|From: Bill Wolf||6/14/2019 9:09:45 AM|
|Tech Players Confront Long List of Challenges in U.S.-China Trade Fight|
At the WSJ Tech D.Live conference, top investors and company leaders emphasize how unpredictable the global economy has become
By Timothy W. Martin
June 14, 2019 8:54 a.m. ET
HONG KONG—The U.S.-China feud is challenging the technology industry in areas including financial deals, supply chain and talent recruitment, though some players are finding bright spots, executives said on Friday.
At The Wall Street Journal’s WSJ Tech D.Live conference, top investors and company leaders in the industry emphasized how unpredictable the global economy has become as Washington and Beijing battle over trade and technological dominance.
“Quite frankly, right now the list of things to be very worried about is long—longer than it’s actually ever been in my career,” said Jennifer Nason, global chairman of investment banking at JPMorgan Chase & Co. “Some of it is pretty scary stuff.” She said the uncertainty has made it trickier for some company boards to feel confident about taking on big deals.
The U.S. last month put Huawei Technologies Co. on a trade blacklist that bars sales of components to China’s leading producer of smartphones and telecom equipment without a Commerce Department license. That move has created pain for some tech suppliers, including Micron Technology Inc., one of the world’s largest makers of memory chips.
Huawei is one of Micron’s biggest customers, and the U.S. action against the Chinese company has brought uncertainty and some turbulence to the semiconductor industry, Micron Chief Executive Sanjay Mehrotra said at Friday’s conference.
The Boise, Idaho-based company is conducting a legal review of what can or can’t be shipped to Huawei, Mr. Mehrotra said. He didn’t specify the financial impact of the export ban, saying he would do so later this month on Micron’s earnings call.
“We will always focus on following the laws and regulations,” Mr. Mehrotra said. “However, there are details to be pursued and to be studied. That’s what our team continues to do.”
Another U.S. chip company, Broadcom Inc., said Thursday that it would make $2 billion less in annual sales than expected as a result of Washington’s export restrictions on Huawei, news that sent shares in Broadcom and other chip companies lower.
Kyum Kim, co-founder and head of U.S. operations for Teamblind, said the trade fight hasn’t directly affected the South Korean startup. But the battle has colored discussions on its anonymous forums.
In a recent survey of its users, Chinese citizens reported that they felt threatened by the trade dispute. “Chinese nationals were actually feeling threatened by the trade war, especially in hardware companies like Qualcomm , ” Mr. Kim said.
Others are seeing some new opportunities despite the cloud created by the U.S.-China fight—or even because of it.
The tensions are benefiting China in that tech professionals and investment that might have gone from China to the U.S. is returning home, said Ben Harburg, managing director of MSA Capital. “There’s a lot more talent coming to China now that would’ve stuck around the U.S. previously,” he said.
One Chinese tech company doing well in the U.S. despite the bilateral strains is Bytedance Ltd., whose TikTok video app has soared in popularity among American users.
Jared Grusd, chief strategy officer at social-networking company Snap Inc. said Bytedance is one of the first China-based companies to scale its consumer platform in the U.S. and other parts of the world. “Their ability to chime consumer awareness outside of its core market is really interesting,” he said.
Smartphone sales have cooled as consumer spending pulled back because of global economic concerns over Beijing and Washington’s protracted trade disagreement. But Samsung Electronics Co. saw strong initial demand for its 5G-enabled handset, an optimistic sign for the next-generation mobile network.
Samsung started selling a 5G variant of its Galaxy S10 phone in April in South Korea.
“The initial response we got was overwhelming,” said Junehee Lee, who heads Samsung’s technology strategy team. “It’s surpassing any expectations we may have had.”
Write to Timothy W. Martin at firstname.lastname@example.org
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read|
|From: benhorseman||6/14/2019 10:48:43 AM|
Analysis: Will court ruling against Qualcomm weigh on its stock?
June 14, 2019
Will the court ruling against Qualcomm continue weighing on its stock?
Analysts estimate the negative impact from court’s decision will be limited on Qualcomm. Will the Qualcomm stock price continue rebounding?
Qualcomm is the world’s biggest producer of mobile phone chips and the leader in 5G tech. Its stock dropped 12%, the biggest fall in more than two year, on May 22 after a federal judge ruled against Qualcomm in a dispute with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, finding that the company used its dominant position to harm competition and charge smartphone makers excessive licensing fees. Before that Qualcomm stock rallied over 50% after the chip giant came to a settlement with Apple, granting Qualcomm licensing rights while becoming the 5G supplier for iPhone. Qualcomm released second quarter earnings in the beginning of May, reporting higher profit while revenue fell to $4.88 billion, but beat analysts’ estimates of $4.80 billion. The company forecast $1.23 billion to $1.33 billion in revenue for its licensing business in the third quarter, above analysts’ consensus forecast of $1.22 billion.
While Qualcomm will be appealing the ruling, analysts point that the negative impact from court’s decision will be limited as the company prepares for rollout of 5G mobile phones as the year ends. The next earnings statement is scheduled for July 24. The continued US-China trade dispute remains the major downside risk for Qualcomm.
Get our Weekly Commitment of Traders Report: - See where the biggest traders (Hedge Funds and Commercial Hedgers) are positioned in the futures markets on a weekly basis.
Get Our Free Metatrader 4 Indicators - Put Our Free MetaTrader 4 Custom Indicators on your charts when you join our Weekly Newsletter
On the daily timeframe the S-QCOM: D1 is rising above the 200-day moving average MA(200) and Fibonacci 61.8. It is also above the support line. These are bullish developments.
The Parabolic indicator has formed a buy signal.The Donchian channel indicates uptrend: it is tilted up.The MACD indicator gives a bullish signal: it is below the signal line and the gap is narrowing.The RSI oscillator is rising but has not reached the overbought zone yet.We believe the bullish momentum will continue after the price breaches above the upper boundary of Donchian channel at 72.17. This level can be used as an entry point for placing a pending order to buy. The stop loss can be placed below the fractal low at 64.75. After placing the order, the stop loss is to be moved every day to the next fractal low, following Parabolic signals. Thus, we are changing the expected profit/loss ratio to the breakeven point. If the price meets the stop loss level (64.75) without reaching the order (72.17), we recommend cancelling the order: the market has undergone internal changes which were not taken into account.
Technical Analysis Summary
|Buy stop||Above 72.17|
|Stop loss||Below 64.75|
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read|
|To: Bill Wolf who wrote (158547)||6/14/2019 1:49:21 PM|
|The current U.S./China clash is about telecom supremacy.|
The U.S. has decided that it needs to contain China, and its great comparative advantage is technology. They’re going to take Huawei down. That could really turn around and—excuse my French—bite you in the ass. If Apple can’t produce in China, or can’t sell what it produces in China back to the U.S., or if China starts blockading its product, you’ve destroyed one of your biggest companies. Samsung Electronics [5930.Korea] will pick up the pieces. Technology is one of the biggest parts of the U.S. stock market.
Ok, that right there? I don't care who you are. That's funny.
a) Making as if Apple is a tech company upon whom telecom supremacy depends. (see "Nokia 1998)
b) Making as if telecom supremacy is fundamentally about things like consumer trinkets floating on top of a deep sea of telecom infrastructure.
But I could be missing something and laughing in ignorance. After all I still haven't grokked the import of Apples patent on the rectangle.
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read|
|From: frmrVZguy||6/14/2019 3:51:39 PM|
|ODM orders to BRCM/AVGO shifting to new fab locations temp'ry 'interruption' to resume soon. |
AVGO is now a USA domicile.
Shipments halted to PRC.
This is a logistical adjustment as alternate fabs spin up.
A second possibility mixed into the PRC quagmire is India financial and accounting scandal putting assets under question and 'hold'
'Playahs' gonna play
Opportunities sometimes look like someone else's losses.
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read|
|From: Bill Wolf||6/14/2019 3:55:00 PM|
|Huawei Has 56,492 Patents and It's Not Afraid to Use Them|
Susan Decker,Bloomberg•June 14, 2019
(Bloomberg) -- As Huawei Technologies Co. comes under unrelenting pressure from the Trump administration, the Chinese telecom giant has one advantage that the U.S. can’t undermine: a vast, global portfolio of patents on critical technology.
Huawei holds 56,492 active patents on telecommunications, networking and other high-tech inventions worldwide, according to Anaqua’s AcclaimIP. And it’s stepping up pursuit of royalties and licensing fees as its access to American markets and suppliers is being restricted.
The company is in protracted licensing talks with phone-services provider Verizon Communications Inc. and is in a dispute with chipmaker Qualcomm Inc. over the value of patents. Huawei also lodged claims against Harris Corp. after the defense contractor sued it last year alleging infringement of patents for networking and cloud security.
“Patents are, at their basic level, weapons of economic warfare,” said Brad Hulbert, a patent lawyer with McDonnell Boehnen Hulbert & Berghoff in Chicago. “They’re being hurt by the sanctions that the Trump Administration imposed and saying ‘You have hurt us and our ability to sell, and we can hurt back.’ It’s saber-rattling.”
Broader national security concerns also hang over this technology battle. In some circles Huawei’s outsized role as a supplier to next generation, or 5G networks makes it a potential threat either as an espionage agent or network disruption tool. Huawei has not only become a flashpoint in the middle of a 5G arms race, it’s also one of several companies targeted in President Donald Trump’s ongoing trade dispute with China.
Trump signed an order in May that’s expected to restrict Huawei from selling equipment in the U.S. Shortly after, the Department of Commerce said it had put Huawei on a blacklist that could forbid it from doing business with American companies.
For its part, the Asian nation sees Huawei as a potent symbol of its evolution from the world’s factory to a technology powerhouse, while the U.S. claims the tech company steals inventions from American firms.
“Huawei has invested a lot of money and they want to be recognized,” said Jim McGregor, a Mesa, Arizona-based technology analyst with Tirias Research. “Huawei is just playing out standard business practices for the wireless industry.”
Patent disputes are common in the tech industry, and the coming revolution predicted by advances in “5G” wireless technology promises to bring even more. Traditional players like Ericsson AB and Nokia Oyj are ramping up efforts to get more money from their patents. Qualcomm is appealing a ruling in a lawsuit by the U.S. Federal Trade Commission that threatens the licensing program that accounts for the bulk of its profits. Huawei and Samsung Electronics Co. ended a two-year royalty fight in February.
Qualcomm and Huawei are seen as two of the biggest players developing 5G that could bring not only faster speeds but bring new capabilities including remote surgery via robots and self-driving cars that talk to each other. The global ban on Huawei equipment promoted by Trump has roiled telecom companies worldwide. It’s a reminder, McGregor said, that 5G relies on both the U.S. and China.
“Huawei, over the past couple of years, has really ramped up its efforts in not only patents but in the standard bodies, particularly in wireless technology,” McGregor said. “They can say ‘whether you’re using our equipment or Ericsson’s equipment, you’re using our inventions. You still have to take a license.’”
The Chinese government and companies have been investing billions in high-tech research, and have the patents to show for it. Last year alone, Huawei received 1,680 U.S. patents, making it the 16th biggest recipient, figures by Fairview Research’s IFI Patent Claims Services show. Huawei’s total portfolio of active patents and published applications is 102,911, according to Anaqua, an intellectual property-management software firm.
Royalty demands against cell-phone carrier Verizon by Huawei, reported Wednesday by the Wall Street Journal, could be become part of the political battle, said Peter Toren, a Washington-based patent lawyer who consults with other firms and companies on licensing and litigation.
“Given Huawei’s position and the pressure they are feeling, they have nothing to lose at this point than to go after American companies in the patent arena,” Toren said. “They get poked in one area and they’re going to stick back in another to show there are consequences for this continued pressure.
“I don’t see how the government can stop them,” he said. “They have ownership in the patents.”
Verizon, while declining to comment on specific talks, sees the negotiations as more than just a typical patent-licensing discussion.
“These issues are larger than just Verizon,” the company said in a statement. “Given the broader geopolitical context, any issue involving Huawei has implications for our entire industry and also raise national and international concerns.”
Officials with Huawei had no immediate comment.
McGregor said it makes sense for Huawei to demand royalties from Verizon because it’s the largest cell-phone carrier in the U.S. Verizon claims it’s the first to offer speedy new 5G services for mobile phones, though it’s only available in a limited area.
“If they don’t go to them within a reasonable amount of time and at least try to enforce those patents, those patents become unenforceable,” McGregor said. “You have to pick a starting point. It’s better to pick one of the major players and it makes sense to pick one of those who’s rolling out that technology.”
--With assistance from Ian King and Scott Moritz.
To contact the reporter on this story: Susan Decker in Washington at email@example.com
To contact the editors responsible for this story: Jon Morgan at firstname.lastname@example.org, Elizabeth Wasserman
For more articles like this, please visit us at bloomberg.com
©2019 Bloomberg L.P.
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read|
|From: Bill Wolf||6/14/2019 3:57:56 PM|
|This Is a ‘Critical’ Time for Apple in China, Analyst Says|
By David Marino-Nachison
June 14, 2019 3:15 p.m. ET
A timely resolution to U.S.-China trade tensions could add $25 to the price of Apple stock within months, according to new research.
Apple stock (AAPL) was recently down less than 1% to $192.74 as the S&P 500 was about flat. Wedbush analyst Daniel Ives late Thursday reiterated an Outperform rating on the shares, calling China “the major swing factor” for the company’s shares.
That’s partly because of trade—but also because investors are watching for signs that Chinese demand is improving, Ives wrote.
The back story. Apple stock is up about 20% in 2019. They’ve risen in June after ending a monthlong run-up in April, with China being one of the most important ongoing themes.
On one hand, there’s demand. The year began with warnings of disappointing iPhone sales in China, and while a focus on services subsequently revitalized the shares, investors decided to sell in May following its latest release of quarterly results.
Then there’s trade. Apple relies on China for much of its manufacturing, so as the U.S. and China continue to talk of widening tariffs and measures it’s made the company a kind of poster child for the economic effects of the countries’ strained relations.
The G-20 summit, scheduled for later this month in Japan, could see a cooling-off—or more or the same.
What’s new. June marks the winding down of Apple’s fiscal third quarter.
“We believe the June quarter has been tracking ‘in line with expectations’ around China iPhone demand, which has seen a modest rebound from softness seen in the December/March quarters,” Ives wrote. “That said, it’s a ‘nervous environment’ across the supply chain, with the semi space seeing clear uncertainty.”
That’s a reference to the latest news out of chip maker Broadcom (AVGO), shares of which were recently down 6.4% to $263.63 as it lowered its full-year sales guidance, surprising Wall Street.
“With China representing roughly 20% of all iPhone upgrades over the next 12 to 18 months, with our estimation that 60 million to 70 million iPhones in China are currently in the window of opportunity, this is a critical time for Apple to solidify its key installed base in the region.”
What’s next. Ives has a $235 price target, above FactSet’s $211 average, on Apple’s stock.
“We believe if a resolution to the China tariff situation comes to a head starting with G-20 talks in a few weeks this would add between $20-$25 per share to Apple’s stock over the coming months,” Ives wrote. “This would take away the primary China risk, which is a dark cloud over the stock now.”
It isn’t clear that Chinese President Xi Jinping and President Trump will meet in Japan, which could prolong uncertainty—at the least. If negotiations go south, leading to tariffs that lead Apple to move manufacturing elsewhere, the company could take a 10%-15% hit to earnings over “the next few years,” according to Ives.
Email David Marino-Nachison at email@example.com. Follow him at @marinonachison and follow Barron’s Next at @barronsnext.
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (1)|
|To: Bill Wolf who wrote (158557)||6/14/2019 3:59:45 PM|
|From: Bill Wolf|
|Broadcom’s Woes Could Point to Trouble for Apple|
By Tae Kim
June 14, 2019 2:25 p.m. ET
Chip maker Broadcom ’s full-year sales guidance reduction may point to poor iPhone sales, according to Bank of America Merrill Lynch.
Apple (AAPL) is Broadcom’s (AVGO) biggest customer, accounting for about a quarter of Broadcom’s revenue in fiscal 2018, according to the last annual securities filing. Cowen also estimated the iPhone generated more than 50% of Broadcom’s Wireless segment sales.
On Thursday, Broadcom reduced its 2019 revenue guidance to $22.5 billion, from $24.5 billion, and lowered its outlook for capital spending to $500 million, from $550 million. The reduction sent Broadcom stock tumbling on Friday.
Broadcom’s “guide down could indicated continued weak iPhone units,” Bank of America Merrill Lynch analyst Wamsi Mohan said Friday in a note to clients.
Apple stock was down 0.8% in Friday afternoon trading, to $192.52 per share, while the Dow Jones Industrial Average was down just slightly.
Mohan estimated that Broadcom’s poor guidance implies 5 million to 10 million fewer iPhone units for the year. He kept his Buy rating and $230 price target for Apple stock, due to its “strong capital return” program and services growth opportunities.
Broadcom’s report also affected the general chip sector. The iShares PHLX Semiconductor ETF (SOXX), which tracks the performance of a widely followed semiconductor sector index, fell 2.8% on Friday.
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read|
|From: Bill Wolf||6/14/2019 4:11:55 PM|
|Huawei exec: Don't mix trade war and security|
Huawei's U.S. security chief Andy Purdy says the U.S. is right to want to make sure its networks are secure. But he maintains that, in the quarrel the Trump administration has picked with his company, it has focused on the wrong things and mixed up trade issues with security concerns.
What they're saying: "I don’t trust anybody. We cannot and should not trust anybody," said Purdy, who was an assistant U.S. attorney and acting director of the U.S. national cybersecurity division before joining Huawei in 2012. "That’s the way we make America safer."
Details: Rather than simply exclude Huawei from U.S. networks, Purdy encouraged the government to sit down with the Chinese network vendor and create a system to ensure its products are safe.
"There are ways to test products for back doors," he said, adding that wireless carriers, not network equipment vendors, are in charge of the data and are vigorously ensuring it isn't leaving their hands. Context: The U.S. has been increasingly cracking down on Huawei, which it characterizes as both a security risk and an intellectual property thief.
The largest American phone carriers have long been been effectively prohibited from using Huawei gear.But in recent weeks the Trump administration has ratcheted up the pressure, excluding U.S. companies from most business with Huawei. That has hurt the company's business prospects globally, and could stop its fast-growing device business in its tracks.Purdy also lamented the fact that concerns over Huawei are being mixed in with the broader U.S.-China trade dispute.
"We don’t want to be part of trade talks," Purdy said. "We don’t like [the] fact that we are kind of in the middle."The other side: Sens. Mark Warner and Marco Rubio sent a letter to Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and U.S. Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer, urging that the Huawei issue be kept separate from trade discussions.
"In no way should Huawei be used as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations," they wrote. "Instead, the U.S. should redouble our efforts to present our allies with compelling data on why the long-term network security and maintenance costs on Chinese telecommunications equipment offset any short-term cost savings."Our thought bubble: Huawei may decry the mixing of trade and security concerns — and that indeed seems like bad national security policy. But being a pawn in trade talks might not be so bad for the company: Huawei could benefit if China makes looser restrictions on Huawei a part of a demand in future bargaining.
Meanwhile, market research firm IHS says the U.S. ban is already having a significant revenue impact on some U.S. component suppliers, including memory maker Micron and hard drive maker Western Digital.
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last ReadRead Replies (2)|
|From: Maurice Winn||6/14/2019 4:27:56 PM|
|Lucy is wrong. There is no Monopoly. A couple of days ago I bought a Cyberphone at the 2degrees shop in Newmarket, Auckland. There were mostly Huawei, Samsung and Apple phones. I wanted Snapdragon by Qualcomm. The sales lady told me they mostly use their own chips because they want their own specifications.|
She pointed me towards some Oppo phones that use Qualcomm.
There was no Xiaomi which I wanted. Nor HTC etc.
Qualcomm is barely surviving.
So why the FTC court case?
Lucy has defined the so called monopoly stupidly narrowly. As I have explained for decades, first they identify the target victim and big pile of money to attack. Then they set about defining a so called market so that it catches just the target victim. Because it's hard to get just the target victim they define a monopoly to be about 70 percent of that narrowly defined market.
Then they exclude evidence that contradicts that narrowly defined market of a particular kind of premium phone in a particular part of the spectrum, in a particular part of a country at a particular time, or some stupid thing.
Hey presto a monopoly that's abusive and bundling and extorquerationste and must be looted to save consumers.
Of course consumers get no benefit from the attack and in fact are harmed. The loot goes to the judge, the lawyers, the favoured friends like Tim Apple, Samsung, Huawei.
Why does Lucy twist herself up into a pretzel to achieve that aim. What's in it for her.
She voted against Big D and for Hillary
She's Korean as identity rulz
She uses iPhone
She's anti-male Geeks and giving them the lash
She wants Liberal promotion
She's a lawyer thinking she's better than Geeks
She's envious of Geek Silicon Valley money
Her judgment was full of rubbish demonstrating her intentions from the beginning. The process rules she chose and evidence eliminated showed her bias.
She could not be a scientist because she doesn't understand that all evidence has to be considered. But she can be a judge as law is about who gets the loot produced by scientists, engineers and Geeks. Law has nothing to do with reason though they dress it up with a little legalistic fig leaf to cover their lust for loot.
I'd like to see Lucy go shopping for a Cyberphone and try to demonstrate the Qualcomm monopoly.
It's insane that Broadcom was banned by Trump as Qualcomm was a mission critical company for national security but Lucy is aiming to destroy it.
PS ... Check Lucy's bank accounts too as bribery is always tempting. Cayman Islands etc. The USA has the best politicians money can buy.
|RecommendKeepReplyMark as Last Read|