Motley Fool Hidden Gems Investing - Stocks We're Thankful For and Must-See Movies

Episode Date: November 24, 2017

In the spirit of Thanksgiving, our analysts share 7 stocks they’re thankful for, and dig into some humble pie (i.e., stocks we were wrong about). Plus, corporate governance expert and film critic Nell Minow talks about the state of corporate boardrooms and shares some must-see movies for the holidays. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Support for Motley Fool Money comes from our friends at Rocket Mortgage by Quicken Loans. Home plays a big role in your life, that's why Quicken Loans created Rocket Mortgage. It lets you apply simply and understand the entire mortgage process fully, so you can be confident you're getting the right mortgage for you. To get started, go to rocketmortgage.com slash fool. Everybody needs money. That's why they call it money. From Fool Global Headquarters, this is Motley Fool Money.

It's the Motley Fool Money radio show. I'm Chris Hill, and joining me in studio this week from Million Dollar Portfolio, Jason Moser. From Rule Breakers, Aaron Bush. And from Motley Fool Pro and Options, Jeff Fischer. Good to see you as always, gentlemen. Hello, Chris. Welcome to our Thanksgiving special. We're going to give thanks for some stocks. We will call out a few turkeys, and we'll talk boardrooms and movies with Nell Minow. But long-time listeners know that we take our budget for special effects here at Motley Fool Radio, and we blow it all on this episode. Steve Broido, our man behind the glass,

is going to be lobbing in a few sound effects. And by a few, I mean just one. Let's start with a serving of humble pie, which we do every year for our Thanksgiving special. Jason Moser, what is a stock or a business story in 2017 that you got wrong? Stupid TripAdvisor. That's the one. That doesn't sound so humble. No, that doesn't sound remotely humble. Listen, I got this one dead wrong, because I really did leap to the assumption that they were making the right call in moving over to the instant booking platform of the business,

really trying to become more of a transactional platform, as opposed to just being an informational one, where we get information about where we may want to go. So, it's fascinating to see. The stock is down somewhere like 35% so far just this year. And really, when you look at the engagement metrics, by every measure, TripAdvisor, the actual site and app, continues to grow quarter-in and quarter-out. I mean, visits are up, reviews are up. I mean, people go there for a reason, but they really, really misjudged the opportunity of becoming more than just that informational platform. So, they invested a lot of money and a lot of time into building the instant booking platform that then completely flopped. And a good sign

of this, I think I mentioned this a couple of weeks back, if you go back two years, instant booking, the term instant booking, was mentioned on their earnings calls 21 times in the most recent quarter. Two years later, just this past quarter, it was mentioned exactly once. And that's not in the good way. So, the stock has really paid the price. I think Priceline has really shown their strength in this market. They really kind of flexed their muscles, so to speak, as TripAdvisor tried to build this platform out. So, it's going to be back to square one. I'm not sure they really know exactly what to do at this point. It wouldn't surprise me at all if the Liberty Trip Advisor leaders there, Greg Maffei and John Malone,

are maybe shopping this thing around. Aaron Bush, what about you? You got some humble pie you want to take a bite of? Fortunately, I've avoided any explosions in 2017, but there are still some investments from my past that haunt me to this day. So, I'll take it back in time a little bit. About eight years ago, actually, I purchased shares of Atwood Oceanics, which at that time was an up-and-coming owner of oil rigs, jackups, and ultra-deep-water rigs, essentially. But at that time, it seemed like it was just going up and up, big contracts, more rigs all the time.

But I just checked this morning, and this has become the worst investment I have ever made. I've lost something like 95% on this, and it's losing to the market. It could be worse. Probably like 200% or something at this point. So, yeah, it's absolutely horrible. Buy on the dip? No.

No, there's been a lot of dips. What was your main mistake, Aaron? My main mistake was not realizing how volatile oil prices could be, and from that, seeing that there was an oversupply of regs. But I think that the largest mistake for me with this company in 2017 is, I've just wasted so much time thinking about it. Right now, it's less than a 0.1% position of my portfolio, but I probably have spent well over 0.1% of my time here, just thinking about what to do with this. The company was acquired by Ensco, and so now I'm thinking about this

other company, which is essentially just a larger version of the same, just garbage. Is it worth hanging on to a position? I find that sometimes it's worth hanging on to those big, fat losers, just as a reminder of what I did wrong, so that I at least have a chance of not repeating the same mistake again. Do you find that sometimes? Well, that's why I've been holding onto it, because hopefully there's a lesson from here. But if anything, the lesson is that sometimes things really don't turn around, and that you can waste a lot of time. So, it really is just a case-by-case thing. But in 2017, Atwood, now InSco, still haunts me.

