SodaStream stock loses fizz amid ‘boycott fears’

soda stocks

SodaStream slumps over the last month

Things seem to be going from bad to worse for SodaStream. Here’s the news. Last week British mega bank Barclays cut SodaStream’s rating to “Underweight”. Motley Fool reports Barclays was “throwing in the towel on SodaStream once and for all –… predicting the company will sell for as little as $35 a share within a year.” Ouch!

The market is closed today for the holiday, but take a look at what a Google search of SodaStream stock looks like:

xxx

Googling SodaStream

 

All fizzed out. That little bounce in their share price last month following the rumor Starbucks might purchase a 10% stake in what even New York Magazine terms the “blood-bubbles” corporation? Gone. WallStreetPR reports:

“Boycott fears hang around….political issues between Israel and Palestine are rearing their head into the business of Sodastream……threats of consumer boycotts can be seen taking the better part of the possible deals….Starbuck recently dismissed as rumors reports about its possible deal with Sodastream”.

Yep, that was an easy call.

About Annie Robbins

Annie Robbins is Editor at Large for Mondoweiss, a mother, a human rights activist and a ceramic artist. She lives in the SF bay area. Follow her on Twitter @anniefofani
Posted in Israel/Palestine | Tagged , , , ,

{ 0 comments... read them below or add one }

  1. ohiojoes says:

    Yeah. Still not taking stock advice from Mondoweiss.

    • Ellen says:

      Ohio, good investors come up with ideas on their own — by staying informed on a wide range of stuff and thinking about things, connecting dots.

      They don’t go to blogs for advice.

      But Soda will be a penny stock in 18-30 months. The boycott will not do it. It is just a low value product appealing to demographics that do not and cannot sustain it.

      • seafoid says:

        “political issues between Israel and Palestine are rearing their head into the business of Sodastream”

        Lethal for a company whose business is selling lifestyle.
        They can’t manage their image with the albatross of YESHA hanging around their necks.

      • ohiojoes says:

        So wait–why does the article from motley fool conclude by saying you, the investor, should buy Soda stream stock now?link to fool.com

        • you have a different article that was written today, probably at the urging of someone who’s licking their wounds.. both my motley fool articles ended inthe negative. one: “Barclays is right to counsel investors to sell.”

          the other “SODA stock has stumbled this year on the heels of weak quarterly results and disappointing guidance.”

          here’s the end of your article, after listing a string of bummers:

          This isn’t new to SodaStream. The arrival of brand-name competition has done more good than harm for SodaStream throughout Europe in recent years. Yes, things are a mess in terms of operations. SodaStream may also be setting itself up for a fall this year by sticking to a 15% top-line guidance target for all of 2014 that implies sales will grow at a roughly 25% clip during the latter half of this year. That just doesn’t seem realistic. However, the stock has already shed more than half of its peak value at a time when sales growth and margin pressures may have bottomed out.

          Buying SodaStream here is certainly risky, but the rewards do seem to outweigh the pitfalls.

          i am not a stock specialist (at all) but nothing in that article said anything that indicated the ‘rewards outweighs the pitfalls’.

        • ritzl says:

          @ohiojoes- The MF conclusion sounds like a description of speculation and the accompanying suspension of disbelief/fiduciary judgement to me, and even that is made with a qualified, cautionary tone.

          To the extent that speculation is someone’s/your investment criterion, they/you should have at. It’s probably not for many on any meaningful (i.e. sound fundamentals/stock-price elevating) scale, especially for responsible institutional investors.

          As Annie pointed out, there are too many unanswered questions (“bummers”), and there’s $Bs in value at stake in SODA getting them ALL right going forward. They may, but it sure doesn’t seem likely.

  2. sky7i says:

    On another note, does anyone know anything about this company? Is it in the same category as Sodastream?

    link to jerusalemsandals.com

    It says “Made in Israel” but also: “Handmade with natural leather east of Jerusalem. … The line is hand crafted by Palestinians for commercial sale by an establishment with Jewish roots.”

    • eljay says:

      >> It says “Made in Israel” but also: “Handmade with natural leather east of Jerusalem. …

      “Jerusalem” and “east of Jerusalem” are not part of Partition-borders Israel.

      >> link to jerusalemsandals.com

      While the geo-political landscape continues to evolve, the principles, agents and advisory board of Jerusalem Sandals continue to be neutral in their position with respect to the political atmosphere. However, consistent with our vision we believe that it is equally important to promote a message of peace in all corners of the earth. Furthermore, we believe that our name lends to our vision.

      After all, Jeru (in Hebrew) translates to “teaching” and Salem (in Hebrew) translates to “peace”.

