|Bid||275.80 x 37900|
|Ask||275.90 x 75600|
|Day's Range||275.75 - 280.10|
|52 Week Range||178.15 - 296.75|
|Beta (3Y Monthly)||0.68|
|PE Ratio (TTM)||28.56|
|Earnings Date||Nov 6, 2019|
|Forward Dividend & Yield||3.35 (1.20%)|
|1y Target Est||198.06|
Dicks Sporting Goods (NYSE: DKS ) shares skyrocketed after the retailer delivered a big third quarter earnings beat on Tuesday. The company reported a 6% comp gain, its strongest same-store sales since ...
Foot Locker, Inc. (NYSE: FL ) reported a third quarter earnings beat on Friday, but a sales miss sent shares plunging. The Analyst and Rating Cowen analyst John Kernan reiterated a Market Perform rating ...
Yoda taught us that a Jedi must have the deepest commitment, the most serious mind. But good shoes can't hurt. For that, Adidas AG (OTC: ADDYY ) in collaboration with Walt Disney Co.'s (NYSE: DIS ) Lucasfilm, ...
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- Earlier this week, my Bloomberg Opinion colleague Chris Bryant examined the ongoing troubles for advanced jet engines used on today’s commercial airliners. These engines now seem to be reaching their technical limits, and as Bryant says, we may be asking too much of the technology.That’s not great news for the companies making those turbines, or for those flying the aircraft. It’s also not the best news for the climate, given the trajectory of emissions from air travel and air freight. Carbon dioxide emissions from commercial aviation made up 2.4% of global emissions in 2018 and, according to the International Council on Clean Transportation, have grown 32% in just five years.The geography of those emissions is highly concentrated. Three markets — the U.S., the European Union and China — account for more than half of all emissions; the top 10 emitters contribute more than 70% of the global total.There’s something hopeful, actually, in that geographical distribution. High concentration means that tackling emissions in just three markets can have an outsized impact, and standards set in those large markets are easy for others to follow. There’s another aspect to the distribution of aviation emissions that’s worth examining: emissions by type of aircraft. Bryant writes of problems with engines on both widebody and narrowbody aircraft: the Rolls-Royce Holdings Plc Trent 1000 engines used on the widebody Boeing Co. 787, and United Technologies Corp. subsidiary Pratt & Whitney’s geared turbofan used on the narrowbody Airbus SE A320neo. While widebody aircraft make up one-third of global emissions, narrowbody and regional passenger plans are almost half. If the turbines used to propel the largest and longest-range of aircraft are approaching technical limits but almost half of emissions are from shorter-range and smaller aircraft, then there’s space to innovate, for emissions’ sake, at the short and small end. And that space looks electric and hybrid. Next month, Vancouver-based Harbour Air will fly its first electric seaplane, a De Havilland DHC-2 Beaver prototype retrofitted with a propulsion system from Seattle-based electric aviation company MagniX. It’s a first look at what electric commercial flight could be, and as it draws upon a sophisticated, global and continually improving network of battery makers while the cost of batteries continues to decrease, it has room to grow. “Because of airborne mobility development, this technology is unstoppable, and it’s getting more practical as every day goes by,” says Greg McDougall, Harbour Air’s CEO. “The brainpower and money involved is snowballing, and there’s no doubt we can roll out what we’re doing to other small airlines.” It’s an infectious enthusiasm, but it just might take to the air elsewhere, too. Weekend readingThe Qantas Group plans to reach net zero carbon emissions by 2050. Meanwhile, Formula 1 plans to reach that milestone by 2030. Ferrari says its new Roma coupe is inspired by the postwar Eternal City. It’s a bit of a step up from the Vespas and Topolinos of the film “Roman Holiday.” The European Investment Bank will not consider new financing of unabated fossil fuels, including natural gas, after 2021. Sweden’s Riksbank is selling bonds issued by the Canadian province of Alberta and the Australian states of Queensland and Western Australia due to those areas’ large climate impacts. How Australia’s big businesses saw the climate turning point coming. The world’s biggest gun has helped solve a long-standing space mystery: the risk that orbiting microdebris poses to satellites. Weather-tech startup Understory is selling Hail Safe, an insurance product that protects auto dealers from hailstorm damages. Think tank Macro Polo’s deep dive into the organic light-emitting diode (OLED) supply chain in East Asia. Adidas has abandoned its robot factory experiment. Open-source code will survive the apocalypse in an Arctic