Portafoglio Black Dog..la storia continua

Beh, come contraddire Buffet... non oso nemmeno. Anche io sono orgoglioso del mio portafoglio e alla lunga penso che tutti coloro che investono sui fondamentali hanno delle soddisfazioni. Tuttavia, e ci penso spesso, non dimentichiamo che i nostri buoni risultati dipendono anche da uno dei mercati "toro" più lunghi della storia e tanta tanta liquidità sui mercati finanziari.

Completamente allineato, ci penso quasi quotidianamente e dico sul serio. Quando arriveranno i tempi delle vacche magre sara` un bel banco di prova per molti (a cominciare dal sottoscritto).
 
Il difficile non è entrare ... il difficile è non vendere per decine di anni.

chi non fa trading tiene anche per decenni senza problemi, il fatto è che da noi il buy&hold normalmente è stato fatto sulle blue chip italiane: unicredit, generali, telecom, seat,enel,eni..... i cui risultati non sono stati proprio paragonabili ai casi di successo americani
 
Recentemente Ascopiave ha lanciato un buy back fino al 20% del capitale, che ritengo piuttosto consistente.
Nemo, o chiunque altro voglia intervenire, ricordi altri buy back con percentuali simili o è un unicum? Io di solito ho sentito parlare di buy back compresi tra il 5% ed il 10%, ma non sono un campione rappresentativo :D

Ascopiave – Nuovo CdA da 6 membri e buy-back fino al 20% del capitale | Market Insight

Assolutamente molto interessante !
Resta da capire se lo faranno fino in fondo e cosa faranno delle azioni proprie.

Ad esempio Azimut sta facendo la stessa cosa e hanno già dichiarato che potrebbero annullare le azioni proprie in assenza di operazioni di scambio.
 
Completamente allineato, ci penso quasi quotidianamente e dico sul serio. Quando arriveranno i tempi delle vacche magre sara` un bel banco di prova per molti (a cominciare dal sottoscritto).

Come scritto sopra questo lungo trend rialzista delle borse è stato sostenuto anche da stimoli del tutto straordinari all'economia da parte delle varie banche centrali..le quali hanno generato un'enorme massa di liquidità che in parte si è poi riversata anche sull'equity.
Anch'io ovviamente mi trovo a riflettere ed ad immaginare cosa potrebbe accadere quando ci sarà un'inversione di tendenza...ma tuttavia all'evento non riesco a sovrapporre nessun scenario del passato poichè a mio parere viviamo un ciclo economico del tutto diverso da quelli pregressi..
Può essere obbiettato che è da sempre che viene ripetuta questa frase..tuttavia non possiamo negare che finanza abbia ormai acquisito una "potenza di tiro" smisurata...e le grandi banche..ed i maggiori fondi di investimento (che talvolta capitalizzano quanto il pil di qualche stato)..non solo gestiscono...ma "manovrano" praticamente tutto..per non considerare poi i costosissimi software di high frequency trading come ad esempio Aladdin di Blackrock che da solo "monitora" e gestisce circa 14 trillioni di dollari..
Sicuramente saranno scenari nuovi...ma speriamo naturalmente di incontrarli in un tempo il più lontano possibile :)
 
Assolutamente molto interessante !
Resta da capire se lo faranno fino in fondo e cosa faranno delle azioni proprie.

Ad esempio Azimut sta facendo la stessa cosa e hanno già dichiarato che potrebbero annullare le azioni proprie in assenza di operazioni di scambio.


Credo di avere un'idea circa l'obiettivo: carta utile per effettuare l'operazione di acquisizione/fusione con Aeb Gelsia, il cui negoziato è stato rinviato e dovrebbe riprendere a settembre/ottobre.
Non mi dispiacerebbe però nemmeno la possibilità che venga usata come merce di pagamento per i prossimi dividendi.
 
Assolutamente molto interessante !
Resta da capire se lo faranno fino in fondo e cosa faranno delle azioni proprie.

Ad esempio Azimut sta facendo la stessa cosa e hanno già dichiarato che potrebbero annullare le azioni proprie in assenza di operazioni di scambio.

