The Dow Jones Industrials have gotten out to a terrible start in 2014, dealing investors a tough blow after five straight years of solid gains. But bond legend Bill Gross believes that investors still need to be cautious even after recent declines, pointing to changing macroeconomic conditions as potentially putting more pressure on risky assets like stocks.

In the following video, Dan Caplinger, The Motley Fool's director of investment planning, goes through Gross's argument, in which he explains that slowing credit expansion could hit asset prices. Basically, Gross believes that falling government deficits and slowing quantitative easing will halt the growth of credit in the economy, and historically, that has led to pressure on risk assets. By contrast, Gross believes that the high-quality bonds in his PIMCO Total Return ETF could outperform in such an environment, and Dan adds that other non-PIMCO ETFs like the iShares 20+ Year Treasury ETF could also do well. Dan concludes that you have to take Gross's advice with a grain of salt given PIMCO's bond emphasis, but it's still worth being careful with your investments.

The United States economy is in trouble. Employment is the backbone of any economy, and there are three reasons jobs today just ain't as sweet as they used to be. Here's why Americans are getting paid less, getting fired, or are just giving up altogether.

1. Uneducated only, please
The United States economy was built on the backs of John Rockefeller, Henry Ford, Rosie the Riveter, and countless others who transformed our nation into a manufacturing machine.

In 1960, General Motors Company was the largest employer, putting 595,200 Americans to work. That's 0.8% of the entire work force, and a whopping 3.5% of all manufacturing jobs.

Source: General Motors Company; 1960 Chevrolet Corvette Convertible. 

But while manufacturing has brought the United States economy unprecedented wealth, it's recently been more headache than help. Outsourcing, improved technology, and a global recession have mangled manufacturing's role as America's everlasting employer.

Since its 2009 bailout, General Motors Company has been cutting jobs and trading out high-paid workers for cheaper labor. The automaker has hired around 18,000 hourly production workers, allowing the company to remove skilled trade jobs. The Center for Automotive Research says General Motors Company saves approximately $57,000 a year when it hands a pink slip to a high-skilled $32-per-hour earner and hires a $15-per-hour employee instead.

2. Subsisting on services
But manufacturing might not even matter much to the United States economy. Today, the sector employs around one-tenth of America's workforce, while the services sector has soared to nearly 90%.

General Motors Company topped the top employer list in 1960, but the biggest spots in 2010 were all filled by services corporations. In first place, Wal-Mart Stores employed an astounding 2.1 million people -- that's equal to the population of Houston, the country's fourth-largest city.

The biggest goods-producing employer in 2010 was Hewlett-Packard Company , with just 324,600 employees. Not only is that less than General Motors Company employed in 1960, but it's shrinking even more. Hewlett-Packard Company announced on New Year's Eve that it will cut 5,000 more jobs, bringing its total termination count to 34,000 -- 11% of its entire workforce.  

For a closer look at services, the Bureau of Labor Statistics periodically releases data on the hottest occupations in the United States economy. For May 2012 (the most recent data available), retail salespersons, cashiers, and restaurant workers snagged the top three spots. Collectively, these three industries alone employ a staggering 10.6 million Americans.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics 

But the news isn't all good for services. The Bureau of Labor Statistics also tracks hourly wages, and our nation's largest employers are also paying pennies compared to manufacturing. While General Motors Company is happy to hire $15-per-hour workers, the average cashier makes just $9.21.

The lowest earners list is littered with services workers. Food preparation workers have it worst, earning just $7.92 per hour. That's lower than the minimum wage for 15 states.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics. 

3. Giving up for good

Source: National Archives; Unemployed wait outside a soup kitchen in 1931. 

While the services sector keeps its employees on subsistence wages and manufacturing jobs continue to get cut, the biggest problem may be getting workers to work-period. The global financial crisis pushed the United States economy's unemployment rate from an enviable 4.5% to an ugly 10% in just two years' time.

US Unemployment Rate data by YCharts

But although rates are back down to 6.7%, it's not because employers are hiring. Many Americans are simply giving up and leaving the work force altogether, making numbers look better than they actually are. Since 2007, the number of employable Americans looking for work has dropped from 66.4% to a measly 62.8%, the lowest since 1978.

US Labor Force Participation Rate data by YCharts.

The future of the United States economy
The United States economy is in a rut. Although the Federal Reserve recently noted that things have "picked up" in recent quarters, it described labor market indicators as "mixed." With current movements between manufacturing and services, as well as in and out of the economy altogether, it's easy to understand why. Employment is the undisputed backbone to the United States economy, allowing America to both produce and purchase.

Warren Buffett has famously recommended only investing in companies that you can understand. 

I understand thirst, and I'm buying Green Mountain Coffee Roasters this month. Here's why.

Here's what happened
Coca-Cola  announced that it was purchasing 10% of Green Mountain for $1.25 billion. Why is Coke investing in a coffee company? Because next year Green Mountain is launching what it calls Keurig Cold, a single serve beverage system designed for cold drinks -- soft drinks, teas, juices, and so on -- and Coke wants its brands to be the first cold drinks available on the platform.

The implications are huge for Green Mountain. First, this deal is nothing short of a ringing endorsement for the future of the company from nothing less than the leading beverage company in the world. But what else is there to this story that has Coca-Cola and me investing so enthusiastically?

1. The single-serve concept has been proven as awesome
Green Mountain started as a coffee business. With the Keurig platform, the company has revolutionized the way millions of Americans get their daily cup of Joe. According to a recent Bank of America note, single cup coffee is now 30% of the market, nearly quadrupling from just three short years ago.

