What Might be in a Portfolio Allocated for a Republican Majority in the House?



Image Credit: Gage Skidmore (Flickr)


Republicans Likely to Have the Majority in the House – Investors May Want to Pivot Early

Elections to the U.S. House of Representatives will be held on November 8, 2022. As of today (July 18), Democrats hold a 220-211 advantage in the U.S. House with four vacant seats. All 435 seats are up for election. Should investors reduce their Democrat-era portfolio? It’s four months away, and election forecasters and other statisticians view a return of a Democrat majority as highly unlikely. What industries and companies may benefit if next year Congress is controlled by Republicans?

 

U.S. House Election Odds

Statisticians at Five Thirty-Eight, a subsidiary of ABC News, which Disney owns, updated their models on July 18, ran it 40,000 times, and found the environment isn’t favorable toward House Democrats in the Fall. Their statistics show that the odds are only 13 in 100 that Democrats would retain control of the chamber. Empirically their data demonstrates that even if Republicans lose all seats that are considered toss-ups, along with those that they are expected to lose, the current Democrat majority will be lost.

Investment Implications

The data for the Senate is not as compelling. It shows a 47 in 100 probability of the Democrats being in control of the Senate after the elections. So the focus is not on the full branch of Congress but instead on who gets to set the agenda in the House.

Beginning in 2021, the national agenda changed dramatically. The new President, with a willing Congress, began implementing plans that focused on more open immigration, higher corporate taxes, a U.S. return to the Paris Climate Accord, reduced oil production and distribution, a more pro-union stance, prison reform, and infrastructure spending with a significant focus on shifting to non-fossil fuel energy alternatives.

Throughout 2021 we saw many industries and commodities rise in response to the planned initiatives, many of which can only be implemented with Congress’s approval.

Change brings opportunity and also missed the opportunity.

Whether one’s ideology supports a change or not is usually secondary to investors. Minimizing holdings in positions most likely to lose ground, and within one’s own sense of socially responsible investing, overweighting in positions that may, over time, strengthen is considered prudent.


Below the Radar

One challenge with investing when change may be afoot is not being the last in the door. The statistics I posted above are not a secret; similar results can be found in many trustworthy outlets. So investors know that the energy policies may have to be softened, that money for infrastructure projects may not be as abundant, and rebate money for EVs and other initiatives could also be slower in coming, if at all.

But what about private prisons? Six days after Biden was inaugurated, he signed an executive order to eliminate the use of privately operated criminal detention facilities. Section 2 of this order specifically prohibits renewing any contracts with criminal detention facilities. 


Source: White House Press Release (January 26, 2021)

After the order, the private prison industry shifted gears and focused on the $3 billion market of detaining immigrants. This shift has been positive, and things don’t look as dark for the two largest for-profit prison companies in the U.S., CoreCivic (CXW) and Geo Group (GEO). Each is now making 30% or more of its revenue from U.S. Customs and Immigration (ICE) contracts.


Source:  Koyfin

Since the beginning of 2022, CoreCivic is up 11.2%, and Geo has performed a bit better than the S&P 500 at negative 16.4% (S&P 500, negative 17.7%).

In an SEC filing from November 2021, GEO Group detailed how, despite the loss of $125 million in contracts due to Biden’s executive order, “record increases in migrant flows at the U.S. border have acted as a tailwind” and have more than made up for the profits lost. Would a Republican-led House of Representatives be more likely to add resources to border security and detainment or reduce it? There is very little discussion about this on investing message boards and on financial news networks and other outlets. Yet, the probabilities are lining up on the side of the Republican agenda, which includes beefing up border security and perhaps allocating more funding in that area.

 

Take Away

If the Democrats lose the significant power they now have in the legislative branch, it would seem that the party that takes power would almost have a mandate from the public to make changes to many of the increasingly unpopular moves made over the past year and a half.

These changes are likely to address the growing concern voters have over the border. In March, a Gallup poll showed that 45%, the highest proportion of Americans since 2007, are concerned “a great deal” about the border. That same poll showed 68% of Republicans are concerned “a great deal.” 

A statistical argument can be made that new doors may open for private prison companies, and investors may want to pay attention.

Register at no cost for daily emails from Channelchek here.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

Suggested Content



The U.S. Gets Its First State of the Union in Two Years, Much Has Changed



Is GDP Growth Transitory and Inflation Persistent?




With Ford’s Electric F-150 Pickup, the EV Transition Shifts into High Gear



Pelosi’s Recent Investment Portfolio Tweaks


Sources

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/01/26/executive-order-reforming-our-incarceration-system-to-eliminate-the-use-of-privately-operated-criminal-detention-facilities/

https://fivethirtyeight.com/about-

https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_House_Republican_Party_primaries,_2022

https://ballotpedia.org/United_States_House_Republican_Party_primaries,_2022

https://projects.fivethirtyeight.com/2022-election-forecast/house/

https://channelchek.com/news-channel/CoreCivic__Inc.__CXW____Biden_Signs_Executive_Order_to_End_Use_of_Private_Prisons_by_BoP

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/07/18/bidens-economic-approval-rating-falls-to-new-low-on-fear-about-inflation-cnbc-survey-finds.html

https://www.opensecrets.org/news/2022/06/private-prison-industry-shifts-focus-to-immigrant-detention-centers-funding-immigration-hawks/

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Financial Protection Bureau Has New Supervisory Powers



CFPB Invokes Dormant Authority to Examine Nonbank Companies Posing Risks to Consumers

 

WASHINGTON, D.C. – The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced that it is invoking a largely unused legal provision to examine nonbank financial companies that pose risks to consumers. The CFPB believes that utilizing this dormant authority will help protect consumers and level the playing field between banks and nonbanks. The CFPB is also seeking public comments on a procedural rule to make this process more transparent.

“Given the rapid growth of consumer offerings by nonbanks, the CFPB is now utilizing a dormant authority to hold nonbanks to the same standards that banks are held to,” said CFPB Director Rohit Chopra. “This authority gives us critical agility to move as quickly as the market, allowing us to conduct examinations of financial companies posing risks to consumers and stop harm before it spreads.”

Under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010, the CFPB has authority to use traditional law enforcement to stop companies from engaging in conduct that pose risk to consumers; this can involve adversarial litigation. However, the law also gives the CFPB authority to conduct supervisory examinations to review the books and records of regulated entities. CFPB examiners typically provide a report to entities with problems that need to be addressed, and responsible institutions typically take prompt corrective action.

