Connect with us

Investment

Total Beats Earnings Estimates, Boosts Renewables Investment – Yahoo Canada Finance

Published

 on


The Canadian Press

Polish pride, free speech at stake in Holocaust libel case

WARSAW, Poland — A Warsaw court is due to deliver a verdict Tuesday in a closely watched libel case in which one side sees Polish national pride at stake and the other the future independence of Holocaust research. Two prominent Polish scholars, Barbara Engelking and Jan Grabowski, are being sued by the 81-year-old niece of a wartime village elder who argues a book they co-edited defames her deceased uncle’s memory by suggesting he had a role in the death of Jews. The uncle is mentioned in a brief passage of a 1,600-page historical work, “Night Without End: The Fate of Jews in Selected Counties of Occupied Poland.” The woman, Filomena Leszczynska, is backed by the Polish League Against Defamation, a group that fights harmful and untruthful depictions of Poland. It argues the woman’s uncle, Edward Malinowski, was a hero who helped save Jews during World War II and accuses the scholars of research errors that resulted in Malinowski appearing as someone who betrayed Jews to the Germans. Malinowski was acquitted in 1950 of being an accomplice to the killing by Germans of 18 Jews in a forest near the village of Malinowo in 1943. The anti-defamation group says the authors slandered an innocent man and deprived the niece of her rights, including the right to pride and national identity. The plaintiffs are suing Grabowski and Engelking for 100,000 zlotys ($27,000) in damages and a published apology. Grabowski, a Polish-Canadian history professor at the University of Ottawa, and Engelking, founder and director of the Polish Center for Holocaust Research in Warsaw, are among Poland’s most prominent Holocaust researchers. They were among several who researched and wrote parts of the two-volume work. They view the case as an attempt to discredit their overall findings and discourage other researchers from investigating the truth about Polish involvement in the German mass murder of Jews. The plaintiffs’ lawyer, Monika Brzozowska-Pasieka, denied there was any attempt to stifle research or speech. She said it was a civil case brought by people who feel they or their families have been defamed. “The ruling will determine whether the researchers properly examined the sources, made a correct assessment of these sources and applied an appropriate research methodology,” Brzozowska-Pasieka said in a statement to The Associated Press. Poland was occupied by Nazi Germany during the war and its population subjected to mass murder and slave labour. While 3 million of the country’s 3.3 million Jews died, so did more than 2 million mostly Christian Poles. Poles resisted the Nazis at home and abroad and never collaborated as a state with the Third Reich. Thousands of Poles have been recognized by Yad Vashem in Israel for risking their own lives to save Jews. Yet amid the more than five years of occupation, there were also some Poles who betrayed Jews to the Germans. The topic was taboo during the communist era and each new revelation of Polish wrongdoing in recent years has sparked a backlash. The libel case has raised concerns internationally because it comes amid a broader state-backed historical offensive. Last week, a journalist, Katarzyna Markusz, was questioned by police on suspicions she slandered the Polish nation, a crime with a penalty of up to three years in prison, for an article that mentioned “Polish participation in the Holocaust.” Jewish leaders in Poland issued a statement Monday saying they have seen an intensification of attempts to “repress historians and journalists … who are trying to honestly present the fate of Polish Jews under the occupation.” Poland’s conservative authorities don’t deny that some Poles harmed Jews, but they believe the focus on Polish wrongdoing obscures the fact that most of these killings occurred under German orders and terror. The government’s pushback against what it calls a “pedagogy of shame” is popular with many Poles. The Polish League Against Defamation is ideologically aligned with the country’s ruling party, and the scholars see that as an indication the case is part of a government-backed effort to promote its historical narrative. “Night Without End” focuses of the fates of Jews who escaped as the Nazis were “liquidating” ghettos and sending inhabitants to extermination camps. It documents cases of Jews who tried to hide, with those who survived doing so thanks to the help of Poles. It also presents extensive evidence of individual Poles who collaborated in betraying Jews to the Nazis. At the centre of the case is testimony given in 1996 by a Jewish woman, born Estera Siemiatycka, to the USC Shoah Foundation, a Los Angeles-based group that collects Holocaust-era oral histories. When she spoke, she had changed her name to Maria Wiltgren. Wiltgren, who is no longer alive, described Malinowski, the elder of the village of Malinowo, as someone who helped her to survive under an assumed “Aryan” identity by putting her in a group of Poles sent to work in Germany after she had purchased false papers. But she also said he cheated her out of money and possessions. Two of her sons testified that she considered him a “bad man.” The book states that Wiltgren “realized that he was an accomplice in the deaths of several dozen Jews who had been hiding in the woods and had been turned over to the Germans, yet she gave false testimony in his defence at his trial after the war.” Engelking, who wrote the chapter, acknowledged one error. In the book she mentioned that when Wiltgren was in Germany during the war, she traded with Malinowski. The book didn’t make clear that was a different man with the same name. Engelking argued the mistake had no bearing on the larger question of the village elder’s behaviour toward Jews. The plaintiff’s lawyer, Brzozowska-Pasieka, also pointed to other details that she believes the authors got wrong, including the discrepancy between 18 Jews killed and Engelking’s reference to several dozen deaths. Engelking says she believes they aren’t major issues, and they mean her critics could find no other real fault in the book. ___ Associated Press researcher Randy Herschaft in New York, and AP writer Monika Scislowska in Warsaw, contributed to this report. Vanessa Gera, The Associated Press

