September 10, 2018. The only ‘action’ in the Core Portfolio is a buy limit order for HCXZ at $24.65, and it appears this will NOT be filled anytime in the near future. Prices keep going up on potential buys, beyond what we are willing to pay.
Regular readers know we really like Lance Roberts and his free financial advice. He has left his gig on the Houston radio station, and is now producing his own podcast. They are recorded and you can listen on the link below. The is the best free financial program that we have ever found.
When we were in the Corporate World, we had experience in dealing with Amazon. We actually went to their Seattle offices, resulting in quite a contentious discussion. In dealing with them, you learn they are predatory and they really put the screws to manufacturers. BERNIE is RIGHT: READ THIS:
Sen. Bernie Sanders’ criticism of Amazon peaked Wednesday as he and Rep. Ro Khanna, D-Calif., introduced legislation to tax corporations for every dollar that their low-wage workers receive in government health-care benefits or food stamps.
The bill, pointedly called the Stop Bad Employers by Zeroing Out Subsidies, or BEZOS, Act, is aimed at shaming companies like Amazon and Walmart, whose workers rely on public assistance.
For months, Sanders has targeted Amazon, juxtaposing the wealth of CEO Jeff Bezos with reports that Amazon warehouse workers are paid less than industry averages and rely on food stamps.
Bezos is the richest man in the world, with a net worth of more than $168 billion.
“Our legislation gives large, profitable employers a choice: Pay workers a living wage or pay for the public assistance programs their low-wage employees are forced to depend upon,” Sanders said of the proposed law.
For example, if an Amazon worker received $2,000 in food stamps, Amazon would be taxed $2,000 to cover that cost.
Amazon has previously called the Vermont independent’s claims about working conditions in its fulfillment centers “inaccurate and misleading” and a spokesperson declined to further comment on the bill.
According to the poll via Axios, Nike’s numbers “dropped 34 points from a net +69 favorable impression (76% favorable, 7% unfavorable) among consumers to a net +35 favorable impression (60% favorable, 24% unfavorable).”
These numbers are nothing short of devastating for Nike, and with no other news worthy of note, there’s no explanation for the sudden decline other than the company’s commitment to Kaepernick.
According to Axios:
While Nike could face negative purchasing consideration as a result of the campaign, experts argue the sports goods giant likely calculated these risks and deemed that it wouldn’t impact its bottom line significantly, despite any short-term pushback.
According to the poll, before Nike announced Kaepernick as the face of its ad campaign, only 2% of Americans reported hearing something negative about Nike recently. That number increased to 33% after the announcement.
The poll also found that purchasing intent was down after the announcement.
Earlier Morning Consult polling shows that brands have relatively little upside in wading into issues that involve President Trump.
Another key finding of the poll was that Nike’s favorability not only didn’t improve among African Americans, it actually declined. This finding is particularly devastating considering it was widely reported that Nike decided to embrace Kaepernick, in part, to increase their already considerable appeal among blacks.
The report features over 8,000 interviews conducted among American adults, including 1,694 interviews pre-campaign launch (8/26/18 – 9/3/18) and 5,481 interviews post-campaign launch (9/4/18 – 9/5/18). Additionally, Morning Consult conducted a study among 1,168 adults in the U.S. about Nike’s ad and the decision to choose Kaepernick as the face of the campaign.