Jeff Fischer, what about you? So far, I must have a giant slice of humble pie for Bitcoin. I have been on this show last year at some point, skeptical of Bitcoin when it was several hundred dollars per coin. And it started January, it started this year at $996 per coin, it's now more than $8,000. So, it's up some eight times in value. So, I must take humble pie for misunderstanding so far what this thing is. I saw something recently that since Jamie Dimon called out Bitcoin as a fraud, the price of Bitcoin has basically doubled. So, you know, you've got some good company

there with Jamie Dimon. Although, I don't know, is Jamie Dimon a humble pie kind of guy? Good head of hair. Good head of hair. I'm just going to say, even though it is still early in the game, I've been wrong so far about Snap, which is only down about 25% from its IPO price. Obviously, they would love to be doing better, but I really thought this thing was on a rocket ship straight down. The combination of the way that they treated their potential investors going into the IPO, no voting rights whatsoever.

So, you're saying this is better than you actually thought it was going to be? Because it's still been downright horrible. It's still better than I thought it was going to be. That plus, I still believe in my heart of hearts that Mark Zuckerberg wants to destroy Snapchat. Ultimately he may, but so far in 2017, it's not ... I've basically been wrong on this one. Let's move from humble pie to stocks that we're thankful for. Jason, what do you got? Yeah, I think back in July, we introduced the war on cash basket. I'm calling out four stocks here that I'm very thankful for. That is MasterCard, Visa, Square, and

PayPal. For me, Chris, we made fun of ourselves every quarter for a good year, probably, when we would cover these companies come earnings time, and then ask ourselves the rhetorical question at the end of taping, why don't we own these stocks again? Well, finally, I just took care of that and bought all four of those companies as part of that basket to get some exposure to the electronic payments trend without having to really put all of my chips on one horse, so to speak. But to me, the companies that executed, all four have executed very well this year thus far. All four companies have outperformed the market since July, when we called that basket out. And thankfully, had some folks who listened and bought shares

of them as well, and have been very happy with their performance. So, it's been a very rewarding year thus far for the electronic payment system. Yeah, I've said before on this show that one of the great investing mistakes of my life was listening to Jeff Fischer talk about Visa early in his days as a public company and thinking to myself, boy, this makes so much sense, and Jeff is such a smart guy, and never buying. There's still time. There is still time, absolutely. And maybe before the end of the year, I'll pull the trigger on Visa. Aaron Bush, something you're thankful for in the world of stocks?

Yeah, sticking to the bundle theme a little bit, I'm thankful for all the gaming stocks that have just been on a huge tear. And to call one out specifically ... O' Video gaming or Vegas gaming? Video gaming. Easily. O' Hey, there are plenty of people who love Vegas. Aren't they going to become one and the same at some point in the new way? No, I'd rather game and make some money with these video game companies. And just to call out one particularly, Tic2 Interactive has just been a ridiculously phenomenal stock

that I've invested in over the past couple of years. This is the company behind franchises like Grand Theft Auto, Red Dead, Civilization, NBA 2K. I've been saying for years and years that I think the entire video game industry is underrated. Even after this huge rise, I still think that's the case. We see digital sales just take off. I think now, for a lot of these companies, it represents over half of the company's revenue. This is not only higher margin, where it replaces the middleman, the retailer, but it adds new high-margin revenue streams just through extra downloadable content. Throw on e-sports, throw on mobile gaming, throw on this IP that can then be leveraged in movies and shows and toys and

whatever which way. I think we still have a long way to go. So, I'm thankful for what it's done, but I'm also, I think, thankful for what it's going to continue doing. Jeff Fischer? Last year on the show, I was thankful for MasterCard, and this year I was going to say Square, it's doubled since the summertime, so I'm right there with Jason on Square. But I'll throw in a new one instead, Paycom, tickers P-A-Y-C, and they have nothing to do with money per se, except in the sense of their payroll provider for companies, mostly mid-sized businesses. They provide payroll and also human resource management software, all software

as a service, all on the cloud. Earnings per share grew 93% last quarter, revenue was up 31%. They topped $100 million in sales for the first time in a quarter. And 98% of their revenue is recurring in nature, subscription-based. So, a very strong company with strong margins and a strong business model, and a lot of runway ahead of it to keep growing. So, I've been thankful for it this past year, because it has doubled the past year, Paycom has. But I think there should be reason to be thankful for the years to come, too. For me, it's Amazon, which is up about 50% year-to-date, which is certainly more than I thought it was going to be up, more than I would expect in any given year.

