Starting your own hedge fund is about one thing and one thing alone... making a boat load of money. Source: Images Money.

George Soros has a net worth of $24 billion. Carl Icahn is worth $25.7 billion. John Paulson's $13.7 billion net worth is downright paltry by comparison.

What do these gentlemen have in common, other than being absurdly wealthy? 

They all made their fortunes investing other people's money. These men, and thousands others like them, got rich by running their own hedge funds. You can too. Maybe. Here's how.

1. Are you ridiculous passionate about investing?
Do you eat, sleep, and breath finance? Is your Kindle currently displaying an SEC filing because you were reading it in bed last night? Is your idea of a "nice little Saturday" sitting at your desk researching court documents, warrant offerings, or industry publications?

It doesn't matter if your an algorithm-driven trader or a value investing prodigy like Buffett, to successfully start your own hedge fund, you must be single-mindedly obsessed with making money in the markets.

The reason is simple enough. Successfully opening a hedge fund means convincing other people that you are a better steward of their money than they are. You must already have a proven strategy and a track record of making money investing.

Before that endowment or pension fund writes a check for $100 million in your name, they must know that you know what you're doing, you're committed to it, and that you bleed investing. 

2. Do you have a network of high net worth individuals willing to invest in your fund?
This part is easier for some than others. If you already manage money at a bank or hedge fund, then you have a huge leg up on the rest of us. For everyone else, the hardest part of starting your hedge fund is raising money. Not only is this the money that you'll be investing, this is also the money that will pay your salary.

Bridgewater Associates in the world's largest hedge fund with $150 billion under management. Source: Company website

The typical hedge fund collects a 1%-2% management fee each year based on the total assets in the fund, plus a 20% cut of investment profits. This is the famed "2 and 20" structure you've probably heard on the news. 

If your start-up hedge fund raises $10 million -- which is a ton of money but still quite small by today's standards -- you could reasonably count on $100,000-$200,000 in management fees per year. That would be great money by nearly any standard. Any standard except being a hedge fund manager.

Throw in costs for compliance, administration, reporting, and marketing, and you're likely losing money. That means you will need to raise more money, a lot more. With standard expenses and regulations already on the books, plus new red tape being rolled out constantly, you'll likely need to raise $100 million or more to successfully launch your fund.

Without a track record and existing network, raising that much cash is extremely challenging, to say the absolute least.

Source: Images Money.

3. Lawyers, brokers, accountants, and analysts
Starting your own hedge fund is starting your own small business. You'll have to deal with tax strategies, accountants, managing employees, and yes, even meeting payroll every month.

As a small start-up fund, you'll likely outsource a great amount of this work. A quick Google search turns up plenty of companies ready to help you on your journey to hedge fund mega wealth. That help is, unfortunately, really expensive. 

If your approach is quantitative -- meaning you rely on computer algorithms to uncover market inefficiencies -- then you will also have a very high IT bill every month to pay for all those servers, high-speed fiber obtic connections, and data scientists.

Remember the "2 and 20" math from above? The 1%-2% management fee has to pay for all of these expenses. Your hedge fund is a business; the income and expenses have to make sense.

Regardless of your approach, you'll also spend a great deal of your time and energy on customer service. That's right, even after you've cashed in those investor checks, you will still have to manage and cultivate those relationships. That means investor letters every month or quarter. That means answering phone calls and discussing performance, strategy, investments, and soothing any concerns they may have.

It's going to be a lot of hard work before you can kick back on your super yacht with Ray Dalio. 

4. Oh yeah, you also have to invest
At this point, you'd be wise to take a breath, because the challenges are really only starting.

You've somehow raised money, convincing investors that your investment strategy is exactly what they need for their $100 million. You've navigated the extremely complex regulatory requirements (those requirements are outside the scope of this article). You've even hired an operations manager to handle administration and coordinate between your lawyers, accountants, and traders. 

Now it's time to put all that investor money to work. You'll apply your strategies and hope for the best. If everything goes according to plan, you'll be hob-nobbing among the nation's elite financiers in no time. If things don't go to plan, you could be broke before next quarter's end.

Before you know it, you could be sharing a Coke with the Oracle of Omaha, discussing investing ideas.

The hedge fund world is ridiculously competitive. Investors expect results; either you achieve those results, or someone else will. There are over 10,000 hedge funds today, up from just a few hundred 15 years ago. One false move, and those enthusiastic investors could turn into enthusiastic redemptions.

Sure, starting a hedge fund is a long shot. But if you have the passion, the knowledge, the network, and the small business acumen, there's no reason you shouldn't get rich doing what you love.

The fertility rate in different countries is one of those topics that you might find kind of interesting only in passing. "Oh weird," you might mutter to your spouse while reading the news, "People in France have more kids than the rest of Europe," and then you never think about it again. 

Maybe you should. 

Thinking about it economically, having a lot of people of a certain age could make a big difference to a country. Consider the demand for particular goods and services, or the relevance of certain social welfare programs. A low birth rate means an aging population, and over time that's necessarily going to impact the fabric of a society.

As it turns out, a country's age is also a very good predictor of its entrepreneurial activity, which, in itself, is also inextricably linked to economic growth.

Age and innovation 
"In the near future," say the authors of a National Bureau of Economic Research study on the subject, "An aging and shrinking workforce likely will be the norm for most of the world." 

While the U.S. has a "replacement" level of fertility, Europe doesn't (it's population is expected to shrink about 20% each generation), and neither does Japan (40% shrinkage per generation) or China.

Take a look at this map. It doesn't have the granularity of the data above, but it gives you a rough idea of how few children are being born per woman in most of the world. 

Source: Wikipedia

What effect will this have on business in the future? 

James Liang, Hui Wang, and Edward P. Lzear sought to find out. The researchers theorized that an aging workforce would reduce two factors critical for the success of entrepreneurs: the first is creativity (which they assume to be most associated with youth) and the second is appropriately high-level work experience. Fewer young people means less creativity, and with more older people competing for high level positions, there's less opportunity for a gifted young person to take on a lot of responsibility.

The evidence bears this idea out. Based on their analysis of a global database of entrepreneurial activity, the authors find that for every one standard deviation* drop in median age in a country, there is a 2.5% higher rate of entrepreneurship. 

That, according to the study authors, is about 40% of the average rate of entrepreneurship -- in other words, it's pretty significant.

For example: The case of Japan 
Japan might be an interesting case in point. After growing furiously for a couple of decades, it experienced a crash and 1991 and never really recovered.

One theory is a lack of entrepreneurship. New firm development went from up to 7% in the 1960s to 3% in the 1990s -- less than a third of the American rate.

"Five of the top ten high tech companies in the US were founded after 1985, and their founders were also very young when they established these companies, with an average age of only 28. By contrast, in Japan, none of the top ten high tech companies were founded in the last 40 years."

Spending hasn't solved the problem -- Japan spends 3% of it's GDP on research and development activities, but it hasn't budged the rate of new firm growth.

Maybe it's the low birth rate
The authors find that an older population affects entrepreneurial activity for every age group, meaning that both young and old are less likely to start businesses when the average age is higher. It's particularly acute for people in their 30s, who you could argue are the best-equipped to start a business: they're young enough to have creative ideas, and experienced enough to have the broad-based business skills to bring those ideas to life.  

What this means for younger countries 
While a nation's demographics aren't going to tell you the whole story by any means, the implication I draw from this paper is that a young country that's growing has a better chance of really taking off over the long run than an old country that's growing. 

So, from an investment perspective, you might want to ask yourself: which are the young, high growth, and high potential markets? 

Now take a look at this map from 2005 (it's a bit outdated, yes, but the changes haven't been immense). 

Source: Wikimedia Commons 

The youngest countries are overwhelmingly in Africa, the Middle East, and Southern Asia. Maybe that's where we should be looking for new opportunities? 

Of course, it would be simplistic to say that young people means entrepreneurship means economic growth. You'd think, realistically, that there would be other factors influencing the rate of new business development, and you'd probably be right. 

One study found that institutional factors and per capita GDP affect the rate of entrepreneurship. Another also found that entrepreneurship is influenced by the level of per-capita income (alongside "innovative capacity") and takes a U-shape. That means that the most entrepreneurial activity takes place in both the poorest and richest countries. 

How all of these factors interact together to bring economic growth is also not a simple matter. Take Nigeria: it's average age is 18, and its GDP growth last year was nearly 8%. You might want to sign up based on that alone. But poverty and unemployment are still major problems, and so is government corruption. Hmm.

At the same time, the government is taking pains to boost new and labor-intensive industries. Take it's import ban on cement, which has resulted in Nigeria becoming a cement manufacturing powerhouse (a good business to be in if you're in a region with infrastructure and housing shortages). 

Are you dizzy yet? Such is analysis.  

So you have to strike a balance, and, I'd argue, consider adding demographics into your equation. Age might have some vital role to play in the analysis -- either way, it's something I'll be keeping in mind. 

*Standard deviation measures the "spread" of data around an average. It's a tool that essentially splits up your "normal" bell curve, where the average is in the middle, into six segments of equal size, with three segments on the left side of the average and three on the right. 

So in this case, going by one "segment" from the average age to a younger one gives you a 2.5% rise in the rate of new business formation. 

Cars don't get tickets. Drivers do. But lead-footed drivers like certain cars a lot.

