Is China Mobile's today Tencent's tomorrow?

Recently, the Internet has been analogous to the views of China Mobile in 2007

Originally a global chief strategist at Societe Generale Securities, he argued that:

"The Internet has moved from the logic of growth stocks to the logic of value stocks, and the future deduction can refer to China Mobile after 2007, China Mobile saw the highest point of 160 Hong Kong dollars in 2007, which is still the high point of history, falling to 39 Hong Kong dollars in early 2021." Standing in 2007 to see China Mobile, it really spent a good full moon, who could have imagined that at that time represented growth, represented high valuation, represented China's core assets at that time, China Mobile, ten years later, the valuation stabilized between 6 times and 8 times, which is the extreme of the Hong Kong market. ”

The analyst is talking about the entire internet industry, and we don't think it's a big problem.

Before September 21, 2020, when the right was restored to open for 1673 yuan, he also wrote an article "Moutai is seriously undervalued"

After a year, the perception of similar prices has gone from "grossly undervalued" to "grossly overvalued", and I really don't know what this view means for investment.

This is the previous complaint: today we must speak for Kun Kun and Maotai

Of course, the focus of today's debate is still "WeChat"

The author's core view of the whole text is as follows: the fate of the "pipeline" is to be "over-the-top"

WeChat, which robbed telecom operators of voice and short/MMS business, is also a "pipeline" for more than a billion people to use for free, with public welfare.

But WeChat is also a "pipeline", but investors do not recognize it. #微信的价值被高估 #

Logically, this assertion is riddled with loopholes:

First of all, the conclusion that you can't get involved in the content running in the "tube" is wrong.

The problem with mobile is that it is unwilling to serve, the service that mobile can provide could have been better, and Fetion originally had the potential to become WeChat, but it did not win the market competition. But WeChat is completely different, it takes the initiative to provide services, it will ask you if you want to play a game, do you want to go to JD.com to buy a bag. Of course, from the perspective of social value, a stable service industry is also very important to society. For this kind of article with flawed logic, 100,000+ readings are also drunk.

Secondly, when discussing the old and new economies, the author one-sidedly emphasizes the creation of heroes by the times, while ignoring the differences in physical culture.

My opinion: The gap between the old and new economies lies in the pursuit of "better". And all cultural organizational structures have to be oriented towards "better." It's an organization that's never satisfied. Wanhua Chemical is the old economy, right? But the new materials of the layout are the new economy. Hikvision cameras are old economies, right? But the digital transformation of the Internet of Things in the layout is a new economy. These are all metamorphosis produced by the spontaneous efforts of the fifth-level organization to be "better" and more "innovative." The "old economy" can be completely transformed into a "new economy".

Mobile could also be the new economy, but he couldn't even shout a "better" and more ambitious slogan. Although Mobile has dug up a lot of people from large factories, friends in Mobile still lament with us that the efficiency and culture of mobile are not good. In contrast, Tencent's past pursuit is the best communication product, and now it is a sense of mission that technology connects everything to good. What has been pursued is "small steps and fast running, rapid iteration, and better service to users every day." "The sense of urgency.

I think the pronoun of the old economy is that there is less sense of mission and urgency for better service.

We believe that if an enterprise can continue to create greater value for society, their value will continue to grow, the key lies in the sense of mission and urgency for better service, and whether there is a corporate culture and organizational structure to serve this.

Two days ago, Xiao Ma Ge did not speak out: Tencent is just an ordinary company, which can be replaced at any time. But it is precisely because entrepreneurs have such a sense of crisis, I think that such a sense of distress may keep Tencent for a long time.

Finally, from the perspective of valuation, we believe that many Internet companies in Hong Kong stocks are not expensive to value even as public utility companies. If it is not a very unsaved company, it is actually a bit bad to be bearish when cheap. Tencent has now fallen to the valuation level of a high-quality utility company, but in the nature of Tencent, will it only be worth the money of a utility company? We think it may be an opportunity rather than a pit here. Even if we are wrong, Tencent's price as a public utility is reasonable, unless from now on everyone does not use WeChat, but what if Tencent is more than a utility company? Related point of view details recent articles discuss more, you see the following content here will not be repeated.

Are you optimistic about Hong Kong stocks wrong? Tencent Holdings: Some immature bits and pieces of thinking

There has been a lot of recent rebounds, but we don't think so. Plug in the eye first and look forward to long-term validation.