Universal banks on ‘Migration’ to expand its animation lead over Disney

Universal and Illuminations latest animated film centers on a family of ducks who decides to leave the safety of a New England pond for an adventurous trip to Jamaica. However, their well-laid plans quickly go awry when they get lost and wind up in New York City.

Universal

Disney dropped the animation crown. Universal has picked it up.

And, with “Migration” opening Friday, the studio is looking to strengthen its grip.

“Migration,” a comic tale about a family of New England ducks that leave their pond for Jamaica, but end up in New York City, is expected to tally $25 million during its domestic debut. Universal has more conservative expectations, forecasting between $10 million and $15 million in ticket sales for the film’s opening.

While that pales in comparison to the $100 million-plus debuts of Illumination/Universal’s “The Super Mario Bros. Movie” and the latest “Minions” film, it’s comparable to the studio and DreamWorks Animation’s “Puss in Boots: The Last Wish,” which ran in theaters for several months, securing nearly $500 million globally.

“‘Migration,’ with solid word-of-mouth and strong reviews, will have to be judged more on its long-term results than the opening weekend splash,” said Paul Dergarabedian, senior media analyst at Comscore.

Disney’s most recent animated film “Wish” failed to connect with audiences. After generating $31.6 million domestically over the five-day Thanksgiving holiday, the film has grossed a total of $55.2 million in the U.S. and Canada. Globally, the film has reached $127.1 million. The film had a budget of $200 million, not including marketing costs.

For comparison, “Trolls Band Together,” which was released the week before Thanksgiving, secured $30 million for its three-day debut and nearly $180 million worldwide. The film had a budget of $95 million, not including marketing costs.

Representatives from Disney did not immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment.

How Disney lost the crown

Ariana DeBose stars as Asha in Disney’s new animated film “Wish.”

Disney

Disney established its animated feature empire in the early 20th century with 1937’s “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs” and continued to dominate, more or less, into the 1980s and 1990s with “The Little Mermaid” and “Beauty and the Beast.”

Later, it acquired Pixar, which together with Walt Disney Animation, generated billions in box-office receipts for the company.

“The world of feature animation has been dominated for decades by Disney and for good reason,” said Dergarabedian. “They set the gold standard.”

Then came the Covid pandemic. While theaters closed, Disney sought to pad its fledgling streaming service Disney+ with content, stretching its creative teams thin, and sending theatrical movies during the pandemic straight to digital.

The decision trained parents to seek out new Disney titles on streaming, not theaters, even when Disney opted to return its films to the big screen. Compounding Disney’s woes was a general sense from audiences that the company’s content had grown overly existential and too concerned with social issues beyond the reach of children.

As a result, no Disney animated feature from Pixar or Walt Disney Animation has generated more than $480 million at the global box office since 2019.

“I think what’s changed is that Disney doesn’t get the benefit of the doubt,” said Josh Brown, CEO at Ritholtz Wealth Management and a CNBC contributor. “And people will not go to a movie just because it’s the latest Disney movie in the way that previous generations did.”

Universal appeal

But as moviegoers have returned to cinemas in the wake of the pandemic, more are gravitating toward Universal’s fare.

“Simply put, Illumination Animation’s only agenda is entertainment,” said Jeff Bock, senior box-office analyst at Exhibitor Relations. “Their animated films are sweet and simple and family audiences appreciate that. Disney sometimes attempts to pack too much into their animated features, and lately have been losing sight of the simplicity of the genre.”

Not to mention, Universal has been revisiting tried and true fan-favorite stories and characters. In fact, Illumination hasn’t released a nonfranchise film since 2016, and only three of the last 10 DreamWorks features have been original stories.

For comparison, of the last eight films released by a Disney animation studio, seven have been original films with just 2022’s “Lightyear,” a “Toy Story” spinoff, tied to an existing franchise. Previously, Disney has thrived bringing new animated material to audiences, but in the post-pandemic world, it has struggled.

It is the exact opposite strategy of Disney’s live-action theatrical releases, which have relied heavily on established franchises. Think “Indiana Jones and the Dial of Destiny,” “The Little Mermaid,” Marvel franchise films and “Haunted Mansion.”

Iger has said that Disney will continue to make sequels, without apology, but admitted that the company needs to be more selective in which franchises it revisits.

“I think there has to be a reason to make them, you have to have a good story,” Iger said during The New York Times’ DealBook Summit in late November.

“Minions: The Rise of Gru” is the sequel to the 2015 film, “Minions,” and spin-off/prequel to the main “Despicable Me” film series.

Universal

In animation, returning to popular characters and worlds is an easy way to capture the attention of parents and kids.

“Because they have seen these characters and related stories before, they have high confidence that they will be high quality, entertaining and ‘brand safe’ for their kids,” said Peter Csathy, founder and chair of advisory firm Creative Media. “And they may even anticipate franchise animated films as much as their kids.”

In developing consistent franchise content like Minions and Trolls, Universal is now able to introduce a new film like “Migration” with a sense of clout. Parents who see that the film is from the same studio that brought other fan favorites to the big screen are then more likely to come out to see it.

It’s what Pixar was able to do so well for nearly three decades.

“With ‘Minions,’ ‘Secret Life of Pets’ and ‘Sing,’ I think Illumination is a brand people are aware of by now,” said Bock. “And that awareness will boost ‘Migration’s’ flight pattern, likely extending its box-office run. That’s key. The long play.”

So far, “Migration” has generally favorable reviews from critics. If audiences respond well, and spread the word, the film could see a solid run, adding to the prestige of Universal’s animation brand.

“The kids animation market opportunity will never grow old, so those playing at the top of the game – as is Illumination – hold the promise and possibility of becoming the next go-to brand for quality animation after Pixar,” said Csathy.

Next year, Disney and Pixar are set to release “Inside Out 2” in June, while Universal and Illumination’s “Despicable Me 4” is scheduled to hit theaters weeks later in July.

Disclosure: NBCUniversal is the parent company of Universal Pictures and CNBC.

Source link

#Universal #banks #Migration #expand #animation #lead #Disney

Nike sinks 12% after it slashes sales outlook, unveils $2 billion in cost cuts

Nike on Thursday unveiled plans to cut costs by about $2 billion over the next three years as it lowered its sales outlook.

The stock fell about 12% in premarket trading Friday. Nike shares were up 4.7% so far this year through Thursday’s close, lagging far behind the S&P 500’s gains for the year. Retailer Foot Locker, which has leaned heavily on Nike products, fell about 8% in extended trading.

Nike now expects full-year reported revenue to grow approximately 1%, compared to a prior outlook of up mid-single digits. In the current quarter, which includes the second half of the holiday shopping season, Nike expects reported revenue to be slightly negative as it laps tough prior year comparisons, and sales to be up low single digits in the fourth quarter.

“Last quarter as I provided guidance, I highlighted a number of risks in our operating environment, including the effects of a stronger U.S. dollar on foreign currency translation, consumer demand over the holiday season and our second half wholesale order books. Looking forward, the impact of these risks is becoming clearer,” finance chief Matthew Friend said on a call with analysts.