But to me, it is a reminder, and this is something we talk about all the time, of the importance of diversification. Because while 2017, for me personally, is the year that Amazon was up 50%, it's also the year that I sold my shares of Chipotle at a loss, because I could no longer take it. But, you know, as we say all the time, that's why we diversify, Jason. Talk about your turkeys. That's a big one right there, isn't it?

All right. Our Thanksgiving special continues after a quick break. Stay right here. You're listening to Motley Fool Money. Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. Chris Hill here in studio with Jason Moser, Aaron Bush, and Jeff Fisher. It is our Thanksgiving special. And before we get to the stocks that are turkeys, we're going to dip into the Fool mailbag.

Radioatfool.com is our email address. That's radioatfool.com. From Sean Lee, who writes, first off, you guys are awesome and you are my everything. Thanks, Sean! Wow, that's not overstating it. I don't even get that from my wife anymore. He continues, I was wondering if you could briefly go into how companies are bought. I hear you always mention things like cash-only deal, etc. Could you explain the different ways a company can be bought?

and when certain deals are preferable over others. Certainly, Jeff, companies can pay cash if they're acquiring another company. They can do all stock. They can do a combination of both of those. Those are sort of the three most common. Right. And one tricky part, of course, is the company being acquired has to agree to the terms. But if you have an expensive stock, say your Tesla and your stock is a pricey equity, you can use that as a currency to buy something if the other company will agree. so you want to use your stock when it's rich. But you can also use cash when it's very cheap to get cash, which is still the case right now with interest rates very low. Those are

two cases where you go to where it costs you less, the least, to make the acquisition. One of the things we look at at various points when we're looking at management and their track record when it comes to capital allocation is, of course, how they make acquisitions. Is there a common approach among different business leaders? Meaning, if a company's in an inquisitive mood, are they always going to go the same route? Are they always going to go the all-cash route or the all-stock route? Or does it just depend? It's a great question, Chris. One company that comes to mind is Open Tech Software, which typically makes about a dozen acquisitions a year. They vary depending on the size. A

smaller acquisition, it may just throw cash at it. A larger one, it throws in stock and takes on debt as well, which of course is cash in the end, but that's a whole other bag of worms when you take on debt just to make an acquisition. So, it really varies depending on the size of the deal. Alright, it's the moment we've all been waiting for, the stocks that are turkeys. Really, it's the moment Steve Broido has been waiting for. Alright, Jason, this is a stock that you would avoid. These are the stocks that we want no part of. What's on your list? Alright, because I go first, I be stealing someone's idea here, because I actually could have gone one of two ways here.

I'm going to jump on Snap here, Purves. I'm kind of surprised that you thought it was going to be worse than it was, because it was really not so good this year. But I have a hard time seeing the light at the end of this tunnel for at least the near term. I think you made a good point in noting that the company was just not set up to be very shareholder-friendly. Shareholders have virtually no say-so whatsoever. These guys are going to have a massive drag in the form of share-based compensation here in the coming years. That is going to tamp down earnings potential for some time to come. There's no real clear path to profitability. Now, it's not to say that they can't be a good investment someday. I do think

there is a lot of innovation there. They're tapping into something with the creative nature for the platform, but I think on its own, Snapchat is very limited in its core purpose in the audience that it can grow. So, I think at least in the near-term, it gets worse for these guys before it gets better. It's not to say it can't get better, but I don't think it's going to happen in 2018. Aaron, what about you? So, I actually was going to say Snap, too, but I'll say something else. But one stat that just says so much to me about Snap right now is that over the past quarter and the past year, they've burned more money in free cash flow than they've made in revenue.

