An Alternative View of Today’s Economy by Cathie Wood
Cathie Wood made the argument that investors comparing the current economic crosscurrents to the 1970s are developing forecasts based on the wrong data-set. Speaking at the Finimize Modern Investor Summit via video, the ARK Invest funds founder instead suggested the current economy and inputs are similar to a different period – she then made a case for her reasoning.
“If you go back to the 19-teens (1912-1922), then the period was very similar to the period we’re in today,” she said at the Investor Summit. That period featured a war, a pandemic (Spanish flu), and supply-chain problems. “It was the most prolific period for innovation in history,” she said, pointing to the disruptive impact of electricity, the telephone, and the car.
Wood explained that inflation went from 24% in June 1920 to -15% in June 2021. She made clear she isn’t forecasting deflation this severe; however, she is expecting year-over-year inflation to swing into negative territory, with prices going down. “What has happened during the last few years is going to flip, and we think that the market will flip back to a preference for growth stocks and our innovation strategy,” she said.
Wood also elaborated on a tweet she issued earlier about how deep the inversion was of the yield curve.
Twitter @CathieDWood
“That’s the bond market saying, ‘hello, Fed, are you watching?'” She said Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell is trying to be the reincarnation of Paul Volcker at a time when it’s not appropriate. “I think that’s a mistake because this is not a 15-year problem; it’s a 15-month one,” said Wood. She highlighted that commodity prices are tumbling, supply chains are improving, and companies are
Ark Invest funds have been positioned in a more concentrated waiting pattern while Wood waits for inflation dynamics to be supportive of innovation. She gave an example; the innovation fund, for instance, has been narrowed to 32 companies from 58, Wood said, as she highlighted that the firm has become less convinced China is supportive of innovation.
Take Away
It’s worth reviewing the differing opinions of several investors that have made above-average returns in their careers. While almost no one is always correct, there are many different right ways to make money in any market.
The Ark flagship fund is down 63% this year; in the past, Wood has indicated her funds’ time period to measure return is five years, not one. Perhaps investors with a longer holding period can garner useful ideas from her pounding the deflation drum, while investors with a shorter time horizon are concerned about inflation.
Robinhood’s One Percent Match Program is an Industry First – Can it Attract More Buy and Hold Users?
Robinhood (HOOD) has entered the IRA market and is offering a 1% match on each dollar contributed to a retirement account on its platform. For someone putting away $5,000 in a qualified account, the funds would also be credited with an additional $50. The thought on this new product is that this seemingly small amount could compound dramatically over the years into much more than the original incentive.
While Individual Retirement Accounts (Roth and Traditional) are standard brokerage offerings, Robinhood is a decidedly different animal than most. A high percentage of its 22.9 million users tend to view themselves as shorter-term traders or investors in highly speculative assets. This customer trait tends to buck the trend at other brokerage firms that see a higher percentage of assets parked in market-indexed ETFs instead of individual stocks. In one quarter of 2021, 26% of Robinhood’s revenue came from trading in Dogecoin, the cryptocurrency that started out as a goof on crypto.
Developing an account base with larger, more stable assets per account is important for the company’s development. Robinhood users generally hold less in their accounts than at other brokerage firms. Shortly before the company went public last year, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) said in a report that the median Robinhood user had $240 in their account. A move toward longer-term savings that builds over time could help increase the average size. And it is important enough to the company that they decided they would compensate investors with the first-of-its-kind a matching program.
“We recognize that this is a pretty big moment for us as a company,” said Sam Nordstrom, an executive in product management at Robinhood. “Retirement is something that folks take very seriously, and we fully expect them to need to trust the institutions that help them save for retirement. So we’re looking to earn that trust over a period of time.”
What’s the IRA Match?
The Robinhood IRA Match provides an extra 1% paid by the brokerage firm. It’s not counted toward the account holders annual contribution limits and is typically available to invest immediately.
The IRA contribution limits for 2022 are $6,000 for people under age 50, which means they can earn up to $60 extra. For people age 50 and over, the limit is $7,000, which means they can earn up to $70 on top of their contributions.
Take Away
Developing a more diverse customer base by offering standard brokerage products has investment app Robinhood providing IRAs to its offerings on the platform.
In typical Robinhood style, they rolled out the offerings just before IRA season with a twist. And the twist may be just what it takes to earn new accounts and attract rollover assets from existing qualified money.
Darknet Markets Generate Millions in Revenue Selling Stolen Personal Data, Supply Chain Study Finds
It is common to hear news reports about large data breaches, but what happens once your personal data is stolen? Our research shows that, like most legal commodities, stolen data products flow through a supply chain consisting of producers, wholesalers and consumers. But this supply chain involves the interconnection of multiple criminal organizations operating in illicit underground marketplaces.