      It sounds like the vision of the principles, agents and advisory board of Jerusalem Sandals is to take advantage – neutrally, of course – of cheap labour in an occupied Palestine. I guess to some people that constitutes “teaching peace”.

      • ziusudra says:

        Greetings eljay,
        …Jeru-salem….
        Jeru = He casts, Salem= peace, but fret not. You have scholars of Hebrew searching frantically for a Hebrew origin of Hebrew and
        think they found it in Ibri= passes through/crossing over. Not bad,
        but not good enough. Hebrew=Greek for ‘Outside of the Hellenic Culture. World Jewry also misinterprets Goy today. Goy=Hebrew
        for nation. The 12 tribes were Goyim and that’s how they greeted
        individuals from other tribes. Example, Moses of the Levi
        greeting Moshe of the Judah as Goy ( same Nation).
        ziusudra
        PS As a lapsed catholic, no, i don’t speak Hebrew, but words of Hebrew
        are politically & religiously misintepreted on purpose to Hebrew speakers.
        PPS There was no term Hebrew before the Macedonian conquest in
        323BC; no Israelite before 1005BC; no Jew before 933BC. No tribes,
        no Kingdoms after 586BC. Only individuals of towns or villages; Jesus
        of Nazareth, etc.
        Just how the tribes came to believe that they were a Nation, Goy could only have been conceptualize after their federation of 12 tribes in the
        first Kingdom of Hebron of King Saul in ca. 1025BC or later. A Nation, they became in 1948AD.

    • kindauu says:

      I went to the Jerusalem Sandals site, and their profession of neutrality makes me sick. I would recommend Camel sandals myself. See link to camelsandals.com. It looks like Jerusalem Sandals is copying their designs.

      Camel’s facebook page indicates they’re located in Hebron and were founded in 1973. I contacted them last year and asked directly if they were a Palestinian company. The reply I got was yes.

    • Woody Tanaka says:

      “The line is hand crafted by Palestinians for commercial sale by an establishment with Jewish roots.”

      In other words, the Palestinians do the work, and the Israeli get the profit.

  3. Taxi says:

    BDS turned a snowflake into an avalanche – we saw it with our own eyes.

    Great and deep gratitude to all BDS activists ALL OVER THE WORLD!

    Loving you and loving this story.

    The bust-up of Sodastream is a particularly good victory because it’s also a victory over zionist Hollywood.

    Heh-heh-heh!

  4. just says:

    Good news, annie.

    (doing the happy BDS dance here!)

    • puts a little smile on my face too.

      • just says:

        little wonder– you did amazing, diligent work wrt to SS and SJ.

        Many thanks!

        • hmm, there has been an amazing teamwork coordinating the boycott against SodaStream for a long long time. had that groundwork not already been put in place things would not have erupted as they did when johansson signed on as global mouthpiece. (people like, bdsmovement, whoprofits, adalah, code pink, end the occupation, we divest, jvp, SodaStream Boycott Interfaith Boycott Coalition, and the list goes on)

          of course, we called it out and we pushed it, but the mobilization of this effort which is what was required to have the fantastic success it has had, i can take little credit for. your enthusiasm is much appreciated tho ;)

          • hophmi says:

            You can little credit in general. Sodastream went down because their sales numbers in the US went down, creating a question about whether there is a real future for the at-home carbonated beverage market. Your effort has zero to do with the stock price going down. So either you don’t understand much about the stock market, or you’re just a liar.

            I’m going to be generous and say it’s the latter. This brand of lying does your cause no good.

          • Blownaway says:

            As a stockbroker I can tell you that managers need to evaluate all risks associated with any given company. Once analysts and money managers start to evaluate the impact of political risk and report it professional money managers have a duty to stay away. This is why BDS is so important.

          • just says:

            hophmi– ugh.

            You can’t help yourself, can you? Go drink some of your bloody bubbles.

          • ritzl says:

            Agree, Blownaway. Great comment.

            BDS foregrounds everything Hostage, talknic, and others have laid out in excruciating black-letter detail and amplifies the financial uncertainty of that heretofore ignored political/legal risk. And that uncertainty works on both the sides of the purchase/investment decision to discount/devalue share prices.

          • Sodastream went down because their sales numbers in the US went down, creating a question about whether there is a real future for the at-home carbonated beverage market.

            i think it’s a little more complicated than that. SS spent a lot of money last year on other things a company under pressure from BDS would not have had to contend with. for one thing they are trying to get a factory inside israel and are so dependent on being subsidized by cheap bonuses from operating out of the settlements they want the israel gov to throw in support in the negev. and i’m not sure that’s gonna happen. i’d have to read up on it, it’s been awhile. they dumped a bunch of money into a bucket with a hole (BDS) ..for example, the superbowl worked against them (negative publicity) as opposed to for them. the writing is on the wall.

            and thanks blownaway, great comment!

