Shares of Under Armour Inc. sprinted higher Wednesday toward a nine-month high, after the athletic apparel and gear seller reported a big beat in fiscal third quarter profit and raised its full-year outlook.
Net income for the quarter to Dec. 31 rose to $121.6 million, or 27 cents a share, from $109.7 million, or 23 cents a share, in the year-ago period. Excluding nonrecurring items, adjusted earnings per share of 16 cents was well above the FactSet consensus of 9 cents.
Revenue grew 3.4% to $1.58 billion, above the FactSet consensus of $1.55 billion, as a 25% jump in footwear revenue offset 2% declines in apparel and accessories revenue. Meanwhile, a 2% decline in North America revenue was offset by a 14% increase in international revenue.
The Class C shares UA, +0.09%
shot up 6.8% in premarket trading, which puts them on track to open at the highest price seen during regular-sessions hours since May 5, 2022. The Class A shares UAA, -0.08%
jumped 6.9%.
Gross margin contracted by 6.5 percentage points, due primarily to higher promotions, sales mix impacts and the negative impact of currency fluctuations.
For fiscal 2023, the company raised its adjusted EPS guidance range to 52 cents to 56 cents from 44 cents to 48 cents, but kept its revenue growth guidance at a low single-digit percentage range. The FactSet consensus for EPS was 46 cents, and the FactSet revenue consensus of $5.86 billion implied 2.7% growth.
The Class C shares have soared 53.5% over the past three months through Tuesday, while the S&P 500 SPX, +1.29%
has gained 8.8%.
Meta Platforms Inc. shares soared in after-hours trading Wednesday despite an earnings miss, as the Facebook parent company guided for potentially more revenue than Wall Street expected in the new year and promised more share repurchases amid cost cuts.
Meta META, +2.79% said it hauled in $32.17 billion in fourth-quarter revenue, down from $33.67 billion a year ago but stronger than expectations. Earnings were $4.65 billion, or $1.76 a share, compared with $10.3 billion, or $3.67 a share, last year.
Analysts polled by FactSet expected Meta to post fourth-quarter revenue of $31.55 billion on earnings of $2.26 a share, and the beat on sales coincided with a revenue forecast that also met or exceeded expectations. Facebook Chief Financial Officer Susan Li projected first-quarter sales of $26 billion to $28.5 billion, while analysts on average were projecting first-quarter sales of $27.2 billion.
Shares jumped more than 19% in after-hours trading immediately following the release of the results, after closing with a 2.8% gain at $153.12.
GOOG, +1.56%
Google and Pinterest Inc. PINS, +1.56%
benefited from Meta’s results, with shares for each company rising more than 4% in extended trading Wednesday.
“Our community continues to grow and I’m pleased with the strong engagement across our apps. Facebook just reached the milestone of 2 billion daily actives,” Meta Chief Executive Mark Zuckerberg said in a statement announcing the results. “The progress we’re making on our AI discovery engine and Reels are major drivers of this. Beyond this, our management theme for 2023 is the ‘Year of Efficiency’ and we’re focused on becoming a stronger and more nimble organization.”
Facebook’s 2 billion-user milestone was slightly better than analysts expected for user growth on Meta’s core social network. Daily active users across all of Facebook’s apps neared, but did not crest, another round number, reaching 2.96 billion, up 5% from a year ago.
Meta has been navigating choppy ad waters as it copes with increasing competition from TikTok and fallout from changes in Apple Inc.’s AAPL, +0.79%
ad-tracking system in 2021 that punitively harmed Meta, costing it potentially billions of dollars in advertising sales. Meta has invested heavily in artificial-intelligence tools to rev up its ad-targeting systems and making better recommendations for users of its short-video product Reels, but it laid off thousands of workers after profit and revenue shrunk in recent quarters.
The cost cuts seemed to pay off Wednesday. While Facebook missed on its earnings, it noted that the costs of its layoffs and other restructuring totaled $4.2 billion and reduced the number by roughly $1.24 a share.
Meta executives said they now expect operating expenses to be $89 billion to $95 billion this year based on slower salary growth, cost of revenue, and $1 billion in savings from facilities consolidation — down from previous guidance for $94 billion to $100 billion. Capital expenditures are expected to be $30 billion to $33 billion, down from previous guidance of $34 billion to $37 billion, as Meta cancels multiple data-center projects.
In a conference call with analysts late Wednesday, Zuckerberg called 2023 the “year of efficiency” after 18 years of unbridled growth. He recommitted to Meta’s emphasis on AI and the metaverse, a platform for “better social experiences” than the phone, he said.
“The reduced outlook reflects our updated plans for lower data-center construction spend in 2023 as we shift to a new data-center architecture that is more cost efficient and can support both AI and non-AI workloads,” Li said in her outlook commentary included in the release.
Meta expects to increase its spending on its own stock. The company’s board approved a $40 billion increase in its share-repurchase authorization; Meta spent nearly $28 billion on its own shares in 2022, and still had nearly $11 billion available for buybacks before that increase.
“Investors are cheering Meta’s plans to return more capital to shareholders despite worries over rising costs related to its metaverse spending,” said Jesse Cohen, senior analyst at Investing.com.
“At first glance…Meta getting its mojo back,” Baird Equity Research analyst Colin Sebastian said in a note late Wednesday. “Results and guidance look particularly solid after Snap’s dismal report; however, further cuts to operating and capital expenditures announced this afternoon were perhaps the biggest surprise.”
UBS analyst Lloyd Walmsley said he anticipates double-digit revenue growth exiting 2023 and strong growth in earnings and free cash flow.
The results came a day after Snap Inc. SNAP, -10.29%
posted fourth-quarter revenue of $1.3 billion, flat from a year ago and the worst year-over-year sales growth Snap has ever reported. But they also arrived on the same day Facebook scored a major win in a California court. The company successfully fended off the Federal Trade Commission bid to win a preliminary injunction to block Meta’s planned acquisition of VR startup Within Unlimited.
Group beat earnings and revenue estimates in the fourth quarter and announced a new $1 billion share buyback plan.
