Unlike many of their developed market peers, U.S. stocks finally found their footing today, in the wake of the conclusion of the Fed's FOMC policy meeting on Wednesday. The S&P 500 , and the narrower, price-weighted Dow Jones Industrial Average both finished the day up 0.3%. That was hardly enough to undo the damage wrought over the previous two days; on the week, the S&P 500 lost 2.1% -- the fourth week of losses in the past five.

But let's put that loss into some perspective: While we have only witnessed one weekly decline that was larger this year, if we go back to Jan. 1950, we find that:

• The S&P 500 fell during 43% of all calendar weeks in that time period.
• Furthermore, among the losing weeks, roughly one in four produced a greater loss than the one we experience this week.

The CBOE Volatility Index (VIX) , Wall Street's "fear index," declined 7.8% from the year-to-date high it achieved yesterday. Investors are still jittery at the thought of a near-term "roll-back" of the Fed's bond-buying program. At 18.90, the VIX remains elevated by recent standards, although, here again, it's instructive to seek some historical context. On that basis, today's closing figure is not particularly high; in fact, it's below the average daily closing value of the index from its inception in Jan. 1990, which stands at 20.3. (The VIX is calculated from S&P 500 option prices, and reflects investor expectations for stock market volatility over the coming 30 days.)

Instead of obsessing over daily changes in the index, investors would be better off listening to billionaire value investor Ron Baron, who, in an email to CNBC yesterday night, wrote "don't worry" about the volatility sparked by the Fed's new guidelines regarding its bond purchases, adding that he "doesn't think turbulence will last."

Mind you, he isn't a raging bull, either; he estimates it will take something like "nine or 10 years for [the] market" to double from its current level, while adding that "maybe it's five or six for us." Apparently, despite the rise of low-cost index ETFs, there are still investors who believe in the value of stock picking.

I don't like Qihoo 360 , but I do realize when a company is here to stay.

If you've followed Qihoo over the past year, you may have heard how it seems to be more of a marketing company with inferior products rather than a serious tech competitor. Well, once you read its most recent earnings report, you may change your mind like I did. The fact is, Qihoo seems to be making profitable strides in the search market.

Before you invest in China's tech scene, here's how to think about Qihoo's long-term prospects.

Why I did not and do not like Qihoo
I've written two articles about Qihoo's poor copy-cat products and six  "anti-competitive" marketing tactics before. To get you up to speed, let me recap a few key points.

(1) Qihoo's flagship anti-virus software essentially rates your computer as less "safe" if you haven't downloaded the company's 360 Browser. (2) In addition, the company prevents you from installing competitors' software by noting (fake) incompatibility.

While you may think this isn't a big deal, the Chinese government does. In February, it issued a public statement reprimanding Qihoo and warning it to stop. As Beijing doesn't seem to have issued any other statement, Qihoo seems to have stopped.

Although this could be a sign that Qihoo has changed, I don't think the company has. It seems embedded into Qihoo's DNA to skirt fair competition.

As far back as 2008 -- three years after the company's founding -- Qihoo decided that it would play the game differently. When transitioning into the browser space, Qihoo essentially stole Microsoft's Internet Explorer logo -- by simply adding a touch of green. Basically, the company was trying to trick users to download the 360 Browser.

Nonetheless, there are positives worth acknowledging about Qihoo's stock prospects.

How Qihoo is taking on Baidu
In its recent earnings report, Qihoo is estimated to have raked in $6 million from search advertising. This may seem small given that some reports say that Qihoo has about 12% of the search market, but you have to recognize two things.

First, Google is taking a cut of Qihoo's search revenue. Back on January 18, Google and Qihoo reached a sales agreement whereby Qihoo can use Google's ad platform to help sell some ads. In turn, Google receives a share of the revenue.

Second, Qihoo is taking in so little money because they're probably undercutting Baidu with cheaper ads. Last November, Qihoo CEO Zhou Hongyi said that he hopes to capture 15% to 20% of China's search market. So far, the company seems like it will soon hit that mark. In just a year, the company went from 0% to 12%. However, to push it farther, Qihoo will need incoming revenues to fund its growth. Given that the company has entered this space only recently, charging advertising partners less will help the company keep ahead of rivals like Sohu's Sogou and Baidu, which are in third place with 8% and in first place with 70% of the search market, respectively (according to CNZZ via Tech In Asia).

Put together, Qihoo's partnership and pricing tactics may be what it needs as search undergoes a shift to mobile. Since not even Baidu has figured out the mobile market yet, Qihoo has entered at an opportune time. If Qihoo can continue to accelerate its search presence, then this may be the beginning of the end for Baidu.

Is it time to buy Qihoo?
While Qihoo has proven that it's here to stay, that doesn't necessarily mean that this is the best time to buy. I still have qualms about the company's product quality -- and you should, too. Until the company can show that it can build a better search engine and not simply grow by partnerships and pricing, I would hesitate to invest, especially since the stock is still trading at all-time highs.

Next Tuesday, Carnival will release its latest quarterly results. Yet, investors already have a pretty good idea just how challenging a quarter this will turn out to be, and they're right to be concerned about how the company plans to address the many issues that have plagued the cruise-ship operator lately.

Carnival is one of the largest companies in the cruise industry, with its Princess, Holland America, and Seabourn lines operating alongside its namesake Carnival ships in North America. Yet, the company also has an extensive operation around the world, with hotels and tourist transportation complementing its cruise offerings. Let's take an early look at what's been happening with Carnival over the past quarter, and what we're likely to see in its quarterly report.

