Buying Three Fright-Night Stocks?

“Investors are worrying there is nothing to worry about.” – CNBC senior markets commentator Michael Santoli

At one time or another, Almost DailyBrett owned shares of Boeing, Berkshire Hathaway and TSMC. It’s time to worry about all of them.

These three companies all have a long-term track record of being extremely good at what they do. They know exactly how they make money. They clearly understand their raison d’etre. They appreciate their value-add to global society.

What could go wrong with any of these blue chips? Another Boeing plane crashes to earth. Warren Buffett departs for the Omaha in the Sky. China invades Taiwan.

The first reason to invest in Boeing (BA: NYSE) is the legendary aircraft manufacturer and defense contractor is part of the exclusive duopoly with Airbus, jointly owned by the Dutch, French and German governments. The barriers to entry into Boeing-Airbus total addressable market (TAM) are virtually impossible to break with capital expenditure and R&D requirements in the zillions.

For the longest time one of Boeing’s leading customers, Southwest Airlines even included its supplier’s 737 in its logo. That was then, this is now.

Almost DailyBrett knows that public relations/marketing/corporate communications/investor relations pros working for Boeing, the airlines (e.g., Alaska Airlines) and airports (e.g., PDX) never sleep well. There is always a chance something can go horribly wrong with a Boeing plane, even having a door blown out at 16,000-feet shortly after taking off from Portland. Yikes!

Boeing’s reputation for trust and reliability is broken. Repair will be difficult. Time can heal (e.g., Tylenol cyanide poisoning, 1982). Boeing needs to be boring, real boring for a long time.

Would Almost DailyBrett buy Boeing at this point of time? Sleep is really important to your author.

Succession Planning?

How do you succeed Warren Buffett, 93?

Conceptually it’s possible. Consider how well supply-chain savant Tim Cook has masterminded Apple in the aftermath of the dearly departed Leonardo da Vinci of this time, Steve Jobs?

Also weigh how Disney completely botched the transfer of power from legacy of success under the masterful direction Bob Iger to “incompetent” Bob Chapek. Iger was forced back into the CEO role for the Mickey Mouse company. Will Disney get succession right in the second try?

Earlier this year, Buffett’s long-time co-pilot Charlie Munger passed away at 99-years-young. The image of the two being driven around in a golf cart speaks more than a 1,000 words.

Buffett has forgotten more about Wall Street investing than what most people, including Almost DailyBrett, will ever know. He seems more robust than the leader of the free world (e.g., POTUS), but does that statement mean anything?

Let’s cut to the chase: How does Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.A and BRK.B: NYSE) approaching $1 trillion in total market capitalization reassure investors, there is a future beyond the inevitable ultimate demise of Warren Buffett?

A clear line of succession needs to be communicated well in advance of the departure of the revered chief Sage of Omaha. Apple did it right, Disney not-so-right.

“The Great Illusion”

“The economic cost of war was so great that no one could possibly hope to gain by starting a war the consequences of which would be so disastrous.” — Thesis of Nobel Peace Prize winner Sir Norman Angell’s “The Great Illusion,” first published just five years before the 1914 start of World War I

More than a decade ago, Almost DailyBrett provided PR counsel to the San Jose headquarters of Taiwan Semiconductor Corporation (TSMC). It’s founder Morris Chang pioneered the “foundry” business, making the chips for virtually every semiconductor company on the planet.

Not only is TSMC (TSM: NYSE) incredibly successful, it’s as close to indispensable as any company on the planet (no hyperbole). And there lies the potential nightmare.

Let’s start with the undeniable geographic fact that nine TSMC’s fabs are located right on the seismic Ring of Fire. It’s not question of if Mother Nature packs a wallop, but when. The majority of these operations sit in Hsinchu on the west coast of Taiwan facing toward the Taiwan Strait and … you guessed it … the People’s Republic of China (PRC).

Just as Mein Kampf accurately outlined plans for conquest, China has made no secret for 75 years its plans for recovering — if necessary by force — the “lost province,” namely Taiwan. Time is not a prevailing consideration in Chinese culture.

When asked about the prospect of an invasion, the company pointed to its two fabs in Mainland China and robust cross Taiwan Strait trade. Surely no one would want to disrupt the free flow of commerce? Hope they are right.

When one considers the greatest fabless semiconductor companies on earth (e.g., ARM: NASDAQ) and (e.g., NVDA: NASDAQ) are virtually 100 percent dependent on TSMC, a Chinese invasion of Taiwan would not be a good thing.

Is pretending it will never happen, a 21st Century version of “The Great Illusion?”

Almost DailyBrett Editor’s Note: In the interest of full disclosure, your author presently owns Berkshire Hathaway, the B shares. No intention of selling two Ferraris to purchase one “A” share of Berkshire Hathaway. Yours truly worked directly with TSMC as a customer corporate PR director (LSI Logic), and then later as a PR counselor from 2006-2009.

Farewell LSI Logic

Never Get Giddy, Never Get Depressed

Women Are Leading America’s Investor Class

The Joy Of Discretionary Income

Is An Adult Back In Charge At Disney?

NVIDIA 4 FAANG

It Takes A Tech Company To Raise A Child

“Just Plane Smart” For Southwest To Tie Its Brand To Boeing’s 737?

“Build Something Better”: Boeing’s “Rule of Three” tagline.

Was the Boeing 737 Max 8 built better?

Wonder if the folks in Indonesia and Ethiopia, agree?

We know now the European Union, China, Canada … and just today, the USA … do not concur.

Two 100 percent fatal crashes for 346 passengers on two Boeing 737 Max 8 in just five months have placed the venerable aircraft manufacturer into an immediate damage control mode.

In dollars and cents terms, Boeing (NYSE: BA) has already shed $26 billion in market capitalization (share price x total number of shares), taking two consecutive nose dives (pardon the unintended pun) in as many days.

The stock is still under pressure. The same is true for Boeing’s management … and its pivotal customer, Southwest Airlines, which flies more than 700 Boeing 737s …including 34 Boeing 737 Max 8s.

For Almost DailyBrett, who has been a frequent flyer of Southwest Airlines (NYSE: LUV) for both vacation and business, the airline has been a great model for the definition of … business strategy.

Southwest, the self-proclaimed and branded The Low-Fare Airline, knows what it wants to do and conversely what it does not want to do with its fleet, pilots, resources, time etc.

For example, the airline’s management in Dallas does not use a maddening hub-and-spoke system, offer assigned seats, serve lousy meals or charge for bags (e.g., “Bags Fly Free).

Southwest is famous for its low fares, direct point-to-point flights, peanuts and pretzels, fun atmosphere (“There are 50 ways to leave your lover, but only six ways off this plane”) and … the airline only flies one plane, the Boeing 737.

Almost DailyBrett can only think of one company, which blazons its supplier’s main product on its logo: Southwest and the Boeing 737. Call it a co-branded logo.

Southwest made the strategic decision to buy American, solidify its relationship to its main supplier Boeing (LUV does not purchase any planes from Airbus), and to signal to its flying public that it flies only one plane, and therefore it knows this plane from the nose-to-the-tail.

Previously, Almost DailyBrett was concerned about what would happen if Southwest and Boeing went to divorce court. Supplier-customer relationships are not always the best (see Qualcomm and Apple patent case for amplification of this point).

Now, the supplier is in deep trouble. And Southwest is tied to the hip with Boeing. Not only does Southwest only fly one airplane, the Boeing 737 is now responsible for more than 300 deaths.

Are more deaths in the offing, including passengers flying Southwest?

Heaven forbid. The Southwest pilots have urged caution when it comes to making conclusions. The same appears to be the case with the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA).

Almost DailyBrett can only imagine how difficult it is for Southwest’s management, marketers and PR teams to sleep at night. Everyone at Boeing already has insomnia.

Should Companies Share Their Precious Branding With Their Suppliers?

Almost DailyBrett knows from more than a decade of corporate public relations experience the care and nurturing of your own brand is a 24/7/365 responsibility. Why a company would want to directly tether itself to another brand obviously multiplies the chances that something serious could go wrong.

Think of it this way: Their crisis becomes your crisis.

Their damage control becomes your damage control.

Their inevitable plaintiff bar lawsuits can easily become your plaintiff bar lawsuits.

Their congressional subpoenas can become your congressional subpoenas.

Their tenuous relationships with key stakeholders (e.g., employees, passengers, investors) become your tenuous relationships with key stakeholders (e.g., employees, passengers, investors).

Some may be tempted to point to über-successful Intel Inside™ campaign, and conclude that these pairings are usually good for business. Southwest/Boeing and Intel/PC manufacturer are not apples to apples, oranges to oranges comparisons.

Intel’s marketing strategy pays PC makers to include the Intel Inside right beside the key pad. The difference is that Intel is teaming with its customers, not its suppliers. More importantly, no one died when Intel’s Pentium processor came up with wrong calculations in 1994.

Here’s the point: Almost DailyBrett now does not believe it’s a good long-term business strategy for corporations to tie a hard-earned, enduring and respected brand management to another company, regardless of whether it is a supplier, partner or customer relationship.

Quite frankly, there are just too many “things” that can go wrong.

As we can now see clearly, it was Just Not Plane Smart for Southwest to marry itself to Boeing, particularly with its brand logo.

Hopefully, the issues with the Boeing Max 8 will be resolved, and safety will reign.

Rest in peace to all of the passengers, who flew Lion Air 610 and Ethiopian Airlines 302.

https://www.travelandleisure.com/travel-news/southwest-not-grounding-boeing-737-max-8-waiving-change-fees

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/10/world/africa/boeing-737-max-8-crash.html

https://www.marketwatch.com/story/europe-has-now-banned-boeings-737-max-should-us-passengers-be-concerned-2019-03-12