cave. Silicon Valley’s Singularity University is cutting staff, and its CEO is stepping down. Elon Musk’s keep-it-in-the-family deal for SolarCity has become the top threat to Tesla Inc.’s future. The new dot-com bubble is here: It’s called online advertising. Designer Iris van Herpen’s work is inspired by the Large Hadron Collider. A fascinating look at how American brands became indelibly Japanese. In data journalism, technology still matters less than people. The coming age of generative biology. Get Sparklines delivered to your inbox. Sign up here. And subscribe to Bloomberg All Access and get much, much more. You’ll receive our unmatched global news coverage and two in-depth daily newsletters, the Bloomberg Open and the Bloomberg Close.To contact the author of this story: Nathaniel Bullard at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Brooke Sample at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Nathaniel Bullard is a BloombergNEF energy analyst, covering technology and business model innovation and system-wide resource transitions.For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
Adidas plans to close high-tech "robot" factories in Germany and the United States it launched to bring production closer to customers, saying on Monday deploying some of the technology in Asia would be "more economic and flexible". The Adidas factories were part of a drive to meet demand for faster delivery of new styles to its major markets and to counter rising wages in Asia and higher shipping costs. It originally planned a global network of similar factories.
The pan-European STOXX 600 index closed 0.2% higher and was about 2% away from reclaiming its record high level, hit last in April 2015. European shares have logged strong gains this week on growing optimism over a trade truce between the United States and China. "All the good news regarding trade has also been largely priced in, so if the rumors prove to be wrong the risk to the potential downside are actually far bigger," said Simona Gambarini, markets economist at Capital Economics in London.
German sportswear company Adidas expects a boost to sales from new soccer merchandise ahead of the 2020 European championships after quarterly growth was held back by a weaker performance from Yeezy shoes designed by Kanye West. Adidas decided to limit supplies of Yeezy products this year to maintain their exclusivity, Chief Executive Kasper Rorsted told journalists. Shares in Adidas, which have risen by more than a third in the last year, were down 2.9% at 1046 GMT.
German sportswear company Adidas said it expects a significant acceleration of sales in the fourth quarter after it reported stronger-than-expected sales and operating profit for the third quarter as it returned to growth in Europe. Sales rose a currency-adjusted 6% to 6.41 billion euros ($7.10 billion), beating average analyst forecasts for 6.32 billion euros, while operating profit was flat at 897 million euros, also above analyst consensus for 882 million euros. Shares in Adidas were up 1.1% at 0716 GMT in early Frankfurt trade.
It began Monday when Adidas AG (ADR) (OTC: ADDYY) CMO Eric Liedtke announced he was stepping down. Liedtke was largely responsible for Adidas’ resurgence in North America and was presumably the company’s next pick for CEO. On Tuesday, more bombshells were dropped when Under Armour Inc (NYSE: UAA) CEO and Founder Kevin Plank announced he was resigning, followed by Nike Inc (NYSE: NKE) CEO Mark Parker resignation just a few hours later.
Nike shares traded higher Monday after analysts at Bank of America Merrill Lynch lift their rating on the stock and boost their price target even as they noted the resurgence of rival Adidas as a 'significant global competitor.'
Houston Rockets general manager Daryl Morey, owner Tilman Fertitta, the NBA, and Rockets star James Harden all apologized to Chinese fans for a tweet that offered support to Hong Kong. Nike stock, exposed to China and the NBA, rose slightly.
California is the first state to pass a law allowing NCAA athletes to hire agents and get paid for use of their name.
Nike Inc's online sales growth and a bullish outlook in China put it on a firm path for years to come and should help it easily ride out rises in U.S. import tariffs on its Chinese-made sneakers, Wall Street analysts said on Wednesday after a strong set of quarterly results. Shares in the world's biggest sportswear maker surged as much as 5% in early trade after the results late on Tuesday showed its margins soaring and sales up 42% through apps and websites it has developed under its Nike Direct strategy. One big questionmark over Nike has been whether it will be hit in its biggest growth market, China, by a backlash against American-branded goods in response to President Donald Trump's rhetoric and successive rounds of import tariffs.
