關於 f stock price ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

The season of mooncakes is fast approaching again!

ALTHOUGH the Mid Autumn celebration will be different this year, it will definitely trigger the instinct of belonging and value of love among family members even though many cannot get together due to the Covid-19 pandemic.

For mooncake lovers or those wondering where to get some to gift your loved ones, we've compiled various attractive packages for you to stock up on the best ones out there! We have limited message card (while stocks last) for those who wants to send greeting and message.

We hope in this Mid Autumn festival will bring more blessings, optimal health and lasting harmony to all of you. Stay Safe!

千层糕月饼试过了吗？里面的馅是千层糕哟,是不是很特别？千万不要错过哦,—年只有—次而已🤗😋

我们诚意为您打造独—无二,更贝心意的中秋伴手礼
饭格盖子可以做 “客制化“ 祝福语和中秋素材雕刻。

✅2021 Mooncake price list

✅Alacarte layer mooncake*

✅Snow skin*
RM17 Mocha Coffee
RM18 Original Pure lotus
RM18 Pandan lotus
RM19 Belgium Chocolate
RM25 Musang king

*Package A*
Snow skin
*RM62*
1 Belgium Chocolate layer mooncake
1 Mocha Coffee Layer mooncake
1 Pure Lotus mooncake *(egg yolk)*
1 Pandan Lotus mooncake

*Package B*
Snow skin layer mooncake
*RM68*
1 Belgium Chocolate
1 Original Pure Lotus
1 Pandan Lotus
1 Mocha Coffee

*Package C*
Snow skin layer mooncake
*RM78*
1 Musang King
1 Belgium Chocolate
1 Pandan Lotus
1 Original Pure Lotus

*Package D*
Baked skin layer mooncake
*RM78*
1 Belgium Chocolate
1 Original Pure Lotus
1 Pandan Lotus
1 Mocha Coffee

*Package E*
Snow skin layer mooncake *(3D)*
*RM88*
1 Belgium Chocolate
1 Original Pure Lotus
1 Pandan Lotus
1 Mocha Coffee

*Package F*
Baked skin layer mooncakes *(3D)*
*RM98*
1 Belgium Chocolate
1 Original Pure Lotus
1 Pandan Lotus
1 Mocha Coffee

#mooncake
#IamWongAnnzz
#Journeywithannzz
#Annzz寻味之旅
#layermooncake

舊文重貼：

2020年7月5日 ·

【我如何運用法律與經濟學在投資決策：營業中斷保險】

2004年左右我就曾為文記錄如何從消費者保護法中的「科技抗辯（state of art）」判斷當年因止痛藥Vioxx瑕疵陷入集體訴訟法律風險、股價腰斬的默克藥廠，其實真正面臨的風險並不高，並大膽$26美元危機入市，兩年半後$50多美元陸續獲利了結。
這部份可以參考後來2018年寫得更清楚的【效率市場假說是錯誤的】一文。
這是一次靠法律專業知識的價值投資操作。
近日因Covid-19在美國失控的疫情，我們又看到新一波影響更廣的法律爭議浮出抬面：營業中斷（business interruption）。
美國各州政府的封城（lockdown）措施使得許多中小企業面臨無法營業、營收中斷、現金流鎖死的倒閉危機。原本這些中小企業購買的商業保險，幾乎都有「營業中斷條款」，此條款大概涵蓋範疇如下（以Allstate公司為例）：
1. 預期收入損失（For lost income from the destroyed merchandise (minus expenses you may have already paid, such as shipping).Your pre-loss earnings are the basis for reimbursement under business interruption coverage. Lost earnings, also known as the actual loss sustained, are typically defined as revenues minus ongoing expenses. ）
2. 額外支出（ For extra expenses if you must temporarily relocate your business because of the fire (for example, the cost of rent at the temporary location).）
然而近日上百萬家申請保險賠償的中小企業卻遭到保險公司拒付，理由是：「Covid-19疫情並未造成實質物理損失（actual physical loss）」。
什麼？賠到當內褲還叫沒有損失？這是怎麼一回事？
一、美國商業保險營業中斷（business interruption）條款法律爭議
多數保險公司紛紛於近日在各自網站上強調「實質物理損失（actual physical loss）的存在是申請保險支付的先決條件」。實質物理損失在保險公司方面的定義為：真實損害（damage）造成營業設備、不動產失去部分或全部原本功能/效用，造成商業收入損失。
換言之，目前美國保險公司的態度是 -- 病毒並未造成中小企業保戶物理上營業設備或不動產失去運作能力，病毒讓人致病又不讓機器廠房店面生病，當然不構成支付賠償金的條件。
中小企業主的立場顯然相反 -- 病毒與政府封城措施造成營業上之不可能，我當初買保險不正是為了這種不可預期之風險？沒了收入但租金、工資與各項支出依然照付，損失哪裡不真實不存在？
為何保險公司可以如此狹隘限縮解釋？這是因為此類商業保險的營業中斷條款最早源自於美國南北內戰時期，當時的商家因戰爭破壞或徵調的關係，其所擁有的商業設備或店面因此不再能持續生產失去收入，在此侷限條件下商界所應運而生的保險制度。故，美國保險法律與習慣上，對實質物理損失的看法是有歷史累積，而因循前例恰恰是普通法（common law）的核心邏輯。
可是現代世界與南北戰爭相差100多年，難道法律上都沒有可以擴張或改變的突破口？
有的，而此問題的法律突破口在一個我想台灣讀者大概都想不到的關鍵點 -- 「附著與污染」。
⟪附著與污染⟫
附著概念在1980、1990年代都已經有州法院判決提供了初步概念，但最標誌性、最多後來者引用的則是2002年康乃迪克州聯邦地方法院的⟪Yale University v. CIGNA Ins. Co.⟫一案。
此案中耶魯大學於1980年代的建築外牆塗漆後來證實含有重金屬鉛與石棉，造成第三人健康受損。耶魯大學根據產物保險條款，要求保險公司支付賠償金。保險公司稱：「塗漆又不影響建築物原本功用，不構成物理性實質損害。」拒絕賠償。
官司先在康乃迪克州州法院打，州法院也是採取與保險公司相同的限縮解釋。
但後來官司打到聯邦地方法院，聯邦地院卻採取擴張解釋：「附著」於耶魯大學建築物上的油漆，實質上「污染（contaminated）」了建築物，使其一部或全部失去了原本功用，因此構成實質物理損害。
此觀點在2009年也於⟪Essex Ins. Co. v. BloomSouth Flooring Corp.⟫案得到位於麻州的聯邦第一巡迴法院支持，認為附著於財產上的「惡臭（odor）」也是種能造成實質物理損害的汙染。
這也是為什麼目前我們看到針對Covid-19相關幾百個保險訴訟案中，最活躍的佛羅里達州律師John Houghtaling II主張：「『附著』於建築物、商業設施表面的冠狀病毒也是一種造成實質物理損害的汙染」。即便事實上多數公衛專家均指出目前科學證據顯示，Covid-19主要還是透過人傳人機制傳染，透過附著物體表面傳染案例屬於極少數特例。
