Tencent's AI Restraint Shows Risk of Alibaba, JD Food War
From Meta Platforms Inc. to Google, one topic has dominated the conversation this tech earnings season: how Silicon Valley's leaders will invest to seize the momentum in a game-changing technology. In China, the industry is just as enthralled by a three-way battle to deliver the cheapest meals and knick-knacks, fastest. That conflict between Alibaba Group Holding Ltd., JD.com Inc. and Meituan — both on social media and in the physical consumer arena — isn't just compressing margins and irking investors — it's risking Beijing's scrutiny.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Dialog Group Berhad (KLSE:DIALOG) Could Be Struggling To Allocate Capital
If you're looking for a multi-bagger, there's a few things to keep an eye out for. Firstly, we'll want to see a proven return on capital employed (ROCE) that is increasing, and secondly, an expanding base of capital employed. This shows us that it's a compounding machine, able to continually reinvest its earnings back into the business and generate higher returns. Although, when we looked at Dialog Group Berhad (KLSE:DIALOG), it didn't seem to tick all of these boxes. Trump has pledged to "unleash" American oil and gas and these 15 US stocks have developments that are poised to benefit. Understanding Return On Capital Employed (ROCE) Just to clarify if you're unsure, ROCE is a metric for evaluating how much pre-tax income (in percentage terms) a company earns on the capital invested in its business. The formula for this calculation on Dialog Group Berhad is: Return on Capital Employed = Earnings Before Interest and Tax (EBIT) ÷ (Total Assets - Current Liabilities) 0.019 = RM132m ÷ (RM8.6b - RM1.7b) (Based on the trailing twelve months to March 2025). So, Dialog Group Berhad has an ROCE of 1.9%. Ultimately, that's a low return and it under-performs the Energy Services industry average of 11%. View our latest analysis for Dialog Group Berhad In the above chart we have measured Dialog Group Berhad's prior ROCE against its prior performance, but the future is arguably more important. If you'd like to see what analysts are forecasting going forward, you should check out our free analyst report for Dialog Group Berhad . How Are Returns Trending? On the surface, the trend of ROCE at Dialog Group Berhad doesn't inspire confidence. Over the last five years, returns on capital have decreased to 1.9% from 9.2% five years ago. And considering revenue has dropped while employing more capital, we'd be cautious. If this were to continue, you might be looking at a company that is trying to reinvest for growth but is actually losing market share since sales haven't increased. In Conclusion... In summary, we're somewhat concerned by Dialog Group Berhad's diminishing returns on increasing amounts of capital. It should come as no surprise then that the stock has fallen 49% over the last five years, so it looks like investors are recognizing these changes. With underlying trends that aren't great in these areas, we'd consider looking elsewhere. If you'd like to know about the risks facing Dialog Group Berhad, we've discovered 2 warning signs that you should be aware of. If you want to search for solid companies with great earnings, check out this free list of companies with good balance sheets and impressive returns on equity. Have feedback on this article? Concerned about the content? Get in touch with us directly. Alternatively, email editorial-team (at) 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. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
16 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump says no imminent plans to penalize China for buying Russian oil
WASHINGTON (Reuters) -U.S. President Donald Trump said on Friday he did not immediately need to consider retaliatory tariffs on countries such as China for buying Russian oil but might have to "in two or three weeks." Trump has threatened sanctions on Moscow and secondary sanctions on countries that buy its oil if no moves are made to end the war in Ukraine. China and India are the top two buyers of Russian oil. The president last week imposed an additional 25% tariff on Indian goods, citing its continued imports of Russian oil. However, Trump has not taken similar action against China. He was asked by Fox News' Sean Hannity if he was now considering such action against Beijing after he and Russian President Vladimir Putin failed to produce an agreement to resolve or pause Moscow's war in Ukraine. "Well, because of what happened today, I think I don't have to think about that," Trump said after his summit with Putin in Alaska. "Now, I may have to think about it in two weeks or three weeks or something, but we don't have to think about that right now. I think, you know, the meeting went very well." Chinese President Xi Jinping's slowing economy will suffer if Trump follows through on a promise to ramp up Russia-related sanctions and tariffs. Xi and Trump are working on a trade deal that could lower tensions - and import taxes - between the world's two biggest economies. But China could be the biggest remaining target, outside of Russia, if Trump ramps up punitive measures. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
