
The End Of The Cheap Everything Era
In the fast-paced world of e-commerce, few brands have captured consumer attention as swiftly as Shein and Temu. Their meteoric rise has disrupted traditional retail, threatening Amazon's (NASDAQ: AMZN) dominance of the market by offering ultra-affordable products that seem to materialize instantly on consumers' doorsteps. And though some of what these companies offer is of questionable value — bizarre, often unnecessary items that address needs or desires the consumer didn't even know they had — the prices are low enough to make them nearly impossible to resist.
In the United States, those prices were made possible in part by the de minimis exemption, which allows small parcels to enter the country duty-free. But as regulatory and geopolitical headwinds intensify, the question now looms: has the Chinese export machine finally reached its limits?
LONDON, ENGLAND - FEBRUARY 20: In this photo illustration, the Temu logo is displayed on a laptop ... More screen alongside the Shein logo on a mobile device on February 20, 2025 in London, England. U.S. President Donald Trump's trade tariffs have affected two of the biggest Chinese-owned ecommerce platforms in the U.S. as Shein and Temu have had to withdraw some products from sale and raise prices. Shein has seen daily sales fall by up to 41% and considered cutting its valuation for a London IPO by nearly 25%. (Photo Illustration by)
In the last few years, Shein and Temu harnessed the power of algorithms, social media marketing, and a relentless focus on affordability to capture the attention — and wallets — of consumers around the world. Shein ascended rapidly, becoming the top e-commerce fashion retailer in many Western markets, with a business model rooted in rapid trend analysis and turnover, as well as on-demand manufacturing. Shein spawned a whole new language of 'real-time fashion,' 'hunger marketing,' 'micro-influencers,' and 'hauls.'
Temu, backed by the Chinese company PDD Holdings (NASDAQ: PDD), followed suit, leveraging its parent company's extensive supply chain to offer similar low-cost, factory-direct goods in more than 100 categories that cover everything from furniture to pet food to auto parts.
This disruptive approach posed a direct threat to Amazon, which had long dominated the online retail market. Consumers, especially those with less discerning tastes and younger demographics, flocked to these new platforms for fashionable apparel and ultra-affordable goods. Quality and durability matter less when anything can be replaced for just a few dollars, with the added allure of constant novelty and the dopamine hit of an endless scroll through quirky, hyper-targeted deals.
The de minimis tariff exemption was an existential pillar of Shein and Temu's business model, as it enabled them to keep prices razor-thin while maintaining incredibly quick turnaround times without the need for warehouses or inventory in the U.S.
But this model was always vulnerable to policy shifts. The Trump administration's move in April 2025 to eliminate the de minimis exemption marked a turning point, significantly increasing import costs for small parcels, which in turn impacted consumer prices and purchase behaviors. The prohibition will be extended to all countries starting on July 1, 2027, as part of the so-called 'Big Beautiful Bill' that Trump recently signed into law.
The consequences are already stark. CNBC reports that Temu has halted direct shipments from China to the U.S., citing the end of the de minimis exemption as a key factor. Temu's sales plummeted 48% in May, while Shein's sales in the U.S. were down by 23%. Shein's U.S. app download ranking went from #7 to #80, and Temu dropped from #3 to #85, according to recent data.
MILAN, ITALY - APRIL 17: Customers visit the SHEIN's 'Spring Boutique' temporary store at Palazzo ... More dei Giureconsulti on March 23, 2024 in Milan, Italy. SHEIN, a Chinese e-commerce platform specialized in ultra fast fashion, frequently holds temporary "pop-up" stores to allow customers to experience their products in person and to interact with the brand offline. (Photo by)
In response to the limitations in the U.S., Shein and Temu have pivoted toward Europe and other emerging markets, as Shein ramped up digital advertising in Europe by over 70% in early May, seeking to offset the decline in the American market. Temu's sales in the E.U. soared by 63% in May while Shein's were up by 19%, according to data from Sensor Tower. However, the campaigns faced strong opposition from environmental groups and labor-rights activists. In France, when Shein launched a 'fashion is a right' campaign, its social justice messages were countered with satirical comments that highlighted the ecological harm caused by the rampant consumerism.
European regulators are increasingly scrutinizing ultra-fast fashion and small parcel imports, threatening to introduce and enforce tighter restrictions. The European Commission's proposed flat tax on parcels under 150 euros, along with ongoing debates about advertising restrictions, underscored the regulatory tightening. Meanwhile, France's Senate has approved a protectionist law that would target 'ultra' fast fashion (read Shein), while exempting 'classic' fast-fashion players, such as European Zara, and struggling French brands, including Jennyfer and Nafnaf, which are already in bankruptcy.
Faced with mounting regulatory and consumer challenges, Shein and Temu are exploring various avenues for reinvention.
Shein is investing in sustainability initiatives, shifting part of its supplier base to India, and attempting to improve its supply chain transparency. Meanwhile, both companies are experimenting with different marketing approaches, including collaborations with local influencers and targeted ad campaigns designed to appeal to European consumers' growing environmental and social justice consciousness. Temu is investing in localizing its supply chain in the U.S. to reduce the tariff bite, while Shein may believe that its inherent price and responsiveness advantages will allow it to reemerge on top once competitors burn through their stockpiles of imported apparel.
Both companies are targeting emerging markets such as Brazil, where Shein has cranked up ad spending by 130% while Temu increased its spend by 800%. Markets outside of the U.S. now make up 90% of Temu's 405 million monthly active users, according to an HSBC report.
The end of the de minimis exemption signals a broader reckoning for the Chinese export machine's low-cost, high-volume model. As tariffs rise and regulations tighten, the economics of hyperspeed, ultra-cheap, factory-direct models they pioneered are under threat.
That said, it would be a mistake to underestimate the ingenuity of these two companies, which have transformed the retail landscape, or the insatiable desire of American consumers for really cheap stuff. Middle-class consumers in emerging markets, with less entrenched domestic brands and manufacturing to protect, may welcome the chance to splurge on abundant, shiny things.
As they pivot to new markets and attempt to reinvent themselves, the broader question remains: Is the era of Western consumers 'shopping like billionaires' coming to an end? The coming months will be crucial in determining whether these brands can sustain their growth or become relics of a bygone trend of cheap, disposable goods.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
12 minutes ago
- Yahoo
US migrant raids spark boom for private detention providers
Donald Trump's promise to carry out the largest deportation operation in US history has appalled some Americans. But others are cashing in on the boom in demand for private detention centers. Migrants captured by Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents need to be temporarily housed in places like the facility being readied in California City, prior to deportation. "When you talk to the majority of residents here, they have a favorable perspective on it," said Marquette Hawkins, mayor of the hardscrabble settlement of 15,000 people, 100 miles (160 kilometres) north of Los Angeles. "They look at the economic impact, right?" California City is to be home to a sprawling detention center that will be operated by CoreCivic, one of the largest companies in the private detention sector. The company, which declined AFP requests for an interview, says the facility would generate around 500 jobs, and funnel $2 million in tax revenue to the city. "Many of our residents have already been hired out there to work in that facility," Hawkins told AFP. "Any revenue source that is going to assist the town in rebuilding itself, rebranding itself, is going to be seen as a plus," he said. - Boom - Trump's ramped-up immigration arrests, like those that provoked protests in Los Angeles, saw a record 60,000 people in detention in June, according to ICE figures. Those same figures show the vast majority have no conviction, despite the president's election campaign promises to go after hardened criminals. More than 80 percent of detainees are in facilities run by the private sector, according to the TRAC project at Syracuse University. And with Washington's directive to triple the number of daily arrests -- and $45 billion earmarked for new detention centers -- the sector is looking at an unprecedented boom. "Never in our 42-year company history have we had so much activity and demand for our services as we are seeing right now," Damon Hininger, executive director of CoreCivic, said in a May call with investors. When Trump took office in January, some 107 centers were operating. The number now hovers around 200. For Democratic politicians, this proliferation is intentional. "Private prison companies are profiting from human suffering, and Republicans are allowing them to get away with it," Congresswoman Norma Torres told reporters outside a detention center in the southern California city of Adelanto. At the start of the year, there were three people detained there; there are now hundreds, each one of them attracting a daily stipend of taxpayer cash for the operator. Torres was refused permission to visit the facility, run by the privately owned GEO Group, because she had not given seven days' notice, she said. "Denying members of Congress access to private detention facilities like Adelanto isn't just disrespectful, it is dangerous, it is illegal, and it is a desperate attempt to hide the abuse happening behind these walls," she said. "We've heard the horrifying stories of detainees being violently arrested, denied basic medical care, isolated for days, and left injured without treatment," she added. Kristen Hunsberger, a staff attorney at the Law Center for Immigrant Advocates, said one client complained of having to wait "six or seven hours to get clean water." It is "not sanitary and certainly not... in compliance with just basic human rights." Hunsberger, who spends hours on the road going from one center to another to locate her clients, says many have been denied access to legal counsel, a constitutional right in the United States. Both GEO and ICE have denied allegations of mistreatment at the detention centers. "Claims there is overcrowding or subprime conditions in ICE facilities are categorically FALSE," said Tricia McLaughlin, the assistant secretary at the Department of Homeland Security. "All detainees are provided with proper meals, medical treatment and have opportunities to communicate with their family members and lawyers." - 'Strategy' - But some relatives of detainees tell a different story. Alejandra Morales, an American citizen, said her undocumented husband was detained incommunicado for five days in Los Angeles before being transferred to Adelanto. In the Los Angeles facility, "they don't even let them brush their teeth, they don't let them bathe, nothing. They have them all sleeping on the floor, in a cell, all together," she said. Hunsberger said that for detainees and their relatives, the treatment appears to be deliberate. "They're starting to feel that this is a strategy to wear people down, to have them in these inhumane conditions, and then pressure them to sign something where they could then agree to being deported," she said. pr/hg/ksb


The Hill
14 minutes ago
- The Hill
Tech companies building massive AI data centers should pay to power them
The projected growth in artificial intelligence and its unprecedented demand for electricity to power enormous data centers present a serious challenge to the financial and technical capacity of the U.S. utility system. Appreciation for the sheer magnitude of that challenge has gotten lost as forecast after forecast projects massive growth in electric demand over the coming decade. The idea of building a data center that will draw 1 gigawatt of power or more, an amount sufficient to serve over 875,000 homes, is in the plans of so many data center developers and so routinely discussed that it no longer seems extraordinary. The challenge, when viewed in the aggregate, may be overwhelming. A recent Wood Mackenzie report identified 64 gigawatts of confirmed data center related power projects currently on the books with another 132 gigawatts potentially to be developed. 64 gigawatts are enough to power 56 million homes — more than twice the population of the 15 largest cities in America. The U.S. electric utility system is struggling to meet the projected energy needs of the AI industry. The problem is that many utilities do not have the financial and organizational resources to build new generating and transmission facilities at the scale and on the data center developers' desired timeline. The public policy question now on the table is who should pay for and bear the risk for these massive mega-energy projects. Will it be the AI developers such as Amazon, Microsoft, Meta and Alphabet — whose combined market value is seven times that of the entire S&P 500 Utility Sector — or the residential and other customers of local electric utilities? The process to answer this and related questions is underway in the hallways of the U.S. Congress, at the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission and other federal agencies, in tariff proceedings before state regulatory authorities and in public debate at the national, state and local levels. Whether they are developed at the federal, state or local level, the following values and objectives should form the core of public policy in this area: Data centers developers that require massive amounts of electric power (e.g. above 500MW or another specified level) should be required to pay for building new generating and transmission facilities. The State of Texas recently enacted legislation that requires data centers and other new large users to fund the infrastructure necessary to serve their needs. Although it is customary to spread the cost of new facilities across the user base of a utility, the demands that data center developers are placing on utility systems across the country are sufficiently extraordinary to justify allocating the costs of new facilities to those developers. Moreover, data center developers have the financial resources to cover those costs and incorporate them into the rates charged to users of their AI services. The developers of large data centers should bear the risk associated with new utility-built generating and transmission facilities, not the utility. As an example of such a policy, the Public Utility Commission of Ohio just approved a compromise proposed by American Electric Power of Ohio that would require data centers with loads greater than 1 gigawatt and mobile data centers over 25 megawatts to commit to 10-year electric service contracts and pay minimum demand charges based on 85 percent of their contract capacity, up from 60 percent under the utility's current general service tariff. Another option included in the Texas legislation requires significant up-front payments early in the planning process and mandates that data center developers disclose where they may have simultaneously placed demands for power. It is not unusual for data center requests for service to be withdrawn once they decide on the best location and package of incentives. Data center developers have the financial capacity and ability to manage this risk, utilities do not. Generating facilities that are co-located at large data centers should be integrated with the local utility electric grid, with appropriate cost allocation. Although a few projects have examined the option of a co-located power generation 'island' fully independent of the grid, most projects intend to interconnect with the grid system for back-up power and related purposes. Properly managed, this interconnection could be advantageous for both the data center and the utility system, provided that costs are appropriately allocated across the system. The U.S. government should continue to support the development of nuclear technology, including small modular reactors. U.S. utilities do not have the financial resources to assume the risk of building new nuclear-powered generating facilities. The emergence of a new set of customers, data center developers with enormous needs for electric power and deep pockets, changes the equation. The U.S. government has provided billions of dollars of support for new nuclear technologies and should continue to do so for the purpose of bringing their costs down. The U.S. government should continue to support energy efficiency improvements at data centers. Data centers use massive amounts of power for running servers, cooling systems, storage systems, networking equipment, backup systems, security systems and lighting. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory has developed a 'handbook' of measures that data centers can implement to reduce energy usage and achieve savings. In addition, there now are strong market forces to develop new super-efficient chips that will lower the unit costs of training and using AI models. The U.S. government should help accelerate the development of these chips given their leverage on U.S. electricity demand. The stakes in this public policy debate over our energy future could not be higher. If we get these policies right, AI has the potential to remake the U.S. economy and the energy infrastructure of this country. If we get it wrong, the push to build new generating and transmission facilities to provide gigawatts of power has the potential to overwhelm the financial and operational capacity our electric utility system, impose burdensome rate increases on homeowners and businesses, undercut efforts to reduce the use of fossil fuels to meet climate-related goals and compromise the reliability of our electricity grid for years to come. David M. Klaus is a consultant on energy issues who served as deputy undersecretary of the U.S. Department of Energy during the Obama administration and as a political appointee to two other Democratic presidents. Mark MacCarthy is the author of 'Regulating Digital Industries' (Brookings, 2023), an adjunct professor at Georgetown University's Communication, Culture & Technology Program, a nonresident senior fellow at the Institute for Technology Law and Policy at Georgetown Law and a nonresident senior fellow at the Brookings Institution.
Yahoo
42 minutes ago
- Yahoo
After Soaring Nearly 100% So Far This Year, Where Will Palantir Stock Be at the End of 2025?
Key Points Palantir has witnessed a meteoric rise in its share price thanks to the company's successful foray into the artificial intelligence (AI) arena. Several respected investors on Wall Street have been applying different approaches when it comes to investing in Palantir, making it hard to discern how "smart money" feels about the company. Palantir is trading for a historically high valuation, and broader buying and selling themes from institutional money managers could suggest a sell-off is on the horizon. 10 stocks we like better than Palantir Technologies › Outside of Nvidia, I'd argue that no other company has benefited from the tailwinds of the artificial intelligence (AI) revolution as much as data mining specialist Palantir Technologies (NASDAQ: PLTR). Over the last three years, shares of Palantir have gained more than 1,300%. Just this year alone, Palantir stock has rocketed by 97%. To put that into perspective, the S&P 500 and Nasdaq Composite indexes haven't even posted gains of 10% in 2025. While it can be tempting to follow the momentum in hopes of more outsize gains, smart investors understand that hope is not a real strategy. Let's explore the catalysts behind Palantir's generational run, and assess some recent trading activity to help discern whether Palantir stock could be headed even higher. The unprecedented rise in Palantir When AI first started to emerge as the next megatrend during late 2022 and early 2023, investors were consistently bombarded with news around big tech's splashy investments in the space. Microsoft plowed $10 billion into OpenAI, the maker of ChatGPT. Both Amazon and Alphabet invested hefty sums into a competing platform, called Anthropic. Tesla was touting its advancements in self-driving cars and humanoid robots. You get the drift -- the AI narrative largely hinged on the moves big tech was making. But in the background, Palantir was building. In April 2023, the company launched its fourth major software suite -- the Palantir Artificial Intelligence Platform (AIP). As the graph above illustrates, Palantir was a relatively slow-growth, cash-burning enterprise prior to the release of AIP. But since AIP's launch a little more than two years ago, Palantir's revenue has accelerated considerably. On top of that, the company has been able to command improving unit economics underscored by a sweeping transition to positive net income and generating billions in free cash flow. At the end of 2022, Palantir had 367 total customers. As of the end of the first quarter this year, Palantir boasted 769 total customers. Perhaps even more impressive is that the company's commercial customers (non-government) have risen by more than twofold over the last couple of years. To me, AIP is serving as a gateway for Palantir to expand its reach beyond federal contracts with the U.S. military, which is what Palantir is best known for. AIP represents a transformational shift as a defense contractor to a more ubiquitous software platform capable of penetrating the private sector, despite relentless competition from larger companies such as Salesforce or SAP. As a Palantir bull myself, I've been blown away by management's ability to outmaneuver big tech and deliver on lofty growth targets time and again. But as an investor, I can't help but wonder if the company's share price trajectory is sustainable. Is Wall Street trying to tell investors something? In addition to analyzing financial trends and operating metrics, investors can augment their due diligence process by listening to how Wall Street analysts talk about a company or even dig into the trading activity of notable investors. Thanks to a nifty tool called a form 13F, investors can access an itemized breakdown of all of the buys and sells from hedge funds during a given quarter. During the first quarter, famed billionaire investor Stanley Druckenmiller sold out of his fund's Palantir position. In addition, Cathie Wood has been trimming exposure to Palantir in Ark's portfolio as well. On the flip side, billionaire investors Ken Griffin and Israel Englander both added to their funds' respective Palantir positions during the first quarter. Given these dynamics, it might be hard to discern how Wall Street really feels about Palantir. I think there are some nuances to point out given the details above. First, both Druckenmiller and Wood have been in and out of Palantir stock in the past -- this is not the first time each investor reduced their exposure to the data analytics darling. On top of that, I think Griffin's and Englander's activity should be taken with a grain of salt. Both investors run highly sophisticated, multistrategy hedge funds. From time to time, some of this activity may include being a market maker. Although it may appear bullish that Palantir stock is held in Griffin's Citadel and Englander's Millennium Management portfolios, I wouldn't quite buy that narrative. Neither fund is necessarily known for holding positions for the long term. Moreover, as a multistrategy fund with a number of different teams and objectives, I think that it's highly likely that Citadel and Millennium have a layered and complex hedge strategy when it comes to owning a volatile growth stock such as Palantir. Where will Palantir stock be at the end of 2025? The chart below illustrates institutional buying and selling of Palantir stock over the last few years. Given that buying (the purple line) remains elevated over selling (the orange line), this could suggest that Palantir remains a favorite among institutional portfolios. However, as I expressed above, not all hedge funds and money managers have the same strategy. In other words, some of this elevated buying could be part of a broader, more complex trading strategy and less so an endorsement of long-term accumulation. Over the last few months, Palantir stock has become increasingly more expensive. In fact, the company is trading well beyond levels seen during peak days of the dot-com or COVID-19 bubbles. While it's impossible to know for certain where Palantir stock will be trading by the end of the year, smart investors know that nothing goes up in a straight line forever. A good indicator for how investors feel about Palantir's prospects should come after the company reports second-quarter earnings in a couple of weeks. As a reminder, shares fell off a cliff for a brief moment following the company's first-quarter blowout report. Expectations are rising with each passing report, and I would not be surprised to see Palantir stock sell off again -- even if its Q2 results are stellar. Given the convergence between institutional buying and selling, combined with Palantir's increasingly expensive valuation, I can't help but be cautious at this point. I do think a valuation correction could be in store sooner or later and would not be surprised if shares are trading for a considerably lower price by the end of the year. Should you invest $1,000 in Palantir Technologies right now? Before you buy stock in Palantir Technologies, consider this: The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the for investors to buy now… and Palantir Technologies wasn't one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years. Consider when Netflix made this list on December 17, 2004... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $636,628!* Or when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005... if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you'd have $1,063,471!* Now, it's worth noting Stock Advisor's total average return is 1,041% — a market-crushing outperformance compared to 183% for the S&P 500. Don't miss out on the latest top 10 list, available when you join Stock Advisor. See the 10 stocks » *Stock Advisor returns as of July 21, 2025 Adam Spatacco has positions in Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft, Nvidia, Palantir Technologies, and Tesla. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Alphabet, Amazon, Microsoft, Nvidia, Palantir Technologies, Salesforce, and Tesla. The Motley Fool recommends the following options: long January 2026 $395 calls on Microsoft and short January 2026 $405 calls on Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. After Soaring Nearly 100% So Far This Year, Where Will Palantir Stock Be at the End of 2025? was originally published by The Motley Fool