  5. weareone says:

    Yes, many thanks Annie and to all at MW and commentors who work tirelessly to promote BDS!

    1S1P1V.

  6. amigo says:

    This is great.

    Even fear of Boycotts does the biz.

    All is needed now is for shareholders to start dumping stock.

    Poor Scarlett .Sure picked the wrong well to drink from.

  7. Ismail says:

    Sodastream trades on the NASDAQ exchange. The NASDAQ composite index gained 21% over the past year. Sodastream lost in the vicinity of 40% in the same time period.

    How great is it to enjoy one’s schadenfreude without a particle of guilt?

    Thanks, Sodastream.

  8. Citizen says:

    So how’s the soda stream movie star doing since she signed onto Israel First for keeps?

  9. Kay24 says:

    Good news for BDS. They did a great job on this. Sodastream is still sold in many stores in the US, and shopping networks like QVC and HSN. I am sure many Americans are still unaware of this controversy, but the latest downgrades by Barclays give us a good indication that they are indeed taking a beating.
    Hopefully, more to come, lots more.
    I think Europe has taken a leadership role in boycotts.

  10. Henry Norr says:

    With all due respect to Annie and commenters congratulating the BDS movement for the slide in SodaStream stock, I don’t buy it.

    The entire drop in the price of the shares this year occurred on one day, Jan. 13, when it fell 25 percent, from a close of $49.89 on the previous trading day all the way down to $36.94. That had little or nothing to do with BDS – it isn’t as if the movement had gone on some special offensive that weekend. The sharp decline was clearly a response to the company’s public announcement that day of preliminary results for fiscal 2013 that were dramatically below both its own previous predictions (“guidance”) and Wall Street analysts’ estimates. Specifically, the company said net income would be approximately $52.5 million versus a previous estimate of $63 million.

    That’s a classic case of what’s known in the business world as an “earnings miss,” something I used to have to write about regularly when I was a business reporter. As such developments always do, it not only triggered the immediate sell-off, but also forced all the analysts, investment advisors, etc., to re-do their models and downgrade their predictions for the future.

    It’s true that SodaStream announced a few days earlier that they were hiring Scarlett Johansson (probably in part an attempt to blunt the bad news they knew was coming), and Annie’s first post here about her (the one entitled “Scarlett Johansson for SodaStream: ‘Set the bubbles free’ but keep the Palestinians bottled in Area A”) appeared on Sunday, Jan. 12, the day before the sell-off. I guess I can’t prove it wasn’t that post, rather than the Monday announcement of financial results, that sent the investors running for the hills – if you want to believe that, be my guest. But it’s certainly a fact that the ScarJo/Oxfam flap didn’t boil up into the mass media until later that month, so you’d have to believe that the major investors were glued to MW over the weekend and made the decision to bail out of the company as soon as they read Annie’s piece.

    Notice that since Jan. 13, through all the media attention the ScarJo issue brought, SodaStream stock has yo-yo’d up and down several times – the six-month chart is here – mainly in response to rumors that Coke or Starbucks was about to buy a big chunk of the company, and to whatever else drives the market. Overall, however, it hasn’t gone down at all since the Jan. 13 sell-off – in fact, its close this past Friday, even after the Barclays downgrade, was still above where it wound up that day five and a half months ago.

    I’m certainly not trying to pooh-pooh BDS in general or the SodaStream campaign in particular – I’ve been participating in it for years, and I do believe it can be a very powerful vehicle for educating people about the occupation. But to suppose that we’re powerful enough to drive major changes in the valuation of a publicly traded corporation with one post on this site strikes me as a dangerous delusion.

    • Blownaway says:

      While I agree BDS is probably not the sole reason for the slide, there is no doubt that it has put a negative spotlight on what may already be a subject company. If a company is having difficulty, any additional bad news is magnified. And if its a blue chip, they sure don’t want any negativity tarnishing their image. BDS continues to be an important piece of the puzzle to solving injustice in Palestine

    • Yitzgood says:

      I’m certainly not trying to pooh-pooh BDS in general or the SodaStream campaign in particular

      Who cares? What could that possibly have to do with whether you are making a valid point or not? Wouldn’t it be nice to part of a political movement that didn’t require you to offer professions of loyalty to the cause in order to qualify a seemingly straightforward point about why a stock rose or fell?

      • Cliff says:

        @Ziobot

        You mean when Jewish organizations disinvite speakers for their ‘anti-Israel’ stance or for supporting BDS?

        • Yitzgood says:

          @Ziobot . . . You mean when Jewish organizations disinvite speakers for their ‘anti-Israel’ stance or for supporting BDS?

          So don’t be a Zionist either–I don’t care. I simply noted the posturing required to demur without stirring up the locals here.

    • I guess I can’t prove it wasn’t that post, rather than the Monday announcement of financial results, that sent the investors running for the hills – if you want to believe that, be my guest. But it’s certainly a fact that the ScarJo/Oxfam flap didn’t boil up into the mass media until later that month

      cough. prior to my post, and the way i heard about scarlett’s ambassadorship, there was already a buzz on twitter. it really didn’t take a rocket scientist to predict the well oiled SS boycott coalition (of which there are many!!!) would rear its head at the new hollywood development.

      what happened on monday would have happened whether i wrote my posts the day before or not. and that is the beauty of synchronicity. because, the movement which was already on high alert,would have also plunged into the SS drama with or without my article, which indeed they already had..on twitter.

      but when you say it’s certainly a fact that the ScarJo/Oxfam flap didn’t boil up into the mass media until later that month, i say so what? there were a few weeks between announcement til the superbowl. exactly at a time when SS had sunk (and it never really bounced back). so all eyes were on SS-scarlett. investors were concerned because of the drop, and we milked it. indeed wrt “later that month”..it was a matter of 4 DAYS (scroll back 30 posts of johansson/SS tags link to mondoweiss.net to link to mondoweiss.net ) before New Yorker writer Emily Greenhouse picked up the story including ‘new face of apartheid’.

      this was published 10 days later:

      SodaStream is suddenly facing widespread criticism in the media for making its seltzer devices in the occupied West Bank. The day after we published Rachele Richards jaw-dropping graphic of Scarlett Johansson drenched in red with sparkling bubbles in the background New York Magazine published Kat Stoeffel’s brand-slaying piece, “SodaStream: Guilt-Free Seltzer or Blood Bubbles?”

      Did someone say “blood bubbles” at a cocktail party in NYC?

      that nymag article was 8 days later. that’s not a bad turn around. it was a movement that thrived off the news SS stocks were down,scarlett, oxfam..all in sync that drove the news and made it so dramatic there was no way to separate investment from apartheid. sure, investors might not have agreed it was apartheid. but they wouldn’t ignore the boycott. within 2 weeks, by the time the commercial aired, it was history.

      and unlike other stocks, it has not recovered.

    • The entire drop in the price of the shares this year occurred on one day, Jan. 13, when it fell 25 percent, from a close of $49.89 on the previous trading day all the way down to $36.94.

      that was over 4 months ago henry, and right now the price is up only 70 cents @37.61. why?

      you don’t think starbucks read this? link to mondoweiss.net

      (because i happen to know they did) or you just don’t think they’d consider the implications wrt making financial decisions about what’s best for their company. i’m trying to figure out why you’re taking a position the work and actions of activists in the BDS movement means nothing and has no impact.

      • Henry Norr says:

        Annie, I’m not at all taking the position that “the work and actions of activists in the BDS movement means nothing and has no impact.” As I said in my previous comment, I’ve been part of the boycott-SodaStream movement for a long time, and I’m delighted that it’s attracted so much attention in recent months, thanks in considerable part to your efforts.

        I also don’t doubt that Starbucks, if they were or are considering an investment in SS, read your piece and take it into account.

        What I question is the idea that the BDS campaign has had much to do with the decline in the price of SodaStream’s stock. To me the evidence is overwhelming that that was a response to their disappointing (to investors) financial results for 2013.

        Yes, that happened four months ago. Why is the stock up only 70 cents or whatever since then? Because the 2013 results, confirmed by this month’s report on Q1 2014, showed that Wall Street’s previous expectations, based on the assumption that SS sales would continue to accelerate at a rapid rate, were illusory. The stock-market analysts then revised their models and predictions to reflect the new data, and the investors are now making their decisions on the basis of those reduced estimates. Like every other stock, it bounces up and down in response to the news and rumors of the day, the moods on Wall Street, etc., but it’s now fluctuating around the new baseline the market set on Jan. 13, when the 2013 warning came out.

  11. Bumblebye says:

    Slightly ot, but still bds, a couple of updates wrt the football issue:

    link to haaretz.com

    Sepp Blatter claiming to be “ambassador of the Palestinians”

    and

    link to theguardian.com

    Cantona criticizes FIFA and UEFA for U-21 championships in Israel.

    • just says:

      Thank you Bumblebye.

      I fervently wish for justice for the Palestinian players…

      And for Israel to be sidelined and held accountable for their criminal behaviors.