![[3월 25일]-미국주식 커뮤니티동향: 테슬라, 전기차, 미국 시장, 클라우드 서비스, 파산, 배당금](https://temazu.com/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/photo_2025-03-24_12-43-34.webp "[3월 25일]-미국주식 커뮤니티동향: 테슬라, 전기차, 미국 시장, 클라우드 서비스, 파산, 배당금")
미국커뮤니티 요약
(상세 내용은 하단부에 첨부합니다.)
요즘 시장이 좀 왔다 갔다 하는 것 같아. 관세 때문에 살짝 반등은 있는데, 혹시나 시장이 확 무너질까 봐 다들 걱정하는 눈치야.그래서 그런지 유럽의 군비 확장 관련 투자 기회나 McCormick(MKC) 같은 특정 주식, DSM Firmenich, FedEx, Adobe 같은 종목들이 주목받고 있대.포트폴리오 분산은 어떻게 해야 할지, 이익 실현은 언제 해야 할지도 고민이 많나 봐. 23andMe는 파산 신청했고, Bayer는 Roundup 소송에서 엄청난 배상금을 물게 됐다는 소식도 있네. ZIM은 배당금을 지급하고, 유럽에서는 Volkswagen이랑 BMW가 Tesla보다 전기차를 더 많이 팔았대.게다가, 배당은 없지만 위험 부담이 적은 ETF나, EU 기업들이 미국 클라우드 서비스 대신 다른 대안을 찾는다는 이야기도 나오고 있어.
트레이딩뷰
1개월 프리미엄 무료
+ 15$ 즉시 할인
미국커뮤니티 상세링크
“유럽 재무장을 고려했을 때 투자할 가치가 있을까?”
Posted by: /u/TinglingTongue |
Date: 3/24/2025, 9:06:39 AM
What is your advice regarding this? Good idea or nah? Looking to invest about £1000 maybe.
submitted by /u/TinglingTongue
야후 차트 21일 단순이동평균선(SMA) 정확도
Posted by: /u/Plenty_Psychology545 |
Date: 3/24/2025, 10:58:50 AM
I have been making decent gains so i decided to write code. After downloading 5 minutes data i thought generating 21 period SMA would be piece of cake. To my surprise it was not. My calculated SMA just does not match Yahoo SMA.
What is more interesting is that yahoo chart set at 5 minutes with 21 period SMA doesn’t match fidelity or TS.
The problem is that i am making a bit of a money with yahoo chart so i dont want to let it go. But i want to code it as well.
Any idea how is yahoo 5 minutes 21 period SMA calculated? What is different about it.
submitted by /u/Plenty_Psychology545
– 백악관, 4월 2일 관세 부과 범위 축소
Posted by: /u/SalehD13 |
Date: 3/24/2025, 12:22:16 PM
submitted by /u/SalehD13
– 테슬라 공매도 논리와 미국 시장: 무너지기 직전의 위태로운 상황 (Part 2) 🃏💥
Posted by: /u/Rainyfriedtofu |
Date: 3/24/2025, 2:52:52 PM
I want to start by saying a huge thank you for all the kind words, thoughtful comments, insightful DMs, and support following my previous post. Honestly—holy shit—I didn’t expect that post to blow up the way it did.
https://www.reddit.com/r/stocks/comments/1jheaxd/tesla_short_thesis_and_the_us_market_house_of/
As of the time I’m writing this, Part 1 has pulled in some pretty insane numbers:
542,000 views
774 upvotes
356 comments
817 shares
Those are absolutely bonkers, and I’m genuinely grateful for the encouragement and engagement. I’ve been a long-time lurker on this subreddit, learning quietly from many of you over the years. I never imagined that something I’d write would get this kind of traction. But some of the comments in that thread raised important questions and valid counterpoints—so I wanted to follow up with a deeper response.
Now, for those asking for charts, crayons, or simplified pictures—just a heads-up: this sub doesn’t support image uploads. So if you’re looking for visual aids, you’ll need to do a bit of homework and look up the references and data I mention here. Trust me, it’s worth your time.
Also, there will be no TL;DR at the end of this post. If you’re someone who can’t—or won’t—read through a detailed explanation, then this probably isn’t for you. The economy, and the factors that influence how a stock moves, are complex. If you’re not willing to engage with that complexity, you’re setting yourself up to get burned. So, with that said, let’s dive in.
u/Worth-Initiative7840 wrote “You don’t need the analysis bruv, 70% of Teslas profits last year were selling credits and interest on cash on hand….they don’t make any money selling cars … the hype lie has been AI and new growth businesses in the company but that’s PT Barnum three card Monty bs – current fundamentals take out all the bs – it’s Ford.”
This comment caught me by surprise because the numbers were totally made up. I have to go back and do some research because what he said wasn’t true at all. In the fourth quarter of 2024, Tesla’s net income was $2.31 billion on revenues of $25.7 billion. During this period, the company earned $692 million from selling automotive regulatory credits. This revenue from regulatory credits represents approximately 30% of Tesla’s net income for the quarter.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/1553187/revenue-of-tesla-regulatory-credits-by-quarter/
Tesla reported a 47% increase in 2024, totaling $1.57 billion for the year, up from $1.07 billion in 2023. While the exact figure for Q4 2024 isn’t specified, if we assume the increase was evenly distributed, the quarterly interest income would be around $392.5 million. This would account for approximately 17% of the quarter’s net income. Combining both regulatory credits and estimated interest income, these sources contributed approximately 47% of Tesla’s net income in Q4 2024. The 70% is false information.
https://www.captide.co/insights/tesla-q4-2024
Now let’s talk about sale of regulatory credits. These are not actual cars sold—they’re a kind of bonus revenue Tesla earns because of how environmentally friendly its cars are. Governments around the world, especially in places like California and Europe, require automakers to sell a certain number of low-emission or zero-emission vehicles. If a car company doesn’t meet those requirements, they have to buy credits from companies that exceed the standard—like Tesla. Tesla earns a bunch of these credits because all its cars are electric. Then it sells them to other automakers who still rely on gas-powered cars. This is essentially free money for Tesla—it doesn’t cost them anything to generate these credits, but they can sell them for hundreds of millions of dollars.
