After getting beaten down over the past week, is it time for investors to look at TD Ameritrade, E-Trade, and Charles Schwab as investments?

Over the past week, the biggest story on Wall Street has been the raging debate over the practice of high-frequency trading. The release of Michael Lewis' exposé-style book on the subject, Flash Boys, as well as an accompanying interview with Lewis on CBS's 60 Minutes, sparked a lot of investor anger and fear on the subject. Those sentiments were compounded when the U.S. Justice Department announced that it is currently investigating the practice. This uncertainty on the market has has a strongly negative impact on the stocks of several discount brokerages, but is the sell-off warranted, or does this represent a buying opportunity?

In this segment from Monday's Where the Money Is, Motley Fool financial analysts David Hanson and Tyler Riggs discuss both sides to the argument, and take a look at how the practice of high frequency trading ties in with these discount brokerages, like TD Ameritrade. They then explore whether the uncertainty surrounding the subject has them scared off, or whether it has them interested in a potential buy.

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

What: Shares of Vocus skyrocketed 47% Monday after the cloud-based marketing software company announced that it had agreed to be acquired by GTCR for $18 per share.

So what: The all-cash transaction values Vocus at roughly $446.5 million, represents a premium of 79% over its 12-month volume weighted average share price, and is expected to close before the end of the second quarter of 2014. 

Vocus CEO Rick Rudman weighed in: "For our shareholders, this agreement provides an opportunity to realize cash value for their shares at a significant premium to historical share prices. For our employees and customers, we believe that joining forces with GTCR creates a significant opportunity to utilize each other's strengths and move even faster toward our vision of creating innovative software and making our customers successful."

Now what: Shares closed today at $17.92 per share, leaving little upside for investors who choose to wait to receive their payout until the acquisition is complete. As a result, unless you bought shares just under a year ago and want to hang on to ensure a lower capital gains tax rate on the profits, I think investors would be wise to take their money and put it to work elsewhere.

The Department of Defense awarded only six defense contracts Monday, and worth only $93.1 million altogether.

By one measure, Lockheed Martin was the day's biggest winner, taking home two awards:

• A $13.7 million contract modification paying for it to identify technology for introduction into present and future Aegis Ballistic Missile Defense Baselines/Spirals by June 30. This small-dollar award moves the cumulative value of Lockheed's underlying Aegis BMD contract up toward $1.79 billion.
• A separate $9.1 million contract modification paying for continued support of the U.S. Army's AN/TPQ-53 radar fleet through Sept. 30.

Other publicly traded companies winning contracts included:

• Raytheon , recipient of a $9.6 million contract modification to perform mission support and sustainment activities relating to U.S. Air Force and Navy AIM-9X Sidewinder missiles, as well as for missiles in the inventories of the militaries of Australia, Denmark, Finland, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, South Korea, Switzerland, and Turkey under the Foreign Military Sales Program. This contract will now run through April 2015.
• Wolverine World Wide , which was awarded an option-year exercise (the third of four possible) to supply the U.S. Navy with up to $15 million worth of men's and women's safety boots through April 7, 2015. 

McDonald's in St. Petersburg, Russia. Source: Wikimedia Commons.

The escalating war of words and deeds over Russia's annexation of Crimea is obviously a concern for world peace, but barring the new Cold War between the U.S. and Russia turning hot -- a situation many doubt will actually happen -- the acquiescence of the West to Vladimir Putin's ambitions to reassemble the former Soviet empire also threatens how international businesses are able to function. The first casualty may be McDonald's .

Putin on the ritz
Although Putin has apparently withdrawn tens of thousands of troops from the Ukrainian border, as many as 15,000 remain in place and NATO commanders say Russia could invade at any moment and conquer the country in mere days. Considering Putin had promised not to invade Ukraine at all but used as a pretext Crimea's vote for independence to immediately roll tanks into the country anyway, it wouldn't be so far afield for the Russian president to begin reassembling the old Soviet Union.

The first western casualty in this war, however, may be McDonald's, which announced last week it had closed three of its Crimean restaurants because they were unable to reliably get supplies from Kiev due to the conflict. Although they said employees at its Simferopol, Sevastopol, and Yalta restaurants could relocate to any other restaurant in the region, nationalist Russian politician Vladimir Zhirinovsky says the closures are a provocation and the chain should be expelled from Russia.

The U.K.'s Telegraph newspaper calls Zhirinovsky the "court jester" of Russian politics, but they also admit his often outrageous pronouncements often serve as trial balloons for policy that eventually become reality. That ought to give PepsiCo pause as well, since he said they'll first go after McDonald's and then take on the beverage giant next.

Eating Big Mac's lunch
McDonald's is taking shots from all sides. Beyond just the usual burger competition, the profitable and expanding breakfast daypart is becoming a breeding ground for rivals to test out new products, like the new waffle offerings from Taco Bell and White Castle seeking to skim dollars off McDonald's dominating position. Convenience stores as well have been siphoning off customers and revenues by presenting new fresh foods catering to the grab-and-go crowd. As a result, U.S. same-store sales at McDonald's fell 1.4% last quarter and were flat for all of 2013 as guest counts fell, even though it enjoyed higher average check values.

Yet Russia has been a bright spot for the burger king amid many dark ones. Along with the U.K., France, and Germany, Russia is part of McDonald's European division that accounts for 40% of its total annual revenues and those four countries amount to two-thirds of the region's total. With sales growing at 5.5% in 2013, Europe was its best-performing region and that was largely due to expansion in Russia where it witnessed a sharp increase in sales. If McDonald's gets cast out of Russia, its ability to keep its head above water becomes seriously compromised.

Refreshing the world
Pepsi generates 7% of its revenues from Russia but has 15% of its assets located there, with only the U.S. having more. Particularly because of strong growth in its snack foods division, it was able to see total sales grow last year as Russia was Pepsi's second best-performing geographic region behind Mexico.

Source: PepsiCo 2013 10-K filing.