Stats on Carnival

Source: Yahoo! Finance.

Will Carnival's earnings sink or swim this quarter?
In recent months, analysts have slashed their estimates on Carnival's earnings. Calls for the May quarter have fallen by nearly half, and a more-than-20% decline for full-year fiscal 2013 reflects negative sentiment following some unfortunate situations for the company.

Carnival has already let investors know that they should be prepared for rough seas ahead. A month ago, Carnival cut its earnings guidance for the full year, cutting its earnings-per-share range by $0.35, to $0.45.

Most people are familiar with the tragedies behind that negative guidance. Carnival has suffered several major problems with its cruise ships, with an engine fire in February leaving its Carnival Triumph vessel with only emergency power and no propulsion for days. Carnival had to have food and water transferred from other vessels, leaving passengers in uncomfortable conditions. Then, in March, the Carnival Dream suffered a generator problem that forced the early termination of the voyage. Followed by news of passengers falling overboard from its Carnival Spirit ship in May, Carnival has seen its credibility hit especially hard.

Carnival isn't the only company facing problems, as a ship from rival Royal Caribbean also suffered a fire last month. But at this point, mishaps from any operator are bad news for the whole industry. In addition to refunds and discounts, Carnival has had to cut prices and offer promotions generally, in order to entice traffic onto its ships. That will likely lead to price wars among the two companies as well as Disney's cruise division, and newly public Norwegian Cruise Line.

In Carnival's quarterly report, watch for the latest about what steps the company is taking to ensure the quality of its fleet. With so much bad news for the company, it's critical for Carnival to get in front of a potential public-relations disaster to the greatest extent possible.

Click here to add Carnival to My Watchlist, which can find all of our Foolish analysis on it and all your other stocks.

Say goodbye to Cinderella and Snow White. Thanks to superheroes and Jedi Knights, Walt Disney stock has never before reached such heights.

Officially, the shares touched an all-time high of $67.89 a share on May 16 -- not even two weeks after Iron Man 3 took the box office by storm. The film has since passed the billion-dollar mark in gross receipts worldwide, leaving fans clamoring to get Robert Downey Jr. back for a fourth go as the Armored Avenger. Mix in theme parks, ESPN, ABC, and a new Star Wars film with $2 billion potential and Disney starts to look like one of the great growth stocks of the next several years.

But investing is also a game best played in context. How does Disney stock compare to peers Time Warner and News Corp. ? Here's what the numbers say:

Sources: S&P Capital IQ, Yahoo! Finance.

And here's what Fools say, going by the data available in our CAPS investor intelligence database:

Source: Motley Fool CAPS.

Disney, at five stars, is easily the top-rated stock of the bunch. The company's $40 billion licensing machine deserves at least some of the credit.

"Disney has always had the Midas touch when it comes to merchandising and with Star Wars and Marvel, the possibilities are endless," writes CAPS investor Scribblesink. "Look for Disney to bring in an amazing profit on their merchandising in the future. And let's not forget Pixar -- yes, Disney will outperform."

Fool pramathmalik adds that Disney has a "unique position" in the content business, and as a result, "huge monetization potential." I agree.

Verdict: Disney stock is a buy
Skeptics will note the huge run-up in Disney shares as a signal to hold off on buying. I'm not so sure. Yes, the stock trades for a premium at nearly 20 times earnings, but Star Wars is one of the top-earning film franchises of all time. And while Marvel has enjoyed two consecutive billion-dollar hits, remember we're still at the beginning of "phase 2" of the development of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. At least three phases are planned.

Will the House of Mouse's big-name entertainment properties provide enough cheese for investors? Let us know what you think of Disney's fantastical franchises, and whether you'd buy, sell, or short Disney stock at current prices, using the comments box below.

Google is in trouble over Street View, again.

Three years after admitting that its horizontal mapping service has indeed been accidentally collecting "fragmentary" personal data, such as email addresses and computer passwords, in the course of taking pictures for Google Maps, Google got served with an enforcement notice by the United Kingdom's Information Commissioner's Office Friday.

According to the ICO, Google has been ordered "to delete the remaining payload data identified last year within the next 35 days and immediately inform the ICO if any further disks are found. Failure to abide by the notice will be considered as contempt of court, which is a criminal offence." The ICO action comes in response to Google's revelation last summer, that it had discovered a few more computer disks still in its possession, containing illicitly obtained information.

Google notes that it has never "accessed" or viewed the contents of the disks in question, nor published any of the data collected thereon. For these and other reasons, ICO says Google's culpability does not rise to the level where it deserves to be fined -- but it does deserve a stern warning, and that's exactly what ICO just issued.

A separate ICO investigation into whether Google's privacy policies comply with EU data protection legislation is still ongoing.

Every quarter, many money managers have to disclose what they've bought and sold, via "13F" filings. Their latest moves can shine a bright light on smart stock picks.

Today, let's look at the Eminence Capital hedge fund company, run by Ricky Sandler, who seeks growing companies in growing industries and out-of-favor companies and industries. He also likes to short stocks when he finds ones he expects will decline.

The company's reportable stock portfolio totaled $3.9 billion in value as of March 31, 2013.

Interesting developments
So what does Eminence Capital's latest quarterly 13F filing tell us? Here are a few interesting details:

The biggest new holdings are Chicago Bridge & Iron and Family Dollar. Chicago Bridge and Iron offers construction and engineering services to the energy and natural resources sectors, working on projects related to the water, hydrocarbon, and nuclear industries. It has been boosting its revenue growth rate lately, and its latest earnings report featured a $1.9 billion gain in awards, growing its hefty backlog to $25.5 billion. The company bought Shaw Group last year, which is known for constructing nuclear-related buildings. The stock is up 60% over the past year and has averaged annual growth of about 18.5% over the past decade. Analysts at Lazard Capital, which rate the stock a "buy," recently upped their price target for it from $65 to $75.