The cigarettes company reported adjusted earnings per share (EPS) of $1.18 on revenue of $6.1 billion in the final three months of the year. Analysts expected EPS of $1.17 on sales of $5.15 billion in the quarter, according to FactSet data.
Short selling can be controversial, especially among management teams of companies whose stocks traders are betting that their prices will fall. And a new spike in alleged “naked short selling” among microcap stocks is making several management teams angry enough to threaten legal action:
Taking a long position means buying a stock and holding it, hoping the price will go up.
Shorting, or short selling, is when an investor borrows shares and immediately sells them, hoping he or she can buy them again later at a lower price, return them to the lender and pocket the difference.
Covering is when an investor with a short position buys the stock again to close a short position and return the shares to the lender.
If you take a long position, you might lose all your money. A stock can go to zero if a company goes bankrupt. But a short position is riskier. If the share price rises steadily after an investor has placed a short trade, the investor is sitting on an unrealized capital loss. This is why short selling traditionally has been dominated by professional investors who base this type of trade on heavy research and conviction.
Brokers require short sellers to qualify for margin accounts. A broker faces credit exposure to an investor if a stock that has been shorted begins to rise instead of going down. Depending on how high the price rises, the broker will demand more collateral from the investor. The investor may eventually have to cover and close the short with a loss, if the stock rises too much.
And that type of activity can lead to a short squeeze if many short sellers are surprised at the same time. A short squeeze can send a share price through the roof temporarily.
Short squeezes helped feed the meme-stock craze of 2021 that sent shares of GameStop Corp. GME, +10.45%
and AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. AMC, +2.54%
soaring early in 2021. Some traders communicating through the Reddit WallStreetBets channel and in other social media worked together to try to force short squeezes in stocks of troubled companies that had been heavily shorted. The action sent shares of GameStop soaring from $4.82 at the end of 2020 to a closing high of $86.88 on Jan. 27, 2021, only for the stock to fall to $10.15 on Feb. 19, 2021, as the seesaw action continued for this and other meme stocks.
Naked shorting
Let’s say you were convinced that a company was headed toward financial difficulties or even bankruptcy, but its shares were still trading at a value you considered to be significant. If the shares were highly liquid, you would be able to borrow them through your broker for little or almost no cost, to set up your short trade.
But if many other investors were shorting the stock, there would be fewer shares available for borrowing. Then your broker would charge a higher fee based on supply and demand.
For example, according to data provided by FactSet on Jan. 23, 22.7% of GameStop’s shares available for trading were sold short — a figure that could be up to two weeks out-of-date, according to the financial data provider.
According to Brad Lamensdorf, who co-manages the AdvisorShares Ranger Equity Bear ETF HDGE, -2.65%,
the cost of borrowing shares of GameStop on Jan. 23 was an annualized 15.5%. That cost increases a short seller’s risk.
What if you wanted to short a stock that had even heavier short interest than GameStop? Lamensdorf said on Jan. 23 that there were no shares available to borrow for Carvana Co. CVNA, +10.63%,
Bed Bath & Beyond Inc. BBBY, -12.24%,
Beyond Meat Inc. BYND, +11.31%
or Coinbase Global Inc. COIN, +1.45%.
If you wanted to short AMC shares, you would pay an annual fee of 85.17% to borrow the shares.
Starting last week, and flowing into this week, management teams at several companies with microcap stocks (with market capitalizations below $100 million) said they were investigating naked short selling — short selling without actually borrowing the shares.
This brings us to three more terms:
A short-locate is a service a short seller requests from a broker. The broker finds shares for the short seller to borrow.
A natural locate is needed to make a “proper” short-sale, according to Moshe Hurwitz, who recently launched Blue Zen Capital Management in Atlanta to specialize in short selling. The broker gives you a price to borrow shares and places the actual shares in your account. You can then short them if you want to.
A nonnatural locate is “when the broker gives you shares they do not have,” according to Hurwitz.
When asked if a nonnatural locate would constitute fraud, Hurwitz said “yes.”
How is naked short selling possible? According to Hurwitz, “it is incumbent on the brokers” to stop placing borrowed shares in customer accounts when supplies of shares are depleted. But he added that some brokers, even in the U.S., lend out the same shares multiple times, because it is lucrative.
“The reason they do it is when it comes time to settle, to deliver, they are banking on the fact that most of those people are day traders, so there would be enough shares to deliver.”
Hurwitz cautioned that the current round of complaints about naked short selling wasn’t unusual and even though short selling activity can push a stock’s price down momentarily, “short sellers are buyers in waiting.” They will eventually buy when they cover their short positions.
“But to really push a stock price down, you need long investors to sell,” he said.
Different action that can appear to be naked shorting
Lamensdorf said the illegal naked shorting that Verb Technology Co. VERB, +69.65%,
Genius Group Ltd. GNS, +45.37%
and other microcap companies have been recently complaining about might include activity that isn’t illegal.
An investor looking to short a stock for which shares weren’t available to borrow, or for which the cost to borrow shares was too high, might enter into “swap transactions or sophisticated over-the-counter derivative transactions,” to bet against the stock,” he said.
This type of trader would be “pretty sophisticated,” Lamensdorf said. He added that brokers typically have account minimums ranging from $25 million to $50 million for investors making this type of trade. This would mean the trader was likely to be “a decent-sized family office or a fund, with decent liquidity,” he said.
“It’s like being robbed in a library, but you can’t shout ‘Thief!’ because there are ‘Silence, please’ signs everywhere.”
That’s how Roger Hamilton, chief executive of Genius Group Ltd. GNS, +55.02%,
describes the powerlessness he feels as U.S. securities rules prevent him from discussing his company’s share price, even as it comes under attack from a group of naked short sellers.
The Singapore-based education company on Thursday announced it had appointed a former FBI director to lead a task force investigating alleged illegal trading in its stock that it first addressed in early January.
The news sent the stock up a record 290% on Thursday, and it climbed another 59% on Friday. Volume of about 270 million shares traded in Thursday’s session crushed the daily average of about 634,000 — another indicator, Hamilton told MarketWatch in an interview Friday, of wrongdoing, given that the company’s float is just 10.9 million shares. “Clearly, that’s far more shares than we created,” he said.
