Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

1) Car Washes (Self-Serve) Recurring customer usage, minimal staff… & high-ticket upsells boost margins. Cash flow covers debt and funds lifestyle.

Gedam Tekle

21,191 subscribers

481,557 Aufrufe • vor 11 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

1) Laundromats ~95% survive 5 years. Consistent demand, coin-operated, minimal staff. Profit margins: 30-35% thanks to self-service & upfront payment.

1) Laundromats ~95% survive 5 years. Consistent demand, coin-operated, minimal staff. Profit margins: 30-35% thanks to self-service & upfront payment.

Ben Kelly

140,905 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

"There's an incredible amount of leverage that's been taken out without cash flow able to service the debt" Nico Lechuga on why cash flow is what makes Bitcoin leverage survivable "Everybody has their own take on this, and we'll see what happens within the market. But if you're taking on any type of leverage, any type of debt, think about our own personal lives. If you buy a car, you buy a house and you're mortgaging that, you're taking out an interest loan, generally there's some degree of credit institution checking you to make sure that you have the cash flow to service the debt you've taken out" "When we're building businesses we think of risk vectors, and how those risk vectors potentially impact the business's chance of success. If you've introduced a risk vector, in this case leverage taken out against the business without having cash flow able to service it, then you can impair your business. This is designed by having uncorrelated businesses with good margins, sustainable cash flows. If you're taking out even a degree of leverage to buy Bitcoin, the only time you would ever do that is after you have the businesses and you have the cash flow" "Even if Bitcoin's price goes down, we see a drop from 126 to where we're at 65, 66 today, it doesn't matter, because you have the cash flow to service the debt. In the same way, when you buy a car and drive it off the lot, if you're paying with financing and the value drops 50% the day you drive it off the lot, you have a job and you can service that, so you're not impaired"

"There's an incredible amount of leverage that's been taken out without cash flow able to service the debt" Nico Lechuga on why cash flow is what makes Bitcoin leverage survivable "Everybody has their own take on this, and we'll see what happens within the market. But if you're taking on any type of leverage, any type of debt, think about our own personal lives. If you buy a car, you buy a house and you're mortgaging that, you're taking out an interest loan, generally there's some degree of credit institution checking you to make sure that you have the cash flow to service the debt you've taken out" "When we're building businesses we think of risk vectors, and how those risk vectors potentially impact the business's chance of success. If you've introduced a risk vector, in this case leverage taken out against the business without having cash flow able to service it, then you can impair your business. This is designed by having uncorrelated businesses with good margins, sustainable cash flows. If you're taking out even a degree of leverage to buy Bitcoin, the only time you would ever do that is after you have the businesses and you have the cash flow" "Even if Bitcoin's price goes down, we see a drop from 126 to where we're at 65, 66 today, it doesn't matter, because you have the cash flow to service the debt. In the same way, when you buy a car and drive it off the lot, if you're paying with financing and the value drops 50% the day you drive it off the lot, you have a job and you can service that, so you're not impaired"

The Wolf Of All Streets

30,854 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Horrific Staff at a VA high school allegedly took 2 girls for abortions—without telling parents, using school funds & violating the law 1 girl was 5 months pregnant and fled when told she “had no choice” These abusers belong behind bars

Horrific Staff at a VA high school allegedly took 2 girls for abortions—without telling parents, using school funds & violating the law 1 girl was 5 months pregnant and fled when told she “had no choice” These abusers belong behind bars

Lila Rose

50,760 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

Here is the big question Apollo & others are grappling with on financing data centers. Apollo Pres Jim Zelter. $5-7T needed to fund data center and infra capex over next 5-7 yrs. ~$1.5T from from free cash flow of hyperscalers Next $1.5% from project finance, private capital & variety of other debt markets $1-1.25T from high grade investment grade market Leaves ~$1-1.5T where is that going to get financed?? Great interview Lisa Abramowicz annmarie hordern #oott

Here is the big question Apollo & others are grappling with on financing data centers. Apollo Pres Jim Zelter. $5-7T needed to fund data center and infra capex over next 5-7 yrs. ~$1.5T from from free cash flow of hyperscalers Next $1.5% from project finance, private capital & variety of other debt markets $1-1.25T from high grade investment grade market Leaves ~$1-1.5T where is that going to get financed?? Great interview Lisa Abramowicz annmarie hordern #oott

Dan Tsubouchi

33,928 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

i'm hiring a chief of staff i would've killed for this job when i was 25 a bit about us - building self-improving software - raised $6m from yc, gradient, leaders from openai - serve millions of users per day - doubled revenue each of last two months looking for someone smart, relentless and high-eq you'll own some of our most important problems — growth strategy, scaling customer onboarding, building automations, helping with hiring basically, whatever it takes for us to 10x it won't be glamorous, but you'll learn more than you ever have before. dm if interested

i'm hiring a chief of staff i would've killed for this job when i was 25 a bit about us - building self-improving software - raised $6m from yc, gradient, leaders from openai - serve millions of users per day - doubled revenue each of last two months looking for someone smart, relentless and high-eq you'll own some of our most important problems — growth strategy, scaling customer onboarding, building automations, helping with hiring basically, whatever it takes for us to 10x it won't be glamorous, but you'll learn more than you ever have before. dm if interested

Zach Witzel

32,507 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

If you’re a physician in private practice, your student debt doesn’t count. Not to the federal government. Not to PSLF. Not if you built your own clinic, serve your own patients, and operate without subsidies. But if you work for a tax-exempt system that receives billions in government support, suddenly your debt becomes “forgivable.” Here’s the absurdity: A nonprofit health system receives DSH funds, UPL subsidies, 340B drug profits, GME/IME payments, facility fee margins, and tax-exempt bonds. They pay executives $2–10M annually. They operate in commercial markets. They bill at 300–600% of Medicare for standard services. And their employed physicians qualify for Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF)—as if they’re sacrificing. Meanwhile… A private practice physician: Builds their own business Takes on risk Serves Medicaid patients at below-cost rates Hires staff, negotiates contracts, covers malpractice Receives no subsidies And is told: PSLF doesn’t apply to you. Same degree. Same training. Same patients. But only one gets financial relief—the one inside the subsidized system. This isn’t fairness. It’s punishment for independence. If the US of A was serious about equity, PSLF must be site-neutral—based on who you serve, not who you’re employed by. Independent physicians treat the underserved. They open clinics in rural and urban deserts. They take Medicaid without fanfare. They just don’t work for the health system cartel. And in today’s healthcare economy, that’s the real public service. #PSLF #PhysicianDebt #IndependentPhysicians #LoanForgiveness

