• Alumni

Activity Feed

Thanks for sharing this interesting post, Brad. I found it particularly interesting to learn how leveraged the company is to Apple. While Skyworks doesn’t directly sell its products to Apple, it sells them to Foxconn, which is a major supplier of Apple. In fiscal years 2015 the total percentage of revenue derived from Foxconn was 44%. [1]
I appreciate how you support many of your claims with well-researched numbers, and how you visually show the strong correlation with the AAPL stock price. I also fully agree with your recommendation that SKWS should focus more on Chinese phone manufacturers, and diversify the business model away from mobile.
While Skyworks seems to be one of the first adopters to the IOT, they still only provide part of the value chain, i.e. the semiconductors [2]. The IOT obviously represents an enormous opportunity to sell more chips, but I wonder how easily these chips become commoditized, and what you view as Skyworks’ competitive advantage to other semiconductor companies?

[1] Seeking Alpha. 2016. Skyworks Solutions Steering Away From Reliance On Apple – Skyworks Solutions, Inc. (NASDAQ:SWKS) | Seeking Alpha. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2016].
[2] Wikipedia. 2016. Skyworks Solutions – Wikipedia. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2016].

On November 20, 2016, Clemens commented on Tencent’s Wechat: The end of small apps? :

Interesting post, Derek. I found it fascinating to learn that “In-Wechat-Apps” combine third party Apps into the one platform without requiring downloading the native 3rd-party App. I believe that the trend of installing and using fewer apps is a global one, that can also be observed in the U.S.
I wonder why Facebook has not taken a similar approach. Facebook apps were very popular at some point (e.g. Zynga games such as FarmVille and Mafia Wars [1]). Zynga eventually was listed in a article “The top 10 tech ‘fails’ of 2012” [2], however I believe that mostly relates to its lack of viability as a business model due to the constant pressure to produce new viral games, and not its nature as a Facebook game.

[1] Wikipedia. 2016. FarmVille – Wikipedia. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2016].
[2] Wikipedia. 2016. Zynga – Wikipedia. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2016].

On November 20, 2016, Clemens commented on In a digital universe full of Marvel :

Jeremy – thanks for your post. As a comic nerd (mostly Batman / DC though) the topic immediately resonated with me. I appreciate how you described comics as another example of traditional print media going through a significant transformation to adapt to the digital ages. While I found it interesting to learn how Marvel is adapting its original core business of publishing comics to digital technologies, such as the smartphone app and online distribution, I would have expected it to be completely dwarfed by their income from movies by now. Overall, Marvel movies earned over $21 billion dollars at the box office, and that doesn’t even include other merchandise products. [1] I understand that not all of these earnings go to Marvel directly, since unless Marvel produces the movie itself, it would only get a royalty fee. That said, it would be interesting to see how much money Marvel makes from movies nowadays vs its original business of publishing comics.

[1] Money Nation. 2016. How Much Money Has Every Marvel Movie Made? – Money Nation. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 20 November 2016].

On November 19, 2016, Clemens commented on Where Art Meets Engineering: Google Art Project :

Thanks for the interesting post, Deepa. I love how Google is using its technology for the greater good and without intent of monetization. I found it very interesting that you pointed out that the Google Art Project is not cannibalizing traffic away from the art galleries – on the contrary. The Economist wrote about the project a while ago, mentioning (in line with your statement) that “Looking through the Google Art Project is a bit like walking by a bakery, smelling the brownies and shoving your nose against the glass. It intensifies the hunger rather than quashing it.” [1]

I also wonder whether the Google Art Project will help make art for young people in particular more accessible and interesting. I think it’s great that people can look at art from their sofa at home; but furthermore, I think it is great that it augments the on-site museum experience through the ability to access information and educational content about the painting as you stand in front of it. That should connect well with millennials, who are used to being on the phone at all times and accessing information through their smartphones. I wonder whether there are other ways Google could implement to make classic art more “cool”, such as implementing more social features. Some studies show [2] that millennials prefer social media to discover art, rather than visiting a gallery.

[1] The Economist. 2016. Google Art Project: Getting in close and impersonal | The Economist. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 19 November 2016].

[2] Study: U.S. Millennials Prefer Instagram to Museums; Purchase & Discover Art Online | Business Wire. 2016. Study: U.S. Millennials Prefer Instagram to Museums; Purchase & Discover Art Online | Business Wire. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 19 November 2016].

