Connect with us

Published

on

In this article

Nikola Jokic #15 of the Denver Nuggets shoots the ball during the game against the San Antonio Spurs during Game Five of Round One of the 2019 NBA Playoffs on April 23, 2019 at the Pepsi Center in Denver, Colorado.
Bart Young | National Basketball Association | Getty Images

Jackson Wieger has been a Denver sports fanatic for 20 years. He loves the Nuggets, who are led by reigning NBA most valuable player Nikola Jokic, and grew up watching the NHL’s Colorado Avalanche.

“Both the Nuggets and the Avalanche play 82 games, and I’d say I used to watch 65 games a year,” said Wieger, 27, who lives in Lakewood, Colorado, just outside of Denver.

Two years ago, his fandom was crushed. Comcast stopped carrying Altitude Sports, the regional network that owns broadcast rights for both teams, because the two sides couldn’t reach a carriage agreement. Comcast said at the time that more than 95% of its customers watched the equivalent of less than one game per week.

Wieger was in the 5%, along with many people he knows. Sports for them are different now.

“My friends and family used to be so passionate, but now that you can’t watch, you’re not as in tune with what’s going on,” Wieger said. “You’re not as excited. You’re not as engaged.”

The local sports saga is playing out in markets across the U.S. as cable and satellite TV companies abandon regional sports networks, or RSNs. Rather than accept large monthly subscription fees, pay-TV providers like Comcast, DirecTV and Dish, and digital providers such as YouTube TV and Hulu, are increasingly walking away to keep costs down.

They’ve decided the amount they have to pay to keep RSNs in the bundle no longer makes economic sense, given how few people watch them and how much they charge.

Other than ESPN, RSNs are the most expensive networks in the bundle. Many charge more than $5 per month per subscriber, according to research firm Kagan, a subdivision of S&P Global. Cable bills have to rise to support the added cost, which leads to more cancellations.

Since 2012, about 25 million U.S. households have cut the cord on traditional pay-TV. Media executives expect subscriber numbers to fall by another 15 million to 25 million by the end of 2025. Meanwhile, monthly bills continue to go up.

The result is a lot unhappiness. Fans are shut out. RSNs are bleeding money. Teams and leagues are losing their most valuable asset: their audience.

A potential escape from the vicious cycle is subscription streaming, where media and entertainment companies are focusing their attention. That push accelerated during the pandemic as consumers looked for ways to cut costs and, for several months, had no live sports to watch while stuck at home.

But RSNs haven’t yet figured out a streaming solution, and professional sports leagues are starting to consider their future options.

“As an investor, I would short RSNs,” said Leo Hindery, former CEO of New York’s YES Network who now works in private equity and recently formed two special purpose acquisition companies. YES broadcasts New York Yankees baseball games and Brooklyn Nets basketball games. “The cost of sports is the main reason people are cutting the cord on cable. We’re learning to live without sports,” Hindery said.

The plight of Sinclair

Chris Ripley, CEO of Sinclair Broadcast Group, is feeling the pain. Sinclair is the majority owner of 21 RSNs, more than any other company. Its networks broadcast live sports from 43 teams across Major League Baseball, the National Basketball Association and the National Hockey League.

Sinclair acquired the RSNs for about $10 billion in 2019 after Disney purchased the majority of 21st Century Fox and divested the sports networks. The deal shocked the business world, because Sinclair owns nearly 200 local broadcast affiliate stations across the U.S. but wasn’t in the RSN business at all before the transaction.

With a market cap below $4 billion, Sinclair had to borrow $8 billion to do the deal using a separate entity called Diamond Sports, and also tapped Byron Allen’s Entertainment Studios for some financing help.

“I’ve always thought that consolidation of the rest of the industry makes sense,” Ripley said earlier this month during his company’s third quarter earnings conference call.

Ripley’s dream of an industry-wide rollup would also amount to a bailout of his investment. While Sinclair shares initially soared 35% on news of the deal and briefly topped $60, the stock has since plunged by more than half to around $24. Its market cap has fallen below $$2 billion, and bonds for Diamond Sports have plummeted.

Last year, less than 15 months after closing the acquisition of its RSN portfolio, Sinclair wrote down the value of the assets by $4.23 billion.

In expanding into regional sports, Sinclair bet that airing local games would continue to command high pay-TV carriage fees because passionate fans of MLB, NBA and NHL teams have no other way to watch on days when there’s no national broadcast.