If you’re a physician in private practice, your student debt doesn’t count. Not to the federal government. Not to PSLF. Not if you built your own clinic, serve your own patients, and operate without subsidies. But if you work for a tax-exempt system that receives billions in government support, suddenly your debt becomes “forgivable.” Here’s the absurdity: A nonprofit health system receives DSH funds, UPL subsidies, 340B drug profits, GME/IME payments, facility fee margins, and tax-exempt bonds. They pay executives $2–10M annually. They operate in commercial markets. They bill at 300–600% of Medicare for standard services. And their employed physicians qualify for Public Service Loan Forgiveness (PSLF)—as if they’re sacrificing. Meanwhile… A private practice physician: Builds their own business Takes on risk Serves Medicaid patients at below-cost rates Hires staff, negotiates contracts, covers malpractice Receives no subsidies And is told: PSLF doesn’t apply to you. Same degree. Same training. Same patients. But only one gets financial relief—the one inside the subsidized system. This isn’t fairness. It’s punishment for independence. If the US of A was serious about equity, PSLF must be site-neutral—based on who you serve, not who you’re employed by. Independent physicians treat the underserved. They open clinics in rural and urban deserts. They take Medicaid without fanfare. They just don’t work for the health system cartel. And in today’s healthcare economy, that’s the real public service. #PSLF #PhysicianDebt #IndependentPhysicians #LoanForgiveness

Dutch Rojas

53,788 Aufrufe • vor 1 Jahr

If you've raised €10M in equity, there's another €1-3M sitting there in additional finance that costs you 0 percent of your company. Let’s talk about debt. Global debt markets are 75 times larger than VC. But we barely talk about it and few people understand it. I invited William Godfrey from Tangible, who is currently arranging hundreds of millions in debt facilities for hardware companies, to teach us how to raise debt. 👉 Full video on YT, link in comments The core mistake: using equity to pay for CapEx. You raise VC, then spend it on CNC machines, a small factory, or robots you'll rent out to customers. Every euro of it dilutes you, and you're back raising again sooner. Some of my favorite takeaways from Will: - If you've raised €10M in equity, expect roughly 10-30% of that available in equipment finance. So another €1-3M, without giving up more of the company - Advance rates run around 80%, meaning you put in €20k of every €100k borrowed. Same logic as a mortgage deposit. - Asset-backed facilities put the collateral and the contract into a separate SPV. If that vehicle fails, the risk sits there rather than killing the company - Time your debt raise with your equity raise. You negotiate best with a full bank account, and debt is a terrible tool for extending runway in a pinch - Build a "seed portfolio" first. Finance ten as-a-service deployments off your balance sheet, prove the recurring cash flow, then take that record to a credit fund and refinance the lot - Lenders don't reject small startups because they're risky. They reject them because they're effort. Will's advice is to be easy to lend to. Use components from reputable manufacturers with warranties and insurance. Skip the clever per-inspection pricing. Sell the boring, provable cash flow and keep the ambitious stuff on the equity side. Disclaimer: Big fan, small investor in Tangible since early days.

If you've raised €10M in equity, there's another €1-3M sitting there in additional finance that costs you 0 percent of your company. Let’s talk about debt. Global debt markets are 75 times larger than VC. But we barely talk about it and few people understand it. I invited William Godfrey from Tangible, who is currently arranging hundreds of millions in debt facilities for hardware companies, to teach us how to raise debt. 👉 Full video on YT, link in comments The core mistake: using equity to pay for CapEx. You raise VC, then spend it on CNC machines, a small factory, or robots you'll rent out to customers. Every euro of it dilutes you, and you're back raising again sooner. Some of my favorite takeaways from Will: - If you've raised €10M in equity, expect roughly 10-30% of that available in equipment finance. So another €1-3M, without giving up more of the company - Advance rates run around 80%, meaning you put in €20k of every €100k borrowed. Same logic as a mortgage deposit. - Asset-backed facilities put the collateral and the contract into a separate SPV. If that vehicle fails, the risk sits there rather than killing the company - Time your debt raise with your equity raise. You negotiate best with a full bank account, and debt is a terrible tool for extending runway in a pinch - Build a "seed portfolio" first. Finance ten as-a-service deployments off your balance sheet, prove the recurring cash flow, then take that record to a credit fund and refinance the lot - Lenders don't reject small startups because they're risky. They reject them because they're effort. Will's advice is to be easy to lend to. Use components from reputable manufacturers with warranties and insurance. Skip the clever per-inspection pricing. Sell the boring, provable cash flow and keep the ambitious stuff on the equity side. Disclaimer: Big fan, small investor in Tangible since early days.

Andreas Klinger 🦾

13,706 Aufrufe • vor 16 Tagen

Really interesting parallel from Ben, comparing Google to Berkshire Hathaway. He says Google's search business is See's Candies. Its AI bet is Berkshire's move into the railroad: "They have See's Candies. Tremendously high margin business. The problem with a lot of high margin businesses is the percentage profit you can make is very high, but the absolute profit is small. So the brilliance of the BNSF Railway thing was they took the See's Candy profits and said, here's another industry whose margins are worse, but the absolute dollar amounts are so large that those worse margins result in absolute profits that are much larger. BNSF in one year threw off more free cash than See's Candies had thrown off in its entire lifetime. The reason why I find that story so interesting is it seems to capture where Google itself might be going. This unbelievable high margin business of search, one of the most perfect, beautiful business models of all time. And meanwhile there's this AI opportunity which requires astronomical spend. It's a cash incinerating machine. But if AI is intelligence and its TAM is basically all white collar work and eventually more, the margins are lower but the absolute profits available are much larger. Will we look back and say Google was See's Candies? It feels like that's happening. In that world, you use all your free cash flow. They've done that. You tap the debt markets to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. They've done that. You issue equity. What does an equity issue do? It dilutes your interest in your shareholders. So you have a smaller percentage of the pie. Well, you have a smaller percentage of an astronomically larger pie. At the end of the day, no one's going to be complaining. Berkshire is actually not just an investor in Google, but a model for Google and where they're going."

Really interesting parallel from Ben, comparing Google to Berkshire Hathaway. He says Google's search business is See's Candies. Its AI bet is Berkshire's move into the railroad: "They have See's Candies. Tremendously high margin business. The problem with a lot of high margin businesses is the percentage profit you can make is very high, but the absolute profit is small. So the brilliance of the BNSF Railway thing was they took the See's Candy profits and said, here's another industry whose margins are worse, but the absolute dollar amounts are so large that those worse margins result in absolute profits that are much larger. BNSF in one year threw off more free cash than See's Candies had thrown off in its entire lifetime. The reason why I find that story so interesting is it seems to capture where Google itself might be going. This unbelievable high margin business of search, one of the most perfect, beautiful business models of all time. And meanwhile there's this AI opportunity which requires astronomical spend. It's a cash incinerating machine. But if AI is intelligence and its TAM is basically all white collar work and eventually more, the margins are lower but the absolute profits available are much larger. Will we look back and say Google was See's Candies? It feels like that's happening. In that world, you use all your free cash flow. They've done that. You tap the debt markets to the tune of hundreds of billions of dollars. They've done that. You issue equity. What does an equity issue do? It dilutes your interest in your shareholders. So you have a smaller percentage of the pie. Well, you have a smaller percentage of an astronomically larger pie. At the end of the day, no one's going to be complaining. Berkshire is actually not just an investor in Google, but a model for Google and where they're going."