With Russian politicians literally laughing at sanctions that are being imposed, and perhaps believing the West has no taste for more war, an aggressive Vladimir Putin with larger ambitions may impinge the ability of businesses like McDonald's and PepsiCo to safely do business there, an untenable situation that would have a significant impact on growth and profitability.

In this video after a big day in the biotech sector, Motley Fool health-care analyst David Williamson takes investors through today's big winner and loser.

Idenix is the winner for the day, up 10% after posting solid results in a proof-of-concept trial for its hepatitis-C drug IDX21437. Idenix has also been in the news lately for its lawsuit against Gilead for patent infringement over Sofosbuvir, more commonly known as Sovaldi. The drug is set to do $5 billion in sales in its first year, making the legal battle worthwhile for Idenix, but David doesn't see this as something that should factor into the investing thesis just yet. He also worries about how far behind Idenix is in the hepatitis-C space, with the competition already having drugs showing excellent results in much later stages of development.

Meanwhile, MannKind was the big loser of the day, falling by about 10% after the FDA announced a delay to its PFUFA, or approval decision date, for the company's inhaled insulin Afrezza. After a massive victory for the company last week, with the FDA advisory committee voting overwhelmingly in favor of approving the drug, the FDA's decision to postpone has made some concerned that it will go against the advisory committee's recommendation. David, however, remains unconcerned and thinks that the sell-off today may have been overblown. He still sees a high chance for FDA approval here and gives some ways that he would like to start seeing MannKind prepare for the drug's launch.

Despite investigations into the composition of its key drug, Acthar gel, as well as into its marketing practices, Questcor Pharmaceuticals has announced that it is being bought by Mallinckrodt for $5.6 billion. Short-sellers have been attacking Questcor relentlessly recently, alleging that the stock could, in fact, be worth nothing if Acthar's composition is found not to be what the company claims.

In this video, Motley Fool health-care analyst David Williamson looks at the purchase, which was at a 27% premium to the stock's price, and discusses the pros and cons for Mallinckrodt. He also tells Questcor bulls everywhere that this signals the end of the battle for Questcor investors, and that they've officially won the fight on this stock over the bears.

Google   is positioned to do well in the long run. The company's decision to sell off the Motorola Mobility unit will drive its operating earnings higher. In addition, the company's recent stock split will drive the share price even higher.

Strong fundamentals
Last quarter, Google's stand-alone revenue grew 22% year-over-year to $15.7 billion, demonstrating that the company's revenue growth rate isn't showing signs of slowing, in spite of its relatively big size. In 2013, operating income was $13.97 billion, indicating an EBIT margin of 23.3%. Google's net income for the full year was $12.9 billion, which represents a margin of 21.6%.

Google's diluted EPS increased 18% year-over-year to $38.13 in 2013. As the company continues to expand, more revenue is being generated from overseas markets; in the last quarter, only 56% of revenue came from outside of the U.S. Google's operating cash flow for 2013 stood at $18.7 billion, a 12% year-over-year increase.

Google sold off the Motorola Mobility business to Chinese PC maker Lenovo for $2.9 billion. Motorola's negative operating earnings hindered Google's operating income for several quarters, so this asset divestiture should lead to operating margin expansion. The search giant's cash balance stood at $59 billion at the end of 2013, which the company can utilize to make more strategic acquisitions.  

The future looks bright
Continued strength in search, and heavy investments in YouTube, Android, Chrome, and Enterprise, will drive substantial upside for Google's revenue and free cash flow. The search giant generated $11.3 billion in free cash flow in 2013, and going forward, the company has an even greater capacity to earn significantly higher free cash flow. Of course, this is contingent upon its capital expenditures. 

Google's other revenue, which includes both hardware sales and earnings from the Google Play store, grew 111% year-over-year to $4.97 billion in 2013. According to IDC, the Android OS holds 78.1% of the mobile OS market share, which illustrates the overwhelming dominance of the company's mobile operating system. Google's enhanced campaigns, which help companies to build advertising campaigns across desktop and mobile platforms, has been resonating well with advertisers. 

Google's share of the U.S. search engine market remains steady at 67.5%, while Microsoft held an 18.4% share in February 2014, according to comScore. Microsoft has been doing well with a new CEO in place, and the market appears to have faith in management, as the company's stock price is near multi-year highs.  

On the last earnings call, Google's Nikesh Arora disclosed that YouTube has more than 1 billion monthly users and saw a 50% increase in daily viewing time in 2013; more than 6 billion hours of video are watched on YouTube every month. YouTube reaches more U.S. adults between the ages of 18-34 than any other cable network, according to Nielsen. These strengths are very good selling points for YouTube to gain even more brand advertisers from across the globe.

The company's core businesses, search and YouTube, are doing very well, as they appeal to different types of advertisers, utilizing both text and video ads.  As more marketers turn away from old media platforms to newer forms of digital media for fulfilling their advertising needs, Google stands to benefit from this trend. 

Going forward
Google's stock split into Class A and Class C shares gives more power to the company's founders and board. Management is very good, and no issues with corporate governance will arise. This lower-priced stock will also attract more investors into the fold, thus increasing the possibility of even more growth.

The company's strong revenue and free cash flow generation are major positives. Google's stellar positioning across numerous search, display, and video advertising types gives it a big advantage in gaining more revenue from online advertising. Google's decision to divest the cash-burning Motorola Mobility business will substantially aid its margins. Along with the stock split, this will benefit the company's stock price in the long haul. 

The U.S. Defense Security Cooperation Agency notified Congress Monday of plans to sell the Republic of Korea a package of AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Missiles, plus associated equipment, parts, and training services. If approved, this sale will mean approximately $98 million in incremental revenues to Raytheon Company , which manufactures the missiles.