Yeah. So, I mean, they're still a $15 billion business, and they have fallen some, but unless they can really dig out of that hole, it's ... It's hard to see it as even a $5 billion business at this point. I mean, a lot working against them. Yeah, but my plan B is to say Blue Apron. Blue Apron is just, yeah, it's an absolute turkey. It's honestly one of the worst business models that I've probably run across in public markets. The unit economics are just absolutely terrible. They spend tons of money on marketing to bring in these customers, but the retention rates are so awful and the margins are so thin

on food that they're not keeping people around long enough to cover the cost to acquire them. So, you see, it's not as bad as Snap and how much money they're burning, but it's probably something like, for every dollar they bring in in revenue, they're losing $0.20 to $0.30 on each of that. So, I mean, yep, definitely. Do you think you could get turkey from Louis Vuitton? So, yeah, I mean, I think they realize, they definitely recognize that they should not have IPO'd when they did, and that they need to make some serious changes in how they keep

customers and how they acquire customers. Because if they keep things up at this rate, it's just going to be even more downhill from here. Well, they could always become a camera company. And that's one risk. You IPO when you have to. It was maybe their Hail Mary pass. Like, we need to raise money now! So we can spend more on marketing. Jeff, what about you?

Oh, man, you could talk about so many companies that had a dismal year, whether it's Sears, JCPenney, Fossil Watch, or Pier One, or Blue Apron, but I had to go with a giant, and that's General Electric. Really?! The stock is down 42% this year to a six-year low. The pain that it has inflicted on itself the last 10, 15 years was all self-inflicted. A lot of it, shockingly, happened during Jack Welch's watch. In 1999, he was named Manager of the Century, but it just goes to show you need to give this more time to marinate before you can really judge someone's career,

He made all these acquisitions and introduced some questionable accounting as well that has since caused the company to go, not belly up, but to face a lot of pain. It's been a turkey. It's been beheaded, basically. So, new CEO John Flannery, you're not buying shares of him. Well, he has a lot more work cut out for him than just one year's work. That's why I can say it's a turkey for this coming year. But Jack Welch and Jeff Immelt, both highly regarded managers, were misjudged. GE just announced, of course, that it's cutting its dividend. So, here's a company with $100 billion in revenue, and they have to cut the dividend. They've been around since 125 years,

and they're struggling badly. Steve Broido, you want to weigh in before we go to break? Achieva Pharmaceuticals, that one has been a giant turkey. I don't know if anyone's following that, but it's not done well, and I own that one, so that's for me. All right, Jason Moser, Aaron Bush, Jeff Fischer, guys, we'll see you a little bit later in the show. Coming up, we're going to check in with our most frequent guest here at Motley Fool Money, and of course, it's the one and only Nell Minow. Stay right here, you're listening to Motley Fool Money.

Hey, before we get back to the show, I want to say thanks to our friends at Rocket Mortgage from Quicken Loans. Getting a mortgage, refinancing your existing home loan, these are not simple things. And when you're making a big financial decision, you want to be as confident as you are in your job, in your life in general. And Rocket Mortgage gives you that same level of confidence when it comes to buying a home or refinancing your existing home loan. It's simple. Rocket Mortgage allows you to fully understand all the details and be confident that you're getting the right mortgage for you. To get started, go to rocketmortgage.com slash fool. Equal housing lender licensed in all 50 states

and mlsconsumeraccess.org number 3030. Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. I'm Chris Hill. So much happening in the boardrooms and Hollywood is making its final push for awards season. And so, of course, we turn to our favorite corporate governance expert slash film critic, Nell Minow. She joins me now from Washington, D.C. Hi, Nell. Well, hi. Let's start with this. Earlier in the month, we had Michael Lewis on the show.

And when I asked him what he sees when he looks at Wall Street, he said that he is struck by the continued absence of women in critical jobs. And he's amazed that there has not been more of a gender movement on Wall Street, which leads me to the topic that has been dominating the headlines in politics and entertainment, and that is sexual harassment. When it comes to corporate America, how are boards dealing with sexual harassment? Very poorly, if at all. This is a true story. I, some years ago, got a call from a reporter that a CEO of a Fortune 500 company had been accused of sexual harassment, and they asked me what would happen next. I said, well, you know, who knows whether it's true or not,

but the board has got to look into it. They have to convene a committee of independent directors and hire counsel, which they did, but the counsel they hired was somebody who had done a lot of work for the CEO before. So, of course, you know, I said I didn't think that was such a good idea. And the company's official response was, oh, we would do that if he was innocent. Wow. Yeah.