Patrick OShaughnessy

125,399 Aufrufe • vor 4 Tagen

The AI App Layer is a valuation trap, and most AI apps will go to zero. Billionaire investor Graham Weaver breaks down the four AI zones. Pick wrong and you’re cooked: 1. Infrastructure Layer (SAFE): Chips, data centers, energy - print money as long as the lights stay on. 2. Model Layer (RED): OpenAI, Google, Anthropic - you need billions and success is already priced in. 3. App Layer (DANGER ZONE): High churn, constant attack from LLM updates and customers building it themselves. 4. Use-Case Layer (GOLD): Buy boring operating businesses and use AI to crush the overhead. This has real cash flow + automation. Stop trying to out-code the giants in the cloud. Go where the algorithm can’t follow: proprietary data, deep customer relationships, and real-world results. The ultimate moat isn’t a better prompt; it’s owning the actual customer in the physical world. Sam Parr Shaan Puri

The AI App Layer is a valuation trap, and most AI apps will go to zero. Billionaire investor Graham Weaver breaks down the four AI zones. Pick wrong and you’re cooked: 1. Infrastructure Layer (SAFE): Chips, data centers, energy - print money as long as the lights stay on. 2. Model Layer (RED): OpenAI, Google, Anthropic - you need billions and success is already priced in. 3. App Layer (DANGER ZONE): High churn, constant attack from LLM updates and customers building it themselves. 4. Use-Case Layer (GOLD): Buy boring operating businesses and use AI to crush the overhead. This has real cash flow + automation. Stop trying to out-code the giants in the cloud. Go where the algorithm can’t follow: proprietary data, deep customer relationships, and real-world results. The ultimate moat isn’t a better prompt; it’s owning the actual customer in the physical world. Sam Parr Shaan Puri

My First Million

285,908 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

Dave Ramsey says all debt is stupid. Credit cards, student loans, car payments, borrowing against your house. All of it. He says your income is your number one wealth-building tool, and the second you hand it to someone else, you give up your economic future. He is half right. On credit cards, I agree completely. You are paying 28 to 30% on that. But notice what he never mentions. Cost of capital. That is the whole game, and he skips it. High-priced student debt, fine. But my own loans were at 3%, and they were the only way I got into college. I paid them back over time. That was a good investment, not a stupid one. Where he is dead wrong is real estate. Debt on real estate lets you use other people's money to buy an asset that pays for itself. That is what he misses. His whole philosophy depends on you earning more income. But with wages growing 3% while inflation runs 3%, you never get ahead. You run in place like a rat in a wheel, the exact thing he is warning you about. The only way out is to own hard assets that produce cash flow, and you buy those with debt. Here is the difference between us. He thinks all debt is bad. I think debt is a tool. Good debt and bad debt, high cost and low cost, and that difference is everything. He once said he would not take a billion dollars at zero interest. A billion dollars, costing him nothing. Put it in Treasuries and that is 30 to 40 million a year for doing nothing. He said he would pass. That is lunacy. When I borrow on real estate, someone else covers it. Always. The office building you work in and the Starbucks you walk into all carry debt, and the tenants pay it back. I own a single-family house, my tenant pays off the loan. I do not pay it. I do not need more income. I just need to keep a good tenant in that house. And yes, you get vacancies and turnover and the occasional problem tenant, but that is what management is for. He never had to learn that, because he does not use debt. And here is the part almost nobody gets. It is your money anyway. The cash sitting in your retirement account or your bank is yours. You are just borrowing it back at a lower rate and finding a tenant to cover it. That is why I disagree with him on debt. Used right, it is not the enemy. It is the entire engine.

Dave Ramsey says all debt is stupid. Credit cards, student loans, car payments, borrowing against your house. All of it. He says your income is your number one wealth-building tool, and the second you hand it to someone else, you give up your economic future. He is half right. On credit cards, I agree completely. You are paying 28 to 30% on that. But notice what he never mentions. Cost of capital. That is the whole game, and he skips it. High-priced student debt, fine. But my own loans were at 3%, and they were the only way I got into college. I paid them back over time. That was a good investment, not a stupid one. Where he is dead wrong is real estate. Debt on real estate lets you use other people's money to buy an asset that pays for itself. That is what he misses. His whole philosophy depends on you earning more income. But with wages growing 3% while inflation runs 3%, you never get ahead. You run in place like a rat in a wheel, the exact thing he is warning you about. The only way out is to own hard assets that produce cash flow, and you buy those with debt. Here is the difference between us. He thinks all debt is bad. I think debt is a tool. Good debt and bad debt, high cost and low cost, and that difference is everything. He once said he would not take a billion dollars at zero interest. A billion dollars, costing him nothing. Put it in Treasuries and that is 30 to 40 million a year for doing nothing. He said he would pass. That is lunacy. When I borrow on real estate, someone else covers it. Always. The office building you work in and the Starbucks you walk into all carry debt, and the tenants pay it back. I own a single-family house, my tenant pays off the loan. I do not pay it. I do not need more income. I just need to keep a good tenant in that house. And yes, you get vacancies and turnover and the occasional problem tenant, but that is what management is for. He never had to learn that, because he does not use debt. And here is the part almost nobody gets. It is your money anyway. The cash sitting in your retirement account or your bank is yours. You are just borrowing it back at a lower rate and finding a tenant to cover it. That is why I disagree with him on debt. Used right, it is not the enemy. It is the entire engine.