As for interest income, this is money Tesla earns just for having cash in the bank or investments. Tesla holds billions in cash and short-term investments. Instead of letting it sit there, they invest it in safe, interest-earning instruments (like U.S. Treasury bonds or money market funds). This also include bitcoin. As interest rates rise, these earnings go up—so Tesla earns hundreds of millions per quarter just from letting their money sit and grow.
Remember what I said about bitcoin in the previous post? “In December 2024, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) updated its guidelines, allowing companies to report digital assets like Bitcoin at their fair market value. This change enabled Tesla to recognize unrealized gains on its Bitcoin holdings without selling them. Leveraging the new accounting standards, Tesla reported a $600 million increase in net income for the fourth quarter of 2024, attributed to the appreciation of its Bitcoin holdings. This gain represented approximately 26% of Tesla’s net income for that quarter. https://www.investopedia.com/why-a-new-rule-helped-tesla-get-usd600m-in-bitcoin-gains-but-may-cost-microstrategy-billions-8783060 If you have been paying attention to the price of bitcoin since Q2024, it has dropped dramatically. The next earnings are going to be really bad.
As of March 22, 2025, Bitcoin’s price is approximately $84,123.
On December 31, 2024, (Tesla Q4 2024 earning) Bitcoin’s closing price was around $93,429. On December 31, 2024, Bitcoin’s closing price was around $93,429.”
If this number hold true, Tesla interest income from bitcoin will drop by 9.96%.
With that said, the saying that Tesla doesn’t make money from car isn’t true. In the fourth quarter of 2024, Tesla’s automotive sales revenue—which includes income from vehicle sales and related services—totaled approximately $18.8 billion. This figure represents about 73% of Tesla’s total revenue of $25.7 billion for the same period. For the entire year of 2024, Tesla’s automotive sales revenue amounted to $72.5 billion, accounting for approximately 74% of the total annual revenue of $97.7 billion. Remember the stuff about regulator credit above? These percentages indicate that automotive sales remain the primary contributor to Tesla’s revenue, both quarterly and annually. Tesla is still a car company at heart, and this was it moat.
You might not know this about me, but I used to be a hardcore Tesla fanboy. I invested in the company back when they were just producing the original Roadster. Over the years, I’ve owned every single product Tesla has put out—including four of their vehicles.
Tesla’s sky-high valuation wasn’t just hype—it was because the company was doing things no one else dared to. It was more than just an automaker; it was positioned as a tech and AI company, with aspirations in robotics and full self-driving. But even beyond that, Tesla was pioneering a completely new model of vertical integration.
It wasn’t just about selling electric cars. Tesla popularized EVs, achieved massive adoption rates, and built an entire ecosystem around the vehicle. They sold their own insurance, handled their own repairs, created and standardized their own charging port (which others later adopted), and developed the most expansive EV charging network in the world.
Elon Musk wasn’t just building a car company—he was positioning Tesla to be the Rockefeller of the 21st-century automotive industry. Just like how Rockefeller controlled the oil pipeline from extraction to distribution, Tesla was aiming to control everything:
Design and manufacturing of the vehicles
Repair and servicing (only Tesla could repair a Tesla)
Insurance and financing
And the “gas stations” of the future—their Supercharger network
It was a brilliant playbook, and it echoed what made Sony so dominant in the 1990s: Sony owned the formats. Whether it was CDs, MiniDiscs, Blu-ray, or the Walkman headphone jack, Sony created the platforms and collected royalties when others used them.
Had Tesla stayed on that course—doubling down on ecosystem control and technological dominance—they truly had a shot at owning the entire EV industry. But somewhere along the way, they pivoted, and that vision started to drift.
I was a fanboy of Tesla, and I sold everything in November. I also started shorting Spy, but hopefully, I have time to talk about the economy in this post.
What truly broke the long-term vision for Tesla, in my eyes, was the company’s decision to step back from its charging station expansion—the very dream of becoming the next-generation energy empire, replacing Shell, Chevron, Mobil, and essentially every gas station in the world.
In late April 2024, Tesla made a dramatic internal shift by disbanding its entire Supercharger team, including its leader, Rebecca Tinucci. This wasn’t a small reorganization—it was a major strategic reversal. The move immediately sparked concern about the future of Tesla’s vast charging infrastructure, which had once been one of its most significant competitive advantages.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tesla_Supercharger
In response, Elon Musk stated that Tesla would still grow its Supercharger network—but at a much slower pace. The new focus would be on maintaining 100% uptime and expanding existing sites, rather than continuing the rapid rollout of new stations across the country and around the world. This change came as part of broader company-wide layoffs and a growing strategic pivot toward artificial intelligence and robotics.
https://www.teslarati.com/elon-musk-explains-reasoning-behind-tesla-supercharger-team-disband/
For Tesla’s automotive partners—like Ford, GM, and Rivian, who had recently committed to adopting Tesla’s NACS charging standard—this sudden shift caused confusion and uncertainty. They had signed on with the expectation that Tesla would continue leading the way in EV infrastructure. Now, that future looked far less clear.
https://www.reuters.com/business/autos-transportation/musk-disbands-tesla-ev-charging-team-leaving-customers-dark-2024-04-30/
As a Tesla owner in California, where EV adoption is highest, I’ve already started to see the consequences firsthand. Fewer new charging stations are being built, and the reliability of existing ones is noticeably declining. Increasingly, I encounter broken or malfunctioning Superchargers—something that used to be rare. In some locations, the charging speeds are significantly slower than they used to be—sometimes even half as fast.
On top of that, Tesla has introduced energy usage-based time rates, and the cost of charging has surged. What used to be a convenient and cost-effective option now feels like a premium-priced service. Three years ago, I used Superchargers without thinking twice. Today, I charge almost exclusively at home—because it’s five to eight times cheaper. Furthermore, you have to think about the high cost of housing and the majority of people renting or living in an apartment. They would have all had to use the Tesla charging stations for every EV car. Think about this implication!
The bigger picture here is that Elon Musk had the chance to be a modern-day Rockefeller. He was on track to own the entire energy pipeline for electric vehicles: manufacturing the cars, selling the insurance, controlling the repairs, and operating the “gas stations” of the EV era through the Supercharger network.
But that opportunity has slipped away. The dream of Tesla owning the entire EV ecosystem—end to end—has fractured. And it’s hard not to see this as a major strategic misstep.
u/Qc4281 “I believe the Bulls are putting all of their hope in robotaxis and regardless of Q1, June will be the real test of how much support Tesla continues to have.”
It’s time to face a hard truth: Tesla is no longer on the cutting edge of robotaxi technology. As of 2025, the undisputed leader in autonomous ride-hailing is Waymo, a subsidiary of Alphabet (Google’s parent company).
Waymo operates at SAE Level 4 autonomy, meaning their vehicles can drive themselves without any human inside, in specific geofenced areas. This isn’t a prototype—it’s real, operational, and public.
Their Waymo One robotaxi service is live in Phoenix, San Francisco, and Los Angeles, where anyone can hail a fully driverless car—no safety driver, no steering wheel input, no human control required. Riders are using it every day like a regular Uber or Lyft.
In contrast, Tesla’s so-called Full Self-Driving (FSD) is still classified as Level 2 autonomy. That means the system can assist with steering, acceleration, and braking, but the driver must be fully alert and ready to take over at all times. Tesla has no regulatory approval to operate a robotaxi fleet, and no Tesla on the road today can legally drive itself.
Waymo uses a sophisticated sensor fusion approach:
Lidar for detailed 3D mapping
Radar for object detection in poor visibility
High-definition maps to understand complex city layouts
Tesla, by contrast, has removed radar and relies exclusively on cameras and neural networks, a vision-only system. While Tesla claims this mimics human driving, it’s also less reliable in poor lighting, bad weather, or unpredictable road scenarios. Waymo has logged over 20 million miles on public roads and released a detailed 2023 safety report showing zero major injuries or fatalities across millions of fully autonomous rides.
Elon Musk has been promising Level 4 or even Level 5 autonomy “next year” since 2016—nearly a decade of delays. As of today, FSD Beta still requires constant supervision. Tesla has not submitted its system to any regulatory body (e.g., DMV or NHTSA) for approval as an autonomous driving platform. No Tesla vehicle qualifies as a robotaxi, and none are legally allowed to operate as such
Tesla can’t jump straight to Level 4. It first needs to prove Level 3, where the car can drive itself under limited conditions without driver input—but even that milestone has not been reached. It’s based more on hope and hype than actual technical progress or regulatory reality. Tesla has a powerful brand, and Elon’s ambitious promises get attention—but when it comes to real-world robotaxi deployment, Waymo is years ahead.
Now we can talk about the robot. Boston Dynamics and Tesla’s Optimus are both developing humanoid robots. Boston Dynamic Has been developing humanoid and quadruped robots for over a decade. Their humanoid robot, Atlas, can run, jump, do parkour, backflips, and handle complex terrain. Their quadruped robot, Spot, is already being used in real industrial environments—construction sites, factories, even police and research teams.
Tesla first unveiled Optimus in 2021as a concept, with actual development starting in 2022. Still in early prototype stages—Tesla has shown it walking, lifting objects, and folding clothes, but it’s not yet capable of dynamic movement like Atlas. As of 2025, it’s still being tested internally and isn’t commercially deployed.
Boston Dynamics is years ahead in terms of real-world functionality.
I think I’ve looked into this deeply enough to respond to the common claim that “Tesla is more than just a car company.” The truth is, Tesla was more than just a car company. It had a bold vision—revolutionizing energy, transportation, and robotics all at once.
But that vision has faded.
Today, Tesla has lost much of its momentum under Elon Musk’s shifting priorities. Right now, it’s essentially an overvalued car company that’s trying to break into the robotaxi and robotics space—fields where it’s already years, if not a decade, behind the actual industry leaders.
The ambition is still there—but the execution no longer matches the hype.
Now, this isn’t to say that Tesla will be going down in the next months or two. I noticed many of the people who are reading the previous post didn’t understand what I was talking about when I was talking about LPSY. Specifically, I was referring to the Wyckoff distribution schematic phase c-d LPSY. Phase C is the test. The ‘Test’ serves the same but opposite function as the ‘Spring’ in the accumulation phase: the bull trap before the downtrend. While this level does get broken, it doesn’t change the picture of the cycle. Phase D is the effect. Phase D in this distribution phase is a mirror image of Phase D in the accumulation cycle. There is a considerable surge in volume and volatility, comprising one or more Last Point of Supply (LPSY) points. A Sign of Weakness (SOW) level happens, the final indication that the bears will soon take center stage. You have to open up tradingview or similar program to draw this, but it looks like Tesla is currently in that phase.
https://www.tradersmastermind.com/wyckoff-method/
The LPSY (Last Point of Supply) is a critical stage in the Wyckoff distribution schematic where rallies begin to fail, unable to reach previous highs. During this phase, we typically expect to see a short-term rally, but it’s often weak and unsustainable. Volume behavior becomes a major red flag—buying volume dries up on the way up, while selling volume increases during pullbacks. This pattern suggests that institutions have already completed their distribution, leaving retail traders to buy the dip, unaware that the “smart money” has exited. As a result, the stock becomes highly vulnerable to a sharp decline.
In Tesla’s case, these signs are already becoming visible. We’re seeing a pattern of lower highs, indicating that each rebound is losing strength. Key support levels are eroding, and momentum is fading, even in response to what would typically be considered “good news.” At the same time, narrative fatigue is setting in—delays in the robotaxi rollout, slowing delivery growth, ongoing price cuts, and Tesla’s recent pullback from expanding its Supercharger network have all contributed to weakening sentiment. All of this points to Tesla potentially being in its LPSY phase, teetering on the edge of a deeper markdown.