Nike (NYSE:NKE) stock is up over 20% in 2019. But it hasn't been a smooth path for the Beaverton, Oregon company. Nike will report their first-quarter earnings on September 24. NKE stock is trading at a level of resistance it has failed to break twice this year.Source: Shutterstock Will the third time be the charm? There are several reasons to believe it will. And a positive earnings report is just one of them. Nike Expects to Post Positive EarningsIn June, Nike reported positive top-line sales but a negative earnings per share. This was the first miss by the company in many years. The stock had already climbed nearly 20% at that point, and many investors took the report as an opportunity to take profits.InvestorPlace - Stock Market News, Stock Advice & Trading TipsI believe in the mantra that good companies don't suddenly become bad. Nike is experiencing increased competition and a changing retail landscape. But the company is showing an incredible ability to adapt and is still delivering value to shareholders by way of a small dividend and a proportionate amount of share buybacks. * 7 Triple-'F' Rated Stocks to Leave on the Shelf This leads me to believe that if Nike posts positive earnings (as expected), there is no reason to believe the stock should not get a lift going into the holiday season despite an increasingly competitive landscape. Nike Outsells its CompetitionThere's no question that both Adidas (OTCMKTS:ADDYY) stock which is up nearly 50% and Lululemon (NASDAQ:LULU) stock which is up over 30% are crushing Nike stock in 2019. But a closer look shows that Nike still is beating both regarding a fundamental metric: sales.Nike is forecasting full-year revenue of $39.1 billion as opposed to $26.43 billion for Adidas and $3.68 billion for Lululemon. In fairness, Lululemon is a niche player on the high end of the "athleisure" market. but the Vancouver company's dominance in the marketplace is a threat to Nike's future growth.And it's a threat Nike is taking seriously. The company continues to expand its line of women's athleisure wear. One example of this commitment was the company's "high performance kits" that they introduced for this year's Women's World Cup. Nike also has introduced their own yoga collection that includes both men's and women's offerings.Adidas competes with Nike directly in the sneaker game. But while both companies have exposure to China that is causing concern, Adidas is headquartered in Germany, a country that is either headed for or possibly already in a recession. Nike is Exhibiting a Start-Up MentalityI'm old enough to remember when Nike was a start-up. But despite becoming a blue-chip, dividend-paying stock, Nike has continued to adapt to a changing retail landscape and consumer. One of its latest ventures is the Nike House of Innovation 000 in New York City. The store is an extension of Nike's growth in the digital space. Mobile scan and pay, interactive kiosks, and displays that reflect local trends are all a staple of the Fifth Avenue store.Nike is also demonstrating a commitment to an enhanced in-store experience in its partnership with Foot Locker (NYSE:FL). As other shoe brands are fleeing the brick-and-mortar model, Nike is showing that in-store can work if the experience is right.But that doesn't mean that Nike lacks a strong digital presence. It has initiated a partnership that allows the company to sell directly on Amazon. And the company has also partnered with Walmart's (NYSE:WMT) urban brand, Jet.com. The store saw digital sales growth of over 40% in 2018 which was well ahead of the retail sector. And Nike's mobile demand accounted for over half of its e-commerce sales last year. What's Next for NKE Stock?Nike stock has been right around this $90 level twice before this year. In June, NKE plunged as the company posted their first decline in EPS in a long time. However, the decline was short-lived and by early July, NKE stock was back near present levels. Once again, it failed to sustain the momentum.Is the third time the charm? I think it will be. NKE stock is not inexpensive. It currently trades for over 30 times its fiscal 2020 consensus EPS.However, analysts are high on Nike stock. And the technical indicators for Nike show a stock that has investors looking for a catalyst. A positive earnings report should provide just that spark.As of this writing, Chris Markoch did not hold a position in any of the aforementioned securities. More From InvestorPlace * 2 Toxic Pot Stocks You Should Avoid * 7 Triple-'F' Rated Stocks to Leave on the Shelf * 10 Excellent Stocks to Watch for 2020 and Beyond * 7 Consumer Stocks to Buy in an Uncertain Market The post Nike Stock Just Needs a Little Earnings Momentum appeared first on InvestorPlace.
For beginners, it can seem like a good idea (and an exciting prospect) to buy a company that tells a good story to...