“This new outlook reflects increased macro headwinds, particularly in Greater China and EMEA. Adjusted digital growth plans are based on recent digital traffic softness and higher marketplace promotions, life cycle management of key product franchises and a stronger U.S. dollar that has negatively impacted second-half reported revenue versus 90 days ago.”

The company still expects gross margins to expand between 1.4 and 1.6 percentage points. Excluding restructuring charges, it expects to deliver on its full-year earnings outlook.

As part of its plan to cut costs, Nike said it’s looking to simplify its product assortment, increase automation and its use of technology, streamline the overall organization by reducing management layers and leverage its scale “to drive greater efficiency.”

It plans to reinvest the savings it gets from those initiatives into fueling future growth, accelerating innovation and driving long-term profitability.

“As we look ahead to a softer second-half revenue outlook, we remain focused on strong gross margin execution and disciplined cost management,Friend said in a press release.

The plan will cost the company between $400 million and $450 million in pretax restructuring charges that will largely come to fruition in Nike’s current quarter. Those costs are mostly related to employee severance costs, Nike said.

Earlier this month, The Oregonian reported that Nike had been quietly laying off employees over the past several weeks and had signaled that it was planning for a broader restructuring. A series of divisions saw cuts, including recruitment, sourcing, brand, engineering, human resources and innovation, the outlet reported.

The company didn’t immediately respond to CNBC’s request for comment on The Oregonian’s report.

During Nike’s fiscal second quarter, it posted a strong earnings beat, indicating its cost-savings initiatives were already underway. But, for the second quarter in a row, it fell short of sales estimates, which is the first time Nike has seen consecutive quarters of revenue misses since 2016.

Here’s how the sneaker giant performed compared to what Wall Street was anticipating, based on a survey of analysts by LSEG, formerly known as Refinitiv:

  • Earnings per share: $1.03 vs. 85 cents expected
  • Revenue: $13.39 billion vs. $13.43 billion expected

The company reported net income for the three-month period that ended Nov. 30 was $1.58 billion, or $1.03 per share, compared to $1.33 billion, or 85 cents per share, a year earlier.

Sales rose about 1% to $13.39 billion, from $13.32 billion a year earlier.

Nike is considered a leader among industry peers such as Lululemon, Adidas and Under Armour, but its profits have been under pressure and it has been in the middle of a strategy shift that has seen it rekindle its relationships with wholesalers including Macy’s and Designer Brands, the parent company of DSW.

Focus on margins

For the past six quarters, Nike’s gross margin has declined compared to the prior-year period, but the story turned around on Thursday. Nike’s gross margin increased 1.7 percentage points to 44.6%, slightly ahead of estimates, according to StreetAccount.

This time last year, Nike’s inventories were up a staggering 43% and the retailer was in the middle of an aggressive liquidation strategy to clear out old styles and make way for new ones, which weighed heavily on its margins. Several quarters later, however, Nike is in a far better inventory position, which is a boon for margins.

During the quarter, inventories were down 14% to $8 billion.

Nike’s gross margin turnaround came as the retail environment overall has been flooded with steep promotions and discounts as retailers struggle to convince inflation-weary consumers to pay full price. In September when Nike reported fiscal first-quarter earnings, finance chief Friend said Nike was “cautiously planning for modest markdown improvements” given the overall promotional environment.

While the company repeatedly pointed out the overall promotional environment, it said the average sales price of footwear and apparel were up during the quarter and the average selling price grew across channels with higher-priced products proving particularly “resilient.”

The company attributed the gross margin uptick to “strategic pricing actions and lower ocean freight rates,” saying it was partially offset by unfavorable foreign exchange rates and higher product input costs.

As one of the last retailers to report earnings before the December holidays, investors are eager to hear good news when it comes to Nike’s expectations for the crucial shopping season. When many retailers issued holiday-quarter guidance in November, the commentary was largely tepid and cautious as companies looked to under promise and over deliver in an increasingly uncertain macro environment.

Nike struck a note that hit somewhere in the middle. Its sales miss and focus on cost cuts signal larger demand issues, but CEO John Donahoe was upbeat when discussing Black Friday week sales.

“We outpaced the industry, driving growth of close to 10%, Nike digital had its strongest Black Friday week ever and a record number of consumers shopped in our stores over the long Thanksgiving weekend,” said Donahoe.

China is another key part of the Nike story. As the region emerges from the Covid-19 pandemic and widespread lockdowns, China’s economic recovery has so far been a mixed bag. In November, retail sales climbed 10.1% in the region.

It was the fastest pace of growth since May, but those numbers were up against easy comparisons and the growth was largely driven by car sales and restaurants, according to a research note from Goldman Sachs.

During the quarter, China sales came in at $1.86 billion, which fell short of the $1.95 billion analysts had expected, according to StreetAccount. Sales in Europe, the Middle East and Africa also fell short of estimates, but revenue came in ahead in the North America, Asia-Pacific and Latin America markets, according to StreetAccount.

Read the full earnings release here.

Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO:

Source link

#Nike #sinks #slashes #sales #outlook #unveils #billion #cost #cuts

2024 energy outlook: What investors can expect from crude prices, and how to play it

Source link

#energy #outlook #investors #expect #crude #prices #play

GPT and other AI models can’t analyze an SEC filing, researchers find

Patronus AI co-founders Anand Kannappan and Rebecca Qian

Patronus AI

Large language models, similar to the one at the heart of ChatGPT, frequently fail to answer questions derived from Securities and Exchange Commission filings, researchers from a startup called Patronus AI found.

Even the best-performing artificial intelligence model configuration they tested, OpenAI’s GPT-4-Turbo, when armed with the ability to read nearly an entire filing alongside the question, only got 79% of answers right on Patronus AI’s new test, the company’s founders told CNBC.

Oftentimes, the so-called large language models would refuse to answer, or would “hallucinate” figures and facts that weren’t in the SEC filings.

“That type of performance rate is just absolutely unacceptable,” Patronus AI co-founder Anand Kannappan said. “It has to be much much higher for it to really work in an automated and production-ready way.”

The findings highlight some of the challenges facing AI models as big companies, especially in regulated industries like finance, seek to incorporate cutting-edge technology into their operations, whether for customer service or research.

The ability to extract important numbers quickly and perform analysis on financial narratives has been seen as one of the most promising applications for chatbots since ChatGPT was released late last year. SEC filings are filled with important data, and if a bot could accurately summarize them or quickly answer questions about what’s in them, it could give the user a leg up in the competitive financial industry.

In the past year, Bloomberg LP developed its own AI model for financial data, business school professors researched whether ChatGPT can parse financial headlines, and JPMorgan is working on an AI-powered automated investing tool, CNBC previously reported. Generative AI could boost the banking industry by trillions of dollars per year, a recent McKinsey forecast said.

