AAPL

 I’m taking AAPL off my portfolio. Three incidents lead to this with the first being the death of Steve Jobs. AAPL was a tech company. Steve Jobs’ idea of the iPhone was genius. It was like a handheld CPU that would connect to any 3rd party device. The size and connection port remained the same across iPhone generations so that even new models would fit into pricey, professional 3rd party devices. With the iPhone 5, this was over. The size and connection port changed. Although people often change smartphones within 3 years, professional equipment such as sound or video equipment are often much longer than that. With iPhones changing in form every model, professional equipment manufacturers are no longer motivated to create serious equipment for iOS. So rather than Apple creating a business model based on an environment where 3rd party companies and consumers pay to be a part of

 Second, around last year, I had an iOS update. I barely used my iPhone and mostly it was just turned on with occasional charging to keep battery levels at around 80%. I had an older iPhone which I used more often. It contained most of the apps and data I frequently used and didn’t bother to sync with the new iPhone. Battery health of the new iPhone was at high 90% range, but after the update, I could no longer see the battery health and the phone started switching off at 40% battery. This was a deal breaker, but I continued to use the new iPhone as I could not adapt to Android and the Numbers app was convenient for keeping track of stocks. But I did start lowering my dependency on the iPhone.

 A few days ago, the deal broke. After another update, my iPhone turned off at 100% state of charge. Also, during the night, it turned off again and only turned on after 2.5 hrs of charging. Though I was trying to move away from my dependence on I found that I couldn’t do my daily activities for that time. With a bit of learning, I am now used to Google Docs and the last reason to use iOS is gone.

 Furthermore, there are videos on Youtube which demonstrate that new iPhone’s more components on new iPhones are coded for each phone and cannot be interchanged with identical iPhone models. Apple seems to be looking at repairs as another one of their business models, which will charge ridiculous amounts to customers. Not only is this bad news for customers, but also bad news for the environment.

 Finally, iOS has become so complex with unnecessary built in features that it is no longer intuitive. One of the biggest reasons I stuck to iOS over Android was that I didn’t want to bother learning to adapt to a new environment. Now, I feel I need to either learn to use new iOS versions ever time one is released or just use the limited features that haven’t really changed over time. Considering the price and longevity of iPhones, it would be much more beneficial for me to use something like Fairphone. I’d have to learn to adapt to Android and any updates, but at least it won’t cost as much as relying on Apple products. By the way, I still have my iPhone 4S and while it is incredibly slow, it is much more intuitive and stable compared to my new iPhone. The cease of updates and addition of unnecessary features has actually made it a much more robust gadget for me.

 All in all, AAPL is losing grasp of its tech business in which they could create a platform that would serve close to infinite number of customers. Now it looks more like a manufacturing company. The brand image of Apple was built on professional music or visual producers choosing Apple for their work. I no longer use the iPhone for music nor videos. Friends with creative professions have also moved away from Apple due to short longevity and high price. Apart from the brand prestige built quite some time ago, there is no reason for consumers to flock to Apple anymore. If Apple loses its ties with music or visual professions, it’s brand prestige can also collapse. In the end, the truth will catch up and I believe AAPL will become more of a manufacturing business stock rather than a tech stock, lowering its adequate PE ratio levels to below 20. In essence, manufacturing requires cost of production for every sales the company can make. Most tech stocks are based on services that can be created once and used by almost infinite number of users. Revenue of manufacturing companies may be higher, but profitability is significantly lower. Before Apple can find another innovator like Steve Jobs, I am going to stay clear of AAPL.

TLRY

 Cannabis a substitute to a problematic substance, alcohol. Alcohol is the main legal recreational substance, but is causing so much problems to the basic well-being of people. It is one of the leading causes of death and degrades health significantly. It’s an addictive substance and many people become aggressive or active, causing accidents and costs to society.

 On the flipside, there is possibility that the cannabis industry will grow, but Tilray will end up only taking a small pie of the industry. If governments decide to favor companies from their own countries in issuing permits for cannabis business, Tilray’s growth potential can be significantly limited. However, this has not been the case in recent years. Tilray has been exporting their products and have acquired permits in Portugal. Whether this is a green light for Tilray’s growth or not should be your decision.

 If you think that the cannabis industry will grow, but still doubtful that Tilray or any company will be in the spotlight, consider investing in ETFs such as MJ or POTX.

TSLA and what to learn from it

 TSLA is an innovative company that is out to solve problems. This is the number one aspect I look for when choosing stocks with purpose of growth. There are all sorts of new technology being developed everyday around the world and some are focused on solving problems while others are focused on making life easier. My basic philosophy is based on the idea that finances and resources will be more devoted towards solving problems than enhancing convenience. The former is mandatory while the latter is optional.

 TSLA is the reason I started trading stocks. I am a researcher in transportation greenhouse gas policy and I believed what scientists were saying to be true since my undergrad years in mid 2000s. I’ve always been a car nut and when Tesla started production of the Model S in 2013, I wanted to be a part of it. I jumped on TSLA in 2014 at around USD 200. This was the first stock I’d ever bought and I knew nothing about investing. Financial news was full of doubts about TSLA which I now suspect were the doing of shortsellers. I got scared, and sold TSLA with about 20 percent profit. Although it was a huge mistake, I think I learned so much from this mistake and I’m still learning a lot from it.

 So what have I learned? It was a great investment in a company that was out to contribute to solving the biggest problem mankind is facing, but the overwhelming doubts and shorts got to me. Now I know to filter out fake news or those that extract portions of financial data and present them as key performance indicators with the purpose of provoking fear and doubt. News is written by journalists that need attention. I don’t base my investment decisions on attention seekers anymore, but rather resort to science, as I had done when first buying TSLA.

 Science is even more important when looking for growth stocks. Today, science isn’t just about pushing the boundaries of tangible technology. It steers policy and influences every aspect of our lives, even our thoughts. On the contrary, buzzwords don’t last. If you’re looking for long term growth, stick to what scientific journal articles are saying instead of stock news. In particular, focus on research and technology that is out to solve the most important problems. This is easier these days as climate change is threatening our economy, our lives and survival of the human race. As the impact becomes more severe, this is where policymakers will allocate finances and resources. Buzzwords like ‘space’ is receiving a lot of attention as people are looking for early stages of cutting edge tech. But will policymakers devote to exploring space when climate change on earth is increasing the severity and frequency of deadly disasters and agriculture? I seriously doubt it. So when you’re looking for the next TSLA, make sure it is a company that will solve urgent problems rather than creating things that are nice to have but not really necessary.

By the way, I don’t own TSLA anymore because even success in all businesses that Elon Musk had planned and those Elon Musk had not announced, but feasible considering the strengths of Tesla, my calculations can only justify a target price of around USD 340.