>>> Tower Intl beats by $0.06, beats on revs; guides FY19 EPS below consensus, r

Tower Intl beats by $0.06, beats on revs; guides FY19 EPS below consensus, revs below consensus; guides FY20 revs in-line (23.46)
  • Reports Q1 (Mar) earnings of $0.23 per share, excluding non-recurring items, $0.06 better than the S&P Capital IQ Consensus of $0.17; revenues fell 7.0% year/year to $378.74 mln vs the $373.25 mln S&P Capital IQ Consensus.
    • Adjusted EBITDA for the First Quarter 2019 was $30.4 million compared with $43.0 million a year ago
  • Co issues downside guidance for FY19, sees EPS of $2.10-2.30, excluding non-recurring items, vs. $2.48 S&P Capital IQ Consensus; sees FY19 revs of $1.575-1.6 bln vs. $1.63 bln S&P Capital IQ Consensus.
    • Adjusted EBITDA of $165 million to $170 million;
    • Positive Full Year Free Cash Flow, with strong Free Cash Flow in the second half of the year more than offsetting the expected cash outflow in the first half of the year.
  • Co issues in-line guidance for FY20, sees FY20 revs of $1.69-1.74 bln vs. $1.72 bln S&P Capital IQ Consensus.
    • Adjusted EBITDA of $200 million to $210 million;
    • Adjusted EBITDA margin of approximately 12 percent; and
    • Free Cash Flow of more than $60 million

>>> US Gapping down

Gapping down
In reaction to disappointing earnings/guidance
:

  • EB -32.5%, ABMD -14.5%, NVTR -13.7%, FLR -13.2%, MITK -12% (also ends review of strategic alternatives), CASA -11%, WLL -10.3%, CREE -9.5%, CDAY -7.3% (also appoints Christopher Armstrong to the position of COO), WTI -7.3%, FARO -6.4%, W -5.8%, HGV -4.7%, SQ -4.5%, PPC -4.5%, PDCE -4.1%, RYI -4%, SWM -4%, VNDA -3.8%, TYL -3.1%, SM -3%, CAR -2.8%, FIVN -2.8%, LPI -2.7%, BWXT -2.6%, HST -2.5%, APA -2.2%, AGI -2.2%, NLY -1.9%, AEGN -1.9%, APTV -1.9%, MD -1.6%, OI -1.4%, LMAT -1.3%, AM -1.1%, BLL -1.1%, AYX -1%, NTCT -1%

Other news:

  • XBIT -4% (enters into Equity Distribution Agreement providing for the sale of up to 4,334,453 shares of Common Stock from time to time)
  • ZLAB -3.8% (announces proposed public offering of 5.0 mln ADSs)
  • VCYT -2.7% ( commences underwritten public offering of 5 mln shares of its common stock)
  • RMTI -2.1% (announces preliminary recommendation from CMS to establish a new J-code for Triferic powder packet)
  • GWRE -0.9% (says audited consolidated financial statements for FY18 & FY17 should no longer be relied upon, expects to report material weakness in internal control over financial reporting related to the matter)
  • WAB -0.9% (prices upsized public offering of 22.0 mln shares by selling stockholder of common stock at $73.50)

Analyst comments:

  • MOS -2.6% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at BofA/Merrill)
  • EL -1.4% (downgraded to Sector Perform from Outperform at RBC Capital Mkts)
  • ADSW -1.1% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at UBS)
  • DX -0.7% (downgraded to Neutral from Buy at Ladenburg Thalmann)
  • SMG -0.7% (downgraded to Underperform from Neutral at BofA/Merrill)

>>> US Gapping up

Gapping up
In reaction to strong earnings/guidance
:

  • ZNGA +13.2%, PENN +9.3%, DLB +8.5%, DMRC +6.9%, QLYS +6.1%, SSW +5.6%, SSYS +5.4%, WEX +5%, APO +5%, HBI +4.7%, UAA +4.6%, DNKN +4%, OLN +3.8%, DISCA +3.8%, MNTA +3.7%, TPX +3.6%, STAA +3.4%, PES +3.4%, HABT +3.3%, BLDP +3.3% (also reaches agreement for $44 mln order with Weichai-Ballard JV to support initial fuel cell vehicle deployments in China), CACI +3.2%, DOOR +3.2%, CZR +3%, CCRN +2.8%, EVTC +2.8%, TUSK +2.7%, RDS.A +2.7%, SNN +2.6%, RDS.B +2.6%, NVCR +2.5%, FIT +2.4%, NMIH +2.3%, EQIX +2.2%, ACOR +2%, YETI +2%, PS +1.9%, NEWT +1.9%, AR +1.7%, STNG +1.7%, NPO +1.6%, AEL +1.6%, HFC +1.5%, HRI +1.4%, XHR +1.4%, XPO +1.3%, NEWM +1.3%, TTMI +1.2%, HI +1.2%, DFIN +1.1%, KL +1.1%, VVV +1%, XAN +1%, MGLN +1%, COT +1%, KEX +1%