But GPT’s entry into the industry hasn’t been smooth. When Microsoft first launched its Bing Chat using OpenAI’s GPT, one of its primary examples was using the chatbot to quickly summarize an earnings press release. Observers quickly realized that the numbers in Microsoft’s example were off, and some numbers were entirely made up.

‘Vibe checks’

Part of the challenge when incorporating LLMs into actual products, say the Patronus AI co-founders, is that LLMs are nondeterministic — they’re not guaranteed to produce the same output every time for the same input. That means that companies will need to do more rigorous testing to make sure they’re operating correctly, not going off-topic, and providing reliable results.

The founders met at Facebook parent company Meta, where they worked on AI problems related to understanding how models come up with their answers and making them more “responsible.” They founded Patronus AI, which has received seed funding from Lightspeed Venture Partners, to automate LLM testing with software, so companies can feel comfortable that their AI bots won’t surprise customers or workers with off-topic or wrong answers.

“Right now evaluation is largely manual. It feels like just testing by inspection,” Patronus AI co-founder Rebecca Qian said. “One company told us it was ‘vibe checks.'”

Patronus AI worked to write a set of more than 10,000 questions and answers drawn from SEC filings from major publicly traded companies, which it calls FinanceBench. The dataset includes the correct answers, and also where exactly in any given filing to find them. Not all of the answers can be pulled directly from the text, and some questions require light math or reasoning.

Qian and Kannappan say it’s a test that gives a “minimum performance standard” for language AI in the financial sector.

Here’s some examples of questions in the dataset, provided by Patronus AI:

  • Has CVS Health paid dividends to common shareholders in Q2 of FY2022?
  • Did AMD report customer concentration in FY22?
  • What is Coca Cola’s FY2021 COGS % margin? Calculate what was asked by utilizing the line items clearly shown in the income statement.

How the AI models did on the test

Patronus AI tested four language models: OpenAI’s GPT-4 and GPT-4-Turbo, Anthropic’s Claude 2 and Meta’s Llama 2, using a subset of 150 of the questions it had produced.

It also tested different configurations and prompts, such as one setting where the OpenAI models were given the exact relevant source text in the question, which it called “Oracle” mode. In other tests, the models were told where the underlying SEC documents would be stored, or given “long context,” which meant including nearly an entire SEC filing alongside the question in the prompt.

GPT-4-Turbo failed at the startup’s “closed book” test, where it wasn’t given access to any SEC source document. It failed to answer 88% of the 150 questions it was asked, and only produced a correct answer 14 times.

It was able to improve significantly when given access to the underlying filings. In “Oracle” mode, where it was pointed to the exact text for the answer, GPT-4-Turbo answered the question correctly 85% of the time, but still produced an incorrect answer 15% of the time.

But that’s an unrealistic test because it requires human input to find the exact pertinent place in the filing — the exact task that many hope that language models can address.

Llama 2, an open-source AI model developed by Meta, had some of the worst “hallucinations,” producing wrong answers as much as 70% of the time, and correct answers only 19% of the time, when given access to an array of underlying documents.

Anthropic’s Claude 2 performed well when given “long context,” where nearly the entire relevant SEC filing was included along with the question. It could answer 75% of the questions it was posed, gave the wrong answer for 21%, and failed to answer only 3%. GPT-4-Turbo also did well with long context, answering 79% of the questions correctly, and giving the wrong answer for 17% of them.

After running the tests, the co-founders were surprised about how poorly the models did — even when they were pointed to where the answers were.

“One surprising thing was just how often models refused to answer,” said Qian. “The refusal rate is really high, even when the answer is within the context and a human would be able to answer it.”

Even when the models performed well, though, they just weren’t good enough, Patronus AI found.

“There just is no margin for error that’s acceptable, because, especially in regulated industries, even if the model gets the answer wrong 1 out of 20 times, that’s still not high enough accuracy,” Qian said.

But the Patronus AI co-founders believe there’s huge potential for language models like GPT to help people in the finance industry — whether that’s analysts, or investors — if AI continues to improve.

“We definitely think that the results can be pretty promising,” said Kannappan. “Models will continue to get better over time. We’re very hopeful that in the long term, a lot of this can be automated. But today, you will definitely need to have at least a human in the loop to help support and guide whatever workflow you have.”

An OpenAI representative pointed to the company’s usage guidelines, which prohibit offering tailored financial advice using an OpenAI model without a qualified person reviewing the information, and require anyone using an OpenAI model in the financial industry to provide a disclaimer informing them that AI is being used and its limitations. OpenAI’s usage policies also say that OpenAI’s models are not fine-tuned to provide financial advice.

Meta did not immediately return a request for comment, and Anthropic didn’t immediately have a comment.

Don’t miss these stories from CNBC PRO:

Source link

#GPT #models #analyze #SEC #filing #researchers #find

As inflation falls, corporate America won’t rush to pay the price

U.S. President Joe Biden delivers remarks during an event to celebrate the anniversary of his signing of the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act legislation, in the East Room of the White House in Washington, U.S., August 16, 2023. 

Kevin Lamarque | Reuters

In recent weeks, President Joe Biden has been doing everything he can to point the finger at big corporations for high prices.

“Too many things are unaffordable,” the president said.

“Stop the price gouging,” Biden said on another recent occasion.

The blame game may be good retail politics, and the president has announced some real actions to alleviate consumer financial stress, forgiving as much student debt on the margins as he can under the law, unveiling various plans to eliminate “junk fees,” and using new powers under the Inflation Reduction Act to bring down key drug prices.

Some recent research supports the case that corporations have taken more advantage of the current inflationary era than they really need to do. But amid the political pressure, don’t expect corporate America to be swayed.

As the Federal Reserve signals for the first time that it’s getting comfortable with the decline in inflation, and even short of declaring “mission accomplished” seemed to say this week it doesn’t wholly disagree with the market view that rates cuts are the next phase in its monetary policy, the one major force in the economy not talking about cuts in a major way is corporations.

That’s been on the mind of Fed presidents as the central bank contemplates a big shift. Richmond Fed President Tom Barkin, a former corporate sector CFO, recently told CNBC that one area he monitors and speaks to companies about is price setting. Companies won’t be giving up their power to raise prices “until they have to,” Barkin, who will be a voting member of the FOMC next year, said.

It’s been a hard-won advantage. Over the past two decades, price setters “have been beaten up,” Barkin said, by the combination of ecommerce, globalization, access to new supply and the power of big box retailers. “If you go back to 2018-2019, you had people who really weren’t into raising prices [as they] didn’t think they had the power to do it. I’m out there talking to price setters now and there are some who have taken a step back and said, ‘Okay, we’re on the backside of this,’ but I still talk [to others] who are looking to get more price.”

During an interview later in November with Barkin at CNBC’s CFO Council Summit in Washington, D.C., the subject came up again, and an informal poll of CFO Council members in the room on the subject of pricing plans for 2024 was taken. A majority said their companies would be raising prices next year; a minority said they would keep pricing the same; none said they would be lowering prices. 