Green Mountain's platform is today in over 15 million households and serves coffee brands from Starbucks  to Caribou Coffee to its own Green Mountain grinds. 

The single serve concept and Keurig platorm just works. Its convenient, its easy, and it produces a beverage that tastes great. And because of this, its taken the coffee world by storm.

2. Massive market to sell cold beverages
If the market for coffee is huge, the market for cold beverages is goliath. Coke is the world's leading beverage company, and will report year end financials later this month. Through the first three quarters of 2013, the company recognized sales of $35 billion. PepsiCo , the second largest global beverage brand, reported revenues of $29 billion for the same period in its Americas, Europe, and Asia/Middle East/Africa beverage units (PepsiCo also has a substantial food business, which has been excluded in this revenue figure).  

Green Mountain reported an impressive (but tiny compared to Coke) $4.3 billion in annual revenues for its last year end back in September 2013. The growth potential in cold beverages is just incredible for Green Mountain. Coke and Pepsi sold a combined $64 billion of beverage products in nine months in 2013. That's nearly 15 times what Green Mountain reported in its most recent full year!!

In its latest SEC filing, Green Mountain reported that 100% of revenues were generated in the U.S. and Canada. The company states that global expansion is part of a "longer-term" growth plan. The new partnership with Coca Cola dramatically increases Green Mountains chances for international success. Coca Cola has long established relationships, distribution channels, and expertise all over the globe. The value of this knowledge and experience to a young company with international ambitions should not be understated. Green Mountain will be going global, and I think it will be sooner rather than later.  

3. What if Keurig Cold Diet Coke doesn't taste as good as bottled Diet Coke?
One of the largest risks is the quality of the beverages produced by Keurig Cold. The original Keurig product was successful because, among other reasons, it produced delicious coffee. Keurig Cold hasn't yet come to market, and its still to be determined if it will stack up against the cold drinks already in your refridgerator.

Coca Cola executives, smart investors as they are, had the same concern. Green Mountain CEO Brian Kelley stated that Coke has actually been in discussions about the deal for months, and have been very close to the development process for Keurig Cold. Why? Because they needed to be sure that a Coca Cola poured from a Keurig would taste like, well, a Coca Cola.

Through this process, these executives became comfortable with the product and backed up their confidence with $1.25 billion of company money. If these executives feel $1.25 billion comfortable with the product, then so do I.

Feeling thirsty yet?
Taken altogether, the investment thesis for Green Mountain is pretty simple. It produces a fantastic product that is transforming the method for coffee consumption in the United States. It has tremendous growth opportunities both in their existing coffee niche, as well as a treasure trove awaiting in cold beverages. Coca-Cola has vouched for the company with a $1.25 billion vote of confidence, and will be bringing its globally leading cold beverage brands to the Keurig platform. 

Great products, tremendous opportunities for growth, and backing from the global industry leader. Suffice it to say, I'm buying.

Today we are looking at EQT Corp.  an industry-leading low cost natural gas producer. With a fourth-quarter earnings release this next week, now is a good time for investors to review this growing Marcellus player. 

2013's winner
There's a huge difference between a good stock and a stock that can make you rich. The Motley Fool's chief investment officer has selected his No. 1 stock for 2014, and it's one of those stocks that could make you rich. You can find out which stock it is in the special free report "The Motley Fool's Top Stock for 2014." Just click here to access the report and find out the name of this under-the-radar company.

This segment is from Thursday's edition of Digging for Value, in which sector analysts Joel South and Taylor Muckerman discuss energy and materials news with host Alison Southwick. The twice-weekly show can be viewed on Tuesdays and Thursdays. It can also be found on Twitter, along with our extended coverage of the energy & materials sectors @TMFEnergy.

None

Follow @andrewtonner

Shares of tech giant Apple have taken it on the chin over the last two weeks in the wake of its disappointing earnings report.

However, as we head into that time of year often regarded as a quiet period for Apple, all is not lost at the world's largest technology company.

Hope springs eternal
By now, it's a given that Apple will launch updates to the iPhone and iPad later in the year. But as we saw in its most recent earnings report, that can only drive growth to an increasingly limited extent.

So for investors, much of the reason to invest is predicated on what else Apple might have up its sleeve. And if a series of recent moves serve as any indication, Apple could still have plenty of innovation in its tank.

Recently, a number of sources have detailed how Apple has quietly been bolstering its content-delivery capabilities. This has left many Apple observers speculating that the moves mean it could be slowly laying the foundation for its long-rumored television product in the months ahead.

In the video below, tech and telecom analyst Andrew Tonner discusses the news and the possible implications it could hold for Apple investors.

If you head to any corporate website, chances are you'll find evidence of their fantastic environmental initiatives. But for those wanting to delve deeper, the EPA has separated fact from fiction, and awarded gold, silver, and bronze to the three Fortune 500 companies using the most renewable energy. Here's how Intel Corporation , Microsoft Corporation , and Kohl's Corp. topped the list.

1. Intel Corporation

Source: Intel Corporation. 

Chip manufacturing takes a load of electricity, and Intel Corporation sources 100% of its demand from renewable sources. At 3,100,850,000 kWh of annual usage, Intel Corporation's consumption is enormous -- but the company's committed to keeping itself clean. The company isn't afraid to get political and makes it clear in its policy that global warming is a real threat:

Intel believes that climate change is a serious economic, social and environmental challenge that warrants an equally serious societal and policy response.