Genius Group has evidence from Warshaw Burstein LLP and Christian Levine Law Group, with tracking from Share Intel, that certain individuals and/or companies sold but failed to deliver a “significant” amount of its shares as part of a scheme seeking to artificially depress the stock price.
The company is now exploring legal action and is planning an extraordinary general meeting in the coming weeks to get shareholder approval for its planned actions. These include paying a special dividend as a way to flush out bad actors and working with regulators to share information.
Share Intel uses tracking software in real time to determine exactly where there are discrepancies in the market and where brokers are opening large positions, Hamilton said. The software can measure the number of shares that are being naked shorted and has found multiple instances where significant amounts of fake shares were being created, said Hamilton.
Naked short selling is illegal under Securities and Exchange Commission rules, but that hasn’t stopped the practice, which Hamilton said affects far more companies than is generally known.
In regular short trading, an investor borrows shares from someone else, then sells them and waits for the stock price to fall. When that happens the shares are bought cheaper and returned to the prior owner, with the short seller pocketing the difference as profit.
In naked short selling, investors don’t bother borrowing the stock first and simply sell shares with a promise to deliver them at a later date. When that promise is not fulfilled, it’s known as failure to deliver.
By repeating that process again and again, bad actors can generate massive profits and manipulate a stock’s price lower, with an ultimate goal of driving a company to bankruptcy, at which point all the equity is wiped out and the naked shorts no longer need to be covered.
Hamilton said the evidence gathered by Genius Group shows a great deal of the illegal activity is happening on U.S. exchanges, but there’s also activity happening off-exchange and involving dark pools.
The company is fighting back “because we want this to stop,” Hamilton told MarketWatch. “They’re taking value away from our shareholders. They’re predators. They’re doing something illegal, and we want it to stop, whether that means getting regulators to enforce existing regulations or put new ones in place.”
Public companies have to have committees to monitor and report internal fraud to protect shareholders, he said. But there is no such team looking for external fraud and many retail investors see stocks being manipulated, he said.
“Hopefully, regulations will change and regulators will see there are as many, if not more, threats from outside a company,” he said.
Genius Group is not alone, said Hamilton. He cited among other examples Torchlight, an oil- and gas-exploration company that decided to merge with Metamaterial Inc. to thwart a naked-short-selling attack.
The stock rose from 30 cents to $11 in the six months after the deal was completed, and the company was able to raise about $183 million through a combination of convertible debt and equity. An interview Hamilton conducted with Torchlight’s former CEO, John Brda, can be found below.
Then there’s Jeremy Frommer, CEO of Creatd Inc. CRTD, +4.14%,
which aims to unlock creativity for creators, brands and consumers, who is behind Ceobloc, a website that aims to end the practice of naked short selling.
“Illegal naked short selling is the biggest risk to the health of today’s public markets,” is how the site introduces its mission.
On Friday, the stock of Helbiz Inc. HLBZ, +65.48%
joined Genius Group in rocketing higher in high volume, after that company said it, too, was taking on naked short sellers.
The New York–based maker of e-scooters and e-bicyles said that it was following Genius Group’s example and that it believes “certain individuals and/or companies may have engaged in illegal short selling practices that have artificially depressed the stock price.” The stock had plummeted 64% over the three months through Thursday’s close at 12.31 cents.
Genius Group’s stock, which went public in April 2022 at $6 a share, has gained more than 600% this week. The S&P 500 SPX, +1.89%
has gained 1.1% over the same four trading sessions.
The stock of a Singapore-based ed-tech and education company called Genius Group Ltd. rallied more than 200% on Thursday, after it said it appointed a former F.B.I. director to lead a task force investigating alleged illegal trading in its stock that it first disclosed in early January.
The stock was last up 264% to mark its biggest-ever one-day percentage gain. Volume of 197.76 million shares traded crushed the 65-day average of just 634,17. Genius Group GNS, +290.29%
also said it would issue a special dividend to shareholders to help expose the wrongdoing and is considering a dual listing that would make illegal naked short selling more difficult.
The task force will be led by Timothy Murphy, a former deputy director of the F.B.I. who is also on the board. It will include Richard Berman, also a Genius Group Director and chair of the company’s Audit Committee, and Roger Hamilton, the chief executive officer of Genius Group.
“The company has been in communication with government regulatory authorities and is sharing information with these authorities to assist them,” the company said in a statement.
Genius Group said it has proof from Warshaw Burstein LLP and Christian Levine Law Group, with tracking from Share Intel, that certain individual and/or companies sold but failed to deliver a “significant” amount of its shares as part of a scheme seeking to artificially depress the stock price.
It will now explore legal action and will hold an extraordinary general meeting in the coming weeks to get shareholder approval for its planned actions.
Genius’ IPO priced at $6 a share in April of 2022, he wrote in a blog. The company, which aims to develop an entrepreneur education system, then completed five acquisitions of education companies to build out its portfolio and reported more than 60% growth in its last earnings report.
Analysts at Diamond Equity assigned it an $11.28 stock price target, while Zacks assigned it a $19.20 stock price target.
“By all measures, we believed we were doing all the right things to justify a rising share price,” said Hamilton.
The company then announced two funding rounds totaling $40 million to grow its balance sheet to more than $60 million, yet its stock fell to under 40 cents, or less than 25% of the cash raised and less than 20% of its net assets.
“This didn’t happen gradually,” the executive wrote. “It happened in two month intervals from our IPO, in June, August, October and December. Each time, over a period of a few days, massive selling volume that was a multiple of our float (As most of our shares are on lock up, only around 4 million are tradeable) was sold into the market, making our share price drop by 50% or more.”
The company has since drawn on Wes Christian, a short-selling litigator from Christian Levine Law Group, who has helped it understand how naked short selling works, and then Share Intel helped find the proof that that’s what has happened.
Individuals or groups get together and sell shares in a target company that they don’t own, with the aim of getting the share price to fall 50% in a short period. They use small-cap firms that have low buying volume, allowing them to scare off buyers.