One thing we often overlook when talking about Tesla is its status as a luxury brand, which brings us back to the broader conversation about the economy. Before I go any further, I want to be clear: I’m praying that I’m wrong. I don’t want the economy to crash. But I’ve lived through a recession before—and I remember it vividly.
Back in 2008, I watched family and friends lose their businesses, homes, jobs, savings—and in some cases, even loved ones. The pain was real. And what made it worse was knowing that much of it happened while our government and institutions downplayed the risks or outright lied to the public. That experience has shaped the way I look at economic data today.
Right now, I believe we’re entering a recession—or at the very least, staring down a serious economic slowdown. I’m not writing this to tell you to sell all your stocks or panic. I’m sharing this because I hope you’ll take a step back, assess your risks, and plan accordingly.
According to the National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER), a recession is defined as a significant decline in economic activity that is widespread and lasts for more than a few months. It typically shows up in multiple indicators: GDP, personal income, employment, industrial production, and retail sales. There’s also a more technical (but less comprehensive) definition: two consecutive quarters of negative real GDP growth.
During the 2008 financial crisis, the earliest warning signs appeared in November 2007, which the NBER later marked as the official start of the recession. At that time, major financial institutions began reporting huge losses on mortgage-backed securities, job growth slowed, consumer confidence dropped, and the stock market—which had peaked in October 2007—began to decline. Subprime lenders were collapsing, and credit was tightening across the board.
By mid-2008, the crisis accelerated: Bear Stearns collapsed in March, and Lehman Brothers filed for bankruptcy in September. Housing prices plummeted, unemployment surged, and the economy spiraled. If you had exited the market in November 2007, you would not have seen the S&P 500 return to the same level until May 2011. That’s 3.5 years of waiting—and that’s assuming you had the ability to hold through it all. This matters because knowing when to cut losses can save years of financial recovery, unless you’re okay with sitting on those losses for the long haul.
I still remember watching Alan Greenspan, then Chairman of the Federal Reserve, downplay the risks in the housing market and broader economy. Despite clear signs of overheating in credit and housing, he failed to act—ignoring warnings from economists, regulators, and data. That experience is why I don’t place my faith in Jerome Powell or any official narrative. I trust only the numbers.
Looking ahead, the week of March 24–30 will give us key economic data. On Wednesday, we’ll get the Durable Goods Orders report. The forecast is -0.7%, compared to last month’s +3.1%. If it comes in even lower, that’s significant—because durable goods (like cars, appliances, aircraft, and machinery) are only purchased when businesses and consumers feel confident. A steep drop in this number is a classic early warning sign of a recession. However, durable goods alone don’t tell the full story—it needs to be paired with rising unemployment, falling retail sales, and declining industrial production to form a full recessionary picture.
On Thursday, we’ll see the GDP growth rate (QoQ). It was 3.0% in September and 3.1% in December. The projection now is 2.3%. If it misses expectations and drops even lower, we may not officially “ring the recession bell” just yet—but June’s data will become pivotal. That’s when things may start to shift into “oh-shit” mode.
Then on Friday, we’ll get personal income and personal spending figures. These are crucial. If both decline, that’s another strong recession signal. Personal spending accounts for nearly 70% of U.S. GDP, and if consumers stop spending, the economy slows—simple as that. Personal income tells us how much financial cushion people have. When both metrics go down, it shows growing financial stress among households.
For the week of March 31–April 6, we’ll get more insight with ISM Services PMI on Thursday, and then non-farm payrolls and the unemployment rate on Friday. Forecasts haven’t been released yet, but if these numbers also disappoint—especially in combination with all the metrics above—we’ll be staring at a textbook recession setup. These are the early signs, and I’m laying them out not to scare you, but to prepare you.
You may think I’m being overly cautious, and I could absolutely be wrong. And honestly—I hope I am. But the question you have to ask yourself is: Are you willing to risk losing 50% of your savings just to see if I’m wrong?
Looking back at 2008, throughout most of 2007 and early 2008, the Bush administration repeatedly said the economy was “fundamentally sound,” even as the housing and credit markets collapsed beneath them. In January 2008, President Bush acknowledged “economic challenges” but still refused to call it a recession. And by the time the government acted decisively, it was already too late for millions of families.
This isn’t about being Republican or Democrat. It’s about making sure the words our officials say line up with what the numbers are telling us. If they don’t—we need to learn from history and not fall into the same trap. We can’t afford to get scammed into losing our life savings again.
Let’s circle back to the topic of Tesla as a luxury brand—because that’s an important lens to view its current position through. Do you remember what happened during the 2008 financial crisis? Both automobile sales and luxury goods took a massive hit. Consumers cut back sharply on big-ticket purchases, and the luxury sector—cars, fashion, jewelry, travel—was no exception.
If you haven’t already, take a look at LVMH, the world’s largest luxury conglomerate. Its stock has dropped significantly, reflecting weakening demand for high-end consumer goods. This is a telling sign. Now ask yourself—what about Airbnb (ABNB)? Another brand that, while not traditionally “luxury,” thrives on discretionary income and consumer confidence. It’s also seeing a decline, which suggests people are pulling back on travel and experiences—another luxury-like behavior.
Then there’s the VIX, the so-called “fear index” that tracks market volatility. If you examine the chart, you’ll notice that it’s starting to resemble the early stages of 2008—with rising spikes and volatility building quietly under the surface.
Some may argue that it also looks like 2020, when COVID-19 triggered a global economic shutdown. But the key difference is that in 2020, the whole world was impacted simultaneously—the pandemic was a shared crisis that brought coordinated government responses, massive stimulus, and a V-shaped recovery.
This time is different. What we’re seeing now is primarily an American problem—rooted in sticky inflation, rising consumer debt, eroding household savings, and waning confidence in domestic institutions and policy. Other countries aren’t yet showing the same systemic stress.
So when we talk about Tesla, or any luxury-adjacent brand, we have to recognize that luxury spending is one of the first things to be cut when consumers feel insecure. And the signs—from LVMH to ABNB to the VIX—are stacking up. This isn’t fear-mongering. It’s pattern recognition.
Lastly—and I want to emphasize this—I’m not saying the sky is falling, nor am I predicting that the stock market is going to crash tomorrow. In fact, I actually believe the market may move upward in the short term due to momentum, technicals, or temporary optimism.
However, looking beyond the next few weeks, I believe the economic data over the next six months will begin to confirm what many of us already feel: that a recession is likely on the horizon. In particular, I think the next three months will be the most revealing. The trends we see in that window—whether in job growth, consumer spending, durable goods, or inflation—will be the “tell” that it’s time for investors to start protecting their assets and reassessing their positions.
You don’t need to sell everything. But you do need to have a plan. Because once the data becomes undeniable, the window to exit cleanly and safely may close fast.
Thank you for taking the time to read my posts. I had planned to dive into other topics, but honestly, there’s so much unfolding right now that it’s hard to keep it all focused. I genuinely feel for those who are still holding on, caught in the sunken cost fallacy, hoping things will bounce back simply because they’ve already lost so much.
Just remember: losing less is always better than losing more. Sometimes survival in the market isn’t about timing the top or the bottom—it’s about knowing when to step aside and preserve what you have.
As always, I welcome your thoughts, counterpoints, or insights. Let’s navigate this together.
submitted by /u/Rainyfriedtofu
유럽연합(EU) 내 기업들이 아마존, 구글, 마이크로소프트 클라우드 서비스를 버릴 방법을 모색하기 시작했다.
Posted by: /u/YourFuture2000 |
Date: 3/24/2025, 4:49:17 PM
Trump’s Aggression Sours Europe on US Cloud Giants
Companies in the EU are starting to look for ways to ditch Amazon, Google, and Microsoft cloud services amid fears of rising security risks from the US. But cutting ties won’t be easy.
The global backlash against the second Donald Trump administration keeps on growing. Canadians have boycotted US-made products, anti–Elon Musk posters have appeared across London amid widespread Tesla protests, and European officials have drastically increased military spending as US support for Ukraine falters. Dominant US tech services may be the next focus.
There are early signs that some European companies and governments are souring on their use of American cloud services provided by the three so-called hyperscalers. Between them, Google Cloud, Microsoft Azure, and Amazon Web Services (AWS) host vast swathes of the internet and keep thousands of businesses running. However, some organizations appear to be reconsidering their use of these companies’ cloud services—including servers, storage, and databases—citing uncertainties around privacy and data access fears under the Trump administration.
“There’s a huge appetite in Europe to de-risk or decouple the over-dependence on US tech companies, because there is a concern that they could be weaponized against European interests,” says Marietje Schaake, a nonresident fellow at Stanford’s Cyber Policy Center and a former, decade-long member of the European Parliament.
The moves may already be underway. On March 18, politicians in the Netherlands House of Representatives passed eight motions asking the government to reduce reliance on US tech companies and move to European alternatives. Days before, more than 100 organizations signed an open letter to European officials calling for the continent to become “more technologically independent” and saying the status quo creates “security and reliability risks.”
Two European-based cloud service companies, Exoscale and Elastx, tell WIRED they have seen an uptick in potential customers looking to abandon US cloud providers over the last two weeks—with some already starting to make the jump. Multiple technology advisers say they are having widespread discussions about what it would take to uproot services, data, and systems.
“We have more demand from across Europe,” says Mathias Nöbauer, the CEO of Swiss-based hosting provider Exoscale, adding there has been an increase in new customers seeking to move away from cloud giants. “Some customers were very explicit,” Nöbauer says. “Especially customers from Denmark being very explicit that they want to move away from US hyperscalers because of the US administration and what they said about Greenland.”
“It’s a big worry about the uncertainty around everything. And from the Europeans’ perspective—that the US is maybe not on the same team as us any longer,” says Joakim Öhman, the CEO of Swedish cloud provider Elastx. “Those are the drivers that bring people or organizations to look at alternatives.”
Concerns have been raised about the current data-sharing agreement between the EU and US, which is designed to allow information to move between the two continents while protecting people’s rights. Multiple previous versions of the agreement have been struck down by European courts. At the end of January, Trump fired three Democrats from the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB), which helps manage the current agreement. The move could undermine or increase uncertainty around the agreement. In addition, Öhman says, he has heard concerns from firms about the CLOUD Act, which can allow US law enforcement to subpoena user data from tech companies, potentially including data that is stored in systems outside of the US.
Dave Cottlehuber, the founder of SkunkWerks, a small tech infrastructure firm in Austria, says he has been moving the company’s few servers and databases away from US providers to European services since the start of the year. “First and foremost, it’s about values,” Cottlehuber says. “For me, privacy is a right not a privilege.” Cottlehuber says the decision to move is easier for a small business such as his, but he argues it removes some taxes that are paid to the Trump administration. “The best thing I can do is to remove that small contribution of mine, and also at the same time, make sure that my customers’ privacy is respected and preserved,” Cottlehuber says.
Steffen Schmidt, the CEO of Medicusdata, a company that provides text-to-speech services to doctors and hospitals in Europe, says that having data in Europe has always “been a must,” but his customers have been asking for more in recent weeks. “Since the beginning of 2025, in addition to data residency guarantees, customers have actively asked us to use cloud providers that are natively European companies,” Schmidt says, adding that some of his services have been moved to Nöbauer’s Exoscale.
Harry Staight, a spokesperson for AWS, says it is “not accurate” that customers are moving from AWS to EU alternatives. “Our customers have control over where they store their data and how it is encrypted, and we make the AWS Cloud sovereign-by-design,” Straight says. “AWS services support encryption with customer managed keys that are inaccessible to AWS, which means customers have complete control of who accesses their data.” Staight says the membership of the PCLOB “does not impact” the agreements around EU-US data sharing and that the CLOUD Act has “additional safeguards for cloud content.” Google and Microsoft declined to comment.
The potential shift away from US tech firms is not just linked to cloud providers. Since January 15, visitors to the European Alternatives website increased more than 1,200 percent. The site lists everything from music streaming services to DDoS protection tools, says Marko Saric, a cofounder of European cloud analytics service Plausible. “We can certainly feel that something is going on,” Saric says, claiming that during the first 18 days of March the company has “beaten” the net recurring revenue growth it saw in January and February. “This is organic growth which cannot be explained by any seasonality or our activities,” he says.
While there are signs of movement, the impact is likely to be small—at least for now. Around the world, governments and businesses use multiple cloud services—such as authentication measures, hosting, data storage, and increasingly data centers providing AI processing—from the big three cloud and tech service providers. Cottlehuber says that, for large businesses, it may take many months, if not longer, to consider what needs to be moved, the risks involved, plus actually changing systems. “What happens if you have a hundred petabytes of storage, it’s going to take years to move over the internet,” he says.
For years, European companies have struggled to compete with the likes of Google, Microsoft, and Amazon’s cloud services and technical infrastructure, which make billions every year. It may also be difficult to find similar services on the scale of those provided by alternative European cloud firms.
“If you are deep into the hyperscaler cloud ecosystem, you’ll struggle to find equivalent services elsewhere,” says Bert Hubert, an entrepreneur and former government regulator, who says he has heard of multiple new cloud migrations to US firms being put on hold or reconsidered. Hubert has argued that it is no longer “safe” for European governments to be moved to US clouds and that European alternatives can’t properly compete. “We sell a lot of fine wood here in Europe. But not that much furniture,” he says. However, that too could change.
Schaake, the former member of the European Parliament, says a combination of new investments, a different approach to buying public services, and a Europe-first approach or investing in a European technology stack could help to stimulate any wider moves on the continent. “The dramatic shift of the Trump administration is very tangible,” Schaake says. “The idea that anything could happen and that Europe should fend for itself is clear. Now we need to see the same kind of pace and leadership that we see with defense to actually turn this into meaningful action.”
Credit: (Matt Burgess is a senior writer at WIRED focused on information security, privacy, and data regulation in Europe. He graduated from the University of Sheffield with a degree in journalism and now lives in London.)
submitted by /u/YourFuture2000
r/Stocks 일일 토론 – 2025년 3월 24일 월요일
Posted by: /u/AutoModerator |
Date: 3/24/2025, 6:30:31 PM
Some helpful links:
Finviz for charts, fundamentals, and aggregated news on individual stocks
Bloomberg market news
StreetInsider news:
Market Check – Possibly why the market is doing what it’s doing including sudden spikes/dips
Reuters aggregated – Global news
If you have a basic question, for example “what is EPS,” then google “investopedia EPS” and click the investopedia article on it; do this for everything until you have a more in depth question or just want to share what you learned.
Please discuss your portfolios in the Rate My Portfolio sticky..
See our past daily discussions here. Also links for: Technicals Tuesday, Options Trading Thursday, and Fundamentals Friday.
submitted by /u/AutoModerator
23앤미, 공동 창업자이자 CEO인 워치츠키 사임과 함께 챕터 11 파산 신청
Posted by: /u/callsonreddit |
Date: 3/24/2025, 10:10:49 PM
The company said Sunday that it will look to sell “substantially all of its assets” through a court-approved reorganization plan.
The San Francisco-based company also said Anne Wojcicki had resigned as CEO effective immediately but would remain on the company’s board. Her resignation comes a couple weeks after a board committee had rejected a nonbinding acquisition proposal from Wojcicki.
Shares of 23andMe Holding Co., which have shed nearly all their value since last spring, plunged below $1 in premarket trading Monday.
The voluntary bankruptcy filing caps months of turmoil for the company, which has struggled to find a profitable business model since going public in 2021.
Last September, all of its independent directors resigned in a rare move following negotiations with Wojcicki, who had been trying to take the company private.
The company then announced in November that it would lay off 40% of its workforce, or more than 200 employees, and discontinue its therapeutics division.
In January, the board’s special committee said it was exploring strategic alternatives, including a possible sale.
Board Chair Mark Jensen said in a statement Sunday that the company has determined that a court-supervised sale was “the best path forward to maximize the value of the business.” He said they also expect it to help the company’s efforts to cut costs and also resolve legal and leasehold liabilities.
Jensen also said, “We are committed to continuing to safeguard customer data and being transparent about the management of user data going forward, and data privacy will be an important consideration in any potential transaction.”
23andMe plans to continue operating its business and has $35 million in debtor-in-possession financing from JMB Capital Partners.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/23andme-files-chapter-11-bankruptcy-125809303.html
submitted by /u/callsonreddit
– (03/24) 내 관심 종목 목록 – 일부 보류된 관세로 인한 소폭의 시장 반등
Posted by: /u/WinningWatchlist |
Date: 3/24/2025, 10:15:43 PM
News: US Treasuries Fall on Signs That Trump Will Dilute April Tariffs
This has resulted in a market bounce and overall means that markets will likely NOT be as impacted by tariffs as they were expecting.
The tariff game Trump is playing reminds me of that scene from the office: “You have no idea the physical toll three vasectomies have on a person! Snip Snap! Snip Snap! Snip Snap!” -Michael Scott.
Anyway back to the watchlist.
TSLA (Tesla)- Seen a significant bounce in TSLA due to the news of the lessened (supposedly) future tariffs—interested in seeing if we can break above $260 at open; otherwise, not interested and likely still will be negatively biased. This might actually be reacting a little positively due to BYD’s blowout earnings. BYD reported $107B annual revenue for the year and are close to TSLA’s profit! Mainly concerned in the long run about margin compression due to pricing cuts, increased competition in the EV space, macro headwinds, and of course, Elon making fork sculptures in the White House but no one appreciating them.
MSTR (MicroStrategy)- MicroStrategy buys 6,911 more of the underlying, now holds over 506k, currently at 2x premium. Nothing too interesting to note beyond the typical upwards move from whenever MSTR announces a buy of the underlying. We’ve bounced slightly off the lows, but worth noting that the underlying is also rose from news that Trump might use his gold holdings to buy more. I always keep in mind MSTR’s heavy dependence on underlying performance, regulatory scrutiny, and volatility, of course. Related tickers to watch on this are RIOT and COIN/HOOD.
LUNR (Intuitive Machines)- Reported strong Q4 and FY24 results. Q4 revenue of $54.7M (+80% YoY) and FY24 revenue of $228.0M (nearly 3x YoY).
Backlog reached $328.3M (+22% YoY), with projected positive run-rate Adj. EBITDA by year-end. Overall backlog seemed to be the second most important factor, signifies that there is future revenue and they are far more financially stable than anticipated and even profitable by year end! I have a very small position long. Going to bail if we break below $7 but overall I think there are many tailwinds that can help LUNR. LUNR’s main risks are execution risk tied to lunar missions (beginning of this month saw the stock fall close to 50% in a single day), contract delays, reliance on government funding, and high R&D intensity with limited margin buffer/no defined return. Also watching RKLB on this.
AZEK (The AZEK Company)- James Hardie to acquire AZEK in a cash/stock deal valued at $8.75B (including debt). AZEK holders to receive $26.45 cash + 1.034 JHX shares, totaling ~$53/share (as of premarket prices). These hybrid stock/cash acquisitions can fluctuate in price because of how the acquirer pays with their own stock. Typical M&A risks apply such as integration risk, housing market softness, FX exposure (James Hardie also trades in Australia IIRC), regulatory risk, etc.
Earnings: OKLO
submitted by /u/WinningWatchlist
2월 유럽 시장에서 폭스바겐과 BMW 그룹의 전기차 판매량이 테슬라를 넘어섰습니다. 🚗⚡
Posted by: /u/callsonreddit |
Date: 3/24/2025, 10:22:25 PM
Elon Musk’s all-electric brand is facing a loyalty test in Europe after the close ally of U.S. President Donald Trump openly supported far-right parties in the continent, including with at least two dozen posts on his X platform promoting Germany’s Alternative fur Deutschland.
Musk’s role in politics, rising competition in the EV market and the phasing out of the existing version of its best-selling vehicle, the Model Y, have all impacted sales, Felipe Munoz, Global Analyst at JATO Dynamics, said in a report.
“Brands like Tesla, which have a relatively limited model lineup, are particularly vulnerable to registration declines when undertaking a model changeover,” Munoz said.
Tesla’s battery-electric vehicle (BEV) registrations in 25 European Union markets, the UK, Norway and Switzerland fell on average by 44% from the same month of 2024, to under 16,000 cars sold in February. Its market share in the month fell to 9.6%, the lowest February reading in the last five years.
By comparison, Volkswagen’s BEV sales were up 180% to under 20,000 cars, while the BMW brand and BMW-owned Mini, combined, sold almost 19,000 BEVs in February, the data showed.
Chinese-owned brands, combined, also sold more electric cars than Tesla, JATO Dynamics said.
BYD’s (1211.HK, BYDDY) and Polestar’s (PSNY) BEV sales in the same markets were up respectively 94% and 84% to over 4,000 and over 2,000 cars. Xpeng (XPEV, 9868.HK) sold over 1,000 cars and Leapmotor (9863.HK) almost 900.
BEV sales at Geely (0175.HK, GELYF) -owned Volvo and SAIC (600104.SS)-owned MG, instead, dropped by 30% and 67% respectively, the data showed.
Total car sales in 25 European Union markets, the UK, Norway and Switzerland dropped by 3% to 0.97 million in February, while BEV registrations were up by 25%.
https://finance.yahoo.com/news/volkswagen-bmw-group-electric-cars-114132432.html
submitted by /u/callsonreddit
– 장기적 이익과 단기적 이익
Posted by: /u/CrRory |
Date: 3/24/2025, 10:45:53 PM
Thanks!!
submitted by /u/CrRory
미국 조지아주에서 진행된 암 소송에서 바이엘, 라운드업 제초제 관련 20억 달러 배상 평결 받아 💰
Posted by: /u/WinningWatchlist |
Date: 3/24/2025, 10:57:07 PM
The verdict, which Bayer said on Saturday it would appeal, is one of the largest legal settlements issued in a Roundup-related case and is the latest setback for the group, among the world’s largest seeds and pesticides makers.
Bayer has paid about $10 billion to settle disputed claims that Roundup, based on the herbicide glyphosate, causes cancer. Over 60,000 further cases are pending for which the group has set aside $5.9 billion in legal provisions.
The German pharmaceutical and biotechnology group acquired Roundup as part of its $63 billion takeover of U.S. agrochemical company Monsanto in 2018.
The Georgia verdict includes $65 million in compensatory damages and $2 billion in punitive damages, according to a statement emailed to Reuters by the plaintiff’s law firms Arnold & Itkin LLP and Kline & Specter PC.
Bayer said in a statement it disagreed with the jury’s verdict, as it conflicted with the overwhelming weight of scientific evidence and the consensus of regulatory bodies and their scientific assessments worldwide.
“We believe that we have strong arguments on appeal to get this verdict overturned and the excessive and unconstitutional damage awards eliminated or reduced,” it said.
It said that damages in cases that have reached final judgements have been reduced 90% overall compared with the original jury awards.
Earlier this month, Bayer told U.S. lawmakers it could stop selling Roundup unless they strengthened legal protection against product liability litigation, a financial analyst and person close to the matter told Reuters.
Link: https://www.reuters.com/business/healthcare-pharmaceuticals/bayer-hit-with-2-bln-roundup-verdict-us-state-georgia-cancer-case-2025-03-22/
BAYRY (trades OTC) down 7% on this
https://www.marketwatch.com/investing/stock/bayry
submitted by /u/WinningWatchlist
ZIM, 4월 3일에 주주들에게 순이익의 10%를 배당금으로 지급 예정 💰
Posted by: /u/Admirable_Reception9 |
Date: 3/25/2025, 1:47:23 AM
Israel takes 25% off the top for taxes against US citizens. Making net payment of $2.3775 per share or 15.5% at current price as of this writing. Seems like a no brainer to me. What say you?
submitted by /u/Admirable_Reception9
– $MKC 실적 발표 투자 전략 💰
Posted by: /u/PennyStockWorth |
Date: 3/25/2025, 2:33:11 AM
I’m sure all of us, including myself purchase from their brand, as we grab the cheapest black pepper or chili pepper spice we can find.
They’re a slow moving giant trying to prove that they can attain growth. To justify their P/E of 27.4 which is 20%+ higher than their competitors.
Recently with Trump’s tariffs, doubling on China to 20%, this company will be hit quite hard. McCormick in end of February till now, has received 499 shipments from China + HongKong. Which equates to their highest import from country, second place is Sri Lanka with 268 and third is Spain with 229. FYI these shipments are in thousands of tonnes, very large. (https://www.importinfo.com/mccormick-co-inc)
This news isn’t a surprise, Walmart their biggest customer is pushing back on all suppliers to eat some of the tariff costs so consumers don’t take the hit. If you haven’t noticed, McCormick hasn’t had many hot sales in the spice isles in US stores. I visited Kroger and only sales I found is cheaper brand names. This tells me, they’re likely starting to feel the heat from both sides, consumers and suppliers.
Some more information, there’s lots of Reddit forums where people around the world are boycotting US products. This will harm their international market growth.
Interesting enough, world wide spice prices are dropping MoM. This is a result of US disrupting the demand market. Likely as US companies are requesting farmers to drop their prices, they face demand issues. So they lower them some amounts, yet other countries reap the real benefits of buying them for less (no tariffs).
I don’t think $MKC will drop 20% in a day. I expect a modest correction that will take a week or two, bleeding the stock from $80 to $65, to a healthy P/E of 20 and dividend yield closer to 3.5%.
This is my play for the week.
submitted by /u/PennyStockWorth
4억 원 상당의 포트폴리오에 펀드가 아닌 개별 주식 20개 이상을 보유하는 것은 너무 많은 걸까요? 🤔
Posted by: /u/advan24r |
Date: 3/25/2025, 4:32:07 AM
submitted by /u/advan24r
‘향료 및 향수 분야에서 DSM Firmenich가 저평가되었다고 믿는 이유’
Posted by: /u/ElevatorPitchGuy |
Date: 3/25/2025, 5:20:49 AM
The merger between Dutch DSM and Swiss F&F leader Firmenich in 2022 has created a combined entity that is well-positioned, similar to sector leader Givaudan. However, I believe the complexity of the integration process has left DSM Firmenich underappreciated in the market. Trying to piece the financials together is painful honestly.
Looking ahead, there’s clear visibility on the remaining disposals and the associated proceeds, which I expect will primarily be used for share buybacks(up to 12% of market cap!). This strategy should enable DSM Firmenich to grow revenue in the high single digits annually while expanding EBITDA margins into the low twenties. I anticipate organic adjusted EPS growth exceeding +10% per year, complemented by a dividend yield of over 2%.
All of this points to a total shareholder return (TSR) exceeding 12% per year at an unchanged multiple, which given the stability of the sector is attractive in my view.
Anyone looking into F&F or DSFIR?
submitted by /u/ElevatorPitchGuy
* **차익 실현 조언*** **수익 실현 권고*** **이익 실현 꿀팁** 🍯* **차익 실현 타이밍** ⏰* **수익 챙기세요!** 💰
Posted by: /u/Upset_Letter275 |
Date: 3/25/2025, 5:52:52 AM
I am a relatively new investor, looking to avoid some early mistakes, so I apologize if this question is too basic for this group.
I need help understanding if a certain strategy is terrible. I am using made up numbers for the sake of simplicity.
Let’s say I were to have a 50k portfolio, diversified over about 25 stocks, and on a given week, the portfolio as a whole is up 5k or 10%. For my personal situation, it is important to secure gains. Is it stupid to every week, take any (if any) profits over 50k? Let’s say I considered this 50k my “investing money” that I was comfortable risking, but want to try and secure profit above that. Is it a poor idea to take profits weekly or whenever they get to 5-10% by selling a bit of each of the 25 stocks?
Thanks in advance.
submitted by /u/Upset_Letter275
– 이자나 배당금을 지급하지 않는 저위험 ETF를 찾고 있습니다.
Posted by: /u/randombetch |
Date: 3/25/2025, 5:56:06 AM
Best I could find was SGOV, but I would have to sell once a month before the dividend hits.
Any bond ETF that accrues value rather than paying out dividends?
submitted by /u/randombetch
– ‘$TECK: 장기 구리 투자처인가, 인수 대상인가? (글로브 앤 메일 심층 분석)’
Posted by: /u/MarshallGrover |
Date: 3/25/2025, 6:36:24 AM
The Story:
QB2 Mine: This is Teck’s coveted copper mine. They aim to ramp up production to 300,000 tonnes/year. It’s the linchpin of their pivot to becoming a top-10 copper producer.
Teck’s CEO is between a rock and a hard place (mining pun not intended). Therein lies a potential investment opportunity: They can either succeed at becoming a top-10 copper producer, or, if they stumble, an acquisition target (Glencore already bought their metallurgical coal business).
Bull Case: Copper demand (EVs, AI, grid) increases → Teck becomes a top-10 producer → $TECK goes up.
Bear Case (with a bullish upside): Execution stumbles → Glencore/Anglo (or others) pounce at (hopefully) a premium.
My Take:
Holding shares + eyeing 2026 40−40−50 calls (long runway for copper thesis).
Management has frustrated me, but the optionality here is intriguing.
Discussion Points:
Long-term investors: Is Teck’s copper pivot worth the volatility? (I can tell you it has been a roller-coaster ride so far.)
Traders: Are LEAPS the move, or is the timing too tricky? (I tend to think the latter, but curious what your thoughts are.)
submitted by /u/MarshallGrover
– “FEDEX와 ADOBE에 대한 생각은 어떠신가요?”
Posted by: /u/Plane-Isopod-7361 |
Date: 3/25/2025, 6:46:24 AM
FEDEX has dropped to 15 PE. They will be hard hit by recession. But how much lower can it go? Some day it will have to come back to 20 or 25 PE. Does it make a good long term buy?
submitted by /u/Plane-Isopod-7361
참고링크
투자 관련 참고할 만한 웹사이트 목록입니다.