On November 7, 2016, Clemens commented on Learning from Disaster: NYC After Hurricane Sandy :

Thanks for the interesting post. This is somewhat personal as I witnessed Hurricane Sandy in NYC first-hand, and living in an affected neighborhood I spent a week without electricity – on the 24th floor with an elevator that didn’t work, in an area without functioning traffic lights, all shops closed and barricaded, surrounded by broken trees and cars… reminded me of the movie “I am Legend”. While I was fortunate to have friends “in the North” – i.e. with functioning electricity – I understand that many people were horribly affected as Sandy wiped out their houses and destroyed their lives. I was shocked to read that a similar storm would cause nearly five times the damage by the 2050s.

On the positive side however, it was encouraging to see that the city has ambitious goals to cut emissions. I also really appreciated to see that NYC has actually managed to cut emissions by 19% from 2005-2013. I also found it interesting to learn that in NYC, very different sources cause greenhouse gas emissions than in the rest of the country – which requires a different plan of action than on the federal or state level. I strongly agree with your recommendation that on top of its own ambitious targets, NYC should be an ambassador to other cities and convince them to implement similar targets. NYC should make it “trendy” to follow its lead.

I also wonder what could be done to make citizens feel more responsible, and think more “green”. It is definitely possible, as, for example, many West Coast cities successfully encourage to recycle more, and many cities in Asia are extremely clean due to the complete lack of littering [1]. Is this a culture than can be taught?

[1] Why the Japanese Don’t Litter, A lesson in Courtesy and Respect. 2016. Why the Japanese Don’t Litter, A lesson in Courtesy and Respect. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 07 November 2016].

On November 7, 2016, Clemens commented on Is it all a Hoax? The GOP and Climate Change :

Thanks for your post, Ina! Interesting that you brought up religion as a reason. I understand why you brought it up, but the surprising thing is that even the Pope acknowledged that climate change is man-made, and called global warming a sin [1]. He specifically called for action to reduce man-made climate change [2]

[1] Crux. 2016. Pope calls global warming sin, says protecting creation is work of mercy. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].
[2] Crux. 2016. Pope Francis pleads with nations to act now on climate change. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 07 November 2016].

On November 6, 2016, Clemens commented on China’s War on Pollution: Spotlight on Water :

Thanks for sharing – very interesting post. I found it shocking to read that 60% of China’s groundwater is unfit for human consumption. I was aware of air pollution in the big cities, but didn’t know that groundwater pollution is such a significant issue. I also find it helpful that you included pictures to visualize the problem.

It is very encouraging to see that the Chinese government is taking increasing action against pollution, and BEW’s success so far looks highly promising. I fully agree with your recommendation that BEW and the Chinese government need to invest in its technology and treat more provinces. However, I wonder what the root causes are of groundwater pollution – is it related to climate change? If so, how? Or is it simply driven by lack of oversight over disposal of chemicals? Also, the effect of pollution in the big cities (as you showed in the picture of the smog) is clearly a very visible one. But will the Chinese government (and BEW) be as engaged with reducing the invisible greenhouse gases such as CO2 and CH4, which are the main contributors to global warming and climate change on a global scale? Let’s hope that governments keep to their promises of the Paris climate deal [1].

[1] The Guardian. 2016. Breakthrough as US and China agree to ratify Paris climate deal | Environment | The Guardian. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].

I found your post on NuScale extremely interesting. While it is disappointing that that public perception of nuclear energy is so poor, I find it particularly troubling that most environmental groups (e.g. Greenpeace [1]) and the political left / green liberals (e.g. Sen. Bernie Sanders, D-VT [2]) have been so outspoken against nuclear energy. Even assuming energy consumption stays stagnant and doesn’t grow, it will take decades for renewable energy (such as water, wind and solar) to be efficient enough to completely replace coal and other “dirty” energy sources. In fact, as you state, nuclear is extremely efficient and produces almost no emissions.

Specifically regarding NuScale, it would be interesting to see how NuScale compares to the competition… does it have significantly superior technology that can’t be replicated? How exactly does it compare to conventional reactors? Is it really a breakthrough in terms of how nuclear energy is generated (in terms of safety, efficiency, cost…) or is it just smaller and slightly more efficient than a conventional modern one offered by competitors? If it is a significant enough breakthrough, could it solve some of the issues related to nuclear energy?