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Collaborative Fund Why this could be the right climate for investment – CMC Markets

Published

 on


In part one of this two part series, Lily Bernicker at Collaborative Fund explores the climate investment landscape, looking at where it’s come from and where it’s going.

Climate technology has not been an obvious fit for venture capital. These businesses have rarely found a way to grow large enough, quickly enough.

That said, climate clearly satisfies the venture requirement for massive markets. And as the climate crisis is caused by and affects every part of our global economy, decarbonisation is the biggest investment opportunity for impact and value creation over the next decade.

Given this potential, the question of whether or not venture dollars can be responsibly invested into climate businesses is not if, but when?

2006 seemed like the right moment. An Inconvenient Truth just came out, oil crossed $75 per barrel, and VCs doubled their investments in clean energy in just a year. Investors then went on to put more than $25bn in the sector from 2006-2011 giving rise to the infamous clean tech boom.

But the rush was short lived, and mainstream interest in the sector quickly contracted after the financial crisis and a few high-profile shutdowns, driving early-stage investing down to just 35 deals in 2013.

PWC Analysis of Early-Stage Climate Tech Investments (2013-2019)

At Collaborative Fund, we’ve gradually ramped up deployment from our first major climate investment in Beyond Meat [BYND] in 2015. At the time, plant-based meat alternatives weren’t a radical innovation. They’d been around and geared towards vegans for years.

However, we recognised that demand for healthier substitutes and affinity for brands that align with how consumers see themselves couldn’t be satisfied with existing products, and would only grow. Beyond Meat was the first to make mass market consumers feel good about a healthy and more sustainable choice that doesn’t ask them to compromise on taste, nutrition, or value. This vision convinced us that they could become one of the biggest food companies in the United States.

Since then, we’ve been compelled to do more in the category, encouraged by trends like: increased spend on sustainable products, newly cost-competitive low-carbon technologies, and a wave of experienced founders entering the field.

These shifts have created new opportunities to invest in businesses where mitigating or adapting to climate change is a driver of performance rather than a limitation.

We’ve also been active through some of the industry’s big setbacks. Our first clean energy investment was Dandelion Energy’s seed round in 2017: the same month that the US announced its intent to leave the Paris Agreement and shortly after Solar City dodged a shutdown through their merger with Tesla [TSLA].

While the path to decarbonisation will never be a straight line, there have been irreversible advancements in technology and market pressures that make this generation of climate tech fundamentally different from the last.

As we’ve expanded our climate practice over the last five years, it’s helped us to consistently track how and to what extent the market has changed. Luckily there has been some great research on the first cleantech boom. And there is increasing consensus on why it failed to deliver the returns VCs require, namely: cheap competition, technical challenges, and lack of capital availability.

At Collaborative Fund, we use these challenges as a model to explore how the market has shifted over time.

In the short term, even climate businesses built on mature technology will continue to face financing risk. But as commercialisation timelines get shorter and venture-backed climate businesses start to break out across every industry (not just energy), we anticipate a wave of traditional funding will enter the field.

