關於 sustainable growth中文 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

🌻本周末的估值會議(全程是用中文; 免費), 請有興趣參與的朋友看一下:

繼上次的年報導讀會議後, 讓我們再做另一個會議! 這次很榮幸邀請到一位對估值很有見解的股友前輩來帶大家了解估值(恩, 這次我會是主持人, 不是主講人).

主題: 估值(valuation)分享會(Cat: 這不算是基礎的估值會議)

主講人: 小揚(from安泰價值投資)
https://www.facebook.com/antaiinvestment　(此為小揚的粉絲頁)

參與者: 具基本估值能力. 若打算參加者, 請事先跟我(請私訊)提出一個關於估值的case study, 到時候可在會議中分享(最好是以投影片形式呈現, 這樣到時候好跟大家分享). 若有估值的問題, 也可以提出.
Case study可以是美股, 也可以是台股.

(P.S. 因為主題有點難度, 所以不鼓勵旁聽, 因為吸收效果會不好. 不過若有讀者實在是很有興趣, 請私訊.)

時間: 台灣時間07/10 (周六)晚間９點. 預計一個小時(不會像上次那樣冗長了😅): 前30分鐘由小揚做分享, 後30分鐘大家分享估值案例&提問

進行方式: 以Zoom進行(之後會私訊會議資訊給參與者)

🌻好股介紹(不是推薦): Pool Corporation (POOL)

美股裡面最會漲的個股, 除了科技股外, 就是民生消費股了.

今天在整理資料的時候, 發現了一家好公司. 介紹(不是推薦)給有興趣進一步研究的讀者.

POOL是一家做游泳池的公司. 有競爭優勢(有市佔, 管理層好, 財務管理好). 過去五年漲了4.5倍.

公司網站: https://www.poolcorp.com/

Pool Corp. (ticker: POOL) is the nation's largest distributor of swimming pool supplies and parts, with a small irrigation business as well. It is larger than its next 52 competitors combined, but a fragmented industry means it still has a long runway for growth.

“Pool has everything we look for in terms of a sustainable competitive advantage: good core business, management team and financials," says Tim Holland, portfolio manager at Aston/Tamro Funds.
資訊來源:
https://www.barrons.com/articles/SB50001424053111903843804579535632354750784

🌻復盤2010科技股

有人說, 今年科技股像是2010年, 漲不太起來.

好奇心驅使下, 我去挖了點資料.

結果發現, 2010那時候Netflix漲很多(226%), 還是當年最會漲的一隻股. 而那時候NFLX還是高成長股, 也有獲利.

那年NFLX的年營收成長是40%+
—> 是不是營收成長越高, 股價就會越衝? 值得投資人思考.

所以原本就投資secular growth的投資人, 若不想換策略, 就還是專注在secular growth的個股. 只是挑股要嚴謹.

The Best-Performing Stocks of 2010
https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/flowchart/2010/12/28/the-best-performing-stocks-of-2010

Top Performing Stocks of 2010
https://www.cnbc.com/id/40862453

NFLX2011年報:
https://s22.q4cdn.com/959853165/files/doc_financials/annual_reports/NFLX_10K.pdf

🌻我平常做的功課

曾經有幾位股友問我平常會看甚麼資料, 訂甚麼刊物.

目前我有訂閱的是: Barron's, IBD(investors.com), WSJ, Seeking Alpha.

固定看的網站: CNBC

每季做的事情: 看&整理公司季報結果.

平常有空會看看公司的新聞(其實若重要的事件, 高層在發表財報的時候也會提).

Picture: 美國國慶日周末, 與朋友到湖邊烤肉, 順便消暑(熱熱熱!) 過去幾年, 每次去人都很少的湖邊公園, 這次竟然人滿為患! 美國人顯然悶壞了........

🌻[新書介紹]"從0開始打造財務自由的致富系統：暢銷10年經典「系統理財法」，教你變成有錢人"

這陣子一些個股的飆法, 是不是讓您覺得賺錢很容易呢? 這並不是常態, 所以正確的投資與理財觀念很重要. 也請不要認為這樣(買這些飆股)能一夕致富喔.

今天要介紹的一本書, 就是作者藉由分享自己的理財方式, 希望讀者能夠參考自己的方法, 來有系統地打造一個理財計劃.

我年紀不小了, 所以不是這本書的主要目標族群😅, 不過倒挺建議剛入社會, 或是年輕人看看, 說不定會從裡面得到一些啟發. 你不理財, 才不理你. 如果能從年輕時開始擬定適合自己的理財計劃, 並養成習慣, 好好執行, 那財富指日可待!

柏客來網站:
https://www.books.com.tw/products/0010882103?loc=P_0004_053

🌻Fidelity Contrafund的Will Danoff訪談摘要
很扎實, 有內容的一篇訪談. 雖然不少內容都已經在自己的實作上了, 但有從他的談話中應證了以前的一些想法, 於是還是整理了一下筆記(不過也不是完全100%同意他的觀點就是(有寫在下方))
https://makingsenseofusastocks.blogspot.com/2021/01/fidelity-contrafundwill-danoff.html

🌻Microsoft(MSFT)財報結果
節錄CNBC的重點:
1. Azure revenue growth accelerated and came in above analysts’ expectations for the quarter.
2. Sales of new Xbox consoles didn’t hurt the margin of the Windows business as much as analysts had expected.
3. Revenue guidance for the company quarter beat expectations.

CEO的話:「過去1年裡，我們見證了席捲每家公司和每個行業的第2波數位化轉型的曙光。」
(中文文字來源: https://tw.appledaily.com/property/20210127/YQPVSZAXC5HV5GFAWVZACAT5QQ/)
原文: What we are witnessing is the dawn of a second wave of digital transformation sweeping every company and every industry. Digital capability is key to both resilience and growth. It's no longer enough to just adopt technology. Businesses need to build their own technology to compete and grow. Microsoft is powering this shift with the world's largest and most comprehensive cloud platform.

官方財報新聞稿連結: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/Investor/earnings/FY-2021-Q1/press-release-webcast

🌻沒太follow ARK的新聞, 不過最近連續有三個媒體在報導. 這些基金對我來說, 算是動能投資的操作方式. 若碰到修正, 會拉回很多. 供參.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/22/cramer-worries-about-investors-mimicking-ark-invests-cathie-wood.html
https://www.barrons.com/articles/ark-etfs-might-be-too-popular-for-their-own-good-51611234009
https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-story-behind-the-markets-hottest-funds-thematic-etfs-arkg-vegn-11610722419

🌻關於SPAC
高盛：美股的確已有泡沫現象 SPAC火熱
https://news.cnyes.com/news/id/4562981

GS的CEO在財報上也有提到SPAC: Goldman Sachs warned of the risks in SPACs"I do think SPACs is a good use case, versus a traditional IPO, and advantages for sellers and for investors and looking at this ecosystem. But the ecosystem is not without flaws. I think it's still evolving. I think the incentive system is still evolving. One of the things we're watching very, very closely is the incentives of the sponsors, and also the incentives of somebody that selling. And while I think these activity levels continue to be very robust, and that they do continue as we head into 2021 continue to be very, very robust. I do not think this is sustainable in the medium term...things I certainly think is the case is you have something here it's a good capital markets innovation. But like many innovations, there's a point in time as they start, where they have a tendency, maybe to go a little bit too far, and then need to be pulled back or rebalanced in some way. And that's something my guess is we'll see over the course of 2021 or 2022, with SPAC" - Goldman Sachs (GS) CEO David Solomon

Pictures來源: 出版社提供; https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/26/microsoft-msft-earnings-q2-2021.html

I have recently perused Nicholas Kristof’s NYT piece “China’s Man in Washington, Named Trump”(https://nyti.ms/3h2JXh8). One paragraph in particular caught my attention: “A joke in China suggests that Trump’s Chinese name is Chuan Jianguo, or “Build-the-Country Trump.” That’s because Build-the-Country is a common revolutionary name among Communist patriots, and it’s mockingly suggested that Trump’s misrule of the United States is actually bolstering Xi’s regime.”

Kristoff also avows that since Trump’s ascension to presidency, the American nation became highly polarized. This is reflected in the current administration’s policies on climate change, foreign relations with established U.S. allies, and COVID-19 prevention, all of which are rather ineffective. It also seems like Mr. Trump and his team diverged from the traditional priorities, including promoting free trade, human rights, and other quintessentially American values. As described thoroughly by John Bolton, all these factors contributed to the declining standing of the U.S. in global politics.

What is more, many people fall prey to CCP’s propaganda and its interpretations of Trump’s actions, which only enhances China’s reputation.

But that might not exactly be the case.

The CCP apparently failed to utilize the window of opportunity created by the ineptness of the Trump administration, as China could have grown to the position of a leader by filling in the void left by the U.S.

During the 2016 APEC Ministerial Meeting in Lima, Peru, Xi Jinping and his team actively supported the plans to establish the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and a Free Trade Area of the Asia Pacific, or FTAAP. In contrast, the United States withdrew its signature from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) in early 2017. Coupled with China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure and Investment Bank (AIIB), this move bolstered China’s capacity to influence global investments and trade, high-tech mergers and acquisitions, and, overall, expand its geostrategic influence on the entire globe.

At the same time, various propaganda films about great power competition, military industry, and science and technology surged all at once, and gained remarkable following around the world.

All this provided a window of opportunity for the CCP to slowly change its course. Around the same time, the distrust for POTUS among U.S. allies’ reached its apex. According to polls conducted by the Pew Research Center, the distrust for the U.S. president in the U.K. reached 75%, 72% in Japan, 70% in Australia, and stunning 86% in France.

Had the C.C.P,. begun to open up at that time, or at least resumed the governance style of the Hu-Wen administration, it could have reaped the benefits of promoting liberalism where the U.S. failed to deliver. It was the time for Beijing to gradually enhance freedom of speech domestically, pursue sustainable infrastructural projects, gradually reform unfair barriers to trade, transform its S.O.E.s, strengthen protections for private ownership, and vitalize its start-ups and enterprises.

Moreover, were China to cease the genocide in East Turkestan and refrain from cracking down on Hong Kong's semi-autonomy, it would have greatly enhanced its global international image. Additionally, if paired with slow but steady reforms, Beijing’s respect for sovereignty of its peoples would have attracted a large amount of foreign investment, which in turn would have continued to buttress the country’s growth.

It is China prerogative to remain idle.
It might still be possible for Chinese “Dream” to come true.
Yet, a historic window of opportunity is now closed.

Xi assumed the tools of proscribing and stalling, which are completely antithetical to the aforementioned window of opportunity.

Today, China is more authoritarian, less flexible, and fully deprived of horizontal accountability. Its reliance on wolf warrior diplomacy backfired: for example, the Swedish parliament sought to expel the Chinese ambassador to Stockholm. Also, Prague, the capital of Czechia, terminated its sister-city agreement with Shanghai and instead signed a new one with Taipei. Last but not least, we ought not to forget about the recent fiasco in the relations with the United States who ordered the shutdown of China’s consulate in Houston. All of this took its toll on China’s reputation.

Its international standing and inability to replace the U.S. as the major global power are not the only issues China is currently facing.
As it experiences multiple domestic and international shocks, China struggles to combat the COVID-19 pandemic and tame the disastrous floods of Yangtze River. The swarm of locusts of biblical proportions is also crippling Beijing’s institutional capacity and may soon lead to food shortages. In fact, the precarity of food supply further diminishes the level of trust for Chinese authorities.

In 2019, the Pew Research Center conducted a public opinion survey to examine the international views of China. In the U.S., Argentina, the U.K., Canada, Germany, and Ukraine, only about 30% of respondents claim a favorable view of China.

As the COVID-19 pandemic rages in the U.S., as many as 73% of U.S. respondents view China unfavorably.

Recently, the C.C.P. is losing its focus by continuously shifting targets. In fact, I believe there is no need for the C.C.P.to rely on nationalistic appeals, since in this new century values, business relations, and fair competition are all far more important than greater than delusive blood ties.
China lies only 130 kilometers away from us. Of course, we welcome dialogue and seek to avoid misjudgments. But we also distinguish between the C.C.P. and China. While we do welcome dialogue, but we will not be coerced to talk under unjust preconditions or in fear.

The only fair prerequisites are those of reciprocity, mutual respect as well as fairness and openness with respect for the rule of law.
Source: Pew Research Center

最近看到紐約時報中文版的一篇文章
<美國的川普，中國的「川建國」>，其中一小段是這樣的

「在中國，人們戲稱川普的中文名字是川建國。那是因為建國是共產黨愛國者中一個普遍的革命人名。它在諷刺地暗示川普對美國的治理不當實際上是在鞏固習近平的政權。」

裡面也提到，川普在任的幾年，國家更分裂，對於氣候變遷，傳統美國盟友，乃至於疫情處理等都相當拙劣，對於美國傳統的自由貿易、人權等價值也基本上都沒有太大興趣。這些方針，導致美國在世界的評價降低，波頓的新書也多有描述。

除此之外，許多不幸相信中共宣傳，又或者是中共圈養的小粉紅，特別故意愛宣傳川普增強中國的威望。

但這不是真的。

中共完全沒有掌握美國做得不夠好的地方，去增強其在世界的領導力。

在2016年時，秘魯的亞太峰會舉行期間，習近平政權爭取（RCEP）及亞太自由貿易區（FTAAP）談判；對比2017年初，美國剛宣布退出ＴＰＰ，加上中國到「一帶一路」和亞洲基礎設施投資銀行，中國當時在世界全面發揮投資貿易、高科技併購還有其地緣戰略的影響力。

也是那個時候，各種的大國崛起、大國軍工、大國科技的宣傳影片此起彼落，似乎正準備要在世界舞台發光發熱。

這曾經是中共慢慢轉向的一個機會之窗。彼時（2017)美國盟友對美國總統的不信任度達到歷史新高，根據皮尤研究中心的資訊，英國對於美國總統的不信任度達到75%、日本72% 澳洲70% 法國更高達86%

如果那時中共開始有限度的改革，對內放寬言論自由，或者至少維持在胡溫當時的水中，對外追求有責任的基礎建設，逐步緩慢減低不公平的貿易壁壘，對於國有企業改革，增強私營企業、新創企業的活力。

停止對新疆迫害，不干預香港自治，不僅國際形象會大幅改善，哪怕是緩慢但是穩健的改革，也會讓大量吸引外資，讓中國的活力持續前進。

哪怕是什麼都不做也好

那或許有這麽一點可能性，中國「夢」是可以前行的

但是歷史機緣的大門已經關上。

習、禁、停、放棄了這個機會之窗，徹底的走向相反的方向。

更專制、更沒有彈性，更沒有任何制衡的力量。各種戰狼外交，讓瑞典議員提案驅逐中國大使，捷克布拉格市長與台北簽訂姊妹是，就解散上海與該市關係、被美國關閉領事館、各種讓中國形象低下的事情，中共都沒有少做。

中共不但完全沒有辦法取代美國，在多重國內外的衝擊之下，又是瘟疫，又是超大水患，緊接著蝗害，還有進來的糧食不足問題，正在面臨巨大的瓶頸。

而糧食的命脈，卻恰恰又在對他最不信任，對中共價值最反對的國家聯盟

根據皮尤研究中心:Pew Research Center2019調查各國對中國的喜好度，美國、阿根廷、英國、加拿大、德國、烏克蘭等，對於中國的喜好度都在30%上下

而2020疫情後美國對於中國的不信任度，更高達73%。

最近中共在演習，又要玩轉移目標的手段，對於中共，其實不必再有民族主義的同情，因為新的世紀，價值、商業模式、公平競爭的制度大於血緣幻想。

中國離我們只有130公里的距離，我們當然歡迎對話，避免誤判。但我們同時也區分中共與中國，歡迎對話，但不在前提、條件、恐懼之下對話。

如果真的要有前提，那就是對等、尊重，還有公平公開法治的方式會晤。

資料來源：皮尤研究中心:Pew Research Center
（美國著名的民調機構和智庫機構，https://www.pewresearch.org/）