top of page
Search

Amazon Vs. U.S. Steel: Cloud Computing Meets A Blast Furnace

  • Martin Sosnoff
  • Nov 8, 2021
  • 4 min read


I never dreamed of comparing U.S. Steel with Amazon whose market capitalization flirts with $1.5 trillion. Little more than a year ago, U.S. Steel was termed a basket case, trading around five bucks, now $26. Market capitalization was hardly over $1 billion. The country, then in deep recession, suggested U.S. Steel was headed to the scrap pile.


With present market capitalization approximating $7.5 billion, U.S. Steel is now a polite small capitalization piece of paper. The big surprise, U.S. Steel earned over $5 a share in its September quarter, thereby trading at 1 times earnings if annualized. Nothing sells for 1 times extrapolated earnings for very long, but there was such a big bounce.


Meanwhile, mighty Amazon, faced with order fulfillment turmoil in e-commerce, here and abroad, posted most disappointing quarterly numbers. Net income for the September quarter, $3.15 billion, was half year-ago numbers.


Amazon’s quarterly report is filled with a conceited management’s bravado. Its lead sentence is never earnings per share, but rather an operating cash flow number. The previous 12 months operating cash flow is always sizably more than net earnings.


Admittedly, this stat does carry weight. I consider operating cash flow as the signal wherewithal management has to work with to build out its footprints. This was a flat 12-month number. Eight bullet points down the page you find net income numbers for the third quarter, half the year ago total of $12.37.


Amazon’s earnings guidance for me is always a joke, a lowball number toying with its analysts’ following. Quarterly operating income is expressed as anywhere from zero to $3 billion, compared with $6.9 billion year ago results.


You gotta keep digging, hoping to rationalize Amazon’s valuation anywhere near $1.5 trillion. Latest quarter, Amazon made no money in e-commerce. A big operating loss developed in its international business. This won’t last forever, but how capitalize their numbers in a price-earnings model? I’d capitalize Amazon’s retailing business with Walmart, Costco, even Home Depot. Give ‘em a P/E of 25 times earnings. Use 2020’s retailing numbers as a starting point. I’d put the combined international and domestic operating income no higher than a normalized $10 billion.


Even if I put a huge multiple on this business, say 30 times earnings for e-commerce, you don’t get above $300 billion. Unless you believe e-commerce is a $30 billion earner some years out, you can’t tot up more than a $600 billion valuation, about half what we’ve got today.


There’s a gem in Amazon. The AWS computer cloud division, a big player, developed on their own, pretty much from scratch. They’ve got scale, with quarterly revenues moving up 39%, and operating income at $4.8 billion. Alibaba hasn’t made serious money in their cloud startup. Microsoft’s cloud business covers several divisions but their growth rate overall seems lower than Amazon’s, but still a hefty 30%, or so.


How capitalize Amazon’s cloud business? Let’s project AWS operating income at $25 billion next year. Then put a 25 multiplier on this business. We’re then at a market capitalization of $625 billion. On Amazon’s present market capitalization of say $1.5 trillion we are talking about AWS worth 40% of Amazon presently.


Here’s a situation with the tail wagging the dog. A high margin business is overshadowing the enormous infrastructure scope and employment rolls of Amazon’s core business. Everyone extrapolated huge numbers for 5 years to justify Amazon’s lofty valuation.


Amazon as a stock has weathered through its bad numbers. As for U.S. steel, everyone’s memory bank runs deep with disappointments. How dare anyone extrapolate today’s arresting numbers? Certainly not its management who just threw its holders a nickel dividend. This is an insulting, dumb gesture for a company now earning serious money.


Reminds me of what Treasury Secretary Andrew Mellon used to say about business cycles. Mellon saw them as repeatable every 5 years or so. He considered industrialists foolish operators who created their own inventory and capital goods cycles by repeated overspending for plants and equipment.


This was a good call that repeated itself through the sixties. FDR despised Mellon and had the U.S. Treasury indict him for tax evasion. Mellon won his case but died before the decision came down in his favor. We are all indebted to Mellon for founding the National Gallery of Art in Washington, D.C., with his own capital. Mellon, an avid collector of classical art, outfoxed the Russians who foolishly sold him several old masters for peanuts. The Russians sorely needed capital to fund projects like steel factories.


Actually, I shouldn’t own U.S. Steel because I despised such starch white-collar managers. They never hired Jewish boys in their training programs. Neither did Metropolitan Life Insurance and others in the 1950s and early sixties.


Let’s call U.S. Steel’s realized price per ton of steel up 50% this year. The stock ticks at book value, 1 times earnings with $2 billion in cash on a market cap of $7.5 billion. When I pulled up U.S. Steel’s 5-year price chart, I was surprised to see it had peaked at $47 in March of 2018.


Then, the stock traced down in an expert’s ski trail to five bucks in March, 2020, but recently peaked over $30. Alas, few of us ever come into a stock at rock-bottom and later exit near the top.


Amazon, recently peaked over $3,700, but over a 12-month period, no perceptible gain. I keep reading Amazon’s quarterlies, but get cross-eyed in their statistical blizzard. I’m uncomfortable with management’s presentations where as I can understand Microsoft’s presentation and digest it. My position in Microsoft is outsized, but came through appreciation.


 
 
 

Recent Posts

See All
When Markets Slide How to Stop Blood Flow?

Structure not stock selection is what counts. I’ve sold down to a 25% long portfolio with the rest mainly in 10-year and 30-year Treasuries. I won’t own high yield corporates because I fear the busine

 
 
 

1 Comment


thomasgrace9
Dec 06, 2021

Martin, Good to see you are back writing!

Like
Post: Blog2_Post
  • LinkedIn

©2021 by Martin Sosnoff

This website and this blog do not provide investing advice.  This website and the blog are for general, informational purposes only and are not to be construed as financial, investment, legal, tax or other advice.   This website and blog contain only the opinions, subjective views, and commentary of Martin T. Sosnoff which are subject to change at any time without notice.  This website and the blog may not be relied on in making an investment or any other decision. Any decision to invest or take any other action may involve risks not discussed herein and no such decisions should be made based on the information contained herein. You agree that Martin T. Sosnoff is not liable for any action you take or decision you make in reliance on any content of this website and/or the blog.   Any decisions based on the content are the sole responsibility of the user.   If you would like financial, investment, legal, tax or other advice, you should consult with your financial advisors, accountants or attorneys regarding your individual circumstances and needs.  None of the information or content presented on the website or the blog should be construed as an offer to sell, or a solicitation of an offer to buy, any securities, financial instruments, investments or other services.  While Martin T. Sosnoff may use reasonable efforts to obtain information from sources believed to be reliable, Martin T. Sosnoff does not independently verify the accuracy of such information and makes no representations or warranties as to the accuracy, reliability or completeness of any information or content on the website or the blog.  Certain information on the website and the blog may contain forward-looking statements.  Martin T. Sosnoff undertakes no obligation to publicly update or review any forward-looking statement, whether as a result of new information, future developments or otherwise.   Martin T. Sosnoff makes no guarantee or other promise as to any results that may be obtained from using anything contained on the website or the blog.  While past performance may be discussed, past performance should not be considered indicative of future performance.   The information provided on this website and the blog is of general interest and is not intended as investment advice for any reader.  This website and the blog are not and are not intended to be a solicitation for investment management services.

bottom of page