While Intel Corporation keeps its own corporation clean, it's also working hard to advance green options for others. Its eco-friendly processors are industry leaders in energy efficiency, and its applications range from improving offshore wind power productivity to enhancing smart grid capabilities.

2. Microsoft Corporation
Microsoft Corporation is undergoing massive management changes, but its energy use is consistently clean. While its renewable energy use only accounts for 80% of total consumption, its sheer scale enables the company to use a whopping 1,935,551,000 kWh of clean energy every year.

Microsoft Corporation's environmental initiatives span the nation, and it relies on a mix of on- and off-site biomass, small-scale hydro, solar, and wind projects to keep business bustling.

Source: Microsoft Corporation. 

In 2012, Microsoft Corporation announced its intentions to go 100% carbon neutral in fiscal 2013, from data centers to its employee's flights around the world. To help it achieve its goal, the company initiated an innovative "carbon fee," which levies specific tariffs on its individual business segments for their energy use. Ceres, the company responsible for the design of the fee, describe its unique approach:

By disseminating the costs associated with its carbon neutral policy across the organization (based on which divisions are actually responsible for the carbon emissions), Microsoft has created a self-replenishing fund to subsidize green initiatives and offset any residual emissions.

3. Kohl's Corp.

Source: Kohl's Corp.; Arizona store with solar rooftop panels.

Kohl's Corp. may be known for clean clothes, but certainly not clean energy. Nevertheless, this department store company is the Fortune 500's third-largest renewable energy user. At 1,536,529,000 kWh of annual green power usage, Kohl's Corp. actually produces and purchases more green energy than it needs -- 105% of its total electricity use.

Of Kohl's Corp.'s stores, 148 currently sport solar panel systems, and 801 are Energy Star certified. And by 2015, the company expects to up its solar stores to 200.

A central energy management system keeps an automatic eye on all of Kohl Corp.'s stores, controlling lighting, heating, and cooling nationwide. This has helped it achieve one of the lowest energy usages per square foot of all retail corporations.

Source: Kohl's Corp.; Horizontal wind turbines at Texas store.

But Kohl's Corp. isn't keep all the clean fun to itself. In addition to its solar investments, the company has been running two wind pilot projects since 2011, and its research should help big-box stores everywhere determine how wind power could cut their own carbon consumption.

Go green to make green?
Intel Corporation, Microsoft Corporation, and Kohl's Corp. are the greenest Fortune 500 companies around. But their environmental initiatives make sense. Energy efficiency cuts electricity costs, while renewable energy use makes their products increasingly attractive to environmentally minded consumers. These three companies are Fortune 500 leaders -- and their green goodness could be a secret sign of solid sales to come.

Although we don't believe in timing the market or panicking over daily movements, we do like to keep an eye on market changes -- just in case they're material to our investing thesis.

On a week that had a number of important jobs reports and more than one that missed expectations, the major indexes finished on a high note and performed much better than expected. For the week, the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 95 points, or 0.6%, while the S&P 500 rose more than 14 points, or 0.8%, and the Nasdaq increased almost 22 points, or 0.53%.

As for the jobs data, ADP's Wednesday report indicated 175,000 new private-sector jobs in January, below the 185,000 economists had predicted. Weekly jobless claims, announced on Thursday, fell to 331,000, a drop of 20,000 from the previous week and below estimates of 337,000. And on Friday, the all-important Labor Department report came in at a measly 113,000 jobs created in January. Economists had been calling for 189,000, but it was still better than December's report of just 74,000 jobs. 

Among the good news was that the unemployment rate fell to 6.6% and the labor force participation rate increased to 63% from 62.8% in December.  

Before we get to the Dow's biggest losers of the week, let's look at its top performer. Walt Disney climbed 4.21% for the week, after the company's earnings, released Thursday, revealed beats on both the top and bottom lines. Revenue increased by 9% during the quarter, as the blockbuster movie Frozen racked up more than $870 million in worldwide box-office sales. With Disney's infrastructure, that kind of performance in the theater will translate to big-time revenue in areas such as branding, merchandising, and maybe even theme-park attractions. Investors have a bright future to look forward to.  

Last week's big losers
United Technologies closed the week down 2.88%, enough to make it the Dow's third worst-performing component of the week. There was little hard news, though rumors did begin to spread that the company may sell or spin off its Sikorsky helicopter unit, which is highly levered to the Defense Department and sensitive to budget cuts. The division, which makes the famed Black Hawk chopper, generated $6.25 billion in sales during 2013, a 7.9% decline from the year before as the Pentagon made cuts. Some observers think more cuts could be on the way, and that makes Sikorsky a potential liability. However, Sikorsky also makes up about 10% of the company's revenue, and that wouldn't be easy to replace in the near future. This stock will become a tough call if the rumors pan out.  

Coming in second place, after falling more than 3.06%, was AT&T . The telecom giant dropped like a rock on Monday afternoon and never rebounded. Going on the offensive in the wireless wars, the company said it will offer a cheaper version of its family plan than will allow up to two lines to have unlimited talk and text and 10 gigabytes of data for only $130 per month. The plan is much cheaper than what rival Verizon is offering and more competitive than what T-Mobile provides. AT&T's strategy may sound like a great way to attract and keep customers, but it means margins will fall in the coming quarters.  

