Wow, What A Bunch Of Crap -- September 19, 2018

CNBC posted a story earlier today reporting that Amazon plans as many as 3,000 cashierless stores by 2021. 

The story suggests that even though Amazon plans this, the likelihood of this happening is pretty remote. But regardless, CNBC presses on. A direct quote from the article:

Shares of retailers including CVS, Walgreens, Walmart, Target and Kroger moved sharply lower Wednesday afternoon following the report.

At the bottom of the article, CNBC posted the share prices of Kroger, Target, Walmart, CVS, Walgreens, and Amazon. Because I have holdings in one, two, some, many, all of the companies listed I was greatly concerned -- whether Sophia gets new shoes or not -- reading that "shares of these retailers moved sharply lower following the report."

See the table below -- this is a screenshot of the graphic posted by CNBC in the same article.

Note that two of the five (other than Amazon) actually increased in share price (CVS and Walgreens). Walmart, a $100-share company, lost 19 cents (sharply lower?). Target tanked well below $60 not long ago and is now trading near $90, despite a "sharply lower" price today -- a loss of 52 cents, again, on a $90-share stock.

This is incredibly embarrassing, one would think. It is certainly tedious.

Here's the chart.

Whether a 1.4% drop for KR is sharply lower or not is in the eye of the beholder. But after hours, based on criteria set by CNBC, Kroger was sharply higher:

**********************************************

Trade War: More Crappy News Reporting

Here are the three cars that Americans might not be able to purchase if the trade war with China escalates, at least according to CNBC:

• the Buick Envision
• the Cadillac CT6 Plug-In (note: the article says the import was canceled earlier this year, and has nothing to do with tariffs or trade wars)
• the Volvo S90: it turns out the company will manufacture the Volvo S90 in Sweden so it can still be shipped to the US

And actually, the article simply says these three makes/models are "most at risk." It doesn't say it's going to happen, and as noted, two of the three are .... well ... not even in the mix.