Among holdings in which Eminence Capital increased its stake was Qualcomm , which is a top player in the smartphone world, supplying iDevices and Android devices alike with its chips. Some promising moves by the company are its push into emerging markets and display technology, as well as its attention to the health-care industry and telemedicine. Qualcomm recently hiked its dividend by 40%, and its yield is now at 2.3%.

Eminence Capital reduced its stake in lots of companies, including IT consulting and outsourcing specialist Cognizant Technology Solutions , led by a highly rated CEO. Based in New Jersey, but with much of its operations based in India, home to other top outsourcers, Cognizant has been growing briskly, with its most recent quarter featuring double-digit revenue and earnings growth, and projections of continued double-digit growth by management. With a forward P/E of 12.8 well below its five-year average of 22.6, the stock seems attractively priced. Indeed, a director of the company, John E. Klein, recently bought nearly half a million dollars' worth of shares.

Finally, Eminence Capital's biggest closed positions included EMC and NetApp . Storage giant EMC has been tapping the bond market, borrowing $5.5 billion to help it repurchase close to 10% of its shares. It has also initiated a dividend, recently yielding 1.6%. Many see it poised to gain from the rapidly growing cloud-computing and "Big Data" arenas, and it holds an 80% ownership stake in virtualization specialist VMware, too. EMC has been posting strong numbers and, in many ways, outpacing its smaller rival NetApp.

NetApp, meanwhile, also yields 1.6% these days (via its own new dividend), and recently jumped in price on hopes that an activist investor might help the company's prospects. It has also announced layoffs, and boosted its share buyback plans -- though such share reduction can be offset by stock issuances for employees. The company recently posted disappointing revenue numbers, but it still looks attractive to some, in part due to strong free cash flow. There's also speculation that NetApp might end up acquired by another major data player, such as Oracle.

We should never blindly copy any investor's moves, no matter how talented the investor. But it can be useful to keep an eye on what smart folks are doing. Therefore, 13-F forms can be great places to find intriguing candidates for our portfolios.

Today Sprint Nextel  tomorrow the world. That is the message SoftBank CEO Masayoshi Son sent out Friday at his company's annual shareholder's meeting in Tokyo.

"I now say, we will become the world's biggest company -- by all measures, whether by sales, profit, or market cap," Son proclaimed, referring to the coup de grace that SoftBank appears to have administered to rival DISH Network this week.

SoftBank and DISH have been fighting over acquiring Sprint in a battle that has gone back and forth since the middle of April, but DISH threw in the towel after SoftBank raised its offer. In addition, Sprint then seemingly blew DISH's $4.40 a share bid for Clearwire out of contention with a SoftBank-supported $5.00 a share offer.

But Son's apparent gloating was leavened with a touch of reality. Wary of DISH chairman Charlie Ergen's legendary tenaciousness, Son did raise the possibility of DISH throwing something else into the pot before Sprint stockholders vote on SoftBank's proposal at their June 25 meeting.

"We don't know what could happen before the meeting," he told SoftBank shareholders.

If all goes according to SoftBank plans, the company will tout a combined SoftBank/Sprint mobile projected annual revenue stream of $25.6 billion, compared to Verizon's $28.7 billion, and China Mobile's $33.8 billion. China Mobile has over 700 million subscribers.

After DISH made its counteroffer for Sprint a little over two months ago, SoftBank had considered going after T-Mobile USA ). "We were faced with extremely difficult problem, since Dish could conceivably disrupt our plans," Son said.

If and when SoftBank and Sprint finally merge, we may then see DISH also seriously considering a T-Mobile takeover.

The 30-year goal for SoftBank, as presented at its stockholders' meeting, is to be among the world's top 10 companies in market capitalization. SoftBank is currently No. 113. The top 10 is now filled with companies like ExxonMobile, Apple, Google, and Microsoft.

Barring unforeseen circumstances (yet another DISH counteroffer, for example), SoftBank expects closing on its Sprint acquisition in early July. Just one more step toward Mr. Son and company's over-arching goal - to be No. 1, and not just in telecom.

Like a commuter caught in an early evening traffic jam, Dell stock is stuck under $13.65 a share. Investors don't believe Carl Icahn's $14 bid is serious, even if the fight between Icahn and Michael Dell is all that and more.

"Can you imagine a real estate broker running advertisements warning of termite danger in a house each time a prospective buyer seems interested?" Icahn wrote in an open letter to shareholders.

He's referring to a late March filing in which Dell described its prospects as bleak enough to require a total overhaul of the business, an overhaul best executed as a private entity. Who's right?

Let's address that question in context. Here's a by-the-numbers look at how Dell stock compares to peers Apple and Hewlett-Packard :

Sources: S&P Capital IQ and Yahoo! Finance.

And here's what Fools say, going by the data available in our CAPS investor intelligence database:

Source: Motley Fool CAPS.

Fools have expressed mixed views of the Dell's go-private plan for months. The last CAPS All-Star to weigh in abandoned the stock in April. "PC sales [fell off] much steeper than I expected," wrote Flygal5 in giving the stock a thumbs-down rating in CAPS. "I was wrong on this one, got to stop listening to Southeastern Asset Management."