The stolen data supply chain begins with producers – hackers who exploit vulnerable systems and steal sensitive information such as credit card numbers, bank account information and Social Security numbers. Next, the stolen data is advertised by wholesalers and distributors who sell the data. Finally, the data is purchased by consumers who use it to commit various forms of fraud, including fraudulent credit card transactions, identity theft and phishing attacks.
This trafficking of stolen data between producers, wholesalers and consumers is enabled by darknet markets, which are websites that resemble ordinary e-commerce websites but are accessible only using special browsers or authorization codes.
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, Christian Jordan Howell
Assistant Professor in Cybercrime, University of South Florida and David Maimon, Professor of Criminal Justice and Criminology, Georgia State University.
We found several thousand vendors selling tens of thousands of stolen data products on 30 darknet markets. These vendors had more than US$140 million in revenue over an eight-month period.
The stolen data supply chain, from data theft to fraud. Christian Jordan Howell, CC BY-ND
Darknet Markets
Just like traditional e-commerce sites, darknet markets provide a platform for vendors to connect with potential buyers to facilitate transactions. Darknet markets, though, are notorious for the sale of illicit products. Another key distinction is that access to darknet markets requires the use of special software such as the Onion Router, or TOR, which provides security and anonymity.
Silk Road, which emerged in 2011, combined TOR and bitcoin to become the first known darknet market. The market was eventually seized in 2013, and the founder, Ross Ulbricht, was sentenced to two life sentences plus 40 years without the possibility of parole. Ulbricht’s hefty prison sentence did not appear to have the intended deterrent effect. Multiple markets emerged to fill the void and, in doing so, created a thriving ecosystem profiting from stolen personal data.
Example of a stolen data ‘product’ sold on a darknet market. Screenshot by Christian Jordan Howell, CC BY-ND
Stolen Data Ecosystem
Recognizing the role of darknet markets in trafficking stolen data, we conducted the largest systematic examination of stolen data markets that we are aware of to better understand the size and scope of this illicit online ecosystem. To do this, we first identified 30 darknet markets advertising stolen data products.
Next, we extracted information about stolen data products from the markets on a weekly basis for eight months, from Sept. 1, 2020, through April 30, 2021. We then used this information to determine the number of vendors selling stolen data products, the number of stolen data products advertised, the number of products sold and the amount of revenue generated.
In total, there were 2,158 vendors who advertised at least one of the 96,672 product listings across the 30 marketplaces. Vendors and product listings were not distributed equally across markets. On average, marketplaces had 109 unique vendor aliases and 3,222 product listings related to stolen data products. Marketplaces recorded 632,207 sales across these markets, which generated $140,337,999 in total revenue. Again, there is high variation across the markets. On average, marketplaces had 26,342 sales and generated $5,847,417 in revenue.
The size and scope of the stolen data ecosystem over an eight-month period. Christian Jordan Howell, CC BY-ND
After assessing the aggregate characteristics of the ecosystem, we analyzed each of the markets individually. In doing so, we found that a handful of markets were responsible for trafficking most of the stolen data products. The three largest markets – Apollon, WhiteHouse and Agartha – contained 58% of all vendors. The number of listings ranged from 38 to 16,296, and the total number of sales ranged from 0 to 237,512. The total revenue of markets also varied substantially during the 35-week period: It ranged from $0 to $91,582,216 for the most successful market, Agartha.
For comparison, most midsize companies operating in the U.S. earn between $10 million and $1 billion annually. Both Agartha and Cartel earned enough revenue within the 35-week period we tracked them to be characterized as midsize companies, earning $91.6 million and $32.3 million, respectively. Other markets like Aurora, DeepMart and White House were also on track to reach the revenue of a midsize company if given a full year to earn.
Our research details a thriving underground economy and illicit supply chain enabled by darknet markets. As long as data is routinely stolen, there are likely to be marketplaces for the stolen information.
These darknet markets are difficult to disrupt directly, but efforts to thwart customers of stolen data from using it offers some hope. We believe that advances in artificial intelligence can provide law enforcement agencies, financial institutions and others with information needed to prevent stolen data from being used to commit fraud. This could stop the flow of stolen data through the supply chain and disrupt the underground economy that profits from your personal data.
Patients Suffering with Hard-to-Treat Depression May Get Relief from Noninvasive Magnetic Brain Stimulation
Not only is depression a debilitating disease, but it is also widespread. Approximately 20 million adult Americans experience at least one episode of depression per year.
