Friday, February 8, 2019

This Autonomous Navy Ship Just Passed a Huge Milestone

The research arm of the U.S. Navy has successfully sailed an autonomous ship from San Diego to Hawaii and back with little human intervention. That's a huge accomplishment for the Navy, as well as for the contractor who supplied the brains for the vessel.

The Office of Naval Research said the Sea Hunter, a 132-foot-long trimaran designed by Leidos Holdings (NYSE:LDOS), completed the mission without a crew save for short boardings from an escort vessel to monitor electrical and propulsion systems. The voyage was part of a series of tests begun in 2016 and expected to extend through the rest of the year.

The Sea Hunter makes a turn on the Willamette River in Portland, Ore.

The Sea Hunter gets under way on the Willamette River in Portland, Ore. Image source: U.S. Navy photo by John F. Williams.

The ship is at the forefront of an effort by the Navy to rapidly expand its autonomous capabilities, with the service hoping to see the same sort of dramatic expansion of capabilities the Air Force experienced when it first introduced drones over the battlefield in the 1990s. The Sea Hunter is designed to stay at sea for months, hunting for mines, tracking submarines, keeping shipping lanes safe, and collecting intelligence.

The ship was built by privately held Vigor Industrial of Oregon, with Leidos providing the design and the technology to allow it to operate without anyone on board. The technology is based in part on work done for NASA's Jet Propulsion Laboratory for the Mars Exploration Rover.

A bigger Navy at a faction of the cost

While it is hard to imagine the Navy deploying crewless destroyers or larger vessels any time in the foreseeable future, the ability to deploy specialized autonomous craft has the potential to reduce the strain on the service and allow it to focus resources in other areas. The Sea Hunter was first envisioned as a submarine hunter, but as trials have progressed and the Navy has had more time with the ship, the potential use cases for the vessel have grown.

Eventually, the Navy hopes to use autonomous vessels in combat situations, providing sensor data and offensive firepower and to overwhelm and distract enemy radar and surveillance equipment to help shield crewed ships from danger.

While production costs are unclear, the Navy has previously said it believes it can procure autonomous ships fitting the Sea Hunter profile for as little as $20 million apiece and operate them for $15,000 to $20,000 per day. By comparison, a new Arleigh Burke-class destroyer costs $1.8 billion, and with its full crew costs $700,000 per day to operate.

The Pentagon has an ambitious timetable when it comes to uncrewed vessels. In 2016, Robert Work, at the time Deputy Secretary of Defense, said he hoped to see autonomous flotillas operating in the Pacific and Persian Gulf region within five years. Although that deadline will almost certainly be missed, this success of the latest test should provide momentum to the effort.

Disruption in the contractor base?

The push toward autonomous ships will open new opportunities for non-traditional shipbuilders like Leidos and Textron, which has developed its own smaller robotic speedboat.

The impact on more traditional shipbuilders including Huntington Ingalls (NYSE:HII) and General Dynamics (NYSE:GE) is less clear. The Navy is seeking to expand its fleet by more than 25% to upwards of 355 ships, but a key unresolved issue with that plan is the ongoing expense of additional personnel needed to crew the new vessels. If autonomous ships can take over routine missions like data-gathering and patrolling shipping lanes, it could free up personnel and larger ships to take on new roles, and over time, it could reduce the need for that full expansion.

The Sea Hunter at dock in Portland, Ore.

The Sea Hunter during its 2016 christening ceremony in Portland, Ore. Image source: Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency.

The contractors' flagship programs, including Huntington-made aircraft carriers and GD-made Columbia-class submarines, will proceed as scheduled. But longer-term autonomous technology could eat into future demand for destroyers, littoral combat ships, and a planned new frigate.

An optimist would hope that fewer destroyers and frigates would free up personnel and funding for more higher-margin carriers and subs, while a pessimist might fear that as autonomous tech advances, the emphasis on massive warships might decrease. In truth, this will take decades to play out, and while investors should monitor the situation, for now, there is ample funding for new Huntington and GD-built vessels.

It's all upside for Leidos

Leidos is best known as providing outsourced IT, engineering, and science work to government customers, but it, like many of its peers, is attempting to diversify its revenue base by finding ways to apply its engineering skills to military hardware.

The Sea Hunter business is still just a drop in the bucket for Leidos, which has $10 billion in sales, but it is growing. The Navy, based on the initial trials, awarded Leidos up to $43.5 million to develop and build a sister ship, currently under construction in Mississippi, and the contractor was also awarded up to $36 million to explore development of torpedo countermeasure technologies for the ship.

The Navy has been tight-lipped about its long-term purchasing plans in its budget requests, but based on the public statements by Work and others, it's not unreasonable to expect the Pentagon to move aggressively to order perhaps hundreds of autonomous ships in the years to come. Thanks to the success of the Sea Hunter, it seems Leidos will have a role whether the Navy moves that design into production or if the company is brought on as a key contributor to another design.