Here are the top 10 ticket-getters, based on an analysis of more than 550,000 car insurance quotes delivered through Insurance.com. (You can find Ticket Magnet rankings of more than 500 individual models here.) Most of the tickets were for speeding, but all types of violations were included in the rankings.

One in three drivers of the Subaru WRX reported a recent traffic violation. For all models, the average was 19.9 percent.

Unlike accident claims, which ultimately drive up rates for everyone insuring that particular model of car, tickets jack up the premium for only the driver involved - but those penalties can be huge.

Every insurance company looks at cars, drivers and violations based on its own experiences, and their rates reflect huge differences of opinion. One company might charge a WRX driver with a speeding ticket less than another company might charge the same driver with a clean record.

We ran sample rates for each of the top ticket magnets, looking at a wide variety of traffic violations. Our driver is 25 and lives in California. We compared quotes on full coverage for cars newer than 2004 and got liability-only quotes for older ones. Yours will differ depending on your ZIP code, driving record, age and model of car; the only way to know for sure how much your rates will rise after a ticket is to compare insurance quotes for yourself.

10: Mazda Mazda2

28.1% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: Racing

2014 Mazda Mazda2, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible for comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $2,310 to $3,408
• Range of quotes with conviction for racing: $3,454 to $4,322

9: Toyota FJ Cruiser

28.4% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: Speeding in a school zone

2010 Toyota FJ Cruiser, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible on comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $1,742 to $2,576
• Range of quotes with conviction for speeding in school zone: $2,584 to $3,406

8: Scion TC

28.8% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: Speeding in excess of 100 mph

2012 Scion TC, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible on comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $2,482 to $3,850
• Range of quotes with conviction for speeding in excess of 100 mph: $3,060 to $4,804

7: Mercury Topaz

28.8% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: Failure to yield

1991 Mercury Topaz XR5, 50/100/50 liability only

• Range of quotes with no violations: $654 to $1,210
• Range of quotes with conviction for failure to yield: $878 to $1,700

6: Volkswagen Rabbit

29.6% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: 3 speeding tickets 6 to 9 mph over the limit

2007 Volkwagen Rabbit, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible on comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $1,538 to $2,532
• Range of quotes with 3 convictions for speeding 6 to 9 mph over limit: $2,332 to $3,282

5: Subaru Tribeca

29.7% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: Fleeing from police

2014 Subaru Tribeca, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible on comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $2,112 to $3,172
• Range of quotes with conviction for fleeing from police: $3,932 to $7,872

4: Toyota Supra

30.8% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: Driving without insurance

1996 Toyota Supra, 50/100/50 liability only

• Range of quotes with no violations: $628 to $1,250
• Range of quotes with conviction for driving without insurance: $792 to $1,250

3: Scion FR-S

32.6% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: 2 speeding tickets 6 to 9 mph over limit

2013 Scion FR-S, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible on comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $2,672 to $3,596
• Range of quotes with 2 convictions for speeding 6 to 9 mph over limit: $3,350 to $5,880

2: Pontiac GTO

32.7% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: DUI no accident

2006 Pontiac GTO, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible on comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $2,044 to $3,276
• Range of quotes with conviction for DUI no accident: $5,758 to $6,072

1: Subaru WRX

33.6% of drivers report violations

Sample of ticket impact on insurance for: Speeding 11 to 15 mph over limit

2014 Subaru WRX, 50/100/50 liability, $500 deductible on comprehensive and collision

• Range of quotes with no violations: $2,618 to $4,182
• Range of quotes with conviction for speeding 11 to 15 mph over limit: $3,610 to $5,248

Addressing the issue of saving money is the most fundamental, yet neglected, aspect of personal finance in the U.S. today. According to a 2012 survey by Credit Donkey, almost 50 percent of Americans don't have more than $500 in their emergency savings accounts, which not only puts a kink in savers' finances in the event of an unforeseen expense, but also creates undue stress for failing to prepare a safety net adequately.

So, in our latest Money Mistakes series, we highlight the top 10 money mistakes Americans make when it comes to saving money.

1. Not budgeting
There are a number of philosophies on the best approach to take when budgeting your money; but at times, the thought of sitting down with statements, bills, and an expense sheet is just too stressful. This mind-set is an easy trap to fall victim to, but is one of the worst money mistakes to make if you want to grow your savings fund.

Hope A. Rising of Clearwater, Fla., learned this lesson the hard way. "Rather than make savings a part of my life I 'lived for the moment' and now have virtually no savings for emergencies," Rising said. "For example, my car recently broke down and I had to borrow money to have it fixed, rather than just being able to take the money out of the bank."

2. Saving too little
It's commendable that about half of Credit Donkey's survey participants had saved up some cash; but often, individuals don't save enough money to carry themselves through a challenging and sudden financial crisis. A common recommendation when it comes to the appropriate amount to save in a nest egg is about three months' salary, or six months worth of expenses (i.e. mortgage, auto loan, utility bills, gas, etc.).

For instance, the average American in 2013 made $42,693 before taxes. Take away about 25 percent of that income for taxes, and the average person walks away with $32,020 annually. Three months of net income (the ideal emergency fund amount) is about $8,000 to help keep you comfortably afloat in an emergency.

3. Not setting specific goals
Determining what exactly you're saving for, and when you need to save by, is a helpful motivational guide to follow. It acts as a constant reminder of what you're working toward, and lets you know when your efforts have been successful.

Examples of this include saving money for a down payment on a car in the next six months, or getting more specific like committing to saving $200 per month for the next six months, to achieve this goal.

4. Failing to track spending
Creating a budget is the start of the savings process and setting a goal is the end of it, but there has to be a quantitative way to follow your progression in the time between. Tools such as Mint.com or even a simple spreadsheet are great ways to avoid this money mistake.

5. Living paycheck to paycheck
When budgeting your spending allowance, don't stretch your money to the last dollar. Not allowing yourself about a $100 per month buffer sets you up for disaster, as small, seemingly harmless purchases quickly add up.

6. Overdrawing an account
Overdrawing a checking account is usually the result of making one of these other money mistakes, but expensive overdraft fees are a cost you have complete control over. A $35 overdraft fee might not sting now, but as more pile up on your account statement, the damage can become apparent in a short period of time.

Simply put, overdrawing is a money waster and an entirely avoidable circumstance if you stay diligent with your savings plan.

7. Claiming the wrong tax withholding
Claiming the lowest withholding allowance when it comes to your federal taxes is a mistake that Americans commonly make. When you do so, the government takes away more income taxes throughout the year, and you're left with a fat tax return check.

Don't let this windfall fool you -- what you're doing is essentially giving Uncle Sam an interest-free loan and getting nothing back in return. Instead, you can claim the withholding allowance you rightfully qualify for, and use the extra cash in each paycheck to grow your savings fund in a high-interest savings account.

8. Signing up for low deductibles
One way to increase the amount of cash you can save each month is to lower your premium and raise your deductible for auto and health insurance. This means you assume more risk up front by paying a lower monthly premium, with the expectation to pay more out of pocket in the event you have to file a claim (which should be no problem if you've saved that emergency fund).

According to the Insurance Information Institute, increasing your deductible from $200 to $1,000 can lower collision and comprehensive coverage premiums by at least 40 percent.

9. Buying name brands
More customers are employing frugal tactics like passing on branded products in lieu of a generic version. Similarly, retailers have caught onto the fact that shoppers are looking for a frugal alternative in today's challenging economic times.

That's not to say you should never splurge on a brand that's worth it, but most generics are the same product as their pricier counterparts. Look for generic products on the lower shelves of grocers aisles.

10. Waiting
One of the worst money mistakes you can make is procrastinating on getting started with your savings plan, since achieving a savings goal can take longer than you might expect. Paying $500 per month toward an emergency fund at the income outlined in mistake No. 2, for example, would take the average American 16 months to save up three months' income.

This article originally appeared on gobankingrates.com

Finding a flip that is a good deal is hard. The biggest reason for the difficulty is the intense competition -- particularly in markets that are hot, as many are today. I have tried hundreds of strategies to find and secure good deals for a flip including cold calling, making a bazillion offers, voodoo, praying and other superstitious antics.

The best strategy by far has been creating a pipeline of short-sale deals.
There are still plenty of short-sale deals to be had out there, even though prices are rising in many areas. A short sale is a type of real estate sale where the seller/owner of the house sells for an amount that is less than the amount of their loan.

How a short sale works
For example, let's say you bought a house for $100k. If you got a traditional mortgage you would put something like 20% down, or in this case $20k. The other 80% or $80k needs to come from somewhere. The answer is that it will come in the form of a loan from a bank. If you sold your house for $100k, the next day you would (less fees, commissions, etc.) get $20k back, and the bank would get their $80k. However, if you sold your house for anything less than the $80k that you owe the bank, then it would be a short sale deal, and you would need the bank's approval to go through with the sale.

In the years before the financial crisis of 2008, many people were getting loans from banks and putting down 3% or less, instead of the usual 20%. Let's say that this house you bought went from being worth $100k to closer to $50k. It seems drastic, but it happened all over the U.S. In this scenario you now "own" something that is worth $50, but you owe $80 on your loan. In other words, you are now underwater.

Even if housing prices go up 50%, you are still underwater. Doesn't seem fair, right? If they drop 50% and then increase 50%, then one should be equal. Not true. If they drop 50% from $100k, then your home is worth $50k. If it increases 50% from $50k then it is only worth $75k. Remember, your loan is still $80k.

So assuming you are underwater, you have three basic choices: keep paying your mortgage, foreclosure, or short sale.