Ho visto che sei diventato socio del Vacchi...:D
 
Teva Pharmaceutical to Nominate Four New Directors - WSJ

Teva Pharmaceutical Industries Ltd. will seek to overhaul its board by nominating four new directors, the latest step toward remaking the struggling drug company.
Teva, the world’s biggest seller of low-price generic drugs, will ask shareholders to approve the nominees at the company’s annual meeting July 13, said Sol Barer, the board’s chairman. The nominees would replace longtime board members who have decided to step aside or aren’t seeking new terms. Three of the nominees would bring international drug-industry and financial experience to the Israel-based company, while the fourth is an Israeli venture-capitalist. Among their first orders of business would be picking a new chief executive.
“We are evolving the board to meet new challenges both within Teva and the business” of generic drugs, Dr. Barer said in an interview. The nominees include Murray Goldberg, former chief financial officer at Regeneron Pharmaceuticals Inc. ; Roberto Mignone, managing partner of hedge fund Bridger Management LLC that specializes in health care; and Perry Nissen, a former GlaxoSmithKline PLC research-and-development official who now leads the Sanford Burnham Prebys Medical Discovery Institute in La Jolla, Calif. The fourth nominee is Chemi Peres, managing partner of Israel’s Pitango Venture Capital, which has invested in health care and information technology. They would replace Ari Belldegrun, who left the board in January; Roger Abravanel, who is resigning as of the annual meeting to support the board’s makeover; and Ory Slonim, who is not standing for re-election. Joseph Nitzani will leave when his term ends in September. None of the nominees had a comment, a company spokeswoman said. In statements, Mr. Slonim said, “I thought it would be better to allow the board to refresh” with new members; Mr. Abravanel said that he will be involved in the company in the future, and he is “proud to have been a board member”; Mr. Nitzani said, “I consider rotation as a significant value.” Mr. Belldegrun had no comment. Teva is confronting challenges of its own as well as those besetting the entire generic-drug industry.
Like other generic-drug makers, Teva faces a tough pricing environment and intensifying competition for copycat medicines that is squeezing their tight margins. The company must also deal with $32 billion in debt and a sprawling supply chain accumulated through acquisitions. And multiple-sclerosis therapy Copaxone, one of Teva’s few brand-name drugs but a key source of sales and profit, is starting to lose patent protection in the U.S. The company has been trying for several years to effect an overhaul. In 2012, it hired Jeremy Levin from Bristol-Myers Squibb Co. to take the helm but he was forced out the next year during a dispute with the board over the direction to take the company. His replacement, Erez Vigodman, an Israeli who was familiar with the company from his time serving on its board but lacked a drug-industry background, stepped away from the company in February for undisclosed reasons. Longtime CFO Eyal Desheh is scheduled to leave June 30. Analysts and investors have been pressuring Teva to add more global industry experience to the board, so it can support executives to take the steps needed to restructure the company.
Dr. Barer described the new board nominations as an effort to position Teva to make “a lot of tough decisions.” With the new members added, the board would be “ready for change” and back up the next chief executive to “aggressively move Teva forward.” The board is interviewing candidates for chief executive, and the choice would likely be someone from outside Israel willing to live in the country and with global drug-industry experience. He declined to give a timetable for a decision, but said the search is the company’s main priority. The board is also looking for a chief financial officer, but Dr. Barer said the next chief executive would pick the person.
 
drawdown

bg a tutti ,

domanda forse stupida ma per me importante . qlc ha un link da condividere per individuare drowdawn medio per anno ? mi spiego meglio : se volessi individuare e/o monitorare società con un drawdown annuo, per esempio max 20% o 15% , esiste un sito che mi puo' aiutare per una rapida analisi per poi approfondire con calma oppure è un "lavoro" da fare a manina ? ho cercato su 4trdaders e investing ma non ho visto nessun dato a proposito . :( grz in anticipo per eventuali risposte .
 
heineken in italia (buona l'ichnusa):
Heineken: cura friulana per Ichnusa la birra sarda sara una seconda Moretti - Repubblica.it