The specific equipment that South Korea is asking to buy includes:

• 76 AIM-9X-2 Sidewinder Block II All-Up-Round Missiles.
• 24 CATM-9X-2 Captive Air Training Missiles (dummy missiles used in training exercises).
• Eight CATM-9X-2 Block II Missile Guidance and Control Units (GCUs), which contain most of the missiles' electronics.
• Four AIM-9X-2 Block II "Tactical Guidance Units."
• Containers for the missiles, spare parts, missile support and testing equipment, and similar hardware. 

Explaining the sale to Congress, DSCA noted that "the ROK continues to be an important force for peace, political stability, and economic progress in North East Asia," and that it intends to use these missiles "to strengthen its homeland defense and deter regional threats."

According to DSCA, "there will be no adverse impact on U.S. defense readiness as a result of this proposed sale." Nor will the sale "alter the basic military balance in the region." 

Investors fled from the stock market with little discretion on Monday, as all 10 sectors ended in the red and a three-day Wall Street sell-off intensified. After a uniquely bullish 2013, major indexes have remained stagnant; the S&P 500 Index lost 20 points today, or 1.1%, to end at 1,845. It has yet to gain 1% in 2014. While we can ridicule the S&P for its ho-hum performance this year, Valero Energy , Mylan, , and Teradata Corporation deserve our concern and inquiry, since each stock ended as an incorrigible underperformer today.

The larger theme of the stock market today -- aside from the fact that everyone was selling them, was that investors rushed to sell momentum stocks above all others. Shares of Valero Energy lost 4.5% Monday, just days after hitting 52-week highs last week. Valero and other oil and gas refiners in the U.S. have benefited immensely from the ban on exporting American crude oil abroad. As my colleague Varun Chandran notes, lifting the ban would undoubtedly pressure refinery margins and hurt their business. But as Capitol Hill starts pondering what a lift on the ban would mean for the American economy, Valero and its peers are beginning to face some political risks.

Image source: Mylan website.

Generic-drug maker Mylan, is well-versed in headaches induced by regulators and Washington lawmakers. In fact, the company is even forced to deal with international regulators in the case of foreign acquisitions, and if you think the $18 billion Mylan isn't vying for a worldwide generic drug empire, then perhaps you haven't been taking your unbranded memory pills. Mylan shares shed 4.4% today after a modest advance on an analyst upgrade last Friday. The upgrade, however, came before Swedish drug maker Meda squashed negotiations that were aimed at joining the two companies. 

Teradata Corporation stands alone as the single stock on today's list that hasn't posted market-beating returns in the last year. While demand for data storage is growing by leaps and bounds, Teradata's real value lies in its data analytics, consulting, and discovery. Shares lost 4.3% on Monday, and they've fallen 14% in the last year as competitors from open-source platforms like Hadoop threaten Teradata's business model. The company almost seems desperate to reclaim the throne as the king of data and data analytics, putting out three press releases over a span of 10 minutes this morning touting new "unprecedented," "sophisticated," and "unmatched" offerings.

Source: Michael Kors.

is one of the most explosive growth stories in the fashion business over the last several years, demand has been booming for this high-end brand, and the company is growing at full speed while gaining market share versus competitors such as Coach .

The stock has risen by more than 50% in the last 12 months and the run is hardly over. Michael Kors still offers plenty of upside potential for investors.

Fashion can be a fickle and volatile business, but it can also be a source of extraordinary profitability for powerful brands positioned on the right side of the trend. Michael Kors sells handbags, shoes, and accessories in the affordable-luxury segment of the pricing spectrum, and management has done a great job at building a high-end aspirational brand that's generating avid demand from its customers around the globe.

The media has shown the company's designs being carried by all kinds of famous personalities, including supermodels, movie stars walking the red carpet, and even First Lady Michelle Obama. This is probably the best kind of free advertising an aspirational brand like Michael Kors can hope for.

Brand differentiation and exclusive designs are key competitive strengths for Michael Kors, and this allows the company to generate superior profitability due to its extraordinary pricing power.

Demand is truly booming for the company's products, Michael Kors has generated sales growth of 47.5% per year through the last five years, far outpacing Coach -- one of its main U.S. competitors -- which produced sales growth of 9.8% per year over the same period.

And there is no reversal in sight. Michael Kors continues accelerating while Coach is facing increased headwinds in the U.S according to the latest financial reports.

Source: Michael Kors.

While Michael Kors delivered a whopping growth rate of 51% in North American revenues on the back of a 24% increase in same-store sales for the quarter ended on Dec. 28, Coach announced a decline of 9% in total sales and a big fall of 13.6% in same-store sales in the region during the same period.    

Coach has overexpanded over the last several years, and the brand is losing strength in North America due to excessive promotions. On the other hand, demand for Coach products is remarkably strong in China, where sales increased by approximately 25% during the last quarter.

Coach is aiming to refresh its image with a renewed collection from the company's new creative director, Stuart Vevers, so the company could generate better performance if it manages to bring more fashionable products to the market.

But even if Coach stabilizes performance in the U.S., that will hardly be enough to stop Michael Kors and its explosive potential for growth.

Michael Kors delivered a sales increase of 59% in the last quarter of 2013. Retail sales increased by 51.3% on the back of 98 new stores and a remarkable growth rate of 27.8% in comparable-store sales, wholesale revenues increased by 68.2%, and licensing fees jumped by 59%.

Profit margins were also on the rise during the quarter: Gross profit margin was 61.2% of sales versus 60.2% in the year-ago quarter, and operating margin expanded to 33.9% of sales from 32.2%. Net earnings per share came in at $1.11, a big annual increase of 73.4%.

Strong same-store sales performance is showing that the company is far from reaching any kind of saturation point, as new store openings are not cannibalizing sales at previously existing locations.

Source: Michael Kors.

High and growing profit margins reflect that the company still has enormous pricing power as opposed to needing to reduce prices like Coach and other competitors are doing in order to gain market share via price competitiveness.

Management believes the company has room for more than 700 global stores versus 395 retail stores currently, and Europe is looking like a promising opportunity in the medium term as Michael Kors is making successful inroads in such a relevant market for high-end fashion. Sales in the Continent increased by a whopping 144% on the back of a 73% increase in comparable-store revenues and 19 new locations during the last quarter.