Finally, this past week's biggest Dow loser was Microsoft , down 3.38%. There was debate about whether the announcement of a new CEO would move shares up or down, depending on whether investors thought the right person was picked for the job. What that says about the selection of longtime Microsoft employee Satya Nadella to be the company's third CEO perhaps remains to be seen. Nadella was widely considered a conservative pick, especially among those who thought the company needed a real Bill Gates-type of visionary to take over from Steve Ballmer. As for me, I like to think that slow and steady wins the race -- even in the world of technology.

The other Dow losers this week:

• ExxonMobil, down 1.71%
• Goldman Sachs, down 1.33%
• Home Depot, down 0.52%
• Intel, down 1.38%
• Nike, down 0.22%
• Travelers, down 0.49%
• UnitedHealth Group, down 1.27%
• Verizon, down 2.52%
• Wal-Mart, down 1.24%

Apple  just put down $14 billion -- and it's betting on itself. In an interview with The Wall Street Journal, CEO Tim Cook said that he was surprised with the market's reaction to Apple's latest earnings report. In order to take advantage of the overreaction, Apple decided to conduct another accelerated share repurchase program. That means that Apple has repurchased approximately $42 billion of its stock thus far, out of its total $60 billion authorization.

That authorization was originally expected to last through the end of calendar 2015, but at this rate Apple will exhaust it in no time. It looks like the Mac maker might need to boost its authorization in the near future, and likely take out more debt in order to fund the repurchase program without tapping foreign reserves. Investors are quite pleased with the news, sending shares higher on Friday.

In this segment of Tech Teardown, Erin Kennedy discusses Apple's repurchase activity with Evan Niu, CFA, our tech and telecom bureau chief.

Earnings season has brought some great results from many companies, as net-income gains have pointed to solid performance from a fundamental standpoint. Yet in many cases, great earnings news is followed by a falling stock price. Why aren't investors happier about positive results?

In the following video, Dan Caplinger, The Motley Fool's director of investment planning, explains how stocks can fall even after great earnings. Dan explains how AT&T , Boeing , and Ralph Lauren have all beaten expectations that investors had for their most recent quarters. Yet Dan reminds investors that the stock market is a forward-looking mechanism, and when companies like these don't give the positive outlooks that shareholders want to see, a stock-price drop often follows. Dan concludes that looking back at past results is mostly useful for what they tell you about the future, and smart investors maintain a future-looking focus in their investing choices.

Source: CVS Caremark.

CVS has recently announced that it will stop selling tobacco in its U.S. stores, and the decision is generating a lot of debate. Is tobacco qualitatively different from alcohol or high-calorie food? Is CVS making the right decision from an investor's point of view?

What a cigarette really is
CVS will continue selling other products that aren't exactly good for consumers' health, like alcoholic drinks and high-calorie food, and this has generated some criticism from those who believe that a cigarette is not necessarily very different from a can of beer or a bag of chips.

There are some important aspects to consider, though. Unlike an occasional beer or a bag of chips, or even both of them together, cigarettes are not only horrendously damaging to our health, but also highly addictive -- perhaps even as addictive as heavy illegal drugs, according to the American Heart Association: "Pharmacologic and behavioral characteristics that determine tobacco addiction are similar to those that determine addiction to drugs such as heroin and cocaine."

Alcohol can be very destructive for many people, and certain theories say that some people may be developing addictions to particular foods, but that's clearly not the case for most consumers. The addictive nature of tobacco makes a big difference when it comes to considering its potential for health damage over the years.

Short-term costs
CVS expects the decision to cost nearly $2 billion in lost annual sales and $0.17 in earnings per share per year. For 2014, since the measure will be implemented in October, the cost to earnings is calculated to be in the range of $0.06 to $0.09 per share. Wall Street analysts are estimating that the company will gain around $4.47 per share during the year, so the move won't have a dramatic impact, but it will have one. 

Besides, the indirect impact could be hard to measure. People tend to purchase different items while they're at the store buying their smokes, so competitors such as Walgreen and Rite-Aid could gain market share by attracting customers who prefer to buy their cigarettes and other products all in the same place.

Dollar General can be an important example to consider. The company started selling tobacco in 2013, and it's having material positive impact on revenues. According to the company, the number of customers buying more than just cigarettes has been rapidly growing, while cigarette-only purchases are declining. This means that Dollar General is effectively converting cigarette buyers into valuable clients.

Long-term strategy
On the other hand, even if CVS could lose some sales and market share versus Walgreen and Rite-Aid in the short term, the company is making the right decision in terms of its long-term strategic focus. The company is transforming itself from a simple drugstore to an integrated health-care provider, and this means having to close some doors so others will open.

CVS is planning to expand its MinuteClinic facilities from 800 to 1,500 by 2017, a business that has promising long-term possibilities because of rising health-care demand in the coming years. As pharmacies move into the treatment arena, removing tobacco products from their shelves sounds like an appropriate and coherent decision.

Unlike Walgreen and Rite-Aid, CVS is not only a drugstore chain but also a pharmacy benefit manager, so the company could benefit materially from building stronger relationships with hospitals, insurers, and physician groups.

If CVS can manage to extract higher cost savings and provide better care to patients, the decision to stop selling cigarettes could actually produce market share gains for the company versus rivals such as Walgreen and Rite-Aid over the years.

At the end of the day, tobacco is a decaying industry, while health care is benefiting from strong secular tailwinds as a result of demographic trends, technological innovation in treatments and drugs, and increased health-care insurance coverage.

CVS is letting go of the past to embrace the future, and that should be a positive decision from financial perspective over the long term.