Cagliari. Antonio gira il maialetto infilzato ad uno spiedo dentro a un vecchio camino acceso. Poi stappa un’Ichnusa e brinda ai 50 anni del birrificio di Assemini e agli oltre cent’anni di questa birra bevuta dai pastori dell’Ogliastra come dai pescatori del Sulcis. È qui, in un ovile senza corrente, circondato solo da lentischi, ginestre e cinghiali, a diversi chilometri dal primo centro abitato, che il marchio Quattro mori, ha deciso di raccontare ai giornalisti il rapporto quasi ancestrale tra la bionda e l’isola. Un legame che ora Heineken, proprietaria del brand, vuole sfruttare usando la forza del Made in Sardegna, per sedurre il mercato italiano e crescere ancora. Già in passato l’azienda olandese, 835 milioni di euro di ricavi in Italia, ha preso delle birre regionali e le ha portate alla ribalta nazionale. È anche così che è riuscita a primeggiare nel nostro paese, superando il 28 per cento di quota di mercato. Grazie innanzitutto al brand Birra Moretti, nato in Friuli ma che in vent’anni ha quadruplicato i suoi volumi, raggiungendo i circa 2 milioni di ettolitri. E adesso è la volta di Ichnusa che di ettolitri ne commercia 640mila quasi esclusivamente in terra sarda. “Questo brand adesso sarà cruciale all’interno della nostra strategia - spiega Soren Hagh, amministratore delegato Heineken Italia - Puntiamo a farlo crescere seguendo proprio il modello Birra Moretti”. Se le cose ripetute giovano, di sicuro Heineken, un consolidato di circa 21 miliardi
di euro a livello mondo, 5,5 milioni di ettolitri di prodotto venduto in Italia (anche con marchi quali Heineken, il terzo marchio più venduto nel paese, Dreher e Desperados), è così che gioca in attacco nella guerra della birra. I competitors sono tutti grandi gruppi. Primi fra gli altri i giapponesi di Asahi, oltre 14 miliardi di euro di ricavi a livello globale, che con Peroni, acquistata solo lo scorso anno, ha il 18,4 per cento di quote di mercato grazie a un portfolio di brand come Nastro Azzurro, Tuborg e Birra Peroni, seconda birra più consumata lungo lo Stivale. E poi c’è Ab Inbev, terzo nel nostro paese con una quota di mercato intorno al 9,2 per cento, grazie a marchi quali Beck’s e Corona. Ma primo colosso al mondo in questo settore, che ha chiuso il 2016 con un fatturato di circa 40 miliardi e nel frattempo si è unito a un altro grande gruppo, tra i maggiori del pianeta, la SabMiller. Con concorrenti così, ecco che nemmeno Heineken può vivere sugli allori. E la carta del Made in Sardegna sembra buona da giocare. Anche per via del grande flusso di turisti che frequenta la regione e dei settanta circoli dei sardi distribuiti lungo lo Stivale, che radunano circa 350mila emigrati che fanno un’intensa attività di promozione dei prodotti isolani. Tanto da aver già portato Ichnusa oltre i confini regionali facendo un po’ da testa d’ariete, facendo leva sull’orgoglio sardo che li porta a consumare quando possibile i ‘frutti’ della propria terra e a farli conoscere. E questo è un bene per Ichnusa. Per ora il grosso delle vendite è comunque realizzato in Sardegna. Dove si bevono in media 60 litri di birra all’anno a persona, il doppio di quanta ne viene consumata in Italia. Ma le cose stanno per cambiare. «In questi giorni andrà in onda uno spot, affidato al regista californiano David Holm, per lanciare birra Ichnusa sulle principali televisioni nazionali», afferma il brand manager di Heineken, Patrick Simoni, che mostra un video dove si susseguono le immagini di Orgosolo e dei suoi murales, della reggia nuragica di Barumini, del mare di Alghero. «Abbiamo poi rivisitato il look delle bottiglie, alcune riportano le foto di chi per Ichnusa lavora, e infine stiamo presentando al mercato una nuova birra non filtrata», racconta Simoni. Prossimo passo distribuire il marchio, acquisito da Heineken nel 1986, soprattutto attraverso i supermercati. Cavalcando il momento più che favorevole. Il consumo di birra sta crescendo nel nostro Paese. Secondo l’Osservatorio costituito da Fondazione Moretti, dal 2010 al 2015 in Italia si è registrato un incremento dei consumi pari all’8,6 per cento, confermato da un aumento dell’1,6 per cento nel 2016 e da uno straordinario +11 per cento nel primo quadrimestre del 2017. «Nel 2016 - afferma Andrea Bagnolini direttore di Assobirra - le stime parlano di una quota di consumi pro capite mai raggiunta prima: siamo infatti attorno ai 31 litri per italiano». L’ad di Heineken Italia Soren Hagh A lato, una campagna pubblicitaria della birra Ichnusa.