Fashion is a cyclical and competitive business, especially when it comes to a growth company operating on the high end of the pricing spectrum like Michael Kors. On the other hand, the company offers extraordinary potential for growth in the years ahead considering demand strength, whopping profitability levels, and its relatively small store base. The trend is your friend, and Michael Kors is quite a trendy fashion company.

Ctrip and Baidu's Qunar are rallying higher on Tuesday amid reports of a merger or partnership. While talks are still in their infancy, such a deal could create cost synergies in a highly competitive Chinese online travel market. Yet, despite the optimism that's been created, investors might still be best suited with Priceline .

A deal that makes sense
Ctrip and Qunar are each getting over a 10% pop on Tuesday; this following a report on Bloomberg of a potential merger. Qunar is owned in large part by Baidu, a 58.8% stake, and is important to Baidu's footprint in the travel industry and its continued growth in advertising.

In fact, China's online travel market is expected to be worth $75 billion in the next three years, and the majority of its business comes from China's 618 million Internet users via search. Therefore, Baidu is well-connected to this industry as China's Internet/search giant, which is why it makes sense for Ctrip to partner with Qunar for operational synergies and increased exposure.

With that said, China's online travel companies have been at a bit of a pricing and mobile war as of late. After rallying 130% in 2013, shares of Ctrip have traded flat and volatile in 2014 thanks to new coupon plans, which boosted volume but consequently decreased margins. On the other hand, Qunar has thrived, up more than 100% from its November 2013 IPO, having seen strong download activity on both Android and iOS apps and large expansion in both flight and tax-booking over the last year.

Granted, Qunar is a very small company with just $135 million in revenue during the last year - growing at a 70% pace - compared to Ctrip's $859 million in annual sales. Still, with Ctrip's growth expected at just 27.8% in 2014, this partnership could boost growth and increase its exposure on search, which are two key areas of need.

Priceline is still the 800-pound gorilla
With all things considered, a Qunar (Baidu) and Ctrip partnership/acquisition means more pricing power and the replacement of a competitor with a peer. Nonetheless, Ctrip, Qunar, and Baidu still have to contend with the 800-pound gorilla that is Priceline.

Relatively speaking, Priceline is an American company, but has a presence in nearly 200 countries. Hence, North America may be Priceline's most significant market, but according to management in its fourth-quarter conference call, China may be its largest market in the future.

Albeit, Priceline is a very diversified company, and through Booking.com it saw 85% of its gross bookings come from international markets, including 94% of consolidated operating income, and its Asia/Pacific region, including China, is a major reason.

So, while Ctrip, Qunar, and Baidu have inconsistent and volatile margins, Priceline, as a pure play in online travel, has seen six consecutive years of operating margin improvements. Not to mention, Priceline's 25% growth is expected to continue through 2014, and Booking.com has become a very pleasant and disruptive unit for the travel giant.

Specifically, Booking.com's mobile accommodation bookings grew 160% in 2013 to $8 billion, which is an area where Chinese travel companies have struggled. Essentially, Booking.com is selling itself, and its presence in China is becoming more visible. With that said, Qunar and Ctrip may perform well for a while, but Priceline's Booking.com thrives with a global network of travelers, and this fact makes it primed for continued success regardless of its Internet search presence on Baidu.

Final thoughts
Priceline shares have fallen 15% in the last month, and is now trading at just 18 times next year's earnings. For a company with 20% plus growth, 18 times earnings is not expensive, instead, it's cheap!

With that said, Priceline is just now making its presence known in China, and has spent the last few years creating dominance in other areas of the world like North America and Europe. Today, Asia is the company's growth engine, which has a massive population and a highly fragmented market to monetize.

Thus, Qunar and Ctrip are rightfully so trading higher on Tuesday, but in retrospect, Priceline has the best opportunity to own the Chinese market long-term. And with this market's size, growth, and Priceline's valuation, it looks like the best investment within the space.

Source: Stillwater Mining.

Despite a handful of catalysts that should be propelling platinum group metals prices higher, platinum and palladium futures pulled back sharply yesterday, leading shares of Stillwater Mining to lose almost 4% of their value as well. Yet despite its stock being up 38% over the last six months, the only U.S. producer of palladium and platinum -- and the largest primary producer of platinum group metals outside South Africa and Russia -- remains significantly undervalued.

The PGM metals industry faces a series of challenges in the immediate future that indicate pricing will move significantly higher, and though Stillwater is a smaller player on the world stage, it should benefit nonetheless from the drama about to unfold.

Russia and South Africa account for 80% of the world's supply of platinum group metal reserves, and the possibility of interruptions in either locale could have far-reaching repercussions. Russia's aggression against Ukraine, for example, could lead to additional sanctions being imposed against it, including against palladium, which accounts for 41% of the world's supply. South Africa is in the grips of widespread strikes against PGM miners in the country, and since it is responsible for almost three quarters of the world's platinum supply, disruptions in production will create shortages.

All of this comes as demand for PGM metals expands. In February, Moody's Investors Service said global light vehicle sales ought to grow 3.2% this year, and though that's down from 4.8% one year ago, Europe should see sales widen 2% as it returns to pre-financial crisis levels and China jump some 8% over the next two years. With the U.S. Geological Survey estimating as much as 58% of palladium going toward the auto industry, limitations on supplies could be severe.

These are essentially short-term supply constraints, and though they'll have a critical impact on PGM pricing, of more lasting concern should be the declining ore grades in Russia's platinum and palladium mines. Without lower quality ores coming to market and new mines many years away, supply constraints will be even more acute.

Norilsk Nickel is the world's largest producer of palladium and one of the biggest producers of platinum. It reported in January that production of platinum and palladium in 2013 fell 3% and 5%, respectively, due to reduction of PGM grades in the processed ore. In the fourth quarter alone, platinum production was down 13% to 143,000 ounces, and palladium tumbled 12% to 602,000 ounces. While much of that was because production over the first nine months of the year came in ahead of budget, the lower grades mean its expecting output in 2014 to be virtually unchanged from last year.