Millions of them take medication to treat their depression. But for many, the medications don’t work: Either they have minimal or no effect, or the side effects are intolerable. These patients have what is called treatment-resistant depression.
One promising treatment for such patients is a type of brain stimulation therapy called transcranial magnetic stimulation.
This treatment is not new; it has been around since 1995. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration cleared transcranial magnetic stimulation in 2008 for adults with “non-psychotic treatment-resistant depression,” which is typically defined as a failure to respond to two or more antidepressant medications. More recently, in 2018, the FDA cleared it for some patients with obsessive-compulsive disorder and smoking cessation.
Insurance generally covers these treatments. Both the psychiatrist and the equipment operator must be certified. While the treatment has been available for years, the equipment to perform the procedure remains expensive enough that few private psychiatry practices can afford it. But with the growing recognition of the potential of transcranial magnetic stimulation, the price will likely eventually come down and access will be greatly expanded.
Does it Work?
Transcranial magnetic stimulation is a noninvasive, pain-free procedure that has minimal to no side effects, and it often works. Research shows that 58% of once treatment-resistant patients experience a significant reduction in depression following four to six rounds of the therapy. More than 40 independent clinical trials – with more than 2,000 patients worldwide – have demonstrated that repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation is an effective therapy for the treatment of resistant major depression.
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 Patricia Junquera, Associate Professor and Vice Chair of Clinical Services, Florida International University.
As a professor and psychiatrist who has used transcranial magnetic stimulation to treat some of my patients, I have seen depression symptoms decrease even within the first two weeks of treatment. What’s more, the effects continue after the treatment has ended, typically for six months to a year. After that, the patient has the option of maintenance treatment.
About the Procedure
For the patient, the procedure is easy and simple. One sits in a comfortable chair with a snug pillow that holds their head in place, puts on earplugs and can then relax, check their phone, watch TV or read a book.
A treatment coil, which looks like a figure 8, is placed on the patient’s head. A nearby stimulator sends an electrical current to the coil, which transforms the current into a magnetic field.
The field, which is highly concentrated, turns on and off rapidly while targeting a portion of the prefrontal cortex – the area of the brain responsible for mood regulation.
Researchers know that people suffering from depression have reduced blood flow and less activity in that part of the brain. Transcranial magnetic stimulation causes increases in both blood flow and in the levels of dopamine and glutamate – two neurotransmitters that are responsible for brain functions like concentration, memory and sleep. It’s the repeated stimulation of this area – the “depression circuit” of the brain – that brings the antidepressant effect.
It is Not ‘Electroshock’ or Deep Brain Stimulation
Some people confuse transcranial magnetic stimulation with electroconvulsive therapy, a procedure used for patients with severe depression or catatonia. With electroshock therapy, the anesthetized patient receives a direct electrical current, which causes a seizure. Typically, people who undergo this procedure experience some memory loss after treatment.
Transcranial magnetic stimulation is very different. It doesn’t require anesthesia, and it doesn’t affect memory. The patient can resume daily activities right after each treatment. Dormant brain connections are reignited without causing a seizure.
It should also not be confused with deep brain stimulation, which is a surgical procedure used to treat obsessive-compulsive disorder, tremors, epilepsy and Parkinson’s disease.
Side Effects and Access
Transcranial magnetic stimulation patients undergo a total of 36 treatments, at 19 minutes each, for three to six weeks. Research has concluded that this is the best protocol for treatment. Some patients report that it feels like someone is tapping on their head. Others don’t feel anything.
Some very minor side effects may occur. The most common is facial twitching and scalp discomfort during treatment, sensations that go away after the session ends. Some patients report a mild headache or discomfort at the application site. Depending on how effective the therapy was, some patients return for follow-ups every few weeks or months. It can be used in addition to medications, or with no medication at all.
Not everyone with depression can undergo this type of brain stimulation therapy. Those with epilepsy or a history of head injury may not qualify. People with metallic fillings in their teeth are OK for treatment, but others with implanted, nonremovable metallic devices in or around the head are not. Those with pacemakers, defibrillators and vagus nerve stimulators may also not qualify, because the magnetic force of the treatment coil may dislodge these devices and cause severe pain or injury.
But for those who are able to use the therapy, the results can be remarkable. For me, it is amazing to see these patients smile again – and come out on the other side feeling hopeful.
Dramatic Collapse of the Cryptocurrency Exchange FTX Contains Lessons for Investors but Won’t Affect Most People
In the fast-paced world of cryptocurrency, vast sums of money can be made or lost in the blink of an eye. In early November 2022, the second-largest cryptocurrency exchange, FTX, was valued at more than US$30 billion. By Nov. 14, FTX was in bankruptcy proceedings along with more than 100 companies connected to it. D. Brian Blank and Brandy Hadley are professors who study finance, investing and fintech. They explain how and why this incredible collapse happened, what effect it might have on the traditional financial sector and whether you need to care if you don’t own any cryptocurrency.