Ken McElroy

38,406 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Michael Saylor just went on CNBC and said that if Bitcoin drops 90%, he'll simply "refinance the debt" and "roll it forward." This guy is a desperate fraud who has NO CLUE what he's talking about. Let's actually look at what "rolling it forward" means in reality: Strategy holds 714,644 Bitcoin purchased at an average cost of $76,056 per coin. Total acquisition cost: $54.35 billion. Bitcoin is trading around $68,000. Already below their cost basis. The company carries over $8 billion in debt. 100% of its convertible notes are now out of the money. Now imagine Saylor's own scenario. Bitcoin drops 90%. That takes it to roughly $6,800. Strategy's 714,644 Bitcoin would be worth approximately $4.9 billion. Against $8 billion in debt. The assets don't cover the liabilities. Period. And he thinks banks are going to refinance that? On what collateral? On what cash flow? Because Strategy's operating cash flow was negative $138 million in 2025. Down from negative $53 million the year before. The trajectory is going the wrong direction. When asked: "You think banks would lend to you at that point?" Saylor just laughed it off. But here's who's not laughing: 11 state pension funds that bought MSTR as a "regulated proxy" for Bitcoin exposure. CalPERS. New York State. Florida. Wisconsin. New Jersey. Teachers. Firefighters. Police officers. Together they hold 1.8 million shares. Their original investment: $577 million. Current value: $240 million. That's $337 million in paper losses. Most funds are down 60%. CalPERS, the largest public pension fund in the country, bought 448,000 shares for $144 million. That position has been cut nearly in half. These aren't hedge fund cowboys who can stomach a drawdown. These are retirement systems with fiduciary obligations to millions of public workers. Meanwhile $MSTR has fallen from $543 to roughly $123. Down 77% from its all-time high. Saylor says he'll buy Bitcoin "every quarter forever" and will never sell. But that's not how debt works. You don't get to choose when your creditors come calling. You don't get to "roll forward" $8 billion in debt when your only asset has collapsed and your operating business generates negative cash flow. The people who say "we'll just refinance" are always the ones who can't. The question isn't whether Saylor believes in Bitcoin. The question is whether pension funds managing trillions in retirement savings should be exposed to a leveraged single-asset bet run by a man who laughs off a 90% drawdown scenario on national tv. Teachers. Firefighters. State employees. Their retirement savings are sitting inside a company that just posted a $12.4 billion loss and whose chairman's contingency plan is "we'll figure it out." That's STUPID. And the people who'll pay the price aren't on CNBC. They're counting on those pensions to be there when they retire.

Michael Saylor just went on CNBC and said that if Bitcoin drops 90%, he'll simply "refinance the debt" and "roll it forward." This guy is a desperate fraud who has NO CLUE what he's talking about. Let's actually look at what "rolling it forward" means in reality: Strategy holds 714,644 Bitcoin purchased at an average cost of $76,056 per coin. Total acquisition cost: $54.35 billion. Bitcoin is trading around $68,000. Already below their cost basis. The company carries over $8 billion in debt. 100% of its convertible notes are now out of the money. Now imagine Saylor's own scenario. Bitcoin drops 90%. That takes it to roughly $6,800. Strategy's 714,644 Bitcoin would be worth approximately $4.9 billion. Against $8 billion in debt. The assets don't cover the liabilities. Period. And he thinks banks are going to refinance that? On what collateral? On what cash flow? Because Strategy's operating cash flow was negative $138 million in 2025. Down from negative $53 million the year before. The trajectory is going the wrong direction. When asked: "You think banks would lend to you at that point?" Saylor just laughed it off. But here's who's not laughing: 11 state pension funds that bought MSTR as a "regulated proxy" for Bitcoin exposure. CalPERS. New York State. Florida. Wisconsin. New Jersey. Teachers. Firefighters. Police officers. Together they hold 1.8 million shares. Their original investment: $577 million. Current value: $240 million. That's $337 million in paper losses. Most funds are down 60%. CalPERS, the largest public pension fund in the country, bought 448,000 shares for $144 million. That position has been cut nearly in half. These aren't hedge fund cowboys who can stomach a drawdown. These are retirement systems with fiduciary obligations to millions of public workers. Meanwhile $MSTR has fallen from $543 to roughly $123. Down 77% from its all-time high. Saylor says he'll buy Bitcoin "every quarter forever" and will never sell. But that's not how debt works. You don't get to choose when your creditors come calling. You don't get to "roll forward" $8 billion in debt when your only asset has collapsed and your operating business generates negative cash flow. The people who say "we'll just refinance" are always the ones who can't. The question isn't whether Saylor believes in Bitcoin. The question is whether pension funds managing trillions in retirement savings should be exposed to a leveraged single-asset bet run by a man who laughs off a 90% drawdown scenario on national tv. Teachers. Firefighters. State employees. Their retirement savings are sitting inside a company that just posted a $12.4 billion loss and whose chairman's contingency plan is "we'll figure it out." That's STUPID. And the people who'll pay the price aren't on CNBC. They're counting on those pensions to be there when they retire.

George Noble

136,473 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

Larry Ellison borrowed $125 billion to bet everything on a single customer that LOSES $5 billion a year. American banks are already refusing to lend him another dollar. And now that single customer has started to slowly walk away. This is one of the biggest gambles in tech history - and it’s NOT looking good: Oracle has $124.7 billion in debt on its books right now. That's more than the GDP of 100+ countries. Their free cash flow over the last 12 months? Negative $13.18 billion. They are spending more money than they make. And they're doing it on PURPOSE. Every other hyperscaler funds their AI buildout with cash. Google has cash. Amazon has cash. Microsoft has cash. Oracle has IOUs. They raised $58 billion in debt in just two months. $38 billion for Texas and Wisconsin data centers. $20 billion for New Mexico. And they need another $100 billion on top of that. Even US banks are starting to say no. TD Cowen reported that multiple banks have pulled back from Oracle lending. Borrowing costs have roughly DOUBLED since September. They're now paying interest rates typically reserved for companies rated below investment grade. Barclays downgraded their debt to underweight and warned Oracle could run out of cash by November 2026. So what does Larry Ellison do? He FIRES 30,000 people. Oracle is planning layoffs affecting up to 18% of its entire workforce. The goal is to free up $8 to $10 billion in cash flow just to keep the lights on while they build data centers for ONE customer: OpenAI. Oracle's $553 billion backlog sounds incredible until you realize a massive chunk of it flows through a single relationship. If OpenAI sneezes, Oracle catches pneumonia. And OpenAI is already sneezing... Sam Altman DROPPED plans to expand the Stargate site in Abilene, Texas. And the reason is insane: Nvidia's chips are improving so fast that by the time Oracle finishes building the data center, the processors inside it will already be outdated. Oracle is building with Blackwell chips. But Nvidia's new Vera Rubin platform delivers 5x the inference performance at 10x lower cost per token. So Oracle is borrowing billions to build facilities that will house yesterday's technology before they even open. The world of bits moves faster than the world of atoms. And Oracle is trapped in between. But here's where it gets wild: The earnings call revealed something most people missed... Oracle now REQUIRES certain customers to buy their own GPUs upfront and hand them over. They call it the "bring your own chips" model. Translation: Oracle can't afford the hardware anymore. So they're asking customers to fund the construction of Oracle's OWN data centers. The stock is still down 23% this year even after the 12% earnings pop. Moody's rates Oracle just two notches above junk status. Lower than Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft. And they have $248 billion in ADDITIONAL lease obligations that aren't even on the balance sheet yet. Larry Ellison is 81 years old and making the biggest bet in corporate history. He's trying to turn a legacy database company into a hyperscale AI cloud provider using other people's money. All while his only major customer is a startup that burns $5 billion a year and just had its expansion partner refuse to fund the next campus. The earnings beat was real. Revenue up 22%. Cloud infrastructure up 84%. But revenue growth funded by debt isn't growth. It's leverage. And leverage works both ways. If OpenAI stays loyal, if the Stargate buildout continues, if the debt markets keep lending, if Vera Rubin doesn't make their entire infrastructure obsolete overnight, then Larry Ellison pulled off the greatest corporate reinvention in history. But that's a lot of ifs for a company two notches above junk. Oracle is either the most undervalued AI play on the market or the most overleveraged house of cards since 2008. The next six months will tell us which one.