“I’m looking for the point where they’re no longer taking outsized price increases because they’re worried the volume and the market won’t sustain it,” Barkin said.

That is happening in certain goods markets where the Covid outsized demand has waned, and as the pressures in the real estate market with high mortgage rates have cut down on purchases for the home. It’s also a function of a massive freight market recession, which has sharply lowered transportation costs for shippers after a period of huge contract rate increases during the pandemic boom. A recent decline in energy prices has also lessened input cost pressures.

Costco CFO Richard Galanti said after its earnings this week that inflation for the quarter just ended was in the 0% to 1% range. But the big moves were in the “big and bulky items,” like furniture sets due to lower freight costs year-over-year, as well as on “things like domestics,” he said. And what he called the “deflationary items” were steeply down in price, as much as 20% to 30%.

Toys are another example.

No one wants to be the first to cut prices

Overall, though, the economy is not headed for deflation, and the Fed’s stance this week may have given companies more room to keep prices where they want if real wage growth proves sustainable. Inflation is falling faster than wages,” said KMPG chief economist Diane Swonk. “That does not equate to deflation. The goal is to keep that trend going, so that consumers regain the purchasing power lost to inflation.”

But with any easing of rates, the central bank is “willing to throw the dice, and enable the economy to grow more rapidly rather than risk recession,” Swonk said. “That is a major shift from where we were a year ago. They knew that the decision to call an end to rate hikes would trigger financial markets to ease. That was like a stealth cut in rates. It will stimulate the economy. Improvements in inflation are expected to continue, but the pace at which price increases decelerate could slow.”

The recent tailwinds from a softer freight market may be near their end, too. A logistics CFO speaking on a CNBC CFO Council member call on Tuesday about the market outlook said that after one of the longest stretches in recent history for a freight recession, the trough may have been reached. “Truck rates may start bouncing off of a bottom here,” said the logistics CFO on the call, where chief financial officers are granted anonymity to speak freely.

While the Fed may get its wish of a “soft landing” for the economy, that doesn’t mean prices will land as softly for consumers, according to Marco Bertini, a professor of marketing at business school Esade who studies pricing strategy and pricing psychology. “Companies will do what they want and will never react at the speed you want them to, especially after they have been increasing prices,” Bertini said. “Why would I be the first to cut my margins when we just went through a period where we had the world’s best excuse [inflation] to recover margins?” he said.

At some point, companies will need to reassess pricing strategy, especially with margins more than recovered for many, and this period of rapid inflation in the U.S. doesn’t have a precedent for companies to use as a barometer of how to shift. “It’s uncharted territory for the U.S. market,” Bertini said.

That’s part of the reason why not one CFO raised their hand at the CNBC CFO Council Summit when asked if any were considering a price decrease for 2024.

“Imagine I am the first to say I am holding on prices, and make that known to customers? That’s how a price war starts and the competitive advantage from being the ‘good guy’ lasts two seconds,” Bertini said. “No one wants a race to the bottom. The gains over the past few years evaporate in a few months.”

Deflation versus slowing of price increases

There are some signs that the pricing conversation is starting to become more prevalent inside companies beyond the goods areas where demand has been hit hard. But recent declines in pricing don’t indicate that companies will continue in that direction across a broader array of products and services.

“The Fed doesn’t want to see deflation,” said one retail sector CFO on the recent CNBC CFO Council call. “They just want to see inflation cool. And they want to see us get to the point where we can’t raise prices anymore.”

While the CFO said there has been a “settling in the market in the last couple of months, I wouldn’t call it deflation.”

But he pointed to transportation costs as a deflationary force that is having an influence on importers, “a one-time kind of release of supply and demand imbalances … but it’s a price correction to me that is different than deflation. … I think we’ve kind of been through an interesting phase of price correction. But I’d say things are pretty stable from our perspective.”

Consumers have been 'as resilient as they could be,' says former Walmart U.S. CEO Bill Simon

In food distribution, costs for key commodities continue to experience deflation on a sequential basis. But consumers going out to eat won’t see that in the prices they pay.

“We’re in a period where restauranteurs have taken many prices up,” said another retail CFO on the call. “They’re seeing that deflation in their underlying ingredients, so they’re actually going to start seeing a little bit better performance in terms of their bottom line. Now that they’ve taken the prices up, we just don’t think they’re gonna take it down very quickly.”

The science of pricing, according to Bertini, dictates that as long as a company can point to an externality — in this case, higher input costs — the buyer ultimately accepts the situation, and price stickiness is the result.

But the current environment is edging into more of an “unstable equilibrium.”

“When inflation is in the public domain, it’s perfect to collaborate in a perfectly legal way to increase prices. Now the shocks are gone and costs slowly coming down, and the appetite to be the one to decrease prices and get market share gain is increasingly getting bigger,” he said. “But being the first will take some time, because they’re still enjoying it. … What it will take in most markets is a competitor who sees a clear path to getting lots of market share.”

When the party will end for corporations

This difficult balance is also coming during a period of time when the consumer has defied expectations of a slowdown in spending, making it harder for companies to pinpoint just how big the market opportunity really is. Retail sales, as an example, just came in much stronger than expected.

“We’re still trying to understand how strong November retail sales should have been relative to normal, and relative to what’s happened the last three years. It makes it hard,” the logistics CFO said on the recent CNBC CFO Council call.

The view from Costco CFO Galanti after its earnings this week is instructive. Speaking about food, he said it’s been a different story than with goods: “There hasn’t been significant price cuts passed on to the consumer yet.”

“There are a few things that are up and a few things are down, but no giant trend either way. Look, as you’ve known us for a long time, we want to be the first to lower prices. We’re out there pressing our vendors as we see different commodity components come down and certainly on the non-food side as we saw shipping costs come down, things like that. And so, probably a little more than less, but we’ll have to wait and see.”

If the period of price increases is to end, expect there to be a lag between that and other forces in the economy, such as the Fed, said Bertini. “Who wants to end the party early? They will want to see some really strong evidence that the party has ended.”

Another analogy from a CFO on the recent CNBC Council call may have put it best:

“We’re all a bunch of cars on a highway. You’ve got the customer, a retailer, you’ve got the manufacturer. Maybe you’ve got capital providers. And who hits the brakes first? Who wants to hit the brakes before the person in front of them hits the brakes?” 

Source link

#inflation #falls #corporate #America #wont #rush #pay #price

Friday’s S&P 500 and Nasdaq-100 rebalance may reflect concerns over concentration risk

It’s arguably the biggest stock story of 2023: a small number of giant technology companies now make up a very large part of big indexes like the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq-100. 

Five companies (Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Nvidia and Alphabet) make up about 25% of the S&P 500. Six companies (Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Nvidia, Alphabet and Broadcom) make up about 40% of the Nasdaq-100. 

The S&P 500 and the Nasdaq are rebalancing their respective indexes this Friday. While this is a routine event, some of the changes may reflect the concerns over concentration risk. 