What Happened?
In 2019, Sam Bankman-Fried founded FTX, a company that ran one of the largest cryptocurrency exchanges.
FTX is where many crypto investors trade and hold their cryptocurrency, similar to the New York Stock Exchange for stocks. Bankman-Fried is also the founder of Alameda Research, a hedge fund that trades and invests in cryptocurrencies and crypto companies.
Sam Bankman-Fried founded both FTX and the investment firm Alameda Research. News sources have reported some less-than-responsible financial dealings between the two companies. Image via The Conversation.
Within the traditional financial sector, these two companies would be separate firms entirely or at least have divisions and firewalls in place between them. But in early November 2022, news outlets reported that a significant proportion of Alameda’s assets were a type of cryptocurrency released by FTX itself.
A few days later, news broke that FTX had allegedly been loaning customer assets to Alameda for risky trades without the consent of the customers and also issuing its own FTX cryptocurrency for Alameda to use as collateral. As a result, criminal and regulatory investigators began scrutinizing FTX for potentially violating securities law.
These two pieces of news basically led to a bank run on FTX.
Large crypto investors, like FTX’s competitor Binance, as well as individuals, began to sell off cryptocurrency held on FTX’s exchange. FTX quickly lost its ability to meet customer withdrawals and halted trading. On Nov. 14, FTX was also hit by an apparent insider hack and lost $600 million worth of cryptocurrency.
That same day, FTX, Alameda Research and 130 other affiliated companies founded by Bankman-Fried filed for bankruptcy. This action may leave more than a million suppliers, employees and investors who bought cryptocurrencies through the exchange or invested in these companies with no way to get their money back.
Among the groups and individuals who held currency on the FTX platform were many of the normal players in the crypto world, but a number of more traditional investment firms also held assets within FTX. Sequoia Capital, a venture capital firm, as well as the Ontario Teacher’s Pension, are estimated to have held millions of dollars of their investment portfolios in ownership stake of FTX. They have both already written off these investments with FTX as lost.
In traditional markets, corporations generally limit the risk they expose themselves to by maintaining liquidity and solvency. Liquidity is the ability of a firm to sell assets quickly without those assets losing much value. Solvency is the idea that a company’s assets are worth more than what that company owes to debtors and customers.
But the crypto world has generally operated with much less caution than the traditional financial sector, and FTX is no exception. About two-thirds of the money that FTX owed to the people who held cryptocurrency on its exchange – roughly $11.3 billion of $16 billion owed – was backed by illiquid coins created by FTX. FTX was taking its customers’ money, giving it to Alameda to make risky investments and then creating its own currency, known as FTT, as a replacement – cryptocurrency that it was unable to sell at a high enough price when it needed to.
In addition, nearly 40% of Alameda’s assets were in FTX’s own cryptocurrency – and remember, both companies were founded by the same person.
This all came to a head when investors decided to sell their coins on the exchange. FTX did not have enough liquid assets to meet those demands. This, in turn, drove the value of FTT from over $26 a coin at the beginning of November to under $2 by Nov. 13. By this point, FTX owed more money to its customers than it was worth.
In regulated exchanges, investing with customer funds is illegal. Additionally, auditors validate financial statements, and firms must publish the amount of money they hold in reserve that is available to fund customer withdrawals. And even if things go wrong, the Securities Investor Protection Corporation – or SIPC – protects depositors against the loss of investments from an exchange failure or financially troubled brokerage firm. None of these guardrails are in place within the crypto world.
Why is this a Big Deal in Crypto?
As a result of this meltdown, the company Binance is now considering creating an industry recovery fund – akin to a private version of SIPC insurance – to avoid future failures of crypto exchanges.
But while the collapse of FTX and Alameda – valued at more than $30 billion and now essentially worth nothing – is dramatic, the bigger implication is simply the potential lost trust in crypto. Bank runs are rare in traditional financial institutions, but they are increasingly common in the crypto space. Given that Bankman-Fried and FTX were seen as some of the biggest, most trusted figures in crypto, these events may lead more investors to think twice about putting money in crypto.
If I Don’t Own Crypto, Should I Care?
Though investment in cryptocurrencies has grown rapidly, the entire crypto market – valued at over $3 trillion at its peak – is much smaller than the $120 trillion traditional stock market.