So, no. And by the way, he later lost his job. So I do think that this is a severe risk issue that boards need to be aware of. We've seen some very high-profile cases where CEOs have been embarrassed and the company's been embarrassed and they've lost their jobs. And I think that, you know, it's icky and it's gross and it's personal and nobody wants to get involved with it. And so they hand somebody a guidebook and make them watch a video and they figure that they're on top of it, but they're really not. I think it's important for companies now to begin by listening to the women. I think that the most important thing to come out of this latest and ongoing series of shocking revelations is that what we thought of as being kind of an individual problem in a few isolated cases turns out to be kind of a systemic problem and something that every organization has to look at carefully.

When it comes to Wall Street itself, are you surprised that there hasn't been more of this type of news coming out of Wall Street? Or is it because it is such a male-dominated industry that just the law of averages says that there are going to be fewer cases compared to, say, Hollywood or politics? Well, I think there's a lot of dogs that don't bark. It is a very hostile environment for women. And so they leave. And the same is true of, I think, of Silicon Valley. So I think we're going to be hearing revelations about Wall Street, about Congress, about just about every other, you know, academia. I think we're going to be listening to these stories for quite a long time. Gretchen Morgenson, the longtime columnist from The New York Times, recently stepped down after two decades in that role. I was very pleased to see that in her final column, which got a lot of attention, and rightly so, you were mentioned. You two had a conversation about corporate governance and the evolution of boards, certainly in

the last couple of decades that she's been writing that column. What, if anything, has gotten better over time, other than the fact that there is more sunshine, there is more transparency, we're paying more attention to boards. But other than that, which almost seems like table stakes at this point, when you look at corporate boards, what in your mind has been the single biggest improvement? The single biggest improvement is that I would say every director is more active and more engaged than when I first got involved. It was not unusual when I first became involved in this industry that directors would say to me,

well, the board is there to act in case of emergency. And I would say, no, no, the board is there to prevent emergency. Let's get this straight. And as I told Gretchen, when I first started working in this field, O.J. Simpson was on five boards, including an audit committee. And that's not happening anymore. There was a father of the CEO was on the comp committee at a publicly traded company. So that kind of ridiculous, and we all remember Beverly Sills being on a board

and Nancy Reagan being on a board. That's not happening anymore. So I would say boards are more qualified, more engaged, more aware of their responsibilities. On the other hand, the downside of Dodd-Frank and Sarbanes-Oxley is that they're overly focused on compliance and not enough on strategy and risk management. There's not enough climate expertise, not enough cybersecurity expertise on boards. We're still doing a terrible job on diversity. And, of course, CEO pay is still a problem that is far from being solved.

Let me go to General Electric, because GE has a new CEO, John Flannery. And not only has he made it clear that there are no sacred cows at the company and divisions will be cut back or sold off altogether. The latest twist is GE's Board of Directors, which had 18 people on it, and that's now being cut down to 12. My first question is, when you saw that news, what was your gut reaction? It's about time. Just too many people on the board?

Yeah, absolutely. We found in my old company where we rated boards of directors that optimal was 8 to 12. And basically, if you have to use electronic amplification to hear each other in the boardroom, that's too many people in the boardroom. You need to have a good, strong relationship between every member of the board. And I had a talk just a few days ago with some board members at Oxy, and they were telling me that they're doing less work in committees and more work in the board as a whole and that they've found that that's much, much more effective. And I support that. I'm not trying to impose some kind of cookie cutter on everybody, but generally speaking, I think that's right. So I think, you know, he's doing exactly what I hoped that Immelt would do.

Nobody could hold that weird group of assets together the way Jack Welch did. And I hope that somebody would come in, like Michelangelo, seeing the horse inside the block of stone and get rid of everything that wasn't the horse. And I think that it's long overdue to have that kind of zero-sum assessment of all the assets in the company. So when a new CEO of any company walks into the corner office, presumably they are given some amount of latitude in terms of what they're going to do with the business. In your mind, to what extent should that extend to the board of directors? Because I could see the reaction of at least some people, not me and clearly not you, but I could see the reaction of some people looking at what's happening at General Electric and saying Flannery is flexing his muscles a little too much and it should be a little more church and state and the board is the board and he can do whatever he wants regarding the operations of the business but leave the board alone. um sure uh i do worry about that and there have been cases where a new ceo comes in