Other news:

  • QTNT +7.5% (receives European CE Mark for its initial Immunohematology Microarray)
  • GMS +6.5% (to join S&P SmallCap 600)
  • TSLA +4.1% (announces offerings of $650 mln of common stock and $1.35 bln aggregate principal amount of convertible senior notes due in 2024 in concurrent underwritten registered public offerings)
  • NBRV +3.2% (after closing 27% lower on the day)
  • ASNA +0.8% (announces retirement of Chairman and CEO David Jaffe, effective today; appoints Gary Muto as CEO and Carrie Teffner as Interim Executive Chair )
  • CAT +0.7% (increases quarterly dividend; guidance update)

Analyst comments:

  • PII +3.6% (upgraded to Outperform from Neutral at Wedbush)
  • ARNC +1.7% (upgraded to Buy from Neutral at Goldman)
  • CLX +0.5% (upgraded to Hold from Sell at Deutsche Bank)

FT : Ultra-bear hedge fund manager suffers huge losses as stocks rally London-ba

Ultra-bear hedge fund manager suffers huge losses as stocks rally
London-based Horseman Capital, going up against central banks, finds the going heavy

One of the few hedge fund managers still betting that stocks are too high has suffered heavy losses in his fund this year, as a rally fuelled by looser monetary policy makes life increasingly tough for bears.

London-based Horseman Capital, which manages more than $800m in assets, suffered a 12 per cent loss in its Global fund during April, according to figures seen by the Financial Times.

That takes its loss this year to more than 25 per cent. The fund is run by Russell Clark, a media-shy Australian who took over the fund from star stockpicker John Horseman almost a decade ago.

Mr Clark’s losses highlight the conundrum facing traders whose fundamental analysis shows markets are overvalued but who realise that negative bets would stand in the face of a rally driven by years of aggressive monetary easing by central banks. During the first three months of this year, for example, dovish moves by the Federal Reserve after a choppy end to 2018 contributed to the best quarterly performance for the S&P 500 in a decade.

“Markets are making things very tricky,” wrote Mr Clark in a letter sent to investors last month, seen by the FT. “The question that hangs over a fund like mine, and the entire hedge fund industry, is that if there are no obvious downsides to central bank loose monetary policy, what is the point of short selling?”

Mr Clark was not immediately available for comment, and a spokeswoman for Horseman declined to comment further.

Mr Clark, who has previously described quantitative easing as a “disastrous policy”, has been running a huge bet against stocks — whereby his bets on falling prices are more than double his wagers on rising prices. Such positioning is extraordinary by the standards of the hedge fund industry, leaving him as one of a dwindling band of ultra-bears. Almost all managers skew towards positive bets on prices, for fear of being hurt by a stock market rally that has now run — with only a few interruptions — for a decade.

Mr Clark is known among investors for his colourful letters, which can often reference his favourite films. In one, sent to investors in 2016, he depicted then-Federal Reserve chair Janet Yellen as Star Wars hero Luke Skywalker, confronting Darth Vader, who represented deflation.

His fund made double-digit gains in 2014 and 2015 before losing around 24 per cent in 2016.

“The degree of dovishness that central banks have exhibited has surprised me, as has the willingness of markets to look beyond weak earnings in markets that look very oversupplied, particularly in semiconductors,” Mr Clark wrote in his April letter.

However, there is little sign yet of Mr Clark capitulating and taking off his negative bets.

“Given that almost all assets have rallied with the expectation of central bank easing, it would suggest the risks of still being short are diminished,” he wrote.