While investors and regulators are still evaluating the consequences of this fall, the impact on any person who doesn’t personally own crypto will be minuscule. It is true that many larger investment funds, like BlackRock and the Ontario Teachers Pension, held investments in FTX, but the estimated $95 million the Ontario Teachers Pension lost through the collapse of FTX is just 0.05% of the entire fund’s investments.
The takeaway for most individuals is not to invest in unregulated markets without understanding the risks. In high-risk environments like crypto, it’s possible to lose everything – a lesson investors in FTX are learning the hard way.
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 D. Brian Blank, Assistant Professor of Finance, Mississippi State University and Brandy Hadley, Associate Professor of Finance and the David A. Thompson Professor in Applied Investments, Appalachian State University
Blackboxstocks, Inc. is a financial technology and social media hybrid platform offering real-time proprietary analytics and news for stock and options traders of all levels. Our web-based software employs “predictive technology” enhanced by artificial intelligence to find volatility and unusual market activity that may result in the rapid change in the price of a stock or option. Blackbox continuously scans the NASDAQ, New York Stock Exchange, CBOE, and all other options markets, analyzing over 10,000 stocks and up to 1,500,000 options contracts multiple times per second. We provide our users with a fully interactive social media platform that is integrated into our dashboard, enabling our users to exchange information and ideas quickly and efficiently through a common network. We recently introduced a live audio/video feature that allows our members to broadcast on their own channels to share trade strategies and market insight within the Blackbox community. Blackbox is a SaaS company with a growing base of users that spans 42 countries; current subscription fees are $99.97 per month or $959.00 annually. For more information, go to: www.blackboxstocks.com .
Joe Gomes, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Joshua Zoepfel, Research Associate, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.
3Q Results. Revenue for the quarter was $1.22 million, a decrease from last year’s $1.47 million and in-line with our estimate of $1.21 million. The average users were down as well in the quarter, 5,197 compared to 5,535 a year ago and 6,181 in the second quarter. The Company reported a net loss of $1.31 million, or ($0.10) per share, versus a net loss of $505,976 or ($0.05) last year. We estimated a net loss of $1.29 million or ($0.10).
Tough Environment, but a Silver Lining. Continued poor performance in the stock market, along with high inflation and sluggish GDP, has caused the Company to see decreases in overall performance year-over-year. However, the Company will have a Black Friday/Cyber Monday promotion that we believe will attract new users and bring back past users.
This Company Sponsored Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).
*Analyst certification and important disclosures included in the full report. NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of this research summary. Proper due diligence is required before making any investment decision.
Billions in Artemis Program Budget Could Cause these Companies to Rocket
What companies could gain from the Artemis missions to the moon?
The multibillion-dollar Artemis program has been unfolding over the past several years. The most recent success is the 322-foot-tall Space Launch System (SLS), the most powerful rocket NASA has developed, and the Orion spacecraft. This is all designed to, in time, safely carry astronauts to the moon’s orbit and provide a platform for the U.S. to return to the moon’s surface for the first time since 1972.
The mission of Artemis One is to test a powerful NASA rocket called the Space Launch System, as well as the Orion spacecraft that the rocket will ferry into orbit. After the Florida launch, NASA plans to use the SLS rocket to direct Orion on a route around the moon, after which the vehicle’s crewless capsule will return to Earth and parachute into the Pacific Ocean. Those steps represent another trial geared toward ensuring the Orion crew module can safely bring astronauts back from orbit.
The initial mission will help set the stage for a crewed mission to the moon that NASA hopes to conduct as early as 2025. These efforts will entail higher technology and special equipment designed especially for a unique purpose. With billions being spent, investors may ask what companies may benefit. Obviously, the major contractors, then subcontractors and material suppliers.
The cost of SLS is shown above. Additionally, the cost to assemble, integrate, prepare and launch the SLS and its payloads are funded separately under Exploration Ground Systems, currently at about $600 million per year. (Source:Wikipedia)
Major Contractors
Keeping in mind that an unsuccessful launch could weigh on these companies, as much as they may be propelled by continued success, these are prime contractors. NASA’s prime contractors for the rock launch system is Aerojet Rocketdyne (AJRD), Boeing (NYSE: BA), and Northrop Grumman (NOC). As a note, AJRD showed up as one of 5 portfolio holdings of hedge fund manager Michael Burry.
Lockheed Martin (LMT) is the prime contractor on the Orion spacecraft, while NASA’s prime contractors for the rocket launch system include Redwire’s (RDW) critical sun sensor components and advanced optical imaging technologies, they will be launching on NASA’s Orion spacecraft as a part of the space agency’s Artemis One mission. Aeva Technologies (AEVA) is also involved with a LiDAR-based mobile terrain-mapping and navigation system for lunar and other planet exploration, while KULR Technology Group (KULR) has a battery safety contract with NASA to test its lithium-ion cells going into battery packs designed for the Artemis Program.