A ton of money is pegged to a few indexes 

Now that the CPI and the Fed meeting are out of the way, these rebalances are the last major “liquidity events” of the year, corresponding with another notable trading event: triple witching, or the quarterly expiration of stock options, index options and index futures. 

This is an opportunity for the trading community to move large blocks of stock for the last gasps of tax loss harvesting or to position for the new year. Trading volume will typically drop 30%-40% in the final two weeks of the year after triple witching, with only the final trading day showing significant volume.

All of this might appear of only academic interest, but the big move to passive index investing in the past 20 years has made these events more important to investors. 

When these indexes are adjusted, either because of additions or deletions, or because share counts change, or because the weightings are changed to reduce the influence of the largest companies, it means a lot of money moves in and out of mutual funds and ETFs that are directly or indirectly tied to the indexes. 

Standard & Poor’s estimates that nearly $13 trillion is directly or indirectly indexed to the S&P 500. The three largest ETFs (SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust, iShares Core S&P 500 ETF, and Vanguard S&P 500 ETF) are all directly indexed to the S&P 500 and collectively have nearly $1.2 trillion in assets under management. 

Linked to the Nasdaq-100 — the 100 largest nonfinancial companies listed on Nasdaq — the Invesco QQQ Trust (QQQ) is the fifth-largest ETF, with roughly $220 billion in assets under management. 

S&P 500: Apple and others will be for sale. Uber going in 

For the S&P 500, Standard & Poor’s will adjust the weighting of each stock to account for changes in share count. Share counts typically change because many companies have large buyback programs that reduce share count. 

This quarter, Apple, Alphabet, Comcast, Exxon Mobil, Visa and Marathon Petroleum will all see their share counts reduced, so funds indexed to the S&P will have to reduce their weighting. 

S&P 500: Companies with share count reduction

(% of share count reduction)

  • Apple        0.5%
  • Alphabet   1.3%
  • Comcast    2.4%
  • Exxon Mobil  1.0%
  • Visa                0.8%
  • Marathon Petroleum  2.6%

Source: S&P Global

Other companies (Nasdaq, EQT, and Amazon among them) will see their share counts increased, so funds indexed to the S&P 500 will have to increase their weighting. 

In addition, three companies are being added to the S&P 500: Uber, Jabil, and Builders FirstSource.  I wrote about the effect that being added to the S&P was having on Uber‘s stock price last week.  

Three other companies are being deleted and will go from the S&P 500 to the S&P SmallCap 600 index: Sealed Air, Alaska Air and SolarEdge Technologies

Nasdaq-100 changes: DoorDash, MongoDB, Splunk are in 

The Nasdaq-100 is rebalanced four times a year; however, the annual reconstitution, where stocks are added or deleted, happens only in December. 

Last Friday, Nasdaq announced that six companies would be added to the Nasdaq-100: CDW Corporation (CDW), Coca-Cola Europacific Partners (CCEP), DoorDash (DASH), MongoDB (MDB), Roper Technologies (ROP), and Splunk (SPLK). 

Six others will be deleted: Align Technology (ALGN), eBay (EBAY), Enphase Energy (ENPH), JD.com (JD), Lucid Group (LCID), and Zoom Video Communications (ZM).

Concentration risk: The rules

Under federal law, a diversified investment fund (mutual funds, exchange-traded funds), even if it just mimics an index like the S&P 500, has to satisfy certain diversification requirements. This includes requirements that: 1) no single issuer can account for more than 25% of the total assets of the portfolio, and 2) securities that represent more than 5% of the total assets cannot exceed 50% of the total portfolio. 

Most of the major indexes have similar requirements in their rules. 

For example, there are 11 S&P sector indexes that are the underlying indexes for widely traded ETFs such as the Technology Select SPDR ETF (XLK). The rules for these sector indexes are similar to the rules on diversification requirements for investment funds discussed above. For example, the S&P sector indexes say that a single stock cannot exceed 24% of the float-adjusted market capitalization of that sector index and that the sum of the companies with weights greater than 4.8% cannot exceed 50% of the total index weight. 

At the end of last week, three companies had weights greater than 4.8% in the Technology Select Sector (Microsoft at 23.5%, Apple at 22.8%, and Broadcom at 4.9%) and their combined market weight was 51.2%, so if those same prices hold at the close on Friday, there should be a small reduction in Apple and Microsoft in that index. 

S&P will announce if there are changes in the sector indexes after the close on Friday. 

The Nasdaq-100 also uses a “modified” market-capitalization weighting scheme, which can constrain the size of the weighting for any given stock to address overconcentration risk. This rebalancing may reduce the weighting in some of the largest stocks, including Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Nvidia and Alphabet. 

The move up in these large tech stocks was so rapid in the first half of the year that Nasdaq took the unusual step of initiating a special rebalance in the Nasdaq-100 in July to address the overconcentration of the biggest names. As a result, Microsoft, Apple, Nvidia, Amazon and Tesla all saw their weightings reduced. 

Market concentration is nothing new

Whether the rules around market concentration should be tightened is open for debate, but the issue has been around for decades.

For example, Phil Mackintosh and Robert Jankiewicz from Nasdaq recently noted that the weight of the five largest companies in the S&P 500 was also around 25% back in the 1970s.

Disclosure: Comcast is the corporate parent of NBCUniversal and CNBC.

Source link

#Fridays #Nasdaq100 #rebalance #reflect #concerns #concentration #risk

Jim Cramer’s top 10 things to watch in the stock market Thursday

My top 10 things to watch Thursday, Dec. 14

1. U.S. stocks are higher in premarket trading Thursday, with S&P 500 futures up 0.46%. Equities rallied Wednesday after the Federal Reserve held interest rates steady, while indicating it would cut rates three times in 2024 — a decision more dovish than I expected. Meanwhile, bond prices are also strengthening, with the yield on the 10-year Treasury falling below 4%.

2. Toll Brothers announces a new $20 million share-buyback program — and there are only 100 million shares. But CEO Doug Yearley thinks it’s ridiculous that his stock sells at eight-times earnings when it’s more of a secular grower, despite changes in the housing industry.

3. UBS upgrades Club holding Coterra Energy to buy from neutral, citing its strong balance sheet strength and oil diversification. But the firm lowered its price target to $31 a share, down from $33.

4. Piper Sandler raises its price target on Club name Amazon to $185 a share, up from $170, while maintaining an overweight rating on the stock. The firm cites improving retail margins and an expected acceleration at cloud unit Amazon Web Services. Amazon is Piper’s top large cap pick.

5. Stifel raises its price target on Lululemon Athletica to $596 a share, up from $529, while reiterating a buy rating on the stock. The firm argues that “still sound” U.S. consumer balance sheets and wage growth should support margin expansion for companies like Lululemon with “brand specific drivers.”

6. Nike is back. Baird raises its price target on the sneaker company to $140 a share, up from $125, while keeping an outperform rating on the stock. Nike’s “quality growth profile plus margin recovery potential support a continued favorable outlook,” the firm contends.