(Bloomberg Opinion) -- The California Assembly has 61 Democrats and 18 Republicans. The California Senate has 29 Democrats and 11 Republicans. As with everywhere else in the U.S., the two parties are divided on most issues, from regulating the gig economy to limiting gun purchases. But there is one issue on which both Democrats and Republicans in California are aligned: paying, at long last, college athletes.(5)On Monday, a bill that would override the “amateurism” rules of the National Collegiate Athletic Association and give athletes at the major California universities the right to capitalize financially on their name, likeness and image passed the Assembly by a vote of 72-0. Then, on Wednesday, the state senate passed the Fair Pay to Play Act, which allows athletes to market themselves for things like personal sponsorships, endorsements, and video-game licensing, by a margin of 39-0. Not a single dissent! I still can’t quite believe it.There have always been a few lonely voices calling for the athletes who play college football and basketball -- the revenue sports, as they’re called -- to be paid. One such person, believe it or not, was Walter Byers, the man who ran the NCAA from 1951 to 1987. In retirement, he turned against the amateurism rules he had long enforced, describing them (correctly) as the means by which the college sports cartel avoided paying its labor force.Another was Sonny Vaccaro, who did as much as anyone to commercialize college sports; he marketed basketball sneakers for Nike, Adidas and Reebok before quitting to fight the NCAA. His beef was that it was wrong for everyone involved in college sports to be making money except the players.But until recently, those voices went largely unheard. Most people -- even ardent fans -- ignored the question of whether college athletes were being exploited. If they got angry at the NCAA it wasn’t because of its cartel-like nature, or the harshness of its bylaws. It was usually because the school they cheered for was being punished “unfairly” for violating some rule or other. (Fans always think their university is being punished unfairly.)Then, in 2009, the former UCLA basketball star, Ed O’Bannon, sued the NCAA after seeing his avatar in a video game -- and realized that the video game company was paying the NCAA for the rights to his image instead of him. Two years later, Taylor Branch wrote his ground-breaking article in The Atlantic, “The Shame of College Sports.” It included this memorable line: “The tragedy at the heart of college sports is not that some college athlete are getting paid” -- under the table, he meant -- “but that more of them are not.”The coastal elites started paying attention.I jumped in a few month later, after doing some research that convinced me that the exploitation of basketball and football players at big-time college programs was unconscionable. “Frontline” did a documentary about exploited athletes, “Money and March Madness.” Sports columnists began regularly taking the NCAA to task. The issue was rising to the surface.When the O’Bannon case went to trial in June 2014, it was widely covered in the media and the NCAA did not come off well. (Charles Pierce, writing in Grantland, described the NCAA’s arguments as “the threadbare piety in which it wraps its heedless commercialism.”) It ended with both the trial judge and the appeals court agreeing that the NCAA’s rules outlining and defining amateur athletics amounted to an antitrust violation. But sadly, the appeals court bought the NCAA’s argument that amateurism was what differentiated college sports from professional sports, so the remedies it allowed did nothing to overturn the status quo.The unanimous vote in favor of the Fair Pay to Play Act shows just how far we’ve come since then. It’s a little like marriage equality. For years, public opinion moved an inch at a time -- and then all at once, it seemed, two-thirds of the country supported it.California State Senator Nancy Skinner, the sponsor of the bill, is a perfect example of how people have come around. In November 2015, she heard the economist Andy Schwarz speak at a Rotary Club meeting in Oakland. Schwarz has been fighting the NCAA since 2004; he was one of the people who helped gin up the O’Bannon case. He can be absolutely withering about the NCAA cartel.As Skinner listened to him, she later told the New York Times:All of a sudden the light bulb went off. Rather than being the bystander going, “Gosh this is so unfair, how do these people get away with this?” I’m like, “Hey, if I’m in the Senate, can the state do something about it?”She also framed the issue in exactly the way critics like Schwarz and Vaccaro have all these years: “I don’t know of any other industry that can rely on a large set of people’s talent for which they deny them any earnings and all compensation.”The bill embraces what’s called the Olympic model. Olympic athletes aren’t paid directly for competing, but they are allowed to accept money from endorsements, sponsorships, autographs, and the like. Skinner’s bill gives athletes at the big California universities the same ability, overriding NCAA bylaws that forbid such payments. It’s not everything. Athletes who lack the star power to reap endorsement money will still be unable to capture their economic value to a university. But it’s a start.Or perhaps I should say, it might be a start. You see, assuming the bill is signed into law by Governor Gavin Newsom, it won’t take effect until 2023. That would give the NCAA and the affected California universities plenty of time to sue to have it overturned.Absurdly, the NCAA says that the bill is “unconstitutional,” because it “would remove that essential element of fairness and equal treatment that forms the bedrock of college sports.” In a letter to Newsom, the NCAA also claimed that if California athletes are allowed “an unrestricted name, image and likeness scheme” it will put every other Division 1 university at a disadvantage.I’m not so sure about that. For one thing, Schwarz has co-founded the Historical Basketball League, an eight team league that will pay college-age basketball players upwards of $150,000 a year before they enter the pros. Its first year of operation will be 2020, and if it’s even mildly successful in drawing top high school players away from college basketball it will put enormous pressure on the NCAA’s amateurism model.For another thing, California is unlikely to be the only state to pass a law similar to the Fair Pay to Play Act. Earlier this year, Washington State considered similar legislation, which will likely go forward now that California has led the way. I imagine by 2023 ten or 15 states might have their own version of the law – at which point the move to give athletes their economic rights, the same rights as any other American, could turn into a stampede.Yes, the winds of change are blowing. What the California bill suggests most of all is that the days when the NCAA could hold back progress are finally coming to an end.(1) The more common term, of course, is “student athlete,” but I avoid it at all costs. It is an Orwellian phrase, devised by the NCAA in the 1950s to avoid having to pay workers’ compensation to injured football players.To contact the author of this story: Joe Nocera at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editor responsible for this story: Timothy L. O'Brien at email@example.comThis column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.Joe Nocera is a Bloomberg Opinion columnist covering business. He has written business columns for Esquire, GQ and the New York Times, and is the former editorial director of Fortune. His latest project is the Bloomberg-Wondery podcast "The Shrink Next Door."For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com/opinion©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
(Bloomberg) -- Apple Inc. and manufacturing partner Foxconn violated a Chinese labor rule by using too many temporary staff in the world’s largest iPhone factory, the companies confirmed following a report that also alleged harsh working conditions.The claims came from China Labor Watch, which issued the report ahead of an Apple event on Tuesday to announce new iPhones. The non-profit advocacy group investigates conditions in Chinese factories, and says it has uncovered other alleged labor rights violations by Apple partners in the past.For its latest report, CLW said undercover investigators worked in Foxconn’s Zhengzhou plant in China, including one who was employed there for four years. One of the main findings: Temporary staff, known as dispatch workers, made up about 50% the workforce in August. Chinese labor law stipulates a maximum of 10%, CLW noted.Apple said that, after conducting an investigation, it found the “percentage of dispatch workers exceeded our standards” and that it is “working closely with Foxconn to resolve this issue.” It added that when it finds issues, it works with suppliers to “take immediate corrective action.” Foxconn Technology Group also confirmed the dispatch worker violation following an operational review.Apple’s supply chain has faced criticism over poor labor standards for years, and the company has pushed manufacturing partners to improve factory conditions or risk losing business. However, suppliers and assemblers are always trying to churn out more handsets. Foxconn, officially known as Hon Hai Precision Industry Co., hires tens of thousands of temporary workers to ramp up production and meet iPhone demand during the key holiday season each year.“Our recent findings on working conditions at Zhengzhou Foxconn highlights several issues which are in violation of Apple’s own code of conduct,” CLW wrote in its report. “Apple has the responsibility and capacity to make fundamental improvements to the working conditions along its supply chain, however, Apple is now transferring costs from the trade war through their suppliers to workers and profiting from the exploitation of Chinese workers.”CLW was founded in 2000 as a 501(c)(3) organization to investigate Chinese factories that make toys, shoes, electronics and other products for some of the world’s largest multinational companies. It has an office in New York City and one in Shenzhen that offers a hotline for factory workers in China, according to its website.While its report said 55% of factory staff were dispatch workers in 2018, and about 50% in August, this included student interns. Because many of these students returned to school at the end of August, that number is now closer to 30%, which is still a violation, according to CLW.“We believe everyone in our supply chain should be treated with dignity and respect,” Apple also said in a statement. “To make sure our high standards are being adhered to, we have robust management systems in place beginning with training on workplace rights, on-site worker interviews, anonymous grievance channels and ongoing audits.”Foxconn said it found “evidence that the use of dispatch workers and the number of hours of overtime work carried out by employees, which we have confirmed was always voluntary, was not consistent with company guidelines.”It added that its “work to address the issues identified in our Zhengzhou facility continues and we will closely monitor the situation. We will not hesitate to take any additional steps that might be required to meet the high standards we set for our operations.”Apple releases an annual supplier responsibility report that details working conditions in its supply chain. In its latest report, Apple said it conducted 44,000 interviews with supplier employees last year to check if they were properly trained and knew how to voice concerns, while taking new steps to prevent forced labor.In late 2017, Apple found Foxconn had employed high school students who worked illegal overtime to assemble the iPhone X. Apple sent specialists to the facility to work with management on systems that ensured appropriate standards were followed.Foxconn is the largest of a coterie of gadget assemblers that produce most of the world’s consumer electronics from sprawling Chinese bases. Typically operating on wafer-thin margins, they employ millions of mostly migrant and temporary workers because activity tends to wax and wane with shopping seasons and fluctuations in demand.Dispatch workers don’t receive benefits that full-time employees get, such as paid sick leave, paid vacations and social insurance, which provides medical, unemployment and pension coverage, according to CLW. While base wages can be higher for dispatch workers, they are paid by third-party firms on a short-term basis and are not employed directly by Foxconn, CLW says. Dispatch workers can become official factory workers after an initial three-month period, according to the group’s report.Last month, Foxconn said it fired two executives at one of its Chinese plants after another CLW investigation found the company was relying heavily on temporary workers and teenage interns to assemble Amazon.com Inc. Echo speakers. Foxconn reviewed the Hengyang facility and found the proportion of contract workers and student interns had on occasion exceeded legal thresholds, and that some interns had been allowed to work overtime or nights.The group, which also monitors conditions in myriad industries from apparel to retail, has run reports in the past on suppliers to the likes of Nike Inc. and Adidas AG and, recently, probed a factory that manufactured Ivanka Trump-branded shoes.Apple and Foxconn seek to produce about 12,000 iPhones per shift at the Zhengzhou factory, CLW’s latest report found. Last year’s iPhone XS models were more complex to build than the iPhone X, requiring more workers, the group also said.According to emails seen by Bloomberg, Apple told CLW in August that it was looking into the findings and had questions about the report. The company sent an investigator to the factory and met with Foxconn officials to discuss the heavy use of dispatch workers, but Apple and Foxconn are still allowing the activity despite violating the 10% standard, CLW said.The CLW report also detailed other findings, such as:During peak production periods, resignations are not approved.Some dispatch workers have not received promised bonuses.Student workers do overtime during peak production season, even though regulations on student internships prohibit this.Some workers put in at least 100 overtime hours each month, during busy production periods. Chinese labor law limits monthly overtime to 36 hours.Workers must get approval to not do overtime. If requests are denied and staff still choose not to work overtime, they are admonished by managers and miss out on future overtime opportunities.Workers sometimes have to stay at the factory for unpaid meetings at night.The factory doesn’t provide adequate protective equipment for staff.Work injuries are not reported by the factory, and verbal abuse is common there.While overtime is allegedly often required, most workers want to work overtime to make more money, according to an anonymous diary written by a CLW investigator in the factory.“We looked into the claims by China Labor Watch and most of the allegations are false,” Apple said. “We have confirmed all workers are being compensated appropriately, including any overtime wages and bonuses, all overtime work was voluntary and there was no evidence of forced labor.”Apple added that less than 1% of workers were student workers, and that a small percentage of them voluntarily worked overtime or night shifts. Apple and Foxconn both said this issue has been corrected.Most factory workers are paid about 4,000 yuan ($562) a month, one CLW investigator found. After taxes and mandatory fees, they get roughly 3,000 yuan a month, according to the CLW report.China’s per capita disposable income was 28,228 yuan in 2018, or 2,352 yuan a month, China Daily reported earlier this year, citing government data.(Updates with detail on the group from the 7th paragraph)\--With assistance from Debby Wu.To contact the reporter on this story: Mark Gurman in San Francisco at firstname.lastname@example.orgTo contact the editors responsible for this story: Tom Giles at email@example.com, Alistair Barr, Edwin ChanFor more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com©2019 Bloomberg L.P.