Raytheon Technologies'(RTX) was selected to advance spacewalking capabilities in low-Earth orbit and on the Moon. Goodyear Tire & Rubber (GT) has been contracted to develop tires to perform on the lunar surface.
Rocket Lab (RKLB) has been called upon to test new orbits around the moon. For communications, Lockheed Martin (LMT), Amazon (AMZN), and Cisco (CSCO) are working in conjunction to develop a new voice, AI, and tablet-based video technologies for use around the moon.
The companies being called upon is expected to grow rapidly after scientific experiments begin on the moon’s surface.
Voyager Digital Ltd.’s (TSX: VOYG) (OTCQX: VYGVF) (FRA: UCD2) US subsidiary, Voyager Digital, LLC, is a fast-growing cryptocurrency platform in the United States founded in 2018 to bring choice, transparency, and cost-efficiency to the marketplace. Voyager offers a secure way to trade over 100 different crypto assets using its easy-to-use mobile application. Through its subsidiary Coinify ApS, Voyager provides crypto payment solutions for both consumers and merchants around the globe. To learn more about the company, please visit https://www.investvoyager.com.
Joe Gomes, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Joshua Zoepfel, Research Associate, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.
The Collapse of FTX. As widely reported, on Friday cryptocurrency exchange FTX filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the U.S. Included in the filing is subsidiary FTX US, the entity that had won the auction process for Voyager.
The Old Deal. Recall, back in October, the Bankruptcy Court approved Voyager’s entry into an asset purchase agreement between FTX US and Voyager. FTX US’s bid was valued at approximately $1.422 billion. Voyager’s claims against Three Arrows Capital would have remained with the bankruptcy estate and any recovery on account of the 3AC claims would have been available for additional distribution to Voyager creditors.
This Company Sponsored Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).
*Analyst certification and important disclosures included in the full report. NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of this research summary. Proper due diligence is required before making any investment decision.
TAAL Distributed Information Technologies Inc. delivers value-added blockchain services, providing professional-grade, highly scalable blockchain infrastructure and transactional platforms to support businesses building solutions and applications upon the BitcoinSV platform, and developing, operating, and managing distributed computing systems for enterprise users.
Joe Gomes, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Joshua Zoepfel, Research Associate, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.
3Q 2022 Results. Revenue totaled CAD$4.4 million for the quarter (all figures in CAD), or a decrease from the prior year’s $12.3 million, and is down sequentially from $7.3 million the previous quarter. The decrease from the prior year and quarter is due to the continuation of the macro trend in cryptocurrency with decreasing prices. Net loss for TAAL was $4.9 million, or diluted EPS of ($0.14), compared to net income of $2.1 million last year, or $0.05. We would note TAAL still does not have an auditor so all statements were prepared solely by management.
Continued Challenging Environment. The Company noted the continued volatility of the cryptocurrency prices, including the Company’s main coins, Bitcoin Core (“BTC”), BitcoinSV (“BSV”) and Bitcoin Cash (“BCH”). For BSV, the price of the coin was approximately $67 on September 30, 2022, and is now $52 as of November 10, 2022.
This Company Sponsored Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).
*Analyst certification and important disclosures included in the full report. NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of this research summary. Proper due diligence is required before making any investment decision.
One Stop Systems, Inc. (OSS) designs and manufactures innovative AI Transportable edge computing modules and systems, including ruggedized servers, compute accelerators, expansion systems, flash storage arrays, and Ion Accelerator™ SAN, NAS, and data recording software for AI workflows. These products are used for AI data set capture, training, and large-scale inference in the defense, oil and gas, mining, autonomous vehicles, and rugged entertainment applications. OSS utilizes the power of PCI Express, the latest GPU accelerators and NVMe storage to build award-winning systems, including many industry firsts, for industrial OEMs and government customers. The company enables AI on the Fly® by bringing AI datacenter performance to ‘the edge,’ especially on mobile platforms, and by addressing the entire AI workflow, from high-speed data acquisition to deep learning, training, and inference. OSS products are available directly or through global distributors. For more information, go to www.onestopsystems.com.
Joe Gomes, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Joshua Zoepfel, Research Associate, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.
3Q22 Results. Record quarterly revenue of $18.8 million, up 17.7% y-o-y. Consensus was $18.5 million and we also had forecast $18.5 million. OSS reported GAAP net income of $132,533, or $0.01 per share, compared to $980,696, or $0.05 per share last year. Adjusted EPS was $0.03 in 3Q22, compared to $0.08 per share in 3Q21. We were at $0.02 and $0.04, respectively. Consensus was at $0.04 per share.
AI Transportable Business a Contributor. The AI Transportable business posted solid growth in the quarter, with two AI Transportable clients now in the top 10 of OSS’s clients. The Company won six major programs during the quarter, five of which are in the AI Transportables space. At quarter’s end, OSS had 30 pending awards, 18 of which are in the AI Transportables space.
This Company Sponsored Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).
*Analyst certification and important disclosures included in the full report. NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of this research summary. Proper due diligence is required before making any investment decision.
Why Meta’s Share Price Collapse is Good News for the Future of Social Media
Facebook may not be the original social media platform, but it has stood the test of time – until recently. Meta, the company that owns Facebook, Instagram, and WhatsApp, saw its value plummet by around $80 billion (£69 billion) in just one day at the end of October after its third-quarter profits halved amid the global slowdown. Meta is now valued at around $270 billion compared with more than $1 trillion last year.
Several issues have caused investors to turn away from the social media giant, including falling advertising revenue, a conflict with Apple over its app store charging policy, and competition for younger audiences from newer platforms such as TikTok.
Meta’s chief executive Mark Zuckerberg has also used his majority control to double down on his ambitions for the “metaverse”, a virtual reality project on which he has already spent more than $100 billion – with questionable results, according to the initial investor and media reaction. Zuckerberg has promised even more investment in the metaverse next year.
It’s tempting to describe this spending spree as a billionaire’s “insane fantasy”, but there is a simpler explanation. As dominant platforms compete for a limited amount of advertising revenue, regulation – particularly when it differs between countries or regions – has created space for more competitors. This is good news for new social media companies, but it also means that the only way Meta is likely to be able to keep its dominant position is by placing a massive bet on the technology of the future. Zuckerberg believes that means the metaverse, but this remains to be seen.
Tech’s Changing Fortunes
Even with its recent troubles, Meta owns the largest social network in the world. Those recent results that caused investors to flee in their droves still showed total revenues of $27 billion and profits of $4.4 billion.
To maintain its position as the market leader in the past, Meta has typically bought its most promising competitors as early as possible. Integrating these newly acquired startups into the company’s ecosystem helped to maximize advertising revenue and preclude competition.
Research shows that digital markets are typically dominated by a single firm, but also that these firms tend to be much more specialized than the major companies of the past. Meta is only active in social media and makes money almost exclusively by selling advertising.
Attempts by such firms to expand into other areas typically fail – know anyone with a Facebook phone? And while you may not remember Google’s attempt at social media, iPhone users are probably at least aware of Apple’s maps app.
So Facebook relies on consumers using devices produced by other tech companies to make money. But as global social media advertising revenue slows down, this is becoming more difficult. Apple has begun charging Meta for the revenue it makes from iPhone users, for example. And research shows that, when two companies compete to make money from the same captive source, their successive markups not only push prices higher for consumers but also keep profits lower for both firms.
Global Domination Fail
Meta’s strategy has, until recently, allowed it to rule social media in western markets – but not in China, a country of more than 300 million social media users. Since 2009, Facebook has been blocked by the country’s “great firewall”, the largest and most sophisticated system of censorship in the world.
Reported attempts to adapt Facebook to suit Chinese government media control have never been successful. And so, Chinese company ByteDance was able to launch a news platform called Toutiao in 2012 without having to compete with a dominant social network. In 2016, ByteDance launched Douyin, a social media platform for publishing short videos, which was subsequently released to the rest of the world in 2018 as TikTok.
Despite not being profitable, ByteDance’s market capitalization is now estimated at around $300 billion – versus Meta’s current £270 billion valuation. It is also popular among younger users, that tend to be much more avid social media users.
Meta cannot simply buy TikTok: it is too big, not publicly traded and under tight control by the Chinese government. Zuckerberg’s firm has instead tried to compete by launching similar features on Instagram. Ironically, the only large market where this strategy is really working is India, a country that banned TikTok in 2021 due to a military conflict with China.
Fair Competition
At the same time that TikTok has been expanding beyond Meta’s reach, western regulators have also started to examine the impact of the lack of competition in digital markets on innovation. While research shows that the winner-take-all nature of highly innovative markets is typically good for consumers, this is only true when all companies get a fair chance to become dominant.
In addition to recent rulings against tech company dominance by its highest court, the European Union also recently introduced the Digital Markets Act. This outlaws many practices used by dominant firms to preserve their status in a market.
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 Renaud Foucart, Senior Lecturer in Economics, Lancaster University Management School, Lancaster University.