7. Mid-stage trial data shows that Merck and Moderna‘s experimental cancer vaccine, used in conjunction with Merck’s Keytruda therapy, reduces the risk of death or relapse in patients with melanoma skin cancer after three years.

8. JPMorgan raises its price target on L3Harris Technologies to $240 a share, up from $213, while maintaining a neutral rating on the stock. The firm has “high confidence” in the aerospace-and-defense-technology company’s targets for sales and cash flow.

9. Piper Sandler upgrades Club holding Foot Locker to overweight from neutral, while raising its price target to $33 a share, up from $24. The firm cites Foot Locker’s margin expansion opportunity in 2024, arguing the company is best positioned among the athletic-and-footwear group over the next year.

10. Bernstein raises its price target on FedEx to $340 a share, up from $305, while reiterating an outperform rating on the stock. FedEx, which Bernstein expects to benefit from cost cuts and improved international market conditions, is set to report quarterly results on Dec. 19.

Sign up for my Top 10 Morning Thoughts on the Market email newsletter for free.

(See here for a full list of the stocks at Jim Cramer’s Charitable Trust.)

What Investing Club members are reading right now

As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust’s portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade.

THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY, TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER.  NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB.  NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.

Source link

#Jim #Cramers #top #watch #stock #market #Thursday

Hasbro laying off 1,100 workers as weak toy sales persist into holiday season

Hasbro is laying off about 1,100 employees as the toy maker struggles with soft sales that have carried into the holiday shopping season, according to a company memo obtained by CNBC.

Hasbro had about 6,300 employees as of earlier this year, according to a company fact sheet.

Shares of the company fell more than 2% Tuesday. Rival Mattel’s stock also slipped.

“We anticipated the first three quarters to be challenging, particularly in Toys, where the market is coming off historic, pandemic-driven highs,” CEO Chris Cocks said in the memo. “While we have made some important progress across our organization, the headwinds we saw through the first nine months of the year have continued into Holiday and are likely to persist into 2024.

Hasbro, which already laid off hundreds of employees earlier this year, had warned in October that trouble was on the horizon. In the company’s most recent quarterly earnings report, Hasbro slashed its already-soft full-year outlook, projecting a 13% to 15% revenue decline for the year.

Popular toy brand sales had dropped significantly, Hasbro also said in the October quarterly report. Popular brands like My Little Pony, Nerf and Transformer had fallen 18% at the time, due to “softer category trends.”

Hasbro’s stock was down nearly 20% through Monday’s close.

Hasbro competitor Mattel had also warned of soft sales. Yet Mattel’s stock is up about 6% through Monday, powered a great deal by the box office success of the film “Barbie.” That’s still behind the 17% gain posted by the S&P 500 so far this year, though.

Retailers overall could be in for a tepid holiday season, and toys saw lower discounts for consumers when compared to discounts a year ago.

Read the full memo from CEO Chris Cocks:

Team,   

A year ago, we laid out our strategy to focus on building fewer, bigger, better brands and began the process of transforming Hasbro. Since then, we’ve had some important wins, like retooling our supply chain, improving our inventory position, lowering costs, and reinvesting over $200M back into the business while growing share across many of our categories. But the market headwinds we anticipated have proven to be stronger and more persistent than planned. While we’re confident in the future of Hasbro, the current environment demands that we do more, even if these choices are some of the hardest we have to make.   

Today we’re announcing additional headcount reductions as part of our previously communicated strategic transformation, affecting approximately 1,100 colleagues globally in addition to the roughly 800 reductions already taken.  

Our leadership team came to this difficult decision after much deliberation. We recognize this is heavy news that affects the livelihoods of our friends and colleagues. Our focus is communicating with each of you transparently and supporting you through this period of change. I want to start by addressing why we are doing this now, and what’s next. 

Why now? 

We entered 2023 expecting a year of change including significant updates to our leadership team, structure, and scope of operations. We anticipated the first three quarters to be challenging, particularly in Toys, where the market is coming off historic, pandemic-driven highs. While we have made some important progress across our organization, the headwinds we saw through the first nine months of the year have continued into Holiday and are likely to persist into 2024.  

To position Hasbro for growth, we must first make sure our foundation is solid and profitable. To do that, we need to modernize our organization and get even leaner. While we see workforce reductions as a last resort, given the state of our business, it’s a lever we must pull to keep Hasbro healthy. 

What happens next? 

While we’re making changes across the entire organization, some functional areas will be affected more than others. Many of those whose roles are affected have been or will be informed in the next 24 hours, although the timings will vary by country, in line with local rules and subject to employee consultations where required. This includes team members who have raised their hands to step down from their roles at the end of the year as part of our Voluntary Early Retirement Program (VRP) in the U.S. We’re immensely grateful to these colleagues for their many years of dedication, and we wish them all the best.   

The majority of the notifications will happen over the next six months, with the balance occurring over the next year as we tackle the remaining work on our organizational model. This includes standardizing processes within Finance, HR, IT and Consumer Care as part of our Global Business Enablement project, but it also means doing more work across the entire business to minimize management layers and create a nimbler organization. 

What else are we doing? 

I know this news is especially difficult during the holiday season. We value each of our team members – they aren’t just employees, they’re friends and colleagues. We decided to communicate now so people have time to plan and process the changes. For those employees affected we are offering comprehensive packages including job placement support to assist in their transition.  

We’ve also done what we can to minimize the scale of impact, like launching the VRP and exploring options to reduce our global real estate footprint. On that note, our Providence, Rhode Island office is currently not being used to its full capacity and we’ve decided to exit the space at the end of the lease term in January 2025. Over the next year, we’ll welcome teams from our Providence office to our headquarters down the road in Pawtucket, Rhode Island. It’s an opportunity to reshape how we work and ensure our workspace is vibrant and productive, while reflecting our more flexible in-person cadence since the pandemic.   

Looking ahead 

As Gina often says, cost-cutting is not a strategy. We know this, and that’s why we’ll continue to grow and invest in several areas in 2024.  

As we uncover more cost savings, we’ll invest in new systems, insights and analytics, product development and digital – all while strengthening our leading franchises and ensuring our brands have the essential marketing they need to thrive well into the future.  

We’ll also tap into unlocked potential across our business, like our new supply chain efficiency, our direct-to-consumer capabilities, and key partnerships to maximize licensing opportunities, scale entertainment, and free up our own content dollars to drive new brand development. 

I know there is no sugar-coating how hard this is, particularly for the employees directly affected. We’re grateful to them for their contributions, and we wish them all the best. In the coming weeks, let’s support each other, and lean in to drive through these necessary changes, so we can return our business to growth and carry out Hasbro’s mission.  

Thanks,    

Chris  

–CNBC’s Claudia Johnson contributed to this report.