Sinclair was also angling to tie future RSN negotiations with the company’s other networks, which are affiliates of ABC, NBC, CBS and Fox — channels that customers would loathe losing. Nearly 85% of Sinclair’s RSN revenue comes from pay-TV subscriptions.

During the two-plus years since Sinclair dove into the RSN market, the company’s rationale has been undermined by two major events.

First was the pandemic.

The other was the decision by Dish to stop carrying Sinclair’s networks. Dish dropped the 21 RSNs in July 2019, a month before Sinclair closed its transaction. Dish, the fourth-largest U.S. pay-TV provider, has about 11 million subscribers nationwide between its satellite TV product and digital Sling TV, and some of them live in Sinclair territories.

Dish’s Charles Ergen
Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Dish’s decision to move away from RSNs goes beyond Sinclair. Dish dropped Comcast’s NBC Sports RSNs in Apriland AT&T’s RSNs in September. In Denver, near where Dish is headquartered, the company doesn’t carry Altitude Sports, the network that’s home to the Nuggets and Avalanche. Both teams are controlled by Altitude owner Stan Kroenke.

Altitude says on its website that Comcast and Dish “continue to ignore the wishes of their customers and our fans” and “have demonstrated a level of greed that is clearly out of touch.”

Dish’s billionaire founder and chairman Charlie Ergen refuses to budge. On the company’s quarterly earnings call in August, Ergen described RSNs as a tax on subscribers. When there are no live games, most of the networks air low-rated programs like sports documentaries and reruns.

“We don’t have any customers calling us on RSNs today,” Ergen told analysts. “We’re happy to talk about anything that’s creative and doesn’t harm our customers, but we’re not interested in taxing our customers when they don’t watch the channel. That doesn’t make any sense.”

‘Bundle is broken’

Even if most people don’t watch RSNs, irritating fans that do isn’t good business for sports leagues. NBA commissioner Adam Silver sounded off on the issue last month at the SBJ World Congress of Sports in New York.

“The bundle is broken,” Silver said. “It’s clearly broken. Our regional sports networks – Sinclair in particular. They paid $10 billion. It’s not clear it’s a good deal at $5 billion.”

Silver’s concern is shared by many in the industry.

Comcast’s NBCUniversal owns seven RSNs. AT&T and Charter each own four. The rest are independently owned by a variety of companies, including Madison Square Garden, Cox Communications and sports teams.

Comcast wants to sell its RSNs. AT&T considered selling theirs before agreeing to merge WarnerMedia with Discovery earlier this year. Comcast shut down its NBC Sports Northwest RSN on Sept. 30, after losing the broadcast rights to air games from the NBA’s Portland Trail Blazers.

Signage stands outside the Sinclair Broadcast Group Inc. headquarters in Cockeysville, Maryland, U.S., on Friday, Aug. 10, 2018. 
Andrew Harrer | Bloomberg | Getty Images

As the RSN industry reckons with an existential threat, the potential downstream effects have America’s major sports franchises justifiably on edge. RSNs provide billions of dollars to sports leagues, which use the revenue as one way to pay player salaries and invest in the organization.

There’s also the future of fandom. If fewer people are exposed to local sports because they’re no longer available on their bundle and consumers can’t find them outside of pay TV, younger audiences may have little interest in going to games or buying hats and jerseys.

Warnings signs are already present. Research shows that younger Americans are far less likely than their parents to watch live sports.

“Forget the actual teams and regional sports networks, it’s not going to be good for the sport or the leagues,” said Michael Schreiber, CEO of Playfly Sports, a sports marketing and media company. “The trick is maintaining high exposure of live games across the U.S. at the same time as creating new, innovative ways to access the content.”

Sinclair’s near-term plan is to build a direct-to-consumer subscription service, allowing local fans to get streaming access to games outside of the cable bundle. The company laid out its streaming strategy in an SEC filing in July.

In the document, Sinclair predicted that allowing fans to watch their hometown teams over the internet could “potentially generate $2 billion+ in annual revenue” with an estimated 4.4 million subscribers by 2027. The filing hints at opportunities in sports betting, fantasy and non-fungible tokens, all hot topics that may or may not produce actual revenue. Sinclair rebranded its RSNs using the Bally’s casino name earlier this year to more closely align the networks with gambling.

The biggest obstacle for a streaming service is affordability. Based on contracts with pay-TV operators, Sinclair would be forced to charge much more for a direct-to-consumer product than the amount that Comcast, DirecTV and Dish pay the company. One industry insider told CNBC the typical rate for a consumer would be five times higher.

