Tuesday, May 29, 2018

A Modest Little Affair: Breaking Down the Details of Harry and Meghan's Wedding Budget

Love was in the air just west of London last weekend -- love and another scent (sniff, sniff)... oh, yes, that's the smell of money being spent in truly regal quantities.

In the "What's Up, Allison" segment from this episode of Motley Fool Answers, Robert Brokamp and Alison Southwick consider just how Prince Harry and Meghan Markle spent their way to a multimillion-pound wedding -- it was a magnificent spectacle and worth every shilling. They also look into how much the royal nuptials boosted England's economy. Maybe that extravagance paid for itself in more ways than one.

A full transcript follows the video.

This video was recorded on May 22, 2018.

Robert Brokamp: So, Alison, what's up?

Alison Southwick: Hey, that's right. I'm the person who's what's up today, not Bro. It's exciting!

Brokamp: It is!

Southwick: So, Bro, two people got married this weekend [maybe you heard] and now that we're all done partying, it's time to take a look at the cheque, by which I mean, of course, Harry and Meghan Markle.

Brokamp: Yes. And cheque is spelled with a "que" at the end, I suppose.

Southwick: Absolutely.

Brokamp: That's right.

Southwick: According to the England-based luxury wedding planner, Aimee Dunne, a woman most qualified to make outrageous guesses, the wedding of Prince Harry and Meghan Markle will end up costing 拢2 million, which is roughly $2.7 million. Let's break it down, shall we?

Brokamp: Let's do that.

Southwick: Well, they're having a humble affair at home, albeit the home is Windsor Castle in this case. At $75 a pop they spent $45,000 on invites. These are all estimates. I mean, no one knows for sure.

Brokamp: Just on invites?

Southwick: Yes, just on invites. Again, these are all just best estimates, so these could be totally off, but let's just enjoy it, huh? Estimates for a wedding dress are coming in at around $270,000. You can buy a house to live in for that and it's a dress. All right, whatever. Flowers, a $150,000-300,000 budget. They invited 600 guests, so let's talk about food, wine, and all that good stuff. The guests get lunch and dinner and another 2,640 commoners will get tea and a snack, so the estimates are that food and beverage will come in at about $680,000. I think that sounds like a deal if the dress is already $270,000. I don't know. It's all relative. So, $2.7 million. That's an expensive wedding. Still not as expensive as Prince Charles and Lady Diana's wedding. That apparently cost $48 million in 1981... or $110 million when adjusted for inflation. Well, here's the thing. This so-called expert lady when she was estimating...

Brokamp: [Laughs] Expert lady!

Southwick: ... the cost of the wedding, she was only looking at the fun stuff [the dress, the food]. She left out the largest part of the bill, which is... Do you want to guess?

Brokamp: Security?

Southwick: Yes!

Brokamp: Really?

Southwick: Yes, that's it. You've got to have your wedding snipers.

Brokamp: What?

Southwick: You've got to have your wedding policemen. Escorts. All of that security is estimated to cost up to $40 million for this wedding. And guess who gets stuck with the bill?

Brokamp: The taxpayers.

Southwick: Yes, that's right! The taxpayers!

Brokamp: Was there such a thing as a wedding sniper?

Southwick: No, it wasn't like what wedding sniper did you get for your wedding. He was the best. Let me give you my recommendation. No, you've got to have snipers. They just happen to be at a wedding. Here's a side note, though. For security for Kate and William's 2011 wedding, it only cost 拢6.35 million. And Harry is the spare [not the heir], so I don't know why there's such a massive difference and why they're saying it's going to be so much more for his wedding than the others.

So, $40 million. That is a small price to pay considering what a windfall this wedding is going to be for the U.K. economy according to some. Britain's very serious-sounding [Office for National Statistics] reports that the royal wedding could generate as much as 拢550 million or roughly $680 million and this is because of tourists coming in for the festivities, trinkets, souvenirs sold, and all of that.