Larry Ellison borrowed $125 billion to bet everything on a single customer that LOSES $5 billion a year. American banks are already refusing to lend him another dollar. And now that single customer has started to slowly walk away. This is one of the biggest gambles in tech history - and it’s NOT looking good: Oracle has $124.7 billion in debt on its books right now. That's more than the GDP of 100+ countries. Their free cash flow over the last 12 months? Negative $13.18 billion. They are spending more money than they make. And they're doing it on PURPOSE. Every other hyperscaler funds their AI buildout with cash. Google has cash. Amazon has cash. Microsoft has cash. Oracle has IOUs. They raised $58 billion in debt in just two months. $38 billion for Texas and Wisconsin data centers. $20 billion for New Mexico. And they need another $100 billion on top of that. Even US banks are starting to say no. TD Cowen reported that multiple banks have pulled back from Oracle lending. Borrowing costs have roughly DOUBLED since September. They're now paying interest rates typically reserved for companies rated below investment grade. Barclays downgraded their debt to underweight and warned Oracle could run out of cash by November 2026. So what does Larry Ellison do? He FIRES 30,000 people. Oracle is planning layoffs affecting up to 18% of its entire workforce. The goal is to free up $8 to $10 billion in cash flow just to keep the lights on while they build data centers for ONE customer: OpenAI. Oracle's $553 billion backlog sounds incredible until you realize a massive chunk of it flows through a single relationship. If OpenAI sneezes, Oracle catches pneumonia. And OpenAI is already sneezing... Sam Altman DROPPED plans to expand the Stargate site in Abilene, Texas. And the reason is insane: Nvidia's chips are improving so fast that by the time Oracle finishes building the data center, the processors inside it will already be outdated. Oracle is building with Blackwell chips. But Nvidia's new Vera Rubin platform delivers 5x the inference performance at 10x lower cost per token. So Oracle is borrowing billions to build facilities that will house yesterday's technology before they even open. The world of bits moves faster than the world of atoms. And Oracle is trapped in between. But here's where it gets wild: The earnings call revealed something most people missed... Oracle now REQUIRES certain customers to buy their own GPUs upfront and hand them over. They call it the "bring your own chips" model. Translation: Oracle can't afford the hardware anymore. So they're asking customers to fund the construction of Oracle's OWN data centers. The stock is still down 23% this year even after the 12% earnings pop. Moody's rates Oracle just two notches above junk status. Lower than Amazon, Alphabet, Meta, and Microsoft. And they have $248 billion in ADDITIONAL lease obligations that aren't even on the balance sheet yet. Larry Ellison is 81 years old and making the biggest bet in corporate history. He's trying to turn a legacy database company into a hyperscale AI cloud provider using other people's money. All while his only major customer is a startup that burns $5 billion a year and just had its expansion partner refuse to fund the next campus. The earnings beat was real. Revenue up 22%. Cloud infrastructure up 84%. But revenue growth funded by debt isn't growth. It's leverage. And leverage works both ways. If OpenAI stays loyal, if the Stargate buildout continues, if the debt markets keep lending, if Vera Rubin doesn't make their entire infrastructure obsolete overnight, then Larry Ellison pulled off the greatest corporate reinvention in history. But that's a lot of ifs for a company two notches above junk. Oracle is either the most undervalued AI play on the market or the most overleveraged house of cards since 2008. The next six months will tell us which one.

Ricardo

181,554 Aufrufe • vor 5 Monaten

David Friedberg: Starlink alone could be a trillion-dollar company "Starlink alone could be generating on the order of $40 billion of revenue top line, with a huge amount of that flowing to free cash. That could be $30 billion in free cash flow within the year." "That alone provides the cash flow to fund much of what Elon is doing. And if you just put a 30x multiple on that, which I think you can, because these subscription businesses have very high renewal rates and very low customer acquisition costs (CAC)." "The Starlink business alone could be a trillion-dollar market cap within 18 months. That alone funds all the rest of this." "You can see it in AT&T, Verizon, HughesNet, and Viasat... That market got decimated by Starlink." "If he launches the handset thing, that subscriber growth is going to go. Right now, he's adding 2 million subscribers on the consumer side per quarter. You could see that going to 4 to 5 million a quarter. You could actually see an acceleration. There are 400 million mobile subs just in the U.S." "And the rest of it is like, is Elon going to do well with the excess capital that's spinning out of Starlink? Well, I don't know who else I would give it to, considering what he's doing with Starship, AI compute, and the Terafab." Elon Musk david friedberg The All-In Podcast

David Friedberg: Starlink alone could be a trillion-dollar company "Starlink alone could be generating on the order of $40 billion of revenue top line, with a huge amount of that flowing to free cash. That could be $30 billion in free cash flow within the year." "That alone provides the cash flow to fund much of what Elon is doing. And if you just put a 30x multiple on that, which I think you can, because these subscription businesses have very high renewal rates and very low customer acquisition costs (CAC)." "The Starlink business alone could be a trillion-dollar market cap within 18 months. That alone funds all the rest of this." "You can see it in AT&T, Verizon, HughesNet, and Viasat... That market got decimated by Starlink." "If he launches the handset thing, that subscriber growth is going to go. Right now, he's adding 2 million subscribers on the consumer side per quarter. You could see that going to 4 to 5 million a quarter. You could actually see an acceleration. There are 400 million mobile subs just in the U.S." "And the rest of it is like, is Elon going to do well with the excess capital that's spinning out of Starlink? Well, I don't know who else I would give it to, considering what he's doing with Starship, AI compute, and the Terafab." Elon Musk david friedberg The All-In Podcast

