ReportWire

Tag: beverages

  • 20 banks that are sitting on huge potential securities losses—as was SVB

    20 banks that are sitting on huge potential securities losses—as was SVB

    [ad_1]

    Silicon Valley Bank has failed following a run on deposits, after its parent company’s share price crashed a record 60% on Thursday.

    Trading of SVB Financial Group’s
    SIVB,
    -60.41%

    stock was halted early Friday, after the shares plunged again in premarket trading. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen said SVB was one of a few banks she was “monitoring very carefully.” Reaction poured in from several analysts who discussed the bank’s liquidity risk.

    California regulators closed Silicon Valley Bank and handed the wreckage over to the Federal Deposit Insurance Administration later on Friday.

    Below is the same list of 10 banks we highlighted on Thursday that showed similar red flags to those shown by SVB Financial through the fourth quarter. This time, we will show how much they reported in unrealized losses on securities — an item that played an important role in SVB’s crisis.

    Below that is a screen of U.S. banks with at least $10 billion in total assets, showing those that appeared to have the greatest exposure to unrealized securities losses, as a percentage of total capital, as of Dec. 31.

    First, a quick look at SVB

    Some media reports have referred to SVB of Santa Clara, Calif., as a small bank, but it had $212 billion in total assets as of Dec. 31, making it the 17th largest bank in the Russell 3000 Index
    RUA,
    -1.70%

    as of Dec. 31. That makes it the largest U.S. bank failure since Washington Mutual in 2008.

    One unique aspect of SVB was its decades-long focus on the venture capital industry. The bank’s loan growth had been slowing as interest rates rose. Meanwhile, when announcing its $21 billion dollars in securities sales on Thursday, SVB said it had taken the action not only to lower its interest-rate risk, but because “client cash burn has remained elevated and increased further in February, resulting in lower deposits than forecasted.”

    SVB estimated it would book a $1.8 billion loss on the securities sale and said it would raise $2.25 billion in capital through two offerings of new shares and a convertible bond offering. That offering wasn’t completed.

    So this appears to be an example of what can go wrong with a bank focused on a particular industry. The combination of a balance sheet heavy with securities and relatively light on loans, in a rising-rate environment in which bond prices have declined and in which depositors specific to that industry are themselves suffering from a decline in cash, led to a liquidity problem.

    Unrealized losses on securities

    Banks leverage their capital by gathering deposits or borrowing money either to lend the money out or purchase securities. They earn the spread between their average yield on loans and investments and their average cost for funds.

    The securities investments are held in two buckets:

    • Available for sale — these securities (mostly bonds) can be sold at any time, and under accounting rules are required to be marked to market each quarter. This means gains or losses are recorded for the AFS portfolio continually. The accumulated gains are added to, or losses subtracted from, total equity capital.

    • Held to maturity — these are bonds a bank intends to hold until they are repaid at face value. They are carried at cost and not marked to market each quarter.

    In its regulatory Consolidated Financial Statements for Holding Companies—FR Y-9C, filed with the Federal Reserve, SVB Financial, reported a negative $1.911 billion in accumulated other comprehensive income as of Dec. 31. That is line 26.b on Schedule HC of the report, for those keeping score at home. You can look up regulatory reports for any U.S. bank holding company, savings and loan holding company or subsidiary institution at the Federal Financial Institution Examination Council’s National Information Center. Be sure to get the name of the company or institution right — or you may be looking at the wrong entity.

    Here’s how accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI) is defined in the report: “Includes, but is not limited to, net unrealized holding gains (losses) on available-for-sale securities, accumulated net gains (losses) on cash flow hedges, cumulative foreign currency translation adjustments, and accumulated defined benefit pension and other postretirement plan adjustments.”

    In other words, it was mostly unrealized losses on SVB’s available-for-sale securities. The bank booked an estimated $1.8 billion loss when selling “substantially all” of these securities on March 8.

    The list of 10 banks with unfavorable interest margin trends

    On the regulatory call reports, AOCI is added to regulatory capital. Since SVB’s AOCI was negative (because of its unrealized losses on AFS securities) as of Dec. 31, it lowered the company’s total equity capital. So a fair way to gauge the negative AOCI to the bank’s total equity capital would be to divide the negative AOCI by total equity capital less AOCI — effectively adding the unrealized losses back to total equity capital for the calculation.

    Getting back to our list of 10 banks that raised similar red margin flags to those of SVB, here’s the same group, in the same order, showing negative AOCI as a percentage of total equity capital as of Dec. 31. We have added SVB to the bottom of the list. The data was provided by FactSet:

    Bank

    Ticker

    City

    AOCI ($mil)

    Total equity capital ($mil)

    AOCI/ TEC – AOCI

    Total assets ($mil)

    Customers Bancorp Inc.

    CUBI,
    -13.11%
    West Reading, Pa.

    -$163

    $1,403

    -10.4%

    $20,896

    First Republic Bank

    FRC,
    -14.84%
    San Francisco

    -$331

    $17,446

    -1.9%

    $213,358

    Sandy Spring Bancorp Inc.

    SASR,
    -2.91%
    Olney, Md.

    -$132

    $1,484

    -8.2%

    $13,833

    New York Community Bancorp Inc.

    NYCB,
    -5.99%
    Hicksville, N.Y.

    -$620

    $8,824

    -6.6%

    $90,616

    First Foundation Inc.

    FFWM,
    -9.11%
    Dallas

    -$12

    $1,134

    -1.0%

    $13,014

    Ally Financial Inc.

    ALLY,
    -5.70%
    Detroit

    -$4,059

    $12,859

    -24.0%

    $191,826

    Dime Community Bancshares Inc.

    DCOM,
    -2.81%
    Hauppauge, N.Y.

    -$94

    $1,170

    -7.5%

    $13,228

    Pacific Premier Bancorp Inc.

    PPBI,
    -1.95%
    Irvine, Calif.

    -$265

    $2,798

    -8.7%

    $21,729

    Prosperity Bancshare Inc.

    PB,
    -4.46%
    Houston

    -$3

    $6,699

    -0.1%

    $37,751

    Columbia Financial, Inc.

    CLBK,
    -1.78%
    Fair Lawn, N.J.

    -$179

    $1,054

    -14.5%

    $10,408

    SVB Financial Group

    SIVB,
    -60.41%
    Santa Clara, Calif.

    -$1,911

    $16,295

    -10.5%

    $211,793

    Source: FactSet

    Click on the tickers for more about each bank.

    Read Tomi Kilgore’s detailed guide to the wealth of information available for free on the MarketWatch quote page.

    Ally Financial Inc.
    ALLY,
    -5.70%

    — the third largest bank on the list by Dec. 31 total assets — stands out as having the largest percentage of negative accumulated comprehensive income relative to total equity capital as of Dec. 31.

    To be sure, these numbers don’t mean that a bank is in trouble, or that it will be forced to sell securities for big losses. But SVB had both a troubling pattern for its interest margins and what appeared to be a relatively high percentage of securities losses relative to capital as of Dec. 31.

    Banks with the highest percentage of negative AOCI to capital

    There are 108 banks in the Russell 3000 Index
    RUA,
    -1.70%

    that had total assets of at least $10.0 billion as of Dec. 31. FactSet provided AOCI and total equity capital data for 105 of them. Here are the 20 which had the highest ratios of negative AOCI to total equity capital less AOCI (as explained above) as of Dec. 31:

    Bank

    Ticker

    City

    AOCI ($mil)

    Total equity capital ($mil)

    AOCI/ (TEC – AOCI)

    Total assets ($mil)

    Comerica Inc.

    CMA,
    -5.01%
    Dallas

    -$3,742

    $5,181

    -41.9%

    $85,406

    Zions Bancorporation N.A.

    ZION,
    -2.44%
    Salt Lake City

    -$3,112

    $4,893

    -38.9%

    $89,545

    Popular Inc.

    BPOP,
    -1.56%
    San Juan, Puerto Rico

    -$2,525

    $4,093

    -38.2%

    $67,638

    KeyCorp

    KEY,
    -2.55%
    Cleveland

    -$6,295

    $13,454

    -31.9%

    $189,813

    Community Bank System Inc.

    CBU,
    -0.22%
    DeWitt, N.Y.

    -$686

    $1,555

    -30.6%

    $15,911

    Commerce Bancshares Inc.

    CBSH,
    -1.61%
    Kansas City, Mo.

    -$1,087

    $2,482

    -30.5%

    $31,876

    Cullen/Frost Bankers Inc.

    CFR,
    -1.08%
    San Antonio

    -$1,348

    $3,137

    -30.1%

    $52,892

    First Financial Bankshares Inc.

    FFIN,
    -0.90%
    Abilene, Texas

    -$535

    $1,266

    -29.7%

    $12,974

    Eastern Bankshares Inc.

    EBC,
    -3.16%
    Boston

    -$923

    $2,472

    -27.2%

    $22,686

    Heartland Financial USA Inc.

    HTLF,
    -1.26%
    Denver

    -$620

    $1,735

    -26.3%

    $20,244

    First Bancorp

    FBNC,
    -0.31%
    Southern Pines, N.C.

    -$342

    $1,032

    -24.9%

    $10,644

    Silvergate Capital Corp. Class A

    SI,
    -11.27%
    La Jolla, Calif.

    -$199

    $603

    -24.8%

    $11,356

    Bank of Hawaii Corp

    BOH,
    -6.15%
    Honolulu

    -$435

    $1,317

    -24.8%

    $23,607

    Synovus Financial Corp.

    SNV,
    -2.91%
    Columbus, Ga.

    -$1,442

    $4,476

    -24.4%

    $59,911

    Ally Financial Inc

    ALLY,
    -5.70%
    Detroit

    -$4,059

    $12,859

    -24.0%

    $191,826

    WSFS Financial Corp.

    WSFS,
    -2.78%
    Wilmington, Del.

    -$676

    $2,202

    -23.5%

    $19,915

    Fifth Third Bancorp

    FITB,
    -4.17%
    Cincinnati

    -$5,110

    $17,327

    -22.8%

    $207,452

    First Hawaiian Inc.

    FHB,
    -3.48%
    Honolulu

    -$639

    $2,269

    -22.0%

    $24,666

    UMB Financial Corp.

    UMBF,
    -3.35%
    Kansas City, Mo.

    -$703

    $2,667

    -20.9%

    $38,854

    Signature Bank

    SBNY,
    -22.87%
    New York

    -$1,997

    $8,013

    -20.0%

    $110,635

    Again, this is not to suggest that any particular bank on this list based on Dec. 31 data is facing the type of perfect storm that has hurt SVB Financial. A bank sitting on large paper losses on its AFS securities may not need to sell them. In fact Comerica Inc.
    CMA,
    -5.01%
    ,
    which tops the list, also improved its interest margin the most over the past four quarters, as shown here.

    But it is interesting to note that Silvergate Capital Corp.
    SI,
    -11.27%
    ,
    which focused on serving clients in the virtual currency industry, made the list. It is shuttering its bank subsidiary voluntarily.

    Another bank on the list facing concern among depositors is Signature Bank
    SBNY,
    -22.87%

    of New York, which has a diverse business model, but has also faced a backlash related to the services it provides to the virtual currency industry. The bank’s shares fell 12% on Thursday and were down another 24% in afternoon trading on Friday.

    Signature Bank said in a statement that it was in a “strong, well-diversified financial position.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • SunnyD Vodka Seltzer will officially be sold in stores | CNN Business

    SunnyD Vodka Seltzer will officially be sold in stores | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    SunnyD, the flavorful orange drink chugged from childhood by millennials, is embracing one of its more collegial cocktail combinations.

    There’s now a vodka seltzer version of the drink that was created because of “popular demand,” the brand said. SunnyD Vodka Seltzer becomes the latest entrant into the canned cocktail craze that has customers thirsting for flavor-packed adult beverages over their malt-based seltzer siblings.

    The vodka seltzer is 4.5 percent alcohol by volume, has 0 grams of sugar and only 95 calories. But there’s not actual SunnyD in the drink, rather the company said it has the “same great orange taste” as SunnyD that uses “real fruit juice and natural ingredients.”

    SunnyD was first developed in 1963, but later boomed in popularity in the 1990s garnering it a loyal fan base because of its tangy orange flavor that is likened to a much sweeter tasting (and sugar packed) version of regular orange juice. SunnyD was sold to Harvest Hill Beverage Company in 2017, the privately owned manufacturer of Juicy Juice, with sales of the orange drink growing more than 30% since 2019.

    “Consumers are passionate about this iconic brand, rooted in nostalgia but with a taste that resonates today,” said Ilene Bergenfeld, chief marketing officer of Harvest Hill, in a release. “Many have told us that they enjoy SunnyD as a mixer and asked for this product. So, we looked at the hard seltzer category, and thought, good, but we can do better.”

    SunnyD Vodka Seltzer is sold in single cans for $1.99 and in a 4-pack of 12-ounce slim cans for $9.99. It hit shelves beginning Saturday at some Walmart stores.

    Fruit juice-based drinks are growing in popularity in the alcohol industry. Simply Spiked recently expanded its lineup beyond lemonade to add a peach flavor, Bud Light Seltzer is using fruit juice for the first time in its new flavors and NÜTRL, a Anheuser-Busch brand, has seen sales of its vodka seltzer drink mixed with fruit juice, explode over the past year.

    In total, sales of premixed cocktails grew 42% last year to $1.6 billion, according to Distilled Spirits Council of the US because drinkers are loving the new flavors and convenience they offer.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • This is the dynamic that could decide the 2024 GOP race | CNN Politics

    This is the dynamic that could decide the 2024 GOP race | CNN Politics

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    The same fundamental dynamic that decided the 2016 Republican presidential primaries is already resurfacing as the 2024 contest takes shape.

    As in 2016, early polls of next year’s contest show the Republican electorate is again sharply dividing about former President Donald Trump along lines of education. In both state and national surveys measuring support for the next Republican nomination, Trump is consistently running much better among GOP voters without a college education than among those with a four-year or graduate college degree.

    Analysts have often described such an educational divide among primary voters as the wine track (centered on college-educated voters) and the beer track (revolving around those without degrees). Over the years, it’s been a much more consistent feature in Democratic than Republican presidential primaries. But the wine track/beer track divide emerged as the defining characteristic of the 2016 GOP race, when Trump’s extraordinary success at attracting Republicans without a college degree allowed him to overcome sustained resistance from the voters with one.

    Though the early 2024 polls have varied in whether they place Trump or Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis in the lead overall (with the latest round tilting mostly toward Trump), that same overriding pattern of educational polarization is appearing in virtually all of those surveys, a review of public and private polling data reveals.

    “Trump does seem to have a special ability to make this sort of populist appeal [to non-college voters] and also have a special ability to make college-educated conservatives start thinking about alternatives,” GOP pollster Chris Wilson said in an email. “I think we’ll continue to see a big education divide in his support in 2024.”

    The stark educational split in attitudes toward Trump frames the strategic challenge for his potential rivals in the 2024 race.

    On paper, none of the leading candidates other than DeSantis himself seems particularly well positioned to threaten Trump’s hold on the non-college Republicans who have long been the most receptive audience for his blustery and belligerent messaging. By contrast, most of the current and potential field – including former Governors Nikki Haley and Chris Christie; current Governors Chris Sununu of New Hampshire and Glenn Youngkin of Virginia; former Vice President Mike Pence; and Sen. Tim Scott – appear better suited to attract the white-collar Republicans who have always been the most skeptical of Trump.

    That could create a situation in which there’s too little competition to Trump for voters on the “beer track” and too many options splintering the voters resistant to him on the “wine track.” That was the dynamic that allowed Trump to capture the nomination in 2016 even though nearly two-thirds of college-educated Republicans opposed him through the primaries, according to exit polls, and he didn’t reach 50% of the total vote in any state until the race was essentially decided.

    While the political obstacles facing Trump look greater now than they were then, his best chance of winning in 2024 would likely come from consolidating the “beer track” to a greater extent than anyone else unifies the “wine track” – just as he did in 2016. In each of the past three contested GOP presidential primaries, the electorate have split almost exactly in half between voters with and without college degrees, analyses of the exit polls have found.

    “Right now, unless somebody cracks that code to get competitive with Trump there [among blue-collar Republican voters], it could fall into the old pattern which is the best scenario for him,” said long-time GOP strategist Mike Murphy, who directed the super PAC for Jeb Bush in the 2016 race.

    Jennifer Horn, the former GOP state chair in New Hampshire, added that while Trump’s ceiling is likely lower than in 2016, he could still win the nomination with only plurality support if no one unifies the majority more skeptical of him. “He isn’t going to need 50% to win,” cautioned Horn, a leading Republican critic of Trump.

    The wine track/beer track divide has been a consistent feature of Democratic presidential primary politics since 1968. Since then, a procession of brainy liberal candidates (think Eugene McCarthy in 1968, Gary Hart in 1984, Paul Tsongas in 1992 and Bill Bradley in 2000) have mobilized socially liberal college-educated voters against rivals who relied primarily on support from non-college educated White voters and racial minorities (Robert F. Kennedy, Walter Mondale, Bill Clinton and Al Gore in those same races). In the epic 2008 Democratic primary struggle, the basic divide persisted in slightly reconfigured form as Barack Obama attracted just enough white-collar White and Black voters to beat Hillary Clinton’s coalition of blue-collar Whites and Latinos. Joe Biden in 2020 was mostly a beer track candidate.

    Generally, over those years, the educational divide had not been as important in Republican primary races. More often GOP voters have divided among primary contenders along other lines, including ideology and religious affiliation. Both the 2008 and 2012 GOP races, for instance, followed similar lines in which a candidate who relied primarily on evangelical Christians and the most conservative voters (Mike Huckabee in 2008 and Rick Santorum in 2012) ultimately lost the nomination to another who attracted more support from non-evangelicals and a broader range of mainstream conservatives (John McCain and Mitt Romney).

    The conservative columnist Patrick J. Buchanan, in his long-shot 1992 and 1996 bids for the GOP nomination, pioneered a blue-collar conservatism centered on unwavering cultural conservatism and an economic nationalism revolving around hostility to foreign trade and immigration. Huckabee and even more so Santorum advanced those themes, clearing a path that Trump would later follow – with a much harsher edge than either.

    In 2008, there was no educational divide in the GOP race: McCain won exactly the same 43% among Republican voters with and without a college degree, according to a new analysis of the exit poll results by CNN polling director Jennifer Agiesta. But by 2012, Santorum’s blue-collar inroads meant Romney won the nomination with something closer to the Republican equivalent of a wine-track coalition: Of the 20 states that conducted exit polls that year, Romney won voters with at least a four-year college degree in 14, but he carried most non-college voters in just 10.

    Wilson, the GOP pollster, said that an educational divide also started appearing around that time in other GOP primaries for Senate, House and governor’s races more frequently though by no means universally.

    “This wasn’t always the driving demographic or ideological difference in primaries before Trump,” Wilson said. “Sometimes a candidate [who] was particularly strong in sounding populist themes would create this type of gap, but often a more traditional issue difference either on social issues or on issues like tax increase votes or support for Obamacare or something adjacent to it would be a stronger signal in a primary.”

    In 2016, Trump turned this traditional GOP axis on its head. He narrowed the big divisions that had decided the 2008 and 2012 races. He performed nearly as well among voters who identified as very conservative as he did among those who called themselves somewhat conservative or moderate, according to a cumulative analysis of all the 2016 exit polls conducted by ABC’s Gary Langer. Likewise, Trump performed only slightly better among voters who were not evangelicals than those who were, Langer’s analysis found.

    Instead, Trump split the GOP electorate along the wine-track/beer-track divide familiar from Democratic primary contests over the previous generation. According to Langer’s cumulation of the exit polls, Trump won fully 47% of GOP voters without a four-year college degree – an incredible performance in such a crowded field. Trump, in stark contrast, carried only 35% of Republican voters with at least a college-degree across the primaries overall. But the remainder of them dubious of him never settled on a single alternative. Sen. Ted Cruz, who proved Trump’s longest-lasting rival, captured only about one-fourth of the white-collar GOP voters, with the rest splitting primarily among Marco Rubio, John Kasich and Trump himself.

    In October 2015, I wrote that Trump’s emerging strength in the GOP nomination race could be explained in two sentences: “The blue-collar wing of the Republican primary electorate has consolidated around one candidate. The party’s white-collar wing remains fragmented.” That same basic equation held through the primaries and largely explained Trump’s victory. The question now is whether it could happen again.

    There’s no question that some of the same ingredients are present. Recent national polling by the non-partisan Public Religion Research Institute, according to detailed results shared with CNN, shows that Republicans without a college degree are more likely than those with advanced education to agree with such core Trump themes as the belief that discrimination against Whites is now as big a problem as bias against minorities; that society is growing too soft and feminine; and that the growing number of immigrants weakens American society.

    The educational divide is also appearing more regularly in other GOP primaries for offices such as senator or governor, especially in races where one candidate is running on a Trump-style platform, Republican strategists say. It is also reappearing in polls measuring GOP voters’ early preferences for 2024. Recent national polls by Quinnipiac University, Fox News Channel and Republican pollsters including Whit Ayres, Echelon Insights and Wilson have all found Trump still running very strongly among Republicans without a college degree, usually capturing more than two-fifths of them, according to detailed results provided by the pollsters. But those same surveys all show Trump struggling with college-educated Republican voters, usually drawing even less support among them than he did in 2016, often just one-fourth or less.

    Wilson, for instance, said that in his national survey of prospective 2024 GOP voters, Trump’s support falls from about half of those with a high school degree or less, to about one-third of those with some college experience, one-fourth of those with a four-year degree and only one-fifth of those with a graduate education. In a recent national NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist poll, half of Republicans without a college degree said nominating Trump again would give the party the best chance of winning in 2024; two-thirds of the Republicans with degrees said the party would have a better chance with someone else.

    State polls are showing the same pattern. The latest University of New Hampshire survey showed Trump attracting about two-fifths of GOP voters there without a high school degree, about one-third of those with some college experience, and only one-sixth of those with a four-year or graduate degree. A recent LA Times/University of California (Berkeley) survey in that state produced very similar results. Trump also ran much better among Republicans without a degree than those with one in the latest OH Predictive Insights primary poll in Arizona, according to detailed results provided by the firm.

    Craig Robinson, the former GOP state party political director in Iowa, said he sees the same divergence in his daily interactions. “The people that I hang out with or have breakfast with on Saturday, it’s the more business, more educated guys, and they are like, ‘Hey, we just want to move on [from Trump],’” Robinson told me. “But if I go back home to rural Iowa, they are not like that. They are looking for the fighter; they are looking for the person that they think will stand up for them and that’s Trump by and large.”

    Republicans who believe Trump is more vulnerable than in 2016 largely point to one reason: the possibility that DeSantis could build a broader coalition of support than any of Trump’s rivals did then. In many of these early state and national polls, DeSantis leads Trump among college educated voters. And in the same polls, DeSantis is generally staying closer to Trump among non-college voters than anyone did in 2016. “DeSantis may be able to do some business there,” said Murphy, referring to the GOP’s blue-collar wing.

    When DeSantis spoke on Sunday at the Ronald Reagan presidential library about an hour northwest of Los Angeles, he smoothly displayed his potential to bridge the GOP’s educational divide. For the first part of his speech, he touted Florida’s economic success around small government principles – a message that could connect with white-collar GOP voters drawn to a Reaganite message of lower taxes and less regulation. In the speech’s later sections, DeSantis recounted his clashes with what he called “the woke mind virus” over everything from classroom instruction about race, gender and sexual orientation, to immigration and crime and his collisions with the Walt Disney Co. Those issues, which drew the biggest response from his audience, provide him a powerful calling card with GOP voters, especially those without degrees, drawn to Trump’s confrontational style, but worried he can’t win again.

    “There is a lot of energy in the party right now around these cultural issues,” said GOP consultant Alex Conant, who served as the communications director for Marco Rubio’s 2016 presidential campaign. “If you watch Fox prime time, they are not talking about tax cuts and balancing budgets. They talk about the same cultural issues that DeSantis is putting at the core of his campaign.”

    The risk to DeSantis is that by leaning so hard into cultural confrontation on so many fronts he could create a zero-sum dynamic in the race. That approach could allow him to cut into Trump’s blue-collar base, but ultimately repel some college educated primary voters, who view him as too closely replicating what they don’t like about Trump. (If DeSantis wins the nomination, that same dynamic could hurt him with some suburban voters otherwise drawn to his small government economic message.)

    That could leave room in the top tier of the GOP race for another candidate who offers a sunnier, less polarizing message aimed mostly at white-collar Republicans. “I think there is absolutely room for more than two candidates, especially two candidates who are both competing very hard for the Fox News audience,” Conant said. Almost anyone else who joins the race beyond Trump and DeSantis (assuming he announces later this year) may ultimately conclude that lane represents their best chance to win.

    In many ways, Trump looks more vulnerable than he did in the 2016 primary. But assembling a coalition across the GOP’s wine-track/beer-track divide that’s broad enough to beat him remains something of a Rubik’s Cube, and the countdown is starting for the field that’s assembling against him to solve it.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Silicon Valley Confronts the End of Growth. It’s a New Era for Tech Stocks.

    Silicon Valley Confronts the End of Growth. It’s a New Era for Tech Stocks.

    [ad_1]

    Silicon Valley could use a reboot. The biggest players aren’t growing, and more than a few are seeing sharp revenue declines. Regulators seem opposed to every proposed merger, while legislators push for new rules to crack down on the internet giants. The Justice Department just can’t stop filing antitrust suits against Google. The initial public offering market is closed. Venture-capital investments are plunging, along with valuations of prepublic companies. Maybe they should try turning the whole thing on and off.

    The only strategy that seems to be working is to lay people off. Tech CEOs suddenly are channeling Marie Kondo, tidying up and keeping only the people and projects that “spark joy,” or at least support decent operating margins. Layoffs.fyi reports that tech companies have laid off more than 122,000 people already this year.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Altria exchanges stake in Juul for heated-tobacco intellectual property

    Altria exchanges stake in Juul for heated-tobacco intellectual property

    [ad_1]

    Tobacco giant Altria
    MO,
    +0.15%

    on Friday said it had exchanged its minority stake in embattled e-cigarette maker Juul for “a non-exclusive, irrevocable global license to certain of JUUL’s heated tobacco intellectual property.” Altria Chief Executive Billy Gifford said in a statement that “We believe exchanging our Juul ownership for intellectual property rights is the appropriate path forward for our business. Juul faces significant regulatory and legal challenges and uncertainties, many of which could exist for many years. We are continuing to explore all options for how we can best compete in the e-vapor category.” Altria said it estimated the value of its investment in Juul at $250 million. It said it would book the financial impact of Friday’s decision in the first quarter. Shares finished 0.2% higher during regular trading on Friday, and were up 0.1% after hours.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Molson Coors’ funny ad went too far, regulator says | CNN Business

    Molson Coors’ funny ad went too far, regulator says | CNN Business

    [ad_1]


    New York
    CNN
     — 

    Beer ads try to be funny, but a regulatory group has determined that Molson Coors went too far with a recent ad that compares rivals’ light beer to water.

    The National Advertising Division, which is part of the Better Business Bureau, sided with Anheuser-Busch, which challenged a 2022 ad for Miller Lite that uses the phrase “light beer shouldn’t taste like water, it should taste like beer.” The agency said that Molson Coors should “discontinue” the ad because is “not puffery or a mere opinion.”

    In the 15-second spot, a cyclist takes a break from riding uphill, cracks open a beer and douses himself with it. No specific beers were mentioned, however the beer uses a similar blue color that adorns Bud Light packaging. NAD said that it “determined that tasting ‘like water’ is a measurable attribute” and that customers might “reasonably expect that the statement is supported by such evidence.”

    NAD said the ad should be discontinued because Molson Coors “did not submit evidence supporting the claim that any other light beers ‘taste like water.’”

    In response, Anheuser-Busch said it “appreciates” NAD’s decision.

    “True stewards of the beer industry should be working together to strengthen the beer category instead of resorting to misleading attacks that denigrate products enjoyed by millions of beer drinkers,” an Anheuser- Busch spokesperson said in a statement.

    Molson Coors is appealing the decision, saying it “vehemently disagrees with this decision because we believe light beer should taste like beer, not water, and we are well within our right to share that belief.” A spokesperson also questioned to Anheuser-Busch’s “sudden concern” with the ad since it hasn’t aired since last August.

    NAD’s decisions aren’t legally binding, however most advertisers comply with their decision. If an advertiser doesn’t comply, the ads are referred to the Federal Trade Commission for further scrutiny.

    This isn’t the first time Molson Coors and Anheuser-Busch, which are the top-selling beer makers in the US, have challenged each other. Molson Coors sued Anheuser-Busch in 2019 over Super Bowl ads that accused the Miller Lite and Coors Light maker for saying its beer was sweetened with rice rather than corn syrup. The case was dismissed.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • PepsiCo Beats Earnings Estimates, Hikes Dividend

    PepsiCo Beats Earnings Estimates, Hikes Dividend

    [ad_1]



    PepsiCo


    beat earnings and revenue estimates in the fourth quarter, driven by higher prices. It increased its annual dividend, sending the stock higher in premarket trading Thursday.

    The beverages and snacks giant (ticker:PEP) reported adjusted earnings per share (EPS) of $1.67 on sales of $28 billion. Analysts were expecting EPS of $1.65 on sales of $26.8 billion.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tyson Foods stock slides premarket after earnings miss by a wide margin

    Tyson Foods stock slides premarket after earnings miss by a wide margin

    [ad_1]

    Tyson Foods Inc. stock slid 5.5% in premarket trade Monday, after the meat processor and parent to brands including Jimmy Dean and Hillshire Farm missed consensus estimates for its fiscal first quarter by a wide margin.

    “We faced some challenges in the first quarter,” Chief Executive Donnie King said in a statement. “Market dynamics and some operational inefficiencies impacted our profitability. We expect to improve our performance through the back half of fiscal 2023 and into the future, as we strive to execute with excellence and work to become best in class in our industry.”

    Springdale, Arkansas-based Tyson posted net income of $316 million, or 88 cents a share, for the quarter to Dec. 31, down from $1.121 billion, or $3.07 a share, in the year-earlier period. Adjusted per-share earnings came to 85 cents, well below the $1.31 FactSet consensus.

    Sales rose to $13.260 billion from $12.933 billion, also below the $13.515 billion FactSet consensus.

    The company, the biggest U.S. meat supplier measured by sales, said beef prices fell by an average of 8.5% in the quarter, while chicken prices rose 7.1% and pork prices were up 1.4%. The company’s prepared foods division’s sales rose 7.6% and international and other food sales were up 4.9%.

    Beef sales rose 2.9% to $4.723 billion, while pork sales fell 7.4% to $1.529 billion. Sales of chicken rose 2.5% to $4.263 billion, while prepared foods sales rose 1.2% to $2.538 billion. International and other food sales were up 6.4% to $612 million.

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture is expecting domestic protein production — beef, pork, chicken and turkey — to be flat in fiscal 2023 versus year-earlier levels, said Tyson.

    Tyson said it is expecting fiscal 2023 sales of $55 billion to $57 billion, while FactSet expects $55.2 billion. Tyson expects capex of about $2.5 billion and net interest costs of about $330 million.

    The stock has fallen 27% in the last 12 months, while the S&P 500
    SPX,
    -1.04%

    has fallen 8%.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Big Tech just added to a shrinking forecast, but maybe Bob Iger can brighten the mood

    Big Tech just added to a shrinking forecast, but maybe Bob Iger can brighten the mood

    [ad_1]

    Wall Street’s expectations for 2023 have been diving as forecasts for the new year come in light, and the news could get worse once they factor in disappointing results from Big Tech. But at least Bob Iger is coming back for a sequel.

    Google, Facebook, Amazon and Apple all disappointed with holiday earnings this week. Their forecasts ranged from nonexistent to piecemeal to meh, and the fallout will only add to the biggest dive in Wall Street’s expectations through the beginning of a year since 2016.

    Analysts’ average forecast for 2023 earnings from the S&P 500 index
    SPX,
    -1.04%

    dropped by 2.5% in January, according to FactSet Senior Earnings Analyst John Butters, the worst in seven years. Those projections began heading lower last year, and the decline is only steepening — analysts are now projecting 3% earnings growth in 2023, and that is contingent on a big holiday rebound from the results being released this quarter.


    Uncredited

    The news was even worse for the first quarter, for which projections declined 3.3% in January as companies whiffed on their forecasts at a rapid pace: 86% of the 43 companies that have guided for first-quarter earnings have missed projections, Butters reported. Earnings are now expected to decline 4.2%, which would be the first year-over-year earnings decline since the third quarter of 2020, when the COVID-19 pandemic write-offs started to come in.

    Big Tech only added to the downward trajectory in recent days. Amazon.com Inc.
    AMZN,
    -8.43%

    missed on its holiday earnings as well as its forecast for the first quarter, and that company could determine if S&P 500 profits rise in 2023 all on its own. Amazon’s worst holiday earnings since 2014 could also contribute to the consumer discretionary sector’s first earnings decline since the beginning of the pandemic, with holiday sector earnings now expected to drop more than 5%.

    Google parent Alphabet Inc.
    GOOGL,
    -2.75%

    GOOG,
    -3.29%

    and Facebook parent Meta Platforms Inc.
    META,
    -1.19%

    also missed their respective earnings targets amid problems with the digital-advertising industry, leading to the communications-services sector having the worst earnings season in the S&P 500. Profit has declined 25.2% in that sector so far, the worst among the 11 S&P 500 sectors, but would be down just 6.5% without the effects of Meta and Alphabet, Butters reported.

    Apple Inc.
    AAPL,
    +2.44%

    also didn’t do projections any favors, reporting its biggest sales decrease since 2016 and an earnings miss Thursday afternoon. In a piecemeal forecast, executives projected a similar sales decline in the calendar first quarter, though unofficially.

    This week in earnings

    After the busiest week in earnings season wrapped up, don’t expect much of a breather — 95 S&P 500 companies are expected to report in the week ahead, the third consecutive week with at least 90 companies reporting. There will be plenty of intrigue among companies not in the S&P 500 too, including Robinhood Markets Inc.
    HOOD,
    -3.59%

    and Affirm Holdings Inc.
    AFRM,
    -14.14%

    reporting together on Wednesday afternoon.

    Only one Dow Jones Industrial Average
    DJIA,
    -0.38%

    stock will report, but that is the Wednesday call you will want to tune in for: Bob Iger’s return to the Walt Disney Co.
    DIS,
    -2.21%

    earnings show.

    The calls to put on your calendar
    The numbers to watch

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tesla, GM, Lucid, Alibaba, and More Stock Market Movers

    Tesla, GM, Lucid, Alibaba, and More Stock Market Movers

    [ad_1]


    • Order Reprints

    • Print Article


    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 6 cheap stocks that famed value-fund manager Bill Nygren says can help you beat the market

    6 cheap stocks that famed value-fund manager Bill Nygren says can help you beat the market

    [ad_1]

    These are tricky times in the stock market, so it pays to look to the best stock-fund managers for guidance on how to behave now. Veteran value investor Bill Nygren belongs in this camp, because the Oakmark Fund OAKMX he co-manages consistently and substantially outperforms its peers. 

    That isn’t easy, considering how many fund managers fail to do so. Nygren’s fund beats its Morningstar large-cap value index and category by more than four percentage points annualized over the past three years. It also outperforms at five and…

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Best drip coffee maker in 2023 | CNN Underscored

    Best drip coffee maker in 2023 | CNN Underscored

    [ad_1]



    CNN
     — 

    There are so many brewing methods to choose from (French press, the currently trendy dalgona whipped, pour-over), but many coffee lovers still rely on the classic, automatic drip for their daily fix. That’s why we tested the best-rated drip coffee makers using a wide range of criteria (outlined below) over the course of several weeks. Bags upon bags of dark roast, light roast and medium roast coffee beans were ground and brewed. We made full carafes, half carafes and single cups. And we tasted the results black, with cow’s milk, almond milk, sweetened condensed milk, cold-brew strength over ice — you name it.

    Many, many pots of coffee later, we settled on four standout drip coffee machines.

    Best drip coffee maker overall

    The Braun KF6050WH BrewSense Drip Coffee Maker produced consistently delicious, hot cups of coffee, brewed efficiently and cleanly, from sleek, relatively compact hardware that is turnkey to operate, and all for a reasonable price.

    Runner-up with a modern bent

    This was, to our eye, the most handsome and minimally designed of the straightforward auto-brewers, delivering a clean, tasty cup. It lost first place only because the touchscreen may not be for every consumer, and brew time is significantly longer than the other machines we tried out.

    Luxury pick for the design-obsessed

    In just near five minutes, the Technivorm Moccamaster 59636 KBG Coffee Brewer turns out a whole pot of pretty perfectly brewed coffee, and the process is as entrancing as a targeted Netflix trailer.

    Best affordable drip coffee maker

    One of the cheapest options we tested, the Mr. Coffee 12-cup brewer is compact, simple to operate and yields a very competitive cup. ​

    CNN Underscored_drip coffee makers_braun body

    We brewed countless pots of coffee with the BrewSense, ranging from light to dark roast, and each one yielded a strong, delicious cup with no sediment, thanks to the gold tone filter, designed to remove the bitterness from coffee as well reduce single-use paper-filter waste. The machine we tested was white — a nice option for those with a more modern kitchen design — but it also comes in black, and it’s compact enough to fit under the cabinets in a smaller space compared to some of the more cumbersome machines we tested.

    The BrewSense is straightforward to operate: It’s designed like a traditional automatic drip machine with manual operating buttons, but with a sleek, modern upgrade. The hardware is a sophisticated combination of brushed metal and plastic, with a glass carafe that feels comfortable in the hand.

    The BrewSense doesn’t have a lot of bells and whistles compared to some of the machines we tested, and that functional ease helped elevate it to the top of our list. You could unbox this machine, flush it through with water once, and be drinking a freshly brewed cup within 15 minutes, all without reading the manual. Brewing is also a nearly silent process, which can be pleasing on early mornings. Some consumers may want a machine loaded with special features, but for those who just want delicious, hot coffee every morning, without spending over a hundred bucks, this is your best bet.

    The BrewSense isn’t perfect: It’s not the fastest we tested — to brew a full pot of 12 cups took upwards of 11 minutes. And we found an annoying error in the instruction manual around how to program the clock (call us rigid, but we insisted on programming the time before using each of the machines!); the directions read to press and hold CLOCK and then SET, but that didn’t work. We had to simply press and hold the CLOCK button and then sort of trial and error our way through the hours and minutes. Meanwhile, the auto-program setup is not as obvious as we’d have liked; though once we got it, it worked like a dream. But otherwise, we found this machine intuitive and easy to operate even without the instruction manual.

    Cleanup could at times be a little messier than some of our other machines. The hot water comes up through the filter basket and spreads the grounds up to the top of the cone, and during one brewing, a tiny bit rose up outside the cone so the top of the brew apparatus needed a little wipedown. Overall, though, for less than $80, this machine delivers the best bang for your buck of anything on the market.

    CNN Underscored_drip coffee makers_cuisinart body

    Coming in just a few points behind the Braun BrewSense was one of the three Cuisinart automatic drip machines we tested: the Touchscreen 14-Cup Programmable.

    We rated all three Cuisinarts highly, but the Touchscreen ranked highest for its combination of progressive design and everyday efficacy. All the Cuisinart products we encountered were well designed, but this one feels special, like when you unbox a brand-new Apple product: Its all-black, shiny surfaces and touchscreen control panel look and feel next-level for an everyday coffee maker (and the price, $235 at Macy’s, more than three times that of the Braun, reflects that).

    But this isn’t just a fancy, aesthetically pleasing machine: It brewed strong, delicious coffee that tasted cleanly filtered but rich. It’s also relatively easy to program and use, given its tech-centric platform. The touchscreen panel features cute little icons signifying one-touch commands to help customize your brew: If you like your coffee bolder, you can select the BOLD feature; if you’re brewing less than half a pot, select the 1 to 4 cups feature for a slower brew with the proper extraction time; adjust the hot plate temperature to low, medium or high; turn the audible brew-cycle-finished tone on or off.

    That tech-centric design is also one of the reasons this didn’t come in at number one, however. As exciting and different as it felt, we did feel that this machine — the only touchscreen model we tested — would feel less intuitive and more laborious than some consumers would want as part of their morning coffee routine. The touchscreen goes dark during the brew process, which yes, is nice-looking, but also feels a bit jarring, like you’re literally in the dark, asking yourself, “What’s going on? Is coffee brewing?” The settings and operating buttons are clear enough when illuminated, but it did take us a few times brewing to get used to how much pressure you need to apply with your fingertip to the touchscreen. We could easily think of people in our own lives who would be flummoxed by this machine if left alone with it and a bag of coffee — and for that, it lost a few points in functionality.

    Also, like its Cuisinart cousins we tested, this one’s a slower brewer. We clocked 11 minutes for eight cups, and if you’re watching your coffee maker brew like, well, a watched pot, it seems like it … takes forever. We understand the appeal of a slower brewing process (pour-over and Chemex fans, we hear you!), but 12 to 14 minutes for a full pot of coffee seems like a long time to wait when you’re thirsty for your morning Joe and you’re not doing it by hand. Finally, not everyone will want to spend more than $200 on a coffee maker. But many may.

    While some consumers might be flummoxed by the technology of this higher-end product, others will embrace it and make it a centerpiece of their kitchen, and rightly so. Form plus function equals morning happiness here.

    CNN Underscored_drip coffee makers_moccamaster body

    We had heard about the Technivorm Moccaster, a machine beloved for its innovative and old-school industrial design, handmade and tested in the Netherlands since 1968, even before we received it for this story. Multiple friends reached out upon hearing that we were testing a Moccamaster, singing the brand’s praises, and one declared it superlative via Instagram DM: “Moccamaster? Test over!” And the Moccamaster arrives with its own best PR too. Its user manual applauds buyers: “Congratulations on your purchase of the World’s Finest Coffee Brewer!” (If you’re spending more than $300 on a coffee maker, perhaps the enthusiasm feels validating.)

    Once we got the apparatus set up — which takes a little focus and time, to be honest — it really did pay off, with possibly the most delicious, hot, fresh cup of coffee we have ever tasted from a home-brewed machine. What’s more, you barely have time to peruse the morning news headlines before the process is done. The Moccamaster brewed 10 cups in less than six minutes, and, on a second trial, six cups in under four minutes. The brew function is almost jarringly fast: Once you turn on the machine, the brewing starts immediately. Then, seeing the water heat in the tank and bubble up through the water transfer tube into the brewer was a throwback to middle-school science experiments in the most pleasing way, like if a lava lamp produced fresh hot coffee after a few mesmerizing undulations.

    We discovered much to love about the Moccamaster, but there also were elements we didn’t adore. Perhaps ironically, they’re about the design. Some love a more hands-on coffee-making process, but some might find that there are just too many moving parts here, literally. We needed to read the directions pretty closely to assemble the parts. Once assembled, and once we digested what was happening brew-process-wise, the machine became fairly easy to operate.

    But each time you use this machine, you have to take the brew basket apart to add a new paper filter (yes, it requires a paper filter, if that makes a difference to you) and coffee grounds, and that basket removal sometimes disrupts the outlet arm and the reservoir lid — not a huge deal, but it could feel like you have to put your coffee maker back together from scratch every morning. Also, the basket lid and outlet arm, through which the hot water travels from the tube to the brew basket, get very hot during the process. It’s fine if you’re aware and cautious, but you wouldn’t want someone to wander up and unknowingly touch the hot part of the brewer.

    And finally, perhaps our most significant beef with this model: When you return the glass carafe to hotplate in between pours, the glass scrapes the warmer in a slightly cringey way.

    The coffee that this striking machine yields, though, may diminish other distractions — we found ourselves moving this maker back to the kitchen counter time and again, because the brew process and its results were superior. If you, like us, are a fan of the Moccamaster, you’re likely to be one for many years to come, which will amortize the steep price tag accordingly.

    CNN Underscored_drip coffee makers_mr coffee body

    We won’t go on and on about the Mr. Coffee 12-Cup, but it brewed a very workable 12 cups, in both taste and temperature, in just nine minutes. The machine came packaged in some pretty intense plastic and cardboard — the unboxing took a full five minutes and a pair of scissors — but once separated from its packaging, this machine’s a breeze to put together. The hardware is very easy to use (and to program to brew at a specific time), even without reading the directions. It’s compact — one of the best small drip coffee makers we tested — and durable, and the lid, brew basket, carafe and removable top half are all dishwasher safe, which wasn’t common among the machines we tested.

    The testing process for these coffee makers was intensive, lasting more than a month. We evaluated each machine based on what would be most important to the user — namely, functionality, durability and design. We tested each machine at least twice (but four to eight times for some) with both dark and light roast freshly ground beans, did a programmed/timed brew when available, and tested the additional functions of the more specialty machines (single-cup, cold brew, tea, milk frothing). We jotted notes about every machine’s unboxing, read every instruction manual, handled and rehandled the hardware, timed the brew of each machine, noted the temperature of the resulting coffee, and tasted and had others taste and weigh in on user experience. We tried to get as acquainted as possible with each of these machines, became fond of a good many of them — and as a result, we drank way too much coffee over the month in question.

    Read on for the categories and their breakdowns.

    Brew function

    • Optimal temperature: We didn’t take the actual temperature of the coffee from each machine, because we don’t think that’s how the average coffee drinker evaluates home brewing — experts recommend that coffee be brewed at between 195 and 205 degrees Fahrenheit, and served immediately, at 180 to 185 degrees — but we scored the perceived temp of each brew against all the others. We tasted each cup immediately after brewing, black, and then with added cold milk, and recorded the results.
    • Taste: The taste of coffee is, obviously, subjective. Two people could spend a lifetime tasting the different coffee varietals and never agree on one. That being said, we tested each machine with both a dark roast and a light roast, keeping the amount of grounds consistent to the machine’s directions. As a result, some machines that recommended using more grounds yielded stronger brews — in those instances, we retested those with less grounds accordingly.
    • Time to brew: For each carafe brewed, we timed the process on an iPhone timer, both for a full carafe and half. For those machines that made single cups, we timed that process as well.
    • Heat retention: We noted whether the machine brewed into a glass or a thermal carafe, and how hot the coffee remained a half hour to an hour after brewing.
    • User-friendliness: We did an initial scan of each machine, evaluating whether a new customer would be able to brew coffee without reading the instruction manual. We then assessed whether the design of each machine is immediately intuitive, and on a more micro level, assessed the settings and buttons on the face of the machine, the markings on the water tank and carafe, how easy the carafe is to fill, and the design of the brew basket.
    • Volume yield: We noted how many ounces each machine can brew.
    • Programmability: We recorded whether you can program the machine to brew at a set time.

    Durability

    • Everyday durability: For this category, we assessed how the machine responded to being handled during setup, filling the water tank, adding the grounds, removing and replacing carafe to serve, cleanup, and how durable the hardware felt.
    • Build quality: We noted what materials the machine is built from, e.g., plastic, metal, brushed metal, glass, and the tangible feel of each machine in a user’s hands.
    • Serviceability: We noted the ease of opening and taking apart the removable parts of each machine, in the case it would need to be serviced.

    Setup and breakdown

    • Ease of assembly: We observed how long it took to unbox the machine, put it together, and do an initial water flush before the product could be used.
    • Size of machine: We assessed how much counter space each machine took up, and how easy it is to move and store.
    • Ease of clean: After each brewing, we took note of how easy it was to clean the brew basket, the carafe, and the surrounding hardware.

    Aesthetic

    • First impression: We observed our first impression of each machine, noting details of design, color, size, feel — whether this machine looked attractive on our counter.
    • Color options: We researched if the machine came in any colors besides black.

    Warranty

    • We checked the number of years of warranty of each machine.

    Ninja Hot and Cold Brewed System ($179.99, originally $199.99; amazon.com)

    We tested two Ninja machines, both of which have some very appealing features. The hot and cold brew system brewed an excellent pot of hot coffee in less than five minutes, as well as a very tasty single cup (in multiple sizes), a less easy feat to perfect. It also brews coffee intended to be served directly over ice, an option that lots of consumers will like. We love the cool, minimalist glass carafe, though the lid features a big hole in the middle for pouring, which can lead to some splashing.

    This machine, though prolific in function, lost points because the water tank — plastic with prominent ridges — feels cheap and devolves the user experience a bit (with this machine, thankfully, the plastic tank is in the back, hidden from view, but does need to be handled every time you add water). Another problem with this machine: The water tank doesn’t have marking measurements, only half carafe, and full carafe, and two sizes of single cup. Without ounce or cup markings, how does one know how much water to add versus amount of coffee grounds? The Ninja machines come with a special-sized coffee scoop, different amounts on each end of the scoop, but it was bothersome that the water and the coffee amounts couldn’t be more standardized without relying only on the provided removable accessories (which, for the record, are cute — there’s a removable frothing wand). A lot of performance features with this machine also means a busy control panel that also feels a bit high-maintenance.

    Ninja Specialty Coffee Maker with Glass Carafe ($159.99; amazon.com)

    The Ninja Specialty is similar to the hot and cold brewed one, with one major difference: The water tank is adjacent to the brew basket, and visible to the eye. This one also brews a very nice cup of hot fresh coffee, and has nifty added functions, too, like myriad sizes of individual cups, half and full carafes, and an over-ice option. The placement of the water tank front and center here, though, makes this one less appealing than the hot and cold option; the tank, similarly, feels flimsy and cheap, a factor that’s difficult to overlook in user experience. For those who like the Ninja brand products (they make blenders and other items), though, there’s a lot of function for your buck here.

    Cuisinart PerfecTemp 14-Cup Programmable Coffeemaker ($99.95, originally $185; amazon.com)

    The most basic of the Cuisinart options we tested, this one brewed a nearly perfect cup at, for this reviewer, a perfectly hot temp (even after adding significant cold milk, we still had a steaming hot cup), thanks to an adjustable carafe temp. This machine is solid and well-designed, with one downside (for us): Brewing time was 14 minutes for eight cups, nearly double the time of some of the other brewers we tested.

    Cuisinart Coffee Center 10-Cup Thermal Coffee Maker and Single Serve Brewer ($200.98, originally $229; amazon.com)

    Our third Cuisinart brews only 10 cups into a thermal carafe, but has the handy bonus feature of a single-serve brew — with an attachment to use prepackaged coffee pods, or an adorable mini filter to use fresh grounds. (Note: The mini filter is a bit of a chore to clean because it is so small.) Like its Cuisinart siblings above, this machine makes good coffee, but the single-serve brewer does make the whole of the hardware more cumbersome. One annoying design issue: There’s an on/off switch on the side of the machine, whose placement feels not intuitive.

    Breville BDC450 Precision Brewer ($299.95; amazon.com)

    We were giddy upon opening this fancy brewer with much to offer: standard brew, fast, gold (what even is that, I wondered at first glance!), cold brew, single cup (with a sold separately attachment), and a customizable to your preferences setting. The options are exciting, but also overwhelming. The user is prompted to enter the consistency of their water, on a hard to soft scale — do all home coffee drinkers know the texture of their tap water? Also, does the average coffee drinker know what Gold Cup certification is? These feel like niche details for an automatic drip machine.

    Big picture, the Breville brewed a good pot of coffee, quite quickly, but we didn’t find it hot enough. The whole apparatus is beautifully designed, with sleek brushed metal and a lightweight, handsome carafe lovely enough to join a brunch table. But digging in further, we found this machine just to be … too much. Too much hardware — it doesn’t fit easily under our cabinets. Too many options — we needed to read up on a bunch of coffee wisdom before we could even set up the machine to our preferences. There are lots of users who would find this machine the sweet spot of function and sophistication, and enjoy exploring all of its specialties, but for those looking for turnkey coffee-making, this is a little extra.

    Black+Decker 12-Cup Programmable Coffeemaker, Black, CM1160B ($19.99; target.com)

    The most affordable automatic drip machine we tested, the Black & Decker 12-cup, is also a solid choice. It brewed eight tasty cups in eight short minutes — overall a good user experience. Hardware-wise, it felt a bit less durable than its closest rival, the Mr. Coffee, but it’s programmable and super easy for near the cost of two lattes with an extra shot.

    Bonavita Connoisseur 8-Cup One-Touch Coffee Maker ($145.99; amazon.com)

    The Bonavita Connoisseur has its fans, but we had multiple issues with the machine. This pleasingly retro-looking apparatus brews a nice cup quickly and at a good temperature, but the user experience leaves much to be desired. Simply put, the design feels flawed. The lid of the carafe needs to be removed before brewing, so the coffee just brews directly into a wide-open carafe — this was so counterintuitive to us, even after three or four brew tries, that it diminished the experience of the brew process. The brewer also gets very hot during brewing — so hot that we wondered if it might actually be a safety issue. Lastly, after brewing, we screwed the carafe lid back on and tried to return the carafe to underneath the brewer — sure, maybe we were still sleepy, maybe not enough caffeine yet — but the carafe doesn’t fit under the brewer with the lid on; the entire top of the machine popped off. This affects storage of the machine, too; because the carafe lid and the brew basket don’t both fit into the hardware at the same time, there’s always one piece loose.

    Read more from CNN Underscored’s hands-on testing:

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Take profits on Starbucks after its huge run, and check out these 3 other stocks

    Take profits on Starbucks after its huge run, and check out these 3 other stocks

    [ad_1]

    A Starbucks store is seen inside the Tom Bradley terminal at LAX airport in Los Angeles, California.

    Lucy Nicholson | Reuters

    In Friday’s “Morning Meeting,” we dug into our inbox and found an excellent question raised by a member of the Investing Club.

    Starbucks – like Halliburton – has had a nice run lately. The Club trimmed some Halliburton on Thursday. Why not trim Starbucks too? I have a double-digit percent gain on shares accumulated over the past five months. It seems like I should take some off the table. I would appreciate your perspective on what I see as a similar situation, but two different stocks.

    -Clay

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Inflation is easing, but the prices of these groceries are expected to soar in 2023 — including one whose price rose nearly 60% in December

    Inflation is easing, but the prices of these groceries are expected to soar in 2023 — including one whose price rose nearly 60% in December

    [ad_1]

    General inflation is easing, but the prices of some food items are not going down anytime soon. And the reasons are largely out of the Federal Reserve’s control.

    The consumer price index cooled in December, falling to an annualized 6.5% from the 7.1% annual rate recorded in November, according to government data. Still, the annualized inflation rate in food was 10.4% in December, significantly higher than the overall inflation rate even as it represented a slower rate of increase than November, when food prices were 12% higher than in November 2021.

    Inflation running at nearly 40-year highs over the past year has put a squeeze on American wallets. Through a series of jumbo rate hikes, the Federal Reserve has sought to tamp down inflation. Its target interest rate was lifted from a negligible level to a range of 4.25% to 4.50% by the end of 2022.

    But a few factors impacting food prices are not going away. War is still ongoing in Ukraine, which affected the prices of fertilizers and animal feeds; the avian flu continues to impact the egg supply; and extreme weather conditions are adding complexities to food production. 

    The following is a look at how a few popular food items are affected.

    Eggs

    The price of eggs surged 59.9% on the year in December, up from 49% in November, according to the most government data. That means a carton of Grade A large eggs on average more than doubled in cost with prices reaching $4.25 in December 2022, compared to $1.79 a year earlier. In some parts of the country, consumers could pay up to $8 for a carton of organic eggs. 

    Avian flu, which has forced millions of chickens to be culled and caused a shortage of eggs, is the main reason behind the price increase. In a change from previous breakouts that faded as summer ended, this time the avian flu lingered into winter. 

    The holiday season is usually the peak for consumer egg demand, which means that we could see egg prices tick down a little in the new year, experts said. 

    But it will not be a significant drop given the ongoing flu and high cost of feed. If input costs continue to increase and the bird flu continues to kill large quantities of hens, the costs will most likely be passed on to consumers, said Curt Covington, senior director of partner relations at AgAmerica Lending, a financial services company providing agriculture loans. 

    Experts, including the biggest egg producer in the country, Cal-Maine, said the avian flu will be hitting egg supplies for the long term. “More than 43 million of the 58 million birds slaughtered over the past year to control the virus have been egg-laying chickens, including some farms with more than a million birds apiece in major egg-producing states like Iowa,” the Associated Press reported this week.

    Read more: Cal-Maine says avian flu could continue to hit egg supplies after this year

    “I suspect it will take much additional effort to ‘stamp-out’ HPAI this time around and we may very well be dealing with the reality that this will be a year-round issue,” said Brian Earnest, lead economist for animal protein at CoBank, a national cooperative bank serving industries across rural America, in an email to MarketWatch. 

    The weekly supplies of eggs on hand has also reached a historic low, he told MarketWatch. For the week ended Dec. 19, cases on hand reported by the USDA totaled 1.176 million. That’s a 20% drop year-over-year, and the lowest level for the same week since 2014, he said. 

    Also see: Why egg prices are sizzling — up 38% on last year

    Butter

    Butter prices rose by 31.4% on the year in December, up from 27% in November, making the average price for a pound of butter $4.81 nationally. It was $3.47 a year earlier. 

    Extreme heat and smaller cow herds are the main reasons behind that, experts told MarketWatch. Cows eat less and produce less milk in the heat, and the cost of maintaining milk production skyrocketed last year, making farmers unwilling to expand their herds. 

    Going forward into 2023, the price of butter could soften, but year-over-year price increases could still stay high, said Tanner Ehmke, lead economist of dairy and specialty crops at CoBank. 

    Cows are approaching their prime milk-producing season, which usually runs from March through May, although customer demand usually peaks during the recently completed holiday season, he said.

    But the increase of supply will not be much, Ehmke said, because costs are staying at record highs for farmers to maintain and expand their herds. Drought in the Western part of the country and the war in Ukraine continue to impact the supply and costs of feed. 

    “It’s [going to be] a very modest increase,” said Ehmke. 

    About 58% of the U.S. is at least “abnormally dry,” according to the National Integrated Drought Information System. It’s likely this year will see more drought-inducing La Niña weather conditions, according to National Weather Service’s Climate Prediction Center.

    “If so, the third dry year in a row would signal the worst drought since at least 2011- 2013,” said Rob Fox, director of CoBank’s knowledge-exchange division in a 2023 preview released in December. “But this time it is more concentrated in the Western states, and it would be even more devastating to their already precarious water supplies and desiccated pastures,” he added.

    At the same time, butter production is competing with the growing production of and appetite for cheese in the U.S., Ehmke told MarketWatch last September. U.S. cheese consumption per capita is growing around 1% to 2% each year, according to the USDA. U.S. cheese exports also increased, particularly to countries like South Korea and Japan.

    Read more: Butter prices hit an all-time high — partly because extreme heat is taking a toll on dairy cows

    Vegetable oil and margarine

    Margarine, which is largely made of vegetable oil, is also seeing a huge price increase. The price of margarine, the substitute for butter in the old days, rose by 43.8 % in December, down slightly from 47.4% in November compared to a year before. 

    While soybeans, corn and sunflower oil are among the food items that have been hugely impacted by the war in Ukraine, another dynamic is at play here, analysts suggested: A large quantity of vegetable oil is being used for the production of renewable diesel.

    In 2021/2022, 38.4% of soybean-oil supplies were used for biofuel production — biofuel is a broader category than renewable diesel — up from 35.6% the year before, according to USDA data updated in October 2022. 

    Transitioning to a green economy laid out in the Inflation Reduction Act will require more soybean supply. The expected growth in soybean oil-based renewable diesel will require considerably more soybean bushels for domestic production, wrote Kenneth Scott Zuckerberg, CoBank’s lead economist for grain and farm supply, in a report in September

    At the moment, global grain and oilseed supplies are tight, and the combined global stocks of corn, wheat and soybeans are forecast to decline for the fifth straight year in 2023, according to the CoBank report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 18 stock picks in a ‘Goldilocks’ scenario for U.S. consumers

    18 stock picks in a ‘Goldilocks’ scenario for U.S. consumers

    [ad_1]

    It may not have been a surprise to see the consumer discretionary sector of the S&P 500 get hammered last year amid talk of a looming recession while the Federal Reserve jacked up interest rates to push back against inflation.

    But the stock market always looks ahead. Following a decline of 19.4% for the S&P 500
    SPX,
    +0.42%

    in 2022 and a 37.6% drop for the benchmark index’s consumer discretionary sector, this may be the time to begin looking for bargains.

    And now, analysts at Jefferies have lifted the sector to a “bullish” rating.

    In a note to clients on Jan. 10, Jefferies’ global equity strategist, Sean Darby, wrote: “A Goldilocks scenario might be unfolding for the U.S. consumer — falling inflation but steady employment conditions.”

    He sees consumer confidence improving, in part because “households are still sitting on [about] $1.4 trillion of Covid savings.”

    Darby pointed to a list of 18 consumer discretionary stocks favored by Jefferies analysts that was published on Jan. 6. Those are listed below, along with three stocks in the sector the analysts rate “underperform.”

    The ratings of the Jefferies analysts for individual stocks is based on their 12-month outlooks for the companies, in keeping with Wall Street tradition.

    So we have added another list further down, showing which companies in the S&P 500 consumer discretionary sector are expected by analysts polled by FactSet to increase sales the most through 2024.

    The Jefferies 18

    Here are the 18 consumer discretionary stocks recommended by Jefferies analysts with “buy” ratings on Jan. 6, sorted by how much upside the firm sees for the shares from closing prices on Jan. 9:

    Company

    Ticker

    Jan. 9 price

    Jefferies price target

    Implied 12-month upside potential

    Three-year estimated sales CAGR through 2022

    Two-year estimated sales CAGR through 2024

    Topgolf Callaway Brands Corp.

    MODG,
    -0.22%
    $20.76

    $56

    170%

    32.8%

    10.0%

    Bloomin’ Brands Inc.

    BLMN,
    +3.87%
    $22.08

    $35

    59%

    2.4%

    3.7%

    Coty Inc. Class A

    COTY,
    +1.23%
    $9.38

    $14

    49%

    -7.1%

    3.7%

    MGM Resorts International

    MGM,
    +1.71%
    $37.64

    $56

    49%

    -0.1%

    6.6%

    Chewy Inc. Class A

    CHWY,
    +1.63%
    $40.13

    $57

    42%

    28.0%

    10.6%

    Planet Fitness Inc. Class A

    PLNT,
    +0.69%
    $82.36

    $115

    40%

    10.4%

    13.9%

    Molson Coors Beverage Co. Class B

    TAP,
    +0.67%
    $50.21

    $69

    37%

    0.5%

    1.4%

    Fox Factory Holding Corp.

    FOXF,
    +3.95%
    $99.90

    $135

    35%

    28.1%

    6.6%

    Hasbro Inc.

    HAS,
    +0.99%
    $63.70

    $85

    33%

    9.1%

    3.6%

    Hostess Brands Inc. Class A

    TWNK,
    +0.33%
    $23.10

    $30

    30%

    14.2%

    5.0%

    Lowe’s Cos. Inc.

    LOW,
    +0.08%
    $199.44

    $250

    25%

    10.6%

    -1.9%

    Walmart Inc.

    WMT,
    -0.27%
    $144.95

    $175

    21%

    4.9%

    3.3%

    Dollar General Corp.

    DG,
    -0.26%
    $241.05

    $285

    18%

    10.9%

    6.7%

    Church & Dwight Co. Inc.

    CHD,
    -1.17%
    $82.25

    $97

    18%

    7.0%

    4.6%

    McDonald’s Corp.

    MCD,
    +0.39%
    $267.25

    $315

    18%

    2.4%

    4.0%

    Estee Lauder Cos. Inc. Class A

    EL,
    +0.39%
    $261.63

    $304

    16%

    2.8%

    5.8%

    Mondelez International Inc. Class A

    MDLZ,
    -0.04%
    $67.24

    $75

    12%

    6.3%

    4.1%

    Tapestry Inc.

    TPR,
    +0.73%
    $41.25

    $45

    9%

    3.3%

    3.2%

    Sources: Jefferies, FactSet

    Click on the tickers for more information about the companies.

    Click here for Tomi Kilgore’s detailed guide to the wealth of information available for free on the MarketWatch quote page.

    The two right-most columns on the table show estimated compound annual growth rates (CAGR) for the companies over the past three calendar years and expected sales CAGR for two years through calendar 2024, based on the companies’ financial reports and consensus estimates among analysts polled by FactSet.

    (We used calendar-year numbers, some of which are estimated by FactSet for prior years, because some companies have fiscal years or even months that don’t match the calendar.)

    The stock pick with the highest 12-month upside potential, based on Jefferies’ price target, is Topgolf Callaway Brands Corp.
    MODG,
    -0.22%
    .
    This company has the highest estimated three-year sales CAGR on the list, and has the third-highest projected sales CAGR through 2024, after Planet Fitness Inc.
    PLNT,
    +0.69%

    and Chewy Inc.
    CHWY,
    +1.63%
    .

    On Jan. 6, the Jefferies analysts also listed three stocks in the sector they rated “underperform.” Here they are, sorted by how much the analysts expect the stocks to decline over the next 12 months:

    Company

    Ticker

    Jan. 9 price

    Jefferies price target

    Implied 12-month upside potential

    Three-year estimated sales CAGR through 2022

    Two-year estimated sales CAGR through 2024

    Lululemon Athletica Inc.

    LULU,
    +2.98%
    $298.66

    $200

    -33%

    26.3%

    14.6%

    Williams-Sonoma Inc.

    WSM,
    +1.75%
    $122.17

    $98

    -20%

    14.1%

    -0.3%

    Harley-Davidson Inc.

    HOG,
    +0.35%
    $43.25

    $39

    -10%

    -2.8%

    4.4%

    Sources: Jefferies, FactSet

    Screen of consumer discretionary sales growth

    A look head at which companies are expected to increase sales the most over the next two years might serve as a good starting point for your own research.

    Bear in mind that some of the companies in travel-related industries suffered declining sales for three years through 2022 because of the coronavirus pandemic. Some of those are on this new list of 20 stocks in the S&P 500 consumer discretionary sector expected to show the highest two-year sales CAGR through calendar 2024:

    Company

    Ticker

    Two-year estimated sales CAGR through 2024

    Three-year estimated sales CAGR through 2022

    Share “buy” ratings

    Jan. 9 price

    Consensus price target

    Implied 12-month upside potential

    Las Vegas Sands Corp.

    LVS,
    +1.59%
    59.2%

    -32.6%

    79%

    $52.78

    $53.53

    1%

    Norwegian Cruise Line Holdings Ltd.

    NCLH,
    +1.67%
    39.6%

    -9.3%

    44%

    $13.78

    $16.96

    23%

    Carnival Corp.

    CCL,
    +1.64%
    35.2%

    -14.7%

    30%

    $9.47

    $10.11

    7%

    Tesla Inc.

    TSLA,
    -1.83%
    34.3%

    49.7%

    64%

    $119.77

    $232.43

    94%

    Wynn Resorts Ltd.

    WYNN,
    +2.01%
    29.3%

    -17.5%

    53%

    $94.33

    $96.07

    2%

    Royal Caribbean Group

    RCL,
    +2.22%
    28.4%

    -6.8%

    53%

    $57.29

    $66.43

    16%

    Chipotle Mexican Grill Inc.

    CMG,
    -0.17%
    13.4%

    15.9%

    71%

    $1,446.74

    $1,778.81

    23%

    Amazon.com Inc.

    AMZN,
    +2.61%
    12.2%

    22.1%

    92%

    $87.36

    $133.76

    53%

    Booking Holdings Inc.

    BKNG,
    +0.37%
    11.9%

    3.9%

    63%

    $2,208.41

    $2,307.67

    4%

    Aptiv PLC

    APTV,
    +1.66%
    11.9%

    6.4%

    70%

    $97.98

    $117.23

    20%

    Starbucks Corp.

    SBUX,
    +1.28%
    11.2%

    7.2%

    42%

    $104.74

    $103.44

    -1%

    Etsy Inc.

    ETSY,
    +3.56%
    11.1%

    45.3%

    50%

    $120.99

    $124.04

    3%

    Hilton Worldwide Holdings Inc.

    HLT,
    +0.06%
    10.1%

    -2.9%

    38%

    $129.08

    $146.17

    13%

    Expedia Group Inc.