“The broker doesn’t bother to find shares to borrow,” said Hamilton. “They simply sell shares they don’t have and after a few days book them as FTDs (failure to deliver) or hide them as long sales instead of short sales. The people who bought the shares have no idea they bought a fake share, and suddenly there’s plenty more shares in the market than there should be.”
If these groups sell 6 million shares from $12 to $6 each, and then buy back over two months at under $6, they double their money. That allows them to make up to $30 million out of thin air. They can then repeat the whole process a few months later.
“If they don’t buy back all the shares, they simply leave them as FTDs or hide them in offshore accounts,” he wrote. “At no point do they need to put up any cash to make this happen, as they’re making money from the moment they start selling fake shares.”
The ultimate goal is to push a company into bankruptcy, where the equity will be wiped out, meaning they never have to cover the short position on the fake shares.
By issuing a special dividend, Genius is hoping to find who is responsible, as all brokers are forced to disclose to the Depository Trust & Clearing Corp. (DTCC) how many shares their clients hold and how many dividends will be paid. Theoretically, that should expose the oversold shares and dishonest brokers will be forced to cover their position, said Hamilton.
In practice, dishonest brokers will not declare the fake shares and just pay the dividend out of their own pockets.
“If you issue a dividend that isn’t straight cash—such as a spinoff of a company so you are issuing shares, or a blockchain based asset, then the brokers can’t do that are a forced to either cover or be exposed,” he wrote.
Tesla Inc. shares Friday wrapped up their worst week since 2020, as Chief Executive Elon Musk sold billions in stock and faced a call from a prominent investor to step down from the helm of the electric-vehicle maker.
Tesla TSLA, -4.72%
stock fell 4.7% Friday for a weekly decline of 16.1%, the fourth-worst week in history for the shares after a series of three weeks in late February and early March 2020, when investors sold stocks in fear of the COVID-19 pandemic’s effects. Tesla ended the week with a market capitalization of less than $500 billion for the first time since November 2020, and the share price nearly fell lower than $150 for the first time since that month, ending the week at $150.05.
The decline occurred as Musk sold stock, which he has done repeatedly since November of 2021. Musk disclosed the sale of more than $3.5 billion in Tesla stock late Wednesday, after performing the trades over the three previous trading sessions, when the price declined a cumulative 12.4%. In total, the Tesla CEO has sold $39.3 billion worth of Tesla stock in the past 13 months, according to calculations from Dow Jones Market Data and MarketWatch.
The recent sales have seemed tied to Musk’s acquisition of the social-media platform Twitter, which he bought for roughly $44 billion this year. It is the second time he has sold stock since closing that deal in October.
Bullish analysts have also expressed concerns about Musk’s focus and stock sales. Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives, who has an outperform rating and $250 12-month price target on Tesla shares, wrote Thursday that “Musk continues to throw gasoline in the burning fire around the Tesla story by selling more stock and creating Tesla brand deterioration through his actions on Twitter.”
“The nightmare of Musk owning Twitter has been an episode out of the Twilight Zone that never ends and keeps getting worse,” Ives wrote. “In late April Musk said he was done selling Tesla stock, instead the exact opposite has happened and put massive pressure on Tesla shares which have significantly underperformed the market since Musk took over Twitter in late October.”
Tesla shares have now declined 57.4% so far in 2022, as the S&P 500 index SPX, -1.11%
has declined 18.3%. Tesla’s market cap was $474.4 billion as of Friday’s close.
Tesla Inc. stock edged higher Thursday, but Wedbush analyst Dan Ives minced no words to decry what he called an ongoing Twitter Inc. “funding nightmare,” accusing Chief Executive Elon Musk to treat the electric-vehicle maker as an ATM machine.
“The nightmare of Musk owning Twitter has been an episode out of the Twilight Zone that never ends and keeps getting worse,” said Ives, a noted Tesla bull, in a note Thursday.
Danish biotechnology companies Novozymes AS NZYM.B, -10.74%
and Chr. Hansen Holding AS CHR, +25.98%
said Monday they have agreed to merge, creating a biological solutions provider with combined annual revenue of around 3.5 billion euros ($3.69 billion).
The companies, which produce products such as enzymes, probiotics and biopharmaceutical ingredients, said the combination between two strategically complementary businesses will drive efficiencies while unlocking potential within biosolutions and providing additional growth opportunities.
“Novozymes and Chr. Hansen share the strong conviction that our combined scale, know-how, commercial strengths, and innovation excellence will drive value for our shareholders, customers and society at large,” said Novozymes Chief Executive Ester Baiget.
The deal will see Chr. Hansen shareholders receive 1.5326 new B-shares in Novozymes for each Chr. Hansen share, reflecting an implied premium of 49% to Chr. Hansen’s closing share price on Friday and valuing each Chr. Hansen share at 660.55 Danish kroner ($93.53) a share.
Novo Holdings AS, the largest shareholder in both Novozymes and Chr. Hansen, will support the proposed merger and exchange its 22% stake in Chr. Hansen at an exchange ratio of 1.0227 new B-shares in Novozymes.
The companies said they see annual revenue synergies of EUR200 million within four years after completion of the deal.
Write to Dominic Chopping at dominic.chopping@wsj.com
The Federal Trade Commission on Thursday sued Microsoft Corp. to block its $69 billion deal to buy Activision Blizzard Inc.
The acquisition, which would be Microsoft’s MSFT, +1.07%
largest and the biggest ever in the video gaming industry, would “enable Microsoft to suppress competitors to its Xbox gaming consoles and its rapidly growing subscription content and cloud-gaming business,” the FTC claimed.
“Microsoft has already shown that it can and will withhold content from its gaming rivals,” Holly Vedova, director of the FTC’s Bureau of Competition, said in a statement. “Today we seek to stop Microsoft from gaining control over a leading independent game studio and using it to harm competition in multiple dynamic and fast-growing gaming markets.”
FTC members pointed to Microsoft’s record of “acquiring and using valuable gaming content to suppress competition from rival consoles,” including its acquisition of ZeniMax, parent company of Bethesda Softworks.
