hard to understand the true risk if the data is not shared.
Getting to Know ChatGPT: A Shallow Dip into Its Current Functionality and Future Potential
ChatGPT and the underlying AI technology are, as near as anyone can tell, the next-level toolkit for research, communication, idea generation, and a million other uses. If you haven’t introduced yourself to it yet, leave plenty of time – getting started is easy, but getting yourself to stop may not be. Those of us that were around pre-internet may liken the first-time experience to the first time we gained access to the world wide web. The Sudden, much easier access to a world of information, puts one in a place where you don’t know what to try first.
Over the past couple of months, the now-familiar name, ChatGPT has made headlines. It quickly captivated the worlds imagination as an AI product that is likely to disrupt or destroy some industries while enhancing others. Obviously, this is of particular interest to investors. With this in mind, I sat down for an interview with ChatGPT; below are answers to questions that many investors are asking.
Channelchek (PH) – Am I able to interview Chatgpt?
ChatGPT – Hello! As an AI language model, I’m happy to answer any questions you may have. However, it’s important to keep in mind that I don’t have personal experiences or opinions like a human, and I can only provide information based on my training data. So feel free to ask me anything!
Channelchek (PH) – What do most users have ChatGPT to do for them?
ChatGPT – As an AI language model, ChatGPT can be used for a wide range of tasks, including:
Language translation: ChatGPT can be used to translate text from one language to another.
Content creation: ChatGPT can generate text for various types of content, such as articles, blog posts, and product descriptions.
Chatbot development: ChatGPT can be used to develop chatbots that can interact with users and provide information.
Sentiment analysis: ChatGPT can be used to analyze the sentiment of a piece of text, such as a social media post or a product review.
Question-answering: ChatGPT can be used to answer questions on a wide range of topics.
Text summarization: ChatGPT can be used to summarize long pieces of text into shorter, more manageable summaries.
Language modeling: ChatGPT can be used to train new models for specific domains, such as medical or legal language.
These are just a few examples of what ChatGPT can be used for. Its versatility and flexibility make it a powerful tool for many different applications.
Channelchek (PH) – From where do you pull your answers ChatGPT?
ChatGPT – As an AI language model, I don’t have pre-programmed answers. Instead, I generate responses to questions by analyzing patterns in large amounts of text data that I was trained on. Specifically, I was trained on a dataset of billions of words from various sources, including books, articles, websites, and other textual sources. During my training, I was exposed to a wide range of topics and writing styles, which helps me generate responses to many different types of questions.
When you ask me a question, I use natural language processing (NLP) techniques to analyze the question and generate a response based on patterns in the text data that I was trained on. I then use statistical models to determine the most likely response based on the context of the question and the patterns in the training data.
It’s important to note that my responses are only as accurate and reliable as the patterns that I learned during my training. While I strive to provide accurate and helpful information, I may not always get it right, and my responses may not reflect the views or opinions of OpenAI.
Channelchek (PH) – Are you at risk of having the response you generate slanted or biased based on users feedback adjusting your training ChatGPT?
ChatGPT – As an AI language model, I am designed to learn from the data that I am trained on, including the feedback that users provide to adjust my training. However, it’s important to be aware that the feedback that users provide can sometimes introduce biases into my training.
If the feedback is consistently biased in a particular direction, this could affect the accuracy and fairness of my responses. This is why it’s important to carefully monitor and evaluate any feedback that is used to adjust my training, and to ensure that it is representative of a wide range of perspectives.
To address this issue, OpenAI has implemented a number of safeguards to prevent bias and ensure that my training data is as accurate and diverse as possible. For example, the training data is carefully curated to include a wide range of sources and perspectives, and the training process is carefully monitored to ensure that biases are not introduced.
Additionally, OpenAI has implemented a number of techniques to help identify and mitigate any biases that may be present in the training data or feedback. For example, I am periodically evaluated to ensure that my responses are accurate and unbiased, and any issues that are identified are addressed through additional training or other adjustments to the model.
Channelchek (PH) – As an editor I write for Channelchek about stocks, the financial markets, the economy and business climate. Are you a good resource for current events related to these topics ChatGPT?
ChatGPT – As an AI language model, I can certainly provide you with information on current events related to stocks, financial markets, the economy, and the business climate. I have been trained on a vast amount of text data, including news articles and other sources related to these topics, so I can provide you with up-to-date information and insights on current events.
When asking me questions related to these topics, it’s important to provide me with as much context and specificity as possible so that I can provide you with the most accurate and relevant information. For example, if you are looking for information on a particular company or sector, you could provide me with the name of the company or sector, as well as any other relevant details or questions you may have.
However, it’s important to note that my responses are generated based on patterns in the text data that I was trained on, and may not reflect the views or opinions of OpenAI. Additionally, while I can provide you with information on current events and trends, I cannot provide investment advice or make predictions about future market performance. It’s always important to carefully evaluate information and seek the advice of a qualified financial professional before making investment decisions.
Channelchek (PH) – Do users ask you to forecast the stock market direction?
ChatGPT – Yes, users sometimes ask me to forecast the direction of the stock market. However, as an AI language model, I cannot make accurate predictions about future market performance. While I can provide information on current market trends and historical data, predicting the future direction of the stock market is a highly complex task that involves a range of economic, political, and social factors.
It’s important to note that investing in the stock market involves a certain degree of risk, and investors should always carefully evaluate market conditions and seek the advice of a qualified financial professional before making investment decisions. While I can provide general information and insights related to stocks and financial markets, I cannot provide investment advice or predict the future performance of individual stocks or the overall market.
Channelchek (PH) – Are you familiar with Channelchek?
ChatGPT – While I am not specifically programmed to be familiar with individual websites, I may have come across content from Channelchek during my training.
That being said, I can still provide you with general information on what Channelchek is. From my understanding, Channelchek is a financial information platform that provides independent research, analysis, and market commentary on publicly traded companies. It offers a range of tools and resources for investors and financial professionals, including market data, stock quotes, and research reports.
Channelchek’s focus is on providing unbiased and independent information to help investors make informed investment decisions.
Channelchek (PH) – Does your AI technology pose a risk to traditional internet search engines?
ChatGPT – My purpose is not to compete with traditional search engines like Google or Bing, but rather to complement them by providing an additional source of information and assistance to users. While I am capable of providing answers to a wide range of questions and generating responses to open-ended queries, I am not designed to replace traditional search engines or web browsing.
Search engines like Google and Bing are still the primary means by which users navigate the internet and find information, and they use a range of sophisticated algorithms and machine learning techniques to index and rank content on the web. While I am capable of processing natural language queries and generating responses, my training data is based on pre-existing content, which means that my responses are generated based on patterns in the text data that I was trained on, rather than direct access to the vast amounts of data on the internet.
Early Boolean Phrase Search Tool
Overall, AI language models like me are part of a larger ecosystem of tools and technologies that are designed to help users access and navigate the vast amount of information available online. While there may be some overlap between the capabilities of traditional search engines and AI language models, both serve different purposes and can work together to provide users with the most comprehensive and accurate information possible.
Channelchek (PH) – What industries are you likely to disrupt and which are you likely to augment or help build?
ChatGPT – As an AI language model, my capabilities are quite broad, and I have the potential to impact a wide range of industries and areas of society. Here are a few ways in which I could potentially disrupt or augment various industries:
Industries that could be disrupted:
Customer service: AI language models like me are already being used by many companies to automate and improve customer service interactions, and this trend is likely to continue. As AI technology improves, it could potentially replace many human customer service jobs.
Content creation: AI language models have the potential to automate certain types of content creation, such as news articles, product descriptions, and even social media posts. This could have a significant impact on the journalism and writing industries.
Education: AI language models could potentially disrupt the traditional education model by providing personalized learning experiences and automating certain types of teaching and grading.
Industries that could be augmented:
Healthcare: AI language models could help augment healthcare by providing more accurate and personalized diagnoses, and by automating certain types of administrative tasks.
Finance: AI language models could help augment finance by providing more accurate and data-driven investment advice, and by automating certain types of financial analysis.
Research: AI language models could help augment research by processing and analyzing vast amounts of data, and by identifying patterns and insights that might be difficult for humans to spot on their own.
Overall, the impact of AI language models like me on various industries will depend on a wide range of factors, including the development of the technology, the regulatory environment, and societal attitudes toward automation and AI. While there may be some industries that are more susceptible to disruption or augmentation than others, it’s important to approach these developments with a nuanced understanding of the potential benefits and risks.
Channelchek (PH) – Are users using ChatGPT to create social media bots to respond without human intervention likely to flood the internet?
ChatGPT – While it is technically possible for users to use AI language models like ChatGPT to create social media bots that can respond to messages without human intervention, I cannot speculate on whether this is likely to flood the internet.
The use of AI language models like ChatGPT could potentially make it easier and more accessible for users to create more sophisticated chatbots that can mimic human conversation more convincingly.
It’s also important to consider the potential impact of widespread use of social media bots on the quality and authenticity of online interactions. While chatbots can be useful in certain contexts, they can also be used to spread misinformation and propaganda or to manipulate public opinion. As with any technology, it’s important to approach the use of AI language models and chatbots in a responsible and ethical way, and to consider the potential risks and benefits of their use.
Channelchek (PH) – What do you call one that uses ChatGPT?
ChatGPT – There is no specific term for a person who uses ChatGPT or other AI language models, as these tools are designed to be accessible and usable by anyone with an internet connection.
However, a person who uses ChatGPT to create chatbots or other automated tools could be referred to as an AI developer or AI engineer. Similarly, a person who uses ChatGPT to conduct research or analysis in a specific field could be referred to as an AI researcher or analyst.
Channelchek (PH) – How much do you cost?
As an AI language model, I do not have a specific cost as I am not a commercial product. My purpose is to provide information and assistance to users like you, and I am freely accessible through various platforms that integrate my technology, including chatbots, voice assistants, and search engines.
Channelchek (PH) – Should I throw out the encyclopedias on my book shelf and rely instead on ChatGPT?
ChatGPT – Ultimately, whether or not to keep your encyclopedias depends on your personal preferences and how you prefer to access information. While AI language models like ChatGPT are convenient and accessible, they may not always provide the level of detail or accuracy that you require for a specific question or topic. So, it’s always a good idea to consult multiple sources of information to ensure that you have a well-rounded understanding of a given topic.
Channelchek (PH) – How does one get started using ChatGPT for research?
ChatGPT – Getting started with using ChatGPT for research can involve several steps. Here are a few basic steps you can follow:
Identify your research question or topic: Start by identifying the research question or topic you want to investigate. This will help you to focus your search and make the best use of ChatGPT.
Choose a ChatGPT platform: There are several platforms that integrate ChatGPT, including chatbots, voice assistants, and search engines. Choose a platform that best fits your needs and preferences.
Familiarize yourself with the platform: Once you have chosen a platform, take some time to explore and familiarize yourself with its features and capabilities. Many platforms offer tutorials and guides to help you get started.
Start asking questions: Once you are comfortable with the platform, start asking questions related to your research topic. Try to ask open-ended questions that will allow ChatGPT to provide more detailed and relevant answers.
Evaluate the results: As you receive answers from ChatGPT, evaluate the accuracy and relevance of the information. Keep in mind that ChatGPT is not perfect and may not always provide the most accurate or comprehensive information. Be sure to double-check any information you receive with other sources to ensure its accuracy.
Refine your search: If you are not finding the information you need, try refining your search by using more specific keywords or phrases.
Overall, using ChatGPT for research can be a valuable tool for gathering information and conducting preliminary investigations. However, it’s important to keep in mind that it is just one tool in the research process, and should be used in conjunction with other sources of information and research methods.
Wrap Up
It’s easy to comprehend how this technology, which will likely see stronger competition in the coming year, will quickly become something that is used every day to help streamline how we do our jobs, and find information in our personal lives. Unlike an internet search engine, queries produce individual results tailored to the individual question. The same question will recieve different phraseology if asked a minute later. Whereas Google or DuckDuckGo list websites that may provide the answer, ChatGPT responds using its own answer using artificial intelligence.
Getting started is as easy as going to OpenAI.com and navigating to Chat.OpenAI.com and providing an email and verification phone number. Click on my name below and write me, I’d love to hear what you are using it for.
Scion’s Michael Burry Owns Online Retailers, Tech Firms, a Mortgage Servicer, and a Detention Provider
GEO Group (GEO), the publicly held prison company organized as a REIT, again tops Michael Burry’s public market holdings as of the end of last year. This is one of nine holdings; a few are on-again, off-again favorites of the revered hedge fund manager. If there is one theme in his positions, it is that of select online retail merchants. While the overall size of the positions as of quarter-end is known, these positions may not represent all investments, just those that are public and reportable to the SEC on form 13F. Burry famous for his portrayal in the movie “The Big Short” was not short any publicly traded securities as 2022 drew to a close.
Below are the nine holdings, in size order, copied directy from the 13F-HR filing. GEO, Alibaba, and JD.com are familiar to followers of Dr. Burry’s holdings as this is not the first time they have appeared in his portfolio.
Geo Group (GEO) runs private detention systems. As shown below, at the end of the second quarter of 2022, it represented 100% of Scion Asset Management’s public market positions. The current holding is roughly half the dollar amount of what it was three months prior.
Black Knight (BKI) is making its first appearance in the Scion portfolio. The mid-cap company provides mortgage and loan servicing products.
Coherent Corporation (COHR) has not been in the hedge fund manager’s portfolio prior to the last quarter. The small-cap technology company is involved in communications networks for aerospace, automotive, life sciences, and various other electronics and systems.
Alibaba (BABA) is often described as the “Chinese Amazon.com”. The only other time Scion held this well-known online retailer was during the second quarter of 2019.
JD.com (JD) is China’s largest online retailer and largest internet company by revenue. Burry owned shares once before during the first quarter of 2019.
Wolverine Worldwide (WWW) makes active footwear and apparel. Brands include Sperry, Saucony, and Hush Puppies. The small-cap company has not been in the Scion portfolio previously.
MGM Resorts (MGM) is a mid-cap company that owns and manages hotels and casinos worldwide. This is the first time Michael Burry has owned this name.
Qurante (QRTEA), formerly Liberty Interactive Corporation, is yet another direct marketer through the internet and video. The small-cap company is headquartered in Colorado.
Skywest Inc. (SKYW) is Burry’s smallest holding but still represents 4.4%. The airline has scheduled flights, including international, and also leases equipment for non-commercial flights. This is the first time the small-cap company has made an appearance in the Scion portfolio.
Take Away
Four times each year the SEC requires asset managers above a certain size to make a public filling of its portfolio.
Scion Asset Management is not exempt, but may, in addition to transacting in public securities, be creating positions in assets that are not required to be reported here. The reputation of Michael Burry has at times caused a lot of interest around less followed stocks.
Investors Receiving a 5% Yield are Losing to Inflation
The CPI inflation report and the Fed’s relentless increases in Fed funds levels have pushed the six-month US Treasury Bill (T-Bill) above 5%. This is the first time since 2007 that this low-risk investment has topped 5%. Last year on this date, the six-month T-Bill was 0.76%. While the stock market is concerned that higher borrowing costs will have the Fed’s intended effect of slowing demand, rates are reaching a point where another concern creeps in. The concern is will traditional stock investors lay back and be satisfied getting paid interest.
More likely, the high cash position represents “dry powder” waiting for an opportunity.
Short Term Rates
Money Market fund assets were $4.81 trillion for the week ended Wednesday, February 8, according to the Investment Company Institute. Just shy of the record MF balances reported in January. Higher than average cash levels have often been thought of as a bullish sign as it represents potential to drive stock prices up when flows toward equities increase.
This may be part of the situation as we come off a dismal 2022 for equities, but there is likely something else incentivizing the retreat to safety. The higher interest rates are in the short end of the curve, investors are getting paid to retreat. High-yielding cash equivalents with six-month T-Bills now at 5% (10-year Treasuries are only 3.75%) may be more than a parking place. It may represent an alternative investment with a much more assured return.
With inflation at 6.4%, the answer is no. But it is definitely preferable to seven of the periods on the 10-year chart above. And with January’s consumer price index (CPI) report revealing signs of sticky to reaccelerating inflation, the Federal Reserve is more likely to be hiking rates for longer than expected.
For investors looking to invest for longer periods, the stock market handily beats inflation. In other words, for the various time frames below, S&P 500 investors did not see their assets erode due to inflation.
Beating inflation is foundational to investing. Far exceeding it is the goal of many. Investors are not doing this choosing cash, in fact they are choosing to lose buying power rather than risk that the market doesn’t perform as it has historically.
Data released on Tuesday February 14 showed the inflation rate (CPI) slowed to 6.4% in January. The cost of goods and services rose 0.5% during the month. The half percentage is the largest one month erosion of purchasing power in three months.
Investors content with 4%-5% returns should consider that they are losing ground to persistent inflation.
Investors with a five-year time horizon or longer should weigh the risks of earning yields below the inflation rate to the ups and downs of stocks. In fact, as more do, the 4-5 trillion in cash can make or quite a bull market.
Managing Money Is as Important as Making It: The Sad Case of Athletes Going Broke
Lacking a solid team is a recipe for organizational failure, and those intending to excel in business—or any other sector—must invest in management. Considering that many professional athletes encounter bankruptcy shortly after retiring, they are a demographic that could greatly benefit from quality financial management teams. Elite athletes earn millions of dollars during a short time, but few succeed at multiplying their earnings to create wealth. An investigation by the Global Financial Literacy Center found that 16 percent of National Football League (NFL) players declare bankruptcy within twelve years of retirement. Quite startling is that some athletes report bankruptcy as early as two years after retirement.
The results of the study also showed that NFL stars were just as likely to experience bankruptcy as other NFL players. Bankruptcy figures are equally daunting for basketball players. Research reveals that National Basketball Association (NBA) players who file for bankruptcy do so within 7.3 years after retirement, and 6.1 percent of all NBA players go bankrupt within fifteen years of exiting their profession. The emotional trauma of bankruptcy can lead to distress. Research indicates that 78 percent of NFL players experience financial distress two years after retirement.
Inept management of finances is the easiest strategy for losing wealth. Professional athletes can avert financial calamities by investing in a better management team. There is a stark difference between managing a junior athlete and managing a superstar who earns millions of dollars yearly. A professional who manages a junior athlete could be an excellent manager for a player at that stage, but the transition to elite status requires people with greater expertise.
In business, a manager should possess the relevant skills. They don’t have to be your friend. Elite athletes need elite managers to help them navigate stratospheric wealth. If a manager doesn’t have expertise in managing successful athletes or businesses, then he is unfit to manage an elite athlete. Athletes who succeed at expanding their empires are reluctant to rely on the services of amateurs.
Magic Johnson credits his success to investing in capable people rather than to the “wisdom” of family members and old friends. Pablo S. Torre paints Johnson as a serious businessman in a piece highlighting the failures of professional athletes:
Johnson started out by admitting he knew nothing about business and sought counsel from . . . men such as Hollywood agent Michael Ovitzand and Peter Guber. Now, Johnson says, he gets calls from star players “every day” . . . and cuts them short if they propose relying on family and friends.
Johnson’s strategy is even more relevant in light of the recent financial scandal involving the disappearance of over twelve million dollars held by sprinting legend Usain Bolt in Jamaican investment firm Stock and Securities Limited (SSL). Venting to reporters, Bolt’s attorney Linton Gordon argues that the Financial Services Commission (FSC) should be held liable for the mishap because the agency lapsed in providing proper oversight:
They should bear responsibility to some extent, if not entirely, because all along they kept quiet and did not alert the public, including Mr. Bolt, to the fact that the company was not operating in a way compliant with the law. It’s 10 years now they say they have been red flagging this company. Had he known that he would have withdrawn his money and he would not have lodged anymore.
Blaming the regulator is easy, but the debacle reveals deficits in Bolt’s management team. Usain Bolt did not need to know that SSL was deemed unsound years ago because his management team should have furnished him with that information. Some years ago, I was at an event where fellow investors argued that SSL was irredeemable. Bolt’s managers were out of the loop. Moreover, Jamaica is known for institutional weakness and fraud, so it’s a bit weird that a man of Bolt’s stature would have so much money stored in a Jamaican institution to begin with.
Some say that the FSC must be accountable for the misappropriation of Bolt’s money, but the FSC penned a report that Bolt’s managers would have seen if they were doing research. Moreover, in a country where agencies are frequently compromised by politics, there is a possibility that the FSC did not suspend the operations of SSL because it was constrained by rogue actors. Bolt’s managers should have shown some insight by recommending that the superstar limit his Jamaican investments and by soliciting the services of leading wealth management firms like UBS Wealth Management or Baird.
The case study of Usain Bolt demonstrates that even athletes with good managers should never hesitate to upgrade when their employees are not equipped for bigger challenges. Money is hard to make, but with a bad manager, it’s easy to lose. Therefore, athletes interested in keeping their money must invest in the right team or face the consequences.
About the Author:
Lipton Matthews is a researcher, business analyst, and contributor to Merion West, The Federalist, American Thinker, Intellectual Takeout, mises.org, and Imaginative Conservative. He may be contacted at lo_matthews@yahoo.com
Twitter’s New Data Fees Leave Scientists Scrambling for Funding – or Cutting Research
Twitter is ending free access to its application programming interface, or API. An API serves as a software “middleman” allowing two applications to talk to each other. An API is an accessible way to collect and share data within and across organizations. For example, researchers at universities unaffiliated with Twitter can collect tweets and other data from Twitter through their API.
Starting Feb. 9, 2023, those wanting access to Twitter’s API will have to pay. The company is looking for ways to increase revenue to reverse its financial slide, and Elon Musk claimed that the API has been abused by scammers. This cost is likely to hinder the research community that relies on the Twitter API as a data source.
The Twitter API launched in 2006, allowing those outside of Twitter access to tweets and corresponding metadata, information about each tweet such as who sent it and when and how many people liked and retweeted it. Tweets and metadata can be used to understand topics of conversation and how those conversations are “liked” and shared on the platform and by whom.
This article was republished with permission from The Conversation, a news site dedicated to sharing ideas from academic experts. It represents the research-based findings and thoughts of, Jon-Patrick Allem, Assistant Professor of Research in Population and Public Health Sciences, University of Southern California.
As a scientist and director of a research lab focused on collecting and analyzing posts from social media platforms, I have relied on the Twitter API to collect tweets pertinent to public health for over a decade. My team has collected more than 80 million observations over the past decade, publishing dozens of papers on topics from adolescents’ use of e-cigarettes to misinformation about COVID-19.
Twitter has announced that it will allow bots that it deems provide beneficial content to continue unpaid access to the API, and that the company will offer a “paid basic tier,” but it’s unclear whether those will be helpful to researchers.
Blocking Out and Narrowing Down
Twitter is a social media platform that hosts interesting conversations across a variety of topics. As a result of free access to the Twitter API, researchers have followed these conversations to try to better understand public attitudes and behaviors. I’ve treated Twitter as a massive focus group where observations – tweets – can be collected in near real time at relatively low cost.
The Twitter API has allowed me and other researchers to study topics of importance to society. Fees are likely to narrow the field of researchers who can conduct this work, and narrow the scope of some projects that can continue. The Coalition for Independent Technology Research issued a statement calling on Twitter to maintain free access to its API for researchers. Charging for access to the API “will disrupt critical projects from thousands of journalists, academics and civil society actors worldwide who study some of the most important issues impacting our societies today,” the coalition wrote.
@SMLabTO (Twitter)
The financial burden will not affect all academics equally. Some scientists are positioned to cover research costs as they arise in the course of a study, even unexpected or unanticipated costs. In particular, scientists at large research-heavy institutions with grant budgets in the millions of dollars are likely to be able to cover this kind of charge.
However, many researchers will be unable to cover the as yet unspecified costs of the paid service because they work on fixed or limited budgets. For example, doctoral students who rely on the Twitter API for data for their dissertations may not have additional funding to cover this charge. Charging for access to the Twitter API will ultimately reduce the number of participants working to understand the world around us.
The terms of Twitter’s paid service will require me and other researchers to narrow the scope of our work, as pricing limits will make it too expensive to continue to collect as much data as we would like. As the amount of data requested goes up, the cost goes up.
We will be forced to forgo data collection on some topic areas. For example, we collect a lot of tobacco-related conversations, and people talk about tobacco by referencing the behavior – smoking or vaping – and also by referencing a product, like JUUL or Puff Bar. I add as many terms as I can think of to cast a wide net. If I’m going to be charged per word, it will force me to rethink how wide a net I cast. This will ultimately reduce our understanding of issues important to society.
Difficult Adjustments
Costs aside, many academic institutions are likely to have a difficult time adapting to these changes. For example, most universities are slow-moving bureaucracies with a lot of red tape. To enter into a financial relationship or complete a small purchase may take weeks or months. In the face of the impending Twitter API change, this will likely delay data collection and potential knowledge.
Unfortunately, everyone relying on the Twitter API for data was given little more than a week’s notice of the impending change. This short period has researchers scrambling as we try to prepare our data infrastructures for the changes ahead and make decisions about which topics to continue studying and which topics to abandon.
If the research community fails to properly prepare, scientists are likely to face gaps in data collection that will reduce the quality of our research. And in the end that means a loss of knowledge for the world.