Source link

#Hasbro #laying #workers #weak #toy #sales #persist #holiday #season

Long Covid is distorting the labor market — and that’s bad for the U.S. economy

Charlotte Hultquist

Charlotte Hultquist

Weeks after Charlotte Hultquist got Covid-19 in November 2020, she developed a severe pain in her right ear.

“It felt like someone was sticking a knife in [it],” said Hultquist, a single mother of five who lives in Hartford, Vermont.

The 41-year-old is one of millions of Americans who have long Covid. The chronic illness carries a host of potentially debilitating symptoms that can last for months or years, making it impossible for some to work.

For about a year, Hultquist was among those long Covid patients sidelined from the workforce. She would fall constantly, tripping just by stepping over a toy or small object on the floor. She eventually learned that the balance issues and ear pain resulted from a damaged vestibular nerve, a known effect of long Covid. After rigorous testing, a physical therapist told Hultquist she had the “balance of a 1-year-old learning to walk.”

Her body — which she said felt like it weighed 1,000 pounds — couldn’t regulate its temperature, causing dramatic swings from cold to hot.

More from Your Health, Your Money

Here’s a look at more stories on the complexities and implications of long Covid:

Her work on the Dartmouth Hitchcock Medical Center’s information desk required a sharp memory of the hospital’s layout — but long Covid dulled that clarity, too. She had to quit her job as a patient care representative in March 2021.

“I couldn’t work when my memory just kept failing,” Hultquist said.

There remain many unknowns about long Covid, including causes, cures, even how to define it. But this much is clear: The illness is disabling thousands, perhaps millions, of workers to such an extent that they must throttle back hours or leave the workforce altogether.

In other words, at a time when job openings are near an all-time high, long Covid is reducing the supply of people able to fill those positions. The dynamic may have large and adverse effects on the U.S. economy.

Long Covid “is certainly wind blowing in the other direction” of economic growth, said Betsey Stevenson, a professor of public policy and economics at the University of Michigan who served as chief economist for the U.S. Department of Labor in the Obama administration.

Up to 4 million people are out of work

Mild symptoms, employer accommodations or significant financial need can all keep people with long Covid employed. But in many cases, long Covid impacts work.

Katie Bach

nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution

Katie Bach, a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution, has published one of the higher estimates to date. She found that 2 million to 4 million full-time workers are out of the labor force due to long Covid. (To be counted in the labor force, an individual must have a job or be actively looking for work.)

The midpoint of her estimate — 3 million workers — accounts for 1.8% of the entire U.S. civilian labor force. The figure may “sound unbelievably high” but is consistent with the impact in other major economies like the United Kingdom, Bach wrote in an August report. The figures are also likely conservative, since they exclude workers over age 65, she said.

“Mild symptoms, employer accommodations or significant financial need can all keep people with long Covid employed,” Bach said. “But in many cases, long Covid impacts work.”

Impact akin to extra year of baby boomers retiring

Other studies have also found a sizable, though more muted, impact.

Economists Gopi Shah Goda and Evan Soltas estimated 500,000 Americans had left the labor force through this June due to Covid.

That led the labor force participation rate to fall by 0.2 percentage points — which may sound small but amounts to about the same share as baby boomers retiring each year, according to the duo, respectively of the Stanford Institute for Economic Policy Research and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.

Put another way: Long Covid’s labor impact translates to an extra year of population aging, Goda said.

For the average person, the work absence from long Covid translates to $9,000 in foregone earnings over a 14-month period — representing an 18% reduction in pay during that time, Goda and Soltas said. In aggregate, the lost labor supply amounts to $62 billion a year — equivalent to half the lost earnings attributable to illnesses like cancer or diabetes.

What’s more, foregone pay may complicate a person’s ability to afford medical care, especially if coupled with the loss of health insurance through the workplace.

A separate Brookings paper published in October estimated about 420,000 workers aged 16 to 64 years old had likely left the labor force because of long Covid. The authors — Louise Sheiner and Nasiha Salwati — cite a “reasonable” range of 281,000 to 683,000 people, or 0.2% to 0.4% of the U.S. labor force.

About 26% of long-haulers said their illness negatively affected employment or work hours, according to a July report published by the Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis. Those with long Covid were 10 percentage points less likely to be employed than individuals without a prior Covid infection, and worked 50% fewer hours, on average, according to Dasom Ham, the report’s author.

Return to work can be ‘a really frustrating experience’

Outside of these economic models, the labor impact was borne out in numerous CNBC interviews with long Covid patients and doctors who specialize in treating the illness.

Just half of the patients who visit the Mayo Clinic’s Covid Activity Rehabilitation Program can work a full-time schedule, said Dr. Greg Vanichkachorn, the program’s medical director.

“Because of the brain fog issues in addition to physical symptoms, many patients have had a really frustrating experience trying to get back to work,” Vanichkachorn said.

Those able to return, even part-time, sometimes face hostility from employers and co-workers, he added.

For one, many of the hundreds of potential long Covid symptoms are invisible to others, even if disabling for the afflicted. Difficulty meeting a work deadline due to brain fog or extreme fatigue, for example, may not be met kindly by their colleagues.

Long Covid is so different for so many different people.

Alice Burns

associate director of the Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured at health-care nonprofit The Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation

“There are some people out there who don’t even think Covid exists,” Vanichkachorn said.

Meanwhile, long Covid can put even accommodating employers in a tricky situation. It can take several months for a patient to make progress in treatment and therapy — meaning some businesses may need to make tough retention, hiring and personnel decisions, Vanichkachorn said. Lengthy recovery times mean a patient’s job might be filled in the interim, he said.

And patients’ symptoms can relapse if they push themselves too rigorously, experts said.

“You can bring a [long Covid] diagnosis to your employer, but it doesn’t allow you to say, ‘I need to be part time for X number of months,” said Alice Burns, associate director of the Program on Medicaid and the Uninsured at health care nonprofit the Henry J. Kaiser Family Foundation. “It may be more months or fewer months; it may mean you can return 10% or 80%.

“That’s just because long Covid is so different for so many different people.”

Why the long Covid labor gap matters

Jerome Powell, chair of the Federal Reserve, mentioned Sheiner and Salwati’s long Covid research in a recent speech about inflation and the labor market.

Millions of people left the labor force in the early days of the pandemic, due to factors like illness, caregiving and fear of infection. But workers haven’t returned as quickly as imagined, particularly those outside their prime working years, Powell said. About 3.5 million workers are still missing, he said.

While most of that shortfall is due to “excess” (i.e., early) retirements, “some of the participation gap” is attributable to long Covid, Powell said. Other big contributors to the shortfall include a plunge in net immigration to the U.S. and a surge in deaths during the pandemic, he added.

“Looking back, we can see that a significant and persistent labor supply shortfall opened up during the pandemic — a shortfall that appears unlikely to fully close anytime soon,” the Fed chair said.

That shortfall has broad economic repercussions.

When the U.S. economy started to reopen in early 2021 from its pandemic-era hibernation — around the time Covid vaccines became widely available to Americans — demand for labor catapulted to historic highs.