I agree with the former comment that a PR campaign to educate the population would be useful. Without sufficient support by the electorate, future governments may impose additional restrictions on nuclear power that could significantly threaten NuScale’s business – i.e. what happened in Germany – where Chancellor Angela Merkel’s laudable push for more renewable energy unfortunately also included a plan to shut down all nuclear plants, which causes Germany to import more electricity from other (ironically, often nuclear-powered) countries [3]. What I would particularly do, is to try to win over environmental groups and green liberals. They should understand that, for the next few decades (absent any ridiculous scientific breakthrough), nuclear energy is our ONLY HOPE to get rid of coal plants and reduce emissions from the power industry. Sen. Bernie Sanders made protection of the environment his central issue when he competed in the Democratic primary, and for many is the face of today’s young generation’s desire to save the planet in the U.S. He should be the face of nuclear energy! Or maybe Leonardo DiCaprio?

[1] Greenpeace USA. 2016. Nuclear Energy . [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].
[2] Bernie Sanders. 2016. Full Plan: Combating Climate Change to Save the Planet. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].
[3] Judy Dempsey. 2016. How Merkel Decided to End Nuclear Power – The New York Times. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].

On November 6, 2016, Clemens commented on Sunny Days Ahead for SolarCity? :

Very interesting post on SolarCity. I liked how you simply and clearly laid out the business model, including stating the risks the company is facing. While it certainly sounds extremely encouraging and promising from an environmental point of view, I was surprised to see how much the business model relies on the government and the regulatory environment. You stated that SolarCity’s model might not be sustainable if it were not for tax incentives. This is scary. I appreciate President Obama’s push to tackle climate change, and how these policies have significantly benefited the business, however, it is uncertain how future administrations will handle this issue. I would be curious to see what you would recommend to the business to make more sustainable on its own and less dependent on legislation.

On November 6, 2016, Clemens commented on The Panama Canal: The “Bottleneck” of Global Shipping? :

Very interesting post – a topic I wouldn’t have thought to be related to climate change. I didn’t think that the ability to operate the canal could potentially be compromised by the unavailability of water. I also liked how you posted a few pictures to visualize the canal, and how you described the significance of the canal for world trade in numbers, at the beginning of your post. I also found it interesting that you brought up the Northwest Passage (i.e. the sea route north of Canada, connecting the Atlantic and Pacific Ocean via the Arctic) – I didn’t know that was a potential opportunity for cargo and shipping, and that it could be used as an alternative to the Panama canal; another impact of global warming & rising sea levels that I wouldn’t have expected. Also, it seems that certain cargo ships and cruise ships will still be too large to fit through the canal [1], so maybe another expansion will be necessary in the future.

[1] Wikipedia. 2016. Panamax – Wikipedia. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].

On November 6, 2016, Clemens commented on Is it all a Hoax? The GOP and Climate Change :

Thank you for your comment Kristen. In response to your comment about “marketing”, I agree that it is sometimes difficult to separate “words” from “actions” in politicians. There are definitely multiple Republican governors who have implemented legislation to protect the environment from pollution (such as disposal of chemical waste, etc.), but that’s not the same as acknowledging climate change and reducing CO2 emissions. There may be more than Arnold Schwarzenegger, but I only brought him up because he was the most outspoken example. It would obviously take a lot more comprehensive research than this blog post to figure out how politicians’ public statements correlate with, or contradict, their voting as well as the measures they implement in their home state. I think this problem is also partially rooted in issue of a 2-party system: with only 2 parties for a country of 350 million, it is often difficult to understand what a party really stands for, since each party is comprised of so many different (and often contradicting) statements, opinions and policies.
In response to your second point about what can influence them… I think this is challenging. If not even the Pope can convince them [1][2]… who can? I think younger people are more educated about this issue, so hopefully it will change meaningfully as the next generation puts more pressure on politicians.

[1] Crux. 2016. Pope calls global warming sin, says protecting creation is work of mercy. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].
[2] POLITICO. 2016. Pope Francis’s climate message unlikely to sway Republicans – POLITICO. [ONLINE] Available at: [Accessed 06 November 2016].
Add to My References

On November 5, 2016, Clemens commented on ‘The Power in Poop’ or ‘A Dirty Source for Clean Energy’ :

Fascinating! Can this be used for all kinds of waste and trash or mainly for sewage / wastewater?