9to5 : Super Micro dropping Chinese chips despite no evidence of Apple spy chip

Super Micro dropping Chinese chips despite no evidence of Apple spy chip claims

American server supplier Super Micro is dropping Chinese chips from its products, despite zero evidence ever emerging to support claims of spy chips installed in Apple and Amazon servers – and a great deal of evidence to suggest that Bloomberg’s report was wrong.
Bloomberg last year claimed that Apple found Chinese surveillance chips in servers supplied by Super Micro, a claim which was quickly and aggressively refuted by Apple and others …

Nikkei Asian Review reports that Super Micro’s decision appears to have been made due to increasing concern about cybersecurity and China on the part of US clients.
Super Micro Computer, the California-based server maker at the heart of spy chip allegations last autumn, has told suppliers to move production out of China to address U.S. customers’ concerns about cyber espionage risks, according to industry sources familiar with the matter […]
U.S. customers and especially government-related clients have asked Super Micro not to supply them with motherboards made in China because of security concerns, according to one company executive […]
Super Micro is not alone in responding to concerns over Chinese made motherboards in data centers and servers. In 2017 roughly 90% of the motherboards used in the 13.9 million servers shipped worldwide were made in China. Last year that had dropped to less than 50% of motherboards used in the global total of 15.2 million, according to Digitimes Research, a tech supply chain specialist.
“There is a major shift out of China happening from the server supply chain,” said Betty Shyu, a server analyst at Taipei-based Digitimes.
Super Micro is not just dropping Chinese chips, but also boosting its in-house manufacturing to further reduce perceived risk.
The original story remains an embarrassment for Bloomberg, which has to this day refused to withdraw its claims or put forward any proof despite masses of evidence that it was mistaken. The counter-evidence includes statements made by the Dept of Homeland Security, the NSA, server hardware experts and even one of Bloomberg’s own sources. An independent audit of the company’s hardware found no spy chips.

(Bus. Of Fashion) Instagram's E-Commerce Plans Are Bigger Than You Think The soc

Instagram's Checkout feature allows users to shop directly in the app, through influencer accounts | Source: Courtesy

(Bus.Of Fashion) Luxury's New World Order The global luxury market is being resh

Luxury's New World Order
The global luxury market is being reshaped by the maturation of Chinese consumers and digital disruption, increasing the polarisation between successful fast-growing brands and everyone else, argues Luca Solca.

GENEVA, Switzerland — Starting from the '90s, large-scale new wealth creation in China and the resulting need to display newfound social status brought millions of new consumers to the luxury market. These consumers were primarily after the best-known products from the best-known brands. They had lots of cash and little in their wardrobes, so satisfying them was relatively easy.

There was little demand for innovation across product, communications and retail. Rather, for most brands, the most important priorities were ramping up manufacturing volume and expanding store networks, while maintaining quality and service standards. Therefore, they focused largely on standardisation across product icons, store formats and selling ceremonies.

But China has changed, and the country’s luxury consumers are now in a very different place. They raced along the maturation curve faster than their predecessors in the West primarily because of significantly higher per-capita consumption compared to Western peers: buying one handbag every month makes you an expert faster than buying one handbag per year.

Today, the wardrobes of many Chinese consumers are full, and a second generation of shoppers is driving most of the nation’s luxury growth. This cohort is very different to their parents in terms of their consumer preferences and behaviours. They learn about brands differently (they are overwhelmingly exposed to local social media platforms); they buy differently (they are e-commerce natives); and they want newness (yesterday’s icons are no longer sufficient).

Brands that believe luxury is about static, timeless appeal are falling by the wayside. Staying desirable means putting innovation centerstage across products, store environments and communications. In the growing polarisation between successful, fast-growing brands (think: Louis Vuitton, Gucci and Moncler) and everyone else, the ability to surprise and re-invent is a decisive factor.

Digital disruption is the other major vector of change in the luxury’s new world order, impacting all key processes and reshaping the competitive arena. For a start, digital offers new ways — primarily through social media and influencers — for brands to communicate and interact with consumers. There was a time when communications strategy was largely reduced to choosing a photographer to shoot a campaign to be published in the usual glossy magazines. No longer. Young consumers, who account for a large percentage of luxury growth, hardly read magazines and are learning about luxury brands from digital channels. As a result, brands have seen the cost and complexity of their communications efforts increase significantly.

Digital also offers new ways — through e-commerce — for brands to serve shoppers. This may seem obvious, but it has taken many years for brands to accept this reality and organise themselves accordingly. Less than five years ago, many brands still preferred consumers to come to their stores. In the real world, however, consumers were flocking to websites and brands have mostly since shaped up and seized this opportunity, defining a new paradigm of digital distribution and taking steps to integrate e-commerce with physical retail, including services like buy online and pick-up or return in store and buy in store for home delivery.

Digital is also making the shortcomings of physical distribution very clear, forcing brands to shape up their wholesale strategies. Brands with material exposure to wholesale are seeing their own wholesale customers compete with them online, mostly on price. This is causing two problems: First, limiting their own development online (Who wants to buy at full price from brand.com, when you can buy the same product elsewhere 30 to 40 percent cheaper?) and second, increasing the risk of brand trivialisation, by weakening price discipline, a key pillar that supports brand exclusivity and brand value perception. As a result, companies have had to backtrack on wholesale exposure — Luxottica is a case in point — and this can be a long and painful process.

If wholesale is a problem, the grey market and off-price are even worse. The same channel conflict and brand trivialisation problems coming from wholesale exposure are hitting brands with legacy grey market activities and significant off-price engagement. If the grey market was once something that existed in the back streets of Hong Kong, today grey market products risk appearing whenever consumers Google your brand, plus platforms like Farfetch have created a conduit for the grey market to reach a global audience. This is forcing prudent brand stewards to reduce grey market activity. Digital has also made off-price products highly accessible and this similarly risks shifting consumers away from full price sales.

Digital, coupled with big data and artificial intelligence, is also allowing brands to make their processes more scientific. For example, achieving finer consumer segmentation and differentiating assortments by store; briefing designers and merchandisers based on systematic analysis of what styles and prices are trending on social media; engaging consumers with CRM in more effective ways. I expect an arms race on this front, as leading companies have already started to invest significantly to create muscled-up data science departments within them.

Of course, digital distribution is also opening up the luxury market to new entrants. Newcomers no longer need material upfront investments to open flagship stores in expensive prime locations. They can start their distribution online, turning much of their fixed costs into variable costs. The high SG&A (selling, general and administrative) expenses of incumbents and low cost of goods sold is creating a price umbrella for new entrants to offer great value for money. A number of product categories — like eyewear (Warby Parker, Gentle Monster, Hawkers), footwear (Allbirds, Paul Evans, Velasca) and watches (Daniel Wellington) — are seeing new entrants stealing growth from incumbents.

And yet, both fundamental drivers of luxury’s new world order — the maturation of Chinese consumers and digital disruption — are converging to increase scale-driven competitive advantage. Scale advantage was originally about outspending competitors on communications, driving higher sales densities. Add to that the ability of larger brands to outspend on digital channels; make processes more scientific and effective through big data and AI; shed lower quality distribution faster and reduce brand trivialisation risk; and manage a faster-paced product innovation pipeline. It’s clear that today’s luxury market is not for the faint-hearted and increasingly demands both sophistication and heft.

Luca Solca is head of luxury goods research at Bernstein.

>>> 3M to buy wound-care product maker Acelity in $6.7bn deal

3M to buy wound-care product maker Acelity in $6.7bn deal
Industrial group trims share repurchase programme as a result of transaction

3M on Thursday said it would acquire a maker of wound care products for roughly $6.7bn, including net debt, even as the industrial group last month announced plans to shed jobs as part of a restructuring.

The Minnesota-based company will finance the transaction with a combination of available cash and proceeds from the issuance of new debt.

The conglomerate behind everything from Post-it notes to industrial products agreed to buy Acelity and its KCI subsidiaries — which make a broad range of wound care products. 3M is buying the group from a consortium of funds advised by buyout group Apax Partners alongside affiliates of Canada Pension Plan Investment Board and the Public Sector Pension Investment Board.

“Acelity is a recognised leading provider of advanced wound care technologies and solutions and an excellent complement to our healthcare business,” said Mike Roman, 3M chief executive officer.

The company expects the deal to be dilutive earnings per share by 35 cents in the first 12 months following the completion of the deal, including transaction costs. Excluding one-time transaction costs, 3M expects the deal to be accretive to earnings per share by 25 cents over the same period.

As a result of the deal, 3M scaled back its share buyback programme to between $1bn to $1.5bn, down from $2bn to $4bn. Acelity generated 2018 revenues of $1.5bn.

The news of the acquisition comes after 3M last month said it would shed 2,000 jobs globally as part of a restructuring and reduced its full-year earnings guidance. The company recently realigned its portfolio to four business groups from five, in its efforts to drive productivity, reduce costs and boost cash flow.

The transaction, which is subject to regulatory approval, is expected to close in the second half of the year.

Credit Suisse acted as financial adviser to 3M. Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP acted as legal counsel to 3M.