Job openings peaked near 12 million in March 2022 and remain well above the pre-pandemic high. There are currently 1.7 job openings per unemployed American — meaning the available jobs are almost double the number of people looking for work, though the ratio has declined in recent months.  

That demand has led businesses to raise wages to compete for talent, helping fuel the fastest wage growth in 25 years, according to Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta data.

While strong wage growth “is a good thing” for workers, its current level is unsustainably high, Powell said, serving to stoke inflation, which is running near its highest level since the early 1980s. (There are many tentacles feeding into inflation, and the extent to which wage growth is contributing is the subject of debate, however.)

A worker shortage — exacerbated by long Covid — is helping underpin dynamics that have fueled fast-rising prices for household goods and services.

But the labor gap is just the “tip of the iceberg,” said Stevenson at the University of Michigan. There are all sorts of unknowns relative to the economic impact of long Covid, such as effects on worker productivity, the types of jobs they can do, and how long the illness persists, she said.

“When you’re sick, you’re not productive, and that’s not good for you or for anybody around you,” Stevenson said of the economic impact.

For example, lost pay might weigh on consumer spending, the lifeblood of the U.S. economy. The sick may need to lean more on public aid programs, like Medicaid, disability insurance or nutrition assistance (i.e., food stamps) funded by taxpayer dollars.

Economic drag will rise if recovery rates don’t improve

In all, long Covid is a $3.7 trillion drain on the U.S. economy, an aggregate cost rivaling that of the Great Recession, estimated David Cutler, an economist at Harvard University. Prior to the pandemic, the Great Recession had been the worst economic downturn since the Great Depression. His estimate is conservative, based on known Covid cases at the time of his analysis.

Americans would forgo $168 billion in lost earnings — about 1% of all U.S. economic output — if 3 million were out of work due to long Covid, said Bach of the Brookings Institution. That burden will continue to rise if long Covid patients don’t start recovering at greater rates, she said.

“To give a sense of the magnitude: If the long Covid population increases by just 10% each year, in 10 years, the annual cost of lost wages will be half a trillion dollars,” Bach wrote.

Charlotte Hultquist

Charlotte Hultquist

Hultquist was able to return to the workforce part time in March, after a yearlong absence.

The Vermont resident sometimes had to reduce her typical workweek of about 20 hours, due partly to ongoing health issues, as well as multiple doctor appointments for both her and her daughter, who also has long Covid. Meanwhile, Hultquist nearly emptied her savings.

Hultquist has benefited from different treatments, including physical therapy to restore muscle strength, therapy to “tone” the vagus nerve (which controls certain involuntary bodily functions) and occupational therapy to help overcome cognitive challenges, she said.

“All my [health] providers keep saying, ‘We don’t know what the future looks like. We don’t know if you’ll get better like you were before Covid,'” Hultquist said.

The therapy and adaptations eventually led her to seek full-time employment. She recently accepted a full-time job offer from the New Hampshire Department of Health & Human Services, where she’ll serve as a case aide for economic services.

“It feels amazing to be recovered enough to work full time,” Hultquist said. “I’m very far from pre-Covid functioning but I found a way to keep moving forward.”

Source link

#Long #Covid #distorting #labor #market #bad #economy

The top 10 things to watch in the stock market Monday

The top 10 things to watch Monday, Dec. 11

1. U.S. stocks are muted Monday following last week’s push to a new 52-week high in the S&P 500, helped by a stronger-than-expected jobs report Friday. Good economic news is good news for the stock market, for now, with investors looking ahead to Tuesday’s consumer price index report. But we’ll learn what the Federal Reserve makes of the state of the labor market and inflation when the central bank convenes this week for its final meeting of the year.

2. Bank stocks like Club name Wells Fargo became “extraordinary performers” last week, according to Jim Cramer’s Sunday column. “The percentage gains for bank shares and the pretty stock charts, all wondrous, look like they are in their infancy,” he writes.

3. Health insurer Cigna abandons its pursuit to acquire Club holding Humana — a deal that was misguided from the start because it never would have received regulatory approval. Cigna announces a new $10 billion stock buyback. And shares of Humana rally roughly 2% in premarket trading.

4. Occidental Petroleum announces plans to buy privately held CrownRock for $12 billion in cash and stock, while raising its quarterly dividend by 4 cents, to 22 cents per share. Before the deal announcement, Morgan Stanley had upgraded Occidental to overweight from equal weight, with an unchanged price target of $68 a share.

5. More analysts are warming up to energy stocks after last week’s carnage. Citi upgrades Club holding Coterra Energy, along with EQT and Southwestern Energy, to a buy. Coterra is the firm’s top large cap pick, with a $30-per-share price target based on capital-efficiency improvements.

6. Goldman Sachs upgrades Abbvie to buy from neutral, with a $173-per-share price target. The firm cites revenue that has proved more resilient than expected, along with the drug maker’s recent deployment of capital to build out its pipeline. Over the past two weeks, Abbvie has shelled out nearly $20 billion in cash to acquire ImmunoGen and Cerevel Therapeutics.

7. JPMorgan raises its price targets on a handful of cybersecurity stocks, including CrowdStrike (to $269 a share from $230), Club name Palo Alto Networks ($326 from $272) and Zscaler ($212 from $200).

8. Citi upgrades Nike to buy from neutral, while raising its price target on the stock to $135 a share, up from $100. The firm sees margin recovery beginning in the second quarter of next year through 2025, helped by easing freight costs, leaner inventories and a shift to direct-to-consumer.

9. Jefferies upgrades Best Buy to buy from hold, while raising its price target to $89 a share, up from $69. Analysts at the bank think this call won’t take much to work, with expectations low and the stock cheap and yielding a 5% dividend.

10. Citi resumes coverage of Club holding Broadcom with a buy rating and $1,100-a-share price target. The firm sees the chipmaker’s artificial-intelligence business offsetting the cyclical downturn in the semiconductor business, along with strong accretion from its recent acquisition of VMware. We thought the company reported a better quarter last Thursday than what the market gave it credit for. 

(See here for a full list of the stocks at Jim Cramer’s Charitable Trust.)

What Investing Club members are reading right now

As a subscriber to the CNBC Investing Club with Jim Cramer, you will receive a trade alert before Jim makes a trade. Jim waits 45 minutes after sending a trade alert before buying or selling a stock in his charitable trust’s portfolio. If Jim has talked about a stock on CNBC TV, he waits 72 hours after issuing the trade alert before executing the trade.

THE ABOVE INVESTING CLUB INFORMATION IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY, TOGETHER WITH OUR DISCLAIMER.  NO FIDUCIARY OBLIGATION OR DUTY EXISTS, OR IS CREATED, BY VIRTUE OF YOUR RECEIPT OF ANY INFORMATION PROVIDED IN CONNECTION WITH THE INVESTING CLUB.  NO SPECIFIC OUTCOME OR PROFIT IS GUARANTEED.

Source link

#top #watch #stock #market #Monday