It's too soon to buy or sell individual companies based on the impact of autonomous ships. But for holders of Leidos, already among the best buys among government services firms due to its scale, the Sea Hunter's success offers yet another potential avenue for the company to outperform.

Wednesday, February 6, 2019

Facebook: Top Manager Sees More Upside

&l;p&g;&l;img class=&q;dam-image getty size-large wp-image-1126502092&q; src=&q;https://specials-images.forbesimg.com/dam/imageserve/1126502092/960x0.jpg?fit=scale&q; data-height=&q;640&q; data-width=&q;960&q;&g; Tony Mitchell&s;s original investment in Facebook is already worth 10 times what he paid for it, but he is still not selling.

Facebook (FB) was off to a good start in 2019 even before it reported Q4 earnings last week and then jumped over 10% after beating expectations on revenues, earnings and monthly active users. Tony Mitchell, one of my managers, first bought Facebook at $16. At today&s;s price of $169, Tony is still not selling because he sees more upside.&l;/p&g;

&l;strong&g;Ken Kam&l;/strong&g;: Facebook was beaten up pretty badly last year over privacy issues and lost 26.2% in value. Do you think we are past that?

&l;strong&g;Tony Mitchell&l;/strong&g;: For the most part, I do, however, I&a;rsquo;m sure that there will still be issues over privacy, and there will probably be regulations forthcoming, but I don&a;rsquo;t believe they will hold FB back from continuing to be part of the fabric of our lives. FB isn&a;rsquo;t going away anytime soon and the recently reported growth in monthly active users despite all the criticisms over privacy proves that and is turning non-believers into believers.

&l;strong&g;Kam&l;/strong&g;: Your original investment is already worth 10 times what you paid for it. How much more upside do you see?

&l;strong&g;Mitchell&l;/strong&g;: In the last year, I felt like I did when I was buying FB at $16 - $20 when it was popular to say that only old people were using it. The only difference was that in 2018, it was popular to say that everyone would leave FB because they are stealing your data; they are spying on you, etc., etc. If people actually read all the small print contracts they signed every time they opened a new credit card, leased a car, signed up for online banking and a multitude of other things they sign without reading, they would realize that there are worse things that they should worry about.

When TV was in its early years, people were scared that their TV sets were spying on them also. I know that may seem like a stretch, but there is a comparison to be made, more so with the fact that TV has been part of the fabric of our lives for the past 60 - 70 years now, and FB is similar in many ways. They both provide content for our viewing pleasure for only the cost of advertising. FB has many advantages though &a;ndash; one is that it not only provides content to entertain and inform us of what is happening in the world and our communities as TV does, but it also informs us of what is happening in our personal social circles &a;ndash; our families and friends lives, and it lets us interact with many of them instantly with a quick post. With the growth of extended families, more children that move across the country from their families, friends that change jobs and move away more frequently than ever, FaceBook is the glue that keeps your social circles intact.

&l;strong&g;Kam&l;/strong&g;: You said many advantages &a;ndash; are there others that you are factoring in?

&l;strong&g;Mitchell&l;/strong&g;: Yes, Facebook just keeps getting better. Their marketplace is a great way to sell just about anything &a;ndash; I&a;rsquo;ve sold a boat on it, quick, easy, and it doesn&a;rsquo;t cost anything. Groups has been around, but it seems like there are more and more groups that become relevant. I&a;rsquo;m on a plant-based diet, that is very similar to a Vegan diet and so I&a;rsquo;ve joined a Vegan group that provides a lot of great information. I also recently found out that I could share items that I&a;rsquo;ve been saving (like recipes) and the person or persons that I shared it with can add to it. FB is such a useful tool in a busy world -- it is a classic Peter Lynch investment! That is that Lynch had a penchant for investing in businesses that he was intimately familiar with &a;ndash; not as a fund manager, but as a consumer. Then there is also Stories &a;ndash; which FB says is going well.

&l;strong&g;Kam&l;/strong&g;: You have made some great points about the company, but what about the stock &a;ndash; how do you view it fundamentally right now?

&l;strong&g;Mitchell&l;/strong&g;: Fundamentally, it is cheap! FB is trading at a 22 PE ratio on a trailing twelve months basis. This is a growing company with revenue growth of 37%, earnings growth of 40%, advertiser growth, user growth of 9%, and these are all verticals, we haven&a;rsquo;t even touched on the horizontal growth. Also, the Board of Directors just authorized another $9 Billion buyback for 2019, and that can&a;rsquo;t hurt!

&l;strong&g;Kam&l;/strong&g;: &l;a href=&q;https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenkam/2019/01/21/amd-is-top-internet-fund-managers-top-pick-for-2019/&q;&g;We recently talked about AMD&l;/a&g;, and you mentioned using both fundamentals and technical indicators, so what technical indicators do you see for FB here, and by the way, your comments on both AMD and INTC during that conversation seem to be playing out just as you said they would.

&l;strong&g;Mitchell&l;/strong&g;: Yes, it seems like there is some disappointment with Intel naming the CFO as the new permanent CEO, and it is nice to see AMD up 25% in the last week since its earnings report.

Regarding technical indicators for FB, it is bumping up against its 200-day moving average and I think it may be range-bound in the short term. It might pull back in the lower 160s, before heading higher, but I see it grinding higher through the year and I think we may see it back up in the 180s sometime in April.

&l;strong&g;Kam&l;/strong&g;: Are there any other reasons that you like FB so much?

&l;strong&g;Mitchell&l;/strong&g;: Yes, we haven&a;rsquo;t even talked about their other platforms that are currently not contributing much if anything to their revenues and earnings such as Instagram, WhatsApp, and Oculus. FB is wisely integrating these other platforms so that its users can seamlessly login and use them. WhatsApp is adding payments in many countries and FB also expects greater things from &a;ldquo;Watch&a;rdquo;, its live video platform.

&l;strong&g;Kam&l;/strong&g;: So, are you recommending FB as a Buy right now after this early run in 2019?

&l;strong&g;Mitchell&l;/strong&g;: Although Facebook is now up 22% year to date, it is still 24% off of its 52-week high of $218.62.

I think depending on how much FB one currently holds in their portfolio, it could be a buy or a hold, and if you caught it at its recent 52-week bottom of $123.02, I couldn&a;rsquo;t fault anyone for trimming a third of their position, but I&a;rsquo;d hold the other 2/3. If you bought it higher than where it is now, I&a;rsquo;d hold it, and if you have less than 3% of your portfolio in FB, I&a;rsquo;d be a buyer, especially if it dips below $165.

&l;strong&g;My Take&l;/strong&g;: In 2018, Tony Mitchell&s;s Internet fund lost just 0.61% outperforming the S&a;amp;P 500&s;s loss of 4.38% even though many tech stocks like Apple lost 30% or more in the 4th quarter. Many aggressive investors can outperform in a bull market. However, few aggressive investors have been able to beat the S&a;amp;P 500 when the market heads down. In 2019, Tony Mitchell&a;rsquo;s Internet fund is already up 14% year-to-date.

Tony Mitchell&s;s Internet Fund has an 18+ year track record that extends through 2 market crashes, numerous corrections, and sector rotations. Over that period, Tony averaged 16.92% a year which compares well to the S&a;amp;P 500&s;s 5.62% return for the same period. Over the last 10 years, Tony&a;rsquo;s fund did better than the top U.S. equity mutual fund manager in Morningstar&s;s database.

To be notified when Tony updates his views, &l;a href=&q;https://paths.marketocracy.com/lists/?p=subscribe&a;amp;id=423&q; target=&q;_blank&q;&g;click here&l;/a&g;. To be notified when I write about specific stocks my managers cover &l;a href=&q;https://paths.marketocracy.com/lists/?p=subscribe&a;amp;id=1&q; target=&q;_blank&q;&g;click here&l;/a&g;.&l;/p&g;

Tuesday, February 5, 2019

Seagate Technology Earnings: STX Stock Surges on Q2 Profit, Sales Beat

Seagate Technology earnings (NASDAQ:STX) were unveiled late in the day on Monday and the company impressed with its latest quarter as its earnings and revenue both came in ahead of what Wall Street was calling for in its consensus estimate, helping STX stock surge after hours.

Seagate Technology EarningsSeagate Technology Earnings Source: Seagate

The Cupertino, Calif.-based data storage company said that for its second quarter of its fiscal 2019, the company brought in net income of $384 million, a 141.5% gain from the $159 million it amassed during the year-ago quarter. On a per-share basis, the company earned $1.34 per share, a 143.6% surge year-over-year.

On an adjusted basis, Seagate Technology earned $1.41 per share, which was stronger than the $1.27 per share that the Wall Street consensus estimate called for, according to data compiled by FactSet. The company added that its revenue tallied up to $2.72 billion, falling 6.5% compared to the year-ago quarter.

Analysts were calling for the company to post revenue of roughly $2.71 billion, according to data compiled by a FactSet survey. “While there are market and geo-political uncertainties impacting the storage industry, our belief in the long-term growth of data creation and storage demand remains unchanged,” said Dave Mosley, Seagate CEO, in a statement.

STX stock was up roughly 3.1% after the bell on Monday after the company reported its quarterly earnings results for its most recent period, which came in ahead of what analysts were calling for in their consensus estimate. Shares had been increasing close to 0.7% during regular trading hours in anticipation of the company’s quarterly results.

Compare Brokers