Businesses that scale by preventing or mitigating the impact of the climate crisis fit squarely within the Collaborative Fund thesis. Markets value companies that are the best at satisfying demand at scale. Markets don’t care (yet) how urgent the climate crisis is or how little time we have to deploy solutions to keep warming below 1.5°C.

Therefore, we don’t either. We’re technology and business model agnostic. We invest in deep tech, software, and everything in between. But we don’t invest in companies that require users to compromise on performance or cost in exchange for climate impact.

This article was originally published by Collaborative fund on 16 December 2020. In Part II, they share the framework that they use to evaluate climate opportunities and what they’re most excited for going forward.

Disclaimer Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results.

CMC Markets is an execution-only service provider. The material (whether or not it states any opinions) is for general information purposes only, and does not take into account your personal circumstances or objectives. Nothing in this material is (or should be considered to be) financial, investment or other advice on which reliance should be placed. No opinion given in the material constitutes a recommendation by CMC Markets or the author that any particular investment, security, transaction or investment strategy is suitable for any specific person.

The material has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research. Although we are not specifically prevented from dealing before providing this material, we do not seek to take advantage of the material prior to its dissemination.

CMC Markets does not endorse or offer opinion on the trading strategies used by the author. Their trading strategies do not guarantee any return and CMC Markets shall not be held responsible for any loss that you may incur, either directly or indirectly, arising from any investment based on any information contained herein.

*Tax treatment depends on individual circumstances and can change or may differ in a jurisdiction other than the UK.

Continue reading for FREE

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Is Twilio Still A Good Investment After Smashing Earnings? – CMC Markets

Published

 on


Twilio (NYSE: TWLO) is an American cloud-based platform-as-a-service business that enables software developers to use digital communication such as calls, texts, and emails to enhance the user experience. After reporting blowout Q4 2020 earnings, and the stock sitting close to all-time highs, is it still a good investment?

This article was originally written by MyWallSt. Read more market-beating insights from the MyWallSt team here.

 

Bull Case

Twilo has been one of the beneficiaries of the “shift to digital”, where companies would adapt to the internet and mobile in ways that could often take years in the past. Since COVID-19 hit, this timeline has been compressed to weeks and months and has acted as a secular tailwind for the company. This is demonstrated in a report published by Twilio last year surveying over 2,500 companies which found that 97% of companies found that the pandemic sped up this acceleration. Furthermore, companies’ digital acceleration strategy was accelerated by an average of six years. This acceleration has benefitted Twilio to date but looks set to continue in the coming years. 

Twilio reported $548.1 million in revenue, an increase of 65% year-over-year, and full-year revenue growth of 55% to $1.76 billion in Q4 2020. It has a diversified revenue base with 27% of sales generated outside of North America and spread across different business types and sizes. 

Whether you are aware of it or not, you have likely come across Twilio’s software in everyday life, whether to verify your number via Whatsapp or getting messages from Lyft or Airbnb.  Along with several high-profile customers, Twilio reported 221,000 active customer accounts as of December 2020, compared to 179,000 a year prior. Twilio has suffered from losing the business of large customers, such as Uber, which accounted for roughly 12% of revenue. However, despite a short-term fall in the stock price, Twilio continued to grow revenue and decrease its customer concentration levels. Today, its top 10 customers account for 13% of revenue, a 1% decrease YoY. The stickiness of its business and increasing spend by customers is demonstrated in its dollar-based net expansion of 139% in Q4. 

A passionate founding CEO is also a positive indicator. Twilio head, Jeff Lawson, has an impressive 95% approval rating on Glassdoor and still owns a large stake in the company. Twilio also has one of the most diverse leadership teams of any publicly-traded company, with women making up 6 out of 13 of its upper management.

Finally, Twilio has acquired SendGrid and Segment over the past 3 years, and while a strategy of growth by acquisition can be risky, it has demonstrated its ability to do so successfully.

 

Bear Case

Twilio’s valuation may be a cause for concern for investors as it is currently trading at roughly 37x price-to-sales ratio. This high multiple will mean that management will need to continue to execute on its forecasts. Twilio is also not the only player in the space, with Microsoft’s Azure Communication Services providing stiff competition. 