Microsoft President Brad Smith indicated the software giant will fight the lawsuit. In a statement, he said Microsoft has “been committed since Day One to addressing competition concerns.”
“While we believed in giving peace a chance, we have complete confidence in our case and welcome the opportunity to present our case in court,” Smith said.
Activision CEO Bobby Kotick, in a statement, said the suit “sounds alarming, so I want to reinforce my confidence that this deal will close. The allegation that this deal is anti-competitive doesn’t align with the facts, and we believe we’ll win this challenge.”
Still, In recent weeks Microsoft has taken steps to demonstrate to regulators its acquisition of Activision would not give it an unfair advantage in the gaming market. On Tuesday, Microsoft said it would bring the “Call of Duty” franchise to Nintendo Co.’s 7974, -1.31%
Switch, a rival of Microsoft Xbox, and Microsoft has said it would make Call of Duty available on rival Sony Group Corp.’s SONY, -0.06%
PlayStation.
“It’s a bad idea,” Geoffrey Manne, president of the International Center for Law and Economics, said of the FTC’s lawsuit vs. Microsoft. “There may be markets in which some activities of some of these large tech companies cause concerns, but when they are expanding into new markets or enhancing competition in markets where they aren’t leaders, we should be encouraging them, not threatening them with lawsuits.”
The government’s action in administrative court marks the first serious regulatory threat to Microsoft’s business in more than two decades, when the Justice Department brought a landmark antitrust lawsuit against the software giant that took years and was settled in 2002. Since then, Microsoft had sidestepped antitrust scrutiny and Smith in particular has focused the glare on its tech rivals Amazon.com Inc. AMZN, +2.24%,
Apple Inc. AAPL, +1.19%,
Alphabet Inc.’s GOOGL, -0.94%
Shares of Microsoft are up 1% in trading Thursday. Activision’s ATVI, -1.33%
stock is down 1.5%.
The FTC’s lawsuit comes the same day it is heading to court in San Jose, Calif., in what is expected to be a three-week trial to bloc Meta’s $300 million acquisition of VR fitness app maker Within.
The trial is likely to showcase an intriguing look at the agency’s ability to stifle alleged anticompetitive conductusing largely untested legal theories at a time when Congress is sitting on tech antitrust legislation.
have been caught in the sell off that’s hammered small-capitalization stocks that don’t produce earnings or generate free cash flow, yet. Investors hoped that third-quarter earnings could turn sentiment around, but some concerns linger.
(ticker: CHPT), on Thursday afternoon, reported a per-share loss of 25 cents from $125 million in sales. Wall Street was looking for a loss of 20 cents per share on sales of $132.3 million.
CrowdStrike Holdings Inc. shares dropped in the extended session Tuesday after the cybersecurity company said new subscriptions came in below expectations amid macro headwinds and longer customer buying cycles.
Given concern that businesses are cutting back on spending, CrowdStrike CRWD, -1.04%
shares plummeted nearly 20% after hours, following a 1% decline in the regular session to close at $138.
George Kurtz, CrowdStrike’s co-founder and chief executive, told analysts on a conference call that the company reported $198.1 million in net new annual recurring revenue, or ARR, in the quarter, not as much as it had hoped.
ARR is a software-as-a-service metric that shows how much revenue the company can expect based on subscriptions. That grew 54% to $2.34 billion from the year-ago quarter, while the Street expected $2.35 billion. Kurtz said that about $10 million was deferred to future quarters.
“We expect these macro headwinds to persist through Q4,” Kurtz told analysts.
Burt Podbere, CrowdStrike’s chief financial officer, explained that the company relies on ARR because it’s “an X-ray into the contract sales.”
“As George mentioned, even though we entered Q2 with a record pipeline, and we are expecting the elongated sales cycles due to macro concerns to continue, we’re not expecting to see the typical Q4 budget flush given the increased scrutiny on budgets.”
Podbere said it is “prudent to assume” fourth-quarter net new ARR will be up to 10% below the third quarter’s. That would mean about a 10% year-over-year headwind going into the first half of next year, and “full-year net new ARR would be roughly flat to modestly up year over year.”
“This would imply a low 30s ending ARR growth rate and a subscription revenue growth rate in the low to mid-30s for FY 2024,” Podbere said.
The company expects adjusted fiscal fourth-quarter earnings of 42 cents to 45 cents a share on revenue of $619.1 million to $628.2 million, while analysts surveyed by FactSet forecast earnings of 34 cents a share on revenue of $633.9 million, according to analysts.
CrowdStrike expects full-year earnings of $1.49 to $1.52 a share on revenue of $2.22 billion to $2.23 billion. Wall Street expects $1.33 a share on revenue of $2.23 billion.
The company reported a fiscal third-quarter loss of $55 million, or 24 cents a share, compared with a loss of $50.5 million, or 22 cents a share, in the year-ago period. Adjusted net income, which excludes stock-based compensation and other items, was 40 cents a share, compared with 17 cents a share in the year-ago period.
Revenue rose to $580.9 million from $380.1 million in the year-ago quarter.
Analysts expected CrowdStrike to report earnings of 28 cents a share on revenue of $516 million, based on the company’s outlook of 30 cents to 32 cents a share on revenue of $569.1 million to $575.9 million.
So far in November, cloud software stocks have been getting trashed. While the S&P 500 SPX, -0.16%
has gained 2%, and the tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite COMP, -0.59%
is flat, the iShares Expanded Tech-Software Sector ETF IGV, -0.78%
has fallen more than 2%, the Global X Cloud Computing ETF CLOU, -1.12%
has declined more than 4%, the First Trust Cloud Computing ETF SKYY, -0.74%
has fallen more than 6%, and the WisdomTree Cloud Computing Fund WCLD, -1.05%
has dropped more than 11%.
NESN, -0.26%
said it now expects sales to grow organically between 8% and 8.5% from previous expectations of around 8%. The underlying trading operating profit margin is still seen at around 17%.
By 2025, it expects to return to an underlying trading operating profit margin in the range of 17.5% to 18.5%, following the margin impact of cost inflation in 2021 and 2022.