KanekoaTheGreat

471,722 Aufrufe • vor 14 Tagen

In 2026, Venture Capital will eat Private Equity It used to be that venture capital and private equity lived on two separate planets: VC = San Francisco PE = New York They targeted completely different universes of companies: --> PE - people heavy biz services, stable/low growth, predictable cashflows --> VC - tech-forward, high growth, high risk, massive TAM What was the playbook for B2B VC backed startups? --> Grow to unicorn scale by selling to other early adopter tech companies, then Fortune 500s XX> SMB and mid-market services - think field services, IT staffing, accounting, construction, recruiting - were always tough to sell into for startups Why? -->Thin margins, high labor costs, and small IT budgets >> But as AI eats labor, these businesses are in play << There are 3 ways where VC and PE are colliding: 1/ Private Equity funds will become channel partners for startups. PE funds are focused on financial engineering and cost optimization. Startups building AI products and services can sell across their portfolio to automate the backoffice and uplevel sales and marketing. PE funds have made AI their #1 strategic priority and have hired central leaders to oversee their portfolio adoption efforts 2/ PE portfolio pages are a startup idea menu Private equity will often buyout vertical software companies whose TAM didn’t allow venture scaled returns. As software evolves from data storage and collaboration to agents taking action and completing work, AI should massively expand the TAM for these categories. Founders will set their sights on unseating these legacy incumbents backed by private equity. All they have to do is look at their portfolio pages for category ideas 3/ AI Rollups This is one of the most direct ways that VC is eating PE VC backed AI platform businesses are not just selling software but acquiring legacy business services companies to own the value chain end to end. As an example, our a16z speedrun 🧊 company AgentAstra is acquiring freight forwarding services businesses with mostly debt and integrating AI deeply into their operations These companies aim to increase margins by at least 2x and make them “AI native” tl;dr - While the west coast, Patagonia-wearing VCs and the east coast, PE suits used to live in different universes, in 2026 with AI, I believe, those worlds converge

In 2026, Venture Capital will eat Private Equity It used to be that venture capital and private equity lived on two separate planets: VC = San Francisco PE = New York They targeted completely different universes of companies: --> PE - people heavy biz services, stable/low growth, predictable cashflows --> VC - tech-forward, high growth, high risk, massive TAM What was the playbook for B2B VC backed startups? --> Grow to unicorn scale by selling to other early adopter tech companies, then Fortune 500s XX> SMB and mid-market services - think field services, IT staffing, accounting, construction, recruiting - were always tough to sell into for startups Why? -->Thin margins, high labor costs, and small IT budgets >> But as AI eats labor, these businesses are in play << There are 3 ways where VC and PE are colliding: 1/ Private Equity funds will become channel partners for startups. PE funds are focused on financial engineering and cost optimization. Startups building AI products and services can sell across their portfolio to automate the backoffice and uplevel sales and marketing. PE funds have made AI their #1 strategic priority and have hired central leaders to oversee their portfolio adoption efforts 2/ PE portfolio pages are a startup idea menu Private equity will often buyout vertical software companies whose TAM didn’t allow venture scaled returns. As software evolves from data storage and collaboration to agents taking action and completing work, AI should massively expand the TAM for these categories. Founders will set their sights on unseating these legacy incumbents backed by private equity. All they have to do is look at their portfolio pages for category ideas 3/ AI Rollups This is one of the most direct ways that VC is eating PE VC backed AI platform businesses are not just selling software but acquiring legacy business services companies to own the value chain end to end. As an example, our a16z speedrun 🧊 company AgentAstra is acquiring freight forwarding services businesses with mostly debt and integrating AI deeply into their operations These companies aim to increase margins by at least 2x and make them “AI native” tl;dr - While the west coast, Patagonia-wearing VCs and the east coast, PE suits used to live in different universes, in 2026 with AI, I believe, those worlds converge

Troy Kirwin

187,300 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

54% of Anthropic's new enterprise logos in 2026 came through self-serve. Self-serve enterprise. Real ACV. Real terms of service. No AE in the loop. Anthropic's Head of Industries Eleanor Dorfman walked through at SaaStr AI 2026 last week how they rebuilt the entire sales org in 30 days after Claude Opus 4.6 broke their demand curve in December. 👉The constraint: couldn't 3x or 4x the sales team fast enough without lowering the recruiting bar. The thesis: don't buy a new stack. Thread Claude through the one you already have. What they kept: 1⃣ Clay for enrichment 2⃣LeanData for routing 3⃣ Salesforce as system of record 4⃣Gong for call coaching 5⃣Ironclad for contracts 6⃣Slack for everything else What they added: Claude as the connective tissue between all six. The four moves: 1/ Killed the PLG vs SLG orthodoxy. Launched enterprise self-serve in January. Intercom Fin guides the buyer through the journey. Now 54% of new enterprise logos. 2/ Threaded Claude through the existing stack. Every AE starts the day with a "morning brief" Skill that pulls context from Gmail, Gong, Slack, Salesforce, Intercom, Greenhouse. 3/ Made Slack the front door for every support function. Slack ticket in, Jira ticket out. Claude triages and resolves inline if it matches precedent. Escalates with full context if not. 4/ Codified what the best reps do as Skills. Every new rep gets a sales plug-in with 5 Skills: morning brief, call prep, customer follow-up, competitive intel, create-an-asset. Anthropic didn't replace anything. They invested in the stack they already had and let Claude be the seam between everything. Most companies will spend 2026 evaluating AI-native sales platforms. But Anthropic did it with its current stack + Claude. Almost none of it required new software.

54% of Anthropic's new enterprise logos in 2026 came through self-serve. Self-serve enterprise. Real ACV. Real terms of service. No AE in the loop. Anthropic's Head of Industries Eleanor Dorfman walked through at SaaStr AI 2026 last week how they rebuilt the entire sales org in 30 days after Claude Opus 4.6 broke their demand curve in December. 👉The constraint: couldn't 3x or 4x the sales team fast enough without lowering the recruiting bar. The thesis: don't buy a new stack. Thread Claude through the one you already have. What they kept: 1⃣ Clay for enrichment 2⃣LeanData for routing 3⃣ Salesforce as system of record 4⃣Gong for call coaching 5⃣Ironclad for contracts 6⃣Slack for everything else What they added: Claude as the connective tissue between all six. The four moves: 1/ Killed the PLG vs SLG orthodoxy. Launched enterprise self-serve in January. Intercom Fin guides the buyer through the journey. Now 54% of new enterprise logos. 2/ Threaded Claude through the existing stack. Every AE starts the day with a "morning brief" Skill that pulls context from Gmail, Gong, Slack, Salesforce, Intercom, Greenhouse. 3/ Made Slack the front door for every support function. Slack ticket in, Jira ticket out. Claude triages and resolves inline if it matches precedent. Escalates with full context if not. 4/ Codified what the best reps do as Skills. Every new rep gets a sales plug-in with 5 Skills: morning brief, call prep, customer follow-up, competitive intel, create-an-asset. Anthropic didn't replace anything. They invested in the stack they already had and let Claude be the seam between everything. Most companies will spend 2026 evaluating AI-native sales platforms. But Anthropic did it with its current stack + Claude. Almost none of it required new software.