Twilio is also still unprofitable despite a great year of revenue growth, reporting a net loss of $490.9 million in fiscal 2020 compared to $307 million a year prior. On an adjusted basis, this loss is lessened due to excluding items such as stock-based compensation. Nevertheless, it is clear that Twilio has some way to go.

Twilio’s gross margins are not as high as other SaaS companies either, coming in at 56% for Q4, a slight decrease YoY. Although management expects 60-65% margins over the long term, this is yet to materialize, and investors should keep an eye on it. 

 

So, Should I Buy Twilio Stock?

Twilio is well-positioned to benefit from a shift to digital during COVID-19 and in a post-pandemic world and the visionary Jeff Lawson at the helm. Twilio has the numbers to back it up and could be a great addition to a portfolio. The stock is likely to be volatile due to the run-up in recent times, but investors should take advantage of any weakness in the stock as it is likely to continue to keep performing.

MyWallSt gives you access to over 100 market-beating stock picks and the research to back them up. Our analyst team posts daily insights, subscriber-only podcasts, and the headlines that move the market. Start your free trial now!

Disclaimer Past performance is not a reliable indicator of future results.

CMC Markets is an execution-only service provider. The material (whether or not it states any opinions) is for general information purposes only, and does not take into account your personal circumstances or objectives. Nothing in this material is (or should be considered to be) financial, investment or other advice on which reliance should be placed. No opinion given in the material constitutes a recommendation by CMC Markets or the author that any particular investment, security, transaction or investment strategy is suitable for any specific person.

The material has not been prepared in accordance with legal requirements designed to promote the independence of investment research. Although we are not specifically prevented from dealing before providing this material, we do not seek to take advantage of the material prior to its dissemination.

CMC Markets does not endorse or offer opinion on the trading strategies used by the author. Their trading strategies do not guarantee any return and CMC Markets shall not be held responsible for any loss that you may incur, either directly or indirectly, arising from any investment based on any information contained herein.

*Tax treatment depends on individual circumstances and can change or may differ in a jurisdiction other than the UK.

Continue reading for FREE

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Investment

Investment Firm for the Ultra-Rich Opens Office in Hong Kong – BNN

Published

 on


(Bloomberg) — Investment firm Cambridge Associates is opening a Hong Kong office, ramping up its focus on Asia amid a surge in wealth in the region.

The Boston-based company that serves clients such as endowments, family offices and pension funds already has offices in Singapore and Beijing. It hired Edwina Ho in February as senior director of business development for Asia and relocated its head of the global private client practice, Mary Pang, to Singapore from San Francisco, according to a statement Monday.

“Asia has long been a key market for Cambridge Associates and we are very excited to be expanding in Hong Kong as the next stage in our mission to provide strong investment performance and excellent service to clients across the region,” said Aaron Costello, the firm’s regional head of Asia, in the statement.

Wealth growth has surged in the region in recent years and the number of people with more than $30 million is forecast to outpace the rest of the world through 2025, according to a Knight Frank report last month. The richest Asia Pacific billionaires are worth a combined $2.5 trillion, almost triple the amount at the end of 2016, data compiled by Bloomberg show.

Cambridge Associates, which has more than $38 billion under management, serves over 230 wealthy individuals and families globally. The company’s owners include the Hall family behind Hallmark greeting cards, the Rothschilds and the Boels of Belgian investment firm Sofina SA.

The rapid wealth growth in Asia has pushed financial firms to turn their focus to the region. HSBC Holdings Plc said it would shift billions of dollars of capital from its investment bank in Europe and the U.S. to fund the expansion of its Asian businesses. Singapore’s DBS Group Holdings Ltd. has seen a rise in accounts for family offices.

The world’s ultra-rich have also flocked to the region to establish their wealth-management shops. Google co-founder Sergey Brin set up a branch of his family office in Singapore, while Bridgewater Associates’ Ray Dalio said in November it would open one there. Vacuum-cleaner mogul James Dyson is another who has his firm in the city-state.

©2021 Bloomberg L.P.

Let’s block ads! (Why?)



Source link

Continue Reading

Trending