Bottom line
Quitting smoking requires a long term focus: You need to make a considerable effort in the short term, but the benefits from such decision can be enormous and long-lasting. CVS's decision to stop selling tobacco can have a negative financial impact in the coming quarters, but it's still the right thing to do when considering the long term implications, both for clients and investors.

The first computer I ever bought was a Tandy TRS-80 I got at Radio Shack in the mid-1980s. There was no floppy drive, no operating system, no Internet connection, and no hard drive. I used a tape recorder to save data, but I still felt pretty cutting-edge, even if it was largely an expensive paperweight, since I had no programming skills and used it like a big calculator.

While those were also the halcyon days of Radio Shack, as its popular Super Bowl commercial last week indicated, the electronics retailer would like 2014 to be the start of a new golden age. Unfortunately, a funny commercial doesn't translate into a business plan, and though The Shack has lived several years beyond my prediction that it didn't have long to survive, you cant say it's been thriving.

Trailing sales of almost $4.1 billion are just as much as it generated 20 years ago, and last quarter they dropped more than 10% as same-store sales tumbled more than 8%. It's been spinning its tires and now is on a fast track down, which is partly the reason behind its reported decision to close some 500 stores.

If it continues on this path of trying to be nothing more than a mini-Best Buy , of a consumer-electronics retailer chasing mobile phone dollars amid a general push for big screen TVs, headphones, and gadgets, then its future will be dismal. In the era of e-commerce and Amazon.com, Best Buy can't even be Best Buy anymore, let alone lesser competitors like Circuit City or Sixth Avenue Electronics. Radio Shack needs a bolder path, one that harks back to its roots of catering to the electronics hobbyist who wanted to build stuff with his own hands rather than buying pre-packaged goods.

Although diodes, capacitors, and electronic esoterica may seem quaint and part of a dying art, that same entrepreneurial spirit is still very much alive in the maker movement that's springing up all over. Management needs to visit one of the many Maker Faires around the country to understand the DIY electronic platforms arduinos and Raspberry Pis represent shouldn't be stuck in some obscure corner of its stores as they are now, but need to be brought ought front where they can displace the pushy mobile-phone salespeople customers are greeted by.

And additive manufacturing in particular will usher in a whole new revolution as it becomes more accessible to the general public, particularly those who are hip-deep in the maker movement when they have the tools of creation placed in their hands. It will indeed be a new industrial revolution, and Radio Shack can be at the forefront of its birth if it merely looks back to its own past and embraces it.

Instead of touting the latest calling plans, why doesn't Radio Shack offer 3-D printing services, printers, and supplies? Office-supply leader Staples and UPS both offer such printing capabilities and Office Depot is now stocking 3D Systems Cube line of of 3-D printers. Instead of prominently displaying the latest Beats headphones, why not provide customers with LilyPad arduinos that can be sewn into fabrics and textiles? Or give them the tools to develop robotics and electronics projects using Raspberry minicomputers and Arduino micro controllers?

Cube 3-D printer. Source: 3D Systems

3D Systems has partnered with Google on Project Ara to create a customizable, open-source, and modular smartphone platform. Privately held Optomec is developing electronic circuitry that it's already printed using Stratasys 3-D technology. These are the technologies around which whole industries will grow and Radio Shack ought to be where its future begins.

It's the people most interested in these advances, the Makers, who also happen to be the ones that would be most likely to shop Radio Shack's stores.

The Shack's whole existence was originally predicated on the do-it-yourself guy building his own electronics in his basement. The modern industrial revolution will similarly arise out of basement and garage shops all across the country because of the technological tumult 3-D printing, additive manufacturing, and robotics will create. 

Management says it's committed to remaking itself, but whether it will be this bold, new vision, or simply a pale shadow of paths everyone else has trod is the question that needs to be answered. Radio Shack can either be in the vanguard of change, or it can relegate itself to the dustbin of history alongside its Tandy computers. Which road do you think it will take?

NVIDIA is making noise -- moving toward a custom core approach with its mobile processors. The next iteration of the new NVIDIA Tegra K1 chip is expected to offer more targeted performance and consumption, and a challenge to Qualcomm in the smartphone arena.

The Motley Fool's Evan Niu got a chance to check out the new chip at NVIDIA's booth at the 2014 Consumer Electronics Show in Las Vegas. In this video Evan chats with Rex Moore from the exhibit floor about the opportunities in this space, and what it means to Qualcomm.

A full transcript follows the video.

Rex Moore: Next thing let's talk about is chips. You saw the nice, impressive NVIDIA booth. What did you think of their new chip?

Evan Niu: Yes, I just came from NVIDIA's booth, and talking to them about their new Tegra K1, a brand new chip they announced earlier this week. Really impressive graphics; they're talking console-level graphics on a mobile chip, which is pretty impressive. We were seeing some pretty nice things running on a tablet -- stuff that's better than the PlayStation 3, which they also power -- some really high-level stuff there.

But also, on the next iteration of that K1 chip, they're going to finally be going to more of a custom core approach. I think that they led this race to, "How many cores can you get into a processor?" but that's not necessarily the best solution, in a lot of cases.

They're going to be taking the design to another level in terms of more sophisticated -- going to more custom designs -- which should really allow you to pinpoint performance and consumption a little bit better.

Really, that will put some heat on Qualcomm, because they haven't had as much traction in smartphones. Qualcomm has really led the way because they have a custom approach. Apple also has a custom approach, but NVIDIA is now stepping into the game.