and brings in all his guys to uh to be on the board um but i think as long as the board itself um does the nominating and evaluation of its directors i think they're probably in pretty good shape and uh so i i'm very encouraged by this but of course we'll be watching them very closely to make sure that they are not just a bunch of yes-men. We're going to get to movies in a second. And of course, this is the final push for awards season for Hollywood. But it's also awards season in the business world where different entities are naming their business leader of the year. With that in mind, is there any CEO or board that you want to call out and give an award to? I would give an award to the small group of CEOs who have spoken out

against Trump's backing out of the Paris Accords, the ones who have stood up and said, we are business people, we understand risk, we understand strategy, we understand sustainability, and that's not good for business. And so all of those guys get my vote for CEOs of the Year. I'm going to start with movies in kind of a nerdy direction, and it's documentaries. And it's because earlier this year, I got the chance to interview Steve James, who directed Abacus, Small Enough to Jail, and Ted Braun, who's the director of the documentary about Herbalife called Betting on Zero. Do either of these films have a shot in your mind at a Best Documentary nomination? Because I thought they were both phenomenal.

They're both great. I would love to see them get a nomination. I don't think that either one of them is a front-runner for an Oscar because generally the Oscar films like ones that are more heart-wrenching. But boy, Abacus, not only a great business story, not only a total slam on Cyrus Vance Jr., which is long deserved, but also what a story of a family. That family, and I was privileged to interview two of the daughters in the family, That family sticks together with such dignity and courage and resilience.

It was just a wonderful film to watch. I'm really happy that it was on PBS. I agree with that. Although, the fact that Bill Ackman, who is a billionaire activist investor, ends up essentially being the sympathetic protagonist of Betting on Zero, that almost, in my mind, deserves its own special award, like a separate one-off. He's an underdog all of a sudden. Yeah. And for all the coverage of Bill Ackman, it doesn't really come off in his day-to-day life like that. So the fact that he does in the film is amazing to me. It is.

But I have to say, I think he's right about Herbalife. You're not the only one. What are, in the bigger sense and sort of the big awards, obviously everyone's going to see Star Wars. And I'm assuming you've already bought your tickets to see Star Wars. I get to see it early because I'm a critic. So, I know. And isn't that the nice trade-off for all the direct movies?

Yes, for all the buddy cop movies, all the teen comedies. Yeah, absolutely. That's my dessert. So other than Star Wars in terms of films, whether they are gunning for Best Picture nominations or whatever, what should we be on the lookout for this holiday season? Well, I'm very excited about The Post, the story of The Washington Post and the Pentagon Papers. I think it's very, very timely, and it's got great people behind it, Meryl Streep, Steven Spielberg, and an amazing story. So I'm super excited about that. The Darkest Hour, another true story with Gary Oldman, and what I can guarantee you will be an Oscar-nominated performance as Winston Churchill.

Absolutely brilliant film. It focuses on just a few weeks in his life from being made prime minister to Dunkirk, and I thought it was just fabulous. And then one you might not have noticed, but I think is going to be big, is called The Shape of Water with Sally Hawkins, a kind of a sci-fi mystery that looks really intriguing. There's a sort of under-the-radar small film called Last Flag Flying with Steve Carell and Lawrence Fishburne and Bryan Cranston. And I believe Richard Linklater is the director. that strikes me as, and we've talked about this in years past, that strikes me as possibly a wonderful adult movie. Because there are obviously the sci-fi movies, Star Wars, etc. And then there are movies like Pixar's latest, Coco, which will attract a lot of families. But I'm always on the

lookout, and I'm clearly showing my age here, for those movies that are sort of in the middle. and I'm wondering if you've seen it and have any thoughts on it. Yeah, I thought it was an excellent movie. First of all, you're never going to see three better actors together in a movie than those three guys. And it is a touching, touching story. It's kind of a loose sequel to a movie from the 1970s, The Last Detail, with Jack Nicholson.

Some of the characters have the same names and it's kind of related and the same guy wrote it. But it is so touching as these three guys who fought together in Vietnam get together after not having seen each other for many years and go on a trip to retrieve the body of the one's son who was killed in Afghanistan. And obviously they have a lot of ups and downs along the way, but the ending is so powerful and the acting is so brilliant. It's a wonderful film. It does seem like when we look back on 2017 in terms of movies, one of the big stories of the year is going to be Wonder Woman, not just as a breakout hit movie and star with Gal Gadot, but also Patty Jenkins, the director. Given what we've discussed and what we've seen over the last few months in terms of sexual harassment and sexual abuse in Hollywood, is there a glimmer of hope that more Patty Jenkins of the world are going to get to helm not just independent movies but larger budget movies? Yeah, we've got Ava DuVernay with Wrinkle in Time coming up.

They just released this weekend the new trailer. it looks dazzling. And so, yes, I definitely think so. There have been outstanding films at all levels of budget directed by women this year. And there was a great piece in the Huffington Post by Catherine Michon, who is a writer and director and an actress, and she says if the Weinstein Company wants to stay in business, they should just make a pledge to only hire women writers and directors for the foreseeable future.

And I think that would be a really good step forward. Before we wrap up, in the spirit of Thanksgiving, what's a movie that everyone should watch? And it can be family-based, it can be food-based. When you think about Thanksgiving, what do you recommend? I recommend a wonderful, wonderful movie, What's Cooking, by the director of Bend It Like Beckham, which is about four families getting ready for Thanksgiving. It is absolutely terrific. It's got a great cast. And then if you just want a fun family movie, try Danny Kaye and the Court Jester.

I guarantee you everybody in the family will love it. One of the best reasons to be on Twitter is so that you can follow Nell Minow. You can get her thoughts on corporate governance, movies, and so much more. Nell, have a wonderful holiday. We'll talk Academy Awards next time. Wonderful. Bye-bye. Movies and movies and magic.

Up next, we'll give you an inside look at the stocks on our radar. This is Motley Fool Money. As always, people on the program may have interest in the stocks they talk about, and The Motley Fool may have formal recommendations for or against, so don't buy or sell stocks based solely on what you hear. Welcome back to Motley Fool Money. Chris Hill here in studio once again with Jason Moser, Aaron Bush, and Jeff Fischer. Time to get to the stocks on our radar. And our man behind the glass, Steve Brodo, will hit you with a question. And, Jason, you're up first. What are you looking at? Yeah, one I had to dip a toe in the water personally here recently.

I like playing into those big long-term trends. I think healthcare is, of course, one that's going to be around for quite some time to come. And Teladoc, a company I've mentioned here before, T-D-O-C is the ticker. They are an internet healthcare provider, essentially trying to scale healthcare services beyond just that traditional going to the doctor's office and waiting for half the day. companies really producing some fascinating growth rates grew organic organic revenue this past quarter 45 they have grown their active membership base to a little bit more than 21 million folks now they provide directly to businesses they provide as supplements to

bigger health care providers so as the internet has disrupted virtually everything in our lives the internet is also starting to disrupt health care i think in a good way and teladoc is is helping play a part in that. Steve, question about Teladoc? How do they deal with malpractice insurance? Especially, probably, they're across state lines, so you probably have all different states involved here. How does that work? Well, I think, generally speaking, you're looking at probably insurance companies wanting to erase that state line issue. But you're right. I mean, they still, at its core, it's a network of doctors, so those physicians still have to insure themselves in some way, shape, or form.

I think, ultimately, this is all in the effort to bring down health care costs, which hopefully will bring down those insurance costs along with them. Aaron Bush, what are you looking at this week? I'm looking at Stitch Fix, which IPO-ed last week. It's a $1.4 billion company. They would say changing retail a little bit, apparel. Every month, you can sign up for a subscription, and monthly, they'll send you a box of clothes, five items. You can choose what are the five items you want. If you choose all of them, you get a discount. The service learns over time what styles work best for you. The company is growing, it's making money, I think it's

kind of interesting. And the ticker? SFIX. Steve, question about Stitch Fix? Is Stitch Fix profitable? Yes, they are profitable. They actually have positive free cash flow right now, and it's looking to get better as more people come on board and they raise their retention rates. So, at the surface, it looks pretty promising. Less than a minute, Jeff Fischer. What are you looking at? Alright, Coherent, ticker is C-O-H-R. they are a manufacturer of laser machines, which companies use to then manufacture whatever

they want to. Mostly, it's consumer electronics or medical devices, or it's used for materials processing or even welding for electric vehicles and battery packs right now. So, as lasers become integral to more and more manufacturing, Coherent's business is growing strongly, sees a record 2018 ahead. Steve, what is your favorite aspect about this company? I think, Steve, it's the large addressable market that it faces over the coming years, and the way that what they offer is essential to production of semiconductors and all these electronics. You can't move away from that. All right, guys, that's going to do it for

this week's edition of Motley Fool Money. Our engineer is Steve Broido, our producer is Matt Greer. I'm Chris Hill. We'll see you next week.