Nonbank Supervision

For decades before the Dodd-Frank Act, only banks and credit unions were subject to federal supervision. But after the 2008 financial crisis in which nonbank companies played a pivotal role, Congress tasked the CFPB with supervising certain nonbanks, in addition to large depository institutions with more than $10 billion in assets, and their service providers. Nonbanks do not have a bank, thrift, or credit union charter; many today operate nationally and brand themselves as “fintechs.”

Congress authorized several categories of entities subject to CFPB’s nonbank supervision program. First and foremost, all nonbank entities in the mortgage, private student loan, and payday loan industries, regardless of size. Another category of supervised entities includes what the law calls “larger participants” in other nonbank markets for consumer financial products and services. The CFPB conducted rulemakings to define thresholds for entities subject to supervision in the markets of consumer reporting, debt collection, student loan servicing, international remittances, and auto loan servicing.

The third category of entities subject to the CFPB nonbank supervision are nonbanks whose activities the CFPB has reasonable cause to determine pose risks to consumers. This authority is not specific to any particular consumer financial product or service. While the CFPB did implement the provision through a procedural rule in 2013,  the agency has now begun to invoke this authority. This will allow the CFPB to be agile and supervise entities that may be fast-growing or are in markets outside the existing nonbank supervision program.

Such risky conduct may involve, for example, potentially unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices, or other acts or practices that potentially violate federal consumer financial law. The CFPB may base such reasonable cause determinations on complaints collected by the CFPB, or on information from other sources, such as judicial opinions and administrative decisions. The CFPB may also learn of such risks through whistleblower complaints, state partners, federal partners, or news reports.

Transparency

The CFPB is also issuing a procedural rule today to increase the transparency of the risk-determination process. Unlike other provisions of law regarding nonbank supervision, entities subject to supervision based on risk are given notice and an opportunity to respond. In order to provide greater guidance to the marketplace on how the CFPB will make determinations, the CFPB is updating an aspect of its procedures for risk determinations to authorize the release of certain information about any final determinations made.  The company involved will have an opportunity to provide input to the CFPB on what information is released to the public.

 

Suggested Reading



Will Mortgage Forbearance Impact Other Markets? (April 2021)



How Much is a Trillion?

 

Sources

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/about-us/blog/introducing-our-new-bureau-seal/

https://www.consumerfinance.gov/

 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

House Overwhelmingly Passes Changes to Retirement Savings



Image Credit: Marco Verch (Flickr)


Retirees May Soon Have More Options as House Passes “Securing a Strong Retirement Act”

 

Raising the required minimum distribution age to 75 (from 72) on retirement accounts will have more impact than many may realize. The House advanced legislation on Tuesday (March 29) raising the age where retirees must take RMDs or face severe IRS penalties. The measure seems to take into account much that is facing retirees, but there are some pitfalls older Americans must be watch as well.

Background

The House of Representatives passed the Securing a Strong Retirement Act, often referred to as the Secure Act 2.0, by a vote of 414-5. The most consequential provisions are below:

  • Raise the age savers must take minimum distributions, or RMDs, from their retirement savings accounts to 73 from 72, effective next Jan. 1, to 74 starting in 2030 and to 75 starting in 2033. *The RMD age was raised to 72 from 70½ by the Secure Act of 2019.
  • Increase the limits on “catch-up contributions for employees ages 62 to 64. In 2021, this age worker was permitted to contribute up to $6,500 to their retirement savings plans beyond the standard limits. The bill would increase the limit to $10,000, beginning in 2024, and indexes it to inflation.
  • Expanded automatic enrollment of workers in employer-sponsored retirement saving plans. Beginning in 2024, employees would be automatically enrolled in plans such as 401(k)s and 403(b)s unless they opt out. Workers’ initial automatic contributions would be between 3% and 10% of pretax earnings, and that amount would be increased by 1% each year until reaching 10%.

    All current 401(k) and 403(b) plans are “grandfathered,” the employer-based plan doesn’t have to comply with this provision. There’s also an exception for businesses with 10 or fewer employees, businesses that have existed for less than three years, church plans, and governmental plans.

  • Reduces the penalty for failure to take RMDs to 25% from 50%. In addition, if this failure is corrected in a timely manner, as defined by the bill, the penalty would be further reduced to 10%.
  • Allows employers to match a worker’s student loan payment by making the same size contribution to that worker’s retirement savings plan. This provision, which will take effect Jan. 1, is to help workers who find it difficult to save for retirement because of student-loan payments. Npt contributing causes them to miss out on their employers’ matching contributions to company-sponsored retirement savings plans.
  • Enhances the Saver’s Credit, which intends to incentivize low- and middle-income Americans to save for retirement with a tax credit of up to $1,000 each year. Today these workers can qualify for a tax credit of 50%, 20%, or 10% of their contributions to a qualified retirement plan, up to $2,000, based on  income level.
  • Creates an online, searchable “retirement savings lost-and-found database” at the Labor Department to help workers and retirees find their lost retirement accounts, including those from previous employers.

People are living longer than ever before, and everyone’s situation is different. Raising the minimum age for a person to take distributions allows more freedom to design around one’s own retirement and tax circumstances.

The purpose of the requiring distributions is that the IRS did not collect taxes on the qualified retirement money when it was earned. RMDs are their way to finally collect. Should savers opt to wait longer, it is likely the IRS will benefit as the savings is likely to grow and the expected time remaining until death is likely to shrink. Therefore, the RMDs will be much larger and taxes would be higher. This could benefit the tax rolls but still benefits the retiree.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



IRA Investments and Small Cap Stocks



Index Funds Still May Fall Apart over Time





Trading Accounts for Children



Robinhood Continues to Push to Expand Their Users’ Possibilities

 

Sources

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/2954

https://www.barrons.com/advisor/articles/senators-retirement-security-bill-secure-act-cardin-portman-51638537894

https://www.reportdoor.com/how-the-secure-act-could-trigger-higher-taxes-for-some-retirees/

https://www.barrons.com/articles/secure-act-2-0-retirement-rmd-requirements-51648594141

 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Detailed Data Sharing Plans for Medical Research are Soon Due



Image Credit: Nat’l Institute of Health


New Data-Sharing Requirements from the NIH are a Big Step Toward More Open Science – and Potentially Higher-Quality Research

 

Starting on Jan. 25, 2023, many of the 2,500 institutions and 300,000 researchers that the U.S. National Institutes of Health supports will need to provide a formal, detailed plan for
publicly sharing the data generated by their research
. For many in the scientific community, this new NIH Data Management and Sharing Policy sounds like a no-brainer.