American supermarket chain Safeway  recently posted a rather dull quarterly performance amid intense competition in the market. Can Safeway recover from this quarter, or has it lost its way? The answer remains to be seen. Let's have a look at the company and compare it to Roundy's and SUPERVALU .

Third-quarter earnings
Safeway reported mixed results for the third quarter. First, there was a 1.1% increase in sales to $8.6 billion compared to $8.5 billion in the third quarter of last year. Second, earnings per share slipped 58% to $0.27. The gross profit dipped by 36 basis points to 25.8%, while same-store sales grew by 1.9%. All in all, the company didn't do a bad job in terms of sales but struggled to earn sizable profits.

What is Safeway up to?
In November, the company sold its Canadian business to Sobeys for $5.8 billion in order to focus more on the US market. The move, however, has been met with great skepticism by many analysts, as the company's Canadian operations had been generating healthy profits for the past few years. According to the company, the proceeds from the deal will be used for a stock-buyback program and paying off debt.

At the end of the third quarter, Safeway announced that it wanted to exit the Chicago market by selling all its Dominick's locations in the region. The company has already sold 15 stores; four to New Albertsons and 11 to Roundy's. For the remaining 57 stores, Safeway is still looking for buyers.

Safeway is expecting a tax benefit of $400 million to $450 million by exiting the Chicago market. The net present value of these tax benefits is around $145 million, as estimated by the company. This cash will be used for the share-repurchase program and investing activities.

On the other hand, leaving the market is going to trigger a multi-employer pension withdrawal liability for Safeway, which is amortized for more than 20 years. Safeway estimates the present value of these payments to be around $375 million. For this reason, many analysts are of the view that exiting the Chicago market may not be a very judicious decision.

Safeway is facing intense competition from big players like Kroger, Whole Foods, Wal-Mart, and Target, which means that the company's margins aren't going to increase significantly, at least in the near future. Hence, the company will not be able to generate considerable profits, casting a shadow of doubt over its future prospects.

Safeway has also lowered its financial guidance for fiscal-year 2013. Now the company expects its earnings to be in the range of $0.93-$1.00 as opposed to prior earnings guidance of $1.02-$1.12.

According to Reuters, Safeway has become a buyout target after announcing that it wants to sell its Chicago business. Cerberus Capital Management, after buying five stores from SUPERVALU, is looking for a leveraged buyout of Safeway. As per the Reuters' report, the value of buyout could be around $8 billion, which would make it one of the largest leveraged buyouts since the financial crisis.

Safeway is adopting a "poison-pill"' strategy (plan to discourage a hostile takeover); therefore, the company has increased its stock-buyback authorization by $2 billion. This action was taken after Jana Partners, a hedge fund, acquired 6.2% position in the company.

Competitors
Roundy's latest quarter wasn't a satisfactory result, as the company's earnings per share dropped to $0.07 from $0.20 in the comparable quarter last year. Same-store sales declined by 3.7%, while revenue grew by 1.1%. The earnings took a hit due to an increase in operating expenses, a weak economy, and new store openings.

Mariano's, a fast-growing upscale grocery chain owned by Roundy's, recently bought 11 Dominick's locations from Safeway. Considering Mariano's success in the market and its expansion plans, Roundy's is expected to get back on track. However, it would be prudent to further monitor the company before investing in it.

To keep a check on its operating expenses, SUPERVALU sold more than 900 stores to Cerberus for $3.3 billion. As a result, SUPERVALU reported adjusted earnings of $0.12 per share in its first quarter of fiscal-year 2014 compared to $0.08 per share in the year-ago quarter. Revenue, however, stood at $4 billion after a 1% dip. Save-A-Lot remained strong with positive identical-sales growth and revenue performance. The retail food and independent business segments also benefited from the company's cost-cutting initiatives, which could prove vital to SUPERVALU's future.

Final thoughts
Safeway's latest quarterly performance should be a worrying sign for investors. The outlook for the next year as portrayed by the company looks rather dim, as the management has revised its earnings downward. The company is facing massive competition both in the upscale and downscale markets, which is putting an enormous amount of pressure on margins. Furthermore, there are rumors going around regarding the possible buyout of the company. Considering all of this, I don't believe Safeway presents a valuable investment opportunity at this point in time.

Still trying to figure out who would ever risk his or her life doing the luge at the Winter Olympics? At least it's not as dangerous as staying in a Sochi hotel. Now check out why Wall Street deserved a bronze medal last week.

1. January employment report disappoints
In its big monthly announcement, the Labor Department reported that although unemployment dipped from 6.7% to 6.6%, the U.S. added only 113,000 jobs in January -- well below economists' expectations of 200,000. Although that's the second straight disappointing month after the economy had so much jobs momentum over 2013, both November and December's jobs reports were revised upward. Some economists think absurdly cold weather may have affected hiring, but overall investors weren't too upset Friday, because a mediocre jobs report most likely means the Federal Reserve will continue its economic stimulus policies.

• Monday -- earnings: Hasbro, Loews, Pizza Pizza
• Tuesday -- NFIB Small Business Index; earnings: CVS Caremark, Sprint
• Wednesday -- Fed President James Bullard speaks; earnings: Dr Pepper Snapple, Manchester United
• Thursday -- New Fed Chairman Yellen speaks; retail report; earnings: Burger King Worldwide, PepsiCo
• Friday -- Reuters/University of Michigan Consumer Sentiment Survey; earnings: Campbell Soup, World Wrestling Entertainment

MarketSnacks Fact of the Day:  Ford Field (home of the Detroit Lions) sells the most expensive beer in the NFL at $0.67 per ounce, while Bank of America Stadium (home of the Carolina Panthers) sells the cheapest at $0.27 per ounce.

As originally published on MarketSnacks.com

Walt Disney , Sony , and Viacom's Paramount Pictures spent big to advertise their next round of blockbusters-in-the-making during the Super Bowl. Who won the trailer wars? Host Ellen Bowman puts these questions to Fool analysts Nathan Alderman and Tim Beyers in this week's episode of "1-Up on Wall Street," The Motley Fool's Web show in which we talk about the big-money names behind your favorite movies, toys, video games, comics, and more.

Paramount teased Transformers: Age of Extinction. Sony released a new trailer for The Amazing Spider-Man 2, while Disney's Marvel Studios brought fans more of Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Tim and Nathan agree that, of the three, The Winter Soldier appears to do the best job of combining effective storytelling and commercial appeal.

YouTube numbers back up their thesis. As of this writing, fans have watched the new trailer for Captain America: The Winter Soldier more than 12 million times. By contrast, fans have watched the Age of Extinction trailer 6.8 million times and Spidey's Super Bowl spot 2.9 million times. Marvel Studios and Disney appear to have yet another winner on its hands.

Meanwhile, RadioShack earned raves for a deprecating Super Bowl spot that acknowledged its "lost-in-the'80s" reputation. Tim and Nathan say that, while the ad resonates, there's little proof that RadioShack has figured out how to sustainably profit in a market where even Best Buy has trouble competing with Amazon.com. Margins have declined sharply every year since 2009 as the retailer has struggled to find a defensible niche.

Now it's your turn to weigh in. Which of the various trailers thrilled you most? Which entertainment stock do you think is the best to buy right now? Please watch the video to get the full story, and be sure to check back here often for more "1-Up on Wall Street" segments.

Chris Evans plays a solemn, conflicted hero in Captain America: The Winter Soldier. Credit: Marvel Studios.

Almost every major automaker showed off some new technology at the recent 2014 International CES in Las Vegas. Ford made several announcements, and also unveiled the new Mustang to the public for the first time. This 50th-anniversary edition is the first truly global Mustang, complete with right-hand drive for those left-lane countries who need it.

In this video, Ford's Jim Farley -- executive vice president of global marketing, sales and service - talks about the reaction the iconic new Mustang is getting from the international community, as well as its U.S. base.

A full transcript follows the video.

James Farley: We've got an amazing connection with the enthusiast crowd around the world. A lot of sports cars don't get connected to the brand; they kind of live on their own. But whether it's the 911 or the Mustang, both those products are really connected to the core brand, which is unusual for a sports car.

Mustang's dream is really not about doing burn-outs. It's really more a democratic idea of a convertible down, driving through the Western U.S. and taking a road trip.

We have decided to go global and launch a right-hand drive Mustang. It's a big decision by the company, and the reaction was amazing. I happened to be in Europe, in Spain. We launched the car also in China, and the reaction was amazing.

Mustang is one of those iconic vehicles. We have 600 owner's clubs; we have an owner's club in Finland and Greenland. Those customers have been waiting a long time to be able to buy a Mustang in Brazil or China, or in Germany, and that reality is coming now.

But more importantly, we had to really change the car. Not its character -- it's always going to be a Mustang -- but the technology in the car, and the power trains. That really changed the scope of the project. We now have a 2.3 liter twin turbo; that will be very popular around the world. We upgraded the rear suspension to independent rear suspension, a really dramatic change in the ride comfort.

Because of the price of the vehicle around the world -- this is a very expensive car -- we really needed to have the vehicle perform at a different level, which we now can.

Source: HBS1908

While tens of thousands will apply to Ivy League institutions every year, only approximately 10% will have the opportunity to attend the school of their choice. 

For those lucky enough, despite the incredible odds, to be accepted to more than one institution -- or, perhaps, for those deciding which schools they should apply to -- I suggest we look at the problem from a very business-like perspective.

An article published by Forbes, suggested we, "Don't Buy The Hype, College Education is Not an Investment." To the article's credit, it stated that past earnings of those who earned a college degree (much like the stock market) doesn't guarantee future students will see similar results.

The article went on to say, "Employers do not reward workers just for passing enough classes to earn a degree." In many cases this is absolutely true, although, this argument is ignoring the importance of goodwill -- which is one of the chief similarities between today's top businesses and top universities.

Goodwill is accounting terminology for the acquisition of intangible (or hard to value) assets. Ivy League schools can attract the best students because they have some of the best teachers and most storied traditions -- and in the process build and maintain strong brand names. 

A brand name that will serve as an essential competitive advantage when competing in today's job market.  

Not to mention, in 2011, according to National Center for Educational Statistics, the average college graduate (between the ages of 25 and 34) earned $15,000 more per year than the average high school graduate.  

That's, however, for all college graduates -- and most colleges don't cost upwards of $200,000 like Ivy League schools. That begs the question, how good of an investment are Ivy League schools? Moreover, which school is the best investment of the bunch? 

To answer these questions, with the help of Payscale.com, each slide will have three statistics unique to the university.

At the bottom will be "30-year net ROI" which is the earnings differential -- or, the difference between graduates of the school in question and high school graduates -- subtracted by the "Weighted total cost" -- which is the total amount students in 2012 could expect to pay, and the second statistic on the slides. 

At the top of each slide is the "Annualized Net Return on Investment (ROI)" which can be described as earnings differential divided by weighted total cost annualized for a 30-year return on investment.  