    EXPE,
    +0.39%
    9.0%

    -0.9%

    50%

    $93.77

    $125.65

    34%

    NIKE Inc. Class B

    NKE,
    +0.68%
    8.1%

    5.8%

    62%

    $124.85

    $126.15

    1%

    Marriott International Inc. Class A

    MAR,
    +0.47%
    7.5%

    -1.2%

    30%

    $152.53

    $172.81

    13%

    BorgWarner Inc.

    BWA,
    +1.82%
    7.1%

    15.3%

    53%

    $42.24

    $46.93

    11%

    Tractor Supply Co.

    TSCO,
    +1.06%
    6.8%

    19.0%

    61%

    $217.48

    $232.34

    7%

    Yum! Brands Inc.

    YUM,
    -0.76%
    6.7%

    6.4%

    47%

    $129.76

    $137.79

    6%

    Dollar General Corp.

    DG,
    -0.26%
    6.7%

    10.9%

    67%

    $241.05

    $267.54

    11%

    Source: FactSet

    Among the companies on this list that didn’t suffer sales declines from 2019 levels, Tesla Inc.
    TSLA,
    -1.83%

    is expected to achieve the highest two-year sales CAGR through 2022.

    Dollar General Corp.
    DG,
    -0.26%

    is the only company to appear on this list based on consensus sales growth estimates and the Jefferies recommended list.

    Don’t miss: These 15 Dividend Aristocrat stocks have been the best income builders

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • SEC charges ex–McDonald’s CEO Easterbrook for making false statements relating to his 2019 ouster

    SEC charges ex–McDonald’s CEO Easterbrook for making false statements relating to his 2019 ouster

    [ad_1]

    The Securities and Exchange Commission said Monday it has filed charges against Stephen J. Easterbrook, former chief executive of McDonald’s Corp., for making “false and misleading” statements to investors about the circumstances that led to his ouster in November 2019.

    The agency has also filed charges against McDonald’s for “shortcomings” in its public disclosures relating to Easterbrook’s severance agreement.

    McDonald’s
    MCD,
    -0.55%

    fired Easterbrook for exercising poor judgment and violating company policy by engaging in an inappropriate personal relationship with a McDonald’s employee. However, the separation agreement struck with the executive concluded that his termination was without cause, allowing him to retain substantial equity compensation that would have been forfeited in other circumstances.

    “In making this conclusion, McDonald’s exercised discretion that was not disclosed to investors,” the SEC said in a statement.

    In July 2020, McDonald’s discovered in an internal probe that Easterbrook had engaged in other, undisclosed relationships with employees. Those findings were not disclosed prior to Easterbrook’s termination, in the knowledge that they would influence the board’s decision making, according to the SEC.

    “When corporate officers corrupt internal processes to manage their personal reputations or line their own pockets, they breach their fundamental duties to shareholders, who are entitled to transparency and fair dealing from executives,” said Gurbir S. Grewal, the SEC’s director of the division of enforcement. 

    The SEC is charging Easterbrook with violating anti-fraud provisions of the SEC Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Easterbrook has consented to a cease-and-desist order and five-year officer and director bar and a $400,000 civil penalty, without admitting to or denying the charges.

    McDonald’s is charged with violating section 14(a) of the Exchange Act and Exchange Act Rule 14a-3. The fast-food giant has consented to a cease-and-desist order, without admitting to or denying SEC findings. The SEC has opted not to fine the company, as it cooperated with the agency and clawed back compensation after its probe.

    The stock was slightly lower Monday in early trades.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Myths and facts about treating a hangover | CNN

    Myths and facts about treating a hangover | CNN

    [ad_1]

    Editor’s Note: Get inspired by a weekly roundup on living well, made simple. Sign up for CNN’s Life, But Better newsletter for information and tools designed to improve your well-being.



    CNN
     — 

    Are you celebrating the first day of 2023 with a hangover?

    If so, you might be looking for a method to ease your misery. There are certainly a lot of so-called hangover cures, some dating back centuries.

    “The ancient Greeks believed that eating cabbage could cure a hangover, and the Romans thought that a meal of fried canaries would do the trick,” said Dr. John Brick, former chief of research at the Center of Alcohol Studies, Education and Training Division at Rutgers University in New Jersey, who authored “The Doctor’s Hangover Handbook.”

    “Today, some Germans believe that a hearty breakfast of red meat and bananas cures hangovers. You might find some French drinking strong coffee with salt, or some Chinese drinking spinach tea,” he said. “Some of the more unusual hangover cures are used by some people in Puerto Rico, who rub half a lemon under their drinking arm.”

    In truth, the only cure for a hangover is time, according to the National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism.

    “A person must wait for the body to finish clearing the toxic byproducts of alcohol metabolism, to rehydrate, to heal irritated tissue, and to restore immune and brain activity to normal,” according to the institute. That recovery process can take up to 24 hours.

    Are there things you can do to ease your transition? Possibly, experts say, but many common hangover “cures” may make your hangover worse. Here’s how to separate fact from fiction.

    Having another drink, or the “hair of the dog that bit you,” is a well-known cure for a hangover, right? Not really, experts say.

    The reason some people believe it works is because once the calming effects of alcohol pass, the brain on a hangover is overstimulated. (It’s also the reason you wake up in the middle of the night once your body has metabolized alcohol.)

    “You’ve got this hyperexcitability in the brain after the alcohol is gone,” said Dr. Robert Swift, a professor of psychiatry and human behavior at Brown University’s Warren Alpert Medical School in Providence, Rhode Island.

    “If you look at the brain of somebody with a hangover, even though the person might feel tired, their brain is actually overexcited,” he said.

    Consuming more alcohol normalizes the brain again, “because you’re adding a sedative to your excited brain,” Swift said. “You feel better until the alcohol goes away and the cycle repeats in a way.”

    The answer is yes, depending on hangover symptoms, Brick said. If you’re a coffee drinker, skipping your morning cup of joe may lead to caffeine withdrawal on top of your hangover.

    But coffee can irritate the stomach lining, which is already inflamed by alcohol, Brick said. So if you are queasy and nauseous, coffee may only make matters worse.

    “If you have a hangover, have a quarter of a cup of coffee,” Brick suggested. “See if you feel better — it takes about 20 minutes for the caffeine to start to have some noticeable effect.

    “If coffee doesn’t make you feel better, don’t drink anymore. Obviously, that’s not the cure for your hangover.”

    Forget eating a greasy breakfast in the wee hours after a night of drinking — you’re adding insult to injury, Swift said: “Greasy food is harder to digest, so it’s probably good to avoid it.”

    Eating greasy food also doesn’t make much sense. The alcohol we drink, called ethyl alcohol or ethanol, is the byproduct of fermenting carbohydrates and starches, usually some sort of grain, grape or berry. While it may create some tasty beverages, ethanol is also a solvent, Brick said.

    “It cuts through grease in your stomach much the same way it cleans grease off oily car parts,” he said.

    Instead, experts suggest using food to prevent hangovers, by eating before you have that first drink.

    “Eating food loaded with protein and carbohydrates can significantly slow down the absorption of alcohol,” Brick said. “The slower the alcohol gets to your brain, the less rapid the ‘shock’ to your brain.”

    Alcohol dehydrates, so a headache and other hangover symptoms may be partly due to constricted blood vessels and a loss of electrolytes, essential minerals such as sodium, calcium and potassium that your body needs.

    If you’ve vomited, you’ve lost even more electrolytes, and all of this can lead to fatigue, confusion, irregular heart rate, digestive problems and more.

    Replacing lost fluids with water or a type of sports drink with extra electrolytes can help boost recovery from a hangover, Swift said.

    Taking over-the-counter pain meds can be dangerous, especially if you take too many while intoxicated, experts say. Taking an acetaminophen, such as Tylenol, can further damage your overtaxed liver, while aspirin and ibuprofen can irritate your stomach lining.

    “You should never, never take alcohol with acetaminophen or Tylenol,” Swift said. “You can actually cause liver damage from an overdose of Tylenol.”

    But aspirin, ibuprofen and naproxen are “theoretically” OK, he added.

    “Even though they tend to be anti-inflammatory in the body, they can cause inflammation in the stomach,” Swift said. “Don’t take them on an empty stomach; always take anti-inflammatories with food.”

    While most alcohol is handled by the liver, a small amount leaves the body unchanged through sweat, urine and breathing.

    Get up, do some light stretching and walking, and drink plenty of water to encourage urination, Brick said.

    “Before you go to sleep and when you wake up, drink as much water as you comfortably can handle,” he said. You can also take a multivitamin “before you hit the shower in the morning (to) replenish lost vitamins, minerals and other nutrients.”

    If you would rather have something warm and soothing, Brick suggested broth or other homemade soups.

    “These will also help to replace lost salts, including potassium and other substances,” he said, “but will not make you sober up faster or improve impairment due to intoxication or hangover.”

    Store shelves are packed with so-called hangover cures. Unfortunately, there’s no proof they work. In 2020, researchers published what they called the “world’s largest randomised double-blind placebo-controlled” trial of supplements containing vitamins, minerals, plant extracts and antioxidants and found no real improvement in hangover symptoms.

    Even if one solution works, it likely won’t fix all your symptoms, experts say.

    “The effects of alcohol and alcoholic beverages are so complicated, so complex,” Swift said, “that any solution might address one or two of the symptoms but won’t address them all.”

    What does work for a hangover? Time. It will take time for your body to release all the toxins causing your misery, experts say. And the only way to prevent a hangover is to abstain.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • These 20 stocks were the biggest winners of 2022

    These 20 stocks were the biggest winners of 2022

    [ad_1]

    Even during a year in which the S&P 500 index declined 19%, with 72% of its stocks in the red, there were plenty of winners.

    Before showing you the list of the best performers in the benchmark index, let’s look at a preview: Here’s how the 11 sectors of the S&P 500
    SPX,
    -0.25%

    performed for the year:

    Index

    2022 price change

    Forward P/E

    Forward P/E as of Dec. 31, 2021

    Energy

    59.0%

    9.7

    11.1

    Utilities

    -1.4%

    18.9

    20.4

    Consumer Staples

    -3.2%

    21.0

    21.8

    Health Care

    -3.6%

    17.6

    17.2

    Industrials

    -7.1%

    18.3

    20.8

    Financials

    -12.4%

    11.9

    14.6

    Materials

    -14.1%

    15.8

    16.6

    Real Estate

    -28.4%

    16.5

    24.2

    Information Technology

    -28.9%

    20.1

    28.1

    Consumer Discretionary

    -37.6%

    21.3

    33.2

    Communication Services

    -40.4%

    14.3

    20.8

    S&P 500

    -19.4%

    16.8

    21.4

    Source: FactSet

    Maybe you aren’t surprised to see that the energy sector was the only one to increase during 2022. But it might surprise you to see that despite the sector’s weighted price increase of 59%, its forward price-to-earnings ratio declined and remains very low relative to all other sectors.

    It might also surprise you that West Texas Intermediate crude oil
    CL.1,
    +2.69%

    gave up most of its gains from earlier in the year:


    FactSet

    The reason investors are still confident in energy stocks is that oil producers have remained cautious when it comes to capital spending. They don’t want to increase supply enough to cause prices to crash, as they did in the run-up to the summer of 2014, after which prices fell steadily through early 2016, causing bankruptcies and consolidation in the industry.

    Now the oil companies are focusing on maintaining supply, raising dividends and buying back shares, as Occidental Petroleum Corp.’s
    OXY,
    +1.14%

    chief executive explained in a recent interview with Matt Peterson. Click here for more about Occidental and the long-term supply/demand outlook for oil.

    Best-performing S&P 500 stocks of 2022

    Here are the 20 stocks in the benchmark index that rose most during 2022, excluding dividends. Proving that there are always exceptions, not all of them are in the energy sector.

    Company

    Ticker

    Sector

    Industry

    2022 price change

    Occidental Petroleum Corp.

    OXY,
    +1.14%
    Energy

    Oil & Gas Production

    117.3%

    Hess Corp.

    HES,
    +0.68%
    Energy

    Oil & Gas Production

    91.6%

    Marathon Petroleum Corp.

    MPC,
    +0.18%
    Energy

    Oil Refining/ Marketing

    81.9%

    Exxon Mobil Corp.

    XOM,
    +1.01%
    Energy

    Integrated Oil

    80.3%

    Schlumberger Ltd.

    SLB,
    +1.04%
    Energy

    Contract Drilling

    78.5%

    APA Corp.

    APA,
    +1.68%
    Energy

    Integrated Oil

    73.6%

    Halliburton Co.

    HAL,
    +1.23%
    Energy

    Oil & Gas Production

    72.1%

    First Solar Inc.

    FSLR,
    +0.68%
    Information Technology

    Semiconductors

    71.9%

    Valero Energy Corp.

    VLO,
    +0.43%
    Energy

    Oil Refining/ Marketing

    68.9%

    Marathon Oil Corp.

    MRO,
    +1.08%
    Energy

    Oil & Gas Production

    64.9%

    ConocoPhillips

    COP,
    +1.38%
    Energy

    Oil & Gas Production

    63.5%

    Steel Dynamics Inc.

    STLD,
    -0.72%
    Materials

    Steel

    57.4%

    EQT Corp.

    EQT,
    -0.12%
    Energy

    Oil & Gas Production

    55.1%

    Chevron Corp.

    CVX,
    +0.66%
    Energy

    Integrated Oil

    53.0%

    McKesson Corp.

    MCK,
    Health Care

    Medical Distributors

    50.9%

    Cardinal Health Inc.

    CAH,
    -0.46%
    Health Care

    Medical Distributors

    49.3%

    EOG Resources Inc.

    EOG,
    +0.69%
    Energy

    Oil & Gas Production

    45.8%

    Enphase Energy Inc.

    ENPH,
    -0.20%
    Information Technology

    Semiconductors

    44.8%

    Merck & Co. Inc.

    MRK,
    +0.12%
    Health Care

    Pharmaceuticals

    44.8%

    Cigna Corp.

    CI,
    +0.19%
    Health Care

    Managed Health Care

    44.3%

    Source: FactSet

    Click on the tickers for more information about the companies.

    Click here for Tomi Kilgore’s detailed guide to the wealth of information available for free on the MarketWatch quote page.

    Don’t Miss: These 20 stocks were the biggest losers of 2022

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • 5 things not to buy in 2023

    5 things not to buy in 2023

    [ad_1]

    It’s been a year of contradictions.

    The recession drum beats on, interest rates are rising, and the stock market has taken a tumble, and yet retail sales have risen 6.5% in the last 12 months, trailing a 7.1% increase in the cost of living.

    There are other reasons people should consider cutting back on spending in 2023. The personal saving rate — meaning personal saving as a percentage of disposable income, or the share of income left after paying taxes and spending money — hit 2.4% in the third quarter from 3.4% in the prior quarter, the Bureau of Economic Analysis said.

    There are signs that people are pulling back on certain expenditures.

    That is the lowest level since the Great Recession and the eighth-lowest quarterly rate on record (since 1947). Adjusted for inflation, savings are down 88% from their 2020 peak and 61% lower than before the pandemic, according to government data. The personal saving rate hit 2.4% in November vs. 2.2% in October. 

    Are people buying stocks during a bearish market, and/or have they run out of their pandemic-era savings? Whatever the reasons, more judicious investing and spending decisions seem to be the most prudent approach — especially given the uncertain economic outlook for 2023.

    There are signs that people are already pulling back on certain expenditures. Although retail sales are up on the year, they did decline 0.6% month-on-month in November to mark their biggest decline in almost a year, largely because of weak car sales.

    About those new cars: New-vehicle total sales for 2022 are projected to reach 13,687,000 units, down 8.4% on the year, according to a joint forecast from J.D. Power and LMC Automotive. MarketWatch reporter Philip van Doorn explains all the reasons why you may wish to skip buying a new car in 2023, in addition to their rising prices.

    So what else should you save your money on in 2023? MarketWatch writers give their verdict below.

    SPACs

    During the pandemic, people loved to buy special purpose acquisitions companies, known as SPACs. In 2021, 613 SPACs listed on U.S. stock exchanges through initial public offerings, according to SPAC Insider. The year before, there were 248 SPAC IPOs. There had never been more than 100 of these before in a single year. There were SPACs associated with Donald Trump and Serena Williams. There were so many, that one was called Just Another Acquisition Corp. 

    SPACs exist as a means to take private companies public, and theoretically give these shell companies a faster and less regulatory burdensome means to access public capital. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission warned investors last April that so-called advantages of the SPAC process, such as reduced legal liability, may not prove to be so solid if tested in court.

    The SPACs raised money even though they had no commercial operations or business, and tried to use the cash to buy something that did exist. But investors who bought SPACs that merged with private companies since 2015 have suffered losses of 37%, on average, a year after the merger, according to a recent study.  The SPAC and New Issue ETF 
    SPCX,
    +0.37%

    has slipped 12% this year. The frenzy for SPACs has predictably gone bust. But if you see one, just stay away from it.

    — Nathan Vardi

    Crypto 

    There are two main reasons not to invest in cryptocurrency in 2023, and neither has to do with the precipitous drop in value for most of the major coins in the last year, including but not limited to bitcoin
    BTCUSD,
    -1.11%
    ,
    ethereum
    ETHE,
    -2.71%

    and tether
    USDTUSD,
    -0.02%
    .
    Investors have long been conditioned to buy the dip and find value where others fear to tread, and then make money on the upswing. 

    Crypto is different because there’s no correlation to long-held market theories, and buying it amounts more to speculation than to investing. That might seem semantic, but if you look at financial planning holistically, then you treat investing as an exercise in risk tolerance — and crypto is all risk. 

    Which leads to the other main reason to avoid crypto in the next year: If you do buy it, there’s really no safe way to store it. There’s no federal insurance covering exchange failures and little cyber-theft protection for individuals. That leaves you on your own, which is not a good place to be with your money.

    — Beth Pinsker

    Meta Quest headsets

    On the consumer front, if you’re really into virtual reality, there is nothing wrong with jumping on the new Meta Quest two and Meta Quest Pro headsets that were introduced in 2022 by Meta Platforms Inc. 
    META,
    -0.78%
    .

    The problem is that you might feel like you bought a BlackBerry
    BB,
    -3.42%

    phone in early 2007. Apple Inc.
    AAPL,
    -1.40%

    is expected to finally show off what engineers at the Silicon Valley giant have been cooking up in a years-long project to jump into augmented and virtual reality, and consumers are expected to at least get a glimpse at Apple’s attempt this year, if not a chance to buy whatever the company produces. 

    The headsets don’t come cheap: Meta said earlier this year it was raising the price of Meta Quest 2 headsets by $100 to $399.99 (128GB) and $499.99 (256GB). The iPhone’s introduction 15 years ago changed the way people look at smartphones, and Apple’s expected jump into this field in 2023 could leave anyone who spent their money on a Meta Quest headset wishing for a new reality.

    — Jeremy Owens

    Meme stocks 

    Struggling companies with business models that appear to some to be dying and/or struggling do not generally perform well in the stock market. But during the pandemic these companies often had stocks that soared. What drove them was social media sentiment, driven on platforms like Reddit, by a swarm of retail investors. 

    There was video game retailer GameStop
    GME,
    -7.42%
    ,
    movie theater chain AMC
    AMC,
    -8.43%
    ,
    and smartphone dinosaur Blackberry. AMC recently announced the sale of another $110 million in stock, adding to a total that has already exceeded $2 billion since the theater chain got swept up into meme-stock madness. CEO Adam Aron wrote on Twitter that the move put the company “in a much stronger cash position.”

    GameStop recently reported its seventh consecutive quarterly loss and reiterated its goal of returning to profitability in the near term, but analysts have signaled that many challenges lie ahead. During the company’s recent third-quarter conference call, Chief Executive Officer Matt Furlong said that GameStop would be open to exploring acquisitions of a strategic asset or complimentary business if they were available “in the right price range.”

    Buying meme companies like this worked for some in a booming stock market fueled by ultra-low interest rates. But we are now in a bear market with interest rates that are elevated. Corporate fundamentals are back in vogue. So are quaint investment ideas like cashflow. More likely than not, the days of buying meme stocks are over.

    — Nathan Vardi

    Tesla cars

    In recent years, Tesla Inc.
    TSLA,
    -8.25%

    has stood alone as the best option for electric vehicles, while other manufacturers struggled to get production running. But in 2023, there should be many more types of electric cars available, at prices that are expected to trend downward as the year goes along. Teslas range in price from $46,990 for the Tesla Model 3 to $138,880 for the Tesla Model X Plaid. 

    With major manufacturers such as General Motors Co.
    GM,
    -0.73%
    ,
    Ford Motor Co.
    FORD,
    -2.68%
    ,
    Toyota Corp. and Volkswagen
    VOW,
    -0.77%

    VLKAF,
    -1.15%

    jumping into the fray, and young Tesla wannabes like Rivian Automotive Inc.
    RIVN,
    -7.11%
    ,
    Lucid Group Inc.
    LCID,
    -7.24%

    and FIsker Inc.
    FSR,
    -6.19%

     expected to start producing cars, consumers will have many more options for EVs. 

    Meanwhile, Tesla has done little to update the Model 3 since it was introduced in 2017, and has increased prices at a level that Chief Executive Elon Musk has admitted is “embarrassing” for a company that claimed to have a goal of mass-market pricing for EVs. 

    The average price of a new EV is $64,249, while a new gas car is $48,281, according to​​ Liz Najman, a climate scientist and communications and research manager at Recurrent Auto, an EV research and analytics firm focused on the used-vehicle market. After years of not having much choice beyond Tesla for EVs, 2023 appears to be the year that changes.

    — Jeremy Owens

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Blue Apron receives delisting notice, just as stock bounces back above $1

    Blue Apron receives delisting notice, just as stock bounces back above $1

    [ad_1]

    Shares of Blue Apron Holdings Inc.
    APRN,
    +1.46%

    shot up 9.9% in morning trading Friday, to trade back above the $1 level for the first time in more than two weeks, after the meal-kit company said it received a delisting notice from the New York Stock Exchange. The notice said the company was not in compliance with the listing requirement of a minimum average stock closing price of at least $1 over a consecutive 30-day period and an average market capitalization of at least $50.0 million, also over a consecutive 30-day period. The company said it plans to notify the NYSE on Jan. 6 that it received the delisting notice, and intends to submit a plan to “cure” the minimum stock price and market capitalization deficiencies. The stock has closed below the $1 mark since Dec. 6, and closed at a record low of 64 cents on Dec. 13. It has bounced since then after the company said it received funding from a major investor; it has rocketing 56.7% amid a four-day winning streak. Meanwhile, the company’s market capitalization was $41.6 million at current stock prices, and has been below $50 million since Nov. 11, according to FactSet data. The stock has plummeted 84.4% year to date, while the S&P 500
    SPX,
    +0.59%

    has shed 20.1%.

    [ad_2]

    Source link