All of which positions Stillwater Mining for a valuation boom. Like Norilsk, the U.S. PGM miner also suffered from lower ore grades in 2013, leading to a 3% drop in production year over year, but its problem was temporary, and by November and December, actual ore grades were above those budgeted.

With some calling for the creation of a PGM cartel (including the governments of Russia and South Africa), the long-term outlook for pricing remains positive, a situation that can only serve to sweep Stillwater Mining along with it. At just $15 a share today, we may be thinking how quaint that price seems tomorrow.

The Amazon Fire TV is the latest mainstream tech product with a credible chance of disrupting the increasingly crowded gaming space. The set-top box was announced and released at the beginning of April with an MSRP of $99 for the main unit and $39.99 for its gaming controller. The device represents Amazon's first tangible commercial step into claiming a portion of the gaming market, but the online retail and cloud giant has taken steps to ensure that the Fire TV is not viewed as a "console." How much of a threat does the new device pose to the respective gaming empires of Sony , Microsoft , and Nintendo ?

Are 'non-consoles' the future of gaming?
Rumors that Amazon would enter the console gaming space were persistent throughout the year leading up to Fire TV's release, but the actual product is less focused on gaming than the rumors have suggested. Upon officially revealing the Fire TV, Kindle VP Pete Larsen decreed that the device was definitely not a gaming console. The Fire TV has primarily been positioned as a streaming device competitive with the likes of Apple TV, Google Chromecast, and Roku, but Amazon's roundabout entrance into gaming can be taken as a sign of things to come.

Dedicated gaming is headed for a contraction
Despite strong launches for the PlayStation 4 and the Xbox One, the future of the dedicated console gaming space remains very much in doubt. The failure of Nintendo's Wii U console all but guarantees that the market will contract in this hardware cycle, and developers are increasingly moving resources to mobile and PC platforms.

The majority of the Japanese gaming industry appears to have abandoned the triple-A console games market, and rising development costs mean that there are fewer big games in development for the new systems than there were for their predecessors. Due to the need to reach as large of an audience as possible, many of the big games that will hit the Xbox One and PlayStation 4 in 2014 will also be available on the Xbox 360 and the PlayStation 3. The new consoles from Sony and Microsoft have yet to offer much outside of marginally improved visuals, and Nintendo has never looked weaker on the console front. The traditional console gaming space is ripe for disruption.

Everyone is getting in the game
Amazon's statement that the FireTV is not a gaming console is indicative of the direction in which gaming is heading. In fact, the messaging for the product bears certain similarities to that of the Xbox One upon its initial unveiling. Microsoft positioned its latest console as an all-in-one multimedia box that would have a heavy focus on television integration and original interactive programming.

The greater success of Sony's more gaming-centric PlayStation 4 pushed Microsoft to alter the presentation of its Xbox One messaging, but consoles have expanded to become multimedia devices. Alternatively, phones, smart televisions, and video streaming devices are becoming increasingly capable when it comes to gaming. As a greater number of platforms emerge for consumers to get their gaming fix on, dedicated consoles will have to offer increasingly impressive and differentiated experiences to justify their existence.

Amazon targets the casual audience
The casual gaming market that exploded in the last console cycle and drove Nintendo's Wii to a staggering 100 million unit installed base is now largely served by offerings on mobile platforms. A $99 set-top box with basic gaming features from Amazon (or its immediate competitors) has the bells and whistles necessary to provide a basic gaming experience and court consumers away from dedicated console offerings.

With an average price for paid games of $1.85, the Fire TV offers an attractive and affordable entry point into gaming without the need to purchase dedicated hardware. Of the big three console platform holders, the rise of set-top gaming poses the greatest threat to Nintendo, while Sony and Microsoft have greater cache with the hardcore audience. They have also invested more in the hardware and network capabilities necessary to provide a more distinguished, high-end experience. Still, neither console manufacturer is immune to the inevitable rise of devices like the Fire TV.

The beginnings of a transition
Amazon's gaming-enabled set-top box isn't going to revolutionize the industry overnight. The device will likely wind up being little more than a footnote in a broader transition, but the company has shown that it's serious about building infrastructure and playing a larger role in games going forward. With Amazon, Apple, and Google looking to be increasingly influential in shaping the industry, Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo face added pressure to convince consumers that their respective platforms are essential.

Big Lots has stores that are roughly the same size in square feet as Target , but that would be the end of the similarities between the two retailers. As Target opens 124 stores in Canada, marking the first year of international retail sales, Big Lots is patting itself on the back for a successful exit from the market.

In look and feel, Big Lots is more comparable to the dollar stores than Target. There is one other primary difference between Target and Big Lots: the latter sells furniture. Target sells some furniture, things like desks and foot stools, but Big Lots sells living room and bedroom sets. The CEO recently announced the rollout of a financing program, with preliminary tests showing that the program has the potential to increase sales in the high single- to low double-digit growth range for stores.

Eight quarters of same store sales declines
Yes, there are signs of life at Big Lots, but let's take a few steps back to look at the fourth quarter of 2013. Sales declined 7.3% compared to 2012. Net income dropped from $120.1 million in 2012 to $81 million in 2013. The main reason for the drop is a 3% decline in same store sales growth, which is to say regular customers are going elsewhere. This is a trend that's been going on at Big Lots for the past eight quarters, and the company isn't alone.

Source: Big Lots

Large-box retailers in general have been experiencing a decline in same store sales (SSS) growth. Target's SSS growth declined from 3% in 2011, to 2.7% in 2012, to -.4% in 2013. Wal-Mart Stores has had similar issues. 2012 was a decent year of growth ending the year up 2.1%, followed by a 0.4% decline in 2013.