ISG (Information Services Group) (Nasdaq: III) is a leading global technology research and advisory firm. A trusted business partner to more than 700 clients, including more than 75 of the world’s top 100 enterprises, ISG is committed to helping corporations, public sector organizations, and service and technology providers achieve operational excellence and faster growth. The firm specializes in digital transformation services, including automation, cloud and data analytics; sourcing advisory; managed governance and risk services; network carrier services; strategy and operations design; change management; market intelligence and technology research and analysis. Founded in 2006, and based in Stamford, Conn., ISG employs more than 1,300 digital-ready professionals operating in more than 20 countries—a global team known for its innovative thinking, market influence, deep industry and technology expertise, and world-class research and analytical capabilities based on the industry’s most comprehensive marketplace data. For additional information, visit www.ISG-One.com
Joe Gomes, Senior Research Analyst, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Joshua Zoepfel, Research Associate, Noble Capital Markets, Inc.
Refer to the full report for the price target, fundamental analysis, and rating.
Business Remains on Track. Information Services Group remains on track to post record revenue and adjusted EBITDA. According to management, demand remains strong for digital services, driving a strong profitable mix of products and services, while ISG continues to see an uptick in demand for its cost takeout services given the uncertain economic environment.
Priming the Pump for Additional Growth. ISG added 56 professionals during the quarter, an increase of 3.8%. The new hires are expected to focus on the higher growth digital and recurring revenue opportunities. During the quarter, ISG serviced 625 clients, including 65 new to ISG, both up from the prior year and quarter-over-quarter.
This Company Sponsored Research is provided by Noble Capital Markets, Inc., a FINRA and S.E.C. registered broker-dealer (B/D).
*Analyst certification and important disclosures included in the full report. NOTE: investment decisions should not be based upon the content of this research summary. Proper due diligence is required before making any investment decision.
Acquisition creates a global powerhouse in change management
STAMFORD, Conn., November 3, 2022 ― Information Services Group (ISG) (Nasdaq: III), a leading global technology research and advisory firm, today announced it has acquired Change 4 Growth, an award-winning company specializing in transformational change for enterprises.
Founded in 2017, Change 4 Growth offers market-leading change solutions and expertise to support large-scale business transformations involving people, process and technology. Last year it was named a top 10 change management company in the U.S. by Manage HR magazine.
“The combination of Change 4 Growth and our existing ISG Enterprise Change business creates a global powerhouse in change management at a time when demand for such services is expected to grow significantly,” said Michael P. Connors, chairman and CEO of ISG. “Enterprises are in a state of continuous transformation, as they adjust to new technologies, new competitors, and ever-changing market forces. To be successful, they need a highly adaptable, change-ready workforce.”
The combined business will go to market as ISG Enterprise Change with capabilities in organizational change management (OCM), communications, training development and delivery, leadership development, mentoring, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) programs, executive coaching and culture change.
“Transformational change is a complex journey best undertaken with a strong and knowledgeable partner,” said Beth Thomas, CEO and founder of Change 4 Growth, who has been named partner and co-leader of ISG Enterprise Change. “Together, we will offer unrivalled expertise, methodologies and tools to help our clients build and sustain change-capable organizations. We could not be more excited to be joining ISG and expanding the reach of both firms’ industry-leading solutions.”
Among those solutions is ATLAS™, a transformational change platform developed by Change 4 Growth that provides access to OCM templates and tools for greater efficiency and gives clients real-time visibility via dashboards into the progress and health of their business transformations. ISG Enterprise Change intends to offer this new solution to its clients immediately.
Change 4 Growth and ISG Enterprise Change together have successfully conducted more than 1,000 change management engagements involving more than 5 million employees. The two businesses have served more than 300 clients in industries including retail, automotive, manufacturing, banking and financial services, insurance, utilities and healthcare.
For more information about ISG’s OCM services, visit the ISG website.
About ISG
ISG (Information Services Group) (Nasdaq: III) is a leading global technology research and advisory firm. A trusted business partner to more than 800 clients, including more than 75 of the world’s top 100 enterprises, ISG is committed to helping corporations, public sector organizations, and service and technology providers achieve operational excellence and faster growth. The firm specializes in digital transformation services, including automation, cloud and data analytics; sourcing advisory; managed governance and risk services; network carrier services; strategy and operations design; change management; market intelligence and technology research and analysis. Founded in 2006, and based in Stamford, Conn., ISG employs more than 1,300 digital-ready professionals operating in more than 20 countries—a global team known for its innovative thinking, market influence, deep industry and technology expertise, and world-class research and analytical capabilities based on the industry’s most comprehensive marketplace data. For more information, visit www.isg-one.com.