PwC is skeptical that royal weddings really are such a boom to the U.K.'s economy. William and Kate's wedding generated about 拢107 million, but in perspective, that's less than 4% of the spending in the U.K. for Black Friday. There's maybe some more money to be squeezed out of that royal commemorative tea towel.

Brand Finance, a company that sounds way less serious than the [Office for National Statistics] thinks the wedding could create a boost of 拢1 billion, but they assigned an eye-roll inducing 拢300 million to something called PR value for the U.K., as if you're going to be like, "There's a royal wedding. Now I want to go to the U.K. and spend all my money."

And they compared it to, let's say, 拢50 million in merchandise that will be sold.

Speaking of merch, according to racked.com, the must-have item is Harry and Meghan themed china. You can get a plate for $49. You can get a mug. There's even an official commemorative plate which is a lovely cornflower blue and has initials, and plenty of doodads and whirligigs. That goes for $67. You can also buy some weird stuff, like commemorative sweet ginger and American mustard-flavored pork sausages.

You can get coloring books and condoms [or, as the Brits say, kawn-domms] named "crown jewels." That's not really how Brits say condoms, but they say it in such a way that just is so weird to American ears. You know what I'm talking about.

Brokamp: I don't think I've had this conversation with many English folks, but I should now, I guess.

Rick Engdahl: How many Brits have you known through the years?

Brokamp: I don't know. I was just saying...

Southwick: I went to school in England for a while, so...

Engdahl: So, you have experience. OK.

Southwick: My mom listens to this show, Rick, so let's just walk it back a little. So, you're not, unfortunately, going to make a ton of money off your Harry and Meghan sparkle-flavored bag of parsnip crisps [again, that's a commemorative thing you can buy], but you could maybe make some lucrative bets.

Yes, that's right. Something called Paddy Power, one of the largest sports gambling houses in the world has more than a dozen prop bets around the wedding including what tiara Meghan will wear [because she has many options, now]. What dish will be the main course? What color hat will the Queen wear? Will it rain? Will Harry shave? Maybe you went a little crazy and made the bet that Donald Trump will walk Markle down the aisle. It had 500 to 1 odds. Man, how awesome would that have been if it hit? But, of course, as they say, unlucky in gambling, lucky in love, and that, Bro, is what's up this week.

Monday, May 28, 2018

Bank of America (BAC) Stake Decreased by Afam Capital Inc.

Afam Capital Inc. cut its stake in shares of Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) by 2.3% during the first quarter, according to the company in its most recent filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The firm owned 269,250 shares of the financial services provider’s stock after selling 6,198 shares during the quarter. Afam Capital Inc.’s holdings in Bank of America were worth $8,075,000 at the end of the most recent quarter.

Several other large investors also recently bought and sold shares of BAC. Bank of New York Mellon Corp grew its stake in Bank of America by 5.8% in the 4th quarter. Bank of New York Mellon Corp now owns 104,558,690 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $3,086,572,000 after acquiring an additional 5,720,403 shares during the last quarter. UBS Asset Management Americas Inc. grew its stake in Bank of America by 3.7% in the 4th quarter. UBS Asset Management Americas Inc. now owns 39,813,205 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $1,175,286,000 after acquiring an additional 1,403,412 shares during the last quarter. Schwab Charles Investment Management Inc. grew its stake in Bank of America by 0.7% in the 1st quarter. Schwab Charles Investment Management Inc. now owns 34,514,599 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $1,035,093,000 after acquiring an additional 247,700 shares during the last quarter. Sanders Capital LLC grew its stake in Bank of America by 1.8% in the 4th quarter. Sanders Capital LLC now owns 30,422,232 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $984,107,000 after acquiring an additional 534,000 shares during the last quarter. Finally, LSV Asset Management grew its stake in Bank of America by 0.7% in the 1st quarter. LSV Asset Management now owns 29,892,545 shares of the financial services provider’s stock valued at $896,477,000 after acquiring an additional 221,600 shares during the last quarter. 67.22% of the stock is currently owned by institutional investors and hedge funds.

Get Bank of America alerts:

A number of equities research analysts recently commented on the stock. Jefferies Group reissued a “buy” rating and issued a $34.00 price objective on shares of Bank of America in a research note on Tuesday, April 17th. Vetr cut shares of Bank of America from a “strong-buy” rating to a “buy” rating and set a $33.17 price objective on the stock. in a research note on Tuesday, April 17th. ValuEngine lowered shares of Bank of America from a “buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a report on Wednesday, April 18th. Vining Sparks started coverage on shares of Bank of America in a report on Monday, April 16th. They issued a “buy” rating and a $35.00 target price on the stock. Finally, Citigroup upped their target price on shares of Bank of America from $32.00 to $34.00 and gave the company a “neutral” rating in a report on Tuesday, April 24th. Nine equities research analysts have rated the stock with a hold rating and fifteen have assigned a buy rating to the company. Bank of America presently has an average rating of “Buy” and a consensus target price of $32.13.

Bank of America opened at $30.16 on Monday, MarketBeat Ratings reports. The stock has a market capitalization of $308.95 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 16.48, a PEG ratio of 1.48 and a beta of 1.37. Bank of America has a 12-month low of $22.07 and a 12-month high of $33.05. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.96, a quick ratio of 0.91 and a current ratio of 0.92.

Bank of America (NYSE:BAC) last announced its quarterly earnings data on Monday, April 16th. The financial services provider reported $0.62 earnings per share for the quarter, topping the Thomson Reuters’ consensus estimate of $0.59 by $0.03. The business had revenue of $23.10 billion for the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $23.04 billion. Bank of America had a net margin of 19.65% and a return on equity of 9.40%. The company’s revenue was up 4.1% on a year-over-year basis. During the same period in the prior year, the firm posted $0.41 EPS. analysts forecast that Bank of America will post 2.54 earnings per share for the current year.

The business also recently disclosed a quarterly dividend, which will be paid on Friday, June 29th. Stockholders of record on Friday, June 1st will be issued a dividend of $0.12 per share. The ex-dividend date of this dividend is Thursday, May 31st. This represents a $0.48 annualized dividend and a dividend yield of 1.59%. Bank of America’s payout ratio is currently 26.23%.

Bank of America Profile

Bank of America Corporation, through its subsidiaries, provides banking and financial products and services for individual consumers, small- and middle-market businesses, institutional investors, large corporations, and governments worldwide. It operates through four segments: Consumer Banking, Global Wealth & Investment Management (GWIM), Global Banking, and Global Markets.

Want to see what other hedge funds are holding BAC? Visit HoldingsChannel.com to get the latest 13F filings and insider trades for Bank of America (NYSE:BAC).

Institutional Ownership by Quarter for Bank of America (NYSE:BAC)

Saturday, May 26, 2018

Boeing Continues as Top Performing Dow Stock

Boeing Co. (NYSE: BA) held on to its place last week as the top-performing Dow Jones industrial average stock for the year to date. The company’s shares added about 2.5% during the past week to post a 22.1% gain since the beginning of the year.

The second-best performer among the Dow industrials so far this year is Intel Corp. (NASDAQ: INTC), which is up about 20.1%. That is followed by Nike Inc. (NYSE: NKE), up 15.5%, Visa Inc. (NYSE: V), up 15.1%, and Microsoft Corp. (NASDAQ: MSFT), up 15%. Of the 30 stocks comprising the Dow index, only 11 have posted year-to-date gains as of Friday’s close.

The Dow added just 38 points over the course of last week to close at 24,753.09, essentially flat for the week. For the year to date, the tech sector has added 10.5%, best among the 10 market sectors.

Boeing’s week got off to a rocky start with a crash in Cuba that claimed 111 lives. The cause of the crash of the chartered Boeing 737 is being investigated. The aircraft, a 737-200, was built in 1979 and was owned by a Mexico-based charter company that operates an aging fleet of planes, and questions arose almost at once over the company’s operations and attention to safety requirements.

In the week ahead the company faces another vote at its North Charleston, South Carolina, plant for union representation. More than a year ago, 74% of the plant’s 2,700 workers rejected union representation. Boeing has strenuously resisted efforts to unionize the plant, efforts that have paid off so far.

The company also received Federal Aviation Administration certification for the folding wing the company uses on its new 777X aircraft, the 777-8 and 777-9. The company claims the 777X is on track for its first test flight next year and first delivery to a customer in mid-2020.

Boeing’s shares closed up about 0.3% Friday to $360.09, in a 52-week range of $184.53 to $371.60. The consensus 12-month price target on the stock is $396.67, up more than $9 week over week, and the forward price-earnings ratio is 21.02.

24/7 Wall St.
Procter & Gamble Remains the Dow’s Worst Performing Stock

Friday, May 25, 2018

Gateway Distriparks zooms 20% ahead of acquisition of PE firm's stake in freight arm

Gateway Distriparks share price was locked at 20 percent upper circuit at Rs 199.30 after the company decided to acquire private equity investor's stake in its subsidiary.

There were pending buy orders of 43,366 shares, with no sellers available at 14:21 hours IST.

The container logistics firm will acquire global private equity major Blackstone's entire shareholding in its freight company Gateway Rail Freight for Rs 810 crore.

"The board of directors approved the acquisition of entire shareholding held by Blackstone in compulsorily convertible preference shares (CCPS) and equity shares in Gateway Rail Freight Limited for a total consideration of Rs 810 crore," the company said in its filing.

After the stake buy, Gateway Distriparks' shareholding in its subsidiary Gateway Rail Freight will increase to 99.80 percent, it added.

The company said it would complete this acquisition within a period of 90 days, subject to statutory and regulatory approvals as may be required.

Gateway Rail provides inter-modal logistics and operates its own rail-linked Inland Container Depots (ICD) at Gurgaon, Faridabad, Ludhiana, and Sanand. It also runs a domestic terminal at Mumbai.

Thursday, May 24, 2018

Head to Head Survey: Johnson Controls International (JCI) versus Tencent (TCEHY)

Johnson Controls International (NYSE: JCI) and Tencent (OTCMKTS:TCEHY) are both large-cap industrial products companies, but which is the better business? We will contrast the two businesses based on the strength of their valuation, earnings, profitability, dividends, analyst recommendations, risk and institutional ownership.

Analyst Ratings

Get Johnson Controls International alerts:

This is a summary of recent ratings and recommmendations for Johnson Controls International and Tencent, as provided by MarketBeat.com.

Sell Ratings Hold Ratings Buy Ratings Strong Buy Ratings Rating Score
Johnson Controls International 2 8 6 0 2.25
Tencent 0 0 4 0 3.00

Johnson Controls International presently has a consensus price target of $45.00, indicating a potential upside of 27.88%. Tencent has a consensus price target of $65.00, indicating a potential upside of 24.66%. Given Johnson Controls International’s higher probable upside, analysts plainly believe Johnson Controls International is more favorable than Tencent.

Dividends

Johnson Controls International pays an annual dividend of $1.04 per share and has a dividend yield of 3.0%. Tencent pays an annual dividend of $0.10 per share and has a dividend yield of 0.2%. Johnson Controls International pays out 40.0% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Tencent pays out 10.6% of its earnings in the form of a dividend. Both companies have healthy payout ratios and should be able to cover their dividend payments with earnings for the next several years.

Profitability

This table compares Johnson Controls International and Tencent’s net margins, return on equity and return on assets.

Net Margins Return on Equity Return on Assets
Johnson Controls International 6.83% 11.60% 4.89%
Tencent 30.70% 25.58% 12.48%

Volatility & Risk

Johnson Controls International has a beta of 0.87, meaning that its share price is 13% less volatile than the S&P 500. Comparatively, Tencent has a beta of 1.16, meaning that its share price is 16% more volatile than the S&P 500.

Institutional & Insider Ownership

91.3% of Johnson Controls International shares are owned by institutional investors. Comparatively, 0.3% of Tencent shares are owned by institutional investors. 0.4% of Johnson Controls International shares are owned by insiders. Strong institutional ownership is an indication that hedge funds, large money managers and endowments believe a company will outperform the market over the long term.

Valuation & Earnings

This table compares Johnson Controls International and Tencent’s top-line revenue, earnings per share (EPS) and valuation.

Gross Revenue Price/Sales Ratio Net Income Earnings Per Share Price/Earnings Ratio
Johnson Controls International $30.17 billion 1.08 $1.61 billion $2.60 13.53
Tencent $36.39 billion 13.62 $10.58 billion $0.94 55.47

Tencent has higher revenue and earnings than Johnson Controls International. Johnson Controls International is trading at a lower price-to-earnings ratio than Tencent, indicating that it is currently the more affordable of the two stocks.

Summary

Tencent beats Johnson Controls International on 10 of the 16 factors compared between the two stocks.

Johnson Controls International Company Profile

Johnson Controls International plc operates as a diversified technology and multi industrial company worldwide. The company operates through Building Technologies & Solutions and Power Solutions segments. It designs, sells, controls, installs heating, ventilating, and air conditioning systems. The company also provides residential air conditioning and heating systems, and industrial refrigeration products, as well as technical and energy management consulting services. In addition, it designs, sells, installs, services, and monitors electronic security systems, and fire detection and suppression systems; and manufactures and sells intrusion security products, anti-theft devices, breathing apparatus, and access control and video management systems for commercial, industrial, retail, residential, small business, institutional, and governmental customers. Further, the company produces and supplies lead-acid automotive batteries for passenger cars, light trucks, and utility vehicles, as well as advanced battery technologies to power start-stop, hybrid, and electric vehicles. It offers its lead-acid automotive batteries to automotive original equipment manufacturers and the general vehicle battery aftermarket. The company was formerly known as Johnson Controls, Inc. and changed its name to Johnson Controls International plc in September 2016. Johnson Controls International plc was founded in 1885 and is headquartered in Cork, Ireland.

Tencent Company Profile

Tencent Holdings Limited, an investment holding company, provides Internet value-added services (VAS) and online advertising services in Mainland China, Hong Kong, North America, Europe, other Asian countries, and internationally. The company operates through VAS, Online Advertising, and Others segments. It offers online/mobile games, community VAS, and applications across various Internet and mobile platforms; instant messaging services; and online literature services. The company's online advertising services include display advertising; and delivery of pay-for click, pay-for download, or pay-for instant display advertisements. The company also provides payment related, cloud, and other services. In addition, it is involved in the development of software and provision of information technology services; asset management business; design and production of advertisement; development and operation of online games; and provision of online music entertainment services. Tencent Holdings Limited has strategic partnerships with Dentsu Aegis Network and Ubisoft. The company was founded in 1998 and is headquartered in Shenzhen, China.

Tuesday, May 22, 2018

Glencore Is Said to Near $1 Billion Chevron Southern Africa Deal

Glencore Plc is close to a $1 billion deal to buy Chevron Corp.’s southern African assets, potentially scuppering an earlier agreement with China Petroleum & Chemical Corp., according to three people familiar with the matter.

The Switzerland-based miner and trader will complete the deal within the next six weeks, said one of the people who asked not to be identified because the information is not public. The assets include a 100,000 barrel-a-day refinery in Cape Town and more than 800 gas stations in South Africa and neighboring Botswana.

Chevron agreed last year to sell its 75 percent holding in the southern African business to the Chinese group known as Sinopec. However, the deal stalled after black-owned minority partners, backed by Glencore, exercised a preemptive right on the stake.

A Chevron spokeswoman didn’t immediately reply to questions seeking comment. A Glencore spokesman declined to comment.

Read more: Glencore’s Double-Deal Week Adds African Oil and Peru Zinc

While Sinopec’s deal had political backing in South Africa when it was announced, the change in leadership of the ruling African National Congress and Cyril Ramaphosa’s appointment as president means Glencore is now favored as a buyer, said the people.

Despite the competition from Glencore, Sinopec has continued with a regulatory process for its own bid to buy the assets and South Africa’s Competition Tribunal in March approved a merger between the company and Chevron’s local unit.

Glencore is supporting black-investor group Off The Shelf Investments Fifty Six Pty Ltd. as a technical and financial partner, it said previously. Off The Shelf’s investors own the other 25 percent of the Chevron business.

Saturday, May 19, 2018

Ex-Barclays Trader Says His Boss ��Afraid�� to Let Him Manage the Trading Book

A former Barclays Plc trader on trial for rigging a key interest rate continued to stress that he was a junior employee, saying that his boss wouldn’t take vacations or even smoking breaks because he was “scared” to leave him in charge of the trading book.

Carlo Palombo, who is testifying in a London court for a third day, said that his manager, Philippe Moryoussef, didn’t give him any opportunities to make decisions on his own when he was a junior trader in 2006 and 2007.

#lazy-img-327878416:before{padding-top:66.68334167083543%;}

Carlo Palombo

Photographer: Luke MacGregor/Bloomberg

“He was afraid of leaving the office because he was afraid I would make a mistake,” the 39-year-old Palombo said. “He would wait until 4 o’clock to go out and smoke a cigarette because he didn’t want to leave me.”

Palombo and Moryoussef are among five traders from Barclays and Deutsche Bank AG on trial on charges that they fixed the euro interbank offered rate, or Euribor, between 2005 and 2009. While they all have pleaded not guilty, Moryoussef isn’t attending the trial and isn’t represented by an attorney at the proceedings.

The investigation by the U.K. Serious Fraud Office, which is prosecuting the case, was part of a wider probe into benchmark rates, which are tied to trillions of dollars worth of derivatives and loans, the most famous of which was Libor, a counterpart of Euribor.

Barclays ‘Culture’

Palombo said that if there was any inappropriate conduct, it was part of the “culture at Barclays.”

“My involvement with Euribor setting was minimal, marginal, because I found myself on the team doing these things,” he said. “I did not see anything wrong because it was the culture at Barclays to make these requests.”

Prosecutor James Waddington asked Palombo if there was anything wrong with getting three banks together to fix a rate.

Palombo said the requests he got “were completely fine.”

“I just sent a message,” he said. It didn’t seem “wrong.”

Palombo said he would keep in touch with Moryoussef, after his boss went to another bank in 2007.

“We would sometimes have a chat and talk about the market.”

Former Barclays traders Colin Bermingham and Sisse Bohart, as well as Achim Kraemer from Deutsche Bank AG, are also part of the trial, and all deny the charges.

Tweak It

Waddington asked Palombo about an email he sent to Bohart after Moryoussef left. Palombo asks in the email where she thinks the Euribor submission will come out and she replies “your wish is my command.”

Palombo replied that he was merely asking for information.

“As swap traders we needed to have a good idea of where the fixings will come,” he said, and that’s why he emailed her.  

Bohart replied in an email “I’ll see if I can tweak it.”

Waddington asked if that meant Bohart was tweaking the rates in his favor. Palombo said that wouldn’t have helped him on that trading day.

Waddington asked Palombo why he didn’t express surprise in May 2009 when a Euribor submitter told him that the compliance department might frown upon a request for information on the rate and possible tweaks.

“This is the time when people started looking into this stuff and we were all trying to figure out what was permitted and what wasn’t,” he said. “The regulation was being introduced and the way business was done was changing.”