In other words, if a cable company pays $4 per month per subscriber to Sinclair for one of its regional sports networks, Sinclair would have to charge at least $20 per month for the same content to be streamed directly to a user.

Julius Randle #30 of the New York Knicks drives to the basket against the Atlanta Hawks during Round 1, Game 5 of the 2021 NBA Playoffs on June 2, 2021 at Madison Square Garden in New York City, New York.
Nathaniel S. Butler | National Basketball Association | Getty Images

The New York Post reported in June that Sinclair was considering a $23 monthly offering to stream games in markets where it owns digital rights, though Sinclair hasn’t confirmed the figure. By comparison, Netflix and HBO Max cost about $15 per month, and the combined package of Disney+, Hulu and ESPN+ costs $13.99 per month. Sinclair declined to comment on the pricing it’s considering for its streaming service, which will debut next year.

The risk to Sinclair, beyond just the high price, is that a streaming play could make it even easier for pay-TV distributors to cut its networks from the bundle. As Ergen points out, if content is no longer exclusive to the bundle, it’s also not as essential.

Last month, Comcast dropped MSG Network from its Xfinity channel lineup, claiming that viewership was “virtually non-existent.” MSG and its sister networks, MSG2 and MSG Plus 2, show live games from the NBA’s New York Knicks and the NHL’s New York Rangers, New York Islanders and New Jersey Devils. Comcast serves New Jersey and Connecticut but not New York City.

“We don’t believe that our customers should have to pay the millions of dollars in fees that MSG is demanding for some of the most expensive sports content in the country with extremely low viewership in our markets,” Comcast said in a statement. “Almost 95% of all customers who received MSG over the past year did not watch more than 10 of the approximately 240 games it broadcast.”

Sinclair isn’t faring any better with digital distributors. YouTube TV, Hulu with Live Sports and even sports-focused FuboTV have chosen not to carry the RSNs in their bundles, which start at $65 a month.

Complicating matters further, Sinclair hasn’t actually secured streaming rights for most of the teams on its RSNs.

MLB allows each team to negotiate separately for its media rights. The NBA and NHL own digital rights for all of their teams. So far, Sinclair has direct-to-consumer streaming rights for four MLB teams and is in talks with the NBA and NHL to stream outside of the cable bundle.

MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred
Steven Ferdman | Getty Images

Ripley is confident he’ll get what he needs because Sinclair holds what’s in essence a block function on digital rights. That means it would be financially punitive for the leagues to circumvent Sinclair without the company’s participation.

Whether Sinclair can afford to participate is another matter.

“We’ve been very clear with [Sinclair] from the beginning that we see both those sets of rights as extraordinarily valuable to baseball, and we’re not just going to throw them in to help Sinclair out,” MLB Commissioner Rob Manfred said last month during the CAA World Congress of Sports. He went on to say that cord cutting is one problem, but there’s also “excessive leverage” in Sinclair’s Diamond subsidiary.

Can RSNs survive?

Creating a unified entity that controls all RSNs is an ideal way forward for the major sports leagues as they adapt to the digital era. They could sell multi-team packages to local fans. They could allow individuals to pick and choose different teams across different sports and subscribe to just those games.

While MLB and the NBA already have out-of-market national streaming options — MLB TV and NBA League Pass — blackout restrictions prevent the packages from including local teams. The whole concept of geofencing seems antiquated at a time when nearly every other form of video content is accessible on mobile devices wherever you are.

Greg Maffei, CEO of Atlanta Braves owner Liberty Media, told CNBC earlier this week there will be plenty of ways to get games to fans outside of using RSNs.

“You’ll see a host of new alternatives, whether it be offerings provided by MLB, whether it be over-the-top offerings or whether it be a more a la carte model over traditional linear television,” Maffei said. “Those will proliferate.”

MLB’s Manfred said that digital rights “are very valuable and crucial to our future,” but “who exactly the partners will be I’m not prepared to dismiss or not dismiss.”

Team owners are acclimating to a possible future without RSNs. Some hope that large technology companies, such as Amazon, could acquire streaming rights, potentially through partnerships with existing RSNs. Amazon already owns a minority stake in the YES Network and streamed 21 Yankees games to New York-area Prime users this year.

Comcast could also choose to include local games in Peacock, NBCUniversal’s streaming service.

