ReportWire

Tag: Tesla

  • California needs a million EV charging stations — but that’s ‘unlikely’ and ‘unrealistic’

    California needs a million EV charging stations — but that’s ‘unlikely’ and ‘unrealistic’

    [ad_1]

    California will have to build public charging stations at an unprecedented — and some experts say unrealistic — pace to meet the needs of the 7 million electric cars expected on its roads in less than seven years.

    The sheer scale of the buildout has alarmed many experts and lawmakers, who fear that the state won’t be prepared as Californians purchase more electric cars.

    A million public chargers are needed in California by the end of 2030, according to the state’s projections — almost 10 times more than the number available to drivers in December. To meet that target, 129,000 new stations — more than seven times the current pace — must be built every year for the next seven years. Then the pace would have to accelerate again to reach a target of 2.1 million chargers in 2035.

    A robust network of public chargers — akin to the state’s more than 8,000 gas stations — is essential to ensure that drivers will have the confidence to purchase electric vehicles over the next several years.

    “It is very unlikely that we will hit our goals, and to be completely frank, the EV goals are a noble aspiration, but unrealistic,” said Stanford professor Bruce Cain, who co-authored a policy briefing detailing California’s electric vehicle charging problems. “This is a wakeup call that we address potential institutional and policy obstacles more seriously before we commit blindly.”

    Under California’s landmark electric car mandate, a pillar of Gov. Gavin Newsom’s climate change agenda, 68% of all new 2030 model cars sold in the state must be zero emissions, increasing to 100% for 2035, when 15 million electric cars are expected in California.

    “We’re going to look really silly if we are telling people that they can only buy electric vehicles, and we don’t have the charging infrastructure to support that,” said Assemblymember Jesse Gabriel, a Democrat from Encino who introduced a package of unsuccessful bills last year aimed at expanding access to car chargers.

    “We are way behind where we need to be,” Gabriel told CalMatters.

    Big obstacles stand in the way of amping up the pace of new charging stations in public places. California will need billions of dollars in state, federal and private investments, streamlined city and county permitting processes, major power grid upgrades and accelerated efforts by utilities to connect chargers to the grid.

    State officials also are tasked with ensuring that charging stations are available statewide, in rural and less-affluent areas where private companies are reluctant to invest, and that they are reliable and functioning whenever drivers pull up.

    In Pacific Gas & Electric’s vast service area, home to 40% of all Californians, electric car purchases are moving twice as fast as the buildout of charging stations, said Lydia Krefta, the utility’s director of clean energy transportation. Californians now own more than 1.5 million battery-powered cars.

    Patty Monahan, who’s on the Energy Commission, the state agency responsible for funding and guiding the ramp-up, told CalMatters that she is confident that California can build the chargers its residents need in time.

    The agency’s estimate of the current chargers is likely an undercount, she said. In addition, fast-charging stations could play a bigger role than initially projected, meaning hundreds of thousands of fewer chargers might be needed. Also, as the ranges and charging speeds on cars improve, there may be less demand for public chargers.

    “California has a history of defying the odds,” Monahan said. “We have a history of advancing clean cars, clean energy, writ-large. We have naysayers left and right saying you can’t do it, and then we do it.”

    Barriers to private investments: an uncertain market

    On a September day last year, Monahan spoke behind a podium in the parking lot of a Bay Area grocery store. A row of newly constructed car chargers rose behind her.

    “Let’s celebrate for a moment,” she said.

    California had met its goal of 10,000 fast electric chargers statewide — two years ahead of a target set in 2018.

    Fast chargers like the new ones at the grocery store are increasingly seen as critical to meeting the needs of drivers. They can power a car to 80% in 20 minutes to an hour, while the typical charger in use today, a slower Level 2, takes from four to 10 hours.

    But installing and operating fast chargers is an expensive business — one that doesn’t easily turn a profit.

    Nationwide each fast charger can cost up to $117,000, according to a 2023 study. And in California, it could be even more — between $122,000 and $440,000 each, according to a separate study, although the Energy Commission said the range was $110,000 to $125,000 for one of its programs.

    Most of America’s publicly traded charger companies have been forced to seek more financing, lay off workers and slow their network build outs, analysts said. EVgo, for instance, has seen its share price crater, as has ChargePoint, which specializes in selling the slower, Level 2 hardware.

    California stands apart from other states — it has by far the most chargers and electric car sales, and more incentives and policies encouraging them.

    Tesla, America’s top-selling electric car manufacturer, dominates fast-charging in both California and the U.S. — but the company didn’t get into the business to sell charges to drivers; it got into the charger business to sell its electric cars. Initially Tesla Superchargers were exclusive to its drivers, but starting this year other EV drivers can use them after Tesla provided ports to Ford and other automakers.

    Tesla’s manufacturing prowess, supply chain dominance and decade-plus of experience with fast chargers have given it an edge over competitors — a coterie of unprofitable, publicly traded startups, as well as private companies that often benefit from public subsidies, according to analysts.

    “All the automakers joined forces with their biggest competitor,” said Loren McDonald, chief executive of the consulting firm EVAdoption. “If that doesn’t tell you how bad fast-charging networks and infrastructure were, I don’t know what else does.”

    Now Tesla is showing uncertainty about the future of its charging business amid slumping car sales, and eliminated nearly its entire 500-member Supercharger team in April. Then chief executive Elon Musk said in May that he would spend $500 million to expand the network and hired back some fired workers.

    In California, Electrify America, a privately held company, was created by Volkswagen as a settlement for cheating on emissions tests for its gas-powered cars. The company is spending $800 million on California chargers, building a robust network of 260 stations, with more than half in low-income communities, including the state’s worst charging desert, Imperial County.

    The problem is Electrify America was ranked dead last in a consumer survey last year, and its chargers have been plagued by reliability problems and customer complaints. The California Air Resources Board in January directed Electrify America to “strive to achieve charger reliability consistent with the state of the industry.” A company spokesperson said the dissatisfaction showed “an industry in its growth trajectory.” There are signs of improvement, based on consumer data from the first three months of this year.

    Startups continue to jump into the charging business, with the number of companies offering fast chargers growing from 14 in 2020 to 41 in 2024, EVAdoption said. Seven carmakers formed a $1 billion venture to build a 30,000-charger network in North America. And gas stations such as Circle K are offering more charging because electric car customers spend more time shopping while waiting for their rides to juice up.

    But the realization that charging is a costly business has set in on Wall Street, and that doesn’t seem likely to change anytime soon. “Can public EV fast-charging stations be profitable in the United States?” the consultancy McKinsey & Company asked.

    “The fervor, the excitement from the investor base, has definitely dwindled quite a bit, given the prospects that EV adoption in the U.S. is going to be slower, revenue growth is really slower, the path to profitability is going to be slower, and they might need more capital than everyone originally expected,” said Christopher Dendrinos, a financial analyst who covers electric car charging companies for the investment bank RBC Capital Markets.

    The stakes are high for California when it comes to encouraging investments in expensive fast chargers: If 63,000 additional ones were built, California might need 402,000 fewer slower Level 2 chargers in 2030, according to an alternative forecast by the Energy Commission.

    Billions of public dollars: Will it be enough?

    Nationwide $53 billion to $127 billion in private investments and public funding is needed by 2030 to build chargers for about 33 million electric cars, according to a federal estimate. Of that, about half would be for public chargers.

    Congress and the Biden administration have set aside $5 billion for a national network of fast chargers. So far only 33 in eight locations have been built, but more than 14,000 others are in the works, according to the Federal Highway Administration. California’s share of the federal money totals $384 million; about 500 fast chargers will be built with an initial $40.5 million, said Energy Commission spokesperson Lindsay Buckley.

    In addition, the state has spent $584 million to build more than 33,000 electric car chargers through its Clean Transportation Program, funded by fees drivers pay when they register cars. The Legislature extended that program for an additional decade last year.

    Newsom has committed to spending $1 billion through 2028 on chargers with his “ California Climate Commitment,” Buckley said. But this year Newsom and the Legislature trimmed $167 million from the charger budget as the state faces a record deficit. A lobbyist for the Electric Vehicle Charging Association said “the state pullback sends a very challenging message” to the industry.