birre.jpg
 
Cocktails Rise and Shine While Beer and Wine Sales Slip - WSJ

Liquor makers sold more spirits and mixed drinks around the world in 2016 than in the year before—a bright spot in an industry where volumes of almost every other kind of alcoholic drink are in decline. Overall, last year was a tough one for beer and wine. Global alcohol volumes across all types fell 1.3%, a steeper decline than the average 0.3% drop over the past five years, according to industry tracker IWSR. Beer volumes fell 1.8% around the world in 2016, while wine sales slipped 0.08%. Yet sales of hard alcohol like gin, tequila and whiskey eked out an increase of 0.04%, and mixed drinks, including pre-mixed cocktails and some flavored alcoholic beverages, grew by 1.6%.
The numbers underscore a shift in consumer tastes away from beer and wine and toward drinks that typically pack a higher percentage of alcohol, though intended to be consumed in less volume. Spirits are growing faster in the U.S. They were up 2.6% last year, in line with the five-year average and more than double wine-sales 2016 growth. Overall alcohol sales in the U.S. inched up 0.1% by volume.
The growth has been helped by liquor makers’ efforts in recent years to attract new drinkers. Makers of scotch and other types of whiskey have been courting women and younger drinkers while internationally, spirits companies are pushing into Africa, China and other developing markets where beer has typically been king. “Scotch is coming out of the stuffy club room into the cocktail bars and restaurants,” said Bacardi International Ltd. Chief Executive Michael Dolan. Spirits makers, he said, are benefiting from the revival in cocktail culture.
Liquor ads, after years of restrictions, have crept back onto TV screens in recent years. The National Football League, a holdout until recently, plans to accept commercials for distilled spirits in the coming 2017 season. Spirits have also benefited from what executives describe as more fickle consumption habits by millennial drinkers, who tend to sip on a range of different beverages. Spirits tend to retail at higher prices than wine and beer, providing a bit of a cushion for the alcohol industry as a whole. Despite falling volumes last year, the dollar value of alcoholic drinks sold globally grew 4.7%, according to Euromonitor. In the U.S., dollar sales rose 3.3%.
Liquor makers have started pushing more expensive brands, as have beer and wine companies. “We continue to look to premiumize,” Diageo PLC Chief Financial Officer Kathy Mikells told investors earlier this year. “You can see across our biggest brands, our global giants and local stars—it’s the reserve brands and variants that are growing faster.” Those brands include Johnnie Walker Green Label and Johnnie Walker Gold Label Reserve, pricier variants of its flagship Scotch whisky.
Earlier this year, Diageo launched a new high-end Irish whiskey brand, Roe & Co, which sells at £30 ($39) a bottle in the U.K. Rémy Cointreau SA, which currently gets 50% of its sales from products priced above $50 a bottle, has set a target to bump that share up as high as 65%.
The taste shift has left brewers out in the cold. Beer volumes in the U.S. fell 0.3% last year, according to IWSR, and beer makers experienced big sales drops in key overseas markets. An economic crisis in Brazil sent sales down 5.7%. Chinese beer sales fell 4.2% as drinkers flocked to wine and spirits. Beer sales in Russia fell 7.8% amid economic headwinds and price rises there. “We need to take back the share of stomach we’ve lost over the past decade to wine and spirits,” said Britt Dougherty, MillerCoors’s vice president of marketing insights and engagement.
Anheuser-Busch InBev NV’s Bud Light, the biggest beer brand in the U.S., continues to lose volume and market share. After a failed bid to revive the brand last year, AB InBev this year launched a new U.S. marketing campaign. The company last month said it would invest $2 billion through 2020 in U.S. capital expenditures targeted in part at “elevating” struggling core brands.

alcol.jpg
 
damodaran,greenwald e altri su welch e immelt a GE:
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/15/...n=latest&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=collection

For Fortune magazine in 1999, Jack Welch, then General Electric’s chief executive, wasn’t just the country’s best executive, or the manager of the year, but nothing less than the best manager of the 20th century, “far and away the most influential manager of his generation.” Mr. Welch himself was more circumspect. “My success will be determined by how well my successor grows it in the next 20 years,” he said at a management conference that year.
Eighteen years later, with this week’s announcement that Mr. Welch’s handpicked successor, Jeffrey R. Immelt, would step down as G.E.’s chief executive, the verdict would appear to be in.
“Given how horrendous the stock performance has been for so many years, the most amazing thing is why the board didn’t act sooner” to replace Mr. Immelt, said Charles M. Elson, a professor and director of the John L. Weinberg Center for Corporate Governance at the University of Delaware. Scott Davis, a Barclays managing director, said on CNBC that Mr. Immelt’s tenure was “an unmitigated disaster for shareholders.”
Mr. Welch brought much needed energy and charisma to the chief executive’s job and streamlined G.E.’s bloated bureaucracy. Had he stayed on through the financial crisis, perhaps he would have recaptured the growth that eluded Mr. Immelt. But hardly anyone considers Mr. Welch, now 81, a management role model anymore, and the conglomerate model he championed at G.E. — that with strict discipline, you could successfully manage any business as long as your market share was first or second — has been thoroughly discredited, at least in the United States.
No wonder, given the performance of the company’s stock over the past 10 years. G.E. shares dropped 25 percent during that period, in contrast with a 59 percent rise for the S.&P. 500. The rival industrial conglomerate Honeywell’s stock has more than doubled, and Danaher’s has tripled. United Technologies gained 67 percent. Nonetheless, Mr. Immelt remained one of the country’s highest-paid executives: $21.3 million in 2016, $33 million in 2015, and $37 million in 2014. Even without a formal severance package, Mr. Immelt, 61, will get an additional $211 million when he retires, Fortune estimates. “I’m a long-term G.E. shareholder,” Mr. Elson said. “The bottom line is, I did poorly and he did very well.”
Speaking of his tenure as G.E.’s leader, Mr. Immelt pointed to the increased strength of the company’s industrial businesses, their competitiveness and large market shares. “I’ll say that will stand the test of time,” he said in an interview on Monday with my colleague Steve Lohr. “Let other people make their own judgments.”
Mr. Immelt’s defenders have pointed out that he had to contend with the collapse of the tech bubble, the Sept. 11 attacks and the financial crisis, all circumstances beyond his control. But so did the chief executives of every other major company. “About the best that can be said is that he enabled G.E. to survive through a difficult time,” said Bruce Greenwald, professor of finance and asset management at Columbia. “But he never really understood how to create value through growth.” And he inherited “a highly inflated stock price,” Mr. Greenwald said, thanks to Mr. Welch’s aura and lofty expectations that probably no one could have met. As Aswath Damodaran, a finance professor at the New York University Stern School of Business, put it, “It’s always tough to follow a legend.” Suffice to say that Mr. Immelt won’t be writing a book like Mr. Welch’s national best seller, “Jack: Straight From the Gut,” to celebrate his tenure at the helm of G.E. But ultimately, it may be the much-lauded Mr. Welch whose reputation emerges more tarnished. “Jeff Immelt brought his best every day for 16 years,” Mr. Welch said in a statement. His office said he was not available to comment about his own legacy. Mr. Immelt tacitly repudiated the Welch model himself, moving to dismantle parts of the sprawling G.E. empire by getting rid of NBCUniversal and the once-too-big-to-fail GE Capital. The problem, many critics said, is that he didn’t do so nearly fast enough.
“I don’t think Jack Welch was ever as good as he was made out to be,” said Mr. Damodaran, who has spent years trying to value G.E. During Mr. Welch’s tenure, “he benefited from the growth of financial services in the American economy and the growth of GE Capital,” Mr. Damodaran added. “That’s what made it untouchable for so long.” That strategy backfired in 2008, years after Mr. Welch had left, with the arrival of the financial crisis. “It turned out G.E. had no competitive advantage in financial services,” Mr. Damodaran said. “If anything, their risk controls were even worse” than those at other large financial institutions. Warren E. Buffett had to come to the rescue with a $3 billion infusion.
Mr. Damodaran said he warned G.E. executives in 2005 that complexity could become a problem. “If you wanted to create a valuation hell, it would be G.E.,” he said. “It was too complex by design, growing through numerous acquisitions. I told them back then, ‘You’re getting away with this now, but if there’s ever a crisis, it will come back to haunt you.’”
Mr. Greenwald, the Columbia professor, agreed that much of G.E.’s success, and then its problems, stemmed from an overreliance on its huge financial services business. “It was contributing 60 percent of profits, and Jack Welch could always tweak the earnings by turning to GE Capital,” he said. “But it had no stable source of deposits” to fall back on in the financial crisis. That is the main reason G.E.’s rivals have fared so much better, Mr. Greenwald said. “They were never the broad conglomerate G.E. was, with huge financing businesses,” he said. “They’re much more focused on industrial production.”
Both Mr. Greenwald and Mr. Damodaran said the Welch conglomerate model had been thoroughly repudiated, so much so that there is a widely recognized “conglomerate discount” applied by investors to the stock prices of companies consisting of businesses with no obvious synergies. Activist investors have pounced on this to urge the breakup of disparate operations, and G.E. itself has been the target of the activist investor Nelson Peltz.
“Specialization is something that provides real value,” Mr. Greenwald said. “If you’re a conglomerate, by definition you’re not specialized.”
Even companies like Honeywell and United Technologies “aren’t trying to do everything,” he added. “They have areas of specialization.” Mr. Damodaran said few of the world’s conglomerates, if any, are superstars. “They may be doing better than G.E., but they all suffer from similar problems,” he said. “They’re not nimble and adaptable. It’s much harder to be a conglomerate today than it was 20 or 30 years ago. The Welch model is certainly dated. Maybe it’s still used in a few old-line manufacturing businesses, but not in the rest of the economy, where a start-up can destroy your business.”
Even though Mr. Immelt deserves praise for abandoning the Welch model, Mr. Damodaran said, he did it much too late. “They’d be much better off if they’d started sooner,” he said. In a statement, a General Electric spokeswoman said, “Today, G.E. is a more focused industrial company with strong growth opportunities in the long term.”
G.E. shares rallied this week on news of Mr. Immelt’s departure, largely on hopes that his successor — John Flannery, a company veteran — will embrace that logic. He promised a “comprehensive review” of all G.E. businesses to be carried out “with speed, urgency and no constraints.”
That left investors salivating for more divestitures or spinoffs. “Does anyone really think there are any synergies between medical equipment and jet engines?” Mr. Greenwald asked. “A complicated, specialized business like medical equipment would be much better on its own.”
More divestitures may well result in pretty much the same G.E. that Mr. Welch inherited, which is “a boring, mature company,” Mr. Damodaran said. “This isn’t a company that’s going to work miracles. Even if well run, about the best G.E. can hope for is to grow at the rate of the economy. But that may be the best-case scenario. If it tries to rediscover its youth, that would make me nervous.”
a.jpg
 
Why Diageo Is Paying $500 a Bottle for George Clooney’s Tequila - WSJ

Diageo is so desperate to avoid ending up the Budweiser of U.S. liquor that it could pay almost $500 a bottle for George Clooney’s tequila brand. On the shelf, it costs around $50. Only supercharged tequila drinking will justify Diageo’s splurge. The London-listed group announced Wednesday that it had agreed to buy Casamigos for up to $1 billion, comprising a $700 million downpayment and a further $300 million if the brand hits certain milestones. The label was only launched in 2013, but its sprinkling of Hollywood stardust--Mr. Clooney and Rande Gerber founded the company with real-estate man Mike Meldman--has taken the tequila market by storm. It is on track to ship 170,000 cases this year, Diageo said, up from 120,000 last year.
Craft beer started squeezing big brewers like Bud-maker Anheuser-Busch InBev in the 2000s, but really took off this decade. It now accounts for about a fifth of U.S. beer sales. Meanwhile, craft liquor represents just 3% of its market, reports Citi, and is only just getting into its stride.
Liquor has important differences to beer: The U.S. market is growing faster, thanks to the millennial cocktail craze, and most big brands can boast a craft heritage. Still, established categories like blended scotch--and labels like Diageo’s Johnnie Walker--have found themselves challenged by upstarts. Diageo’s U.S. market share by unit sales was 17.1% last year, down from 17.3% in 2015 and 19.3% in 2012, according to data provider IWSR.
Diageo has responded as it can, by investing in booming categories. In January it launched an Irish whiskey, and in March opened a new $115 million bourbon distillery for its Bulleit brand in Shelby County, Kentucky, Mr. Clooney’s home state. Casamigos is another step. There are some worries Diageo is overpaying for a fad: Bernstein estimates that the investment will only cover its cost of capital if Casamigos sales continue to grow by 40% to 50% a year. But the real risk for investors could be that the liquor market fragments further to the benefit of upstarts. To revive U.S. growth, Diageo really needs Americans to go back to drinking scotch.
 
Indietro