Stock Market News From Amazon, Nike, McCormick, and More

We also talk with author Nicola Twilley about her new book, “Frostbite: How Refrigeration Changed Our Food, Our Planet, and Ourselves.”

In this podcast, Motley Fool host Dylan Lewis and analysts Jason Moser and Bill Mann discuss:

  • Tips for playing the long game with the 2024 election cycle ramping up.
  • Amazon joining the $2 trillion club, and which member is most likely to experience a big fall.
  • Disappointing earnings from Walgreens Boots Alliance and Nike, while McCormick keeps business zesty.
  • Two stocks worth watching: Disney and Itron.

Author Nicola Twilley talks about her new book, the development of modern refrigeration, and what its evolution can teach us about the development of other technologies today.

To catch full episodes of all The Motley Fool’s free podcasts, check out our podcast center. To get started investing, check out our quick-start guide to investing in stocks. A full transcript follows the video.

This video was recorded on June 28, 2024.

Dylan Lewis: We’ve got a message for investors in 2024 and a new company crossing the $2 trillion mark. This week’s Motley Fool Money radio show starts now. Everybody needs money. That’s why they call it money.

It’s the Motley Fool Money radio show. I’m Dylan Lewis. Joining me over the airwaves, Motley Fool Senior Analysts Bill Mann and Jason Moser. Fools, great to have you both here.

Jason Moser: Hey.

Bill Mann: Good to see you, Dylan.

Dylan Lewis: We’ve got a rundown on the history of refrigeration, some big earnings moves, and of course, stocks on our radar. We’re going to kick off some of the biggest stories the week, though, and maybe starting off with the most unavoidable one. Last night was the first 2024 presidential debate in Atlanta. We’re going to put politics on the side here and just acknowledge, it’s an election year and much ink is going to be spilled on that over the next few days, weeks, and months. Bill, we know the market likes predictability. Elections are not exactly predictable. What do you want listeners to have in mind as we look out to the back half of the year and are processing a lot of election-based news.

Bill Mann: In 2024, I think will be even much less predictable, particularly after some of the wake from last night’s performance. I say this every four years, that every four years, people get really angry with me for making this point. But the market and our economy has survived really bad and really great administrations in the past. I don’t put as much weight into who is sitting in the oval office in terms of the performance of either the markets or the economy as a lot of people do. There are huge cycles at play. I think most people who watched the debates probably came away with something that was somewhere in between disgust and terror, and I felt the same. We have survived all sorts of administrations. This is a land of rule of law and regulations and not power. I think we will ultimately be just fine, although it’s going to be an interesting six months.

Dylan Lewis: Jason, what about you? What is your message to voters? Or should I say investors, those who vote with their dollars as they look out over the next six months?

Jason Moser: I like that, investors more. I would imagine most voters came away from this more firmly entrenched in their opinion than when they went in. For investors, I think the thing that really came to mind immediately was just that in the market in the short term is a voting machine, and in the long run it’s a weighing machine. That old saw that Ben Graham gave us. We’ve seen so many great views, and Jeff Bezos stands out as wanted. It’s about taking that longer-term view. I think Bill really hit on something there. There is plenty of data out there that shows you that our economy, that we, as a nation, have prospered under both kinds of administrations, really and everything in between. We’ve seen great performance and poor performance across the aisle. I think that’s something just to keep in mind there. Now, I do recognize that this election cycle, and I think this is important to note, there is more uncertainty and there are more potential outcomes at this point than we probably have ever seen in any election cycle in our lives. We will see a lot spilled here in the coming weeks and months, and I would just encourage investors to not let those headlines cause hasty or irrational decisions because, I think at the end of the day, we’re going to continue to move forward regardless of the results, and I think things will be OK.

Bill Mann: Not to sound too pollyanna-ish, but the US economy is one of the most resilient economic machines that’s ever been devised. It’s really hard to screw it up.

Dylan Lewis: A piece of that resilient economic machine celebrating a major milestone this week. We have a new entrant to the $2 trillion club, Amazon, joining Alphabet, Microsoft, NVIDIA, and Apple as one of the only companies to hit the milestone. Jason, it feels like a nice opportunity for us to reflect on Amazon, the business here, because I think that they have managed time and time again in this climb to 2 trillion to embody the nature of, whatever got you here will not get you there, and have been an incredibly flexible business.

Jason Moser: Well, after all, it started out as just a purveyor of books. Jeff Bezos was just out there trying to more or less democratize the book market, and well, behold, look where we are today. This is a company now. That valuation incidentally, represents $8,700 per prime member in market capitalization. Something like 230 million prime members at this point.

Bill Mann: From the Mann household, that feels about right. [laughs].

Jason Moser: From our household, it feels about right too. But I think when you look at Amazon today, you’ve got a business that reported close to $50 billion in advertising revenue alone in 2023. You got that it was 2020, it wasn’t even its own explicit line item on the earnings report. We’ve talked at nauseum about AWS and that opportunity, 90 plus billion dollar in revenue in 2023, and no signs of slowing down. Clearly capturing a lot of this AI opportunity. In Taboot, I think the CEO transition has been just a total success. It’s really hard to argue that it’s not worked out well. You’ve got a lot going for this company right now, and it sounds like Andy Jassy is going to be steering this thing for a good while to come. So far, so good. Listen, it was September 4th, 2018, when it cost 1 trillion. I think we’re going to see 3 trillion here in the blink of an eye.

Dylan Lewis: I’m going to throw an intentionally hard question at you and revisit that $1 trillion milestone a little bit. I mentioned the five companies to top $2 trillion, Microsoft, Apple, NVIDIA, Alphabet, Amazon. Bill, if I were to say five years from now, one of them is a sub-$1 trillion company, which one is it?

Bill Mann: Oh, no. You’re really going there, are you? I’m going to hate this answer, but I’m going to give it anyway. I think the answer of those is actually NVIDIA. The reason why I think that is not so much, hey, it’s gone up so much, but right now NVIDIA has a lower revenue base than Accenture, and Accenture is a sub-$200 billion company, so you’re talking about something that is 9% the size of Nvidia. There is so much that is being based on things that are not yet in evidence for Nvidia that you having come up with this absolutely horrible exercise. That’s the one I’m going to have to go with.

Dylan Lewis: It’s a thought exercise, Bill. It’s not a prediction. I just want to give you guys something to play with here.

Bill Mann: Its mean. I was told there would be no meanness here.

Dylan Lewis: Jason I’m going to ask you to respond to my meanness. Which one is going below 1 trillion?

Jason Moser: I’d probably wager none of them, but I think Bill strikes some important points there and I will throw in there. I do think that we should at least acknowledge Nvidia’s assent here over the last five years. It’s up better than 3,000% over the last five years. Now, of all of these companies that we mentioned, the next closest competitor that there, it’s Apple, at 343%. It just goes to show you, if you think about that hype cycle, AI is going to be that will follow out a hype cycle to some extent. Are we at the peak of inflated expectations? Maybe. What if we hit some trough of disillusionment at some point? What’s going to be the company that feels that the most? I don’t know, but it seems reasonable to expect that there could be some type of correction in Nvidia’s share price, but I wouldn’t say that would be something to have longer-term implications on the business, still a very good business.

Dylan Lewis: We’re going to wrap this segment talking through another one of the hottest markets in 2024. Bill, ever since the weight loss management drugs like Wagovi and Zepbound have hit the market and consumers have started using them, there has been a ton of speculation about some of the industries that they may affect outside of pharmaceuticals. This week, we got to look at one potential avenue for disruption. Shares of Med Tech company ResMed down as much as 10% this week after studies of Eli Lily Zepbound showing the drug may help reduce the severity of sleep apnea. ResMed is in the business of treating sleep apnea. Bill, how are you processing this news?

Bill Mann: ResMed is the leading producer of CPAP machines. They are sleep apnea airway machines. They are directly in the path of the GLP-1 drug companies. They are definitely not Eli Lilly proof. The data that came out of this Zepbound weight loss treatment study was astounding. Reduce sleep apnea by almost 63%, and a large number of the people who were in the trial is that they no longer had sleep apnea. Now, the interesting thing about this is that for ResMed, GOP drugs have, actually GOP one drugs I should say, have actually been around for a while, and there has not been a reduction in the revenues at ResMed. They’ve continued to see a growth in sales. Longer-term, I do wonder that the part of the science that we don’t know yet, which is what is it going to be like for people to be taking GLP-1 drugs chronically over a very long period of time. We don’t really have data yet, so I think that investors are right to be nervous. I feel like this is pretty much overblown, given the evidence that we have [MUSIC].

Dylan Lewis: Coming up after the break, we’ve got a down outlook on two huge brands in retail. Stay right here. You’re listening to Motley Fool Money.

Ricky Mulvey: Ricky Mulvey with Motley Fool Money here to tell you about a vehicle that is redefining sporting luxury, the Range Rover Sport. The first thing I noticed when I sat down in the driver’s seat is that I felt like I was in a cockpit. You’re up off the ground in a focused interior that promotes exhilarating driver engagement. I also really appreciated the overhead 360-degree cam review that let me know exactly where I was going as I was backing out of the parking space. I went for a drive in the Range Rover Sport out in Littleton, Colorado, and tested the accelerator just a little bit and felt the performance and agility. It’s an instinctive drive with engaging on-road dynamics and effortless composure. To put it plainly, the Range Rover Sport is powerful. It’s also quiet and comfortable. Advanced cabin technologies, such as active noise cancellation and cabin air purification, offer new levels of comfort and refinement. The third-generation Range Rover Sport is the most desirable, advanced, and dynamically capable yet. I’d like to invite you to visit to learn more about the Range Rover sport.

Dylan Lewis: Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. I’m Dylan Lewis, joined on the air by Bill Mann and Jason Moser. Next wave of earnings kicked off this week, and some big movers on quarterly updates for us to go through first up shares of Walgreens down over 20% this week, following the company’s earnings that were below expectations. The company also reduced its outlook for the year and signaled that it will be interested in closing some of its 8,600 locations. Bill, what is going on at Walgreens?

Bill Mann: I’m not so old that I don’t remember when Walgreens was being described by Charlie Munger as being one of the best retailers in America. What you’re seeing now is a continuation of a process that’s already started. They actually came out and said that 25% of their stores are at risk of being closed. It won’t be that number that they are closing, but they are considering 25% of them to be underperforming. They’ve already closed almost 500 stores since February, and they’re stepping away from Village MD, which was their primary care, the offices, the minute clinics that you see in Walgreens. They’re in the middle of a huge retrenchment, and the biggest problem for them is once again, Amazon and a lot of the other online pharmacies that are taking foot traffic away from Walgreens because it’s the front of store that you go in and you fill a prescription, and then you also buy things in front of store, which are very high margin for this company. They’ve got some problems that they need to solve. I am confident that Walgreens will be able to do so, though, in time.

Dylan Lewis: One of the interesting things I saw in the earnings results and some of the commentary for management. We were just talking about the impact of the GLP-1 drugs. CEO Tim Wentworth noted they are losing money on the pharmacy filling prescriptions for those GLP-1 drugs. The impact of them being felt within their own industry, in addition to some of the ancillary industries, Jason, anything to add on the Walgreens side?

Jason Moser: Just to reiterate something Bill said. A quote from Tim Wentworth said 75% of our stores drive 100% of our profitability today, so clearly, they have a real estate problem. They are going to be closing down some underperforming. This is a company that needs to right size the business. Then just the general state of the consumer, he noted and I quote, the consumer is absolutely stunned by the absolute prices of things. I think it just goes to say that perhaps the consumer is not in as good a place as we could be hearing these days.

Dylan Lewis: Sticking with the downbeat earnings theme shares of Nike down, over 10%, following earnings Thursday after the bell. Jason results came in ahead of expectations on the bottom line but the company fell short on revenue and on outlook for the year. You’re just talking about the state of the consumer. Are we seeing that show up in Nike’s results as well?

Jason Moser: Partly, this is the result of some missteps from management. We talked a little bit about last quarter, and I’ll talk to that a minute here. mean, I guess ultimately, we just say for Nike, this is a marathon and not a sprint. It’s going to take a little time to get this thing going back in the right direction. This was a quarter that, to me, very much rhymed with their last report. Back to that misstep, you know, there was this intentional move to more Nike direct that they made. That’s really been a bit stifling. Nike Direct revenue for the quarter down 8%. Obviously a problem, and they saw fourth quarter revenue down, essentially flat. Then their wholesale revenue, which is where they’re taking the business back to as they try to correct that Nike direct mistype. Wholesale revenue up 8% on a currency-neutral basis. That’s encouraging. Again, your point, the guidance when a company ratchets back the way they did, you have to expect the market to take a different perspective and offer a new valuation on the stock, and that’s exactly what’s happened.

Dylan Lewis: Bill, what are your thoughts on what we saw from the Greek goddess of victory?

Bill Mann: There was no win. Those results were awful. They were so awful that the cynic and me wonders a little bit whether they kitchen synced all of their problems. Just throw it all in, get it out of the way so, they can next time around, show some improvements. I’m only saying that because it’s been done in the past. We can dump all over Nike. They were never going to turn the company around in a single quarter. It was not going to happen. The competitive pressures for Nike are as strong as they have been since the days when it seemed like under armor was ascendant. They are basically out of trend right now. Athlesia is beating workwear. That’s Lulu Lemon. That’s On Holdings. That’s Adidas. I feel like it’ll come back. Fashion is a funny thing. It does cycle, and it cycles in a way that a lot of times people can’t predict. I did think it was interesting by my count in the conference call a Nike executive used the word Innovation 47 times.

Dylan Lewis: You have to innovate, obviously. That’s how you get out of those issues, Bill.

Bill Mann: Got to super innovate 47 times.

Dylan Lewis: We’re gonna wrap with a look at McCormick. It came up last week on the show as Bill’s radar stock. But, Jason, we couldn’t talk McCormick without bringing your name up as well. I’m going to go to you first on the earnings take here. Company’s up around 5% on earnings. What you see?

Jason Moser: All things considered it was a respectable quarter. I think we’ve seen enough evidence that the consumer is in right now. That’s another theme that was reiterated here in McCormick’s call. It’s not a McCormick-specific problem. This is something that’s really been playing out on a lot of CPG related companies, and they just kind of need to tread water right now. They can only pass through so much on pricing. I think it’s encouraging reaffirming their guidance for this fiscal year. They did note in the flavor solution side of the business, which is that commercial side, some lower demand from quick service restaurants and packaged food customers. Which is interesting because you’re seeing that dynamic play or people are trying to figure out. Where can I get the best value here? Is it going out to dinner, or is it cooking dinner at home? What we’re seeing is that a lot of folks, and I think we’ll talk about this a little bit later. We’re seeing the quick service restaurants, right? You fast food restaurants, maybe having a little moment here, focusing more on the value. Let’s focus on the really important stuff here, Dylan. I mean, we’re talking about 2024. McCormick is launching nearly four times more grilling rubs and seasonings compared to 2023. Importantly, the grilling season of 2024 is off to a great start? That’s all I needed to hear? I leave assured.

Dylan Lewis: I will never short the grilling market. Bill, now that Jason has gotten his contractually obligated first take on McCormick out of the way. What did you see?

Bill Mann: I’m not sure that I should speak on it at all since last week I was accused of stolen valor for even bringing it up outside of Jason’s presence. I’m going to defer to the grill master and simply point out that much more of McCormick’s business comes from the restaurant channel than we maybe think. We think of all the spices that are in our cabinets. That is huge margin business for them, and it has struggled almost across the board. I will cycle back.

Dylan Lewis: All right. Bill, Jason, we’re going to see you guys a little bit later in the show. Up next, we’ve got to look at the history of refrigeration. Stay right here. You’re listening to Motley Fool Money.

Dylan Lewis: Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. I’m Dylan Lewis. If you’re stepping inside after working out in the yard or coming home after a run this time of year, you’re probably heading to the fridge for something to cool you down. It seems obvious now, but the road to refrigeration in the home was not a slam dunk from the start. Cold storage went through all the same cycles as most new technologies from full dismissal to misuse and abuse. Author Nicola Twilley’s new book Frostbite details modern refrigeration. This week, Motley Fool Money’s, Ricky Mulvey, caught up with her about the history and what its evolution can teach us about the development of other technologies today.

Ricky Mulvey: Nicola Twilley’s book is Frostbite. How refrigeration changed our food, our planet, and ourselves. She’s also the host of gastropod podcast I enjoy and a contributor to the New Yorker. Thanks for joining us on Motley Fool Money.

Nicola Twilley: Thanks for having me.

Ricky Mulvey: Your book follows the history of refrigeration. I think it’s relevant to investors because there was a hype cycle involved for a retail investor listening, you’re going to consistently see hype cycles, the one we are contractually obligated to mention is artificial intelligence. Refrigeration follows a general hype cycle in an interesting way and also breaks from it, because as the technology rose, there was still a lot of distrust in it. But let’s start. Let’s go through the hype cycle with refrigeration. What was the technology trigger? What triggered the interest in mechanical refrigeration and not just sending things around in ships in ice boxes?

Nicola Twilley: There are a couple of things that triggered the interest. First of all, our waterways were getting more polluted. The ice trade was doing great. But unfortunately, as cities grew, and before we had the water treatment that we have now or the EPA or any of those, pesky things that try and keep our water clean, the waterways for harvesting that ice were filthy, and people were getting sick. There was a real trigger there. But actually, the overall motivator was one, cities were getting bigger, and when cities, they were bigger than they’d ever been in history. They need to be fed. It was increasingly a problem of how to do that. There were complaints, 3,000 pigs living in Kensington, London, trying to herd flocks of turkeys into Philadelphia to be killed. Because how did you get your meat? It had to be walked into town and slaughtered there for you to eat because it couldn’t be shipped under refrigeration. That was an issue. The other thing is honestly, a scientific mistake. Chemists at the time had discovered protein. They were all excited about protein, and they had mistakenly concluded that protein was the only nutrient that people needed to be strong and work. Carbohydrate was just like a fancy extra. they hadn’t discovered vitamins at all. Good luck to you on produce. They were like, Protein is it. Protein in their minds, came from meat and dairy, flesh forming foods. They weren’t like, Great, let’s all eat lentils. They were like, Wow, we really need to eat more meat. If we are to have strong workers in our cities, we have this meat famine. That was the real urge. It was a crisis at the time. In the early 1800s, you know, the finest minds in science were engaged on this question of, how do we get this flesh forming food? To our urban dwellers so that they can be strong and productive. People were thinking about fumigation and coatings and drying meat and shredding it into little whole wheat treaties that you could rehydrate and compressing it into little pills and powders. There were all sorts of solutions. Actually, cold was thought to be the least practical of them all because no one had figured out how to do it at scale mechanically. At the time, they were just thinking, Oh, we have to use ice, and natural ice is just too ephemeral and can be scaled up. That was what triggered it and led to people actually, finally, figuring out how to make cold on demand and eventually shrink it a little. The first refrigeration machines were these steam powered behemoths that just went up in flames all the time. With electrification, they were able to be shrunk and become a little more reliable.

Ricky Mulvey: It’s easy to take our refrigerators for granted, but they were incredibly unreliable, and before then, you would have had tremendous gambles being placed on shipping various produce or meat to different sides of the country in the world, hoping that it doesn’t melt before it gets there. Was it just the technological failures as to why the idea of mechanical refrigeration was dismissed? Was it that or was there more to the story?

Nicola Twilley: That’s a great question. I mean, first of all, literally, no one thought it was possible. Cold. This is one of the things that I think is so remarkable about this. Humans have had control of fire for millennia. People argue it’s one of the things that made us human. We have had control over cold for a couple hundred years, Max. It was discovered by accident as a party trick by a Scottish professor, how to use what is a chemical known as a refrigerant to actually create cold on demand. For a century after he discovered it, everyone ignored that and didn’t think that cold could ever be mechanized and at scale. It really wasn’t until this global ice trade took off, that people thought, You know what, cold is useful. If we could figure out a way to do it at scale, it would be handy. A lot of people had taken a lot of time at that point. American entrepreneurs like Gustavus Swift of Swift meat company in Chicago. He invested enormous amounts of time and money trying to ship meat using ice from Chicago to New York. Eventually, succeeded not before he had had to dump, train car after train car into the Fall River and Boston after arrived completely rotten. He lost a lot of money on the way. It was the people trying to use ice to deliver meat and dairy at scale, who really gave the impetus to the and honestly, they were pretty odd ball inventors. One was an Australian journalist. There was a Florida physician. these are just random individuals who just built their own steam punk machines and made it work. Those early machines. I mean, they’re uninsurable. They’re unreliable. People would ship, meat from, Argentina to Paris, and the whole thing would go rotten en route, because the machine broke down. It was people died. People committed suicide, when they lost all their money. It was a troubled beginning for the industry for sure.

Ricky Mulvey: I think if we continue the theme of the hype cycle, the things that seem to switch are the peak of inflated expectations where people are very excited about this new technology in the trough of disillusionment. Usually there’s a huge amount of excitement and interest, and then people immediately lose interest and they say, we were way too excited about this. With refrigeration technology, it seems that that switched because there was so much distrust in eating produce that had been sitting around for a while. I couldn’t possibly be fresh.

Nicola Twilley: I think that’s the most interesting thing about this is because nowadays, it’s the exact opposite. People don’t trust that food is fresh if it hasn’t been refrigerated, and if it’s been out of the fridge for a couple of hours, they’re not sure it’s good anymore. But, it was literally the exact opposite.

In 1911, the dairy poultry and egg warehouseman got together to hold a promotional cold storage banquet to try to convince Americans that they could eat refrigerated food and not die. There was editorials in the journal of the American Medical Association being like, well, this proves nothing. Cold stored food is still deadly. Honestly, at the time, it was, and this is the aspect of the hype cycle where there are these inflated expectations. Food warehousemen and food wholesalers saw this new technology and were like, great, immortal life for food. I can take something out in the morning, I can have it out all day, and if it doesn’t sell, I’ll just put it in the refrigerator, and it will be good the next day. There are headlines from the time. There is no death, only cold storage. Food was being stored for much longer than it should have been. In ways that we now know aren’t safe at all, and no one had done the scientific research to figure out, how long will refrigeration really keep food good? What temperature do things need to be at? Any of that didn’t exist.

Ricky Mulvey: Those mistakes also led to a a lot of distrust because things spoiled, people got sick. What did it take for folks to eventually trust and rely on refrigeration, particularly in the Western world?

Nicola Twilley: People at first, were just like, well, I don’t know. Previously, if you’d bought a chicken, and it looked like it was freshly slaughtered, it was freshly slaughtered. Now if you bought a chicken, it could have been slaughtered six months ago, a year ago, you had no idea, and you had to trust. People didn’t trust. There were a lot of food borne illnesses associated with chilled foods. What it really took actually was government regulation. The government hired this rock star scientist, a woman, which is very, very unusual at the time. Her name was Polly Pennington. She had got herself a degree in chemistry against all the odds. The University of Pennsylvania was refusing to let her do a PhD, and she kind of finagled her way in. She set herself up in business, and she is the one who made refrigeration scientific. She traveled around the country. She worked out the answer to the questions like, how long does a chicken stay good in cold storage and what temperature should you keep it at and how much ice you need in your rail cart to keep it at that temperature, and so on. She is the one who created that trust in refrigeration. The end of her life, she sort of said, this is my legacy. People now trust that refrigerated food is safe. That’s what it took.

Dylan Lewis: Listeners, we’ll be airing more of Ricky’s conversation with Nicola Twilley this weekend on our Sunday show. You can catch it and all of our episodes in the Motley Fool Money podcast feed, wherever you listen to shows. Don’t worry. No issues with bad leftovers here. Our engineer Dan Boyd’s keeping the tape fresh and crisper. Coming up next, Bill Mann and Jason Moser return with a couple of stocks on their radar. Stay right here. You’re listening to Motley Fool Money.

As always, people in the program may have interests in the stocks they talk about, and the Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against. So don’t buyer sell anything based solely on what you hear. I’m Dylan Lewis joined again by Jason Moser and Bill Mann. Gents, we’ve got stocks on our radar coming up in a minute. But first, as we often like to do on the show, some fun with food. We’ve got two great stories on McDonald’s this week. First up, Bill, the McPlant is struggling. The head of McDonald’s America, Joe Erlinger, noting the company’s plant-based burger developed with Beyond Meat, struggled in test markets in the Bay area, and in Texas. We have not seen any developments of the McPlant. I have to say, I’m not a huge fan of the branding. I’m not all that surprised that it didn’t really work out.

Bill Mann: The McPlant seems like one of the most desultory names I think I’ve ever heard. I like a McShrub please. Look, it’s easy for meat eaters to laugh about something like this. The results were terrible. They expected to sell 40-60 units per day per store in the Bay area, where you’d think the market would be primed. They sold fewer than 20. In East Texas, it was three per day. It was a miserable trial for them. But I always think back to one of the greatest CEOs that I’ve known, woman named Cheryl Batchelder who ran Popeyes, who once said, people don’t come to Popeyes for salad. I wonder maybe if the trial was poorly conceived. Like, Hey, come in and try this McPlant. People who don’t go to McDonald’s already not likely to come in and do that. But if you were to structure it as, hey, families who have a member of the family who are vegetarians, come give this a try. I feel like they would have had a much better shot. We’re going to see it again. I hope it succeeds. But McPlant, come on.

Dylan Lewis: Bill, I think what I’m hearing there is a know your lane and stay in it for McDonald’s. Is that it?

Bill Mann: A bit. I would say that’s right. You can build a new lane, but don’t just tape it on and expect people to show up.

Dylan Lewis: Jason, as UT’s earlier. We also saw some developments from McDonald’s this week indicating they might know what they need to be focusing on. The company coming out with a $5 value meal in an attempt to reach more value-oriented customers. For $5, you get a sandwich, small fry, four piece McNugget, and a small drink, a little bit more in what I would expect to be getting from McDonald’s.

Jason Moser: Speaking of sticking to your knitting, this is something that McDonald’s are very good at, presenting value. I think this is going to be their moment to shine. Because as we’ve seen with many of these consumer package goods companies and retail in general, we’re just seeing that trend go on where the consumer is facing headwinds and having to make choices and trade offs. I think that McCormick call was sort of noteworthy there and that consumers are really starting to focus on value at the grocery store as well as restaurants. Typically, what that means is your quick service, your true fast food restaurants are going to have a little bit more of a moment in the sun. So I absolutely commend these restaurants on taking advantage of this moment in time. By the same token, you know, we don’t eat a lot of fast food. It’s just o obviously, the longer term implications on health. I don’t know that you want to be taking your family out for McDonald’s or Burger King or Wendy’s 3, 4, 5 times a week. Maybe that’s a problem. But you know, at least they’re taking advantage of this little window they’ve got.

Dylan Lewis: I will say, it’s the summertime. I’m doing a decent number of drives up I95 and up the Garden State Parkway, going up to visit New Jersey. I’ve made some stops into the fast food restaurants along the way. Not thrilled to be dropping $15 at Wendy’s at the rest stop for a burger and a meal. I welcome the $5 menu options. I hope we see more of them. I hope we see a little sticker shock.

Jason Moser: I hope we see more of that Wendy’s dream sickle frosty because that thing is fire.

Dylan Lewis: More menu innovation. Never bet against it. Let’s get over to stocks on our radar. Our man behind the glass, as always Dan Boyd is going to hit you with a question. Bill, you’re up first. What are you looking at this week?

Bill Mann: My company is a micro-cap that maybe you all have never heard of before. It’s called Disney. Disney has Yeah. You know this, they’ve got parks, they’ve got movies, they’ve got ESPN. What they really have had over the last couple of years is trouble. They have almost no part of the business has been firing well, except for actually maybe theme parks, oddly enough. They have a legitimate blockbuster on their hands in the movie studios with inside out two. They’ve had a resolution of a lot of their political arguments with the state of Florida. They’re in the process of revamping the Park Ride reservation process. I sense from Disney and the Disney shares that people have extrapolated a whole lot of the trouble, and Disney is starting at least in parts of their business to see green Shoots and is coming out on the other side.

Dylan Lewis: Dan, a question about Disney.

Dan Boyd: More of a comment. Dylan, Bill, I have a toddler, and my wife is pregnant with our second due in October, and she’s starting to make noise about going to Disney World, and I am terrified. I’ve never been, never wanted to go, and I know I don’t want to drop that much money.

Bill Mann: Start saving now because you’re going to Disney.

Dylan Lewis: That’s going to be a new banking product, I think in the next couple of years. The Disney savings account, to put the money there so it’s there when you know your child is five or six. Alright, Jason, what is on your radar this week?

Jason Moser: Yeah, a company called Itron Ticker is ITRI. Itron, they have a portfolio of art network, software services, devices, and sensors that help their customers better manage operations in the energy water and smart city space. You think about their customers. Those are primarily large electric natural gas and water utilities, as well as smaller utilities. But those offerings ultimately help these companies take advantage of this industrial Internet of things. All of these devices and networks and things are all being connected and transmitting all of this data all the time. We talk about AI, the benefits there of running things more efficiently. This is just really right up Itron’s alley there, 60% of the business is thanks to its networked solution segment that’s a combination of communicating devices like smart meters, and modules, and sensors, as well as network infrastructure in software. An interesting business as we start to see our nation’s energy needs expand.

Dylan Lewis: Dan, a question or a comment about Itron.

Dan Boyd: You might think that Disney might be the flash your choice here and get my nod, but and this could be a wild statement here, but I think that infrastructure and water and utilities might be a little bit more important than Disney these days.

Dylan Lewis: Disney you’re going to have to wait. A little microcap micro to be a big company someday, but not today, Dan, appreciate you weighing in, putting Itron on your watch list. Jason, Bill, appreciate you bringing your radar stocks and your analysis as always. That’s going to do it for this week, Motley for Money radio show. The show is mixed by Dan Boyd. I’m Dylan Lewis. Thanks for listening. We’ll see next time.

Source link

About The Author

Scroll to Top