    California’s commitment to charger funding is “solid,” despite the cuts, Buckley said. They have not yet estimated the total investment needed in California to meet the targets.

    But Ted Lamm, a UC Berkeley Law researcher who studies electric car infrastructure, said the magnitude of building what California needs in coming years likely dwarfs the public funding available.

    State and federal programs will “only fund a fraction,” and the state needs to spend that money on lower-income communities, he said.

    Another possible funding source is California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard, which is expected to be revised in November. The program requires carbon-intensive fuel companies to pay for cleaner-burning transportation. Utilities get credits and use that money to pay for chargers, rebates to car buyers and grid improvements, said Laura Renger, executive director of the California Electric Transportation Coalition, which represents utilities.

    “I think with that, we would have enough money,” Renger said. She said the program’s overhaul could help utilities invest “billions” in chargers and other electric car programs over the next two decades.

    Backlogged local permits and grid delays

    One of the biggest barriers to more chargers isn’t money. It’s that cities and counties are slow to approve plans for the vast number of stations needed.

    State officials only have so much political power to compel local jurisdictions to do what they want — a reality made abundantly clear by the housing crisis, for instance. California relies on grants and persuasion to accomplish its goals, and the slow buildout of chargers shows how those strategies can fall short, said Stanford’s Cain.

    “The locals cannot be compelled by regulatory agencies to make land and resources available for what the state wants to achieve,” Cain said.

    The same obstacles have marked the state’s broader effort to electrify California and switch to clean energy. Local opposition and environmental reviews sometimes hold up large solar projects and transmission projects for years.

    California has created a “culture of regulation that emphasizes the need to be extra careful and extra perfect, but this takes an incredible amount of time,” Steve Bohlen, senior director of government affairs at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, said last month at the inaugural hearing of the state Assembly’s Select Committee on Permitting Reform.

    “We’re moving into a period of rapid change, and so perfect can’t be the enemy of the good.”

    Chargers aren’t as complicated as large-scale solar or offshore wind projects. But most chargers installed in public spaces do need a land-use or encroachment permit, among other approvals. California has passed laws requiring local jurisdictions to streamline permits for chargers. What’s more, the Governor’s Office of Business Development now grades cities and counties using a scorecard and maintains a map displaying who has, or hasn’t, made life easier for car charger builders. But these strategies only go so far.

    “It doesn’t matter how many requirements you put on (local governments),” Lamm said. “If they just don’t have the time in the day to do it … it’s going to sit in the backlog, because that’s how it works.”

    The delays have consequences. Getting a station permitted in California, on average, takes 26% longer than the national average, Electrify America reported. Designing and constructing a station in California can cost on average 37% more than in other states because of delays in permitting and grid connections. A utility on average takes 17 weeks after work is completed to connect chargers to the grid, Electric America said.

    Powering large charging projects often requires grid upgrades, which can take a year or more for approval, said Chanel Parson, a director at Southern California Edison. Supply chain issues also make getting the right equipment a challenge.

    Edison, which has a 10-year plan to meet expected demand, has asked the utilities commission for approval to upgrade the grid where it anticipates high charging demand.

    “Every EV charging infrastructure project is a major construction project,” Parson said. “There are a number of variables that influence how long it takes to complete the project.”

    Impatient with broken chargers, bad service

    Inspired to help the nation reduce its dependence on fossil fuels, Zach Schiff-Abrams of Los Angeles bought a Genesis GV60. As a renter, he has relied on public charging, primarily using Electrify America stations — and that’s been his biggest problem about owning an electric car.

    Charging speeds have been inconsistent, he said, with half-hour sessions providing only a 15 to 30% charge, and he often encounters broken chargers.

    “I believe in electrical, so I’m really actually trying to be a responsible consumer,” Schiff-Abrams said. “I want to report them when they’re down, but the customer service is horrible.”

    For years, the reliability of charging networks has been a well-documented problem. Only 73% of fast chargers in the San Francisco Bay Area were functional in a 2022 study. The growth of the EV market has put increasing strain on public charging stations, a consumer survey found.

    In January, the California Air Resources Board approved a final $200 million spending plan for Electrify America — but not before board chair Liane Randolph scolded its CEO.

    Randolph — arguably one of America’s top climate regulators — told CEO Robert Barrosa about an exchange she had with his company’s customer service line after finding a broken charger at a station along Interstate-5.

    “It didn’t work,” Randolph said during the board meeting. “Called the customer service line, waited like 10-ish minutes. …(The charger) was showing operable on the app and the guy goes, ‘oh, my data is showing me that it has not had a successful charge in three days.’”

    “These issues are not easy,” Barrosa responded. “Our head is not in the sand,” he told board members earlier. “We are listening to customers.”

    But Randolph, addressing journalists at a conference in Philadelphia, pushed back against the idea that because the transition to electric vehicles is happening gradually that it’s a failure. Many people will rely on charging at home or work, and batteries are becoming more efficient.

    “The infrastructure is continuing to be rolled out at a rapid pace,” Randolph said. “It doesn’t all have to be perfect instantly. It’s a process. And it’s a process that’s continuing to move.”

    ——-

    Data journalists Erica Yee and Arfa Momin contributed to this report.

    ___

    This story was originally published by CalMatters and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tesla CEO Elon Musk appears to confirm delay in Aug. 8 robotaxi unveil event to make design change

    Tesla CEO Elon Musk appears to confirm delay in Aug. 8 robotaxi unveil event to make design change

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT (AP) — Tesla CEO Elon Musk on Monday appeared to confirm a report that the company’s much-ballyhooed event to unveil a robotaxi will be delayed beyond its scheduled Aug. 8 date.

    Musk didn’t give a new date for the event, but in a posting on X, the social media site he owns, he wrote that he requested a design change to the front of the vehicle.

    “The extra time allows us to show off a few other things,” he wrote.

    A message was left Monday seeking comment from Tesla.

    Bloomberg News reported on Thursday that the robotaxi event would be delayed until October due to changes sought by Musk. That sent Tesla shares down 8% for the day. But they have since rallied and closed Monday up 1.8% at $252.64.

    Tesla shares had been down more than 40% earlier in the year, but are up more than 80% since hitting a 52-week low in April.

    For many years Musk has said Tesla’s “Full Self Driving” system will allow a fleet of robotaxis to generate income for the company and Tesla owners, making use of the electric vehicles when they would have been parked. Musk has been touting self-driving vehicles as a growth catalyst for Tesla since “Full Self Driving” hardware went on sale late in 2015. The system is being tested on public roads by thousands of owners.

    But in investigative documents, the U.S. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said it found 75 crashes and one death involving “Full Self Driving.” It’s not clear whether the system was at fault.

    Tesla, which is based in Austin, Texas, has said the system cannot drive itself and that human drivers must be ready to intervene at all times.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Tesla’s Cheaper Long-Range Model 3 Is Back

    Tesla’s Cheaper Long-Range Model 3 Is Back

    [ad_1]

    Plus: The Ford Capri returns as an EV, Samsung workers are on indefinite labor strike, and the market for anti-obesity drugs is messier than ever.

    [ad_2]

    Boone Ashworth

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: July 14, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: July 14, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    Are U.S. rate cuts on the way?

    While Canada’s inflation rate is obviously at the forefront around decision making for the Bank of Canada (BoC) in setting the key interest rate, inflation below the border is also a major consideration. Arguably, policymakers are loath to devalue the Canadian dollar beyond a certain level. Consequently, if U.S. inflation stays high—and U.S. interest rates correspondingly stay high—it will likely impact just how quickly the BoC can cut our interest rates.

    “The Canadian and American economies are very closely intertwined, especially when it comes to the cost of borrowing. Historically the BoC and the Fed have mirrored each other in terms of monetary policy (the act of cutting, holding, or hiking their benchmark interest rates).”

    —Penelope Graham, mortgage expert

    Markets were mostly flat on Thursday after the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics announced that headline CPI was down 0.1% from May, and the 12-month inflation reading was now 3%.

    Source: CNBC

    U.S. inflation highlights

    The CPI report included the following details:

    • Core CPI (excluding food and energy) increased 0.1% and up 3.3% from a year ago.
    • Gas prices were down 3.8%.
    • Food prices were up 0.2%.
    • Shelter prices were up 0.2%.
    • Used vehicles prices were down 1.5%.
    • Real hour earnings were up 0.4% for the month.

    Overall, the down-trending inflation rate, as well as Fed Chairman Jerome Powell’s comments about holding interest rates too high for too long this week, both seem to indicate a probable rate cut in September. CME Group’s FedWatch tracker uses futures contracts to predict the likelihood of interest rate movements, and it currently shows a strong likelihood of two interest rate cuts before the end of 2024. There is even a 40% probability of three cuts before year end.

    Obviously this is welcome news to indebted Americans, but also to Canadian consumers who want to see interest rates come down here sooner rather than later.

    —Kyle Prevost

    Pepsi’s revenues taste flat

    Beverage-and-snack behemoth PepsiCo released lukewarm earnings news on Thursday. For those who aren’t familiar with Pepsi’s corporate structure, it long ago ceased to be a single-beverage entity. With brands ranging from numerous snack and soft drink choice to breakfast cereals, Pepsi is a diversified food conglomerate, including FritoLay and Quaker.

    Source: Chathura Nalanda via LinkedIn

    Pepsi earnings highlights

    All figures in U.S. dollars.

    • PepsiCo (PEP/NASDAQ): Earnings per share came in at $2.28 (versus $2.16 predicted) on revenues of $22.50 billion (versus $22.57 billion predicted). Shares were down nearly 2% in early trading on Thursday.

    The company cited a declining demand in North America as the main factor in slowing revenue growth. Company executives explained that North American consumers were becoming more price conscious after failing to “push back” on significant price increases over the last few years. Low-income shoppers were highlighted as being the most willing consumer group to shift to cheaper private-label options. As well, increasing agricultural commodity costs were cited as an increasing operating expense. It’s worth noting that some market watchers believe weight-loss drugs, such as Ozempic and Wegovy, may curb demand for snack foods in the North American market.

    FritoLay’s North America sales were down 4% year over year, while North American beverages were down 3%. Those sales declines were offset by international revenue increasing by 7% year to date. Management highlighted that this was the 13th straight consecutive quarter with at least mid-single-digit organic revenue growth for international operations.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link

  • Tesla stock notches 10th consecutive day of gains as investors eye growth potential

    Tesla stock notches 10th consecutive day of gains as investors eye growth potential

    [ad_1]

    Tesla’s stock (TSLA) closed up about 4% on Tuesday, securing its tenth straight day of gains.

    The positive moves mean Tesla has erased all of its year-to-date losses, with the stock up about 5% since the start of the year. Shares have also surged about 75% since hitting 52-week lows in April.

    Analysts have credited the company’s second quarter vehicle production and deliveries numbers, which beat Wall Street expectations, along with momentum surrounding Tesla’s artificial intelligence businesses.

    “All of a sudden, the market is valuing the growth potential for Tesla,” Seth Goldstein, equity strategist at Morningstar, told Yahoo Finance. “Q1 deliveries surprised to the downside so the market was assuming a lower growth rate, and that’s why we’ve seen the large rally.”

    Tesla is set to report its next quarterly results on July 23 after the market close. It’s teased the development of more affordable electric vehicles, which investors see as another key catalyst for growth.

    But Goldstein said the company will have to lay out a “solid, concrete timeline” when it comes to the rollout of those cars, which the company previously said could happen as soon as 2025.

    “We need to see that being met or pushed up earlier so that [Wall Street] can assume Tesla will see a second wave of deliveries growth starting in 2026,” he said. “As long as that narrative remains intact, I think that the stock will be OK. But if that’s pushed out or if management sounds more uncertain that that’s going to happen, then I think we could see the stock falter.”

    Outside of earnings and deliveries, investors will also be on the lookout for another growth opportunity: robotaxis. The company is set to unveil its much-anticipated robotaxi on Aug. 8.

    Tesla’s stock plummeted in the first half of the year after its fourth quarter financial report missed on both the top and bottom lines. A 9% year-over-year drop in first quarter vehicle deliveries sent shares even lower as investors questioned the EV maker’s sky-high valuation and demand still left in the US.

    Soon after the delivery miss, the company slashed more than 10% of its staff. At the time, analysts categorized the layoffs as an “ominous signal” for what’s to come.

    Competition abroad from Chinese EV makers including Lucid (LCID), Li Auto (LI), Nio (NIO), and XPeng (XPEV) has also served as a significant overhang, fueling a price war that’s forced Tesla to aggressively cut prices in order to compete.

    Short sellers have piled into the name as a result — but they’ve now been crushed by its recent rally.

    “Short sellers have been up and down in this name over the past couple years. It was the No. 1 short in the market. Now it’s No. 4 behind … Nvidia, Apple, and Microsoft,” S3 Partners’ Ihor Dusaniwsky told Yahoo Finance on Tuesday. “But this is like the OG short. Everyone is still in it.”

    FILE - Tesla and SpaceX chief executive officer Elon Musk listens to a question as he speaks at the SATELLITE Conference and Exhibition in Washington, March 9, 2020. A Delaware judge heard arguments Monday, July 8, 2024, over a massive and unprecedented fee request by lawyers who argued that a massive and unprecedented pay package for Tesla CEO Musk was illegal and should be voided. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File)

    Tesla and SpaceX CEO Elon Musk listens to a question as he speaks at the SATELLITE Conference and Exhibition in Washington, March 9, 2020. (AP Photo/Susan Walsh, File) (ASSOCIATED PRESS)

    Alexandra Canal is a Senior Reporter at Yahoo Finance. Follow her on X @allie_canal, LinkedIn, and email her at alexandra.canal@yahoofinance.com.

    Click here for the latest stock market news and in-depth analysis, including events that move stocks

    Read the latest financial and business news from Yahoo Finance

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: July 7, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: July 7, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    Prediction: Tesla will finish the year down 30%

    Let’s wait and see how this one goes. If I wrote this column a week ago, I would have said Tesla looked like an excellent bet to be down 30% by year end. But shares jumped more than 10% this week on its positive second-quarter news. Despite the high numbers for vehicle deliveries, it has been a volatile year for Tesla shareholders, with prices down 42% at one point. Our central thesis was that decreased profit margins and increased competition would lead to lower profit projections. That still feels solid to me. 

    Prediction: Crypto might be volatile, but could finish 2024 up 50%

    This one hit the bullseye. After going on a tear in February, bitcoin was down almost 20% between mid-March and the beginning of May. 

    Source: Google Finance

    Overall, bitcoin only has to go up slightly over the next six months to meet that 50% return prediction. Of course, I believe the asset will be ultimately worth very little in the long term. Admittedly, I’m quite skeptical about crypto.

    Prediction: U.S. election in November will be chaotic

    We also predicted that this election year would be more chaotic than most, even though U.S. election years are historically quite positive for U.S. stock markets. We shied away from making too many specific predictions about how a Biden/Trump victory would impact stock-market prices, but said many market-watchers would be cheering for a split government. 

    Well, it’s certainly been chaotic in the headlines. As the rest of the world watches in disbelief, the 2024 U.S. election has so far proven to be the most volatile campaign in recent memory—and maybe of all time. At this point, betting markets think it’s a coin toss as to whether Biden even makes it as the Democratic Party nominee. Ordinarily, a political candidate running against a convicted felon would be an easy win. Then again, ordinarily, a candidate running against an incumbent whose own party isn’t sure he’s still right for the job would be an easy win as well.

    Given all the variables, we don’t even know how to measure the degree of accuracy of this prediction. We did reluctantly predict a very slim Biden victory, and that doesn’t look like such a great prognostication now that Trump is a fairly strong betting favourite. However, our strong feeling was that a split government would lead to a robust end of the year for U.S. stocks. That scenario could still be very much in play. We’re going to wait to fully assess this one.

    What’s left of 2024?

    After a very accurate round of 2023 predictions, we were statistically unlikely to repeat the feat in 2024. While we may have called it wrong about U.S. tech, I think there’s a good chance we’re going to get the big picture stuff right—by the end of the year. Despite a ton of negative headlines and general “bad vibes” over the last six months, one of my big takeaways is that the world’s stock markets (and especially America’s) should continue to reward patient Canadian investors.

    Read more about investing:



    About Kyle Prevost


    About Kyle Prevost

    Kyle Prevost is a financial educator, author and speaker. He is also the creator of 4 Steps to a Worry-Free Retirement, Canada’s DIY retirement planning course.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: June 30, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: June 30, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    If the summer heat doesn’t get you, inflation will

    Canadians hoping for interest rate relief will likely have to wait a bit longer. The Consumer Price Index (CPI) reading for May came in at 2.9%, according to Statistics Canada

    The money markets predict a 45% chance that the Bank of Canada (BoC) will cut rates at its July 24 meeting. Lowering interest rates after a month of renewed inflation worries would carry a large credibility risk for the BoC, after it raised rates so quickly to restore faith that it would tame inflation over the long term.

    CPI May 2024 highlights

    Here are some notable takeaways from the CPI report:

    • May’s overall 2.9% CPI increase was 0.2% higher than April’s 2.7% CPI increase.
    • Renters in Canada continue to get slammed, as the year-over-year increase in rent was 8.9%.
    • Mortgage interest costs also massively grew, by 23.3%.
    • Core CPI (stripping out volatile items such as gas and groceries) was 2.85%.
    • The cost of travel also jumped, with airfare up 4.5% and tours up 6.9%.
    • Gasoline costs were up 5.6%.
    • In slightly better news, grocery prices were only up 1.5% year-over-year, but they’re up 22.5% since May 2020.
    • Cell phone services continue to be a bright spot for deflation, as they are down 19.4% since May 2023.

    We’re sure the BoC was hoping for inflation to be closer to 2.5%, which would allow it to justify cutting interest rates and point to a stronger downward trend for inflation. Continuing to balance long-term growth and full employment versus controlled inflation isn’t going to get easier anytime soon for BoC governor Tiff Macklem and his team. 

    For now, savers will continue to benefit from higher interest rates, like those of guaranteed investment certificates (GICs) and high-interest savings accounts (HISAs), while borrowers keep hoping for relief sooner rather than later. And, of course, to read about how to invest in a high-inflation world, see our article on the best low-risk investments at MillionDollarJourney.com.


    FedEx delivers, Nike just doesn’t do it

    It was a tale of two extremes in U.S. earnings this week as FedEx shareholders became quite happy, while Nike investors were down in the dumps.

    U.S. earnings highlights

    This is what came out of the earnings reports this week. Both Nike and FedEx report in U.S. dollars.

    • Nike (NKE/NYSE): Earnings per share of $1.01 (versus $0.83 predicted). Revenue of $12.61 billion (versus $12.84 predicted).
    • FedEx (FDX/NYSE): Earnings per share of $5.41 (versus $5.35 predicted). Revenue of $22.11 billion (versus $22.08 billion predicted).

    Nike finance chief Matthew Friend found himself in an odd position on his earnings call with analysts on Thursday. On one hand, Nike’s effort to reduce costs by shedding 1,500 jobs is paying off, and earnings per share came in substantially higher than experts predicted. On the other hand, declining sales in China and “increased macro uncertainty” were cited as reasons for a predicted sales drop of 10% in the next quarter. Investors chose to see the half-empty part of the glass, as shares plunged more than 12% in after-hours trading.

    Friend attempted to put the downward forecast in perspective: “While our outlook for the near term has softened, we remain confident in Nike’s competitive position in China in the long term.” Nike highlighted running, women’s apparel and the Jordan brand as growth areas to watch going forward.

    FedEx had a much better day, as shares were up more than 15% after it announced earnings on Tuesday. Future earnings projections were up on the news of increased cost-cutting efforts that will save the company about $4 billion over the next two years. FedEx announced possible increased profit margins as a result of consolidating its air and ground services.

    Cash-strapped consumers pinch Couche-Tard

    Canada’s 13th-largest company, the gas and convenience store empire known as Alimentation Couche-Tard, announced its earnings on Tuesday.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: June 23, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: June 23, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    We’re building more houses—and prices are down!

    On Monday, the Canada Mortgage and Housing Corporation announced housing starts rose from 241,111 units in April to 264,506 units in May: good for a 10% increase. The pace was highest in Montreal, where starts were up 104%, and in Toronto, they were notably up 47%. That’s a pretty good clip, considering how high interest rates are at the moment.

    While it would be statistically correct to say that this level of housing starts is near historically high levels, that doesn’t quite tell the whole story.

    Source: Statista.com

    To get a more accurate historical perspective, we should consider the housing starts per capita over the years. After all, Canada’s higher population should mean more capital, carpenters, electricians and other factors of production that go into housing creation, right?

    Line graph of housing starts per person in Canada from 1949 to 2021
    Source: Brent Bellamy on X

    Perhaps we’re moving in the right direction, but we’ll need a major uptick in housing starts before we have proportionately the same housing creation numbers as we did back in the heyday of the 1970s. Many young Canadians are hoping recent government incentives will spur more housing development sooner rather than later.

    While there is more housing supply on the way, it appears that high interest rates continue to affect the current market. This week, the Canadian Real Estate Association released data that revealed total Canadian home sales were down nearly 6% in May on a year-over-year basis. The average home price slipped to $699,117, down 4% from May 2023 and about 14.4% from its peak in February 2022.

    Line graph of seasonally adjusted composite benchmark home prices in Canada
    Source: Better Dwelling

    While the small interest rate cut earlier this month may spark some renewed appetite in the real estate market, it’s notable that the number of newly listed properties has jumped 28.4% from this time last year. As more mortgage renewals start to come up, it will be interesting to see which force is stronger: the increase in demand as mortgage rates decrease, or the continued softening of the market as more folks are forced to list houses they can no longer afford (as well as more new units being added).

    What does the average Canadian buy?

    Each month, Statistics Canada produces  an inflation report based on the consumer price index (CPI), a representative “basket” of goods and services across eight categories (food, shelter, transportation, etc.) whose prices are tracked over time. Most of us simply accept that the CPI is a good measurement to go by, while others think it’s out of touch with reality. This week, the CPI got its annual update, after the Statistics Canada team looked at how average consumer preferences have changed over the last 12 months. 

    The CPI can’t stay the same from year to year because what we buy changes significantly over time. Consequently, measuring inflation with exactly the same goods from years ago doesn’t make much sense. For example, compact discs and videocassettes would have been part of the CPI basket back in my childhood—probably not so much today. Here are some of the more notable changes:

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link

  • Tesla shareholders approve $46 billion pay package for CEO Elon Musk

    Tesla shareholders approve $46 billion pay package for CEO Elon Musk

    [ad_1]

    In the history of U.S. corporate pay packages, there have been plenty of massive payouts worth almost $1 billion in today’s dollars. But none comes close to the $46 billion pay deal Tesla shareholders on Thursday handed to CEO Elon Musk. 

    The results of the shareholder vote, which concluded today, were announced during Tesla’s annual meeting, prompting a standing ovation from shareholders attending the Thursday event at Tesla’s headquarters in Austin, Texas. Musk had already declared victory, writing late Wednesday on his social media platform X that shareholders were voting to approve the pay package by “wide margins.”

    “Hot damn, I love you guys,” an exultant Musk said at the shareholder meeting after the vote results were announced. He also capitalized on the occasion to tout Tesla’s success in selling electric vehicles and what that means for the fight against climate change. 

    “It’s incredible. I think we’re not just opening a new chapter for Tesla, we’re starting a new book,” he said, adding, “We’re starting to make a real noticeable dent in carbon emissions.”

    Tesla said in a Friday regulatory filing that 72% of voting shares supported Musk’s pay package, excluding shares voted by himself and his brother, Kimbal Musk, who serves on Tesla’s board.

    The pay package has become a lightning rod over executive pay, with some critics calling the package “excessive.” Supporters argue that such a deal is necessary to tether Musk to Tesla and ensure he doesn’t decamp to start another business. Along with Tesla, the billionaire currently owns five additional businesses including X (formerly Twitter), Neuralink and SpaceX, the latter of which he is also CEO. 

    With Musk trumpeting his apparent win ahead of the final tally, shareholders sent the stock up 3% in Thursday trading, indicating that many view the pay package as essential to ensuring Musk’s future at the company. 

    “It is a pop-the-champagne moment for Musk and Tesla shareholders,” noted Wedbush Securities analyst Dan Ives in a Thursday research note about the preliminary vote results. “[L]arge shareholders at the end of the day knew that voting no would risk Musk potentially eventually leaving as CEO.” 

    Ives said he believes Musk is now likely to pledge to remain CEO of Tesla for another three to five years, given the apparent approval of his pay package. 

    Still, questions remain about whether Tesla will be able to actually deliver the pay package to Musk, given a Delaware court ruling earlier this year that struck down the plan’s earlier 2018 shareholder approval. Meanwhile, Tesla shareholders on Thursday also approved a proposal to move the company’s legal jurisdiction from Delaware to Texas, which could play a part in whether Musk’s payout materializes.

    For instance, with Tesla shareholders approving the move to Texas, reapproval of the pay package could now be handled as a Texas corporation, which means the issue could fall under the purview of Texas courts.

    Why does the pay package need to be voted on?

    The vote on Musk’s payout stems from a court ruling in January that struck down his previous pay deal, worth almost $56 billion earlier this year. The value has since declined due to a slide in Tesla’s share price. 

    That package, approved in 2018 by Tesla shareholders, sparked a shareholder lawsuit that accused Musk and Tesla’s board of directors of breaching their duties and unjustly enriching the billionaire. A Delaware judge ruled that Musk and his his company failed to prove that the massive payout was fair.

    Because that initial pay deal was struck down, Tesla said in April that it would once again take the issue to its shareholders, asking them to re-ratify the package. 

    How much does Musk earn from Tesla? 

    Tesla hasn’t paid Musk a base salary since 2019, according to the company’s regulatory filings. Instead, his compensation has been paid through “performance awards” of stock options that are based on Tesla hitting certain milestones, such as vehicle production or increasing the company’s market value. 

    After the pay package was struck down by the Delaware court, Tesla Chairwoman Robyn Denholm wrote to shareholders that they should re-ratify the package as “Elon has not been paid for any of his work for Tesla for the past six years that has helped to generate significant growth and stockholder value.”

    Denholm described the situation as “fundamentally unfair, and inconsistent with the will of the stockholders who voted for it.”

    However, Musk is hardly without financial resources: He owns almost 13% of Tesla shares, worth $73 billion. He also has stakes in SpaceX, worth $71 billion, and multiple other businesses, giving him a total net worth of $203 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. That makes him the world’s third richest person.

    Why are some shareholders supporting the pay package? 

    According to Ives, some shareholders are concerned that Musk might decamp for another business or start a rival company if he isn’t richly rewarded for working at Tesla. That’s a threat that Musk himself has issued, stating in a post on X in January that he wanted 25% voting control of Tesla or he might leave. 

    Tesla chairwoman Denholm echoed those sentiments, writing in a June shareholder letter, “If Tesla is to retain Elon’s attention and motivate him to continue to devote his time, energy, ambition and vision to deliver comparable results in the future, we must stand by our deal.”

    Are some shareholders voting against the pay deal?

    Yes, some shareholders had spoken publicly against the package, most notably the California’s State Teachers Retirement System. 

    The large pension fund said Tuesday that it would vote against Musk’s pay “based on its sheer magnitude, and because the award would be extremely dilutive to shareholders. We also have concerns with the lack of focus on profitability for the company.”

    Tesla’s top five institutional shareholders — Vanguard, BlackRock, State Street, Geode Capital and Capital Research — either said they wouldn’t announce their votes or wouldn’t comment. They control about 17% of the votes.

    How is Elon Musk’s pay package structured?

    The pay deal is structured to deliver several rounds of stock options that will allow Musk to buy about 304 million shares of Tesla stock. Musk is able to receive each round of options after the company hits certain milestones — such as when Tesla reached a market value of $100 billion, and then at every $50 billion mark beyond that. (Currently, Tesla’s market cap is about $580 billion.)

    Based on today’s stock price, the value of the pay package stands at about $46 billion. 

    The package also includes a requirement that Musk hold onto the shares for five years after he exercises the options, according to regulatory filings.

    Do large payouts ensure better CEO performance? 

    The underlying question of the debate over Musk’s payout is whether such grandiose packages actually make a difference in CEO performance. In other words, do CEOs actually outperform when they are given larger-than-normal packages? And if they don’t receive such jaw-dropping deals, do they underperform? 

    Generous CEO pay packages don’t actually guarantee better results, according to a 2017 study from investment research firm MSCI. In fact, the analysis found that the companies with the smallest equity incentive awards outperformed those with the heftiest packages by almost 39% on average over a 10-year period. 

    — The Associated Press contributed to this report.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: June 16, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: June 16, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    It appears the rising AI tide continues to lift all boats in the U.S. tech sector.

    Deal-seeking customers power Dollarama

    It was a quiet week for Canadian earnings announcements, with Dollarama (DOL/TSX) being the only large company to release quarterly results. Some Canadian investors might not realize that this humble dollar store is actually the 33rd biggest company in Canada, making it larger than Telus, Rogers or Fortis.

    Dollarama earnings highlights

    Here’s what the thrifty retailer announced this week:

    • Dollarama (DOL/TSX): Earnings per share of $0.77 (versus $0.75 predicted), and revenues were identical to the $1.41 billion expert prediction. 

    Comparable store sales were up 5.6%, and there are plans to add 60 to 70 new stores to the list of 1,551 existing Canadian stores. 

    “As anticipated, we are seeing a progressive normalization in comparable store sales, with growth primarily driven by persistent higher than historical demand for core consumables and other everyday essentials.”

    – Neil Rossy, Dollarama CEO 

    Despite the positive news, share prices dropped on the heel of news for an aggressive expansion under the Dollarcity subsidiary in Latin America. The $761.7 million investment grows Dollarama’s total equity from 50.1% to 60.1%. 

    “We look forward to preparing for entry in Mexico in the near term, a large and dynamic market with untapped potential in the value retail space, guided by the same careful and disciplined approach as with our successful entries in Colombia in 2017 and in Peru in 2021.”

    – Neil Rossy, Dollarama CEO 

    Long-term Dollarama shareholders are probably quite happy despite the pullback, as the stock is up a scorching 26% year to date, and 42% over the last 12 months.

    Read: “Dollarama earnings report and upcoming growth”

    Stock splits for Nvidia and Canadian Natural Resources

    If you were recently looking at the stock prices of Canada’s sixth largest company, Canadian Natural Resources (CNQ/TSX), and the world’s third largest company, Nvidia (NVDA/NASDAQ), you might be alarmed to see steep price declines. No need to panic; this is simply the result of stock splits. (Read: “What does Nvidia’s stock split mean for Canadian investors?”)

    Early this week, CNQ executed a 2-for-1 stock split, and Nvidia executed a 10-for-1 stock split. (Broadcom also announced that it too would be undertaking a 10-for-1 stock split in the near future.)

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link

  • Elon Musk wins back his $44.9B Tesla pay package in shareholder vote

    Elon Musk wins back his $44.9B Tesla pay package in shareholder vote

    [ad_1]

    DETROIT — Tesla shareholders have voted to restore CEO Elon Musk’s records $44.9 billion pay package that was thrown out by a Delaware judge earlier this year.

    Vote totals weren’t immediately announced at Tesla’s annual stockholders’ meeting on Thursday, but the company said they voted for Musk’s compensation plan, which initially was approved by the board and stockholders six years ago.

    But the favorable vote doesn’t necessarily mean that Musk will get the all-stock compensation anytime soon. The package is likely to remain tied up in the Delaware Chancery Court and Supreme Court for months as Tesla tries to overturn the rejection.

    Tesla last valued the package at $44.9 billion in an April regulatory filing. It was once much as $56 billion but has declined in value in tandem with Tesla’s stock, which has dropped about 40% in the last 12 months.

    Chancellor Kathaleen St. Jude McCormick ruled in January in a shareholder’s lawsuit that Musk essentially controlled the Tesla board when it ratified the package in 2018, and that it failed to fully inform shareholders who approved it the same year.

    Tesla has said it would appeal, but asked shareholders to reapprove the package at Thursday’s annual meeting.

    A separate issue to move the company’s legal home to Texas to avoid the Delaware courts also was approved, Musk said Thursday at the meeting in Austin, Texas.

    “Its incredible,” a jubilant Musk told the crowd gathered at Tesla’s headquarters and large factory in Austin, Texas. “I think we’re not just opening a new chapter for Tesla, we’re starting a new book.”

    Legal experts say the issue of Musk’s pay will still be decided in Delaware, largely because Musk’s lawyers have assured McCormick that they won’t try to move the case to Texas.

    But they differ on whether the new approval of the pay package will make it easier for Tesla to get it approved.

    Charles Elson, a retired professor and founder of the corporate governance center at the University of Delaware, said he doesn’t think the vote will influence McCormick, who issued a decision based on the law.

    McCormick’s ruling essentially made the 2018 compensation package a gift to Musk, Elson said, and that would need unanimous shareholder approval, an impossible threshold. The vote, he said, is interesting from a public perception standpoint, but “in my view it does not affect the ruling.”

    John Lawrence, a Dallas-based lawyer with Baker Botts who defends corporations against shareholder lawsuits, agreed that the vote doesn’t end the legal dispute and automatically give Musk the stock options. But he says it gives Tesla a strong argument to get the ruling overturned.

    He expects Musk and Tesla to argue that shareholders were fully informed before the latest votes, so McCormick should reverse her decision. But the plaintiff in the lawsuit will argue that the vote has no impact and isn’t legally binding, Lawrence said.

    The vote, he said, was done under Delaware law and should be considered by the judge.

    “This shareholder vote is a strong signal that you now have an absolutely well informed body of shareholders,” he said. “The judge in Delaware still could decide that this doesn’t change a thing about her prior ruling and doesn’t require her to make any different ruling going forward. But I think it definitely gives Tesla and Musk strong ammunition to try to get her to revisit this.”

    If the ruling stands, then Musk likely will appeal to the Delaware Supreme Court, Lawrence said.

    Copyright © 2024 by The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved.

    [ad_2]

    AP

    Source link

  • Tesla Shareholders Approve Elon Musk’s Big Payday

    Tesla Shareholders Approve Elon Musk’s Big Payday

    [ad_1]

    Under CEO Elon Musk, Tesla has been credited with revolutionizing the auto industry, jump-starting the electric revolution, and racking up billions in profit in the process. Now Musk is set for a record payday worth around $50 billion, after the electric car company’s shareholders approved a compensation plan that had been previously blocked by a federal judge.

    The preliminary outcome of the vote was announced Thursday afternoon during an annual shareholder meeting at Tesla’s newest auto and battery factory in Austin, Texas.

    The setting was apropos: Shareholders also approved a measure to move Tesla’s corporate registration away from Delaware and to Texas. The company’s board argued that Delaware’s court system—where a judge struck down Musk’s pay scheme in January—has been unfair to Tesla.

    “Hot damn, I love you guys,” an ebullient Musk told shareholders from the stage of the meeting in Austin, after the pay package approval was announced.

    This vote was a referendum on Musk’s leadership at Tesla, as some shareholders argued the CEO has grown more visibly distracted with his other companies, which include SpaceX, the tunneling venture the Boring Company, the social media site X, and the artificial intelligence firm xAI. The electric car company has also lost more than half its value since its highest heights, when it was worth some $1.24 trillion in late 2021. Slower car sales, increased competition in the electric car market, and a pivot to robotics and autonomous vehicle technology have left some shareholders confused about the future of Tesla.

    In a letter published before the vote, the proxy advising firm Glass Lewis said it was concerned that the compensation package would give Musk too much power over Tesla by making him the company’s largest shareholder “by a healthy margin.”

    But proponents for the package—who prevailed in Thursday’s vote—said the compensation was fair payment for Musk’s performance at Tesla. “If Tesla is to retain Elon’s attention and motivate him to continue to devote his time, energy, ambition and vision to deliver comparable results in the future, we must stand by our deal,” board chair Robyn Denholm wrote in a letter to shareholders ahead of the vote.

    Musk’s compensation package, tied to a series of ambitious financial targets, was first approved by more than 70 percent of Tesla shareholders in 2018. But a group of investors challenged the package in a Delaware court, and in January a state chancery judge threw it out, ruling it should be undone. The package, she wrote, was an “unfathomable sum” and had been approved by a board of directors made up of less-than-impartial members.

    Now, Musk will have even greater control over his electric car company. What he does with that power remains to be seen.

    [ad_2]

    Aarian Marshall, Morgan Meaker

    Source link

  • Elon Musk says Tesla stockholders approving his $56 billion pay package by

    Elon Musk says Tesla stockholders approving his $56 billion pay package by

    [ad_1]


    6/12: CBS Evening News

    19:48

    Tesla CEO Elon Musk said late Wednesday that the electric vehicle company’s shareholders were voting to approve his multibillion-dollar pay package by “wide margins,” in a post on his social media platform X ahead of the vote’s conclusion.

    “Both Tesla shareholder resolutions are currently passing by wide margins!” Musk wrote, referring to resolutions to approve his pay package worth as much as $56 billion and a plan to shift Tesla’s place of incorporation from New Castle, Delaware to Austin, Texas.

    Official vote results haven’t been released but Tesla’s annual shareholder meeting is slated for Thursday afternoon.

    Tesla has campaigned to persuade shareholders to approve Musk’s giant compensation package.

    The company said on an annual meeting website that the “future value we are poised to deliver for you is at risk,” adding, “We need your vote NOW to protect Tesla and your investment.”

    Tesla also launched a sweepstakes of sorts in which 15 investors who vote would be randomly picked for a tour of Tesla’s plant in Austin personally led by Musk and vehicle designer Franz von Holzhausen.

    Shareholders overwhelmingly backed the Musk compensation plan in March 2018, but it was struck down by a Delaware judge in January.

    This year’s vote was expected to be closer than the 2018 ballot after influential advisory firms Investor Shareholder Services and Glass Lewis came out against the windfall

    ISS dismissed the proposal as “excessive” and Glass Lewis wrote in a 71-page report, shared with CBS MoneyWatch, that Tesla shareholders risk stock dilution if Musk is granted the massive stock grant, meaning their shares could be worth less as a result. 

    In April, Tesla revived the package, with chair Robyn Denholm imploring investors to “fix this issue” after the Delaware ruling.

    He said in a letter to shareholders that the firm had “created more than $735 billion in value” in the previous six years.

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: June 9, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: June 9, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    “The Big Cut”

    While The Big Short film is a riveting watch, “The Big Cut” may be even more enthralling. 

    The Bank of Canada (BoC) made the decision to cut its key interest rate to 4.75% on Wednesday. It’s the first rate cut since March 2020. With about $700 million worth of mortgages coming up for renewal in Canada this year, “The Big Cut” is going to affect a lot of Canadians.

    “We’ve come a long way in the fight against inflation. And our confidence that inflation will continue to move closer to the 2% target has increased over recent months.”

    – BoC Governor Tiff Macklem 

    Macklem also said: “Total consumer price index inflation has declined consistently over the course of this year, and indicators of underlying inflation increasingly point to a sustained easing.”

    However, in the tradition of central bankers the world over, Macklem was also careful to speak using neutral language, pointing out that the BoC was going to take things “one meeting at a time.” He added “We don’t want monetary policy to be more restrictive than it needs to be to get inflation back to target. But if we lower our policy interest rate too quickly, we could jeopardize the progress we’ve made.”

    While the BoC was the first G7 country to begin cutting interest rates, the European Central Bank followed suit on Thursday, cutting its key interest rate from 4% to 3.75%. Market experts are speculating that the BoC will cut interest rates three or four more times in 2024. (There are four announcements left on the BoC interest rate schedule).

    The BoC (as well as many other central banks) have taken a lot of flak over the last couple of years. But if they manage to cut interest rates, get the economy growing again, and avoid resurgent interest rates, then they deserve a hand. Such a Goldilocks scenario would certainly qualify as a “soft landing” by most economists’ definitions.

    If the BoC manages to slowly cut interest rates, while managing to get the economy growing again—all without supercharging inflation—that would certainly qualify as a “soft landing” by most economists’ definitions. 


    Lululemon stops its share price slide, Nvidia skips past Apple

    It was a relatively slow week for earnings news, but Canadian retailers Lululemon and the North West Company let investors know how they did last quarter. Note: Lululemon releases its earnings numbers in U.S. dollars, while the North West Company releases its earnings in CAD. You might remember the North West Company from your history textbooks, as the Winnipeg-based grocery chain is significantly older than Canada (1779 versus 1867).

    Retail earnings highlights

    The latest share prices and revenue for Lulu and NWC. 

    • Lululemon (LULU/NASDAQ): Earnings per share of USD$2.54 (versus USD$2.40 predicted) on revenues of USD$2.21 (versus USD$2.20 billion predicted)
    • North West Company (NWC/TSX): Earnings per share of $0.61 (versus $0.58 predicted) and revenues of $617.50 million (versus $626.31 million predicted).

    Lulu shared a mostly positive earnings report and saw its share price rise 8% on Wednesday. This was welcome news for shareholders who have watched the stock go down over 36% year to date. Shares of the North West Company were flat the day after announcing earnings that were in line with expectations. (Read more about Lululemon’s earning report.)

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link

  • Tesla Recalling More Than 125,000 Vehicles – KXL

    Tesla Recalling More Than 125,000 Vehicles – KXL

    [ad_1]

    (Associated Press) Tesla is recalling more than 125,000 vehicles to fix a seat belt warning system that may increase the risk of an injury in a collision.

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration said that the recall includes certain 2012-2024 Model S, 2015-2024 Model X, 2017-2023 Model 3, and 2020-2023 Model Y vehicles.

    Tesla plans to start deploying an over-the-air software update to the affected vehicles free of charge in June.

    More about:

    [ad_2]

    Grant McHill

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: June 2, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: June 2, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    Corporations, it seems, are just really, really good at making larger-than-ever profits. There are many reasons for fatter margins. It could be innovative new products and services, lower taxation, decreasing competition, willingness of consumers to pay higher prices, and so on. The bottom line is that the stock market will certainly pull back at some point (as it did this week). And there are solid reasons why companies are worth more now than they were, say, a few years ago.

    Source: AWealthOfCommonSense.com

    Stagflation’s disappearing act

    Back in spring/summer of 2022, all the “cool” writers were predicting a scary-sounding future of stagflation. We, on the other hand, were a bit more skeptical. We felt that these worst-case economic scenarios were just around the corner.

    So, two years later, are we fearing unemployment rates may shoot through the roof? Are we fearing a shrinking GDP? (Gross domestic product, that is.)

    Barry Ritholtz doesn’t think so. He’s the co-founder, chairman and chief investment officer of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC, in New York City.

    Source: Ritholtz.com

    The above chart illustrates what economists call the “misery index.” It’s a rough approximation of measuring stagflation.

    You’ll notice that while things weren’t exactly great in 2020 and 2022, they weren’t historically bad either. Last year was downright tame, and (spoiler alert!) we’re probably in for another not-so-miserable year for 2024.

    Note, though, that this features American data. While Canada’s misery index isn’t quite as upbeat as the USA’s, Canada still sits below long-term averages.

    Sure, the cost of living is up in for Canadians and Americans. But so are wages. And unemployment in the USA is at 60-year lows. While growth in Canada has been “anemic,” we haven’t experienced the deep recession folks were worried about over the last couple of years. Growth in the U.S. has been excellent. And inflation has steadily trended downward in both countries.

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link

  • You Can Buy a Used Tesla for Cheap. Just Be Careful If You Do

    You Can Buy a Used Tesla for Cheap. Just Be Careful If You Do

    [ad_1]

    The launch of a new electric vehicle these days is invariably met with a chorus of “this car is too expensive”—and rightfully so. But for used EVs, particularly used Teslas, it’s quite another story, thanks to a glut of former fleet and rental cars that are now ready for their second owner.

    “Due to a variety of reasons, Tesla resale values have plummeted, making many Tesla models very affordable now. Plus, for some consumers, an additional $4,000 federal tax credit on used EVs may apply, sweetening the deal even further. Buying a used Tesla can be a great deal for the savvy shopper, but there are significant things to look out for,” says Ed Kim, president and chief analyst at AutoPacific.

    Indeed, a quick search on the topic easily reveals some horror stories of ex-rental Teslas, so here are some things to consider if you’re in search of a cheap Model 3 or Model Y.

    For more than a year, Tesla has been engaged in an EV price war, mostly driven by its attempt to maintain sales in China. Heavily cutting the price of your new cars is a good way to devalue the used ones, and Hertz’s decision to sell at least 20,000 of its Teslas was in part a response to the lower residual values.

    What to Watch For

    “The prices are very appealing, but shoppers must keep in mind that rental cars can and do get abused, and some of these ex-rental units may have nasty surprises stemming from their hard lives. Be sure to have yours checked out thoroughly by a mechanic before buying,” Kim says.

    Mismatched tires and minor dents, scrapes, and rock chips are fairly common minor issues. Many of the Teslas that Hertz is selling have been used as Ubers—you can tell it’s one of these if the odometer is approaching 100,000 miles. Battery degradation could be an issue, although most cars will not have lost more than 4 to 5 percent of capacity, and Long Range Teslas should have a powertrain warranty for up to 120,000 miles (or eight years).

    “One side effect of Tesla’s widespread and reliable DC fast-charging network is that many owners end up relying on it to keep their cars charged rather than dealing with the often considerable expense of installing a home charger and associated home electrical upgrades,” Kim told Ars. As such, you should make sure to check the battery’s health (which can be done on the touchscreen or as part of the inspection) before you buy.

    Rental cars can suffer from an excess of slammed doors and trunks—slamming the latter can mess up the powered strut. In the interior, you should expect high signs of wear on some touchpoints, especially the steering wheel and the rear door cards, which can bubble or flake, particularly if the Tesla was used as a ride-hailing vehicle.

    Other Potential Headaches

    Teslas are very connected cars, and many of their convenience features are accessed via smartphone apps. But that requires that Tesla’s database shows you as the car’s owner, and there are plenty of reports online that transferring ownership from Hertz can take time.

    Unfortunately, this also leaves the car stuck in Chill driving mode (which restricts power, acceleration, and top speed) and places some car settings outside of the new owner’s level of access. You also won’t be able to use Tesla Superchargers while the car still shows up as belonging to Hertz. Based on forum reports, contacting Tesla directly is the way to resolve this, but it can take several days to process, or longer if there’s a paperwork mismatch.

    Once you’ve transferred ownership to Tesla’s satisfaction, it’s time to do a software reset on the car to remove the fleet version.

    [ad_2]

    Jonathan M. Gitlin, Ars Technica

    Source link

  • Tesla shareholders urged to reject Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package

    Tesla shareholders urged to reject Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package

    [ad_1]

    Tesla shareholders should reject CEO Elon Musk’s $56 billion pay package, according to proxy advisory firm Glass Lewis, which singled out the “excessive size” of the deal and its potentially negative impact on smaller shareholders. 

    The recommendation from the influential proxy advisory company comes as Tesla is asking its shareholders to vote again on his 2018 pay package after a Delaware judge earlier this year nullified the payout, which was the biggest compensation plan in corporate America. 

    Tesla shareholders are set to vote on the pay package on June 13. The company didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment about Glass Lewis’ recommendation to vote against the pay deal.

    Proxy advisory firms are relied on by institutional investors to provide research and advice on how to vote during annual and special meetings on public companies’ proxy proposals, which can range from executive compensation to corporate governance issues. In Tesla’s case, Glass Lewis wrote in a 71-page report, shared with CBS MoneyWatch, that Tesla shareholders risk stock dilution if Musk is granted the massive stock grant, meaning that their shares could be worth less as a result. 

    The proxy advisory firm also noted that Musk is well compensated through his current 12.9% ownership of Tesla, a stake that is valued at about $74 billion, according to the Bloomberg Billionaires Index. Musk doesn’t receive a salary from Tesla, but Glass Lewis noted that his shares in the company mean that his interests are already aligned with that of the business.


    Deadly Tesla crash and burn in Weston

    00:27

    The value of Musk’s current Tesla stake “challenges the very basis that the 2018 grant as structured and sized was even necessary,” Glass Lewis wrote.

    Dilution occurs when a company issues additional stock, which in turn shrinks the proportional ownership stake of pre-existing shares. Under the 2018 pay deal for Musk, Tesla would issue about 304 million new shares, creating a dilution effect of about 9%, the firm said. 

    “[T]hese concerns are exacerbated by the concentration of ownership in Mr. Musk,” the report said, noting that Musk would increase his ownership stake to 22.4% if the 2018 pay package were to be approved next month. “Mr. Musk would be the Company’s largest shareholder by a healthy margin.”

    It added, “Given the impact on the holdings of other shareholders, the continued concentration of ownership around Mr. Musk warrants particular attention.”

    [ad_2]

    Source link

  • Elon Musk Shares Unconventional Views on Future Jobs, Biden’s 100% Chinese EV Tariffs

    Elon Musk Shares Unconventional Views on Future Jobs, Biden’s 100% Chinese EV Tariffs

    [ad_1]

    Elon Musk speaks at the Milken Institute’s Global Conference at the Beverly Hilton Hotel,on May 6, 2024 in Beverly Hills, Calif. Apu Gomes/Getty Images

    Elon Musk believes that, in a future where artificial intelligence and robots can provide pretty much anything to keep society running, the notion of a job will more or less become a hobby and no one will ever need to work for a living. “Probably none of us will have a job. If you want to do a job that’s kind of like a hobby, you can do a job. But otherwise, A.I. and the robots will provide any goods and services that you want,” the Tesla (TSLA) CEO said during a virtual keynote at VivaTech 2024 in Paris yesterday (May 23).

    Musk launched his generative A.I. startup, xAI, last summer. His Tesla is also investing heavily in developing A.I. capabilities to power its autonomous driving technology. The entrepreneur, who is also a co-founder of OpenAI, has been outspoken about his concerns around the rapidly advancing technology. He’s said one reason he founded xAI is to counter the increasingly monopolistic influence by Big Tech companies like Google and Microsoft (which has a huge stake in OpenAI), which he believes are too focused on profitability and don’t care enough about the safety of A.I. applications.

    During yesterday’s keynote, Musk cited the science fiction series “Culture Book” by Ian Banks as “the best envisioning of a future A.I.” The sci-fi series describes a utopian, multi-planetary society run by superintelligence A.I.

    “I’m in favor of no tariffs and no incentives” for EVs

    During the Q&A session following his keynote yesterday, Musk was asked for his views on the Biden Administration’s recent announcement of a 100 percent tariff on electric vehicles imported from China. (With the new measure, the total tariff to be imposed on Chinese EVs would be 102.5 percent.)

    Musk’s Tesla has a Gigafactory in Shanghai, which supplies China and some overseas markets. The new tariffs won’t affect Tesla cars sold in the U.S., which are manufactured in California. In fact, some industry observers believe the tariffs could benefit Tesla in the U.S. by fending off potential Chinese competitors.

    “Neither Tesla nor I asked for these tariffs. In fact, I was surprised when they were announced,” Musk replied, adding that he’s in favor of no tariffs and no incentives for electric vehicles—or for oil and gas.”

    China is Tesla’s largest market outside the U.S. Its mass-market Model 3 and Model Y are consistently among the top-selling EVs there. Musk said Tesla “competes quite well in the market in China with no tariffs and no deferential support.”

    The Biden Administration slapped the unprecedentedly high tariffs earlier this month in a bid to stop Chinese EVs, many priced significantly lower than U.S. alternatives, from flooding the U.S. market and taking away market shares from homegrown automakers.

    Musk has warned about the threat of Chinese EV makers to Western carmakers. On Tesla’s earnings call in January, he said Chinese EV makers “will pretty much demolish most other companies in the world” if there’s no trade barriers.”

    Elon Musk Shares Unconventional Views on Future Jobs, Biden’s 100% Chinese EV Tariffs

    [ad_2]

    Sissi Cao

    Source link

  • Making sense of the markets this week: May 26, 2024 – MoneySense

    Making sense of the markets this week: May 26, 2024 – MoneySense

    [ad_1]

    How a stock split works

    A stock split divides existing shares into smaller pieces. So, if you previously had one share of Nvidia worth $1,000, you would now have 10 shares of Nvidia each worth $100, for an unchanged total value of $1,000. Stock splits are a way for companies to ensure that investors can easily buy and sell single shares.

    Read “What is a stock split?” in the MoneySense glossary.

    The massive hype behind Nvidia has resulted in a price-to-earnings ratio of over 55x. By comparison, tech giants Microsoft and Apple currently have ratios of 36x and 29x, respectively. Conventional logic says Nvidia’s growth has to fall back into line at some point—but this sustained period of record earnings is tough to argue with for the moment. Nvidia made 18% more money in Q1 2024 than it did in Q4 2023, and it made a whopping 262% more money than it did in Q1 2023.

    To put this growth in perspective, Nvidia’s market capitalization has grown more than $1.1 trillion since Jan. 1, 2024. That’s bigger than the entire market capitalization of Canada’s 14 largest companies—and that’s just growth so far this year!

    Founder and CEO Jensen Huang sounded appropriately upbeat in stating, “The next industrial revolution has begun—companies and countries are partnering with Nvidia … to produce a new commodity: artificial intelligence.”

    Nvidia bought back $7.7 billion worth of its shares in Q1 and announced it was increasing its dividend from four cents to 10 cents per share (on a pre-split basis).

    Frankly, I think it’s just a matter of time until competitors start to close the gap with Nvidia and some of those juicy profit margins start to shrink. That said, there is a whole lot of money to be made while that process plays out. Clearly, investors are willing to pay a premium for Nvidia’s future earnings.

    Tough week for U.S. retail

    Despite last week’s record good news for Walmart, the first quarter was not universally good for big American retailers. All figures below are in U.S. dollars.

    U.S. retail earnings highlights

    Quarterly reports from three major retailers:

    • Target (TGT/NYSE): Earnings per share of $2.03 (versus $2.06 predicted), and revenue of $24.53 billion (versus $24.52 billion estimated).
    • Macy’s (M/NYSE): Earnings per share of $0.27 (versus $0.15 predicted), and revenue of $4.85 billion (versus $4.86 billion estimated).
    • Lowe’s (LOW/NYSE): Earnings per share of $3.06 (versus $2.94 predicted), and revenue of $21.36 billion (versus $21.12 billion estimated).

    All three of these retail heavy hitters cited a stretched consumer as the main reason for mediocre quarterly earnings reports. Target CEO Brian Cornell explained that low sales numbers reflected “continued soft trends in discretionary categories.” Compared to its rival Walmart, Target has substantially fewer customers coming into its stores to buy groceries, so the consumer shift to necessities appears to be hitting it harder.

    Lowe’s CEO Marvin Ellison had similar thoughts on the current retail scene, saying, “Interest rates can go down, but you still need consumer confidence to come up.” Macy’s CFO and COO Adrian Mitchell went so far as to say that its team expects consumers “will remain under pressure for the balance of the year.”

    [ad_2]

    Kyle Prevost

    Source link