Jason ✨👾SaaStr.Ai✨ Lemkin

437,853 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Michael Burry Sees The Financial System Running Out of Time The long end of the Treasury market is where several unresolved stresses are colliding. A 30 year yield above 5% reflects inflation uncertainty, heavy federal borrowing and weaker demand for duration. When the economy is deteriorating but long yields refuse to fall, the usual recessionary relief valve is failing. Slower growth is not producing cheaper capital because inflation volatility and debt supply are overpowering it. Burry does not mention 2007, but the comparison is useful. The 30 year yield stayed above 5% for 50 days that year, versus 27 days already in 2026. That does not mean another identical housing crisis. It shows how prolonged high rates corrode leveraged balance sheets. In 2007 the leverage sat mainly in housing and banks. Today it is spread across private equity, private credit, commercial property and data centers. AI Has Become A Debt Story The AI buildout increasingly relies on bonds, leases, project finance and private credit. Burry is not saying major technology companies are about to default. He is saying AI is creating another huge source of long duration debt just as the Treasury must finance persistent deficits. Technology companies and the government are competing for many of the same buyers. AI also consumes electricity, natural gas, copper and grid capacity. The market sees future productivity. Burry is asking whether AI first becomes an inflation and leverage problem. Inflation Volatility , Oil And The Basis Trade Bond investors care not only about current inflation but how predictable it will be over decades. When CPI components move violently, the headline can look contained while the system underneath becomes unstable. Investors then demand a larger term premium. Oil near $100 intensifies that problem. The shock spreads through transportation, agriculture, fertilizer and shipping. Businesses face higher costs while households lose purchasing power. The basis trade depends on hedge funds buying cash Treasuries, shorting futures and financing them through repo. The return is tiny, so it requires enormous leverage and stable funding. If funding costs or volatility rise, funds may unwind by selling cash bonds. Burry is asking who absorbs the next wave of Treasury and AI debt if a major buyer is retreating. PE and PC is private equity and private credit. Holding their breath means extending maturities, delaying exits and postponing writedowns. Private assets can hide deterioration longer, but accounting flexibility does not create cash flow. The sequence Burry appears to see • Oil and inflation volatility keep long yields elevated • Treasury and AI borrowing compete for capital • The basis trade loses capacity • Private markets can no longer delay recognition • Credit spreads widen and valuations reset • High multiple equities finally react • A credit event creates demand destruction • Only then do Treasuries rally and the Fed cut aggressively Burry can be bearish on long bonds now while still expecting them to rally later in a crisis. The lower rates needed to validate existing prices may not arrive until something breaks.

Michael Burry Sees The Financial System Running Out of Time The long end of the Treasury market is where several unresolved stresses are colliding. A 30 year yield above 5% reflects inflation uncertainty, heavy federal borrowing and weaker demand for duration. When the economy is deteriorating but long yields refuse to fall, the usual recessionary relief valve is failing. Slower growth is not producing cheaper capital because inflation volatility and debt supply are overpowering it. Burry does not mention 2007, but the comparison is useful. The 30 year yield stayed above 5% for 50 days that year, versus 27 days already in 2026. That does not mean another identical housing crisis. It shows how prolonged high rates corrode leveraged balance sheets. In 2007 the leverage sat mainly in housing and banks. Today it is spread across private equity, private credit, commercial property and data centers. AI Has Become A Debt Story The AI buildout increasingly relies on bonds, leases, project finance and private credit. Burry is not saying major technology companies are about to default. He is saying AI is creating another huge source of long duration debt just as the Treasury must finance persistent deficits. Technology companies and the government are competing for many of the same buyers. AI also consumes electricity, natural gas, copper and grid capacity. The market sees future productivity. Burry is asking whether AI first becomes an inflation and leverage problem. Inflation Volatility , Oil And The Basis Trade Bond investors care not only about current inflation but how predictable it will be over decades. When CPI components move violently, the headline can look contained while the system underneath becomes unstable. Investors then demand a larger term premium. Oil near $100 intensifies that problem. The shock spreads through transportation, agriculture, fertilizer and shipping. Businesses face higher costs while households lose purchasing power. The basis trade depends on hedge funds buying cash Treasuries, shorting futures and financing them through repo. The return is tiny, so it requires enormous leverage and stable funding. If funding costs or volatility rise, funds may unwind by selling cash bonds. Burry is asking who absorbs the next wave of Treasury and AI debt if a major buyer is retreating. PE and PC is private equity and private credit. Holding their breath means extending maturities, delaying exits and postponing writedowns. Private assets can hide deterioration longer, but accounting flexibility does not create cash flow. The sequence Burry appears to see • Oil and inflation volatility keep long yields elevated • Treasury and AI borrowing compete for capital • The basis trade loses capacity • Private markets can no longer delay recognition • Credit spreads widen and valuations reset • High multiple equities finally react • A credit event creates demand destruction • Only then do Treasuries rally and the Fed cut aggressively Burry can be bearish on long bonds now while still expecting them to rally later in a crisis. The lower rates needed to validate existing prices may not arrive until something breaks.

EndGame Macro

101,589 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

If you’re an investing beginner, you MUST watch this video. If you’re an advanced investor, watch it as a reminder. Peter Lynch is the most successful Fund Manager of all time. He uses these 45 minutes to cover 95% of all of investing! My Key Takeaways: 1. Personal Edge - Look for the fields in which you have a knowledge benefit. Working in an industry, being a customer, all of that is an advantage. 2. The Key Organ for Investing: The Stomach - Investing is not about brains. It’s about having the stomach. “The real key to making money in stocks is not to get scared out of them.” - Peter Lynch 3. Categories - Categories and labels are guidelines, not hard rules. Successful investing is about flexibility. 4. P/E Rule of Thumb - Stocks follow Earnings Fairly Priced: P/E equals annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Expensive: P/E extensively higher than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Cheap: P/E extensively lower than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. 5. Balance Sheet Rules of Thumb - Is the BS healthy? a) Cash should be higher than Short-Term Debt b) If Cash - Short-term Debt - Long-Term Debt is only 1/4 of Net worth, the BS is decent c) Total Debt should equal 20% of capitalization or less 6. Focus on Stories - Stock prices move with the stories told about the companies. Have a long-term story for every company you own and check if it plays out. 7. Profit from Chaos - A market decline of at least 10% occurs every two years. Pick up your high-conviction bets at a discount when this happens. 8. Forget about Macroeconomics - Focus on business growth, not GDP growth. “If you spend 13 minutes a year on economics, you’ve wasted 10 minutes.” - Peter Lynch