The incredibly quick development of rapid tests and vaccines for COVID-19 demonstrate the success that can follow the open sharing of data within the research community. The importance and impact of that data even drove a White House Executive Order mandating that “the heads of all executive departments and agencies” share “COVID-19-related data” publicly last year.

 

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 Stephen Jacobs, Professor of Interactive Games and Media, Rochester Institute of Technology.

 

I am the Director of the Rochester Institute of Technology’s Open Programs Office. At Open@RIT, my colleagues and I work with faculty and researchers to help them openly share their research and data in a manner that provides others the rights to access, reuse and redistribute that work with as few barriers or restrictions as possible. In the sciences, these practices are often referred to as open data and open science.

The journal Nature has called the impact of the NIH’s new data management policy “seismic,” saying that it could potentially create a “global standard” for data sharing. This type of data sharing is likely to produce many benefits to science, but there also are some concerns over how researchers will meet the new requirements.

 


The National Institutes of Health has had data-sharing guidelines in place for years, but the new rules are by far the most comprehensive. NIH

 

What to Share and How to Share It

The NIH’s new policy around data sharing replaces a mandate from 2003. Even so, for some scientists, the new policy will be a big change. Dr. Francis S. Collins, then Director of the NIH, said in the 2020 statement announcing the coming policy changes that the goal is to “shift the culture of research” so that data sharing is the norm, rather than the exception.

Specifically, the policy requires two things. First, that researchers share all the scientific data that other teams would need in order to “validate and replicate” the original research findings. And second, that researchers include a two-page data management plan as part of their application for any NIH funding.

So what exactly is a data management plan? Take an imaginary study on heat waves and heatstroke, for example. All good researchers would collect measurements of temperature, humidity, time of year, weather maps, the health attributes of the participants and a lot of other data.

Starting next year, research teams will need to have determined what reliable data they will use, how the data will be stored, when others would be able to get access to it, whether or not special software would be needed to read the data, where to find that software and many other details – all before the research even begins so that these things can be included in the proposal’s data management plan.

Additionally, researchers applying for NIH funding will need to ensure that their data is available and stored in a way that persists long after the initial project is over.

The NIH has stated that it will support – with additional funding – the costs related to the collection, sharing and storing of data.

 

Sharing Data Promotes Open Science

The NIH’s case for the new policy is that it will be “good for science” because it maximizes availability of data for other researchers, addresses problems of reproducibility, will lead to better protection and use of data and increase transparency to ensure public trust and accountability.

The first big change in the new policy – to specifically share the data needed to validate and replicate – seems aimed at the proliferation of research that can’t be reproduced. Arguably, by ensuring that all of the relevant data from a given experiment is available, the scientific world would be better able to evaluate and validate through replication the quality of research much more easily.

I strongly believe that requiring data-sharing and management plans addresses a big challenge of open science: being able to quickly find the right data, as well as access, and apply it. The NIH says, and I agree, that the requirement for data management plans will help make the use of open data faster and more efficient. From the Human Genome Project in the 1990s to the recent, rapid development of tests and vaccines for COVID-19, the benefits of greater openness in science have been borne out.

 

Will the New Requirements be a Burden?

At its core, the goal of the new policy is to make science more open and to fight bad science. But as beneficial as the new policy is likely to be, it’s not without costs and shortfalls.

First, replicating a study – even one where the data is already available – still consumes expensive human, computing and material resources. The system of science doesn’t reward the researchers who reproduce an experiment’s results as highly as the ones who originate it. I believe the new policy will improve some aspects of replication, but will only address a few links in the overall chain.

Second are concerns about the increased workload and financial challenges involved in meeting the requirements. Many scientists aren’t used to preparing a detailed plan of what they will collect and how they will share it as a part of asking for funding. This means they may need training for themselves or the support of trained staff to do so.

Part of a Global Trend Toward Open Science

The NIH isn’t the only federal agency pursuing more open data and science. In 2013, the Obama administration mandated that all agencies with a budget of $100 million or more must provide open access to their publications and data. The National Science Foundation published their first open data policy two years earlier. Many European Union members are crafting national policies on open science – most notably France, which has already published its second.

The cultural shift in science that NIH Director Collins mentioned in 2020 has been happening – but for many, like me, who support these efforts, the progress has been painfully slow. I hope that the new NIH open data policy will help this movement gain momentum.

 

Suggested Reading



Stem Cell-Derived Retinal Pigment Epithelium Cells – Vision for the Future



House Approval Expected for Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act (MORE Act)





A Global Reimagined Health Ecosystem



Ultra-Rapid DNA Sequencing Identifies Rare Diseases in Hours

 

Main Image

Scientists discover how eye neurons in the eye may use math to distinguish moving objects.

 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Marijuana Hits the House This Spring



Image: Elsa Oloffson (cbdoracle.com)


House Approval Expected for Marijuana Opportunity Reinvestment and Expungement Act (MORE Act)

 

The first week of Spring may be exciting for marijuana businesses, both publicly traded and private. On Thursday (March 24), The House branch of Congress scheduled a vote to legalize cannabis federally, (MORE Act).

As soon as Monday, The U.S. House of Representatives will vote on the Marijuana Opportunity, Reinvestment, and Disposal Act. This bill would remove marijuana from the list of federally controlled substances. The MORE Act is expected to pass, at that point, it would make its way to the Senate for a vote and is expected to eventually wind up on the desk of the President to be signed into law.

Investors viewed this move to put it on the calendar the last week in March as a huge positive which then pushed cannabis-related stocks higher. Medicine Man Technologies – Schwazze (SHWZ) saw its shares leap 10.48% on Thursday.  SHWZ is involved in production, consulting, and retailing. Stem Holdings (STMH), is involved in properties used in cannabis agriculture, it saw its shares jump 9.37%. Both SHWZ and STMH are small, growth companies with equity research coverage provided on Channelchek, by Noble Capital Markets. Other cannabis companies involved in various ends of the business, both large and small saw similar movement.

The federal legalization of marijuana has bipartisan support in Congress. While it is widely expected to pass in the House and Senate, it is not certain whether President Biden will sign. Senate Majority Leader Schumer has been lobbying President Biden on the positive implications of legal marijuana and has expressed hope Biden will support the law.

Cannabis is legal for recreational use in 18 states and for medical use in 38. Federal recreational drug legalization would dramatically increase the market for cannabis growers, refiners, and distributors while eliminating concerns over banking and securities laws related to involvement in federally illegal businesses.

 

 

Sources

https://www.congress.gov/bill/117th-congress/house-bill/3617/

https://norml.org/blog/2022/03/24/us-house-of-representatives-to-vote-on-more-act-next-week/

 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

ESG Policies and Corporate Departures from Russia



Image: Sandra Cohen (Flickr)


Are ESG Social and Governance Policies Why Companies Stopped Russian Operations?

 

At a more rapid pace than ever before, large companies from the U.S. and non-American companies were quick to halt operations to support social concerns. These actions by companies doing business in Russia were in many cases in addition to sanctions mandated by the US and the other countries where the companies are headquartered.

For example, Nike (NKE) and McDonald’s (MCD) announced they are temporarily closing their Russian stores. Disney (DIS), Warner Bros. (WB), and Sony (SONY) paused the release of new films in Russia. Apple (AAPL), General Electric (GE), and Microsoft (MSFT) stopped selling their products within Russian borders. McKinsey, Ernst & Young, and other large accounting firms said they are leaving the Russian market, indefinitely. 

Since February 24, the growing list now exceeds 300 companies with plans to close outlets, reassign staff or stop selling products in Russia, according to a running count by Yale management professor Jeffrey Sonnenfeld.

ESG Investing

In some ways, these quick decisions fit in with the recent ESG movement where companies have increasingly adopted policies on often debated social and political issues. The groundswell of adoption sometimes has been to cater to investor
appetite
, although not always. Last year non-publicly owned  Major League Baseball moved the planned location of the All-Star Game from Georgia to a state it felt better conformed to the MLB view on voting rights/privileges. While it is easy for a company to not align itself with unpopular actions, including invading a neighboring country, in the past, profits have been the overriding factor driving policy and actions. In the case of corporations leaving Russia, the speed at which these companies departed, often leaving assets behind, and in most cases leaving the companies financially worse off, is in part tied to the ESG adopted policies of these businesses.

Many of the policies were driven by and made to appeal to investors.

 

Betterment

Until relatively recently, companies rarely took a stand on social or political issues. In fact, many that are departing Russia did the opposite. A certain Firestone (BRDCY) tire that had been original equipment on Ford (F) Explorers were failing. The social impact was that they caused 271 fatalities in the early through the mid-90s. While both companies were made aware of the dreadful statistics, neither did anything until lawsuits and eventually, an act of Congress, forced their hand. Another car company, Volkswagen (VWAGY), had a clean diesel Jetta that was anything but clean – and Volkswagen knew it. Their response, until getting busted in 2014, was to install emissions software on more than a half-million diesel cars in the US. and 10.5 million worldwide. The software makes it appear the cars comply with EPA standards. Both Ford and Volkswagen, along with a host of other companies known for previous environmental or social misdeeds have handled the Russia decision differently; they have quickly backed out.

Public Relations

In addition to investor relations, another reason for the change over the years in management governance and policies is customers. News travels fast over the internet, even misleading news. Companies rely on reputations. One post-invasion poll found that 86% of Americans saw the invasion as unjustified. Many categorized Russian President Vladimir Putin with the same disdain as the likes of Adolph Hitler.

A good reputation is worth quite a bit for companies. Today social media “shaming” is taken seriously by CEOs. After #BoycottMcDonalds began trending on Twitter (TWTR) to protest its continued business in Russia, the fast-food chain said it was temporarily closing its stores there. Burger King (BK) has stayed with the promise of donating profits to help refugees and others. Car company Tesla (TSLA), CEO Elon Musk, agreed to provide Ukraine with free satellites after officials from Ukraine used Twitter to request them. Muck replied on the same social media platform.

While the decision to suspend operations often is presented as a trade-off between reputation and revenue, in this multi-stakeholder, interconnected world, it’s increasingly likely that harm to reputation will lead to an impact on revenue. While some companies—particularly those in consumer-packaged goods—have a strong sense of how their stances on social and political issues can affect consumer decisions and therefore revenue, other types of firms have more work to do in developing models to understand the impact of reputation on the bottom line.

Take-Away

The Russian invasion of Ukraine has highlighted the intersection of risk, reputation, and revenue. For many companies, the decision to suspend or cut ties may be a relatively easy one. Given the size of the Russian economy, low amounts of revenue may be involved. And the reputational harm of continuing business—and the benefit of announcing a withdrawal—may be high. But even if this is an easy case, investors need to know if the management of the companies they are invested in has a consistent policy for deciding whether and how to sever business ties. Inconsistency brings uncertainty for stockholders. It is likely many of the larger international companies are fine-tuning some of their policies right now. Smaller companies also should have consistent policies, even if their decisions do not make headline news – investors have become hyper-sensitive to a company’s impact.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



Decentralized Finance, is it the Future?



ESG Growing Pains Include Greenwashing





What’s an ESG Score



Can Buffett and Icahn Both be Right on Occidental Petroleum


Sources

https://www.conference-board.org/topics/geopolitics/cutting-ties-with-russia

https://stories.starbucks.com/press/2022/letter-to-partners-from-kevin-johnson-on-ukraine/

https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/08/business/mcdonalds-pepsi-coke-russia/index.html

https://som.yale.edu/story/2022/over-300-companies-have-withdrawn-russia-some-remain

https://www.cnet.com/news/apple-microsoft-and-other-tech-companies-stop-sales-in-russia/

https://www.mashed.com/789748/heres-why-boycott-mcdonalds-is-trending-on-twitter/

https://theconversation.com/why-apple-disney-ikea-and-hundreds-of-other-western-companies-are-abandoning-russia-with-barely-a-shrug-178516

https://www.wsj.com/articles/big-auditors-to-leave-russia-amid-invasion-of-ukraine-11646666419?mod=djemCFO

https://www.mlb.com/news/2021-all-star-game-draft-relocated

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/russia-ukraine-corporations-pull-out-invasion/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Firestone_and_Ford_tire_controversy

https://www.caranddriver.com/news/a15339250/everything-you-need-to-know-about-the-vw-diesel-emissions-scandal/

 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Nancy Pelosis Coattail Investors Get an Update


Image: BJClayborn (Flickr)


Pelosi’s Recent Investment Portfolio Tweaks

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, financier Paul Pelosi, has had remarkable stock-picking success. This hasn’t gone unnoticed by coattail investors and others that peruse the couple’s investment transactions for ideas. Nancy Pelosi’s wealth, in part because of her spouse’s investment track record, is now listed as 13th among the wealthiest members of Congress. This is why others look to see where they are committing assets.

Background

So-called coat tail or copycat investors that follow hedge fund managers and other professional investors often have to wait 45 days for a quarterly filing to be made public. This makes some of the listed transactions as ancient as 135 days old by the time they become public information. Perhaps too old to act on, the positions may no longer even be held in the portfolio.

Congress and close family members are required to release information concerning their transactions within 45 days of the trade execution. This provides much more current information on a member of Congress’ account than a quarterly 13F filing by Ark Invest or Scion Capital does. The most recent Periodic Transactions Report of the Pelosi’s is comprised of investments all made in late January.

Holdings Changes

From January 21- January 27 there was $2.9m of large tech and financial firms added to Pelosi’s assets. They were Alliance Bernstein (AB), American Express (AXP), Apple (AAPL), Paypal (PYPL), and Walt Disney (DIS). There was nothing reported to suggest that they lowered their holding in previous high flyers, Slack (WORK), Tesla (TSLA), Alphabet (GOOGL), Facebook (FB), or Netflix (NFLX)

 

Image: Paul Pelosi’s Stock Act filing (January 2022)

 

Related News

The latest transaction report comes at a time when actions are being discussed by lawmakers that could require members of Congress and their spouses to be barred from trading individual stocks. A House panel is meeting on March 16th to debate the merits of a Congressional ban on trading and what any trading rules should include. Similar restrictions have been placed on officials at the Federal Reserve.

Representative Lofgren chairs the House Administration Committee; he has been compiling recommendations on how best to enact a ban. The House leadership, steered by Speaker Pelosi, will then have the final decision on how to proceed. Other laws covering members and staff, such as the Ethics in Government Act, are expected to be reviewed as well.

Take-Away

Copycat investing is easiest if you’re mimicking a lawmaker as their reporting is more frequent than SEC-regulated money managers. One of the most successful accounts in Congress is that of the Pelosis. The opportunity to follow lawmakers’ trades may one day come to an end as lawmakers are looking to ban themselves from trading in stocks. Should this ever come to be, this method for self-directed traders to discover ideas will come to an end.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



Lawmakers and Insider Trading Laws



About Cathie Wood’s SEC Filing for a Private Equity Fund





Michael Burry’s Stock Market Holdings (Filed Feb 14, 2022)



The SPAC Advantage in a Volatile or Bear Market

 

Sources

Pelosi’s Transaction
Report

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/coattailinvesting.asp

https://email.punchbowl.news/t/ViewEmail/t/FA92DBE67DB478132540EF23F30FEDED/BCD22D0840B16355A0F01D70678E0DEE

https://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-pelosi-discloses-stock-trades-amid-calls-trading-ban-congress-2022-3


 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Kleptocapture and its Targets


Image: BJClayborn (Flickr)


Seizing Assets of Wealthy and Powerful Russians to Help Weaken Resolve

 

What’s an oligarch, what’s a Russian oligarch, and can nations around the globe choose to seize their assets?

In a US Justice Department press release on March 2nd, Attorney General Merrick Garland Announced the launch of Task Force KleptoCapture. According to the release, the “task force will surge federal law enforcement resources to hold accountable corrupt Russian oligarchs.”

The Task Force is dedicated to enforcing the strict sanctions, export restrictions, and economic countermeasures that the US, EU, and other partners have imposed on the aggressor, says the release.

It explains that Task Force KleptoCapture exists to ensure enough power is provided, so the full effect of the punitive actions and Russian isolation from global markets is fully implemented. The intent is to impose serious costs for an “unjustified act of war, by targeting the crimes of Russian officials, government-aligned elites, and those who aid or conceal their unlawful conduct” according to the DOJ release.

Deputy Attorney General Lisa Monaco is quoted in the release as saying, “To those bolstering the Russian regime through corruption and sanctions evasion: we will deprive you of safe haven and hold you accountable”. “Oligarchs be warned: we will use every tool to freeze and seize your criminal proceeds.” The press release goes on to define the task forces full mission which not only has implications for powerful Russians, it may also impact cryptocurrency transactions and others that under “normal” circumstances may not have been considered as crimes that are worthy of the penalties imposed. The DOJ summarized the mission of the Task Force to include:

  • Investigating and prosecuting violations of new and future sanctions imposed in response to the Ukraine invasion, as well as sanctions imposed for prior instances of Russian aggression and corruption;
  • Combating unlawful efforts to undermine restrictions taken against Russian financial institutions, including the prosecution of those who try to evade know-your-customer and anti-money laundering measures;
  • Targeting efforts to use
    cryptocurrency to evade
    US sanctions, launder proceeds of foreign corruption, or evade US responses to Russian military aggression; and
  • Using civil and criminal asset forfeiture authorities to seize assets belonging to sanctioned individuals or assets identified as the proceeds of unlawful conduct.

Using the combined force of powerful nations to determine guilt and then punish people with close ties to President Putin and their families may turn out to be effective, but, not unlike the conundrum experienced by crypto
exchanges
,  it does create questions related to who owns what and who may seize that which others own. For example, a 500-foot megayacht seized this week in Germany owned by a member of the Russian elite.

A group of mostly obscure officials and businessmen from Russia are now being closely tracked financially. Some of the listed targets have indicated publicly they are against the war. And according to the Wall Street Journal, many of Russia’s better-known oligarchs aren’t on any governments’ sanctions lists. This is the case with Roman Abramovich, who made his money in the energy business and is the owner of British soccer club Chelsea FC. In recent days, he has offered to mediate peace efforts and said he’s looking to sell Chelsea.

Western governments hope that heightened scrutiny of Russia’s oligarchs will pressure President Vladimir Putin.

What is an Oligarch?

An “oligarchy” describes a power system led by a small group of people. It could be compared to a ruling monarchy, although the small number of leaders aren’t necessarily related. In recent years, the word “oligarch” has taken on a more specific meaning when it relates to states from the former USSR. Here it translates to businesspeople and officials who gained wealth and power in the years following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

 

“We are joining with our European allies to find and
seize your yachts, your luxury apartments, your private jets. We are coming for
your ill-begotten gains.”
President Biden, State of the Union Address (March 2022)

 

How Russia’s Oligarchs Gained Wealth and Power?

The country’s current crop of billionaires and officials accumulated wealth and power in different ways. Some of those on the sanction list are part of Mr. Putin’s inner circle; others are longtime associates; while others benefited from a wave of privatizations that followed the collapse of the Soviet Union.

Their Public Stance on the War

Oleg Deripaska, a raw-materials magnate who had been sanctioned before (2014/Crimea) by the US, wrote on social media Sunday that peace “is very important.” Mr. Deripaska sued the US Treasury Department in 2019, challenging his inclusion in the Treasury’s report on Russian oligarchs as well as the sanctions against him. He alleges the US made false accusations based on rumor and innuendo to support the sanctions. A court ruled against Oleg last June.

Mikhail Fridman is the founder of Alfa Bank, Russia’s largest private bank. Mikhail was sanctioned by the EU late Monday. Fridman says he will contest the designation and that he isn’t politically or financially connected to Mr. Putin. “It seems to me that we have done a lot of good things, invested in companies, created a lot of jobs,” Mr. Fridman said at a press conference from his private-equity firm’s office in London. “We will litigate to protect our reputation.”

Take-Away

All matters related to war, politics, and justice are delicate.

 

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



Should Bitcoins Ability to Soften and Stabilize Russian Finances be Stopped?



Integrating Innovative Technology Inputs in Modern Warfare





Cryptocurrencies with the Help of DAOs Provide a Means to Support Ukraine’s Efforts



Will the SEC Allow ETFs to Own Cryptocurrency?

 

Sources

https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/attorney-general-merrick-b-garland-announces-launch-task-force-kleptocapture

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2022/3/2/us-launches-kleptocapture-task-force-against-russian-oligarchs


 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Nancy Pelosi’s Coattail Investors Get an Update


Image: BJClayborn (Flickr)


Pelosi’s Recent Investment Portfolio Tweaks

 

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s husband, financier Paul Pelosi, has had remarkable stock-picking success. This hasn’t gone unnoticed by coattail investors and others that peruse the couple’s investment transactions for ideas. Nancy Pelosi’s wealth, in part because of her spouse’s investment track record, is now listed as 13th among the wealthiest members of Congress. This is why others look to see where they are committing assets.

Background

So-called coat tail or copycat investors that follow hedge fund managers and other professional investors often have to wait 45 days for a quarterly filing to be made public. This makes some of the listed transactions as ancient as 135 days old by the time they become public information. Perhaps too old to act on, the positions may no longer even be held in the portfolio.

Congress and close family members are required to release information concerning their transactions within 45 days of the trade execution. This provides much more current information on a member of Congress’ account than a quarterly 13F filing by Ark Invest or Scion Capital does. The most recent Periodic Transactions Report of the Pelosi’s is comprised of investments all made in late January.

Holdings Changes

From January 21- January 27 there was $2.9m of large tech and financial firms added to Pelosi’s assets. They were Alliance Bernstein (AB), American Express (AXP), Apple (AAPL), Paypal (PYPL), and Walt Disney (DIS). There was nothing reported to suggest that they lowered their holding in previous high flyers, Slack (WORK), Tesla (TSLA), Alphabet (GOOGL), Facebook (FB), or Netflix (NFLX)

 

Image: Paul Pelosi’s Stock Act filing (January 2022)

 

Related News

The latest transaction report comes at a time when actions are being discussed by lawmakers that could require members of Congress and their spouses to be barred from trading individual stocks. A House panel is meeting on March 16th to debate the merits of a Congressional ban on trading and what any trading rules should include. Similar restrictions have been placed on officials at the Federal Reserve.

Representative Lofgren chairs the House Administration Committee; he has been compiling recommendations on how best to enact a ban. The House leadership, steered by Speaker Pelosi, will then have the final decision on how to proceed. Other laws covering members and staff, such as the Ethics in Government Act, are expected to be reviewed as well.

Take-Away

Copycat investing is easiest if you’re mimicking a lawmaker as their reporting is more frequent than SEC-regulated money managers. One of the most successful accounts in Congress is that of the Pelosis. The opportunity to follow lawmakers’ trades may one day come to an end as lawmakers are looking to ban themselves from trading in stocks. Should this ever come to be, this method for self-directed traders to discover ideas will come to an end.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



Lawmakers and Insider Trading Laws



About Cathie Wood’s SEC Filing for a Private Equity Fund





Michael Burry’s Stock Market Holdings (Filed Feb 14, 2022)



The SPAC Advantage in a Volatile or Bear Market

 

Sources

Pelosi’s Transaction
Report

https://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/coattailinvesting.asp

https://email.punchbowl.news/t/ViewEmail/t/FA92DBE67DB478132540EF23F30FEDED/BCD22D0840B16355A0F01D70678E0DEE

https://www.businessinsider.com/nancy-pelosi-discloses-stock-trades-amid-calls-trading-ban-congress-2022-3


 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Should Bitcoins Ability to Soften Sanctions and Stabilize Russian Finances be Stopped


Image Credit: Dmitry Shustov (Flickr)


The Conundrum Crypto-Exchanges Face – What is Their Wartime Responsibility?

 

The ethical question crypto exchanges are faced with as it relates to an aggressive nation versus maintaining a stateless bitcoin or other cryptocurrency creates a predicament with no satisfying answers. Exchanges are faced with allowing as regular transactions those that potentially help fund military aggression while undermining financial sanctions, or halting these transactions, which may in part undermine their own existence. The exchanges have unapologetically pushed back on requests from both U.S. officials and Ukraine leaders. While adhering to the requests may appear the most moral avenue, these same actions would undermine trust, which is the strength of any currency – so restricting transactions could undermine cryptocurrencies’ usefulness for everyone.  One-by-one the crypto exchanges have been solidifying or creating their policies as it relates to their overall obligation.

Position of the Exchanges

In an interview this week, Bloomberg spoke with Jean-Marie Mognetti, the CEO of CoinShares. Mr. Mognetti quoted Winston Churchill saying, “Where there is great power, there is great responsibility.” Mognetti thinks the marketplace and exchanges have good leaders and can develop responsible protocols. When the Bloomberg interviewer asked how an exchange can square the idea that at its philosophical core, cryptocurrency is designed to be stateless and without favoritism, the Coinshares CEO offered, “It’s a conundrum because there is, what crypto is supposed to be, at its core, and how it’s supposed to work. I think sometimes there are events that require different things.” Mognetti then added, “if government asks for freezing assets or doing something like this, most crypto platforms would abide by it, and stand by it.” It seems that, although Mognetti doesn’t feel as though the company should take a position, a regulated environment, perhaps even a self-regulated exchange environment, is not something exchanges would be completely against.

After Ukraine’s Vice Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov publicly pleaded for all major crypto exchanges to freeze related accounts to further challenge Russia’s resources and undermine the war, the CEO of widely used Kraken, Jesse Powell, responded to the call. The Kraken co-founder used Twitter to make clear, that while he has “deep respect” for the people of Ukraine, he believes crypto should enforce individualism, rather than a nationalistic alliance to a country.

Among the key points Binance founder and CEO Changpeng Zhao, told the BBC related to freezing Russian accounts is, “Many normal Russians do not agree with war…We [Binance] differentiate between the Russian politicians who start wars and the normal people…We don’t control the industry.” To demonstrate his company’s official neutrality, Zhao said, “I can publish my sanction list, you can publish yours… Guess what? No-one else is going to follow. It just moves Russian users to other smaller platforms.”

Coinbase, another large crypto U.S.-based exchange, responded to the plea from Ukraine by saying it, “will not institute a blanket ban on all Coinbase transactions involving Russian addresses.” A company spokesman explained their position. “A unilateral and total ban would punish ordinary Russian citizens who are enduring historic currency destabilization as a result of their government’s aggression against a democratic neighbor,” a spokesman for Coinbase said.

 

Position of the U.S. Treasury

The U.S. is forbidding U.S. citizens from employing cryptocurrencies as a work-around to undermine global financial sanctions placed on Russia. The primary goal of the sanctions is to cause the country to come to a financial standstill and tear at the support of some of the wealthiest Russians that may have used bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as a safe haven asset leading up to the Russian invasion.  

Washington’s newest severe financial measures, include prohibiting transactions with Russia’s central bank and restricting access to the SWIFT global payments system.

The U.S. has also urged global cryptocurrency exchanges to block sanctioned individuals from accessing their digital assets regardless of location. The “ask” stops short of requiring this action.

Take-Away

Should crypto exchanges have within their power to do what many would consider “good”, or should they remain stateless and retain their neutrality promise to customers? Neutrality shows they can always be counted on to act one way, anything else may undermine their value and the value of the assets that are traded on their platforms.

While bitcoin and other cryptos are at their core stateless, and the crypto exchanges are honoring this, if required by a regulatory entity, it appears that they would view it as out of their hands and would abide by a legitimate authority.

 

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



Russia/Ukraine War and Reliance on Crypto and Blockchain



The International Energy Agency Takes Steps to Put a Ceiling on Oil Prices





Decentralized Finance, Is It The Future?



Is the Index Bubble Michael Burry Warned About Still Looming?

 

Sources

Bloomberg
Plus

https://news.bitcoin.com/coinbase-will-not-institute-a-blanket-ban-on-all-transactions-tied-to-russian-crypto-addresses/

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60576373

https://www.investopedia.com/treasury-department-cracks-down-on-crypto-used-to-bypass-russian-sanctions-5220729

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60576373


 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Should Bitcoin’s Ability to Soften Sanctions and Stabilize Russian Finances be Stopped?


  Image Credit: Dmitry Shustov (Flickr)


The Conundrum Crypto-Exchanges Face – What is Their Wartime Responsibility?

 

The ethical question crypto exchanges are faced with as it relates to an aggressive nation versus maintaining a stateless bitcoin or other cryptocurrency creates a predicament with no satisfying answers. Exchanges are faced with allowing as regular transactions those that potentially help fund military aggression while undermining financial sanctions, or halting these transactions, which may in part undermine their own existence. The exchanges have unapologetically pushed back on requests from both U.S. officials and Ukraine leaders. While adhering to the requests may appear the most moral avenue, these same actions would undermine trust, which is the strength of any currency – so restricting transactions could undermine cryptocurrencies’ usefulness for everyone.  One-by-one the crypto exchanges have been solidifying or creating their policies as it relates to their overall obligation.

Position of the Exchanges

In an interview this week, Bloomberg spoke with Jean-Marie Mognetti, the CEO of CoinShares. Mr. Mognetti quoted Winston Churchill saying, “Where there is great power, there is great responsibility.” Mognetti thinks the marketplace and exchanges have good leaders and can develop responsible protocols. When the Bloomberg interviewer asked how an exchange can square the idea that at its philosophical core, cryptocurrency is designed to be stateless and without favoritism, the Coinshares CEO offered, “It’s a conundrum because there is, what crypto is supposed to be, at its core, and how it’s supposed to work. I think sometimes there are events that require different things.” Mognetti then added, “if government asks for freezing assets or doing something like this, most crypto platforms would abide by it, and stand by it.” It seems that, although Mognetti doesn’t feel as though the company should take a position, a regulated environment, perhaps even a self-regulated exchange environment, is not something exchanges would be completely against.

After Ukraine’s Vice Prime Minister Mykhailo Fedorov publicly pleaded for all major crypto exchanges to freeze related accounts to further challenge Russia’s resources and undermine the war, the CEO of widely used Kraken, Jesse Powell, responded to the call. The Kraken co-founder used Twitter to make clear, that while he has “deep respect” for the people of Ukraine, he believes crypto should enforce individualism, rather than a nationalistic alliance to a country.

Among the key points Binance founder and CEO Changpeng Zhao, told the BBC related to freezing Russian accounts is, “Many normal Russians do not agree with war…We [Binance] differentiate between the Russian politicians who start wars and the normal people…We don’t control the industry.” To demonstrate his company’s official neutrality, Zhao said, “I can publish my sanction list, you can publish yours… Guess what? No-one else is going to follow. It just moves Russian users to other smaller platforms.”

Coinbase, another large crypto U.S.-based exchange, responded to the plea from Ukraine by saying it, “will not institute a blanket ban on all Coinbase transactions involving Russian addresses.” A company spokesman explained their position. “A unilateral and total ban would punish ordinary Russian citizens who are enduring historic currency destabilization as a result of their government’s aggression against a democratic neighbor,” a spokesman for Coinbase said.

 

Position of the U.S. Treasury

The U.S. is forbidding U.S. citizens from employing cryptocurrencies as a work-around to undermine global financial sanctions placed on Russia. The primary goal of the sanctions is to cause the country to come to a financial standstill and tear at the support of some of the wealthiest Russians that may have used bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies as a safe haven asset leading up to the Russian invasion.  

Washington’s newest severe financial measures, include prohibiting transactions with Russia’s central bank and restricting access to the SWIFT global payments system.

The U.S. has also urged global cryptocurrency exchanges to block sanctioned individuals from accessing their digital assets regardless of location. The “ask” stops short of requiring this action.

Take-Away

Should crypto exchanges have within their power to do what many would consider “good”, or should they remain stateless and retain their neutrality promise to customers? Neutrality shows they can always be counted on to act one way, anything else may undermine their value and the value of the assets that are traded on their platforms.

While bitcoin and other cryptos are at their core stateless, and the crypto exchanges are honoring this, if required by a regulatory entity, it appears that they would view it as out of their hands and would abide by a legitimate authority.

 

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading

Russia/Ukraine War and Reliance on Crypto and Blockchain

The International Energy Agency Takes Steps to Put a Ceiling on Oil Prices

Decentralized Finance, Is It The Future?

Is the Index Bubble Michael Burry Warned About Still Looming?

 

Sources

Bloomberg
Plus

https://news.bitcoin.com/coinbase-will-not-institute-a-blanket-ban-on-all-transactions-tied-to-russian-crypto-addresses/

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60576373

https://www.investopedia.com/treasury-department-cracks-down-on-crypto-used-to-bypass-russian-sanctions-5220729

https://www.bbc.com/news/technology-60576373


 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Stocks in the Sectors Positively Impacted by Armed Conflict


Image: PxHere (1413412)


The Various Ways to Allocate into “War Investments”

 

The developments between Russia and Ukraine, coupled with international reactions will impact all investment markets over the coming weeks/months. While prices will settle as markets push and pull to determine the appropriate range, the current reaction has created some investments to gain substantially along with those that have been hurt by weakness in their own sectors.

 

A Different Angle on Gold

Gold spiked to its highest level since late 2020. Gold is up by $180 per ounce, or almost 10% since the end of January when it was well below $1800. Gold mining stocks, specifically junior gold miners, have performed even better. As measured by the VanEck Junior Miners ETF (GTXJ), the sector is up 16.89%.

 

 

Current news and company information on junior miners is plentiful on Channelchek. There you can review the research on Great Panther Mining (GPL) which is exceeding, by a wide margin, the performance of gold and the junior mining ETF. Among the many other junior miners worth the attention of investors interested in this sector are: Allegiant Gold Ltd. (AUXXF), Great Bear Resources (GTBAF), and Aurania Resources (AUIAF, ARU:CA).

 

Crude is Up, Who
Benefits?

Oil’s surge to the $100 per barrel mark has brought energy sector stocks up along with it, with a bit of a lag. While crude oil has risen 8.69% since January, the overall energy sector measured by the XLE, which is heavily weighted with giants like Chevron and Exxon, is up over 2% in less than a month while the overall stock market has been sliding rapidly.

Smaller energy stocks, represented in the graph below by the ETF Investco Small-Cap Energy (PSCE) are up twice the larger companies and appear to now be gaining at a more rapid pace than crude.

 

 

Small and microcap energy sector stocks are demonstrating they have more upside potential than larger companies in this sector. Current news and company
information
on smaller energy stocks is plentiful on Channelchek. There you can review the research on Indonesia Energy (INDO) whose price has more than doubled over this period. InPlay Oil Inc. (IPOOF, IPO:CA) has also seen a positive impact.

Overlooked Natural Resources

Palladium and platinum mining stocks, although less talked about, have also surged. A good example is Palladium One Mining Inc. (NKORF, PDM:CA). Since the end of January, the stock has risen 9.68%. The percent performance of Palladium One has spiked double digits over the past two days.

 

Take-Way

Changes and events bring opportunities for investors to reallocate and open themselves to other areas to enrich their portfolios. While at times the more profitable changes are from events that we would prefer not to happen, these events are beyond our control. Whereas one’s portfolio positions are well within their control. For example: Reallocating into construction materials after a devastating hurricane should be done without guilt. The same is true for those investing to take advantage of the current Ukraine/Russia situation.

Channelchek provides data and research on companies that often move by higher percentages when their industry moves. Sign-up to receive our emails to supplement your knowledge in ways missing on other equity research and market information platforms.

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



Small-Cap Companies and IRA Investments



How Cryptocurrencies, Gold, and Oil Trade When Political Tensions Rise





Index Funds Still May Fall Apart over Time



Trading Accounts for Children

 

Sources

Channelchek.com

www.koyfin.com


 

Stay up to date. Follow us:

 

Will New Social Media Platform Truth Social Fulfill its Promise



Investors Watch Media SPAC Stay in the Green as Markets Falter

 

The SPAC, Digital World Acquisition Corp. (DWAC), which is likely to soon to become Trump Media & Technology Group (TMTG), is up 750% since the end of the third quarter 2021. This compares quite favorably to the S&P 500, which is up just 1.54% for the same period. Once merged, the media company founded by former President Trump will be a rare publicly owned entity with the former President’s name attached. 

The new social media app offered as a product of the company, Truth Social, became available on Monday in Apple’s App Store. During his White House term, the former President had credited himself with driving traffic and users to social media sites like Twitter. It is unclear how high of a profile Trump will take on this upstart, but it has been a very successful SPAC for investors. The IPO price was $10 and has had a 52-week range of $9.84 to $175. The pre-merger SPAC is currently trading in the upper $80 range. 

While there have been beta users of the app for months, Apple and TMTG made it available for all to download at midnight on Presidents Day. Users that had pre-ordered the app saw it automatically download to their devices. The first day was not without its glitches for Truth Social though. It was reported that many who sought to register their account were unable to and instead received the message, “Due to massive demand, we have placed you on our waitlist.”

Former U.S. Representative Devin Nunes left his Congressional seat to run Trump Media.  Nunes said in an interview with Maria Bartiromo this past Sunday that by mid-March he expects the app to be fully operational within the U.S.

 

De-SPAC Details

In December, TMTG raised $1 billion committed financing from private investors; the funds won’t be made available until the merger with DWAC has been completed. Also, upon merging, the company will have access to capital now being held in trust from the original investors, this is approximately $293 million. The merger is expected to occur during the first quarter of 2022.

Take-Away

One of the most successful SPACs initially offered in 2021 is Digital World Acquisition Corp. (DWAC). At one point the shares were up 1,650%. Today holders of the, as yet unmerged, SPAC are watching the product Truth Social made launched and are responding more positively than the overall market.

 

Paul Hoffman

Managing Editor, Channelchek

 

Suggested Reading



Update on DWAC, the Trump Media SPAC



Trump Media SPAC Merger Details





FOMC Approves Tighter Rules on Trading Activity for Officials



Have You Positioned Your Account to Not Fall Victim to a Crypto-Exchange Hack?

 

Sources

https://www.maxpixel.net/Trump-Truth-Social-Social-Media-App-6739660

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1849635/000119312521348598/d242442d425.htm

https://apps.apple.com/us/app/truth-social/id1586018825

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-trump-spac-might-have-just-given-gensler-and-warren-an-accidental-invitation-to-start-probing-it-11637267697


 

Stay up to date. Follow us: