BYD's Shenzhen Share Split Could Boost Stock After Retreat
Budapest's Most Historic Site Gets a Controversial Rebuild
San Francisco in Talks With Vanderbilt for Downtown Campus
Can This Bridge Ease the Troubled US-Canadian Relationship?
Trump Administration Sues NYC Over Sanctuary City Policy
Its Shenzhen-listed stock trades ex-dividend on Tuesday, taking into account a bonus issue and capitalization issue announced in April. This will lower the price for one lot of 100 shares to around 11,000 yuan ($1,532), down from roughly 34,000 yuan per lot on Monday, a potential boon onshore where retail investors are more active. They're also highly sensitive to the minimum amount required to own shares of the company.
'The stock split is likely to bring in new retail interest as each share drops to a third of the price before trading ex-dividend,' according to He Wenping, managing director at Beijing Youhe Private Equity Management. 'However, these levels may still be too expensive for the bulk of mom-and-pop traders.'
While BYD's Hong Kong-listed stock rose in the lead up to its ex-dividend date last month, there was no apparent boost afterward. This may have been because a lot size of 500 shares on the exchange meant at least HK$70,000 was needed to buy the stock after the split, which may have deterred smaller investors.
Burning Man Is Burning Through Cash
It's Not Just Tokyo and Kyoto: Tourists Descend on Rural Japan
Cage-Free Eggs Are Booming in the US, Despite Cost and Trump's Efforts
Everyone Loves to Hate Wind Power. Scotland Found a Way to Make It Pay Off
Elon Musk's Empire Is Creaking Under the Strain of Elon Musk
©2025 Bloomberg L.P.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
VeriSign (VRSN) Announced Increased Earnings
In July 2025, VeriSign expanded its buyback authorization and announced increased earnings, alongside a declared cash dividend. Despite these positive developments, the company's share price declined by 5.90% over the past month. This decline coincided with a broader market downturn, driven by global tariff uncertainties and disappointing job data. While VeriSign's solid financial results might have typically buoyed investor confidence, the market context placed downward pressure on its stock. The company's follow-on equity offering also added complexity to its share dynamics over this period, contributing to a challenging market performance. Every company has risks, and we've spotted 3 warning signs for VeriSign (of which 1 shouldn't be ignored!) you should know about. Rare earth metals are the new gold rush. Find out which 25 stocks are leading the charge. VeriSign's recent expansion of its buyback authorization and earnings increase, juxtaposed with a share price decline of 5.90% during July, showcases the complexity of market dynamics. This decline coincided with external market pressures like global tariff uncertainties and disappointing job data. Despite these pressures, VeriSign's solid financial results and strategic initiatives may support long-term growth. Notably, in the last year, VeriSign's total return, including dividends, was 41.76%, highlighting its strong performance over a broader timeline despite recent challenges. Comparatively, over the past year, VeriSign outperformed the US market, which returned 16.8%, and also exceeded the US IT industry with its 24.5% return. The company's ongoing initiatives, such as improving domain registration trends and marketing strategies, could positively impact revenue growth, while the introduction of dividends reflects financial stability that could enhance earnings forecasts. VeriSign's current share price of US$265.37 is below the analyst consensus price target of US$309.0, indicating a 16.44% discount, which resonates with the potential for value growth should the company's revenue and earnings forecasts materialize as expected. In light of our recent valuation report, it seems possible that VeriSign is trading beyond its estimated value. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Companies discussed in this article include VRSN. This article was originally published by Simply Wall St. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@ Error while retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data Error while retrieving data
Yahoo
37 minutes ago
- Yahoo
CRISPR Therapeutics (CRSP) Sees 47% Price Increase Over Last Quarter
CRISPR Therapeutics recently announced significant developments in its in vivo cardiovascular disease programs, notably CTX310 and CTX320, which may have contributed to the company's 47% share price increase over the last quarter. The company's inclusion in multiple indices further enhances its market presence, potentially impacting investor interest positively. Meanwhile, CRISPR reported a net loss in its Q1 earnings, although revenue increased year-over-year. Despite a volatile market backdrop, characterized by declining major indices due to weak job reports and tariff concerns, CRISPR's advancements in therapeutic programs and strategic index additions contrasted against broader market movements. We've spotted 1 risk for CRISPR Therapeutics you should be aware of. Uncover the next big thing with financially sound penny stocks that balance risk and reward. Over the past year, CRISPR Therapeutics reported a total shareholder return of 9.74%. While the company's shares outperformed the US Biotechs industry, which returned a decline of 8.4% over the same period, it lagged behind the broader US Market's 17.7% return. The favorable performance relative to its industry can be linked to its strategic advancements in cardiovascular disease programs and inclusion in various Russell indices. The recent developments highlighted in the introduction, particularly the positive updates in CRISPR's cardiovascular programs and index additions, could potentially influence expectations around future revenue and earnings. Analysts forecast strong revenue growth of 57.3% annually, despite the company's forecast to remain unprofitable over the next three years. Meanwhile, with the current share price at $56.09, the market seems to discount the consensus analyst price target of $80.91, reflecting a substantial perceived upside potential in the stock. This price movement suggests that investors might see potential growth opportunities, even as the company navigates its profitability challenges. The valuation report we've compiled suggests that CRISPR Therapeutics' current price could be quite moderate. This article by Simply Wall St is general in nature. We provide commentary based on historical data and analyst forecasts only using an unbiased methodology and our articles are not intended to be financial advice. It does not constitute a recommendation to buy or sell any stock, and does not take account of your objectives, or your financial situation. We aim to bring you long-term focused analysis driven by fundamental data. Note that our analysis may not factor in the latest price-sensitive company announcements or qualitative material. Simply Wall St has no position in any stocks mentioned. Companies discussed in this article include CRSP. This article was originally published by Simply Wall St. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team@
Forbes
40 minutes ago
- Forbes
Apple's $275 Billion China Bet Is Now A Major Risk
Apple sells more than 220 million iPhones a year. By most estimates, nine in ten are made in China. Many of the components in Apple products are made, sourced, and assembled in China. The tech giant reported robust earnings for the three months to June, but the future is cloudy. It has been for some time because of Apple's reliance on China and the increasing tension between China and the US. Tariffs are one manifestation of the growing geopolitical strife. Chief executive Tim Cook told analysts on a conference call that tariffs had already cost Apple $800 million in the previous quarter, and may add $1.1bn in costs to the next quarter. But it is not just the costs that tariffs will add to the Apple supply chain. Apple has nurtured Chinese companies whose products are now highly competitive with the tech giant. In the book Apple in China, the author Patrick McGee reports that Apple pledged in 2016 that over the following five years, it would invest more than $275 billion in China. That pledge was exceeded. The sophisticated supply chain Apple built in the country, with suppliers that Apple nurtured, is now being leveraged by Chinese companies, notably Huawei, to build sophisticated electronics products. Huawei's Mate XT is a more expensive phone with alluring features than the iPhone. Apple isn't expected to match these product capabilities until 2017. Apple has gone from leadership in design in this market, with the margins to match, to having serious competition. How could Apple have been so stupid? A fundamental concept of risk management is that you don't put all your eggs in one basket. Patrick McGee explains how this came to be in his outstanding book. McGee interviewed over 200 people, mostly Apple employees, to provide insights on this 'famously secretive company.' Apple's Historic Supply Chain Historically, Apple manufactured its own products across several regions. In 1983, Apple opened a highly automated plant in Fremont, California, to produce the first Macintosh computers. Apple established a presence in Europe with a plant in Cork, Ireland. This plant, which opened in 1980, later manufactured customized Macintosh computers for European markets. This is the historic way of hedging your bets and managing risk. Apple understood this principle. But as contract manufacturing emerged as an alternative to a company owning its own manufacturing plants, Apple experimented with this model and achieved positive outcomes. The theory behind contract manufacturing is that companies should focus on what they do best, their core competencies. In Apple's case, that was design. Initially, they were working with American firms and had plants in the US. But Taiwanese headquartered Foxconn proved to have better capabilities than its US rivals, and Foxconn won an increasing share of Apple's final assembly business. You can still practice effective risk management using contract manufacturers with plants in different regions of the world. Foxconn, at Apple's behest, did experiment with manufacturing in other regions of the world in addition to China. But Foxconn, a tremendously harsh taskmaster when it comes to their labor force, struggled to achieve the same level of quality, cost, and scalability anywhere but in their facilities in mainland China. Foxconn then committed to relying on production based in China. As Foxconn delivered better results than its competitors, they gained a larger and larger share of Apple's business. Apple's Strategy in Procurement Apple does not believe in win/win procurement or vested outsourcing. McGee points out that the iPhone accounts for fewer than 20% of smartphones sold globally, yet it garners more than 80% of industry profits. 'In no other market does a minority player command this kind of dominance.' 'Insofar as this statistic was discussed at all, it was chalked up to Apple's brand appeal.' This is not entirely true, says McGee. Apple was able to get suppliers to work for a pittance. As the design leader, suppliers came to believe that other electronics OEMs would copy the cutting-edge features in Apple phones and that they would be the leading contenders to win deals with Apple's competitors. These deals would command much higher margins. The Taiwanese contract manufacturer Foxconn was the first to come to this conclusion. They bet big on this model. And they grew to be the world's largest contract manufacturer based on this bet. A Different Approach to Contract Manufacturing Companies can differentiate their products in different ways. Differentiation can be based on price, a broad set of product choices, service, or market-leading product capabilities. Being on the cutting edge of design is how Apple has always differentiated itself. This led to a fundamentally different kind of supply chain for Apple. Apple's electronics rivals sell a limited number of units across dozens of different models per year. The follow-the-leader strategy employed by these companies was based on using standardized parts with wider tolerances. 'But Apple was different,' McGee wrote. 'Apple's product portfolio remained radically simplified. Even by 2015, Apple was only releasing two new iPhones a year. They were hand crafting luxury phones but doing it in mass market quantities. In their search for suppliers, Apple gravitated toward quality, not price. To reach that quality, Apple had to come up with new processes to make the phones; but until Apple chose a new design these processes wouldn't exist. So it had to work far more intimately with suppliers.' This supplier intimacy model included designing and purchasing the equipment that the suppliers used. This is very different from standard contract manufacturing, where the contract manufacturer purports to have better manufacturing capabilities than the companies they work for, and their clients take a hands-off approach to managing production. 'Apple took extraordinary control over its suppliers to ensure it was getting the appropriate prices,' McGee explained. 'It demanded access to every detail about the suppliers' operating costs, from the wages of its workers and the cost of its dormitories to the bill of materials and expense of the machinery.' Apple also procured components on behalf of the suppliers. 'In fact, Apple often had a better sense of the supplier's operation costs than the supplier itself.' And as Foxconn concentrated on manufacturing in China, an industrial cluster of suppliers would grow up around these plants. Apple engineers would teach these suppliers, competing suppliers for different components, how to do quality manufacturing on a huge scale. China Subsidized Manufacturing in China Foxconn concentrated on manufacturing in China not just because of the low wages of the Chinese workers, but because the state subsidized and promoted export-led production in numerous ways. If you want to build a new factory in the US or Europe, obtaining the necessary building permits and complying with other regulations can take years. In China, authorities could make this happen in months. China would give Foxconn and some of the suppliers the land on which the factories would be built and then build the road infrastructure at no cost to Foxconn or their suppliers. Initially, China even bought new machine tools for companies like Foxconn. Local regions often lacked the necessary workers. China facilitated getting these workers from other, poorer regions of the nation. Are there rules about the number of hours workers are allowed to work, overtime, or environmental compliance? China prioritized building a sophisticated manufacturing base over the enforcement of these pesky regulations. Apple Has Been Captured by China McGee concludes that for Apple to extricate itself from production in China will be tremendously difficult. Suppliers with the requisite skills don't exist in other regions, and there is no guarantee that China will permit its indigenous suppliers to produce outside the country. The Chinese government can also make diversification painful. Beijing has deployed a number of tactics against other companies to make this point. Electricity suddenly becomes available for only a few hours a day. Raw materials can be stopped before they arrive at the factory. McGee concludes that there is no way Apple could diversify from China in any meaningful way within the next five years. 'It's just impossible.'