While Target is working through data breach issues, Wal-Mart is adjusting its strategy to include small store formats as a way to combat SSS declines. Here's an excerpt from Wal-Mart U.S. CEO, Bill Simon, on the company's most recent fourth quarter earnings release:

Neighborhood Markets continued to deliver consistent solid comp sales growth, and customers appreciate the convenience of our small stores. They are a proven model. We're also pleased with how well the 20 Express stores are doing, and we're expanding our pilot beyond the initial three markets. These small formats are digitally connected and provide customers convenient access to a broad assortment, including fresh, pharmacy and fuel. We will now open between 270 and 300 small format units this year, which will nearly double our fleet and fuel growth as we enter the next generation of retail.

Indeed, Simon is turning the small-store format into his legacy at Wal-Mart.

Big Lots' SSS solution
While Big Lots isn't planning to open any "Little" Lots, it is changing its focus in fundamental ways that could have the same effect on SSS. 

In addition to the furniture financing program, the company is riding the success of its food segment and rolling out a cooler/freezer program. David Campisi, the CEO and President, had this to say on the last earnings call:

Specifically I am encouraged by food and consumables for the second quarter, consecutive quarter we saw our strongest comps in two of our biggest businesses as both food and consumables [comped] up mid single-digits. Along this same category line, we are actively rolling out our cooler/freezer program and intend to hit approximately 600 additional stores in full year '14 which will leave us with a little over 700 stores by the end of the year. Over the last several months in our test stores which had cooler/freezers and SNAP eligible, we experienced an incremental sales lift in low single-digit range to the total store.

The company is also focusing on more productive inventory. It is replacing kitchen faucets, TV's, and paint with food, consumables, and affordable financing on furniture.

Takeaway
Big Lots isn't alone in its struggles; the retail marketplace is more demanding as consumers have more options at their disposal. The challenge for large-box stores is the creation of constant traffic flow and high inventory turnover. This is one reason why many discount retailers are focusing on food and consumables, as these items have low margins but get customers in the door.

Big Lots has three strategies it's employing to get customers in the door and improve SSS:

• Rolling out a cooler/freezer program
• Getting rid of slower-moving or "unproductive" inventory lines
• Implementing a furniture financing program to help customers purchase higher-margin items 

While Wal-Mart is expanding its small-store base and Target is growing in China, Big Lots is focusing on consumables, food, and furniture. We'll have to wait until the end of 2015 to see which company had the better strategy.

It's been a busy year so far for Amazon.com . The world's biggest online retailer has been in full press mode since the start of 2014 as it attempts to take a bigger share of the video streaming market and build out the Amazon ecosystem. It's in this spirit we'll look at three reasons for investors to love Amazon in the year ahead.

New hardware enables Amazon to sell more services
Unless you've been living under a rock, you know Amazon recently released its Fire TV device for streaming video content. This sleek gadget costs $99. However, for the e-tailer, it's not about hardware sales, but rather selling more digital content to consumers. With Fire TV, users get instant access to over 200,000 movies and TV shows not only from Amazon Instant Video but also from third-party apps like Netflix and ESPN. 

Moreover, with innovative features like voice-activated search and Advanced Streaming and Predictive controls, Amazon's Fire TV should give Apple TV a run for its money. Fire TV is the same price point as Apple TV, yet unlike with Apple's device, users often won't need to wait for video content to buffer or load. That's because Amazon's gadget uses ASAP, or Advanced Streaming and Prediction, so that your favorite shows or movies are ready to view as soon as you push Play. 

Apple currently dominates the U.S. streaming device space with 43% market share. However, that could change now that Amazon has its own hardware available for connecting consumers with Amazon's growing media ecosystem. 

Prime price hike helps Amazon control costs
Another reason investors should love Amazon these days is the company's recent announcement that it will now charge $99 per year for its Prime subscription, up from $79 a year. This may not seem like a lot to pay from a value standpoint because you're getting unlimited free two-day shipping on millions of products, as well as unlimited video streaming of 40,000 movies and TV shows and access to free e-books from Amazon's Kindle Owners' Lending Library. 

However, for the e-commerce giant, increasing the cost of Prime by just $20 should help Amazon better control costs going forward. Rising shipping costs continue to weigh on Amazon's bottom line. In fact, delivery expenses swelled 19% to a whopping $1.21 billion in Amazon's fiscal fourth quarter. 

Nevertheless, Amazon reportedly has more than 20 million users paying for its Prime service today. Therefore, even this modest price hike of $20 per member, per year, could add upward of $400 million to the online retailer's bottom line.

Fresh thinking has consumers turning to Amazon while offline
AmazonFresh, the company's grocery delivery service, provides consumers in Southern California, Seattle, and San Francisco with same-day and early-morning delivery of fresh groceries, everyday essentials, local products, and items from Amazon.com. The service may only be available in select markets today, but its new Dash device is making headlines around the world. Amazon Dash connects to a customer's home Wi-Fi network so they can scan the barcode or speak the name of grocery items into their Dash device. These items are then added to a list in their AmazonFresh account. 

Source: Amazon.com.

Amazon's new Dash device now makes it even easier for AmazonFresh subscribers to create shopping lists without having to log in to the service online. While some analysts view the device as gimmicky, I believe this is a smart way for Amazon to get more customers to make more Amazon purchases. It's also another example of how Amazon is building out hardware (think Fire TV) that basically acts as point-of-sale devices for customers to access and buy everything from groceries to e-books faster than ever.

Profits in the making
Together, these three things are making it faster and more convenient for people to make purchases within the Amazon ecosystem. Down the road, this should help Amazon steal market share from competing media ecosystems such as Apple's. After all, we're already seeing Amazon make headway in the online streaming arena. In fact, Amazon's video-streaming usage has now surpassed both Apple's and Hulu's, according to research firm Qwilt. 

Aluminum giant Alcoa released its first-quarter results today after the closing bell. The company reported a net loss of $178 million, or $0.16 per share. However, excluding special items Alcoa's net income was actually $98 million, or $0.09 per share, which was nearly twice what analysts were expecting. This was despite revenue falling to $5.5 billion as aluminum prices fell 8% year-over-year.

Alcoa's reported loss was due to $276 million in special items largely tied to smelter and rolling mill capacity reductions. Excluding the impact of those special items, the company delivered very strong profitability. The company delivered record first-quarter profitability from its Engineered Products and Solutions segment, which was up 9% year-over-year. Meanwhile, the profitability of its Global Rolled Products segment tripled. Finally, its upstream segments improved performance for the 10th straight quarter.

While Alcoa continues to reduce its operated smelting capacity, which is down 28% since 2007, it instead is increasing the capacity at its higher-margin businesses. In the first quarter, the company invested $300 million to expand its automotive division in the U.S. Meanwhile, overseas it also invested to double its Dura-Bright wheel production in Hungry while it spent $40 million to invest in a high-value specialty packaging facility in Brazil. These changes to its portfolio will further enhance Alcoa's profitability in the future.

In a press release commenting on the quarter, CEO Klaus Klienfeld said that Alcoa's "transformation is accelerating -- we're powering growth in our value-add business and aggressively reshaping our commodity business." This transformation enabled the company to increase its profitability this past quarter despite falling aluminum prices.  

Samsung has ushered in a new era of social media marketing: the selfie. A strategy that first went viral after Ellen DeGeneres' Oscars moment, the company made headlines again last week when Boston Red Sox star David Ortiz snapped a photo with President Obama. Dubbed the Obama-Ortiz selfie, it has some critics, including my colleague Daniel Kline, up in arms.

A controversial kind of marketing
Ortiz's selfie is controversial for the same reason it's popular: It looked spontaneous. The slugger still maintains it was -- he told The Boston Globe last week that "it had nothing to do with" any sponsorship -- but the fact remains that Samsung hired Ortiz to be its "MLB social media insider" earlier this year, according to SportsBusiness Daily. He made over $4 million in endorsements last year while wearing baseball's most popular jersey, so the terms of his agreement, while undisclosed, probably aren't cheap.

Occurring while the Red Sox were visiting the White House, the moment was marketing gold for Samsung. After Ortiz tweeted the photo, the company retweeted it with the tag line, "Big Papi, Big Selfie." As you might expect, it ruffled some feathers. The president's senior advisor, Dan Pfeiffer, recently told CBS that Obama "didn't know anything" about Samsung's involvement.

The bigger issue
Ultimately, the company's strategy forces its customers, and all social media users, to decide what constitutes proper marketing etiquette. As The Boston Globe's Michael Farrell wrote, the selfie asks, "When is a social media moment also an advertising event?"

In my opinion, the answer is easy. Any time an athlete with a known history of sponsorships interacts with his followers, it should be taken with a grain of salt. It's naive to assume otherwise. Ortiz's own Twitter  account, for example, is filled with tweets that look like they were written by a PR firm.

One, last month, hypes bat manufacturer Marucci Sports. Ortiz is listed as a partner and a member of the company's Player Advisory Board on its website. Another clearly promotes a local Dunkin' Donuts franchise group,   while a third tells fans to watch "Off the Bat," a TV show from the MLB and MTV2.

David Ortiz on the left of marketing photo. Via @davidortiz, Twitter. 

Other promotional tweets, including a partnership with Pedigree, regularly pepper Ortiz's feed. 

Until the Federal Trade Commission gets its act together, though, I have a hard time seeing why the slugger's Samsung selfie was worse than any other celebrity endorsement. The government agency issued guidelines on tweets last year but hasn't adequately enforced them.

While broad, the FTC's focus is on ensuring that celebrities disclose which tweets are posted for promotional purposes. As CopyPressed's Amanda Dodge explains, "Now any paid endorsement must include two parts: 1. the statement that it's an advertisement and not an organic tweet, and 2. the acknowledgment that the product might not work exactly as the endorser promises."

The first step is easy enough. It simply asks the tweet to include a term like #ad or #spon (for sponsored). The second is less clear, but generally means, according to Dodge, that "adding words like "typically" or "about" prevents misleading statements." So are celebrities following the guidelines?

Some are, but many aren't. Here are just a couple examples:

Justin Bieber, Twitter.

Miley Cyrus, Twitter.

Originally found by Business Insider, Justin Bieber's tweet was rumored to be a potential promo for 1-800-Flowers when it was posted last year. The musician has his own floral collection on the retailer's website. BlackJet, on the other hand, which was the subject of Miley Cyrus's tweet, told the The New York Times that Cyrus "was given some consideration for her [post]."

And the examples don't stop there. According to the Huffington Post, everyone from Jared Leto to Tyrese have been connected with sponsored tweets.

The bottom line
At the end of the day, Samsung's strategy is clearly valuable. As Mr. Kline points out, the combo of Ortiz and Ellen DeGeneres' selfies netted the company close to $70 million in social media exposure.

It's arguable David Ortiz should have disclosed his arrangement with Samsung before snapping his selfie with President Obama, sure. It also would have been best if the tweet was marked with #ad. But does he deserve the media backlash he's been hit with? No, unless the numerous celebrities who came before him are subject to similar criticism, and many aren't.

If we lived in a world where the FTC regularly issued fines for misleading tweets, a case could be made that Ortiz and Samsung deserve punishment. But we don't. And frankly, when a Twitter feed is as PR-friendly as Ortiz's, users should've been skeptical to begin with.

In the past companies had to pay a celebrity to endorse their product. Now they can receive at least an implied endorsement if another famous person leverages a relationship with -- or even just proximity to -- another star in order to take a selfie.

In these pictures the person taking them knows the goal of the picture is marketing a brand or product, not preserving a moment or having an image to share with fans. The other person or people in the shot don't and are being exploited

My colleague Jake Mann disagrees.

This guerrilla marketing tactic hidden under the idea of being a good sport first gained widespread notoriety when Ellen Degeneres snapped a selfie with an army of stars during the Oscars. The shot, which was so popular it briefly crashed Twitter , was taken on a Samsung phone, something that was clearly planned as Samsung was an Oscars sponsor. Degeneres, the host of the program, knew the bit was a planned product tie-in, while the many other stars who crowded around her and Bradley Cooper likely did not.

None of those stars complained about having their images co-opted for a commercial, but when Boston Red Sox DH David Ortiz pulled the same stunt on President Barack Obama, the leader of the free world was not as quiet.

"He [President Obama] obviously didn't know anything about Samsung's connection to this.... And perhaps maybe this will be the end of all selfies," White House Senior Advisor Dan Pfeiffer said on CBS's Face the Nation Sunday.

Everyone denies responsibility

The key to marketing a promotional selfie is denying that the intent was ever to be promotional in the first place.

"ABC said Samsung did not pay specifically for use of the camera in DeGeneres' selfie segment and the company wasn't explicitly named on the air as the stunt unfolded," the Associated Press reported.

That's threading a needle -- Samsung was an Oscar sponsor and had a very visible presence during the telecast. It also seems very likely Degeneres knew exactly what she was doing as photos of her backstage posted on Twitter clearly show her personal phone of choice is an Apple iPhone.

David Ortiz (@davidortiz), Twitter.

In the Obama-Ortiz photo, the beloved Boston slugger says the shot was spontaneous ... but he has a paid endorsement relationship with Samsung. "It had nothing to do with" any sponsorship, Ortiz told The Boston Globe, and in the moment it may not have. But once the picture is shared on social media it's no longer a souvenir, it's a commercial.

And as my colleague Mr. Mann pointed out in his piece, Samsung hired Ortiz earlier this year to be its Major League Baseball social media insider. Terms of that deal have not disclosed, Ortiz made over $4 million in endorsements, according to SportsBusiness Daily, while wearing baseball's most popular jersey, so the terms of his agreement probably aren't cheap.

Where is the ethical line?

The prevalence of connected cameras now makes pictures possible that were not in the past, blurring the line between legitimate commercialism and spontaneous fun. Ortiz likely was excited to meet the president and he probably did not set out to create a marketing moment -- that's just a byproduct of the spur-of-the-moment picture.

Holding Degeneres at fault for her actions is easy because they appear to have been calculated as a marketing opportunity for Samsung. If people -- especially stars who get paid for their endorsements -- are going to be co-opted for a commercial, they have a right to know about it.

Ortiz's actions fall much more into a gray area. It's easy to believe the slugger did not stalk the president to create a moment for Samsung and that he shared the photo with the best of intentions. Still, once a celebrity has a paid endorsement relationship with a product, it's hard to see any action as completely devoid of financial motivation.

Selfie marketing works, but to what end?

The Obama-Ortiz selfie has over 42,000 retweets worth almost $1 million in social media exposure, given SumAll's estimation of a retweet's value, Mr. Mann reported. Ellen DeGeneres' Oscars selfie, by comparison, was worth nearly 70 times that.

Exploitative selfies, however, may be a problem that solves itself as the bar for going viral and the public distrust of these shots will rise. If we now know Ortiz shoots selfies at least partially due to an endorsement deal, it casts doubt about every picture he takes going forward. Is he really excited to be at whatever restaurant he might be sharing a picture from or did they comp his meal in exchange for a little publicity?

The President of the United States should not be used as a commercial prop nor should anyone be unwittingly drafted into an ad without their consent. We're headed to a time where the celebrity selfie becomes as calculated as when the Pillsbury Doughboy started rapping. The public however -- with the help of the president -- has seen through the curtain however and there's no going back to the days when an innocent picture could be taken as just that.

Click here to read Mr. Mann's take.

It's been less than two weeks since Yum! Brands' Taco Bell rolled out its breakfast menu worldwide, but the country's largest chain of Mexican eats is ready to take another bite out of McDonald's .

You may have seen the first ad in which Yum! Brands found several folks named Ronald McDonald and turned them into promoters for the new Taco Bell breakfast menu that features a taco-shaped waffled sandwich and a breakfast tweak of its Crunchwrap stuffed tortilla. The ad has gone viral, with more than 1 billion earned impressions on social media, according to Taco Bell.

The quick-service giant is not resting on its laurels. Taco Bell is introducing a new ad pitching its breakfast menu, and it's still aiming at McDonald's. 

The new spot singles out the Egg McMuffin, cleverly reworking the lyrics to "Old MacDonald Had a Farm" into a dig at how dated Mickey D's signature breakfast sandwich has become. Second only to the RadioShack Super Bowl spot for bringing back the awesomeness of the 1980s, the new commercial compares the Egg McMuffin to mullets, keytars, Howard the Duck, Galaga, and even Canadian rockers Loverboy.

Taco Bell obviously isn't the first company to challenge McDonald's leadership in the morning market, but no rival has been as brazen in going for the jugular of the world's largest burger chain. It's not a bad move, as McDonald's is vulnerable. After years of consistently positive comps, the Golden Arches have been posting iffy store-level sales lately. Taco Bell also clearly feels that it has a differentiated product, and it'd better hope that it's not just the novelty of the waffle taco that is attracting attention.

Taco Bell tested more conventional offerings including oatmeal and yogurt parfaits, which not so coincidentally are options at McDonald's for diners seeking healthier alternatives to its eggy sandwiches and fried hash brown patties. However, it didn't launch with them on March 27, and now we're seeing why it's tucking those products away until later. If Taco Bell is going to attack McDonald's -- not once, but now twice within a span of two weeks -- it can't be copying its rival's menu.

One can rightfully argue that McDonald's beat Taco Bell to the breakfast burrito that is part of the new morning menu, but that low-profile entry was a given. Taco Bell was going to need a breakfast burrito. However, emphasizing the more unique waffle taco and A.M. Crunchwrap options in its marketing campaign will set it apart. Yum! Brands will keep taking swings at McDonald's until it lands a punch.