Annual underlying earnings-per-share growth is seen between 6% and 10% in constant currency over the 2022-25 period, Nestle said. The company aims for free cash flow toward 12% of sales, and return on invested capital of 15% by 2025.
In terms of portfolio management, it said it will explore strategic options for peanut allergy treatment Palforzia, following slower than expected adoption by patients and heathcare professionals. The review should be completed in the first half of next year.
Nestle said the health-science business will focus more on consumer care and medical nutrition.
The company confirmed its program to repurchase 20 billion Swiss francs ($21.14 billion) of its shares between 2022 and 2024 and said it aims to keep increasing its dividend year on year.
closing its $69 billion acquisition of the company. With
Activision
shares trading at a significant discount to the deal price, the stock looked closest to a sure thing in an increasingly uncertain market.
Four months later, the risks of the deal falling apart over antitrust concerns haven’t changed. What has changed is the outlook for Activision’s business. The firm behind Call of Duty and Candy Crush is suddenly doing quite well on its own.
Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, is abandoning its proposed acquisition of the non-U.S. assets of rival FTX, amid the latter’s liquidity crunch.
“As a result of corporate due diligence, as well as the latest news reports regarding mishandled customer funds and alleged US agency investigations, we have decided that we will not pursue the potential acquisition of FTX.com,” according to a tweet by Binance’s official account Wednesday.
“Our hope was to be able to support FTX’s customers to provide liquidity, but the issues are beyond our control or ability to help,” Binance wrote.
Executives at Binance have found a gap, likely in billions and possibly more than $6 billion, between the liabilities and assets of FTX, Bloomberg reported Wednesday, citing an anonymous source familiar with the matter.
Representatives at Binance and FTX didn’t immediately respond to a request seeking comments.
On Tuesday, Changpeng Zhao, Binance’s chief executive, said the exchange had signed a letter of intent to acquire FTX.com, a separate entity from FTX.US, after FTX “asked for help.”
Investors are worried about any contagion, as concerns over FTX’s solvency spilled over to the already battered crypto market. BitcoinBTCUSD plunged Wednesday to as low as $16,863, the lowest level since November 2020.
FTX is the third largest crypto exchange by trading volume, according to CoinMarketCap.
Vicki Hollub’s Occidental Petroleum controls the biggest piece of the most important area for oil production in the United States. Not so long ago, an oilman in a position like that—and it would’ve been a man, before Hollub came along—would have gone for broke, turning up production to its physical limits.
Not Hollub. Occidental produces on average the equivalent of about 1.15 million barrels of oil a day, and that’s more than enough to turn a profit. The company can make money as long as oil prices are above $40 a barrel. They’ve been above $80 for almost all of this year, as the war in Ukraine takes a toll on global markets and the Saudi-led oil cartel OPEC now slashes production.
“We don’t feel like we’re in a national crisis right now,” Hollub told MarketWatch in an interview. And that means Hollub can keep executing on her plans: making shareholders happy by paying down debt and buying back shares. “When you have such a low break-even, to me there’s no pressure to increase production right now, when we have these other two ways that we can increase shareholder value,” Hollub said.
That market-focused logic puts her at odds with President Biden, who is acting like there is a national energy crisis ongoingprecisely because of what oil CEOs like Hollub are doing. The size of oil companies’ profits is outrageous, Biden said Monday. They’re raking in cash not because of innovation or investment but as a windfall from the war in Ukraine, Biden said. “Rather than increasing their investments in America or giving American consumers a break, their excess profits are going back to their shareholders and to buying back their stock, so the executive pay is — are going to skyrocket,” Biden said. He has ordered releases from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve to keep down gas prices and asked Congress to tax oil-company profits.
But Hollub is single-mindedly focused on seizing the moment to improve the company’s financial position. Occidental still has significant debt left over from a challenging acquisition Hollub spearheaded before the pandemic. In the second quarter alone, the company used its windfall to repay $4.8 billion in debt. If Biden called, she’d listen, but she hasn’t spoken to him one-on-one. Hollub said she’d spoken to the administration through Energy Secretary Jennifer Granholm. (“She doesn’t know the industry very well right now, but it’s because she hasn’t been in her job very long,” Hollub said.) The White House and the Department of Energy did not return requests for comment.
Hollub says she’s just following the market. “If demand goes down, we reduce production, if it goes up, we increase.” Oil prices have fluctuated rapidly over the year, and with a recession widely anticipated in the near future, demand could drop, Hollub said. Biden’s releases of oil from the SPR, she added, may have reduced gasoline prices, but at a cost to national security. “The SPR should be reserved for emergency situations, and you never know when those might come,” Hollub said.
Hollub’s message may not be politically convenient, but it’s exactly what her shareholders want to hear. Occidental OXY, -2.29%
is America’s hottest stock and has returned 150% this year, making it the top-performing company in the S&P 500 SPX, -0.65%.
Investors who bought shares of Occidental in January and held them through today would have more than doubled their money, even as the broader market has crashed. Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway has gone on a buying spree this year, and now owns more than 20% of Occidental’s shares. How Hollub got here constitutes America’s greatest corporate saga in recent years, from her 2019 debt-fueled decision to buy bigger rival Anadarko Petroleum over the vocal objections of activist investor Carl Icahn, to the pandemic-induced collapse in oil prices that almost bankrupted Occidental, and Buffett’s extension, removal, and re-extension of support.
With Occidental now on solid financial footing, Hollub is continuing to leave a mark on the oil industry and the world, landing her on the MarketWatch 50 list of the most influential people in markets. Hollub’s tangles with the wise men of Wall Street have left her savvier about how to manage her business. Stung by previous boom-and-bust cycles, Hollub has helped lead America’s oil frackers away from being “swing producers” that could counter the war-driven increase in energy prices, as she paid down debt and returned cash to shareholders through dividends and stock buybacks instead of plowing some of that money into shale oil fields. She is also pushing investment into Occidental’s massive new carbon-capture effort.