30 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Steve Jobs' first Silicon Valley boss turned down an offer to buy a third of Apple for $50,000—today, his share would be worth nearly $1 trillion
Atari cofounder Nolan Bushnell turned down his former employee, the late Steve Jobs, when he was offered to buy a third of Apple for $50,000 in the 1970s. With the iPhone titan now standing at $3.1 trillion, the video gaming pioneer missed out on making $1 trillion from his relatively small investment. But he isn't troubling himself with regret, reasoning he might not be as happy—and Apple may not have been as successful—if he accepted the deal. Many people may be kicking themselves for not buying Bitcoin or investing in Nvidia stock sooner—but few will have missed out on a bigger deal than Atari cofounder Nolan Bushnell, the first Silicon Valley boss of the late Steve Jobs. A young Jobs offered the gaming mogul an eye-popping deal: buy a third of Apple for just $50,000. What might come as a shock to many is that Bushnell turned it down. Apple has since grown into a $3.1 billion sensation with over a billion iPhones sitting in people's back pockets, and over 100 million Mac users worldwide—and if Bushnell had taken the deal, his cut would have made him $1 trillion today. But Bushnell isn't crying over the missed opportunity Bushnell first witnessed Jobs' potential as a businessman in the 1970s, when the college dropout joined Atari as a technician and games designer before moving into entrepreneurship. Jobs was an essential engineer 'solving problems in the field' at Atari, Bushnell recalled, but his leadership mentality also meant some tension at the office. The Atari cofounder strategically employed Jobs during nightshifts, knowing that Wozniak would also join and help out on projects like the brick-breaking game 'Breakout.' But Jobs would also barge into his office to tell Bushnell that the other employees weren't good at soldering, offering to instruct them. Bushnell recognized that Jobs was a genius—albiet, a complicated one. 'He was a difficult person,' Bushnell told ABC News in 2015. 'He was very smart. Often he was the smartest person in the room, and he would tell everybody that. It's generally not a good social dynamic.' But years later, the tech pioneer isn't quietly simmering over his choice to reject the offer. 'I could have owned a third of Apple computer for $50,000, and I turned it down,' Bushnell said in the interview. 'I've got a wonderful family, I've got a great wife, my life is wonderful. I'm not sure that if I had been uber, uber, uber rich that I'd have had all of that.' In fact, Bushnell even thinks Apple may not have been so successful if he had taken the deal. And his potential payout may not have soared to that trillion-dollar height. 'I'm still an Apple fan and you know I think that hindsight is 20/20,' he told Tech Radar in 2013, when asked about his decision to say no. 'I can go through a thread very easily which, by me turning Steve down led to me introducing him to Don Valentine, and he introduced him to Mike Markkula who is as responsible for Apple's success as Steve Woz[niak] and Jobs.' He's not the first tech boss to have missed out on billions Bushnell isn't the only one who missed out on critical business opportunities that would launch them into billionaire status—there are even others who blew it on big deals with Apple. Ronald Wayne, the lesser-known third Apple cofounder, was also working at the electronics company Atari when he stepped up as Jobs' friend to help convince Wozniak of formalizing Apple's launch. Wayne even typed up the contract, penning that he would receive a 10% share in the tech company, while Jobs and Wozniak would each be awarded a 45% stake. However, less than two weeks after drafting up the document, Wayne sold his stake for just $800, also reaping $1,500 to forgo any claim to the company. Looking back, it's a massive misstep as his 10% share could now be worth between $75 billion and $300 billion today. His wasted opportunity isn't as stark as Bushnell's—and the decision mainly came from a desire to have financial stability in his life. 'Jobs and Woz didn't have two nickels to rub together,' Wayne told Business Insider in 2017. 'I, on the other hand, had a house, and a car, and a bank account—which meant that I was on the hook if that thing blew up.' YouTube's cofounders, Chad Hurley, Steven Chen and Jawed Karim could also be sitting in a sizable nest egg today if they didn't sell their company so early. The YouTube creators sold their popular video platform to Google for $1.65 billion in fall 2006—each receiving millions of dollars worth of stock. Hurley got company shares worth around $345 million, according to The New York Times, while Chen accepted about $326 million worth. Karim, who left the business early to go back to school, got $64 million of shares. They were ecstatic about the deal in the beginning, but the buyer's remorse would potentially creep up less than 20 years later. Today, YouTube is valued at $550 billion—333 times higher than its market cap from nearly two decades prior, adjusted to inflation. If Hurley and Chen accepted the same stock deal today that they did in 2006, each could have more than $100 billion in their bank accounts. This story was originally featured on Sign in to access your portfolio