“The revenue that comes from people enjoying our games who are not in the stadium, I don’t think that is going to bust,” said Steve Ballmer, owner of the NBA’s Los Angeles Clippers and former Microsoft CEO, in an interview. “How we get that revenue, there’s a lot of open questions. Will they be big media contracts from people who are on cable in broadcast TV? Will the players change, and companies like Amazon, Apple and the streaming guys want to come into the game, as opposed to just ESPN and Turner? Will there be some direct-to-consumer offer by the league, which is certainly a possibility? There’s a lot to be figured out.”

According to a New York Post story last month, MLB, the NBA and the NHL have considered launching a streaming service together that circumvents the need for RSNs. Sinclair would have to either forego its block provision or work with the league to be part of the streaming solution.

Sinclair knows leagues and teams desperately want a direct-to-consumer strategy. Cord-cutters abound and RSNs are reaching fewer people in the pay-TV ecosystem. But RSNs still generate billions in cash for the leagues each year, and Sinclair sees some leverage in that position.

“I tend to think that RSNs aren’t going to go away,” said Ed Desser, president of Desser Media, a consultancy firm that advises the sports television industry. However, they have to evolve to meet the realities of the market, he said.

“It’s been one-size-fits-all for many years,” Desser said. “I would expect that will change.”

(Disclosure: Comcast is the parent company of NBCUniversal, which owns CNBC).

–CNBC’s Jabari Young contributed to this report.

WATCH: Sinclair Broadcasting and Bally’s team up

Continue Reading

Technology

European SpaceX rival raises $160 million for reusable capsule to carry astronauts, cargo to space

Published

on

By

European SpaceX rival raises 0 million for reusable capsule to carry astronauts, cargo to space

The Space Exploration develops a product called Nyx, a reusable capsule that can be launched from rockets into space carrying passengers and cargo.

The Exploration Company (TEC) announced Monday it has raised $160 million to fuel development of its capsule that is designed to take astronauts and cargo to space stations.

Venture capital firms Balderton Capital and Plural were the lead investors in the round which also included French government-backed investment vehicle French Tech Souveraineté and German government-backed fund DeepTech & Climate Fonds.

TEC’s core product is Nyx, a capsule that can be launched from rockets into space carrying passengers and cargo. Nyx is reusable so once it has dropped its payload, it can re-enter the Earth’s atmosphere and be used for the next mission.

“It’s a big market, and it’s growing about a bit more than 10% per year because more nations want to fly their astronauts and more nations want to go to the moon,” Hélène Huby, founder and CEO of TEC, told CNBC in an interview.

“So there is an increased demand for sending people to stations, sending cargo to stations,” she said.

This part of the market has very few players. Some of the biggest are SpaceX which has a capsule called Dragon. There are also rivals from China and Russia.

“We said, ‘okay, let’s build this capacity in Europe so that Europe can have its own capsule and also the world needs an alternative solution. [We] cannot only bet on SpaceX,” Huby said.

TEC is currently developing the second version of Nyx which it expects to launch next year, followed by a final version in 2028. This model will be partly financed by the European Space Agency.

Huby said the company has signed $800 million in contracts to use its capsule. These include mission contracts with companies including Starlab, which is designing a new space station, and Axiom Space.

There is increasing activity in space among nations including China, the U.S. and India. One of the most ambitious projects is the NASA-led Gateway, which will be the first space station to orbit the moon.

“If you have more people, you also have a need for more cargo. So this is what is happening around the Earth and around the moon,” Huby said.

Huby sees TEC being a key player when it comes to developing the technology that is needed to return cargo to Earth once it has been in space.

“This is also where we where we believe our vehicle is going to play an important role,” Huby said.

Continue Reading

Technology

Palantir jumps 9% to a record after announcing move to Nasdaq

Published

on

By

Palantir jumps 9% to a record after announcing move to Nasdaq

Alex Karp, CEO of Palantir Technologies speaks during the Digital X event on September 07, 2021 in Cologne, Germany. 

Andreas Rentz | Getty Images

Palantir shares continued their torrid run on Friday, soaring as much as 9% to a record, after the developer of software for the military announced plans to transfer its listing to the Nasdaq from the New York Stock Exchange.

The stock jumped past $64.50 in afternoon trading, lifting the company’s market cap to $147 billion. The shares are now up more than 50% since Palantir’s better-than-expected earnings report last week and have almost quadrupled in value this year.

Palantir said late Thursday that it expects to begin trading on the Nasdaq on Nov. 26, under its existing ticker symbol “PLTR.” While changing listing sites does nothing to alter a company’s fundamentals, board member Alexander Moore, a partner at venture firm 8VC, suggested in a post on X that the move could be a win for retail investors because “it will force” billions of dollars in purchases by exchange-traded funds.

“Everything we do is to reward and support our retail diamondhands following,” Moore wrote, referring to a term popularized in the crypto community for long-term believers.

Moore appears to have subsequently deleted his X account. His firm, 8VC, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

Last Monday after market close, Palantir reported third-quarter earnings and revenue that topped estimates and issued a fourth-quarter forecast that was also ahead of Wall Street’s expectations. CEO Alex Karp wrote in the earnings release that the company “absolutely eviscerated this quarter,” driven by demand for artificial intelligence technologies.

U.S. government revenue increased 40% from a year earlier to $320 million, while U.S. commercial revenue rose 54% to $179 million. On the earnings call, the company highlighted a five-year contract to expand its Maven technology across the U.S. military. Palantir established Maven in 2017 to provide AI tools to the Department of Defense.

The post-earnings rally coincides with the period following last week’s presidential election. Palantir is seen as a potential beneficiary given the company’s ties to the Trump camp. Co-founder and Chairman Peter Thiel was a major booster of Donald Trump’s first victorious campaign, though he had a public falling out with Trump in the ensuing years.

When asked in June about his position on the 2024 election, Thiel said, “If you hold a gun to my head I’ll vote for Trump.”

Thiel’s Palantir holdings have increased in value by about $3.2 billion since the earnings report and $2 billion since the election.

In September, S&P Global announced Palantir would join the S&P 500 stock index.

Analysts at Argus Research say the rally has pushed the stock too high given the current financials and growth projections. The analysts still have a long-term buy rating on the stock and said in a report last week that the company had a “stellar” quarter, but they downgraded their 12-month recommendation to a hold.

The stock “may be getting ahead of what the company fundamentals can support,” the analysts wrote.

WATCH: Palantir hits record as defense adopts AI tech

Palantir hits record high as defense adopts AI tech

Continue Reading

Technology

Super Micro faces deadline to keep Nasdaq listing after 85% plunge in stock

Published

on

By

Super Micro faces deadline to keep Nasdaq listing after 85% plunge in stock

Charles Liang, chief executive officer of Super Micro Computer Inc., during the Computex conference in Taipei, Taiwan, on Wednesday, June 5, 2024. The trade show runs through June 7. 

Annabelle Chih | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Super Micro Computer could be headed down a path to getting kicked off the Nasdaq as soon as Monday.

That’s the potential fate for the server company if it fails to file a viable plan for becoming compliant with Nasdaq regulations. Super Micro is late in filing its 2024 year-end report with the SEC, and has yet to replace its accounting firm. Many investors were expecting clarity from Super Micro when the company reported preliminary quarterly results last week. But they didn’t get it.

The primary component of that plan is how and when Super Micro will file its 2024 year-end report with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and why it was late. That report is something many expected would be filed alongside the company’s June fourth-quarter earnings but was not.  

The Nasdaq delisting process represents a crossroads for Super Micro, which has been one of the primary beneficiaries of the artificial intelligence boom due to its longstanding relationship with Nvidia and surging demand for the chipmaker’s graphics processing units. 

The one-time AI darling is reeling after a stretch of bad news. After Super Micro failed to file its annual report over the summer, activist short seller Hindenburg Research targeted the company in August, alleging accounting fraud and export control issues. The company’s auditor, Ernst & Young, stepped down in October, and Super Micro said last week that it was still trying to find a new one.

The stock is getting hammered. After the shares soared more than 14-fold from the end of 2022 to their peak in March of this year, they’ve since plummeted by 85%. Super Micro’s stock is now equal to where it was trading in May 2022, after falling another 11% on Thursday.

Getting delisted from the Nasdaq could be next if Super Micro doesn’t file a compliance plan by the Monday deadline or if the exchange rejects the company’s submission. Super Micro could also get an extension from the Nasdaq, giving it months to come into compliance. The company said Thursday that it would provide a plan to the Nasdaq in time. 

A spokesperson told CNBC the company “intends to take all necessary steps to achieve compliance with the Nasdaq continued listing requirements as soon as possible.”

While the delisting issue mainly affects the stock, it could also hurt Super Micro’s reputation and standing with its customers, who may prefer to simply avoid the drama and buy AI servers from rivals such as Dell or HPE.

“Given that Super Micro’s accounting concerns have become more acute since Super Micro’s quarter ended, its weakness could ultimately benefit Dell more in the coming quarter,” Bernstein analyst Toni Sacconaghi wrote in a note this week.

A representative for the Nasdaq said the exchange doesn’t comment on the delisting process for individual companies, but the rules suggest the process could take about a year before a final decision.

A plan of compliance

The Nasdaq warned Super Micro on Sept. 17 that it was at risk of being delisted. That gave the company 60 days to submit a plan of compliance to the exchange, and because the deadline falls on a Sunday, the effective date for the submission is Monday.

If Super Micro’s plan is acceptable to Nasdaq staff, the company is eligible for an extension of up to 180 days to file its year-end report. The Nasdaq wants to see if Super Micro’s board of directors has investigated the company’s accounting problem, what the exact reason for the late filing was and a timeline of actions taken by the board.

The Nasdaq says it looks at several factors when evaluating a plan of compliance, including the reasons for the late filing, upcoming corporate events, the overall financial status of the company and the likelihood of a company filing an audited report within 180 days. The review can also look at information provided by outside auditors, the SEC or other regulators.

Lightning Round: Super Micro is still a sell due to accounting irregularities

Last week, Super Micro said it was doing everything it could to remain listed on the Nasdaq, and said a special committee of its board had investigated and found no wrongdoing. Super Micro CEO Charles Liang said the company would receive the board committee’s report as soon as last week. A company spokesperson didn’t respond when asked by CNBC if that report had been received.

If the Nasdaq rejects Super Micro’s compliance plan, the company can request a hearing from the exchange’s Hearings Panel to review the decision. Super Micro won’t be immediately kicked off the exchange – the hearing panel request starts a 15-day stay for delisting, and the panel can decide to extend the deadline for up to 180 days.

If the panel rejects that request or if Super Micro gets an extension and fails to file the updated financials, the company can still appeal the decision to another Nasdaq body called the Listing Council, which can grant an exception.

Ultimately, the Nasdaq says the extensions have a limit: 360 days from when the company’s first late filing was due.

A poor track record

There’s one factor at play that could hurt Super Micro’s chances of an extension. The exchange considers whether the company has any history of being out of compliance with SEC regulations.

Between 2015 and 2017, Super Micro misstated financials and published key filings late, according to the SEC. It was delisted from the Nasdaq in 2017 and was relisted two years later.

Super Micro “might have a more difficult time obtaining extensions as the Nasdaq’s literature indicates it will in part ‘consider the company’s specific circumstances, including the company’s past compliance history’ when determining whether an extension is warranted,” Wedbush analyst Matt Bryson wrote in a note earlier this month. He has a neutral rating on the stock.

History also reveals just how long the delisting process can take. 

Charles Liang, chief executive officer of Super Micro Computer Inc., right, and Jensen Huang, co-founder and chief executive officer of Nvidia Corp., during the Computex conference in Taipei, Taiwan, on Wednesday, June 5, 2024. 

Annabelle Chih | Bloomberg | Getty Images

Super Micro missed an annual report filing deadline in June 2017, got an extension to December and finally got a hearing in May 2018, which gave it another extension to August of that year. It was only when it missed that deadline that the stock was delisted.

In the short term, the bigger worry for Super Micro is whether customers and suppliers start to bail.

Aside from the compliance problems, Super Micro is a fast-growing company making one of the most in-demand products in the technology industry. Sales more than doubled last year to nearly $15 billion, according to unaudited financial reports, and the company has ample cash on its balance sheet, analysts say. Wall Street is expecting even more growth to about $25 billion in sales in its fiscal 2025, according to FactSet.

Super Micro said last week that the filing delay has “had a bit of an impact to orders.” In its unaudited September quarter results reported last week, the company showed growth that was slower than Wall Street expected. It also provided light guidance.

The company said one reason for its weak results was that it hadn’t yet obtained enough supply of Nvidia’s next-generation chip, called Blackwell, raising questions about Super Micro’s relationship with its most important supplier.

“We don’t believe that Super Micro’s issues are a big deal for Nvidia, although it could move some sales around in the near term from one quarter to the next as customers direct orders toward Dell and others,” wrote Melius Research analyst Ben Reitzes in a note this week.

Super Micro’s head of corporate development, Michael Staiger, told investors on a call last week that “we’ve spoken to Nvidia and they’ve confirmed they’ve made no changes to allocations. We maintain a strong relationship with them.”

Don’t miss these insights from CNBC PRO

Super Micro shares down on earnings, says investigation finds 'no evidence of fraud or misconduct'

Continue Reading

Trending