The list can be found in the slideshow below.

Here we go again. LinkedIn recently announced another strong quarter, and year, almost across the board. Each of LinkedIn's three primary revenues sources grew, earnings jumped, and more of the same is expected this year. So, naturally, LinkedIn shares took a beating yesterday, dropping nearly 8% in pre-market trading, before ending the day down a little over 6%.

What gives? Just like IBM a few weeks ago, LinkedIn's stock suffered the all-too-familiar "problem" of missing analyst estimates. The fact this quarter's revenues are expected to range between $455 million and $460 million was, apparently, depressing enough to cause a sell-off since analysts were guesstimating LinkedIn would generate $471 million. LinkedIn's 2014 annual revenue forecast of $2.02 billion to $2.05 billion also "missed" average analyst expectations of $2.16 billion.

Reason No. 1 LinkedIn's a buy
How does a long-term growth investor reconcile LinkedIn's missing revenue estimates? By reviewing what really matters: How this quarter and year compares to 2013. Somewhat lost in yesterday's sell-off was the fact that LinkedIn's $455 million to $460 million in expected revenues this quarter compares to 2013's Q1's $324.7 million. Even at the low end, LinkedIn should generate revenues in Q1 of this year that are 40% higher than the year-ago period, and its stock price gets punished for that?

A sell-off after posting outstanding results, and an expectation of a 40% pop in year-over-year revenues for the quarter, not to mention annual revenues for 2014 that should come in about 32% higher than last year, should have long-term growth investors salivating. If LinkedIn was a sound growth opportunity before yesterday, its sell-off is reason number one it's an even better buy now.

Another upside
Similar to social media giant Facebook , LinkedIn is gaining traction in mobile -- 41% of user traffic is now via a mobile device -- and the introduction of new apps and features like its "sponsored updates" and "showcase" pages are already beginning to drive enhanced advertising revenue. Facebook is further along the mobile path, as it demonstrated last quarter, after announcing that a whopping 945 million of its 1.23 billion monthly average users were mobile. Not surprisingly, Facebook's revenues and earnings have shot through the roof, and mobile has played a key part in its success.

But don't be surprised to see the same kind of mobile success Facebook has enjoyed come LinkedIn's way. Already, LinkedIn is making significant strides in attracting and retaining mobile users, jumping from a paltry 8% three years ago to the aforementioned 41% last quarter.

But wait -- there's more
The third reason LinkedIn should be on your growth investment watch list, if not a part of your portfolio, was demonstrated when CEO Jeff Weiner and team announced it was acquiring Bright, a data-analysis solution that matches job hunters with employers. In addition to the technology, the Bright deal, which is expected to close this quarter, also includes some engineering and product talent LinkedIn can leverage.

What's really telling about the Bright acquisition isn't simply what it will bring to LinkedIn's product suite; it's what it says about Weiner and team. Some pundits raised concerns that the $120 million deal for Bright will translate to a year of spending, which will dampen LinkedIn's top and bottom lines. But that's nonsense, except for day traders and short-term investors. Long-term, LinkedIn shareholders should have a similar mind-set as its management -- plan for the next three to five years, not three to five weeks, or even months. Weiner is investing today to drive growth for years to come, and LinkedIn will be better for it.

Final Foolish thoughts
LinkedIn naysayers will often cite its ridiculously high valuation: It's trading over 900 times trailing earnings, after all. But, just as with its recent sell-off despite posting outstanding results, the over-valued argument doesn't tell the whole LinkedIn story. Going forward, LinkedIn is trading at about 82 times 2014 earnings expectations; certainly not out of range for a high-end growth stock.

Continued growth but missing estimates, diversified revenue streams including its transition to mobile, and a management team willing and able to invest with the next three to five years in mind, are compelling reasons to get onboard LinkedIn's train. And the timing couldn't be better for long-term Fools.

The Treasury recently issued its first floating-rate bonds, with variable interest rates tied to short-term rates. Despite interest from institutional investors, though, floating-rate Treasuries might not meet your needs as an income investment.

In the following video, Dan Caplinger, The Motley Fool's director of investment planning, talks about floating-rate Treasury bonds. Dan notes that the first auction went well for the Treasury, but that yields of just 0.045 percentage points above three-month Treasury bill rates won't give investors much return. In fact, with such low yields, the new iShares Treasury Floating-Rate ETF (TFLO) would have trouble paying its 0.15% management fee if iShares hadn't taken a voluntary waiver of those fees. The true test for this and the broader-based iShares Floating-Rate Bond ETF will come when short-term rates rise, but for now, low yields are the price you pay for some protection from interest rate increases in the future.

During the past twelve months, Intel stock has served investors a 13.3% gain, underperforming the S&P 500's rise of 18.8% during the same period. Has Intel's underperformance provided investors a buying opportunity?

In the video below, Fool contributor Daniel Sparks and Motley Fool Technology Bureau Chief Evan Niu discuss Intel's prospects and the stock's valuation. Daniel explains that while ARM's microprocessor designs dominate the mobile device market today, it doesn't mean this will always be the case. In the past, Intel has been known to outspend and out invest its peers to maintain its competitive advantage -- and there's nothing stopping it from using the same strategy to make progress in mobile with its Atom line. Best of all, as Daniel points out, very little of this potential upside in mobile is priced into Intel's stock. The stock trades at just 13 times earnings.

Check out the following video to see why Daniel thinks Intel is a buy at today's prices.