Ouch! I'm not so sure Southeastern deserves such harsh criticism.

Verdict: Sell Dell stock now
And yet it's worth noting that Southeastern has sold half its stake in Dell to Icahn. Explaining the move in a statement to Businessweek, the firm said Icahn is  "in the best position" to lead the fight for a better offer. I suppose just saying "we have to move on" would have been too forward?

To be fair, those holding on are still due a dividend payment yielding 2.4% annualized. Dell also continues to partner with Oracle for serving data centers and other larger-size customers. There's plenty of life left in the business.

But can Icahn force a sale above $13.65 a share? I don't think so. Not with Southeastern moving to the sidelines. Do you agree? Let us know what you think of Icahn's chances, and whether you'd buy, sell, or short Dell stock at current prices, using the comments box below.

Investors love stocks that consistently beat the Street without getting ahead of their fundamentals and risking a meltdown. The best stocks offer sustainable market-beating gains, with robust and improving financial metrics that support strong price growth. Does Embraer fit the bill? Let's take a look at what its recent results tell us about its potential for future gains.

What we're looking for
The graphs you're about to see tell Embraer's story, and we'll be grading the quality of that story in several ways:

• Growth: Are profits, margins, and free cash flow all increasing?
• Valuation: Is share price growing in line with earnings per share?
• Opportunities: Is return on equity increasing while debt to equity declines?
• Dividends: Are dividends consistently growing in a sustainable way?

What the numbers tell you
Now, let's take a look at Embraer's key statistics:

ERJ Total Return Price data by YCharts.

Source: YCharts. * Period begins at end of Q1 2010.

ERJ Return on Equity data by YCharts.

Source: YCharts. * Period begins at end of Q1 2010.

How we got here and where we're going
Embraer doesn't look very strong today with only three out of nine possible passing grades. Maintaining its dividend has actually hurt Embraer's score, since it's been forced to reduce payouts -- and its negative free cash flow still can't support that payout at present at any rate. Yet despite this general weakness, investors have been flocking to the aircraft manufacturer recently. Is that optimism justified? Let's dig a little deeper.

This year has been one of big deals and big rumors for Embraer. Just a few days ago, the company announced a deal with American International Group's airplane leasing subsidiary for at least 50 jets and potentially up to 100, beginning in 2018. It's a multibillion-dollar deal that could be worth more than Embraer's entire trailing-12-month revenue stream. Embraer also has a deal with Republic Airways for at least 47 E-175 jets -- the first of which should be delivered around this time of year -- and potentially 47 more if the airline likes what it sees. Several major carriers are also looking to expand their fleet of regional jets, which is Embraer's specialty and thus also its great opportunity. SkyWest is also committed to buying 40 of the E-175s and could buy up to 140. Between these three deals, Embraer's backlog should swell considerably.

Embraer's even getting some help from rival plane maker Boeing in military sales. Embraer will rely on Boeing to market its KC-390 aerial refueling craft, which can also seat 80 people or carry nearly 24 tons of cargo. It's purportedly the largest aircraft ever built in Brazil, and its versatility should make it appealing to the world's modern air forces, which are estimated to want approximately 700 KC-390s. However, Embraer may be in for some frustration in the defense segment, as its joint contract with Sierra Nevada to supply the Air Force with 20 Light Air Support craft has been protested by rival contractor Beechcraft.

On the other hand, Embraer may be fighting against the carrier current, which my fellow Fool Adam Levine-Weinberg says is moving in the direction of larger planes. JetBlue Airways , one of Embraer's prime customers, is about to start flying some larger Airbus 190-seat craft and will reduce the size of its Embraer 100-seat fleet to accommodate the new planes. For now, it looks like Embraer has more opportunity

Putting the pieces together
Today, Embraer has some of the qualities that make up a great stock, but no stock is truly perfect. Digging deeper can help you uncover the answers you need to make a great buy -- or to stay away from a stock that's going nowhere.

Keep track of Embraer by adding it to your free stock Watchlist.

Score one for the algorithm crunchers over at Netflix . After collecting just two months of viewer data since Hemlock Grove's April release, the streaming video company felt confident enough to approve a second season of the thriller.

Hemlock Grove didn't get anywhere near the critical praise that Netflix's original House of Cards attracted. But that didn't worry the company. It's the numbers that really matter. And by that measure, Hemlock Grove was a hit. It received more viewing worldwide on its opening weekend than House of Cards, and it did particularly well among young adults.

In other words, Netflix's algorithms were right.

The company analyzes terabytes of viewer information from its 30-plus million subscribers. We're talking everything from high-level data like watches, rewinds, and pauses, to granular bits, like which actors are popular with which types of viewers. As an executive from the company boasted to Wired, "We know what people watch on Netflix and we're able with a high degree of confidence to understand how big a likely audience is for a given show based on people's viewing habits."

Amazon.com has taken a different approach to searching for hit shows. It put its Prime instant video series decisions up to a popular vote, asking viewers to help it decide which ones get green-lighted, and which get canceled. While that model has some advantages, it's a tough process for Amazon, as it involves piloting and development work. Still, Amazon's experiment won't really be put to the test until its first crop of shows begin to get released later this year.

But for now, Netflix's decision to double down on the show suggests the company's forecasting models are on point. And that means it's likely full speed ahead for spending on original series. Netflix expects these investment to run at a costly $200 million annually, or 10% of its total content spending.

The bad news for investors is that, because payments are front-loaded, Netflix's original series often need to be funded with debt. CEO Reed Hastings has explained: "As we expand Originals, they will consume cash. Since we are otherwise using domestic profits to fund international markets, we will raise capital as needed to fund the growth of Originals."

Expect Netflix's debt levels to continue to rise. But, as long as the new shows keep meeting or exceeding Netflix's projections, that spending should pay dividends in the form of higher net subscriber growth.

The common premise goes like this: Since much of Microsoft's business benefits from PC sales, which are declining, don't invest in Microsoft.

That view doesn't satisfy me. It doesn't take price into consideration. And even a company amid unfortunate circumstances can be a great stock when the price is right. So let's stop guessing. What is Microsoft really worth?

Microsoft's business
When you break down Microsoft's business, revenue comes from five main divisions: 

Source: SEC filings.

Though its entertainment and devices division combined with its online services account for a substantial sum of the company's revenue, online services currently runs at a loss, and entertainment and devices runs on a slim profit.

Operating profit, therefore, paints a much clearer picture of Microsoft's business:

Source: SEC filings.

Though the above chart is only the company's most recent quarter, the annual picture looks similar -- for fiscal 2012, entertainment and devices had a very small profit and online services had a loss, too.

Estimating growth
Now that we have identified Microsoft's most meaningful business segments (Windows, server and tools, and Microsoft business), we can take a look at their respective growth rates to decide on an estimate for Microsoft's future growth. Since Microsoft provides necessary adjustments for quarterly revenue in its quarterly filings, revenue will be the most useful indicator. 

Source: SEC filings. Revenue growth rates are after adjustments, from the year-ago quarter.

Declining PC sales or not, Microsoft is growing, albeit slowly. Again, these growth rates are fairly close to Microsoft's fiscal 2012 year-over-year revenue growth rates. Analysts expect growth, too, with a consensus estimate for almost 9% growth per annum for the next five years.

But let's be conservative. Maybe the Microsoft bears are partially right. What chance does Microsoft have in a mobile environment with Apple and Google dominating it? In our discounted cash flow valuation I'll bet on a flat 3% growth rate (in line with the historical rate of inflation) for Microsoft's free cash flow, per annum.

Using a 10% discount rate, Microsoft shares have a value of approximately $48.50. In other words, at $34.60 Microsoft stock, trades at a 29% margin of safety.

So it's time to buy Microsoft stock?
Not necessarily. A discounted cash flow valuation should never replace high quality analysis and simple business savvy. But it's a great starting point. And it does a great job of taking emotions out of the game.

That said, if you have a very good understanding of Microsoft's business, and you are certain that it can grow free cash flow at 3% or greater per year, Microsoft stock might be worth considering. A 29% margin of safety is nothing to sneeze at.

Last month, NVIDIA started taking pre-orders at $349 for its first handheld gaming device, NVIDIA Shield.

Naturally, that number upset more than a few people and drew skeptical reactions. Remember, Sony , for one, long struggled to sell its own Playstation Vita handheld until it finally dropped the price by $100 to $249.

Besides, the mobile gaming market is also currently being upended by smartphones and tablets, which are arguably the biggest reason Sony had such a hard time selling its Vita in the first place. (Incidentally, that's something at least one fellow Fool saw coming long before he Vita was even released.)

Of course, unlike Sony, NVIDIA doesn't exactly have the widely favored Playstation 4 to fall back on, so many couldn't help but wonder why NVIDIA even entered the crowded handheld space to begin with.

Sure, the Tegra 4-powered Shield runs on Android, and its specs are impressive in their own right. What's more, hardcore gamers love the that fact Shield not only includes a comfortable gaming controller built in, but also enables them to stream high-powered games from their PCs via Wi-Fi, and even to their big-screen TVs.

In fact, that's why Shield has already raked in dozens of awards, including "Best of Show" at this year's CES, Computex, and E3.

Image source: NVIDIA

One final touch
Even so, many folks still couldn't seem to get past the sticker shock. In an official company blog post published on Thursday, NVIDIA's Jason Paul acknowledged, "We've heard from thousands of gamers that if the price was $299, we'd have a home run."

"So," Hall went on, "we're changing the price of Shield to $299."

As it stands, Shield won't actually be available for another week but, for those who've already pre-ordered the system, they'll be charged the new, lower price when it ships. 

Finally, Hall summed up the post by saying NVIDIA simply wants "to get Shield into the hands of as many gamers as possible [...] because we think they'll have the same reaction to it as thousands of gamers already have: joy."

The elephant in the room
Unfortunately, this absolutely begs one awkward question: With a week to go until Shield's official release, is this a sign of desperation from NVIDIA?

After all, so far the company has remained mum on actual sales numbers for Shield, so you can't help but wonder whether this move was a reaction to less-than-satisfactory pre-order results.

Then again, while I wasn't going to complain if the product actually sold well, last month I did warn we shouldn't expect Shield to move NVIDIA's revenue needle in the near future -- especially since it's a relatively niche product, anyway. What's more, as fellow Fool Evan Niu also recently suggested, one saving grace for NVIDIA if it all hits the fan is that Shield "only required relatively small incremental investments and amounts to a cheap experiment."

Bigger and better things
Still, I'd like to reiterate placing undue focus on Shield's sales numbers may be missing the point entirely.

Remember, as I also wrote last month, I think NVIDIA is using Shield "as an avenue through which it can raise awareness for its platform-independent, cloud-based GRID gaming solution."

And while NVIDIA's happy to continue extending its innovation to traditional console-based game platforms, its increasing focus on cloud-based solutions has made its long-term vision more clear by the day. Thanks to GRID, NVIDIA claims:

You'll soon be able to stream video games from the web just like any other streaming media. GRID renders 3D games in cloud servers, encodes each frame instantly and streams the result to any device with a wired or wireless broadband connection.

The page goes on to highlight users will be able to use GRID to experience "high-quality, low-latency, multi-device gaming on any PC, Mac, tablet, smartphone, or TV."

With that in mind, do you really think NVIDIA is all that concerned if Shield doesn't immediately take the world by storm? I certainly don't, because it looks like the folks at NVIDIA have their minds set on much bigger and better things for the gaming industry.

Investors managed to close the week on a positive note for the stock market, as the Dow Jones Industrials rose 41 points. Yet as comforting as a gain of any size might be after the past two days, it's clear that investors are still unconvinced that the four-year-old bull market can continue on its present course in the face of potential resistance from the Federal Reserve.

In some ways, markets are stuck, as good economic news will prompt the Fed to exit faster, while weak economic news might perpetuate stimulus measures but only at the cost of raising pessimism about the overall health of the economy. That irresolvable dilemma is likely a big part of why investors aren't seeing the recent drop as a buying opportunity.

One thing investors are doing, though, is returning to their old playbooks. Defensive consumer stocks were among the top performers in the Dow today, with Procter & Gamble posting a jump of nearly 3%. In recent weeks, P&G has suffered as investors have bid down dividend stocks along with the rise in bond yields. Yet despite a fairly substantial run-up in rates today, P&G is going the opposite direction, with the company looking to restart its emerging market growth initiatives and get back on a more innovative track with its products.

Coca-Cola also posted a strong gain of 1.6%. As much as the soft-drink giant has suffered controversy from the obesity epidemic in the U.S., its growth prospects around the world remain enviably strong, and it would take a massive economic disruption to stop Coca-Cola from realizing its profitable prospects in emerging markets -- with earnings that would go a long way toward offsetting any headwinds from greater regulation in the U.S. or other developed economy countries.

Finally, Merck rose 1.5%, showing some of the same resiliency that P&G, Coke, and other high-yielding dividend stocks showed today. Yet as Fool contributor M. Joy Hayes noted yesterday, Merck faces the challenge of navigating the Supreme Court's ruling on so-called "pay-for-delay" agreements with generic-drug producers. Given the higher profit potential from delaying generic production as long as possible, it's clearly in the best interest of big pharma companies to enter into such agreements, but with the FTC and other regulators having the power to review them for potential problems, it will become harder for Merck to count on enforceable agreements with generic rivals.

Idenix Pharmaceuticals received more bad news today after reporting that the FDA will require more preclinical data before it can proceed with clinical trials for its experimental hepatitis C drug IDX20963. In the following video, health-care analyst Max Macaluso discusses what this news means in the context of Idenix's previous drug development problems. 

This afternoon, I noted that during the past few months, we have seen a number of losing days -- but they have always been followed by a winning session as investors move in and have bought on the dips. A little before 1 p.m. EDT today, that didn't seem to be the case, as all the major indexes were in the red. But, as the day progressed, the bulls came back, and the markets moved into positive territory.

When the closing bell finally rang, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was up 41 points, or 0.28%, and sat at 14,799. The 41-point change did break an eight-session streak in which the index moved higher or lower by more than 100 points. The S&P 500 also ended the day higher, up 0.27%, but the Nasdaq couldn't make it into the black, as it lost 0.22% during the day.

This morning, when the Dow was down by as much as 69 points, there were a number of its components in the red, but at 4 p.m. EDT on Wall Street, only 11 remained down for the session. Let's take a look at three of today's losers.

Shares of JPMorgan Chase declined by 0.99% today on very little news pertaining directly to the company. But, interest rate risk, and a new scandal at fellow Dow banking stock Bank of America have provided investors enough fuel to cut the share price of JPMorgan today. As my colleague John Grgurich pointed out earlier today, although JPMorgan fell 3.31% this past week, the company is a great one to be invested in right now. The bank has a great balance sheet, and the fundamentals of the company are getting better and better as each quarter passes. 

Another Dow component that fell on news that doesn't directly pertain to the company, but could have serious long-term effects on its business, was Alcoa . The aluminum producer fell 0.44% today on news that the Chinese government is tightening credit. The reason this will affect Alcoa is that the company needs strong economies where construction and large infrastructural projects are happening in order for it to sell its product, aluminum. If credit tightens in China, large projects and development will likely slow, and ultimately hurt the company's top and bottom lines. 

Another Dow stock that likely fell on the news from China was Caterpillar , which ended the day down 0.1%. Although today's announcement clearly didn't have a major affect on either caterpillar or Alcoa, it did add fuel to the bearish sentiment investors have had with each company this year. Caterpillar is down 7.24% year to date, while Alcoa has lost 8.06%. These may not seem like massive declines, but when we add in the fact that the Dow itself is up 12.94% in 2013, the idea that Alcoa and Caterpillar have been beaten by nearly 20% over just the past six months is rather shocking.

Since its IPO, Facebook has struggled to prove to the world that its business offers tremendous growth potential in the years to come. This is not surprising, considering the company has had a difficult time increasing its average revenue per user (ARPU), perhaps the single most important metric for investors to follow. Despite first-quarter total revenue increasing by 38% year over year, ARPU only increased by 12%. The majority of revenue growth can be attributed to active user growth, which increased by 23% to 1.11 billion users. Eventually, Facebook will reach a point where user growth begins to slow, which should be when the focus will shift more toward ARPU.

Longer term, Facebook's greatest challenge is figuring out how to grow ARPU without detracting from the user experience. It's not as simple as slapping a few more banner ads on the site since that will likely detract from user engagement, which could negatively impact the number of marketing opportunities.

Just because Facebook has struggled with growing ARPU in the past, doesn't mean the company can't overcome it in the future. Below are three ways Facebook could breathe big life into ARPU.

Earn the trust of marketers
Facebook has made earning the trust of marketers a top-three priority. To that end, the company purchased Microsoft Atlas in an effort to bolster its advertising tracking technology. The thinking here is that the better Facebook can measure the effectiveness of a campaign, the more advertisers it can attract. The more advertisers it can attract, the higher prices it can charge. Keep in mind, this logic assumes Facebook's ecosystem is an effective advertising platform to begin with, which the verdict is still out on. I suppose we'll have to wait and see if Facebook can build the proof that social media is an advertising effective medium.

Go local
Given Facebook's massive scale and worldwide reach, the company is in a unique position to serve local markets. Additionally, the social network is home to 16 million small businesses, which could help improve the impact of going local.

If Facebook solicited the opinion of users who simply checked into restaurants or local businesses, it would likely make Yelp investors very nervous. Although it isn't necessarily a new idea for Facebook to go after Yelp customers, it's certainly a powerful one. With a database of more than 39 million reviews and counting, Yelp attracts 102 million unique visitors who are looking for trusted local businesses. With Facebook's scale, it could seemingly out-muscle Yelp in a heartbeat, which in turn could translate into higher user engagement.

Another localized area where Facebook could enter is commerce. If Facebook entered the daily deals market, how do you think Groupon investors would react? My guess is not well, considering the daily deals purveyor has yet to earn a full-year profit throughout the company's existence. Despite the carnage, the company has begun venturing into the e-commerce market and has set a goal to become a $100 billion a year business. Since Groupon is likely preoccupied with its massive ambitions, it could be a great opportunity for Facebook to begin partnering with local merchants.

Perhaps more importantly than the fees generated from daily deals is how Facebook could begin changing the consumer mind-set that its brand isn't only a platform for communication and entertainment, but it's also a platform for commerce. This could go a long way toward driving higher marketing spend because companies could be inclined to pay more for advertising if they knew a user was more in the mood to buy.

Close that gaping hole
Frankly, the fact that Facebook is providing a free service for businesses to directly promote themselves to customers and potential customers is doing a disservice to investors. For the businesses that have organically built up a large Facebook following, there's little, if any, incentive for them to spend money on advertising. This could be why less than 6.25% of businesses on Facebook are currently active paying customers. If Facebook were to begin charging a monthly subscription fee for businesses with a large following, it could significantly drive new revenue growth while simultaneously locking businesses into the ecosystem that want a social media presence.

Pay up, marketers!
As I highlighted earlier, Facebook's greatest challenge is to grow ARPU without detracting from the user experience. The ideas I've suggested will help drive ARPU growth by putting the burden more on marketers and businesses rather than the user itself. In fact, if Facebook were to implement either of the localized suggestions, it would likely improve the user experience.

With a few relatively simple moves, it's become clear that Facebook has the power to potentially improve the long-term outlook for investors. Let's just hope someone's listening.

Investors' reaction this week to Ben Bernanke's comments about the future of the Federal Reserve's stimulus programs were nothing less than insane. Well, perhaps "insane" isn't quite right. The market has looked more like a toddler throwing a tantrum when a grown-up told him he can't have his way all the time.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average lost 1.79%, or 270 points, this past week. On both Monday and Tuesday of last week, the Dow rose by more than 100 points each day. But on Wednesday and Thursday combined, the blue-chip index fell more than 550 points, after the Fed chairman told investors that the central bank sees signs of a strengthening economy, and as that long as the economy continues down its current path, the central bank will soon begin slowing its stimulus programs. Cue the tantrum. The markets experienced their worst week in nearly two months.

Even though the Dow rose by more than 200 points during the beginning of the week, the past five trading sessions added up to the worst week since April 15-19, when the Dow lost 317 points, or 2.1%. But one big difference between this week and that one is that in April, the Dow had only 19 losers at the end of the week. This past week, 27 of the Dow's 30 components saw their prices decline.

Furthermore, back in April, the Dow's worst performer was IBM which lost 10.11%. The reason that matters is that the Dow is a price-weighted index, which means that stocks with higher prices have a larger impact on the index. Since IBM represents 10% of the Dow's total score, when it lost 10% in April, it singlehandedly cut around 160 points from the index, or around half of its loss that week. 

This past week, in contrast, IBM lost 3.74%. That's still a large decline, but it represents only about 57 points of the Dow's 270-point loss. This time around, AT&T was the index's largest decliner, losing 4.47% this past week, but the stock represents only about 1.4% of the Dow, so it didn't play a major role in tanking the index. The next largest decliner, at 4.13%, was Travelers -- which, besides AT&T, was the only other component to lose more than 4% of its value. But, while Travelers' weight is substantially larger than AT&T, it still makes up only 4.1% of the index, ranking it as the 10th heaviest component.

The point is that this past week's drop was a broad market descent, meaning that stocks in general across the board declined in value, based on news at a macro level. As the old Warren Buffett saying goes, "Be fearful when others are greedy, and greedy when other are fearful." This is one of those times we should be getting greedy.

Bernanke's view that the U.S. economy is growing stronger should signal to investors that corporate revenues and profits should be rising in the future. If we believe that the long-term price of a stock is based on profits, then we should be buying stocks today, with the belief that we'll see higher profits in the future. In addition, when we see big market moves caused by macro events and not company-specific news, value investors should start salivating. The market is essentially selling shares of quality companies at a discount for no logical reason.

So why would stocks fall in reaction to Bernanke's comments? One view is that investors believe that when the Fed shuts down the free-money spigot, the economic growth we've seen over the past few years will come to a halt and we'll experience a period of extremely low GDP growth -- an environment in which corporate profits would struggle. The problem with this theory is that the Fed has told investors that if economic growth begins slowing after it ramps down its stimulus, it will come back in to give the economy another kick-start. That tells me the Fed will essentially backstop the market at a level it thinks is appropriate.

Final takeaway
If the markets fall even when the Fed talks merely about slowing its stimulus, and if the theory about a slow economy in the future plays out, we'll probably see a few more big drops from the market in the coming months. But if the markets continue to fluctuate, it should give long-term value investors some great buying opportunities in the future. Furthermore, if we practice the principle of buying in thirds, we should be able to fully build a position in the coming six to 12 months, during days or weeks when the market is falling because of macro events such as we experienced this past week.

The following video is from The Motley Fool's weekly Tech Review, in which host Chris Hill talks all things tech with Fool analysts Eric Bleeker and Lyons George.

While still only a rumor, it seems that Google may be looking toward the release of a low-end Android phone, coming in under the $100 price point. In this segment, our analysts discuss why this would be an important move for Google that could sacrifice some profit for the sake of market share in emerging markets, and why the Android operating system itself would make it very challenging for Google to get much below the $100 mark.

The relevant video segment can be found between 0:00 and 3:13.

For the full video of this edition of the weekly Tech Review, click here.

Did Bank of America enrich itself by defrauding potentially millions of homeowners who requested loan modifications under the 2009 Home Affordable Modification Program, or HAMP? Yes, or at least that's what six of its former employees are claiming in a class action lawsuit being waged in a Massachusetts federal court. But while the allegations are stunning and disappointing, I'm sad to say that they aren't surprising.

When President Obama announced HAMP in a speech on Feb. 18, 2009, he said its purpose was to "create new incentives so that lenders work with borrowers to modify the terms of subprime loans at risk of default and foreclosure." While subprime loans made up only 12% of mortgages at the time, they accounted for roughly half of all foreclosures.

In Obama's words:

Right now, when families with these mortgages seek to modify a loan to avoid this fate, they often find themselves navigating a maze of rules and regulations but rarely finding answers. Some subprime lenders are willing to renegotiate; many aren't. Your ability to restructure your loan depends on where you live, the company that owns or manages your loan, or even the agent who happens to answer the phone on the day you call.

My plan establishes clear guidelines for the entire mortgage industry that will encourage lenders to modify mortgages on primary residences. Any institution that wishes to receive financial assistance from the government, and to modify home mortgages, will have to do so according to these guidelines -- which will be in place two weeks from today.

If lenders and homebuyers work together, and the lender agrees to offer rates that the borrower can afford, we'll make up part of the gap between what the old payments were and what the new payments will be. And under this plan, lenders who participate will be required to reduce those payments to no more than 31% of a borrower's income. This will enable as many as 3 to 4 million homeowners to modify the terms of their mortgages to avoid foreclosure.

The reality, as we soon came to find out, was that HAMP wasn't passed with the intention of helping homeowners, but rather to serve as an additional backdoor bailout for the banking industry. Neil Barofsky, the former special inspector general in charge of the oversight of TARP, discussed this point in his book Bailout. Recounting a conversation he and Elizabeth Warren had with then-Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner, Barofsky noted (emphasis added):

Geithner apparently looked at HAMP as an aid to the banks, keeping the full flesh of foreclosures from hitting the financial system all at the same time. Though they could handle up to "10 million foreclosures" over time, any more than that, or if the foreclosures were too concentrated, and the losses that the banks might suffer on their first and second mortgages could push them into insolvency, requiring yet another round of TARP bailouts. So HAMP would "foam the runway" by stretching out the foreclosures, giving the banks more time to absorb the losses while the other parts of the bailouts juiced bank profits that could then fill the capital holes created by housing losses.

And it's here where the new allegations about Bank of America come into play. According to a handful of affidavits recently filed in the case by former employees of the bank, they were instructed to intentionally delay the loan modification process, and to deny otherwise qualified applicants for made-up reasons. They were even rewarded for sending homeowners to foreclosure. "[Supervisors] regularly told us that the more we delayed the HAMP modification process, the more fees Bank of America would collect," one former employee said. He went on to note:

Employees were rewarded by meeting a quota of placing a specific number of accounts into foreclosure, including accounts in which the borrower fulfilled a HAMP Trial Period Plan. For example, a [loan collector] who placed 10 or more accounts into foreclosure in a given month received a $500 bonus. Bank of America also gave employees gift cards to retail stores like Target or Bed Bath & Beyond as rewards for placing accounts into foreclosure.

My point here isn't to pile on top of Bank of America or even its purported partner-in-crime, the Treasury Department. For what it's worth, I both own Bank of America stock and am a relatively content customer.

My point is instead to highlight the unfortunate reality that most of the nation's largest banks aren't run for their customers, or, for that matter, their shareholders. And lest there be any doubt about the latter, over the past five years, Bank of America's stock has returned a negative-50% while the S&P 500 is up by 35%. It accordingly follows that while the executives responsible for policies like these will invariably receive their exorbitant salaries and bonuses, the responsibility to actually bear the financial consequences will fall to those who own its stock.