Today there was a dividend from $COST (+0,23 %)

I would prefer to sell everything and put it into say 3-5 ETFs, but due to a mixture of different feelings I can't take this step. At least not overnight. Today I was able to part with the following positions (a big step for me, a small step for my portfolio).

$COST (+0,23 %) -3% may not have been the best time to sell, but I'm no longer convinced in the long term, or rather it doesn't fit my investment idea

$PG (+0,36 %) -8% stinks of opportunity cost. It may be that there is a good entry point for a solid dividend stock at the moment, but I would rather continue to build up the broadly diversified ETF.

$ROL (-0,03 %) -4% ditch or not, we won't see the big fast percentages here.

$RMS (+0,48 %) +25% I would not buy again today at the current price and find the valuation excessively high.

Reallocated to $VWRL (+0,36 %) 🥱 and $EQQQ (+0,36 %) 😎

(Thanks to a mini crash from 17:00, I also got a lot of shares)

get a foot in the door 😬

but had to $REGN (+0,15 %) had to make way 😁

Hello to the community ✌️

I would like to reduce the size of my portfolio.

my portfolio currently consists of 1 ETF and 40 individual shares.

my goal is to reduce the number of individual stocks to around 30-32 positions over time 🤔

There are currently 2 positions at the top of the closing list

$NKE (+0,34 %)
$REGN (+0,15 %)

I would like to add 2,3 more positions, but unfortunately I don't have the imagination to get rid of them 😅

Maybe with the help of the community here, to make the decision a little easier😬

On the other hand, I also want to $COST (+0,23 %) & $WM (-0,52 %) despite the still high valuations, but they are absolute Dauerläufer🤷🏼‍♂️

What are your opinions?

which positions would you throw out?

and why exactly these?

Thank you !

$COST (+0,23 %)
$LULU (+0,44 %)

https://www.tradingview.com/news/DJN_DN20250711007713:0/

You can learn a lot about one of America's most valuable and beloved companies from a lawsuit about pants.

$COST (+0,23 %) was recently sued by $LULU (+0,44 %) for allegedly selling cheap imitations of the athleisure brand's premium apparel. One of those products is a pair of comfortable, fashionable and extremely popular men's pants by Lululemon, which were launched a decade ago and cost $128.

A few years ago, Costco began selling a version of these pants that looked and felt suspiciously similar - for $20.

And you don't need a law degree to read this legal document and understand why so many people are so enamored with Costco.

These pants were part of the Kirkland Signature private label, which is based on a simple but powerful idea: Sell high quality products at low prices. With this philosophy, Kirkland has become an integral part of Costco's success. None other than Costco co-founder Jim Sinegal describes the introduction of Kirkland three decades ago as one of the most pivotal developments in the company's history.

The private label now accounts for around a third of Costco's sales - and is growing faster than the company as a whole. Costco's total sales have almost doubled since 2017. Kirkland's sales have almost tripled.

It is now larger than many of the world's largest companies. Kirkland alone generated 86 billion dollars last year - more than the entire Procter & Gamble group. In fact, this brand, known for its no-frills affordability, achieved roughly the same annual turnover as luxury giant LVMH.

Kirkland doesn't just drive sales. The brand also creates customer loyalty. It gives people a reason to become members - and members a reason to keep coming back. If the cult of Costco had its own drink, it would undoubtedly be Kirkland Signature.

Perhaps the most important thing Kirkland does is lower the prices of other brands.

To understand that, you have to understand the basics of Costco economics. The company carries fewer products than traditional retailers and makes up for the smaller margins with extremely high sales volumes. Branded products are sold at Costco at no more than a 14% markup over cost, even if that means losing out on potential profit. Only with Kirkland products does Costco allow itself an exception and permits a mark-up of 15%.

The mere existence of a new Kirkland item can change an entire product category. It means less space for other suppliers, more negotiating power for Costco's buyers - and significantly more value for members.

That value is such a point of pride that executives regularly highlight certain niche Kirkland products and their savings on earnings calls. At the last report, they bragged about lowering the price of macadamia chocolate clusters from $17.99 to $14.69.

(Before we go any further: Check out this video about Kirkland's business. It's as good as the famous Costco fried chicken).

But even the Costco executives who dreamed up Kirkland never imagined it would become so lucrative.

It all started when Sinegal noticed something strange about his business: even when the cost of raw materials went down, the price of branded products kept going up. This inefficiency became his opportunity.

Costco introduced a private label in 1995 and named it Kirkland Signature - a reference to the company's then headquarters in Kirkland, Washington. The name stuck, even when the company later moved to Issaquah.

From the very beginning, one thing counted more than the price of Kirkland products: their quality. When the company was just considering a private label, Sinegal sent a handwritten memo to Costco executives listing all the reasons why it was a smart concept.

"Quality private label," he wrote, underlining the word twice, "can not only gain acceptance but also generate intense loyalty."

To maintain that quality, the company subjects Kirkland products to the same relentless standards as all other items in Costco's warehouses. They have to earn their place in the best retail location. If they don't pass, they're out. "We can't fall in love with our own stuff," CEO Ron Vachris said in a recent conference call.

Kirkland toothpaste was once discontinued because it couldn't compete with Colgate and Crest, according to the book "The Joy of Costco." The first two Kirkland beers flopped before Costco tried again last year and finally came up with a good lager. The company does not produce these products itself, but works together with manufacturers. Costco only enters markets where it can match or beat national brands on price and quality - which explains why there are no Kirkland electronics.

There is no Kirkland Signature smartphone, but almost everything else: toilet paper and kitchen rolls, wine and mineral water, fresh sushi, the famous nut mixes and whole loaves of Parmigiano Reggiano.

And clothes, of course. Earlier this year, my colleagues Sarah Nassauer and Nikki Walker visited Costco headquarters for an insightful conversation with Sinegal, the company's legendary former CEO. He was dressed from head to toe in Kirkland: socks, shoes, glasses - even his underwear.

Sinegal can thank himself for his wardrobe.

Costco is so rigorous in its selection and so fanatical in its standards that every single Kirkland product has to be personally approved by the CEO. When he was still running the company, Sinegal marked his approval with a green pen he carried in his shirt pocket. The - you guessed it - was often from Kirkland Signature.

"Seam by seam, button by button," he once told students, "it's one of the best shirts you can find."

And that brings us back to the strikingly similar pants, which are sold at radically different prices.

Lululemon's ABC pants are named after the company's proprietary "anti-ball crushing" technology. Now they are causing accusations of anti-competitive behavior.

Lululemon accuses Costco of profiting from its intellectual property and "sweat labor" and calls the lawsuit a battle against retailers who chose to copy "rather than compete." Lululemon says Costco copied several features of its ABC pants - including the stretchy fabric and crotch insert - and argues that they are non-functional and trademarked like the distinctive shape of a Coca-Cola bottle or the red sole of a Louboutin shoe. Costco has not yet responded to the lawsuit and declined to comment.

This is not the first time this year that Costco has been targeted for selling "dupes" (imitations). Deckers Outdoor also sued the company over Kirkland unisex sheepskin slip-on shoes that resemble Uggs. In this case, Costco filed a motion to dismiss the lawsuit.

But the Lululemon lawsuit could ultimately turn out to be free advertising for Costco - the company's favorite form of advertising.

That's because the news coverage of the lawsuit let many customers who would never spend $128 on a pair of pants know that their favorite company was selling a visually similar product for a fraction of the price.

And when they learned that these allegedly imitation pants were not currently available, it was only because they were doing what they always do when they hear about a new Kirkland product:

They immediately went to Costco to hunt for their next bargain.

the general assumption seems to be correct. So something can still happen with $COST (+0,23 %) . Strong figures for June after the close of trading!

Investing.com - Shares of Costco Wholesale (NASDAQ:COST) rose 1% after the wholesale retailer announced an 8% increase in net sales for June. This indicates continued robust consumer demand.

For the retail month of June, a five-week period ending July 6, 2025, the company reported net sales of $26.44 billion. This represents an increase from the $24.48 billion reported in the same period last year. With this performance, Costco is continuing its stable growth trajectory: In the first 44 weeks of the financial year, net sales amounted to USD 227.46 billion, which also represents a year-on-year increase of 8%.

Like-for-like sales showed solid growth in all regions in the five-week period. Group-wide, they increased by 5.8%, with growth of 4.7% in the USA, 6.7% in Canada and a particularly strong performance of 10.9% in the other international markets. At 11.5%, e-commerce sales continued to grow faster than brick-and-mortar retail in the month under review.

Adjusted for the effects of petrol price changes and currency fluctuations, like-for-like sales growth was even stronger at Group level at 6.2%. Adjusted growth in the USA amounted to 5.5 %, while Canada and the other international markets achieved growth of 7.9 % and 8.2 % respectively.

The company's e-commerce business continued its double-digit growth. Adjusted like-for-like sales increased by 11.2% for the month and 16% for the 44-week period, underlining Costco's successful omnichannel strategy.

Despite general economic uncertainty, Costco continues to deliver consistently strong sales figures. The company benefits from its membership model and its reputation for value for money, which continues to attract consumer spending.

Hello everyone,

This is my current portfolio allocation. My strategy is Core Satellite with high-quality satellites as a supplement, which I hope will result in better performance.

My plan:

• expand the ETF position with 100€ per month to approx. 50% portfolio weighting
• Inclusion of $COST (+0,23 %) into the portfolio with a lower reset
• Expand my Bitcoin position
• Buy and hold the current positions if necessary $MC (-0,29 %) liquidate, as I lack the growth

How would you rate my strategy and do you have any suggestions for improvement?

Hello everyone,

I would be interested to know what amount (in €) you would invest in the following shares? The companies are certainly also suitable for savings plans. However, I would like to have a "starting position" first.

You are also welcome to use this as a suggestion for discussion in the comments ✌🏽

$MCD (+0,3 %)

$COST (+0,23 %)

$WMT (+0,47 %)

$WM (-0,52 %)

Best wishes and a good start to the stock market tomorrow 🖖🏽

I would just like to show the community what my sale at the time $COST (+0,23 %) sale went into.

In hindsight, I would do it again at any time.

The good piece was rented almost continuously for the last 3 weeks at 60€ per day.

This weekend I'm going to do a bit of work in the garden myself 🏗 or remove an unnecessary strip of grass from the barn.