Many people get discouraged paying a mortgage for a house that is hundreds of thousands of dollars underwater, and it is likely not a good use of your precious funds. Getting foreclosed on is easy -- just don't make any payments and wait until someone like me shows up at your front step and tells you to leave.

This process could take longer than a couple of years, so make sure to save up! The other option is to do a short sale by selling your house for less than you owe. As I mentioned, the key in a short sale deal is that the bank needs to approve to sale.

Using a short sale to your advantage
Anyway, back to the point of how to make money and get a great deal on a short sale. The first thing to know is that the owner/seller is in control of who the home is sold to. The bank can't run around trying to find a buyer -- only the owner can. The bank ultimately has to approve the deal, but they can only approve deals that the seller/owner brings to them.

The other important piece to understand is that in a short sale deal, the seller/owner shouldn't care at all about what the sales price is, as long as it is less than the amount they owe. In our example, if the home is sold for $1k or $75k, the owner gets nothing from the sale because they still owe the bank $80k. If the home sells for $79k, then the bank still gets all of the proceeds because the loan is worth $80k.

So how does one come by a great deal? The answer is to incentivize the seller.

Let's say, using our example, that you put your house that is worth $50k on the market for just that, $50k. You are already going to lose money on this house (your $20k down payment), and therefore you aren't going to put another dime in to fix the list of things that are wrong. I come to you and say, "Hey, I will buy your house for $20k, and I will give you $5k to help you move."

Would you take that over an offer of $50k, where you get nothing? Most people would, and it's perfectly legal. Just make sure to put it in the purchase contract.

Finding short sales in your area
A great way to find people who are underwater is to use ForeclosureRadar or any myriad of sources that list public foreclosures. Chances are that if their home is listed for foreclosure sale that they are underwater. Create a flyer telling people that you want to buy their home, possibly with the help of a real estate agent friend, and go around sticking them into mailboxes of people on your foreclosure list. This isn't a high percentage game -- most people won't respond. However, just a couple of short sale deals a year can make you quite the bundle of dough.

The strategy that has worked for me on short sales that are already on the market is to offer the listing agent the listing on your flip. This may seem sketch, but the reality is that the listing agent is still securing their client the most amount of money and selling the house. Again, it is a strategy that requires a lot of leg work.

Next steps
Once you find a seller who is willing to sell their short sale home for a good price to you, make sure to have a beer and congratulate yourself -- for about ten minutes. Then you need to get back to work because the bank still needs to approve the deal. For this you need a contractor -- and preferably two -- on your side.

Basically, you have them go through the house and put in bids to fix absolutely everything -- and at top dollar. You won't end up paying them to do it for top dollar, but you will take these bids and submit them to the bank as the justification for the low sale price. It may take some time to negotiate, but more often than not the bank will actually be scared by the extremely high bids and accept your offer.

Finding good flip deals is hard, but the formula is doable. Pound the pavement and be resourceful. Good luck!

This article originally appeared on Bigger Pockets and is Copyright 2014 BiggerPockets,

You may also enjoy these financial articles:

Two Reasons Why a Short Sale is Like Plastic Surgery

3 Things That May Have Crashed Your Last Short Sale Deal

I have been following Apple chip suppliers for quite a while. One phrase that I'm intimately familiar with after listening to earnings calls from countless Apple suppliers is, "we can't comment on any specific customers" -- or something to that effect. 

Companies tend to make these statements (or similar statements) due, at least in part, to pretty strict confidentiality agreements between them and Apple. Given how high-profile and powerful a customer Apple is, it's probably not a good idea to break such agreements. 

It puzzles me, then, that Samsung's semiconductor chief would outright confirm that it will build Apple's next-generation applications processors.

Why would Samsung do this?

Samsung isn't quite like other Apple suppliers
Most of those Apple suppliers I mentioned are typically chip or other component companies whose livelihoods depend on winning big deals such as slots in the iPhone and iPad. For example, chip-maker Broadcom derives over 10% of its revenue from sales of chips to Apple, meaning that if it loses an iPhone or an iPad, its financial results would be materially affected.

Samsung, however, is a very large, very powerful conglomerate that makes most of its money competing with Apple's products. Component supply to Apple is non-trivial, but it won't make or break the company.

Furthermore, Samsung enjoys a pretty unique position of being one of the few remaining leading-edge logic chip manufacturers. And, if what Samsung and others claim is true, Samsung is not only ahead of Taiwan Semiconductor in getting next-generation 14-nanometer silicon up and running, but its 14-nanometer technology looks superior -- at least with respect to chip density -- to its chief rival's.

So if Samsung's semiconductor chief spills the beans that the company supplying Apple, what exactly is Apple going to do? Leave? Taiwan Semiconductor already admitted that its 16-nanometer process is behind schedule and won't really begin ramping up until late 2015, making it too late for Apple's iPhone 6s and 6s Plus processors. It looks like Apple has no choice but to go with Samsung.

Mobile device woes
it isn't news to anyone following the consumer electronics industry that Samsung's operating profit from the sale of mobile devices is crumbling, with analyst Claire Kim reportedly stating, "We all know Samsung's third-quarter earnings will be pretty ugly."

The tablet market is generally weak (and increasingly dominated by commodity, low-margin devices), Samsung's premium smartphone lineup is probably losing share to Apple, and the low end of the smartphone market is being increasingly dominated up by various local Chinese vendors.

In other words, the huge Apple-like profits Samsung saw from the sale of mobile devices was seemingly an anomaly rather than anything sustainable over the long haul.

All that and a bag of chips
One area that has been fairly encouraging for Samsung has been its chip business. Samsung is the largest DRAM vendor on the planet, and recent pricing strength (due to a tight control of supply) in DRAM has allowed the company and peers such as Micron to profit handsomely.

However, Samsung's logic foundry business, which builds microprocessors and other complex chips, has apparently been struggling. ZDNet reported that Samsung's system LSI business (logic foundry and internal chip development) has "reported huge losses this year" as a result of the loss of the iPhone 6 and 6 Plus business to Taiwan Semiconductor.

It seems, though, that Samsung is aggressively trying to signal to investors that its 14-nanometer process will help it win significant logic share against Taiwan Semiconductor over the next couple years.

Foolish takeaway
All signs point to Samsung gaining a significant edge over Taiwan Semiconductor at the 14 and 16-nanometer node, which makes the idea that Samsung has won most, if not all, of Apple's business at this node pretty likely.

We will also see over the next year or so just how much leading-edge business beyond Apple that Samsung is ultimately able to take from Taiwan Semiconductor.

Altria Group has rewarded shareholders for decades through reliable dividend payments and share buybacks. In fact, the tobacco giant has increased its dividend 48 times over the past 45 years. Much of this success is a result of Altria's strong portfolio of premium brands including Marlboro, Skoal, and Black & Mild. However, the tobacco industry is in the midst of its biggest shift in centuries as more consumers opt for electronic cigarettes over traditional smokes. This could negatively affect Altria Group going forward, as traditional tobacco sales made up more than 89% of the company's net revenue in fiscal 2013.

Where there's smoke ...
There isn't a person on the planet today that would tell you smoking is healthy for you. More than 5 million people die each year from smoking, according to The Economist. As a result, more companies are taking a stand against smoking than ever before. San Francisco and Boston have outlawed the sale of tobacco products in all retail pharmacies. And earlier this year, CVS Caremark banned the sale of cigarettes in its stores nationwide, taking a $2 billion haircut in revenue as a result. The pharmacy and wellness chain believes these bans will significantly reduce the number of people who buy tobacco products today -- creating a worrisome trend for big tobacco companies like Altria.  

It isn't too surprising then, that revenue from Altria's "smokeable" products and cigarettes fell 1.2% in the second quarter. The company blamed lower shipment volume for the decline. Volume in Altria's premium cigarette segment suffered the most, falling more than 10% in the period, followed by a near 5% decline in its Marlboro products.

Part of the problem is more smokers are choosing vapor products over traditional cigarettes. Sales of electronic cigarettes and refillable vaporizers more than doubled during both 2012  and 2013, with sales of around $1.7 billion last year. While that is still a drop in the bucket of the $89 billion tobacco industry, e-cigs and vapors are gaining popularity with younger would-be cigarette smokers.

The Center for Disease Control estimates that as much as 10% of all high school students tried e-cigarettes last year. This means the next generation of smokers may not be buying packs of Marlboro or other traditional smokes, but so-called e-cigs instead. Today, the number of electronic cigarette and vapor users is already swelling around the world. More than 7 million people were believed to be using e-cigs in Europe last year, and that number continues to grow both overseas and in the United States.

If you can't beat 'em, join 'em
Nonetheless, Altria and other traditional cigarette brands won't go down without a fight. To combat the movement away from tobacco smokes, Altria introduced its own e-cig brand last year. The tobacco giant formed Nu Mark LLC and rolled out its MarkTen e-cigarettes in test markets in Indiana and Arizona last year. Altria has since expanded its MarkTen brand nationally.

The company was able to get its MarkTen smokeless products into 60,000 retail stores in the western part of the U.S. so far this year. Additionally, Altria's Nu Mark business acquired the e-vapor company called Green Smoke. While this is still a small portion of Altria Group's overall business, it opens a door for the tobacco company into the burgeoning e-cigs market. There is no doubt that mounting challenges in its traditional cigarette business could cause trouble for Altria down the road. However, the king of tobacco probably isn't going to go up in smoke just yet.

After all, Altria Group's stock has outperformed the market for years on end. Over the past five years, Altria's total shareholder return was more than 244%, compared to just 128% return for the S&P 500 during the same period. The company's shareholder friendly ways were on full display recently when Altria's board approved a $1 billion stock repurchase plan with a completion date of late 2015.

Altria's decision to finally invest in e-cigs and vapor products could help curb declining sales of traditional tobacco products, but it may only be a short-term stopgap.

Citrix Systems,'s headquarters in Fort Lauderdale, FL, Credit: Wikimedia Commons

Shares of Citrix Systems have risen 10% since the cloud and virtualization services specialist's most recent quarterly report in July. With its next announcement coming up later this month, now's a great time to revisit what Citrix has told investors to expect going forward. Here are five things that Citrix CFO David Henshall said during the company's most recent conference call:

1. The pivot to mobile is going well

First, though Citrix's Mobile & Desktop business grew just 4% to $396 million last quarter, Henshall assured investors that the company's mobile solutions are thriving. He cited Citrix's XenMobile solution as a main catalyst which "continue[s] to set the bar in the enterprise mobility market with [mobile device management], mobile productivity apps, and virtual apps and data in a unified, secure solution [...]." Henshall elaborated on the stickiness of XenMobile, saying:

Similar to the last few quarters, 80% of our mobile platform customers have opted for this complete solution, demonstrating the value of our integrated offerings versus stand-alone MDM technologies. In the aggregate, I'd say we're still very pleased with our revenue and pipeline momentum and while still a relatively small component of overall revenue, mobile platforms grew more than 50% year-on-year in Q2.

Mobile solutions might still represent a small slice of Citrix's overall business, but if it can continue growing the segment at anywhere near its current pace, it shouldn't be long before it materially boosts results.

2. Mobile isn't Citrix's only source of growth

But as Henshall began to detail Citrix's guidance -- which included steady expectations for revenue growth of 8.5% to 10%, and increased adjusted earnings per share of between $3.20 and $3.25 -- he also reminded investors mobile wasn't their only catalyst when he said, "We expect to see the strongest forward growth coming from our networking, mobile platforms, and data sharing businesses."

Networking & Cloud revenue jumped 9% to $179 million last quarter, driven primarily by Citrix's NetScaler products. Meanwhile, Citrix's software-as-a-service business grew 12% to $161 million. That included 60% growth in ShareFile sales, which now comprise around 9% of Citrix's overall SaaS mix. Henshall didn't elaborate on specific numbers, but it's certainly great for investors that these segments are expected to continue chugging along.  

3. That growth comes at a cost

However, noting networking in particular is a lower-margin business for now, Henshall also says this growth has come at a cost of a "500 basis point decline over the last few years as we've been ramping up networking and SaaS [...] very aggressively." That included a 130 year-over-year basis point decline in gross margin to 85% last quarter.

On one hand, then, as networking and SaaS grow to represent a greater mix of Citrix's overall business, gross margin will inevitably continue to decline over the near-term. On the other hand, those declines are expected to plateau in the second half of this year and level off as Citrix moves into 2015.

4. Operational efficiencies will continue to take hold (shareholder value)

In the meantime, Citrix certainly isn't sitting on its hands. Early in the call, Henshall said "We're also taking direct actions to improve operating efficiencies. [...] This includes refinements to the portfolio, real estate, delayering and others, initiatives that will continue into the second half."

In Q2, for example, Citrix's operating expenses declined about 130 basis points, thanks mostly to a modest 200-point decline in sales and marketing as a percentage of revenue to 39%. 

Better yet, Henshall says, once Citrix's networking-related gross margin declines abate, "that stops becoming a headwind to all the activities that we've been driving to just improve efficiencies." When that happens, those efficiencies should finally start translating to Citrix's bottom line.

5. Citrix will continue returning capital to shareholders 

Finally, touching on the massive share repurchase plan announced back in April, Henshell stated [emphasis mine]:

[W]e've initiated new programs to better optimize our cap structure and programmatically return capital to shareholders. In Q2, we successfully completed the issuance of $1.4 billion in convertible securities, while simultaneously initiating a $1.5 billion share repurchase program. This allowed us to buyback an initial 21 million shares of our own stock last quarter and we still have over $400 million remaining under the current authorization.

In the upcoming quarter, investors should keep an eye on whether Citrix puts that remaining $400 million to work to retire even more shares. Considering both Henshell's "programmatic" verbiage and the fact that Citrix doesn't pay a quarterly dividend, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the company does so, and/or authorizes another expanded share repurchase in the coming quarter.

Although technically a Spotify competitor, Beats Music was far from threatening when it debuted earlier this year. With a unique element of personal curation, it wasn't just a me-too product, but its $10 per month on-demand music model is almost indistinguishable from Spotify's. Technical glitches plagued its launch, and in May, a leaked document suggested that Beats Music had only 111,000 paying subscribers -- a drop in the bucket compared to Spotify's 10 million.

But in spite of its massive lead, Beats Music could eventually catch up to its much more entrenched competitor. Apple's acquisition is already benefiting Beats Music, and further advantages seem likely to accrue in the months ahead.

Beats Music comes to Apple TV
Late last month, Apple updated Apple TV with a new channel: Beats Music. Though known mostly for its streaming video and cord-cutting prowess, since the beginning, music has been an integral part of Apple TV, and for years, Apple TV has served as an ideal way to play iTunes music over a home theater setup.

But digital downloads are waning in popularity and subscription-based services are on the rise. In July, Nielsen reported that, for the first six months of 2014, digital track sales declined 13% on an annual basis. Meanwhile, on-demand streaming rose 42%.

The addition of Beats Music to Apple TV makes it the only on-demand streaming service with a native Apple TV app. Admittedly, Spotify music can be sent to an Apple TV, but only with a paired Mac or iOS device using AirPlay. That's a solution, but it's not ideal -- the use of AirPlay limits what that paired device can do. For Apple TV users -- of which there are at least 20 million -- the integration with Beats Music could entice a few Spotify subscribers to jump ship.

Closing Beats Music down?
But more significant is what the addition suggests -- Apple is using its ownership of the platform to give Beats Music a leg up over Spotify. That seems likely to intensify, particularly as Apple works to further integrate Beats Music within its iOS platform.

Late last month, a report from TechCrunch alleged that Apple planned to discontinue the Beats Music service at some point in the near future. Apple later denied the report, but Re/code elaborated: Though Apple may discontinue the Beats Music brand, it would remain active in streaming music, perhaps merging Beats Music with its own iTunes application.

Spotify's rivals have a big advantage
If so, that would be similar to what Google has done with Google Music All Access: For $10 per month, owners of devices powered by Android can give the core Google Music app Spotify-like functionality.

Not all of Spotify's users rely on iOS or Android devices, but its most lucrative do: Although Spotify is ad-supported on traditional PCs, its mobile app requires a subscription for unrestricted, on-demand listening. Of its 40 million active listeners, 10 million pay for the service -- most of which likely do so for the added mobile functionality.

This puts Spotify in an unfortunate position, similar to the one Pandora has faced in recent months: Going forward, Spotify will have to compete with larger, deeper-pocketed rivals that happen to own the very platforms it depends upon for its customers.

Spotify isn't a publicly traded company, but it's widely expected to IPO at some point in the near future. Given Apple's recent moves, investors eyeing a stake should be cautious: Though it's the on-demand, streaming music leader for the time being, maintaining that position could be remarkably difficult as more intense competition from Apple seems imminent.

Tesla Motors plans to more than double its workforce in Hong Kong to more than 100 people by the end of the year, according to a recent press release on the Hong Kong government's website that quotes Tesla's vice president of China operations Veronica Wu. This expansion is due to anticipated increased demand for the Model S and significant initial demand for the Model X in Hong Kong, a largely autonomous area that's a Special Administrative Region, or SAR, of the People's Republic of China. 

It often seems to fly under the radar that Hong Kong was and remains a pivotal component of Tesla's strategy to electrify the roadways of China. The electric carmaker began taking pre-orders from Hong Kong buyers in July 2013 -- and received more than 300 in that month, despite the fact that pricing hadn't been established -- a month before it started taking pre-orders in mainland China. 

I've previously written about three reasons Tesla is likely to spark Teslamania in China. However, I didn't touch upon Tesla's strategy of leading with Hong Kong to help conquer the extremely important Chinese market. Here are three reasons this is a winning plan.

The Model S at the initial Hong Kong deliveries event in July. Source: Tesla Motors.

1. Hong Kong is quite wealthy 

Surely, a fair number of Hong Kong's 7.2 million citizens can afford to shell out some big bucks for a Model S or X, as Hong Kong has one of the highest per capita incomes in the world: $53,203 in 2013 (based on purchasing power parity), according to the World Bank. That's just a hair lower than Switzerland's $53,672 and well ahead of that of the highest-ranking European Union country, Austria, at $44,149.

While Hong Kong residents still need deep pockets to buy a Model S, those pockets don't need to be as deep as they'd usually need to be to purchase a luxury vehicle. This is thanks to Tesla's principle of treating consumers in all countries equally by pricing the Model S globally on par with its U.S. price, excluding any unavoidable fees. And thanks to Hong Kong's government, buyers' pockets can be shallower than those of customers living in mainland China because there are no hefty import fees or sales tax. Furthermore, Hong Kong's government threw Tesla a bone as the Model S received "the first registration tax exemption for electric vehicles in the city," according to Tesla spokeswoman Wu.

The base price of a Model S with the 60 kWh battery in Hong Kong is HK$579,000 ($74,606 at the current exchange rate), while the 85 kWh model starts at HK$657,000 ($84,657). These prices are just a few thousand dollars more than the approximate $71,000 and $81,000 base prices in the U.S. -- that's due to shipping. 

Another factor relates to Hong Kong's wealth and status as a leading financial center: power. Like mainland China, Hong Kong has a huge air pollution issue. I think it's likely that some of the elite living in this SAR will not only embrace Tesla's high-end EVs -- because they don't need to give up status or luxury to do so -- but also exert their influence in mainland China for the country to clean up its dirty air, much of which certainly billows down to them. This could possibly help Tesla's vehicles qualify for China's EV subsidies despite not being made in the country, or could take some other form that could help Tesla.

2. Hong Kong is geographically small and extremely densely populated

Hong Kong skyline. Source: Wikipedia (Robster839).

Hong Kong has a population of about 7.2 million over its 426-square-mile land mass. To put that in perspective, New York City's 8.3 million residents are clustered in its 303 square miles. So, people are packed in nearly as tightly as they are in the Big Apple. 

I believe that the "range anxiety" issue is overblown in the U.S., given that the P85 Model S gets 265 miles per charge, though it's certainly a legitimate concern for some. However, the fear of running out of a charge and not being near somewhere to juice up should be as close to a nonissue as possible in Hong Kong, due to its small geographical size and urban nature.

Model S owners in Hong Kong can currently charge up at two Supercharger sites, though Tesla plans to greatly increase coverage in Hong Kong -- as well as in the entire Asian region -- by the end of 2015. It looks like Tesla has plans to have a total of nine or 10 Superchargers in Hong Kong (which is on the southern coast of China) by 2015. 

Supercharger station coverage planned by the end of 2015. Source: Tesla Motors.

3. Hong Kong is a trendsetter in the region

This is the most important reason, in my view, with the first and second reasons simply playing a supporting role.

In many ways, Hong Kong is to mainland China as California -- and perhaps New York City, in some respects -- is to the United States. Products and styles that become popular in affluent Hong Kong often gain a following among the people in mainland China. So, anything Tesla can do to continue to win favor with Hong Kong consumers should help in its sales efforts in mainland China, a country that's going to be an ever-increasingly key factor in Tesla's success going forward.

China is already the world's largest auto market and the world's third-largest luxury auto market behind Europe and the U.S. However, because sizable waves of its humongous population of more than 1.3 billion continue to enter the middle and more affluent classes, China's lead as the world's largest auto market should continue to expand. More important, China is projected to surpass the U.S. as the No. 2 luxury auto market by 2017 and leapfrog over No. 1 Europe by 2020.

Takeaway

It's too early in the Hong Kong and China game to state anything definitively, though investors will soon learn more about how eagerly the region is initially embracing the Model S when Tesla reports Q3 earnings in a month. However, given Tesla's smart "lead with Hong Kong" strategy, its already speedy buildout of Superchargers in mainland China, and its recently announced partnership with China's No. 2 mobile carrier China Unicom to install charging stations at 400 China Unicom stores in 120 cities, it seems Tesla is on track to electrify the roadways of China. 

The oil and gas industry is one of the fastest growing sectors of the U.S. economy. From 2007 to 2012, employment in the industry grew 40%, while the rest of the economy grew just 1%. Looking ahead, the industry expects even more growth as it expects to add more than a million new jobs by the end of the decade. That will open up a lot of new opportunities for job seekers. Here are the fastest growing sectors within the oil industry to find those opportunities

Industrial sand mining
From 2010 to 2013, employment in the industrial sand mining sector surged 49%, according to research from EMSI. It's a sector that is directly benefiting from the fracking boom in America as industrial sand is a key ingredient in fracking. The sand, which is called proppant when used in the oil and gas industry, is critical to propping open the fractures in shale formations that are formed by hydraulic fracturing. These proppants allow oil and gas to flow more freely through the shale and out the wellbore.

This surge in employment in the sector isn't a surprise given the surging demand for raw frac sand in the oil and gas industry. As the following slide from a recent investor presentation by frac sand producer Hi-Crush Partners LP shows, the volume of raw frac sand proppants consumed by the industry has skyrocketed from 1.3 million tons in 2002 to 29.6 million tons in 2012.

Source: Hi-Crush Partners LP Investor Presentation 

As that slide also shows, there is no end in sight to the growth in demand for raw frac sand as the industry expects demand to increase to 51.2 million tons by 2017 and 78.5 million tons by 2022. This will only add more jobs to the industrial sand sector as it supports the oil and gas industry.

Oil and gas pipeline and related structures construction
Another fast growing sector within the oil and gas industry relates to the construction of pipelines and other infrastructure to support the energy boom. These pipelines are critical to the industry for transporting oil and gas from production basins in Texas, North Dakota, and Pennsylvania to market centers so the energy can be used to fuel our economy. Overall, employment growth in this sector has been as fast as the growth in the industrial sand mining from 2010 to 2013. However, this growth is actually much larger in aggregate as it is off of a much larger base seeing that the pipeline industry supports nearly 150,000 jobs while industry sand mining supported just over 5,000 jobs last year.

Source: Kinder Morgan

Looking ahead, this sector should continue to create even more jobs, as by 2035 American energy companies will need to invest $614 billion to build new energy infrastructure. In fact, by the end of this decade alone $114 billion will need to be spent on natural gas pipelines in America while $272 billion needs to be invested to build oil pipelines in the U.S. and Canada. These pipeline projects will support thousands of construction jobs apiece, and each one of those jobs will add another 1.68 jobs to the supply chain to support the construction. It all adds up to a lot of future job opportunities. 

Support activities for oil and gas operations
While jobs supporting the growth of the oil industry are growing faster, the biggest jobs creator over the past three years has been in oil and gas drilling operations. Overall, employment over that timeframe grew 43% to more than 300,000. It's growth that again isn't likely to cease given the massive drilling opportunities still left within U.S. shale plays. As the following slide from an Enterprise Products Partners LP investor presentation shows, the industry still has hundreds of thousands of wells left to drill in America's shale plays.

Source: Enterprise Products Partners LP Investor Presentation 

The drilling of these wells will create thousands of new direct jobs at oil and gas producers. In addition to that, each direct job that is created will create 2.15 additional supply chain jobs that are critical to supporting the drilling process. Needless to say, there will be incredible job opportunities directly supporting the oil and gas industry over the next few decades.

Key takeaway
When we think about careers in the oil industry, all too often working directly for an oil company is what comes to mind. While the industry will create a lot of direct jobs, some of the fastest growing opportunities in the industry actually relate to sand and pipelines. Because of this there are plenty of opportunities for a career linked to the oil industry even if it isn't for an oil company.

Virtual computing veteran VMware is having an interesting 2014, to say the least. Shares raced sky-high in the first quarter, driven by analyst upgrades and the strength of its vSAN virtual storage networking product. Then the stock fell back to Earth due to a soft earnings guidance update, and activist investor firm Elliott Management started looking for a way to separate VMware from majority owner EMC .

VMW data by YCharts

Today, with VMware's next earnings report about three weeks away, the stock is supported by several potential catalysts and held down by multiple threats. To get some more clarity in this stock's baffling situation, I dug through VMware's latest earnings call in search of executive insights.

These are five of the most instructive observations I could find.

VMware CEO Pat Gelsinger. Source: VMware.

"Tectonic shift"

"We are in the early stages of tectonic shift, transitioning from the previous client server platform to the mobile cloud era. Every customer I meet feels like the pace of technological change is faster than ever before. Software is being used to efficiently manage companies. This has become the heart and soul of new companies, and new ventures within existing companies.

"Customers are realizing the dramatic benefits of the new software-defined model for IT, and VMware delivers exactly that. By making IT dramatically more fluid and automated, we ensure that customers can boldly deliver the apps that deliver revenue, differentiation, and loyalty -- faster and more reliably than ever."

-- Pat Gelsinger, VMware CEO

This is Gelsinger outlining the size of the market opportunity he sees in front of VMware. He's not the first IT executive to highlight the value of increased automation and software-based controls, and he'll hardly be the last.

This, of course, also means VMware faces unprecedented amounts of competition in the virtual-anything markets. The runway ahead is both long and bumpy.

Virtual networking

"Our network virtualization platform, VMware NSX, gained significant momentum in Q2. Being in the [software-defined networking] market for only two years and only since October with NSX, we are pleased to say that our networking business is now at a greater than $100 million total annual sales run rate with currently over 150 paying customers and traction across all geographies and verticals.

"We are closing key architectural wins as customers look to transform their networking operations, in a similar way they did with compute to the use of vSphere and server virtualization. As we look to move beyond the first hundred customers to the next thousand, we are broadening the NSX sales channel through the addition of NSX to VMware's price list, and increased channel-enabling activities.

"This is a decade-plus opportunity for VMware. Contrary to what you may have heard from other vendors, this momentum is real and traction is occurring right now. Our customers are embracing our NSX solution, not only as a network virtualization platform but as a network security one as well."

-- Carl Eschenbach, VMware president and COO

"Decade-plus opportunities" are exactly what long-term investors are looking for. If software-defined networking, often shortened to SDN, can deliver on Eschenbach's growth promises, VMware will have another rock-solid business platform for the long haul.

However, this proposed growth driver has its fair share of critics, too. Last year, Cisco Systems CEO John Chambers took a direct shot at VMware's SDN business in a Barron's interview.

"Nobody has proven [VMware's SDN unit] Nicira can scale," he told reporter Tiernan Ray. "How many do they have in production? Very, very little. Less than $10 million in revenue."

One year later, Eschenbach wants to debunk Chambers' old criticism as VMware SDN sales have multiplied to a $100 million annual run rate.

Source: Cisco.

This town is big enough for the two of us

"What customers are seeing is the power of the software-defined data center strategy. Use cases like microsegmentation really show the power of this approach, things that literally cannot be achieved by any other approach, delivering radical improvements in the security of applications and east-west traffic flow efficiencies.

"That said, we love Cisco gear. We don't need them to lose and many NSX customers are using it. So we really see this as an opportunity for customers to take advantage of a new network virtualization technology, and we are out to win in that game and do it on the best gear that's available in the industry."

-- Gelsinger

Even so, VMware doesn't mind sharing the stage with Cisco. The IT equipment market is large enough to keep many rivals in circulation. And it's always better to provide great performance when hooked up to other vendors' equipment than it is to lock everything down to your own exclusive solutions.

IT buyers can smell those lockdowns from a mile away. Gelsinger would rather focus his energies on winning in the open market than on throwing dirt at competitors like Cisco. It's the right thing to do from so many perspectives.

Hidden sales strength

"Total unearned revenue ended the quarter at $4.39 billion, up 22% from Q2 2013. Of this, $1.68 billion is long term, up 23% year over year.

"As expected, approximately 88% of our unearned revenues will be recognized ratably over future quarters. The unearned revenue mix is in line with prior periods, and is primarily a reflection of our strong support business. It's important to note that the participation in renewal rates for our support business remains high and the customers enjoy significant ongoing value from VMware, including all future product updates and upgrades.

"In effect, this model has a great combination of perpetual license business with the ongoing revenues and cash flows associated with the subscription, the future upgrades and updates."

-- Jonathan Chadwick, VMware CFO

Unearned revenue is growing quicker than generally accepted accounting principles sales, which rose 18% year over year in the second quarter.

This means that many VMware customers are prepaying for long-term support and service contracts. VMware collects the cash up front, but can't claim these payments as GAAP revenue until the related products and services have been delivered.

In other words, VMware is building up a growing platform of guaranteed revenue in upcoming quarters and fiscal years, where the cash has already been collected. It's great for sales visibility, and a hallmark of companies whose customers are loyal for the long haul.

Going big in the Far East

"We continue to rapidly expand the global footprint of our vCloud Hybrid Service. Last week I was joined by Ken Miyauchi, CEO at SoftBank, to announce a joint venture in Japan, which launches our first vCloud Hybrid Service in Asia. The service will go live in Q4 and is already available as a private beta.

"I was also joined by Yang Jie, General Manager of China Telecom 's cloud computing branch, to announce a partnership for China Telecom to provide hybrid cloud services for the China market be available in early 2015."

-- Gelsinger

The other hot product in VMware's arsenal is the vCloud private cloud platform.

Elsewhere in the same call, Eschenbach noted that roughly half of the company's enterprise license agreements contain a vCloud element. Gelsinger also clarified that vCloud is a big deal in every market, with 4,000 resale partners on tap by the end of 2014. VMware cloud services will then be available in more than 75% of the global cloud market.

The Asian expansion is a critical element in this expansion of VMware's private and hybrid cloud services. If anything, I'm shocked to see the Chinese and Japanese introductions arriving this late. It's only a matter of time before China outgrows the world-leading American economy, with IT equipment markets sure to follow suit.

CalAmp investors finally found reason to cheer in a year filled with disappointment on Monday afternoon. The connectivity specialist came through with better-than-expected earnings for the second quarter of its 2015 fiscal year, reporting revenue of $59.2 million and adjusted EPS of $0.21 after previously nudging its own guidance for this quarter down to a range of $57 million to $61 million in revenue and $0.17 to $0.21 in EPS. Wall Street responded to that guidance by recalibrating its consensus at $59 million in revenue and $0.17 in EPS, so the bottom-line beat is particularly positive.

CalAmp continues its recent tendency to guide Wall Street's expectations lower, but there is at least a silver lining in its full-year projections. The company anticipates that the third quarter of fiscal 2015 will result in revenue in the $61 million to $65 million range, with adjusted EPS ranging from $0.21 to $0.25. The midpoint of both guidance ranges both fall below Wall Street's consensus for $65.2 million in revenue and $0.24 in EPS for the third quarter. However, full-year guidance now calls for revenue to range from $250 million to $255 million, producing adjusted EPS in the range of $0.88 to $0.94. This is roughly in line with analyst expectations  for $253 million in revenue and $0.91 in EPS for the full year.

Let's take a look at CalAmp's recent progress, and see how both its current and upcoming quarters look in comparison to prior periods.

Sources: CalAmp quarterly filings.
* Q3 2015 (in blue) shows the midpoint of CalAmp's guidance for that quarter.

After several years of rapid top-line growth, it appears that CalAmp hit a wall going into the 2015 fiscal year that it may not fully climb past until the 2016 fiscal year begins. The midpoint of its third-quarter guidance projects a slight decline in revenue from the year-ago quarter, which is a bit concerning in light of the fact that CalAmp's top line barely grew at all in this quarter.

Sources: CalAmp quarterly filings.
* Q3 2015 (in blue) shows the midpoint of CalAmp's guidance for that quarter.

One likely explanation is that CalAmp is becoming almost entirely reliant on its Wireless Datacom segment, but its other major segment (Satellite) has lost a lot of revenue over the past year. Wireless Datacom grew 6% year-over-year to reach $50.2 million in revenue for the second quarter, but this only managed to offset continued weakness in the company's Satellite segment, which dropped 22% year-over-year to $9 million in revenue.

Source: CalAmp earnings report.

Investors seem encouraged by CalAmp's full-year guidance and thus willing to overlook what's likely to be an underwhelming third quarter.Perhaps they should be: based upon CalAmp's own projections, the fourth quarter should see revenue of roughly $71.3 million with $0.28 in EPS, and both would be record high financial results for the company.

CalAmp seems poised to rise on its relationship with Caterpillar , the "heavy equipment OEM customer" company executives highlighted in the report as likely to contribute up to $10 million in second-half revenue. Caterpillar will thus become a significant driver of CalAmp's short-term growth, but this reliance on major customers tends to make CalAmp's earnings rather chunky. Investors should continue to keep an eye out for reports of other large deals, as a broader range of major customers will be essential to CalAmp as it attempts to move from the sidelines to center stage as the Internet of Things takes shape.

Intel is known for having some of the world's most advanced chip manufacturing technology. Until recently, it has kept this technology to itself, using it to build its own PC and server chips. However, over the last year or so, Intel has become much more willing to enter the contract chip manufacturing business.

That being said, Intel has made clear that it doesn't want to run a general purpose foundry, but instead wants to selectively take on customers -- specifically those willing to pay for the value Intel believes it brings to the table with its technology.

I think one such candidate might be the company that designs the main chip inside of GoPro cameras, Ambarella .

Ambarella is a high gross margin, performance-sensitive company
From what I can tell, the characteristics of a good foundry customer for Intel are the following:

• High gross margin profile
• Performance/power sensitive
• Fairly low volumes

Ambarella certainly seems to fit the bill. The company's gross margin profile has been consistently above 60%, and management has been open about trying to transition to the latest-and-greatest manufacturing technologies.

In fact, during a number of Ambarella's recent earnings conference calls, management has signaled that the company has begun work on chips that will be built on 14-nanometer technology, which suggests Ambarella derives value from using leading-edge chip manufacturing technology.

Finally, since Intel Custom Foundry is still fairly new, I expect lower-volume customers will be the name of the game early on, with higher-volume customers coming in as Intel proves this operation. Ambarella's cost of goods sold totaled approximately $57 million during fiscal 2014, with a large chunk of that likely going to the company's chip manufacturing partner, Samsung Electronics , which I would say is relatively low volume as far as foundry clients go.

In other words, I think this could be a really good match.

Would Intel aggressively go after this business?
Getting a chipmaker like Ambarella to desert its current manufacturing partner for a new collaboration obviously requires significant technical effort for all involved. Ambarella would need to work closely with Intel to move its chip designs to Intel's technology. To make the transition less painful, Intel would probably need to dedicate serious engineering resources to help Ambarella make the switch.

The question, then, is whether Intel would even be interested.

The Ambarella opportunity is more or less a rounding error for Intel, financially. However, such a deal would enable Intel to gain exposure to some adjacent businesses that it doesn't current play in (it's unlikely that Intel would be interested in directly competing with Ambarella). It would also put revenue in Intel's pockets that thus would not go to its competitors.

Foolish takeaway
At this time, few Intel foundry customers have been announced. However, Intel management seems to think this is a business worth investing in over the long term. This, at least to me, means the company is in some serious discussions with a number of potential customers.

I think Ambarella could be a very interesting fit for Intel's foundry ambitions, but only time will tell if such a hookup actually materializes.

In Hawaii, electricity costs $0.38 per kilowatt hour, almost three times the national average. Solar power, which costs as much as $0.30 per kilowatt hour is a bargain in comparison. However, in Ohio where power costs around $0.14 per kilowatt hour, roughly the U.S. average, solar doesn't compete nearly as well. So it's no wonder solar projects fell off a cliff when Ohio passed Senate Bill 310.

A little help
Solar power is increasingly affordable and, thus, increasingly viable as an alternative for homeowners and businesses. However, it isn't cheap enough to compete with utilities in most areas just yet. And it isn't cheap to put up, either. For example, in Los Angeles, installing a solar panel on your roof would cost around $0.11 per kilowatt (note that this is not the cost of buying solar power, it's the cost of putting a panel on your roof). However take out government incentives and your price jumps over 40% to $0.19 per kilowatt.

(Source: ReubenGBrewer, via Wikimedia Commons)

And there are huge variations depending on where the solar is being installed. Just a short way up the coast in Seattle, the cost is $0.17 per kilowatt after incentives and $0.29 before — roughly 40% higher again. In other words, solar is getting a lot of help from the government. And that goes beyond the financial space; around 40 states have mandates for renewable power in some form.

That puts electric utilities in the hot seat to either invest in solar or help customers invest in it, whether they want to or not. And that's a problem since the National Renewable Energy Laboratory estimates that solar won't be competitive with utility supplied power until as late as 2025. In other words, utilities are being asked to push solar even though it costs them less to run their current power plant fleets.

The big 310
That's why in a place like Hawaii where power is so expensive (the state relies heavily on imported oil) solar is expanding faster than Hawaiian Electric Industries can tie installations to the grid. In fact, it looks like many customers aren't even bothering to tell the utility that they've put solar on their rooftops. It's just not the same in Ohio, where SB310 put a freeze on the state's renewable power mandates until 2017.

(Source: ReubenGBrewer, via Wikimedia Commons)

Subsequent to that bill, solar power installations went from a rate of about 1 megawatt per month to just around 100 kilowatts. Look out below, that's a 90% drop! And the market for solar renewable energy credits, which can be used in lieu of building solar for utilities, has dried up, too.

That's music to the ears of some market players, like FirstEnergy and American Electric Power , which operate in the state. However it shows just how vulnerable solar power is to such shifts in government largess. And SB 310 wasn't the only win for renewable power opponents, House Bill 483, signed after SB 310, made it harder to build wind farms by materially increasing the distance required between a property line and a wind turbine. Clearly, there's a push in the state to slow down on the renewable power front, and it's working.

Solar's not dead yet
Solar power is still growing fast, there's no question about it. SolarCity's massive customer growth of over 100% a year since 2009 is proof positive of that. And it projects annual customer growth of 70% through mid-2018, which is notably lower but hardly a number to complain about.

But Ohio's move is worthy of note. Not only does it show that there's a push back against renewable power, but that without government support renewable sources like solar could quickly stall. That may never be an issue in supportive states like California, but it's something worth watching if you're investing in solar power companies. If Ohio's push back becomes a wider trend, the solar industry could come face to face with a notable headwind.

Source: Flickr/IQRemix.

This NHL season, you'll be able to experience hockey from a whole new perspective -- the players'. The NHL is teaming up with GoPro to provide footage of certain plays from the perspective of goalies and stick handlers. The one caveat is the footage won't come from in-game situations. The footage will be shot during practice, used for promotions, and interspersed with live broadcasts so color commentators can explain plays better.

GoPro benefits from the partnership, as well. It gets to keep the rights to the footage for its growing YouTube channel, and each time the NHL uses its footage, it's a televised advertisement for its products. If GoPro can continue to make partnerships with sports leagues, it could build up a very valuable library of content from professional athletes at relatively little cost.

Shot on goal
The deal between the NHL and GoPro isn't groundbreaking. It's a nice win for GoPro, but ultimately, it's not a game changer. It's a good demonstration of the potential for GoPro, though.

Mainstream sports have been experimenting with camera placements for years. In the late '90s, Fox introduced us to the Catcher-Cam, giving us an inside look at an inside fastball. We've also seen in-car cams in NASCAR. These are features that GoPro cameras are particularly suited for, and there's clearly a desire for them from broadcasters.

The NHL is only America's fifth most popular sports league after the NFL, NBA, MLB, and NASCAR. With cameras designed to take a beating, GoPro is well-suited for the NFL, NASCAR, and NHL. It's not unrealistic, though, to think that GoPro could make a deal with every major sports league to use its cameras in at least a similar manner to the NHL.

That would give GoPro a lot of high-quality content. GoPro is largely a media company that monetizes its content through camera sales. As GoPro grows its video catalog, it plans to find new ways of monetizing its content.

Finding the back of the net
Making the jump to in-game footage presents a more difficult task. Players aren't going to wear a camera if it detracts from performance. Working with the leagues is key to getting footage from games.

The cameras don't have to be on players to provide interesting footage, though. For example, Major League Baseball umpires could wear cameras on their masks or their chests to get their perspective and truly capture the difficulty of calling balls and strikes. Pit crews could wear cameras to capture pit stops better.

If GoPro can continue to shrink its cameras and make them lighter weight, or design cameras in conjunction with equipment makers -- like a hockey stick cam -- it could get some interesting footage.

In a world with dozens of cameras in players' equipment, or key parts of the field, sports leagues and GoPro could offer fans a much more personalized viewing experience. Say you only want to follow your favorite player, you could elect to watch a stream of the game from his perspective. This could be one way for GoPro to monetize its content.

The future of sports broadcasts
The NHL is a good start for GoPro. For the cost of a few cameras, GoPro picks up some excellent content. But GoPro should be able to push deeper into mainstream sports.

Even if it does nothing more than get the rights to a few practice sessions of all the major sports, that's some of the best content it could wish for. For one, it's exclusive to GoPro and the sports league. None of GoPro's competitors has access to professional athletes like that. Second, it's tremendously popular; if people are clicking on YouTube videos of amateurs, think how many more will watch pros.

Developing relationships with sports leagues now sets GoPro up for more deals with them in the future. If GoPro is able to develop unobtrusive wearable or equipment-embedded cameras, it may find more success getting them in players' hands if it's had support from the leagues in the past. Then it can work with the leagues to monetize the footage, as well.

The deal with the NHL may be just the start.

For the second quarter of 2014, The Container Store posted negative same-store sales and only slight revenue growth, causing its shares to drop more than 10% in after-hours trading Monday. There was no mention of a "retail funk" this time around, but CEO Kip Tindell stressed his high expectations for the upcoming holiday season instead of dwelling on sluggish sales trends.

Digging a little deeper into the earnings bin, here's what stood out in the latest quarter:

1. Still some funk in the financials

It's evident that a rebound has yet to occur in terms of The Container Store's foot traffic. Management expected to see flat-to-positive comps, but instead the slump continued. Same-store sales were down 0.4% year-over-year, a modest improvement against the first-quarter's 0.8% drop.

Negative comps put a lid on revenue growth, but the company did post a profit for the first time as a public company. Here's a high-level look at some key financial results:

• Net sales of $193.2 million, up 5.2%
• Consolidated gross margin of 58.8%, up 40bps
• Adjusted net income was $5.1 million versus $3.7 million last year

It's hard for investors to get too excited about single-digit growth at a newly minted public company. For perspective, revenue growth of 5.2% is well below the first-quarter's increase of 8.6% and the company's 3-year average of 9.58%.

Looking ahead, guidance was also revised downward. Management expects "flat-to-down" comps in the third quarter and "low to mid-single digit" comps in the fourth quarter. Previous guidance envisioned positive same-store sales in the latter half of the year.

2. Profit margins are a mainstay for now

Container Store boasts some of the highest margins in the retail business, and this was one aspect that remained resilient. The company's gross margin increased 40 basis points year-over-year to 58.8%, an indication that pricing power remains intact.

Management also noted that its rewards program, POP! or "Perfectly Organized Perks," reached 1 million enrollments in less than a few months, and 50% of store sales are derived from POP! Star members. High-frequency customers account for the lion's share of Container Store's sales, and they tend to be the most profitable audience as well. As we pointed out before, this will be a lever The Container Store can pull on to increase engagement, traffic, and profit margins down the road.

3. It's all about the buzzer beater

While we're only halfway through the fiscal year, The Container Store seems to have its sights set on the upcoming holiday season. Tindell says, for better or worse, selling storage solutions is akin to a basketball game, and it all boils down to fourth-quarter performance.

This is when The Container Store's annual elfa sale drives foot traffic, and it also happens to be a period that was deeply affected by last year's volatile winter weather patterns. Weather permitting, comps should benefit due to lackluster prior-year results.

Management expects 70% of earnings to come in the fourth quarter, up from a typical level of 60%. Meanwhile, the company will benefit from two new rollouts by year's end: Contained Home services (formerly known as "ATHOME") and TCS Closets. Both of these organizational services are expected to reach every store by the end of 2015, indicating that early sales have been up to snuff. What's more, the average ticket price on TCS Closets is expected to be "much more than the $2,000 average ticket" for the Contained Home service.

The takeaway for investors

The Container Store is more than halfway through its rookie season as a public company, but it has yet to work out all of the kinks in its game. Store growth remains on-track for a 12% square footage increase, but the market is yearning for better comps and top-line performance. After an uninspiring string of results, investors are hoping that management delivers a slam-dunk in the fourth quarter.

NFL fans will get eight more years of Sunday Ticket. Source: DirecTV.

NFL fans stuck in a two-year contract with DirecTV can breathe easy after the satellite TV provider struck a new deal with the NFL for its Sunday Ticket package. The NFL's price tag continues to increase, though, and some DirecTV investors may worry that $12 billion over eight years might be a little pricey for such a niche product.

But sports have quickly become the last bastion of live television, and the NFL is by far the most popular of all the major sports. Perhaps more important to investors, though, is that the deal means AT&T no longer has the option to back out of the acquisition offer it made earlier this year. The removal of that risk caused DirecTV's stock price to rise, but what does the Sunday Ticket deal mean for the next eight years of DirecTV's operations?

Only a 50% price increase. What a deal!
DirecTV's previous contract with the NFL was worth about $1 billion per year over four years. The new deal has DirecTV paying $1.5 billion per year, a 50% increase. That's actually a pretty good deal if you compare it to recent contract negotiations between the NFL, Twenty-First Century Fox, CBS , Comcast's NBC, and Disney's ESPN.

What's more, the NFL just sold CBS half its slate of Thursday Night games, which it had kept for its own NFL Network in previous seasons. CBS paid the NFL more than $34 million per game.

Even with the rapid price increases coming from the NFL, DirecTV was able to keep its costs under control. In fact, the $12 billion deal was better than expected. The new contract averages out to a 6% annual increase in programming costs. Overall, DirecTV expects programming costs to increase 7% to 9% during the next few years. The extra room provided by its centerpiece and most costly content gives DirecTV room to negotiate with other content companies.

Is it really worth it?
The NFL hasn't made it easy on DirecTV in recent years. Not only is it charging high prices for the rights to Sunday Ticket, it's offering its own competitive services -- like the RedZone channel -- which offers commercial free in-game looks at every NFL game, all Sunday afternoon. The NFL offers the channel on most major cable providers, and it costs about $10 per month. The move forced DirecTV to reduce the price of Sunday Ticket ahead of the 2012 season from starting at $335 to $199.

Of DirecTV's 20 million U.S. subscribers, only about 2 million have the Sunday Ticket package. DirecTV is expanding its audience to college students living in dorms and apartment dwellers with online streaming packages, and the new deal likely has wireless streaming rights with AT&T in mind, but those numbers are negligible right now. Those 2 million subscribers are only generating $400 million to $600 million in subscription fees per year.

In order to break even on its Sunday Ticket deal, DirecTV needs to generate about $1 billion per year in advertising during the games. That might be asking a lot. Take a look at the expected and historical ad rates from NBC, CBS, and ESPN.

*Estimates based on CBS's asking price and guaranteed cumulative.

What's worth noting here is that ESPN has a much smaller reach compared to NBC, and its ad prices reflect that. DirecTV's reach is even smaller, however, with 2 million subscribers. An aggressive estimate of its average ad rate might be $50,000. I'd think it's much lower considering not all 2 million subscribers can watch every game at the same time, so the actual audience per game is lower. But at that rate, DirecTV would be able to break even on its Sunday Ticket contract.

A great loss leader
Investors shouldn't fret. Even if DirecTV is losing money on its deal with the NFL, and it certainly seems that way, it draws in new subscribers, and keeps them around. Without an exclusive deal with the NFL, those 2 million subscribers may look elsewhere for pay TV.

Indeed, those 2 million Sunday Ticket subscribers are getting subsidized by the 18 million non-subscribers in the U.S. Overall, that makes the whole deal profitable for DirecTV.

From the way the stock of DryShips is trading lately, you might think all of its ships have hit an iceberg. With the stock falling further and further to new 52-week lows, it may be tempting to try to pick a bottom and ride it back up. However, as cheap as DryShips may look now, here are three reasons it may get even cheaper.

Reason 1: Blame the bigger guy
I've said it or at least implied it before, and I'll do it again: DryShips stock is going nowhere unless its wholly owned and public subsidiary Ocean Rig UDW cooperates. Since DryShips owns 78.3 million shares of Ocean Rig, every penny that Ocean Rig's stock goes down lowers the fundamental value of DryShips materially.

With Ocean Rig itself drifting down to new 52-week lows, it's only hurting that asset value and the perception of value that is DryShips stock. All other things being equal, if Ocean Rig continues to plunge, it will inevitably take DryShips stock down with it.

George Economou, CEO of both companies, complained in Ocean Rig's last earnings report, "We continue to see some softness in the market as several units are coming off contract and certain uncontracted newbuilds are being delivered." In addition, as a contractor of offshore deepwater drilling services, there may be market concern that falling oil prices lately will eventually lead to a reduction in offshore deepwater serve demand.

Reason 2: Speaking of low oil prices ...
Low fuel prices are a double-whammy for DryShips. Not only does it hurt the fundamental perception of deepwater drilling, but it also hurts the shipping market DryShips is in. According to Peter Sand, chief shipping analyst of the Baltic and International Maritime Council, high fuel prices lead to "slow steaming" to maximize fuel economy. Cheap fuel prices lead to faster-moving ships, which effectively raise the global supply for shipping at a moment's notice.

Considering Sand estimates that the global fleet is already oversupplied by between 20% and 25%, the last thing companies like DryShips need is that even more supply problems depress rates. Since DryShips stock trades often based on rates (when its Ocean Rig stake is trading flat), even lower rates mean DryShips stock could fall even lower.

Reason 3: Three times isn't always a charm
DryShips will probably announce its third-quarter results in early November. Analysts expect it to report EPS of $0.04, but that is only as the results are reported mixed in with Ocean Rig. On a stand-alone basis, the dry shipping business probably performed terribly and may cause even this mixed estimate to miss badly, as the analysts didn't adjust their numbers while the shipping rates during the quarter remained softer than expectations and lacked the normal seasonal upswing in September.

DryShips' strategy during the third quarter couldn't have been in a weaker position, either. Anticipating a red-hot market since at least back in a March interview, Economou positioned the vast DryShips Panamax fleet to operate predominantly based on daily spot prices, with the expectation that these would rise to rates much higher than fixed-rate contracts would provide.

Long story short, a disappointing grain season in South America and some stockpiling by farmers scared of their currencies resulted in a much weaker than expected export season. Brazilian exports of iron ore failed to fill the larger Capesize ships, so there was no spillover effect into the Panamax. The result was terrible rates particularly for Panamax ships, which will result in bad numbers from DryShips come November. If the market doesn't like what it sees or the outlook given, DryShips stock could be seen plunging further downward.

As much as I'd love to analyze the earnings results and conference calls from different quarters of 2014, Hertz Global Holdings still hasn't reported any. Normally, that in and of itself would be a red flag of epic proportions, but here are three basic reasons the stock price could still step on the gas and drive uphill anyway.

Reason 1: Uncertainty is worse than bad news
Hertz's is currently undergoing accounting work to restate certain errors and audit reviews dating back to 2011. While it's highly doubtful that whatever changes come out of it has any effect on cash flow, the market has always hated uncertainty, especially when the consequence is a delay in more current 2014 results.  Investors are investing in Hertz with somewhat of a partial blindfold on.

Hertz hasn't given a hard date of when it can expect to be caught up on its financials, so either the financials themselves or at least guidance for same could theoretically come literally any day. With financials come certainty, and with certainty the potential pool of investors widens.

As an example of uncertainty getting priced in, competitor Avis Budget Group trades with a P/E of around 14 based on analyst estimates for fiscal 2015. Meanwhile, Hertz trades with a cheaper P/E of 12 based on estimates for the same timeframe, despite having higher growth expectations based on both revenue and sales. A return to certainty may result in a higher trading multiple, assuming analysts remain confident in their figures.

Reason 2: Icon Carl Icahn
Whenever billionaire hedge-fund manager and activist Carl Icahn seemingly falls from the sky and gets directly involved in a big name like Hertz, it's rarely a bad sign. He doesn't use the term "activist" lightly. In a filing on Aug. 20, Icahn and his Icahn Enterprises revealed that it acquired an 8.48% stake in Hertz. The filing stated, in part:

The Reporting Persons acquired their positions in the Shares in the belief that they were undervalued. The Reporting Persons intend to have discussions with representatives of the Issuer's management and board of directors relating to shareholder value, accounting issues, operational failures, underperformance relative to its peers and the Reporting Persons' lack of confidence in management. The Reporting Persons may also seek shareholder board representation if appropriate.

At the time of the filing, the stock was over $30 per share and now sits under $24. Icahn has since won the board seats he wanted in a definitive agreement with Hertz. What's next on Icahn's possibly secret agenda is anybody's guess beyond improving the company in the ways listed, but quite often he strives for a buyout at a substantial premium, and also quite often he gets his wish.

Reason 3: Fill 'er up for less
Real simple: Cheap gas means more travel and more demand for rental cars, since most car rentals are done at airports. Not only does cheaper fuel inevitably lead to cheap airline tickets, but the perception of affordability for travel also improves.

Oil prices are now firmly under $100 per barrel and actually under $90 at the time of this writing. As a result, gas prices are now at a four-year low and could be dropping further. Lower oil and gas prices should help provide fuel to lift Hertz, Avis Budget Group, and the stocks of others in their industry.

Another factor to keep in mind with cheap gas is that the temptation is far higher to upgrade to that gas-guzzling $80-per-day SUV rather than sticking with the discount $15 to $25 fuel-efficient car. According to Neil Abrams of Abrams Consulting Group, $4 gas beats up the demand for SUV rental. It stands to reason, then, that the discount at the pump will help lift average ticket sales, and profits at Hertz could act as a catalyst for upward stock price movement.