More than anything, Hollub is focused on guys like Bill Smead, founder of Smead Capital Management, who is a long-term investor in Occidental and a Hollub fan. “She’s somebody that we have a great deal of respect for and appreciate all the money she’s making us,” he said.
With that kind of backing, Hollub is planning to put Occidental in the driver’s seat of the massive national economic transition induced by climate change. She is positioning Occidental to be the company of the energy transition, one geared not to the free-for-all economy of the last century or some carbonless vision of the next, but the oil company for right now. She might even stop drilling new oil wells entirely.
“Now we feel like we control our own destiny,” Hollub said.
For the chief executive of a company that’s having a banner year on Wall Street while investors choke down generational losses, Hollub seems to constantly be on the alert for threats. Talking through the company’s prospects, she repeats a certain phrase: “I know that this will ultimately get me in trouble, but…”
Trouble? Hollub and Occidental have known their share.
The drama surrounding Occidental’s 2019 acquisition of Anadarko would make for a good boardroom thriller—or at least a lively business-school case study. Anadarko had big assets in the crucial Permian Basin region of Texas and New Mexico, where horizontal drilling in shale rock had reinvigorated an aging oil field into the nation’s biggest production zone.
Hollub and her team made an offer to buy Anadarko after months of research. She thought she had a deal locked, only to hear on the radio that Anadarko had announced plans to combine with Chevron. She nearly drove off the road, Texas Monthly recounts.
Hollub turned to Buffett for help. He agreed to what was effectively a $10 billion loan at 8% interest, in the form of preferred shares, along with warrants that allow Berkshire Hathaway, Buffett’s company, to buy more common stock. That got Hollub what she wanted, but many on Wall Street hated it. “The Buffett deal was like taking candy from a baby and amazingly she even thanked him publicly for it!” Icahn wrote in a letter to his fellow shareholders. Icahn had bought a slug of Occidental’s shares and, in the ensuing months, the billionaire investor led a shareholder campaign against Hollub, insisting that she needed stronger board oversight. Icahn allies were made Occidental directors.
In 2020, as COVID-19 flattened the global economy, deeply indebted Occidental was forced to cut its dividend for the first time in decades. Buffett sold his stock. At Icahn’s urging, the company issued 113 million warrants to its shareholders, allowing them to buy shares at $22, at a time when the stock was trading at $17. Gary Hu, one of the Icahn directors on Occidental’s board, pointed to those warrants as evidence of their success. “Our involvement in Occidental represented activism at its finest,” said Hu.
Hollub flatly disagrees. Icahn saw an opportunity to make an easy profit in derailing the Anadarko deal, Hollub said. “And what he expected is that we would lose and he would benefit from that. Since that didn’t happen, he managed to maneuver his way onto the board.” Icahn’s representatives on the board came to Hollub with a number of plans, including the warrants. She felt that one wouldn’t do any harm. “So that’s what we agreed to, but yeah, the other 10 or so weird things, we didn’t do.”
““She’s somebody that we have a great deal of respect for and appreciate all the money she’s making us.””
— Bill Smead, founder of Smead Capital Management
Former Occidental CEO Stephen Chazen returned to chair the board at Icahn’s insistence. Icahn and Occidental ultimately reached a settlement. His board members left, and the activist sold his common shares earlier this year. Chazen passed away in September. The experience embittered both sides, but there is one point of agreement: Hollub will do as she sees fit. “We were clearly wrong about the board’s ability to restrain Vicki’s ambitions,” Hu said.
Icahn made a $1.5 billion profit. At a MarketWatch event in September, Icahn said he still holds the warrants. But he hasn’t let go of the issues that motivated him to push into Occidental in the first place, though he insists he has no problem with Hollub personally. He likened her to a kid who got lucky gambling in Vegas. “The system allowed her to do it. And she’s just one small example of what is wrong with corporate governance.”
But as Icahn has himself shown, the system of corporate money in America is malleable. Its players can learn the rules of the game and adapt. Quarter after quarter since the dark days of the pandemic, Hollub turned up on corporate earnings calls pledging to keep cash flows strong, to invest in the highest-returning assets, and not to fall into the trap of overinvesting in debt-fueled or expensive production capacity, as so many failed shale producers have done in the past. She’s driven the company’s debt from nearly $40 billion following the Anadarko acquisition to less than $20 billion today. She increased the company’s dividend earlier this year. Along the way she transformed from market pariah to textbook CEO.
Hollub and other CEOs who run America’s biggest shale-oil producers have learned from the industry’s past mistakes. After proving a decade ago they could successfully extract shale oil, many U.S. oil producers were cheered on by growth and momentum stock investors as they borrowed billions to ramp up production, only to have those same investors abandon them after Saudi Arabia induced a plunge in oil prices. In the years that followed, U.S. shale-oil producers cultivated a new set of more value-oriented shareholders by promising they would share in profits through dividends and stock buybacks. Hollub and many of those other CEOs are not interested in chasing unrestrained growth again.
The world’s most famous value investor is now also on board. For Buffett, an earnings call Hollub led in February was the turning point. “I read every word, and said this is exactly what I would be doing. She’s running the company the right way,” Buffett told CNBC. Berkshire Hathaway BRK.A, +0.15%
started buying Occidental stock soon after. In August, federal regulators gave Buffett’s company permission to buy up to half of the company. (Asked for comment, a representative of Berkshire Hathaway asked for questions by email but did not respond to them.)
The markets are rife with speculation that Buffett will go all the way and purchase the entire company, though neither Hollub nor Berkshire have said as much. Hollub said simply that Buffett is bullish on oil, so she expects him to invest for the long haul. A Buffett buyout wouldn’t necessarily be a win for the investors who’ve hung on as Occidental’s stock price has recovered. “I’d probably make more money if he doesn’t buy it,” said Smead.
Warren Buffett is back to betting on Hollub and bought 20% of Occidental’s stock this year.
Johannes Eisele/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
Where Hollub might cause real trouble is in the fight to keep carbon dioxide out of the earth’s atmosphere. That’s not because she’s a climate-denier. Far from it. Like many of her fellow oil-and-gas CEOs in recent years, Hollub has come to see climate change not as a threat to the business, but as an opportunity to be managed.