If you’re an investing beginner, you MUST watch this video. If you’re an advanced investor, watch it as a reminder. Peter Lynch is the most successful Fund Manager of all time. He uses these 45 minutes to cover 95% of all of investing! My Key Takeaways: 1. Personal Edge - Look for the fields in which you have a knowledge benefit. Working in an industry, being a customer, all of that is an advantage. 2. The Key Organ for Investing: The Stomach - Investing is not about brains. It’s about having the stomach. “The real key to making money in stocks is not to get scared out of them.” - Peter Lynch 3. Categories - Categories and labels are guidelines, not hard rules. Successful investing is about flexibility. 4. P/E Rule of Thumb - Stocks follow Earnings Fairly Priced: P/E equals annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Expensive: P/E extensively higher than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. Cheap: P/E extensively lower than annual growth rate over the next 3-5 years. 5. Balance Sheet Rules of Thumb - Is the BS healthy? a) Cash should be higher than Short-Term Debt b) If Cash - Short-term Debt - Long-Term Debt is only 1/4 of Net worth, the BS is decent c) Total Debt should equal 20% of capitalization or less 6. Focus on Stories - Stock prices move with the stories told about the companies. Have a long-term story for every company you own and check if it plays out. 7. Profit from Chaos - A market decline of at least 10% occurs every two years. Pick up your high-conviction bets at a discount when this happens. 8. Forget about Macroeconomics - Focus on business growth, not GDP growth. “If you spend 13 minutes a year on economics, you’ve wasted 10 minutes.” - Peter Lynch

Daniel Mahncke

493,303 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

Years in banking taught me that successful stock picking comes down to 6 specific criteria. Whether markets are rising, falling, or stagnant, these criteria consistently identify quality companies Here's what they are: Criteria #1: Gross Margin >60% Companies with 60%+ gross margins aren't getting undercut by competitors. The product is defensible and hard to replicate. Service businesses typically achieve these numbers more easily than manufacturing due to lower overhead costs. Criteria #2: Return on Invested Capital Above 10% How effectively does the company turn money into more money? I want minimum 10-12% returns. Many companies barely hit 4%—you'd earn more in a high-yield savings account. Criteria #3: Free Cash Flow >20% Think of Amazon sellers constantly reinvesting in inventory—they never touch the cash. You want businesses that actually generate free cash flow of 20% or higher. This means they won't need to borrow money or dilute shareholders. They're fundamentally stronger. Criteria #4: Interest Coverage Ratio 3x+ Can they easily pay interest on debt from profits? I want this at least 3x so that even if rates spike, the business survives. This is your big warning signal for financial risk. Criteria #5: Forget P/E Ratios P/E ratios are useless snapshots. Netflix in 2015 had a P/E of 554x—everyone said "you're an idiot." Earnings then went up 100x. What matters is whether profits grow and fundamentals stack up, not the snapshot ratio. Criteria #6: The Moat How difficult is it for competitors to replicate the business? Apple's moat isn't just the phone—it's the stores, brand ecosystem, and App Store working together. Compare that to frozen yogurt shops competing themselves into bankruptcy. Look for deep, defensible competitive advantages. The Simpler Path Too complicated? Buy quality ETFs like SPQ (S&P 500 Quality Index) or IWQ (MSCI World Quality). You'll own the top 100 companies like Microsoft, Nvidia, and Apple instead of all 500 mediocre S&P companies. Stop donating money to Wall Street. Start building wealth with quality companies and real strategy.

Felix Prehn 🐶

40,089 Aufrufe • vor 6 Monaten

S&P just cut Oracle to one notch above junk, and the stock went UP anyway. Think about that for a second... Back in December I told you the AI arms race would keep rewarding capex right up until the moment it didn't, and I pointed straight at Oracle. The stock is now down more than 55% from its high and this week S&P downgraded its credit to the lowest rung of investment grade, which means one more cut and Oracle wears a junk rating for the first time in its history. The downgrade landed because the cash bleed is getting MUCH worse. S&P now sees Oracle burning close to $42 billion in free cash flow next year, nearly double its earlier estimate, with capex rocketing toward $90 billion and a single customer (OpenAI) sitting behind roughly half of that $638 billion backlog. The bond market looked at all of that and reached for insurance. The stock market looked at the exact same company and bid it higher. When those two disagree like this, 45 years in this business has taught me to side with the bondholders every single time. They get paid before shareholders do, so they tend to see the trouble first. And Oracle is now funding this buildout with equity instead of debt, with another $20 billion in stock issuance slated for this year. A company confident in its own cash flows borrows against them. A company bracing for a downgrade dilutes its shareholders instead. Oracle showed you which one it is. If you want to know how to actually make money in a market this dominated by Big Tech narratives, that is what July 22nd is for. 14 elite investors are sharing the specific longs and shorts they are backing with their own capital - for just $99. We entered the golden era of stock picking. Grab your ticket today:

S&P just cut Oracle to one notch above junk, and the stock went UP anyway. Think about that for a second... Back in December I told you the AI arms race would keep rewarding capex right up until the moment it didn't, and I pointed straight at Oracle. The stock is now down more than 55% from its high and this week S&P downgraded its credit to the lowest rung of investment grade, which means one more cut and Oracle wears a junk rating for the first time in its history. The downgrade landed because the cash bleed is getting MUCH worse. S&P now sees Oracle burning close to $42 billion in free cash flow next year, nearly double its earlier estimate, with capex rocketing toward $90 billion and a single customer (OpenAI) sitting behind roughly half of that $638 billion backlog. The bond market looked at all of that and reached for insurance. The stock market looked at the exact same company and bid it higher. When those two disagree like this, 45 years in this business has taught me to side with the bondholders every single time. They get paid before shareholders do, so they tend to see the trouble first. And Oracle is now funding this buildout with equity instead of debt, with another $20 billion in stock issuance slated for this year. A company confident in its own cash flows borrows against them. A company bracing for a downgrade dilutes its shareholders instead. Oracle showed you which one it is. If you want to know how to actually make money in a market this dominated by Big Tech narratives, that is what July 22nd is for. 14 elite investors are sharing the specific longs and shorts they are backing with their own capital - for just $99. We entered the golden era of stock picking. Grab your ticket today:

George Noble

18,966 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat