AMZN has something called EC2/AWS (you know the real reason why their stock is rocketing) they have built for years; it does every kind of compute possible. Pretty easy for them to build a viable streaming service yes; but AAPL has none of that.
Yes that's why you see the cheapest/junkiest toys/gadgets/candies with Mickey/Minnie/Frozen/StarWars/Avengers plastered all over it. Best part is DIS just collects the cash, the other business takes all the risk. I mean some of these items I see in the bargain bins and such I wonder who would ever buy this stuff; if they don't then DIS doesn't lose out; that's the risk DIS gets out of by licensing out.
What good does it do DIS to keep it themselves? If you think it's easy to start a viable streaming service then there would be hundreds of NFLX and AMZN Prime starting up now. There's quite a bit of costly infrastructure in place and constant upgrades as technology changes. AMZN can do this easily because they leverage their own EC2/AWS. And NFLX, we'll that's their business specialty. DIS has no business being in that game. They can do the theater distribution and home entertainment part (which might fizzle into the streaming eventually). But really they outsource/license all the avenues where they don't have the existing infrastructure/support/experience (toys, clothing, video games just went out).
To be honest, I was always afraid to short this one even though I knew it was a sinking ship. Over the past 5-7 years it's been a rollercoaster with some pretty wild swings. Never was a short term options guy (that's just a gamble - even if you are "successful" (lucky) at it) and the LEAP puts are quite expensive. Don't know if I missed the boat but still at $1.3b market cap so lots more to pare off. Would you rather short now or use LEAPs?
Your post doesn't make any sense; NKE and UA products are widely excluded from "discounts/coupons" (ie B1G1F or 25% off any 1 item). But when you have gift card/certificate that isn't a discount; that's the same as store credit.
That's because the deal potentially has huge consequences for NFLX and the general streaming market; whereas the change for DIS is most likely just a drop in the bucket. Maybe to put it into perspective, Force Awakens had more global sales than NFLX does in an entire quarter.
Any subscription based model is a cash cow. Just think for the past 20-30 years people just paid their monthly cable bills w/o thinking much abut it and ESPN was a huge chunk whether you watched it or not That guarantee is gone; and exploring alternatives = uncertainty.
We can argue all day on differing opinions. But fact is Steph's jersey was the top seller for the past 2 years. It doesn't matter what I think, or what you think; the greater population has spoken, and in the end that's what's going to matter.
I won't call this a fact as I don't see the data to back it up but:
"an analyst at financial firm Morgan Stanley says Curry is currently selling more sneakers in the U.S. than LeBron James and every other active player. In fact, the only person who's ahead of Curry right now is His Airness himself."
Have read the same blurb from multiple sources as well. LeBron had his time in the spotlight. But he is aging and not the same player he was 3 years ago (not picking on him specifically because this is true for everyone once you start getting into your 30's in this sport). The changing of the guard has already happened. I would say it's more of Steph elevating than LeBron declining thus far. But in the coming year or two, LeBron's decline will accelerate.
And please, it's a compliment to not have same persona as LeBron.
Whether it's fair or not UA getting hammered with other "retail". Just look at TGT today; another retailer getting killed. A more direct impact on UA is Sports Authority going BK. But UA and TGT will be left standing in the end. No worries if you are a long term holder. If you're a short term "trader", we'll you're just gambling anyways.
Great advice. Sorry but unless you are in the know you will never be able to call every peak and valley. Pick the winners, stick with them, and you will be rewarded. UA still has a lot of growth ahead so I'd have no issue still recommending it at this point.
UA by any metric is an expensive stock. So it will get hit harder than others when times are bad. But the reality is it's expensive because the majority feel it will succeed in the long run and will not give their shares away. If you ever invested in MSFT AMZN GOOG AAPL in their big growth years, their stock prices were never cheap. It reached a point where their chance of success was very high. UA doesn't have the same potential as those companies, but I categorize them in the same very safe long term bet. But without a doubt it will have hiccups and to me it's just time to add more shares.
I really hope you don't consider AMZN a retailer. If you do, you have no idea where their profits are coming from and what are the most valuable parts of their business.
That is why for the most part I trade in the long term. I look at the 10 year chart for UA and I'm still smiling. The same is true of the others you mentioned really, AMZN and APPL (though I sold out of my APPL too early but can't complain). It's pretty simple; you pick the winners and you stick with them.
If you want to try to hit every peak and valley I can guarantee you will fail in the long run, unless you are in the know.
I bought last time this think tanked in JAN and sold during the run up after previous earnings. Tempted today but decided to hold off. I think it will head lower since all retail is getting hammered. I certainly would not compare this stock to LL though; entirely different reason why they tanked.
Don't disagree that TV is the way out and it will be all about online streaming in the future. But ESPN still accounts for a sizeable amount of profit that isn't going to be replaced overnight. DIS has ALWAYS had content, it's nothing new.
Wow I didn't even catch that it was unanimous. Well deserved, but there's always some homer who votes for his own guy.
No offense, but this is where you and the other guy are completely clueless - you have NO entitlement to choose B or C. Every shareholder who owns an A gets 1 B and 1 C at time of split. Everything is EQUAL here. The company UA is worth the same if it's all A shares of it's the sum of B and C shares.
Your share of the company (and everyone else's) is exactly the same when you held only A shares and when you now hold B and C shares. You can't just have more B shares (unless you bought more A share prior to the split - that's now how it works LOL).