“I know some people don’t want oil to be produced for very long, but it’s going to be,” Hollub said. For that to change, people have to start using less oil. “It’s not that the more supply we generate, then the more that people are gonna use. It’s all driven by demand,” she said. And even with an electric vehicle in every driveway, we’d still need to extract oil to produce plastics and to create airplane fuel, among other projects that fall under the category of hard-to-abate emissions.
Hollub’s plan for Occidental is to wrap the company around that lingering stream of demand for hydrocarbons. She says Occidental is now in the business of carbon management, a euphemism that glides over the messiness of the climate transition and companies’ role in it. Companies need to show anxious shareholders that they’re serious about reducing their carbon emissions, but they also need to keep operating in an economy that is still seriously short on meaningful alternatives to fossil fuels. Occidental is here to help, spurred along by a series of state and federal incentives that the company lobbied for over years, culminating in the passage this year of the Inflation Reduction Act.
Climate advocates have for years tried to make the use of fossil fuels reflect their full cost on the environment. That has put them deeply at odds with oil-and-gas executives like Hollub, who opposes carbon taxes. It’s also left U.S. climate policy stalled as the planet warms. But the IRA tries something else. “I do not see the IRA as a handout to the energy industry,” said Sasha Mackler, executive director of the energy program at the Bipartisan Policy Center, a D.C. think tank. Rather than making dirty energy more expensive, the IRA tries to make clean energy cheaper, Mackler said. And that’s something Hollub can get on board with. She’s selling the idea that a barrel of oil can be clean.
Getting to a net-zero barrel of oil, as Hollub calls it, involves literally rerouting the route carbon dioxide takes through the world. For companies like Occidental, CO2 isn’t just a planet-destroying waste product. It’s a critical input to the process of oil production. Engineers can use CO2 to essentially juice aging oil wells by pumping it underground to displace hydrocarbons. The process is called enhanced oil recovery, or EOR. Occidental is the industry leader, producing the equivalent of 130,000 barrels per day of EOR oil and gas as of 2020. And that oil can, in theory, be less impactful on the climate. “We have it documented that it takes more CO2 injected into the reservoir than what the incremental barrels from that CO2 that are produced will emit when they’re used,” she said.
The trick is where that injected CO2 comes from. The Permian is crisscrossed with thousands of miles of pipelines that bring CO2 to oil fields from as far away as Colorado. At the moment, the vast majority comes from naturally occurring reservoirs or as a byproduct of the production of methane. One of the strangest ironies of modern oil production is that companies like Occidental don’t actually have enough CO2. “There’s two billion barrels of resources remaining to be developed in our conventional reservoirs using CO2,” Hollub said.
So she and her team went out looking for more. Eventually they hit on the idea that’s encapsulated in the IRA. Instead of pulling CO2 out of the ground only to put it back, Occidental could divert some of the CO2 that’s being produced by so-called industrial sources, companies that would otherwise be dumping it into the atmosphere because, of course, there’s no business reason not to.
Finding companies that wanted to do the right thing with their waste CO2 turned out to be harder than Hollub thought. “We knocked on the doors of a lot of emitters,” Hollub said. They found one taker—a Texas ethanol producer that was willing to try a pilot. It was a decent start but not enough to unlock all those buried barrels.
That may soon change, driven by the IRA. The law puts new financial incentives behind those conversations Occidental was having with CO2 emitters. The IRA significantly beefed up the so-called 45Q tax incentive for companies to put CO2 permanently in the ground. Occidental can get $60 a ton in tax credits if the CO2 is stored in the process of pumping more oil for EOR, or $85 if the company just buries it.
There’s also a higher tier of incentives if companies obtain that CO2 using an experimental technology called direct air capture. Occidental is spending $1 billion to build what would be the world’s largest direct-air-capture facility in Texas, which you can loosely think of as a giant fan to suck ambient CO2 directly out of the atmosphere. Hollub plans to build as many as 70 by 2035.
The problem some see with this plan, and with Hollub and others’ efforts to shape legislation around it, is it tightens the economy’s dependence on fossil fuels rather than loosening it. Americans will now effectively pay Occidental to pursue more enhanced oil recovery. Those net-zero barrels of oil—should they materialize—might be better in climate terms than a traditional barrel. But that’s not the only alternative. Dollar for dollar, public money would be better spent on solar energy and other low-carbon options than on EOR, said Kurt House, who knows as much because he’s tried it. House got a Ph.D. at Harvard in the science of carbon capture and storage more than a decade ago and co-founded a company to put the idea into practice. “It is bad, bad economics,” he said. “If you pay people a million dollars a ton of CO2 sequestering, they will sequester a lot of CO2. But it’ll cost us. It’ll make solving global warming much, much, much, much, much more expensive.”
But Hollub isn’t likely to change course. “I would say to those who don’t like what we’re doing, who do they want to do this? Tell me who have they gotten to, that will commit to take CO2 out of the atmosphere?” she said. “This climate transition cannot happen as fast as some people want it to happen because the world can’t afford it,” Hollub said. “We’re looking at, you know, $100 to $200 trillion for this climate transition. We cannot spend that kind of money to make this transition happen without help from diverting some of the CO2 to enhanced oil recovery, which enables then the technology to be developed and to be built at a faster pace.” And in the meantime, Occidental can sell carbon offsets to companies like United Airlines, which is supporting the direct-air-capture facility.
Those companies can choose whether they want the CO2 Occidental is capturing to be buried, full stop, or used for more oil production. But it’s clear Hollub thinks EOR is a big part of the future for Occidental. She has often said that the last barrel of oil should come from EOR. “I think there could be a world where we do stop drilling new wells,” she said. “To increase recovery from the remaining conventional reservoirs is something that’s kind of like a best kept secret for the United States. Nobody very much realizes that, but that is there. And that gives us that longevity beyond what some people are forecasting,” Hollub said.
Hollub is well-aware of her critics. Perhaps that’s why she keeps looking around for signs of trouble. But even if it finds her, she doesn’t plan to change much. “I have no regrets,” she said.