因為熟悉英美法的人都知道，common law的先例是一個比較可能勝訴的框架，律師多盡量把訴之主張想辦法塞進成功框架裡，即便看起來很彆扭。要是跳脫既有框架另創新法律見解，則勝訴機率很可能大減。
但前述「附著與污染」見解並非每個法院都買單，例如紐約州州法院在2002年與2014年不同判決中都否定此擴張見解，堅持南北戰爭留下的狹義解釋。
可這就進入我們第二個重點...
二、經濟學角度切入：
各州法院之間對於營業中斷（business interruption）的法律定義不同勢必會增加各州中小企業與保險公司各自在營運上的不確定性。當然，這也會增加再保險公司的不確定性。
依據美國法架構，各州法律見解不同牽涉到跨州商務，是有高度可能最後進入聯邦最高法院以求一統一見解。然而法律訴訟程序的曠日廢時將使得中小企業不見得有足夠資金支撐到訴訟結果，但反之，希冀減少損失的保險公司們卻有相當高誘因要把戰場拖到最高法院。
從經濟學競爭（competitiveness）的概念切入，中小企業方也必將嘗試繞過既有遊戲規則，即法律程序，試圖建立有利於自己的新遊戲規則。
於是乎我們就見到美國知名四大主廚--Daniel Boulud （米其林兩顆星）, Thomas Keller（米其林三顆星）, Wolfgang Puck（米其林一顆星） 以及 Jean-Georges Vongerichten（米其林三顆星）-- 結盟，並於今年3月底去電美國總統川普，要求逼迫保險公司支付停業的商業損失。
川普果然也在4月份內部會議上提出：「他知悉保險公司對多年支付保費的餐廳業者雨天收傘一事，雖然他也知道保險公司保單涵蓋範圍有限，但如果支付賠償金是公平的，則保險公司就應該支付。（... saying restaurateurs had told him they paid for business-interruption coverage for decades but now they need it and insurers don’t want to pay. He said he understood that some policies have pandemic exclusions, adding: “I would like to see the insurance companies pay if they need to pay, if it’s fair.）」
熟悉制度經濟學的朋友都知道，當「無主收入」出現時，意味著租值消散（rent dissipation），也代表著整體社會的浪費。租值消散是整個經濟學最難掌握的高級概念，許多有名的經濟學家或教授，甚至某些諾貝爾獎得主，也不見得能正確理解並掌握此概念，本文並不打算詳談，請有興趣的讀者自行參考我過去幾篇舊文。
就我所知，一般經濟學者未曾討論「準租值消散（rent dissipation on depend）」狀況 -- 在法律定義未由最高法院統一見解前，被保險人無從得知是否可以取得保險賠償金；保險人雖暫時對保費有所有權，但一旦訴訟發生依會計原則也必須劃出一部分作為賠償準備金。可是在真實世界，我們目前不存在比曠日廢時的司法或所費不貲的政治遊說（包含政治獻金/賄絡），更有效率且廣為接受的制度來安排這樣的權利衝突。
（此處on depend概念類同於英美財產法中的on depend概念，我就不岔題解釋）
這是說，從經濟分析角度看，在統一法律見解未出現前，此狀況是一種社會費用，以租值消散形式暫時存在。
這就轉到本文的第三個重點，身為證券市場投資人，怎麼看怎麼應對？
三、投資人角度
在日常法律爭議上，此類「未有最終判決前，權利範圍或收入歸屬處於未定狀態」的狀況實屬常見。換個角度說，其實這些案件多屬於個體性風險，即便在系統內會產生一定權利範圍/未來收入預期影響，可幾乎都不會構成「系統性風險」。
但此次對「營業中斷」定義爭議卻碰上歷史罕見的大規模被迫停業狀況，根據美國普查局 (United States Census Bureau)的資料顯示，截至今年5月8日，因被迫停業而申請Paycheck Protection Program (PPP)的中小企業高達360萬家，借款金額達$5370億美元。4月26日～5月2日該週資料更是超過51.4%企業受到疫情影響（見圖）。
有保險公司代表說得清楚：保險原理是基於「大數法則」，亦即平時由多數人分別出資一小部分，於個別性風險實現時支付賠償金彌補其風險。但若「近乎所有出資者的風險都實現」，保險公司根本不可能同時支付所有被保險人賠償金，這已經不是個別性風險而是系統性風險，保險公司只能宣告破產。
2008年金融風暴主因之一也是原本以為透過大數法則建立的CDOs，包裹大量不同債信的房貸債權很安全，結果不堪系統性風險實現而崩潰。
我在今年五月份【美國失業人數破2千萬為何股市上漲？再來怎麼看？】一文中特別強調我們應該多關注CLOs（Collateralized Loan Obligation）潛在違約危機，也是著眼於此類別個別性風險轉為系統性風險的可能性激增。
同樣的，前述營業中斷保險條款無論美國法院最終見解為何，都很可能發生二選一結果：「大規模中小企業因封城出現流動性枯竭引發的大規模倒閉風險」對上「保險公司支付如此大量賠償金恐陷大規模財務危機」。
即便是繞過法律程序，透過政治遊說施壓美國行政單位，依然繞不開上述兩項風險必然實現其中一種的局面。
根據富國銀行（Wells Fargo）的推估，美國目前含有營業中斷條款的保險金額約$8千億美元，其中50%透過再保險方式轉嫁。值得慶幸的是我並未查到此類保險有轉化為其他衍生性金融商品，這表示風險可能未如CDO、CLO般倍數放大。富國銀行認為美國商業保險公司應該有能力吸收$1500億左右的賠償，但根據美國普查局資料受影響商家超過5成，意味著假設$4千億索賠發生時，即便能移轉$2千億至再保險公司，依然還有約$500億的差額。
我們要特別注意的是保險公司收到保險金後必須轉為投資方能獲利，這表示當股市下挫時保險公司的資產也會跟著縮水，償付能力也會隨之下降。例如巴菲特的Berkshire Hathaway旗下保險集團於今年第一季因支付保險賠償金淨損$4.89億美元，但同時集團資產卻也記入$550億資產減損。
故，我前述二擇一風險實現時，會不會引發股市下挫傷害保險公司資產也值得注意。
另一方面，有誘因把法律戰拖到聯邦最高法院的保險公司即便此策略成功執行，流動性短缺的中小企業恐怕提早實現第一種風險，對整體經濟乃至於股市同樣不利。
身為投資人還要再小心的，是本屆Fed主席Jerome H. Powell屢破歷史紀錄的灑鈔救市風格，也很可能在前述因保險爭議而生之系統性風險可能實現時再度開啟瘋狂印鈔機制，而在經濟學上會有什麼效果，我在【美國失業人數破2千萬為何股市上漲？再來怎麼看？】一文已經講得清楚，簡言之：
a. 證券資產價格將局部出現嚴重通貨膨脹。尤其這段時間持有美國資產者獲利率可能超越持有其他國家資產者。
b. 各國因貨幣政策多少掛著美元，而將出現輸入性通膨。
c. 寬鬆貨幣產生的貨幣幻覺（money illusion）將埋下更多錯誤投資地雷。
d. 每次寬鬆貨幣救市都是以美元地位為代價。當美元地位跌破均衡點，人民幣等主要貨幣不再支撐美元，美國將出現全面性嚴重通貨膨脹，美國債券價格將大跌，許多州政府、市政府有破產可能。此時，持有美元與美國境內資產者恐受相當傷害。
結論：
我批評過很多次，坊間常見的「價值投資」多半只是拿幾個財務數字挪來搬去，從嚴謹的經濟學角度看這只是看圖說故事的自我欺騙行為。我認為真正有效的價值投資，是依據如經濟學這類具備科學解釋力的理論架構，蒐集真實世界的關鍵侷限條件與條件轉變從而預測未來，並嘗試從中獲利。
掌握真實世界的關鍵侷限條件必須：a. 累積大量、多範圍的各種知識，其中法學、經濟學、基礎物理/化學/醫學乃至於某些工程實務等都是必須；與b. 有足夠的能力從無數侷限條件中分離出「關鍵」。
我也談過，Benjamin Graham以降至巴菲特的傳統價值投資法最大缺失在於「忽略貨幣因素」，一旦出現極端貨幣現象時，價值投資幾乎失效。這部份價值投資者必須自行強攻以價格理論出發的貨幣學來彌補。
巴菲特老夥伴Charlie Munger認為投資者需具備各種不同知識體系，吾人深以為然。此文為一又牛刀小試。
參考資料：
✤ Yale University v. CIGNA Ins. Co., 224 F. Supp. 2d 402 (D. Conn. 2002)
✤ Matzner v. Seaco Ins. Co., 1998 WL 566658 (Mass. Super. Aug. 12, 1998)
✤ Arbeiter v. Cambridge Mut. Fire Ins. Co., 1996 WL 1250616, at *2 (Mass. Super. Mar. 15, 1996)
✤ Essex Ins. Co. v. BloomSouth Flooring Corp., 562 F.3d 399, 406 (1st Cir. 2009)
✤ Roundabout Theatre Co. v. Cont’l Cas. Co., 302 A.D. 2d 1, 2 (N.Y. App. Ct. 2002)
✤ Newman, Myers, Kreines, Gross, Harris, P.C. v. Great N. Ins. Co., 17 F. Supp. 3d 323 (S.D.N.Y. 2014)
✤ The Wall Street Journal, "Companies Hit by Covid-19 Want Insurance Payouts. Insurers Say No." June 30, 2020
✤ Steven N.S. Cheung, "A Theory of Price Control," The Journal of Law and Economics, Vol. XVII, April 1974, pp. 53-71
✤ Willam H. Meckling & Armen A. Alchian, "Incentives in The United States," American Economic Review 50 (May 1960), pp. 55-61
✤ Milton Friedman, "Money and the Stock Market," Journal of Political Economy, 1988, Vol. 96, no. 2
✤ Irving Fisher, "The Money Illusion," 1928
文章連結
https://bit.ly/3gsJK6l

🌻另一個Zoom會議(第二次貼......有補上一些內容)
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.
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)

🌻Morgan Stanley Mid-year Investor Outlook: A tricky transition

https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/midyear-2021-global-markets-outlook

🌻在您投資生涯中, 有沒有一些觀念讓您受用很多?
下面這位投資名人的好觀念影響我很深. 他的意思是, 一般投資人, 只要能説出三個買一家公司的理由, 就很夠了. 這也迫使我, 每次在買股票時, 問自己對這家公司的了解有多少. 也會去衡量公司的優點與缺點在哪裡.

"It is vital (重要的) that you know what you own, that if I asked you on the street why you like a certain stock, you can give me three reasons. If you don't know how they make their money, who their key clients are and what they make if, then I will tell you that you are over your head and should not own individual stocks."

全文在此:
Jim Cramer: In Times Like This, Go for the Easy Money
Look at the stocks you own. Can you tell me why you've got them? If you can't answer the following three questions, then have a look at several I like right now.

We've endured the meme stock craziness, with all of its love for heavily shorted stocks. We have watched the collapse of bitcoin to levels viewed as shocking, even if they are still more than double where they were not that long ago. We've dealt with Fed officials making it clear that they are no longer on the side of the bulls or the bears. They are on the side of job growth, but are wary of inflation. We've seen the end of the rush to get vaccines, which means that millions of people are going to get the new COVID variant, because there is no natural immunity to it. We've watched as the hopes for an infrastructure bill have collapsed. We've endured shortages of everything from chips to plastic to imported goods and labor.

And we're still standing, yeah, yeah, yeah.

Yep, we are in one of those halcyon moments, where the masks are off -- even if they shouldn't be -- and Americans are back doing what they do best: consume, spend, go out to eat and then consume and spend some more.

There are times in the stock market where the collective mindset is revealed. This is one of those times: Things are cool, it's not a big moment, there's no real news for a bit, it's the historically strong period and we can reach some conclusions about where we are.

When things are like this, it is important to remember that buyers like to revert to tried-and-true companies that thrive no matter what. These are companies that have an edge and are better at what they do than other companies.

You know that I am a great believer in index funds, that the average person doesn't have the time or the inclination to research individual stocks. It's a difficult barrier. I think you need to make time to read the quarterly report and listen to the conference call, to Google articles and, if possible, get some research about the companies you own. It is vital that you know what you own, that if I asked you on the street why you like a certain stock, you can give me three reasons. If you don't know how they make their money, who their key clients are and what they make if, then I will tell you that you are over your head and should not own individual stocks. I am reminded by this, because, once again, without a mask, I can be recognized and if I am not holding "Nvidia the Second," I can carry on a conversation.

I have had many in the last two weeks and when I have asked this litany of questions, I find myself at a loss as to why almost no one knew what they owned. But they thirsted for individual stocks, because they, like me, think things are better post pandemic. No, that's not a facetious comment. Many, many stocks did better with a stay-at-home economy. A huge number.

So what do I do? I revert to what others do when you are stumped about how to stay in touch with stocks, but want to do less homework. That means buying stocks that are accessible, not stocks like Unity (U) or Snowflake (SNOW) or Twilio (TWLO) or Okta (OKTA) .

I revert to normal businesses people know and I suggest they Google some articles, peruse the conference call, but, above all, like the company's products so you can buy more if it goes down.

Here's some that I have been telling people I like:

First is Ford (F) . I think the Ford lineup is amazing. The electric F-150 series will be incredible. I am eager to get a Maverick for my family, because it is a smaller pickup that will get the job done for the myriad little things I need to do with this farm I bought from that crazy bitcoin foray. I like the competitive edge of the CEO, who says he is going to bury Elon Musk when the Lightning comes out. I even think the Bronco is cool as all get out. Most important, though? I think the chip shortage is ending. My semiconductor friends are telling me the foundries are producing more feature-rich chips and that means Ford can pump out the trucks small business people love and need. Plus, the used car prices at last have plateaued, according to their most important pricing index. Halcyon times.

Second, Costco (COST) : The samples are coming back. Tell me you don't love the samples. You need things in bulk. You want low prices. You want to get all of the things that people don't think of with Costco, like insurance, hearing-aids -- hey, they are a fortune -- jewelry, things around the house. You go and you will buy far more than you first came for. My kind of store.

The kids love this American Eagle Outfitters (AEO) , which we just bought for my charitable trust, which you can follow along by joining the Action Alerts PLUS club. Jay Schottenstein, the CEO, came on "Mad Money" recently and it's clear that his Aerie model has real staying power: 26 consecutive quarters of double digit growth. No flash in the pan, that one. Number one brand in jeans for the 15 to 25 year old group. The best in the mall. How did I know this? I see the credit card bills.

I got up this morning to do my physical therapy. I have been doing it ever since I hurt my back in February. I have this really cool pair of sneakers that fit me perfectly and I love them, but I am fortunate enough to have a vacation house and I am always taking those shoes with me.

So I went on Amazon (AMZN) this morning and lo and behold I saw them for half price. I bought two pairs. Then I went over everything I have bought in the last year and got a bunch of those things. Then I bought a pair of binoculars, because mine were stolen. I paid half price.

Yep, Amazon's universal. I was talking to Alexa, while I was ordering, getting some new music on, asking questions. I saw that despite all of the Sturm und Drang of Amazon being late with things, all the delivery dates were within range. I didn't click on any ads, and I didn't need the speed of Web Services, but the whole thing reminded me about how special the darned company is. I don't care if it's ahead or behind plan for the moment. I would just buy some more when it goes down.

Finally, Apple (AAPL) . I think people who don't own Apple should look what they are holding at this very moment. Yes, right now. Or look at what's in your lap or on the table besides your fork. And then think about the bill you paid last night without knowing it. Think about what you bought in the App store yesterday. Think about what would happen if it would break or get stolen or, left in the Uber (UBER) , or heaven forbid, be dropped into the pool or in the, yes, toilet.

There, that's what you buy in halcyon times. Stocks of companies you know that if they go lower, because things get less halcyon, you are fine with it and buy more. If things go up, believe me, you will participate.

So accept the moment. Don't try for the hard money. Go for the easy kind. That's the best kind.

https://realmoney.thestreet.com/jim-cramer/jim-cramer--15692051

Picture: 牡丹(peony)花開. 恨不得院子裡有一塊地是牡丹園.